- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
Featherina, I read the post. I moved this to the current section due to the way the thread discussion developed, since that discussion was about the title of the post. I will move it back to General Discussion.
I titled the subject “Book club” as kindof a joke. I feel like the church is like a book club to many of us – we accept the Book of Mormon for the literary work it is, not necessarily completely literally, directly from God. If you read the original post, you’ll understand that. Featherina wrote:I titled the subject “Book club” as kindof a joke. I feel like the church is like a book club to many of us – we accept the Book of Mormon for the literary work it is, not necessarily completely literally, directly from God. If you read the original post, you’ll understand that.
Is the first rule not to discuss Book Club?
I’m interested in a lot of the suggestions, but bear in mind that a lot of us can’t necessarily get some of the titles.
Sam, People put all kinds of subject titles – “Hi” “Just me” – that doens’t mean we discuss all of the ways to say hello or what “Just me” means. No matter what the subject says, I read the initial post, for full meaning. Sam, you responded in regards to my concerns with the Book of Mormon, which I appreciate.
I was hoping that my thoughts would be considered, & I do appreciate the responses. I feel upset when even a moderator is “hijacking” the thread – it hits a sore spot, in trying to “stay lds” (-especially after another entire post was deleted in another thread). Everyone makes mistakes & I respect people more when they admit it.
Featherina, may I suggest in all mildness and meekness that there was no intentional threadjacking – and that this might be a good example of a time when letting go of hurt feelings can free you to enjoy something that has a lot of good in it despite occasional screw-ups by others? I don’t mean to sound sanctimonious when I say that – and I don’t mean to lessen the hurt or excuse a threadjack. All I’m saying is that sometimes we take offense when absolutely none was intended, and our happiness and peace and joy depend on how we handle those things – not on what others do.
I really am sorry I moved it to a section where you didn’t want it to be, and I moved it back immediately when you asked me to do that. That’s all I can do – try to rectify my mistake and apologize for it. Please accept that and forgive me.
Sorry, Featherina, I was cracking a joke – film reference – “The first rule of Fight Club is that you do not discuss Fight Club.” Thanks, Sam & Ray. 
Back to the topic….(Did I just hijack my own thread?
Quote:Personally, I think I’d enjoy church so much more if it were all open – out on the table, & if people went by the spirit of the Book of Mormon instead of insisting on its factual divinity.
Featherina, I understand totally what you mean about perceptions of the BofM, but consider this:
1) It might actually be what it claims to be. Maybe not, but maybe. More importantly, if church leaders really do believe it is a factual, historical record, asking them to present it as anything else is holding them to an impossible standard. If you want them to respect your view as you present it, it’s really important to respect theirs as they present it – especially if it is the majority view and yours is the minority one. That happens to me all the time in lots of discussions.
I share my heterodoxy sometimes; I bite my tongue other times.For example, I have an interesting view on repentance and how it usually is presented in the Church. I generally don’t share it, since it would rock most people’s paradigms and be seen incorrectly as attacking or dismissing the general understanding – unless I have at least an hour to explain it in detail. Tonight, however, I did share an abbreviated version – since I was assigned to conduct a training session that was focused on repentance. Some of the people understood what I said; some didn’t; all, I think, were surprised – including those who gave me the assignment. The key is that I was conducting the training for Stake leaders – people who are going to be talking about repentance with lots of other people, so I thought it was important to be totally open and honest about how I view that topic.
At the end of the training session, I handed out ten pages of posts I’ve written on my personal blog about repentance – long ones and short ones. Some might read them; others might not. The point is that I picked a time to put it all out there when I thought it might be the most effective – and in a way that was totally non-threatening and not packed with expectations that they had to agree with me. I had the stage by invitation, so I shared much more than I generally do.
2) What might help you enjoy church more might deprive others of the enjoyment they get through their belief in the BofM’s factual divinity. I think that’s important to recognize and credit.
3) There are more options than just following the spirit of the BofM or believing it is factually divine. My own view is a moderated mixture of those two concepts – a focus on the spirit and message AND an acceptance of a degree of historicity AND some divine facts AND more. It might or might be correct, but it’s mine – and I find great value in it. I respect and acknowledge almost anything that works for someone else regarding this and most other issues, and I don’t really care all that much if one view predominates at any given time – or how many people agree with me at church. If they do, great; if they don’t, fine.
Anyway, I figure at some point, how the majority sees this will change – if our history is any indication.
Someone once described Joseph’s translation process of the book of Mormon as one of seeing the events in the book of Mormon, and then writing them down in his own thought and language, rather than actually translating it as one would translate Spanish to English, for example, keeping the original words as much as possible. The reason I find it odd is because the actual translation route is apparently the way the Bible has been translated into our language. So, it seems strange to me that the Book of Mormon would be more of a paraphrase of something Joseph saw rather than a word for word translation. I put this aside, however (although I’m fascinated by responses to this from knowledgeable people). I have grown to love the Book of Mormon as a source of spiritual truth over and above the Bible.
Featherina wrote:It is nice to be in the LDS book club with you! You may read & say anything you want, as long as it fits with the book club rules & reading list. You are also urged to find more people to come along & commit & pretend with us! Some say otherwise, but it doesn’t take much – they’ll learn more after they join. Can’t wait to see you at our next book club meeting!
This is so true.
Feather – I’m little guilty of thread-jacking this. Didn’t mean to be trite about your issue. It’s just not my issue so I don’t have much to add. I guess I just don’t really believe it to be historical, nor do I believe that it was “translated” from gold plates – and yet I’ve “worked” my way into recognizing it’s spiritual value for me and my family and I’m okay with it “not being true” if you will. I recognize that for some folks (don’t know where you’re at) who are starting to come out of Fowler stage 3, this could be devastating. Unfortanely I’m locked in stage 4 – for over a DECADE now – and Iahve forgotten and have perhaps become a little bit insensitive to this particular issue. I apologize.
Now, if you want to talk WofW – I have plenty to say.
SilentDawning, I’ve often felt good, reading concepts in the Book of Mormon too. I’m just trying to sort out in my mind & heart, what seems to be of God & what seems to be of Joseph Smith or even others. I’ve read that Joseph’s dad often told him stories, like the one about Lehi & the iron rod. Also, that Joseph was spiritually exploring (mythic) like many others around him. I wonder if he maybe had some psychic or other abilities that enabled him to tap into inspiration at times.
Ray & Cwald –
Thanks for the reminders that we’re all at different stages, religiously & spiritually. Less than a year ago, I was at a very different stage. I’m still learning & much of how I tend to learn is by questioning – looking at things at different angles, & hopefully getting input to help me with that. I haven’t really completely concluded a lot, because I’m still searching. But sometimes, I throw out questions or comments to see what you all think. However, I don’t bring things like this up in church – because I already know what they will say.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.