Steve Noel Posted April 11, 2016 Author Posted April 11, 2016 53 minutes ago, Bernard Gui said: Does training in hermeneutics result in increased faith in Jesus Christ and a greater determination to follow Him? It should, but that doesn't mean that it will. Many times scholars possess only a cerebral Christianity. That seems to be what so many are railing against in these posts. The assumption seems to be that one cannot be scholarly and Spirit filled / Spirit led. This is a false dichotomy. I am not advocating scholarship or the fire of the Spirit, but rather scholarship on fire.
Bernard Gui Posted April 11, 2016 Posted April 11, 2016 (edited) 2 hours ago, Steve Noel said: It should, but that doesn't mean that it will. Many times scholars possess only a cerebral Christianity. That seems to be what so many are railing against in these posts. The assumption seems to be that one cannot be scholarly and Spirit filled / Spirit led. This is a false dichotomy. I am not advocating scholarship or the fire of the Spirit, but rather scholarship on fire. I don't assume that a scholar cannot be Spirit-filled. Unfortunately, some use scholarship to destroy faith rather than strengthen it. That was the point of the words Salgare quoted from Elder Boyd K Packer, but I'm not sure he quoted Elder Packer to portray him in a good light. The quote I gave from Nibley's book aptly describes what Salgare did to Packer, who has gone to his reward. Hugh Nibley was a genuine scholar in every sense of the word, and he was most surely intelligent, intellectual, brilliant, humorous, faithful and Spirit-filled and Spirit-led. I recommend reading him if you want to know more about Mormonism from a scholarly and faithful point of view. Richard Abanes, to his credit, came here to defend his awful book, One Nation Under Gods, and even attended a FAIR conference to learn more about our beliefs and interact with us. He made some changes in later editions based on discussions with people here, but it's impossible to fix the unfixable. Edited April 11, 2016 by Bernard Gui
The Nehor Posted April 11, 2016 Posted April 11, 2016 I don't mind the concept when it tries to discover the culture surrounding a book and the author but it never stays there. Conclusions are drawn about how such and such clearly influenced so and so and great chains of causality are formed based on them. In addition it is assumed that books are hodgepodges of various writers. The whole thing sounds convincing but these great students of how culture and life experience should really test how well their system works. Get a modern book with a living author. Read nothing from the author about how it was written or why certain bits were included. Present this to the author to fact-check. My guess is it would reduce the author to laughter. The advantage of the field is that, barring new material coming forth, it will never be crudely proven wrong. Peter, Paul, and Moses are unlikely to appear to the scholar and tell them they are an idiot. 1
Recommended Posts