Theology And Speculation

[Moksha]

I was just thinking about the interface and possible interchangeability between Theology and Speculation.

What are your thoughts?

[prisonchaplain]

I was just thinking about the interface and possible interchangeability between Theology and Speculation.

What are your thoughts?

I find the Left Behind series an interesting and highly approachable exercise in theological speculation.

[the Ogre]

<div class='quotemain'>

I was just thinking about the interface and possible interchangeability between Theology and Speculation.

What are your thoughts?

I find the Left Behind series an interesting and highly approachable exercise in theological speculation.

I just ordered the entire series on Amazon. I am really pumped to see what all the excitement is all about.

[CrimsonKairos]

Meh, I got turned off to the Left Behind stuff after seeing the movie. But then, I dislike historical fiction or future fiction where religion is concerned, and where actual people who existed have words put into their mouths that "they might have said."

Work and the Glory? You can have it, I don't think I could read one book in the series. I have no problem with making up characters and setting them in a particular age or era, but please don't put words in Peter's mouth, or Christ's, or Joseph Smith's, or some future prophet, y'know?

[prisonchaplain]

Religious fiction does what Jesus did: Narrative preaching (story telling). It does not pretend to be infallible, inherent, or inspired revelation. But, it does take theological understanding and try to present it through real life parable.

So long is the "fiction" is understood for what it is, I find this tool powerful. BTW, I learned a bit about LDS history (learning curve was admittedly huge) from the Work & the Glory. :-)

[CrimsonKairos]

I'm sorry.

[Moksha]

I think President Hinckley has tried to deemphasize some speculation passing as doctrine when he announced on national TV such things as "We don't know much about that" or "I don't know that we teach that". I applaud President Hinckley for taking this approach in handling both the media on these speculative subjects, and laying the ground work to eventually take them out of LDS circulation as well.

[Elphaba]

BTW, I learned a bit about LDS history (learning curve was admittedly huge) from the Work & the Glory. :-)

Oh, PC, Say it ain't so!

Do you recall any historical specifics you learned from W&TG?

Elphaba

[pam]

I think there is alot to learn about church History from this series. I think most know that is a historical fiction. But there are actual historical events interwoven through the series. I know Elphaba you will argue this point with me but it's my opinion and I'm sticking with it.

[prisonchaplain]

<div class='quotemain'>BTW, I learned a bit about LDS history (learning curve was admittedly huge) from the Work & the Glory. :-)

Oh, PC, Say it ain't so!

Do you recall any historical specifics you learned from W&TG?

Elphaba

That slavery politics played a part in opposition to LDS in the formative years, that Joseph Smith decided to cancel a military venture, and that a beautiful actress (version 1) could transform into someone that looked quite different (version 2).

[Elphaba]

I think there is alot to learn about church History from this series. I think most know that is a historical fiction. But there are actual historical events interwoven through the series. I know Elphaba you will argue this point with me but it's my opinion and I'm sticking with it.

Pam, this the third time you’ve said to me “it’s my opinion and I’m sticking with it.” I’m not sure why you think you have to justify your opinion to me. You really don’t.

I do not dispute there are actual historical events interwoven through the series. I do dispute the series should be used specifically to teach someone Church history.

There is no way someone with no background in Church history can tell when Lund is being historically accurate and when he is not.

For example, one of the most glaring omissions is in Book 4, The Gold to Refine, which is devoted to the Missouri period. The Mormons suffered horrific atrocities in Missouri, including the unthinkable Haun’s Mill Massacre. That is well-known in Church history.

What most people don't know is that Mormon Danites responded to the anti-Mormon mobs by looting and burning non-Mormon farms and settlements.

In addition, the Church leaders, perhaps even Joseph himself, plundered the anti-Mormons homes as well. It's hard to blame them. They felt that driving out mobbers and taking their property was fair compensation for the great losses they had inflicted on the Saints.

Also, my 1838 Missouri Wars book is packed away, but I do believe the Missouri militia required the Mormons to return all of the plunder they had taken (but of course no one was required to return anything back to the Mormons ).

Unfortunately in TW&TG, Lund outlines every detail of the Missouri mob, but only alludes to the Mormon’s plundering by calling it a "rumor." It was much more than a rumor, and I can't believe Lund didn't know that. To me, this is a major omission,

So, I think it is obvious why I think TW&TG should not be used to teach someone Church history.

Next, I have an example that is really a minor issue, but one I also believe Lund should have caught.

It is the story of Colonel George Hinckle, whom Joseph Smith believed had betrayed him, when in fact Colonel Hinckle may have saved the members of the Church, at the moment, from genocide.

Joseph knew he had to turn himself in, and so he asked Colonel Hinckle, a fellow Mormon, to meet with the General Lucas of the Governor's state militia and negotiate a settlement. General Lucas demanded that, as a pretext to not attacking the city, Joseph and a few other leading Mormons give themselves up as hostages within one hour. Hinckle urged Smith to agree, because he felt it was the only way to save the Mormons from being massacred, and Smith agreed that he must do this to save the people.

When Hinkle escorted the prophet and the others back into Lucas' camp, however, the General received Smith and his party as prisoners and not merely hostages. He did this without Hinckle’s knowledge; however Smith, and the rest of the Saints, believed Hinckle had framed him.

