Tällä saralla he näyttävät olevan todellisia "eksperttejä". Sanovat itsekin uskovansa historian kirjoituksen esille tuomiin faktoihin, mutta asenne "hieman" muuttuu, kun siirrytään heidän omaan historiaansa.
Kun esimerkiksi on kahdeksantoista (luku likiarvo, ja tämä esimerkki) toisistaan riippumatonta lähdettä, joiden voidaan todistaa olevan oikeita, luotettavia, ja että ne eivät perustu mihinkään mormoni-vihaan, ja nämä lähteet todistavat, että Oliver Cowdery ja Sidnon Rigney olivat Joseph Smithin tuttuja monia vuosia ennen 1820-luvun loppua ja vuotta 1830, mutta Joseph Smith väittää kivenkovaan tavanneensa heidät vasta jälkimmäisenä ajankohtana, mormonit uskovat Josephia. Hohhohhoijaa.
Onko jokin toinen tällä palstalla havainnut saman?
Kun esimerkiksi on kahdeksantoista (luku likiarvo, ja tämä esimerkki) toisistaan riippumatonta lähdettä, joiden voidaan todistaa olevan oikeita, luotettavia, ja että ne eivät perustu mihinkään mormoni-vihaan, ja nämä lähteet todistavat, että Oliver Cowdery ja Sidnon Rigney olivat Joseph Smithin tuttuja monia vuosia ennen 1820-luvun loppua ja vuotta 1830, mutta Joseph Smith väittää kivenkovaan tavanneensa heidät vasta jälkimmäisenä ajankohtana, mormonit uskovat Josephia. Hohhohhoijaa.
Onko jokin toinen tällä palstalla havainnut saman?
Vastaukset 9
Vanhimmat
'Tällä saralla he näyttävät olevan todellisia "eksperttejä".'
En väitä olevani mikään expertti, mutta jos joku kuvittelee että voi noin vaan tulla laukoa jotakin, niin voinee yllättyä (;-)
"Sanovat itsekin uskovansa historian kirjoituksen esille tuomiin faktoihin,..."
Fakta on faktaa...
'mutta asenne "hieman" muuttuu, kun siirrytään heidän omaan historiaansa.'
Ei muutu. Ellei sitten puhuta siitä että miten jokin fakta tulkitaan....
'Kun esimerkiksi on kahdeksantoista (luku likiarvo, ja tämä esimerkki) toisistaan riippumatonta lähdettä,...."
Ei ole minulle ongelma.
"... joiden voidaan todistaa olevan oikeita, luotettavia, ja että ne eivät perustu mihinkään mormoni-vihaan, ja nämä lähteet todistavat, että Oliver Cowdery ja Sidnon Rigney olivat Joseph Smithin tuttuja monia vuosia ennen 1820-luvun loppua ja vuotta 1830, mutta Joseph Smith väittää kivenkovaan tavanneensa heidät vasta jälkimmäisenä ajankohtana, mormonit uskovat Josephia."
Olenko sanonut noin?
"Hohhohhoijaa."
Hohhoijaa tosiaankin... Mikä on tuon tiedon merkitys? NOh.. Tilasin sen kirjan.. luen sen sieltä sitten ja palataan aiheeseen sitten.
Tosin tiedän jo mitä tulee tapahtumaan.
Kirjoitan mitä tahansa ... Niin vastauksena on "seli, seli"....
"Onko jokin toinen tällä palstalla havainnut saman?"
Aika inhimillistä toimintaa... ei rajoitu pelkästään mormoneihin edes tällä palstalla.
Esimerkki:
Subject: LDS Church secretly censoring historical documents before release..
Date: Jul 24 10:29
Author: Deconstructor
I've just received a tip from a close friend that his parents have a new assignment as missionaries.
Their new job for the church? They are sifting through the church's historical archives, along with many others, to select documents to be added to the new history archive building being built now in downtown SLC.
The church has instructed all of the workers to read through the documents and remove those that are not faith promoting.
I would like to confirm this information. Does anyone else knows someone working on this project for the church. Apparently they are mostly senior missionary couples reassigned to help with the task.
Subject: No big surprise if it's true.
Date: Jul 24 10:36
Author: Stray Mutt
It fits perfectly with the Packer-Oaks doctrine of faith-promoting history. Some things that are true are not useful.
Subject: Re: LDS Church secretly censoring historical documents before release..
Date: Jul 24 10:53
Author: anon
Why don't you write and ask and see what kind of a response you get?
