NOM

"President Nelson clarified that the Book of Mormon is not a historical textbook. Instead, it further defines many Bible teachings — while revealing new concepts and refuting many falsehoods, including the notion that revelation ended with the Bible and that one can be saved by grace alone."

https://www.thechurchnews.com/leaders-a ... sowfWpltjI

??

This isn’t the first time RMN has said this about the BoM. He told new mission presidents the same thing a few years ago. He must believe it. Does the BoM teach that we are not saved by grace alone?

I think people read too much into his statement. Saying the BoM is not a historical textbook is not the same as saying that the BoM stories are not historical.

If asked to clarify I think Nelson would say that the BoM relates real historical events but the value of the BoM is not in relaying history, it's in its teachings about Jesus.

I think this is probably Nelson's way of trying to diminish the importance of the historical truth while still maintaining that space for believers.

It's a good way to work with potential converts too because it can sidestep the historical issues and just say "it's based on historical events but still written by men, but the importance is the lessons that it teaches."

It also feels like what has been a very, very slow watering down of the historicity of the BoM by the church, where they are... I believe... going to eventually get to a point where they refer to it as a revelation and nothing more. We'll see on that one, but I think Soares really kicked that off at GC last year when calling it a revelation and not a translation.

Gaslighting: It's what LD$-Inc. does.

Neither historicity nor testimony of the Book of Mormon is a required belief in the temple recommend interview. This is one area of belief where wiggle room can be discussed. If you can provide the correct answers to the temple recommend questions and keep you mouth shut on any other issues then continuing church membership is not a problem.

Perhaps it’s time they refresh the appearance of the book.

Get rid of the dark blue cover. Change it to a nice environmentally friendly green. Change the font to something warm and friendly. Perhaps one of those warm Mormon mommy blog fonts?

We should have a contest to redesign it.

This isn't really new, "not a textbook" has been said before. He also went on to talk about Jesus personally ministering to the people in the Americas, so he's still leaving room for it being historical, just not a "textbook". The bigger takeaway (I actually watched the whole talk) was his comment that it doesn't mention ALL of the people who were here. I think these little nuggets are the first steps in a baby-step process that will land on "it's a revealed story" in about 75 years. 75 years from now the most ardent TBM will scoff at the idea that God cursed people with dark skin.

When RMN delivered this “not a historical textbook” statement, there is great irony in the other events around this visit. While there, the church presented a check for $2 million specifically for the First Nations (American Indians) to discover their ancestors….the dark skinned Lamanites of the BoM. Maybe that is why he said the BoM is not historical??

It's weasel words.

Church: The Book of Mormon is true and historical.
Human: Then why isn't there any evidence to support it? And so much that refutes it?
Church: It's generally, overall true and historical but it's not a freakin' textbook, so don't think you can pin it down to specific, textbook style facts.
Human: So why shouldn't I be able to use the same metrics of truth and historicity that I would use elsewhere?
Church: The Book of Mormon is true and historical.

2bizE wrote: ↑

Wed Oct 20, 2021 6:02 pm

When RMN delivered this “not a historical textbook” statement, there is great irony in the other events around this visit. While there, the church presented a check for $2 million specifically for the First Nations (American Indians) to discover their ancestors….the dark skinned Lamanites of the BoM. Maybe that is why he said the BoM is not historical??

$2million... data fabrication business is getting greedy...

I mean... how generous of a charitable donation for the church, and wouldn't it be interesting if the church found data that no one else found validating its history....

So the Book of Mormon belongs in the Historical Fiction section. It fits in with The Work and the Glory series (South Park is more accurate). Maybe it's more along the lines of Aesop's Fables. Fictional characters to teach moral lessons in life. I grew up hearing the BOM was 100% correct while the Bible had human flaws. So now the BOM is not 100% correct?

hmb wrote: ↑

Sat Oct 23, 2021 5:40 am

So the Book of Mormon belongs in the Historical Fiction section. It fits in with The Work and the Glory series (South Park is more accurate). Maybe it's more along the lines of Aesop's Fables. Fictional characters to teach moral lessons in life. I grew up hearing the BOM was 100% correct while the Bible had human flaws. So now the BOM is not 100% correct?

But even historical fiction requires some basis in actual historical events. Sci-fi/fantasy is a better fit.

Ya'll know that the Corp.™ has changed the article to remove the word "historical" right?

Red Ryder wrote: ↑

Wed Oct 20, 2021 11:31 am

We should have a contest to redesign it.

I would like to see some Lord of the Rings-style maps.

wtfluff wrote: ↑

Sun Oct 24, 2021 6:50 pm

Ya'll know that the Corp.™ has changed the article to remove the word "historical" right?

Wow, that's hilarious. Yet again the Mouthpiece of God has been censored by the Mouthpiece of the Mouthpiece of God. I hear they are going to metal-plate and wire his garment markings so his Remote Scrutinizer can deliver a painful corrective shock whenever he starts to drift off-message.