- Sute on Is “Godhead Incarnate” False Doctrine? Reclaiming John Rutter’s Candlelight Carol for LDS Theology: “Curious, if you could also describe your own child as “Godhead incarnate”? Probably not, but if you wanted to be metaphorical and get all Lorenzo Snow-y you could. We find ourselves in the uncomfortable position of following Jesus and how he spoke about himself and then also following how others spoke about him after the resurrection. Let’s not forget he got prickly when someone called him good. He made it very clear in one time and place that our Father in Heaven was perfect, and then after he was resurrected he included himself in that But we also have clear scriptural instances of referring to the atonement like it happened in the past and seeing and receiving the power of it, when at that time in scripture it hadn’t happened yet. Therefore, I’m totally ok with with referring to baby Jesus as God in the flesh, but I can see why some might get the wrong idea, why I think connects to where some of these trinitarian notions came from. “You’re saying Jesus wasn’t always perfect?! That’s heresy, he’s the same yesterday, today and forever!” Shorter version – don’t take too much doctrinal stock in a single poetic turn of phrase as though all truth must be contained in it with clarity and precision.” Dec 7, 22:09
- on Declining Confidence in Religion and Other Institutions: “For the Des News to delete the whole graph and focus the text on religion and labor, I think shows a low opinion of their readers. To mention the general trend of decreasing confidence across nearly all fields gives a better summary of attitudes. The commenters’ inability to distinguish colors tells you why the graph was not printed..TMI. I think your comment diminishes the influence of the trump years. Even a “best fit” graph to display linear results has outsized influences on the endpoints. Especially following the spiking cynical decade of the 90s.” Dec 7, 21:06
- on Declining Confidence in Religion and Other Institutions: “The head of the serpent is consuming its own tail. The university has taught its students to be suspicious of institutions–and now the students are becoming suspicious of the university itself.” Dec 6, 19:04
- on Devotion in the Postinformation Age: “That’s a great comparison, RLD. The discrepancies in Mercury’s orbit aren’t the most important thing about Mercury, even if you were living on Mercury. But we can break our brains over the question, “When is an orbit not elliptical?” and miss everything else going on in the solar system.” Dec 6, 18:30
- on Is “Godhead Incarnate” False Doctrine? Reclaiming John Rutter’s Candlelight Carol for LDS Theology: “Chad, oh yeah, it’s kind of hard to add a footnote to a choir performance. For various reasons your post reminded me of some similar discussions.” Dec 6, 18:27
- on Is “Godhead Incarnate” False Doctrine? Reclaiming John Rutter’s Candlelight Carol for LDS Theology: “In D&C 132, Jesus is speaking in the first person, and he declares “I am the Lord thy God” eight times. One of those declarations is in verse 12: 12 I am the Lord thy God; and I give unto you this commandment—that no man shall come unto the Father but by me or by my word, which is my law, saith the Lord. There, we see the Father and the Son in the very same verse, and the Son still claims the dignity of God for himself. Amen. I want to respect all those who serve in offices in the church, but I have little confidence in Elder McConkie’s dogma and dogmatism. In my opinion, he reinforced error in many ways. I am glad we have moving beyond him in some ways – but sadly, his influence still looms. Given a choice between believing and following Jesus or Elder McConkie, I will choose the former. I regret that within our church culture, many fellow Latter-day Saints would choose Elder McConkie instead.” Dec 6, 18:09
- on Is “Godhead Incarnate” False Doctrine? Reclaiming John Rutter’s Candlelight Carol for LDS Theology: “Spencer Greenhalgh, that’s a good point and you’re probably right that that alone could justify it. ji, what’s interesting to me is that the question of whether Jesus should be called God or not is something that we seem to go back and forth on. Bruce McConkie was emphatic that Jesus was subordinate to the Father and should never be an object of worship (though I sometimes wonder if he just did that to pick a fight with another BYU professor). Nowadays, Church leaders seem pretty committed to treating Jesus as God. Jonathan Green, yeah. I don’t think that Oxford University Press will add that as a footnote just for Latter-day Saints with the piece, but Latter-day Saints could add that in when questioned about it. Vic Rattlehead, agreed!” Dec 6, 16:12
- on Is “Godhead Incarnate” False Doctrine? Reclaiming John Rutter’s Candlelight Carol for LDS Theology: “Not a Cougar, I kept thinking of the story of the Book of Mormon translation into Portuguese while writing this, where the mission president in Brazil and the First Presidency freaked out because they thought that “Catholic doctrine” had found a way into the Portuguese Book of Mormon text and that the book taught “the wrong conception of Deity and the Godhead.” In reality, it just translated what the Book of Mormon says about the Trinity into Portuguese, and the German-speaking mission president thought it sounded too Catholic. (https://www.fromthedesk.org/how-was-the-book-of-mormon-translated-into-portuguese/)” Dec 6, 16:07
- on Is “Godhead Incarnate” False Doctrine? Reclaiming John Rutter’s Candlelight Carol for LDS Theology: “Great post. I have zero problem with the trinitarian shield that is often used as a visual device and believe other Latter Day Saints should have no issue with it either. The Father is God, Jesus is God, the Holy Spirit is God, and they are not each other. The only difference is we do not believe they share the same ousia, or essence.” Dec 6, 11:00
- on Is “Godhead Incarnate” False Doctrine? Reclaiming John Rutter’s Candlelight Carol for LDS Theology: “The verse from Colossians 2 is probably enough by itself to justify leaving the wording in place, perhaps with a footnote reference to the verse. Some of the new hymns have included notes like this for unfamiliar language.” Dec 6, 11:00
