What Mormonism boils down to

[Anonymous]

nibbler wrote:

I feel certain that if, in our homes, parents will read from the Book of Mormon prayerfully and regularly, both by themselves and with their children, the spirit of complaining bitterly about having to read scripture will come to permeate our homes and all who dwell therein. :angel:

Nibbler, this was a tradition in my childhood, that I have proudly passed on to my family

Heber–I totally agree with you. I think it’s the reading of good books that does indeed help fulfill the promise ETB speaks of. Doing those things as families helps common values permeate our homes. I’m fine with parts of the BofM making into that rotation.

DarkJedi wrote:

Thanks for giving me the opportunity to vent, Startpoor.

You’re welcome. Admittedly, my ward’s BofM lesson didn’t mention this quote. It was all sorts of other madness.

Old-Timer wrote:

What works for some people doesn’t work for others – but most people don’t understand that, even some prophets.

In his defense, he did say, “I feel certain . . .” That isn’t a promise, no matter how much too many members think it is.

I don’t defend Pres. Benson very often (okay, almost never), but there is NOTHING inaccurate in what he actually said. He did feel certain about it – and he was right for many members but wrong for many others.

Also, to be as blunt as possible, I think the title of this post is just as inaccurate as the accuracy of the quote being discussed. I think to say that Mormonism boils down to being blessed for reading the Book of Mormon is incredibly simplistic and wrong – kind of the polar opposite mirror-image of the quote in question.

If we condemn or criticize hyperbole from others, we ought not use it ourselves.

Benson’s quote wasn’t intended to be hyperbole, he meant it, and whether it was a promise or not, it has taken on a life of its own and has become such by well meaning members and leaders. Pardon my title, but I really cannot think of a “promise/teaching” that has influenced the culture of Mormonism more than that one. What surprises me is how many members will “admit” this in one way or another. My dad’s advice to me when going through my FC, is “everybody knows about this stuff, but nobody cares. Just do what you’re supposed to and you’ll be happier.” A member in my ward told me he knows there are historical issues but he willfully ignores them to maintain peace in his marriage. I put off serious study for the same reason. The bulk of DW’s testimony comes from the fulfillment of his quote. It has become a member fulfilled prophecy!

[Anonymous]

The church works well for many people. IME when people are happy and fulfilled they are less likely to be bothered by historical stuff. Also some people just do not have a mind for history.

I do remember in SS the instructor asking the meaning of the word “panacea”. I had actually looked that word up not to long previous so I explained that it means “cure-all” and is usually used to say that xyz is not a cure-all because it will not fix EVERYTHING.

The teacher then read the quote from the manual that said that the gospel was a panacea. I was quiet. :silent:

[Anonymous]

startpoor, I am not defending the quote in any way. It works for many and doesn’t for many others. However, I still say Mormonism absolutely doesn’t boil down to, “Read the Book of Mormon and everything will be rosy in your life.” I dare say the VAST majority of members would not accept that statement, as worded, especially if removed from the context and not attributed to a Church President.

Of course, the way so many members uncritically accept whatever one Church President says is an issue – but most of them only do that with statements with which they agree already, generally. As we say here fairly often, we all are cafeteria members; most just don’t see it in themselves because they choose to ignore the things they don’t put on their plates and assume they aren’t picking and choosing.

If that quote is what Mormonism boils down to, where does temple theology fit – or eternal progression – or the nature of the Godhead – or building Zion – or continuing revelation – or all of the Articles of Faith – ad infinitum.

If I were to say what I believe Mormonism boils down to, I would say, “I am a child of God.” (and all of the implications of taking that statement literally)

Each person here probably would say something different – slightly or significantly, and so would most orthodox, traditional members. That diversity is part of the beauty of Mormonism, imo – and it is beautiful to me, even with the messiness of so many things.

[Anonymous]

Heber13 wrote:

I don’t dislike ETB. On my mission, he was a huge source of inspiration for me, and the talk on Pride was outstanding, and his emphasis on BOM was good for the church and moved many people to good actions.

I don’t love everything he said. But at least he wasn’t boring and never said any opinionated things. As a leader, he had a job to do, and sometimes did it.

Brigham Young doesn’t seem like a warm guy either…idk…but he had to keep the church together after JS and move the masses to a new place. He was successful in somethings he had to do (although I didn’t care for the polygamy or Adam-God stuff).

I am not sure what Mormonism boils down to. At different times it seems to have different things it needs to be to benefit people. Not necessarily what people want it to be, but what it needs to be.

I think it needs the Book of Mormon. It is a big part of what makes the religion different. And ETB kicked the church in the pants and said to everyone…”Read it! This is our scripture…we need to know it!”

I don’t dislike ETB, either – saying he is my least favorite still denotes he’s a favorite (depending on your point of view, of course ). I highlighted part of your comment because I found the talk on pride one of the most distasteful. I agree with Pres. Uchtdorf:

Quote:

I also remember one interesting side effect of President Benson’s influential talk. For a while it almost became taboo among Church members to say that they were “proud” of their children or their country or that they took “pride” in their work. The very word pride seemed to become an outcast in our vocabulary.

