Is Talmage's Jesus the Christ outdated?

[clarkgoble]

17 hours ago, HappyJackWagon said:

That's great, Kevin. Thanks.

Isn't Jesus the Christ still very influential in establishing the Christology the church still maintains today?

For example, isn't it JtC that cements the idea of Jesus being the Jehovah of the Old Testament?

I think the First Presidency message from 1916 on the nature of the father and son is more significant there. You can argue Talmage influenced that a lot of course. But the First Presidency proclamation gets reprinted a lot while you really don't see many people reading Talmage anymore.

Back when I was on my mission Talmage's Jesus the Christ and Articles of Faith were one of the few books you were allowed to read. So I think a lot of people read it there. I don't know if that's still the case though.

Edited June 30, 2017 by clarkgoble

[clarkgoble]

24 minutes ago, Kevin Christensen said:

"All the texts in the Hebrew Bible distinguish clearly between the divine sons of Elohim/Elyon and those human beings who are called sons of Yahweh.

This is really important in understanding Abinadi in particular. He appears to have some sort of proto-Merkabah style (as does Nephi/Lehi in their visions too). But this distinction is pretty key in both his opening in Mosiah 15 but more particularly in how he applies Isaiah 53. My guess is that Isaiah 53 (deutero-Isaiah) represents a tradition tied to these pre-exilic pantheon more akin to Canaanite pantheon. The tradition lives on in the post-exilic tradition of Merkabah texts particularly 3 Enoch or the Testament of Abraham.

Edited June 30, 2017 by clarkgoble

[USU78]

24 minutes ago, Kevin Christensen said:

Jesus the Christ remains influential, deservedly so.  When I read it on my mission in England in 1974, the cultural vibe I felt that reading it was a cultural rite of passage, an initiation into diving into the deep end of the pool.  Since then I've learned that the pool is connected to seas, the seas to oceans, the oceans on a planet, and the planet a speck amid countless galaxies.  We all have to start somewhere if a lot of us start there, that becomes place of common vocabulary, understanding, and experience, which is good for community building.

And yes, it remains influential in that it importantly codified particular ways of thinking, and became a cultural touchstone, a book that a great many people read, and therefore, conditioned and guided a great deal of thought.

In one sense, yes, it was Jesus the Christ, and a near contemporary First Presidency Statement that codified the idea of Jesus being Jehovah of the Old Testament.  However, I now think that (contrary to a famous Sunstone essay by Thomas Alexander and essays by Boyd Kirtland), the notion of Jesus as Jehovah is inherent from the start of Mormonism, if not fully grasped by the diverse membership in the absence of a pedagogical book like Jesus the Christ.  On this see the essay by Bruening and Paulson:

https://publications.mi.byu.edu/fullscreen/?pub=1454&index=12

I've read a book length version of the essay and find it convincing and impressive.  I'm particularly impressed with final line of their footnote three. "Most proponents of this developmental theory make the same claims and use the same proof texts."  Rather then generalizing from those few anchoring proof texts, Bruening and Paulson make a comprehensive attempt to read the Book of Mormon comprehensively and contextually.  And that, I think, changes things.

And next time you sing "Praise to the Man" or "Jesus, Once of Humble Birth" pay close attention to the thought behind the words crossing your tongue.  "Praise to the man who communed with Jehovah, Jesus anointed that prophet and seer"  And "Once a meek and lowly lamb, now the Lord, the Great I AM."  Those hymns long predate the First Presidency statement and the publication of Jesus the Christ, and were not referenced by either Alexander or Kirtland.

For me though, while I young and splashing around in the pool of thought available then, I was initially impressed by Alexander and Kirtland in the 1980s.  Then in 1999 I read Margaret Barker's The Great Angel: A Study of Israel's Second God.  In my personal experience, and that of several other LDS scholars I know, the common reaction produced the same one word review. "WOW!"   She made the case far more comprehensively and powerfully than any LDS scholar, including Talmage, had ever done.  She drew on sources he did not have and used language skills he did not possess.  And yes, while he wrote physically in the temple, she got there spiritually, the Temple being her goal and key.  And she produced a body of work that connected to the Book of Mormon in ways that neither we nor Barker had imagined, but which strikes me as fulfilling the prophesy in 1 Nephi 13.

