What Truth Do You Seek?

[_Spider-to-the-Fly]

Friends and Foes alike,

An apologetic refrain is to claim that 'truth' might not necessarily mean that the events portrayed in the Book of Mormon might not really have occurred. The papyri Joseph Smith bought in Kirtland along with the mummies didn't really bear Abraham's handwriting. Joseph Smith might not have been visited physically, but just "spiritually" by heavenly personages and messengers. That is, the only physical component to the divine claims might have occurred inside Joseph Smith's cranium. Others are more slippery and 'truth' for them is just wise counsel, wherever it may be found and they think the Mormon Church offers a treasure trove of wisdom.

Do you reject the Book of Mormon unless you think there were actual peoples of Jewish descent here in the Americas circa 2,300 B.C. and from 600 B.C. to 424 A.D. that did what is described in the Book of Mormon?

Do you reject the Book of Abraham unless you think Abraham did, as Joseph Smith said, hand write on the same papyri that Joseph Smith bought and held in his hands?

Do you reject Joseph Smith's revelations unless you think God actually instructed Joseph Smith in that information?

What truth do you seek, if any?

Regards,

Spider.

[_Jeneum]

Do you reject the Book of Mormon unless you think there were actual peoples of Jewish descent here in the Americas circa 2,300 B.C. and from 600 B.C. to 424 A.D. that did what is described in the Book of Mormon?

I have a pretty flexible view of "truth" in this regard. I can still find things in the Book of Mormon which ring true to me, despite the fact that I know, beyond a shadow of a doubt (hehe) that there were no Nephites or Lamanites or Jaredites on this continent. I don't believe the Book of Mormon needs to be literal history for me to find truth in it.

This is the same for the Bible, the Bhagavad Gita, The Zohar, or any other text that purports to be historically truthful. I see truth as simply something that makes you a better person. Somethings that is transformative and that you can hold to a higher degree than most other things. I know this may not be philosophically sound, but it works for me, and it allows me to live my life in a way that I treat myself, others, and this Earth better.

Do you reject the Book of Abraham unless you think Abraham did, as Joseph Smith said, hand write on the same papyri that Joseph Smith bought and held in his hands?

See above

Do you reject Joseph Smith's revelations unless you think God actually instructed Joseph Smith in that information?

See above. I realize that Joseph was a flawed man, and that he was most likely a liar. That does not negate the many beautiful and profound things that he said...but that does mean I can trust the organization he founded, especially when said organization is so far from what he intended it to be today.

What truth do you seek, if any?

I seek all the truth in the world. I seek those things that are "virtuous, lovely, or of good report, or praiseworthy." What I find to be truth may seem silly to another person. But if something I read, and then implement into my life, causes a change in my being and is positive, you can bet I'm going to keep going with it. I truly believe in the concept of "eternal progression" and I think that progression only occurs when we look outside of our belief systems, something that many within organized religion are not capable of doing today, Mormons included. It is good for me, to wake up every morning, and meditate, and then read from another faith's scripture. It is good for me, once every couple of weeks, to commune with the Divine the best way I know how: through entheogenic substances. It really does "feel so good not to be trammeled."

[_Nightlion]

Friends and Foes alike,

An apologetic refrain is to claim that 'truth' might not necessarily mean that the events portrayed in the Book of Mormon might not really have occurred. The papyri Joseph Smith bought in Kirtland along with the mummies didn't really bear Abraham's handwriting. Joseph Smith might not have been visited physically, but just "spiritually" by heavenly personages and messengers. That is, the only physical component to the divine claims might have occurred inside Joseph Smith's cranium. Others are more slippery and 'truth' for them is just wise counsel, wherever it may be found and they think the Mormon Church offers a treasure trove of wisdom.

Do you reject the Book of Mormon unless you think there were actual peoples of Jewish descent here in the Americas circa 2,300 B.C. and from 600 B.C. to 424 A.D. that did what is described in the Book of Mormon?

Do you reject the Book of Abraham unless you think Abraham did, as Joseph Smith said, hand write on the same papyri that Joseph Smith bought and held in his hands?

Do you reject Joseph Smith's revelations unless you think God actually instructed Joseph Smith in that information?

What truth do you seek, if any?

Regards,

Spider.

Christ is the truth, the Way and the Life. With all the effort man exerts to live a Christ-like life and fashion cradle to the grave trappings after the image and likeness of God and Christ few ever find the truth that Jesus Christ was sent into the world to suffer and die that he might conceive his seed and bring forth the children of God.

Only a handful of true saints ever got the baptism of fire and of the Holy Ghost in the days after Christ's resurrection in the New Testament. Few ever found in down through the ages until Christ came into the world. Same in the Book of Mormon.

