Is it possible to metaphorize Joseph Smith's beliefs and visions?

[Francisco_Fernando]

Is it possible to metaphorize Joseph Smith's beliefs and visions? I wonder if God telling him that 'all creeds are corrupt and do not join any churches' means that God must've told him to not listen to corrupt clergy. I wonder if God telling him to marry other women was an 'Abrahamic test' like Isaac. I wonder if Joseph's beliefs on the Trinity can be metaphorized as trinitarian. Or maybe Joseph didn't actually listen to God and was mistaken.

 

[HomeschoolDad]

This is a Catholic forum and matters internal to the Latter-day Saints religious movement aren't of central interest here. This said, what Mr Smith thought or didn't think is unknowable. One could speculate all day.

 

[Francisco_Fernando]

I'm asking if it is morally licit in the Catholic Church to metaphorize such visions.

 

[HomeschoolDad]

I'm asking if it is morally licit in the Catholic Church to metaphorize such visions.

Catholicism assigns no credence whatsoever to the claims of Latter-day Saints. What was actually the explanation for Joseph Smith's visions --- overactive imagination, psychological imbalance, outright fraud, or even demonic influence --- cannot be known. Almighty God would never manifest Himself to any man so as to lead him away from the truth of the Catholic Faith.

As to the claim of the several other men who said that Smith showed them the golden plates, it is altogether possible that Smith made the plates himself out of some metal treated to look like gold, such that the men did indeed see a physical book made out of metal, and took Smith's word for it that they were what he said they were.

 

[Francisco_Fernando]

I was just reframming his life similar to an Orthodox person who was a schismatic and that maybe God was speaking metaphorically to Joseph Smith.

 

[po18guy]

As with Muhammad, there is zero evidence that either tested the spirit who spoke to them.

 

[HomeschoolDad]

As with Muhammad, there is zero evidence that either tested the spirit who spoke to them.

The stories of Muhammad and Joseph Smith do have some parallels, such as claiming to have had revelations that prompted them to say that God's message to man was not complete prior to them, and introducing additional would-be "holy books" that are supposed to be the Word of God.

In the case of the LDS, they claim that the much-romanticized "early Church" (which many use as a palimpsest to make into whatever they want it to be) was, indeed, very similar to their movement today, with their temple ordinances, Aaronic and Melchizedek priesthoods, and so on. In the case of Islam, they "ret-con" the life of Jesus (Whom, to their credit, they do revere, as they do Our Lady) to suggest that portions of the Gospel did not really happen that way. We are warned in Scriptures about false teachers who will come and proclaim another gospel. (Interestingly, both Islam and the LDS urge their adherents to live clean, sober lives, eschewing alcohol, and in the case of the LDS, other consumables that they see as unwholesome. And to their credit, as a result, LDS adherents tend to live longer, healthier lives, and their strong work ethic and sense of community and mutual assistance are not bad things, far from it.)

 

[po18guy]

There are some startling similarities between how Islam and Mormonism unfolded. Revelation to a single man with zero physical evidence or witnesses. Claims of corrupted scripture or Church apostasy. The teaching or acceptance of polygamy. The death of the founders by/during criminal activity. The struggle for control of the religion after the founders died: both pitting family members against organization insiders. One ideology being spread by violence/force while the other by incessant door-knocking.
I wonder what happens when Muslims confront Mormons.

 

[HomeschoolDad]

There are some startling similarities between how Islam and Mormonism unfolded. Revelation to a single man with zero physical evidence or witnesses. Claims of corrupted scripture or Church apostasy. The teaching or acceptance of polygamy. The death of the founders by/during criminal activity. The struggle for control of the religion after the founders died: both pitting family members against organization insiders. One ideology being spread by violence/force while the other by incessant door-knocking.
I wonder what happens when Muslims confront Mormons.

To my knowledge, Muslims no longer seek converts (or, as they would say, "reverts") in that fashion. They present their faith, errant though it is, to the world in general, and invite people to seek it themselves. I did kind of have to chuckle inwardly at the juxtaposition of violent forced conversion with the image of clean-cut, wholesome young people wearing black name tags and showing up at your front door. LDS adherents (their leader told them that they shouldn't call themselves "Mormons" anymore) are about as unthreatening as unthreatening gets.

