Good news everyone! Three hours of Sunday church service and weekday church meetings are paying off in more than spiritual ways. All that instruction is making us religiously smart, so says recent research by the Pew Forum on religion and public life.
Pew research shows that “Atheists and agnostics, Jews and Mormons are among the highest-scoring groups . . . of religious knowledge, outperforming evangelical Protestants, mainline Protestants and Catholics on questions about the core teachings, history and leading figures of major world religions.” On a test of 32 religious questions, “Atheists and agnostics average 20.9 correct answers. Jews and Mormons do about as well, averaging 20.5 and 20.3 correct answers, respectively. Protestants as a whole average 16 correct answers; Catholics as a whole, 14.7. Atheists and agnostics, Jews and Mormons perform better than other groups on the survey even after controlling for differing levels of education.”
Way to go everyone! Perhaps this study will help convince the evangelical community that Mormons are religiously informed people. You see, by and large they think we are deceived members of a cult.
Case in point: The evangelical response to Glenn Beck’s recent revival in Washington DC. Christiannewswire.com is skeptical about Beck’s ability to create a religious revival in America because of his religion, Mormonism. The website brings up many of the old arguments against Mormonism. Here’s a sampling.
1. Our country was founded on Judeo-Christian values. Mormonism is not a Christian denomination but a cult of Christianity.
My response: According to latter-day scripture America was founded for the purpose of bringing forth the Book of Mormon and the restoration of the gospel of Jesus Christ (aka Mormonism).
2. The country needs to get back to the simplicity of the Bible. The reason our country is in bad shape is that ministers for the most part do not share the truth. Many endorse false gospels including Mormonism.
My response: America is a better place because of the Restoration (aka Mormonism).
Blaming Mormonism and accusing Mormons of not being Christian has been going on for a long time. These sorts of accusations have been a major stumbling block for many evangelicals, thus keeping them from the blessings of the Restored gospel. Removing these stumbling blocks from evangelicals’ minds seems a big a task, kind of like taking down the Iron Curtain, but we all know what the Lord did to that barrier.
I welcome the day when the evangelical community declares that members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (aka Mormons) are Christian. The Pew study will hopefully help in this regard. In this world of increasing secularism, America will be better off if evangelicals and Mormons set aside their differences and unite in the cause of promoting traditional Christian values.
Stephen Hawking's new book titled The Grand Design hit the bookshelves on Sept. 7th, 2010. Since its release it has become a lighting rod for religionists. How can Hawking engender the wrath of believers who 22 years ago applauded his God-friendly message in A Brief History of Time? What is going on?
In his 1988 book A Brief History of Time, Hawking discusses his lifelong dream to discover the Grand Unifying Theory (GUT) of the universe. GUT is a scientific theory that unites all laws and theories of physics. He declares that when we discover the GUT, we will know the mind of God. This declaration created warm fuzzies in the minds of religionists who viewed Mr. Hawking as a genius and fellow believer on a mission to uncover the handiwork of the Creator. With Hawking’s latest book, however, warm fuzzies have been replaced by sharp criticism.
Here’s one source of the criticism. In The Grand Design Hawking declares that understanding complex theories of physics makes it "[un]necessary to invoke God." Believers are in a tizzy over this statement, claiming that Hawking has dismissed God. Hawking has not dismissed God – he is staying true to the tenets of science by giving a scientific explanation that does not invoke God. Anytime we claim that something happened because God did it, we are giving a theological explanation, not a scientific one. It is good to acknowledge deity in science; it is not good to invoke deity in scientific explanations.
Moreover, hearing that it is unnecessary to invoke God is a good thing because it minimizes our reliance on what are called “God of the gaps” explanations. “God of the gaps” involves resorting to “God did it” explanations when we don’t have an adequate scientific explanation for natural phenomena. Getting rid of such explanations is a good thing because it means that we are moving closer to the truth. However some believers like “God of the gaps” explanations because they represent a validation for their faith (“See here! Science can’t explain this phenomenon, so it must have been done supernaturally. There is a Creator!”) Here’s some advice for these folks: Don’t let your faith be driven by what science does or does not discover.
A second criticism of The Grand Design involves spontaneous creation. Hawking declares that “The Universe can and will create itself from nothing…. Spontaneous creation is the reason there is something rather than nothing, why the Universe exists, why we exist.” He continues, “It is not necessary to invoke God to light the blue touch paper and set the Universe going…. Because there is a law such as gravity, the Universe can and will create itself from nothing.”
For those who accept the false doctrine of creation ex nihilo (creation from nothing) and believe that there has been and always will be just one god, and that he created the entire physical universe, yes, the notion of parts of the universe existing without supernatural intervention is very problematic, but not if you’re LDS.
From latter-day revelation we’ve learned that the elements of the physical universe are co-eternal with our God. So, yes, in a way our God did not have to “light the blue touch paper and set the universe going” because it was already going.
As I point out in Truth & Science, restored gospel truths can go a long way in helping to reconcile science and religion.
