Sunday, February 28, 2010
Saturday, February 27, 2010
WWEED? What Would Eugene England Do?
Yesterday, I reread the (infamous) letter that Bruce R. McConkie wrote to Eugene England, severely rebuking him with some of the most abusive, nauseating, and--dare I say?--un-Christlike way possible. Just as with the first time I read this letter, my admiration for Gene multiplied a thousand times over. At the same time, I have to ask myself, Could I have done as Eugene England did? Could I have held back and not retaliated? Could I have written back that I would comply, ask others not to criticize McConkie in my presence, still praise and sustain him, and then wait 4 years after McConkie's death to publish the peace that provoked McConkie's wrath?
I don't think I could.
Some back story:
In June of 1980, Elder Bruce R. McConkie gave a speech at BYU entitled "The Seven Deadly Heresies," (original version / published version) condemning beliefs in (1) God's progression in knowledge; (2) organic evolution; (3) that temple marriage guarantees salvation; (4) that baptisms for the dead offer those who have died a second-chance to accept the gospel; (5) that a soul may progress from one kingdom of glory to another; (6) Adam-God; and (7) that perfection is required for salvation.
The problem with McConkie's speech was that (2) can only be denied by those ignorant of the facts of evolution; (1), (5), and (6) were taught by many Church leaders, including Brigham Young; and that the dogmatic assertion of (4) --as nearly all of McConkie's words were-- implies a unloving God that most Mormons simply don't believe in.
To make things worse, McConkie authoritatively claimed that the denial of (1) was a "saving truth"; that "no man can believe in the atonement" who believes in (2); and that anyone who believes in (6) "does not deserve to be saved."
He of course failed to mention that Brigham Young was not going to be saved for believing and teaching (1), (5), and (6).
Posted by
the narrator
at
12:30 AM
6
comments
Tuesday, February 23, 2010
Recent Reads
In this brilliant little book, Givens sidesteps the usual mode of introducing the Book of Mormon by briefly describing it's narrative, and instead gives brief character sketches, examples of narrative forms, and other approaches to the text. It is by far the best introduction to the BofM yet, and is worth reading for even the most experienced of BofM readers. 5 thumbs up.
I read this perhaps a decade too late, and thus found myself a little bored by finding nothing particularly new. I do think it is better than Dan Vogel's American Apocrypha: Essays on the Book of Mormon. 4 thumbs up.
Too twisted and messed up. Even for me. 2 thumbs up.
Posted by
the narrator
at
1:37 PM
0
comments
Sunday, February 21, 2010
Guess who's back. Back again. The Narrator is back. Tell your friends.
I'm back!!!!
~~~~~
This was a lame allusion to Eminem in case you didn't catch it.
Posted by
the narrator
at
6:09 PM
6
comments
Friday, February 19, 2010
How is it that Bill O'Reilly is able to come off as the most reasonable person at Faux News?
Posted by
the narrator
at
7:38 AM
0
comments
Wednesday, February 17, 2010
Glenn Beck once again proves that he is a lying quack
From the Rachel Maddow Show
h/t Steve
Posted by
the narrator
at
5:18 PM
7
comments
Monday, February 15, 2010
"Those called Christians" and their "false Christianity"
My friend Chris recently pointed out that the new Gospel Principles manual teaches that traditional Christians are a part of "false Christianity. I couldn't believe it. I quickly googled "gospel principles manual 'false Christianity'" and the Church's official version came up on the third entry.
Wow.
Here are some select sections from the 16th chapter of the increasingly terrible Gospel Principles Manual. (With some commentary.)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Jesus established his Church when he was on the earth. (Except most scholars today believe that Jesus did not establish anything resembling an organized Church as we understand it today. Paul, the father of Christianity, did not either.)
All of the offices and functions of the Church in the days of Jesus are present in the Church today. (Except pastors, and for the others they often have completely different functions and are present as names only--except in the case of evangelists-patriarchs, in which they differ by name and function.)
The Church of Jesus Christ was a carefully organized unit. (Except that it wasn't.)
Jesus appointed other priesthood leaders to assist the Apostles in the work of the ministry. He sent officers called seventies in pairs to preach the gospel. (Except the seventy that Jesus sent out were not actually called 'seventies.') Other officers in the Church were evangelists (patriarchs), pastors (presiding leaders), high priests, elders, bishops, priests, teachers, and deacons. (Except that Jesus did not call any evangelists, pastors, high priests, elders, bishops, priests, teachers, nor deacons. Also, there were no high priests or priests in the New Testament church.)
The Bible does not tell us everything about the priesthood or the organization and government of the Church. However, enough of the Bible has been preserved to show the beauty and perfection of the Church organization. (Okay, so it actually doesn't. But we will just go ahead with our constructed narrative and pretend that it does.)
The New Testament shows that this Church organization was intended to continue. (Yes, but the New Testament shows that the second coming was expected within the next several years following Jesus' ascension, and thus the Church was intended to continue for only a generation.) For example, the death of Judas left only eleven Apostles. Soon after Jesus had ascended into heaven, the eleven Apostles met together to choose someone to take the place of Judas. Through revelation from the Holy Ghost, they chose Matthias. (Sure, if we call drawing stones out of a bag 'revelation.')
Throughout history, evil people have tried to destroy the work of God. This happened while the Apostles were still alive and supervising the young, growing Church. Some members taught ideas from their old pagan or Jewish beliefs instead of the simple truths taught by Jesus. (It seems that the so-called "simple truths" (i.e. faith, repentance, baptism, holy ghost) were the ones that were actually retained in the traditional LDS apostasy narrative. The truths that were supposedly lost were complex priesthood structures; post-mortem evangelization; a complex theology of God and deification; and complex temple rituals--all summed up in a complex plan of salvation involving a pre-mortal existence, a war in heaven, a valiant adam and eve, and three levels of heaven, among many many other things--hardly things that could be called 'simple truths.')
Soon pagan beliefs dominated the thinking of those called Christians. The Roman emperor adopted this false Christianity as the state religion. (I certainly hope Mormons are willing to quit whining and crying that traditional Christians don't consider us Christian now. It's a bit difficult to whine about them not seeing us as Christian if we are referring to them as "those" merely "called Christians, who practice a "false Christianity.")
These people lost the understanding of God's love for us. They did not know that we are his children. (Yeah, ask most Christians and they'll agree that they don't understand God's love for us and don't believe that they are children of God.) . . . Many of the ordinances were changed because the priesthood and revelation were no longer on the earth. (When Christians change ordinances, we call it apostasy; when we change them, we call it modern revelation.)
The emperor chose his own leaders and called them by the same titles used by priesthood leaders in the true Church of Christ. Church officers were given honor and wealth. Bishops and archbishops fought among themselves to gain more power. (I won't deny that corruption occured--it does in any organization, including our Church; however, to generalize Christianity in this manner is both ahistorical and offensive.) There were no Apostles or other priesthood leaders with power from God, and there were no spiritual gifts. The prophet Isaiah had foreseen this condition, prophesying, "The earth also is defiled under the inhabitants thereof; because they have transgressed the laws, changed the ordinance, broken the everlasting covenant" (Isaiah 24:5). (Except Isaiah wasn't prophesying a Christian apostasy here.) It was the Church of Jesus Christ no longer; it was a church of men. (Well, expect that they still were a Church that worshiped Jesus as the central figure.) Even the name had been changed. (Kind of like when the our church changed from "Church of Christ" to "Church of Latter-day Saints" to "Church of Jesus-Christ of Latter-day Saints" to predominantly using "Mormon Church" in the mid-twentieth century. By the GP's logic we were switching back and forth between being a church of Jesus Christ and a church of men.)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I do not point out these problems to argue that there was no apostasy and restoration. Rather, my point is that if we are going to make claims about an apostasy and restoration, we shouldn't use false proof-texts, ahistorical claims, and simply make stuff up without any sort of critical eye.
Discuss.
Posted by
the narrator
at
1:25 PM
8
comments
Do not criticize -- ever.
A few weeks ago I posted a link to a Church website that asked for thoughts and criticisms of the new (and terrible) Gospel Principles manual. Apparently a troop of Mormons decided that any form of criticism is an act of apostasy and went to the post to defend the Church.
Here are some beautiful examples from the comments on the Church's media blog:
Sarah - "I hate to criticize anything put our by the Church because I feel that is not really supporting our Prophet and our Leaders. . . . Please, Brothers and Sisters, let’s not say unkind things about this manual, even if you think they are true. I think it reflects poorly on us as members. We are supposed to sustain our leaders in all things. Including the committees that research and write the manuals."
Annie - "I don’t understand the point of this survey. Isn’t God the one directing the church. Wouldn’t he know whether it was a good idea or not. With our leaders being so inspired why would they need our opinion?"
Jeff - "Some of these comments sadly reflect a glaring lack of faith which I find much more disturbing than any perceived shortcomings of the GP manual. . . . Next time a survey like this is offered, perhaps it should require not only name and email but perhaps membership number? There’s too much anti-mormon nonsense and rhetoric clouding up this page."
Nicolas - "The people here that complain about the book, calling it such things as “an insult to our intelligence”, are NOT asking God if this decision is correct, they are nitpicking and criticising their own leaders. They are not searching for the truth, they are searching for reasons to be offended. Yes we are encouraged not to follow blindly, but that means we have to seek a spiritual confirmation that our leaders’ decisions are divinely inspired. We are NOT encouraged to find fault with them, or to rant and complain about their decisions." (emphasis mine)
Posted by
the narrator
at
9:47 AM
11
comments
Thursday, February 11, 2010
ahhhhhhh
h/t to Bobby. This is an awesome video. You need to watch it all the way through though.
Enjoy.
Posted by
the narrator
at
7:13 PM
5
comments
Monday, February 08, 2010
Why only men have the priesthood
In Mormonism, the men often (and sometimes the women) attempt to justify a patriarchal priesthood by asserting that women are inherently more spiritual/faithful/strong/etc and that men are given the priesthood to elevate us to their level.
Posted by
the narrator
at
11:23 AM
8
comments
Sunday, February 07, 2010
Slate - "Down With the People Blame the childish, ignorant American public—not politicians—for our political and economic crisis."
h/t Adam.
"Anybody who says you can't have it both ways clearly hasn't been spending much time reading opinion polls lately. One year ago, 59 percent of the American public liked the stimulus plan, according to Gallup. A few months later, with the economy still deeply mired in recession, a majority of the same size said Obama was spending too much money on it. There's nothing wrong with changing your mind, of course, but opinion polls over the last year reflect something altogether more troubling: a country that simultaneously demands and rejects action on unemployment, deficits, health care, climate change, and a whole host of other major problems. Sixty percent of Americans want stricter regulations of financial institutions. But nearly the same proportion says we're suffering from too much regulation on business. That kind of illogic—or, if you prefer, susceptibility to rhetorical manipulation—is what locks the status quo in place."
Read the whole article here.
Posted by
the narrator
at
6:59 PM
1 comments
Thursday, February 04, 2010
Maren is pretty much my favorite cousin
There are so many reasons why Maren is my favorite cousin. It's not just because she was on a billboard towering over the Boise freeways--okay, that's one of the main reasons. If I had the time I would list them all, but I have to hurry to my next class.
For all of you other cousins who feel slighted by this, let me just say that there is plenty of time to do whatever it takes to win over my love and adoration.
Posted by
the narrator
at
4:52 PM
0
comments
Tuesday, February 02, 2010
Are you Republicans serious?
I often get accused of grossly over-exaggerating and over-generalizing my stereotypes of Republicans. After seeing this recent poll by the Daily Kos, I feel rather justified.
Here are some of the wonderful results from polled Republicans:
- If 2012 elections were today, Palin would receive the most support with 16% of Republicans. Romney comes in second with 11%. Cheney--yes, that DICK Cheney--is third with 10%.
- 39% believe Obama should be impeached. Why? I'm not sure. I'm guessing it has to do with a combination of him being a black, Kenyan, Soviet, Nazi democrat. Or something like that.
- 36% believe Obama was not born in the US. That's right. More than one out of three Republicans are Birthers.
- 63% believe that Obama is a socialist--though I'm not sure they know what that means.
- 24% believe Obama wants the terrorists to win.
- 21% believe ACORN somehow managed to steal the 2008 elections and give Obama his overwhelming win.
- 53% believe that Sarah Palin is more qualified to be president that Obama--yes, that's right. at least 53%--MORE THAN HALF--of Republicans believe Palin is qualified to be president.
- 31% believe Obama is a racist who hates white people
- 23% believe their state should secede from the US.
- 73% believe that openly gay men or women should not be allowed to teach public school
- 77% believe public school students should be taught that the book of Genesis in the Bible explains how God created the world
- 31% believe contraceptions should be outlawed
- 91% support the death penalty
Posted by
the narrator
at
7:57 PM
20
comments
Monday, February 01, 2010
Books of 2010
This post will be a work in progress to catalog the books I finish reading through the year. If I get bored enough I may even try to write mini-reviews. I doubt I will though.
The First Christmas: What the Gospels Really Teach About Jesus's Birth - John Dominic Crosson and Marcus Borg
Y: The Last Man
An Abundant Life: The Memoirs of Hugh B. Brown - Ed Firmage
Logicomix: An Epic Search for Truth
The God Delusion - Richard Dawkins
Benjamin Franklin: An American Life
How to Read Heidegger (How to Read) - Mark Wrathall
The Book of Mormon: A Very Short Introduction (Very Short Introductions- Terryl Givens
New Approaches to the Book of Mormon: Explorations in Critical Methodology
The Complete Maus: A Survivor's Tale (No 1)
The Filth
The Last Week: What the Gospels Really Teach About Jesus's Final Days in Jerusalem
Religion and Friendly Fire: Examining Assumptions in Contemporary Philosophy of Religion--The Vonhoff Lectures And Seminars, University Of Groningen, 1999-2000
Understanding the Book of Mormon: A Reader's Guide
Being and Time
Being and Time: A Translation of Sein and Zeit (SUNY series in Contemporary Continental Philosophy)
Being-in-the-World: A Commentary on Heidegger's Being and Time, Division I.
By His Own Hand Upon Papyrus: A New Look at the Joseph Smith Papyri
Tell-All
Quest for the Gold Plates
Hearken, O Ye People: The Historical Setting of Joseph Smith's Ohio Revelations
Bone: The Complete Cartoon Epic in One Volume (Vol 1)
Crime and Punishment
Mormon America - Revised and Updated Edition: The Power and the Promise
Modern Polygamy and Mormon Fundamentalism: The Generations After the Manifesto
The Angel and Beehive: THE MORMON STRUGGLE WITH ASSIMILATION
The Lost Symbol (Robert Langdon, No. 3)
The Walking Dead, Vol. 1: Days Gone Bye (v. 1)
The Great Brain
More Adventures of the Great Brain
Me and My Little Brain (Great Brain)
Great Brain at the Academy
Body for Life: 12 Weeks to Mental and Physical Strength
The Illustrated Brief History of Time, Updated and Expanded Edition
The Sickness Unto Death: A Christian Psychological Exposition For Upbuilding And Awakening (Kierkegaard's Writings, Vol 19) (v. 19)
Existentialism from Dostoevsky to Sartre (Meridian)
America and the Challenges of Religious Diversity
An Interpretation of Religion: Human Responses to the Transcendent, Second Edition
Salvations: Truth and Difference in Religion (Faith Meets Faith Series)
The Invention of World Religions: Or, How European Universalism Was Preserved in the Language of Pluralism
The New Gospel of Christian Atheism
The Cambridge Companion to Atheism (Cambridge Companions to Philosophy)
After God (Religion and Postmodernism Series)
Religious Pluralism and Civil Society (The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science Series)
Pluralism
The Return of the Great Brain
Mormonism in Transition: A History of the Latter-day Saints, 1890-1930
The Fragile Absolute: Or, Why Is the Christian Legacy Worth Fighting For? (Second Edition) (The Essential Zizek)
Modern Mormonism: Myths & Realities
Posted by
the narrator
at
10:10 PM
5
comments
