- Kendall Buchanan on The Book of Mormon Witnesses, The Miracle of the Sun, and Other Historically Plausible Miracles: “Stephen C, Thanks for sharing the sun miracle; super fun. My personal favorite with contemporary documentation is Joan of Arc, also told well on Astral Codex Ten: https://www.astralcodexten.com/p/your-review-joan-of-arc. Pushback: You’re arguing that there’s something more rational in our faith’s founding miracles than the aimlessness inherent in others’. This is an interesting aspect of Mormonism: reason is important, to a point; faith is important, to a point; and those limits align nicely with our theology by confirming our own miracles and giving us space to look skeptically on those outside. Why did God let only a handful of people see the gold plates? He in His great wisdom knew this was best. Why would He help someone levitate? Well, He wouldn’t, so… I think you’re gently acknowledging that there’s something ungenerous in this line of thought; but my point is it’s an irony within common Mormon belief—God only does inexplicable things in ways *I* can understand.” Apr 9, 09:19
- on The Book of Mormon Witnesses, The Miracle of the Sun, and Other Historically Plausible Miracles: “Miracles are often the uncomfortable point for faith for educated folks. At times I felt like Jefferson wading through the New Testament wanting it to all fit a rational cohesive idea. Lately I’ve come to appreciate parts of the scriptures that aren’t perfect fits for how we see things now. Like Hazel Motes in Wise Blood, the reality of the weirdness beyond the common calls is to a new reality: “Later he saw Jesus move from tree to tree in the back of his mind, a wild ragged figure motioning him to turn around and come off into the dark where he might be walking on the water and not know it and then suddenly know it and drown.”” Apr 8, 22:12
- on The Book of Mormon Witnesses, The Miracle of the Sun, and Other Historically Plausible Miracles: “@ Jonathan Green: Almost everything in ancient history for one. @Carey F: Well put.” Apr 8, 20:09
- on The Book of Mormon Witnesses, The Miracle of the Sun, and Other Historically Plausible Miracles: “Signs don’t force belief they extend an invitation. They only matter if they point beyond themselves to something meaningful. The clearest evidence isn’t the sign itself but the transformation that follows, which is why signs tend to come after faith rather than before it.” Apr 8, 18:22
- on The Book of Mormon Witnesses, The Miracle of the Sun, and Other Historically Plausible Miracles: “I always assumed that the plates were one of those things people just have to take on faith, but when I read the historical accounts, they’re surprisingly solid. That doesn’t rule out all skeptical explanations, of course, but it does demand an explanation. I haven’t looked at Fatima at all, but solar phenomena are common enough in the stuff I look at that it’s likely the people saw something, although people will disagree about what and how best to explain it. Another fun question is to turn it around: Which basic historical events are less well attested than some of these miracle reports?” Apr 8, 18:00
- on Moving Beyond the KJV: Kent Jackson’s Modern Translation of Genesis: “Jonathan, Thanks for your comments. (1) The seminar mentioned was for PhD students who intended to become professionals in the field. It was assumed that we already had learned Hebrew before we took the course. My word “brutal” is hyperbolic, but it was intense and demanding and required many hours of preparation to master the assigned reading block before we met. Several of the erstwhile PhD students disappeared from the program after the seminar, which was a good thing for them. (2) I felt that the JST was a necessary inclusion with a new Genesis text for Latter-day Saints. I don’t necessarily feel the same way about other biblical books, where there is much less JST, and most of it just provides revised wordings for clarity. But JST Genesis is one of the most important revelations of the Restoration, and it is unlike most of the JST elsewhere. In the book, the Genesis text, the commentary, and the JST readings are nicely segregated typographically. And the translation is not influenced in any way by any source other than the Hebrew text itself, so there is nothing specifically “LDS” about the translation.” Apr 8, 16:55
- on A Review: Welding Another Link: Latter-day Saint Essays on Faith and Intellect: “Yeah. It’s fun to see his name pop up so much, especially this year, with his book with Oxford coming out as well.” Apr 7, 11:22
- on How Many Latter-day Saints View Pornography?: “Upon reflection on this thread, I have edited my Q&As… Does the church counsel its members to avoid pornography? Yes (well, yes in the recent past but not as much lately). Is viewing pornography a sin? Maybe, maybe even probably (especially considering the Lord’s instruction in Matthew 5:28), but inasmuch as the current handbook states that viewing pornography is not a basis for church discipline, I suppose it is not a major sin in comparison with some other sins. The church does not equate viewing pornography with actually committing adultery. Our scripture is silent on the matter, and God has never provided a complete list of all possible sins especially for private matters — indeed, God’s concept of sin may differ from the church’s concept (and the church’s concept may change with time), and the church’s concept may differ from an individual member’s concept (which also may change with time). For a great many some matters, especially small matters, the same identical action might be a sin for one person in a particular circumstance and might not be a sin for a different person or a different circumstance. Can one who views pornography hold a temple recommend? Yes, at least since the change in questions in 2019; provided, the applicant can affirm that he or she is striving for moral cleanliness. Viewing pornography might be unclean and/or unchaste, but is not a violation of the church’s Law of Chastity. I appreciate the discussion.” Apr 7, 10:58
- on A Review: Welding Another Link: Latter-day Saint Essays on Faith and Intellect: “Thanks for the review, and congratulations to Nate, one of many T&S emeriti who went on to bigger and better things after graduating from blogging.” Apr 7, 10:55
- on How Many Latter-day Saints View Pornography?: “I suspect it’s things like this letter that prompted the Church to tighten up what counts as an official Church position and be more transparent about those positions–in particular by making the Handbook public. We could quibble about what exactly is official, but “Something my institute teacher said was in a letter 40 years ago” clearly is not. Want to know the Church’s actual position on pornography or birth control? Read section 38.6 in the Handbook, “Policies on Moral Issues.” (All members really should be familiar with 38.6.) Want to know if fornication will lead to a membership council? Read chapter 32 in the Handbook. Want to know the Church’s position on oral sex? Read 38.6 and note that it’s not there. Check the scriptures, the Family Proclamation, For the Strength of Youth (unlikely), recent general conference talks, the Church website, and anything else you might consider authoritative; note that it’s not there either. Conclude that the Church has no position on oral sex. Because if it did, it would put it somewhere that we’re encouraged to read. It’s not entirely cut and dried–the status of old conference talks is pretty ambiguous, for example. But it’s not nearly as opaque as you’d think from the discussion here.” Apr 7, 08:58
