Hamblin-Peterson Column In Deseret News

[Libs]

I read this one on Facebook. I thought, from the title, that it was going to, somehow, relate to Joseph Smith's seer stone...and, perhaps, it does.

[Daniel Peterson]

Yesterday's column, on the Sibylline oracles:

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/765612802/Christians-saw-ancient-femaleoracles-as-divine.html

[Daniel Peterson]

A column on Margaret Barker and temples:

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/765614556/Understanding-the-centrality-of-temple-rites.html

[Libs]

Margaret Barker is amazingly interesting..

[Calm]

Have you seen the interview Bill Hamblin had with her?

[Libs]

I know I watched some four or five part interview with her, but can't remember if it was Bill Hamblin...I don't think it was, because I think it was done in England. Can you link it?

[Libs]

Ah, I found it! It IS the one I had listened to, before. Very interesting!

Here it is, in case anyone is interested.

http://www.templestudy.com/2008/08/06/william-hamblin-video-interview-with-margaret-barker-part-1/

[Libs]

Here are parts two and three (a & b).

http://www.templestudy.com/2008/08/06/margaret-barker-interview-part-2-temple-studies/

http://www.templestudy.com/2008/08/07/margaret-barker-interview-part-3a-christmas/

http://www.templestudy.com/2008/08/07/margaret-barker-interview-part-3b-christmas/

[Daniel Peterson]

Another one:

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/765615763/Author-JRR-Tolkiens-tales-deeply-rooted-in-Christianity.html

[Nathair/|\]

Another one:

http://www.deseretne...ristianity.html

I can't seem to log in on Deseret News to respond to the comments. Why can't a story like this be both pagan and Christian at the same time? I think it's a false dilemma to set Celtic and Norse Paganism against Christianity.

[Daniel Peterson]

On shari‘a law:

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/765616753/The-function-of-Shariahh-law-in-Egypt.html

[Daniel Peterson]

I think I forgot to puff this one, on "Advent":

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/765617836/Advent-refers-to-Christs-2nd-Coming.html?pg=all

[Daniel Peterson]

Today's Hamblin/Peterson column for the Deseret News, on the Arabic title or term Allah:

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/765619974/Allah-is-not-pagan-term-2-it-means-God.html

[Daniel Peterson]

I haven't been keeping up on these, but here's a new column on the little-known religion of Jainism:

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/765623200/Jainism-is-rooted-in-nonviolence.html

[Daniel Peterson]

I'm really puzzled by the absence of hateful and contemptuous comments on this column thus far:

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/865575221/Papal-conclaves-offer-not-only-pageantry-but-living-history.html

[Calm]

I'm really puzzled by the absence of hateful and contemptuous comments on this column thus far:

http://www.deseretne...ng-history.html

Maybe they forgot to set their clocks ahead and are still asleep.

[Daniel Peterson]

A curious Easter tradition from Jerusalem:

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/865576457/The-holy-light-of-Easter-in-Jerusalem.html

[Daniel Peterson]

On the transmission of the New Testament:

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/865577544/Christian-beliefs-are-rooted-in-reliable-early-records.html?pg=1

[Daniel Peterson]

On reading the scriptures of other faiths:

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/865578593/Reading-other-peoples-scriptures-requires-sympathy-not-just-facts.html

[Robert F. Smith]

On reading the scriptures of other faiths:

http://www.deseretne...just-facts.html

SYMPATHY OR UNDERSTANDING?

It is not true, as Peterson & Hamblin maintain, that “secular approaches to religion necessarily remove the passion from scripture.” It is not true that “passion and belief are an intrinsic part of what makes scripture scripture.” Teachers of great literature may be passionate about the course of study they are bringing to their students, but it is not their job to imbue their students with actual belief in or passion for the doctrines derived from great literature.

To study scripture of any kind as “literature” does not need to miss the essence of why that book has had a powerful impact on some part of mankind, and we should not attempt to negate the need for courses of study which select particular features of a book for classroom focus. One need not give any credence to scriptural claims about any book in order to read it effectively as literature, and to enjoy it solely on that account – admiring its motifs, its oracular narrative or poetic power, its typology, etc. If reading widely is broadening and helpful for the education of any student, then exposure to the literature of other cultures can be very worthwhile, but need not be taught as “scripture,” but simply as great literature. I think for example of the presentation of the Bible as literature by Robert Alter and by Northrop Frye, or of the Book of Mormon by Grant Hardy.

One need not approach Buddhist literature as scripture in order to be convinced that it is great literature, nor does one have to accept the extraordinary claims made in the texts of Judeo-Christian or Mormon literature in order to accept them as great literature. Indeed, since C. S. Lewis made a point about Christian literature being “subversive” of his atheism, one might well want to soft-peddle the scriptural claims in order to at least familiarize an otherwise scripturally illiterate culture with the body of scripture. How else might a believer approach such illiterate and unprepared hoi-polloi with the kerygma?

[Daniel Peterson]

You and I probably disagree on this considerably less than you imagine, Bob.

[Robert F. Smith]

You and I probably disagree on this considerably less than you imagine, Bob.

Probably. But it did require a public response, lest some innocent parties get the wrong idea.

[3DOP]

SYMPATHY OR UNDERSTANDING?

It is not true, as Peterson & Hamblin maintain, that “secular approaches to religion necessarily remove the passion from scripture.” It is not true that “passion and belief are an intrinsic part of what makes scripture scripture.” Teachers of great literature may be passionate about the course of study they are bringing to their students, but it is not their job to imbue their students with actual belief in or passion for the doctrines derived from great literature.

To study scripture of any kind as “literature” does not need to miss the essence of why that book has had a powerful impact on some part of mankind, and we should not attempt to negate the need for courses of study which select particular features of a book for classroom focus. One need not give any credence to scriptural claims about any book in order to read it effectively as literature, and to enjoy it solely on that account – admiring its motifs, its oracular narrative or poetic power, its typology, etc. If reading widely is broadening and helpful for the education of any student, then exposure to the literature of other cultures can be very worthwhile, but need not be taught as “scripture,” but simply as great literature. I think for example of the presentation of the Bible as literature by Robert Alter and by Northrop Frye, or of the Book of Mormon by Grant Hardy.

One need not approach Buddhist literature as scripture in order to be convinced that it is great literature, nor does one have to accept the extraordinary claims made in the texts of Judeo-Christian or Mormon literature in order to accept them as great literature. Indeed, since C. S. Lewis made a point about Christian literature being “subversive” of his atheism, one might well want to soft-peddle the scriptural claims in order to at least familiarize an otherwise scripturally illiterate culture with the body of scripture. How else might a believer approach such illiterate and unprepared hoi-polloi with the kerygma?

Hey Robert,

This not exactly on topic, but your answer could persuade me to reconsider the claims in the article as well.

It appears you have given this subject previous thought. I had never considered my position on this but had always presumed that the best teachers of literature were precisely those who transferred some of their enthusiasm for the goodness, beauty, and even truth of the literature to the student. I am thinking right now of someone who opened my horizons a little in that way. I think he said that great literature is supposed to "delight with the intention to instruct", or something like that. It seems like his view would be that the teacher has to explain why a particular piece is both enjoyable and true in some important respect. So I intuitively disagree with your claim about teachers, but I need to hear why you say it should be otherwise than I have presumed.

Thanks,

Rory

[Robert F. Smith]

Hey Robert,

This not exactly on topic, but your answer could persuade me to reconsider the claims in the article as well.

It appears you have given this subject previous thought. I had never considered my position on this but had always presumed that the best teachers of literature were precisely those who transferred some of their enthusiasm for the goodness, beauty, and even truth of the literature to the student. I am thinking right now of someone who opened my horizons a little in that way. I think he said that great literature is supposed to "delight with the intention to instruct", or something like that. It seems like his view would be that the teacher has to explain why a particular piece is both enjoyable and true in some important respect. So I intuitively disagree with your claim about teachers, but I need to hear why you say it should be otherwise than I have presumed.

Thanks,

Rory

I was thinking, Rory, of our secular high school and college system when I suggested that teachers of Bible as literature at such institutions ought to focus on the esthetic qualities rather than attempt to indoctrinate the students in a particular belief system. Of course, specifically religious schools can freely pass on the deep spiritual meaning felt by the teachers, which can be infectious and very inspiring. So your intuition is good and on point.

By far and away, in my opinion, the biggest problem we face is biblical illiteracy.

Bob

[volgadon]

A good teacher, like Nabokov, doesn't shy away from the ugly and problematic, either. In his lectures on Don Quixote, for instance, he discusses the book's frequent cruelty, and how subsequent generations tended to find such humour side-splittingly hilarious. In the course of the lectures he also discusses literary flaws such as plot holes and inconsistencies.