Skip to main content

About

The following articles where written to provide information about me and about this blog:

Welcome to my Blog: This opening post explains why I choose the title of this blog, defines some key terms I use, and briefly explains some of my plans for this blog.

About Me: What more is there to say? This post explains all about me: my family, my upbringing, my mission, my education, my interest, and my marriage to my wonderful wife McKall.

The Purpose of my Blog: This posting explains in detail my what motivated me to start writing about LDS apologetics, and what I hoped to achieve with this blog, including secondary goals that go somewhat beyond the scholarly and apologetic fields.

My Testimony: On this posting, I explained what I believe the is process of gaining a testimony/discovering truth. I explain four different means of discovery and how all four interact with each other and how each plays a role in one’s testimony. In the end, I share the testimony I have in the Gospel of Jesus Christ as represented in the LDS Church.

Later Addendum

Why I Choose to Believe: A post where I explain my personal, non-revelatory reasons for choosing to believe in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, despite questions or doubts that arise from time to time.

Novum Nomen - Studio et Quoque Fide: This post explains the new name and provides my take on the meaning of the passage in the Doctrine and Covenants to which it refers. I also provide an updated explanation of what this blog is all about.

Stay up-to-date on the goals and aims of this blog and my other apologetic-relevant activities by reading the occasional Blog Updates.

About Apologetics

I originally had no intention of explaining what apologetics is. However, when someone misunderstood my use of the term on a discussion board, I decided it might be good to provide a little bit of an explanation.

Many people misunderstand what “apologetics” means, and (understandably enough) assume it is related to apologizing, or saying sorry. This, however, is not the case. Apologetics involves giving reasons for, or defending, what you think or believe. Most of us are involved in some basic apologetics of some sort or another on a daily basis. We all have our reasons for believing, thinking, and feeling the way we do about things. Anytime in which we are asked to explain why we think, or believe, of feel that way (whether it is because of hostile questioning, or simple curiosity) we are engaged in some informal apologetics. Formally, apologetics is typically a defense of a religious belief and involves using logic, argument, and evidence to support your reasoning and belief.

Some people suggest that apologetics is not appropriate for Latter-day Saints. This is not true. The work of LDS apologists has been featured in Church publications, including Sunday school and institute manuals, as well as the Ensign. Various general authorities have engaged in apologetics over the pulpit. Orson and Parley Pratt, John Taylor, John A. Widstoe, B.H. Roberts, James E. Talmage, and Bruce R. McConkie are all examples of General Authorities who have, to varying degrees, written or spoken apologetically. Most recently, several of Elder Jeffery R. Holland’s General Conference talks have had an apologetic nature [1].

So, there is nothing particularly wrong with being involved in apologetics. Certainly, as with all things, there is both good apologetics and bad apologetics. Here, I make every effort to use good, sound reasoning, quality scholarship, and honest representation of evidence. In short, I sincerely try to practice “good apologetics.” Please understand I am imperfect, and I may make mistakes. As such, I welcome any and all feedback which may help me improve.

For more information on LDS apologetics, I recommend these articles:

http://en.fairmormon.org/Apologetics

Daniel C. Peterson, "Editor's Introduction: An Unapologetic Apology for Apologetics," FARMS Review, Vol. 22, Iss. 2 (2010), pg. ix-xlviii

----------------------------------

Notes:

1. See Jeffrey R. Holland, “The Only True God and Jesus Christ Whom He Hath Sent,” Ensign (Nov. 2007), pg. 40-42; Holland, “My Words…Never Cease,” Ensign (May 2008), pg. 91-94; Holland, “Safety for the Soul,” Ensign (Nov. 2009), pg. 88-90

Popular posts from this blog

Nephite History in Context 4: The Iron Dagger of King Tutankhamun

Editor’s Note: This is the fourth contribution to my new series Nephite History in Context: Artifacts, Inscriptions, and Texts Relevant to the Book of Mormon. Check out the really cool (and official, citable) PDF version here. To learn more about this series, read the introduction here. To find other posts in the series, see here.
The Iron Dagger of King Tutankhamun
Background
The discovery of King Tutankhamun’s tomb in 1922 was a worldwide sensation, and to this day is widely regarded as one of the greatest archaeological discoveries of all-time due to the veritable treasure trove of artifacts found inside. The treasure was so great that to this day many of the items have yet to be studied. Likewise, Tutankhamun (ca. 1336–1327 bc) remains the best-known Pharaoh of Egypt in popular culture today, but details about his actual reign and accomplishments are still generally unknown among the public. Some are aware that he ascended to the throne as a mere child, about 8 years old, but few r…

Nephite History in Context 3: Vered Jericho Sword

Editor’s Note: This is the third contribution to my new series Nephite History in Context: Artifacts, Inscriptions, and Texts Relevant to the Book of Mormon. Check out the really cool (and official, citable) PDF version here. To learn more about this series, read the introduction here. To find other posts in the series, see here.
Vered Jericho Sword
Background
Vered Jericho was a small ancient Israelite fortress first excavated in the winter of 1982 by archaeologist Avraham Eitan. It’s located roughly 3.7 miles (6 km) south of Jericho proper, on the northern side of Wadi es-Suweid. The walls still stand over 6 and half feet tall (2 m) and nearly 3 feet (0.9 m) wide, with two towers on each corner flanking the gate. Inside the fort is a courtyard and two dwelling structures. The fort may have also had cultic or ritual functions as a “high place” (beit bamah). It dates to the late seventh to early sixth century BC, and was destroyed by fire, quite likely in either the Babylonian siege of …

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…