"For behold, thus saith the Lord God: I will give unto the children of men line upon line, precept upon precept, here a little and there a little; ..."
~ 2 Nephi 28:30
"... because the [LDS] Restoration was birthed [in the 1830s] in a culture thoroughly steeped in misconceptions regarding sin and salvation, we as Latter-day Saints often continue to bear that [Augustinian/ Calvanist] legacy of inherent depravity. An important goal of Joseph Smith's revelations was to free us from a burdensome [Protestant] heritage."
~ The Christ Who Heals by Terryl and Fiona Givens, page 40 (words in brackets my own).
Emerging/Emergent Mormonism has a double meaning:
Meaning 1:
The New Mormonism of The Maxwell Institute, The Joseph Smith Papers, Richard Bushman, Terryl and Fiona Givens and Patrick Q. Mason, and others, has much in common with Emerging/Emergent Christianity (but of course there are major differences).
So I felt it was appropriate to title the blog domain Emergent Mormon because the Mormon authors and scholars that most resonate with me are those who themselves have developed philosophical and theological positions that do in fact have much in common with Emergent Christians like Rob Bell.
Meaning 2:
I also use what the author of churcheistrue.com calls the Emerging Paradigm (Metaphorical or Sacramental Paradigm), in contrast to the Earlier Paradigm (Literal Paradigm). Benjamin Knoll, at rationalfaiths.com, also refers to it as the Sacramental or Metaphorical Paradigm.
Building upon these websites by Mormon authors, I wrote a blog post explaining my own version of the Emergent Paradigm (as an Interpretive Lens): by that I mean that I see Joseph Smith emerging from his Evangelical Protestant background to become more of a humanistic Christian and spiritual naturalist: what I've summarized as Abrahamic Expansionism.
Emergent thus means that Mormon theology and scripture went through a process of development; and Joseph Smith's core nature (his fun and sociable personality and masculine nature and athletic body) becomes intertwined with his radiant body theology: which is always breaking free from the restraints of the somber, doom and gloom Protestant ideologies he grew up in. So like a blade of grass cracking through concrete Smith is continuously emerging from out of Augustinian Calvinism and toward Abrahamic Expansionism.
The top three books I recommend, supporting an emergent paradigm in understanding the Bible and Christianity, are: > Spirit Possession and the Origins of Christianity by Steven Davies
> Evolution of the Word: A Chronological Look at the New Testament by Marcus Borg > Rescuing the Bible from Fundamentalism: A Bishop Rethinks the Meaning of Scripture by John Shelby Spong
> Who Wrote the New Testament?: The Making of the Christian Myth by Burton L. Mack
These books summarize modern critical biblical scholarship that shows an evolving and emergent development from the apocalypticism-driven, spirit-possession, movement that was martyr-centric and celibacy-focused within the Pauline Corpus and synoptic Gospels; to then the various Christianities going through an ongoing cultural evolution until there emerged a more this-world-focused in the last gospel composed, Gospel of John; which John Spong describes as Tales of a Jewish Mystic, and then came the Gospel of Thomas.
Just as there is an emergent development in New-Testament-based Christianity, so too a historical study of Mormonism (or the Smith-Rigdon Movement) reveals that it too went through an evolutionary development: from Joseph starting out as a Fundamentalist Evangelical Christian to him emerging into a more humanistic/science-minded Christian and Abrahamic Expansionist.
In other words, just as Christianity evolved from an anti-familial, celibacy-focused apocalyptic martyrdom sect (see the scholarly work of Paul Middleton on this), to more of a the Kingdom of Heaven is here, now, with a mysticism-driven social movement in the gospels of John and Thomas; so too, the Mormon Canon of scripture and its theological development can be shown to also go through a similar changing trajectory: from apocalypticism and fundamentalism toward a spiritual naturalism and "Let's build Zion, Here and Now."
