FAIR

Blog

Data, Doctrines, & Doubts: Improving Gospel Instruction

by

This post originally appeared at Times and Seasons and is reposted here with permission.

By Walker Wright

I’m grateful for the invitation and excited to participate here at Times & Seasons. The following is a talk I gave in our recent Stake General Priesthood meeting as the newly called Stake Sunday School President. While many of the ideas below were conceived independently, I was heavily influenced by some of Ben Spackman’s writings (especially the quotes) when it came to their final form. Big thanks to him.

I’ve been asked to speak tonight on improving gospel instruction in the home and at church. So much time could be dedicated to analyzing the best teaching methods and the how-to of engaging gospel lessons. However, I will forgo these particulars partially due to time constraints, but mainly because they don’t really get to the heart of the matter. There are plenty of resources provided by the Church that can assist us in improving the mechanics of our teaching. Manuals like Teaching, No Greater Call or Preach My Gospel as well as Leadership and Teaching tutorials are free of charge and available at the Church website. Elder Packer’s Teach Ye Diligently has been a CES staple since the 1970s and is available used and cheap on Amazon. Lesson suggestions can be found scattered all over the Internet, from Mormon blogs to Pinterest.

But I’m not convinced that typical lessons suffer due to lack of skills or quality methods. In fact, I’d argue that most members most of the time are relatively capable in these processes. The problem is that as a Church we’ve become very good at teaching fluff. Elder Holland asked years ago, “Are we really nurturing our youth and our…members in a way that will sustain them when the stresses of life appear? Or are we giving them a kind of theological Twinkie—spiritually empty calories?” These “philosophies of men interlaced with a few scriptures and poems just won’t do.”[1] Feel-good entertainment, warm fuzzies, and trite platitudes should not be confused with edification just as, according to Howard W. Hunter, “strong emotion or free-flowing tears are [not to be] equated with the presence of the Spirit.”[2] In essence, I’m more interested in what and why we teach over how we teach it. Here are few suggestions that I think can help increase the what and why of gospel instruction:

“Read. Read. Read.”

President Hinckley taught, “We live in a world where knowledge is developing at an ever-accelerating rate. Drink deeply from this ever-springing well of wisdom and human experience. If you should stop now, you will only stunt your intellectual and spiritual growth…Read. Read. Read. Read the word of God in sacred books of scriptures. Read from the great literature of the ages.”[3] This accelerating knowledge includes groundbreaking biblical scholarship along with increasing transparency on the part of the Church regarding its historical documents. Academic and independent presses, including Oxford, Harvard, Greg Kofford, and others, are continually publishing important books on Church history, scripture, and theology. The Joseph Smith Papers Project provides both scholars and laypersons with the original documents and manuscripts of the Restoration, edits and all. Some of this new material has even been incorporated into the Church’s new Gospel Topics essays. These essays attempt to address controversial subjects such as polygamy, the Book of Mormon translation, and the priesthood ban.

In a recent presentation, the head of the Church’s Public Affairs Department Michael Otterson explained, “It’s the intent of Church leaders that these essays be more than just a one-read experience on LDS.org, but rather that their content and principles work their way into the larger tapestry of learning, especially for our youth.”[4] I wonder, however, if we are taking advantage of these materials. We are instructed in modern revelation to “study and learn, and become acquainted with all good books, and with languages, tongues, and people” (D&C 90:15); to “seek…out of the best books words of wisdom” (D&C 109:7; 88:118) that we “may seek learning even by study, and also by faith” (D&C 109:14). In order to understand the scriptures and our own doctrines, we need to be familiar with their historical and cultural contexts. Teaching, No Greater Call acknowledges that it is “helpful to study the political, social, or economic history of the times in which a scripture was given” in order to gain “a better understanding of a particular scripture passage.”[5]

