Vogel responds to Brian Hales

[dan vogel]

Tonight, at 6:20 Mountain Time, I’m on Mormonism Live with Bill Reel and RFM. I’ll be responding to Hales’ two-star review of my book on Amazon.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iwn333hzTVQ

[drumdude]

Brian Hales' review is the only low star review, out of over 30.

The theory promoted throughout CHARISMA UNDER PRESSURE describing Joseph Smith as a “pious fraud” fails to accommodate the historical Joseph Smith in two important ways.

First, it fails to account for Smith’s creation of the Book of Mormon. Charisma does not bestow the composition and oratory skills needed to create a 269,320-word book with 207 name characters, 77 storylines, 149 geographic locations, 45 socio-geographic groups, 63 sermons comprising over 87,000 words, 100 distinct titles for God, and over 170 new English proper nouns. And importantly, not a single full sentence of his original dictation has been edited since the word stream was spoken, written, and immediately delivered to the printer.

In his writings, Dan Vogel describes Joseph Smith as a “pious fraud,” but frauds don’t produce books like the Book of Mormon; only actual authors with literary skills can do that. This fact is ignored throughout Vogel’s works, including CHARISMA UNDER PRESSURE. Assuming Smith had the skills also ignores dozens of eyewitness accounts declaring he didn’t—an issue CHARISMA fails to address, let alone resolve.

The second glaring problem involves how Vogel portrays the people around Joseph Smith as gullible dupes who couldn’t detect what Vogel easily can see nearly 200 years later: Charisma empowered Smith to deceive all those Mormons. While some of Smith’s followers might have been that naïve, the vast majority were skeptical and devout Christians.

The historical record supports that women like Eliza Snow and Zina Huntington and men like John Taylor and Brigham Young, would not have been fooled by a charismatic male as easily as Vogel portrays. I think Fawn Brodie would agree: “The best evidence of the magnetism of the Mormon religion was that it could attract men with the quality of Brigham Young, whose tremendous energy and shrewd intelligence were not easily directed by any influence outside himself.” The scenarios depicted through CHARISMA seem comic-book-like, where Smith’s followers behave differently than genuinely sincere and skeptical religionists would have behaved.

It appears that the version of Joseph Smith portrayed by Vogel is a caricature and inadequate. Neither is it clear Smith’s followers would have been so blinded by “charisma under pressure” to Smith’s true motives if they were what Vogel declares them to have been. Caution is advised for anyone tempted to embrace the version of Smith (and his followers) portrayed in CHARISMA UNDER PRESSURE and Vogel’s other writings.

[Kishkumen]

Cheryl Bruno’s review is a lot better. She does have criticisms, but she also recognizes the virtues of the book. A fair review will do exactly what Bruno’s did—recognize the strengths and weaknesses as the reviewer sees them. This is not to say that Bruno is necessarily always right. It is the case, however, that her review is fairer and more collegial than what a number of people in this field of Mormon Studies sometimes do in responding to the work of others they disagree with.

[Dr. Shades]

Brian Hales clearly has no concept or understanding of group dynamics. He gullibly thinks that early Mormons couldn’t be fooled by a charismatic type, but completely ignores how many were fooled by Adolf Hitler and are fooled by Donald Trump even today.

I doubt Hales even read the book, but if he did, he’s clearly living in an idealistic bubble.

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

He didn’t read the book.

[Moksha]

I doubt Hales even read the book, but if he did, he’s clearly living in an idealistic bubble.

They noted in the podcast that Hales is still in the process of listening to the audio version.

Apologists do not have to be familiar with the material they are criticizing. If their bosoms tell them to put forth a hit piece they will send their balderdash off to the Interpreter. If heavier than a feather, it will have passed peer review and will eventually be published. Amazon reviews take even less effort.

[dan vogel]

Thank you everyone for commenting.

[MG 2.0]

He didn’t read the book.

Neither have I. And I’m just a layperson that has opinions on one subject or another. Not a scholar in the sense of advanced degrees. But I do think a lot and try to look at things with eyes wide open. My downfall? I’m an active believing member of the church.

On my own, and without digging deeply in any sort of scholarly way, I’ve thought about the ‘charismatic Joseph Smith’. His magnetic appeal. Many folks have it. Many religious/political figures have had it.

But that’s not always enough to carry something over the long haul. Especially in this case where the whole restoration narrative is somewhat fantastical. Fantastic claims require something more than charisma. Especially as the ‘story’ ages.

I think it’s important to look at the bigger picture. And I don’t think many here would disagree. Looking at certain characteristics (or pet theories of explaining Joseph Smith) in isolation, more or less, can distort one’s view of the whole.

A while back Kyler Rasmussen wrote a number of articles over at the Interpreter. They were discussed here. Of certain value to the arguments Hales makes against Vogel’s charismatic Joseph were these two:

https://interpreterfoundation.org/categ ... ce/page/2/

Numbers 1 and 3.

There’s just a lot of stuff to throw into the pot as one tries to make a determination as to whether Joseph was not only sincere and charismatic, but also telling the truth.

I suppose I would have to be convinced as to why I’d want to spend a chunk of change to buy this book and support the author.

And I did watch the RFM episode. It didn’t knock my socks off.

Regards,
MG

[drumdude]

I suppose I would have to be convinced as to why I’d want to spend a chunk of change to buy this book and support the author.

Dan Vogel made the rookie mistake of not asking for 10% tithing in exchange for eternal salvation. That one, somehow, convinces a lot of folks.

[Moksha]

I think it’s important to look at the bigger picture.

Regards,
MG

Good point. This presentation by Chris Smith can be helpful in understanding the bigger picture.

https://sunstone.org/wp-content/uploads ... th2015.mp3