Missing Scroll Theory & Catalyst Theory in light of Mormonism Live

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
Post Reply
User avatar
Kishkumen
God
Posts: 6121
Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2020 2:37 pm
Location: Cassius University

Re: Missing Scroll Theory & Catalyst Theory in light of Mormonism Live

Post by Kishkumen »

Dr Exiled wrote:
Sat May 14, 2022 6:18 pm
I don't think Joseph Smith subscribed to your definition of truth. https://oneclimbs.com/2015/01/16/joseph-smith-truth/ He was quite literal, claiming he actually saw angels and was given authority by peter, james and john, etc. D&C 1:30 comes to mind where Joseph Smith has God proclaim the church as the one and only. He thought the church he created was true. However, discovering what it really is saves a lot of time and money.
I’m completely unconcerned that you think so. Joseph Smith was not who you assume he was, and he did not think as you assume he did. It takes more that reading on a surface level a series of quotes to get into his mindset. I mean, this is very charming of you, but it means very little.

That said, I never said you should spend your time and money on the LDS Church. Your decision not to do so is yours to make. Bully for you!

I just don’t accept that either the LDS understanding of early Mormonism or yours—and this includes most critics—is that meaningful or accurate. Oh, it is meaningful to you because it got you out of the LDS Church and saved you all that tithing money. But in the larger scheme of things it says nothing about early Mormonism at all.
“If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don’t have to worry about the answers.”~Thomas Pynchon, Gravity’s Rainbow
User avatar
Kishkumen
God
Posts: 6121
Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2020 2:37 pm
Location: Cassius University

Re: Missing Scroll Theory & Catalyst Theory in light of Mormonism Live

Post by Kishkumen »

Chap wrote:
Sat May 14, 2022 8:24 pm
About that bit in bold - sorry, Kishkumen? Joseph Smith and his successors never meant that their followers should accept their statement as being factually correct?

So if I had turned up in Nauvoo and said stuff like "Look, it doesn't seem to me that there is any evidence that those Nephites and Lamanites actually existed anywhere in the Americas", the worthy inhabitants would have shaken their heads with a pitying smile, and said "My dear man! Didn't they teach you anything at that expensive school and university in the old country? Are you really that simple minded? Real religion isn't about that kind of thing at all. Let us explain what "truth" actually means in a religious context ..."
I was saying that when people say the Church is true, I don’t really think they are primarily saying that the Church is factually correct. They are saying that they have a spiritual conviction that is true, and that spiritual conviction comes straight out of the Book of Mormon’s guidelines for how to obtain spiritual knowledge. It is not a science experiment or a history class. It is about having faith in true principles, testing them through living them, or asking God for revelation, and acting on the results to build stronger faith.

That is what I see as fundamental in Mormon epistemology.

I mean, you can certainly play contrafactual history, but I prefer to look at the text and make sense out of what it is saying over this nonsense.
“If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don’t have to worry about the answers.”~Thomas Pynchon, Gravity’s Rainbow
User avatar
Moksha
God
Posts: 5810
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 3:13 am
Location: Koloburbia

Re: Missing Scroll Theory & Catalyst Theory in light of Mormonism Live

Post by Moksha »

Maybe "Church is true" could be interpreted to mean, "I'm one of the club. Count me in on your Saturday BBQs and seances".
Cry Heaven and let loose the Penguins of Peace
User avatar
Doctor CamNC4Me
God
Posts: 8980
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 2:04 am

Re: Missing Scroll Theory & Catalyst Theory in light of Mormonism Live

Post by Doctor CamNC4Me »

Came across this a second ago:

Image

- Doc
Hugh Nibley claimed he bumped into Adolf Hitler, Albert Einstein, Winston Churchill, Gertrude Stein, and the Grand Duke Vladimir Romanoff. Dishonesty is baked into Mormonism.
Philo Sofee
God
Posts: 5015
Joined: Thu Oct 29, 2020 1:18 am

Re: Missing Scroll Theory & Catalyst Theory in light of Mormonism Live

Post by Philo Sofee »

Moksha wrote:
Sun May 15, 2022 3:41 am
Maybe "Church is true" could be interpreted to mean, "I'm one of the club. Count me in on your Saturday BBQs and seances".
I do a wickedly delightful bacon wrapped, cheese stuffed, bratwurst in the smoker. Sunday School at MY HOUSE!!!! :D
Philo Sofee
God
Posts: 5015
Joined: Thu Oct 29, 2020 1:18 am

Re: Missing Scroll Theory & Catalyst Theory in light of Mormonism Live

Post by Philo Sofee »

Doctor CamNC4Me wrote:
Sun May 15, 2022 3:42 am
Came across this a second ago:

Image

- Doc
I've seen that before... the things that make ya go "Hmmmmmm..."
Don Bradley
Star B
Posts: 113
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2020 2:41 am

Re: Missing Scroll Theory & Catalyst Theory in light of Mormonism Live

Post by Don Bradley »

Doctor CamNC4Me wrote:
Fri May 13, 2022 5:59 pm
Thanks for popping in, Don. Are you hanging your current research somewhere so interested parties can follow along?

- Doc
Hey Doc!

I've got an old manuscript on the back burner that needs updating but that I may not get back to for a while. But i will keep in mind that DM would be a good place to float ideas and get feedback.