Christian religions across America are concerned about the effects of education on religiosity, and with good reason – past research shows a negative correlation between level of education and religiosity. In other words, data show that as level of education rises, level of religiosity drops. Here’s some data for all Christian religions. However, there is one Christian religion that bucks this trend. For this religion there is a positive correlation, meaning that as education level rises, so does religiosity. That religion is Mormonism. This unusual positive correlation between education and religiosity among Mormons even made it into the Wiki article on “religiosity and intelligence”. Here’s some religiosity data for Mormons. Why does Mormonism buck the trend that exists among other religions? I think that latter-day revelation on the importance of learning plays a role. The Lord has instructed us to “seek ye out of the best books words of wisdom; seek learning, even by study” (D&C 88:118). He is not just referring to scriptures here; He is referring to all good books. Christian religions that reject latter-day revelation have not accepted this instruction from the Lord - they have not gotten the message that the Lord wants us to continually learn.
The LDS faith is also unique in the sense that it lays all its cards on the table. It encourages people to thoroughly explore its doctrines of salvation and the lifestyle it engenders among its members. It encourages people to study the Book of Mormon and revelations from the prophets – go ahead and scrutinize the teachings, ask questions in church classes, and talk with others about church doctrine. With regard to the doctrines of salvation, there is nothing to hide.
The fact that educated Mormons score relatively high on measures of religiosity suggests that they are finding harmony between what they’ve learned in their studies of the gospel and in their studies of science, philosophy, arts, and literature. If this harmony did not exist, measures of religiosity would certainly be lower among educated Mormons.
I have found much harmony between my religious and secular studies; these have strengthened my testimony. At the same time, however, I have found some inconsistencies, particularly between science and religion. Inconsistencies have not created a faith crisis in my life, nor should they. Inconsistencies between secular and religious learning should not be shunned – they should be sought out and explored with the understanding that secular knowledge is continually evolving, as is our knowledge of the mysteries of the kingdom of Heaven.
Acknowledging inconsistencies between secular and religious learning is an important step in moving closer to the truth of all things.
Sources of graphs: Princeton Religion Research Center
Other sources: The Consequential Dimension of Mormon Religiosity, by Stan L. Albrecht; Secularization, Higher Education, and Religiosity, by Stan L. Albrecht and Tim B. Heaton.
The recent defection of renowned novelist Anne Rice from organized religion has some religionists taking stock of the state of organized religion in America. Things don’t look good. The current state of organized religion may be described like a patient in medical shock: weak pulse, shallow breathing, and pale skin. What is driving down the number of parishioners in the pews? I don’t think secularism is largely to blame. I think certain doctrines from the pulpit are the culprit.Do you return missionaries remember what it was like to encounter ardent evangelicals and their closely allied believers, Born Again Christians? I do. They were good people alright, good people like those you find in any LDS church house on a Sunday morning, yet I could not understand why they so firmly accepted a doctrine of salvation rooted in simply affirming acceptance of Christ. No matter how many times I quoted the familiar phrase, faith without works is dead, they downplayed the importance of works, claiming instead that we are saved by faith and grace, not by works. Downplaying the importance of works was bound to have ramifications on behavior, and it is. Recent polls indicate that the “saved by grace, not by works” chickens are coming home to roost (to borrow a phrase from Obama’s former minister, Reverend Wright). Consider, for example, that evangelical pollster George Barna found that Born Again Christians are more likely to divorce, and University of Texas researcher Mark Regnerus found that evangelical adolescents who believe in abstaining from premarital sex are more like to be sexually active at an earlier age than Mormons, mainline protestants, and Jews. Are these the sort of polling results we would expect to find among believers who are continually reminded that salvation is largely about faith and not works? Perhaps. Author Ronald Sider calls it the “The Scandal of the Evangelical Conscience”. In his book by the same name, he asserts that “By their daily activity, most Christians regularly commit treason. With their mouths they claim that Jesus is their Lord, but with their actions they demonstrate their allegiance to money, sex, and personal [self-gratification].”This sort of treason is present in all Christian churches, but why is it increasingly becoming a concern among evangelical and born again churches? Perhaps the “saved by grace, not by works” doctrine is sending an unintended message, that it is okay to sin a little as long as you accept Jesus as Lord. Is this doctrine and its accompanying laissez-faire attitude toward works, particularly works of a sinful nature, contributing to the hypocrisy that is pushing people like Anne Rice out of organized religion? Finally, changing doctrine away from traditional Christian teachings is also contributing to defections from organized religion. Consider that in 2009 the American Evangelical Lutheran Church voted to remove the celibacy requirement for gay ministers, a vote which opened the door for openly homosexual Lutheran ministers. In the same year (2009), the Lutheran Church lost almost 91,000 members or 48 congregations, largely due to the aforementioned vote.Like Forrest Gump, I wish I could end by saying, “That’s all I have to say about that.” Yet this sort of post demands a closing comment. I used to think that it is better for someone to be in a mosque, church, temple, or synagogue on a Sunday morning than at home watching football; now I am not so sure. If I had to choose between someone being at church listening to an openly homosexual minister downplaying the importance of good works in obtaining salvation, or being at home on a Sunday morning, I might chose being at home (reading scriptures and good books instead of watching football ;)