 

[po18guy]

They have routinely been defeated militarily. They now seek and obtain political power.

 

[Anobsitar]

Catholicism assigns no credence whatsoever to the claims of Latter-day Saints. ...

Not only that, but it is impossible to change the past and baptize the dead. And even if it were possible, it would not make sense, since we must always honor our ancestors, especially our biological parents, just as they are - regardless of anything else. Unfortunately, Mormon baptism thus departs not only from the Holy Church, but also from the entire Christian community.

 

[Anobsitar]

I was just reframming his life similar to an Orthodox person who was a schismatic and that maybe God was speaking metaphorically to Joseph Smith.

He had about 40 wives. So I wonder, what could make his life similar to that of an “orthodox person”? And why do you think God is “schismatic”? One God, one truth, one church. The fact that we are often unable to know and/or agree on what is ultimately true is our problem - not really the problem of God as an omniscient and omnipotent being. We are all always united in Jesus, who was not only 100% human, but also true God from true God. We are on this journey with him - together- not alone. And specially we are not on the way against each other.

 

[Anobsitar]

... I wonder what happens when Muslims confront Mormons.

As far as I know, Joseph Smith has been or is referred to as a “prophet.” But Muslims believe that Muhammad was the last prophet.

 

[po18guy]

As far as I know, Joseph Smith has been or is referred to as a “prophet.” But Muslims believe that Muhammad was the last prophet.

True believer is as true believer does.

 

[Anobsitar]

True believer is as true believer does.

I'm not sure what that means. Let me put it more specifically: In my view, Joseph Smith is nothing more than a liar and political leader. And it took me a long time to realize that I will never know what Muhammad really said. The reason for this is that words are empty - only context creates meaning, and only in context can we understand them. The problem with this context, “Muhammad and his words,” is that the context was destroyed by the author of the Koran. If I remember correctly, that was the third caliph, Osman. So I believe that Joseph Smith only believed in himself, and I will never be able to find out what Muhammad really believed.

But Muslims and Mormons will get problems because of the use of the word "prophet" for Joseph Smith.

 

[po18guy]

A true believer is someone who has absolute faith in a particular belief or doctrine, often showing strong commitment to a cause or ideology. This term can also refer to individuals who persist in their beliefs despite evidence to the contrary, known as true-believer syndrome.

 

[Anobsitar]

A true believer is someone who has absolute faith in a particular belief or doctrine, often showing strong commitment to a cause or ideology. This term can also refer to individuals who persist in their beliefs despite evidence to the contrary, known as true-believer syndrome.

What you are saying here could force me to give a very long answer. The Christian religion, for example, is not an ideology. But first, a quick question: are you an atheist? ... And what, in general, is a false believer according to your definition? Anyone who believes in God?

Personally, I prefer the very old Catholic saying, ‘We are called children of God, and we are.’ Or, in other words, in this context: God is truth, and we can recognise him in every truth. It is suboptimal to believe something that is not true – but it is equally suboptimal not to recognise the widespread atheistic paradox, ‘I don't believe in belief.’

 

[po18guy]

I view Protestantism as an ideology derived from Christianity.

 

[Anobsitar]

I view Protestantism as an ideology derived from Christianity.

Which is wrong. The Christian religion itself is not an ideology. It is always open to criticism, without anyone needing to know anything about the Christian religion. Truth is always true – independent of anything other than truth itself. And the Holy Spirit blows where it wills. But sometimes we need centuries to discuss it. Fortunately, it's even easier than that: anyone can criticise a Christian, for example with the simple question, ‘And you're sure that this (... whatever it is ...) is love?’ But ... do you remember Jesus? ... No one threw a stone at the adulteress. ‘Automatisms’ are often a problem – unless we have the right guidance and/or intuition so that we are anything but helpless in the fight against the worst enemy, even if we are sometimes on our own.

 

[po18guy]

I stick with what I have said. Sorry you disagree. Consider doing some history of the Church prior to the 1500s. Here is a good start. Former Lutheran PhD William Marshner.