Bom: Do We Really Need It?

[Stone holm]

I think it is also very important not to make a generalised evaluation due to the highly varied level of interaction with materials and experiences that would affect his writing and speaking ability. Even ordinary people's ability to write can change dramatically with some higher education. Later in his life, he seems to have put significant time and effort into increasing his knowledge in relevant areas, so while I would expect an ongoing development as he became more and more involved in speaking and writing, I would not be surprised to see a dramatic improvement when he brought in some professionals to teach.

He also seemed intent on self improvement so again over the years would develop greater verbal skills.

I would be very interested in any longitudinal studies of his writings to pinpoint changes if any and at what level and significance. Anyone aware of anything like this?

 

Bushman discusses this a little in Rough Stone Rolling, notes the change in the format of the revelations from Moses style first person announcements to more modern memo type revelations like we tend to get today.

[why me]

Actually, the fact that I've read his letters (and sermons) prompted my reply.  I watched the video to the part where the woman says* she was impressed by Joseph Smith and his "loftiness of language, his vocabulary his understanding and his imagery."  It sounds more like the Emma Smith interview, above, is a fabrication because it certainly doesn't jibe with the written record.

 

*just after the 5 minute mark

I think that people can have a wonderful vocabulary, lofty language and yet, not put together a clear sentence with a great many mistakes in punctuation etc. Emma who was more educated than Joseph and certainly wrote better than he did would have a perfect right to make such a judgment about joseph's sentence structure. I have always found it amazing just how people can judge emma for her comments or remarks, implying that she was a liar.

Edited January 17, 2014 by why me

[Calm]

Bushman discusses this a little in Rough Stone Rolling, notes the change in the format of the revelations from Moses style first person announcements to more modern memo type revelations like we tend to get today.

Thanks for the info....now I just have to remember who I lent my book to.

[why me]

You do realize that just because Joseph couldn't write or dictate a coherent letter when he translated the Book of Mormon doesn't mean he didn't improve his abilities. He wasn't much of a public speaker at first either. Sydney Rigdon was called to be his spokesman. Over time he developed his own voice.

 

He also educated himself to be quite good with languages later in his life.

People who deny his calling as prophet would have a difficult time seeing progression in his abilities to match his calling. Certainly, joseph the farmboy and joseph the treasure seeker did not exactly match joseph the prophet, the builder of cities, candidate for president,  founder of a church, organizer of immigrants,and a wonderful speaker.

Edited January 17, 2014 by why me

[Gervin]

I think that people can have a wonderful vocabulary, lofty language and yet, not put together a clear sentence with a great many mistakes in punctuation etc.

 

Right.  Wonderful vocabulary, lofty language, and great imagery with poor punctuation can = incoherence. 

 

Then, there's this:

"During our evening conversations, Joseph would occasionally give us some of the most amusing recitals that could be imagined. He would describe the ancient inhabitants of this continent, their dress, mode of travelings, and the animals upon which they rode; their cities, their buildings, with every particular; their mode of warfare; and also their religious worship. This he would do with as much ease, seemingly, as if he had spent his whole life among them."

I wonder why Lucy Mack Smith didn't mention the fact that he couldn't put a coherent sentence together?

 

[Duncan]

Right.  Wonderful vocabulary, lofty language, and great imagery with poor punctuation can = incoherence. 

 

Then, there's this:

"During our evening conversations, Joseph would occasionally give us some of the most amusing recitals that could be imagined. He would describe the ancient inhabitants of this continent, their dress, mode of travelings, and the animals upon which they rode; their cities, their buildings, with every particular; their mode of warfare; and also their religious worship. This he would do with as much ease, seemingly, as if he had spent his whole life among them."

I wonder why Lucy Mack Smith didn't mention the fact that he couldn't put a coherent sentence together?

 

 

children can tell you all kinds of stories but they couldn't write it out on paper, I suspect Joseph like many other people of his day and age were the same

[why me]

Right.  Wonderful vocabulary, lofty language, and great imagery with poor punctuation can = incoherence. 

 

Then, there's this:

"During our evening conversations, Joseph would occasionally give us some of the most amusing recitals that could be imagined. He would describe the ancient inhabitants of this continent, their dress, mode of travelings, and the animals upon which they rode; their cities, their buildings, with every particular; their mode of warfare; and also their religious worship. This he would do with as much ease, seemingly, as if he had spent his whole life among them."

I wonder why Lucy Mack Smith didn't mention the fact that he couldn't put a coherent sentence together?

I think that we need to remember that this was written long after her sons were murdered. It is not uncommon for a mother to remember her son with such favorable words. However, the only problem is whether or not it is true and not a little overblown. Lucy was in pain for the death of her sons for quite awhile. Memory can certainly play tricks on the mind.

