Jump to content
Seriously No Politics ×

Mormon History And Mormon Belief


Daniel Peterson

Recommended Posts

There's a nice entry, just up today on Mormon Scholars Testify, from Paul Reeve at the University of Utah, about the relationship between his work as a historian and his faith in Mormonism:

http://mormonscholarstestify.org/2699/w-paul-reeve

Since certain critics claim that honest history and Mormon belief are antithetical, Professor Reeve's statement might be of some interest to a few here.

Link to comment

There's a nice entry, just up today on Mormon Scholars Testify, from Paul Reeve at the University of Utah, about the relationship between his work as a historian and his faith in Mormonism:

http://mormonscholarstestify.org/2699/w-paul-reeve

Since certain critics claim that honest history and Mormon belief are antithetical, Professor Reeve's statement might be of some interest to a few here.

Another helpful testimony on an increasingly useful site.

Also, on this general theme, the recent FAIR publication on the backstage politics of how History is done on Wikipedia is very enlightening.

http://www.fairlds.org//FAIR_Conferences/2011_Something_Wiki_This_Way_Comes.pdf

Kevin Christensen

Bethel Park, PA

Link to comment

There's a nice entry, just up today on Mormon Scholars Testify, from Paul Reeve at the University of Utah, about the relationship between his work as a historian and his faith in Mormonism:

http://mormonscholarstestify.org/2699/w-paul-reeve

Since certain critics claim that honest history and Mormon belief are antithetical, Professor Reeve's statement might be of some interest to a few here.

Another helpful testimony on an increasingly useful site.

Also, on this general theme, the recent FAIR publication on the backstage politics of how History is done on Wikipedia is very enlightening.

http://www.fairlds.org//FAIR_Conferences/2011_Something_Wiki_This_Way_Comes.pdf

Kevin Christensen

Bethel Park, PA

Link to comment

That's fine and dandy, but everyone knows that no true historian could actually be a Mormon. If s/he is, they need to have a proverbial asterisk next to their name by labeling them as an "apologist" or some other pejorative rather than a historian. Those with negative views about Mormonism, regardless of whether they have a Ph.D. or run a defunct ministry out of a storefront with a high school diploma, must always be referred to as "scholars" or some other credible expression.

Here are some good examples of how to properly do this:

"Apologist Richard Bushman speculates in Rough Stone Rolling (p 490) that this delay was possibly because Smith did not fall for the trap completely and did not translate the plates before his death a year later." [1]

"Two Utah scholars, Jerald and Sandra Tanner, have written the definitive treatise on Joseph Smith and money digging..." [2]

Link to comment

That's fine and dandy, but everyone knows that no true historian could actually be a Mormon. If s/he is, they need to have a proverbial asterisk next to their name by labeling them as an "apologist" or some other pejorative rather than a historian. Those with negative views about Mormonism, regardless of whether they have a Ph.D. or run a defunct ministry out of a storefront with a high school diploma, must always be referred to as "scholars" or some other credible expression.

Here are some good examples of how to properly do this:

You have now passed the qualification to edit LDS Wikipedia articles. Go forth and edit... :blink:

WW

Link to comment

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...