It's a revelation thing
Discussions of The Mormons are all over the place. Is it weird that the first time I ever heard of the documentary was the end of last week? Let me opine briefly on what I thought, before I read too many other commentaries by people who can better articulate what I am thinking.
I mostly liked it and think it was long overdue.
I am kind of fascinated by the reaction people have had to our Church throughout its short history, and I don't just mean the negative reaction, although that part fascinates me the most. Join this newfound religion and leave England to follow a prophet who has seen God? Leave my wife and young kids to fend for themselves on the farm while I go on a mission for three years at a time? Pour tar over people and roll them in feathers? Issue an order to exterminate an entire civilization? Not elect somebody because of his religious affiliation? Teach anti-Mormon classes to the 7th graders at my church so they can approach their Mormon friends fully equipped with knowledge about horns on their heads and cultish behavior? Okay! Lots of people have said, Sign me up! I find it all very intriguing. I'm also kind of surprised when I hear that Mormonism is out of the mainstream. I suppose that's true in many places, but in my little world, I eatbreathesleep Mormonism and it's not obscure in the least. So I thought this program was overdue because it's time that a dialogue began about this young religion that reaches all corners of the earth and that stirs up such stong reaction.
I like knowing and learning about the history of Joseph Smith and the early Church. Sometimes I wish the Church was more forthright about mistakes made in the past because I feel like the truth has nothing to hide, but I understand the motivation of putting the best foot forward. I certainly don't feel the personal need to be defensive regarding polygamy, blacks and the priesthood, DNA evidence (note: I am not insinuating these are mistakes that the Church has made), or any other hang-ups some people have, and this is why: it's a revelation thing. I have strong, firm convictions that the Church of Jesus Christ is led by--who else?-- Jesus Christ, working through a living prophet and through relevation that each one of us can receive. Faith persists beyond societal pressures or scientific data or human error. I can't remember who said it last night, but I liked that part about how legitimate belief and participation in a religion cannot nor does not depend on empirical evidence. By definition, faith is "things that are hoped for, but not seen."
Abby and Nancy, you both mentioned that you thought the documentary was skewed and inaccurate. Please correct me if I'm putting words in your mouth, but I wonder if you felt that way because the Gospel was not presented as you are accustomed to perceiving it. Steve used the word "hollow." To those of us in the faith, the gospel of Jesus Christ is presented through the gift of the Holy Ghost. It is peace, it brings happiness, it offers hope. When everything is as it should be personally, the gospel is more than a history of events or a way of life or a group of people cleaning up after the wreckage of Katrina. It feels like truth, and it does not depend on empirical evidence. Attacks or criticism on these beliefs we value so highly therefore sometimes end up feeling like a punch in the gut.
Back to the documentary. Regarding the production value, I think it mostly cast a favorable light on Mormonism. Of course, everyone gets out of it what they want to get out of it. Haters probably got justification for hating, critics probably got justification for criticizing, believers won't stop believing. I wish the director had been more clear on who was speaking and how they came by their expertise on the subject. I would have liked to have seen fewer lengthy narrations by a couple of talking heads, and more contribution by more contributors. Maybe that's just because I get bored easily, and don't trust one-sided stories. I thought the absence of Jan Shipps was notable, although the credits listed her as a consultant. I thought Elder Jensen was thoughtful and well-spoken. I appreciated Elder Oaks' concession that the Mountain Meadows massacre was wrong on all fronts. I thought it was wonderful that the subject of eternal families was covered so thoroughly. If there is one message that I think we as a church ought to be broadcasting to the world, this is it. I saw my friends Mary and Craig Romney on tv! I'm sad for the child whose mother died in childbirth and whose father said some days he wouldn't do it again, but I was touched by the testimony that was shared in the telling of this story. If I think of more to say, I'll be back.
Your turn.
I mostly liked it and think it was long overdue.
