free thinker
24th December 2005, 08:13 PM
Here is a review from Amazon. Thought you might enjoy it.
Reviewer: Gnarly1 (Sacramento, CA USA) - See all my reviews
America in the 19th Century was populated by a fantastic array of interesting characters. The ever expanding nation produced a person of notoriety for every need. It was a fascinating time with remarkable people.
For religious prominence and audacity in the 19th Century, no one else came close to Joseph Smith. He was, however, a man of his time and place. Though Mormons claim him as the founder of their religion, Smith's Mormonism died in 1890. With the hopes of the faithful dashed by the failure of Christ's return (as predicted by Smith), and with the U.S. Government poised to seize all Church property and destroy the organization, the LDS Church started down the path of respectability by giving up polygamy. The on-going "mainstreaming" of Mormonism since that time has resulted in cover stories on Newsweek and Time and favorable publicity where scorn formerly abounded.
But Smith's connection to modern Mormonism is as tenuous as that of Thomas Jefferson to the current Democratic Party. The list of Smith's now discarded doctrines is extensive. Polygamy, consecration of property, gathering of "Zion" in Missouri, second anointings, patralineal patriarchs, speaking in tongues, direct visions of heavenly beings, "thus saith the Lord" pronouncements, the Council of Fifty - to name the most obvious- have all been declared "inoperative" either specifically or by neglect.
Bushman deserves much of the praise given him by other reviewers. He certainly goes farther than most "believing scholars" in giving us a human Smith. He touches on most of the sensitive subjects regarding Smith that the LDS Church has kept hidden in its historical closet since it moved its base of operations to Salt Lake City. And he has done a great job of putting a positive "spin" on nearly every one of Smith's flaws. OK, so Smith was a treasurer seeker with a "peepstone." So what? How could there be a better background for a prophet? Married to three dozen women, many of whom had then existing husbands? Well, yes, but not for love, of course. He was always true to Emma "in his fashion." Temple rituals mirroring Masonic rites? Sure, but Smith had the real goods. His acceptance of Masonry at the very time he introduced the temple ceremony was just another of those marvelous coincidences that proves his prophetic standing.
Bushman does, however, jump the track of revisionism from time to time to flog some old mythical horses. How could anyone with so little education write something as complex as the Book of Mormon? He couldn't, therefore he was a prophet. (How could Margaret Mitchell write "Gone With the Wind," or Beryl Markham "West With the Night?") The fact that the Book of Mormon is not very complex, is deadly dull, and has been substantially corrected through numerous re-printings is irrelevant. And, yes, Smith really did predict the Civil War, despite the conclusion of most scholars, including Smith proponents, to the contrary.
Occasionally Bushman's terminology is simply disingenuous. While he continually refers to Smith as a "translator," he conclusively demonstrates that Smith never translated anything. The plates of the Book of Mormon were either covered with cloth, or hidden in a nearby forest, while he dictated the book's text by burying his face in a hat containing the peepstone. The papyri that Smith said were actually written by Father Abraham (but which have turned out to be only run-of-the-mill Egyptian funeral writings), were not translated in the sense that you or I understand the term. They merely were a catalyst for heavenly pronouncements that were totally unrelated to what is actually on the documents themselves.
Regardless of any preconceptions one has of Smith, Bushman has produced something which deserves attention. If nothing else, the book proves that the life of Joseph Smith is like the Bible. There is something there to bolster any point of view. But it leaves the reader wondering what Bushman, or any other intelligent Mormon, really believes. That the Garden of Eden was actually located in Missouri and the remnants of Adam's altar were there for Smith to discover? That a battle involving the death of more than a quarter of a million pre-Columbian people occurred in upstate New York without leaving a trace? That despite DNA evidence to the contrary, Native Americans are Jewish?
Modern Mormonism is a family-oriented, conservative religion that appeals to many because it espouses "good values." Though never articulated as such, the Mormon God is a grandfatherly white man in a charcoal suit, with a white shirt and gray tie, who votes Republican. Smith's God, by contrast, was right out of the Old Testament - jealous, vengeful, demanding, quixotic- who was not reluctant to send an angel with a sword to force Smith to marry numerous women.
Mormons should enjoy Smith for the colorful character he was. They should appreciate that he thoroughly enjoyed the adulation of his followers while constantly testing their credulity. He drank wine up to the day he died, hid from the law, physically assaulted people he didn't like, rejected all criticism, had himself anointed "King," and, in the end, got into trouble for believing his own press releases. While Bushman tries to make the case that Smith is as relevant to Mormons today as he was to the Nauvoo Saints, he has, instead, demonstrated that Smith was a man who fully belonged to America's turbulent 19th Century. That's where he should be left.
