All or Nothing: Believe it or not

[moksha]

Great Pretender
The Platters

Oh oh, yes we're the great pretenders
Pretending that all's going well
Our need is such we pretend too much
We're sinking but no one can tell

Mankind is always having the rug pulled out from underneath it whenever we have made blanket assertions about the unknown. Sometimes we were wrong and sometimes we were right, but even the times we were right there was still more to be known.

Recently LDS Apostle Tad R. Callister issued yet again another assertion "As a result, if the Book of Mormon can be proved to be man-made, then the Church is man-made. On the other hand, if its origin is God-given, then Joseph Smith was a prophet, and if he was a prophet then The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is true. It is that simple."

If we find that it is man-made does that truly contaminate everything? Makes me wish the Church would place more emphasis on the message of Jesus than its own truth. That would lessen the need to be the great pretender.

What are your thoughts on this matter?

[Mormorrisey]

Thanks for posting this, it's been on my mind for a while now. And even now, I'm not sure how to deal with this very troubling binary, and I'll just pick Joseph Smith as an example, since Callister did. I still love some of his doctrines, and his thought process was very interesting; I still see D&C 121 as divinely inspired, especially the part about "it is the nature and disposition of almost all men" as being some very real insight into the human condition, and Joseph in particular suffered from that which is utterly fascinating to me.

However, I see the things he did, the behaviours he exhibited with polygamy and such, and say, whoa. I'm also not convinced of the historicity of the BOM, or obviously of the BOA, so where does that leave someone like me in Callister's binary trope? In the middle, which is why I'm here. I'm convinced that the insistence of the higher-ups on "it's either true or it isn't" is ultimately going to lead to the church's continuing dwindle into irrelevancy, and force me and people like me, the people here, to make a choice. And I don't think they are going to like that choice.

[Dravin]

What are your thoughts on this matter?

I think he's engaging in a logical non-sequitur. The premises he gives are insufficient to conclude the church is true in the sense he means it. For instance, those premises could be met and the church could be in a current state of apostasy. Indeed it could be in a state of apostasy that goes back to Brigham Young or any time after Joseph Smith received the Book of Mormon. As much as he wants it to be the case his premises don't actually take him to the conclusion, he needs more legwork.

[Corsair]

Callister is leaving out two groups of people that love the Book of Mormon and highlight his false dichotomy. First groups like the FLDS revere the Book of Mormon and hold it in high regard like mainstream Mormons do. Secondly, there are some more pastoral apologists who will happily work with hopeful believers that can only hold the Book of Mormon as inspired fiction. Grant Hardy falls into this category. He put together a reader's version of the Book of Mormon and draws truths from it while acknowledging the historicity problems.

Callister also ignores Muslims who make the same claims about the Koran. He similarly ignores fans of the very Catholic "Lord of the Rings" and "Chronicles of Narnia" who are led to Christianity through inspiring fiction. I doubt that Callister would ever really want to engage the many nuanced beliefs arising from non-orthodox Mormons and lots more non-Mormons.

[moksha]

I still see D&C 121 as divinely inspired, especially the part about "it is the nature and disposition of almost all men" as being some very real insight into the human condition, and Joseph in particular suffered from that which is utterly fascinating to me.

Another nugget from that D&C 121 can be important to read occasionally:

41 No power or influence can or ought to be maintained by virtue of the priesthood, only by persuasion, by long-suffering, by gentleness and meekness, and by love unfeigned;

That has the potential of throwing a monkey wrench into many General Conference Talks.

[Hagoth]

The problem I see here is that the Book of Mormon has sufficiently been proven to be the work of men over and over again but if you're not willing to consider the evidence and accept the inevitable conclusions you are unlikely to arrive at that realizaation. So the Book of Mormon, by Calister's process, is proven to be the work of God through ignorance and wishful thinking. What he presents as a logic problem is really merely a test of devotion.

Makes me wish the Church would place more emphasis on the message of Jesus than its own truth. That would lessen the need to be the great pretender.

I agree but I have come to the conclusion that that the only message of the church is its own significance. Everything else is arranged in concentric rings around the central message that the church is the only reliable source of truth and the place you should be putting all of your time, talents and everything with which the Lord has blessed you. Sunday school, primary, priesthood and relief society lessons cover all sorts of topics but the takeaway message is always that the church is true. Conference speakers tell all kinds of inspirational stories and they talk a lot about God, but the stories are always about how someone was blessed because the church is true or how they would have been blessed had they realized the church is true, and all talk about a relationship with God is really a relationship with the church. In my head I often replace the words God and Jesus with The Church or The Brethren and it works out the same.

[deacon blues]

I don't think Moroni was the devil appearing as an angel of light, but I've met people who were convinced of it on my mission. It would be interesting to see a conversation between people who believe the BOM was inspired of God and people who believe it was inspired by Satan.

[Red Ryder]

I don't think Moroni was the devil appearing as an angel of light, but I've met people who were convinced of it on my mission. It would be interesting to see a conversation between people who believe the BOM was inspired of God and people who believe it was inspired by Satan.

I recall the first time I heard that on my mission too. Some "investigator" asked how we knew Moroni wasn't the devil. As a 19 year old bike riding virgin, I couldn't fathom why anyone would suggest such nonsense.