Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Challenges of (Non-existent?) Mormon Theology (OPEN)
Patheos ^ | August 9, 2010 | Blake Ostler

Posted on 08/19/2010 9:50:35 AM PDT by greyfoxx39

The Challenges of (Non-existent?) Mormon Thelogy
August 9, 2010
By Blake Ostler

Addressing the future of Mormon theology is problematic on many fronts.

First, there are many in Mormonism who believe that it doesn't have any "theology." There are others, like BYU philosophy professor James Faulconer, who believe that although Mormonism may have some types of informal theology, the endeavor to develop any theology is either inherently dangerous to faith or otherwise a worthless project. Nevertheless, such "post-modern" skepticism, which denigrates development of such theological issues, is fundamentally at odds with Mormonism's commitment to continuity with the natural world and the inherent capacity of mortals to discover truth. However, it is clear that because Mormonism embraces "continuing revelation," any statement of theology is always subject to revision by any future revelations that may be received by the prophets of the Church.

This statement of the problem gives rise to one of the primary tasks of Mormon theology. Taking "theology" in its broadest sense as a faithful attempt to make sense of one's received faith within the culture in which one finds oneself, a primary task of Mormon theology in the future is to find the role of theological assessment of scripture and revelation and the value of coherent thought in Mormonism. More importantly, the task of defining what is authoritative in Mormon theology and what constitutes Mormon "doctrine" remain major tasks for the future. Various positions have been suggested to date.

Most Mormons appear to uncritically assume a more-or-less evangelical view of theology as a statement of a totalizing attempt at a coherent system of scriptural doctrine that elucidates a completed worldview. However, given the nature of Mormonism's open canon and its rejection of scriptural inerrancy, such a view of theology and, more particularly revelation, does not seem to be sustainable within Mormonism.

Nathan Oman has suggested that Mormonism embraces a view of theology something like a judicial assessment based upon many sources of common law. (Click here to read more on Mormon doctrinal sources and the question of authority). In his view, Mormonism assesses the many sources of the Mormon scriptures and statements by general authorities like a judge assesses the sources of common law. However, any such undertaking is necessarily subject to revision by further "judicial" decisions that may modify the common law.

I have suggested a view of revelation consisting of "creative co-participation" in which prophets necessarily provide revelation within the contexts of a particular linguistic structure, linguistic practice, and worldview. In addition, the sources of authority are to be assessed based upon a hierarchy of value beginning most authoritatively with the scriptures, non-canonized revelations, statements of Joseph Smith, the official statements of church authorities (such as First Presidency statements), and the Lectures on Faith, rounded out by the statements made by General Authorities in General Conference talks and elsewhere. Such an approach has much in common with Nathan Oman's proposed "common law" approach to assessing what constitutes Mormon doctrine and revelation.

The primary task of Mormon theology for the foreseeable future is to assess its relationship to naturalism and the scientific worldview. Many Mormons view God as located within and limited by our "particular universe," which began some fourteen billion years ago with the big bang and is thus subject to all of the limitations of natural law. Others see God as transcending the existing natural universe because God is the organizer not only of this universe, but of many others. God's relationship to the natural universe, whether God had a beginning of his divinity, and whether God is at the mercy of limitations of natural laws, remain major issues for Mormon thinkers to work out.

In addition, Mormon theology has the difficult task of elucidating how religious and spiritual knowledge are reliable, compared to empirical and technical knowledge gained through the scientific method and the assumptions of naturalism. To date, few Mormon thinkers have developed a consistent explanation of Mormon spiritual experiences and how they provide reliable knowledge. However, elucidating an epistemology of spiritual experiences within the Mormon tradition seems to be a primary task that must be undertaken to provide a basis of commitment to Mormonism. Mormonism has tended to simply adopt an uncritical fideism where believers simply accept the assertions of faith on faith and the validity of spiritual experience without critical thought.

Finally, Mormonism has yet to develop a theology of the problem of human consciousness and issues related to its commitment to a type of "spirit matter" or "intelligence" that is uncreated and eternal. These issues have become much more pressing with the advances in brain and cognitive sciences. The relation of the laws of nature and Mormonism's commitment to free will and agency is a particularly important and fundamental theological issue. Indeed, just what is meant by an "intelligence," what it is that is uncreated, and whether individuality is an eternal feature remain critical and bed-rock issues for Mormon thinkers.



TOPICS: General Discusssion; Other non-Christian; Religion & Science; Theology
KEYWORDS: beck; christian; glennbeck; inman; lds; mormon
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-90 last
To: Paragon Defender

“I applaud your effort and desire but we’re just going to have to disagree on what God has revealed to us about this. =-)”

No, we don’t have to “disagree”.