FT
Reviewer: Gnarly1 (Sacramento, CA USA) - See all my reviews
America in the 19th Century was populated by a fantastic array of interesting characters. The ever expanding nation produced a person of notoriety for every need. It was a fascinating time with remarkable people.
For religious prominence and audacity in the 19th Century, no one else came close to Joseph Smith. He was, however, a man of his time and place. Though Mormons claim him as the founder of their religion, Smith's Mormonism died in 1890. With the hopes of the faithful dashed by the failure of Christ's return (as predicted by Smith), and with the U.S. Government poised to seize all Church property and destroy the organization, the LDS Church started down the path of respectability by giving up polygamy. The on-going "mainstreaming" of Mormonism since that time has resulted in cover stories on Newsweek and Time and favorable publicity where scorn formerly abounded.
But Smith's connection to modern Mormonism is as tenuous as that of Thomas Jefferson to the current Democratic Party. The list of Smith's now discarded doctrines is extensive. Polygamy, consecration of property, gathering of "Zion" in Missouri, second anointings, patralineal patriarchs, speaking in tongues, direct visions of heavenly beings, "thus saith the Lord" pronouncements, the Council of Fifty - to name the most obvious- have all been declared "inoperative" either specifically or by neglect.
Bushman deserves much of the praise given him by other reviewers. He certainly goes farther than most "believing scholars" in giving us a human Smith. He touches on most of the sensitive subjects regarding Smith that the LDS Church has kept hidden in its historical closet since it moved its base of operations to Salt Lake City. And he has done a great job of putting a positive "spin" on nearly every one of Smith's flaws. OK, so Smith was a treasurer seeker with a "peepstone." So what? How could there be a better background for a prophet? Married to three dozen women, many of whom had then existing husbands? Well, yes, but not for love, of course. He was always true to Emma "in his fashion." Temple rituals mirroring Masonic rites? Sure, but Smith had the real goods. His acceptance of Masonry at the very time he introduced the temple ceremony was just another of those marvelous coincidences that proves his prophetic standing.
Bushman does, however, jump the track of revisionism from time to time to flog some old mythical horses. How could anyone with so little education write something as complex as the Book of Mormon? He couldn't, therefore he was a prophet. (How could Margaret Mitchell write "Gone With the Wind," or Beryl Markham "West With the Night?") The fact that the Book of Mormon is not very complex, is deadly dull, and has been substantially corrected through numerous re-printings is irrelevant. And, yes, Smith really did predict the Civil War, despite the conclusion of most scholars, including Smith proponents, to the contrary.
Occasionally Bushman's terminology is simply disingenuous. While he continually refers to Smith as a "translator," he conclusively demonstrates that Smith never translated anything. The plates of the Book of Mormon were either covered with cloth, or hidden in a nearby forest, while he dictated the book's text by burying his face in a hat containing the peepstone. The papyri that Smith said were actually written by Father Abraham (but which have turned out to be only run-of-the-mill Egyptian funeral writings), were not translated in the sense that you or I understand the term. They merely were a catalyst for heavenly pronouncements that were totally unrelated to what is actually on the documents themselves.
Regardless of any preconceptions one has of Smith, Bushman has produced something which deserves attention. If nothing else, the book proves that the life of Joseph Smith is like the Bible. There is something there to bolster any point of view. But it leaves the reader wondering what Bushman, or any other intelligent Mormon, really believes. That the Garden of Eden was actually located in Missouri and the remnants of Adam's altar were there for Smith to discover? That a battle involving the death of more than a quarter of a million pre-Columbian people occurred in upstate New York without leaving a trace? That despite DNA evidence to the contrary, Native Americans are Jewish?
Modern Mormonism is a family-oriented, conservative religion that appeals to many because it espouses "good values." Though never articulated as such, the Mormon God is a grandfatherly white man in a charcoal suit, with a white shirt and gray tie, who votes Republican. Smith's God, by contrast, was right out of the Old Testament - jealous, vengeful, demanding, quixotic- who was not reluctant to send an angel with a sword to force Smith to marry numerous women.
Mormons should enjoy Smith for the colorful character he was. They should appreciate that he thoroughly enjoyed the adulation of his followers while constantly testing their credulity. He drank wine up to the day he died, hid from the law, physically assaulted people he didn't like, rejected all criticism, had himself anointed "King," and, in the end, got into trouble for believing his own press releases. While Bushman tries to make the case that Smith is as relevant to Mormons today as he was to the Nauvoo Saints, he has, instead, demonstrated that Smith was a man who fully belonged to America's turbulent 19th Century. That's where he should be left.
FT