I vividly recall these conversations in classes and even SM talks – pride became as vile a word as doubt is to some today. (I’ve been hit with “doubt your doubts” twice in the last three days.) I didn’t like the pride talk then and I don’t like it now – but that doesn’t mean it has no value and it doesn’t mean ETB was evil. DFU goes on to say many of the same things, just in a softer way and with some clarification.

The jury is still out for me on the BoM. As I have said, it’s a good book, it can bring people closer to God and Christ, and it is unique to Mormonism (including offshoots). But I think it should be no more than equal to the Bible (which does the first two above and also contains the fullness of the gospel), and for me making it more important than the “New” Testament does not put it in its place as “another” testament (a rather recent addition to the title). That is my point of view, however, and I understand that others may get more out of it, and less out of the Bible, than I do.

[Anonymous]

startpoor wrote:

This quote from ETB manual from ch 9 on the Book of Mormon, I think, is the core reason behind the motivation and fear that drives members to remain orthodox, to willfully ignore facts, refrain from reading the scriptures objectively and to lack empathy when someone else refuses to do so:

“I feel certain that if, in our homes, parents will read from the Book of Mormon prayerfully and regularly, both by themselves and with their children, the spirit of that great book will come to permeate our homes and all who dwell therein. The spirit of reverence will increase; mutual respect and consideration for each other will grow. The spirit of contention will depart. Parents will counsel their children in greater love and wisdom. Children will be more responsive and submissive to the counsel of their parents. Righteousness will increase. Faith, hope, and charity—the pure love of Christ—will abound in our homes and lives, bringing in their wake peace, joy, and happiness” (Ensign, May 1980, p. 67).

Thoughts?

As far as I can tell Mormonism mostly boils down to, “Follow the prophet(s).” If you think about it at this point being LDS is primarily about a handful of Mormon traditions like temple marriage, full-time missions, and the checklist of temple-worthiness points and other explicit expectations that often have little or nothing to do with what Jesus originally taught according to the Bible or even what you will read about in the Book of Mormon such as the Word of Wisdom and garments. Well how do we know these things are all that important? Basically because Church leaders said so, that’s why. And why exactly is it so important to listen to what Church leaders say? Because they claim to speak directly for God, that’s why.

Sure you can make it more complicated than that if you want to but to me it looks like anything above and beyond the basic checklist that is actually enforced by interviews and/or other members checking up on whether you did what you were supposed to according to the Church are basically optional afterthoughts for practical purposes. Take away the confidence in LDS prophets and apostles and what are we really left with? I guess in theory we should still have some variation of Christianity at that point but even in that case we are still left with the expectations of other Church members that continue to believe LDS prophets and apostles absolutely know what they are talking about to deal with.

So to me it looks like many of the negative aspects of the current Church doctrines and culture are all a direct product of the single basic root problem of overconfidence in revelation as the best way to know what we should do and why, what is true or not, etc. This quote demonstrates some of the overconfidence that if we just do what we are told then everything will supposedly work out for the best when in many cases it’s simply not going to happen that way in practice but it could be hard for many members to see what is wrong with the quote at first glance especially if they are already on board with the Church’s program because if they don’t experience the promised blessings like happiness, prosperity, etc. then it seems like they could always blame themselves for not doing enough or as much as they could have instead of questioning how realistic these claims and promises really are to begin with.

[Anonymous]

DarkJedi wrote:

I don’t dislike ETB, either – saying he is my least favorite still denotes he’s a favorite (depending on your point of view, of course )

:clap: Well done, sir! I’ll have to remember that when my son says “I don’t want any beans. They’re my least favorite thing of all!” …I can reply…”So…they are your favorite then!” 🙂 (Sounds like a Dumb and Dumber quote…”What was all that one in a million talk??” haha).

DarkJedi wrote:

Pres Uchtdorf: I also remember one interesting side effect of President Benson’s influential talk. For a while it almost became taboo among Church members to say that they were “proud” of their children or their country or that they took “pride” in their work. The very word pride seemed to become an outcast in our vocabulary.

I remember those debates in class too…but it seemed the most reasonable people knew there were times being proud of our accomplishments was not sin. Only the truly literal and staunch narrow minded people would take the extreme position that all pride is evil because the prophet said so. And I remember that being part of the debates in class. I think that was President Uchtdorf’s point…we should use wisdom in our obedience to prophet teachings. Because I don’t think that was the point ETB was making…all pride is sin. He was saying all sin comes from unrighteous pride. And I think at the time, the church needed to hear that, as we too often think we are so special in the church.

Old-Timer wrote:

If I were to say what I believe Mormonism boils down to, I would say, “I am a child of God.” (and all of the implications of taking that statement literally)

This is a good summation of what Mormonism boils down to for me. Thanks Ray. I didn’t think I could find something…and was leaning towards “God loves us”…but that wasn’t quite hitting mormonism to me. But being taught we’re children of God really is the crux of it all, and all the teachings and doctrines flow out of that statement. The fact Joseph Smith was talked to, that God has a body, that the Book of Mormon is about the Atonement…all this comes back to that simple lesson. All that God does is because we are His children. (See Moses 1).

