Kimball explained what he called the "three levels" of Mormon history, which he termed Levels A, B, and C. (Given my own background in philosophy, I might have chosen Hegel's terminology instead: "thesis," "antithesis" and "synthesis.")
This reminds me of certain project I need to get back to!
From the Article "The claims of the Restoration do, in fact, stand up to historical examination, although (very likely by divine design) their truth is neither so blazingly obvious nor so indisputable as to compel acceptance — least of all from people disinclined to accept them."
Normal interpretation of this Statement = If someone of intelligence and sanity cannot accept the CRAZY, UNSUPPORTABLE, FAIRY TALE version of Mormon History and Logic then they will never be as STUPID as me. What a shame on them.
Darth J wrote:Ancient prophets who lived on the American continent wrote the records of their people on plates of ore.
It is quite an accomplishment for them to have written on plates of ore. I would appreciate someone with a greater knowledge of metallurgy than mine offering an opinion, but my understanding is that you have to take ore and smelt it into a usable form of metal before you could make plates out of it.
I'm sure the smelting process used to make steel weapons and gold history books between 600 B.C. and circa 421 A.D. (and the Jaredites before that), as described in the Book of Mormon, is one of those claims that doubtlessly stands up to history.
Ore has been found; metal from the Book of Mormon era has not.
I'm going to have tip my hat to DCP on this one, trying to sneak passed the metal problem, claiming they were plates of ore.
moksha wrote:Dr. Peterson's suggestion is right on, especially in light of Elder Jensen recently admitting that many members are leaving the Church because they have learned of the messier version. Dr. Peterson suggests forgiving leaders and their actions as perceived in connection to particular events and the altered after-story.
But charity and context are all-important. Life would be much easier if we could find a church composed of perfect leaders and flawless members. Unfortunately, at least in my case, the glaringly obvious problem is that such a church would never admit me to membership.
There is an essential truth to the statement that we all screw up, and any candor that can help lead us away from the American Tobacco Association's method of total denial and cover-up is worthy of praise. The implications that honesty is the best policy are undeniable.
Forgive them? Of course.
Continue buying their BS that they are oracles for elohim/jehovah? Of course not.
The Brethren have been lying to the Members for decades and decades. They did so to exact millions and millions, rock star adoration, and unquestioning obedience from Church members. Based on lies.
Fool the Members once shame on the Brethren, fool them again, shame on the Members. Forgive, but never forget. Not unless you have a weird psychological need to continue to be duped.
Kimball remarked that the church isn't eager to expose its members to such problems. Why? Because souls can be and are lost on Level B. And, anyway, the church isn't some sort of floating seminar in historiography. Regrettably, perhaps, most Latter-day Saints — many of them far better people than I — aren't deeply interested in history, and, more importantly, many other very important priorities demand attention, including training the youth and giving service. Were he in a leadership position, Kimball said, he would probably make the same decision.
So church leaders knowingly withhold material facts about Mormon history, but tell members to give money to the Church based on the members' confidence that they have been told all they need to know.
If only there were a word to describe this kind of action..........
But he argued that once members of the church have been exposed to Level B, their best hope is to press on to the richer but more complicated version of history (or to the more realistic view of humanity) that is to be found on Level C. Very importantly, he contended (and I agree) that Level C — what I call the "synthesis" — turns out to be essentially, and profoundly, like Level A. The gospel is, in fact, true. Church leaders at all levels have, overwhelmingly, been good and sincere people, doing the best that they can with imperfect human materials (including themselves) under often very difficult circumstances.
It's not really that difficult to achieve the Nirvana of level C. Just takes a little intellectual honesty.
Chap wrote: I agree it sounds bizarre today to use 'ore' as if it means 'metal'. It may just be a sign that Joseph Smith did not know much about metallurgy. But if we look at Webster's 1828 dictionary, which is attempting to record usage in Joseph Smith's day, it seems that someone might then have used 'ore' to mean 'metal':
While I can see your point, I would suggest that the article and its accompanying caption are intended for a modern-day audience. The caption is not from the Book of Mormon; it is "1997 by Intellectual Reserve, Inc."
I cannot say with absolute certainty that there may not be some of Joseph Smith's contemporaries who are still around and have not converted to the LDS Church by now. Maybe this article will be what finally convinces them.
You're quite right. To use the term 'ore' to mean 'metal' nowadays is simply ridiculous, since the word definitely does not convey that sense in 21st century usage, even if there is a chance that it may have had 'metal' as a secondary (or possibly archaic) sense in the early 19th century.
Zadok: I did not have a faith crisis. I discovered that the Church was having a truth crisis. Maksutov: That's the problem with this supernatural stuff, it doesn't really solve anything. It's a placeholder for ignorance.
The history of the church, like the history of all religions, is problematic from just a logical standpoint alone, not to mention a consistency standpoint. Let me use the example of Joseph Smith's First Vision.
1. As background, there are estimated to be at least 300,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 stars in the universe, and the universe is about 40,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 seconds old. Also, there have been an estimated 100,000,000,000 people (homo sapiens)that have lived or are living on the earth. Additionally, it is estimated that over 99% of the species that have ever lived are now extinct. Also, there have been thousands of religions practiced at different times during human history. Finally, evolution teaches us that we look the way we do through the sheerest accident of evolution.
Just based on those arguments alone, what is the probability that God: a) Visited this planet b) in 1820 c) Saw Joseph Smith and Joseph Smith alone d) looked like a man and e) gave Joseph Smith the "right" religion? In my estimation, not very high.
2. Which is more probable based on 1: that Joseph Smith had a supernatural experience where the laws of physics changed in his favor, or that he was mistaken? I say the latter.
3. Even if Joseph Smith did have a supernatural experience, does that actually prove anything? Among the almost endless number of possibilities, maybe Joseph Smith was talking to a non-diety humanoid from an alien planet, or maybe Loki tricked him into rebelling against Odin.
These are only a few of the historical problems with the church's claims. Viewed against true history -- the history of the universe -- they don't make sense.
"Joseph Smith was called as a prophet, dumb-dumb-dumb-dumb-dumb" -South Park
bcspace wrote:It's not really that difficult to achieve the Nirvana of level C. Just takes a little intellectual honesty.
Are you talking about the intellectual honesty required to believe that:
- The anthropomorphic Mormon God exists (in spite of overwhelming evidence to the contrary).
- This God would select a lying serial adulterer and convicted scam artist to be the founder of his one true Church on Earth.
- This God would select for his great revelation to humankind the fictional story this scam artist and his friends made up and plagiarized about groups of bronze age humans coming to the New World in wooden semi-submersibles around 2500 BCE, and in a home made boat with a magical compass around 600 BCE, said groups eventually numbering in the millions but then disappearing without leaving a trace in the archeological or genetic record.
- Africans have been cursed with a black skin because of the fictional Cain and that Amerindians and Polynesians are actually Lamanites whose ancestors were likewise so cursed by the Mormon God because of their iniquity.
- And finally, that all of this, together with the numerous and unresolvable contradictions and demonstrably false claims found in LDS scriptures and doctrine, makes perfect sense and reflects the real world as it should be interpreted and understood.
If this is what passes for "intellectual honesty" in Mormonism, it is no wonder that honest people are leaving in droves.
David Hume: "---Mistakes in philosophy are merely ridiculous, those in religion are dangerous."
DrW: "Mistakes in science are learning opportunities and are eventually corrected."
I'm still scratching my head at the title of the article. There one line in the whole article that addresses that claim and it's just a restatement of the title using different words.