Richard Bushman excerpts of his musings about God.

[Rivendale]

I found this interesting somewhat contradictory to how he explains his faithfulness to Mormonism as a gateway to being the man he wants to be. Strange ideas. An excerpt from his book credit instrument_801.

While Richard Bushman was publishing and touring with Rough Stone Rolling, he kept a personal journal of the experience. That journal later became On the Road with Joseph Smith: An Author’s Diary. It is a small but fascinating book that pulls back the curtain on Bushman’s insecurities, reflections, and inner wrestling as the biography made its way into the world.

It’s a book I’ve returned to often, and one I very much enjoy. There’s a section (pages 59–63) that has always intrigued me. In it, Bushman tries to articulate his view of God and the doctrines that shaped his inner life, teachings that felt deeply important to him but that he admitted he could never fully communicate.

The date was October 28, 2005. Page 59 ends with “Some of the doctrines I considered most valuable to my inner life were incommunicable.” Bushman continues:

What is my point of view?

God is one of a number of superior intelligences who have learned—how we do not know exactly—to obtain glory and intelligence. They can create worlds and do much else.

These gods take us lesser intelligences, swimming about like fish in the sea, under their tutelage, saying they will teach us how to achieve intelligence and glory.

One of their great lessons is that we can do more acting together than we can standing (or swimming) alone. Thus, they bind us to them with multiple covenants.

We are not only to obey them; we are to join with our brothers and sisters in the order of the priesthood under God’s direction. This priesthood goes back before the foundations of the earth and includes all the gods who have gone before. They are bound into one God whose combined force and intelligence is the source of glory. We may even add to the glory by joining them—like computers strung in parallel, generating computing power. Hence the essential importance of unity.

In this sense, the priesthood is God. When joined together like the council of gods that organized the earth, it manifests its godly powers. At the same time, any one God can speak for the whole because they are unified. Adam can become the God of this earth under Christ’s suzerainty [delegated authority].

We exist on the ragged edges of this holy order, but in subscribing to it we join the grand alliance that rules the godly universe.

Outside of this created order, only chaos reigns, but in the outer darkness are other intelligences such as Lucifer who have orders and priesthoods of their own, independent of and possibly in opposition to Elohim’s.

Within the created order, the intelligences find their places, some as animals, some as stones perhaps, some as humans. The diversity of forms on the earth suggests the diversity of unorganized intelligences. Hence the detail in the temple account of creation of the many forms of life, each to fulfill the measure of its creation.

Ben believes each of these intelligences will assuredly find its true place where it can maximize its possibility. God will guarantee that. He may be right, but I suggested the alternative view that God is constantly recruiting intelligences to the godly path and the success of this operation depends on us. If we attract people to Christ, they get included; if someone doesn’t reach them, these souls may slip to a lesser spot. God will not necessarily guarantee everyone the highest possible position for his or her intelligence. Some may fall to a lower rung because there was no one there to raise them up. It is scary, but it makes life real.

What makes it less scary is that there are many ways to grow in intelligence. The Mormons are not the only source of light. Christ radiates throughout the world, through many voices. We need only to listen to one to set our foot on the right path.

As I write, this doctrine tastes good to me. I believe it is the truth. All of it can be found in Joseph’s teachings. But it is not being taught by the Church today. Jennifer Dobner, the AP reporter, told me after the book signing that the Church chastised her for writing about doctrines of this kind, as if they felt they discredited the Church. President Hinckley has said he does not put much stock in such teachings. That may be the proper position for today when we are under attack from evangelical Christians. It would be a mistake, however, to discard them entirely. They are a precious cultural resource. It may be one function of my book to sustain their life by explicating Joseph’s thought as part of the campaign to preserve doctrine.

Bushman wrestled with the idea that divinity is not a single all-controlling God but a community of exalted intelligences bound together in priesthood and unity. In his view, God invites lesser intelligences to grow, yet our progress and even the eternal outcomes of others depend partly on our choices, while Christ’s light shines through many voices, not only Mormonism.

[drumdude]

What towering heights have been built upon Joseph Smith’s con artistry. A few offhand comments spring forth endless speculation and philosophical opining.

It’s clear to me that the man was just trying to satisfy his worldly desires, and yet his religion has endured. I can’t say Bushman is misguided, maybe his views about God are true. I just think they’re so incredibly implausible when seen in the context of Mormonism’s full history.

