- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
It’s a rhetorical question I guess. I’ve come to the point that I have moved from defending the BoM as historically accurate and how I used to try to fit the lands into existing maps, to a general agnosticism. Is it possible that there were these people that came from the old world to the new? Sure. Are they the principal ancesters of the American Indians? Doubtful. (I know this is not stated in the BoM that they were the ancestors, I’m just comparing)
Part of this came on after reading the Bible cover to cover, and finding many of the same inconsistencies, that I felt the BoM had. The story telling seems to be just that, moral tales to help humans live better lives. Did Jesus exist? Probably. Are the stories written about him historically accurate or have they been imbellished? Possibly.
Whether or not Nephi was a real person is the same as whether or not Jonah was a real person and swallowed by a whale.
How has this affected my spirituality? I feel like I’ve become luke warm. Church-wise, for sure.
I recently renewed my TR, was able to honestly answer all of the questions (the church may not be the one and only way to god, but for me I could answer that the church is the only one for me [to paraphrase and simply my nuance] you get what I mean).
Anyway I feel like I’m rambling, that thought had been on my mind for a while and I’m feeling apathetic.
Thanks for letting me ramble disjointed and incomplete thoughts.
It depends which Nephi you mean. There are several after all. :crazy: In some senses it doesn’t matter if the Nephis were real. It’s all about what you get out of the Book of Mormon. Some people believe they were real and don’t get much out of it. Some people believe they were fictional and do.
Theoretically you could have someone who thinks the Book of Mormon characters are real but the story’s skewed (interestingly in a couple of parts of the Book of Mormon, the Lamanites speak for themselves and provide a very different perspective, which is in my view one of the cases in favor of it being a real document.) In an extreme version of this idea, then you could say the BOM is biased like parts of the Bible, which would make parts of it better than others, and not equally inspired.
Likewise, there are even some people who think the BoM is entirely fictional, who nonetheless admire it as a work of literature, and even derive inspiration from it.
Myself, I have had spiritual experiences with the Book of Mormon I find hard to explain. But it doesn’t matter a hill of beans to me if it is the record of an ancient civilization or not. They could find Laban’s sword or curelom skeletons but that wouldn’t be the important thing. Or they could find sweet nada. It’s what the BoM and the stories of Nephi(s) mean to me in the present day which counts.
Personally, I don’t believe Moses ever existed. Or if he did, his whole identity and story got twisted far beyond any recognition, and none of the biblical stories about him hold much more than a sliver of truth. As with the Book of Mormon, yes, I believe there is some truth in it. For example, I believe King Zedekiah was a literal person… but that’s about it. With Jesus, I believe he was a real person, but I also believe he is probably the most misunderstood character in all of history. I don’t think he was distorted as much as “whatever-moses’-origins-were”, but I don’t think most would recognize him today. For example, it’s like with Star Wars. It speaks to our souls. It holds “eternal truths”. But it is also a work of fiction. Does that make it any less valuble? I’d say no. It might even make it more valuble, that we recognize it as a fiction, because it can speak to each of us differently. So let’s say there’s a group of people who love Star Wars but recognize it as a fiction. Then lets say a cult pops up who believes the events in “Star Wars” actually happened, and are trying to reconnect with the “force”. Let’s also say they teach mostly good things, but also some bad things, and a few pretty awful. All of it is based around the historicality of Star Wars. Then, there’s a third group that believes “Star Wars” should be banned because of the second group. They claim the “Star Wars” cult is decieving people, and taking their money. While it might be good on some level, it also does plenty of harm, and any goodness would be better coming from elsewhere.
I think those are akin to the three groups of people people fall into with the Book of Mormon, or even the Bible. Or at least they fall somewhere inbetween. I feel like I’m in the first group, while the Church is the second group. The third are the anti’s. While I agree with most of the premis behind the third group, but I don’t want to wreck the meaning behind the “fandom” of the second group. They’ve got some cool insights, even if I don’t agree with most of it. It gives meaning to them, and I try to be ok with it… unless they start hurting people, in which case
“not cool!”. But I’m still not comfortable giving them money, or participating in rites that require a profession of belief. “Do you believe Master Tarogth to be the chief among Jedi, and the only living being capable of exercising the force in all it’s power and glory?” Some could dance around that question, but I’ve gotta say “no”. Still, I wish to and want to fanboy about the BOM and Bible. I just don’t want to be fully associated with the literalness of belief in the second group.
