Comments on: The Role of History in Religion: Two Diverging Views http://www.juvenileinstructor.org/the-role-of-history-in-religion-two-diverging-views/ Fri, 10 Feb 2012 00:20:29 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: Juvenile Instructor » The Transcendentalist’s “New Bible”, the Book of Mormon, and the Romantic Desire for Modern Scriptural Texts http://www.juvenileinstructor.org/the-role-of-history-in-religion-two-diverging-views/comment-page-1/#comment-9397 Juvenile Instructor » The Transcendentalist’s “New Bible”, the Book of Mormon, and the Romantic Desire for Modern Scriptural Texts Thu, 03 Jul 2008 01:52:48 +0000 http://www.juvenileinstructor.org/the-role-of-history-in-religion-two-diverging-views/#comment-9397 [...] a deeper comparative analysis of Emerson and Joseph Smith’s views of the role of history, see here). The Transcendentalists’ emphasis on the present to the point of de-emphasizing the past [...] [...] a deeper comparative analysis of Emerson and Joseph Smith’s views of the role of history, see here). The Transcendentalists’ emphasis on the present to the point of de-emphasizing the past [...]

]]> By: Juvenile Instructor » The Role of Friendship and Community http://www.juvenileinstructor.org/the-role-of-history-in-religion-two-diverging-views/comment-page-1/#comment-7776 Juvenile Instructor » The Role of Friendship and Community Tue, 03 Jun 2008 16:21:28 +0000 http://www.juvenileinstructor.org/the-role-of-history-in-religion-two-diverging-views/#comment-7776 [...] in case you didnt get enough on Emerson back in February (see here and here), this is an encore [...] [...] in case you didnt get enough on Emerson back in February (see here and here), this is an encore [...]

]]> By: Juvenile Instructor » The Transformation of Joseph? http://www.juvenileinstructor.org/the-role-of-history-in-religion-two-diverging-views/comment-page-1/#comment-3659 Juvenile Instructor » The Transformation of Joseph? Thu, 13 Mar 2008 15:42:58 +0000 http://www.juvenileinstructor.org/the-role-of-history-in-religion-two-diverging-views/#comment-3659 [...] I also agree with Clark in believing that these similarities can be easily overstated (see here and here). While both hoped to collapse the distance between the sacred and the profane, I just [...] [...] I also agree with Clark in believing that these similarities can be easily overstated (see here and here). While both hoped to collapse the distance between the sacred and the profane, I just [...]

]]> By: Philosophy and Theology Posts From Around II : Mormon Metaphysics http://www.juvenileinstructor.org/the-role-of-history-in-religion-two-diverging-views/comment-page-1/#comment-3465 Philosophy and Theology Posts From Around II : Mormon Metaphysics Sat, 08 Mar 2008 04:42:25 +0000 http://www.juvenileinstructor.org/the-role-of-history-in-religion-two-diverging-views/#comment-3465 [...] That probably should be read relative to the Juvenile Instructor’s posts on Emerson (Here and here) I made lots of comments at both sites. Some might find my post on mysticism from the old [...] [...] That probably should be read relative to the Juvenile Instructor’s posts on Emerson (Here and here) I made lots of comments at both sites. Some might find my post on mysticism from the old [...]

]]> By: Kevin Christensen http://www.juvenileinstructor.org/the-role-of-history-in-religion-two-diverging-views/comment-page-1/#comment-2843 Kevin Christensen Wed, 20 Feb 2008 15:20:13 +0000 http://www.juvenileinstructor.org/the-role-of-history-in-religion-two-diverging-views/#comment-2843 Emerson's account of his visit to Salt Lake City while traveling on to visit naturalist John Muir), besides being hilarious (Young's obliviousness regarding Emerson's stature elsewhere, and the description of a melodrama they attended in SLC), includes his comment that listening to Brigham Young speak in the tabernacle quite mended his impressions of the man. He thought Young offered good sense and practical advice. It is after these comments that Emerson said that after this, Father Abraham could go no further, which I see as his prediction that Bible religion was on the way out. Kevin Christensen Pittsburgh, PA Emerson’s account of his visit to Salt Lake City while traveling on to visit naturalist John Muir), besides being hilarious (Young’s obliviousness regarding Emerson’s stature elsewhere, and the description of a melodrama they attended in SLC), includes his comment that listening to Brigham Young speak in the tabernacle quite mended his impressions of the man. He thought Young offered good sense and practical advice. It is after these comments that Emerson said that after this, Father Abraham could go no further, which I see as his prediction that Bible religion was on the way out.

Kevin Christensen
Pittsburgh, PA

]]> By: Clark http://www.juvenileinstructor.org/the-role-of-history-in-religion-two-diverging-views/comment-page-1/#comment-2825 Clark Wed, 20 Feb 2008 06:27:59 +0000 http://www.juvenileinstructor.org/the-role-of-history-in-religion-two-diverging-views/#comment-2825 I'd add that Brigham Young in particular tended to adopt the more Emersonian way of speaking rather than the way Benjamin (or Paul) tended to frame things. I think this is ultimately an issue of rhetoric as I said. But it is interesting. I’d add that Brigham Young in particular tended to adopt the more Emersonian way of speaking rather than the way Benjamin (or Paul) tended to frame things. I think this is ultimately an issue of rhetoric as I said. But it is interesting.

]]> By: Clark http://www.juvenileinstructor.org/the-role-of-history-in-religion-two-diverging-views/comment-page-1/#comment-2824 Clark Wed, 20 Feb 2008 06:26:52 +0000 http://www.juvenileinstructor.org/the-role-of-history-in-religion-two-diverging-views/#comment-2824 Regarding the natural man is an enemy bit. I'm not so sure how Emerson would react. In terms of rhetoric, of course he was all about nature. But nature as properly engaged with. Which entails the spiritual. So in a sense Emerson's philosophy can be seen as making a very similar claim to many ways of reading Mosiah 3. I don't have my Emerson handy, but in some of his more neoPlatonic passages you get very much an idea of folks who are enlightened and who have their minds in tune with Nature (with a capital N) versus those who are caught up in more transitory things. Check, for instance his essay <a href="http://www.rwe.org/works/Essays-1st_Series_09_The_Over-Soul.htm" rel="nofollow">"The OverSoul"</a>. Yeah there are some passages one couldn't help but disagree with. But there's a lot there a Mormon would see in Mosiah. Consider the ending, for instance. <blockquote>More and more the surges of everlasting nature enter into me, and I become public and human in my regards and actions. So come I to live in thoughts, and act with energies, which are immortal. Thus revering the soul, and learning, as the ancient said, that "its beauty is immense," man will come to see that the world is the perennial miracle which the soul worketh, and be less astonished at particular wonders; he will learn that there is no profane history; that all history is sacred; that the universe is represented in an atom, in a moment of time. He will weave no longer a spotted life of shreds and patches, but he will live with a divine unity. He will cease from what is base and frivolous in his life, and be content with all places and with any service he can render. He will calmly front the morrow in the negligency of that trust which carries God with it, and so hath already the whole future in the bottom of the heart.</blockquote> Regarding the natural man is an enemy bit. I’m not so sure how Emerson would react. In terms of rhetoric, of course he was all about nature. But nature as properly engaged with. Which entails the spiritual. So in a sense Emerson’s philosophy can be seen as making a very similar claim to many ways of reading Mosiah 3.

I don’t have my Emerson handy, but in some of his more neoPlatonic passages you get very much an idea of folks who are enlightened and who have their minds in tune with Nature (with a capital N) versus those who are caught up in more transitory things. Check, for instance his essay “The OverSoul”. Yeah there are some passages one couldn’t help but disagree with. But there’s a lot there a Mormon would see in Mosiah. Consider the ending, for instance.

More and more the surges of everlasting nature enter into me, and I become public and human in my regards and actions. So come I to live in thoughts, and act with energies, which are immortal. Thus revering the soul, and learning, as the ancient said, that “its beauty is immense,” man will come to see that the world is the perennial miracle which the soul worketh, and be less astonished at particular wonders; he will learn that there is no profane history; that all history is sacred; that the universe is represented in an atom, in a moment of time. He will weave no longer a spotted life of shreds and patches, but he will live with a divine unity. He will cease from what is base and frivolous in his life, and be content with all places and with any service he can render. He will calmly front the morrow in the negligency of that trust which carries God with it, and so hath already the whole future in the bottom of the heart.

]]> By: Clark http://www.juvenileinstructor.org/the-role-of-history-in-religion-two-diverging-views/comment-page-1/#comment-2823 Clark Wed, 20 Feb 2008 06:19:25 +0000 http://www.juvenileinstructor.org/the-role-of-history-in-religion-two-diverging-views/#comment-2823 Ben the very divide between materialist and idealist is, of course, someone problematic unless one is making specific ontological (and not physical) claims. Thus one could be a neoPlatonist but very open to nature and science. (I actually have around here some very interesting modern neo-neo-platonist philosophy of science articles) So, to give the example I always use to clarify idealism to non-philosophers, Berkeley believed all the material things we talk about were real. He was just making a particular metaphysical claim about their ultimate nature. I know you know all that but I bring it out for other readers. The point being that Joseph wasn't a philosopher so one has to tread carefully. His materialism wasn't necessarily an ontological one (despite Orson Pratt's attempts to make it so). And the passages that sound idealistic (such as D&C 88 & 93) have to be read with caution. So when applying an Emersonian critique to Joseph regarding materialism one has to be careful. I'm using materialist in a loser sense (as Emerson sometimes did as well) as more an interest in the regular world material items we have. But clearly Joseph also saw the importance of principles and ideas. I think it arguably that he also adopted a realism towards such things. (Although once again we have to be careful: Joseph wasn't doing philosophy) So while I present Joseph as a materialist I don't think he was an empiricist or a positivist. Probably something closer to a scholastic realism ala Scotus (minus the philosophical subtlety). i.e. not quite a strict materialist or a strict idealist. Ben the very divide between materialist and idealist is, of course, someone problematic unless one is making specific ontological (and not physical) claims. Thus one could be a neoPlatonist but very open to nature and science. (I actually have around here some very interesting modern neo-neo-platonist philosophy of science articles)

So, to give the example I always use to clarify idealism to non-philosophers, Berkeley believed all the material things we talk about were real. He was just making a particular metaphysical claim about their ultimate nature.

I know you know all that but I bring it out for other readers.

The point being that Joseph wasn’t a philosopher so one has to tread carefully. His materialism wasn’t necessarily an ontological one (despite Orson Pratt’s attempts to make it so). And the passages that sound idealistic (such as D&C 88 & 93) have to be read with caution.

So when applying an Emersonian critique to Joseph regarding materialism one has to be careful.

I’m using materialist in a loser sense (as Emerson sometimes did as well) as more an interest in the regular world material items we have. But clearly Joseph also saw the importance of principles and ideas. I think it arguably that he also adopted a realism towards such things. (Although once again we have to be careful: Joseph wasn’t doing philosophy) So while I present Joseph as a materialist I don’t think he was an empiricist or a positivist. Probably something closer to a scholastic realism ala Scotus (minus the philosophical subtlety). i.e. not quite a strict materialist or a strict idealist.

]]> By: Juvenile Instructor » Emerson–The Sequel! http://www.juvenileinstructor.org/the-role-of-history-in-religion-two-diverging-views/comment-page-1/#comment-2802 Juvenile Instructor » Emerson–The Sequel! Wed, 20 Feb 2008 00:11:07 +0000 http://www.juvenileinstructor.org/the-role-of-history-in-religion-two-diverging-views/#comment-2802 [...] Only 92% MormonJuvenile Instructor » I’m Only 92% Mormon: Which Theologian are You?Ben: The Role of HistoryRay: The Role of [...] [...] Only 92% MormonJuvenile Instructor » I’m Only 92% Mormon: Which Theologian are You?Ben: The Role of HistoryRay: The Role of [...]

]]> By: Ben http://www.juvenileinstructor.org/the-role-of-history-in-religion-two-diverging-views/comment-page-1/#comment-2791 Ben Tue, 19 Feb 2008 21:09:43 +0000 http://www.juvenileinstructor.org/the-role-of-history-in-religion-two-diverging-views/#comment-2791 Ray: Not well. :) Ray: Not well. :)

]]>