Skip to main content


            Compared to most issues, this issue is rather small. It features only seven reviews/essays. Despite its size, this issue has a lot to offer. Five of the seven articles are recommended, and each was very good. A lot of emphasis seems to be on science this time around, with one review and an essay discussing the relationship of science and Mormonism (well, if you count intelligent design as a science). The others discuss pretty standard topics for the Review, i.e. theology, evangelical anti-Mormonism, apologetics, etc.

Recommended Reading

            Daniel C. Peterson, “Editor’sIntorduction – The Witchcraft Paradigm: On Claims to ‘Second Sight’ by PeopleWho Say It Doesn’t Exist,” pg. ix-lxiv: In what is one of my favorite Ed. Intro.’s by Peterson, he offers an “apology (defense) for apologetics,” and also dispels several myths and rumors about FARMS (particularly their peer-review process) that are frequently circulated by anti-Mormon’s and other critics in an effort to dismiss and discredit the organization.

            Robert R. Bennett, “Science vs.Mormonism: The Dangers of Dogmatism and Sloppy Reading,” a review of Duwayne R.Anderson, Farewell to Eden: Coming toTerms with Mormonism and Science (Bloomington, IN: 1st BooksLibrary, 2003), pg. 1-43: Bennett critiques Anderson’s approach to both Mormonism and Science, and touches on each type of science Anderson compares to Mormonism.

            Richard Sherlock, “Mormonism andIntelligent Design,” pg. 45-81: Sherlock has actually recently converted to Catholicism. What impact that may have had on the views he expressed in this article, I do not know. I can’t imagine that his perspective on Design Theory would change simply by switching from one religious belief to another (both of which obviously believe in some sort of design behind the creation of the world), though his views on Design Theory certainly could have changed for other reasons (I’m not sure where ID and other forms of Design Theory stand in the scientific community at this point; when this article was published, proponents of the theory were fighting to win some scientific credibility for the theory; as an aside, I can remember hearing/reading about this controversy my senior year of high school). Despite all that may have changed, however, I still found this to be an informative essay. Sherlock defines what ID theory is, discusses its relationship to science, religion, God, and Mormonism. Throughout, he argues for ID as a science, and he argues that it is something Mormons should be open to and even accepting of.

            David L. Paulsen and Cory G.Walker, “Work, Worship, and Grace,” a review of Dougles J. Davies, The Mormon Culture of Salvation: Force,Grace, and Glory (Aldershot, UK: Ashgate, 2000), pg. 83-177: Looking at the page numbers, this seems like a daunting, 90-plus page review. The review itself, however, actually ends on page 127. The extra 50 pages comprise Appendices A-D, which contain several quotes from LDS leaders, hymns, and scriptures regarding grace and salvation. Thus, these appendices are an invaluable resource for those seeking to understand the LDS view on grace and salvation. The review itself is pretty good as well, as Paulsen and Walker note that they feel that Davies got a few things wrong about how LDS view and understand grace and works, worship, and salvation. They layout how they understand the balance between grace and works to function, and argue that grace has always played an important role in LDS sortiology.  

            Louis Midgley, “Orders of Submission,”a review of essays on Mormonism published in the Southern Baptist Journal of Theology 9/2 (Summer 2005): 1-81, pg.189-228: Midgley compares the SBC’s anti-Mormon campaign in 1998 to a recent issue of their journal to see if any progress has been made. The answer: not much, if any. He also uses this as an opportunity to comment on another group of evangelicals (some of whom cast their lot with the SBC by publishing some essays in the issue of SBJT under review, while others were criticized in said issue) who have delusions of “converting” the entire LDS Church into an evangelical group through the means of “dialogue.”

Final Thoughts

            Though lacking somewhat in overall content when compared to other issues, I found this to be a very good issue. Peterson’s introduction, Sherlock’s discussion of ID, and Paulson and Walkers review of grace in LDS theology are all must-reads in my book. Midgley’s review also provides a very important intellectual history on some of the development in sectarian anti-Mormonism. One thing to note that, although I don’t recommend all seven contributions to this issue, there really wasn’t a single one not worth reading; an overall solid issue.

Rating: 4/5


  1. From reading Sherlock's bio it looks like he never was an active Mormon. Thus I'm happy for him that he's become a devout Catholic.


Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The 15 “Best Books” to Read BEFORE Having a Faith Crisis

Elder M. Russell Ballard recently stressed that it is important for Gospel educators to be well-informed on controversial topics, not only by studying the scriptures and Church materials, but also by reading “the best LDS scholarship available.” I personally think it is imperative in today’s world for every Latter-day Saint—not just Gospel educators—to make an effort to be informed on both controversial issues as well as knowing reliable faith-building information as well.
(Given that Elder Ballard’s CES address was published to general Church membership in the Ensign, I think it’s safe to say that Church leadership also feels this way.)
An important step in the process of getting informed is reading the 11 Gospel Topic essays and getting familiar with their contents. But what’s next? How can a person learn more about these and other topics? What are the “best books” (D&C 88:118) or “the best LDS scholarship available”?
Here are 15 suggestions.
1. Michael R. Ash, Shaken Faith S…

Responding to the New Video on Nahom as Archaeological Evidence for the Book of Mormon

Many of my (few) readers have probably already seen the new video by Book of Mormon Central on Nahom as archaeological evidence for the Book of Mormon, starring my good friend (and co-author on a related paper) Stephen Smoot. If you haven’t, check it out:

As usual, comments sections wherever this video is shared have been flooded by Internet ex-Mormons insisting this not evidence for the Book of Mormon. I’ve actually had a few productive conversations with some reasonable people who don’t think Nahom is, by itself, compelling evidence—and I can understand that. But the insistence that Nahom is not evidence at all is just, frankly, absurd. So I’ll just go ahead and preempt about 90% of future responses to this post by responding to the most common arguments against Nahom/NHM now:
1. The Book of Mormon is false, therefore there can be no evidence, therefore this is not evidence. First, this is circular reasoning. It assumes the conclusion (Book of Mormon is false) which the evidence pre…

New Paper on Isaiah in the Book of Mormon

Joseph M. Spencer, an adjunct professor at the BYU religion department, recently published a paper in the non-LDS peer review journal Relegere: Studies in Religion and Reception, titled, “Isaiah 52 in the Book of Mormon: Note’s on Isaiah’s Reception History.” Spencer is a young scholar who is doing exciting stuff on the Book of Mormon from a theological perspective.
The paper is described as follows in the abstract: Despite increasing recognition of the importance of Mormonism to American religion, little attention has been given to the novel uses of Isaiah in foundational Mormon texts. This paper crosses two lines of inquiry: the study of American religion, with an eye to the role played in it by Mormonism, and the study of Isaiah’s reception history. It looks at the use of Isa 52:7–10 in the Book of Mormon, arguing that the volume exhibits four irreducibly distinct approaches to the interpretation of Isaiah, the interrelations among which are explicitly meant to speak to nineteent…