"All the texts in the Hebrew Bible distinguish clearly between the divine sons of Elohim/Elyon and those human beings who are called sons of Yahweh. This must be significant. It must mean that the terms originated at a time when Yahweh was distinguished from whatever was meant by El/Elohim/Elyon. A large number of texts continued to distinguish between El Elyon and Yahweh, Father and Son, and to express this distinction in similar ways with the symbolism of the temple and the royal cult. By tracing these patterns through a great variety of material and over several centuries, Israel’s second God can be recovered." Barker, Great Angel, 10, emphasis deleted. Also, “This distinction is important for at least two reasons; Yahweh was one of the sons of El Elyon; and Jesus in the Gospels was described as a Son of El Elyon, God Most High.” Barker, Great Angel, 4.

The Book of Mormon keeps the same distinction and identity.  The source of confusion for Mormon readers is the combination of cultural conditioning from other faith backgrounds combined with the assumption that a Son cannot also be a Father and have a Father who is not the Son, an assumption I find contradicted everytime I shave and brush my teeth and see a son who is also a father and has a father who is not the son.

Best,

Kevin Christensen

Canonsburg, PA

We're definitely not worthy

[stemelbow]

26 minutes ago, Kevin Christensen said:

Jesus the Christ remains influential, deservedly so.  When I read it on my mission in England in 1974, the cultural vibe I felt that reading it was a cultural rite of passage, an initiation into diving into the deep end of the pool. 

I had the same feeling when I engaged on my mission in 1995.  It was a bit of a "cultural rite of passage, an initiation into diving into the deep end of the pool."

26 minutes ago, Kevin Christensen said:

Since then I've learned that the pool is connected to seas, the seas to oceans, the oceans on a planet, and the planet a speck amid countless galaxies.  We all have to start somewhere if a lot of us start there, that becomes place of common vocabulary, understanding, and experience, which is good for community building.

And yes, it remains influential in that it importantly codified particular ways of thinking, and became a cultural touchstone, a book that a great many people read, and therefore, conditioned and guided a great deal of thought.

In one sense, yes, it was Jesus the Christ, and a near contemporary First Presidency Statement that codified the idea of Jesus being Jehovah of the Old Testament.  However, I now think that (contrary to a famous Sunstone essay by Thomas Alexander and essays by Boyd Kirtland), the notion of Jesus as Jehovah is inherent from the start of Mormonism, if not fully grasped by the diverse membership in the absence of a pedagogical book like Jesus the Christ.  On this see the essay by Bruening and Paulson:

https://publications.mi.byu.edu/fullscreen/?pub=1454&index=12

I've read a book length version of the essay and find it convincing and impressive.  I'm particularly impressed with final line of their footnote three. "Most proponents of this developmental theory make the same claims and use the same proof texts."  Rather then generalizing from those few anchoring proof texts, Bruening and Paulson make a comprehensive attempt to read the Book of Mormon comprehensively and contextually.  And that, I think, changes things.

And next time you sing "Praise to the Man" or "Jesus, Once of Humble Birth" pay close attention to the thought behind the words crossing your tongue.  "Praise to the man who communed with Jehovah, Jesus anointed that prophet and seer"  And "Once a meek and lowly lamb, now the Lord, the Great I AM."  Those hymns long predate the First Presidency statement and the publication of Jesus the Christ, and were not referenced by either Alexander or Kirtland.

For me though, while I young and splashing around in the pool of thought available then, I was initially impressed by Alexander and Kirtland in the 1980s.  Then in 1999 I read Margaret Barker's The Great Angel: A Study of Israel's Second God.  In my personal experience, and that of several other LDS scholars I know, the common reaction produced the same one word review. "WOW!"   She made the case far more comprehensively and powerfully than any LDS scholar, including Talmage, had ever done.  She drew on sources he did not have and used language skills he did not possess.  And yes, while he wrote physically in the temple, she got there spiritually, the Temple being her goal and key.  And she produced a body of work that connected to the Book of Mormon in ways that neither we nor Barker had imagined, but which strikes me as fulfilling the prophesy in 1 Nephi 13.