However, many times previous to the surrender Hinkle had proven his commitment to the Church. In fact, he had commanded the Mormon resistance at the battle of De Witt less than a month before the fall of Far West.The day before he was accused of perpetrating his heinous deception against Joseph, he had shown extreme courage when he (in his military capacity) called for volunteers to go with him to protect an outlaying Mormon settlement that had been brutally attacked earlier that day.Finally, in the years following the Missouri period, though he remained bitter about being blamed for the events that transpired at the surrender, he nevertheless remained true to the Mormon Church.

Yet in TW&TG, Lund tells the story as it has been told for 170 years, that Hinckle betrayed Joseph. It simply is not true. Any story that old demands verification, but Lund did not bother. So, I can't help wonder how many other "little stories" are in the series that haven't been verified.

As such, I would never, ever suggest TW&TG to someone to learn about Church history. However, if I were already familiar with Church history, I see nothing wrong with reading it as a novel.

Elphaba

[CrimsonKairos]

In this specific instance, I agree with Elphaba.

Historical fiction ought not be the foundation of a history student's understanding, but rather the capstone of a serious study.

[pam]

I think there is alot to learn about church History from this series. I think most know that is a historical fiction. But there are actual historical events interwoven through the series. I know Elphaba you will argue this point with me but it's my opinion and I'm sticking with it.

Pam, this the third time you’ve said to me “it’s my opinion and I’m sticking with it.” I’m not sure why you think you have to justify your opinion to me. You really don’t.

Perhaps because I feel that sometimes the opinions of others don't mean diddly. Not referring to you now though there are times.

Also I may have been misunderstood. I too don't feel like the The Work and the Glory should be a foundation for church history study. Nor did I say this at all. I agree with your points that there is alot of misinformation. However, and I apologize if I misunderstood....

QUOTE(prisonchaplain @ Jul 28 2007, 10:48 PM)

BTW, I learned a bit about LDS history (learning curve was admittedly huge) from the Work & the Glory. :-)

Oh, PC, Say it ain't so!

This just appeared to me the way it was written that you were insinuating that there wasn't an ounce of truth to it as a whole.

Again I apologize for any misunderstanding I may have had.

[BenRaines]

Perhaps Joseph Smith was there, perhaps he wasn't. Isn't that like asking the question :Are you still beating your wife or have you stopped. There is no right answer.

Speculate all you want. History is written by one side or the other. I am sure that many of the Anti LDS authors or those with an ax to grind leave out all the stuff that was done by the anti Mormon mobs, government, etc. "because those crazy Mormons don't live like we do, or have too much political power".

Let us live and worship as we see fit and we hope that you can do the same is what I have to say.

Ben Raines

[Elphaba]

QUOTE(prisonchaplain @ Jul 28 2007, 10:48 PM)

BTW, I learned a bit about LDS history (learning curve was admittedly huge) from the Work & the Glory. :-)

Oh, PC, Say it ain't so!

This just appeared to me the way it was written that you were insinuating that there wasn't an ounce of truth to it as a whole.

Again I apologize for any misunderstanding I may have had.

I am fairly adamant that TW&TG not be used as a teaching tool. However, I don't think you have any reason to apologize. I can see how my words were presumptuous. I try hard to be flippant, and obviously I dont always succeed.

Elphie

Perhaps Joseph Smith was there, perhaps he wasn't. Isn't that like asking the question :Are you still beating your wife or have you stopped. There is no right answer.

Yes, there is a right answer.

Speculate all you want. History is written by one side or the other. I am sure that many of the Anti LDS authors or those with an ax to grind leave out all the stuff that was done by the anti Mormon mobs, government, etc. "because those crazy Mormons don't live like we do, or have too much political power".

History is also written by historians who are interested in what really happened. Their only bias is the truth, and they work very hard to determine what that truth is. You don't have to be a member to be seriously interested in the truthful history of the Church.

Let su live and worship as we see fit and we hope that you can do the same is what I have to say.

Have I said something that would give you the idea I would want anything less?

Elphaba

[BenRaines]

I was referring to the statement that "perhaps" Joseph Smith was there. I guess that can be said about anyone that was alive at that time. Perhaps they were there and again perhaps they weren't.

Ben Raines

[prisonchaplain]

In this specific instance, I agree with Elphaba.

Historical fiction ought not be the foundation of a history student's understanding, but rather the capstone of a serious study.

IMHO, religious fiction can be a great appetizer for delving into primary works.

[Elphaba]

IMHO, religious fiction can be a great appetizer for delving into primary works.

Hi PC,

Do you consider religious fiction to be different from historical fiction?

Elphaba

[prisonchaplain]

<div class='quotemain'>IMHO, religious fiction can be a great appetizer for delving into primary works.

Hi PC,

Do you consider religious fiction to be different from historical fiction?

Elphaba

Religious fiction need not be about history (Left Behind is the obvious example). Also, sometimes it is purely a story (Chronicles of Narnia or Screwtape Letters). In the case of The Work and the Glory, it should be roughly the same. On the other hand, even with secular historic fiction, one cannot demand comprehensiveness, nor complete accuracy.

[CrimsonKairos]

Which is why I don't read it.

I know people who swear by the Work&Glory series, as well as the Kingdom&Crown (or Crown&Kingdom) series.

I just am not interested. It's a personal thing, I'm not saying other people can't get into it and enjoy it.