Comments about ‘Nephi trial shows up judicial inability’

What a stupid article. Articles like this make me embarassed to tell anyone I'm a Mormon.

I find it amusing how some people can say so much about a subject when there is so little information.

Just remember, Mr. Welch is not a Church authority and his fun personal opinions do not carry any weight in the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

His theories are just for entertainment purposes only. Everyone can relax, because Mr. Welch is not in a position to be putting forth Church Doctrine.

I want to talk about why the Steward of Gondor in "Return of the King" did not have authority or proper jurisdiction to arrest and try Aaragon or Gandolf?

As usual, a few Latter-Day Saints show up on these types of articles claiming that there is nothing of interest here, since this article is (gasp), scholarly and intellectual. (Unless they are anti-Mormons trying to disguise themselves.) For the life of me, I don't understand why scholarly or intellectual issues are so offensive to some Latter-Day Saints. If scholarly issues in the BOM discussed by BYU or Maxwell Institute scholarls don't interest somebody in the Church, they certainly don't have to study them. FARMS (or the proper name, Maxwell Institute) is funded by the Church, and I am sure the First Presidency is fully aware of their scholarly projects. Members who criticize these endeavors seem to me to be claiming that they are above the First Presidency who allows these endeavors and funds them and approves them.

Once again, if it doesn't interest you, DON'T READ IT. Others, like myself will learn and gain knowledge from spiritual and scholarly sources. If you don't like these scholarly issues, and choose not to learn from it, that is perfectly fine with me.

The Stewards ruled in place of the King, sitting on a simple chair of black stone placed below the throne. The emblem of their office was a white rod and their banner was plain white with no device or charge upon it.

Steward was the traditional title of a chief counsellor to one of the Kings of Gondor, much like Lord High Steward of England.

The reason the Steward of Gondor did not have authority to arrest and try Aaragon was that he recognized the hereditary right of Aaragon to rule and therefore, lacked jurisdiction over him.

There is no way that J.R.R. Tolkein could have known about the intricate laws and jurisdiction the Steward would have rightfully held unless this was truly an inspired book (which I feel it is). There is way too much evidence that Return of the King was beyond the knowledge and scope of its author (just look at the chiastic structure and detailed accounts of the people and their culture). It is definitely a true and inspired book.

As a member of the LDS faith, I have no problem with these kind of publications as long as people remember that this is not Church doctrine. I for one, try to steer clear of books that try to expound and offer alternative explanations to events in the Book of Mormon (unless they are from our Church Leaders).

There is some danger in reading these types of books to the exclusion of our Standard Works and books from our Prophets and Apostles.

Aragorn, Gandalf.

Aragorn was the son of Arathorn, the nine and thirtieth heir in the right line from Isildur, and yet more like Elendil than any before him.

Gandalf's name is Olrin in the language of the Valinor. "Olrin was my name in my youth in the West that is forgotten". The word originates the language of Quenya, and its meaning is associated with dreams.

Nobody can tell me that J.R.R. Tolkein could have possibly known the above facts. It is just one more piece of evidence that he was inspired when he wrote Return of the King. It is an inspired work.

To Myself 11:21 am:

Not a single BYU or Maxwell Institute scholar has ever even hinted at replacing the Standard Works or words of prophets and apostles with their publications. Most people, including myself, can use less time in front of the TV, less time browsing useless websites, less time just "doing nothing" and more time studying.

I see these scholarly issues as just one more thing that is "lovely, praiseworthy, or of good report". Others might not, and that is perfectly fine. I see these scholarly issues as a hobby also. President Monson raised pigeons as a hobby. I like to study BOM scholarly issues as a hobby. There is no danger in that at all, as my daily routine includes spiritual study of the Standard Works, etc. and my hobby of studying BOM scholarly issues is when I have some time to spare, etc. There is no danger in this at all, and I venture to say that there is possibly a danger in judging what others study, and thinking that BYU studies is somehow harmful.

