Hamblin's Creed

[_Equality]

So Hamblin is a fascist. But we knew that already, right?

[_MrStakhanovite]

I notice the practice of loving your fellow man didn't crack the top four.

Bill over doing it with the orthodoxy at the expense of orthopraxis, because he needs to create some kind of criteria to justify his treatment of others.

[_Kishkumen]

I notice the practice of loving your fellow man didn't crack the top four.

Bill over doing it with the orthodoxy at the expense of orthopraxis, because he needs to create some kind of criteria to justify his treatment of others.

I think that is a big part of it, yes.

[_Darth J]

"Wild" Bill Hamblin proudly presents:

"No True Scotsman!"

Now with 30% more self-righteousness!

[_Kishkumen]

"Wild" Bill Hamblin proudly presents:

"No True Scotsman!"

Now with 30% more self-righteousness!

You hit the nail on the head.

Or, another way of putting it:

"I (Bill Hamblin) don't consider John Dehlin to be Mormon."

[_Sethbag]

I can understand that people can feel like they are Mormons pretty much no matter what they believe or do. I can also understand Hamblin's point of view.

I mean, the church has traditionally taught certain doctrines which seem to be very important. That is, without these teachings being true, the rest of it is pretty much irrelevant. I think Hamblin's list is a good start on this. Without Joseph Smith being a true prophet, I personally don't see how the LDS church remains relevant in the ways it claims to be, ie: God's own Kingdom on Earth, as authorized by God himself. Without Jesus having been a human sacrifice on our behalf, the whole Plan of Salvation taught by the church doesn't mean much.

Also, the church needs to have its current hierarchy taken seriously, hence Hamblin's "Monson is a prophet" thing.

Anyhow, though I can sympathize with folks who grew up in the church wanting to continue to claim to be "Mormon" for as long as they want, regardless of whether they believe traditional Mormon doctrines or not, I also sympathize with Hamblin in thinking that, for Mormonism to mean anything, a person really should actually believe traditional Mormon doctrines. When I was TBM that's the angle I would have taken.

[_Kishkumen]

There was a time when Mormons did not take the WoW very seriously. My Utah and Idaho distant relatives still drank coffee (so did my grandfather, just hours before he died). There was a time Mormons practiced polygamy. There was a time that the majority of BYU students did not believe in a literal Satan.

Sethbag, I think your views on doctrine may owe a lot to two factors: the upswing of religious fundamentalism in the US, and the long reach of McConkie's shadow.

The reality of religious identity is much more complicated. Hamblin posted a .pdf of Robert F. Smith responding to his creed. He makes some good points. In any case, I think there are always those who obsess over true doctrine and so forth. They tend to be the most vocal, work for CES, and act as apologists. Their loudness makes it seem like the only way to be. I am encouraged that some thoughtful people are imagining other ways of looking at things. Gerald Bradford's MST testimony is a good example.

[_Blixa]

There was a time when Mormons did not take the WoW very seriously. My Utah and Idaho distant relatives still drank coffee (so did my grandfather, just hours before he died). There was a time Mormons practiced polygamy. There was a time that the majority of BYU students did not believe in a literal Satan.

Sethbag, I think your views on doctrine may owe a lot to two factors: the upswing of religious fundamentalism in the US, and the long reach of McConkie's shadow.

The reality of religious identity is much more complicated. Hamblin posted a .pdf of Robert F. Smith responding to his creed. He makes some good points. In any case, I think there are always those who obsess over true doctrine and so forth. They tend to be the most vocal, work for CES, and act as apologists. Their loudness makes it seem like the only way to be. I am encouraged that some thoughtful people are imagining other ways of looking at things. Gerald Bradford's MST testimony is a good example.

yes

[_malkie]

He can make up all the stupid lists he likes. He has no authority to enforce them. So let him bluster in the corner about his criteria for what makes a "real Mormon."

As far as I am aware, this is what makes a person a member of the LDS Church:

1. You were baptized.
2. You have not resigned.
3. You have not been excommunicated.

According to Hamblins logic the church can claim you as a member, but you may not be able to claim yourself as one. I'd like to see the membership numbers using his criteria.

From Bill's blog:

Intriguing post. I wonder, Bill, if you could give us a ballpark figure for how many of the 14 million members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints would affirm the four principles you have articulated. I would very much appreciate your thoughts on the matter. Another way of putting it is this: how many people who are numbered among the Latter-day Saints are Mormons in name only, and how many are truly true to the faith?

I have no idea. I’m sure the vast majority would. The vast majority believe in the articles of faith, of which my four suggestions are a subset.

Just to play with the numbers a little, let's assume that "the vast majority" means about 90%, and that about 50% of members are active.

Even if all of the active members meet the criteria, you would have to believe that 80% of the inactive members (some of whom are likely to be dead) believe in the articles of faith.

I find it difficult to imagine that this could be true.

Any suggestions?

[_Cicero]

Sethbag, I think your views on doctrine may owe a lot to two factors: the upswing of religious fundamentalism in the US, and the long reach of McConkie's shadow.

I agree, and I think the latter is especially important. Correlation played a part as well. As I child growing up in the Church in 80s, Mormon Doctrine was THE "go to" source for teachers (both in Church lessons and in seminary) outside of correlated lesson manuals. I was amazed to find out as an adult that its initial publication was highly controversial.