AH Challenge: Mormon Majority

I have to think the challenge is pretty much impossible.

No it isn't! Frankly, all you need is massive proselytizing. That's how religions grow. In the scenario, Mormon missionaries simply preached to so many people across America throughout the second half of the 19th century, a very large number converted, had many children, and by the early 21st century, a third of the American people were members of the LDS Church. It's as simple as that.
 
Here's an idea for a PoD:
1. Leman Copley sent as a missionary to the Shakers. (See D&C 49 http://scriptures.lds.org/en/dc/49 )
2. Instead of going to North Union Village (Now the Shaker Heights region of Cincinnati), he heads to Union Village near Lebanon, Ohio.
3. He manages to convert the villagers there, including Richard McNemar, who spreads it prior to his death. (For McNemar, see http://www.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~ohwarren/Bogan/bogan284.htm )
4. It spreads in wider circles from there...
 
The only way I could see this working is if Mormons never mostly become a single, very organized group but instead metastasize with radical protestants so that what we would call evangelicals or pentecostals are in this timeline pejoratively called Mormons, and there's a huge number of groups with a diverse set of beliefs that are called by that name.

Radical protestantism identifies itself with the principle that the bible (usually King James version to the exclusion of others) is the first and last word in the faith. Statues, paintings and rosaries sported by Catholics are seen as unnecessary, if not offensive to their fundamentalism. So, the notion of another testament (Book of Mormon) would classify the Mormons as non-Christian, a notion today shared by many Baptists and evangelicals.

So, to pull converts from other churches, they would have to do the work individually, as in OTL.

Frankly, all you need is massive proselytizing. That's how religions grow. In the scenario, Mormon missionaries simply preached to so many people across America throughout the second half of the 19th century, a very large number converted, had many children, and by the early 21st century, a third of the American people were members of the LDS Church. It's as simple as that.

That is how the Mormons so thoroughly settled so many Rocky Mountain regions. In fact, their OTL success is quite impressive, though coming nowhere near 1/3 of the population.

To gain a massive wave of conversion, the Mormons would need evidence: as I said in post #11, they might produce artifacts that can be linked or associated with the plates/foils Joseph Smith described as he founded the faith. Forgeries might work in the 1800's, but to be successful in the twentieth century, the artifacts would have to be authentic. With such artifacts, they might make inroads with Latin-American Catholics and Native Americans, on the notion that the faith says Christ came to America. Converting Catholic bishops might be far-fetched, but not impossible.

The temple getting burned down was an effect, not a cause, of the Saints leaving.

Yes, the migration started while the temple was being finished. But the Mormons would like you to believe it was the cause of their flight. [They do have a knack for telling history their own way.] In any case, I would think some would have stayed if the temple remained intact.

The main reason they were driven out of so many places was that they didn't police their followers. Some of their members did not respect other people's rights; and it was their actions, not beliefs, that caused their neighbors in Ohio, Missouri and Illinois to drive them out.

Once they left Nauvoo, their reputation for responsibility changed. Suppose they became more respectful from the start, eventually leaving settlements and temples from community to community.
 
Let's look at the history of Mormon theology. Prophet Joseph Smith claimed to transcribe the Book of Mormon from metal plates (golden foils) provided to him by angels. He grasped stones to give him the power to translate the writings. Of course, the plates were taken away.

Most non-Mormons simply believe Smith wrote the Book of Mormon. Suppose that there really were metal plates. The plates would be engraved with illustrations and writings made by an ancient (unknown) society. Smith could see illustrations of mammoths and other extinct creatures and concluded the writings were a scripture that depicted a different world (or lost continent?). Knowing that the content of plates of this type might eventually be discovered and made public, he delivered a Book of Mormon that gives accounts of Christ visiting other worlds. Since the "angels" who showed the plates were native Americans, Smith concluded these were chosen people.

Jump ahead to the 1850's. Suppose metal plates are found and made public. If they are real artifacts, they will be unintelligible except for illustrations. They may or may not be the same plates seen by Smith. With Joseph Smith and his stones gone, Mormons would insist these were sacred texts that would become readable when angels again empowered a prophet. [Those who doubt the existence of real artifacts can assume the new plates were carefully engraved by Mormon craftsmen.] The Mormons now have a vehicle with which to spread their faith.

Agree. More than its teachings on prohibition and race, the widespread adoption of LDS would be hampered by the lack of physical evidence supporting the relevations in the Book of Morman (both for the tablets themselves and in the archaeological record). Show that the tablets are indeed real, and better yet, show they are written in a language related to Hebrew which can be read by independent scholars. This would still not solve the problem cause by the absence of any supporting data in the archaeological record, but a mass movement could succeed on the basis of the tablets alone (as witnessed by the fact that millions of people believe in extensive pre-columbian contacts on the basis of supposed runestones and other markers).

I'm sure some will argue that other religions, such as Chrsianity and Islam lack this physical evidence, but their founding stories occurred in the distant past in places where critical physical evidence may no longer exist, and the deep motives of the founding prophets (Mohammed, St Paul) can only be speculated upon. Too much is known about Joseph Smith, and the LDS church claims to possess actual evidence in the form of the plates - but won't allow independent scientific study - ample reason for most religiously inclined people to place their faith in a religion whose basic foundation stories are not so easily verified or refuted.
 
