Jeffrey R. Holland's Talk

[why me]

If, ex hypothesi, Hyrum had known that his brother had made the whole thing up, I think it extremely unlikely that he would have gone willingly to his death for the scam or found comfort and consolation in the words of something he knew to be a hoax. And the same is true, in spades, for Joseph himself.

And yet the critics do claim that Hyrum was in on the fraud from the beginning. The whole critic story flies against human nature. The strongest case for the book of mormon rests with the people involved from the beginning. JS, the 11 witnesses, and other people who acted as scribes and witnessed the process. Not to mention the wives of the witnesses. I can not see the witnesses lying to their wives and not getting caught out. Usually one of the wives would have spilled the beans if it were a fraud.

[why me]

I disagree that it was even "righteous anger."

He was fervent, but I certainly discerned nothing even resembling "anger" in his words.

He was passionate. Something every lds apologist should be.

[Daniel Peterson]

Reassessing authorship of the Book of Mormon using delta and nearest shrunken centroid classification - Literary and linguistic computing - 2008, vol. 23, no4

"Our results indicate that likely nineteenth century contributors were Solomon Spalding, a writer of historical fantasies; Sidney Rigdon, an eloquent but perhaps unstable preacher; and Oliver Cowdery, a schoolteacher with editing experience. Our findings support the hypothesis that Rigdon was the main architect of the Book of Mormon and are consistent with historical evidence suggesting that he fabricated the book by adding theology to the unpublished writings of Spalding (then deceased)."

Let the debate roll on.

Oh, trust me. It's not finished quite yet.

Your point would almost make sense if the mobs were demanding that Joseph and Hyrum deny their testimonies of the BoM.

Sadly, the Nauvoo Expositor had much more to do with the situation in Carthage than Joseph's activities 14 years prior.

Joseph risked death for many years before he was finally murdered by anti-Mormons. If it was a scam, the cost/benefit ratio doesn't seem very attractive. My point makes perfect sense, and I stand by it.

And we all know that the dread pirate B.H. Roberts was the most vicious of all anti-Mormons.

Don't be ridiculous.

The fact is simply that Hyrum read to Joseph from the BoM. Whether Joseph found consolation in the reading is anyone's guess.

Good grief.

S-t-r-e-t-c-h!

To presume to know the thoughts of Joseph Smith is silly. It's like assuming that a professor of Islamic studies can read the mind of a deranged kidnapper.

Since nobody is assuming that any professor of Islamic studies can read the mind of a deranged kidnapper, your point is a little opaque.

You really are asserting that Joseph and Hyrum dying for their testimony proves the BOM is a true historical record so strongly that the best possible critical argument against is weak and desperate?

No, I'm not. When I want to assert something, I'll say it.

PS, Dan. Where does this particular view of yours put you on the fundamentalist/intellectual scale we discussed a while back in another thread?

What "view" of mine? The one you falsely attributed to me just above?

Anyway, your "fundamentalist/intellectual scale" makes little sense to me, and, to the extent that I can make anything of it, seems utterly irrelevant. So I'm afraid that you're going to have to situate me somewhere on the scale, and then persuade me that your decision is even marginally related to reality.

[pcarthew]

Just thought I would say that, as always, Jeffrey R. Holland's talk is powerful, well thought out, insightful, etc. etc. etc. He is both a moving and a persuasive speaker, his logic excellent. Plus, I always love his topics! I do always feel the Spirit when he talks.

Fantastic Talk, bold and beautiful.

[chileanseabass]

I served my mission in Chile while Elder Holland was Area President and had the opportunity to meet with him and hear him speak at two mission conferences and a stake conference. He never disappoints, especially when speaking on the Book of Mormon. It's not so much that he's "angry," he just knows of the importance of the message, and does not take it lightly.

[John Williams]

I watched this talk while I was helping my daughter make bread in the kitchen. Elder Holland's talk made me want to believe more than I have in a very long time. I wouldn't say I've crawled over the Book of Mormon, as it was years before I left the church that I'd made my peace with its not being an actual historical record, but then that's beside the point. I really did ache for that faith I once had, and I felt keenly the loss of it.

After the talk was over, I went into my bedroom, where my wife had been watching conference. She was weeping, and I put my arms around her and held her and told her how sorry I am for putting her through what I had. She said that she was crying because she hadn't felt the spirit that strongly in a long time. But she did acknowledge how much it has hurt to see me take the path I have taken.

[Deborah]

Amazing how this powerful testimony of the Book of Mormon has brought out so much excitement on the part of the critics.

I think Elder Holland probably has access to some documents that the rest of us don't at this time. In any case he knows the Book of Mormon is what it claims to be. The arguments against it have been foundering for several years and they still haven't disproved anything to those who have this testimony.

[robuchan]

No, I'm not. When I want to assert something, I'll say it.

What "view" of mine? The one you falsely attributed to me just above?

