Golden Mean Mormonism

The upper-crust forum for scholarly, polite, and respectful discussions only. Heavily moderated. Rated G.
Post Reply
_tomhardman
_Emeritus
Posts: 9
Joined: Sun Jul 14, 2013 12:51 am

Golden Mean Mormonism

Post by _tomhardman »

I know Mormons at different ends of the spectrum of belief. I will call them Strictly Literal Mormons and Highly Metaphorical Mormons. However, I have a difficult time fully embracing either of their perspectives. Is there a reasonable, morally responsible and spiritually resonant middle ground between these two extremes? This is a post from my blog where I explore that question.

http://in-fide-scientiam.com/2013/11/12 ... Mormonism/

I’d love to hear your feedback.
_subgenius
_Emeritus
Posts: 13326
Joined: Thu Sep 01, 2011 12:50 pm

Re: Golden Mean Mormonism

Post by _subgenius »

your post was interesting but a bit of a cursory critique of generalized (perhaps over) views of religion.
Nevertheless, i fond the following quote form your blog to be the most important point of your entire post:

"I believe as much as I can, but I reject what my conscience tells me I must."

This statement is interesting and perhaps merits further explanation and exploration.

(footnote: ironically Catholicism considers Christianity to be quite consistent with the Golden Mean)
I am not convinced that your post is simply putting forth a false compromise.
Seek freedom and become captive of your desires...seek discipline and find your liberty
I can tell if a person is judgmental just by looking at them
what is chaos to the fly is normal to the spider - morticia addams
If you're not upsetting idiots, you might be an idiot. - Ted Nugent
_Tobin
_Emeritus
Posts: 8417
Joined: Wed Feb 01, 2012 6:01 pm

Re: Golden Mean Mormonism

Post by _Tobin »

I really don't think your blog nearly covers all the possible views (extremes) of Mormonism that exist. My own view is simply that Mormonism may have a basis in fact, yet to be proven in almost every case. For example, Joseph Smith may have received gold plates and translated them as he said. However, without the plates to examine, I'm highly dubious of that claim. The same could be said of Jesus Christ. Such a being may have visited our world and performed magic tricks and seemingly rose from the dead. The only reasonable way I know of that happening however is through the use of very advanced technology. However, without evidence of such beings (or that kind of technology), I'd be just as dubious of the claims around Jesus Christ.

So, I think you can have a very reasonable view of Mormonism (and most other religions) in that they may have a basis in fact and that they teach some good principles without being either a Literal Mormon or Metaphorical Mormon. However, the likely answer is that most of the claims aren't factual. They are either mythological or are highly embellished accounts. And you need to be very cautious of other bad things that have crept into Mormonism and been taught and promoted as well.
"You lack vision, but I see a place where people get on and off the freeway. On and off, off and on all day, all night.... Tire salons, automobile dealerships and wonderful, wonderful billboards reaching as far as the eye can see. My God, it'll be beautiful." -- Judge Doom
_Bazooka
_Emeritus
Posts: 10719
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2013 4:36 am

Re: Golden Mean Mormonism

Post by _Bazooka »

Tobin wrote:I really don't think your blog nearly covers all the possible views (extremes) of Mormonism that exist. My own view is simply that Mormonism may have a basis in fact, yet to be proven in almost every case. For example, Joseph Smith may have received gold plates and translated them as he said. However, without the plates to examine, I'm highly dubious of that claim. The same could be said of Jesus Christ. Such a being may have visited our world and performed magic tricks and seemingly rose from the dead. The only reasonable way I know of that happening however is through the use of very advanced technology. However, without evidence of such beings (or that kind of technology), I'd be just as dubious of the claims around Jesus Christ.


You've had direct, explicit evidence of such beings (and that technology) so presumably you are not dubious of the claims around Jesus Christ at all, right?
That said, with the Book of Mormon, we are not dealing with a civilization with no written record. What we are dealing with is a written record with no civilization. (Runtu, Feb 2015)
_Bazooka
_Emeritus
Posts: 10719
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2013 4:36 am

Re: Golden Mean Mormonism

Post by _Bazooka »

tomhardman wrote:I know Mormons at different ends of the spectrum of belief. I will call them Strictly Literal Mormons and Highly Metaphorical Mormons. However, I have a difficult time fully embracing either of their perspectives. Is there a reasonable, morally responsible and spiritually resonant middle ground between these two extremes? This is a post from my blog where I explore that question.

http://in-fide-scientiam.com/2013/11/12 ... Mormonism/

I’d love to hear your feedback.


