|
|
| (804 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| − | == Question: Why do apologetics? == | + | {{GregSmithUser:Browsebar}} |
| | + | == Links to check == |
| | + | {{Set off quote 1 |
| | + | |color=eaf9f5 |
| | + | |image=Russell_nelson_official_portrait_2018.jpeg |
| | + | |I believe that if the Lord were speaking to you directly tonight, the first thing He would make sure you understand is your true identity. My dear friends, you are literally spirit children of God. ... |
| | | | |
| − | === Apologists participate for a variety of reasons ===
| + | Labels ''can'' be fun and indicate your support for any number of positive things. Many labels will change for you with the passage of time. And not all labels are of equal value. But if any label replaces your most important identifiers, the results can be spiritually suffocating. ... |
| | | | |
| − | Apologists participate for a variety of reasons. They may:
| + | ''Who are you?'' First and foremost, you are a child of God. |
| | | | |
| − | * have an interest in Church history and doctrine
| + | Second, as a member of the Church, you are a child of the covenant. And third, you are a disciple of Jesus Christ. |
| | | | |
| − | * have a background in the study of ancient languages or other religions which give a useful perspective on the restored gospel
| + | Tonight, I plead with you not to ''replace'' these three paramount and unchanging identifiers with any others, because doing so could stymie your progress or pigeonhole you in a stereotype that could potentially thwart your eternal progression. |
| | | | |
| − | * experience frustration with anti-Mormon authors who ignore the totality of LDS doctrine and thought
| + | For example, if you are identified mainly as an American, those who are not Americans may think, “I know everything there is to know about you” and attribute erroneous beliefs to you. |
| | | | |
| − | * wish to protect others from poorly-reasoned criticisms, thus preventing others from enduring the suffering which anti-Mormon attacks have caused in the apologist's own life, or the lives of friends or family
| + | If you identify yourself by your political affiliation, you will instantly be categorized as having certain beliefs—though I don’t know anyone who believes everything that their preferred political party presently embraces. |
| | | | |
| − | * want to enhance their own knowledge of Church doctrine or history
| + | We could go on and on, rehearsing the constraints of various labels that we put on ourselves or that other people place upon us. ... |
| | | | |
| − | * need information to improve their ability to share the gospel with others who have sincere questions or misunderstandings
| + | How tragic it is when someone believes the label another person has given them. ... |
| | | | |
| − | * enjoy the company of other like-minded Church members, who are interested in the same sorts of issues
| + | [Satan] rejoices in labels because they divide us and restrict the way we think about ourselves and each other. How sad it is when we honor labels more than we honor each other. |
| | | | |
| − | * serve in Church leadership positions which require them to address questions
| + | Labels can lead to judging and animosity. Any ''abuse'' or ''prejudice'' toward another because of nationality, race, sexual orientation, gender, educational degrees, culture, or other significant identifiers is offensive to our Maker! Such mistreatment causes us to live beneath our stature as His covenant sons and daughters! |
| | | | |
| | + | There are various labels that may be very important to you, of course. Please do not misunderstand me. I am not saying that other designations and identifiers are not significant. I am simply saying that no identifier should ''displace'', ''replace'', or ''take priority over'' these three enduring designations: “child of God,” “child of the covenant,” and “disciple of Jesus Christ.” |
| | | | |
| − | === Is it appropriate for a Church member to be involved in apologetics? ===
| + | Any identifier that is not compatible with these three basic designations will ultimately let you down. Other labels will disappoint you in time because they do not have the power to lead you toward eternal life in the celestial kingdom of God. |
| | | | |
| − | C.S. Lewis pointed out that since enemies have invoked 'science' or 'reason' to attack faith, it may now be necessary that someone respond in the same vein:
| + | Worldly identifiers will never give you a vision of who you can ultimately become. They will never affirm your divine DNA or your unlimited, divine potential.<ref>Russell M. Nelson, "Choices for Eternity," Worldwide Devotional for Young Single Adults, 15 May 2022 {[link|url=https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/broadcasts/worldwide-devotional-for-young-adults/2022/05/12nelson?lang=eng}}</ref>}} |