The trouble with Star Wars is that it is utterly commercial and what spiritual messages it has are undermined and destroyed by the fact that the makers of the films are so obsessed with making money out of every last detail. Star Wars is to spirituality what the Spice Girls are to opera.
SamBee wrote:
The trouble with Star Wars is that it is utterly commercial and what spiritual messages it has are undermined and destroyed by the fact that the makers of the films are so obsessed with making money out of every last detail.Star Wars is to spirituality what the Spice Girls are to opera.
Unfortunately, I could say the same thing about religion. There are plenty of people out there, who just use religion as a money-making scheme. I can turn on my TV any Sunday morning and find half a dozen different TV Evangelists urging people to send in their money.
I would like to reorganize the Star Wars Universe, counting everything after ESB as apostate and the work of a fallen prophet. Quote:I would like to reorganize the Star Wars Universe, counting everything after ESB as apostate and the work of a fallen prophet.
Amen.
SamBee wrote:
The trouble with Star Wars is that it is utterly commercial and what spiritual messages it has are undermined and destroyed by the fact that the makers of the films are so obsessed with making money out of every last detail.Star Wars is to spirituality what the Spice Girls are to opera.
Not surprisingly, I disagree. There’s the other thread about finding truth elsewhere (or everywhere). There is truth in Star Wars (and Dickens and Tolkien and Poe and Mozart and….). There are people here who would argue that this church and/or others are really about making money – and there’s some truth there as well. Just because it’s “for profit” doesn’t mean there’s no truth (prophet) in it.
Back to the OP. My view of the BoM is very similar to my view of the Bible. I think most of the Bible is “fictitious” (or not literal) but conveys a moral message. I don’t believe Jonah was real (or at least the literal fish part), I’m pretty sure Job is actually a sort of compilation story that’s really several people some of who are not real (maybe none are), I’m not sure Moses was real (nor that the Jews were held captive in Egypt), etc. That doesn’t mean I don’t get the same meaning from all of those stories that someone who literally believes them does. In my mind such is the BoM. It’s a good book that teaches of Jesus Christ and and and does bring people closer to God and their Savior. To me whether or not Nephi or the Lamanites or anyone else int he book are real are immaterial – that doesn’t mean it’s immaterial to others. I respect that others need to have the literal belief and “need” to know that it took place in a specific part of the Americas (wherever that may be), and can only hope that they can have the same respect for my belief that I have for theirs. That said, I have no need to “flaunt” my belief – I can keep it quietly to myself content that we both benefit from our beliefs.
SamBee wrote:
The trouble with Star Wars is that it is utterly commercial and what spiritual messages it has are undermined and destroyed by the fact that the makers of the films are so obsessed with making money out of every last detail.
If it’s popular,
someonewill try make a fortune off of it. But people still do find spiritual enlightenment from it. People find spiritual enlightenment in a lot of things. And people can, and have, churned a religion out of just about everything. But no matter how messy, complicated, or even corrupt its origins can be, doesn’t mean people can’t pull a lot of value, meaning, and purpose from it. I totally get the Star Wars analogy. I similarly associate many things in life, ie Force to the Spirit, midichloridans to the priesthood etc. I thought about Moses as well when I started writing, as well as others. There are so many similarities with other fables.
If someone at one time believed that the SW saga were actual events, and no longer feels that way, it would affect the way they then feel towards all aspects related to and associated with it.
I guess I need to figure out my goal. What is the point of asking all these questions, is it to break myself out of this apathy? I like deep philosophical thought and challenging questions, yet I don’t take enough time to thoroughly explore them.
I appreciate everyone’s input on the site. Often I read and don’t comment for lack of time, or other distractions. If I had more time…. Always more time… And cranial capacity.
Holy Cow wrote:
SamBee wrote:
The trouble with Star Wars is that it is utterly commercial and what spiritual messages it has are undermined and destroyed by the fact that the makers of the films are so obsessed with making money out of every last detail.Star Wars is to spirituality what the Spice Girls are to opera.
Unfortunately, I could say the same thing about religion. There are plenty of people out there, who just use religion as a money-making scheme. I can turn on my TV any Sunday morning and find half a dozen different TV Evangelists urging people to send in their money.
