Monday, August 17, 2020

The Stoddards attack Dallin H. Oaks as a Promoter of Occultism and the Destructive, Liberal, Non-Believing "New Mormon History"

 

In an attempt to show that modern Latter-day Saint historians are not to be trusted (e.g., Bushman; Arrington), the Stoddards reference how many LDS historians (as well as LDS leaders) accepted as authentic various forged documents by Mark Hoffman, and often lampooning how some tried to reconcile the traditional narrative of the angel Moroni and the white salamander appearing to Joseph Smith. Here is something they do not mention in Faith Crisis Volume 1: We Were not Betrayed.

 

Question: who was a leading defender and promoter of the article they make fun of on pp. 51-52, “Why Might a Person in 1830 Connect an Angel with a Salamander?” was *drum roll please*

 

 

President Dallin H. Oaks

 

On pp. 22-23 of a speech "Reading Church History" presented at the 1985 CES Doctrine and Covenants Symposium, BYU, August 16 1985, he said:

 

One wonders why so many writers neglected to reveal to their readers that there is another meaning of "salamander," which may even have been the primary meaning in this context in the 1820s. That meaning, which is listed second in my Random House Dictionary of the English Language, is "a mythical being thought to be able to live in fire." Modern and ancient literature contain many examples of this usage. For examples, see the research notes by F.A.R.M.S., circulated at this symposium.

 

A being that is able to live in fire is a good approximation of the description Joseph Smith gave of the Angel Moroni: a personage in the midst of a light, whose countenance was "truly like lightning" and whose overall appearance "was glorious beyond description." (Joseph Smith History 1:30, 32.) As Joseph Smith wrote later, "the first sight [of this personage] was as though the house was filled with consuming fire . . . " (History of the Church, vol. 4, p. 536). Since the letter only purports to be Martin Harris' interpretation of what he had heard about Joseph Smith's experience, the use of the words white salamander and old spirit seem understandable.

 

Commenting on the apologetic attempts to harmonise the Salamander Letter (which would later be proven to be a forgery) and the traditional LDS narrative, the Stoddards, on p. 10 of their book wrote:

 

In spite of desperate apologetic attempts to explain otherwise, the salamander unmistakably represented an occult icon. The striking salamander parallels of these accounts contrasted with the Lord’s work and subsequent coming forth of the Bok of Mormon, may have signified a counterfeit—a mockery intended to ridicule and pervert the events and timing of the Lord’s Kingdom—but certainly not a friendly advocate for the Restoration.

 

I will note here that the Stoddards, who are amongst the most anti-intellectual, Fundamentalist members of the Church, would attack as “apostate” and “unbelieving liberals” FairMormon or some other apologetic group or individual apologist who would say this about a Latter-day Saint leader’s work. However, when it comes to smearing the characters of faithful Latter-day Saint historians like the late Leonard Arrington or Richard L. Bushman, they engage in a blatant double standard (via deception). They have no problem (silently and deceptively) throwing Church leaders under the bus when it suits their agenda, as well as engaging in a hack job of historical sources to defend their understanding of LDS history (on this, see, for e.g., Stephen Smoot, Yes, Joseph Smith Really Did Use a Seer Stone in the Translation of the Book of Mormon)