Church News Downplays Significance of Book of Abraham

[CardiacCoug]

This is a tough thing to grapple with from a believing perspective. It is very hard for me to agree with either one of those quotes, I think they both overstate what, to me, appear to be the reality. On the other hand, I think that Joseph was a "visionary man" much in the same sense as Lehi describes himself almost as an apology to his wife.

So did Joseph receive revelation, did he take as revelation his own thoughts, did he say that some things were revealed knowing that they were his opinions? I lean toward saying yes to all three and I appreciate that this probably exposes me to some ridicule because that might not be the most logical thing to think. Still, I view Joseph as seer/rascal and I find him at turns full of revelation and full of mischief/nonsense. I think that a great many of the things said about him good or bad are all in some measure true.

This sticks you with the question of whether God would use a person like that to deliver His message and, to me, that is something that is better answered by examining the texts themselves and deciding whether you can have faith that they are inspired. As I said above, the "how" is an important part of the analysis but only part of it. The other critical part is the product. If the product is something that you find inspiring, that you find to contain truth and you believe to contain the thoughts of God then it really is a pearl of great price. To me it is a pearl that some think is the genuine article and some think is a fake made of plastic. You can't sell it, so the question is, do you want to wear it? (If that makes sense).

(This is good stuff here, feel free to throw me a nomination)

Nice post. Really, what kind of person starts a new religion and dictates revelations in the form of "Thus saith the Lord...."? You have to be a "visionary" man, a narcissist, and a megalomaniac to do that.

That said, I can see two ways to call the scriptural texts that Joseph produced "inspired" texts, despite Joseph's immense flaws:

1. An individual reader can prayerfully and thoughtfully determine that they contain divine truth and the word of God. Who am I to say the texts can't be inspired just because Joseph had his flaws? That's an "eye of the beholder" thing.
2. The demonstrated ability of the texts to inspire and motivate the enormous Mormon religious movement (in all its flavors) almost makes the texts "inspired" by definition.

[SeattleUte]

2. The demonstrated ability of the texts to inspire and motivate the enormous Mormon religious movement (in all its flavors) almost makes the texts "inspired" by definition.

Exactly. You can say the same thing, indeed to a much greater degree, about many books. But for the Iliad, we would not be here as we are. Western Civilizaton sprang out of that as much as it did the Bible, Harold Bloom has argued more so.

[UtahDan]

DDD? I am now curious to know your thoughts on my thoughts.

[LA Ute]

Since this is from FAIR I suppose many will dismiss it, but I found it educational:

http://en.fairmormon.org/Book_of_Abr...h_Smith_Papyri

I gues UD and I like the "revealed text" theory.

[UtahDan]

Since this is from FAIR I suppose many will dismiss it, but I found it educational:

http://en.fairmormon.org/Book_of_Abr...h_Smith_Papyri

I gues UD and I like the "revealed text" theory.

That is actually pretty informative and comprehensive and only contained one paragraph that insulted my intelligence, which is pretty good for FAIR.

[SteelBlue]

Members need to stand up for their history, take ownership of it, look the anti in the eye and say:

"Yer gosh darn right Joseph Smith translated the gold plates by looking at a seer stone placed in a hat, and I thank your fine artist for that lovely depiction of the Lord's Servant, The First Prophet of the Last Dispensation of Times, Joseph Smith, receiving revelation from God. And do you know what, sir? Your artist depicted a real event, and that event has consequences, one being this, sir -- I stand before you today, and testify in the name of our Lord, Jesus Christ, that Joseph Smith was a prophet of God, and that he received the word of God through the use of seer stones in a hat, and I will tell you this, sir, if God had spoken to Joseph Smith through the yellow lips of a rubber chicken, it would be just as much the word of God as were the words the emerged to Moses from a burning bush. Please, sir, share that image with everyone that you know, because it depicts the truth, and God has a funny way of working with the truth. Now pray about my testimony, and God will let you, too, know that what I am saying is true."

Be a man. Real men stand up for the truth, no matter the source.

Robin, I'm glad you're back. This may be my favorite Finderson post ever. Very well done.

[Surfah]

Robin, I'm glad you're back. This may be my favorite Finderson post ever. Very well done.

x2. I really liked that post.

[CardiacCoug]

Be a man. Real men stand up for the truth, no matter the source.

That is a surprisingly sexist comment from you -- I guess you just can't shake your misogynistic LDS upbringing.

I agree with you that Mormons should accept and be proud of their history and not try to hide or obscure historical facts. But to me it seems like a "real man" should be honest and admit that it's not possible to know exactly what happened to Joseph Smith because none of us were there.

[Uncle Ted]

I am glad the Maxwell Institute cleared this up....

Here is an interesting statement from Blair Hodges [Public Communications Specialist of the Maxwell Institute] that new Maxwell Institute “has no official position on the Book of Abraham” (posted on David Bokovoy’s Facebook page.)


Blair Hodges Just to be clear: the Maxwell Institute as such has no official position on the Book of Abraham, and the articles from Gee and Muhlestein represent their own perspectives. The Institute welcomes a variety of perspectives on these things.

http://mormonscriptureexplorations.o...cial-position/

[Jeff Lebowski]

I am glad the Maxwell Institute cleared this up....

http://mormonscriptureexplorations.o...cial-position/

Dan Peterson and his cronies are all over this. You would think the Maxwell Institute had come out of the closet as Satan worshippers or something.

[San Juan Sun]

Dan Peterson and his cronies are all over this. You would think the Maxwell Institute had come out of the closet as Satan worshippers or something.

Can you explain why they are so upset? I'm not sure who the players are and what team they are on.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Can you explain why they are so upset? I'm not sure who the players are and what team they are on.

Dan Peterson was ousted last year as the head of the MI and he has been carrying a major grudge ever since. Current leadership is trying to develop a more honest academic approach and distance themselves from aggressive style used by DP and associates. So DP sees something like this and immediately blows it way out of context as proof that the MI people are not true believers like him.

[San Juan Sun]

Dan Peterson was ousted last year as the head of the MI and he has been carrying a major grudge ever since. Current leadership is trying to develop a more honest academic approach and distance themselves from aggressive style used by DP and associates. So DP sees something like this and immediately blows it way out of context as proof that the MI people are not true believers like him.

OK, thanks.

[Harry Tic]

Dan Peterson and his cronies are all over this. You would think the Maxwell Institute had come out of the closet as Satan worshippers or something.

What makes their consternation so inadvertently entertaining is the fact that FARMS--and, in particular, Hamblin and Peterson--for years did precisely this same kind of thing with Book of Mormon geography. "Well, there is no official church position on where the events took place and Joseph Smith's statements weren't authoritative," etc. etc.

Of course they are the first to defend the "limited geography" theory (more specifically, limiting the events to Mesoamerica) and dutifully instruct lay members that appearances and church leader statements not withstanding, the BoM is not about the vast majority of the indigenous peoples of the New World but only a very small subset.

Go ask your orthodox Joe in the pews which position is heretical--Hodges's hedging about the BoA or Peterson's views on BoM geography--and he'll probably say "both."

[Moliere]

Dan Peterson was ousted last year as the head of the MI and he has been carrying a major grudge ever since. Current leadership is trying to develop a more honest academic approach and distance themselves from aggressive style used by DP and associates. So DP sees something like this and immediately blows it way out of context as proof that the MI people are not true believers like him.

This surprises me