Emergent Mormonism is a theological movement within Mormonism that has much in common with authors like Brian McLaren and Rob Bell; yet more than that, it's about recognizing the emergent development among all religions. For example, I learned from John Spong that the future of Christianity can be found in rediscovering the early/original non-literal/midrashic interpretation of the Gospels; and from Bart Ehrman and Elaine Pagels, I learned there wasn't one Christianity but many "Christianities" that went through theological developments and insights. This led me to John Spong's concluding point of view (in his book The Fourth Gospel) that the Johannine community offers a great source for locating the future of Christianity: as the Gospel of John and the Johannine Epistles are at the final end of an evolving philosophical and theological development; meanwhile, Elaine Pagels shows that there's more than one form of legitimate Christianity, and she has emphasized the appealing theologies of the Gospel of Thomas and the Johannine community. So I also mean by the terms emergent and emerging, that within both Constantinian-Christianity and Mormon-Christianity, there is an evolving thought process and ongoing cultural development.
The emergent Mormon paradigm accepts as obvious, the ongoing evolution of Mormon thought and culture. For example, there has recently emerged a new Mormon History as an improvement on the former era of "McConkey Mormonism." This New Mormonism with spokesmen like Terryl Givens seeks to present a more honest history and new experimental explorations in LDS theology. For example, Terryl Givens analyzes the historical development away from McConkey Mormonism toward the New LDS History in his book Wrestling the Angel. In his book Restoration, Patrick Mason also documents the emergent nature of Mormon policy over the years. In the blog post “These are they”: Kirtland’s Expansion of the Mormon Afterlife, The Grand Scoobah documents the expanding nature of Mormon theology by specifically focusing on the 1832 afterlife vision in D&C 76. In fact, the idea that LDS theology has evolved and has emerged over time is common knowledge among educated LDS scholars. For example see:
> Line upon Line: Essays on Mormon Doctrine, edited by Gary J. Bergera
> This Is My Doctrine by Charles R. Harrell
> Precept upon Precept by Robert L. Millet
These books prove the emergent nature of LDS theology over time.
Not only are Latter-day Saint scholars openly discussing the emergent and expanding nature of Mormon theology, but they're also acknowledging more openly and frequently the fallibility of Brighamite Church Leaders. In 2021, on the Midnight Mormons podcast, LDS defender Jim Bennett (author of the A Faithful Response to the CES letter (pdf)), discusses the importance of recognizing "prophetic fallibility"; in other words, the past and present prophets of the LDS Church are not immune from mistakes and have even been flat out wrong in their behavior or pronouncements; just as the prophets of the Old Testament we're equally fallible.
Incremental/Progressive Insight through Trial & Error:
The Emergent Paradigm does not see Mormonism as a top down phenomenon, but an incremental development. A simple way to document the progression in Mormon Thought is to break it down by Joseph Smith's location:
Palmyra Phase:
This was when Joseph Smith was steeped in Evangelical Protestantism, and so the Book of Mormon contains this basic Evangelical Protestant theology within an apocalyptic/end-times worldview. For details see these two books by LDS authors: Infinite Goodness: Joseph Smith, Jonathan Edwards, and the Book of Mormon by Jonathan Neville, and The Christ Who Heals: How God Restored the Truth That Saves Us by Fiona and Terryl Givens.
Kirkland Phase: This is when Smith published a Trinitarian doctrinal catechism (the Lectures on Faith) and sought to imitate the New Testament Community in its Communistic Pietism. Yet through this attempt and trial and error, Smith quickly abandoned the United Order Project, and the Restoration Movement became more capitalistic from then on.
Nauvoo Phase: This proved to be the most radical phase in Mormon philosophical development and religion-making. Smith continued to long for the Just Society (Zion) yet he began to embrace Capitalism more fully by this point. The Book of Mormon had begun as a synthesis of Old and New Testament energies, the righteous warrior and the egalitarian ideal. Smith had always been a pro Old Testament theologian and philosopher; and by Nauvoo, his continued study of Hebrew, and the Scientific Enlightenment, had moved him toward his most radical phase: the rejection of Augustinian asceticism and toward what I call on this blog, an Abrahamic Expansionism.
So what we can see historically and theologically is that by Nauvoo, the communistic utopian ideal (the United Order) had ended as an experiment that allowed Smith to abandon that project and to realize that while the Book of Acts depicts the first century Saints living communistically, that phase was over (which I cover on my site The Phases & Strategies of God); and Joseph Smith delayed the Second Coming with a revelation saying Christ would not come until Smith was 85 years old. This refocused the Saints onto this life, their bodies, and building a material Zion.