I am kind of fascinated by the reaction people have had to our Church throughout its short history, and I don't just mean the negative reaction, although that part fascinates me the most. Join this newfound religion and leave England to follow a prophet who has seen God? Leave my wife and young kids to fend for themselves on the farm while I go on a mission for three years at a time? Pour tar over people and roll them in feathers? Issue an order to exterminate an entire civilization? Not elect somebody because of his religious affiliation? Teach anti-Mormon classes to the 7th graders at my church so they can approach their Mormon friends fully equipped with knowledge about horns on their heads and cultish behavior? Okay! Lots of people have said, Sign me up! I find it all very intriguing. I'm also kind of surprised when I hear that Mormonism is out of the mainstream. I suppose that's true in many places, but in my little world, I eatbreathesleep Mormonism and it's not obscure in the least. So I thought this program was overdue because it's time that a dialogue began about this young religion that reaches all corners of the earth and that stirs up such stong reaction.
I like knowing and learning about the history of Joseph Smith and the early Church. Sometimes I wish the Church was more forthright about mistakes made in the past because I feel like the truth has nothing to hide, but I understand the motivation of putting the best foot forward. I certainly don't feel the personal need to be defensive regarding polygamy, blacks and the priesthood, DNA evidence (note: I am not insinuating these are mistakes that the Church has made), or any other hang-ups some people have, and this is why: it's a revelation thing. I have strong, firm convictions that the Church of Jesus Christ is led by--who else?-- Jesus Christ, working through a living prophet and through relevation that each one of us can receive. Faith persists beyond societal pressures or scientific data or human error. I can't remember who said it last night, but I liked that part about how legitimate belief and participation in a religion cannot nor does not depend on empirical evidence. By definition, faith is "things that are hoped for, but not seen."
Abby and Nancy, you both mentioned that you thought the documentary was skewed and inaccurate. Please correct me if I'm putting words in your mouth, but I wonder if you felt that way because the Gospel was not presented as you are accustomed to perceiving it. Steve used the word "hollow." To those of us in the faith, the gospel of Jesus Christ is presented through the gift of the Holy Ghost. It is peace, it brings happiness, it offers hope. When everything is as it should be personally, the gospel is more than a history of events or a way of life or a group of people cleaning up after the wreckage of Katrina. It feels like truth, and it does not depend on empirical evidence. Attacks or criticism on these beliefs we value so highly therefore sometimes end up feeling like a punch in the gut.
Back to the documentary. Regarding the production value, I think it mostly cast a favorable light on Mormonism. Of course, everyone gets out of it what they want to get out of it. Haters probably got justification for hating, critics probably got justification for criticizing, believers won't stop believing. I wish the director had been more clear on who was speaking and how they came by their expertise on the subject. I would have liked to have seen fewer lengthy narrations by a couple of talking heads, and more contribution by more contributors. Maybe that's just because I get bored easily, and don't trust one-sided stories. I thought the absence of Jan Shipps was notable, although the credits listed her as a consultant. I thought Elder Jensen was thoughtful and well-spoken. I appreciated Elder Oaks' concession that the Mountain Meadows massacre was wrong on all fronts. I thought it was wonderful that the subject of eternal families was covered so thoroughly. If there is one message that I think we as a church ought to be broadcasting to the world, this is it. I saw my friends Mary and Craig Romney on tv! I'm sad for the child whose mother died in childbirth and whose father said some days he wouldn't do it again, but I was touched by the testimony that was shared in the telling of this story. If I think of more to say, I'll be back.
Your turn.
Comments
I liked the person who said that he worried we were becoming too mainstream. I agree - there is something wrong if we stop being a "peculiar" (sp?) people.
I also loved the evangelical guy who even though he didn't agree with a lot of our beliefs he seemed to always give us the benefit of the doubt that we were sincerely trying to do what we considered to be right.
Where to start? There's so much, but I'm happy to share. Central to the theology of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is the Fall, the Atonement of Jesus Christ, and the Resurrection, just as I'm sure it is in your system of beliefs. Christ's church as he established it in his lieftime and the authority to act in God's name were lost for a time, but have been restored to the earth. Are you wanting it in my own words? If not, I would refer you to a number of resources.
Thirteen Articles of Faith as outlined by Joseph Smith and published in 1842.
Basic beliefs.
A fantastic explanation of Mormonism with the intent to inform rather than convert.