We understandably want to follow Nephi’s example and “liken all scriptures unto us” (1 Nephi 19:23) as he did with Isaiah. However, Nephi largely occupied the same pre-exilic culture and background as Isaiah. Many of the same cultural assumptions and biases pervade Nephi’s writings. Yet, our “likening” can frequently be described as the art of making stuff up. The collective, honor/shame society of the ancient world is incredibly different from the life of a 21st-century American. Cultural psychologist Joe Henrich and colleagues have described our historically unique culture as WEIRD: Western, educated, industrialized, rich, and democratic.[6] We tend to read these values and assumptions on to the texts, wresting the scriptures until their original meaning is unrecognizable. And while we may think that “having the Spirit” is all we need when it comes to reading the scriptures, it might be important to note that Joseph Smith translated the Book of Mormon by “the gift and power of God” and then later hired a Jewish professor to teach him Hebrew.[7] Granted, no one can be an expert in everything. There just isn’t enough time. But if this is the religion we have supposedly dedicated our lives to, perhaps we should reserve more time to learn about it.

Focus on Doctrine First, then Principles and Applications

In Elder Bednar’s book Increase in Learning,[8] he distinguishes betweendoctrines, principles, and applications. Doctrines, he explains, are the why: eternal truths that “pertain to the eternal progression and exaltation of Heavenly Father’s sons and daughters.” Principles are the what: “doctrinally based guideline[s] for the righteous exercise of moral agency.” Applications are the how: “the actual behaviors, action steps, practices, or procedures by which gospel doctrines and principles are enacted in our lives.”[9] In his book, Elder Bednar relays his experiences of meeting with thousands of Church members and leaders worldwide. He often asks, “In your living of the gospel of Jesus Christ and in your serving and teaching both at home and in the Church, have you focused primarily on doctrine, on principles, or on applications?” The answer, he points out, is consistently “applications.”

The reasons as to why this is typically the focus of gospel teaching range from the more business oriented (such as “I can control applications”; they are “more tangible”) to preference and comfort (such as “I’m not comfortable teaching doctrine”; applications are easier). In a summary that made me want to clap when I read it, Elder Bednar writes, “I find it both noteworthy and troubling that in the dispensation of the fullness of times…many members are exasperatingly engaged in creating ever longer lists of detailed and disconnected gospel applications.” These “lengthy ‘to do’ lists” receive “disproportionate and excessive attention.”[10] This is why our Sunday School classes at times devolve into stories about two pairs of earrings, condemnations of R-rated movies, or debates over whether Coca-Cola is against the Word of Wisdom rather than, say, the relational nature of salvation and the abiding need to practice empathy and develop deep, meaningful connections with each other. An overemphasis on applications can distort fundamental doctrines and confuse principles and applications as ends in themselves rather than means to an end.

Encourage Question Asking and Cease Shaming Doubt

In response to the hypothetical query regarding questions and doubts about “the Church or its doctrine,” President Uchtdorf answered, “[W]e are a question-asking people because we know that inquiry leads to truth. That is the way the Church got its start — from a young man who had questions. In fact, I’m not sure how one can discover truth without asking questions. In the scriptures you will rarely discover a revelation that didn’t come in response to a question.”[11] Intellectual curiosity is the pursuit of truth, which Joseph Smith identified as one of the grand fundamental principles of Mormonism.[12] To ask a question can be an act of vulnerability. In these moments of “uncertainty, risk, and emotional exposure,”[13] we must be very careful not to shame others—especially youth—with the false notion that they are somehow faithless or spiritually lacking for their questioning or skepticism. “One of the purposes of the Church,” said President Uchtdorf, “is to nurture and cultivate the seed of faith—even in the sometimes sandy soil of doubt and uncertainty.”[14] It is true that Joseph Smith saw his own visionary experience as a prototype for the Church and desired his people to experience the same (especially by means of the temple).[15] However, the doctrines of eternal progression and continuing revelation indicate that knowledge is not static.[16] While we should always encourage personal spiritual experiences, we would do well to remember that “to some it is given by the Holy Ghost to know that Jesus Christ is the Son of God” and “to others it is given to believe on their words…” (D&C 46:13-14; italics mine).

