Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Toto · 08-19-2012, 04:49 PM

There is a long review in the current New Yorker by Adam Gopnik on four new books about Mormonism. I, Nephi Mormonism and its meanings

A few points struck me as possibly relevant for Rodney Stark's idea that new religions follow a pattern, and that we can infer some things about early Christianity from studying the Mormons, among other new religions.

Quote:

Scholarly opinion on Smith now tends to divide between those who think that he knew he was making it up and those who think that he sincerely believed in his own visions—though the truth is that, as Melville’s “Confidence Man” reminds us, the line between the seer and the scamster wasn’t clearly marked in early-nineteenth-century America.

Quote:

The Book of Mormon is, in any case, only one of many pronouncements that Smith offered his new troops, apparently improvising as he went along, according to the shifting spiritual needs of the moment. (After other followers began to have revelations from angels of their own, the Holy Ghost inspired Smith to the conclusive revelation that only his revelations ought to be church policy.)

Quote:

The powers that possession of the Book of Mormon conferred mattered more than the doctrines that it contained. “Rarely did missionaries draw on the verses and stories of the Book of Mormon in sermons,” Bowman explains. “Rather, they brandished the book as tangible proof of Joseph Smith’s divine calling.” Some holy texts, the Gospels, for instance, are evangelical instruments meant to convert people who read them; others are sacred objects meant to be venerated. The Book of Mormon is a book of the second sort. As the French religious historian Jean-Christophe Attias points out, in traditional Judaism the physical presence of the Scripture is at least as important as its content: when the Torah is unrolled during the service, it’s meant to be admired, not apprehended. That the Mormons had a book of their own counted for almost as much as what the Book of Mormon said.

(I wonder if this is true of the gospels - were they actually meant to convert the reader? We evidently have the earliest fragment of the gospel of John because someone cut up a small piece and put it into an amulet.)

Quote:

And then the Book of Mormon, unlike anything in the five books of the Torah, is told in a kind of flat first person: the book’s opening chapters all begin with the formula “I, Nephi.” This was not just an American Bible; it was a Bible with an evangelical, camp-meeting tone laid over the Old Testament vocabulary. The testimonial is the essential genre of the Great Awakening, and the Book of Mormon, for all its pastiche, is at heart a testimonial—starting with Nephi’s own account of how he got his people here. Even if you didn’t stay to find out what I, Nephi, did, the fact that I, Nephi, did it counted for a lot. Among other Christian texts, perhaps only the Gnostic Gospels of the early Christian centuries use the first person in quite this way. (Luke and Revelation begin with a personal introduction, but aren’t really personal stories.) And, though the charge of Gnosticism was often directed at them maliciously by other Christians, Mormonism does have a definite Gnostic aroma. Like the Gnostics, the Mormons thought that the conventional texts had too much atonement and too little attainment. Mormonism objects to making a big deal of the morbid agony of Jesus on the Cross at the expense of the more cheerful apparition of Man-made-into-God. This is why there are no crosses on Mormon temples; our guy triumphed far more than he suffered.

Minimalist · 08-19-2012, 04:55 PM

.....and the evidence for Nephi is........

Oh, Joey Smith said so!. Well, that cinches it, I guess.

Toto · 08-19-2012, 05:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Minimalist

.....and the evidence for Nephi is........

Oh, Joey Smith said so!. Well, that cinches it, I guess.

So how would you apply this to early Christianity?

sotto voce · 08-19-2012, 05:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

(I wonder if this is true of the gospels - were they actually meant to convert the reader? We evidently have the earliest fragment of the gospel of John because someone cut up a small piece and put it into an amulet.)

Maybe that was to hide it from Caesar's eyes.

Nobody would prohibit the BoM, except to prevent boredom, that's for sure. I'd rather read Milton than that!

Though it does have its amusing aspects. I mean, the Book of Mosiah, ferchrissakes. Come on. And the Book of Ether! Safer than Chloroform, eh, and with similar effect. The angel Moroni. Big hint, that. And the King James English, of course.

No, Mr Romney, you backed a daft donkey.

Or should it be Mr Romeny.

aeebee50 · 08-19-2012, 06:19 PM

I think it is the other way around. Christianity is the model for Mormonism.

aa5874 · 08-20-2012, 10:03 AM

The Mormon religion is a very good example of how the Jesus cult started based on the Available evidence.

The Mormon Bible was derived from an ANONYMOUS UNKNOWN Source and was located by Joseph Smith by the directions from an UNKNOWN NON-HISTORICAL ANGEL.

Nobody today knows of the author, date of authorship and actual contents of the supposed "ORIGINAL" Mormon Bible--the Golden Plates

In effect, the Mormon Bible is an INVENTION but is STILL BELIEVED.

This is the PRECISE NATURE of the NT Canon--A COMPILATION of INVENTIONS of FABLES by Multiple Unknown Sources but is still NOW Believed.

Joseph Smith showed precisely how a religion can be started WITHOUT any history, WITHOUT any historical characters.