A powerful, intelligent and life-changingmust-read.
And, of course, the Book of Mormon.
Emily, when n buster so rudely commented yesterday, I was confused because your name came up on statcounter. Since you are absolutely the nicest person in all of cyberspace, I quickly figured out that statcounter is whacked. Thanks for your comment!
I imagine other Christians might feel that way about socio-historical documentaries about early Christianity. I suppose I can’t blame the sociologists and the historians for doing what they do; but it seems superfluous, tragic even, to do historical analysis of Jesus – in an attempt to understand his assumedly human motivations, and miss the point that he was the Son of God.
Further, I suppose historians might look at the early Christians and figure that Paul went preaching to the Gentiles because of political pressure. Indeed, outside pressures may have been present for Paul; but it seems like a side-show distraction compared to the fact that he saw a light and heard a voice, and that Peter received revelations to take the Gospel to the Gentiles. So the historian looks at that and says, “Why did he do that? What were his motivations?” And they might look at Paul’s background and say that he was a Jew, but also a Roman, that he had been trained in certain schools, and spoke certain languages and found a people willing to submit to his influence. And Paul might jump up and down (maybe even in front of King Agrippa), and say, “Yes, yes yes. But it was really because I talked to God.” And the socio-historians in Agrippa’s court might hear him say that and hear only sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal – because it’s not in the acceptable Universe for them.
All of that being said, I suppose I’m one of those Mormons they talked about, who has this dichotomy with History, as a subject. I want it read; but it seems tragic when it’s read and people don’t see the hand of God. I wish more members of the Church knew their history. I wish we read it and understood it and even asked questions about it. It’s one of my favorite subjects. But my paradigm is completely different from last night’s producer. I really thought the editing was asking the question: “Why do human behavior and motivations lead to this kind of a result?” Whereas I read Mormon history, and I wonder why God had Joseph do it this way or that? Was that part God’s direction, or was it man’s direction? If God lead people in the scriptures or early church history in such a manner, would he interact with me similarly?
Sorry for the length of this comment.
It really was just entertainment to me, although I recorded it and hope to discuss it with my daughters one day. Being a convert I think it is important to lay it all on the table, my "bubble" burst about 6 years after being baptized when I learned some deeper doctrines, I worked through it and with prayer and trials and faith I have a very strong testimony that this is God's work.
I just want to disect your whole post adn say YES YES YES! You make so many greta points- thanks!
Do you mean that LDS people have lost the meaning of the Gospel, as in the Gospel as it was when Christ established it on the earth? Or the Gospel as it is laid forth in the 4 gospels of the New Testament? Or the Gospel of Jesus Christ as it is on the earth now? I don't really know what you meant.
Did you come here via Nienie?
I'm not saying you bashed on my religion, but why do other Christian believers react against us as if we were the devil incarnate? I assure you, we are not.
"Jesus Christ is the Only Begotten Son of God the Father in the flesh. He was the Creator, He is our Savior, and He will be our Judge. Under the direction of our Heavenly Father, Jesus Christ created the earth. Through His suffering in the Garden of Gethsemane and by giving His life on the cross—that is, by performing the Atonement—Jesus Christ saves us from our sins as we follow Him. Through His Resurrection, Jesus Christ saves us from physical death. Because He overcame death, we will all be given the gift of resurrection."
My husband wants me to point out that Paul, whom you referred to, was called to be an apostle and a prophet after the ascension of Jesus Christ. Paul did not pretend to replace Jesus, but rather as an apostle, he testified of Jesus. Jesus appeared to Paul and spoke to him, and we believe that Jesus continues to work through his chosen servants on the earth. This does not diminish or contradict the teachings of the Bible, but rather strengthens them. Did Paul or other apostles ever indicate in the Bible that there would be no more apostles to follow them?