If it brings Mormons comfort and joy to believe these things, though, more power to them. To me, it was like trying to believe that my ex wife was faithful despite all the evidence to the contrary. I was happy to keep deluding myself until it all came crashing down in a decisive moment of horrific and unavoidable anagnorisis.

I wonder if Bushman ever had that moment in regards to Mormonism.

[Limnor]

What towering heights have been built upon Joseph Smith’s con artistry. A few offhand comments spring forth endless speculation and philosophical opining.

Dizzying.

Although if intelligences can be stones, that would explain why the seer stone seemed to speak for him.

I had to look up anagnorisis…. Spot on.

[Rivendale]

What towering heights have been built upon Joseph Smith’s con artistry. A few offhand comments spring forth endless speculation and philosophical opining.

It’s clear to me that the man was just trying to satisfy his worldly desires, and yet his religion has endured. I can’t say Bushman is misguided, maybe his views about God are true. I just think they’re so incredibly implausible when seen in the context of Mormonism’s full history.

If it brings Mormons comfort and joy to believe these things, though, more power to them. To me, it was like trying to believe that my ex wife was faithful despite all the evidence to the contrary. I was happy to keep deluding myself until it all came crashing down in a decisive moment of horrific and unavoidable anagnorisis.

I wonder if Bushman ever had that moment in regards to Mormonism.

It reminds me of a certain apologist who said that there can be no credible critiques of the church because it is objectively true.

[I Have Questions]

What towering heights have been built upon Joseph Smith’s con artistry. A few offhand comments spring forth endless speculation and philosophical opining.

And an eye watering amount of hoarded cash.

[I Have Questions]

What towering heights have been built upon Joseph Smith’s con artistry. A few offhand comments spring forth endless speculation and philosophical opining.

It’s clear to me that the man was just trying to satisfy his worldly desires, and yet his religion has endured. I can’t say Bushman is misguided, maybe his views about God are true. I just think they’re so incredibly implausible when seen in the context of Mormonism’s full history.

If it brings Mormons comfort and joy to believe these things, though, more power to them. To me, it was like trying to believe that my ex wife was faithful despite all the evidence to the contrary. I was happy to keep deluding myself until it all came crashing down in a decisive moment of horrific and unavoidable anagnorisis.

I wonder if Bushman ever had that moment in regards to Mormonism.

It reminds me of a certain apologist who said that there can be no credible critiques of the church because it is objectively true.

I think he stated that on the basis that an unfalsifiable subjective religious belief is automatically objectively true. Of course, the ramifications of that are that ALL unfalsifiable subjective religious beliefs are automatically true as far as Peterson is concerned. At least if he’s having a moment of intellectual honesty.

[Rivendale]

It reminds me of a certain apologist who said that there can be no credible critiques of the church because it is objectively true.

I think he stated that on the basis that an unfalsifiable subjective religious belief is automatically objectively true. Of course, the ramifications of that are that ALL unfalsifiable subjective religious beliefs are automatically true as far as Peterson is concerned. At least if he’s having a moment of intellectual honesty.

Mormons add the caveat that other religions have elements of unfalsifiable subjective truths. Join Mormonism and let us add to your unfalsifiable subjective truths.

[Physics Guy]

I only thought Peterson said that his beliefs could not have valid objections because they were true. That isn’t a crazy claim. Nothing which is true can have a valid disproof, so believing that something is true necessarily means believing that it can’t be disproven.

I don’t blame Peterson for stating this obvious point, even though it could go without saying. If he wants to concede that some critique of Mormonism isn’t just totally stupid, then it’s fair enough to remind his faithful readers that he still isn’t admitting defeat.

[Kishkumen]

If he wants to concede that some critique of Mormonism isn’t just totally stupid, then it’s fair enough to remind his faithful readers that he still isn’t admitting defeat.

Excellent point.

[Rivendale]

I only thought Peterson said that his beliefs could not have valid objections because they were true. That isn’t a crazy claim. Nothing which is true can have a valid disproof, so believing that something is true necessarily means believing that it can’t be disproven.

I don’t blame Peterson for stating this obvious point, even though it could go without saying. If he wants to concede that some critique of Mormonism isn’t just totally stupid, then it’s fair enough to remind his faithful readers that he still isn’t admitting defeat.

He can't know all the critiques. Therefore making the blanket statement that there can't be valid criticism seems impossible.