Embedded Files
( - previous issue - )
Apologia Report 16:33 (1,083)
September 29, 2011
Subject: LDS and evangelical views of God, really that different?
In this issue:
ATHEISM - "new atheist" Sam Harris has his moral legs removed
MORMONISM - correcting the impression that little divides the LDS from evangelicals
+ how polygamy rides the homosexual revolution
SEVENTH-DAY ADVENTISM - understanding the trajectory and impact of Robert Brinsmead and his global "Awakening" movement
------
ATHEISM
The Moral Landscape, by Sam Harris [1] -- in this review, Chad Meister, professor of philosophy and theology at Bethel College, reports: "More and more leading atheists ... are arguing that morality is objective and that you don't need God in order for that to be true. ... The question, however, is whether a solid account for such a moral position can be made regardless of one's view of God's existence."
The goal of Harris in this work "is to tear down the wall between scientific facts and human values and to demonstrate that science can and should determine morality. ... Unlike other ethicists and moral thinkers who maintain that there is an intractable gulf between *is* and *ought* - between the way science describes the world and the way things ought to be - Harris claims to have achieved the monumental feat of bridging the divide. ...
"We value well-being, says Harris, and we ought to foster it. So once we get a clear meaning of well-being, to be determined by science of course, then science can tell us how to live the moral life. Science can determine moral values. We don't need God or religion to tell us these things after all. ...
"The central problem with The Moral Landscape turns out to be the main goal of the book: explaining how science can *determine* moral values. Harris argues that morality is grounded in consciousness and human well-being. ... What Harris offers as a new idea is really nothing more than recycled utilitarianism, the view that morally right actions are those that produce the most good - 'good' typically defined in terms of pleasure. In Harris's schema, pleasure is replaced with well-being. ...
"Harris provides no answers to real challenges brought against his moral position.
"There are other moral missteps Harris makes in his book as well. One of the most glaring is his denial of free will, both libertarian and compatibilist varieties."
Meister concludes by appealing to an authority in the same camp as Harris. "Leading atheist philosopher of science Michael Ruse has no appreciation for what Harris does in this book; in fact, he thinks the entire project is reckless. His disparagement of Harris's work is glaring. He quips <www.bit.ly/cvolQt>, 'If God wanted to destroy New Atheism, getting this book written was a good start.'" Christian Research Journal, 34:4 - 2011, pp56-57.
---
MORMONISM
"Are Mormon and Evangelical Views of God Really That Different?" by Timothy Dalrymple -- a good example of the increasing pressure on Christians in today's world to think critically. The context is the question of voting for a Mormon presidential candidate. Dalrymple says he can, and he cites another contributor to his blog who says he can't <www.tinyurl.com/3gg2pwg>.
However, Dalrymple is writing here to engage "Deseret News' excellent religion reporter, Michael DeGroote" who claims that "Americans in general are more Mormon in their theology than they might be prepared to admit" <www.tinyurl.com/6y2lrnb>. Dalrymple explains that to arrive at this conclusion, DeGroote says: "When you focus on the differentiation in the Trinity ... Christians by and large do not accept the Mormon view. When you focus on the manner of their unity, however, orthodox Christians show that they really agree with Mormonism."
Dalrymple does a nice job of pointing out the flaws in DeGroote's reasoning and concludes: "First, we do not improve understanding between two communities by blurring the differences between them. ...
Second, differences of belief between Mormons and evangelicals can be important theologically and even soteriologically (in regards to salvation) without being important politically." That, as they say, remains to be seen. Philosophical Fragments, Sep 16 '11, <www.bit.ly/o805Wo>.
"The Present State of Our Polygamous Future" by Joe Carter -- notes that "the New York Times featured a story about a polygamist who is suing the state of Utah to overturn its anti-polygamy law.... [www.nyti.ms/qlTHnX]
"The lawsuit is not demanding that states recognize polygamous marriage. Instead, the lawsuit builds on a 2003 United States Supreme Court decision, Lawrence v. Texas [www.bit.ly/986TmN], which struck down state sodomy laws as unconstitutional intrusions on the 'intimate conduct' of consenting adults. It will ask the federal courts to tell states that they cannot punish polygamists for their own 'intimate conduct' so long as they are not breaking other laws, like those regarding child abuse, incest or seeking multiple marriage licenses."