| − | | |
| − | <blockquote>
| |
| − | | |
| − | To be ignorant and simple now—not to be able to meet the enemies on their own ground—would be to throw down our weapons, and to betray our uneducated brethren who have, under God, no defense but us against the intellectual attacks of the heathen. Good philosophy must exist, if for no other reason, because bad philosophy needs to be answered. <ref>C. S. Lewis, "Learning in War-Time," in ''The Weight of Glory and Other Addresses'' (New York: Macmillan, 1965), 27-28; cited by James S. Jardine, “Consecration and Learning,” in ''On Becoming a Disciple-Scholar'', edited by Henry B. Eying (Bookcraft, Salt Lake, 1995), 77.</ref>
| |
| − | | |
| − | </blockquote>
| |
| − | | |
| − | Indeed, the great risk which apologetics seeks to counter is that those unfamiliar with anti-Mormon arguments will assume that there are no good answers to the critics. Elder Neal A. Maxwell warned of the consequences of such a situation:
| |
| − | | |
| − | <blockquote>
| |
| − | | |
| − | Let us be articulate for while our defense of the kingdom may not stir all hearers, the absence of thoughtful response may cause fledglings among the faithful to falter. What we assert may not be accepted, but unasserted convictions soon become deserted convictions. <ref>Neal A. Maxwell, "'All Hell Is Moved," in ''1977 Devotional Speeches of the Year'' (Provo, Utah: Brigham Young University Press, 1977), 179.</ref>
| |
| − | | |
| − | </blockquote>
| |
| − | | |
| − | === Since you can't "prove" religion, is apologetics a waste of time? ===
| |
| − | | |
| − | Dallin H. Oaks spoke to this concern:
| |
| − | | |
| − | <blockquote>
| |
| − | | |
| − | The lack of decisive scientific proofs of scriptural truths does not preclude gospel defenders from counterarguments of that nature. When opponents attack the Church or its doctrines with so-called proofs, loyal defenders will counter with material of a comparable nature to defend. <ref>Dallin H. Oaks, ''The Lord’s Way'', (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 1991), 92.</ref>
| |
| − | | |
| − | </blockquote>
| |
| − | | |
| − | And, Neal A. Maxwell noted that God would provide fascinating additions to our understanding:
| |
| − | | |
| − | <blockquote>
| |
| − | | |
| − | There will be a convergence of discoveries (never enough, mind you, to remove the need for faith) to make plain and plausible what the modern prophets have been saying all along…[I] do not expect incontrovertible proof to come in this way…, but neither will the Church be outdone by hostile or pseudo-scholars. <ref>Neal A. Maxwell, ''Deposition of a Disciple'' (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 1976), 49.</ref>
| |
| − | | |
| − | </blockquote>
| |
| − | | |
| − | === Apologetics does not aim to "create belief": It aims only to dispense with the poor reasons given by critics for disbelief ===
| |
| − | | |
| − | Austen Farrar said, of C.S. Lewis:
| |
| − | | |
| − | <blockquote>
| |
| − | | |
| − | Though argument does not create conviction, lack of it destroys belief. What seems to be proved may not be embraced; but what no one shows the ability to defend is quickly abandoned. Rational argument does not create belief, but it maintains a climate in which belief may flourish. <ref>Cited by {{BYUS|author=Neal A. Maxwell|article=Discipleship and Scholarship|vol=32|num=3|date=1992|start=5}}{{pdflink|url=http://byustudies.byu.edu/Products/MoreInfoPage/MoreInfo.aspx?Type=7&ProdID=1166}}</ref>
| |
| − | | |
| − | </blockquote>
| |
| − | | |
| − | Apologetics does not aim to "create belief"—it aims only to dispense with the poor reasons given by critics for disbelief. As Elder Maxwell put it, the critics ought not to be permitted "uncontested slam-dunks." <ref>Neal A. Maxwell, cited in {{Ensign1|author=Gilbert W. Scharffs|article=Some people say it is best to leave alone materials that claim to 'expose' the Church and its teachings. What counsel has been given on this? How do we respond when a friend comes to us with questions found in such materials?|date=January 1995|start=60 (scroll half-way down)}}{{link|url=http://www.lds.org/ensign/1995/01/i-have-a-question?lang=eng}}</ref>
| |
| − | | |
| − | In the same way, providing evidence that a belief is ''true'' is not intended to create belief, but it may give a sincere seeker additional reason(s) to obtain a spiritual and experiential witness of that belief.
| |
| − | | |
| − | </onlyinclude>
| |
| − | | |
| − | {{endnotes sources}}
| |
| − | | |
| − | <!-- PLEASE DO NOT REMOVE ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE -->
| |
| − | | |
| − | [[Category:Questions]]
| |
