After learning about the various alternatives to the Utah-based Mormon Church (aka Brighamite sect), which I first began exploring after I served part of my LDS mission in Missouri, I began to think of the way of describing a common denominator of these various Book of Mormon sects or movements. So I decided to call them Scripture Focused Mormons. These are basically "Mormons" who believe that the Scriptures that were voted on by the early Saints in the 1830s to be included in the Standard Works (Canon), are truly revelations from the Lord to Joseph Smith. They believe that the Scripture is the Standard Works (aka the Mormon Canon).
Someone might call them "Protestant Mormons" but this is inaccurate because it not only carries too much baggage from Lutheran Protestantism, but "Scripture Focused Mormons" do not believe that the LDS Scriptural Canon is closed like Protestant do. They believe in continuous revelation and the other gifts of the Spirit described in 1 Corinthians 12; but revelation needs to come through an actual seer and revelator who is actually revealing the words of the Lord ("thus saith the Lord") that is to be bound in Scripture as was the case with the apostle Paul and Joseph Smith.
The Scripture Focused "Lens" in general is very similar to the organic-church movement of Frank Viola. I have listened to quite a bit and read a few of Viola's books which makes an indisputable case for the Church (meaning Ekklesia) is the collective mystical body of Believers and not a church building, leadership hiearchy, or Dogma.
In The Scriptural Teachings of Joseph Smith, at location 348-356 of the ebook we read, "Brother Joseph Smith, Jr. said: ... except the Church receive the fulness of the Scriptures (D&C 42:15; D&C 104:48.) that they would yet fail [5] (Oct. 25, 1831.) FWR, p. 16." Note as well the Book of Mormon passage: "Angels speak by the power of the Holy Ghost; wherefore, they speak the words of Christ. Wherefore, I said unto you, feast upon the words of Christ; for behold, the words of Christ will tell you all things what ye should do" (2 Nephi 32:3). The words of Christ are for us The Scriptures, especially the "thus sayeth the Lord" type passages, the Gospels, and the Doctrine of Christ in The Book of Mormon. Note that it does not say "feast upon the words of the Brethren (or any ecclesiastical leader), and they will tell you all things what you should do."
The Scripture Focused argument is simple: prophets prophesy (as Smith did), seers "see" things through spiritual eyes or use say a seer stone to reveal scripture, or they act as revelators declaring "Thus saith the Lord." The body of believers (the Ecclesia) then vote on those revealed words to become Scripture by common consent (see D&C 26). The succession of Brighamite leaders as Church Presidents (following in line from Brigham Young in Utah) do not do this; that is, they do not provide ongoing legitament revelations that are voted on by common consent. All we have are a few claims to revelation with D&C 138 and Official Declarations 1 and 2 (the latter of which was merely a policy change to remove a racial policy); and the Brighamite-Church leader Russel M. Nelson, in January 2016, claiming President Monson and the "12 apostles" received a revelation ("the revealed will of the Lord") to withhold baptism from children of gay parents (without first gaining the approval of the "Bretheren" to do so), which was then reversed with another alleged "revelation"; and the Brighamite Church website then saying "the changes reflect the continuing revelation that has been a part of the modern Church since the Restoration" (Source: Policy Changes Announced for Members in Gay Marriages, Children of LGBT Parents Contributed By Sarah Jane Weaver, Church News editor, 4 April 2019). What is obvious is that besides the exception of D&C 138, what you have is the leaders of the Brighamite sect basically appealing to "revelation" to mostly undo their obvious mistakes. The undeniable truth is that you just don't have anything comparable to Joseph Smith channeling the voice of Jesus (just as the Apostle Paul did) in today's Utah-based Brighamite sect.
As Parley P. Pratt writes on pages 12-13 of Keys to the Science of Theology, regarding the fall of Jerusalem to the Romans and how the Lord then went to the Gentiles in 70 AD: "From that very time to the present—One thousand eight hundred and fifty-one of the Christian era, the voice of a Prophet has not been heard among the Jews. Angels have not ministered unto them. There has been no vision from the Lord. No dream or interpretation. No answer by Urim or Thummim [or seer stone]. No Prophet. No voice. No sound. No reproof. No comforting whisper. All is silence—stillness— ..." Can't the same be said of the Brigamite sect today, that ever since the days of Joseph Smith and Parley P. Pratt, there has been no real visions from the Lord, no dream or interpretation; no answer by Urim or Thummim [or use of the seer stone the LDS Church has in its possession]. No Prophet [that gives prophetic prophecies like Joseph Smith did]. No voice [of the Lord as came through Joseph]. No sound. No reproof [when are the Brethren ever reproofed/rebuked by revelation from the Lord like Joseph often was]?