[Anonymous]

Heber13 wrote:

Old-Timer wrote:

If I were to say what I believe Mormonism boils down to, I would say, “I am a child of God.” (and all of the implications of taking that statement literally)

This is a good summation of what Mormonism boils down to for me. Thanks Ray. I didn’t think I could find something…and was leaning towards “God loves us”…but that wasn’t quite hitting mormonism to me. But being taught we’re children of God really is the crux of it all, and all the teachings and doctrines flow out of that statement. The fact Joseph Smith was talked to, that God has a body, that the Book of Mormon is about the Atonement…all this comes back to that simple lesson. All that God does is because we are His children. (See Moses 1).

I think you guys are nailing it here. I think it really does boil down to this:

Quote:

For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.

I think when our Apostles talk about the gospel being so simple a child can understand it, they’re referring to this.

[Anonymous]

DevilsAdvocate wrote:

As far as I can tell Mormonism mostly boils down to, “Follow the prophet(s).”

I agree with DA on this one. I look at the way Mormonism is applied in our modern church and it seems to me to be a system of salvation. As in if you follow the system you will be saved/exalted. At the top of the system is a divine head. This is a person or body of persons that receive communication and authority from God. Otherwise the system would be just another man made institution without any saving power.

You can know with all your heart that you are literally a child of God and that he loves you but that won’t do you much good unless that knowledge inpires you to work the system. (or so the understanding goes…)

“Follow the Prophet” with the understanding that the Prophet is divinely authorized of God is a pretty good summary of Mormonism for me. The rest is auxillory.

[Anonymous]

DevilsAdvocate wrote:

Basically because Church leaders said so, that’s why.

I like to think that we’re growing up as a church and allowing for more variations of belief and practice. Maybe conversations like this are a vital part – along with boots on the Sunday ground – of the restoration. Maybe the internet is going to help us finally boil Mormonism down to its true essentials.

[Anonymous]

Ann wrote

Quote:

I like to think that we’re growing up as a church and allowing for more variations of belief and practice.

I agree.

I also think in a weird way our religion is having to speed up it’s teen year procedures. Other religions took hundreds of years to move to their current system. I also think Mormonism boils down to different strokes for different folks. If you really pressed people you would get different answers – eternal families, becoming Gods, sealing ordinances, saving the dead, being Christlike, spreading the gospel. Sometimes they overlap or we pick 2 or 3 without even considering it.

In my lifetime alone (and I can remember David O McKay’s death – DJ I win.) we have swung from, being another Christian religion (McKay), Geneology and Family History (Joseph Fielding Smith), Food Storage (Joseph Fielding Smith and Harold B. Lee), Lamanite Children, Journal Keeping, Long Life Lists (Spencer W. Kimball), Pride and BoM (Benson), Temple Recommends for everyone (Howard W. Hunter), History, Temples, PR (Gordon B. Hinckley), Ear wiggling (Thomas S. Monson).

Mormonism is like the tide, it comes and goes. We’ve left the city of Zion behind – That was our forefather’s dream.

[Anonymous]

mom3 wrote:

Ear wiggling (Thomas S. Monson).

Hey – I can wiggle my ears (even 1 at a time). I guess this is one way I can follow the prophet! 🙂

[Anonymous]

😆

I’d give Monson story telling in addition to ear wiggling.

What’s this about Hunter’s temple recommends for everyone? (I’ve got this mental image of Oprah now). I only had a few months of ETB and a few months of HWH and that was when I was still cutting my teeth.

[Anonymous]

Howard W. Hunter only served 6 months as President/Prophet. His health was very ailing, but in the minimal addresses he did give, he encouraged members to keep or get a recommend, even if you didn’t have a temple nearby. It was the only accomplishment I could pin on him, except hanging in there those few months.

[Anonymous]

One of the things I liked about Pres. Hunter was that he unabashedly admitted not serving a mission, no war/military excuses and so forth – he simply chose not to serve (and played with his band instead).

[Anonymous]

mom3 wrote:

Howard W. Hunter only served 6 months as President/Prophet. His health was very ailing, but in the minimal addresses he did give, he encouraged members to keep or get a recommend, even if you didn’t have a temple nearby. It was the only accomplishment I could pin on him, except hanging in there those few months.

I remember him giving some emphasis on the Atonement, and I remember liking that focus.

As each prophet seems to have something they’re known for or emphasize, they don’t really define all of what mormonism boils down to. Just some messages at the time that needs to be emphasized to keep us on track with “the main message”.

As a whole…they seem to all point back to “I am a child of God”, “There is a plan of happiness”, “this is my work and my glory—to bring to pass the immortality and eternal life of man.” That is what mormonism boils down to for me.

I think that is why we get criticized by some christians, because we don’t just say Christ is the main message…we kind of take it one step further to ask “Why is Christ the central figure? Because of His role in God’s Plan.”

[Author]

Posts