JS's claim about apostasy is also anti-Scripture. Again, doesn't this claim completely undermine the power of the Holy Spirit? Of course, the church has forever been and will remain until Christ's return, made up of imperfect people, so mistakes are made. But (according to lds.org) to claim that the Gospel of Jesus Christ was lost and that it needed a NEW writing to reveal truth?! Why don't you just say, "Jesus, the Gospel and Church you established nearly 2000 years ago were not sufficient for our salvation, so we've got to add a bunch of stuff, and unfortunately, a lot of it goes against Your Word in the New Testament." I'm a Baptist minister, so I'm very familiar with the idea of having to return to a simpler, more stripped down faith. Baptists originally broke away from the Catholic Church in Rome to return to the BIBLE as their ultimate authority instead of a papacy and heirarchical structure. Baptists did NOT, however, look to a new writing as additional Scripture.
"The Book of Mormon is a record of God's dealings with the people who lived in the ancient Americas. Prophets of the Lord engraved the original records on gold plates. On September 22, 1827, an angel named Moroni—the last Book of Mormon prophet—delivered these records to the Prophet Joseph Smith. By the gift and power of God, the Prophet Joseph translated the record into English.
The primary purpose of the Book of Mormon is to convince all people "that Jesus is the Christ, the Eternal God, manifesting himself unto all nations" (title page of the Book of Mormon). It teaches that all people "must come unto him, or they cannot be saved" (1 Nephi 13:40). Joseph Smith said that the Book of Mormon is "the keystone of our religion, and a man [will] get nearer to God by abiding by its precepts, than by any other book" (introduction to the Book of Mormon).
The Book of Mormon is another witness for the truths taught in the Bible. It also restores "plain and precious" truths that have been lost from the Bible through errors in translation or "taken away" in attempts to "pervert the right ways of the Lord" (see 1 Nephi 13:24–27, 1 Nephi 13:38–41). The Bible and the Book of Mormon "shall grow together, unto the confounding of false doctrines and laying down of contentions, and establishing peace" (2 Nephi 3:12).
Near the end of the Book of Mormon, the prophet Moroni teaches us how we can know the book is true: "When ye shall receive these things, I would exhort you that ye would ask God, the Eternal Father, in the name of Christ, if these things are not true; and if ye shall ask with a sincere heart, with real intent, having faith in Christ, he will manifest the truth of it unto you, by the power of the Holy Ghost" (Moroni 10:4; see also Moroni 10:3 and Moroni 10:5)."
Jill, I believe in Christ, I follow Christ, I speak of Christ, I study the teachings of Christ, I learn of Christ, I try to be more like Christ, I pray to God through Christ the Mediator, I weekly partake of the Sacrament to renew covenants with Christ, I participate in the tremendous blessings of the Atonement of Jesus Christ, I worship Christ, I anticipate a full resurrection of body and spirit because of what Christ made possible for all mankind.
If Baptists choose to teach their congregations that they and they alone are the authority on who is and is not a Christian, I guess that's your right and prerogative. Meanwhile, I will continue to worship Jesus Christ and I will continue to not understand why the Baptists especially resent me for doing so.
I also believe that God and Jesus Christ have not left us alone, that They love those of us on the earth now every bit as much as they loved the people in Moses' time, or Abraham's time, or Paul's time. If you don't believe that Jesus could cause there to be additional scripture, perhaps it is because it has traditionally been taught that the Bible is all there is. As you said, people can make mistakes. Precious parts of the Bible have been lost, and perhaps mistranslated. We love and read the Bible and read the Book of Mormon as companion scripture. They go together, each one illuminating the truths found in the other. Why couldn't Jesus Christ, in all His power and love, give us additional tools by which men can come unto Him?
"If Baptists choose to teach their congregations that they and they alone are the authority on who is and is not a Christian, I guess that's your right and prerogative."
Emily, I do not teach my congregation, nor does my senior pastor, that we alone have the authority on who is and is not a Christian. Quite to the contrary, my convictions are based totally on the Bible and not on personal opinion or a feeling of judgment. I'm thankful that God keeps the judging job to Himself! However, as I've said, the Bible does point out that it is the responsibility of Christians to teach Jesus' commandments and to preach against error in faith.
