Dan Peterson on the best way to understand scripture

[_Philo Sofee]

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/danpeterso ... phets.html

The quote is, of course, ludicrously silly...........

“Anyone who wishes to understand the mind of the sacred writers must first cleanse his own life, and approach the saints by copying their deeds.”
St. Athanasius of Alexandria

[Guest]

Here is the CF in full context..

But for the searching and right understanding of the Scriptures there is need of a good life and a pure soul, and for Christian virtue to guide the mind to grasp, so far as human nature can, the truth concerning God the Word. One cannot possibly understand the teaching of the saints unless one has a pure mind and is trying to imitate their life. Anyone who wants to look at sunlight naturally wipes his eye clear first, in order to make, at any rate, some approximation to the purity of that on which he looks; and a person wishing to see a city or country goes to the place in order to do so. Similarly, anyone who wishes to understand the mind of the sacred writers must first cleanse his own life, and approach the saints by copying their deeds. Thus united to them in the fellowship of life, he will both understand the things revealed to them by God and, thenceforth escaping the peril that threatens sinners in the judgment, will receive that which is laid up for the saints in the kingdom of heaven. Of that reward it is written: "Eye hath not seen nor ear heard, .neither hath entered into the heart of man the things that God has prepared" (1 Cor. 2. 9) for them that live a godly life and love the God and Father in Christ Jesus our Lord, through Whom and with Whom be to the Father Himself, with the Son Himself, in the Holy Spirit, honour and might and glory to ages of ages. Amen.

[_Kishkumen]

I reject the idea that a canon of select texts is deserving of the special status reserved for the Bible or the Koran. As Professor G. H. Dorr said in response to the question about whether he was reading the Good Book, "There are many good books." Find them. Read them. Re-read the ones that most inspire and instruct you. One of my Facebook friends was happy to announce that he was re-reading Being and Time by Heidegger. I was both surprised and pleased to hear it. Are such books any less profound than the Bible? Might they not be more profound?

It is sad to me that Joseph Smith abandoned the limitations of canon only to found a church that would embrace a canon again with a vengeance. I doubt I'll miss much by not re-reading Leviticus. Much of the Doctrine and Covenants is of limited applicability. There is no good reason to suppose that directions given to ancient Hebrews or frontier bumpkins are a blueprint for our lives. People who seek to live childish fantasies are cruising for disappointment and pain.

[_SteelHead]

Good books:
The River Why
A River Runs Through It

Not so good books:
Book of Mormon
Bible

[_Dr Exiled]

Obviously Prester John, and those of like mind, are the only true saint scotsmen.

[_Kishkumen]

Once we get past the issue of Bibliolatry, I see great value in what Athanasius said. Books worthy of deep contemplation repay well our sincere, focused effort to understand them. The text can serve as a form of initiation, changing the person who devotes herself to it. Such an initiation, or transformation, requires faith in the value of the text, and much work to interpret it. Faith without works is dead.

[_consiglieri]

It is sad to me that Joseph Smith abandoned the limitations of canon only to found a church that would embrace a canon again with a vengeance.

This!

And when it comes to the Bible, modern Mormonism seems to have found company with the KJV-only crowd of fundamentalist Christians.

Which is a strange point to come to when your founding prophet had no problem doing an inspired version of the KJV.

[_Johannes]

I doubt I'll miss much by not re-reading Leviticus.

Not many people (other than our Orthodox Jewish friends) would use Leviticus as a guide to behaviour today, but it still repays attention, as literature if nothing else. Have you read Mary Douglas on the book?

[_Fence Sitter]

In Mormonism, scripture study is conflated with scripture reading. Repetition is the means to understanding. What is understood is not as important as how it is understood. This is merely a way to reinforce the horribly bad confirmation method that led to conversion in the first place.

[_Kishkumen]

Which is a strange point to come to when your founding prophet had no problem doing an inspired version of the KJV.

Indeed! But it's really about exercising control over a large community. People seem to be unable to abide the discomfort of realizing other people in the room are on a different page, and when they aren't happy, the church is not collecting abundant tithes.

Still, one runs across lots of secret independence, people seeking inspiration from all kinds of unauthorized sources. Unfortunately very little of that surfaces in church meetings.