The Miracle of the Gulls - Faith Promoting or Fiction

[talisyn]

I grew up with the story that the arrival of the gulls was a miracle. Since moving to the SLC area, I have questioned whether it was an actual miracle or simply the case of timing.

I've had people argue with me about why the seagulls were so far away from the ocean. Well, what is the Great Salt Lake basically? Like an ocean but inland. It's full of salt..why couldn't there be gulls?

I found this article awhile back:

Seagulls, Miracle of - The Encyclopedia of Mormonism

This was the settlers first year and harvest there. They were unaware of the habits of seagulls in the area. As Snow mentioned they had already been hit by frosts which did much damage to their crops. The arrival of the gulls was not some miracle..it was coincidence that in their natural migratory pattern it coincided with the problem of the crickets.

I can understand them thinking it was a miracle..but technically more of a coincidence.

Terry Pratchett once said something like miracles are a matter of timing, to which I would add also point of view. Was the parting of the Red Sea a miracle to the Israelites? Yes. Was it a miracle to the Egyptians? I doubt it. Were the seagulls answer to the pioneers prayers? Yes. The crickets prayers? Not so much.

The seagulls didn't have to be in the area to eat those crickets, by that time they were probably good and wary of the pioneers. I bet there were plenty of crickets on the other side of the valley.

I say it's a miracle

[talisyn]

Not to contradict you or your experiences, but that's how urban legends are created--and unfortunately, false doctrine is perpetuated. Anyone remember the Boyd K Packer story of the youth of today will be worshipped? Yeah, sounds wonderful and I'm sure many people found a lot of comfort in it, but completely and utterly false and false doctrine.

It's one thing to tell a story that is faith promoting, it's another to tell a story as if it were completely and utterly true.

But we don't really know if it's false doctrine. Cause we're not dead yet. Can't take anything for granted

[Bluejay]

A lot of prayer was needed to save the

Saints from these Mormon Crickets...

The Mormon katydid?

[Snow]

Was the parting of the Red Sea a miracle to the Israelites?

No - What is probably was, was a mistranslation.

"Yam Suph" is likely better understood as "sea of reeds"... which sounds like a marshy shallow body of water and more easily crossed than the Red Sea.

Edited August 18, 2009 by Snow

[beefche]

Snow, you're taking the fun out of everything. It just doesn't work as well with Charleton Heston parting a creek.

[Snow]

Snow, you're taking the fun out of everything. It just doesn't work as well with Charleton Heston parting a creek.

Why is it so much easier to believe things that supposedly happened long, long time ago?

If someone told you that they parted Lake Michigan and migrated to Canada by foot last week, would you believe them? But say it happened 3000 years ago and people will swallow it like bowl of jello with whipped cream on top.

[bytebear]

Why is it so much easier to believe things that supposedly happened long, long time ago?

If someone told you that they parted Lake Michigan and migrated to Canada by foot last week, would you believe them? But say it happened 3000 years ago and people will swallow it like bowl of jello with whipped cream on top.

It's funny, the early converts were only given very recent miracles to work with. They didn't even have that much doctrine to contend with in the 1830s. All they had was the word of a few witnesses and the Book of Mormon.

[beefche]

Why is it so much easier to believe things that supposedly happened long, long time ago?

If someone told you that they parted Lake Michigan and migrated to Canada by foot last week, would you believe them? But say it happened 3000 years ago and people will swallow it like bowl of jello with whipped cream on top.

I think it's easier because it's harder to disprove and has been accepted far longer than something new. Also, with today's technology, I would expect a video on utube of the parting of L. Michigan.

[Maxel]

Why is it so much easier to believe things that supposedly happened long, long time ago?

If someone told you that they parted Lake Michigan and migrated to Canada by foot last week, would you believe them? But say it happened 3000 years ago and people will swallow it like bowl of jello with whipped cream on top.

I think part of it has to do with the surrounding circumstances. I'd be more inclined to believe someone parted Lake Michigan to get to Canada if:

-It wasn't just one person, but the entire nation of Israel (or another group of the Lord's people).

-The leader of the nation was the authorized prophet of God.

-The people were being pursued by an army bent on their destruction and enslavement.

-The people were backed against Lake Michigan with nowhere else to go.

