Newly Disclovered William McLellin Journal

[LifeOnaPlate]

I would tend to believe that most of you are all just as skeptical as I am. I just apply my skepticism to all 10,000 religions. You only apply your skepticism to 9,999.

That's a very bold assertion. There is a difference between cynicism and skepticism, though.

[John Larsen]

That's a very bold assertion. There is a difference between cynicism and skepticism, though.

That's true, and I know the difference. For example, you skepticism regarding my sincerity is quite cynical.

Besides, cynicism is independent of the the truth. Just because you are cynical doesn't mean you are wrong. My cynicism about the housing markets a couple of years ago proved to be quite beneficial and spot on.

[John Larsen]

Wrong, I would say that most of us are very pleased that God has given scriptures to christians, muslims, etc...

Therefore, many are not kept completely out of the dark.

I would challenge you assertion that "most" Mormons or Christians (it is hard for me to determine who exactly "us: is in your post) believe that the Koran was inspired by God. I think that is a fringe viewpoint.

[Daniel Peterson]

There has always, in my experience, been a slightly too-anxious, ad hoc quality to secularist attempts to explain away the claims of the Witnesses -- when they're even that good. (This is certainly true, even embarrassingly so, in the case of the best of the attempts thus far, Dan Vogel's. Most of the rest don't really even come to grips with the actual texture and details of the combined Witness accounts, so they're mostly dismissing caricatures.)

The notion that the secularist is simply skeptical of one more religion, though, or merely atheistic concerning one more god than the Mormon believer is, doesn't strike me as nearly as strong as its devotees think it is. The presumption that faithful Latter-day Saints do and must reject the spiritual experiences of all non-Mormons, deny their miracles, dismiss every single one of their doctrines as wholly false, etc., is na

[John Larsen]

There has always, in my experience, been a slightly too-anxious, ad hoc quality to secularist attempts to explain away the claims of the Witnesses -- when they're even that good. (This is certainly true, even embarrassingly so, in the case of the best of the attempts thus far, Dan Vogel's. Most of the rest don't really even come to grips with the actual texture and details of the combined Witness accounts, so they're mostly dismissing caricatures.)

The notion that the secularist is simply skeptical of one more religion, though, or merely atheistic concerning one more god than the Mormon believer is, doesn't strike me as nearly as strong as its devotees think it is. The presumption that faithful Latter-day Saints do and must reject the spiritual experiences of all non-Mormons, deny their miracles, dismiss every single one of their doctrines as wholly false, etc., is na

[selek]

Anyway, I believe it was God that said that all other faiths were an abomination.

No- if you're talking about the vision in the Sacred Grove, he specified that their corrupt creeds were an abomination.

You can go to any fast and testimony meeting and hear this "na

[mfbukowski]

Of course not. lol. Although the events were real. There will never be enough evidence to skeptics till Christ Himself says so face to face.

Yes but what if the "vision" is a psychotic delusion. Will you know for sure then?

[selek]

Yes but what if the "vision" is a psychotic delusion. Will you know for sure then?

I gotta agree with MFB, here.

There will always be those for whom no proof will ever enough, and who cling to the idea that "a self-delusion is better than no delusion at all."

[Daniel Peterson]

Okay, I'll call your bet. Which doctrines, spiritual experiences, and or/miracles that are not also held by Mormons do you hold truck with?

Oh my. There must be literally hundreds and hundreds of thousands of encounters with the numinous, near-death experiences, mystical experiences, miraculous healings, etc., with which I have no problem whatever.

Anyway, I believe it was God that said that all other faiths were an abomination.

I think you must be referring to Joseph Smith-History 1:19, which says that the creeds of apostate Christendom are an "abomination."

It's striking and fascinating that you apparently equate creeds with faiths altogether.

You can go to any fast and testimony meeting and hear this "na

[Scott Lloyd]

Oh my. There must be literally hundreds and hundreds of thousands of encounters with the numinous, near-death experiences, mystical experiences, miraculous healings, etc., with which I have no problem whatever. ...

I'm not a "universalist," let alone a "pantheist" [!], and, although I've been attending fast and testimony meetings on every inhabited continent for decades, I don't believe I've ever heard anybody ever declare that every spiritual experience of every non-Mormon is a fraud or a delusion or that absolutely every doctrine of every non-Mormon faith is entirely false.

According to the Church-produced motion picture I showed in my gospel doctrine class last Sunday, it was a non-Mormon, Robert Mason, whose account of a dream/vision he experienced that prompted a youthful Wilford Woodruff to embark on a quest for the pure gospel of Jesus Christ which he recognized when he was introduced to it. (The gospel had not yet been restored when Robert Mason experienced his vision.)

[LifeOnaPlate]

Okay, I'll call your bet. Which doctrines, spiritual experiences, and or/miracles that are not also held by Mormons do you hold truck with?

I believe William Tyndale is a great answer to your query.

Anyway, I believe it was God that said that all other faiths were an abomination.

