MILLIONS spent by LDS Inc on new MMM book

[_TAK]

ScottLloyd
As for "deep anxieties concerning Church history," that hardly seems warranted, given the candor and thorough research in the book that has just been published. That I want the truth given full exposure is precisely the reason I am discussing the book in this and other venues. In that vein, I could hardly do better than quote the authors themselves from the preface: "Church leaders supported our book by providing full and open disclosure" (p. xi)

Hardly shocking comments considering you work for the Church.

[_Dwight Frye]

Perhaps that has something to do with the fact many of us here having been banned from posting over there.

And perhaps that has something to do with your inability to abide by that board's rules.

Just sayin, is all.

[_Trevor]

And perhaps that has something to do with your inability to abide by that board's rules.

Just sayin, is all.

And those have always been a moving target, in my experience. Getting kicked off of that board is much easier if you have the wrong opinions, and that sometimes has very little to do with "rules."

[_Rollo Tomasi]

Perhaps that has something to do with the fact many of us here having been banned from posting over there.

And perhaps that has something to do with your inability to abide by that board's rules.

Just sayin, is all.

Perhaps ... if there's a rule about censoring posters who the Mods deem 'critical' of the Church.

[Guest]

I attribute this more to keen interest in the new book than anything else -- which also might help explain the substantial traffic on this thread, where almost none of the vocal critics have read or even seen the book and thus are unable to discuss it intelligently.

I have my copy on order, and have no desire to discuss the substance until I've had the chance to read it.

To adapt a verse from Proverbs, As cold waters to a thirsty soul, so is an instance of common sense on this thread.

[_ScottLloyd]

But I know that at least some of you are upping our count by lurking over there without posting.

Perhaps that has something to do with the fact many of us here having been banned from posting over there.

Perhaps. I've not suggested otherwise.

[_ScottLloyd]

ScottLloyd
As for "deep anxieties concerning Church history," that hardly seems warranted, given the candor and thorough research in the book that has just been published. That I want the truth given full exposure is precisely the reason I am discussing the book in this and other venues. In that vein, I could hardly do better than quote the authors themselves from the preface: "Church leaders supported our book by providing full and open disclosure" (p. xi)

Hardly shocking comments considering you work for the Church.

But I don't work for the Church.

[_beastie]

Beastie might be interested to know that volume 2 is already in second draft, this because the book was initially conceived as one complete treatment and only became two volumes when the amount of material became unwieldy for a single book. I have this from a conversation I had with author Turley while in his office on another matter a couple of weeks ago.

I agree with Dr. Peterson that, given the organization of the two-volume work, it would have been awkward to include discussion of the cairn incident in the first volume.

I look forward to volume two, which will have to deal with the cover-up and lack of church censorship against known murderers, until they were forced to deal with it by the federal gov’t. I do hope it will appear despite the skepticism voiced on the common consent thread on the topic. (linked earlier on this thread)

I have a hard time imagining how referring to one simple, well-known and contestable event would have been hugely problematic in the chronological format of the book. But, given the fact that it isn’t discussed, I can only hope that the authors didn’t make any pretense of offering insight into BY’s attitude towards the event.

[_TAK]

ScottLloyd
But I don't work for the Church.

Oh Please ..
Unless you have lost your job - you write ChurchNews for Deseret News..
a private LDS enterprise.

[_ScottLloyd]

Beastie might be interested to know that volume 2 is already in second draft, this because the book was initially conceived as one complete treatment and only became two volumes when the amount of material became unwieldy for a single book. I have this from a conversation I had with author Turley while in his office on another matter a couple of weeks ago.

I agree with Dr. Peterson that, given the organization of the two-volume work, it would have been awkward to include discussion of the cairn incident in the first volume.

I look forward to volume two, which will have to deal with the cover-up and lack of church censorship against known murderers, until they were forced to deal with it by the federal gov’t. I do hope it will appear despite the skepticism voiced on the common consent thread on the topic. (linked earlier on this thread)

I have a hard time imagining how referring to one simple, well-known and contestable event would have been hugely problematic in the chronological format of the book. But, given the fact that it isn’t discussed, I can only hope that the authors didn’t make any pretense of offering insight into BY’s attitude towards the event.

The approach of the authors, as expressed in the preface and elsewhere, was not to argue with past conclusions about the massacre, but rather, to take a fresh look at the research and go where it took them. That is why your supposition about this being an "apologetic" work is so far off the mark.

Since the authors did not set out to debate anybody, or to refute anyone's theory about Brigham Young being the instigator, it is a natural course that they would deal with the events roughly in chronological order. Since this has evolved into a two-volume project, that logically leaves the cairn incident to volume 2, which is devoted to discussion of events following the massacre.

Incidentally, I don't concede the accuracy of your rendition above of the alleged "coverup and and lack of church censorship [sic] of the known murderers." But I too eagerly await volume 2 and expect it will be enlightening. Of course, you have the reading of volume 1 before you, which you have yet to do despite having plenty to say on the subject.