I've always wondered if I could trust the primary and secondary accounts of Brigham's transfiguration when many of them were recorded over a decade later. Is this the making of a myth or is there truth to it?
From what I understand it’s very true. If you consider whether the length of time before being recorded as a source, your going to run into trouble. Think about the Prophet Joseph, he didn’t write the First Vision until he was basically forced to because of misunderstandings and outright lies. We’ve got to realize that when something extremely spiritual like that is highly personal. Another thing is that Brigham didn’t witness his transformation so the only ones who could record it were those who witnessed it. There was so much upheaval in the church at that time. It makes me wonder if at the time things were so crazy that they literally have time to record it. It wasn’t that long after the transfiguration that they started preparing for the move west. One thing Dr. Sweat suggests is to search out the reports and see if they are first person. I would think that finding out about the person that wrote the record. Discover the kind of person they were. I feel if you want to know the truth, you need to search it out yourself and pray about it. Read The Saints book that has that story in it, they have a lot of footnotes. Good luck!
Sometimes a primary source like "Doctor" Philastus Hurlbut are anything but trustworthy. Yes there was a bias. What happens when a citation cartel underemphasises a bias?
I like the videos. They are helping me so much! And about God touching the eyes of Joseph, even when it is not a primary source, It really fits with divine gestures in Scriptures. So, for me It is a possibility. May the Lord bless you!
@@nogaffin, yes, I'm a "hating troll" who holds a current temple recommend. The Church CLEARLY has a lot at stake and significant bias when telling it's own history...I don't think that statement would be refuted by most.
@@clarketube1 At least you can admit to be a hating troll. Good for your honesty on that point. But you are the purest form of a hypocrite. You put forth an image with your "current recommend" but in your heart you are liar. A hater. Just another apostate or soon to be.
Best quote of the video: "There is no such thing as objective history"
Great work Anthony. I'm loving it and showing these in seminary.
Love this Dr. Sweat! That makes perfect sense
So glad I found this video! So insightful!
I've always wondered if I could trust the primary and secondary accounts of Brigham's transfiguration when many of them were recorded over a decade later. Is this the making of a myth or is there truth to it?
From what I understand it’s very true. If you consider whether the length of time before being recorded as a source, your going to run into trouble. Think about the Prophet Joseph, he didn’t write the First Vision until he was basically forced to because of misunderstandings and outright lies. We’ve got to realize that when something extremely spiritual like that is highly personal. Another thing is that Brigham didn’t witness his transformation so the only ones who could record it were those who witnessed it. There was so much upheaval in the church at that time. It makes me wonder if at the time things were so crazy that they literally have time to record it. It wasn’t that long after the transfiguration that they started preparing for the move west. One thing Dr. Sweat suggests is to search out the reports and see if they are first person. I would think that finding out about the person that wrote the record. Discover the kind of person they were. I feel if you want to know the truth, you need to search it out yourself and pray about it. Read The Saints book that has that story in it, they have a lot of footnotes. Good luck!
Sometimes a primary source like "Doctor" Philastus Hurlbut are anything but trustworthy. Yes there was a bias.
What happens when a citation cartel underemphasises a bias?
Similar to family history research.
That was SOOO excellent!
I would do the painting!
Tricky thing about LDS history is that almost all the parties had lots of reason for considerable bias. BTW, this is an enjoyable presentation series.
I appreciate you making these videos. I am a seminary teacher and we need to know how to combat these hard questions. THANK YOU!
I like the videos. They are helping me so much! And about God touching the eyes of Joseph, even when it is not a primary source, It really fits with divine gestures in Scriptures. So, for me It is a possibility. May the Lord bless you!
Yes, and the LDS Church can be thought of as Driver #1 in your analogy. There's certainly a lot at stake.
Yawn....just a hating troll. Go away
@@nogaffin, yes, I'm a "hating troll" who holds a current temple recommend. The Church CLEARLY has a lot at stake and significant bias when telling it's own history...I don't think that statement would be refuted by most.
@@clarketube1 At least you can admit to be a hating troll. Good for your honesty on that point. But you are the purest form of a hypocrite. You put forth an image with your "current recommend" but in your heart you are liar. A hater. Just another apostate or soon to be.
Coukd I email you? I have some questions I need help with.