Why did Smith need plates at all when he didn't use them?

[Jim Swarthout]

Originally Posted by UtahDan

I think the binary world is being presented less and less and will be presented still less in years to come.

I think we are emerging form what I think of as a "dark age" on some of these things. In other words, during the first maybe sixty or so years of the church there were people alive who remembered the early history of the church, many of them ordinary members. Once they were all gone, the primary source for information was the church itself through talks and instruction manuals which by design emphasized certain things over others. This lead to several generations of LDS not having access to many of the details of our history. In the internet age, this information has become available first through the anti's and the apologists who respond to them, and more and more through serious scholars both LDS and non-LDS who study us.

During the "dark age" I think a very binary view evolved among the members since they only had one source of information and and anything that varied from it was easily dismissed as "anti." This was not some disinformation campaign by the church, IMO, BTW.

In the modern age there is just a lot out there that cannot be dismissed, a fair amount of which I imagine may even be unfamiliar to some of the leadership of the church, which has not up until now been in the mainstream. I think we are in the process, as a church, of assimilating these things both culturally and in our teachings. There is understandable skepticism about that which is not familiar. In the end though, my guess is that various translation methods will become well enough known to the membership that people will think that this is what was always taught.

As has been pointed out, the story of the restoration is already fantastic and cannot be believed without faith. My sense is that slowly adding much of this in won't hurt too many people's feelings. I was glad to see the reference to the hat/stone method of translation in conference. This is the sort of "inoculation" I have been arguing for.

Nice use of the term "inoculation." Are you a Sunstone reader or Mormon Matters podcast listener?

[Jeff Lebowski]

Originally Posted by Jim Swarthout

Nice use of the term "inoculation." Are you a Sunstone reader or Mormon Matters podcast listener?

We have discussed that term quite thoroughly on CG. It needs to be in our glossary. Errr.... we need a glossary.

[UtahDan]

Originally Posted by ChinoCoug

Dark age? Were you Buddhist or Hindu, this non-binary world would work. But Christianity, Islam, Judaism, and Mormonism are historical religions. Their validity depends on things happening. If Jesus isn't who he said he is (or who we think he said he is), we have no Savior. If JSmith didn't see God, no restoration.

I hope you're not attributing the facile argument you just outlined to me? I used the example of revelatory technique, not whether Joseph saw God, etc.

[UtahDan]

Originally Posted by Jim Swarthout

Nice use of the term "inoculation." Are you a Sunstone reader or Mormon Matters podcast listener?

Neither one, I actually picked that term up from someone here. Don't remember whom. I think it is a good descriptor so I've used it.

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by UtahDan

Neither one, I actually picked that term up from someone here. Don't remember whom. I think it is a good descriptor so I've used it.

We brought it up in the discussion of Dan Stewart's article on innoculating Members by introducing the weird aspects of our history from faithful members to avoid many problems sheltered members experience when it's introduced from the outside.

[Jim Swarthout]

Originally Posted by Archaea

We brought it up in the discussion of Dan Stewart's article on innoculating Members by introducing the weird aspects of our history from faithful members to avoid many problems sheltered members experience when it's introduced from the outside.

"Inoculating the Saints" was the title of a recent panel discussion at the 2007 SLC Sunstone Symposium. (http://www.sunstoneonline.com/sympos...mp-results.asp you'll find it about 7/8 of the way down the page).

It was also "re-aired" on John Dehlin's "Mormon Matters" podcast: http://mormonmatters.org/?p=22

[Sleeping in EQ]

Originally Posted by Jim Swarthout

"Inoculating the Saints" was the title of a recent panel discussion at the 2007 SLC Sunstone Symposium. (http://www.sunstoneonline.com/sympos...mp-results.asp you'll find it about 7/8 of the way down the page).

It was also "re-aired" on John Dehlin's "Mormon Matters" podcast: http://mormonmatters.org/?p=22

True, but the term has been in circulation for quite a while. As Arch mentioned, the term gained currency on CG from our discussion of a Sunstone article from the first of the year. We've discussed John Dehlin some as well.

There are some Sunstone, Dialogue, and Mormon History Association types around here. It's good to have another!