Capitalistic principles were then emphasized more moving forward; and rather than Augustinian puritan piety, the emphasis was on reframing what it means to be a "saint" (in Greek "holy one"), as now meaning: learning how to be a God yourself, as Smith had grown to view God as not a bodiless, static, Platonic Form (as in Protestantism); but God was a tangible Man with a sensual body of flesh; and lives with His divine wife and/or consorts. This new theology radically shifted the minds of the Mormons away from puritanical asceticism and religious communism (or the leveling of the saints into a classless society) toward instead a rank order among the saints on the ladder of success and progress toward Godhood. The goal now was not despising the body, hating earthly matter, and seeking to evacuate one's so-called depraved body to enter the pure realm of Platonic Forms; but instead, all matter was now deemed spirit element, God the Father Himself had a fleshy body and the same sociality that exists here is how heaven is (see D&C 130; 131; 132); and to imitate the Gods was to climb the the ladder of successes towards dominion (see Lecture 7) as kings and queens (see D&C 132 and the temple endowment ritual transcripts). The meaning of life was not avoiding money, sex, and property, but like the Gods that expand toward greater dominion and the joys of sex, one was to imitate their divine nature by imitating the same body-affirming ways and upward mobility as earthlings; by seeking to expand through wealth and status, and strength and power, through earthly pursuits. The most controversial experiment in religion-making during this period was Smith's introduction of plural marriage. I argue in my blog series Sex, Gods, and Zion, in the introduction, that I see Nauvoo plural marriage as intended to expiate body-despising Augustinian dogma from the consciousness of Mormons so they would affirm their natural bodies as God's good creation. Thus, in my view they were to temporarily practice Old Testament plural marriage as way to reaffirm organic life and sexual desire as good and holy. This experiment in religion-making affirmed the goodness of arousal and the instinctual drives to dominion. This experiment ran its course and accomplished its intent by 1890. Thus, the Emergent Mormon Perspective sees plural marriage as problematic yes, but was useful indeed in changing the mind of the early Mormons toward affirming God the Father having a body (which is confirmed by secular biblical scholarship today) and thus by extension affirming their own bodies as good.
Joseph Smith's theological and philosophical development in Nauvoo essentially moved away from Evangelicalism, apocalypticism, and Augustinianism and toward the Scientific Enlightenment and a form of Swedenborgianism, Spiritual Humanism, and Christian Universalism.
Nauvoo Era Mormonism as the Means of Interpretating All LDS Scripture
The Emergent Perspective sees Joseph's pro-body innovations in Nauvoo as the way to interpret all LDS Scripture. For Nauvoo marks the pinnacle of Joseph's philosophical maturity and his revelatory output.
So the key to the Emergent Paradigm is a bottom up understanding of Joseph Smith's philosophical development toward a radical affirmation of the earthy body. In a word previous scriptures and ideas are interpreted based on his final analysis so to speak. What one finds when one does this is that one sees that there is no place for Purity Culture in original Mormonism; and the Brighamite Church, ever since the year 1900, has been adding doctrines and policies based in puritanical Augustinianism that are actually at odds with Joseph Smith's original vision in Nauvoo. They have also sought a Parent-to-Child paradigm, where LDS members are controlled more and more by parental leaders. For example, the original Word of Wisdom clearly states it was not to be presented by commandment nor constraint, but Brighamite Leaders seeking greater control over the membership made the Word of Wisdom a commandment which gave them greater control as parental type figures over grown adults.
