DiscussMormonism.com

I am just chucking this out there because I am interested in the responses. I have a friend that is reading through the Joseph Smith Papers and has found some "faith shaking" things as he has read through them. His opinion was that the Joseph Smith papers were put out there to "sift the wheat from the chaff" a trial of faith of sorts. That those weak members whose testimony was built upon a foundation of sand would be sifted as the chaff and for the strong members it would only strengthen them. This way only those truly worthy would be able to enter the kingdom.

Thoughts?

NeoMorm wrote:I am just chucking this out there because I am interested in the responses. I have a friend that is reading through the Joseph Smith Papers and has found some "faith shaking" things as he has read through them. His opinion was that the Joseph Smith papers were put out there to "sift the wheat from the chaff" a trial of faith of sorts. That those weak members whose testimony was built upon a foundation of sand would be sifted as the chaff and for the strong members it would only strengthen them. This way only those truly worthy would be able to enter the kingdom.

Thoughts?

Sounds like the self-reassuring mantra of a cultist.

Too few members will actually read any of it - too expensive for one thing. So I doubt that was the motivation.

Buffalo wrote:Sounds like the self-reassuring mantra of a cultist.

By what definition of a cult?

LDS truthseeker wrote:Too few members will actually read any of it - too expensive for one thing. So I doubt that was the motivation.

Kind of my thinking too. I think they figure the more they put out there the better off they will be in the long run, with the internet spreading so much anyway, its time to face some of the demons of the past.

NeoMorm wrote:

Buffalo wrote:Sounds like the self-reassuring mantra of a cultist.

By what definition of a cult?

For my money a cult is when a person or group misrepresents authority, knowledge, finances experience and a standard of righteousness in order to guide, influence or control others to abuse and arrest healthy development and promote greater dependence upon the person or groups and its interests.

It is impossible for the true Christian religion to be a cult as it would serve God and his interest and not their own bringing people unto Christ so that the power of the Holy Ghost would lead and teach the people removing dependence upon men. The question is who is NOT a cult?

NeoMorm wrote:I am just chucking this out there because I am interested in the responses. I have a friend that is reading through the Joseph Smith Papers and has found some "faith shaking" things as he has read through them. His opinion was that the Joseph Smith papers were put out there to "sift the wheat from the chaff" a trial of faith of sorts. That those weak members whose testimony was built upon a foundation of sand would be sifted as the chaff and for the strong members it would only strengthen them. This way only those truly worthy would be able to enter the kingdom.

Thoughts?

Mormons today would not know wheat from chaff holding both in either hand.

Nightlion wrote:The question is who is NOT a cult?

Yeah I can see a number of groups and ideologies fitting into the definition.

NeoMorm wrote:I am just chucking this out there because I am interested in the responses. I have a friend that is reading through the Joseph Smith Papers and has found some "faith shaking" things as he has read through them. His opinion was that the Joseph Smith papers were put out there to "sift the wheat from the chaff" a trial of faith of sorts. That those weak members whose testimony was built upon a foundation of sand would be sifted as the chaff and for the strong members it would only strengthen them. This way only those truly worthy would be able to enter the kingdom.

Thoughts?

I have read through most of the first book so far. I have found a few interesting tidbits but nothing that I would consider "faith shaking". You may consider reading it yourself instead of relying on hearsay.

GR33N wrote:I have read through most of the first book so far. I have found a few interesting tidbits but nothing that I would consider "faith shaking". You may consider reading it yourself instead of relying on hearsay.

Hmmm, I'm just not willing to spend the dough.