Saints, Vol 1 available now for free on Kindle

[Rivers]

Maybe he should have just let the angel slay him rather than practice polygamy.🙂

[Rivers]

I just finished reading Saints Vol. 1  I am surprised how much I enjoyed it.   I loved the story-telling format.  I appreciate the empathy it shows towards many of those who apostatized and turned against Joseph.  I also empathize with the Church in not being more transparent with with a lot of things in here.  There’s some ugly things in church history as we are all aware.  Now I am curious to know how the general church membership will respond to this book.  I’m sure it will ignite more crises of faith in some people.

 

[Calm]

Volume 2 is getting put online:

https://newsroom.churchofjesuschrist.org/article/saints-volume-two-chapter-one

[Scott Lloyd]

On 9/17/2018 at 2:48 PM, clarkgoble said:

People who shop at Deseret Book are looking for motivational books or coffee table books and gifts. It's not really where you go for meat period. I'm actually impressed they're still in business given the huge pressure Amazon must be putting on them. So I'm not going to complain about their stocking choices. Most any academic book isn't at Deseret Books and that's been true since Amazon got going. I think they realized the sorts of people apt to desire such books aren't going to go into Deseret Books for them.

 

 

(Bold emphasis above mine for reference.)

Sorry, pet peeve here. The proper name is Deseret Book (short for Deseret Book Company), not "Deseret Books".

You did get it right the first time, though.

[Tacenda]

On 9/3/2018 at 8:21 PM, Scott Lloyd said:

I venture a guess that when you have been told this it was in the context of Sabbath day worship services or classes, where the priority is to build faith or motivate to righteousness.

The Church, in fact, has a proud history of recording, preserving and disseminating its history. The two multi-volume works by B. H. Roberts attest to that (History of the Church and A Comprehensive History of the Church). In the early days of the Church, the Lord decreed that "there shall be a record kept among you" (Doctrine and Covenants 21:1).

More than a century ago, the Church Historian's Office was established, a forerunner to today's Church History Department, which is second to none in its professionalism and historiography, having brought forth such products as the Joseph Smith Papers.

All of the accounts are readily accessible today, including in the Church History Museum in Salt Lake City.

I'd call it foolish to assert without substantiation that the publisher is not attempting to give an accurate account. As for "unbiased history," do you know of an unbiased history of anything? Every author has a bias. It is naive to think otherwise.

To the bold, I guess we can thank Larry H. Miller for donating a large portion of funding for the project. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Joseph_Smith_Papers_(TV_series)

The history of the Joseph Smith Papers Project began with the work of Dean C. Jessee. Jessee, along with LDS Historian Leonard J. Arrington, wanted to collect and publish all the known works of Joseph Smith, so they could be more easily accessed by scholars and the public. His first attempts at the project were The Personal Writings of Joseph Smith, in 1984, and the two volume Papers of Joseph Smith, the first in 1989 and the second in 1992.^[2] In 2001, Jessee's project became a joint venture between Brigham Young Universityand the LDS Church Archives, and was named the Joseph Smith Papers Project. A large amount of funding for the project was donated by Larry H. and Gail Miller the owners of KJZZ-TV, the station which would later air the television series. The project was then moved from BYU to the LDS Church Archives in Salt Lake City, Utah.^[2]

[Tacenda]

On 9/3/2018 at 9:20 PM, rockpond said:

That’s not at all contrary to what I wrote. 

I have no dog in this argument, haven't read 'Saints'. But wondered if what you mean is they are starting out with the milk and slowly going to the meat in the second addition, excuse my simile usage. 

[Tacenda]

On 9/3/2018 at 10:12 PM, rockpond said:

 

Historical elements like the seer stone in a hat and Joseph marrying women without Emma’s knowledge are included. 

Others, like treasure digging, Fanny Alger’s age, and controversial parts of King Follet are left out. 

I wonder if participants here would be interested in doing a book club of sorts?  We read one chapter (“Part”) per week and discuss in a dedicated thread (encouraging anyone who comments to have read the material first). 