 

When it comes to lucy, I wouldn't be surprised if she is remembering boy Joseph a little too extreme in intelligence.

Edited January 17, 2014 by why me

[mfbukowski]

Yes this is how I received the message of the Gospel  in the first place. I had an overpowering witness as I read Matthew that Jesus Christ died for me and He had the power to resurrect me. It would be 2 more years for me to get the same witness for the BoM and the Church.

 

I  totally agree it is the only way to Know the Gospel is true. Studying history and geography is fun but it can't give the witness, but I suppose you could get a witness of the Spirit that the Gospel of Jesus Christ is true while studying history or geography.

Agree.

 

Incidentally Neal Maxwell was the first to say that a lot of people want to serve God, but only in an advisory capacity.

Edited January 17, 2014 by mfbukowski

[mfbukowski]

Agree.

 

Incidentally Neal Maxwell was the first to say that a lot of people want to serve God, but only in an advisory capacity.

I lied.

 

 

Willing to submit, easy to be entreated, and faith. The saintly attributes of spiritual submissiveness, being easy to be entreated, and having faith are perhaps more closely tied together than we realize. One of the best ways to show the Lord we are submissive to Him is by following the counsel of his mouthpieces. President Marion G. Romney made the wry observation that there are too many of us in the Church who are willing to serve the Lord, “but only in an advisory capacity.”² Years ago, I read a story about President Romney that made a deep impression on me. There is a political background to this story, but the story is not about political parties. It’s about a principle President Romney’s decision illustrates.

 

http://www2.byui.edu/Presentations/Transcripts/Devotionals/2011_11_08_Maxwell.htm

The footnote says that Elder Maxwell quoted President Romney.  I first saw the quote in something else Elder Maxwell wrote- I think it must have been one of his favorite quotes

[Kenngo1969]

I lied. . . .

 

Well, I don't know about anyone else, but you've completely and permanently lost all credibility with me!

 

[Avatar4321]

I lied.

 

http://www2.byui.edu/Presentations/Transcripts/Devotionals/2011_11_08_Maxwell.htm

The footnote says that Elder Maxwell quoted President Romney.  I first saw the quote in something else Elder Maxwell wrote- I think it must have been one of his favorite quotes

 

it's true even if you made a mistake with the quote

[cdowis]

 

I have always found it amazing just how people can judge emma for her comments or remarks, implying that she was a liar.

 

Well, she had lost some credibility over her adamant denials regarding Joseph Smith's multiple wives.  But she had compelling reasons to do that.

[Stone holm]

Well, she had lost some credibility over her adamant denials regarding Joseph Smith's multiple wives.  But she had compelling reasons to do that.

 

It seems like Emma lost a lot of credibility in the Church for a lot of reasons, and that her standing or star didn't start to rise again in refurbished form until the Church wanted to become the champion of traditional marriage and display to the world what a wonderful couple the two made in their very traditional loving marriage.  So we could make romantic bronze statues of them with women who faithfully devoted their lives and talents to the Church and who were also married to Joseph, like Eliza Snow, conveniently disappearing from the scene.  Its amazing how as Emma's star has risen, Eliza's has seemingly set.  Emma who raised all of her children to be join splinter groups is now extolled.  I can understand and sympathize with Emma's predicament, but it seems like she is perhaps just a bit over extolled these days -- when we set mothers on major guilt trips when none of their sons go on missions and their children go inactive -- and yet how many faithful women in the Church raise kids who join Churches which for decades attacked the Church?

[mfbukowski]

 

Well, I don't know about anyone else, but you've completely and permanently lost all credibility with me!

 

To lose it, I had to have some to begin with!  No problem there! 

[JLHPROF]

It seems like Emma lost a lot of credibility in the Church for a lot of reasons, and that her standing or star didn't start to rise again in refurbished form until the Church wanted to become the champion of traditional marriage and display to the world what a wonderful couple the two made in their very traditional loving marriage.  So we could make romantic bronze statues of them with women who faithfully devoted their lives and talents to the Church and who were also married to Joseph, like Eliza Snow, conveniently disappearing from the scene.  Its amazing how as Emma's star has risen, Eliza's has seemingly set.  Emma who raised all of her children to be join splinter groups is now extolled.  I can understand and sympathize with Emma's predicament, but it seems like she is perhaps just a bit over extolled these days -- when we set mothers on major guilt trips when none of their sons go on missions and their children go inactive -- and yet how many faithful women in the Church raise kids who join Churches which for decades attacked the Church?

