Rating: 
Summary: All I have to say can be stated simply with
Review: (Joh 9:25) He answered and said, Whether he be a sinner or no, I know not one thing I know, that, whereas I was blind, now I see.
Rating:
Summary: I would be remiss if I didn't bear my testimonkey
Review: And God only knows how bad it is to be remiss. This book did a good job of presenting very difficult theological difficulties in Mormonism in a manner that isn't judgemental or demeaning to Mormonism (hey I would've taken the gloves off). However, like Quinn before him, the true believers cannot handle the truth regarding the questionable origins of their faith and both the faithful and the leadership have taken the matter into their own hands. The author has been disfellowshipped and negative reviews of this book show where the faithful stand.
If you want to see where the negative reviewers come from, read their other on-line reviews and you will see almost all of them wrote a review of the Book of Mormon that was nothing short of a canned testimony of their "true gospel of Jesus Christ." Yep, the Danites are out for blood and hope apost8s will hide in the shrubs. Not this one.
I suggest all Mormons read this book with an open heart and an open mind and pray about it if that works for them. Take the "Pensteman Challenge" and if you read it hoping that it is true, you just might get a 10% increase in pay and Sundays off.
May the spirit of a good pinot noir be with you all, amen.
Rating: 
Summary: The Secular Versus the Spiritual
Review: As some of the other reviews indicate, this book is likely to be embraced by orthodox Christian critics of Mormonism because it critiques popular Mormon theology using historico-scientific methodology. Unsurprisingly, the historico-scientific approach to Mormonism yields a very different picture of Mormon origins than that taught in Sunday School just as the historico-scientific approach to Christianity yields a very different understanding of Christianity than that normally taught in Sunday School. When orthodox Christians approach Christianity using the methods of higher criticism, they tend to lose their faith or to refame it, adopting a much less fervent and nuanced view of Christ and his saving power, just as Palmer has reframed his Mormon faith to accommodate the findings of higher critical approaches to Mormon history. Like most scholars who approach the Bible from a purely or largely secular-scientific perspective, Palmer is an honest seeker for truth. But the results of his search are in some measure predetermined by his allegiance to a purely naturalistic investigation of the topic. So this book is another manifestation of the tension between faith and science that has characterized Christendom since the middle of the 19th century. While I found the book interesting and honest, I would hope that most Mormons don't read it and don't replace their Sunday School understanding with this higher critical understanding, just as I hope that most orthodox Christians don't replace their Sunday School faith with the lastest higher critical understanding of the Bible and Christ. Neither orthodox Christianity nor Mormonism can remain vibrant faiths in the lives of ordinary people if they are presented scientifically rather than spiritually and emotionally. In my experience, there are dimensions of truth that run much deeper than science (though the scientific perspective has value in its sphere). Christianity and the Mormon variant of Christianity have the power to transform lives for good when people believe and live in harmony with Sunday School theology. When they are evaluated pragmatically (even by social scientists tracking happiness and delinquency and child abandonment, etc.), Christianity and Mormonism can be shown to be profoundly true. They transform fallen humanity into more decent, honorable creatures than they would otherwise have been (not infallibly, but reliably). And they bring humanity into a saving relationship with God, a truth that science can never apprehend because its methods rule the finding out ex ante. In sum, orthodox Christians who have an attenuated faith as a consequence of their embrace of higher criticism are well positioned to accept Palmer's critique of Mormonism. But it is hipocritical for fundamentalist Biblical inerantists to embrace a higher critical critique of Mormonism while rejecting a similar critique of their own orthodox Christian faith. This book contains truth--but it is the same partial truth that higher critical accounts of Christianity contain--a truth that doesn't get to the essense of the religion or the faith it embodies.
Rating:
Summary: Faith is a human invention to make the mindless follow.
Review: Consider, at the outset, that anyone giving a one or two-star review must be a Mormon apologist, someone deeply defensive about anything challenging their "world view through Mormon glasses", or has not read the book.
I must also say that this book will be a bit difficult to follow if one doesn't have some cursory knowledge of the founding of the LDS church and it's scripture (beyond the Bible). Not to mention the fact that the various chapters do not deal with events in chronological order (eg. the First Vision, though occurring first in the story of Mormonism, is dealt with last in the text).
This is a book I read in a day-- I could not put it down. Mr. Palmer simply sets out to review the historical documentation of the earliest days of Joseph Smith's life and founding of the Mormon church. As he states, he was surprised that what he found conflicted extremely with the official history so closely guarded and repackaged by LDS authorities beginning after Smith's death until the present day.
