In reality, nobody takes the Bible literally because it is simply not possible to do so. But I'm wondering if Mormons at least profess to do so?

I know that my TBM mother & aunt do. They both also believe in young earth creationism. The sick part is that my aunt is a history teacher outside of the Morridor, & doesn't believe that carbon dating is real.

I wonder what they make of the parts that say the Earth is flat and orbited by the sun.

They take the Old Trestament and the Book of Revelation as literal. They give lip sevice to the Epistles. But they do not take the Gospels as literal. Oh, they really believe that Jesus said all those things. But they do not believe that it applies to them. In the Mormon mind, the purpose of the Gospels is simply to convince everybody else that Jesus was divine, using his parables and sermons to prove his superiority to all other humanoids. But when it comes to actually obeying him by being kind, etc., they feel they have more important things to do, like convincing everybody else that they know more about Jesus and God than the rest of the world does. In their mind Jesus is not about saving, and he is not about tolerance and compassion. He is about vindictive validation of their points of view.

Very interesting summation, thanks.

Like every adherent to the bible, they pick & choose what's literal based on their particular world view.

They only accept it as true insofar as it agrees with Mormonism. If it disagrees with Mormonism, well that passage must of have been translated incorrectly.

Unfortunately, they don't apply the same standards to the Book of Mormon or the Inspired Version of the Bible. The former teaches the Trinity. The latter denies the possibility of eternal marriage.

Ex Aedibus Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> They only accept it as true insofar as it agrees
> with Mormonism. If it disagrees with Mormonism,
> well that passage must of have been translated
> incorrectly.
>
> Unfortunately, they don't apply the same standards
> to the Book of Mormon or the Inspired Version of
> the Bible. The former teaches the Trinity. The
> latter denies the possibility of eternal marriage.

Bingo... I was going to give this same reply myself.

So far as it was "translated" correctly ;)

(reference to one of the articles of faith and the essay on the book of Abraham)

The Bible is often seen as a literal history book by many people.
I know Mormons and other believers that are sure the Bible is absolutely exact, literal, and to only be believed as such.
I know others whose understanding is more symbolic.

The Mormons have done what is typical of other Christian type religions and make a statement of their beliefs.

Mormons, in their 13 Articles of Faith (which have been changed from the original), do take a position on the subject in the
8th Article of faith:
We believe the Bible to be the word of God as far as it is translated correctly; we also believe the Book of Mormon to be the word of God.

Reference to all 13 Articles of Faith:

http://lds.about.com/od/basicsgospelprinciples/a/13articlesfaith.htm

In my experience, most LDS folks tend to consider the Bible a literal history and miss or don't understand the symbolism. Probably because they are not looking for it.

Back in the 60's in the BYU married ward we attended, I recall a discussion on this subject and more were willing to look for the symbolism. I still recall a classroom discussion eating a book. was it literal? (For some odd reason, I am still able to access that experience!)
I'd have to look up the reference as I don't recall it now.

"...the Book of Mormon remains secure, unchanged and unchangeable, ...But with the Bible it was not and is not so....it was once in the sole and exclusive care and custody of an abominable organization [Christianity], founded by the devil himself, likened prophetically unto a great whore, whose great aim and purpose was to destroy the souls of men in the name of religion. In these hands it ceased to be the book it once was."

- Apostle Bruce R. McConkie, The Joseph Smith Translation, pp. 12, 13


“... who, in his right mind, could, for one moment, suppose the Bible in its present form to be a perfect guide? Who knows that even one verse of the whole Bible has escaped pollution so as to convey the same sense now that it did in the original.”

- Apostle Orson Pratt, “The Bible and Tradition, without Further Revelation, an insufficient Guide,” Divine Authenticity of the Book of Mormon – No. 3, December 1, 1850, p. 47

Much like the Book of Mormon, much of the bible was written/ adapted to give credibility to the rulers. Josiah "finding" the book of law and having a restoration is a big clue. TBM's also downplay any surviving mystic elements and dumb them down further by mormonizing them. Sons of God and Daughters of men having nephillim giant offspring turns into covenant keeping church members marrying non-members and that is bad.

This is an interesting topic. I used to take the bible literally and I think your traditional Mormon does too.

Had an interesting Sunday School lesson some time ago where the teacher (who also happens to be a famous LDS composer) chided LDS people for taking everything literally in the bible (in an Old Testament lesson). Talked about bible stories like "Jonah and the Whale", etc. He posed questions to the group like (paraphrasing...just illustrating the thought provoking ideas he was trying to get across to the group) "do you think these stories literally happened?"..."If they didn't literally happen, what do you think the author of the stories was trying to say to us?" (i.e. was the biblical author using these stories to illustrate a message?)..."Would your faith be shaken if you found these stories to not be literal?"..."Is there anything wrong if these stories aren't literal?"

This lesson truly opened my eyes...

Only so far as it is translated correctly!!!

I used to hear "as far as it is translated correctly (WTF that means), when referring to believing the Bible. So I always wondered when the cult would publish a "corrected" version...and tell all the Christian churches that they were preaching from the wrong book.

Ron Burr



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/13/2014 05:56PM by Lethbridge Reprobate.

If there is a part of the Bible that supports their views (and there are plenty of those parts) then they tend to take it literally. The other parts are governed by the idea that the Bible is a poor translation of what God said and/or meant.

In many ways Mormonism is a 'rewrite' of the Christian Bible. It even has additional scriptural books.

The thing is, if the Bible is not the literal or even metaphorical word of God (and it isn't) then how does any Christian decide which parts are right and which are wrong? This is why there are so many different versions of Christianity out there - the Bible is incoherent.

The BoM is sort of fan fiction of the Bible.

It was Mary Baker Eddy, who "discovered" Christian Science (through automatic writing late at nigh), and wrote via divine revelation start to finish.

So it's not the Book of Mormon (1830s) which completes and corrects the Bible. It's "Science and Health" (32 editions from 1875-1910, all different) which corrects the mistakes and mistranslations of the Bible, completes the Gospel, and "restores primitive Christianity and its lost element of healing."

At least, that's what I was told when I was little!