"All the texts in the Hebrew Bible distinguish clearly between the divine sons of Elohim/Elyon and those human beings who are called sons of Yahweh. This must be significant. It must mean that the terms originated at a time when Yahweh was distinguished from whatever was meant by El/Elohim/Elyon. A large number of texts continued to distinguish between El Elyon and Yahweh, Father and Son, and to express this distinction in similar ways with the symbolism of the temple and the royal cult. By tracing these patterns through a great variety of material and over several centuries, Israel’s second God can be recovered." Barker, Great Angel, 10, emphasis deleted. Also, “This distinction is important for at least two reasons; Yahweh was one of the sons of El Elyon; and Jesus in the Gospels was described as a Son of El Elyon, God Most High.” Barker, Great Angel, 4.

The Book of Mormon keeps the same distinction and identity.  The source of confusion for Mormon readers is the combination of cultural conditioning from other faith backgrounds combined with the assumption that a Son cannot also be a Father and have a Father who is not the Son, an assumption I find contradicted everytime I shave and brush my teeth and see a son who is also a father and has a father who is not the son.

Best,

Kevin Christensen

Canonsburg, PA

Thanks.  And well said.

[Johnnie Cake]

35 minutes ago, Duncan said:

is it mentioned in there?

The Coffee Pot or his smoking of cigars?

[Duncan]

9 minutes ago, Johnnie Cake said:

The Coffee Pot or his smoking of cigars?

you had mentioned earlier that he drank coffee while writing JTC and I was asking where do we find that info? as the journal entries linked to earlier don't have him drinking coffee 

"I loved the stories of how Talmage would work in one of the upper rooms in the SL Temple with his coffee pot close by to keep him supplied with fresh brew so he could work his long hours in writing his book.  I can imagine how wonderful it would have been for patrons to be greeting in the morning with the aroma of fresh coffee brewing as they entered the Temple"

[stemelbow]

18 minutes ago, Johnnie Cake said:

The Coffee Pot or his smoking of cigars?

How about his Bourbon?

My grandma used to regale us with stories of her grandpa back in the day.  He was Charles W Penrose, member of the First presidency.  She was born in 1907 and when she went to LDS high School, with Gordon B hinkley (a freshman or sophomore when she was a senior) she'd tell us, and into the beginning of college, I believe, at the UofU, she lived with her grandpa in SLC.  He was a polygamist, as was the custom for church leaders, and for some reason she felt compelled to defend that to us.  Her version was, he was only a polygamist because his first wife ended up getting committed to the state hospital.  But...well....her stories were cute.

Anyway, part of that story telling involved his drinking.  She got defensive of that too.  It turns out, though that my grandma and grandpa drank through the rest of their lives.  When she was 90 she went back to the temple--they married in the temple and didn't make ti back, because as it turned out, they had to stop drinking alcohol and coffee in order to do so, shortly after they married.  She defended herself because of her grandpa though.  to her, at least how she made it feel, it was just part of her life and culture. 

Anyway, all very interesting

Quote

1915 President Joseph F. Smith declares that middle-age men “who have experience in the Church should not be ordained to the Priesthood nor recommended to the privileges of the House of the Lord unless they will abstain from the use of tobacco and intoxicating drinks.”

https://doctrineandcovenants325.files.wordpress.com/2012/02/word-of-wisdom.pdf

1915 was the year Talmage sat in the temple, I think, to write his book. 

Quote

On April 19, 1915, just over seven months after beginning his draft, he completed the manuscript.

https://history.lds.org/article/the-story-behind-the-story?lang=eng

I think there was definitely a split to some degree about this stuff back then. 

Edited June 30, 2017 by stemelbow

[Kevin Christensen]

37 minutes ago, clarkgoble said:

This is really important in understanding Abinadi in particular. He appears to have some sort of proto-Merkabah style (as does Nephi/Lehi in their visions too). But this distinction is pretty key in both his opening in Mosiah 15 but more particularly in how he applies Isaiah 53. My guess is that Isaiah 53 (deutero-Isaiah) represents a tradition tied to these pre-exilic pantheon more akin to Canaanite pantheon. The tradition lives on in the post-exilic tradition of Merkabah texts particularly 3 Enoch or the Testament of Abraham.