I would love this! ETA: Shoot, just saw this post was in 2018! And I wasted 3 posts! 😡

Edited June 21, 2019 by Tacenda

[Scott Lloyd]

5 hours ago, Tacenda said:

To the bold, I guess we can thank Larry H. Miller for donating a large portion of funding for the project. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Joseph_Smith_Papers_(TV_series)

The history of the Joseph Smith Papers Project began with the work of Dean C. Jessee. Jessee, along with LDS Historian Leonard J. Arrington, wanted to collect and publish all the known works of Joseph Smith, so they could be more easily accessed by scholars and the public. His first attempts at the project were The Personal Writings of Joseph Smith, in 1984, and the two volume Papers of Joseph Smith, the first in 1989 and the second in 1992.^[2] In 2001, Jessee's project became a joint venture between Brigham Young Universityand the LDS Church Archives, and was named the Joseph Smith Papers Project. A large amount of funding for the project was donated by Larry H. and Gail Miller the owners of KJZZ-TV, the station which would later air the television series. The project was then moved from BYU to the LDS Church Archives in Salt Lake City, Utah.^[2]

The Joseph Smith Papers Project is a product of the talents and labors of many good men and women, including the Church leaders who approved and supported it. But it’s well known that Larry and Gail Miller provided the bulk of the funding for it. When Larry died, his obit said that of all the philanthropic endeavors he was involved in, the Joseph Smith Papers was the nearest to his heart. 

Edited June 21, 2019 by Scott Lloyd

[Scott Lloyd]

On 9/4/2018 at 12:43 AM, rockpond said:

Okay, let’s try this, just as a hypothetical:

Joseph Smith was a liar and a philanderer.  Footnote: http://www.josephsmithpapers.org/

Is that balanced?  Accurate?  Transparent?

Of course not. But it is not a fair or accurate parallel to what is done with the footnotes in the “Saints” history, which is to link to specific and relevant passages, not to a large and general “archive,” as you have falsely implied here.

This is, in fact, an absurd, disingenuous and contrived analogy. 

Edited June 21, 2019 by Scott Lloyd

[Tacenda]

Curious to know if in the "Saints" book they had that JS went to the Lord asking if he should restore polygamy before the angel with the drawn sword visited commanding it, which is a real problem for me. Or did they even mention the angel with the drawn sword?

Edited June 21, 2019 by Tacenda

[Danzo]

1 hour ago, Tacenda said:

Curious to know if in the "Saints" book they had that JS went to the Lord asking if he should restore polygamy before the angel with the drawn sword visited commanding it, which is a real problem for me. Or did they even mention the angel with the drawn sword?

You could read the book, you know.  

Its on kindle for free. 

 

[Tacenda]

I don't know if it's been mentioned, but my friend who is a believer, mentioned that in the Saints, Vol 1 book, it only mentions 3 or 4 of JS's wives. Why does the author/authors, still not come out with the truth? Why leave those other women out, don't they count? Didn't they sacrifice enough? Is the church ashamed of them? Ashamed of JS? 

[clarkgoble]

58 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

I don't know if it's been mentioned, but my friend who is a believer, mentioned that in the Saints, Vol 1 book, it only mentions 3 or 4 of JS's wives. Why does the author/authors, still not come out with the truth? Why leave those other women out, don't they count? Didn't they sacrifice enough? Is the church ashamed of them? Ashamed of JS? 

The goal was to make it readable to casual readers (i.e. most members) which means a certain focusing only on major points. Those interested can thereafter go to more detailed histories if they are interested. So not all the wives get mentioned. If you've read Compton's book that is a biography of each of the wives you'll know that for most of them there's not a lot we know. The book isn't a biography of Joseph or his wives but a brief overview of an important span of Church history. I don't think even Rough Stone Rolling lists all the wives. (Not where I can check to see - it's possible he lists them in a footnote or appendix.)

[Tacenda]

20 hours ago, clarkgoble said:

The goal was to make it readable to casual readers (i.e. most members) which means a certain focusing only on major points. Those interested can thereafter go to more detailed histories if they are interested. So not all the wives get mentioned. If you've read Compton's book that is a biography of each of the wives you'll know that for most of them there's not a lot we know. The book isn't a biography of Joseph or his wives but a brief overview of an important span of Church history. I don't think even Rough Stone Rolling lists all the wives. (Not where I can check to see - it's possible he lists them in a footnote or appendix.)

It could have said how many wives JS had and a footnote with the link to a list. 

[Scott Lloyd]

44 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

It could have said how many wives JS had and a footnote with the link to a list. 

Have you read the book or at least the content about plural marriage? It links to the Church’s “Gospel Topics” essays on plural marriage, which contain a lot of information about the practice thereof by Joseph Smith and others. 