How did Joseph Smith manage to make people BELIEVE that there was an ACTUAL ANGEL called Moroni??

Who ever SAW the actual Angel Moroni BEFORE Joseph Smith???

No-one saw an actual ANGEL Moroni.

No-one SAW Jesus, too. The NT stories about Jesus are INVENTIONS--WITHOUT history.

Not one author of the Canon claimed they Personally met an actual human Jesus.

The Mormon religion is a prefect example of how a Religion can start WITHOUT history and actual historical characters.

steve_bnk · 08-20-2012, 10:09 AM

It is a good model to see how Chrtianity may have arisen form a myth or a myth based on something.

Scientology as well. It os obviouis Hubbard fabricated it form a sythesis of psychology, religion, scifi, and mysticsm. and today decades later we have an army of true believers.

How Chrtianity may have arisen escpecially gven a root mytholgy in Judaism is not mystifying.

Mormonism hadChrtianity. Early Christians had Judaism. Ancient Jews had flood myths and others to draw on.

outhouse · 08-20-2012, 10:21 AM

Quote:

It is a good model to see how Chrtianity may have arisen form a myth or a myth based on something.

thats silly bud.

we already know christianity rose from mythology and it has nothing in common with JS

we have many classic examples like most of Paul being mythology that share no ressemblance to JS

steve_bnk · 08-20-2012, 10:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by outhouse

Quote:

It is a good model to see how Chrtianity may have arisen form a myth or a myth based on something.

thats silly bud.

we already know christianity rose from mythology and it has nothing in common with JS

we have many classic examples like most of Paul being mythology that share no ressemblance to JS

Chrtianity arose out of Judaism by the same cultural process that gave rise to Mormonism and Scientolgy.

To begin with human nature, people want and may even need to believe in something. Religion has been a constant throughout human history.

There are number of syntheses that have arisen and are still around. Rosicurcians, Theosophy among others. Uniterianism. Est. The process never ends. Chsitainity is one data point and was/is mot unique. Islam synthesized out of Judaism and includes Christ.

The revelation to the Sikh foiunder echoes the revelaltion to Mohammed.

Studying modern relgious forms is a window into Chrtianity and its formation.

Basic historical analysis by comparison to what we can document and human obervation....bud.

Toto · 08-20-2012, 10:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by outhouse

Quote:

It is a good model to see how Chrtianity may have arisen form a myth or a myth based on something.

thats silly bud.

we already know christianity rose from mythology and it has nothing in common with JS

we have many classic examples like most of Paul being mythology that share no ressemblance to JS

There are references to the Jewish Scriptures throughout Paul and the gospels.

If you are going to make such a sweeping statement, at least back it up. None of your modern scholarship agrees with this statement.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

08-19-2012, 04:55 PM	#2
Minimalist Veteran Member Join Date: May 2007 Location: Arizona Posts: 1,808	.....and the evidence for Nephi is........ Oh, Joey Smith said so!. Well, that cinches it, I guess.

08-19-2012, 06:19 PM	#5
aeebee50 Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2010 Location: Texas Posts: 5,810	I think it is the other way around. Christianity is the model for Mormonism.

08-20-2012, 10:03 AM	#6
aa5874 Contributor Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: the fringe of the caribbean Posts: 18,988	The Mormon religion is a very good example of how the Jesus cult started based on the Available evidence. The Mormon Bible was derived from an ANONYMOUS UNKNOWN Source and was located by Joseph Smith by the directions from an UNKNOWN NON-HISTORICAL ANGEL. Nobody today knows of the author, date of authorship and actual contents of the supposed "ORIGINAL" Mormon Bible--the Golden Plates In effect, the Mormon Bible is an INVENTION but is STILL BELIEVED. This is the PRECISE NATURE of the NT Canon--A COMPILATION of INVENTIONS of FABLES by Multiple Unknown Sources but is still NOW Believed. Joseph Smith showed precisely how a religion can be started WITHOUT any history, WITHOUT any historical characters. How did Joseph Smith manage to make people BELIEVE that there was an ACTUAL ANGEL called Moroni?? Who ever SAW the actual Angel Moroni BEFORE Joseph Smith??? No-one saw an actual ANGEL Moroni. No-one SAW Jesus, too. The NT stories about Jesus are INVENTIONS--WITHOUT history. Not one author of the Canon claimed they Personally met an actual human Jesus. The Mormon religion is a prefect example of how a Religion can start WITHOUT history and actual historical characters.

08-20-2012, 10:09 AM	#7
steve_bnk Contributor Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Seattle Posts: 27,602	It is a good model to see how Chrtianity may have arisen form a myth or a myth based on something. Scientology as well. It os obviouis Hubbard fabricated it form a sythesis of psychology, religion, scifi, and mysticsm. and today decades later we have an army of true believers. How Chrtianity may have arisen escpecially gven a root mytholgy in Judaism is not mystifying. Mormonism hadChrtianity. Early Christians had Judaism. Ancient Jews had flood myths and others to draw on.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.