Christ's ministry in the Book of Mormon perfectly demonstrates his gospel and its Zion. Joseph Smith for all the evil that has been spoken of him knew the real gospel and taught it and accomplished it. That is the truth that was restored. Only a couple, seriously, a few souls got the gospel right at the time of Joseph Smith. The Church NEVER learned how to manage the difference between saint and wannabee saints. *(taught about in 3 Nephi Chapter 18)*

Allowing so many people to advance UNWORTHILY in the LDS Church has caused the tremendous ill will against Joseph Smith and the Church. People an being put under condemnation for taking the sacrament, receiving the priesthood, entering the temple, accepting callings having never been visited of God and truly wrought upon and cleansed and made worthy of these things. This has caused a reaction of two extremes.

On the one hand we have hybrid hypocrisy that is so invested in lies that the degree of deceit has fully corrupted the healthy thinking processes of millions upon million of people. On the other hand we have the RESENTERS, those who have revolted against that hypocrisy and have no means to feel clean and obsess against their defilers like a victim of child molestation would.

But the truth of Zion of Christ's redemption is real and true. You can see how blindly the AGENDIZER RESENTERS could only see ill against everything that touches upon the Church. We only need look at the madness of the world denying the existence of God against overwhelming evidence to see how stupid men are when they want to be.

Whatever the weakness might be in the Book of Abraham it will be manifest eventually. But the value of its spiritual worth is equal with all scripture that teaches the gospel that connects man with God.
Believing every whiff of evil against Joseph Smith will continue because of the great evil perpetrated upon the children of men by the Whore of all the Earth that the LDS Church became. Her abominations will only increase until she is rightly judged for her high crimes and treason. She can only offend God and the children of men henceforth.

I am expecting some truly bizarre turn of events in the future of the LDS Church as it continues its convoluted mysterious windings.

Joseph Smith got the gospel right. End of story. Go fish.

[_Tchild]

Friends and Foes alike,

Do you reject the Book of Mormon unless you think there were actual peoples of Jewish descent here in the Americas circa 2,300 B.C. and from 600 B.C. to 424 A.D. that did what is described in the Book of Mormon?

I certainly think that whatever "truths" the Book of Mormon possess are transcendental; they are universal, whether literal, symbolic or metaphoric and are not owned or contained exclusively by a religion. The rites and rituals (which in Mormonism, necessitate a priesthood) are merely symbols we make with ourselves to engage in an inward journey of awareness and enlightment. So, if truth is found in Mormonism, there is nothing "literally" true about its hierarchial claims to control that truth via its policies and doctrines.

Do you reject the Book of Abraham unless you think Abraham did, as Joseph Smith said, hand write on the same papyri that Joseph Smith bought and held in his hands?

See above

Do you reject Joseph Smith's revelations unless you think God actually instructed Joseph Smith in that information?

There is no externalized God up in the sky, "out there". None whatsoever. If there is a "God", it is the Self, or consciousness, a universally present and equally accessible reality for all to experience as the individual's awareness unfolds. The comments concerning the Book of Mormon are the same concerning the "revelations" of J.S, because the author is the same in both examples.

What truth do you seek, if any?

The ultimate truth, whatever that is.


Spider.

[_Spider-to-the-Fly]

Do you reject the Book of Mormon unless you think there were actual peoples of Jewish descent here in the Americas circa 2,300 B.C. and from 600 B.C. to 424 A.D. that did what is described in the Book of Mormon?

I have a pretty flexible view of "truth" in this regard. I can still find things in the Book of Mormon which ring true to me, despite the fact that I know, beyond a shadow of a doubt (hehe) that there were no Nephites or Lamanites or Jaredites on this continent. I don't believe the Book of Mormon needs to be literal history for me to find truth in it.

This is the same for the Bible, the Bhagavad Gita, The Zohar, or any other text that purports to be historically truthful. I see truth as simply something that makes you a better person. Somethings that is transformative and that you can hold to a higher degree than most other things. I know this may not be philosophically sound, but it works for me, and it allows me to live my life in a way that I treat myself, others, and this Earth better.

* * * * *

Do you reject Joseph Smith's revelations unless you think God actually instructed Joseph Smith in that information?

See above. I realize that Joseph was a flawed man, and that he was most likely a liar. That does not negate the many beautiful and profound things that he said...but that does mean I can trust the organization he founded, especially when said organization is so far from what he intended it to be today.

What truth do you seek, if any?

