![]() |
![]() |
#1 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: The People's Republic of Monsanto
Posts: 3,085
![]() |
![]()
The point I have made is this:
Reason demands that, using it's tools and only it's tools, you make a strong case for the Book of Mormon as an authentic historical work. Any takers? Just put your evidence on the table there. Why is no one moving? And yet, somehow, I, and others of similar view, are the ones who aren't being ingenuous. Instead of embracing the modernist position that puts reason and faith in a universal dichotomy, I know that there are other, intellectually valid ways of approaching the Book of Mormon. Through dialectic, for example. Through a philosophical approach that is intellectually vibrant and respected, but that, because it acknowledges reason's limits, has room for faith. It has room for exactly what President Hinckley said of the BoM in the Feb. 2004 Ensign. And yet some of you have questioned my integrity and forthrightness. I have been extremely honest and very, very forthright.
__________________
"Do not despise the words of prophets, but test everything; hold fast to what is good; " 1 Thess. 5:21 (NRSV) We all trust our own unorthodoxies. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Between Iraq and a hard place
Posts: 7,569
![]() |
![]()
Has anyone accused you of being Todd Christensen?
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
Senior Member
|
![]()
I wonder how Hugh Nibley is doing these days. You think he's had a Bible Bash with Fawn Brodie yet?
__________________
εν αρχη ην ο λογος |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Utah
Posts: 1,148
![]() |
![]() Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Utah
Posts: 1,148
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Bookmarks |
|
|