The futility of literalism

[Anonymous]

Cadence wrote:

Heber13 wrote:

I don’t think so, Cadence. They certainly have to craft it and go carefully because they have pushed it for decades, but statements like Pres Hinckley’s in the Wallace interview “I’m not sure we teach that doctrine” and Uchtdotf’s “slowly traditions become expectations and divine principles get lost in good ideas” can be used to slowly teach the members Christ always spoke in parables, and they have deeper meaning because of it…it seems to me these approaches to back off of literalism is the best long term strategy for the church.

I think other religions have gone through these phases, like Judiasm, and they seem to create groups of orthodox interpretations and non-literal interpretations. I’m not sure it has to be one way for our church to keep members.

Maybe if you move slow enough you can make it work. I was thinking more in terms of some big announcement that the BofM was just inspired fiction. How would that go over?

not well. a rigid, all-or-nothing stance is hard to move from, and those who get disaffected pretty quickly go to ‘nothing’ when ‘all’ isn’t quite right.

The transformation and evolution of other religions, especially judaism, have had a lot longer to bake. Orthodoxy is everywhere. If you’re an orthodox jew, then moses wrote the torah, period. ain’t no discussion about it. conservatives less rigid, a little, but reformed is truly a middle-way. But the LDS church is not like Judaism. It’s orthodoxy doesn’t come from a long oral and written tradition. It comes from a hierarchal priesthood, and the other rigidly hierarchal church is in Rome. There are some parallels between the two. For the roman hierarchy, they NEVER changed their flawed teachings but rather hardened them, much like the LDS churc does at times today. it took the reformation to create a middle-way. that implies mass exodus and apostasy. not my cup o tea, really.

Sometimes I see some real improvements, like accepting the publication of RSR, and some of the softer positions taken lately. But then you get talks where it’s an all-or-nothing proposition hardline, or the 14 fundamentals, and zzzzp! we’re back into rigor-mortis.

A recent exchange here and on another forum are telling me that there isn’t much hope. People have created their view of what the LDS church is in their minds on both sides of the TBM/Ex dividing line. There is nothing the church can do to bring most of the disaffected back, and any change would be completely disruptive to the active TBMs who remain.

[Anonymous]

wayfarer wrote:

A recent exchange here and on another forum are telling me that there isn’t much hope. People have created their view of what the LDS church is in their minds on both sides of the TBM/Ex dividing line. There is nothing the church can do to bring most of the disaffected back, and any change would be completely disruptive to the active TBMs who remain.

What more can we say? This is it – this is the conclusion of the whole matter. Damnit.

I just agree 100% and it saddens me to no end. I am a man without hope. The tribe is lost and there isn’t a thing I can do about it.

Oh god, I hope some of you more optimistic folks are right and I am wrong.

[Anonymous]

Cadence wrote:

Maybe if you move slow enough you can make it work. I was thinking more in terms of some big announcement that the BofM was just inspired fiction. How would that go over?

I tend to think there is room for a slower transition. I’m eager to see the pamphlet that Elder Jensen spoke of. I don’t ever imagine a “inspired fiction” announcement coming, because it is both too declarative and unnecessary. What I could see is a new emphasis on “applying the scriptures to our lives” and some small language on the futility of historicity discussions.

[Anonymous]

I see lots of movement – and, yes, it’s back and forth, not truly linear, but I see improvement now over where things were when I was young. I agree there are moments and periods of “entrenchment” – but I absolutely do see movement that is “progressive” overall.

[Anonymous]

wayfarer wrote:

… the clearer it gets that any attempt to literalize it is a waste of time, and misplaced energy.

…so, in my impression, we need to comletely set aside literalism when discussing the Book of Mormon. perhaps this could be an outcome of understanding that the fantastic truth claims of book of mormon origin are likely false: that the book must be considered ‘inspired fiction’ and not history. and, in so doing, one comes to a new papradigm for understanding its message and purpose.

I agree completely, Wayfarer.

I wish that not only TBMs would read what you wrote, but also those who are obsessed with proving every historical or doctrinal Mormon thing wrong.

The church leaders who have used bi-polar thinking by saying, “The church (or Book of Mormon) is either true or it isn’t” majorly goofed. Truth is in perspective, which is (as you mentioned) why Jesus taught in parables. Who cares what type of beast the Samaritan was riding… talk about missing the mark!

I think it would be AWESOME, if someone would stand up in the middle of a trivia pursuit game in SundaySchool & say,

“This is not a history lesson – but a spiritual lesson!”

Maybe if someone sang that opera style it would have a better impact.

[Anonymous]

Cadence wrote:

Maybe if you move slow enough you can make it work. I was thinking more in terms of some big announcement that the BofM was just inspired fiction. How would that go over?

😆 Maybe we could break them easy on Mormon Saturday Night Life.

Truth is easier to take with humor, right?

[Anonymous]

wayfarer wrote:

Sometimes I see some real improvements, like accepting the publication of RSR, and some of the softer positions taken lately. But then you get talks where it’s an all-or-nothing proposition hardline, or the 14 fundamentals, and zzzzp! we’re back into rigor-mortis.

😆 “Rigor-mortis” – perfect metaphor!

Quote:

A recent exchange here and on another forum are telling me that there isn’t much hope. People have created their view of what the LDS church is in their minds on both sides of the TBM/Ex dividing line. There is nothing the church can do to bring most of the disaffected back, and any change would be completely disruptive to the active TBMs who remain.

Yeah, you make a good point, Wayfarer.

