Not just as easy. There’s a lot of room for someone to say “this was actually just metaphor” or even “these are just stories to convey values”.
Take the tower of Babel, for example, we know it never happened. However, a more progressive Christian or Jewish tradition can use the story to talk about how sometimes cultural differences are simply surface level, we are all ultimately the same people. Mormons aren’t so lucky because the book of Mormon was pitched as a literal history and part of the book has literal refugees from the tower of Babel.
Unlike the Bible, we have the author of the religion who very well documented how literal everything is. We don’t even know who authored nearly any book in the Bible or their motivations.
I’m not arguing for a god, I’m an atheist exmo. However, there’s a pretty big difference between a bunch of old stories compiled together into a book and a book of fiction that the author went out of his way to claim was “the most correct book ever written”.
The only difference is time my dude. You can just say stories from the Book of Mormon are metaphor, give them the exact same treatment and get the same result.
I’m an atheist exJW myself so I have a similar background.
I mostly agree with you, though the babble has the upper hand with older and better-funded propaganda campaigns spanning more time and regions and organizations using it for political manipulation. It’s had more polishing, rewriting, adapting, and state-backed proliferation (including by use of armies to wipe out competitors). It also borrowed many more mythical elements from other existing religions. Joseph Smith’s version is newer, and the mythology a bit sloppier, so the average person can conceivably judge the odd parts of its modern context easier. One is star wars and the other is an underfunded filler show on Netflix on its second season in 10 years by comparison. Which one has the better chance of having someone in your life convince you to give it a shot, and disincentivizes you from criticizing it in social settings more?
It’s harder to believe because it’s easily disproven. Turns out Joseph’s “translation” of ancient Egyptian wasn’t inspired.
The Bible is just as easy to disprove my dude. Neither book is real, our society just pretends one is more reasonable.
Not just as easy. There’s a lot of room for someone to say “this was actually just metaphor” or even “these are just stories to convey values”.
Take the tower of Babel, for example, we know it never happened. However, a more progressive Christian or Jewish tradition can use the story to talk about how sometimes cultural differences are simply surface level, we are all ultimately the same people. Mormons aren’t so lucky because the book of Mormon was pitched as a literal history and part of the book has literal refugees from the tower of Babel.
Unlike the Bible, we have the author of the religion who very well documented how literal everything is. We don’t even know who authored nearly any book in the Bible or their motivations.
I’m not arguing for a god, I’m an atheist exmo. However, there’s a pretty big difference between a bunch of old stories compiled together into a book and a book of fiction that the author went out of his way to claim was “the most correct book ever written”.
The only difference is time my dude. You can just say stories from the Book of Mormon are metaphor, give them the exact same treatment and get the same result.
I’m an atheist exJW myself so I have a similar background.
I mostly agree with you, though the babble has the upper hand with older and better-funded propaganda campaigns spanning more time and regions and organizations using it for political manipulation. It’s had more polishing, rewriting, adapting, and state-backed proliferation (including by use of armies to wipe out competitors). It also borrowed many more mythical elements from other existing religions. Joseph Smith’s version is newer, and the mythology a bit sloppier, so the average person can conceivably judge the odd parts of its modern context easier. One is star wars and the other is an underfunded filler show on Netflix on its second season in 10 years by comparison. Which one has the better chance of having someone in your life convince you to give it a shot, and disincentivizes you from criticizing it in social settings more?