|Date Posted: 07/05/2001 2:13 PM
Posted By: Lorenzo
Rank: BuechneriteWhen early Judaism lost the Jerusalem temple, it had to make adjustments to survive. Without the temple sacrifices, rabbinical Judaism focused on acts of loving kindness and sacrifices in the heart. Similarly, post-Apostolic Fathers Christianity gave up on the imminent 2nd coming and settled for a waiting game or alegorical reinterpretation. When early Mormonism lost its polygamy, communitarian projects and shadow government, it had to adjust to survive as well. After losing these 3 prominent features, Mormonism focused on the word of wisdom, the temple and other more modern features of the faith.
Is the rise of NOMS and their loss of faith in certain beliefs not similar to these earlier developments in religious history and can’t we learn from them?
How do people on this list affirm Mormon beliefs you have lost without giving full credence to the party line about them? How do you still teach them to your children, but with a larger framework of understanding? How do you share them with other Mormons?
For instance, many people toy with the idea that the Book of Mormon is inspired fiction, effectively dodging the issues of intentional fraud or delusion while accepting the value of the book as an effective guide to Christian living. So rather than speaking about the Book of Mormon being literally true, should we be actively bearing testimony saying, “I am thankful for the Book of Mormon and how it informs my attempts to be a Christian?”
Another example: the seagull and cricket narrative, viewed in an historical context, is an exaggeration since there were many incidents when seagulls didn’t binge and purge on crickets to save Mormon crops, and, so far as I know, no one was there to videotape individual birds eating crickets, vomiting them into the Great Salt Lake, and coming back for more. But, it’s a great narrative, full of mythic power, and binds the community. It is to Mormon history what the midnight ride of Paul Revere is to American history.
A final example: a friend of mine doesn’t believe in work for the dead, yet he finds the idea that Mormons go into the temple to remember those who are dead and speak their names in a sacred place is beautiful and inspiring.
Even if Mormonism at large isn’t at a crossroads event like the events I pointed out at the beginning of this posting, I suggest this exercise of developing alternative, yet “faithful,” views of traditional Mormon beliefs we no longer 100% uphold will help NOMs find ways to teach their children, affirm the common ideas we have with other Mormons and, and build an alternative foundation to serve others who lose some of their faith or, perhaps, slowly change some of these beliefs in the larger church over time.
|Date Posted: 07/05/2001 6:32 PM
Posted By: sweetpea
“Even if Mormonism at large isn’t at a crossroads event like the events I pointed out at the beginning of this posting, I suggest this exercise of developing alternative, yet “faithful,” views of traditional Mormon beliefs we no longer 100% uphold will help NOMs find ways to teach their children, affirm the common ideas we have with other Mormons and, and build an alternative foundation to serve others who lose some of their faith or, perhaps, slowly change some of these beliefs in the larger church over time.”
That would be great and I think it would help the church strengthen itself to do so. As to how to go about it, beats me! Especially because so many of us are not willing to disclose to each other in an organized manner our disbelief/problems with the doctrine.
I think individually it is what I am attempting to do in order to go back and teach my children and still hold some integrity. I will ponder on your questions and see if anything comes to mind as to a possible direct answer – thanks for bringing this up!
|Date Posted: 07/06/2001 12:17 AM
Posted By: LDSman
Rank: Server & HostReply to : Lorenzo
I think than many of those of us who call ourselves New Order Mormons have done exactly that; reworked definitions to accommodate a faith in flux. We all struggle with recommend questions, pressures to bear testimony, gospel (folk) doctrine, and so on. we struggle with how to cope with TBM spouses, families, friends.
Thanks for your thoughtful post.
|Date Posted: 07/07/2001 12:29 AM
Posted By: Dathon
Rank: sum, ergo cogito?Reply to Lorenzo:
Thank you Lorenzo for your thoughtful post. I am glad to see you articulate those ideas here. I have been a ‘liberal’ Mormon for many years. I have also tried to be a moderately studious and logical member. I accepted that there was much metaphor in scripture and much myth in Mormon history.
I resolved inconsistencies with scientific theories and some internal and external (evidentiary) inconsistencies by constructing what might be considered analogous to the epicycles used to prop up the Ptolemaic model of the Solar system. When those adjustments broke down under the weight of scrutiny (and Egyptology <G>) my first response was that I should abandon or discard the entire system of belief. It took time, consideration, and finding the NOM community to help me understand that I might be throwing out some very good things along with the parts that seem erroneous. I have to remind myself or be reminded by other sojourners that life is not an ‘all or nothing’ proposition. I suspect that reality is analog rather than digital. There exist options other than accepting or rejecting Mormon doctrine, dogma, folklore and history as a whole.
I look forward to reading more of your thoughts on this subject and a fruitful and intelligible discussion of plausible alternative faithful understandings.
|Date Posted: 07/08/2001 8:18 PM
Posted By: John*
I try to keep it simple. I read the 13 Articles of Faith. Cough and say yes.
I then take the Peril at any Price and throw it in the trash where it belongs. Is it in the 13 articles? Reformed Egyptian never existed and we know that. Or, I do. Keeping gays at bay, all the reactionary stuff–that’s not in the 13. Anyway I received the best education, for free, learned how to ski well, dance, meet many beautiful females, and had a lot of fun.
Let’s look at the thirteen again….
|Date Posted: 07/09/2001 7:35 PM
Posted By: John*
Did I say that? Kind of stupid and a bit hostile.
I am being bashed on an antiMormon Board. CARM. They don’t realize that bashing my beliefs makes me stronger. I do limit my acceptance to the LDS Church to the Articles of Faith.
I am very proud of my ancestors. I look at it this way:
On the other side we go back to Yoorik, King of the Visagoths and he claimed to go back to one of the three wise men. I used the LDS computer, anyone can use it. Yoorik was, I think, the 49th generation back.
How can I walk away from that?
|Date Posted: 07/09/2001 8:09 PM
Posted By: Lorenzo
Rank: BuechneriteReply to : John*
Do you have any genealogical ties to Jews in Merovingian France? There are some interesting legendary genealogies for this dynasty, tying back supposedly to Mary Magdalene who, according to the Cathars I believe (?), was thought to have given birth to Jesus’s children. During the crusades, one of the descendants of these kings supposedly became king of Jerusalem. As Mark Twain would say, there seems to be some stretchers in there somewhere.
Armand Mauss is preparing a book about Mormonism and Race that will trace, among other things, some of these legends to the rise of Anglo-Saxon Triumphalism (ie, among others, the belief in the Ephraim lineage and British-Israel theories among Mormons).
|Date Posted: 07/09/2001 9:40 PM
Posted By: John*
Boy are you smart. Well here are the names: The family Vance also known as Vans, Vaux, de Vallibus, Vaux, Ramvard, Hughes de Baux D-1091, Torismond, Theodoric, Aleric, Euric, and Yoorik 475 AD. Then it goes into Magi King Balthazar, one of the wise men.
The day I ran this at the LDS site was real fun, I thought it would end but it when on for 49 times. Hope all have used the LDS site, it’s easy.
Then there is the Allred side.
Lor.. Tell me if Amazing Grace is sung in the LDS Church. I fail to remember. Good day all, John