The historical data debunks such myths as 1) Joseph Smith couldn't possibly write such a complicated book as the Book of Mormon due to his humble beginnings and lack of education ('it could ONLY have come from God'); there were plenty of literary and situational influences to account for the book, not to mention extensive, and one might say extreme, borrowing/quoting of text from the Bible. 2) The First Vision as recounted in Mormon scripture, where Smith purportedly saw and spoke to God the Father and Jesus Christ in a grove in upstate New York, was first mentioned by Smith nearly 10 years after the event supposedly occurred, contradicting his own original written history that had stood for the first 10 years of the church; that being a simple personal epiphany where a young Smith was wrestling with religion in general and a personal desire for the remission of sins. 3) The earliest accounts of anything to do with priesthood authority and its resortation to the earth said nothing of visitations and administrations by long-ago prophets and Biblical figures (ie. John the Baptist; Peter, James & John, etc.). According to contemporaneous documentation, these embellishments were added much later during a time of apostacy in the early church when Smith saw the need to solidify and magnify his own authority, as was the reasoning for enhancing original accounts of the First Vision.
To paraphrase Leonardo DaVinci, do we honestly believe that God put us here on the earth and gave us a wonderful intelligence and powers of discernment, only to tell us not to use them? Should we here on earth rely solely on faith and emotional validation in matters of God and the meaning of life? Or should we, with open minds and open hearts, seek to learn, to investigate, to find out for ourselves what history has to teach us? I think Mr. Palmer's book points us toward the latter. "Faith without works is dead," the church teaches us from the time we are very young. After reading this book, I would expand that to say that "Faith without intelligence and thoughtful review is equally useless and dead."
Rating:
Summary: Awesome Book!!
Review: Finally, LDS Church history being told the way any history should be told... telling the total and honest truth! Instead of being 'watered down' or changed like it has been since the Church started. I like how Mr. Palmer backed up Church history with LDS Sources to show he was using 'true facts'. I don't know if I agree with some of his speculations about differant things, but all in all this was an excellent book to read about the 'true' history of the LDS Church!
Rating: 
Summary: Velvet Glove Smashes Mormon Mythology
Review: Grant could have left out the Golden Pot story. He could have cited all the pseudo scholarship fabricated by entities such as F.A.R.M.S., F.A.I.R. and Professor Emeritus Hugh Nibley. But that was not his intent, I believe. When I read this book, I knew about that vast body of "scholarship" such as horses are really tapirs! (Tapir-back rider), steel swords are wooden clubs with flint shards affixed in them, and somehow, the Amerinds "forgot" about the single most useful innovation known to homo sapiens sapiens; the wheel. How sad they forgot about it! And how about Daniel Peterson's recent statement that the best archaeological evidence of the Book of Mormon, in the Americas, is a stone with the name "NHM" on it ON THE ARABIAN PENNINSULA(!) This is scholarship?
We all need a mythology to explain the meaning of our lives. Grant is honest about the factual history of Mormonism. True believers in Mormondom tend to ignore things that do not support their "model" of the Mormon Church. Scientists do the same with their scientific models to explain the natural world. But as more reliable data is obtained, scientists must revise their scientific models; often it is revised, one scientist's funeral at a time.
An historian ranks the value of an original document something like this:
Most reliable - written contemporaneous to an event by one friendly to the faith. (Martin Harris said twice, 40 years apart, that Smith saw a spirit while using his peep stone).
Very reliable - written contemporaneous to an event that contradicts the modern view, but the writer was friendly at the time. (Mother Smith wrote, through the Corays, that Joseph went to bed one night thinking about which church to join, and an angel, Nephi, appeared to him in a dream and told him not to join any. "And by the way Joseph, there is a gold book buried in a hill nearby." Huh?)
Somewhat reliable - written from an independent source by a disinterested party. (Willard Chase wrote that a Spirit helped Smith find a gold treasure, but the Spirit first looked like a toad in the stone box).
Unreliable - written significantly after the event by a friendly source. (Smith in 1832 wrote that he "saw the Lord" and in 1835 he "saw a first angel, then a second. Then the first testified Jesus was the Christ. Then he saw many angels." Then in 1838, by the hand of Mr. Mulholland, an articulate writer, Smith saw to beings; the Father and the Son).
Palmer goes to contemporary, eyewitness sources, including original scriptures and revelations that were edited and often are contradicted by current versions. Classic to this are the angelic vists of John the Baptist, and of Peter, James, and John. Smith originally had a "charismatic" view of priesthood authority, "if ye have desires to serve God, you are called to the work" (D&C 4, 1829) and "he is to be ordained by the power of the Holy Ghost, which is in the one who ordaines him ..." (D&C 20:60, 1830). Notice how no angels are needed to get authority; just an inner feeling, called "charismatic authority". Later versions, including in the current D&C awkwardly place John the Baptist (D&C 13) into the history. But look at the original (1833) Book of Commandments: No John the Baptist! Then look at the 1835 Book of Doctrine and Covenants: Still no John the Baptist! Where is he? Years later, an 1829 revelation is recorded as the current D&C 13. Where would you rank this document an an historian would? Very reliable? Somwhat reliable? Not reliable? Any contemporary (1829)independent accounts? Nope!
