John Dehlin joins Mormonism LIVE to give the other side

[Marcus]

...According to Wikipedia, Bernard’s text survives in somewhat differently copied versions, and in one, the word “Roma” (Rome) is replaced with “Rosa” (rose). That version’s second line, separated from the previous line referring to three figures from Roman legend, gave Umberto Eco his title for The Name of the Rose. Since the book was set in a late medieval monastery, and narrated by a monk, ending it with a real medieval monk’s Latin verse was effective....

That is fascinating. I loved that book. It took me much longer to read than any other comparable length book I've ever read, and it wasn't just the vocabulary I had to look up, it was the puns to decipher and then appreciate. Umberto Eco was truly gifted. All in all, it was one of the most satisfying reads of my life.

Thanks, PG. Your entire post was a pleasure to read.

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

...According to Wikipedia, Bernard’s text survives in somewhat differently copied versions, and in one, the word “Roma” (Rome) is replaced with “Rosa” (rose). That version’s second line, separated from the previous line referring to three figures from Roman legend, gave Umberto Eco his title for The Name of the Rose. Since the book was set in a late medieval monastery, and narrated by a monk, ending it with a real medieval monk’s Latin verse was effective....

That is fascinating. I loved that book. It took me much longer to read than any other comparable length book I've ever read, and it wasn't just the vocabulary I had to look up, it was the puns to decipher and then appreciate. Umberto Eco was truly gifted. All in all, it was one of the most satisfying reads of my life.

Thanks, PG. Your entire post was a pleasure to read.

People like PG, willing to post with meaning and thought, are why this forum is so valuable. It’s almost become an artifact of forgone time to post with heart and intelligence. It’s very much appreciated.

[Dr. Shades]

If those roses have faded again in their turn, turning into mere names, perhaps we can also plant new roses once more.

Yeah, but how does that apply to Mormonism?

[Physics Guy]

Yeah, but how does that apply to Mormonism?

That’s a good question. I think it’s one for current or former Mormons to answer. Maybe there is no way to restore Smith’s Restoration; maybe it was never anything but a scam, never more than bogus words with no content. But maybe in the common impulse that once led a lot of people to Utah there was something real and good, that could find new expression.

My guess for what it’s worth is that there will have to be a break with the Mormon past, an admission that the LDS church just never was what it has claimed to be. Perhaps the Community of Christ has some points?

[Dr. Shades]

Yeah, but how does that apply to Mormonism?

That’s a good question. I think it’s one for current or former Mormons to answer. Maybe there is no way to restore Smith’s Restoration; maybe it was never anything but a scam, never more than bogus words with no content.

"Maybe" it was never anything but a scam?? Do you truly believe there's a chance it was true as Smith stated?

But maybe in the common impulse that once led a lot of people to Utah there was something real and good, that could find new expression.

Like the common impulse that once led a lot of people to Guyana can find new expression?

My guess for what it’s worth is that there will have to be a break with the Mormon past, an admission that the LDS church just never was what it has claimed to be. Perhaps the Community of Christ has some points?

And what will this new resurrection look like?

[Limnor]

That’s a good question. I think it’s one for current or former Mormons to answer. Maybe there is no way to restore Smith’s Restoration; maybe it was never anything but a scam, never more than bogus words with no content.

"Maybe" it was never anything but a scam?? Do you truly believe there's a chance it was true as Smith stated?

I wondered the same thing about the word choice here.

[Marcus]

That’s a good question. I think it’s one for current or former Mormons to answer. Maybe there is no way to restore Smith’s Restoration; maybe it was never anything but a scam, never more than bogus words with no content.

"Maybe" it was never anything but a scam?? Do you truly believe there's a chance it was true as Smith stated?

I wondered the same thing about the word choice here.

A valid point, and not that I believe there's a chance in hell it's not bogus, I see in PG's comment a sentiment that's beginning to come up in younger 'Mormon' generations in my family.

I put 'Mormon' in quotes because these younger people seem to know virtually nothing about the background claims of their church.

For example, one young person was incensed when I said Mormons didn't allow non-member family members attend their weddings (which is one of the main reasons my non-lds first MIL never fully accepted her son's marriage).

This young person insisted their Church would never do that to non-lds family members, citing the very new rule that civil marriages are allowed on same day as temple sealings. When I told them that was a very recent change they flatly disagreed, stating it had "always been that way," because Mormons would never be that uncharitable toward non-members.

This seems to be the direction the belief in gold plates is going, as well as coffee restrictions, face card rules, garment sleeves, temple components, etc. Pretty soon it will just be a place to sit for an hour with your Mormon family on Sundays. Oh, and give money to. That rule is too tightly entwined in the Mormon business entity masquerading as a religion.

That's the one PR item Mormons seem to excel at. They make a change, and then insist it's always been that way. Then it's just a matter of time before the indoctrinated and gullible among their youth are on board with the idea that "we've always been at war with EastAsia." The rest leave.

I think there's getting to be a larger and larger divide between those who leave and those who have to stay and are brought up with false justifications. According to my younger siblings still with ties to Utah, there is also an issue of inheritance. The ones who are from families closely connected to lds leaders face giving up home and vacation properties, all college costs paid for current and future generations, business connections that forgo normal bidding rules and produce massively disproportionate windfalls, inheritances that disappear without the appearance of staying lds, etc. Mob families should be so connected.


"The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas"

[Limnor]

A valid point, and not that I believe there's a chance in hell it's not bogus, I see in PG's comment a sentiment that's beginning to come up in younger 'Mormon' generations in my family.

I put 'Mormon' in quotes because these younger people seem to know virtually nothing about the background claims of their church.

So it’s more like, from a member’s point of view, “none of those claims were actually claims in the first place?”

Book of Mormon translated from reformed Egyptian? He never said that. Restored priesthood? Never a thing. Physical set of gold plates? You’re being too literal.

Like that?

[Marcus]

A valid point, and not that I believe there's a chance in hell it's not bogus, I see in PG's comment a sentiment that's beginning to come up in younger 'Mormon' generations in my family.

I put 'Mormon' in quotes because these younger people seem to know virtually nothing about the background claims of their church.

So it’s more like, from a member’s point of view, “none of those claims were actually claims in the first place?”

Book of Mormon translated from reformed Egyptian? He never said that. Restored priesthood? Never a thing. Physical set of gold plates? You’re being too literal.

Like that?

Sort of. For a couple more examples in the academic arena: changing the meaning of words, looking for obscure examples to justify a disproportionately low probability, misusing statistical terms such as independence.

As an academic I am astonished at the number of Mormon academics who present pseudo-scientific and even non-scientific arguments as valid. Eventually those contorted arguments get simplified down to look like your examples. Then we end up with people like Peterson stating something like 'the supposed anachronisms in the Book of Mormon have been resolved.' which of course is absolutely not true, nor does it address the bigger picture. His readers believe him and then teach that distortion to the next generation.

[Limnor]

As an academic I am astonished at the number of Mormon academics who present pseudo-scientific and even non-scientific arguments as valid. Eventually those contorted arguments get simplified down to look like your examples. Then we end up with people like Peterson stating something like 'the supposed anachronisms in the Book of Mormon have been resolved.' which of course is absolutely not true, nor does it address the bigger picture. His readers believe him and then teach that distortion to the next generation.

I can see this. Maybe that’s the method. Reduce the problem until it isn’t really a problem anymore, then reduce the history until it never was a problem in the first place.