The issue here is your oversimplication. There is no claim that all other "faiths" were an abomination.

You can go to any fast and testimony meeting and hear this "na

[cdowis]

I would tend to believe that most of you are all just as skeptical as I am. I just apply my skepticism to all 10,000 religions. You only apply your skepticism to 9,999.

I think all religions have a portion of the Gospel, only one having the fullness of the Gospel. I can accept many of the religious claims of other religions, believing that their leaders were inspired by the very same Divine presence that appeared to Joseph Smith.

And that is the difference between us == skepticism/rejection of all religious claims, vs discrimination/acceptance among the religions.

We are on two different planets.

[John Larsen]

We are on two different planets.

On this we definitely agree.

[Deborah]

There will never be enough evidence to skeptics till Christ Himself says so face to face.

What makes you think critics would believe Christ, much less recognize him if they saw him? There were many witnesses to all he did while here and yet the unbelievers still managed to rationalize away the evidence in front of them.

[All-Seeing Eye]

As a witness for the BOM, I find . . .

You're a witness for the BOM?

[Ipso Facto]

You're a witness for the BOM?

As am I.

There are many of us, in fact.

[De Groote]

The Deseret News has an interesting article about a newly discovered journal of William McLellin. The article is here.

Thank you for bringing some attention to this article. Brent Ashworth was kind enough to approach the Deseret News with the story of his rediscovery of the "lost" McLellin notebook. Before we went to press he did not really want to say too much about the notebook's provenance -- at least nothing public. We honored his desires on this. There was a mention of this fact in the article originally, but it was edited out because it seemed to raise more questions if we said he wanted to keep the provenance private.

After the article came out Brent decided to be a little more open with the provenance, so I tracked him down via cell phone (he was in Baltimore) and he agreed to say this much (which I added to the online story both on the Deseret News and MormonTimes.com):

"The notebook has an excellent provenance, going back to the beginning of the last century," Ashworth said. "And it's pretty hard to argue with the photographs (taken of the notebook in the 1920s)."

Ashworth said the evidence implies that the notebook came from McLellin's widow in Missouri who had joined the RLDS Church. Ashworth believes that she gave or sold the book to someone named W.O. Robertson, who has two signature stamps in the notebook. Robertson then sold it to John Resch in 1919, according to an inscription and signature. Resch then sold it to RLDS apostle Paul M. Hanson who put excerpts into a 1929 newspaper.

The notebook remained in the family until a trusted contact of Ashworth's brought it to his attention this summer.

The journal matches up with the content and photographs from the 1920s and is traceable from that time period for certain. Previous to the 1920s it looks like Resch bought it from Robertson. Before Robertson it is not as sure, but it is safe to assume he got it from McLellin's widow. The transcription from the 1920s is in "The William E. McLellin Papers" published by Signature Books (see page xvi and pages 253-255). So some of you may have seen some of this content before. The found notebook confirms and adds context to the Signature Book publication.

This photograph and transcript are remarkable verification of the notebook.

The nature of the notebook itself is also somewhat interesting. From the notebook's detailed index, it appears the McLellin was trying to write a book. Most of it is his doctrinal musings -- some of which are no doubt taken from earlier notebooks that are in "The William E. McLellin Papers." There doesn't appear to be much earth-shattering or unique in the notebook from a doctrinal standpoint that would merit a forgery. The Book is also 266 pages. Each page is crammed with McLellin's beautiful handwriting. A daunting task for a forger -- why not just make 100 pages of non-controversial doctrinal musings. The most critical part of the notebook, where he calls Utah Mormons the "most wicked" people on the planet is even crossed out by McLellin. There would appear to be almost no motive to make this forgery -- particularly since it would have had to been made in the 1920s.

The most interesting thing about this notebook for me is what McLellin says about Joseph Smith's mind and how impressive it was. This is the only real part that I think is new with this discovery. I believe this will be the most quoted part of the notebook in the future:

"I was personally and intimately acquainted with Joseph Smith, the man who read off the translation of the book, for five years near the beginning of his ministry. He attended my High school during the winter of 1834. He attended and learned science all winter. I learned the strength of his mind as to the study and principles of science. Hence I think I knew him. And I here say that he had one of the strongest, well balanced, penetrating, and retentive minds of any man with whom I ever formed an acquaintance, among the thousands of my observation. Although when I took him into my school, he was without scientific knowledge or attainments."

Some excerpts are scheduled for this Thursday's Mormon Times section in the Deseret News. Even longer excerpts will be published on MormonTimes.com tomorrow (Wed. Jan. 28, 2009). These will probably be the longest excerpts published until the full notebook is published.

[Calm]

Thank you for taking the time to come on the board and give these additional details for those of us interested in such things (which are quite a few on this board.)

[ttribe]

Thank you for taking the time to come on the board and give these additional details for those of us interested in such things (which are quite a few on this board.)

Agreed. Very good information.