Subject: It is very true!! LINK
Date: Jul 24 12:11
Author: Onslow
This article is related to what you are discussing.
http://www.sltrib.com/ci_6422939?IADID=Search-www.sltrib.com-www.sltrib.com
A particularly alarming statement in this article:
"Digitization really is going to be a liberator," says Stapley, an independent Mormon researcher in Seattle. "Entire collections have been restricted because of a single paragraph. Now the church can excise that and make the rest available."
As Always,
Onslow
Subject: Anyone recall the 70's when a new history was to be written for the 200 yr celebration?
Date: Jul 24 12:16
Author: SusieQ#1
It was scrapped because there was no consensus on how to write it - some wanted to tell the whole story, some didn't want opposing views included (although they were part of the reports at the time). I got my info second or third hand through the Institute program, so I don't know how it all played out, but that was the gist of it.
So here we are -- again putting the history into "Faith Promoting" style and sticking with the program!
I had been busy typing up syllabus's for Institute director to teach classes on the presidents of the church and I know, first hand, that they were sanitized for "Faith Promoting."
And they claim they don't sanitize the history? What liars!
Subject: yes; Arrington supervised the project, much of which was completed, before GAs killed it.
Date: Jul 24 12:37
Author: Scott Tippetts
The commemorative sesquicentennial Church History set was (I think) 17 volumes, and much of it was already written and ready for publication. Many of the church's best historians were involved. Its forthcoming release had been touted for some years in the Church News. I remember my dad (who worked in the Church Office Building at the time) was very psyched about buying it, couldn't wait for it to come out.
But then, when nearing completion, it was discovered to be too honest. If I remember correctly, release was killed by the Censorship Cadre of GAs.... Packer, Peterson, Oaks, Hinckley. After all the advance hoopla, it just suddenly disappeared off the radar screen very quietly. No one talked about it anymore. Very, very quietly.
You can read about it in Arrington's biographical 'Adventures of a Church Historian'. I don't have the page numbers handy.
Subject: Amazing what excising one paragraph can do
Date: Jul 24 14:27
Author: NormaRae
I was going through a box of old stuff the other day and came across something that was given to me a few years back. I worked with a guy who had a Master's Degree from BYU, probably graduated in the 60s or 70s. While he was there, he worked for the department that cared for the religious historical documents.
This guy has to at least pretend to be TBM for his family, but was very liberal and I could tell he was not a huge believer. One day he brought me a copy of something he had copied years ago when he did this work at BYU. It was an old book entitled "The Key to the Science of Theology," by Parley P. Pratt. They were republishing it and doing a new addition and the person he worked for had to go through and take out or rewrite sections and my friend had to make copies (of the markup). Well, he sort of accidentally made one too many copies and you know, didn't want it floating around BYU so he kept it.
It is so interesting to see how they were able to take out any reference to multiple wives and also the parts where he kept referring to the spirit as a fluid-like substance. There was one section that was totally rewritten to sound like the rest of the book. The rest of the book is still pretty 19th century wacky but they will be able to put it out there as one of those "historical" books that they're not afraid of when it's actually been changed and republished numerous times. I wonder if they will even change the typeset to make it look like it's the original manuscript.
Survey: Mormons want their history 'inspiring, but not sanitized'
By Peggy Fletcher Stack
The Salt Lake Tribune
Article Last Updated: 07/20/2007 10:48:58 AM MDT
Posted: 9:39 AM- You won't see many people in Tuesday's Pioneer Day parade dressed up as one of Brigham Young's polygamous wives or floats touting the Mormon theocrat's view on cooperative economics.
Like all such pageantry, the annual celebration tends to feature an idealized, heroic view of the Mormon pioneers' arrival in Utah on July 24, 1847, and that's the way much of the faith's history has been written, too.
Now a new survey reveals many Mormons want accounts of their history "to be inspiring, but not sanitized," says Rebecca Olpin, director of audience needs for the LDS Family and Church History Department. "They want it to be frank and honest, They are looking for the whole story, accounts of real people, and a wider scope of history than early 19th century pioneers."
It's not a trivial conclusion.
Mormons believe God commanded them to keep a record of their lives and actions beginning with the church's founding in 1830 and continuing to the present. To them, history is a kind of theology and writing it, a sacred responsibility.
That perspective long has put LDS historians and their scholarship at the center of controversy, as they tried to balance accounts of the miraculous with knowledge of human fallibility and flaws. The conflict came to a head in the late 1970s, when the late Leonard J. Arrington was the church's official historian. He assembled a crack team of scholars who together produced two single-volume histories of the church, 18 books, about 100 articles for professional periodicals and more than 250 articles for church magazines. They were at the vortex of a movement, known as the New Mormon History, that combined respect for the LDS faith tradition with academic rigor.
