Response to Arthur (that might be interesting for others to hear)

And sadly, I know the naivete of my own position. If I were writing a church manual on how to handle scholarship within a gospel context, I would almost certainly write something different. It would emphasize, simply put, the importance of developing a truth-seeking edge and intellectual rigor. It would not attempt to give many answers--it would focus on how to engage in "faithful questioning." And I would include Hugh B. Brown's classic talk, "An Eternal Question: Freedom of the Mind."

But you are right: when I hear an instructor say that s/he's going to give some "historical context," my stomach normally begins to turn a little. And you are also right about the reasons why they do not teach missionaries church history...I believe it is because 1) most people don't care about history that much and 2) what I call my "fat man" metaphor. Inconvenient history (polygamy, polyandry, MMM, etc.) makes for excess fat on the body of the church...but we don't burn it off by simply denying its existence. We exercise, we work, we lift weights so that our own body's processes can overpower these semi-natural obstacles. If you looked at my 14-year old photo, you would say I was a fat kid...and I still don't like that photo. But the reality is that I was still Russ--and I'm not ashamed of that Russ. He just had some things to learn--some things were keeping him back from being what he could be. Now I'm Russ in (slightly) better form, both socially and physically.

Before we can come to this realization, however, we must recognize that there really is fat...and that seeing the fat for what it is does not constitute heresy. My (slightly megalomanaical) attempt here is to shift the intellectual center of gravity within the grassroots culture of the Church (these days, the upper-echelons, at least collectively, are very much in favor of intellectual pursuits in a frank manner, so I understand).

And all, right here, on (www.russell-stevenson.blogspot.com)...