NOM

I think it is fair to use the D&C as a comparison to the Book of Mormon, to determine from- the view of the believing -if the translation was "tight" or "loose." The D&C has such numerous edits that it seems Joseph felt his "inspiration/revelation" projects were definitely subject to editing. If his projects were "tight" translations, wouldn't he feel more reluctance to edit them?
Even when I was a believer it seemed the loose translation explained the data better.

Just "finished" the Book of Mormon part with a section that goes over how Joseph Smith composed it orally, how we can tell, and the fingerprints he left that show us where he was pulling sources from.

It also includes Hagoth's "oops" moments - which I need to credit properly, so Hagoth let me know how you'd like to be recognized there!

Shamelessly bumping for anyone who might want to check out the overviews - there are now thirty of them and I believe there are 3 to go at least for now.... then I plan on taking a break and will probably add some more in over time.

If anyone browses through either the topic list in the first post or the overviews themselves, are there any topics you feel would be impactful that I have not gotten to yet?

The final three at least as they are in my head at the moment are:

-Revelations and Discernment and what they tell us about prophets
-The Transfiguration of Brigham Young and what that tells us about changes to church history
-A final page that is something of a hodgepodge of a summary, odds and ends thoughts conclusion, and a 'what now' type of finish for anyone who actually made it through them all

It's been a fun project, I've learned a lot, but I will definitely need a break after these final ones are done.

Not to give you more stuff to do because I know you've worked hard on this--but the Mountain Meadow Massacre is a big thing in church history. I had visited the site when I was a TBM and knew some about Juanita Brooks' history and her work causing her to be shunned and not being allowed to hold a calling (not just for her book on the massacre). But, I found out there was a lot more to the story when I left the church. Anyway, if you feel up to addressing something else. Congratulations on being almost done!

acmeist wrote: ↑

Tue Mar 23, 2021 11:05 am

Not to give you more stuff to do because I know you've worked hard on this--but the Mountain Meadow Massacre is a big thing in church history. I had visited the site when I was a TBM and knew some about Juanita Brooks' history and her work causing her to be shunned and not being allowed to hold a calling (not just for her book on the massacre). But, I found out there was a lot more to the story when I left the church. Anyway, if you feel up to addressing something else. Congratulations on being almost done!

I was thinking the same thing. Mountain Meadows is a big deal that the church tries hard to downplay.

But then I realized that as atrocious as the massacre was the church's attempts to hide their participation is just as bad. Which sparked a new topic that I would like to see. That being the fact that Church leadership have lied frequently over the years and manifested a pattern of dishonesty.

One of the big selling points to it's members is the integrity and honesty of leadership. That's not the feeling I get when thinking about:

Joseph Smith-plural marriage
Brigham Young-Mountain Meadows
Joseph Fielding Smith-differing 1st vision versions removal
Joseph F. Smith- plural marriage after the Manifesto and lying to Congress
Paul H. Dunn-this is actually a serious matter

There are others I'm sure. There is a pattern.