Yesterday, during a virtual fireside, I posed the following question to Patrick Q. Mason:
Question: Statement: "Book of Mormon and First Vision Historicity, and D&C 132 being inspired scripture are non-negotiables." Does Dr. Mason agree/disagree? Could he elaborate on his answer? (about the 1:02:12 mark):
For Mason, it is perfectly allowable for a
Latter-day Saint to believe that the Book of Mormon is the "word of
God" but not historical in any sense, instead, one can view it like the parables of
Jesus (non-historical but inspiring narratives, so in that way, it is “the Word
of God”). For Mason, there is room in the Church for those who believe Joseph
Smith lied about having gold plates and seeing the angel. Little wonder why
John Dehlin is a fan of Mason—they are on the same team, more or less.
To see how absurd this position is, see:
Stephen Smoot,
Et Incarnatus Est: The Imperative for Book of Mormon Historicity