Have you read this yet?, on "The Original Setting of the Fourth Servant Song".

http://www.margaretbarker.com/Papers/FourthServantSong.pdf

Best,

Kevin Christensen

Canonsburg, PA

 

[Atheist Mormon]

20 hours ago, bluebell said:

Is Talmage's Jesus the Christ outdated?

I hope I will not offend you or anyone here but the question should be; "Is Christianity outdated". That is the case for more than a century or so from moral/philosophic points of views. I wouldn't know which of the precepts humans would still use and count them beneficial for species. 

(I still have that pristine copy "Jesus the Christ" given to us in 1980 our wedding day with the signatures of Bishopric & Stake President.)

[clarkgoble]

22 minutes ago, Kevin Christensen said:

Have you read this yet?, on "The Original Setting of the Fourth Servant Song".

http://www.margaretbarker.com/Papers/FourthServantSong.pdf

Yeah I'd read that before. I always think of Zion's March and the Cholera when I read her bit about the high priest. There's a ton of conjecture in that paper though. I'm not sure it gives much insight on how Abinadi uses the text - although I'd be very interested if you see it differently.

 

[bluebell]

Just now, Atheist Mormon said:

I hope I will not offend you or anyone here but the question should be; "Is Christianity outdated". That is the case for more than a century or so from moral/philosophic points of views. I wouldn't know which of the precepts humans would still use and count them beneficial for species. 

(I still have that pristine copy "Jesus the Christ" given to us in 1980 our wedding day with the signatures of Bishopric & Stake President.)

If that's a question you want to discuss, then you should create a thread on it.  It's not the question we are discussing in this one.  

[Gray]

14 minutes ago, Atheist Mormon said:

I hope I will not offend you or anyone here but the question should be; "Is Christianity outdated". That is the case for more than a century or so from moral/philosophic points of views. I wouldn't know which of the precepts humans would still use and count them beneficial for species. 

(I still have that pristine copy "Jesus the Christ" given to us in 1980 our wedding day with the signatures of Bishopric & Stake President.)

That's a pretty broad brush you're painting with. Like, miles wide.

[Atheist Mormon]

15 minutes ago, Gray said:

That's a pretty broad brush you're painting with. Like, miles wide.

Sorry Gray but it is the reality...I did not (consciously) used any part of Scriptures to improve my moral/ethical standards, I used many US constitutional principles...I'm trying to recall the stories in Scriptures, I can't think a single one which is not "self serving/aggrandizing individuals". It is great that some of us live in western countries who can choices.

[Atheist Mormon]

35 minutes ago, bluebell said:

If that's a question you want to discuss, then you should create a thread on it.  It's not the question we are discussing in this one.  

[Kevin Christensen]

1 hour ago, clarkgoble said:

Yeah I'd read that before. I always think of Zion's March and the Cholera when I read her bit about the high priest. There's a ton of conjecture in that paper though. I'm not sure it gives much insight on how Abinadi uses the text - although I'd be very interested if you see it differently.

 

That particular question, what happens if I put Barker's reading of the Servant song into Abinadi's setting, is in my personal "someday, when I have time" queue.

[Johnnie Cake]

2 hours ago, Duncan said:

you had mentioned earlier that he drank coffee while writing JTC and I was asking where do we find that info? as the journal entries linked to earlier don't have him drinking coffee 

"I loved the stories of how Talmage would work in one of the upper rooms in the SL Temple with his coffee pot close by to keep him supplied with fresh brew so he could work his long hours in writing his book.  I can imagine how wonderful it would have been for patrons to be greeting in the morning with the aroma of fresh coffee brewing as they entered the Temple"

To be fair...at this moment I can only provide documentation for smoking of Cigars...which is documented in the reference I provided.  The bottle of Bourbon I stated as a rumor...his coffee pot, until I can provide documentation I guess will also have to be put in the rumor pile.