When one reads Mormon scripture with this view, Smith's dynamic evoloution of his theology leaps off the page. Try it! You will find the onion has many layers.
Sorry folks! Truth sometimes is not pleasent.
Palmer wants the factual truth to be digested by all "non-novice" Mormons. It will be very distracting to one who buys the "faith-promoting mythology" taught today. But when the mythology falls away, Mormons still have each other, 194 years of history, and the legacy left by some very hardy folks who endured tough times.
But why the velvet glove? I believe "Palmer's people" are the Mormons (as are mine), and he wants us to grow out of our intellectual adolesence and become Christians. That is his next book ...
I think we as Mormons have a lot to offer the world. Just think if our 19-year-old sons and our 21-year-old daughters went on missions to teach school to inner-city children in poor cities such as Calcutta and Tblisi! They would come home, bilingual and highly connected to a distant culture! Wonderful! What would the conversion/retention rate be? Can't say, but it could not get much worse.
Rating:
Summary: A balanced book by a Mormon persecuted by his church
Review: I highly recommend "An Insider's View of Mormon Origins". It reveals many important facts about Joseph Smith and the history of Mormonism that the LDS Church's senior patriarchal leadership has concealed from Mormons for generations in order to bolster their faith in them (the leaders) and the church organization (and build a religious/corporate empire). Palmer is to be commended for his balanced approach to communicating buried truth about Mormonism. It's beyond shameful that the church's patriarchal leadership has disfellowshipped Palmer because of his book, considering that the church's own publishing arm, Deseret Book, sold "An Insider's View of Mormon Origins" for two years. Their authoritarian action says a great deal about their need/addiction to control and lack of spiritual enlightenment.
If you want more information about Palmer, his book, and Mormon patriarchy's reaction to both, I'd suggest that you listen to his recent interview on KRCL RadioActive at http://www.publicbroadcasting.net/krcl/news.newsmain?action=article&ARTICLE_ID=716567
The full transcript of the interview is online at http://www.geocities.com/defend_grant_palmer/krclinterview.htm
Given the grossly unjust way that church priesthood leaders have treated Palmer, I'm quite impressed with his Christian response to them. From the interview, it certainly sounds like Palmer is a man who desires the best for the Mormon Church and Latter-Day Saints, which includes knowing the full truth about the origins of Mormonism. Regrettably, there are no men like him in the highest levels of church leadership, at least none that have the courage and integrity to step forward and do what the church has needed for generations. Until there is, the history of Mormonism will continue to be the Achilles heel of the LDS Church.
Rating: 
Summary: I've Met Grant Palmer
Review: I spoke with him at Sunstone a year and a half ago. Though he remained active it sure seemed to me that he was an apostate. He openly maintained, in essence, that Joseph Smith was a liar in matters of the restoration. His book had been out for some time and he said that his bishop and stake president hadn't said much of anything to him--like they didn't care much. Seems like something must have changed or maybe he has a new stake president but likely, based on my impression of him, he is becoming more vocal in his criticism of the Church.
Personally I don't think he adds much to an intelligent discussion. His story is that he taught faithfully in the CES for what, 30 years, AND THEN studied some Church History and decided it was bogus??? He has to say that because if he said that he knew said Church History and continued to teach orthodoxy he didn't believe in for all those years while drawing a paycheck from a Church he thought was lying then that would make him a hypocrite and worse.
I looked at one of those defend Grant Palmer websites that lament that the Church is about to punish one of its own and that's so horrible. Garbage! Those raising such a stink are enemies of the Church and it is abundantly transparent that their motives are far less than honest.
Rating:
Summary: Great book for the right audience.
Review: In his introduction, Grant Palmer states that this book is not written for children or recent converts. He feels the best audience for his book is someone who has spent time within the church and can appreciate his "Insider's View". The so-called "New Mormon History" is not a subject that most church members could easily jump into without a larger degree of background reading. Palmer's book serves as an accessible bridge for those members who want to appreciate the truth of their religion without being subjected to an author's agenda. I felt the initial chapters of the book were the strongest. These include a great overview of Joseph Smith as a translator, the Book of Mormon authorship, and Evangelical Protestantism as it existed in 19th century America.
Rating:
Summary: Terrific Presentation of Historical Facts
Review: Mr. Palmer does an excellent job of presenting the historical problems with the claims of the LDS Church. In short, the church version of it's foundational events lack any historical support or confirmation. According to an AP article, five former presidents of the Mormon History Association have signed a statement supporting the book as an "accurate summary of some of the controversies and puzzles surrounding Joseph Smith."
Excellent, I recommend it to anyone who wants honestly presented information.
|
