"Mormon Scholars Testify"

[Jeff K.]

It is a very good idea. Too often people presume a lack of scholarship among Latter-Day Saints. That somehow we are amateurish in our methods, and how we study the non spiritual past. While testimonies are all equally valid to Heavenly Father, it is helpful for members who know that those trained in various sometimes hostile specializations have also developed a testimony. Akin to the idea that scientists can indeed be religious, regardless of what atheists say.

It may also prove a valuable resource, as we recognize the names of those doing research we sometimes call upon to help us explain or articulate different ideas or theories.

[Daniel Peterson]

I have a few questions.

And I have a few answers!

(I doubt very much that that's a coincidence.)

What makes a Mormon scholar's testimony more interesting or valuable?

Nothing. I'm rather shocked, in fact, that you imagine that a Mormon scholar's testimony is somehow "more interesting or valuable" than a non-scholar's testimony.

How do they differ from Mormon athletes or Mormon housewives?

Mormon athletes qua athletes, are not scholars.

Mormon housewives, qua housewives, are not scholars.

Mormon scholars, qua scholars, are neither housewives nor athletes.

I hope that helps.

Where do Mormon farmers or Mormon ranchers fit in?

If they're also scholars, they would fit into this website. If they're not, they wouldn't.

Likewise, a Mormon scholar wouldn't fit very well, as such, on a website devoted to Mormon farmers or ranchers.

And what about Mormon plumbers or Mormon morticians or the Mormon who never completed high school?

If they're scholars, Mormon plumbers and Mormon morticians and Mormons who never completed high school will fit perfectly with this web site. If they're not, they probably won't fit quite as well, at least as contributors. But they're perfectly welcome to contribute to websites for Mormon plumbers and Mormon morticians and Mormons who never completed high school and, if qualified, to websites for Mormons with blue eyes, Mormons who live in Borneo, Mormons who like body surfing, Mormon scrapbookers, Mormon model-builders, and Mormon bass-baritones.

Are these testimonies geared to "orthodox" or "folk" Mormons?

You'll have to ask the individual authors about that.

I can't imagine the "folk" Mormons even caring.

Maybe they will. Maybe they won't. Maybe some will. Maybe others won't.

I created the web site for people who will be interested. Those who aren't interested won't be required to read it.

Also, what is the education level required for testimony submission?

The right amount of time at the right kinds of school. Nothing more. Nothing less.

Happy to have been of assistance!

Of all the ridiculous criticisms! Dan Peterson is a scholar, so it is quite natural of him to start a website for himself and his colleagues. If morticians wish to do so as well, all the merrier!

Exactly.

Elder Ballard and others have asked us to be actively engaged on line. I'm simply trying to do my part, and have naturally chosen the kinds of people with whom I most often associate.

A Mormon morticians' website would be really interesting, if a bit macabre. But why not? And why not a Mormon womens' site and a Mormon craftsmens' site and a Mormon businessmens' site and a Mormon retirees' site and a Mormon cancer survivors' site and a Mormon sailors' site and a Mormon Spaniards' site? Why not? Let a thousand flowers bloom!

.

[Paul Osborne]

To (very) loosely paraphrase Hugh Nibley (someone you often deride), the best way to get out of left field is to turn 180 degrees and start walking towards right field. May I suggest you follow that advice?

I'll think about it quickly if you will tell me the name of the king in Facsimile No. 3 and which characters spell the name Shulem. It's really that simple.

I will support the seer-ish translation claims of Joseph Smith if they can be verfied by the fine scholarship of Brown University. I happen to have a great deal of respect for the fine scholarship of Brown University. I don't, however, respect the Translations of Facsimile No. 3 as given by the Mormon seer who claimed he could read Egyptian. I would gladly tell Joseph Smith to his face that he is wrong and that I highly disaprove of his character.

Can YOU blame me for that?

Paul O

[Daniel Peterson]

Don't hijack my thread, Paul.

[Paul Osborne]

Don't hijack my thread, Paul.

Is there any chance at all that your new website will touch upon the translations of Facsimile No. 3 which happens to be my most favorite subject in the world of Mormonism?

Paul O

[Daniel Peterson]

The authors will write about what they choose to write about. That they'll address your current non-liquid, non-sexual obsession is unlikely, but not altogether impossible.

Now stop trying to hijack my thread.

[DanGB]

Interesting site I suppose.

Is it your objective to draw interest from Church members outside of those featured on the board? And if so, is it your intention to draw the interest of "lots of members"? If it is, let me make a content suggestion:

I would add the testimonies of some great men like Lavell Edwards, Norm Chow, Coach Mendenhall, Andy Reid, Danny White and the list could go on from there with equally qualified great LDS members who are as accomplished in their field of expertise as any you have included so far. They have all also probably had as great an impact, if not greater, on the lives of members as those you've included as well. I don't know what cerebral level you seek to qualify admittance to the published testimony list, but I have no doubt individuLs such as these rank with the group you are putting together. And they will generate exponentially more interest from Church mbers than the group you are targeting without losing any level of brainpower.

But here is the real payoff for your site: If your intent is to have even the least bit of a missionary effect on members or potential members, you will generate far greater interest, emotion and bonding effect with such men of accomplishment. I believe the appeal of your sight will explode with interest and longevity compared to where it appears to be heading.

Don't get me wrong, I am sure it will appeal to some as is. Just not sure what your broader objective is I guess.

But before my suggestion gets completely snubbed by you, may I ask, on a scale of 1 to 10, how familiar are you with any of the individuals I mentioned above?

I think such an idea will give your site a far greater positive impact on members and potential members and give it much greater longevity.

Ok, now you can take your jab at me!

[Daniel Peterson]

Interesting site I suppose.

Your enthusiasm is breathtaking!

Is it your objective to draw interest from Church members outside of those featured on the board?

I don't understand the question. Who are you talking about? "Featured" in what sense? On what "board"?

And if so, is it your intention to draw the interest of "lots of members"?

It's my intention to draw the interest of as many members (and others) as will find my website interesting.

I would add the testimonies of some great men like Lavell Edwards, Norm Chow, Coach Mendenhall, Andy Reid, Danny White and the list could go on from there with equally qualified great LDS members who are as accomplished in their field of expertise as any you have included so far. They have all also probably had as great an impact, if not greater, on the lives of members as those you've included as well. I don't know what cerebral level you seek to qualify admittance to the published testimony list, but I have no doubt individuLs such as these rank with the group you are putting together. And they will generate exponentially more interest from Church mbers than the group you are targeting without losing any level of brainpower.

Anybody who wishes to do so and is able to do so is entirely welcome to set up a website including the people you've listed, and others besides.

But here is the real payoff for your site: If your intent is to have even the least bit of a missionary effect on members or potential members, you will generate far greater interest, emotion and bonding effect with such men of accomplishment. I believe the appeal of your sight will explode with interest and longevity compared to where it appears to be heading.

Anybody who wishes to set up such a website is absolutely free to do so.

Don't get me wrong, I am sure it will appeal to some as is. Just not sure what your broader objective is I guess.

I seem to puzzle you virtually all the time.

I'm very mysterious.

But before my suggestion gets completely snubbed by you, may I ask, on a scale of 1 to 10, how familiar are you with any of the individuals I mentioned above?

That question really appears to have irked you.

Danny White? About a 2. I've read about him, and seen him on television.

Andy Reid? About the same.

Norm Chow? Ditto.

Bronco Mendenhall? About a 6. I've met him, but that's it.

Lavell Edwards? About a 7 or 8. I've had dealings with him both in Utah and when he was a missionary in New York City. He's exceedingly funny in person.

I think such an idea will give your site a far greater positive impact on members and potential members and give it much greater longevity.

I'm content with my website as I've conceived it. I believe that the souls of scholars, and of those who love scholarship, are just as valuable as those of athletes, coaches, and sports fans, and they're the group I know best.

Ok, now you can take your jab at me!

For reasons best known to you, you seem to relish attempting to provoke "jabs." Sorry, though. It's not a game I choose to play with you.

[volgadon]

Look, it is not a judgement on people's cerebral capacity, it is quite simply a site for LDS from the academic world in which to bear their testimonies. If you want one for LDS coaches please start it yourself.

[Joseph Antley]

Looks impressive. The layout seems similar to some of the Church's official websites. I haven't read all of the testimonies yet, but I particularly enjoyed Dr. Skousen's.

This website was a good idea. I look forward to seeing what other scholars choose to participate.

[mfbukowski]

I'm not quite sure what he wants to do with a list of tannaitic and amoraic opinions on the Sabbath nor why he wants them from a site ofr LDS scholars to bear their testimonies on, but if he wants it he'll get it.

He just wants to derail the thread. What the rabbis thought has no possible relevance to the modern LDS church. I won't discuss this further- it is a derailment.

Great idea for a website Dr. P!

[Mordecai]

If I ever become a scholar, I'll let you know and throw in my two cents also. ha ha Seriously, though, I bookmarked it.

[consiglieri]

I like this web-site, if for no other reason than that there seems to persist a pernicious notion that the more educated a person becomes, the more likely they are to abandon their faith; that science and religion are like oil and water.

This web-site seems a good antidote.

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

[Nofear]

I like this web-site, if for no other reason than that there seems to persist a pernicious notion that the more educated a person becomes, the more likely they are to abandon their faith; that science and religion are like oil and water.

This web-site seems a good antidote.

I agree. Indeed, that is part of the reason I think they put up the website. Though, of course, we can't really use anecdotal evidence to justify the claim scientifically (and fortunately no such claim is made by the site).

I think Davis Bitton's testimony would be a good candidate. He has his article I Don't Have a Testimony of the History of the Church which I quite enjoyed.

[Daniel Peterson]

I agree. Indeed, that is part of the reason I think they put up the website. Though, of course, we can't really use anecdotal evidence to justify the claim scientifically (and fortunately no such claim is made by the site).

The claim is fairly often made that no thinking person can be a Mormon, that Mormonism is too shallow to satisfy a serious thinker, etc. I don't intend to argue directly against that claim (at least, not on "Mormon Scholars Testify"), but I do intend to showcase scores and scores of serious, thinking, believing Latter-day Saints. (I already think that the existence of such organizations as Mormon Scholars in the Humanities, the Society for Mormon Philosophy and Theology, and, yes, the Neal A. Maxwell Institute for Religious Scholarship counts as evidence against the claim, as do the works of such people as Eugene England, David Paulsen, Blake Ostler, Truman Madsen, and Jim Faulconer. But, obviously, their existence hasn't euthanized it.)

I think Davis Bitton's testimony would be a good candidate. He has his article I Don't Have a Testimony of the History of the Church which I quite enjoyed.

I absolutely agree. Davis was a close friend of mine, as is his widow, and I published that essay in the FARMS Review. I've been thinking about how to have Davis represented on the "Mormon Scholars Testify" website. I know that he would have wanted to be included.

[Nofear]

The claim is fairly often made that no thinking person can be a Mormon, that Mormonism is too shallow to satisfy a serious thinker, etc.

Yeah. Kinda sad. Do you know of any such individuals who make such a claim who are serious scholars in their own right?

I don't intend to argue directly against that claim (at least, not on "Mormon Scholars Testify"), but I do intend to showcase scores and scores of serious, thinking, believing Latter-day Saints.

10 so far. Let's hope the site keeps rolling!

PS: I must backpedal a little when I said that "no such claim is made by the site". The site references external studies. Alas, no free internet access to them. This fair article links the two cited by mormonscholarstestify.org and contains some of the data. But, as Dr. Peterson affirms, the site isn't designed to establish a global trend (as the articles do) but to directly counter the idea that no or only a few serious thinkers can be believers with explicit examples.

[Jaybear]

The claim is fairly often made that no thinking person can be a Mormon, that Mormonism is too shallow to satisfy a serious thinker, etc.

Its is a good start. But your website would better address that issue by providing testimonials of scientists, professors and other deep thinkers that converted to Mormonism as adults.

Those who were born in the convent, spent two years of a mission, married in temple, hold important and respected callings, and in your case, employed by BYU, have lives that are so fully invested in Mormonism that, I am sorry to say, don't really provide a compelling example to prove your point to critics.

Though I suppose the site could be helpful to other Mormons who might be struggling to accept some of the more (to borrow your word) "shallow" aspects of your religion.

[Anijen]

I will not be submitting any works (not much of a scholar) although I will be an avid reader. Thanks for the extra source to go to when I am sailing in the doldrums.

[Daniel Peterson]

Its is a good start. But your website would better address that issue by providing testimonials of scientists, professors and other deep thinkers that converted to Mormonism as adults.

Patience, counselor! Patience! As you yourself say, it's a start.

Already two converts, though. Just not yet quite up to the Jaybear Standard for Meaningful Conversion.

Those who were born in the convent [i hope you intended covenant! - dcp], spent two years of a mission, married in temple, hold important and respected callings, and in your case, employed by BYU, have lives that are so fully invested in Mormonism that, I am sorry to say, don't really provide a compelling example to prove your point to critics.

Some critics are more reasonable than others. I know of absolutely nothing that will help the ones who are most impervious to sound thinking, and I don't plan to measure the success of my site by whether or not it somehow convinces those who won't be convinced. There are, after all, still believers in a flat earth, in NASA's faking of the moon landing on a Dallas sound stage, in the CIA's invention of HIV/AIDS, and in a future World Series championship for the Chicago Cubs.

Though I suppose the site could be helpful to other Mormons who might be struggling to accept some of the more (to borrow your word) "shallow" aspects of your religion.

You're using "my word" completely out of the context of my use of it, in an attempt to score a point that I completely reject and regard as ridiculous. Just for the record.

[Daniel Peterson]

Do you know of any such individuals who make such a claim who are serious scholars in their own right?

No. Which is a striking fact.

The closest I can come is the author of How the Irish Saved Civilization and The Gifts of the Jews, a talented popularizer, who, out of the blue, once tried to summarize Manicheism by remarking, quite gratuitously, that, "like Mormonism, it had no depth to satisfy a serious thinker," or something to that effect. (I believe it was in the Irish book, which is really quite good.) My suspicion is that a thimble would be more than enough to contain this character's knowledge of Mormonism, but I found his remark rather irritating.

[noel00]

Recently you mentioned meeting our Australian PM, Kevin Rudd. A couple of years ago he write two papers for a journal, Monthly on the thought of Dietrich Bonhoeffer.It caused quite a stir. More recently President Obama caused a stir by revealing to conservative writer for the NYT, David Brookes his knowledge of the writings or Reinold Neibahr. It has bee noted that the influences of this theologian were evident when President Obama gave a speech to Westpoint cadets. I have noticed that both these writer's quotes appear in Bible reading notes for the public. I did a google alter for both obama-Niebahrand everyday there are a few entries. The same occurs with Bonhoeffer. Somehwere some one is writing preaching about these two scholars.

Besides Oscar Card and Steven Covey what Mormons are out there in the public area being quoted or referenceed by writers? Theology has again become a cool subject for public discussion.

[Daniel Peterson]

Besides Oscar [Orson Scott] Card and Steven Covey what Mormons are out there in the public area being quoted or referenceed by writers? Theology has again become a cool subject for public discussion.

Not many, if, really, any at all. We're a fairly insular group, still. I hope to see it change. I hope to contribute to the change.

Now that I think about it, there are a few.

My old friend Clayton Christensen comes to mind, for example.

There are more. And there will be more still.

.

[Daniel Peterson]

Just added Kent Jackson's excellent testimony.

Hans-Wilhelm Kelling's and Morgan Davis's went up yesterday.

I hope to add at least two a week, indefinitely, though we'll see whether I can actually maintain that pace.

[David Bokovoy]

Not many, if, really, any at all. We're a fairly insular group, still. I hope to see it change. I hope to contribute to the change.

Now that I think about it, there are a few.

My old friend Clayton Christensen comes to mind, for example.

There are more. And there will be more still.

.

Clayton Christensen, BTW, was just recently diagnosed with a very serious disease. He delivered what unfortunately might be his finally lecture last week to a room jammed pack with Harvard students. In an impressive, non-offensive way, he delivered a masterful lecture that included his personal beliefs in the importance of God and morality.

[Daniel Peterson]

Clayton Christensen, BTW, was just recently diagnosed with a very serious disease. He delivered what unfortunately might be his finally lecture last week to a room jammed pack with Harvard students. In an impressive, non-offensive way, he delivered a masterful lecture that included his personal beliefs in the importance of God and morality.

I hadn't heard that, and am terribly, terribly sorry to hear it now.