Quote:
Originally Posted by non sequitur
I don't see how one can accept that the BoM is not historical and still continue to have have faith in Mormonism. That reconciliation seems like a torturous bit of mental gymnastics. The BoM claims to be a history. JS claimed it was a history. Countless prophets and apostles have also claimed it to be so. That claim is at the very heart of Mormonism. If the BoM is not what it purports to be, then the whole ball of yarn called Mormonism quickly unravels.
I liken your attitude to a guy who has had an autographed Mickey Mantle baseball on his mantle for years, only to discover that it was never really signed by Mickey Mantle. The ball might give him comfort because it has become a fixture in his life, and he might even try to convince himself that the ball has value, but in his heart he'll always know the ball is worthless. If I'm that guy, I'm going to get rid of the ball.
|
I think you are wrong about this. Someone I respect a great deal has often said to me that even if none of it is true (the church) it certainly provides a wonderful framework for ones life, a community, a place where others will help you raise you children to be moral people. I can respect that fact that some conclude that the BOM is non-historical on the one hand, but that its teachings and the church built around it can help a person have a happier life on the other. I do not think that Joel Olsteen, for example, is a prophet. But I like to listen to him because I have often heard something there that made me think and helped me be better and happier. Many people view the church this way and I don't see why a belief that the BOM is fiction requires a contrary conclusion. I don't fault your point of view because I think that point of view I am describing is only a choice and not required either.