Trevor wrote:Now, as to what Daniel is doing... You don't imagine that it might be frustrating that the first discussion of the Mountain Meadows Massacre book here would be about why we shouldn't expect anything valuable out of it?
Funnily enough, I've not seen anyone say that we shouldn't expect anything
valuable out of it. Exaggeration is Daniel's forte, not yours. Try to avoid it; it does your point no good.
Of course there is value in the book; heck, there's value in Beep, Beep, Sheep in a Jeep
and Lord of the Rings
! But refusing to acknowledge the problems related to the book that are outside
of the content (the obvious conflict of interest, refusing to address the inability of qualified historians to check the accuracy of the footnotes, and refusing to acknowledge that the church has a problematic history regarding its own history --including turning a blind eye to those who destroy historical documents, hiding information, and rewriting history,and the problematic quotes from some church leaders) has little if anything to do with any discussion of the book itself, but has a great deal to do with the way the book might
be perceived by outsiders (and some insiders).
The discussion is valuable, even if the participants haven't all read the book yet, because the problems aren't related to the content, but to the process of writing it
. And Daniel's continual wailing that some of the thread participants haven't yet read the book isn't going to change those problems.
You no doubt noticed how interested Daniel is in actually discussing the content: he had no comments about your points at all, but simply blew you off with a passing glance. Why? Because his agenda is not to discuss the book; his agenda is to deflect criticism of the church and the Brethren. And that is why this thread is 27 pages long, with only a handful of posts from Daniel that can be in any way construed as significant.
Daniel is simply being Daniel, deflecting any criticism of the church, no matter how justified the criticism. He is nothing if not predictable.
I mean, say what you will of the FARMS Review (Heaven knows I have), but at least they do read the books they write about.
Daniel doesn't. At least not all of them. Didn't you see that post?
(Nevo, Jan 23) And the Melchizedek Priesthood may not have been restored until the summer of 1830, several months after the organization of the Church.