Episode 97: D&C 2 – Section 1

October 19, 2015

Episodes

Episode 97: D&C 2 – Section 1

So, God is super pissed off at the humans in this one, but we never really figure out why. And we’re told to obey commandments, but sadly we’re given nothing about what those commandments are.

“Drink” Count – 11

2 Beers

1f37b[1]

Advertisements

Like and Follow

Like and Follow

15 Comments on “Episode 97: D&C 2 – Section 1”

  1. Phonin' It In From Kolob Says:

    I’m enjoying the show, but I’m glad I’m not relying on the content to save my soul or my ass or anything. So far we’re just talkin’ Holy Talk to talk Holy Talk. Thus sayeth the Lord! What sayeth the Lord? “Thus,” sayeth the Lord. But what sayeth the Lord thusly? The Lord simply sayeth, “Thus.” Oh, you mean, “Thus,” sayeth the Lord. Yea, “Thus,” sayeth the Lord. Wake me up if the Lord says something besides, “Thus,” OK?

    Reply

  2. Jake Says:

    Section 1 can be summarized, “Never, ever trust your fellow man, unless of course he happens to be named joseph smith jr.”

    Reply

  3. Deg Says:

    David & Bryce,

    I must say I’m very disappointed how D&C reading is turning out. BoM reading was awesome because it felt like it had a sincere reading approach and a certain level of respect and decency that has been crossed for the D&C.

    It no longer feels like open honest inquiry or skepticism, but rather just open cynicism & criticism, not to mention crude & lewd. I for one can’t enjoy it when constant references to sexual innuendos and masturbation are mentioned. An occasional reference I can pass, but to much time is spent making fun of the scriptures trying to poke holes out of it, rather than trying to learn something from it, and perhaps being weird out by the lack of understanding which was nice in the BoM.

    As Bryce has self admitted, he isn’t an expert on the material, and reading from the book of commandments to show changes doesn’t make it easy to follow as a listener, but it is interesting to know that the D&C has been revised, but almost everyone knows that even the book of Mormon has been revised to convey proper meaning and intention.

    I wonder if you will care enough to make changes to have it sound like the success that was reached while reading the BoM, otherwise just count me out as a listener, and you guys can just party on… after all it is your show, but not one I’m enjoying.

    That doesn’t mean that a certain type of audience won’t appreciate it, just not me.

    Reply

  4. Mike Says:

    I kind of agree with Deg. I can sympathize with the idea that the D&C is ridiculous. I really can. However, your commentary seems to have devolved to repeatedly saying, “This makes no sense,” and then laughing about how ridiculous you both think it is every couple of sentences. And again, I agree, it doesn’t make sense. However, there was so much more to your commentary about the Book of Mormon then just insulting the text and laughing.

    It’s cool if that’s the direction you want to take this podcast but I figured I’d just mention that it seems to have strayed a bit from what it used to be. And unfortunately I’m not as into the new format. As another one of my favorite podcasters once said, “When there are valid criticisms to be made, it’s counterproductive to make invalid criticisms.”

    Reply

    • Phonin' It In From Kolob Says:

      The content has been a bit thin so far. David and Bryce are kind of treading air for the moment. I’m hoping for some “deep doctrine” here before too long.

      Reply

    • Mr. H. Says:

      “This makes no sense”- “This is so stupid”- “How can anybody believe this sh!t” … I fully agree with Mike…
      During the Book of Mormon you were still trying to make sense of it all- now it’s just “LOL! Orgy in heaven! LOL” (not that it isn’t funy or that you didn’t make those comments during the BoM/Pogp (Faith, Hope,Charity and Love anyone?!) but the show didn’t consist of JUST those kinds of comments)

      Reply

  5. pesquisasmormonas Says:

    As a huge fan of Mormon history, I can appreciate what Bryce is trying to do comparing both books, but it doesn’t make for compelling listening. This sounds like a project for a blog or an essay. Bringing up every tiny change is very distracting and it’s going to take way too long for very little payback.

    Reply

  6. Kathryn Says:

    I love listening to your show, and usually the lively reading helps me understand the content better or catch things I missed on previous readings. The commentary can be a real riot, too!

    This week, I had a hard time following what was going on in the reading. I’m not sure if that was because there were two readers, or because two readers meant more frequent interruptions for commenting. All I can say is, after most episodes I know what was said in the featured sections. At the end of this episode, I had no idea what D&C 1 was about. The only snippets of the text I remember was that there was something about hearts being penetrated, and God judging people for their works.

    Perhaps keeping the historical/contextual commentary to the end of each chapter, or to the beginning, would help out with that? That would necessitate fewer pauses for in-line commentary.

