The Case Against Karen Armstrong: In What Sense is God “Inexpressible”?

Case for GodIn my recent posts I’ve addressed many of the problems I find in Karen Armstrong’s analysis of ‘the modern God’ which I believe is really just a cherry picked interpretation at odds with fact.

One idea I have not addressed is her idea that God is ‘inexpressible’ or ‘ineffable.’

Now I don’t really know any religionists that would argue this point at an abstract level. Certainly God – even the supposed ‘modern God’ — is generally thought of as ‘inexpressible’ or ‘ineffable’ in some way. Even the literally minded Mormons would tend to agree.

What I want to explore is if Armstrong is being precise enough when she presents this idea. Is there only one sense in which God is ‘inexpressible’? What does ‘inexpressible’ even mean? Continue reading

Hugh Nibley’s view of intellectual attacks on the gospel

From “The Way of the Intellectuals,” an essay in “An Approach to the Book of Mormon,”  pp. 375-376.

One thing the Book of Mormon illustrates is that there is no compromise possible with those who attack the gospel on what they call intellectual grounds.  The church flourished mightily when it got rid of them, but suffered gravely while they were in its midst.  No men spent more time with Jesus than the Scribes and Pharisees; they questioned him constantly, and he always answered them — yet there is no instance of his ever converting one of them.  The doctors talked his language, they studied the scriptures day and night, they heard him preach, and they held long discussions with him, yet though he converted dockworkers and bankers, farmers and women of the streets, tax-collectors and soldiers, he never converted the doctors.  It was they who planned his death.

After all, no man can learn enough in his lifetime to count for very much, and no one knows that better than the man who diligently seeks knowledge — that is the lesson of Faust.  How then can any honest man believe that his modicum of knowledge can supersede revelation and supplant the authority of the priesthood?

Discuss.

 

The Case Against Karen Armstrong: Was the Ancient God Non-Literal?

Case for GodIn my last few posts (here, here, and here), I looked at how Karen Armstrong freely takes quotes of some of her sources out of context to make her case that the literal ‘modern God’ was recent and at odds with the original ancient view of God.

In this post I’m going to explore some of the other reasons I find this view suspect.

The Non-Literal Garden of Eden

One case she makes several times (so many it started to hurt) is that the Garden of Eden account in the Bible was not intended to be taken literally. She presents Origen as an ancient example of this. Continue reading

How To Talk To Teenagers: Three Tips

“Nicholeen, I can’t seem to correct my 16 year old son without him getting upset. He rolls his eyes and looks away from me. He just seems to have a wall surrounding him that none of us can penetrate. I know I am not the calmest parent either, but there must be something I can say to get his attention or something. What do you suggest?” Continue reading