Furthermore, we should not mistake intellectual apathy for strong faith. And we certainly should not assume that the attainment of some sure knowledge is the attainment of all. It was Laman and Lemuel who declared, “And we knowthat the people who were in the land of Jerusalem were a righteous people; for they kept the statutes and judgments of the Lord, and all his commandments, according to the law of Moses…” (1 Nephi 17:22; italics mine). This was not based simply on a desire to be disobedient or a refusal to “follow the prophet.” They were following the prophets of Israelite history. They were adhering to traditions and promises laced throughout the scriptures, from the Psalms to Isaiah. They were remembering the Lord’s preservation of Israel from the Assyrians and the fairly recent reforms of King Josiah.[17] Their absolute surety in prior revelations, authority, and tradition led them to see their prophetic father as possibly deranged, if not blasphemous, and caused them to miss out on further light and knowledge. When it comes to this subject, the words of Hugh B. Brown are pertinent:

Our revealed truth should leave us stricken with the knowledge of how little we really know. It should never lead to an emotional arrogance based upon a false assumption that we somehow have all the answers–that we in fact have a corner on truth, for we do not…[C]ontinue your search for truth. And maintain humility sufficient to be able to revise your hypotheses as new truth comes to you by means of the spirit or the mind. Salvation, like education, is an ongoing process.[18]doubts

This outlook is likely why President Brown was known to quote the following from historian Will Durant: “No one deserves to believe unless he has served an apprenticeship of doubt.”[19]

In conclusion, it is worth reflecting on these points. Do we study deeply and broadly or do we use the scriptures merely as “quote books” (to use Neal A. Maxwell’s term)?[20] Do we attempt to understand the scriptures on their own terms and within their own contexts without seeking to Mormonize them? How often do we skip the doctrine of our lessons and go straight for application? Do we confuse application and principles with doctrine? Do we shy away from hard questions or label every challenging bit of information as anti-Mormon? Most important of all, do we love those we teach?

As we go about our lives in the Church, I hope that we may learn to study, teach, and love more deeply.

 

NOTES

  1. Jeffrey R. Holland, “A Teacher Come from God,” General Conference, April 1998: https://www.lds.org/general-conference/1998/04/a-teacher-come-from-god?lang=eng
  2. Howard W. Hunter, “Eternal Investments,” CES Address, 10 Feb. 1989: https://www.lds.org/manual/teaching-seminary-preservice-readings-religion-370-471-and-475/eternal-investments?lang=eng
  3. Gordon B. Hinckley, The Teachings of Gordon B. Hinckley (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 1997), 171.
  4. Michael Otterson, “On the Record,” FairMormon Conference, 7 Aug. 2015:http://www.mormonnewsroom.org/article/full-transcript-michael-otterson-address-at-fair-mormon-conference
  5. Teaching, No Greater Call, 55.
  6. Joseph Henrich, Steven J. Heine, Ara Norenzayan, “The Weirdest People in the World?” Behavioral and Brain Sciences 33 (2010): 61-135.
  7. See Louis C. Zucker, “Joseph Smith as a Student of Hebrew,” Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought 3:2 (Summer 1968): 41-55.
  8. David A. Bednar, Increase in Learning: Spiritual Patterns for Obtaining Your Own Answers (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 2011), Ch. 4 specifically.
  9. Ibid., 151.
  10. Ibid., 167.
  11. Dieter F. Uchtdorf, “The Reflection in the Water,” CES Fireside, 1 Nov. 2009:http://www.ldschurchnewsarchive.com/articles/58360/President-Dieter-F-Uchtdorf-The-Reflection-in-the-Water.html
  12. Don Bradley, ““The Grand Fundamental Principles of Mormonism,” Sunstone (April 2006): 35-36.
  13. Brené Brown, Daring Greatly: How the Courage to Be Vulnerable Transforms the Way We Live, Love, Parent, and Lead (New York: Gotham Books, 2012), 34.
  14. Dieter F. Uchtdorf, “Come, Join With Us,” General Conference, Oct. 2013: https://www.lds.org/general-conference/2013/10/come-join-with-us?lang=eng
  15. See Richard L. Bushman, Joseph Smith: Rough Stone Rolling (New York: Random House, 2005), 202-205; Margaret Barker, Kevin Christensen, “Seeking the Face of the Lord: Joseph Smith and the First Temple Tradition,” in Joseph Smith, Jr.: Reappraisals after Two Centuries, Reid L. Neilson, Terryl L. Givens (New York: Oxford University Press, 2009).
  16. For the tension between these concepts, see Terryl L. Givens, People of Paradox: A History of Mormon Culture(New York: Oxford University Press, 2007), Ch. 2.
  17. See David Rolph Seely, Fred E. Woods, “How Could Jerusalem, “That Great City,” Be Destroyed?” in Glimpses of Lehi’s Jerusalem, ed. John W. Welch, David Rolph Seely, Jo Ann H. Seely (Provo, UT: Neal A. Maxwell Institute for Religious Scholarship, 2004); Neal Rappleye, “The Deuteronomist Reforms and Lehi’s Family Dynamics: A Social Context for the Rebellions of Laman and Lemuel,” Interpreter: A Journal of Mormon Scripture 16 (2015): 87-99.
  18. Hugh B. Brown, “An Eternal Quest – Freedom of the Mind,” BYU Devotional, 13 May 1969:http://aims.byu.edu/sites/default/files/foundationdocuments/An_Eternal_Quest–Freedom_of_the_Mind–Hugh_B_Brown.pdf
  19. Richard D. Poll, “Apostle Extraordinary – Hugh B. Brown (1883 – 1975),” Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought 10:1 (Spring 1976), 70.
  20. Neal A. Maxwell, “Called and Prepared from the Foundation of the World,” General Conference, April 1986:https://www.lds.org/general-conference/1986/04/called-and-prepared-from-the-foundation-of-the-world?lang=eng

Book Review: “Schooling the Prophet: How the Book of Mormon Influenced Joseph Smith and the Early Restoration”

by

Screen Shot 2015-08-20 at 2.29.37 PM
Click to enlarge

A number of writers from both naturalistic and faithful backgrounds (Fawn Brodie and Terryl Givens serve as two immediate examples that represent the competing paradigms) have asked what, if any, environmental factors (e.g. contemporary writers, movements, intellectual currents, etc.) influenced the Prophet’s theology. Methodism, Campbellism, Freemasonry, Republicanism, Swedenborgianism, Romanticism, American lore about Indian origins, folk magic, and other intellectual and theological systems have all been invoked as either directly or circumstantially influencing Joseph Smith’s theology. In Schooling the Prophet: How the Book of Mormon Influenced Joseph Smith and the Early Restoration, a new book published by the Neal A. Maxwell Institute for Religious Scholarship, author Gerald E. Smith tackles this question by investigating what has, somewhat surprisingly and counterintuitively, been generally overlooked by historians as an influence on Joseph’s theology: the Book of Mormon.

Smith begins his treatment with a (semi-rhetorical) question that he sets out to answer in the course of six chapters (some two hundred pages of text): “Could it be that the Book of Mormon had a formative influence on Joseph Smith and the founders of the Mormon restoration?” (11) The evidence Smith provides for his answer to this question (a resounding yes: “It is my thesis that the Book of Mormon had a profound formative influence on Joseph Smith’s doctrinal and institutional development during the nascent days of the nineteenth-century Mormon restoration” [3]) is convincing. “[The practices of the restoration] evolved over time, of course, but in the beginning, in the early restoration, we must see Smith quietly looking to one of the most important sources of religious thought and sacred protocol that he knew: the Book of Mormon” (11). This can be seen, as Smith explores, in the following ways: the formation of the Church and the early revelations received in 1828–1830 (13–44), the influence of the Book of Mormon on such doctrinal subjects as soteriology, Christology, and the Fall (45–86), Mormon sacraments such as baptism and the eucharist (87–128), Latter-day Saint temple theology (129–164), priesthood and ecclesiology (165–206), and the role of the Book of Mormon in shaping a unique early Mormon religious identity (207–218). In his discussion of these categories Smith ably demonstrates the important and central role the Book of Mormon played in fashioning the doctrines of the Restoration.