Could this be because Joseph Smith was the last genuine prophetic seer and revelator of new scripture for the Restoration? Could it be that what we have in the Scriptural Canon (voted on by common consent) is sufficient to move forward by receiving personal revelation ourselves combined with enacting the values and principles of the restored gospel by feasting on the words of Christ? Or if there is further revelation to be revealed, who can deny that its clearly not coming from the Utah-based Brighamite sect: which is clearly not providing continuous revelation akin to the Apostle to the Gentiles (Paul) and the Prophet of the Restoration (Joseph Smith).
Could it be that when the heavens were opened and revelations poured forth through the Apostle Paul (with the Lord speaking through him) to integrate the Gentiles into Israel, that when Paul died the revolatory gift closed for a time, or at least no one had the spiritual skills to manifest the gift? After Paul's death, according to biblical scholarship, what we have is those who came after Paul were not speaking "the word of the Lord" but instead adding to Paul's revolatory words by providing structure and policy changes as maintenance; until new light and knowledge was needed through Joseph Smith: who was like Paul in that he had the prophetic gift, the ability to reveal the "word of the Lord." Could it be that today we just don't have somebody with that spiritual gift? Or is it because that spiritual gift is not needed and the Restored Scriptures are sufficient for now?
For Scripture Focused LDS, the Gifts of the Spirit is available to all the Saints. Yet when revelation truly comes there is usually only one who is a Spiritual Master of the Gifts (like Paul or Joseph): who both demonstrated strong leadership skills and the strength of going against established traditions. Paul challenged those who demanded Gentiles be circumcised and Joseph challenging the Augustinian Creeds. Both demonstrated the gift of producing scripture. Both challenged the leaders of their day.
So there is no "one true prophet" in a line of succession based on the seniority of the next leader in line (as in the Brigamite sect). Intead, the Lord can call anyone to lead, whether it be Moses or Paul, or an obscure farm boy like Joseph Smith: who is described as being "like unto Moses" in The Book of Mormon.
The truth is Paul was not "next in line" as prophet, seer and revelator. Bible scholarship shows that it was James the Just who was the leader of the Jerusalem Church after Jesus died. Paul came out of nowhere to challenge those who he referred to as the "super apostles." For more details see Paul and Jesus: How the Apostle Transformed Christianity by James D. Tabor.
Meanwhile, most of what Jesus did was challenge the religious leadership of his day, as many of the religious leaders of his Jewish Faith were emphasizing the Tradition of the Elders; while he was emphasizing a scripture focused approach by basically arguing "the spirit of the law" in interpreting the Torah (the Standard Works or Scripture Canon of his day) and not adding heavy burdens by adding man-made policies and traditions to the origional ways of The Scriptures. This is why Jesus said to his fellow Jews in Matthew 23:3 (EXB): "So you should ·obey [do; practice] and ·follow [keep; observe] whatever they tell you, but ·their lives are not good examples for you to follow [L do not follow their actions]. ·They tell you to do things, but they themselves don’t do them [L For they say but do not do]." In other words, do what they say when they sit on "Moses's seat" (while reading from the Torah) and what they say aligns with Scripture; but when they add their traditions and policies that don't match the Scriptures, don't bother following their false traditions. As he said earlier in Matthew 15:14 (EXB): "·Stay away from the Pharisees [L Leave/Ignore them]; they are blind ·leaders [guides]. And if a blind person ·leads [guides] a blind person, both will fall into a ·ditch [pit; hole].”
Jesus also challenged the leaders who ran the temple and basically spent most of his time criticizing those in charge at that time; and one could argue that he actually came to end controlling forms of "dogmatic religion" as covered in the book The End of Religion: Encountering the Subversive Spirituality of Jesus by Bruxy Cavey.
So to recap, any Christian/Saint is capable of receiving revelation and producing description on par with The Book of Mormon or the revelations in the Doctrine and Covenants, we have just not seen that demonstrated.