 

I second this sentiment.  It seems like there is a definite push to reestablish Emma as the singular true love and very traditional wife of the prophet Joseph.  It borders on insult to Joseph's other wives who sacrificed so much for the gospel, such as Eliza and Zina.  There is a lot of emphasis on Emma's position as the first Relief Society president as well,  forgetting that the second Relief Society president and the third Relief Society presidents were also Joseph Smith's wives.

I for one would love to see more movies and books devoted to these other amazing women, but there are few available.

Edited January 22, 2014 by JLHPROF

[cdowis]

del

Edited January 22, 2014 by cdowis

[Stone holm]

I second this sentiment.  It seems like there is a definite push to reestablish Emma as the singular true love and very traditional wife of the prophet Joseph.  It borders on insult to Joseph's other wives who sacrificed so much for the gospel, such as Eliza and Zina.  There is a lot of emphasis on Emma's position as the first Relief Society president as well,  forgetting that the second Relief Society president and the third Relief Society presidents were also Joseph Smith's wives.

I for one would love to see more movies and books devoted to these other amazing women, but there are few available.

It seems like this has been developing over the last 50 years as part of the image making rebranding of the Church. We have plenty of Prophets before the restoration who apparently had children go astray and hints at problematic marriages. Do we really have to do this? Nobody put a gun to Emma's head to make her hook up with the RLDS. Yes, Brigham could be abrasive, but I suspect there would have been a lot of members who would have taken her and her family under their wing in the trek West. I can understand and be sympathetic, but do not understand why she is being extolled. I am sure she will or has been forgiven, but it think its time to ease off with the extolling.

[cdowis]

I have created another thread on the question of Emma, rather than derailing this thread.

[Tacenda]

Grasping for straws here, since I cannot post opening topics, sorry if it's not related.    

 

http://io9.com/here-are-the-most-and-least-bible-minded-cities-in-am-1509201444

 

In this poll, Salt Lake City, Utah ranked 87 out of a 100 cities on how often they read the bible. 

 

Interesting that Utah was placed so low or high at not reading their bible.  But I would have to agree.  Most LDS read BoM, from what I've seen, even if it's the year for either the OT or NT in the bible.  Even our lessons this year...I'm still in the classroom in Primary and this past week, the kids looked up primarily scriptures in the BoM, Pearl of Great Price etc.  I don't recall any from the OT!!!!  Just weird to me.  But it's the beginning of the year.  Hopefully I'll see more scriptures out of the OT.  But sometimes I see an aversion to the OT, hard for people to want to read it, myself included. But I'm sure there is a lot of good stuff in it.    

[Calm]

Grasping for straws here, since I cannot post opening topics, sorry if it's not related.    

 

http://io9.com/here-are-the-most-and-least-bible-minded-cities-in-am-1509201444

 

In this poll, Salt Lake City, Utah ranked 87 out of a 100 cities on how often they read the bible. 

 

Interesting that Utah was placed so low or high at not reading their bible.  But I would have to agree.  Most LDS read BoM, from what I've seen, even if it's the year for either the OT or NT in the bible.  Even our lessons this year...I'm still in the classroom in Primary and this past week, the kids looked up primarily scriptures in the BoM, Pearl of Great Price etc.  I don't recall any from the OT!!!!  Just weird to me.  But it's the beginning of the year.  Hopefully I'll see more scriptures out of the OT.  But sometimes I see an aversion to the OT, hard for people to want to read it, myself included. But I'm sure there is a lot of good stuff in it.    

You cannot use SLC as equivalent to LDS.  SLC has the lowest density of LDS in the state…34-41% LDS.

 

According to a Pew report, LDS were the highest religious group who knew the Bible.

 

http://www.mormonnewsroom.org/article/mormons-knowledge-of-bible-christianity-evident-in-national-u.s.-pew-study

 

On the full battery of seven questions about the Bible (five Old Testament and two New Testament items) Mormons do best, followed by white evangelical Protestants

 

There is another Barna report in 2001 on actually reading the Bible…we scored very high there as well.

Edited January 28, 2014 by calmoriah

[BlueDreams]

Grasping for straws here, since I cannot post opening topics, sorry if it's not related.    

 

http://io9.com/here-are-the-most-and-least-bible-minded-cities-in-am-1509201444

 

In this poll, Salt Lake City, Utah ranked 87 out of a 100 cities on how often they read the bible. 

 

Interesting that Utah was placed so low or high at not reading their bible.  But I would have to agree.  Most LDS read BoM, from what I've seen, even if it's the year for either the OT or NT in the bible.  Even our lessons this year...I'm still in the classroom in Primary and this past week, the kids looked up primarily scriptures in the BoM, Pearl of Great Price etc.  I don't recall any from the OT!!!!  Just weird to me.  But it's the beginning of the year.  Hopefully I'll see more scriptures out of the OT.  But sometimes I see an aversion to the OT, hard for people to want to read it, myself included. But I'm sure there is a lot of good stuff in it.    

