Are We Seeing a Dramatic Shift in How Some Mormons Regard the Book of Mormon?

[Apologette]

As I peruse some of the less rigid Mormon sites, which I do from time to time, it seems to me that more and more Mormons (apparently those of an intellectual bent) are willing to admit that the Book of Mormon was probably a 19th century creation, but should be treated as "sacred scripture" nonetheless. In other words, the myth attached to the book, including golden plates translated by urim and thummim and seer stones, is simply a sacred story outside of reality and needs to be viewed as narrative lending credence to the book's contents, not an actual narrative of its origin. Furthermore, that the book's contents are not actual historical occurrences, but are intended to be a teaching tool affirming morality and a belief system somewhat modeled on 19th century piety.

So, how do the Mormons here feel about this theological shift within their own group? Will the more liberal view succeed in shaping the Mormon cult's presentation of their book? Will it now be regarded more as a "story" than as actual historical fact? I think that this is the only viable course for the Mormons. They really are going to be disregarded as void any intellectual honesty if they continue to present the BoM as something historical!

[James Banta]

As I peruse some of the less rigid Mormon sites, which I do from time to time, it seems to me that more and more Mormons (apparently those of an intellectual bent) are willing to admit that the Book of Mormon was probably a 19th century creation, but should be treated as "sacred scripture" nonetheless. In other words, the myth attached to the book, including golden plates translated by urim and thummim and seer stones, is simply a sacred story outside of reality and needs to be viewed as narrative lending credence to the book's contents, not an actual narrative of its origin. Furthermore, that the book's contents are not actual historical occurrences, but are intended to be a teaching tool affirming morality and a belief system somewhat modeled on 19th century piety.

So, how do the Mormons here feel about this theological shift within their own group? Will the more liberal view succeed in shaping the Mormon cult's presentation of their book? Will it now be regarded more as a "story" than as actual historical fact? I think that this is the only viable course for the Mormons. They really are going to be disregarded as void any intellectual honesty if they continue to present the BoM as something historical!

And if they put it in the realm of religious fiction how can it hold a superior position to ACTUAL scripture? How could any LDS honestly say that this 19th century novel can be used to answer any questions a religion might create in their reading of the Bible.. All they have is an opinion of two unschooled 19th century men That had NO AUTHORITY OUTSIDE THEIR OWN OPINION TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THEY HAD CONCERNING CHRISTIANITY?.. IHS jim