His opinion in historiography is authoritative. Bushman is a nationally esteemed historian that has more balance and intellectual capacity than any 2 two dozen pretended academics. I wish we could find ways to be more generous and understanding with one another. A lot of pain, anger, and alienation come out of these disputes. But the admission that we ourselves are subjective human beings whose rational mechanisms are not entirely trustworthy does not diminish our sense that we are right and our counterparts mistaken.Īs it is, I still come down on the side of the believers in inspiration and divine happenings-in angels, plates, translations, revelations-while others viewing the same facts are convinced they disqualify Joseph Smith entirely. One theorist has postulated an “emotional over-ride” that affects how we respond to information. Some feel angry and betrayed others are pleased to have a more realistic account. I have no idea why some people are thrown for a loop when they learn church history did not occur as they had been taught in Sunday School, while others roll with the punches. Others were grateful to find a prophet who had human flaws, giving them hope they themselves could qualify for inspiration despite their human weaknesses. Some found the information about Joseph Smith so damning his prophethood was thrown into question. People have had different takes on Rough Stone Rolling ever since it came out. The reactions should not have surprised me. Others read my words differently I was only saying that there were many errors in the standard narrative that required correction. Sampling a few of the comments on Dan Peterson’s blog I discovered that some people thought I had thrown in the towel and finally admitted the Church’s story of its divine origins did not hold up. Eventually I learned it all began with the transcript of a comment I made at a fireside at Mark England’s house a little over a month ago and posted by John Dehlin. A friend who had been mission president in Brazil sent me a link to a blog in Portugese. Fletcher asked me, did you know you were the subject of a kerfuffle.
I had no idea what was going on until Dan Peterson wrote about a “kerfuffle”-the word of choice for the occasion-on the blogs.
In the middle of the week last week I began to receive thank you notes from people who had read a statement of mine about the Church’s historical narrative requiring reconstruction.
Bushman has asked me to share the following letter in its entirety: In response to this rumor/speculation, Dr. Bushman did not believe in the fundamental LDS truth claims.
0 kommentar(er)