Joseph's Emerging Progress Philosophically as Exemplary
The Emergent Mormon Perspective is about one man's philosophical journey and his ongoing educational enlightenment and his eventually emerging from the constraints of puritanical Augustinian puritanism; to go on to create his own theological philosophy which I have coined Abrahamic Expansionism. This emerging, ongoing philosophical innovation through the language of theology by Joseph Smith is educational and inspiring; as it documents one man's eventual realization of a better life philosophy. As he goes from apocalypticism and utopian-communism to a theological realism by the time of Nauvoo. Through the process of trial and error in Palmyra and Kirkland, he eventually develops a more realistic, Renaissance-humanistic theology that in many ways resembles a form of Existentialism (for example, see Of Truth and Passion: Mormonism and Existential Thought by Michelle Stott); as it embraces reality, choice or free will, and man's true nature. Joseph Smith, like the existentialists and humanists, fully embraces the natural drives as God-given and seeks to provide his Mormon People an outlet for their natural drives; through the focus on expressing the drive for sex and power through religious rituals and concepts; which would ideally liberate his Puritan converts to Mormonism, and expand their mind beyond the constraints of a thousand years of Augustinian dogmatism. The end goal was for them to realize that the Gods of Genesis themselves are more liberal in their views and have sexual bodies themselves who expand in power and dominion; so that they too need to "learn how to be Gods themselves" on earth as the Gods are in heaven (where the way of the Gods in heaven is the same sociality and bodily experiences that exist here).
Liberating the Saints
In this sense, Joseph Smith's Nauvoo era Mormonism acted as both psychological therapy and a New Life Philosophy, as it released the early Mormons from being the tamed "sick animal" that Nietzsche describes. Nietzsche's remedy was the Superhumans, but for Joseph Smith the remedy was the Supercouples.
The Hero's Journey & The Fallible Hero
From this perspective, Joseph's life and Mormon Theology and LDS history is a form of self-improvement literature as a kind of inspiration and motivation; acting as a form of insight and understanding of human nature; with the life of Joseph Smith and his emerging theological philosophy acting as a cautionary tale documenting Smith's mistakes as well as a form of motivation on one's own hero cycle. For Smith can be viewed as a fallible archetype of heroic figure: an innovator, literary artist composing a novel which ingeniously combines the energy of Old and New Testaments into one; a ritual dramatist, army general, mayor, business owner, lover, family man, presidential candidate, etc. Joseph as victor, as warrior, as city planner and builder. Joseph Smith as shortsighted and betrayed, who himself failed at times to avoid the same unrighteous dominion he warned others of; who's mistakes one can learn from, as we have all sinned (error/miss the target) and fall short of God's Ideal (see Rom. 3:23).
Prophets Learn Line upon Line There is a mistaken idea that because prophets are seers, they see all. Remember, however, that although Moses was told there were worlds without number, he was only given an account of this earth (see Moses 1:34–35). His view was limited. Prophets see according to their stewardship and time. Prophets “know in part, and we prophesy in part,” according to Paul (1 Corinthians 13:9). For example, even in April 1830, when the Church was officially organized, Joseph Smith did not know about bishops, high priests, patriarchs, or Seventies. Those all came later. The Prophet Joseph slowly learned about the nature of God, a Heavenly Mother, eternal marriage, the divine potential of mankind, and the redemption of the dead, to name a few.[See Robert Millet, Precept upon Precept: Joseph Smith and the Restoration of Doctrine]
~ Seekers Wanted by Anthony Sweat, pages 204-205
The Emergent Paradigm begins with the work of Robert Wright and his books Nonzero and The Evolution of God, which argue for the fact that organic and cultural evolution follows a trajectory toward greater interdependence and harmony ("nonzerosumness"); and from this scientific analysis one could conclude that there very likely is
a kind of god that is real ... [manifested in the] existence of a moral order ... The existence of a moral order, [that] makes it reasonable to suspect that humankind in some sense has a “higher purpose.”
And maybe the source of this higher purpose, the source of the moral order, is something that qualifies for the label “god” in at least some sense of that word.
Source: excerpt from AFTERWORD - By the Way, What Is God? by Robert Wright
So just as all religions culturally evolved, the LDS church also evolved and continues to emerge into new forms. This is actually what makes Mormonism unique in that Joseph Smith seems to have intuited what Robert Wright would later articulate scientifically; and so Joseph Smith continuously expanded his intellectual pursuits and study and allowed for various theological opinions and generated a revelatory faithstance: that evolves line upon line, precept upon precept, with continuous revelation: as "the only true and living Church" (D&C 1: 30) in that like a living organism, Mormonism continues to grow, adapt and emerge.
