Sunstone Article on BoM arguments for and against historicity

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by Tex

Ouch, yeah. That is some radical stuff.

In depth, not radical. There is so much throw away stuff in Ensign.

[SeattleUte]

Originally Posted by Archaea

https://www.sunstonemagazine.com/ind...ask=view&id=44

Seattle you need not read. Insert your normal stuff.

The conclusion is interesting:

It amazes me how many words can be written about nothing. Book of Mormon "historicicity?" What is there to consider?

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by SeattleUte

It amazes me how many words can be written about nothing. Book of Mormon "historicicity?" What is there to consider?

The articles in two parts examine first how people view the BoM, both those who accept and those who reject it as a faithful work, and then how those conclusions impact Mormons and how the act on those around them.

You are part of Mormon culture but only part of the outskirts now of the outlying area. I am certainly a suburbanite, but I appreciate the inner city as well.

It is an interesting review of perspectives and SIEQ states the second piece about the sociological affects are even better.

[Tex]

Originally Posted by Archaea

In depth, not radical. There is so much throw away stuff in Ensign.

Maybe you're not the target audience.

In any case, comparing a single paragraph of Beck's to an entire full-length Sunstone article and then complaining about "depth" is pretty disingenuous.

[MikeWaters]

I'm not concerned that the Ensign is fluff, if it is in fact that.

I'm more concerned about whether the church tries to excommunicate people who run Dialogue and Sunstone, merely for having an open conversation, if that is what Sunstone and Dialogue are doing.

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

I'm not concerned that the Ensign is fluff, if it is in fact that.

I'm more concerned about whether the church tries to excommunicate people who run Dialogue and Sunstone, merely for having an open conversation, if that is what Sunstone and Dialogue are doing.

I've never been close enough to any of the authors or editors to know. Some here have and they would be qualified to discuss that.

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by Tex

Maybe you're not the target audience.

In any case, comparing a single paragraph of Beck's to an entire full-length Sunstone article and then complaining about "depth" is pretty disingenuous.

So an adult member is not a target audience of its magazine for mature audiences?

Do they have one for me?

[Tex]

Originally Posted by Archaea

So an adult member is not a target audience of its magazine for mature audiences?

Do they have one for me?

You think "adult member" is the only criteria they have in mind when they publish?

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by Tex

You think "adult member" is the only criteria they have in mind when they publish?

Frankly, I don't know what they think, as I'm not on their editorial board. But in fairness it would be difficult to generate a publication of wide distribution which cuts across the wide spectrum of membership. So my speculation is, they target the audience where it is most needed in their opinions.

And in their opinion it is most needed for the new and rank and file members, who need a story here or there to bolster their faith so that they can feel good and continue serving in the Church. They probably don't see a big need to target analytical lawyers or scholars who pick apart historical aspects a a form of sport. But their approach has pitfalls as well. My belief is that there is enough interest to support something for those of us who want more than just milk. They refuse to discuss the meat and potatoes.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Originally Posted by Archaea

Frankly, I don't know what they think, as I'm not on their editorial board. But in fairness it would be difficult to generate a publication of wide distribution which cuts across the wide spectrum of membership. So my speculation is, they target the audience where it is most needed in their opinions.

And in their opinion it is most needed for the new and rank and file members, who need a story here or there to bolster their faith so that they can feel good and continue serving in the Church. They probably don't see a big need to target analytical lawyers or scholars who pick apart historical aspects a a form of sport. But their approach has pitfalls as well. My belief is that there is enough interest to support something for those of us who want more than just milk. They refuse to discuss the meat and potatoes.

I don't have a problem at all with multiple publications, each with different missions. As Mike pointed out, the problem arises when the church tries to stifle publications. Such as when BYU decided to forbid faculty from participating in Dialogue/Sunstone:

https://www.sunstonemagazine.com/pdf/087-62-69.pdf