Smith is quick to anticipate critics of his thesis who insist that, being a product of Joseph Smith’s lucid imagination, of course the Book of Mormon would influence early Mormonism. “The very question of the Book of Mormon’s influence on the Prophet calls for an explanation since one might fittingly dismiss that influence simply because it was derived from Smith himself,” our author notes. “Yet such an assumption is a heuristic one and prematurely precludes further exploration of the Book of Mormon as an original source document” (2). Indeed, Smith’s thesis is strengthened and enriched when one operates within a paradigm of the Book of Mormon being an ancient text, as Smith himself explains. “Rituals, theologies, and doctrines of the early restoration seem to stem directly from Book of Mormon worship forms,” Smith writes, “which in turn seem to have clear correlations with ancient Old Testament rites, rituals, forms, and meanings. The problem of a nineteenth-century explanation of the Book of Mormon text in which Smith wrote the Book of Mormon as his own repository of religious ideas, innovations, and writings . . . is that it ignores the work’s historic origins. . . . Provenance is evidence of historic origin, authenticity, and timeless value in a work” (211–212). This is a keen insight that shouldn’t be missed by either readers of Smith’s treatment or the Book of Mormon itself. The Book of Mormon’s historicity does indeed significantly influence the “timeless value” of the text as a religious work, a point I myself have argued elsewhere. Those (even those who accept the book’s historicity) who insist on reading the Book of Mormon strictly as a modern American religious or literary work are at risk of missing the robust convergences the Nephite record has with ancient Israelite religion and culture. This may in turn blind such a reader to the continuity between ancient biblical practices and modern Mormonism; a continuity that was preserved and perpetuated by the Book of Mormon’s influence on Joseph Smith’s restoration project.

Another valuable insight comes from Smith’s analysis of the Book of Mormon’s influence on the Prophet’s temple theology. No sensible historian of Mormonism denies evolution over the course of Joseph Smith’s prophetic ministry. Doctrinal and ecclesiological development in early Mormonism is clearly discerned from even a cursory glance at Mormon history. That being said, Smith pushes back against historians who insist on a sort of radical departure from early Mormonism during the Nauvoo period of Joseph Smith’s life (1839–1844). The common assumption among historians, Smith explains, is “that Nauvoo doctrines and theologies were distinctly later-period revelations to the Prophet emerging spontaneously in the Nauvoo era.” Although “widely held among both Mormons and non-Mormons,” Smith insists this view is “incorrect” (72–73). Smith argues that the seeds of Joseph’s Nauvoo temple endowment (with its attending doctrines of theosis and ascending into the presence of God, or what Smith calls the “Eden ascension narrative” [78]) are found within the pages of the Book of Mormon (as well as the opening chapters of the Book of Moses, revealed to Joseph Smith in 1830). Smith not only argues for the Eden ascension narrative being located in the pages of the printed Book of Mormon, but also draws on the intriguing work of Don Bradley to suggest that the now lost Book of Lehi contained temple imagery and other overtures to Joseph’s later Nauvoo theology. Although Smith does not deny evolution in Joseph’s teachings, he critiques the common notion of a radical departure from Book of Mormon theology in Nauvoo. “Rather than persisting with the prevailing notion that the fall of Adam was the origin of evil and death,” Smith clarifies, “the Book of Mormon reframed Adam as a divine son of God, showing the faithful the ascension path to return to the presence of God through symbols, rituals, and narratives that appeared similar to the earliest Wisdom traditions enshrined anciently in the Israelite temple. In this the Book of Mormon completely bypassed traditional nineteenth-century theologies, pointing Joseph Smith toward a different path to doctrinal development that ultimately was enshrined in the theology of the Mormon temple” (86).

In addition to his convincingly argued thesis, Smith is to be commended for his use of original sources drawn from the Joseph Smith Papers Project, his engagement with important secondary literature on the Book of Mormon (including the work of Hugh Nibley and the Interpreter Foundation), and the readability of his prose. Illustrations and pictures of Mormon personalities and sites compliment the text, and although I would have personally preferred footnotes, endnotes are employed judiciously and do not overwhelm the reader.

For these and other reasons I highly recommend Smith’s Schooling the Prophet. It is an important contribution to Latter-day Saint scholarship on the Book of Mormon that deserves careful attention by laymen and academics alike who share a common interest in the history and doctrines of the early Restoration.

Faith and Reason 54: New World Writings

by

Podcast: Download (11.8MB)

Subscribe: RSS

 

From the book: Of Faith and Reason: 80 Evidences Supporting the Prophet Joseph Smith

by Michael R. Ash

One reason that LDS scholars believed Book of Mormon events transpired in Mesoamerica is it’s the only place in the western hemisphere where a true writing system can be found for the Book of Mormon period. Since Joseph Smith’s day, however, critics have argued that there were no complex writing systems known in the New World during Book of Mormon times. Science has changed all that. Excavation of a tomb in Mirador uncovered the “remnants of two ancient bark paper books or codices”. An article in Science 86 explains that the Maya “wrote books on folded bark concerning historical, mythological, religious, astronomical, and mathematical matters”. Why have only four out of hundreds of Mesoamerican codices survived? Part of the reason, of course, would be deterioration with time. A second reason was that the Spanish priests destroyed these written records in their zeal to wipe out what they believed to be pagan superstitions.

Michael R. Ash is the author of: Of Faith and Reason: 80 Evidences Supporting The Prophet Joseph Smith. He is the owner and operator of MormonFortress.com and is on the management team for FairMormon. He has been published in Sunstone, Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought, the Maxwell Institute’s FARMS Review, and is the author of Shaken Faith Syndrome: Strengthening One’s Testimony in the Face of Criticism and Doubt.  He and his wife live in Ogden, Utah, and have three daughters.

Julianne Dehlin Hatton  is a media personality in Louisville, Kentucky. She has worked as a News Director at an NPR affiliate, Radio and Television Host, and Airborne Traffic Reporter. She graduated with an MSSc from the Maxwell School of Citizenship and Public Affairs at Syracuse University in 2008. Julianne and her husband Thomas are the parents of four children.

Music for Faith and Reason is provided by Arthur Hatton.

A Simple Hypothesis on Book of Mormon Translation

by

unnamedThis post originally appeared at Mormon Puzzle Pieces and is reposted here by permission with some revisions.

By Ryan Larsen

Translation is interwoven with the restored Gospel of Jesus Christ. Ancient prophets kept records containing a fullness of the Gospel which God preserved, hidden in the earth for many centuries, before making them known to a young Joseph Smith and providing Joseph with means to translate the records through the gift and power of God.

Questions arise concerning how Joseph Smith performed the translation. Specifically, people want to know whether the words in the Book of Mormon’s English translation should be attributed directly to God or to Joseph Smith. Critics and scholars alike have taken interest.

My own interest was recently sparked during an online discussion with a polite critic who claimed that David Whitmer’s description of Joseph Smith seeing English words appear while translating, which he would read out loud to his scribes, means that Mormons are locked into defending and believing that God Himself chose every word in the Book of Mormon. I explained to my critic friend why the question is more complicated than that, and he came to agree. So, I decided to share my ideas in hopes of broadening the general discussion. [Read more…] about A Simple Hypothesis on Book of Mormon Translation

Fair Issues 94: Moroni and the Hill Cumorah

by

Podcast: Download (11.0MB)

Subscribe: RSS

MAThe Book of Mormon model for a Mesoamerican geography has – like virtually all scholarly models – a handful of anomalies or potentially problematic issues.  One of those areas of concern legitimately asks how the golden plates could have been dug out of the ground in upstate New York, if Book of Mormon events took place in Mesoamerica.

In this installment brother Ash discusses several possibilities concerning how Moroni may have traveled to deposit the golden plates on the family farm of Joseph Smith.

The full text of this article can be found at Deseret News online.

Brother Ash is author of the book Shaken Faith Syndrome: Strengthening One’s Testimony in the Face of Criticism and Doubt, as well as the book, of Faith and Reason: 80 Evidences Supporting the Prophet Joseph Smith. Both books are available for purchase online through the FairMormon Bookstore. Tell your friends about the Mormon Fair-Cast. Share a link on your Facebook page and help increase the popularity of the Mormon Fair-Cast by subscribing to this podcast in iTunes, and by rating it and writing a review.

The views and opinions expressed in the podcast may not reflect those of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints or that of FairMormon

Fair Issues 93: Mesoamerican model: Evidences and anomalies

by

Podcast: Download (11.6MB)

Subscribe: RSS

MAIn this installment brother Ash discuss why most LDS scholars believe that ancient Mesoamerica was the home for most Book of Mormon events.

As Mesoamerican ethnohistory specialist Brant Gardner explains, it’s not a single thing but and accumulation and convergence of many different things that strengthen the case for a Mesoamerican geography.

The full text of this article can be found at Deseret News online.

Brother Ash is author of the book Shaken Faith Syndrome: Strengthening One’s Testimony in the Face of Criticism and Doubt, as well as the book, of Faith and Reason: 80 Evidences Supporting the Prophet Joseph Smith. Both books are available for purchase online through the FairMormon Bookstore. Tell your friends about the Mormon Fair-Cast. Share a link on your Facebook page and help increase the popularity of the Mormon Fair-Cast by subscribing to this podcast in iTunes, and by rating it and writing a review.

The views and opinions expressed in the podcast may not reflect those of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints or that of FairMormon

 

 

 

Faith and Reason 53: The Marketplace

by

Podcast: Download (5.2MB)

Subscribe: RSS

 

From the book: Of Faith and Reason: 80 Evidences Supporting the Prophet Joseph Smith

by Michael R. Ash

In Helaman 7:10 we read that Nephi went to pray on a tower in a garden by “the highway which led to the chief market”. This is the only use of the word “market” in the entire Book of Mormon and is mentioned only in passing.  Turning to Mesoamerica we find that a marketplace did indeed exist in ancient Mesoamerican times. Not only did large Mesoamerican cities have markets, but they typically had a main or chief market, according to recent discoveries by non-LDS scholars and archaeologists.

 

Michael R. Ash is the author of: Of Faith and Reason: 80 Evidences Supporting The Prophet Joseph Smith. He is the owner and operator of MormonFortress.com and is on the management team for FairMormon. He has been published in Sunstone, Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought, the Maxwell Institute’s FARMS Review, and is the author of Shaken Faith Syndrome: Strengthening One’s Testimony in the Face of Criticism and Doubt.  He and his wife live in Ogden, Utah, and have three daughters.

Julianne Dehlin Hatton  is a media personality in Louisville, Kentucky. She has worked as a News Director at an NPR affiliate, Radio and Television Host, and Airborne Traffic Reporter. She graduated with an MSSc from the Maxwell School of Citizenship and Public Affairs at Syracuse University in 2008. Julianne and her husband Thomas are the parents of four children.

Music for Faith and Reason is provided by Arthur Hatton.

Church Development in Florida

by

images

The news that The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints plans to develop some of its ranchland in Florida for commercial and residential use has prompted the incorrect story that the Church is “building a city.” The implication is that the Church would own or control the eventual city. This is untrue.

Deseret Ranches has owned the 290,000 acre ranch for 60 years. Last year it acquired a further 380,000 acres. The Ranch plans to convert 130,000 acres of land to commercial and residential use over several decades, and is working with Osceola County officials to envision what eventual development would entail.

Understanding the real estate development process is key to understanding the Ranch’s intentions. The owner of a large parcel of land who wants to sell his land to businesses and homeowners cannot simply put out a “for sale” sign. Building on such a large parcel involves a great deal of practical planning, which requires county government input, and has environmental implications, which could require several layers of local, state, and federal government approval.

So the landowner must devise a development plan, which lays out, in varying degrees of detail, which portions of the land will be sold for residential building, which for commercial use, which will be set aside as off-limits to building in order to protect sensitive environmental areas, where new roads will be placed, where existing roads will be altered, whether public transportation will be needed, how big of lots people will be able to buy for their homes, how the new buildings will be provided with utilities like electricity and water, whether eventual occupants would be part of existing cities or form new cities, and other factors.

The Ranch is presently working with local officials to envision these details, and the main point of continuing discussion seems to be the amount of land to set aside for environmental protection.

After a development plan is eventually approved by all the necessary government regulators, the Ranch will be free to sell off portions of the land to those who want to build houses or businesses on it. The Ranch would not retain any ownership stake after the land is sold. The Ranch would not own a city or any of the resulting houses, businesses, or other new developments. Even the land set aside for environmental conservation would likely transfer to the ownership of the county or the new city.

Why is the Ranch preparing to sell off some of its land? Why now? The Ranch has never before developed its Florida land. But if it doesn’t make a plan for intentional development, it will lose control over its own land bit by bit. Neighboring cities have been suing successfully for water rights, and a neighboring county is attempting to condemn a portion of the land for use as a landfill. Rather than losing a significant portion of the land’s value to such actions, the Ranch has chosen to be proactive and make a coherent plan for the land’s future.

Myth: The Church is building a city in Florida.
Fact: The Ranch is working with local officials to draft a development plan that will allow the Ranch to sell parcels of land for commercial and residential development in the future, which will probably create a new city.

Myth: The Church will have ownership of the future city.
Fact: The Ranch will sell the land to buyers and developers, and will not retain ownership interest in any parcel sold.

Myth: The Ranch’s plan has something to do with creating a gathering place for refuge from future calamities.
Fact: Future development of the land will produce a normal, diverse city without any special LDS character. The only way to live in the city will be to buy or rent a home there from a developer who bought the land from the Ranch.

For more information on Deseret Ranches, see their website here.

Filed Under: Uncategorized

Fair Issues 90: True scholarship vs. wishful thinking

by

Podcast: Download (11.6MB)

Subscribe: RSS

MAIn this installment brother Ash introduces the Mesoamerica model as a possible location for at least some of the Book of Mormon geography along with how an authentic ancient text should only be supported by rigorous scholarship and not wishful thinking and the misuse of scholarly data.

The full text of this article can be found at Deseret News online.

Brother Ash is author of the book Shaken Faith Syndrome: Strengthening One’s Testimony in the Face of Criticism and Doubt, as well as the book, of Faith and Reason: 80 Evidences Supporting the Prophet Joseph Smith. Both books are available for purchase online through the FairMormon Bookstore. Tell your friends about the Mormon Fair-Cast. Share a link on your Facebook page and help increase the popularity of the Mormon Fair-Cast by subscribing to this podcast in iTunes, and by rating it and writing a review.

The views and opinions expressed in the podcast may not reflect those of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints or that of FairMormon

 

On The Record

by

This presentation will cover the role of Church Public Affairs and how it interacts with the Church and the press. Brother Otterson will also discuss many of the issues and misconceptions he deals with, as well as respond to questions from the audience.

Michael R. Otterson has been serving as the Managing Director of the Public Affairs Department since 2008, with responsibility for public affairs issues of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints worldwide.

He was educated in England, his birthplace, where he completed his formal journalistic training. For eleven years he worked as a journalist on newspapers in Britain, Australia and Japan.

Since 1976, he has worked in the London, Sydney and Salt Lake City Public Affairs Offices of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. In his current role as Managing Director he oversees many contemporary concerns facing the church such as women’s issues, religious freedom and an ever-expanding global church.