Don
"People can find meaninglessness in just about anything if they convince themselves that there is no meaning in that thing." - The Rev. Dr. Lumen Kishkumen
User avatar
Kishkumen
God
Posts: 6121
Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2020 2:37 pm
Location: Cassius University

Re: Missing Scroll Theory & Catalyst Theory in light of Mormonism Live

Post by Kishkumen »

Moksha wrote:
Sun May 15, 2022 3:41 am
Maybe "Church is true" could be interpreted to mean, "I'm one of the club. Count me in on your Saturday BBQs and seances".
Yeah, maybe. And honestly that is nothing to sniff at in a world that is very rough on people. Anywhere people can find camaraderie, discuss their best aspirations, and attempt to be better people should not be dismissed as trivial. Life is tough, and good communities are hard to come by.
“If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don’t have to worry about the answers.”~Thomas Pynchon, Gravity’s Rainbow
Dr Exiled
God
Posts: 1602
Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2020 2:40 pm

Re: Missing Scroll Theory & Catalyst Theory in light of Mormonism Live

Post by Dr Exiled »

Kishkumen wrote:
Sun May 15, 2022 3:09 am
Dr Exiled wrote:
Sat May 14, 2022 6:18 pm
I don't think Joseph Smith subscribed to your definition of truth. https://oneclimbs.com/2015/01/16/joseph-smith-truth/ He was quite literal, claiming he actually saw angels and was given authority by peter, james and john, etc. D&C 1:30 comes to mind where Joseph Smith has God proclaim the church as the one and only. He thought the church he created was true. However, discovering what it really is saves a lot of time and money.
I’m completely unconcerned that you think so. Joseph Smith was not who you assume he was, and he did not think as you assume he did. It takes more that reading on a surface level a series of quotes to get into his mindset. I mean, this is very charming of you, but it means very little.

That said, I never said you should spend your time and money on the LDS Church. Your decision not to do so is yours to make. Bully for you!

I just don’t accept that either the LDS understanding of early Mormonism or yours—and this includes most critics—is that meaningful or accurate. Oh, it is meaningful to you because it got you out of the LDS Church and saved you all that tithing money. But in the larger scheme of things it says nothing about early Mormonism at all.
Maybe so or perhaps you are attaching a complexity that isn't there to justify your decisions or feelings. People can find meaning in just about anything if they convince themselves that there is meaning in that thing.
Myth is misused by the powerful to subjugate the masses all too often.
K Graham
God
Posts: 1676
Joined: Wed Oct 27, 2021 6:25 am

Re: Missing Scroll Theory & Catalyst Theory in light of Mormonism Live

Post by K Graham »

Kishkumen wrote:
Sun May 15, 2022 3:14 am
I was saying that when people say the Church is true, I don’t really think they are primarily saying that the Church is factually correct. They are saying that they have a spiritual conviction that is true, and that spiritual conviction comes straight out of the Book of Mormon’s guidelines for how to obtain spiritual knowledge.
But the two aren't mutually exclusive. Mormons typically say both things. The Church is factually true, and they know this because of their "spiritual witness." This is what I had been taught before joining the Church and the first time I had heard of any Mormons teaching that the Church was only true in a metaphorical sense, was well after my mission years when I saw apologists trying to come up with other paradigms to salvage their faith in the face of contradicting evidence.

When anachronisms are found in the Book of Mormon, the members just say well those things haven't been discovered yet. Meaning, they still believe it is factually true, and we all know the Mormon paradigm includes self-defensive mechanisms like assuming Satan is behind everything out there trying to prove it false. So when I bring up the fact that horses didn't exist in America at the time of the Book of Mormon wars, they don't say, "Oh it isn't factually true, only spiritually true." No, they typically say one of two things. My personal favorite is, "Archeology is in its infancy so we may still find horse remains from that time period." The other defense is to blame Satan for inventing all kinds of evidence because, being the one True Church on the planet means Satan has devoted all his time and effort to keep people from joining it.
Kishkumen wrote:
Sun May 15, 2022 3:14 am
It is not a science experiment or a history class.
Well, it sure seemed like it to me. One of the first pro-Mormon videos I was shown as an "investigator" was of a Mormon archaeologist combing through Mesoamerica, drawing all sorts of parallels between things like Quetzalcoatl and the teachings of Jesus. I went to a symposium at the Stake center where some "expert" of some kind talked about newly discovered glyphs which we were told translated to sentences that only appear in the Book of Mormon, etc. When Spencer Kimball said Missionaries were donating blood to help accelerate the process of converting black people and Indians (Lamanites) into white and delightsome saints, or when he dedicated a page of his book to talk about Cain existing today in the form of Sasquatch, or any of the dozens of stories told by authority figures about garments stopping bullets, etc. It all seemed to be quite literal to me.
It is about having faith in true principles, testing them through living them, or asking God for revelation, and acting on the results to build stronger faith.
I'm fairly certain that for most Mormons it is about both, which is why the vast majority of people baptized into the Church end up leaving it. They appreciate the warm fuzzies they initially experience, but then later realize it was self induced because the premise of those warm fuzzies was factually untrue. God isn't a man with literal bones, Indians aren't descendants of Jews, the entire concept of families are forever is incoherent and just silly, etc.
I mean, you can certainly play contrafactual history, but I prefer to look at the text and make sense out of what it is saying over this nonsense.
The Book of Mormon has meaning to whomever decides to read meaning into it. You say it is nonsense but the fact is Church leaders have stated several times that the truthfulness of the Gospel hinges on the Book of Mormon being what it purports to be. And that only makes sense given the extraordinary claims made by the Church. Claims that purport to be factually true. Like it being the ONLY True Church on the face of the earth. There was nothing figurative or metaphorical about this proclamation.

In my view the reason the Church wants members to constantly reaffirm their testimony because it serves as a defense against the evidence against it. Self delusion is a powerful tool. But I don't hold this against Mormons. As I've said before, I think many people are better off in the Church. Hell, I wouldn't mind paying tithing if I thought the money would actually go towards charity, and not funneled into another business venture.
Last edited by K Graham on Sun May 15, 2022 5:42 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"I am not an American ... In my view premarital sex should be illegal" - Ajax18
Post Reply