The Emergent Paradigm works in tandem with the Sacramental / Metaphorical Paradigm. Where we begin with the interpretive lens of reading Mormon scripture more as metaphor and parable. In other words, interpreting Mormon Scripture through Marcus Borg's historical-metaphorical paradigm and John Spongs' view of New Testament Scripture as midrash by Jewish mystics; so that Joseph Smith's production of LDS Scripture also becomes midrashic and Joseph Smith an American mystic. For an excellent explanation of this point of view with visual slides, see the 28 to the 50 minute mark of Mormon Stories #526, wherein John Hamer of the RLDS Church explains the better way to interpret Mormon scripture (and the Smith-Rigdon Restoration) through a historical and metaphorical lens.
The Emergent Paradigm presents the theory that underlying Joseph Smith's transition away from Protestantism, is the emergent properties of the cosmos and life itself and its continual expanding growth and becoming. In other words, Joseph Smith could not be contained by the confines of Protestantism; and the cosmic energies within his body simply emerged as a quantum of power in the form of his developing philosophy and theology.
The emerging paradigm was inspired by my realization that Joseph Smith was moving beyond the Protestant body and working toward what Peter Coviello calls the radiant body. In other words, Smith starts out like a caterpillar stuck in the philosophical shell of Platonic Protestantism; but eventually metamorphosizes into the butterfly of what I consider a more Life-affirming and "muscular" version of Christianity in the form of Abrahamic Expansionism.
Smith begins his philosophical metamorphosis by struggling with both the healthy Cosmic Drives of his athletic body and his Protestant upbringing and cultural surroundings. This can be seen early on in the 1830 Book of Mormon, as his athletic body and masculine stature and strength of will, comes forth in the literary characters he creates. Joseph's characters are not celibate monks hiding in caves or trying to escape their body by dying as nonviolent martyrs. Instead, he combines the action oriented Hero Archetypes on the battlefield in the Hebrew Bible and recasts them midrashically in a Christian context (as the converted Native Americans with Jewish ancestry).
There are other early hints of Joseph Smith breaking out of the shell of Fundamentalist Protestantism. For example, when he first begins composing The Book of Mormon, the language of the book contains typical Protestant Heaven and Hell language (what Marcus Borg called the Heaven and Hell Framework), which is littered all throughout the Book of Mormon. But then, just before the Book of Mormon is published, in 1829 he composes D&C 19 and basically says (through the voice of the Lord) that it's not actually teaching eternal torture in hell which most Protestant converts to Mormonism (at that time) would have read/interpreted those "hell" verses in the 1830 Book of Mormon to mean. Instead, Smith says in D&C 19: 7, "it is written eternal damnation; wherefore it is more express than other scriptures, that it might work upon the hearts of the children of men …" In other words, the language is only metaphorical but is presented as it is in order to work upon men and motivate them to do and be good. These are early glimpses of his breaking out of the shell of Protestantism.
In 1832 he moves ever further beyond the binary view of the Heaven or Hell Framework (saved or damned, etc.) -- and the framework of turn or burn preaching as he saw revivalist preachers of his day do and he mimicked in his oration of the Book of Mormon -- to a more lifeward, organic growth oriented life stance, of a material soul progressing upward to one of Three Degrees of Glory. These initial radical changes cannot be downplayed. They radically changed the philosophical and theological trajectory he was headed: as he moves beyond Augustinianism and Calvinism to something more in line with the Abrahamic theology of the Hebrew Bible.
I see Joseph Smith's early 1830s phase as his caterpillar stage, and 1836 to 1839 as his inner Abrahamic-butterfly being in a cocoon of ongoing transformation. For example, he intimates his cocooning process as he contemplates abandoning traditional Protestant monotheism for Abrahamic Henotheism, when in 1839 he writes in Doctrine and Covenants 121: 28, "A time to come in the which nothing shall be withheld, whether there be one God or many Gods, they shall be manifest." After this point, he emerges as a butterfly by the 1840s as he commits to the doctrine of the Plurality of Gods and Abrahamic Theosis (men can become Gods via imitating Abraham), and the goal of Abrahamic Expansionism.
