How the Mormon Church Now Explains the Translation of the Book of Mormon

  • Thread starter Thread starter Chris-Wa1
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I was thinking about this when I saw the Mormon missionaries take communion at the Easter Vigil after being asked by the Priest not to. No respect.
 
Stephen168 said:
I was thinking about this when I saw the Mormon missionaries take communion at the Easter Vigil after being asked by the Priest not to. No respect.
Click to expand...
What? This is a total lack of respect, similar to those who wish to desecrate the Eucharist.
 
Stephen168 said:
I was thinking about this when I saw the Mormon missionaries take communion at the Easter Vigil after being asked by the Priest not to. No respect.
Click to expand...
LDS missionaries occasionally do bone-headed things. Please accept my apology and please have a Joyous and Happy Easter.
 
Stephen168 said:
I was thinking about this when I saw the Mormon missionaries take communion at the Easter Vigil after being asked by the Priest not to. No respect.
Click to expand...
I don’t know,their motivations for this, but I can say, first, a lot of young Mormons are beyond clueless about what others believe and hold as sacred…and don’t really care for,that matter. And second, the hunger for Christ in the Eucharist, can never be discounted.
 
Last edited:
“Doubt your doubts.” Who said that? I can’t remember.
 
Last edited:
Do you think the church is headed in the direction of someday changing their story by saying the BoM is not factual but rather is religious allegory? It seems they are caught between a rock and a hard place. On the one hand the BoM as factual history is becoming more and more untenable. On the other hand they have always taught that it is factually true. Either way presents problemsfor the church. Something has got to give sooner or later and I wonder which way it will go.
 
Last edited:
Chris-Wa1 said:
“Doubt your doubts.” Who said that? I can’t remember.
Click to expand...
That was in a general conference talk by Elder Uchtdorf, the second counselor of the first presidency, if I remember correctly. It has since been repeated a lot.
 
Ah yes, Uchtdorf. Didn’t he get demoted last year? Wasn’t he one of the leaders that was supposedly open to more transparency?
 
I’m not sure you would call it a demotion but he’s no longer in the first presidency. He retains his seniority among the apostles.

As far as transparency goes, I can’t imagine any of the apostles advocating transparency. The Church essays were a miserable example of what the leadership deems as being transparent.
 
Yes that is true. They know all too well they have to tow the line for the church to survive, even if some of them know the church is false. Grant Palmer spoke about his meetings with an unbelieving GA who told him the same.
 
Last edited:
Is it common for a counselor in the First Presidency to get the boot when a new prophet takes over?
 
From what I remember it seems that once one made the first presidency they tended to stay there until they passed. I think this is unusual.
 
Yes from my understanding the senior apostle is in line to be the next prophet, but it’s quite unusual for one to be kicked out of the first presidency. Got to wonder what was going on with Uchtdorf. I’ve heard people liked his conference talks the best because he was just a little out of the box. Now they all have to suffer through Oaks all the time.
 
Last edited:
I have to admit that I have wondered who the seventy was who Grant Palmer was talking about. But to his credit he never violated his confidence even to the day he died. Palmer said there were a number of others in high positions who knew the church wasn’t true but they were either afraid to come out or simply didn’t want to give up the glory and power they possessed.
 
Yes I heard the same story. I wonder who those guys will talk to now.
 
They also didn’t want to leave millions of followers without a god.
 
Stephen168 said:
Mormonism has changed its beliefs about the Book of Mormon, so they can still say it is true. There are Mormons now claiming it is an allegory so they can “feel” it is true. They are hungry for a way to stay Mormon, so they can avoid the ridicule and pain of leaving.
Click to expand...
So true. I’ve heard Mormon Stories podcasts of members who want to make it work so badly even though they have serious problems with the history or other issues. They end up coming to some nuanced understanding just so they can intellectually stay in the church, buy often their nuanced understanding is in direct conflict with church teaching and it seems obvious they will eventually have to leave. It’s a very painful situation for them.
 
Last edited:
I think they will do what they have always done. Gaslight, lie, reimagine, deny, blame shift. But most of all just remain silent and let conjecture within the membership lead them to periodic press releases that follow a path of least resistance.
 
Last edited:
Well, it’s going to take A LOT of reimagining to change their story of the Book of Mormon being historically factual. I’m not sure it could be done with success. Either way, eventually something has got to give because everyday more and more LDS are looking for answers to the tough questions.
 
Last edited:
I think it is one of the more fascinating things about a lot of Mormons that I know. They don’t know what they know and sometimes I am floored by the things they say.

One example, a coworker had been to Nauvoo and said to me how it was unfortunate that the LDS Church did not own all of the historical sites there, because if they did, they could control the narrative. That sums it up. It is the narrative that needs to keep the calm among the members. The active members aren’t concerned that the narrative is factual or even rational.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top