Whoever you are, "Veedub," it is said that trolls were created by Morgoth in perverted mockery of Ents, the true tree shepherds. Looks like a troll or two is trying to imitate me. LOL. Be careful going out on a sunny day!

I never hinted that the Maxwell institute was replacing the Standard Works, or words of the prophets and apostles with their publications (please read my posts again).

All I said was that people need to understand this book is not Church doctrine and merely contains some fun and entertaining theories of one man, Brother Welch.

I did say that most members would be better edified reading the standard works, books from apostles, prophets or general authorities instead of books like these.

There are literally thousands of books like these in Utah bookstores and the danger is that people think the authors are somehow inspired and that what is contained in the books is doctrine. This is certainly not true and members need to be aware that what they are reading is for entertainment purposes only.

The Maxwell Institute is a cadre of worthless "scholars" who have taken the game of religious trivial pursuit to new heights of absurdity!

Now that you are middle aged, received lots of schooling, I am not sure about your education, do you think you will ever grow beyond your fantasy with fairy tales.

I do not think that BOM intellectual issues are for "entertainment purposes" only. I do not believe that the Church would fund them and the First Presidency approve of funding something that is for entertainment only. Your point is well taken in that not everything in Deseret Book is necessarily doctrine. But neither is every class taught at BYU - but the Church strongly encourages education - which, I think, at least for myself, includes reading some of these issues. But that is just me. Others may decide to not bother with these publications and that is perfectly fine.

I don't see any danger at all and there is far more than entertainment value. Consider President Hinckley's words:

"FARMS represents the efforts of sincere and dedicated scholars. It has grown to provide strong support and defense of the Church on a professional basis. I wish to express my strong congratulations and appreciation for those who started this effort and who have shepherded it to this point."

And I have faith that Latter-Day Saints are intelligent enough to decide for themselves. I see great value and it interests me greatly, far beyond entertainment.

To: Myself,

Books like these are nothing more than entertainment. If you think books like these, from non Church-leaders, are anything more than fun or entertainment, then I would suggest reading recent Conference talks by our Church leaders about not placing value in items like this unless they come from ordained leaders of the Church.

Brother Welch's "theories" are nothing more than that. Anything taught contrary to that is false doctrine.

I think its wrong to use scriptures for personal gain. Clearly, that is all Mr. Welch is after; using scripture to get money.

You have an extra-ordinary narrow view. If these things don't interest you, that is perfectly fine. (Repeating) President Hinckley's words:

"FARMS represents the efforts of sincere and dedicated scholars. It has grown to provide strong support and defense of the Church on a professional basis. I wish to express my strong congratulations and appreciation for those who started this effort and who have shepherded it to this point."

Once again, NOBODY has ever claimed doctrine and necessity of studying these issues. To some of us, it is beyond entertainment value. To others, it might be.

To Pamela and To Myself (12:24)

LOL! Try again. This time put some intelligence in your comments.

"With divine inspiration, the First Presidency (the prophet and his two counselors) and the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles (the second-highest governing body of the Church) counsel together to establish doctrine that is consistently proclaimed in official Church publications. This doctrine resides in the four 'standard works' of [Mormon] scripture (the Holy Bible, the Book of Mormon, the Doctrine and Covenants and the Pearl of Great Price), official declarations and proclamations, and the Articles of Faith."

John Welch's fun and entertaining theories clearly do not fit the above. As such, Mr. Welch's books are merely the personal opinion of one man and hold absolutely no weight in the Restored Gospel of Jesus Christ.

I've always lumped Mr. Welch's books in the same category as "The Work & the Glory", "Charlie" or any of the thousands of Church books by LDS authors who are not general authorities, apostles or the prophet.

These books maybe fun and entertaining, but ultimately leave me hollow.

We need to remember that we have a living prophet and 12 apostles on this earth to give us doctrine. Looking elsewhere for answers is asking for trouble.