DiscussMormonism.com

I was giving some thought to the rumors of Prophet Monson's upcoming revelation at General Conference (my guess is that he'll step aside or allow some sort of proxy-Presidency). My mind wandered to what kind of radical revelation could realistically be offered that would fundamentally change the church.

What if: Prophet Monson declared that Heavenly Father had revealed the Book of Mormon to be merely a metaphor and not an actual history.

I think the LDS church not only could survive this kind of revelation but the church might actually offer it in the future in order to survive. Just as McConkie said that everything he had stated about blacks could be ignored because now the church had further light and knowledge on the subject, so the same could be said for the Book of Mormon.

I'm guessing that a large number of Mormons would really really appreciate this revelation. It would kind of stretch the meaning of the word "metaphor", but that would be much easier to live with that what doesn't exist in Central America or Upstate New York. Who could really complain if Heavenly Father told the church that it was a parable all along? Maybe the 19th and 20th Century Mormons needed to believe it was real in order to start the church?

Realistically, I think they'll actually follow the CofC on this and ambiguously support a historic and metaphoric reading of the Book of Mormon in public, while the leadership and correlation push for a non-literal reading in the younger generations.

I thought Monson was already declared insane.

Tim wrote:What if: Prophet Monson declared that Heavenly Father had revealed the Book of Mormon to be merely a metaphor and not an actual history.

Why stop with the Book of Mormon? The hardest part of the Book of Mormon to believe is the Book of Ether, and the hardest part of the Book of Ether to believe is that there actually was a tower of Babel that the Jaredites came from.

And if you're going to envision Monson declaring a narrative a metaphor simply because it's controversial, and there's no evidence to back it up, why not envision him declaring the account of Noah's flood a metaphor while you're at it? Or the whole book of Genesis for that matter?

Polygamy-Porter wrote:I thought Monson was already declared insane.

Polygamy-Porter, who told you Monson was "declared insane"?

KevinSim wrote:

Tim wrote:What if: Prophet Monson declared that Heavenly Father had revealed the Book of Mormon to be merely a metaphor and not an actual history.

Why stop with the Book of Mormon? The hardest part of the Book of Mormon to believe is the Book of Ether, and the hardest part of the Book of Ether to believe is that there actually was a tower of Babel that the Jaredites came from.

And if you're going to envision Monson declaring a narrative a metaphor simply because it's controversial, and there's no evidence to back it up, why not envision him declaring the account of Noah's flood a metaphor while you're at it? Or the whole book of Genesis for that matter?

Agreed. If you are going to come clean, clean house as they say.