I'm kind of a little bit where subby is on this.
I think the middle ground of any belief is usually the safe and comfortable option for the majority of people.
It's not far enough one way or the other to provoke upset or criticism for the majority and so taking this position protects one from being in the spotlight. It's almost as though people believe the consensus simply because it is the consensus.

If God exists and Mormonism is His only Church then there can be no middle ground for people who want to be considered 'Mormon'.
Mormonism articulates explicit beliefs that you can only be for or against. Take this statement for instance:
"Well, it's either true or false. If it's false, we're engaged in a great fraud. If it's true, it's the most important thing in the world. Now, that's the whole picture. It is either right or wrong, true or false, fraudulent or true. And that's exactly where we stand, with a conviction in our hearts that it is true: that Joseph went into the Grove; that he saw the Father and the Son; that he talked with them; that Moroni came; that the Book of Mormon was translated from the plates; that the priesthood was restored by those who held it anciently. That's our claim. That's where we stand, and that's where we fall, if we fall. But we don't. We just stand secure in that faith." - Prophet Gordon B. Hinckley, Interview "The Mormons"; PBS Documentary, April 2007

In Mormonism (perhaps in other religions too) the principle Hinckley explains in his comment above applies to every single doctrinal point of the Church.
One cannot be what is termed a 'Cafeteria Mormon' as far as that principle is concerned. And make no mistake, 'Cafeteria Mormonism' is the middle ground for members of the Church that simply don't accept or believe it's all true. Which makes them in all but membership status, non-mormons. The Church accepts that it contains within its membership people who do not accept 'it's all true', in the hopes that they will continue on the path towards that finishing point, rather than towards the other extremity of "it's all false". But make no mistake, Mormonism expects it's members to reach a point where they shift out of the middle ground and make the choice about which end of the spectrum they are. Most 'Cafeteria Mormons' are expecting to make that choice in the next life rather than risk leaving the safe middle ground they currently occupy. (lest I be flamed by Cafeteria Mormon's let me be clear that I number amongst them).

Golden Mean Mormonism might be an attractive, comfortable proposition, but it has no doctrinal place whatsoever.
That said, with the Book of Mormon, we are not dealing with a civilization with no written record. What we are dealing with is a written record with no civilization. (Runtu, Feb 2015)
_Dr. Shades
_Emeritus
Posts: 14117
Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2006 9:07 pm

Re: Golden Mean Mormonism

Post by _Dr. Shades »

tomhardman wrote:I’d love to hear your feedback.

It sounds like you've invented your own Mormonism.

But that's okay; pretty much every Mormon does, to some extent or other. (Don't believe me? Then find me one living Mormon who agrees with Brigham Young that Adam and God are the same person.)

From the article:

Both Strictly Literal and Highly Metaphorical Mormons might complain that I am advocating a so-called “cafeteria” approach to religious belief. I detest that term. The way that I approach my faith is in no way analogous to choosing between turkey and roast beef at the deli.

Okay, so you aren't a cafeteria Mormon.

I believe as much as I can, but I reject what my conscience tells me I must.

Okay, so you are a cafeteria Mormon.

Remember, cafeteria Mormons believe as much as they can, but reject what their conscience tells them they must, too. . . just like you.

You and they are one.
"Finally, for your rather strange idea that miracles are somehow linked to the amount of gay sexual gratification that is taking place would require that primitive Christianity was launched by gay sex, would it not?"

--Louis Midgley
_bcspace
_Emeritus
Posts: 18534
Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2006 6:48 pm

Re: Golden Mean Mormonism

Post by _bcspace »

Is there a reasonable, morally responsible and spiritually resonant middle ground between these two extremes?


Sure. You would have to accept all critical doctrines (having to do with your salvation) but even there I think there is some room for personal interpretation as to the details.
Machina Sublime
Satan's Plan Deconstructed.
Your Best Resource On Joseph Smith's Polygamy.
Conservatism is the Gospel of Christ and the Plan of Salvation in Action.
The Degeneracy Of Progressivism.
Post Reply