What we have seen demonstrated was accomplished by Joseph Smith who produced The Book of Mormon and multiple revelations that has not been matched by anyone after him. So for Scripture Focused Mormons, Joseph alone is the Prophet of the Restoration and the "Church" (in Greek: Ekklesia, meaning "the assembled community") is the LDS Restorationists collectively and not a Corporation led by a CEO/Church President in Utah. In other words, the church is the "vine and the branches'' (as the Book of Mormon teaches) and not a church building or hiearchical leadership.
For an excellent introductory summary of the Scripture Focused Movement, see episode (1), episode (4), and episode (47) of The Iron Rod Podcast. Note that I disagree with the concluding thesis of Taylor Drake, on this podcast, that Joseph Smith was a "fallen prophet." Taylor Drake explains his theory in detail in his book Joseph in the Gap: The Hidden History That Explains Mormonism's Past, Present, and Future. I do agree with the historical facts that Drake presents in his book and on this podcast. I also agree with their emphasis on being Scripture Focused, and not following any Mormon leaders blindly when they haven't proven the actual gift of revelation, and especially if they contradict Scripture. But I have an alternative theory and interpretation of the historical facts and data points that they discuss, which I discuss in my blog series Sex, Gods and Zion, and my website The Phases and Strategies of God. So I agree with most of their historical analysis and positions, just not their concluding argument that Joseph Smith was a fallen prophet.
Moving on to what I do agree with them on. In episode 1 of the Iron Rod Podcast, one of the speakers makes an excellent point that very often when something is offensive or troublesome in Mormon teaching and culture, it is usually not in the actual Scriptures (the Standard Works) but is some additional tradition added by the Utah-based Brighamite leaders; that very often, turns out to be not in accordance with the Scriptures. For example, the Utah-based LDS Church teaching that African-Americans were the "seed of Cain" and thus restricted from holding the priesthood, was taught by their First Presidency in official statements in 1949 and 1969. According to fairlatterdaysaints.org, around this time Church President David O McKay:
formed a special committee of the Twelve that "concluded there was no sound scriptural basis for the policy but that church membership was not prepared for its reversal."[Leonard J. Arrington, Adventures of a Church Historian (Urbana and Chicago: University of Illinois Press, 1998), 183]
(Source)
As we can see there was no scriptural justification for this erroneous doctrine and policy, it was simply based on tradition. Yet it was interpreted as official doctrine while it was actually false doctrine that remained doctrine and taught by the Brighamite leaders for over a century. The Utah-based LDS Church finally disavowed this false doctrine in the 2013 essay Race and the Priesthood, acknowledging it was never scriptural and was based on the racial attitudes of Brigham Young. Other examples can be given where the General Authorities (or "the Brethren") in the Utah-based LDS Church taught something as doctrine or church policy that was something completely contrary to and at odds with the Scriptures.
Before I continue I want to present a disclaimer: I am not encouraging all Utah-based Mormons to become "Scripture Focused Mormons" and leave or go inactive from the Brighamite Church. I am more of a "big tent" type of person. Meaning I am seeking to present a variety of positions under the same big tent of the Smith-Rigdon Restoration Movement. I find that there are many roads and options to take in the broad Restoration Movement, other than one narrow option of what I call Brethrenism. It is true that I consider Brethrenism a blindly obedient attitude toward Utah-based LDS leaders and a dynamic of what transactional analysis calls a child-to-parent or parent-to-child dynamic. But I also know that everybody is different, and there are different personality types and intellectual styles. Some people prefer to be essentially "parented" so to speak and given absolutist answers and to have their life "controlled" or constrained to a certain degree. There is also the familial comfort and social stability of the institutional Utah-based church and its financial success and structural security. I do think the Utah-base Church does more good than harm overall, and I wish to see it continue to be a positive force for good in the world. Yet just as not all shoes are made to fit all, the varieties of Mormonisms (Restoration groups) is like a shoe store with many side shoes for different size feet. So Brighamite Mormonism can be restrictive and uncomfortable and thus "unhealthy" for some people, just as you can't force someone with a size 7 foot to fit into a size 4 shoe without causing a lot of a foot pains. Yet there are certain personalities and temperaments who have certain needs and preferences, so that the Brighamite sect fits them perfectly.
