Jump to content

Nevo

Contributor
  • Content Count

    2,154
  • Joined

Community Reputation

2,584 Excellent

About Nevo

  • Rank
    Halting Between Two Opinions
  • Birthday 09/06/1973

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

3,212 profile views
  1. William's biographer, Kyle Walker, finds that William was a lot like his uncle Jesse Smith: "William's personality mirrored that of his uncle Jesse [Smith], and the two men were a match in being impulsive, quick-tempered, and obstinate in their views" (Walker, William B. Smith: In the Shadow of a Prophet, 76). Furthermore, both were large imposing men who sometimes used their physical strength to get their way. Writing of William's experience in Palmyra, Walker notes that "being an outcast for his religious convictions did not sit well him, nor would he tolerate the name-calling and ostracizing he experienced, especially from his peers." His patriarchal blessing later noted that "thou hast greatly desired to see thy father's family redeemed from trouble . . . but thou hast not altogether desired this thing in meekness." Regarding William's physical altercation with Joseph in 1835, Walker writes: "William's animosity toward Joseph went back at least as far as their teens. While the rest of the family universally accepted Joseph's prophetic calling and prominent position in the family, William sometimes resented his older brother and the deference his parents paid to him. In later years, William acknowledged that his rather carefree, irreligious youth had elicited frequent lectures from his brother Joseph. Given that he already found the family's religious devotions irritating, William must have experienced his brother's lectures as bossy and preachy. It was also not the first time the brothers had scuffled, and certainly not the first time William had acted disrespectfully toward his older brother. Benjamin F. Johnson recorded another episode that had occurred, apparently at an earlier date. . . but after the brothers had reached adulthood. 'For Insolence to him,' Johnson related, 'He [Joseph] Soundly Thrashed his Brother William who Boasted himself as Invinsable'" (115). Walker continues: "Though William eventually accepted his brother's prophetic calling, some of his earlier resentments appear to have been rekindled while they were serving together in the leading councils of the church. William felt annoyed that Joseph frequently got his way because of deference to his position as Church president. His brother's prominent role in the family was equally grating. It is evident from Joseph's writings that he strongly felt that he had the prerogative--even the responsibility--to reprove his younger brother for wayward behavior, both because of his ecclesiastical [position] and also because of his birth order in their family." In his letter to William afterward, Joseph wrote that it was "his privilege, of reproving a younger brother" and right "to admonish you because of my birthright" (116). Walker observes that "it was also hard for William to stay in the background while his older brother was continually the focus of attention, both publicly in his civic and church responsibilities, as well as privately in the family. The recipient of his father's name, Joseph Jr. was the fulfillment of both family and scriptural prophecy that all the Smiths unequivocally accepted. . . . With most of the family siding with Joseph, the cost of holding on to his anger became too great, as it left William feeling ostracized from the Church and also isolated from his family. His strong family ties propelled him toward reconciliation with his brother" (117-118).
  2. There's a good Dialogue article on that: Todd Compton, "Was Jesus a Feminist?" (https://www.dialoguejournal.com/wp-content/uploads/sbi/articles/Dialogue_V32N04_9.pdf)
  3. I've tried to like the New Jerusalem Bible, but I just can't. I've bought it twice now, in the giant annotated version and in the smaller reader's version. Whenever I read it side-by-side with other versions, I find I almost always prefer the other version. As far as layout goes, I really like the New English Bible:
  4. As has been mentioned, the Church has already made its own translation of the Bible in Spanish and Portuguese, revising classic Protestant versions. I'd be happy if they did the same with the KJV (although I expect the result would look a lot like the ESV). I sympathize with strappinglad's complaint regarding the "pedestrian" quality of the NRSV and other modern translations. (The NRSV, for example, translates the KJV's "sounding brass" in 1 Cor. 13:1 as "noisy gong." Wayment has "brass horn." ) I love the "numinous rumble" of the KJV as much as anyone. Like liturgical Latin, it feels sacred (and alien and mysterious). But I also think there's a case to be made for making the word of the God accessible in plain, unadorned English too. Most of the New Testament , it should be remembered, was not written in elevated Greek (the Letter to the Hebrews being a notable exception). As David Bentley Hart observes in the Introduction to his new translation of the NT: By the way, the Book of Mormon's "stylistic coarseness" provoked similar contempt when it appeared. Even before it appeared, actually:
  5. Paul H. Peterson's dissertation and articles on the Mormon Reformation are essential reading. Some more recent treatments (which happen to all be from non-LDS historians) include the following: David L. Bigler and Will Bagley, ed., Innocent Blood: Essential Narratives of the Mountain Meadows Massacre, vol. 12 of Kingdom in the West: The Mormons and the American Frontier (Norman, OK: Arthur H. Clark, 2008), chapter 2 Polly Aird, Mormon Convert, Mormon Defector: A Scottish Immigrant in the American West, 1848–1861 (Norman, OK: Arthur H. Clark, 2009), chapters 11 and 12 David L. Bigler and Will Bagley, The Mormon Rebellion: America's First Civil War, 1857–1858 (Norman, OK: University of Oklahoma Press, 2011), chapter 5 John G. Turner, Brigham Young: Pioneer Prophet (Cambridge, MA: Belknap/Harvard University Press, 2012), 254–264 You can read a firsthand account of it here: https://catalog.lds.org/assets/2ee39e17-e14d-4030-b5e4-5c7fa45cd0e4/0/145
  6. Thanks for taking the time to describe your experience in more detail. I asked the question because I've been the teacher for both EQ lessons this month and they fell well short of being "awesome." Today, about half the quorum seemed tuned out and two brothers fell asleep. We were discussing Elder Renlund's talk too. This is my first experience teaching from conference talks and I confess I haven't mastered the form yet. I'm not much of a personal experience sharer so that could be part of the problem. Anyway, I am all ears to find out what is working well for others.
  7. My experience hasn't been anything like this. What is making these lessons so great, other than the extra time?
  8. Even some historians in the 80s were providing useful context. I'm thinking particularly of the pioneering work of Ronald Walker (1984) and Alan Taylor (1987). Mark Ashurst-McGee's MA thesis from 2000 is also indispensible on this subject. None of them gets a single mention. I think this speaks to the professionalism of this article. If you ever get a chance, ask Bushman himself what he thinks about Dan Vogel's work. You might be surprised at his response. I know I was when I heard him heap praise on Religious Seekers and the Advent of Mormonism in the summer of 1999. [Edit: Just came across this in Bushman's On the Road with Joseph Smith: An Author's Diary: "Dan has devoted himself more completely to Joseph Smith than anyone living, with his long string of scholarly books" (p. 120).]
  9. What makes you think Dehlin is trying to make money from this?
  10. Now you're just obfuscating. President Nelson said of the Maxwell Institute in the same email: “[We] need to [help them] know who they are and why they exist." That's the identity "problem" he's concerned about, not what others think of the Institute. If the Brethren feel the MI is tracking in the right direction, why would Elder Holland bring up the findings of an internal report from 2014 that "the current culture at MI may have lost some of the institute’s founding vision and original purpose"?
  11. So President Nelson referring to "the Maxwell Institute problem" and expressing concern about their "identity" in an email to Elder Holland isn't remarkable in any way?
  12. Give it a shot. They published this, after all:
  13. I am not a big fan of the Maxwell Institute right now. I'm still peeved that the one-year "digital subscription" I paid for last December--specifically so I could access the 2018 issue of the Journal of Book of Mormon Studies--was never honored. If I want to read the latest issue of JBMS, I will need to purchase an additional online subscription through the University of Illinois Press. Or I can purchase individual articles from the issue for $14 each. And if I want to read future issues of Mormon Studies Review, well, that will be another $20 (per issue). At least JBMS is now "far more readily available to scholars working in the academy" (https://mi.byu.edu/2018-jbms/). Huzzah! Luckily, though, longtime supporters of the MI like myself still get the occasional bone tossed their way, such as "Kylan Rice’s review of a Book of Mormon-inspired book of deeply postmodern poetry by Renee Angle called Wo0" (https://mi.byu.edu/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/JBMS27-Rice-Sample.pdf).
  14. Another relevant passage from William Hartley's article: Certainly, it is "perfectly right" for deacons to pass the sacrament. This brings to mind something I read a while ago by a Catholic scholar: FWIW.
×
×
  • Create New...