Part of this ongoing process of transformation in his consciousness was the radical shift from Platonic Dualism to Materialist Monism. Terryl Givens discusses this in detail in chapter 6 of his book Wrestling the Angel.
This material monism led to other radical shifts in his theology, from his seeing God the Father as only a personage of spirit in 1835, to him saying that God the Father has a body of Flesh and bone as tangible as man's in 1842. LDS scholar John Tvetednes explains why Smith still believed God the Father was only a spirit, which was because "Joseph Smith came from a traditional Protestant environment, in which there was firm belief in the trinity of the Nicaeno-Constantinopolitan Creed." So the 1835 Lectures on Faith were essentially a modified doctrine of the Protestant Trinity (for more details see: A Reply to Dick Baer by John A. Tvedtnes, pages 25 to 26).
After Joseph Smith began studying Hebrew around 1835, there began a greater shift in his philosophical consciousness. There began an emerging transformation from the Protestant body to the Abrahamic body. The athletic body of Joseph Smith could not be confined to the pious body of Protestantism. He was to be a Moses not a Luther, more Swedenborgian than Calvinist, more like the sexual King David than a celibate Catholic priest, etc. The anti-human-body Creeds could not contain his more pro-body attitude and unashamed sensuality. He would go on to argue that "God is more liberal in his views" and "you have got to learn how to become Gods yourselves" while describing God as having a sensual body who progresses to Godhood through the sensual union of the man and woman in sexual love, the joys of which are the "object and design of our existence." The purpose of existence was no longer the Protestant view of a Fall into depravity but a Fall-upward into experiencing joy in the body: Adam fell so we might have joy in the tangible sensual body.
With the emergent paradigm, the reader of LDS scripture, combined wit the Joseph Smith Papers, will begin to see an unfolding of Joseph Smith's consciousness as he slowly removes the shell of Victorian Protestantism and emerges into a spiritual butterfly by developing the theology of Abrahamic Expansionism. This requires a greater sophistication from the reader in understanding that there will be vestiges of the former caterpillar self (when Joseph Smith was a Protestant Fundamentalism). For example, when one reads the Book of Mormon one can still see the prior pieces of the shell with the constant language of hell fire and damnation and other clear Protestant language he picked up from the Protestant revivalist preachers of his day. Mormons who read the Book of Mormon a lot have become experts at ignoring this Evangelical Protestant language or quickly reinterpreting it within the framework of later doctrinal changes instituted by James Talmage and other Mormon leaders in the 1900s. For example, in 1916 Talmage composed the doctrine of the Godhead that is believed in by most Utah-based Mormons today.
The Emergent Paradigm differs from the traditional Utah-based LDS Church interpretation. James E. Talmadge, Joseph Fielding Smith, and Bruce R. McConkie (and others) together generated a more correlated dogma, and in the process tried to re-interpret the early Protestant-sounding LDS scriptural passages; and ignored the clear evolutionary development away from Protestantism. For example, James E. Talmadge took all of the Protestant versions of the Godhead contained in early Mormon scripture, and simply provided a traditional gloss to cover up the evolution in thought from Trinitarian Protestantism to Abrahamic Expansionism. Howerver, more honest LDS apologists, like Tvetednes admit Joseph Smith was a product of his Protestant environment when contemplating the Godhead during his oration of the Book of Mormon. So that there is a clear Protestant/Trinitarian Doctrine in the book where Christ is the Father. Talmadge remedied this by making this fit into Joseph Smith's later 1840s view on the Godhead, by reinterpreting the Protestant sounding LDS scripture passages of the 1830s, so that Christ is not literally the Father but merely plays the role of a fatherly creator. For more information on this development of Mormon theology over time, see the book written by LDS member Charles R. Harrell, titled "This Is My Doctrine”: The Development of Mormon Theology.