So in the spirit of Mormonism as a big tent. One option besides Brethrenism and Scriptural-Literalism, is The Radical Orthodoxy movement. Another option is what one might call being a Maxwell Institute Mormon. When I have gone to the Deseret bookstore in my hometown and read books published by the Maxwell Institute, or those affiliated with that scholarly organization, I have found essentially what I call A New Kind of LDS-Christianity: that is a way to be an active Brighamite Chapel Mormon without "checking your brain at the door of the church" so to speak. So, I am not advocating only the Scripture Focused Movement, but basically any option that challenges Brethrenism is a good thing in my view. Because if "the Brethren" are never challenged we end up with things like the racial priesthood ban; which in my view was left mostly unchallenged because members felt they were not allowed to question or challenge the Brethren. Thus, Bretheren Worship is as problematic as the Tradition of the Elders that Jesus opposed in his day.
A key component of the Scripture Focused Movement is the avoidance of added traditions. This is in fact what Jesus opposed when he was alive, he was against the Tradition of the Elders that added man-made traditions to the Scriptures of his day. This has led some to compare the Mormon Brethren to the Tradition of the Elders in Jesus' day. A common theme in the Scripture Focused Movement is to focus on the simplicity of the Doctrine of Christ as described in the Book of Mormon.
The Scripture Focused Movements are diverse as well, the Iron Rod Podcast above is just one version. One of the most popular versions is the Denver Snuffer or Remnant Movement. The Wikipedia article says this:
The [Remnant] fellowships believe Smith taught that the Last Days covenant people should forswear allegiance to any institution but to enact the same to each individual's own covenants and to Smith's open canon of scripture. (Compare these movement beliefs with some of the aspects of Sola Scriptura, which the doctrinal foundation of Protestantism especially within its Calvinistical and Lutheran variations. In this respect, movement beliefs perhaps occupy some ground between LDS-style Mormonism institutional authoritarianism and individual conscience-privileging Nonconformist Protestantism.)
"I believe that the many revelations in the D&C identifying Joseph as the spokesman for God means exactly that: Joseph was and IS the spokesman God sent. Joseph's words need to be heeded as if they came from God directly to us. No one has the right to change or ignore them. No one (and I mean NO ONE) has the right to claim they are Joseph's equal. There are no "keys" or "key holders" who can alter Joseph's teachings except at their peril. ..."—Denver Snuffer, September 25, 2013[37]
The movement is supra-denominational Christian. … Fellowships meet at homes or outdoors. (Its baptisms "in living waters" entails meetings along streams.)
(Source)
The Salt Lake Tribune writes of the movement:
The Remnant, as some began to call themselves, would be radically democratic, a “federation of fellowships” with no clear leader, no rigid rules, no prescribed offices, no formal organization — setting themselves apart from what they see as the ultracontrolled and controlling LDS administration operating out of a grand old building and a skyscraper in downtown Salt Lake City. …
… Baptism is not about joining a church. … Tithing monies remain in local fellowships, used for the poor in their midst, and are not sent to any central headquarters. …
… The 60-something Snuffer and these believers advocate “a new tide of open religious thought and worship that is highly individual,” Brent Edward writes in a news release about the Boise conference, “involving no paid clergy. … The faithful in this new school of thought believe that God is capable of revealing his word to anyone who earnestly seeks it, and when truth is discovered, it should be added to the canon of inspired writings.”
… It was the Book of Mormon that propelled Jeff Savage into the Remnant movement. … he discovered Snuffer’s [book The Second Comforter.]
“It was like finding a drink of water in the desert,” the gentle scholar says. “Denver interweaves scripture and prose together and does so masterfully.”
Savage returned to the Mormon scripture he had read maybe 25 times before. This go-around, he saw things he had never before noticed.
“It talks about the last days before Christ’s return,” Savage says. “It describes people who care about appearance and riches and churches ‘built up unto themselves.’ It says those churches have gone astray.”
Reading along with his wife, Savage says, the couple concluded such verses were “talking about us. Our [Utah-LDS] church.” …
… For [Remnant] representatives, the LDS health code known as the “Word of Wisdom,” which forbids alcohol, tobacco, coffee and tea, is just that — wisdom, counsel, advice. It is not a requirement as it has become in Mormonism.
… The notion of all fellowshippers getting their own revelations, including ones that may contradict others, is still an unsettling, new idea, Savage says. ”We are transitioning out of revering the LDS hierarchy but some still feel they can only trust Denver.”
