Jason Bourne wrote:What was once called the Documentive History of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has much good information. Documents, letters, petitions and some writings of Joseph Smith. However, much of it was written by scribes and reconstructed but then written in first person. It does follow the official history of the Church as far as the foundations and the accounts it relates. For example, the 1838 FV account is in it.
One of my concerns as I have studied it is there was heavy editing done in some cases that changes what the original comments, diary entries or statements said. Some change things a lot. I started a thread on a few of these a number of months ago. It is pretty clear the BY and crew edited some things to bolster their succession rights, polygamy, denying the priresthood to women and other such things.
But over all, you certianly can get a feel for the development of the Church from an insiders point of view.
Hey, if you have a copy of it, can I ask you a question in PM's? There was something I saw quoted on another board that I really don't want to throw into the ring to be picked apart. I just want to verify that it was an authentic quote.
Jersey Girl
Failure is not falling down but refusing to get up.
Chinese Proverb
I have read enough to have some serious concerns... :-(
More significantly, I have had some discussions with church history experts, (like Dan Vogel and Michael Marquart, etc), to know that the "History of the Church," is not exactly a reliable source! :-)
~dancer~
"The search for reality is the most dangerous of all undertakings for it destroys the world in which you live." Nisargadatta Maharaj
Jersey Girl wrote:Is it trustworthy? What do you think?
Jersey Girl
For the last six years I have been working on a critical edition of the Documentary History of the Church, vols. 1-6 (DHC). The seventh vol. is excluded because it deals with the apostles after Joseph Smith's death. My project has two goals: tracing just how the History was put together and when, and determining the sources behind the History and how accurately used. Knowing these things will help researchers know how close the DHC is to Joseph Smith, or how authoritative any statement might or might not be. Most of it was written after Joseph Smith died, but nonetheless in first person as if Joseph Smith was speaking. Most of the sermons are composites of various journal entries, primarily Wilford Woodruff's, and fleshed out and expanded. Much of this work was done under Geo. A. Smith's supervision about 1854. Sometimes things are taken from sources such as the Times and Seasons, Nauvoo Neighbor, minutes of the Nauvoo High Council, or William Clayton Journal and changed to first person accounts of Joseph Smith. The compilers tended to write the new apostolic leadership into the History. Although this has been explained by apologists was not unusual for the times, still some of the changes are quite telling of the motivations of the compilers. One must keep in mind that the DHC is an official history of an institution, and like any "official" history of any organization, it is self-interested and self-preserving.
I do not want you to think that I am very righteous, for I am not. Joseph Smith (History of the Church 5:401)
Jersey Girl wrote:Is it trustworthy? What do you think?
Jersey Girl
For the last six years I have been working on a critical edition of the Documentary History of the Church, vols. 1-6 (DHC). The seventh vol. is excluded because it deals with the apostles after Joseph Smith's death. My project has two goals: tracing just how the History was put together and when, and determining the sources behind the History and how accurately used. Knowing these things will help researchers know how close the DHC is to Joseph Smith, or how authoritative any statement might or might not be. Most of it was written after Joseph Smith died, but nonetheless in first person as if Joseph Smith was speaking. Most of the sermons are composites of various journal entries, primarily Wilford Woodruff's, and fleshed out and expanded. Much of this work was done under Geo. A. Smith's supervision about 1854. Sometimes things are taken from sources such as the Times and Seasons, Nauvoo Neighbor, minutes of the Nauvoo High Council, or William Clayton Journal and changed to first person accounts of Joseph Smith. The compilers tended to write the new apostolic leadership into the History. Although this has been explained by apologists was not unusual for the times, still some of the changes are quite telling of the motivations of the compilers. One must keep in mind that the DHC is an official history of an institution, and like any "official" history of any organization, it is self-interested and self-preserving.
When can we expect this? Before the Turley, et. al. work on the MMM?
I detest my loose style and my libertine sentiments. I thank God, who has removed from my eyes the veil... Adrian Beverland
Dan Vogel wrote:Sometimes things are taken from sources such as the Times and Seasons, Nauvoo Neighbor, minutes of the Nauvoo High Council, or William Clayton Journal and changed to first person accounts of Joseph Smith. . . Although this has been explained by apologists was not unusual for the times, still some of the changes are quite telling of the motivations of the compilers.
Hi, Dan:
I've repeatedly heard the "changing things to first person was a common thing back then" apologetic, but please answer me this: Is that assertion true, or is it merely an urban legend the apologists cooked up to cover for the HoC?
"Finally, for your rather strange idea that miracles are somehow linked to the amount of gay sexual gratification that is taking place would require that primitive Christianity was launched by gay sex, would it not?"
What's hilarious about the "changing to first person was common" apologetic is that that's exactly what they use to destroy the credibility of the report that Joseph Smith gave a cursory evaluation of the Kinderhook Plates.
Mormonism ceased being a compelling topic for me when I finally came to terms with its transformation from a personality cult into a combination of a real estate company, a SuperPac, and Westboro Baptist Church. - Kishkumen
Jason Bourne wrote:What was once called the Documentive History of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has much good information. Documents, letters, petitions and some writings of Joseph Smith. However, much of it was written by scribes and reconstructed but then written in first person. It does follow the official history of the Church as far as the foundations and the accounts it relates. For example, the 1838 FV account is in it.
One of my concerns as I have studied it is there was heavy editing done in some cases that changes what the original comments, diary entries or statements said. Some change things a lot. I started a thread on a few of these a number of months ago. It is pretty clear the BY and crew edited some things to bolster their succession rights, polygamy, denying the priresthood to women and other such things.
But over all, you certianly can get a feel for the development of the Church from an insiders point of view.
Hey, if you have a copy of it, can I ask you a question in PM's? There was something I saw quoted on another board that I really don't want to throw into the ring to be picked apart. I just want to verify that it was an authentic quote.