Category: Uncategorized

One of the key features of modernity is the increasing interaction of peoples of different geographical, cultural, and religious backgrounds. While it is a mistake to assume that pre-modern societies did not interact with other cultures, what makes modernity distinctive is the extent to which this interaction occurs. This condition has lead to a variety of responses, from constructively engaging, to ignoring, to eradicating the Other. Consequently, one of the main focuses in ethics has become how to deal with difference. My concern is that as LDS, we have seriously lagged behind in this project which has impacted us negatively.
Continue reading “Knowing our Neighbor: Mormonism’s Failure at Pluralism”

The gloves are off, and all the filler scenes of cuteness like going to a Hogwarts dance are gone. I found it very satisfying, energetic, and I have no complaints. Except that the movie can’t come fast enough. Continue reading “S#!% Gets Real! Spoiler-free review of Harry Potter 7”

In my home ward, my Dad is the SP, and my Mom has taught Institute, Seminary, and Continuing Ed. for adults for many years. The GD class tends to be made up of those actually interested in original setting and scholarly interpretations, as well as the usual kinds of discussion and application. Consequently, the class tends to be happy when all three of us end up in GD, twice yearly or so.

I happened to be home once last year during a lesson on some chapters from Isaiah. The teacher did a decent job, but the comments all tended in one direction. By typical GD standards, it was probably quite good. But afterwards, as I walked out, one man I know well asked me, “Why didn’t you say anything about Isaiah?” Continue reading “Missing the Forest”

To explain why it isn’t completely impossible (or unusually irrational) to hold to a certain form of belief appears to be the chief purpose for all apologetics. With that in mind, it seems to me that there are two fundamentals approaches to the endeavor. Neither, ultimately, is going to dissuade the determined disbeliever from their viewpoint, but one is better designed for the unbeliever and the other better suited to the choir. Continue reading “The ethics of the Apologetic toolkit”

Over at T&S a discussion about the legalization of polygamy was closed after some of the participants got too heated. I’m not asking to continue that discussion here, but I do think it raises a central issue–how much diversity can and should the church tolerate?

What issues/practices/doctrines can we hold differing “righteous” positions on; and which require complete uniformity? How do describe the interplay between culture and gospel norms? Why does it seem that we are more comfortable with gospel norms varying through time, rather than varying by location? We can consent to the practice of polygamy in the OT or in the 19th century, but why not contemporary Africa?

My home Stake President sent this clip around to all his Bishops, probably the only Steve Martin/SNL skit to ever receive such treatment.

Where would I get this “saved money”? Find out today!

I served a mission back when the commitment pattern was king. Prepare–Identify–Invite–Follow Up; those were the rules of the game. If we could get investigators to make and keep commitments, they would feel the spirit and ultimately receive a testimony of the gospel.

I’m wondering though, what this tells us about the role of doctrine (loosely defined) in the conversion experience. Does doctrine serve a functional role, where it is a means to an end? Is the value of doctrine, perhaps, more in its ability to bring about a particular result, rather than in its systematicity? To make it more concrete, the way I viewed “teaching the gospel” in light of the commitment pattern was not so much in getting people to understand the gospel as a comprehensive theology, as much as it was to get them to take action and experience the gospel for themselves.

My hunch is that the value of things such as the BoM is not so much in its ability to present a coherent argument for a certain ideology, as much as it is in its capacity to generate a conversion experience. It’s a raft of sorts, meant to get us to the other shore, and not to be mistaken for that shore itself.

A few Sundays ago the topic of the sacrament meeting talks was the “restoration”. It had all the necessary ingredients: restoration versus reformation, authority being lost as the ancient apostles were killed, our church being the “same” as the ancient church, and America as the prepared homeland for the restoration.

A brief discussion I had with someone between sacrament and sunday school centered on bringing up the differences rather than similarities bewteen the Latter-day church and the ancient church. By only discussing the restoration as a return to the early church, do we sometimes create an awkward space to talk about differences? Can we spell out some of these differences in a faith-reaffirming way?

I’m no historian of early Christianity, and so I won’t even try to make any historical claims (although those with historical interests are more than welcome to); but I am wondering what kinds of similarities are essential to our “restorationist” claims, and what kinds of differences are we comfortable accepting?

While reading through some of the transcripts of the interviews used for PBS’ “The Mormons“, some of Elder Holland’s comments caught my eye. Dave over at DMI also posted about this interview, although he didn’t necessarily pursue the issue I would like to raise here.

Continue reading “Faithful Dissent”

While everybody has been discussing the PBS film on Mormons, a recent archaeological discovery in Israel might be of some interest: Herod’s tomb has been found. Unfortunately, no body was found, but the excavators at the site are quite sure that the tomb does indeed belong to Herod.

Herod is that bad guy in Matthew that you’ve all read about – the infanticidal maniac who “pharoah-ed up” and thought he could rid the Jewish faith of its Davidic Messiah (a threat to his seat within the Empire) by slaughtering all the babes of Jesus’ would-be neighborhood. Luckily Joseph and Mary bolted just in time, Jesus was born, lived, died, and here you are now gathering up precious pearls of truth. Well, add one more pearl of great price to your necklace: Herod was probably a real guy.

Not that I doubt the historicity of the NT per se; I actually find it more historically entrenched than the OT, but I suspect that the infanticide about which we read in Matthew may have been an invention of sorts so that it fit with the Exodus tradition – Matthew seems to coincide his account of Jesus with Moses on several levels – macro and micro. Regardless, I think it’s cool that they concluded that this is Herod even without finding a body.

So rejoice, ye Mormons, for one more artifact has been dug up which ads a kernel of rationality to your faith – which is a good thing.