My positions on some Mormon questions.

It has occurred to me that some folks might be interested in/concerned about where I stand on some key questions about Mormonism, particularly when I’m speaking up for people who are being accused of apostasy. This will kinda be a wordy version of what could be nicely handled by a Mormon Geek Code if such a thing existed and was widely understood.

The Church is true?
Yes. But I’m not entirely certain what “true” means. But my Yes is solid and unequivocal.
The Book of Mormon is true?
Yes, solidly and unequivocally also. Again uncertain about “true” and reasonably certain that the explanation of who and where it describes that I was taught as a child is not literally true. I’m okay with the legendary descriptions of how it was translated not being literally true, and I’m also not bothered by horses, iron, swords, concrete, etc.
Prophets are fallible men inspired by God.
Yes. So stories about their frailties, mistakes and bad choices don’t blow me away – I’m interested in those stories, but they don’t impact the first question at all.
Plural marriage
Also doesn’t blow me away, even the post-Manifesto stuff. Don’t expect to practice it in my lifetime.
Book of Abraham
My position is a hybrid of the Catalyst Theory and the Missing Papyrus Theory. The papyri we have were not written by Abraham and do not contain the text of the BoA. However, there might be missing papyri which contain that text and could possibly have been written by Abraham (but I doubt that last part). The text is the word of God, and I’m not bothered if it is not literally connected to the Abraham Papyri.
Ordaining women
I don’t know. I’m not persuaded that this is necessary, or that it would be good. OTOH, I strongly support the ability to ask for this, on the grounds that it’s always okay to ask for what you want, as long as you will gracefully take “no” for an answer. I don’t accept that that answer has been given yet.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *