Less Literal Mormons

[pellegrino]

So in today's EQ lesson on the creation came straight from the Gospel Essentials manual. The instructor went to great lengths to make sure that we do not interpret each day of the creation as (his words here) "a literal revolution of the earth or a 24 hour period." He spent a good five or more minutes on this point, citing footnotes in Genesis that notes the Hebrew term that was translated as day denotes "period" discussing the differences in God's time and our time, and then as further evidence he talked about how the account in Abraham does not rely on the term day, but refers to each creative period as time (Abraham 4.8: and it came to pass that it was from morning until evening that they called day; and this was the second time that they called night and day).

As he was going through this everyone was in complete agreement, not one person thought there was anything wrong with his interpretation. From his detailed exegesis and the unanimous assent of the class it was clear that Nobody truly believed in a young earth, as many conservative Christian groups (and perhaps many LDS do) and that the influence of science and the study of the earth had indeed had an effect on everyone, to the point that they were willing to interpret the scriptures in light of its discoveries regarding the age of the earth.

I almost asked the question, and if we had more time I might have: If we're able to take this aspect of the creation story as a figurative, what is stopping us from going further and reading more of, if not the entire creation story in that same lens?

I know we've had discussions like this before, and I know many here already interpret the creation as such (or don't believe anymore) but I wonder two things:

1. At what point did you decide that it was better to interpret the creation in a less literal sense? How literal do you interpret it and what caused you to come let go of a more literal interpretation? Have you met many Mormons like you?

2. Do you think that as time passes more and more Mormons will begin to interpret the creation less literally, or are we too invested culturally in a literal exegesis? What would it take for Mormons to embrace a less literal interpretation?

[tooblue]

As opposed to metaphorical Mormons?

[pellegrino]

As opposed to metaphorical Mormons?

Somewhat, yes. I realized when I posted that the title should have read "Less Literal Mormons" but I don't know how to change that, perhaps someone can enlighten me how to change it or do it for me.

[tooblue]

Somewhat, yes. I realized when I posted that the title should have read "Less Literal Mormons" but I don't know how to change that, perhaps someone can enlighten me how to change it or do it for me.

Just giving you grief.

[Slim]

1.
I probably decided to interpret it in a less literal sense in my adolescence. The older I get the less literal I've come to take every scriptural account. I'm not sure whether I've met any other Mormons like me since I don't usually discuss these types of things with them. I tend to avoid religious discussions these days.

2.
I'm relatively certain that as time passes there will be fewer Mormons who interpret the creation literally. I feel like we as a people are becoming a very educated group and are more likely to abandon Dogma.

[woot]

It will be interesting to see if the next round of endowment movie changes include anything that leaves the door open (or more explicitly so) for it all being allegorical.

I suppose it never has to happen; it could just be that when the US catches up to the rest of the Western world regarding respect for evidence that everyone will just figure out that it has to be allegorical.

[pellegrino]

1.
I probably decided to interpret it in a less literal sense in my adolescence. The older I get the less literal I've come to take every scriptural account. I'm not sure whether I've met any other Mormons like me since I don't usually discuss these types of things with them. I tend to avoid religious discussions these days.

2.
I'm relatively certain that as time passes there will be fewer Mormons who interpret the creation literally. I feel like we as a people are becoming a very educated group and are more likely to abandon Dogma.

But isn't that the contradiction that is present in mormonism? We are a very educated people. There are a lot of LDS academics, and yet within broad church culture if you interpret certain scriptures (creation, etc.) allegorically instead of literally you run the risk of being shunned, so to speak. I'll freely admit that one of the reasons I didn't ask my question in EQ is because I don't care that people think I'm the village heretic and I didn't want to be responsible for ruining the meeting. I do hope that more begin to move towards allegorical interpretations of the scriptures because I think it eliminates a lot of problems that create unnecessary tension and cognitive dissonance in modern life.

[Slim]

But isn't that the contradiction that is present in mormonism? We are a very educated people. There are a lot of LDS academics, and yet within broad church culture if you interpret certain scriptures (creation, etc.) allegorically instead of literally you run the risk of being shunned, so to speak. I'll freely admit that one of the reasons I didn't ask my question in EQ is because I don't care that people think I'm the village heretic and I didn't want to be responsible for ruining the meeting. I do hope that more begin to move towards allegorical interpretations of the scriptures because I think it eliminates a lot of problems that create unnecessary tension and cognitive dissonance in modern life.

At least in the last few wards that I have attended, I get the impression that the literalists are the vocal minority.

[Jeff Lebowski]

At least in the last few wards that I have attended, I get the impression that the literalists are the vocal minority.

[pellegrino]

At least in the last few wards that I have attended, I get the impression that the literalists are the vocal minority.

As long as those who aren't literalists stay silent that vocal minority will rule. Didn't the Pew research foundation show that with regards to the creation Mormons were among the most conservative, i.e. the most likely to interpret it literally. IIRC we were more literalist than muslims.

Plus, I get the feeling that the leadership at most levels and especially the GA level interpret the scriptures literally. Holland's talk last fall was a good example of that.

[UtahDan]

As long as those who aren't literalists stay silent that vocal minority will rule. Didn't the Pew research foundation show that with regards to the creation Mormons were among the most conservative, i.e. the most likely to interpret it literally. IIRC we were more literalist than muslims.

Plus, I get the feeling that the leadership at most levels and especially the GA level interpret the scriptures literally. Holland's talk last fall was a good example of that.

This seems generational to me. By the time our generation is in its 60s, our grandkids will be growing up in a church where they won't even know that it used to be hard to express a non-literal view. I believe that. Not to say that the church is moving away from all its truth claims, but I think that the change in culture that attends the generation of "internet Mormons" dominating leadership will be as profound as the first monogamous generation doing the same.

[UtahDan]

I'll qualify what I just said a little. Dehlin made a good point in one of his podcasts that even in the Jewish community where the orthodox are a clear minority, they still define to a large degree what it is to be Jewish. The orthodox are the protectors of what makes us distinct and they do a lot of the heavy lifting within the church in terms of effort. So they will still have a disproportionate influence, but I do think the culture will shift toward more nuanced views.

[pellegrino]

This seems generational to me. By the time our generation is in its 60s, our grandkids will be growing up in a church where they won't even know that it used to be hard to express a non-literal view. I believe that. Not to say that the church is moving away from all its truth claims, but I think that the change in culture that attends the generation of "internet Mormons" dominating leadership will be as profound as the first monogamous generation doing the same.

I hope so, I really do. I guess I lack the faith, having met too many "internet Mormons" who retain literal beliefs all the same. It's ironic in a sense.

[Donuthole]

Can a brother get a hyphen around here?

[Babs]

Can a brother get a hyphen around here?

-here-