« The Atheological Atonement | Main | The Theological Atonement »

Comments

Hey Dave,

Well, I think you've not quite got right what I meant to say by the post. My point isn't that we need theology as well as apologetics. (Indeed, I find myself a little exasperated with the "we can do both" responses to things.) My point was to say that a theological apologetics is a more important apologetics, and a theological apologetics that has an eye on how contested scripture calls for a radical reenvisioning of the underpinnings of our worldview. Another way to put it: so-called "traditional" apologetics concedes the worldviews contested by Mormon scripture in order to demonstrate the truth of Mormon scripture---and that seems deeply problematic to me.

Where does that leave me?

Thanks for the reply, Joe. I like the term "theological apologetics." I suspect traditional apologists would respond that they have consistently opposed the naturalistic worldview of secular critics with a religious or LDS worldview that allows for supernatural events and divine intervention. Within that divine worldview there is still plenty of disagreement over how much intervention occurs, over which events qualify as divine intervention and over how scripture is to be interpreted. Traditional apologists may, for the sake of argument, argue on conceptual terrain not of their own choosing. But given their own choice, I suspect they would frame the discussion differently.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Now Reading

Blog powered by Typepad

General Books 09-12

General Books 06-08

General Books 04-05

About This Site

Mormon Books 2013-14

Mormon Books 2012

Science Books

Bible Books

Mormon Books 09-11

Mormon Books 2008

Mormon Books 2007

Mormon Books 2006

Mormon Books 2005

Religion Books 09-12

Religion Books 2008

Religion Books 2004-07