Jesus returns and declare he is a Mormon.

This reminds me of an old Reader's Digest joke:

The Pope called a meeting of his cardinals. He said, "I have good news and I have bad news. Which do you want to hear first?" The cardinals vote to hear the good news first. The Pope says, "The good news is that I got a phone call from the Lord Jesus Christ. The event we've been waiting 2,000 years for has happened. He has come back to Earth!"

The cardinals are joyfully dancing around, celebrating, when one realises something isn't right. He asks the Pope, "Your Holiness, if that is the good news, what on Earth could the bad news possibly be?" The Pope answered, "He called from Salt Lake City, Utah."

Yikes!
 
No it isn't! Frankly, all you need is massive proselytizing. That's how religions grow. In the scenario, Mormon missionaries simply preached to so many people across America throughout the second half of the 19th century, a very large number converted, had many children, and by the early 21st century, a third of the American people were members of the LDS Church. It's as simple as that.

The Mormons already engaged in massive proselyting in OTL.
 
Radical protestantism identifies itself with the principle that the bible (usually King James version to the exclusion of others) is the first and last word in the faith.

Radical protestantism was never just about one thing, and even in OTL, both Mormonism (which has the Book of Mormon) and Pentecostalism (which in some permutations accepts Holy Ghost inspiration as on par with the Bible) come from the radical Protestant milieu.
 
Yes, the migration started while the temple was being finished. But the Mormons would like you to believe it was the cause of their flight. [They do have a knack for telling history their own way.] In any case, I would think some would have stayed if the temple remained intact.

You know less about Mormons than you think. As a lifelong Mormon I'll eat my hat if you can find some real Mormon source that makes this claim. Frankly, I'm kinda wondering where you got it from.
 
You know less about Mormons than you think. As a lifelong Mormon I'll eat my hat if you can find some real Mormon source that makes this claim. Frankly, I'm kinda wondering where you got it from.

Here is what the Wikipedia says about the Mormons' departure from Nauvoo:

"Most of the Latter-day Saints left Nauvoo, beginning in February 1846, but a small crew remained to finish the temple's first floor, so that it could be formally dedicated. Once the first floor was finished with pulpits and benches, the building was finally dedicated in private services on 30 April 1846, and in public services on 1 May. In September 1846 the remaining Mormons were driven from the city and vigilantes from the neighboring region, including Carthage, Illinois, entered the near-empty city and vandalized the temple."

The story is at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nauvoo_Temple. If it is not accurate, it needs to be changed.
 
Last edited:
What's inaccurate about that? It doesn't make the false claim that the Mormons left Nauvoo because the temple burnt down.
 
In regards to the Shakers, it's also worth noting that the Shakers also had a vision involving Golden Plates being presented by angels, though said plates merely contained anthems. (Incidentally, the songs from said plates were printed at Union Village, Ohio, mentioned earlier.) This happened in 1847, though so some could argue that the LDS may have somehow influenced it. (After all, in OTL, Leman Copley did go to North Union Village...)
For my source, look here:
http://www.geocities.com/lds_research/solomonspalding.html
Scroll down or look for "Shaker" to find the section.

As for General Mung Beans's suggestion, the LDS could potentially have a connection to a form of communism in the traditional sense, though some LDS leaders of today would argue (rightly) that said practice differs from Soviet-style Commuism. The United Order was a system used by the LDS and their offshoots to help provide for all the members.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Order
In addition, the ZCMI Stores originally were smiliar to the modern co-op. Goods could be paid for through barter. Further, this store was usable by Latter-Day Saints and others alike. (Hat tip to the Great Brain books for informing me about this...)
http://historytogo.utah.gov/utah_chapters/pioneers_and_cowboys/zcmi.html
 
The obvious answer is for the legalisation of polygamy and large sacle conversion of Indiands to Mormanism or the toleration of a Moromn state of Utah where polygamy was legal and there was large scale emigration to the rest of America with existing marriages being recognised provided they were made in Utah
 
It doesn't make the false claim that the Mormons left Nauvoo because the temple burnt down.

I stand corrected over the notion that the Mormons left because the temple burned down. As to why I had that impression, it probably came from local conversation, since I live only 40 miles from Nauvoo.

Given the historical circumstances, the OTL spread of the Mormon faith is a very impressive scenario. Nauvoo peaked with a population of about 12,000 when Joseph Smith was assassinated. As the Mormons migrated out of town, they dispersed somewhat. The largest groups went west to a winter encampment on the Missouri River.

The future of the Mormon faith rested very much on the success of Brigham Young who blazed a trail westward to the Salt Lake Valley. Suppose his exploratory party of less than 200 disappears in 1847 and never returns. Will the rest of the settlers stay in Nebraska? What happens to the leadership of the church? Do other dispersed settlers come to Nebraska to the extent they migrated to Utah in OTL?
 
Top