When it came to the Theology of the Godhead, Mormon leaders of the 1900s abandoned Protestantism and moved more toward the direction Joseph Smith went in his Abrahamic Expansionism, when it came to the tangibility and plurality of Gods. However, as Peter Coviello argues, when it came to issues of piety and sexuality the Mormon leadership in the 1900s actually went backwards, and returned to the Protestant Puritanism Joseph Smith sought to overcome. So that in many ways, the Mormon Church in the 1900s reinstated the Protestant Puritanical mindset Smith was breaking free from; and thus the Institutional LDS Church grew further away from Joseph Smith's original theo-philosophy (that grew out of his lively athletic body) and his original vision of Abrahamic Expansionism. This has unfortunately led to a pious and sanctimonious atmosphere at times in the Utah-based Institutional Church, as well as a culture of shame, which Joseph Smith himself rejected.
Some modern LDS Scholars however are attempting to remove the "Protestantized" mindset in LDS culture by pointing out that these are vestiges of Protestantism in Mormon scripture. For example, Terryl and Fiona Givens have pointed out many of the former Protestant vestiges, like Calvinist ideas and language, in some areas of Mormon scripture. So the Givens are trying to unglue this Protestant language and framework from Joseph's later theological developments and conclusions in the 1840s. The Givens believe that it is this Protestant mindset that for example often contributes do the unhealthy "shame culture" (and other phenomenon originating from Protestantism not Joseph Smith). For more details, see their book The Christ Who Heals and All Things New.
So as I see it, these scattered pieces of his former shell are still being glued onto Joseph Smith's Abrahamic vision by many LDS leaders who are still stuck in the Protestant mindset. In other words, you have a butterfly of a theology with big scraps of discarded shell being glued back on to it instead of it being free to fully fly. To remove the scraps of shell glued onto the butterfly, the Givens have argued for understanding these Augustinian and Calvinist vestiges. I agree with the Givens but go further than them with my uncorrelated theory of Smith's Abrahamic Expansionim. I believe that by fully "seeing" the Protestant vestiges as discarded pieces of his former caterpillar shell, we can allow Joseph Smith's radical restorationist philosophy -- and his ideas about the radiant body and the cosmic energies of the Drive to Thrive bubbling up from his athletic body -- to become more apparent and his original vision can more fully emerge like a butterfly set free.
The Emergent Paradigm is also an answer to McConkey type Mormons who can't understand how a Non-Correlated Independent Mormon can find value in Mormon scripture and the LDS Mythos. The answer is simple, I am simply appreciating my Mormon Heritage and LDS upbringing and drawing power from LDS scripture through the Lens of the Emergent Paradigm. I read the Protestant Fundamentalist language in early Mormon scripture as vestiges of the Protestantism Smith outgrew as he continued growing and developing toward Abrahamic Expansionism.
As I see it Iron Rod Mormons and McConkey Mormons do not own the copyright on the Book of Mormon. The Utah sect of the Mormon Church doesn't even own the temple lot Christ is said to return in the Doctrine and Covenants. Most of the original properties of Joseph Smith's original church are owned by The Community of Christ. The succession crisis after Joseph Smith's assassination is not easily assessed with Brigham Young as the only viable succession candidate. In other words, the Utah Mormon church does not own the Mormon Narrative (Story). It is a Grand Story containing many voices and personal histories and many diverging communities. Meanwhile, a testimony of the validity of the Book of Mormon in no way proves Utah-Mormonism as the only true Mormon sect, when there are multiple other Mormon sects that also believe the Book of Mormon is inspired.
So I see no reason to confine myself to the Talmage paradigm or the McConkie paradigm. Or any other Traditional Utah-based Paradigm for that matter. Just as Evangelical Fundamentalists do not own the copyright to the Bible and no one has to accept only their interpretations as accurate, over the thousands of other interpretations and denominations. So too, to give full interpretive "authority" to the Utah-based LDS Church and say that their interpretations, their version of history, and their footnotes in the LDS scriptures, are the only accurate version is in my view naive and arrogant to say the least. There are many other voices from other Mormon sects within a wide variety of Mormonisms, including non-Mormon historians and scholars who are credible and valuable in understanding Mormonism.
So I see no reason why someone cannot be an Independent Mormon and use the Emergent Paradigm to find value in Mormon scripture.