Some religion, yes. But George Lucas is little better than a prostitute when it comes to Star Wars. The amount of merchandizing connected with the first film was completely unheard of and shocked many people at the time.
The best Star Wars film is Empire Strikes Back, but even then I watch these things and I realize so many things in it, which are purely there as an opportunity to sell toys. It gets worse in Return of the Jedi with all these teddy bears running round.
Lucas is to film what the worst money grubbing televangelists are to religion. Luckily I live in a country where religious programming rarely consists of the “give me your money” variety.
A decent religion will give you advice for free, even help you when you are poor.
Also I find that there is a sinister undercurrent to StarWars’ pop Taoism, i.e. the idea that good is an element of evil and vice versa. There are spiritual messages in the franchise which when you unpack them are either ill thought out or dangerous. The recent films (I haven’t seen Solo) undermine them further by turning Luke Skywalker into a mass murderer.
On Own Now wrote:
I would like to reorganize the Star Wars Universe, counting everything after ESB as apostate and the work of a fallen prophet.
That’s by far the best film and I tend to agree. However as I say above, I don’t completely agree with some of the spiritual mesages in the films.
Awful spin off films are nothing new. They did a few SW spin offs no one cares to remember back in the 80s.
By the way, if you’re looking for spiritual messages in science fiction, the Dune series by Frank Herbert makes Lucas’ efforts look like a 13 year old writing pop fan fiction. (Did I mention Lucas blatantly stole from Herbert, again and again? Paul and his sister Alia become Luke and his sister Leia -Lucas barely bothered changing her name.) Herbert wrote too many sequels to be honest, and it’s never worked well on screen, but there are some amazing insights in there, although I don’t agree with them all either.
DarkJedi wrote:Not surprisingly, I disagree. There’s the other thread about finding truth elsewhere (or everywhere). There is truth in Star Wars (and Dickens and Tolkien and Poe and Mozart and….). There are people here who would argue that this church and/or others are really about making money – and there’s some truth there as well. Just because it’s “for profit” doesn’t mean there’s no truth (prophet) in it.
When I read Dickens, Poe or Tolkien, I don’t see them cutting/smoothing corners that some Hollywood test audience survey persuaded them to. Dickens comes closest – he wrote in installments, so is wordy – but I’ve always found his work sincere in a way that Lucas isn’t. Dickens’ work led to social change and an end to child labor in England – Star Wars has probably used child labor to churn out some of its merchandise. I don’t read Dickens’ books and wonder what second rate toy or computer game he is trying to sell me off the back of it.
Quote:Back to the OP. My view of the BoM is very similar to my view of the Bible. I think most of the Bible is “fictitious” (or not literal) but conveys a moral message.
I see similarities, but there are some major differences. When we read the BoM in English, we know that it is close to Smith’s version. With the Bible, there are multiple versions, some of which are quite different. We know that the BoM is presented as Smith intended. Smith’s culture is not completely dissimilar to ours (or at least could be found a few generations ago), although technology is changing that rapidly. Even if we accept the BoM as the product of ancient civilizations we have an early modern prism to see it through. The Bible on the other hand, is from ancient civilizations without doubt, and more than one. Smith as editor provides a consistency and flow which the Bible lacks.
The Bible has a lot of major questions which have linguists, mythologists and historians scratching their heads. There is no question that the Bible is thousands of years old -even its detractors say so. When we talk about Jonah or Moses, even those who think they were not historical, are aware that there are many layers here.
SamBee wrote:
There are spiritual messages in the franchise which when you unpack them are either ill thought out or dangerous.
Lol, this is EXACTLY how I feel about both the BOM and Bible. Maybe even moreso.
dande48 wrote:
SamBee wrote:
There are spiritual messages in the franchise which when you unpack them are either ill thought out or dangerous.
Lol, this is EXACTLY how I feel about both the BOM and Bible. Maybe even moreso.
I knew someone would say that. I don’t find most of the messages in the BoM dangerous, except perhaps lopping off someone’s head. I have more trouble with the Old Testament.
But neither the Bible nor the BoM were written mainly to produce a line of sweat shop clothing, computer games and dumb toys. Not originally anyway.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.