We’d like to welcome two guest bloggers: Jondh from SundayPage and Yellow Dart from LDS Kai Ta Biblia. (For more on them see their “about” pages.) Both are young scholars planning on going to grad school in Biblical or Ancient Near Eastern Studies. Let’s welcome them to FPR!
Author Archives: smallaxe
I don’t really know much about the history of the Three-Fold Mission of the Church:
To Perfect the Saints, Proclaim the Gospel, and Redeem the Dead
(Perhaps someone can refer something to read)
I do know, however, that the Three-Fold Mission has been a central component of my church experience as long as I can remember. It seems, in most regards, that the Three-Fold Mission is meant to express the purpose of the Church (a “mission statement” for our religious organization). If I were to restate it succinctly it would be something like: To make (and keep) people a part of our church. Continue reading
I’ve been thinking lately about the question of revelation; not necessarily in a definitional sense (in terms of this post we can talk about revelation as knowledge revealed from God to his prophet(s)), but in a material sense–is revelation an idea interpreted into a particular language, recorded on paper, edited, and reproduced for others to read? Or is the reproduction the revelation itself? (And if so, then how materially should we take it–is the reproduced paper and ink sacred? Or if we download it, does our computer become sanctified? I remember a visiting GA on my mission talking about the power of having the BoM open when teaching, even when not using it.)
I don’t believe there’s a clear cut answer (and it may vary from situation to situation); but I do believe that our response to this question, perhaps tells us a lot about the way we view the authority of prophets. Continue reading
Leave it to a BYU student to invoke the name of the Lord in BYU’s win last weekend over the U.
Austin Collie, who caught a 49-yard pass on 4th and 18 to keep the drive alive (which eventually put BYU ahead for good), had this to say in a post-game interview: “Obviously, when you’re doing what’s right on and off the field, I think the Lord steps in a plays a part.”
His comment, of course, has generated quite bit of controversy.
My gut reaction is to dismiss the statement as youthful frivolity; but is there any way in which it could be true?
Oh, and for those unfamiliar with the “Immaculate Reception” see here.
1) Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.
2) Do not do to others what you do not want them to do to you.
Or are they both more or less the same?
If all is sacred, is nothing sacred?
This is related to a previous discussion here at FPR.
The categories of “sacred” and “profane” have a long history in the study of religion. And attempts to collapse the sacred and profane can be understood many different ways. I actually find it valuable to consider “All as Sacred”; but not in the sense that “the sacred” is simply a spatial category. IMO, the sacred is a relational category contingent on how we perform within a given space. In other words the sacred is a mode of becoming involving multiple parties (us and God in most cases), rather than a state of being that exists independent of my performance and simply within a given space. In this light, everything is sacred in that there is a proper and an improper way of us performing life’s events (including the option of non-performance in cases that call for it). To perform it improperly is to desecrate a sacrality within ourselves. The sacred, IMO, need not be understood simply an external quality found in a given sphere.
Submitted from an anonymous reader:
If “the song of the righteous is a prayer” (D&C 25:12), does singing “O My Father” constitute praying to Heavenly Mother? It does, after all, contain the line “Father, Mother, may I meet you / In your royal courts on high? / Then, at length, when I’ve completed / All you sent me forth to do / With your mutual approbation / Let me come and dwell with you.”