I stated what HE says.
You deny what HE says and believe the opposite.

ampu


81 posted on 08/21/2010 8:55:36 AM PDT by aMorePerfectUnion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: Paragon Defender

All your links but two are from unofficial websites who’s views do not reflect the official views of the mormon church. This is promoting non-official websites to gain information on mormonism - so I’ll add a few more for people to go to.

http://www.mormonthink.com/
http://www.mrm.org/
http://www.irr.org/
http://www.4witness.org/index.php
http://www.answeringlds.org/index.html?artMtnMeadows.html
http://www.utlm.org/
http://www.mormonsinshock.com/
http://www.josephsmithauthorbyproxy.com/

People should get all sides of the story.


82 posted on 08/21/2010 9:07:10 AM PDT by Godzilla ( 3-7-77)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: aMorePerfectUnion
No, we don’t have to “disagree”.

I stated what HE says.


The only problem for you is that you are wrong. So I guess we will indeed have to disagree.

Hey you guys can hang out in this thread if you want. I try to visit the fresh anti-LDS threads to help out the onlookers. And like I said, I know arguing with the hard core anti’s is pointless.

So I'll see you in a new thread. I am sure we won't have to wait long.

83 posted on 08/21/2010 1:20:21 PM PDT by Paragon Defender
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: Elsie

If you EVER want to man up, and actually take on an ANTI one-to-one (yeah; some of us lil’ heel nippers will probably join in, too.) we’ll be here to accommodate you.


ROFL try to challenge me manliness to get me to play your game? That’s a new one hahaha.

Like I have said, been there done that. Both sides. Now I am wiser for doing so. See you in the next Mormon bashing funhouse thread!


84 posted on 08/21/2010 1:25:18 PM PDT by Paragon Defender
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: Normandy; Elsie

Jesus told Joseph Smith not to join any of the churches of his day,
________________________________________________

So he dashed right out and joined the Methodist church...

he was a member there for a while...

Then later he was a member of the Palmyra Presbyterian Church and the Smith family got ex-communicated from there on March 29, 1830..

TEN YEARS AFTER HE HAD LEARNT THAT PRESBYTERIANISM WAS UNTRUE..

TEN YEARS AFTER HE HAD BEEN TOLD NOT TO JOIN ANY OF THEM...

Oh norz...

He should have listened to the mormon god...


85 posted on 08/21/2010 4:59:22 PM PDT by Tennessee Nana
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]

To: Paragon Defender

“The only problem for you is that you are wrong.”

This is simply an assertion without a shred of evidence to back up your claim.

Please show me anywhere in the Bible that states there is more than one real God. Not idols. In fact, show us anything that supports any claim of mormonism. Anything.

There is no Biblical evidence to support the claims of mormonism.

There is no evidence of an historical nature, archeological, DNA, etc. There is nothing there. Surely, after years of interacting with mormonites here on FR, at least one, sometime, somewhere, on some topic would have brought forth any objective evidence that supports mormonism’s claims. It has not appeared.

What we have are assertions and truth claims with no logical argument that would support any of them. In fact, on every front, mormonism is not just improbable and implausible, but its claims are impossible - and of course, never backed up. What we get over and over are assertions and feelings.

Your posts without evidence or logic are just more in a long, long line.

best,
ampu


86 posted on 08/21/2010 8:34:19 PM PDT by aMorePerfectUnion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: Paragon Defender
ROFL try to challenge me manliness to get me to play your game? That’s a new one hahaha.

Not really...


Job 40:6-8

    6 Then the LORD answered Job from the whirlwind:

    7 Get ready to answer Me like a man;
    When I question you, you will inform Me.

    8 Would you really challenge My justice?
    Would you declare Me guilty to justify yourself?

87 posted on 08/22/2010 4:47:33 AM PDT by Elsie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]

To: Paragon Defender
Like I have said, been there done that. Both sides. Now I am wiser for doing so.

So...

"Wisdom" is not being able to produce any evidence to back up your accusations?

The Lurker jury is shaking their head in amazement!

88 posted on 08/22/2010 4:49:24 AM PDT by Elsie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]

To: aMorePerfectUnion

http://s0.ilike.com/play#Ella+Fitzgerald:Johnny+One+Note:135465:s66434.8486087.13456156.1.2.89%2Cstd_f76834be122a4e33a2a282aaf63a04f3


89 posted on 08/22/2010 4:51:59 AM PDT by Elsie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 86 | View Replies]

To: aMorePerfectUnion
This is simply an assertion without a shred of evidence to back up your claim.

Poor Johnny One Note...

90 posted on 08/22/2010 4:53:12 AM PDT by Elsie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 86 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-90 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson