Discussion on Universalism and the Mormon Church

[_Blixa]

My own beliefs have definite Universalist tie-ins.

So do mine, and perhaps like you (?), I find many aspects of Mormonism tie in very well. Krishnamurti once said, "truth is a pathless land", which is perhaps akin to the idea that Mormonism accepts truth "from where ever it may come" (I'm not necessarily saying individual Mormons, here, nor for that matter, the "institutional Church". Now I suppose some will choke to death on that statement).

Is this a paraphrase from Joseph Smith, Ray? I'm asking because it does seem different, as do many things, from what individual Mormons generally believe and what the contemporary institution teaches...

I cannot speak for him, but generally speaking, Universalism, at least how I understand it, is in stark contrast to what a general Mormon believes, however, signs of universalism are ALL OVER Mormonism. One bigtime clue of it is in the articles of faith: 11 - We claim the privilege of worshiping Almighty God according to the dictates of our own conscience, and allow all men the same privilege, let them worship how, where, or what they may. This doesn't go so far as to say that their way is true for them and our way is true for us, and they are both true because of it, but most people cannot grasp or swallow the concept of Universalism, and so it is left as is.

This is interesting, but problematic if I follow you correctly. "Clues" have been left on purpose that stop short of universalism because most people can not understand it? Or, some of the original writings/ideas of early Mormons (seem to) have rough correspondences with universalist principles?

[_Nephi]

This is interesting, but problematic if I follow you correctly. "Clues" have been left on purpose that stop short of universalism because most people can not understand it? Or, some of the original writings/ideas of early Mormons (seem to) have rough correspondences with universalist principles?

This I cannot answer definitively. I think that the principles of universalism are left on purpose, but most people cannot accept it yet. It is difficult at best to be able to say with faith that this church is true (or, in other words, to have faith that you are in the right church), and yet to also look at someone else's church in stark contrast to your church (say Islam, or a snake handling church), and believe that their church is true as well, just not for you because of your path laid before you in your spiritual journey.

This can be a very hard pill to swallow. God understood this, though, and so wrote about universalism in such a way so that people can learn about it as they grow without throwing the principle out all together. The principles are there, but worded in such a way so that the first step is just mere acceptance, without damaging one's own testimony.

[_Blixa]

This is interesting, but problematic if I follow you correctly. "Clues" have been left on purpose that stop short of universalism because most people can not understand it? Or, some of the original writings/ideas of early Mormons (seem to) have rough correspondences with universalist principles?

This I cannot answer definitively. I think that the principles of universalism are left on purpose, but most people cannot accept it yet. It is difficult at best to be able to say with faith that this church is true (or, in other words, to have faith that you are in the right church), and yet to also look at someone else's church in stark contrast to your church (say Islam, or a snake handling church), and believe that their church is true as well, just not for you because of your path laid before you in your spiritual journey.

This can be a very hard pill to swallow. God understood this, though, and so wrote about universalism in such a way so that people can learn about it as they grow without throwing the principle out all together. The principles are there, but worded in such a way so that the first step is just mere acceptance, without damaging one's own testimony.

Ok I think I see your point...and I'm just trying to figure out that I understand your point, not really argue with it. : )

It is God that has left the "clues" more than they're being the conscious work of various Mormon leaders, is I think your point?

[_Nephi]

Ok I think I see your point...and I'm just trying to figure out that I understand your point, not really argue with it. : )

It is God that has left the "clues" more than they're being the conscious work of various Mormon leaders, is I think your point?

There are certain "universal truths" that most (if not all) religions have, such as self sacrifice. Universalism is one of these universal truths, and is hidden in all religions because God wants us all to come to this realization someday. By realizing that spirituality is not a single dimensional line but a multi dimensional plain (or possibly a sphere or more such dimensions). Take Islam, for example, which states that Islamics are to love their brothers and sisters of the Abrahamic covenant. Take Christ teaching of the good Samaritan, or even His basic principle of Loving everyone. Buddhism teaches of understanding and compassion. Even Hinduism teaches this. Why teach this? The reasoning is two fold - first off, thoughs who truly practice this principle will have fewer conflicts of bloodshed, and secondly, its the starting step towards universalism.

So to answer the question, God left clues. It is our job to discover them.

[_Lucretia MacEvil]

So do mine, and perhaps like you (?), I find many aspects of Mormonism tie in very well. Krishnamurti once said, "truth is a pathless land", which is perhaps akin to the idea that Mormonism accepts truth "from where ever it may come" (I'm not necessarily saying individual Mormons, here, nor for that matter, the "institutional Church". Now I suppose some will choke to death on that statement).

I've been seeing that idea that Mormonism accepts truth "from wherever it may come," and it always makes me wonder, I can't think of a single instance where that has happened. Aside from using Bartlett's Book of Quotes to write talks for Sunday School, where has the church accepted truth from wherever it may come?

[_Nephi]

So do mine, and perhaps like you (?), I find many aspects of Mormonism tie in very well. Krishnamurti once said, "truth is a pathless land", which is perhaps akin to the idea that Mormonism accepts truth "from where ever it may come" (I'm not necessarily saying individual Mormons, here, nor for that matter, the "institutional Church". Now I suppose some will choke to death on that statement).

I've been seeing that idea that Mormonism accepts truth "from wherever it may come," and it always makes me wonder, I can't think of a single instance where that has happened. Aside from using Bartlett's Book of Quotes to write talks for Sunday School, where has the church accepted truth from wherever it may come?

Maybe they hesitate to do this, for fear that others will get the wrong idea. I don't know. Maybe "from wherever it may come" does not imply from other religions, but from personal revelations.

[_Ray A]

I've been seeing that idea that Mormonism accepts truth "from wherever it may come," and it always makes me wonder, I can't think of a single instance where that has happened. Aside from using Bartlett's Book of Quotes to write talks for Sunday School, where has the church accepted truth from wherever it may come?

You need to read what I posted a little more closely. Hint: Look at what I posted in brackets, and then look at your reply again.

And, of course you can't think of a "single instance" where Mormonism has accepted truth from other sources. If you tried for 3 billion years, you still wouldn't see a "single instance".

[_moksha]

The Universalists were part of that early revival atmosphere, of the Burnt Over district, that Joseph Smith talked about. After one tent show went through town preaching about hellfire and brimstone, the Universalists would follow a week later telling the folk of that district that God loved them and would accept them despite their faults. Martin Harris also had been a Universalist and no doubt had some influence on Joseph's thinking.

[_Lucretia MacEvil]

I've been seeing that idea that Mormonism accepts truth "from wherever it may come," and it always makes me wonder, I can't think of a single instance where that has happened. Aside from using Bartlett's Book of Quotes to write talks for Sunday School, where has the church accepted truth from wherever it may come?

You need to read what I posted a little more closely. Hint: Look at what I posted in brackets, and then look at your reply again.

And, of course you can't think of a "single instance" where Mormonism has accepted truth from other sources. If you tried for 3 billion years, you still wouldn't see a "single instance".

I did read your entire post, but didn't want to assume that you were admitting the statement to be mere hyperbole, so I asked the question. Maybe someone else will contribute.

[_Lucretia MacEvil]

So do mine, and perhaps like you (?), I find many aspects of Mormonism tie in very well. Krishnamurti once said, "truth is a pathless land", which is perhaps akin to the idea that Mormonism accepts truth "from where ever it may come" (I'm not necessarily saying individual Mormons, here, nor for that matter, the "institutional Church". Now I suppose some will choke to death on that statement).

I've been seeing that idea that Mormonism accepts truth "from wherever it may come," and it always makes me wonder, I can't think of a single instance where that has happened. Aside from using Bartlett's Book of Quotes to write talks for Sunday School, where has the church accepted truth from wherever it may come?

Maybe they hesitate to do this, for fear that others will get the wrong idea. I don't know. Maybe "from wherever it may come" does not imply from other religions, but from personal revelations.

I guess it's sufficiently vague that people can keep on saying it like it means something even if it doesn't.