Unfortunately, LDS leaders were unnerved by Arrington's approach. They dismantled his team, restricted access to documents and unceremoniously "released" him from his position as church historian.
Two decades, more sophistication among members and an online revolution later, a renewed sense of balance seems to be reflected in the recent survey.
Olpin's department was looking to determine what kind of historical approach and products Mormons wanted. So they queried 2,000 LDS Church members who were engaged in genealogy online. Respondents were active in the LDS Church, interested in family history and computer savvy.
The survey revealed that Mormons get a lot of their information about church history from historical novels such as The Work and the Glory or at church-sponsored historic sites such as Palmyra, N.Y.; Nauvoo, Ill.; and Kirtland, Ohio.
They'd like to see more official histories tackle the tough topics.
"I wish there were an easily accessible and authoritative source that would separate fact from speculation on true but troubling events in [LDS] Church history," wrote one respondent.
Respondents also said they wanted to see official history expand beyond the church's first decades to include family histories from more recent converts, pioneering Mormons in other countries and varied cultural traditions. They want to understand the lives and challenges of ordinary believers, not just celebrity Saints.
And they said they wanted it all to be easily available online, which neatly coincides with the LDS historical department's goal to open its holdings to the public.
Some historians worry that Olpin's department is focusing too much on the needs of church members and might exclude professional historians, non-Mormons and critics.
When Olpin reported the survey to the Mormon History Association in May, Jonathan Stapley says "there was palpable fear that historians would lose access and not be a priority of the department."
Others worried, he says, that the church "could not be a credible source for tough historical issues when there hasn't been a good track record."
For his part, though, Stapley has had only a positive experience researching the history of women's healing practices at the LDS archives. He has a digital copy of a once-restricted collection that has been invaluable in his work.
Though minutes of church meetings, disciplinary hearings, temple discussions and some diaries will remain off-limits, historical department researchers, staff and volunteers have digitized many microfilmed documents, including many pioneer family histories, and personal journals.
"Digitization really is going to be a liberator," says Stapley, an independent Mormon researcher in Seattle. "Entire collections have been restricted because of a single paragraph. Now the church can excise that and make the rest available."
Four years ago, the church posted a searchable database of 250 pioneer companies. It included about 37,000 individuals but had no full text tied to the sources. Now, the database has 335 companies, with 43,779 individuals, and 8,590 sources of which 3,022 have full text accounts tied to them, says Christine Cox, the library's director of customer services.
Cox has seen a similar increase in the number of phone, e-mail and walk-in queries to the LDS historical library from 11, 698 questions in 2004 to 21,393 in 2006.
The church is also engaged in gathering and publishing all archival materials dealing with the life, mission, teachings and legacy of Joseph Smith, Mormonism's founding prophet. The massive project includes about 5,000 documents and involves more than three dozen researchers, writers, editors, and volunteers.
This unprecedented compilation is expected to produce 25 to 30 volumes, including journals, correspondence, discourses and written histories, as well as legal and business documents, Elder Marlin K. Jensen, church historian and recorder told The Salt Lake Tribune in 2005.
The Joseph Smith Papers Project "is the most important church history project of this generation," Jensen said at the time.
"It is a fulfillment of our mission," Olpin said, "to help God's children make and keep sacred covenants by remembering the great things of God."
-- Peggy Fletcher Stack can be reached at [email protected] or 801-257-8725. Send comments about this story to [email protected].
Ymmärrän kyllä sen että ei-niin-evankeliumin-mukaiset jutut halutaan poistaa, MUTTA (kuten olen aikaisemminkin todennut) niin minusta olisi parempi vaan julkaista kaikki sellaisenaan.
Nyt on olo sellainen että käännetään veistä vuosikausia haavassa, kun selvittäisiin yksinkertaisesti yhdellä kauniilla puukotuksella...
Kuten olen todennut totuus tekee vapaaksi (ei tee kipeää....)
Siitä tuli kymmenen pistettä ;).
papukaijamerkki ;-)
Sen haluan....
*)>
Tulee ihan lapsuus mieleen :-)
On myöskin osoitettu että Oliver olisi sekoitettu setäänsä, joten silloin Oliver ei tuntenut JS:ää ennen kuin 1920-luvun lopulla...
Ja samoja viitteitä on Rigney:stä... Eli kirja ei ole ihan objektiivinen tutkimuksissaan...
Ongelmahan on siinä että kuinka moni lukija osaa erotella tiedonmuruset itse kirjoittajien tekemistä päätelmistä? (sama pätee pro-kirjallisuuteenkin ...).