[JulieM]

1 hour ago, Tacenda said:

It could have said how many wives JS had and a footnote with the link to a list. 

Well, baby steps right?  I agree they could be completely honest or forthcoming but there’re still being honest.

Which 3 or 4 did they name? (I haven’t read the book).  If I were to guess, I’d say that Eliza R. Snow and Zina Huntington are two of them.  How about naming his first plural wife (Fanny)?

[clarkgoble]

10 minutes ago, JulieM said:

Well, baby steps right?  I agree they could be completely honest or forthcoming but there’re still being honest.

Which 3 or 4 did they name? (I haven’t read the book).  If I were to guess, I’d say that Eliza R. Snow and Zina Huntington are two of them.  How about naming his first plural wife (Fanny)?

They do name Fanny although they don't give her age.

"During the years Joseph lived in Kirtland, a young woman named Fanny Alger worked in the Smith home. Joseph knew her family well and trusted them. Her parents were faithful Saints who had joined the church in its first year. Her uncle, Levi Hancock, had marched in the Camp of Israel.

Following the Lord’s command, Joseph proposed marriage to Fanny with the help of Levi and the approval of her parents. Fanny accepted Joseph’s teachings and his proposal, and her uncle performed the ceremony.

Since the time had not come to teach plural marriage in the church, Joseph and Fanny kept their marriage private, as the angel had instructed. But rumors spread among some people in Kirtland. By the fall of 1836, Fanny had moved away."

 

I don't know all the ones they name. There's no longer an easy way to search just the book at lds.org anymore. (Man I hate the new search system)

Edited August 9, 2019 by clarkgoble

[Tacenda]

1 minute ago, clarkgoble said:

They do name Fanny although they don't give her age.

"During the years Joseph lived in Kirtland, a young woman named Fanny Alger worked in the Smith home. Joseph knew her family well and trusted them. Her parents were faithful Saints who had joined the church in its first year. Her uncle, Levi Hancock, had marched in the Camp of Israel.

Following the Lord’s command, Joseph proposed marriage to Fanny with the help of Levi and the approval of her parents. Fanny accepted Joseph’s teachings and his proposal, and her uncle performed the ceremony.

Since the time had not come to teach plural marriage in the church, Joseph and Fanny kept their marriage private, as the angel had instructed. But rumors spread among some people in Kirtland. By the fall of 1836, Fanny had moved away."

Thanks for the quotes!

10 minutes ago, JulieM said:

Well, baby steps right?  I agree they could be completely honest or forthcoming but there’re still being honest.

Which 3 or 4 did they name? (I haven’t read the book).  If I were to guess, I’d say that Eliza R. Snow and Zina Huntington are two of them.  How about naming his first plural wife (Fanny)?

Baby steps... 

1 hour ago, Scott Lloyd said:

Have you read the book or at least the content about plural marriage? It links to the Church’s “Gospel Topics” essays on plural marriage, which contain a lot of information about the practice thereof by Joseph Smith and others. 

I haven't read it. 

[clarkgoble]

11 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

Thanks for the quotes!

I found the book on Google Books and you can search there although it is missing pages. (That's their typical practice) . Just listing a few of the wives names it seems that Louisa Beaman's marriage is discussed in some depth as are a few others I wouldn't have expected. I picked up the Kindle version just so I could search it. For reading you can use the Gospel Library but again its search features are a bit problematic. (IMO) Although still better than the current lds.org. When I get a moment I'll search some of the other names. Overall I think it does a better job than most assume.

Edited August 9, 2019 by clarkgoble

[Tacenda]

1 hour ago, clarkgoble said:

I found the book on Google Books and you can search there although it is missing pages. (That's their typical practice) . Just listing a few of the wives names it seems that Louisa Beaman's marriage is discussed in some depth as are a few others I wouldn't have expected. I picked up the Kindle version just so I could search it. For reading you can use the Gospel Library but again its search features are a bit problematic. (IMO) Although still better than the current lds.org. When I get a moment I'll search some of the other names. Overall I think it does a better job than most assume.

I'm horribly bad at reading lately, my eyesight...my Kindle won't enlarge or I don't know how to. Also, I have a poor attention span depending on the material. I do have the book on my Kindle, but can't bring myself to read it because I feel like I already know the history, but I'm sure I'll see things I never knew I didn't know, haha. ETA: I do have reading glasses, so I'll chalk it up to laziness now.

Edited August 9, 2019 by Tacenda