If, ex hypothesi, Hyrum had known that his brother had made the whole thing up, I think it extremely unlikely that he would have gone willingly to his death for the scam or found comfort and consolation in the words of something he knew to be a hoax. And the same is true, in spades, for Joseph himself.

It's this sort of just-so story, advanced so commonly by critics of the Church, that, in my judgment, reveals plainly how weak the critics' case is.

I will readily agree with you that "pious fraud" is the critics' best hope, far and away. But it's a pretty wan hope. I believe that "desperation" was mentioned earlier on this thread. The word comes readily to mind in this context.

I disagree. It (critics case explaining why Joseph/Hyrum would go to Carthage and not deny their testimony even facing death) really is that weak.

[Jeff K.]

I watched this talk while I was helping my daughter make bread in the kitchen. Elder Holland's talk made me want to believe more than I have in a very long time. I wouldn't say I've crawled over the Book of Mormon, as it was years before I left the church that I'd made my peace with its not being an actual historical record, but then that's beside the point. I really did ache for that faith I once had, and I felt keenly the loss of it.

After the talk was over, I went into my bedroom, where my wife had been watching conference. She was weeping, and I put my arms around her and held her and told her how sorry I am for putting her through what I had. She said that she was crying because she hadn't felt the spirit that strongly in a long time. But she did acknowledge how much it has hurt to see me take the path I have taken.

Your post is the saddest I have read in a long time. While I cannot in any sense accept your view and what I consider a deceptive stance in regard to the church. I can appreciate the pain you are going through because you feel one way, and those you love more than anything else in the world have chosen a different path. It seems to me your strength is also your greatest weakness. I appreciate your honesty with your wife, and her strength and hope in the face of where you are.

I wish all of you gods blessing in finding the path that helps all of you obtain happiness.

[lostindc]

Your post is the saddest I have read in a long time. While I cannot in any sense accept your view and what I consider a deceptive stance in regard to the church. I can appreciate the pain you are going through because you feel one way, and those you love more than anything else in the world have chosen a different path. It seems to me your strength is also your greatest weakness. I appreciate your honesty with your wife, and her strength and hope in the face of where you are.

I wish all of you gods blessing in finding the path that helps all of you obtain happiness.

You and me both regarding John's desires. If I lived by John right now I would go cut his lawn and wash his car.

[Sevenbak]

Here is his talk in MP3 form. The video clip isn't out yet on the Church site.

http://broadcast.lds.org/genconf/2009/10/50/GC_2009_10_503_HollandJR___eng_.mp3

[rockslider]

Your post is the saddest I have read in a long time. While I cannot in any sense accept your view and what I consider a deceptive stance in regard to the church. I can appreciate the pain you are going through because you feel one way, and those you love more than anything else in the world have chosen a different path. It seems to me your strength is also your greatest weakness. I appreciate your honesty with your wife, and her strength and hope in the face of where you are.

I wish all of you gods blessing in finding the path that helps all of you obtain happiness.

John, I have some thoughts I would like to share on this. I want to think about this a bit more, and take the time to try and post my feelings. Watch in another thread for my response to your feelings here.

Chad

[Daniel Peterson]

Yes, robuchan. Not what you claimed that I said. So?

[robuchan]

Yes, robuchan. Not what you claimed that I said. So?

Help us understand your stance, then. How is it what you said not accurately summarized by my question "You really are asserting that Joseph and Hyrum dying for their testimony proves the BOM is a true historical record so strongly that the best possible critical argument against is weak and desperate?"

True historical record can be a substitute for "it is what Joseph says it is".

[why me]

Here is his talk in MP3 form. The video clip isn't out yet on the Church site.

http://broadcast.lds.org/genconf/2009/10/50/GC_2009_10_503_HollandJR___eng_.mp3

Here is the video clip:

http://www.youtube.com/user/jeraboo29#play/uploads/10/ld0_7fKGdRM

You just need to wait a second for the tape to come on. It is only part one so far but more will surely follow.

[Lightbearer]

As an addition to my "gushing review" yesterday, I would like to add that the first time I ever heard Elder Holland speak was before he was an apostle, about 30 years ago. I was in the MTC, and I believe if I am not mistaken he was the President of BYU or something like that, maybe it was CES, hard to remember (he was not yet a General Authority) and I heard him bear a similar witness then, I felt it within every fiber of my being and when later he was called into the council of the Twelve I was not surprised at all. It is true Elder Holland did not offer one scrap of "apologetic proof" as was observed by "Mortal Man." However he bore a very strong spiritual witness just as his apostolic calling commissions him to do. It reminded me of that spirit filled testimony of those many years ago while I as a young and unlearned missionary preparing to embark in the service of the master, which had the impact of the spirit flooding the light and truth of the Gospel of Jesus Christ into my heart confirming the already existent testimony. He did not need to refute the Spaulding Manuscript theory, because it has already been discredited in our family through a sacred experience of my father's which I have related before on this board. You see scholarship and apologetic arguments are not what converts, it is the power of the spirit through the means of the law of witnesses. That is the best means of discrediting these spurious theories, let God bring about His own work and it will be seen by all those who have eyes to see and ears to hear.