-The parting of Lake Michigan was the means of miraculous salvation.

As for the crickets and the gulls- I was wondering about this the other day. It makes sense that what transpired isn't unusual, and it could be classified as an "amazing coincidence". However, I'm inclined to believe that this particular coincidence isn't a coincidence at all. Miracles come in all shapes and sizes.

Do you know if I can find that paper you mentioned online? I don't have access to a library that might have it.

[Maxel]

Also, with today's technology, I would expect a video on utube of the parting of L. Michigan.

There's also that.

[Snow]

I think part of it has to do with the surrounding circumstances. I'd be more inclined to believe someone parted Lake Michigan to get to Canada if:

-It wasn't just one person, but the entire nation of Israel (or another group of the Lord's people).

-The leader of the nation was the authorized prophet of God.

-The people were being pursued by an army bent on their destruction and enslavement.

-The people were backed against Lake Michigan with nowhere else to go.

-The parting of Lake Michigan was the means of miraculous salvation.

]

But of course, that is not the issue since we don't know any of that. What we do know is that we have the anonymous writings of a author writing we know not when. So, to make this be a fair comparison, we would have any idea who wrote that he parted Lake Michigan and migrated to Canada.

As for the crickets and the gulls- I was wondering about this the other day. It makes sense that what transpired isn't unusual, and it could be classified as an "amazing coincidence". However, I'm inclined to believe that this particular coincidence isn't a coincidence at all. Miracles come in all shapes and sizes.

Do you know if I can find that paper you mentioned online? I don't have access to a library that might have it.

I don't think it is on line but the book from Signature Books is definately worth buying - it's available in paperback. It has essays from some of the very best Mormon historians.

I did find this: Miracle of the gulls - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia and it gives some more detail on the same subject and references the essay in question.

[Justice]

I get the point you're making in the title to this thread, Snow. However, I don't think a story has to be either faith promoting or fiction... I think it can be both, in the sense that you mean it. I agree that natural events with good timing can be viewed as miracles. That doesn't necessarily make them fiction, but instead, natural events that increase someone's faith because of their timing. Maybe we don't call it "miracle," but I'm not aware of a word in our language for these events. Is there one?

I don't believe their story is/was fiction. I believe it happened. You have shown many other examples of it happening at other times. That supports the fact that it isn't fiction. I gather you're offering that God's intervention may have been fiction. Again, by showing it has happened many times does not prove God was not involved in some way. God often uses natural events to help man and to increase their faith. But, your question is a valid one... if it is a natural event, even if God is involved in the timing or location, can we still call it a miracle?

Well, I think yes, for now. However, I'd be curious to see other words that would better fit this type of event. I reserve the right to change my mind when I see the words. :)

Edited August 18, 2009 by Justice

[talisyn]

It's funny, the early converts were only given very recent miracles to work with. They didn't even have that much doctrine to contend with in the 1830s. All they had was the word of a few witnesses and the Book of Mormon.

You know, a bunch of them never even read the Book of Mormon, but they believed.

-----------

I came across somethings Orson Scott Card wrote about miracles, and I was thinking 'yes! this is it!' lol. From the article MormonTimes - More on how world views Mormons

We are way ahead of the general population in our belief in life after death and in miracles -- but we all know perfectly well that what we believe about life after death is radically different from anyone else, while the kinds of miracles we believe in are definitely not of the image-of-a-saint-in-a-potato-chip variety.

In fact, our miracles tend to be very down-to-earth and practical, a part of everyday life, and in a sense not miraculous or unusual at all!

[bytebear]

You know, a bunch of them never even read the Book of Mormon, but they believed.

My guess is most Christians who believe have never read the Bible.

[Elphaba]

I’ve read numerous pioneer journals and most of them speak of personal miracles, especially given the harsh and difficult situations they endured, both in Nauvoo and Utah. Stories of personal and miraculous survival are very common. Additionally, if the Saints experienced a miracle as a group, as they did with the miracle of the gulls, it was usually recorded immediately when it became known.

Another example of an event where the evidence might lead to a different conclusion than the faith-promoting version is the miracle of Joseph’s mantle falling upon Brigham during the August 1944 meeting where the Saints decided whether to follow him or Sydney Rigdon after Joseph’s murder.

According to D. Michael Quinn, The Mormon Hierarchy, Origins of Power, the event occurred as follows:

As Young spoke a mystical experience settled the succession question for many in the audience. According to reminisces decades later, he was transfigured into the form and even the stature of Smith, who was much taller. Some said Young’s voice sounded like the dead prophet’s distinctive voice.

As is true in the miracle of the gulls, there are no immediate contemporary accounts of this event, although many journals record other things about the meeting; for example, a number of Saints wrote about how long-winded Sydney Rigdon was because he talked for a good hour and a half.

The very first mention of the miracle was not recorded until three months after the fact, in November of 1944, and once the first account was made known to the Saints, many other people came forward and claimed to have seen the same thing. It is possible this was an example of a sort of group-think, where a faith-promoting version gained steam as more and more people claimed to have seen the transfiguration, albeit months, years, and decades, after the event.

Additionally, contrary to the Times and Seasons story that said every Saint saw the manifestation, many did not. Quinn gives future apostle Ezra Taft Benson as an example of someone who did not see the transfiguration. Also, a number of Saints voted against following Brigham, which means they did not see it either.

I admit three months after experiencing a miracle can be considered contemporary; however, that would usually only be true if it were one, or a few person’s account of the event. When many people claim to have seen such a miraculous event all at the same time, three months is a very long time for no one to have recorded it. Thus, this may be another example where the miracle did not happen exactly as told.

Elphaba

[MobyMule]

Salt Lake Valley, 1850.

Salt Lake Valley, 1855 (grasshoppers)

Rush Valley (Utah) 1904

Mandan ND, 1921

Montana 1924

Colorado, 1933 (an estimated 1 million gulls on scene to eat the crickets)

Oregon 1938

Tooele, Utah 1937-38

Oregon 1947

Utah 1952

So what has happened since 52. Plague on crickets or gulls or maybe global warming.

Or could it be pest control:)

[talisyn]

The crickets and grasshoppers all moved to my parent's backyard, and they are too far away from the river for seagulls. Who says insects can't learn?

[Elphaba]

I’ve read numerous pioneer journals and most of them speak of personal miracles, especially given the harsh and difficult situations they endured, both in Nauvoo and Utah. For example, stories of personal and miraculous survival are very common. Additionally, if the Saints experienced a miracle as a group, as they did with the miracle of the gulls, it was usually recorded immediately when it became known.

Another example of an event where the evidence might lead to a different conclusion than the faith-promoting version is the miracle of Joseph’s mantle falling upon Brigham during the August 1944 meeting where the Saints decided whether to follow him or Sydney Rigdon after Joseph’s murder.

According to D. Michael Quinn, The Mormon Hierarchy, Origins of Power, the event occurred as follows:

As Young spoke a mystical experience settled the succession question for many in the audience. According to reminisces decades later, he was transfigured into the form and even the stature of Smith, who was much taller. Some said Young’s voice sounded like the dead prophet’s distinctive voice.

As is true in the miracle of the gulls, there are no immediate contemporary accounts of this event, although many journals record other things about the meeting; for example, a number of Saints wrote about how long-winded Sydney Rigdon was because he talked for a good hour and a half on a very hot day.

The very first mention of the miracle, that we know about, was not recorded until three months after the fact, in November of 1944, and once the first account was made known to the Saints, many other people came forward and claimed to have seen the same thing. It is possible this was an example of a sort of group-think, where a faith-promoting version gained steam as more and more people claimed to have seen the transfiguration, albeit months, years, and decades, after the event.

Additionally, contrary to the Times and Seasons story that said every Saint saw the manifestation, many did not. Quinn gives future apostle Ezra Taft Benson as an example of someone who did not see the transfiguration. Also, a number of Saints voted against following Brigham, which means they did not see it either.

I admit three months after experiencing a miracle can be considered a contemporary account; however, that would usually only be true if it were one, or a few person’s record of an event. When many people claim to have seen such a miraculous event all at the same time, three months is a very long time for no one to have mentioned it. It is possible someone did record it prior to November 1844, but that we don't know about it. Still, given we do not have immediate records of the miracle, one explanation could be it did not occur exactly as is depicted today.

