- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
brown, fwiw, getting outside of that black-and-white, all-or-nothing paradigm is very important. I’m going to say this very carefully – but also very directly:
I’m not aware of ANYONE on this site who would characterize the Book of Mormon as “crap” – and I mean ANYONE.If you’ve read any of the previous posts about the Book of Mormon, you should know that; if you haven’t read them, we will chalk up that statement as simply an emotional reaction to reading something you’re not used to reading from fellow Mormons. It’s cool. 🙂 Please read some of the older threads here that deal directly with the Book of Mormon. Look in the History and Doctrine section. I will try to find one or two to link in this thread. There are some really deep, long discussions.
As to the question of your post:
Yes, the Book of Mormon presents some things differently than the modern LDS Church practices and teaches.
So what?I don’t mean that flippantly – and I don’t mean to make light of your question. It’s just that nothing about our theology and ideology even comes close to implying that nothing should have changed from then to now – either from 600BC-400AD to now, if someone accepts the literal timing claims, or from 1829-2011, if someone doesn’t. Sure, there’s a “same organization” mentality – but even that can’t be totally accurate when we look at an evolving organization. If you look at what was taught in the Old Testament and how it is different than what is taught in the New Testament, for example, you can reach either of the following extreme conclusions quite easily:
1) The New Testament is crap! It contradicts the Old Testament.
2) The Old Testament is crap! It is contradicted by the New Testament.
I prefer the following conclusion, personally:
It’s neat to see how different people viewed God differently – and how those differences influenced their teachings and organizations. It gives me more options and possibilities as I try to figure out what makes the most sense to me, personally. I’m glad I have such competing, sometimes conflicting accounts and perspectives – since, if we accept all of them as “scripture”, it allows me to find my own way and not think it has to be exactly like someone else’s.
For me, that beats, “______ is crap!” every time.
“Questions about the Book of Mormon” ( http://forum.staylds.com/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=742&hilit=transmission “Joseph and Authorship” (
http://forum.staylds.com/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=1316&hilit=transmission What Ray said. Some in the church will push the all or nothing, black or white position for rhetorical reasons but most folks believe and live and learn by what they can and don’t worry about the rest. The “church” is an organic living, breathing, changing thing and benefits from and by our being in it. As long as it does I’ll stay and when it doesn’t I’ll leave. I’d never call the BoM crap because then I’d have to say the same about the Bible and just about any moral and religious teachings. I know what you’re saying, Doug, but you don’t have to go there. Like CWald said there’s a middle way and if you give it a chance it works. IMHO. GBSmith wrote:…I know what you’re saying, Doug, but you don’t have to go there.
Do you mean Brown?
Hey, here is a thought Brown – I think you ARE absolutely correct about the BoM contradicting Mormonism, as taught today. I think there are many aspects of our religion, that JS, and the folks who lived in the BoM (if they are real people) would be horrified about. And yeah, I think the LDS church has missed the boat on the whole “who is going to be saved, and how that saving is going to take place.” Jesus, IMO, isn’t going to put the restrictions on who does and who doesn’t make it to heaven like the LDS leadership claims. No chance is only .01% of the population going to be saved because they were fortunate enough to hear about the gospel – god doesn’t work that way.
But, does that mean the LDS church is FALSE and just a lie and a horrible institution that is destroying peoples lives? Hmmmm? Well, it certainly is not “perfect” and it certainly is not what we grew learning and hearing about in primary and sunday school. Nope – but I’m not sure it is “the church of the devil” like many of the exmos claim it is either.
Sorry, Doug, I meant Brown. I can’t think and type at the same time. I’m trying to stand back and look at this more openly, but I just can’t figure out to reconcile it. We have Joseph Smith claiming that this book was given to him by an angel, and modern prophets saying it is the most true and correct book on the planet and that god’s laws are eternal and unchanging. How many things can you not believe about the LDS church and still have something left that makes it a useful religion to you? Aren’t there at least SOME things that need to be concrete? Brown wrote:if it is not divine text then it might as well be from oprah.
I say this with the deepest reverence. I learned this year to see the divinity (the prophetess) in Oprah. “And the earth will be full of the knowledge of the Lord as the waters cover the sea.”
cwald wrote:Slow down Brown. … don’t panic.
I really, really deeply loved that post, Cwald. Shot straight and from the heart full of love.
Brown wrote:how can their be gray area with this topic? either JS translated a holy book given to him by an angel or he didn’t and he is a liar and a fraud. i get the gray area on gc talks, but not this.
He’s a liar and a fraud. I have no doubt of that. But he’s also a true prophet of God. I have no doubt of that either. And it doesn’t really matter to the farmer in China. But it matters deeply to you, Brown, and I care about that.