Again I will "gush" at this wonderful example of pure apostolic witness... I am sure Elder Holland will reap the wrath of the intellectuals and apostates just as Bruce R. McConkie and Joseph Fielding Smith and others who were bold to declare the truth in an unambiguous way! I glory in what he said and the spirit with which he said it. There were other talks that brought many dialogues that have been on this board, but Elder Holland's was surely the most memorable.

[consiglieri]

To put in my two-cents's worth, I postively thrilled to hear Elder Holland's talk yesterday afternoon. (And I don't typically use the word "thrilled" in such a context, but here it seems appropriate, if inevitably corny.)

This is what apostles are supposed to sound like.

I told my wife it was a shame his talk was in the last session, because it could have imbued the rest of the conference with much needed enthusiasm and passion.

I have not heard a testimony in general conference that moved me to such an extent since Elder McConkie's last testimony in 1985.

And I thought his point regarding Hyrum and Joseph taking solace in their last hours from the Book of Mormon cogent and well put.

I don't know who put the burr under Elder Holland's saddle, but I would like to see it catch on!

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

[Sevenbak]

Here is the video clip:

http://www.youtube.com/user/jeraboo29#play/uploads/10/ld0_7fKGdRM

You just need to wait a second for the tape to come on. It is only part one so far but more will surely follow.

Thanks, here's it is as well as all the other talks on video at ksl.com

http://www.ksl.com/index.php?nid=296&sid=8160431#

[William Schryver]

I have not mischaracterized Roberts.

My AP English teacher used to say that discerning an author's tone was the hardest thing for her to teach. She once had the class read A Modest Proposal by Jonathan Swift and everybody thought it was a serious essay about eating babies. It is Roberts' tone that, for me, provides the strongest evidence that he became convinced that VotH provided structual material for the BoM. I'm sure you noted his numerous exclamation points, which he used to drive home the absurdity of apologetic positions.

If I can find the time, I would like to have a more in-depth conversation with you regarding Roberts' work in another thread.

I am not persuaded that B. H. Roberts believed what you attribute to him. But I am persuaded that, if he did, he wasn't as smart as a lot of people have tried to make him out to be. The notion that View of the Hebrews was used in the fabrication of a fictional Book of Mormon text is, in my judgment, patently ridiculous. If it had any merit at all, it would continue to form an important weapon in the anti-Mormon arsenal. The fact that it doesn't is a measure of its relative weakness.

I do agree with the essential logic behind one of the statements to which Elder Holland referred: when it comes to the suggestion that the Book of Mormon is a fiction of 19th century origin, a wicked man couldn't have done it, and a righteous man wouldn't have. I have become convinced that only people who have driven the Spirit of God from themselves (or who are, at least, well into the process) can get to the point of seeing fraudulence in the Book of Mormon.

[robuchan]

I have become convinced that only people who have driven the Spirit of God from themselves (or who are, at least, well into the process) can get to the point of seeing fraudulence in the Book of Mormon.

I hope you can see how ugly this sounds.

[notHagoth7]

Last night, President Monson didn't seem to have a high opinion of any type of anger.

I won't do you the disservice of reconciling the two perceptions for you - as it might be more beneficial for you to do so on your own.

[Matthew J. Tandy]

I hope you can see how ugly this sounds.

More ugly than saying that Joseph Smith was a pious fraud who willingly led thousands upon thousands to their death in order to satisfy a lie for his own ego or spiritual drive? That he would, when death is at the door, allow his brother and closest friends to be murdered by the darkest of men so that Joseph wouldn't have to admit he or Sidney wrote a book not of God? I mean, that doesn't sound ugly at all Rob.

[ttribe]

There's a lot of misdirection in the FAIRwiki on this subject. For example, the quote in reference 1 applies only to his preliminary study, which he presented to the church leadership and not to his later studies, which were far more exhaustive and damaging and which he kept to himself for completely understandable reasons.

Have you actually read Roberts' essays or just what FAIR says about them?

Please, by all means, address the misdirections you assert in there. I'd like to hear what your argument is on the subject.

[ttribe]

"pious fraud" is a misnomer. JS is either who he says he is, or the central figure in one of the world's greatest conspiracies.

Agreed.

[robuchan]

More ugly than saying that Joseph Smith was a pious fraud who willingly led thousands upon thousands to their death in order to satisfy a lie for his own ego or spiritual drive? That he would, when death is at the door, allow his brother and closest friends to be murdered by the darkest of men so that Joseph wouldn't have to admit he or Sidney wrote a book not of God? I mean, that doesn't sound ugly at all Rob.

It's a lot more complicated than that, isn't it?

1. Who are the thousands upon thousands?

2. A lot of men have sacrificed a lot over history for what they thought was a cause willing to die for. I don't discount that Joseph believed he was following God's will.

3. I don't think it's a clean assumption to say it was a simple choice for Joseph at the end: tell people the BOM was faked or he and Hyrum die. A lot more to the story than that.