In another article, Religion for the People: Ex-Mormons Embrace Populism in the Remnant, author Sarah Scoles describes the remnant movement thus:
... it does not proclaim to be the One True Church. It focuses on the rights, abilities, interests, power, individualism, and virtue of the common people, as opposed to those of the elite Mormon leadership. …
In theory, [Brigham as successor] Mormons are encouraged to seek out “personal revelation” — wisdom whizzed from God to them. But in practice, everyone is supposed to come to similar conclusions, and official authorities are the only ones who really really talk to God. …
… A friend, knowing his doubts, recommended a book, called The Second Comforter, by some guy named Denver Snuffer Jr., an LDS lawyer from Sandy, Utah. Snuffer had, the book claimed, met Jesus Christ, face to face. He conversed with him from time to time. Anyone can, the book continued, if they are righteous and humble and also try very hard. …
… Snuffer’s works have quietly spoken to, likely, thousands of Mormons — often the most Mormon Mormons, people like Corbridge who felt disenfranchised by the church and wanted to talk to God themselves. People who felt like they weren’t getting the spiritual fulfillment, and personal empowerment, they’d been promised. …
Corbridge remained a Latter-day Saint until he wrote his own book, a tome called 77 Truths. It uses 600 quotes from church authorities and 1,000 scriptures to shore up the hypothesis that the official church has strayed from the truth, from God. Churches don’t like to hear that kind of thing, and this one excommunicated Corbridge for it. Many other Remnant members — including, in 2013, Snuffer — have met the same fate.
The church sees Snuffer as a threat. A 2015 presentation, put together by the church’s highest authorities and distributed by MormonLeaks, lists Snuffer (along with 16 other items) in a slide titled “Issues and Ideas Leading People Away from the Gospel.” The church is perpetually concerned with the reasons its congregants leave and who’s spreading information it deems inappropriate. In fact, there is a whole outfit — called the Strengthening the Members Committee — that, a spokesperson told The New York Times, “provides local church leadership with information designed to help them counsel with members who, however well-meaning, may hinder the progress of the church through public criticism.” …
… In the Remnant, “truth” supposedly can come from anywhere, not just from the Book of Mormon or Denver Snuffer. Yet a spiritual caste system had emerged in a movement supposedly based on the opposite of that. “We just call it LDS 2.0,” David said.
… Snuffer rejects any allegation of authority, but his ideas nevertheless calcify the Remnant’s backbone. “I constantly view myself as having the obligation to persuade,” he said. “But I have no right to command anyone. I have no right to control anyone.”
Empowerment within the Remnant comes from the belief that individuals should believe whatever they feel is true. “We should let everyone come to their own conclusions and worship as they please, no matter how, what, or where they choose to worship,” Snuffer told me. “And the LDS church insists that they have a proprietary right to even my thoughts.”
In this statement, Snuffer is doing what Snuffer does best: Turning a mirror toward the church’s own doctrine. Its 11th Article of Faith reads, “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.”
Which means that Snuffer, of course, didn’t tell the Taylors’ fellowship to second-class anyone for not taking the covenant. But what people in a leaderless movement do isn’t actually up to the not-leader, and what happened in Colorado is not an unusual progression. Jan-Werner Müller, professor of politics at Princeton University, notes in his book What Is Populism? that when populist movements actually get power, they tend to start authoritarian regimes that disenfranchise anyone outside of their particular group.
Even Snuffer recognizes that rebels tend to turn into the very thing they rebelled against. Take Martin Luther, initiator of the Protestant Revolution, founder of the Lutheran Church. “Many of the things he hated about Catholicism,” Snuffer said, “became part of his conduct leading Lutheranism,” like kicking out heretics, despite being the ur-heretic himself.
The point is, once oppositional movements have some traction, it’s hard for them not to become what they once opposed. And that, in some minds, applies to Snuffer: People left the church because they didn’t want to follow the prophet. But now some of them are following Snuffer, whether he likes it or not. And he says he doesn’t. “I think that admiration is toxic,” he said. “And I think that ego is toxic.”
… [The Remnant’s logic]: Immense power at the top inherently robs agency from everybody else. And because Mormonism, in theory, holds that regular people can receive revelation, it gives those regulars the power to say, “God told me to do this,” be they a Smith, a Snuffer, or a Corbridge. …
… [After re-baptizing themselves]: Jennifer’s description of this scene, Brian began to cry.
“There was a voice that told me I didn’t fit into the church,” he said. “But I fit with Him.”
Brian also was drawn to a place the Remnant, as a whole, hopes to build: Zion, a collection of people so righteous, so faithful, so seeking, so united in purpose that they can just be taken up to heaven, and have a good life on Earth in the meantime.