Carter explains: "One man's slippery slope is another's ladder of progress. Homosexual activists needed over thirty years to [reach their present legal success levels]. But they have paved a clearer path for polygamists. ...
"[A]s long as polygamists are not violating established laws or committing child abuse, states no longer have the authority to regulate their living arrangements.
"With this decriminalization comes the inevitable push for acceptance. It happened with homosexual relationships and it will happen with polyamorous ones too. And why should society deny a man the right to marry all the women he loves? What reasons do those who favor gay marriage have for excluding polygamy? Having rejected all arguments from nature and reason when they were used against their position, what do they have left to justify their discrimination?
"The answer is nothing but arbitrary personal preference." First Things, Jul 20 '11, <www.bit.ly/nS6zyI>.
---
SEVENTH-DAY ADVENTISM
"Judged by the Gospel" by Martin L. Carey -- reviews the little-understood story of Australian Robert Brinsmead's initial questioning of SDA publications in the late 1950s, his subsequent leadership of an unprecedented global "Awakening" movement away from mainstream Adventism, and his eventual abandonment of religion overall in 1987.
Carey explains: "Robert Brinsmead [began] his career as a conservative Adventist. As the years passed, however, he morphed, slowly becoming liberal, then radical, and finally moving from devotion to hostile rejection. Along the way, he covered much of the territory of Adventist thought that still flourishes today. Robert Brinsmead's Awakening movement reveals not only a microcosm of Adventism but also gives insight into its nature."
Brinsmead initially sought to correct errors in the 1957 Adventist publication Questions on Doctrine (QOD) [2]. The core issue for Brinsmead was the sense felt by many conservative Adventists that some QOD "statements on the atonement appeared to support the common Protestant understanding of a completed atonement."
The investigative judgment is Adventism's unique and central belief that "Christ entered the Most Holy Place of the sanctuary in heaven in 1844 and began a judgment of all those who profess God. The records in heaven are now being examined so that all those who have confessed and overcome every sin will have the evidence of their sins removed from the records. Only then will the atonement for sin be accomplished. ...
"Brinsmead felt that judgment readiness was urgent, that God's professed people were not ready. [T]he standard of readiness was nothing less than perfection of character. [SDA founder and prophetess] Ellen White had made that belief abundantly clear." Carey then discusses "the historic Adventist doctrines of salvation that shape Adventists' understanding of how they can achieve judgment readiness:" God's Law, Original Sin, Righteousness by Faith, and Moral Perfection. Carey notes that Brinsmead's early purpose "was not to destroy Adventism but to restore it to its original judgment day urgency."
Carey - who was raised by a mother active in Awakening, and who speaks as a former "insider" - explains that the movement's culture had three distinctive characteristics: a charismatic leader ("Brinsmead's energy and personality always carried the movement, powered by his strong mind, exceptional communication skills, and an independent spirit"); an "elite remnant identity" ("we felt we were the most Adventist of all Adventists in our knowledge and zeal"); and "intellectual system-building" ("We loved our speculations about the nature of Christ and the end times, projecting our notions in lurid, apocalyptic detail").
From this point onward, Carey gives the impression that the mercurial Brinsmead began a long track of accelerating change from one theological "framework" to another. Brinsmead published a magazine, initially named Present Truth and later Verdict, which came to reveal a growing "antipathy against the Christian church" and ultimately his rejection of religion in general. Proclamation!, Apr/May '11, pp18-24. <www.bit.ly/p7GzCP>
-------
SOURCES: Monographs
1 - The Moral Landscape: How Science Can Determine Human Values, by Sam Harris (Free Prs, 2011, paperback, 320 pages) <www.tinyurl.com/3op2xhw>
2 - Questions on Doctrine, George R. Knight, ed. (Andrews Univ Prs, 2003, hardcover, 619 pages) <www.tinyurl.com/cwzb5k>
--------
( - next issue - )
Page updated
Google Sites
Report abuse