My convictions are summed up much more eloquently in Acts 20:27-31. "For I have not hesitated to proclaim to you the whole will of God. Keep watch over yourselves and all the flock of which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers. Be shepherds of the church of God, which he bought with his own blood. I know that after I leave, savage wolves will come in among you and will not spare the flock. Even from your own number men will arise and distort the truth in order to draw away disciples after them. So be on your guard!"
I truly do not mean to offend you, but a man who claims to have received revelation and new scripture 1800 years after Jesus' time is "a savage wolf," according to Paul. JS claimed to come from "among the flock" by basing his new beliefs on Christian doctrine. Yes, we may have many beliefs in common, but when one of us begins to stray from the truth found in Scripture, the similarities don't matter anymore.
The idea that the Bible "is all there is" is not simply "tradition," Emily. The Bible claims again and again that for Christians, it is to be the ONLY Scripture and written authority. I never said that Jesus CAN'T give us additional tools. But the Bible is explicitly cleat that when it comes to Scripture, it is the last and only writing. CAN Jesus add new Scripture? Of course it's within His perfect span of abilities. If we are are to look only to Scripture as our authority, then WILL He or HAS He added more Scripture? The answer must be no.
Please reference some of these scriptures you keep talking about that say the Bible is the last and only writing.
Consider, just for a moment, what if the Mormons are right? What then?
Thanks.
Twice a year the entire membership of our church attends, in person or via satellite, radio, internet, or written word, a General Conference in which we are instructed by leaders of the church. At the last one, in April, one of the twelve apostles, Elder M. Russell Ballard, spoke on this subject that we've been discussing. He is more eloquent than am I. Would you please read it?
http://lds.org/conference/talk/display/0,5232,23-1-690-29,00.html
Why don't you try this next time and see if it gets you further in understanding: "Emily, I don't know you, but I presume that you are an intelligent, free thinking, bright individual. Surely you have studied the Bible and read all the same passages I have. Surely you have studied the history of your church. Surely you have heard all the claims against the historicity, biblical authenticity, and logic of the Book of Mormon and latter-day prophets a thousand times already. Tell me, why do you continue to believe? What is your faith based on? Why is it that you persist in believing in the bizarre idea that Christ restored his true church on the earth through a 14-year-old boy? Share with me why you believe." If you asked that, we would not need to argue.
As it happens, I believe that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has the fulness of truth and that it is the Baptists who are off track. I believe that I am absolutely on the right path toward salvation, and it would be wonderful if you and others would save your energy and not worry about the welfare of my soul. I believe that the Book of Mormon shows that it is you that does not fully understand the Bible. It is not my modus operandi to be on the offensive, but I am so frustrated and annoyed with your attacks, and others like yours.
I could go on. I would love to quote you blocks of scripture--yes, scripture--from the Book of Mormon that warn against people who say, "A Bible! A Bible! We have a Bible and that is all we need." BUT, I hate that I am so mad right now and I recognize that you have won this little discussion because you succeeded in making me mad. So now I am going to bow out.
Next time someone comes to my blog to criticize my beliefs I will know just to delete their comments.
Emily, you don't know me either. It's awfully presumptuous of you to tell me that I "do not have an honest desire" to understand your faith. For someone who isn't Mormon, I've read a whole lot about the subject, from MORMON sources, not Baptists' take on it. If you believe that it's you who's on track and Baptists who are off, why don't you try to convince Baptists of that? Wouldn't that be what your God wants you to do?
And just like you, I'd love to quote you Scripture that warns against those that would come MUCH later to add to the PERFECT Truth already established in the Bible.
The woman who was portrayed as wronged, the feminist who actually wanted the church to change doctrine to suit herself so she could pray to the mother in heaven in reality irked me because it surely was the church that was wrong not her, since she FELT IT SO DEEPLY. Sorry, that doesn't wash. Believe what you want. Don't try to change an organization to meet your standards. The Dead Sea Scrolls speak of a mother in heaven. Yes we believe in that doctrine, but we do not pray to her. On and On, JUST KNOW I BELIEVE. iF OTHERS DO NOT, don't tell me I'm not Christian. Don't show us as a dark and wearisome group who have child bride slavery. There will always be divisions. That doesn't change truth. Elinor