[Duncan]

7 minutes ago, Johnnie Cake said:

To be fair...at this moment I can only provide documentation for smoking of Cigars...which is documented in the reference I provided.  The bottle of Bourbon I stated as a rumor...his coffee pot, until I can provide documentation I guess will also have to be put in the rumor pile.

fair enough! I hadn't heard the coffee rumour but my mind is wide open!

[Gray]

1 hour ago, Atheist Mormon said:

Sorry Gray but it is the reality...I did not (consciously) used any part of Scriptures to improve my moral/ethical standards, I used many US constitutional principles...I'm trying to recall the stories in Scriptures, I can't think a single one which is not "self serving/aggrandizing individuals". It is great that some of us live in western countries who can choices.

It sounds like you're responding to a literalist interpretation of the Bible, not Christianity as a whole.

[Atheist Mormon]

14 minutes ago, Gray said:

It sounds like you're responding to a literalist interpretation of the Bible, not Christianity as a whole.

I'm literally speechless....you said it very well....

[Calm]

https://www.fairmormon.org/conference/august-2000/up-in-smoke-a-response-to-the-tanners-criticism-of-the-word-of-wisdom

"The early LDS approach to tobacco was similar to that of their attitude to alcohol: it was avoided, but it was also believed–based on contemporary medical advice–to offer medicinal aid for things such as toothaches (as used by Brigham Young123), and relief of fatigue, stress, and headaches. James Talmage was counseled by the First Presidency “‘to try the effect of moderate smoking'” for his nervous disorder. Talmage wrote in his journal that “‘a good cigar produced a marvelous quieting of my over-wrought nerves.'”124"

[cinepro]

 

5 hours ago, bluebell said:

No, i'm sure it's not required.  It wasn't when i served.

This is the set of books that was sold at the MTC in the 1990s for the missionaries to use (the script writing on the covers says "Missionary Reference Library").  Originally it just had four books, then "Our Search for Happiness" was added after it was published in 1993.  These were the only books in addition to the Study Guide and Scriptures that we were allowed to have on my mission (although I did somehow end up with a bunch of institute manuals as well):

 

[mrmarklin]

3 hours ago, Johnnie Cake said:

To be fair...at this moment I can only provide documentation for smoking of Cigars...which is documented in the reference I provided.  The bottle of Bourbon I stated as a rumor...his coffee pot, until I can provide documentation I guess will also have to be put in the rumor pile.

What is the relevance of Talmadge's cigar smoking to this thread?

It was around 1930 that Mormons were to obey the WOW to be temple worthy. Talmadge was before that time.  

[bluebell]

52 minutes ago, cinepro said:

 

This is the set of books that was sold at the MTC in the 1990s for the missionaries to use (the script writing on the covers says "Missionary Reference Library").  Originally it just had four books, then "Our Search for Happiness" was added after it was published in 1993.  These were the only books in addition to the Study Guide and Scriptures that we were allowed to have on my mission (although I did somehow end up with a bunch of institute manuals as well):

 

Those are probably the same set that were around when i served (1998).  I didn't have them myself but some missionaries did.  Eventually I had my parents send me JtC on it's own.

My mission president was pretty lenient though and we were allowed to have read any church book we wanted.  I remember reading some by Bott, the Gordon B. Hinckley biography, and then some missionary books written by Pinegar I think, along with JtC.

[bluebell]

28 minutes ago, mrmarklin said:

What is the relevance of Talmadge's cigar smoking to this thread?

It was around 1930 that Mormons were to obey the WOW to be temple worthy. Talmadge was before that time.  

I'm guessing that some posters might bring it up to imply how unnecessary the WoW is (a 'he was smoking and wrote this great book on Christ in the temple that everyone loved.  Obviously these rules about alcohol and tobacco and coffee are dumb....' kind of thing).

[cinepro]

53 minutes ago, mrmarklin said:

What is the relevance of Talmadge's cigar smoking to this thread?

It was around 1930 that Mormons were to obey the WOW to be temple worthy. Talmadge was before that time.  

It's almost as if everyone doesn't know there were spittoons in the Salt Lake Temple in the 1910s...