If you found out that the Golden Plates never existed, would you still be a Mormon?

[myboynoah]

Originally Posted by Chapel-Hill-Coug

Yeah, but the question wasn't, "would you still think the church is true", but "would you still be a Mormon?" It would be silly to use a phrase "the church is true" when you don't believe in the founding origins. A better question might be, "Is the church good?" or "Do I fit with this organization?" I know a lot of people who don't believe and still acknowledge the value of the church culturally, socially, and even spiritually, and want to participate. No mental gymnastics involved, just practical decision making.

Do you think it is really possible for The Church to make such an evolution, from a belief system to something akin to "a people?" It is an interesting thought, but I would think the central control over doctrine would make such an evolution impossible.

[Chapel-Hill-Coug]

Originally Posted by myboynoah

Do you think it is really possible for The Church to make such an evolution, from a belief system to something akin to "a people?" It is an interesting thought, but I would think the central control over doctrine would make such an evolution impossible.

That's interesting, I'm not sure how to answer. I guess I think that Mormonism is maybe even more a practice than a belief system. I don't see the power in the doctrine as much as I see power in the reinforcement of the doctrine, which is done on a social and cultural level. But I think it all starts with practice. I don't know, that's subject to change, but that's how I envision it in my mind at this point in time. Perhaps a flesh of practice and skeleton of doctrine, I'm really not sure.

As for the early church, my take is that it was 99% about Gathering into the kingdom of God for the imminent coming of Jesus, reinforced by charismatic religious fervor rather than doctrine or any set of beliefs. It is from this charismatic sect that I see the evolution, with important points along the way being Brigham Young's leadership, geographic centralization in Utah, statehood for Utah, etc., all of which changed the focus and trajectory of the group quite a bit.

[Sleeping in EQ]

Originally Posted by Chapel-Hill-Coug

Yeah, but the question wasn't, "would you still think the church is true", but "would you still be a Mormon?" It would be silly to use a phrase "the church is true" when you don't believe in the founding origins. A better question might be, "Is the church good?" or "Do I fit with this organization?" I know a lot of people who don't believe and still acknowledge the value of the church culturally, socially, and even spiritually, and want to participate. No mental gymnastics involved, just practical decision making.

Exactly. As I've said before, I am one of those persons. I think that the LDS Church has a particular role to play in the big scheme of dispersals (apostasies) and collections (restorations) of religious truth amongst humankind. I have faith, so to speak, that it is the part of the vineyard in which God would have me work. In that sense, the Church is the right framework for my spiritual development and has helped me immeasurably in my search for truth, knowledge, and a worthwhile life. It is a huge part of making me who I am--its fruits in my life are good, despite what reason tells me about its roots. But saying "the Church is true" in the conventional sense is kind of like saying "A reuben sandwich is true." The Church is an organization.

[Tex]

Originally Posted by Sleeping in EQ

But saying "the Church is true" in the conventional sense is kind of like saying "A reuben sandwich is true." It's an organization.

We're not going back to this conversation, are we? Was the Lord declaring the truth of a reuben sandwich in D&C 1?

[Sleeping in EQ]

Originally Posted by Tex

We're not going back to this conversation, are we? Was the Lord declaring the truth of a reuben sandwich in D&C 1?

I'm familiar with the D&C 1 passage. I understand it differently than you do. Don't let that stop you from trying to make me in your image, though.

[Tex]

Originally Posted by Sleeping in EQ

I'm familiar with the D&C 1 passage. I understand it differently than you do. Don't let that stop you from trying to make me in your image, though.

Oh, stop with the drama already. I'm not trying to "make you" anything. The last time I asked you this question you also neglected to answer.

If you understand it differently, then out with it.

[Sleeping in EQ]

Originally Posted by Tex

Oh, stop with the drama already. I'm not trying to "make you" anything. The last time I asked you this question you also neglected to answer.

If you understand it differently, then out with it.

Swine...pearl.

My faith is not "drama."

And bullying even as you say you're not trying to make me into your image.

You're quite the piece of work.

Plenty of people have discussed this issue with me productively. Some of them post here. They know who they are.

[Tex]

Originally Posted by Sleeping in EQ

Swine...pearl.

My faith is not "drama."

And bullying even as you say you're not trying to make me into your image.

You're quite the piece of work.

Plenty of people have discussed this issue with me productively. Some of them post here. They know who they are.

*Tex rolls his eyes.*

And thus we see, the church is true.

[Sleeping in EQ]

Originally Posted by Tex

*Tex rolls his eyes.*

And thus we see, the church is true.

And the contemptuous follow up that is completely devoid of reason.

Yet another confirmation of Tex as a congenial, neighbor-loving, and sincere fellow.

And you wonder why some around here don't care for your manner.

[Indy Coug]

He asked you a legitimate question and you gave him a completely contemptable answer, then you have the gall to get huffy with his response to your contempt.

Beautiful.