… “It came to pass,” one verse begins [in the Book of Moses], as many do, “that Enoch went forth in the land, among the people, standing upon the hills and the high places, and cried with a loud voice, testifying against their works; and all men were offended because of him.”
Lohmeier saw a parallel here. “Many Mormons believe in Joseph Smith but are blinded to Denver’s message,” he said. “How often it is we’re blinded by our traditions.”
Eschewing some Mormon traditions means that Remnant adherents are generally more liberal and liberated than traditional LDS churchgoers. Some drink, some curse, some accept that their kids might have teenage sex, some are OK with same-sex relationships. Their Zion, even if it’s both hypothetical and imperfect, sounds like a lot more fun than the LDS church’s version. …
detractors started to get to him. “They were citing correct, legitimate sources,” he said — pointing out, for instance, where the church was putting its money. Like into a $2 billion City Creek mixed-use development in downtown Salt Lake City. “Did Jesus,” Pankratz said, “come down and say, Build a shopping mall, my One True Shopping Mall?”
Searching for answers, Pankratz found the Remnant through a post on Pure Mormonism, a blog The New York Times once described as attracting “Mormons so orthodox that they believe their church is not sufficiently adhering to its own doctrines.”
The Remnant Movement led by Denver Snuffer is just one version of the Scripture Focused point of view. Reform Mormonism is another option.
As I mentioned above, for Scripture Focused LDS, the Gifts of the Spirit is available to all the saints and while there is usually only one who is a Spiritual Master of the Gifts (like Paul or Joseph), there is no "one true prophet," only leaders like Moses which is what Joseph Smith is described as being ("like unto Moses" in the Book of Mormon). This is why the Tribune article ends somewhat sarcastically with the following:
Though he maintains he is just one voice among many, Snuffer will lay out what the group’s approach to history and scripture should be going forward in his “Prayer for Covenant.”
The words of it, Snuffer writes on a recent blog, “came by revelation from the Lord to me alone.”
But don’t call him a prophet.
(Source)
I agree with most of the Scripture Focused Movement's arguments and positions, except many try to throw Joseph Smith under the bus instead of looking at any positive interpretation of the events during Nauvoo. They seem to be stuck in a rather pious and Victorian mindset, and can't see the grand scale spiritually naturalist vision that Joseph Smith was after when he said "you have to learn how to be gods yourselves." In fact, it is the 1840s Nauvoo Mormonism which I am most drawn to and believe in the most. So I do not agree with Denver's Remnant Movement and its attempt to remove the sex-positive and life-affirming scriptural productions of Joseph Smith in the 1840s.
In my view, Joseph Smith was attempting to liberate the Saints from augustinian puritanism and provide a structural hierarchy to maintain order. This is often not fully appreciated. As the Tribune article explains
Two years or so after the LDS Church booted him out, Snuffer joined forces with some followers who wanted to expunge Mormon scriptures of anything that they couldn’t trace explicitly to Smith. Gone were D&C sections that talked about church organization, priesthood offices and polygamy, replaced by a package of Snuffer revelations and tucked into a new volume known as Teachings and Commandments.
(Source)
This is what separates me from some other Scripture Focused Mormons like the Remnant Movement. I have simply formed a thesis that works for me in understanding polygamy. Although if I ever were to attend a Remnant meeting I might be included and welcomed because apparently they even allow polygamist Mormons into the group. To be clear, I am not a polygamous Mormon but I see Joseph Smith's theology of plural marriage as a stepping stone toward liberating the Saints from Victorian augustinian puritanism. I discuss this in detail in my blog series Sex, Gods and Zion.
So if I were to distinguish myself from other "Scripture Focused Saints," I would say that I am more of a philosophical Mormon as opposed to a more supernaturalist Mormon. I tend to look at the Mormon Canon of Scripture through the interpretive lens of Nietzsche's philosophy and the ideas of theologian and scholar Marcus Borg, and the interpretive lenses of mythologist Joseph Campbell and Jungian Christian Existentialist Jordan Peterson. In other words, I see within the Scriptures of Mormonism a very empowering Ethos and Life Philosophy: with the words acting as philosophically empowering psychical energy through healthy memetic contagion that can and does create greater group soladarity, civility, and social cohesion. I believe the words of Scripture are also like unto potential energy that can inspire and uplift and elevate the individual toward higher states of personal excellence and provides existential tranquility with a purpose in life.
