Unholy Moly 2

From the Mormon-owned daily in Salt Lake:

Deseret Morning News | Intro change in Book of Mormon spurs discussion

In the interest of another viewpoint.

My point in publishing this is that I believe Mormonism and the LDS church are a unique picture of American religion. When a change like this happens, it’s fun to watch from the sidelines. There are a lot of arguments which can be successfully made, but I’m just going to ask that if you choose to comment about this, do so to add something good to the discussion. I’d like to find out if blurbomat readers even care about stuff like this. When Heather and I travel, we are usually asked about Utah culture and Mormonism, so I assume it’s a natural curiosity and something of an interest.

My take: Doesn’t change my views about religion, god or Mormonism. Just interesting that the change was all over the local media yesterday and last night. Haven’t seen it on the national news. But isn’t that what makes the internet enjoyable? Discussions about local issues with insight from other locales??

← Older Comments
  • http://ransom-note-typography.com/ jon deal

    “Morm Kippur”

    If this were fark​.com, I’d have to say that “wins” the thread. Awesome.

  • http://www.canyonjam.net/eblog erat

    @Starenova — Write a friendly, to the point letter to your bishop requesting that your name be removed. Don’t get spiteful, or write a novel, or otherwise spit on the church in your letter. Make it clear that you came to your decision after lots of soul searching and you feel this is the best route to take.

  • Cassie

    Even most mormons have to work on mormon holidays. Except I can only think of one mormon holiday…

    I enjoy your viewpoints Jon. I’m a mormon and the change really doesn’t change anything for me. Same testimony and all. I saw it on the news and only thought that it was cool. If there was a change to 1st Nephi, then I would probably be upset.

  • http://mysolidbest.blogspot.com Christy

    I think this is fascinating. As an outsider looking in, that seems a significant change for a very small word. Am I correct in my understanding that the original introduction is believed to be the direct translation by Joseph Smith? If that is so, and if that translation is seen as divine providence, then WOW!

    Suzanne — Limbo was never a tenet of the Catholic church. It was merely a possibility entertained by theologians. The pope has not supported nor denied limbo, just clarified that it be put in its proper place as speculation.

  • Julie

    Very interesting, and the comments too. This is my kind of internet. Thank you.

  • http://mellowmeanderingsblogspot.com Mel

    I forget what the point of the whole article was about because I just spent almost an hour reading the comments. That, friends, is entertainment at its finest! Cheers!

  • http://mellowmeanderingsblogspot.com Mel

    Oh, and to actually have a point for my previous comment; This change really matters to believers more than anything. If it doesn’t change their belief in the Church, good, it doesn’t change my non-belief either and I certainly don’t think it is a valid argument against the church. The sad part of it all is when I read comments from people who don’t live in Utah and cannot understand why there is so much verbal hatred between members and non-members. We look like a bunch of unintelligent idiots arguing over something that simply cannot be proven absolutely in either way; and I think we kind of enjoy it a bit too much.

  • scott

    Christy,

    This is not wording from an original translation from Joseph Smith, it is text that was included as an introduction page in the 1981 edition of the Book of Mormon put together by a committee of the LDS Church.

    There is, however a Title Page that is a translation by Joseph Smith. This is not the text being discussed.

  • http://mysolidbest.blogspot.com Christy

    Thanks for setting me straight, Scott! That makes quite a difference.

  • http://fiddley.com Pete Dunn

    My take on it is posted here: http://​fiddley​.com/​a​r​c​h​i​v​e​/​2​0​0​7​1​1​/​i​_​m​a​k​e​_​a​_​r​e​c​o​r​d​_​o​f​_​m​y​_​p​r​o​c​e​e​d​i​n​g​s​_​i​n​_​m​y_days

    To sum up:

    “It also means that the LDS church has, in part, fessed up to what I’ve and others have been trying to say for several years, that, in fact, the Book of Mormon is not an accurate historical record at all.”

  • Cassie

    That is not true for one reason: The LDS Church does not claim that portion of the text to be scriptural.

← Older Comments