Here’s my favorite take (out of many possible angles I could list) on the opening question:
If we take Mormonism (the Mormonism we love and can adhere to) to embrace all truth, and we impartially acknowledge that the Book of Mormon has “bad parts” like the beheading of Laban, the waving away of the Sermon on the Mount (it’s only for the apostles, you know), the extolling of bad-behaving Captain Moroni, and the endorsement of violent self-defense, then the Book of Mormon (being imperfect) does indeed contradict (ideal and pure) Mormonism. That’s how life is. So my answer is, “Yes.”
Brown wrote:I’m trying to stand back and look at this more openly, but I just can’t figure out to reconcile it. We have Joseph Smith claiming that this book was given to him by an angel, and modern prophets saying it is the most true and correct book on the planet and that god’s laws are eternal and unchanging. How many things can you not believe about the LDS church and still have something left that makes it a useful religion to you? Aren’t there at least SOME things that need to be concrete?
Sigh. I totally feel your pain, Brown (what a screen name!
:clap: ). My signature line acknowledges you, I think. Actually, both of them do. Depending on how you really see all of this, you have some exciting rapids ahead of you. At NOM they say, “GO SLOW!” I say with the Jews, “Your tribe is your tribe.” At NOM they say, “Don’t throw the baby out with the bath water.” Maybe you will have to leave. That’s okay. We don’t condemn you. It’s okay. It’s okay. You are not crazy.It’s false. It was all a delusion. It’s not at all the way we thought. Heaven doesn’t work with handclasps and ordinances. Our man doesn’t have more priesthood in his pinky than the Dalai Lama, the Pope, Obama, and Joel Osteen combined.
But the promises are true. Press on to make you calling and election sure. Receive the more sure word of prophecy. Learn of Him. Enter into His Rest. Beware of pride, anger, judgment, hatred, and fear.
It’s okay, Brown. Big hugs. Big, big hugs. Pray hard. Sleep well. We will be with you.
Love,
Tom
Brown, “It’s all true or it’s all false” has been drummed into many members. It’s hard to give up that kind of thinking. Just remember that few things in life have only 2 choices. Great leaders have faults. Society likes to mythologize leaders, but history often looks differently on them. We celebrate Winston Churchill and Margaret Thatcher as great leaders, yet both were thrown out of office. Bums like Harry Truman and Abraham Lincoln are seen in a much better light today, even though they had extremely low approval ratings when they left office. The church is the same. It’s not all true or all false. It has both good and bad, just like you and I. It’s ok to reject false dichotomies such as when President Hinckley said “it’s all true or all false”, while accepting that he also told us to “accentuate the positive.”
If there is anything virtuous, lovely, or praiseworthy we seek after these things. We can acknowledge that not everything in the church is praiseworthy, but we can certainly seek after the praiseworthy things.
Brown wrote:I’m trying to stand back and look at this more openly, but I just can’t figure out to reconcile it.
I will repeat what has been said before, not to patronize you in any way, but just as another reminder…go slow, buddy. Give yourself some time to process things without making rash conclusions. After all, you’ve been taught for years and years to view it one way, and now you may need months or years to open your mind to the next stage of growth in accepting new views of everything you’ve been taught, not because what you have been taught was wrong, but because it is deep enough to be viewed on multiple levels, and you may be ready for your next stage. Its all right, no rush…you’ve got time. Enjoy the journey.
Brown wrote:How many things can you not believe about the LDS church and still have something left that makes it a useful religion to you? Aren’t there at least SOME things that need to be concrete?
These are outstanding questions. Have you started making your list? I have mine.Something you may want to consider:
Quote:If our religion is something objective, then we must never avert our eyes from those elements in it which seem puzzling or repellant; for it will be precisely the puzzling or the repellant which conceals what we do not yet know and need to know … the truth we need most is hidden precisely in the doctrines you least like and least understand. – CS Lewis
GBSmith wrote:Sorry, Doug, I meant Brown. I can’t think and type at the same time.
No problem.
Brown, I really, really feel for you. While I wholeheartedly agree with all that has been said, I don’t know if any of it is true. Or if any of it will work for you. I hope that it will, because, I guess, I’m hoping it will work for me as well. You have a right to be angry. I mean really, really pissed. So be angry, at least for a while. When you’re ready to not be angry any more and start to put the pieces back together, I think there’s some really good advice here on how to do it. You may end up deciding you’ve had enough of this BS and you’re moving on. That’s okay. Or you may decide to stick around. That’s okay, too. Either way, we’re behind you 100%.
I think I am coming across more upset than i really am. i appreciate all the words of advice and support. 😆 😆 😆 Maybe you are less upset than we all remember being.😳 :shh: I have to say I’d be more impressed by Oprah’s spiritual pronouncements if she wasn’t so obsessed with money… Mind you we could say the same about the church. 😆 Brown wrote:I think I am coming across more upset than i really am.
Quote:Never mind. — Emily Litella
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.