 

Cal's covered the stats. But here's some anectdotal. I discussed, Deborah, Jael, and Huldah from the OT in RS this last weekend. No one seemed to have some massive aversion to them (well maybe Jael....go look her up and you'll see why ). And I personally mostly topic study. So I'm likely to crack open the bible as well as the BoM at any given night. 

 

With luv,

BD

[Mystery Meat]

We NEEEEEEED the BOM. Scientists can say their is no evidence of its authenticity. No big deal. If it scares some investigators away, so be it. If the BOM is not what it claims to be Joseph Smith is a fraud. Plain and simple. Those of the House of Israel (those the Missionaries and Members of the Church are trying to find) will join the Church because of the BOM, not in spite of it. And those who join the Church in spite of it, will eventually have to come to terms with the fact that if it is not what it claims to be Joseph was nothing more then a liar and deceiver. 

 

Why in the blazes are we trying to be like everyone else? That would be the dumbest thing we could do. If the Lord wanted us to not use it he would have told the appropriate people by now. As it is, the BOM is Another Testament of Jesus Christ. That is its purpose. The eternal law of witnesses (in the mouth of two or three...) is crucial.

 

This question boggles my mind. I have seen no good reason for trying to get rid of it. All I hear is people who are embarrassed of it and want to the Church to distance itself from it. The BOM has something to say about people who are ashamed of the Church (Lehi's vision). I am not ashamed to say that I believe in the BOM. It has changed my life and has had real effect. I have had my most powerful scripture study experiences with the BOM, one as recently as this past weekend.

 

Boggles the mind. If we have to hide truth to attract new members, I say pass.  

[Garden Girl]

Grasping for straws here, since I cannot post opening topics, sorry if it's not related.    

 

http://io9.com/here-are-the-most-and-least-bible-minded-cities-in-am-1509201444

 

In this poll, Salt Lake City, Utah ranked 87 out of a 100 cities on how often they read the bible. 

 

Interesting that Utah was placed so low or high at not reading their bible.  But I would have to agree.  Most LDS read BoM, from what I've seen, even if it's the year for either the OT or NT in the bible.  Even our lessons this year...I'm still in the classroom in Primary and this past week, the kids looked up primarily scriptures in the BoM, Pearl of Great Price etc.  I don't recall any from the OT!!!!  Just weird to me.  But it's the beginning of the year.  Hopefully I'll see more scriptures out of the OT.  But sometimes I see an aversion to the OT, hard for people to want to read it, myself included. But I'm sure there is a lot of good stuff in it.    

 

Hello Tacenda...

There is no aversion to the OT...  In fact, when I read this post of yours I got out our lesson guide booklet to see what scriptures were to be used in upcoming Gospel Doctrine classes... Starting week after next our lessons will be based on:

Moses 8:19-30; Genesis 6 - 9, 11:1-9 (Noah... Preparing an Ark...)

Abraham 1:1-4; 2:1-11; Genesis 12:1-8; 17:1-9... (The Abrahamic Covenant)

Then... through the end of the class schedule (Lessons  10 - 48) it is ALL from the Old Testament and uses ONLY the Old Testament as a source of teaching...

 

I think that your "hope" of seeing more scriptures out of the OT will be more than realized.  I suggest you get yourself a lesson schedule for this year's classes and use it as a guide for study... Maybe you'll learn something... 

Your Gospel Doctrine teacher should pass them out in class... they are available from the Ward Library (each year we order the study booklets from the Distribution Center so each member can have a copy and follow the outline of study...)

 

GG

Edited January 29, 2014 by Garden Girl

[Tacenda]

GG, this was in Primary. I'm sure the lesson probably had some OT in it but I just remember POGP and BOM references. I didn't teach btw. I just help with a special needs boy. It should be interesting, it's been awhile since I've studied the OT in Primary. I'll keep you posted.

[Calm]

The primary manual in teaching the story uses the source that has the details. In many cases up to the Flood and some of Abraham's story, this will be the PoGP. However when Genesis has more info it uses that, such as in the Cain and Abel story iirc. As soon as it moves past where there are gaps in the story with info elsewhere, this changes somewhere around lesson 10. Primary spends more time in Genesis, I believe, so would have more lessons using the PoGP.

Tac, do you think given the additional revelation they should still leave out the information because it is not in the OT or provide the most complete picture of God's interaction with men for that time period since God has seen fit to provide revelation on it? Don't you think if God gave us revelation, that means he wants us to teach it?

Edited January 29, 2014 by calmoriah