Jump to content

Quotes on Faith, Reason, Evidence, etc.


Recommended Posts

I am compiling a supplemental resource for Evidence Central which will supply a range of quotes from Latter-day Saint leaders and scholars on the topics of faith, reason, evidence, etc. I know that some who frequent this discussion board likely have lists of such quotes already created, or perhaps know right where to find ones that are particularly memorable or important to them. If anyone has anything that they feel would be helpful in this regard, it would be very welcome. And of course, discussion of such quotes would be welcome as well, if any feel so inclined. This is a discussion board, after all. 

Below is what we have so far (in draft form and surely containing some errors). Some sources have quotes below them, but others are so full of relevant quotes that only the source is given.

Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses 14:116 (May 14, 1871)

Says the scientific man, "I do not see your religion to be true; I do not understand the law, light, rules, religion, or whatever you call it, which you say God has revealed; it is confusion to me, and if I submit to and embrace your views and theories I must reject the facts which science demonstrates to me." This is the position, and the line of demarcation has been plainly drawn, by those who profess Christianity, between the sciences and revealed religion. You take, for instance, our geologists, and they tell us that this earth has been in existence for thousands and millions of years. They think, and they have good reason for their faith, that their researches and investigations enable them to demonstrate that this earth has been in existence as long as they assert it has; and they say, "If the Lord, as religionists declare, made the earth out of nothing in six days, six thousand years ago, our studies are all vain; but by what we can learn from nature and the immutable laws of the Creator as revealed therein, we know that your theories are incorrect and consequently we must reject your religions as false and vain; we must be what you call infidels, with the demonstrated truths of science in our possession; or, rejecting those truths, become enthusiasts in, what you call, Christianity."

In these respects we differ from the Christian world, for our religion will not clash with or contradict the facts of science in any particular.

B. H. Roberts, Defense of the Faith and the Saints vol 1 (Deseret News, 1907), 527.

It is well nigh as dangerous to claim too much for the inspiration of God, in the affairs of men, as it is to claim too little.

John A. Widtsoe, Evidences and Reconciliations, 3rd ed. (Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1943), 28, 29.

“After proper inquiries, using all powers at our command, the weight of evidence is on one side or the other. Doubt is removed. Doubt of the right kind—that is, honest questioning—leads to faith [and]…opens the door to truth.”

Austin Farrer, “Grete Clerk,” in Light on C.S. Lewis, comp. Jocelyn Gibb (San Diego: Harcourt and Brace, 1965).

Though argument does not create conviction, the lack of it destroys belief. What seems to be proved may not be embraced; but what no one shows the ability to defend is quickly abandoned. Rational argument does not create belief, but it maintains a climate in which belief may flourish.  

Lowell L. Bennion, “The Uses of the Mind in Religion,” BYU Studies 14/1 (1973): 47-55.

both the religious and rational footings of our civilization are beyond price. For me nothing in all the ethical thinking of mankind quite equals the combined ethic and morality of the Hebrew prophets and Jesus. The prophets taught justice and mercy in human relations and tied these principles to the ethical character of a living god. Scholars call this ethical monotheism. Jesus, respecting his prophetic forbears, stressed the worth of the individual and taught men to walk with humility to act with love and to trust in the father. Both Jesus and the prophets exemplified moral courage as they attacked the superficialities and hypocrisies of their day. Greek philosophy delighted in man’s capacity to create order out of mystery and chaos. They began to think about nature, how men think, and the rules of logical thought. They inquired into aesthetics and ethics and the nature of society. They were not afraid as were the Jews to create works of art in sculpture and architecture in addition to drama and literature. They laid the foundations not only for philosophy but also for history, the natural and social sciences, medicine, and the arts. Most of all, they discovered and nurtured faith in man’s capacity to think and to create. I do not understand how a person who has come to know these two traditions in any substantial manner can turn his back on either one. I confess my profound respect for each of them and try in my own life to effect a marriage between them-- a marriage that has all the tension, adjustments, frustration, tradition, joys, and ecstasy one finds in a marriage between man and woman. Even as I prefer marriage to living alone so do I prefer to live in a world of both faith and rationality rather than in a world of either alone.

Spencer W. Kimball, “The Second Century of Brigham Young University,” 1975

First among these unique features is the fact that education on this campus deliberately and persistently concerns itself with “education for eternity,” not just for time. The faculty has a double heritage that they must pass along: the secular knowledge that history has washed to the feet of mankind along with the new knowledge brought by scholarly research, and also the vital and revealed truths that have been sent to us from heaven.

This university shares with other universities the hope and the labor involved in rolling back the frontiers of knowledge even further, but we also know that through the process of revelation there are yet “many great and important things” to be given to mankind that will have an intellectual and spiritual impact far beyond what mere men can imagine. Thus, at this university, among faculty, students, and administration, there is and must be an excitement and an expectation about the very nature and future of knowledge that underwrites the uniqueness of BYU.

Your double heritage and dual concerns with the secular and the spiritual require you to be “bilingual.” As scholars you must speak with authority and excellence to your professional colleagues in the language of scholarship, and you must also be literate in the language of spiritual things. We must be more bilingual, in that sense, to fulfill our promise in the second century of BYU.

Neal A. Maxwell, Deposition of a Disciple (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 1976), 15.

If there is sometimes too little respect for the life of the mind, it is a localized condition and is not institutional in character.

Noel B. Reynolds, “Reason and Revelation,” (BYU Speeches, Provo, UT, 30 June 1981).

I stand before you today as one who has accepted the responsibility to try to guide and inspire the students of Brigham Young University to make the most of their educational opportunities and to prepare themselves to be the strongest possible members of the kingdom of God, to be people who can provide special leadership in the great work of the kingdom in these last days. But I have not been given that kind of responsibility for anyone else. I therefore direct my remarks to the students of BYU and hope that, if others choose to listen in, they may find something of value to them as well. …

Henry Eyring, Reflections of a Scientist (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 1983), 2.

Is there any conflict between science and religion? There is no conflict in the mind of God, but often there is conflict in the minds of men.

Neal A. Maxwell, Plain and Precious Things (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 1983), 4.

“It is the author’s opinion that all the scriptures, including the Book of Mormon, will remain in the realm of faith. Science will not be able to prove or disprove holy writ. However, enough plausible evidence will come forth to prevent scoffers from having a field day, but not enough to remove the requirement of faith. Believers must be patient during such unfolding.”

Gordon B. Hinckley, Faith: The Essence of True Religion (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 1989), 73.

There is incumbent upon each of us . . . the responsibility to observe the commandment to study and to learn. . . None of us can assume that we have learned enough.

Neal A. Maxwell, “Lest Ye Be Wearied and Faint in Your Minds,” 1991.

Faith brings with it the expanding “evidence of things not seen.” (Heb. 11:1.) Some mortals dismiss this real, spiritual evidence because “the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him … because they are spiritually discerned.” (1 Cor. 2:14.) But this provincialism on the part of others should not deprive the rest of us of energizing evidence.

Boyd K. Packer, “’I Say unto You, Be One’ (D&C 38:27),” Brigham Young University 1990-91 Devotionals and Fireside Speeches (Provo, Utah: Brigham Young University, 1991), 89.

Each of us must accommodate the mixture of reason and revelation in our lives. The gospel not only permits it but requires it.

Truman G. Madsen, “Philosophy,” quoting B.H. Roberts in B.H. Roberts, The Truth, The Way, the Life, ed. John W. Welch (Provo, Utah: BYU Studies, 1994), lxxiii.

Let us not have the heart breathing defiance to the intellect!

Neal A. Maxwell, “The Disciple-Scholar,” in On Being a Disciple-Scholar, ed. Henry B. Eyring (Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1995).

The Lord sees no conflict between faith and learning in a broad curriculum. … The scriptures see faith and learning as mutually facilitating, not separate processes.

John W. Welch, “The Power of Evidence in the Nurturing of Faith,” in Echoes and Evidences of the Book of Mormon, ed. Donald W. Parry, Daniel C. Peterson, and John W. Welch (Provo, UT: FARMS, 2002), 17—53.

Davis Bitten, “I Don’t Have a Testimony of the History of the Church,” Fairmormon presentation, 2004.

What’s potentially damaging or challenging to faith depends entirely, I think, on one’s expectations, and not necessarily history. Any kind of experience can be shattering to faith if the expectation is such that one is not prepared for the experience. … A person can be converted to the Church in a distant part of the globe and have great pictures of Salt Lake City, the temple looming large in the center of the city. Here we have our home teaching in nice little blocks and we all go to church on Sunday, they believe. It won’t take very many hours or days before the reality of experiencing Salt Lake City can be devastating to a person with those expectations. The problem is not the religion; the problem is the incongruity between the expectation and the reality.

Neal A. Maxwell, “Blending Research and Revelation,” (Brigham Young University President’s Leadership Council, Provo, UT, March 19, 2004).

At a time around 30 years ago when our enemies were after us over something, I or someone with me said in a moment of frustration—“No more slam dunks!” meaning that our enemies’ easy, even sloppy criticisms had seen their day—it was time to move to a new level of spiritual and academic scholarship. Since then there has been a gathering of capacity and competency. Our scholarship has moved to a new level. Our enemies, likewise, are more clever, but our message is so unique and hopeful that it deserves to be articulated in the best possible and most responsible way. It is happening, and I remain a cheerleader for it. I quote from Austin Farrer, who wrote: For though argument does not create conviction, the lack of it destroys belief. What seems to be proved may not be embraced; but what no one shows the ability to defend is quickly abandoned. Rational argument does not create belief, but it maintains a climate in which belief may flourish. [“The Christian Apologist,” in Light on C. S. Lewis, ed. Jocelyn Gibb (New York: Harcourt, Brace and World, 1965), 26] At BYU we unashamedly blend research and revelation, and that is why this whole undertaking—apart from any particular project—is so special. The blending of revelation here, the Spirit, and scholarship has never been better! Otherwise it is interesting to note that the smaller the revealed database, the greater our reliance is upon supposition, extrapolation, and speculation. But by combining scholarship with a revealed database, we can be in full friendship with logic and reason. Logic does not solo very well. It performs many tasks, but logic can be morally weightless. It is a blend of revelation, reason, and research that serves the Kingdom well. Again and again, the men and women involved prove that the Spirit and scholarship can enhance each other. I have great respect for the scientific method insofar as I understand it. It has guided President Cecil O. Samuelson in his medical work, as it has many of you in your specialties. But we can also go to Alma 32 and its formula for the spiritual verification method. Both the scientific method and the process of spiritual verification are open to us! Both are needed. Combining scholarship and the Spirit sometimes pushes us outside the envelope. There are a lot of things that are understood only with the Spirit. The doctrine of resurrection, for instance, is outside what logic alone can verify. It was so for the early disciples. I read from Mark: “But they [the disciples] understood not that saying, and were afraid to ask him” (Mark 9:32).

Robert L. Millet, The Evidence of Things Not Seen (2004)

Daniel C. Peterson, “The Obligation to Do Apologetics,” (FairMormon Conference, Provo, UT, August 2010).

Dallin H. Oaks, Life’s Lessons Learned: Personal Reflections (Salt Lake City, UT: Deseret Book Co., 2011), 55-60.

Religious persons who pursue scientific disciplines sometimes encounter what seem to be conflicts between the respective teachings of science and religion and must work through how to handle these apparent conflicts. Others, such as I in my pursuit of business and law, can be less troubled. For me, that detachment ended when I was appointed president of Brigham Young University. This new position required me to search out, learn, and articulate answers to questions I had previously been privileged to ignore....

Colleges and universities must of course teach science--facts and theories--but Church educators, like the BYU faculty, refrain from substituting science for God and continue to rely on the truths of religion. In the study of science, teachers and students with religious faith have the challenge to define the relationship of science and religion in their thinking. They have the special advantage of seeing countless scientific evidences of the Divine Creator. In those exceptional circumstances where science and religion seem to conflict, they have the wisdom to wait patiently in the assurance that truth will eventually prevail. In doing so, most conclude that religion does not have the answers to all questions and that some of what science "knows" is tentative and theoretical and will be replaced in time by new discoveries and new theories.

Some try to deal with apparent conflicts by compartmentalizing science and religion--one in one category, such as Monday through Saturday, and the other in another category, such as Sunday. That was my initial approach, but I came to learn its inadequacy. We are supposed to learn by both reason and revelation, and that does not happen when we compartmentalize science and religion. Our searchings should be disciplined by human reason and also enlightened by divine revelation. IN the end, truth has only one content and one source, and it encompasses both science and religion....

Latter-day Saints should strive to use both science and religion to extend knowledge and to build faith. But those who do so must guard against the significant risk that efforts to end the separation between scientific scholarship and religious faith will only promote a substandard level of performance, where religion and science dilute one another instead of strengthening both.

For some, an attempt to mingle reason and faith can result in irrational scholarship or phony religion, either condition demonstrably worse than the described separation. This danger is illustrated by the case of an international scholar who was known as an expert in English law when he was in America and as an expert in American law when he was in England. Not fully distinguished in either field, he nevertheless managed to slip back and forth between the two so that his expertise was never properly subjected to qualified review in either. As a result, he provided a poor imitation in both. A genuine mingling of the insights of reason and revelation is infinitely more difficult....

Each of us should pursue...truth by reason and by faith. And each of us should increase our ability to communicate that truth by an inspired combination of the language of scholarship and the language of faith.

I am confident that when we progress to the point where we know all things, we will find a harmony of all truth. Until that time, it is wise for us to admit that our understanding--in religion and in science--is incomplete and that the resolution of most seeming conflicts is best postponed. In the meantime, we do the best we can to act upon our scientific knowledge, where that is required, and always upon our religious faith, placing our ultimate reliance for the big questions and expectations of life on the eternal truths revealed by our Creator, which transcend human reason, "for with God nothing shall be impossible" (Luke 1:37).

Daniel C. Peterson, “Of ‘Mormon Studies’ and Apologetics,” (FairMormon Conference, Provo, UT, August 2012).

Daniel C. Peterson, “Toward a More Effective Apologetics,” (FairMormon Conference, Provo, UT, 2013).

Daniel C. Peterson, “Some Notes on Faith and Reason,” Interpreter: A Journal of Latter-day Saint Faith and Scholarship 10 (2014): vii-xix.

Daniel C. Peterson, “Reason, Experience, and the Existence of God,” Interpreter: A Journal of Latter-day Saint Faith and Scholarship 12 (2014): vii-xix.

Daniel C. Peterson, “An Exhortation to Study God’s Two ‘Books’,” Interpreter: A Journal of Latter-day Saint Faith and Scholarship 13 (2015): vii-xv.

Daniel C. Peterson, “Questioning: The Divine Plan,” Interpreter: A Journal of Latter-day Saint Faith and Scholarship 15 (2015): vii-xv.

Alison L. Maeser, “RSC Turns Forty,” BYU Religious Education Review 8, no. 1 (Winter 2015): 21.

Elder Holland now says he envisions the scholarly products coming out of the RSC symbolizing and exhibiting a combination of “the head and the heart, the spirit and the faith, the reason and the revelation” and becoming the definitive scholarly resource for the LDS Church.

Jared Halverson in Alison L. Maeser, “RSC Turns Forty,” BYU Religious Education Review 8, no. 1 (Winter 2015): 20.

I came to understand then, and have had it repeatedly confirmed since, that the gospel deserves—and can hold up under—careful examination and critical thought, that it is as captivating to the head as it is to the heart, and that scholarship and discipleship were never meant to be mutually exclusive.

Jeffrey R. Holland, “The Greatness of the Evidence,” (Chiasmus Jubilee, Provo, UT, August 16, 2017)

Ian S. Ardern, “Seek Ye Out of the Best of Books,” 2017

Asking of God is to be preceded by careful study, for we are under scriptural mandate to seek “out of the best books words of wisdom” and to “seek learning, even by study and also by faith”  D&C 88:118 There is a rich abundance of these books, written by heaven-inspired Church leaders and recognized, safe, and reliable Church history and doctrine scholars. With that said, none surpass the majesty of the revealed word of God in canonized scripture. From those thin pages thick with spiritual insights, we learn truth through the Holy Ghost and thereby increase in light.

Sharon Eubank, “Turn On Your LightEnsign, November 2017.

Each of us needs to be better at articulating the reasons for our faith. How do you feel about Jesus Christ? Why do you stay in the Church? Why do you believe the Book of Mormon is scripture? Where do you get your peace? Why does it matter that the prophet has something to say in 2017? How do you know he is a real prophet? Use your voice and your power to articulate what you know and feel—on social media, in quiet conversations with your friends, when you’re chatting with your grandchildren. Tell them why you believe, what it feels like, if you ever doubted, how you got through it, and what Jesus Christ means to you. As the Apostle Peter said, “Be not afraid … ; but sanctify the Lord God in your hearts: and be ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you.”

Daniel C. Peterson, “Apologetics: What, Why, and How?” (FairMormon Conference, Provo, UT, August 2018).

Daniel C. Peterson, “Is Faith Compatible with Reason?” Interpreter: A Journal of Latter-day Saint Faith and Scholarship 29 (2018): vii-xvi.

Matthias Held, “Seeking Knowledge By the Spirit,” (General Conference, Salt Lake City, UT, April 2019.

Dear brothers and sisters, the Lord has repeatedly told us to “seek learning even by study and also by faith.” We can receive light and understanding not only through the logical reasoning of our minds but also through the guidance and inspiration of the Holy Ghost.

Edited by Ryan Dahle
  • Upvote 1
Link to post

This is from Ian Barbour, a non-LDS scholar that I quote often.

Quote

Participation in a religious tradition also demands a more total personal involvement than occurs in science. Religious questions are of ultimate concern, since the meaning of one’s existence is at stake. Religion asks about the final objects of a person’s devotion and loyalty, for which he will sacrifice other interests if necessary. Too detached an attitude may cut a person off from the very kinds of experience which are religiously most significant. Reorientation and reconciliation are transformations of life-pattern affecting all aspects of personality, not intellect alone. Religious writings use the language of actors, not the language of spectators. Religious commitment, then, is a self-involving personal response, a serious decision implicating one’s whole life, a willingness to act and suffer for what one believes in. ((Barbour, Myths, Models and Paradigms: A Comparative Study of Science and Religion, 135–136.))

And this is from Thomas Kuhn:

Quote

[T]he issue is which paradigm should in the future guide research on problems many of whihc neither competitor can yet claim to resolve completely.  A decision between alternate ways of practicing science is called for, and in the circumstances that decision must be based less on past achievement than on future promise. The man who embraces a new paradigm at an early state must often do so in defiance of the evidene provided by problem solving. He must, that is, have faith that thenew paradigm will succeed with the many large problems that confront it, knowing only that the older paradigm has failed with a few. A decision of that kind can only be made on faith."  Thomas Kuhn, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, 2nd ed, 157-158.

FWIW,

Kevin Christensen

Canonsburg, PA

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to post

Here are some that are important to me.

---------------

"Skepticism should keep us from accepting inadequate answers and merely wishful hope—but also from accepting inadequate refutations and self-indulgent or cowardly despair. And if anything, as Pascal taught, the possibility that God exists, the mere chance that he guarantees human immortality and joyful eternal purposes, is so stupendous a possibility that we ought to risk all for it, gamble everything, certainly time and intellectual persistence and 'working out our salvation in fear and trembling' rather than getting lost in some absurdly fair or 'objective' game of letting all the negative evidence overbalance the little, but sufficient, positive evidence. If I am marooned on a desert island, absolutely dependent on finding another human being to comfort and perhaps save me, the one little swale where I find a single footprint is more important, more true, than the other hundreds of square miles where I find nothing. . . . 

I believe that the struggle to find truth is only really successful when united with the struggle to find God and that the struggle is worth the pain and the setbacks, worth enduring to the end. I believe the evidences God has provided in history and in the scriptures are adequate to show what great things he has done for our ancestors and can do for us if we will persist in the hope that such evidence provides. I believe his grace is sufficient, that he will visit us with assurance and spiritual confirmation from time to time—not as we demand it but as he knows we need it. And I believe the Church of Jesus Christ is the best context on earth in which to carry on the struggle—because it provides ways to know and serve Christ that can direct and discipline our desires and thus help us to hope genuinely in things that are real but not seen. And through the sacrificial service it requires and unconditional love it thus helps us learn, the Church can teach us to persist in humility, not to be consumers of truth but rather servants of truth . . . . I believe that, together with the scriptures which it plays a major role in preserving and teaching, the Church is one of the major gifts of grace God provides in His promise not to leave us comfortless in a difficult world. It is the most tangible, day-to-day reminder of 'what great things the Lord hath done for [our] fathers,' the chief way we 'may know the covenants of the Lord, that [we] are not cast off forever.'

The claims of the restored gospel, beginning with Joseph Smith and the Book of Mormon, are simply on the face of it the most intellectually and morally and spiritually exciting available on the earth. If it is true that we are eternal intelligences, gods in embryo who can fulfill our infinite potential only in an ever-ongoing process of perfecting the very best of what we know and find joy in—love, marriage, friendship, service, integrity, learning, pursuing beauty, creating—then it is worth every effort, every sacrifice, to engage in the process sufficiently to find out."

— Eugene England, "On Finding Truth and God: From Hope to Knowledge to Skepticism to Faith," in A Thoughtful Faith: Essays on Belief by Mormon Scholars, ed. Philip L. Barlow (Centerville, UT: Canon Press, 1986), 78–82.

 

"Even when science has done its work to perfection, it fails to tell us how to live a life. The Mormon truth, above all, tells us how to be good and helps us to get there. Faith and repentance are wrapped up together. The goodness that I see in the Mormon lives about me, and day after day in my own life when I construct myself as the scriptures direct, is every bit as real as the abstractions of scientific scholarship. I can, if I wish, cast an aura of rationality over this belief in an effort to explain and justify myself to my academic colleagues. Our valiant apologists will go on defending the faith with scholarly evidence, to keep up our connection with the academic establishment. But I hold to my beliefs not because of the evidence or the arguments but because I find our Mormon truth good and yearn to install it at the center of my life."

— Richard Lyman Bushman, "The Social Dimensions of Rationality," in Expressions of Faith: Testimonies of Latter-day Saint Scholars, ed. Susan Easton Black (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book; Provo, UT FARMS, 1996), 77.

 

“For me, Christianity without hope beyond death is of reduced relevance and of diminished interest. . . . If the brooding grave is everyone’s finale, if existence runs out into pitiless nothing, if nihility is everyone’s telos, then the forgotten and marginalized will remain marginalized and forgotten for all time. . . . I, at least, need a God whose love and rule don’t leave us alone with our greatest existential evil, who descends into hell to rescue the dead. I need a God who places heavenly crowns on the heads of the slaughtered infants of Bethlehem. I need the God of the old Roman catacombs, which are full of scenes representing delivery from death—Noah’s ark, the sacrifice of Isaac, Ezekiel’s valley of dry bones, the three youths in the furnace, the raising of Lazarus.

Maybe some, for whom life hasn't been solitary, nasty, brutish, and short but rather enjoyable, happy, wonderful, and long, don't need such a God. Maybe they've reached their goals and can rest content. But the fortunate few don't represent the less fortunate many; and that some of us, like the Sadducees of old, are happy to live and die, doesn't entail that everyone else should buck up and feel the same way. Shouldn't it distress us, if we're not self-contained, that most haven't been as lucky as Hume, while countless others haven't even had the chance to set goals, or have seemingly done little more than suffer a thousand plagues of pain, with death their only escape? Do their circumstances make any difference to God, and will God make any difference to them? Is God the everlasting bystander, so that deism is forever true? Are we all like the prophets of Baal, who called on the name of their god again and again, but there was no answer?

After Gollum and the great ring of power fall into the fires of Mount Doom, Frodo and Sam sit on a little ashen hill. As lava rises around them, Frodo speaks the obvious: 'An end comes. We have only a little time to wait now. We’re lost in ruin and downfall, and there is no escape.' The two friends then slip into unconsciousness. But that’s not the end. The eagles come, and the hobbits are borne away to safety. Later, when Sam awakens and sees Gandalf, he gasps: 'I thought you were dead! But then I thought I was dead myself. Is everything sad going to come untrue?' There must be some analogue to this scene in the universal human story. If not, then the cosmos is finally apathetic, and death can separate us from the love of God; and if that’s so, then love doesn’t endure all things but finally fails. Which cannot be."

— Dale C. Allison Jr., Night Comes: Death, Imagination, and the Last Things (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2016), 16–18. 

 

“Some people feel that they’ve been thrown into this world. Although I don’t dispute their experience, mine is different. I feel that I was gently laid down here. Maybe that’s why so much of life has seemed to be a gift, including my body, which I didn’t design or build. As soon as I became aware, it was just there, going about its manifold business. Furthermore, I don’t really understand much about it. I don’t know how to break down food or how to distribute nutrients. I don’t know how to heal cuts or how to battle infections. I don’t know how to manufacture saliva or how to contract muscles. All these things, and a million more of which I’m the beneficiary, just happen. I do none of them. Science, to be sure, helps me to understand some of what goes on, but it was all going on long before my teachers and my books taught me anything. We’re all immersed in a great Wisdom that we didn’t invent and don’t control, a great Wisdom that’s been with us since birth. Hope in resurrection is the conviction that this Wisdom won’t abandon us as death approaches but will accompany us to whatever awaits us.”

 Dale C. Allison Jr., Night Comes: Death, Imagination, and the Last Things (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2016), 43.

 

Edited by Nevo
  • Like 1
Link to post
10 hours ago, Ryan Dahle said:

.......................Davis Bitten, ...................

Misspelled Bitton

I think that you are hurting yourself in seeking only comments from "Latter-day Saint leaders and scholars."

However, be sure to include

Dallin Oaks, "The three-fold sources of truth about man and the universe: science, the scriptures, and continuing revelation, and how we can know them."  http://www.mormonnewsroom.org/article/fundamental-premises-of-our-faith-talk-given-by-elder-dallin-h-oaks-at-harvard-law-school  

Faulconer, James E.  "Room to Talk: Reason's Need for Faith."   (from the Festschrift for Truman Madsen)

Hafen, Bruce C.  "Reason, Faith, and the Things of Eternity."  (Maxwell Lecture in FARMS Review [20, 2] )

Midgely, Louis.  "The Utility of Faith Reconsidered".  (from the Festschrift for Truman Madsen).

Ostler, Blake.  "Spiritual Experiences as the Basis for Belief and Commitment."  (a FAIR conference paper)

Welch, John W.  "Loving God with All Thy Mind."  (BYU Devotional)

Riddle, Mark A., “Science, Zen and Mormonism: Social Ways of Knowing: A Personal Reminiscence,” Mormon Scholars Testify, June 2010, online at http://mormonscholarstestify.org/1277/mark-a-riddle .

Christensen, Kevin, “Determining What is Real,” Sunstone, #139 (Nov 2005):66-70, online at https://www.sunstonemagazine.com/pdf/139-66-70.pdf .

Christensen, Kevin, “Sophic Box and Mantic Vista: A Review of Deconstructing Mormonism ,” The Mormonist, and Interpreter, 7 (2013):113-179, online at  http://www.themormonist.com/2013/10/sophic-box-and-mantic-vista-a-review-of-deconstructing-mormonism-kevin-christensen/ .

Christensen, Kevin, “Eye of the Beholder, Law of the Harvest: Observations on the Inevitable Consequences of the Different Investigative Approaches of Jeremy Runnells and Jeff Lindsay,” Interpreter, 10 (2014):175-238.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...