I seek all the truth in the world. I seek those things that are "virtuous, lovely, or of good report, or praiseworthy." What I find to be truth may seem silly to another person. But if something I read, and then implement into my life, causes a change in my being and is positive, you can bet I'm going to keep going with it. I truly believe in the concept of "eternal progression" and I think that progression only occurs when we look outside of our belief systems, something that many within organized religion are not capable of doing today, Mormons included. It is good for me, to wake up every morning, and meditate, and then read from another faith's scripture. It is good for me, once every couple of weeks, to commune with the Divine the best way I know how: through entheogenic substances. It really does "feel so good not to be trammeled."

M. Jeneum,

In reading your response post, it struck me that you probably take the 13th Article of Faith more literally than today's Mormon Church. That last part of that Article reads

13. We believe in being honest, true, chaste, benevolent, virtuous, and in doing good to all men; indeed, we may say that we follow the admonition of Paul—We believe all things, we hope all things, we have endured many things, and hope to be able to endure all things. If there is anything virtuous, lovely, or of good report or praiseworthy, we seek after these things.

Regards,

Spider.

[_Jeneum]

M. Jeneum,

In reading your response post, it struck me that you probably take the 13th Article of Faith more literally than today's Mormon Church. That last part of that Article reads

13. We believe in being honest, true, chaste, benevolent, virtuous, and in doing good to all men; indeed, we may say that we follow the admonition of Paul—We believe all things, we hope all things, we have endured many things, and hope to be able to endure all things. If there is anything virtuous, lovely, or of good report or praiseworthy, we seek after these things.

Regards,

Spider.

Yes, I believe I do as well. I got in many fights/disagreements with seminary teachers/Sunday school teachers about this very topic. The closest thing Mormons have to a creed is the Articles of Faith, which is canonized, but yet they don't follow the majority of them. Where are the spiritual manifestations outside of a "burning in the bosom?" Where are the charismatic gifts which were so prevalent in the early days of the Church (Article 7)? Where are the prophetic utterances when giving a Church calling? (the Elder Dunn thread is directly related to this topic).

And above all that, and this is what really makes me angry about the Church, if the Book of Mormon is the Word of God, why is the Church today not following all of its precepts? Or demonstrating Christlike charity and love, as the book commands?

Article 11 plays heavily into my life, as well. I've been on the receiving end of some very, very nasty slurs and cursings because of my decision to leave the Church.

In short, since I've already derailed the thread (my apologies), practice what you preach Mormons!

[_sock puppet]

I would restate the OP this way. To be regarded as 'true', the religion's scriptural text-described events:

a. Must be historically accurate in the way that we understand and accept that Abraham Lincoln was in fact President of the United States from 1861-1865.

b. May be allegorical, accepted in the way the Bible's prodigal son story is viewed and accepted, provided there is reason to think that God was the source or inspiration for the stories.

c. May be merely stories to illustrate mankind's learned wisdom about what life lessons may make us happier and live more productive lives.

[_moksha]

Do you reject the Book of Mormon unless you think there were actual peoples of Jewish descent here in the Americas circa 2,300 B.C. and from 600 B.C. to 424 A.D. that did what is described in the Book of Mormon?

Would one reject the wisdom of the Desiderata just because it really wasn't found in old St. Paul's Church back in 1642? No, because the truths transcend any claims of origin.

There are many truths of a symbolic nature to be found in the Book of Mormon. We should seek after those that resonate with us.

Do you reject the Book of Abraham unless you think Abraham did, as Joseph Smith said, hand write on the same papyri that Joseph Smith bought and held in his hands?

These books contains some hateful things like racial curses and their justification, wars and injustice. These are however true elements of the human experience. The books also contain ideals that we may aspire to. If you were to find that the Brothers Grimm were the originators of their tales, you would still have to admit the morals and lessons these tales provided were still valid, even if they were allegory. Many Mormons know this, but for whatever reason, they are not at liberty to admit this to anyone, including sometimes themselves.

Do you reject Joseph Smith's revelations unless you think God actually instructed Joseph Smith in that information?

Some, like that angel with the flaming sword. However, who among us males have not felt the tug of that flaming sword urging us on, even when common sense told us to desist.

[_Joseph]

Either Joseph Smith told the truth about his Religious 'translations' and experiences... or he was a liar. You can't have it both ways.

You believe what he said or you don't. Many won't admit the truth of this to themselves for fear of having to acknowledge what they really believe. They play the game and are safe in meetings repeating the mantra that comes from primary up. "I Know..." and as long as they keep repeating that and practicing in front of the mirrir like DiNiro in Taxi Driver, so they can sound sincere and practiced when called on to perform, they are safe in their little mental ward within the LDS ward.