But I think there’s hope.

Information (online esp.) is getting too accessible for TBMs to remain oblivious & so naive.

And maybe eventually Ex-Mormons (or those of us who are upset about Mormonism somehow) will become more tolerant & compassionate of even those who they’ve felt hurt by.

You reminded me of when I was praying about this… feeling frustrated that everyone around me wasn’t seeing what I saw & wasn’t up for a change in perspective. I had an unexpected obstacle and I felt like it was an analogy of how “the road to happiness is under construction” – there are obstacles & change takes a while, especially when it’s so deeply rooted in TRADITION!

Cue music:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gRdfX7ut8gw

[Anonymous]

Featherina wrote:

wayfarer wrote:

… the clearer it gets that any attempt to literalize it is a waste of time, and misplaced energy.

…so, in my impression, we need to comletely set aside literalism when discussing the Book of Mormon. perhaps this could be an outcome of understanding that the fantastic truth claims of book of mormon origin are likely false: that the book must be considered ‘inspired fiction’ and not history. and, in so doing, one comes to a new papradigm for understanding its message and purpose.

I agree completely, Wayfarer.

I wish that not only TBMs would read what you wrote, but also those who are obsessed with proving every historical or doctrinal Mormon thing wrong.

The church leaders who have used bi-polar thinking by saying, “The church (or Book of Mormon) is either true or it isn’t” majorly goofed. Truth is in perspective, which is (as you mentioned) why Jesus taught in parables. Who cares what type of beast the Samaritan was riding… talk about missing the mark!

I think it would be AWESOME, if someone would stand up in the middle of a trivia pursuit game in SundaySchool & say,

“This is not a history lesson – but a spiritual lesson!”

Maybe if someone sang that opera style it would have a better impact.

I’ve done the stand up and try to get the lesson back to normative, spiritual values, but haven’t done the opera thing, but I could…I will have to try that.

I don’t think the term ‘inspired fiction’ would float, but rather, ray uses ‘inspired non-fiction’ and I would add, ‘not intended to be historical’, but the half-dozen or so references that state it in the book of mormon.

i think you have a great point of the goofy dualism applying both to TBMs and those who are disaffected and critical. But when GBH said twice in public it’s either all true or massive fraud — there is no middle ground, and this same message was confirmed last year in conference — the gauntlet is thrown down. When I find so few that are willing to say “it’s inspired” and suspect in origin, i feel very alone in this middle way.

alas.

thanks for being here…

[Anonymous]

wayfarer wrote:

When I find so few that are willing to say “it’s inspired” and suspect in origin, i feel very alone in this middle way.

I feel for ya, wayfarer.

I like what you wrote above in that quote.

The definition of “suspect” is “Not as expected”.

I think our expectations of how we expect God to talk to Prophets or scripture is produced is a big part of how people look at this. In some ways, the Church’s correlated teachings have set many expectations (paintings of Joseph looking at the plates to translate)…and sometimes those expectations are then not supported.

We don’t need to confuse “inspired” with our expectations of the origin of it.

[Anonymous]

wayfarer wrote:

…When I find so few that are willing to say “it’s inspired” and suspect in origin, i feel very alone in this middle way.

alas.

thanks for being here…

I’m glad you’re here. I often feel a lone in the middle way too.

I’m glad we have this forum to help with that.

I wish others I cared about were more on-board with me, but every time we talk about this… it’s either black or white to them.

I was asked specific questions that I can’t answer… I just don’t know for sure.

Maybe they think I joined another religion that handed me a belief package all nicely wrapped with a big bow on top.

Times like that, I feel like, “I took the road less traveled… Now I’m lost.”

I’m figuring it out as I go… which can be intimidating, especially when there’s a big & spacious Atheist building on one side & a big & spacious LDS church office building on the other. :crazy:

[Anonymous]

I haven’t taken anything literal in the BofM for years. If you do, there are some difficulties you have to resolve. Taking a step back and looking at the large picture, we see: Nephi lying and committing murder. This is to get a copy of the law of Moses, (something he has no problem violating), so his people do not perish in unbelief. His people later all perish in unbelief. This is after the Jaredites all came to the “promised land” and also perished in unbelief….

Once I started to see it all spiritually, it made much more sense – much like the temple ceremony.

[Anonymous]

onahighnote wrote:

Once I started to see it all spiritually, it made much more sense – much like the temple ceremony.

Well said, onahighnote. I find deeper meaning in that approach as well. Do you think it is 100% “spiritually” or parabolic, or is it some mix of some literal events mingled with revelations and symbolic meanings to teach principles? (I think we both agree, it can’t be 100% literal).

[Anonymous]

onahighnote wrote:

I haven’t taken anything literal in the BofM for years. If you do, there are some difficulties you have to resolve. Taking a step back and looking at the large picture, we see: Nephi lying and committing murder. This is to get a copy of the law of Moses, (something he has no problem violating), so his people do not perish in unbelief. His people later all perish in unbelief. This is after the Jaredites all came to the “promised land” and also perished in unbelief….

Once I started to see it all spiritually, it made much more sense – much like the temple ceremony.

So the common denominator is the law of Moses….good to know if I ever want to start my own group of people in the promised land.

I had to give up on the literalism a while back…started looking at most of it as good moral stories, just like Lord of the Rings…Good valid points of how to live a good life…there is evil out there and sometimes we have to stand up against it. However, I’d be fine if the Elf Lords in LoTR were literally real.

[Author]

Posts