Mercury wrote:What of comparative religion courses? Do they have them? if they do is it just one analysis after another telling the student what aspects of the great whore this or that particular religion is?
I do not know about any other religion courses other then the institute type courses.
One more thing. I was just reading the KG thread on the Brent/Hauglid issue and did a quick search on Hauglid. That took me to BYU's web page and I have to laugh that BYU has a "Neal A. Maxwell institute for religious scholarship" yet doesn't offer one single solitary course training students in the ways of "religious scholarship." They quote Maxwell as saying, "LDS scholars can and should speak in the tounge of scholarship..."
Well, if that's the case, why not teach students the tongue of scholarship? Why are there these "Ancient Scripture" organizations and institutes housed within BYU not only absent a program for students, but a single course? If I attended a university which boasted its institute for advanced neurological research, I'd expect there be some kind of graduate course offered in neurology.
I think the answer is obvious. Any scholarly religious course would shake more faith than it would build, so BYU steers clear of it. But for those LDS who have arrived at their positions (not always directly related to religious studies even) through other venues with testimony in tact, a university offers the infrastructure for an apologetic arm that can be advertised under the guise of serious research. So convinced of the worth of their scripture projects, BYU does not even offer a way to pass down the know-how of their panel of experts to the rising generation.
grayskull wrote:There is a big orange book (or was) called "world religions" you can get from that church supply place.
Mine was blue (5 years ago).
Also, I took the PoGP class from Dr. Rhodes. He actually did mention the stuff about how the literal translation of the facsimilies and of the Book of Breathings. He also told us various theories to account for the differences. He also taught us about the phallus on fac. 2 for which I really had to bite my tonge hard to keep from laughing (yes, I'm immature). None of that really challenged my faith though. I guess I figured that if it was taught at BYU and that the professor believed, then I didn't need to worry. I knew I couldn't read Egyptian and I knew that the guy who could was OK with everything. I may have also thought that he was making things too complicated. In any case all I wanted was doctrinal knowledge and to get a good grade. I didn't care to read Egyptian or dig up controversy at that time.
That's General Leo. He could be my friend if he weren't my enemy. eritis sicut dii I support NCMO