A FANTASTIC read! Careful, once you start you just can't stop...

[Sleeping in EQ]

Originally Posted by Archaea

Fascinating comment here:

"Christian groups have been as forceful as any in trying to put down the Mormons, I think, partly to protect their position as respectable philosophically. I once in a meeting asked a group of evangelical Christians – a small group; Mark Noll was there, Richard Mouw, various other distinguished people – why don't we join forces in making a case that there are grounds for believing in the existence of God simply because the spiritual life confirms it? People believe there is a God because it's manifest to them spiritually.

They really didn't want any of that. They wanted to maintain their philosophical, rational claims, defending their miracles on sort of a quasi-scientific basis. They did not want to get in bed with the Mormons and their strictly subjective view of things. So there is kind of a gap intellectually. Mormonism has never embraced philosophy; it is not particularly interested in philosophy. I would say our most natural ally among the philosophers, frankly, is William James whose view of God is very close to the Mormon view of God."

It was heartwarming for me to discover Bushman's liking for James. A wise BYU professor got me into James when I started asking questions.

[Sleeping in EQ]

Originally Posted by Archaea

another interesting quote:

Yeah, it's one of the mysteries of how it works in that Mormons, both individually and as an official church, have always rebuffed attempts to systematize ideas. There is no creed. If a book is published called Mormon Doctrine that tries to outline Mormon doctrine, it's repudiated by the president of the church. Over and over again, people go back and say, look, follow the Scriptures, read the Scriptures – which in a way begs the question of how you interpret the Scriptures. But every effort to do doctrine systematically is resisted. In that way, it's kind of an anti-intellectual thing against systematic theology.

Bushman's got this right too, except that it's not exactly an anti-intellectual thing. It's a safeguard against the kind of systematic philosophizing that enabled creedal Christianity, but it also encourages individual intellectual pursuit. One of the things that I love about the Church is that it's a great framework within which to ask questions (and sometimes find answers that satisfy me for a time). I like that I can cast my net far and wide, and that others can too and that we can have different perspectives on things.

[creekster]

Great discussion. I only managed about half for now, but I am very glad it was brought to our attention.

[Archaea]

I like his take on things, and am more and more impressed by it. This transcript is great.

[SteelBlue]

Thanks for posting that Cali. I'm only about a 1/4 of the way through, but it's been fascinating.

[Archaea]

Another great quote:

Frank said we seem to be in this Mormon moment in the popular culture, and I wonder if there is anything parallel going on in the academy. What is your sense? You're in the relatively rare perch of being a Mormon historian at an Ivy League university. I wonder, what is the state of Mormon studies in the American academy, and what are the live questions that people ought to be looking at?

BUSHMAN: There are two universities – a strange pair: Claremont Graduate University and the University of Wyoming – that are actively raising money for a chair in Mormon studies. Not to mention Utah State University. There have been a number of conferences on Mormonism – two of them at Yale within the last couple of years, one with the Library of Congress, others in various places – where Mormonism was discussed within an academic setting. I gave a paper on the Book of Mormon to the Intellectual History Seminar in the Charles Warren Center at Harvard with a huge group present to discuss seriously the place of the Book of Mormon in American literature.

I think it's on the radar screen after being off it for a while. It's being treated gingerly by people not knowing whether or not to take it seriously but still recognizing that it's unavoidable. I mean, you've got Romney – I ask myself, why in the world did this ever come about that a Harvard seminar on the Book of Mormon would attract all these people? But there was Kim Clark, who was the dean of the Harvard Business School; there was Mitt Romney; and now university professor Laurel Ulrich, who is running the seminar, a Mormon herself. Mormonism not only grows in numbers and spreads, but there are more Harry Reids and Gordon Smiths around. You can't disregard it. It's forced on your attention. That affects the academy as well as political reportage.

So my guess is that we'll see a huge number of books that are an introduction to Mormonism. Presses all over the place are trying to find something because they sense there is a market there. I'm writing one myself as a matter of fact. (Laughter.)

[UtahDan]

Originally Posted by Cali Coug

http://pewforum.org/events/?EventID=148

This is incredibly interesting and engrossing. It is very lengthy, but fascinating (though in some ways depressing).

Bushman is an absolute gem. I love him for the reasons I think non-LDS do: he doesn't back away from anything we believe or any part of our history and just candidly acknowledges the ambiguities in a way that I believe is incredibly disarming to skeptics and hostiles.

It really is interesting, to me, how much more convincing and interesting Bushman is that almost anyone I listen to on LDS topics because it is so completely non-defensive.

It just reinforces my opinion that much though our defensive instincts may get aroused, here and in other arenas, that allowing them to be so is counter-productive and self indulgent.

I truly hope that my generation produces a Bushman.

EDIT: I would also note that it is fascinating to me how so many of the questions asked in that group mirror themes that we continually retread around here. There are interesting questions worthy of exploration.

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by UtahDan

Bushman is an absolute gem. I love him for the reasons I think non-LDS do: he doesn't back away from anything we believe or any part of our history and just candidly acknowledges the ambiguities in a way that I believe is incredibly disarming to skeptics and hostiles.

It really is interesting, to me, how much more convincing and interesting Bushman is that almost anyone I listen to on LDS topics because it is so completely non-defensive.

It just reinforces my opinion that much though our defensive instincts may get aroused, here and in other arenas, that allowing them to be so is counter-productive and self indulgent.

I truly hope that my generation produces a Bushman.

EDIT: I would also note that it is fascinating to me how so many of the questions asked in that group mirror themes that we continually retread around here. There are interesting questions worthy of exploration.

His answers resonate with me, and perhaps others here. He is knowledgeable, yet paradoxically for the mullahs, he is also very devout and faithful. I understand he has served as bishop, stake president and is not a stake patriarch, hardly the type of apostate some might believe him to be.

Nonetheless, because he has devoted himself to an intellectual study and an honest study of our history, he can tackle the grittier issues fairly.

As far as producing one, SIEQ, Pelagius, Solon and CHC, you guys better step up to the plate. And Dan and I will be able to say, we knew you when.

[UteStar]

Thanks for the link...I will be going thru it later tonight.

Harold Bloom, the Yale professor and writer, has brought up mormonism many times in his books and what role they will play in the future of america. He has been very important in bringing mormons to the table (whether or not you believe in his conclusions). It is nice to see Bushman grabbing this and discussing the potential greatness and the strangeness that is mormonism.

[Lost Student]

I can't believe I read the entire transcript so late at night while procrastinating other things.

I really enjoyed all the questions and answers. Bushman is very impressive.


This is my first post btw.

Hey, everybody.