DiscussMormonism.com

D. Michael Quinn used to teach at BYU and was considered an excellent teacher by many. He won some awards there. He served with the Church Historians office and had access to documents and writings most of us will never see. He published information and articles(still publishing) that Boyd K. Packer, among others, did not approve of. Now he is excommunicated and no longer a member though still a historian to be admired and still publishing articles and books about the LDS Church.

How are we to take his writings? The ones before as more 'correct' in the Church context than the stuff now? It is based on the same research and though years may have brought maturity, the actions of some leaders in excommunicating him and others in trying to discredit some of his research now bring into question what to think of some of the writings?

His Origins Of Power and Extensions Of Power books are well done, footnoted and apparently researched thoroughly. How do we tell research from conclusions when reading some of them? When he does draw conclusions, are they to be taken as probably valid or is a lot more personal research needed to find out? We don't have access to the records he did when he was working with Leonard J. Arrington in the Church Historians office, so how do we confirm what is written in many instances?

I enjoy the writing, just looking for information on how one might look at it from the perspective of others who have done some reading/research on the subject.

Evaluate it as you'd evaluate anything else.

You might find helpful the various reviews of works by Michael Quinn that have been published in the FARMS Review. They're all up, on line, at the Maxwell Institute web site.

Personally, although I think he's intelligent and interesting, I no longer trust Mike Quinn's work.

Daniel Peterson wrote:You might find helpful the various reviews of works by Michael Quinn that have been published in the FARMS Review. They're all up, on line, at the Maxwell Institute web site.

Personally, although I think he's intelligent and interesting, I no longer trust Mike Quinn's work.

And where might I find helpful the various reviews of works by the Farms Review? Are they up, on line, at a credible website?

Personally, although I think they think they are intelligent and interesting, I no longer trust Farm's work.

Daniel Peterson wrote:You might find helpful the various reviews of works by Michael Quinn that have been published in the FARMS Review. They're all up, on line, at the Maxwell Institute web site.

Personally, although I think he's intelligent and interesting, I no longer trust Mike Quinn's work.

So, at one time, you did trust his work, apparently. Would you like to share with us what led you to lose your trust in his scholarship?

I, for one, would be very interested, if you would be so kind.

I admire his work as he sacrificed his church membership (and reputation) in the face of what was truth. On the other hand, I am sometimes weary of the unnecessary conclusions that he seems to draw oftentimes. I think we need to take his evidence for what it's worth--for what it actually tells us, and we must make sure to not draw possible conclusions into fact.

Daniel Peterson wrote:You might find helpful the various reviews of works by Michael Quinn that have been published in the FARMS Review. They're all up, on line, at the Maxwell Institute web site.

Personally, although I think he's intelligent and interesting, I no longer trust Mike Quinn's work.

Can you tell us why you do not trust his work and does this apply to all his work, post Excommunication work or what?

Daniel has commented on this before. Quinn wrote some essay about how Joseph Smith was gay, and apparently misused some sources. The FARMS writers danced gleefully on his grave that evening, singing a funeral dirge that sounded sort of like the Macarena. Then at daybreak they exhumed his body and dumped it in the well so that it would be poisoned forever.

But, like Elvis, some are convinced that Quinn lives on...

The reviews, all published in the FARMS Review, are all up on the Maxwell Institute website.

They are written by a range of people, including William Hamblin, John Gee, Rhett Stephens James and George Mitton, Duane Boyce, and the unbelieving Mormon historian Klaus Hansen, and they extend far beyond merely Quinn's unfortunate book on Same Sex Dynamics: A Mormon Example, or whatever it was called.

I once thought that Quinn was the best and brightest of the Mormon historians. My loss of faith commenced with the first edition of his book on Early Mormonism and the Magic World View, when I wrote a review of it for Sunstone. The more I looked at his book, the more it melted away. I began to have doubts, and those doubts grew with time.

I understand that this may seem threatening to some of you. Faith is a very personal thing. But there are serious arguments that cast doubt upon Quinn's claims, and . . . well, reality doesn't always match our hopes and desires.

I wish you all the best as you struggle with this challenge.

Daniel Peterson wrote:

I understand that this may seem threatening to some of you. Faith is a very personal thing. But there are serious arguments that cast doubt upon Quinn's claims, and . . . well, reality doesn't always match our hopes and desires.

Funny stuff!

Hey! What Sunstone was that in? I want to read it (again?). Do you have a link? or number and issue?