    I’d also suggest delaying any discussion of textual comparisons until the end of the episode or section, and only highlighting those that seem most significant. After all, if the point of the show is to find out what’s in the scriptures that Mormons read, most English speakers are reading the current English editions. They’re not going through comparing different editions. That being said, I enjoy learning about the evolution of religious beliefs, so discussing those textual changes somewhere in the podcast would be fun for me. It’s talking about them *during* the live reading that’s throwing me off.

    It always takes a little bit of time to iron out the kinks when trying something new. I’m looking forward to this new phase of the podcast!

    Reply

  7. nulltestimony Says:

    I have listened to every episode since the beginning and I can say the appeal of the podcast really was the reaction of a non TBM person as they read and the reaction felt “real”. I feel the new direction has lost what made this podcast an award-winner and that is a shame,

    There are a lot of podcasts about mormonism and how silly it all is. If the new format is that, it is just adding to the noise rather than providing the unique perspective as it did before.

    I listen to Naked Mormonism and Bryce is great at historical analysis but his podcast reaches a totally different audience. I feel like you two both have a great separate thing going…why muddle it? Also, the reading two different versions at the same time just slows the whole thing down. The pace of the BoM was perfect and kept the audience engaged. This just feels disjointed.

    You stated an objective early on that you wished to use this as a deconversion vehicle and it started that way. Until now, I could send this to a TBM and let them listen to a genuine reaction to how ridiculous the BoM really is. Now I am afraid they will listen to latest episodes first and the audience is lost.

    Reply

    • jwartena Says:

      “There are a lot of podcasts about mormonism and how silly it all is. If the new format is that, it is just adding to the noise rather than providing the unique perspective as it did before.

      In addition to adding to the noise, we’re running into the problem that these guys can’t bring much to the dialogue other than “Hey, this is silly!”

      Infants on Thrones, John Larson, John Dehlin, Lindsay Hansen Park, Heather at Mormon Expression, these people can make commentary and explore the silliness of Mormonism because they lived and understand it. They can tease out where it comes from and the impact it has on day-to-day life. They also have serious cred as researchers and can dive into the historical impact of the subject matter.

      But David can’t do that because, well, he doesn’t have any experience there. And Bryce is by his own admission a complete novice in Mormon history; this is his first time reading D&C, so any commentary he makes is going to be, well, weak.

      It seems like they’re trying to approach the text from two different directions, but neither has the requisite skill set or experience to do it properly.

      Reply

  8. Duke of Earl Grey Says:

    D&C 1:30 is indeed an important verse for the LDS church. It is the go-to scripture to show everyone that God Himself has a One True Church, and it’s the Mormons… or, I suppose, one of the many breakaway churches that formed sometime after this revelation was given, who think it applies to them, but let’s not even mention them…

    You guys got sidetracked into a little discussion on whether the Lord speaks to the church collectively or individually, but whichever way he supposedly does it, that’s not the point of this statement. In this context, Jesus is saying that he is pleased with the church on the whole. But don’t you think for one minute, random church member who’s reading this, that the Lord is saying he is necessarily pleased with YOU as an individual! Because he probably isn’t! Dude can’t look on sin with the least degree of allowance, you know! Shape up, young man!

    The phrase “no respecter of persons” is supposed to mean God treats everyone equally, not respecting one over another. But that, of course, is demonstrably false in any number of ways.

    Verse 38 is another huge verse for the LDS leadership. I have to wonder if the church leaders would almost prefer that the D&C were not publicly available except for this one verse. They are God’s servants, ergo, their words are the same as God’s words. So why study out God’s words in the scriptures for yourself? Just listen to what they (God) are telling you to do right now.

    This reminds me of an anecdote. I heard that recently one of the current crop of apostles, David Bednar, was giving instruction to some missionaries, and during Q&A, a sister missionary asked a question about women and priesthood. He gave his thoughts on the matter, then the missionary asked, “Are there any scriptures that talk about this subject?” Bednar purportedly replied, “I am scripture.” Charming man. I think I’ll post a picture of him, so we can see the love of God beaming from his shiny, android-like face:

    Reply

    • pesquisasmormonas Says:

      Oh, yes. With the “respecter of persons” thing I was yelling at my phone, “Bryce should know this one!” Lol

      Reply

    • Phonin' It In From Kolob Says:

      This is SO like the Great and Powerful Oz! This grand edifice they construct called “God” is really quite impressive to look at (or hear about, I guess), but while it’s not completely empty, it is just a hollow shell full of, well . . . Kansas. I guess the Hubble telescope has done as much as anything to ruin religion for me. The “grandeur” of our anthropomorphic “deities” just doesn’t measure up to what simply IS.

      Reply

  9. Goto Says:

    I liked how David read all the verses in the BofM and was genuinely surprised. Now Bryce is reading and you don’t get the real shock value in David’s voice? I have listened to all of Naked Mormonism and love Bryce–but I miss David and his style of innocence? Thanks guys–I will keep listening because you two are enjoyable!

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: