Talk:Anti-intellectualism and pluralism
From MormonWiki.org
I think I need to rewrite this item:
- heavily employ narrative storytelling and bearing one's personal testimony, and critically caricature expository, authoritative preaching or declaration of scripture as "bible-bashing".
-Aaronshaf 06:00, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
http://www.slbuddhist.org/thoughts/2004/01.04.htm
---
[edit] Talking points
- Relationship of priesthood authority and Mormonism's church government to intellectual examination
- Atheological focus off of the nature of God and means of comprehensive forgiveness before God to ordinances and worthiness in the community.
- Fear of doubt.
- Supremacy of feelings
- Role of the Book of Mormon in conversion (which has almost nothing to do with its doctrinal and narrative content)
- Bearing one's testimony to gain it. Moroni's challenge.
- Pessimism toward knowing meaning in controversial scripture
- Mormonism's public praise of intellectual, thought, and knowledge. The idea that the gospel encompasses all truth.
- "Mormon elders were often willing, even anxious, to engage priests and ministers in public debate." - "Anti-Intellectualism in Mormon History [Reappraisals of Mormon History]", Dialogue, vol. 1, no. 3, p. 116
- "It is no denial of the Church's splendid qualities to recognize that in many respects it has not proved congenial to free inquiry and that its prejudices tend to be anti-intellectual." p. 130
- Supernaturalism is not to be confused with anti-intellectualism.
- "In practical terms the Mormon lay organization has meant no divinity schools, no theological journals, no class of men competent in languages, versed in the literature, and trained to handle theological ideas. While contributing to the admirable vitality of Mormonism, the non-professionalism of Mormon organization and worship has done much to create an atmosphere of hostility to special competence and to scholarship." p. 133
-Aaron Shafovaloff 04:04, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
[edit] To see
"The New Mormon Anti-intellectualism," Sunstone 15:2
[edit] Bad intro
The intro needs to seriously be redone. It comes off as though it was thrown together in 10 seconds (maybe it was!) rather than an informative encyclopedic entry from a thoughtful evangelical perspective. Keep the quotes, but they should not be at the beginning of the article. Jordan Barrett (talk) 07:17, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
