project mayhem

i've been reading the new mormon challenge. it's an interesting read. as far as 'anti-mormon' books go, this is by far the most courteous and intellectually engaging one i have read. this does not mean i agree with them. so far, i'm about 3/4 of the way through the book

hazen's and mosser's introductory articles about the growth of membership and the 'apologetic impulse' was rather interesting. these articles weren't too critical, but rather gave a synopsis of how the church is right now.

copan and craig's arguements for creation ex nihilo weren't all that great. there scriptural arguements seemed strong at first (which really means nothing to me), but their deductive arguements seemed flawed and and their inductive arguements seemed outdated. for an awesome review of their arguements (which in my opinion, crush their arguements) see blake ostler's review.

adam's and owen's articles were pretty much the same 'i think the scriptures say this' that shows up all over the place in discussions like this. they are some of the first to really reply to lds claims of polytheism/henotheism in the early church and israelite religion, but they seem to ignore some of the greater arguements made

parrish's article was interesting, but i think he spent too much time beating a straw god..i mean man. mosser's arguement was seriously flawed. see ostler's review for arguements criticizing theirs

i haven't read orson pratt's absurdities of immaterialism so i can't say much about moreland's criticism of it

blomerg's article discussing whether or not mormons are christian was another interesting read. it was courteous, and i can better understand why some evangelical believe that we cannot be properly classified as christian in their eyes, but i still found his arguements flawed. for a beautiful reply, read what kent jackson had to say here

that's as far as i have gotten. i'll give my thoughts on the rest when i finish the book in the next couple days