Blixa wrote:I just learned that the new issue of the Mormon Studies Review (formerly the FARMS Review) is hot off the presses.
Is this where Simon chimes in that the review should be called The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints Studies Review?
"The Church is authoritarian, tribal, provincial, and founded on a loosely biblical racist frontier sex cult."--Juggler Vain "The LDS church is the Amway of religions. Even with all the soap they sell, they still manage to come away smelling dirty."--Some Schmo
Blixa wrote:I just learned that the new issue of the Mormon Studies Review (formerly the FARMS Review) is hot off the presses.
Some of the contents are:
The Neal A. Maxwell lecture on the Book of Mormon by Marilyn Arnold.
John E. Clark on "A Key for Evaluating Nephite Geographies."
Brant Gardner's "Nephi as Scribe."
Brian Hauglid's review of Bradshaw's "In God's Image and Likeness: Ancient and Modern Perspectives on the Book of Moses."
Gregory Smith on recent discussions on same-sex marriage.
Matthew Roper and Paul Fields on " The Historical Case against Sidney Rigdon's Authorship of the Book of Mormon" .
Richard Bennett's review of Grow's book on Thomas L. Kane.
"Beyond Politics," an essay of Hugh Nibley.
A review by Noel Reynolds of Bauckman's "Jesus and the Eye Witnesses."
A review by Louis Midgley of Catherwood's "Church History: A Crash Course for the Curious."
Looks like they've got a big bag of nothing.
"The Church is authoritarian, tribal, provincial, and founded on a loosely biblical racist frontier sex cult."--Juggler Vain "The LDS church is the Amway of religions. Even with all the soap they sell, they still manage to come away smelling dirty."--Some Schmo
Doctor Scratch wrote:Thanks, Blixa! Am I mistaken, or do the titles of the articles suggest that the "polemical edge" of the journal has been dulled somewhat?
I wouldn't know what you mean. In your tabloidish mind I'm sure most things sound dull--that seems to be a reason why you are so apt to put a spin on it in hopes to make the benign and mundane to appear offensive and astounding.
Notice for instance how you allude to your own created "gossip" about Oaks chopping heads. Yoohooo, Scratch, you made that up in the confines of your own imagination. Its only gossip among you and your buds.
Love ya tons, Stem
I ain't nuttin'. don't get all worked up on account of me.
It's interesting that Louis "Woody" Midgley is following up on his racist "Book Comments" piece on Christopher Catherwood, this time with a more in-depth piece. Just looking over the titles of the articles in this newly released Mormon Smear Review, I would have guessed that "Woody" Midgley's piece was the most likely to be polemical, but in re-examining his old "book notes" article, I'm not so sure.
"[I]f, while hoping that everybody else will be honest and so forth, I can personally prosper through unethical and immoral acts without being detected and without risk, why should I not?." --Daniel Peterson, 6/4/14
I guess I'm not up with the times, but when and how did Dr. Midgley get the nickname "Woody?"
"Finally, for your rather strange idea that miracles are somehow linked to the amount of gay sexual gratification that is taking place would require that primitive Christianity was launched by gay sex, would it not?"
Dr. Shades wrote:I guess I'm not up with the times, but when and how did Dr. Midgley get the nickname "Woody?"
Trust me, you don't want to know. Let's just say that it involved jars of pickles, John Gee, Bill Hamblin and a tanning bed. Please, just leave it at that, no more questions.
"I'm on paid sabbatical from BYU in exchange for my promise to use this time to finish two books."
Elder Oaks, as reported by the DesNews wrote:"I describe these principles to you young adults because you are current members and future leaders of the Church of Jesus Christ, and you will need to decide these kinds of questions sooner than you think," Elder Oaks said. "You need to understand how our efforts in the public square are informed by the balance between truth and tolerance."
I understand that the Geography article includes a suggestion by the author that Book of Mormon geography be taken as a metaphor, or something to that effect. I am passing on second hand information from someone who works at MI and has read the journal, and may have misunderstood the authors meaning, but I would find that an interesting new direction in apologetic discourse, if this is in fact the case.
Anxiously awaiting it's release to the unwashed masses...