On the other hand, it is obviously possible the miracle happened just as has been taught in the Church for the past 165 years. There are a number of Ensign articles about it, all of them faith-promoting. There is no question the miracle is a beloved account that the Saints treasure to this day.

Elphaba

[James_Fryman]

This reminds me when the locusts came out two years ago. It was impossible to walk out side with a green shirt because you would get attacked by a ton of them. of course if you walked outside at all you got attacked by half a ton anyways. I dont know how many me and my friends killed that summer, it did lead to some pretty good play ideas for scout camp though

[Moksha]

I dont know how many me and my friends killed that summer, it did lead to some pretty good play ideas for scout camp though

The Miracle of the Scout Camp!

[Guest Believer_1829]

Why does Elphaba's post about the meeting where Brigham Young was supposedly transfigured keep disappearing? She has her facts together and made no judgmental statements.

[Elphaba]

Why does Elphaba's post about the meeting where Brigham Young was supposedly transfigured keep disappearing? She has her facts together and made no judgmental statements.

It's my fault Believer. I wanted to check one of my sources so I deleted it just in case I got something wrong.

Here it is again: ~~~~~~~~~~

I’ve read numerous pioneer journals and most of them speak of personal miracles, especially given the harsh and difficult situations they endured, both in Nauvoo and Utah. For example, stories of personal and miraculous survival are very common. Additionally, if the Saints experienced a miracle as a group, as they did with the miracle of the gulls, it was usually recorded immediately when it became known.

Another example of an event where the evidence might lead to a different conclusion than the faith-promoting version is the miracle of Joseph’s mantle falling upon Brigham during the August 1944 meeting where the Saints decided whether to follow him or Sydney Rigdon after Joseph’s murder.

According to D. Michael Quinn, The Mormon Hierarchy, Origins of Power, the event occurred as follows:

As Young spoke a mystical experience settled the succession question for many in the audience. According to reminisces decades later, he was transfigured into the form and even the stature of Smith, who was much taller. Some said Young’s voice sounded like the dead prophet’s distinctive voice.

As is true in the miracle of the gulls, there are no immediate contemporary accounts of this event, although many journals record other things about the meeting; for example, a number of Saints wrote about how long-winded Sydney Rigdon was because he talked for a good hour and a half on a very hot day.

The very first mention of the miracle, that we know about, was not recorded until three months after the fact, in November of 1944, and once the first account was made known to the Saints, many other people came forward and claimed to have seen the same thing. It is possible this was an example of a sort of group-think, where a faith-promoting version gained steam as more and more people claimed to have seen the transfiguration, albeit months, years, and decades, after the event.

Additionally, contrary to the Times and Seasons story that said every Saint saw the manifestation, many did not. Quinn gives future apostle Ezra Taft Benson as an example of someone who did not see the transfiguration. Also, a number of Saints voted against following Brigham, which means they did not see it either.

I admit three months after experiencing a miracle can be considered a contemporary account; however, that would usually only be true if it were one, or a few person’s record of an event. When many people claim to have seen such a miraculous event all at the same time, three months is a very long time for no one to have mentioned it. It is possible someone did record it prior to November 1844, but that we don't know about it. Still, given we do not have immediate records of the miracle, one explanation could be it did not occur exactly as is depicted today.

On the other hand, it is obviously possible the miracle happened just as has been taught in the Church for the past 165 years. There are a number of Ensign articles about it, all of them faith-promoting. There is no question the miracle is a beloved account that the Saints treasure to this day.

Elphaba

[Gatorman]

So, we have those who believe this is a faith promoting event that is taught in church publications versus others who believe that it is important to know the details to remove the faith promoting aspect of it. Which is right? Do facts trump the fact that we are supposed to always work to build and help others faith and never risk tearing it down?

[Elphaba]

So, we have those who believe this is a faith promoting event that is taught in church publications versus others who believe that it is important to know the details to remove the faith promoting aspect of it. Which is right? Do facts trump the fact that we are supposed to always work to build and help others faith and never risk tearing it down?

I did not suggest you do otherwise. I only presented information, with which you can do as you as you see fit.

Elphaba

[Gatorman]

I did not suggest you do otherwise. I only presented information, with which you can do as you as you see fit.

Elphaba

You are correct. I did not mean to suggest you had.