 On September 25, 2006 President Bush used his veto powers for the first time. What did he veto? A bill allowing federal funds to be used for embryonic stem cell research. (I wish he had used his veto powers on big spending bills, but that is another story.) The veto was a welcome blessing for many religious folks, but seen as a curse for many folks stricken with degenerative diseases like Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s, and Multiple Sclerosis. At the bill signing ceremony, children who started out life as frozen embryos designated “to be discarded” were brought to the center stage. The image of President Bush and parents holding these precious kids tugs on your heart strings and makes you glad that the kids were given a chance at life instead of being tossed into the bio-trash bin. But as usual we need to set emotions aside and rely on research and reason when seeking a clearer understanding of what is going on.Most people, including Christian folks, don’t have issues when couples with fertility problems use in vitro fertilization. In vitro fertilization involves fertilizing an egg (ovum) with a sperm outside of the womb. One approach is to inject a sperm directly into an egg (called intracytoplasmic sperm injection). The fertilized egg, called a zygote, is then placed in an incubation chamber and cultured until it reaches the embryonic stage of development, at which time it is transferred to a woman’s uterus.Because embryos fail during the incubation phase, or fail later after being transferred to a uterus, multiple embryos are created. Why go to all the trouble and expense of creating a single embryo that might fail? It seems reasonable to create multiple embryos. But what happens to the extra embryos when a pregnancy is successful, assuming the parents want no more children? They are discarded.Where is the uproar over discarding embryos? There really isn’t any. If there isn’t a fuss over discarding unwanted embryos, then why the fuss over using ‘unwanted’ embryos for stem cell research? It seems to me that people opposing embryonic stem cell research should also be opposing discarding embryos with equal fervor, but they aren’t. Are we, as a society, morally obligated to give every frozen embryo a chance at life? Does tossing out an unwanted embryo translate into a spirit not having a chance at life? I think most Mormons would say no. Wouldn’t it be great if every unwanted embryo were given to adoptive parents? Yes, but that does not always happen for one reason or another. If it is acceptable to discard unwanted embryos created for birth, then why not use them for stem cell research?Good news: Adult stem cell research is proving much more promising that embryonic stem cell research. This will hopefully prevent the creation of embryonic stems cells for research purposes and minimize the use of unwanted embryos in research - a win win situation for everyone, inlcuding people who may one day be adopted as embryos.
 Well friends, another year has past and it's now time for some reflections on operating this site. Whenever I think of something lasting 2 years I think of a mission. Unlike a mission that ends after 2 years, mormonsandscience will go on for now. I know this is disappointing to those of you who would like to see mormonsandscience permanently released (ha), but mormonsandscience is turning out to be something more like Stake Seventies who were never released. (Back in the day when sacrament meetings were in the evening, Stake Seventies were called from the ward membership.)
Sometimes I feel like I am running out of ideas to post on, which is silly because there are many more interesting topics to explore. It is not that I am lazy, it’s just that I have other things vying for my attention like kids, writing a book, writing another book after the previous book is written, and work. However, I am committed to providing thought provoking posts on science (and occasionally politics) on a regular basis.
Thanks to those who are regular visitors. According to the stats meter, mormonsandscience receives an average of 200 hits per day. That is nothing to boast about and half of those are probably bots, but at least 100 of you find the site worthwhile.
Thanks to those who post comments. I welcome all comments except, of course, those that are mean spirited. Unfortunately 2 months ago I was compelled to turn on the “approve comments” setting. Some of the comments were not appropriate while others were auto comments selling tennis shoes or whatever else. Several of the good comments I receive express views that are contrary to mine. If I had to choose between (A) mormonsandscience being a ‘group think’ forum where everyone pats each other on the back and we all see things the same way, or (B) mormonsandscience being a forum where people explore and express divergent viewpoints with the goal of uncovering truth and bringing it to Zion, I would choose B.
I’ve added some resources to mormonsandscience to help LDS students and researchers. There is a page for asking statistical and research design questions, a page on how to use G*Power (a free power and sample size calculation program), and a page on how to use R (a free statistical analysis program). These R and G*Power pages are meaningless (and perhaps nauseating) to many of you, but to students and researchers they can be very useful, so please tell others if you think they might be interested.
Finally, when an acquaintance at the BYU Salt Lake Center told me that he was making $200 a month on Google ads, I thought, “Hey, my personal slush fund could benefit from a $200 cash injection every month.” So I set up Google ads and . . . well, they aren’t there anymore. Too many advertisements like “Click here to discover the shocking truth about Mormons” and “Click here to learn more about Joe Smith’s Mormon bible” kept popping up. Ergo, advertisements are gonzo.
As always, thanks for dropping by.
Sincerely,
Dave
Recently homosexual activists have succeeded in gaining medical, employment, and insurance benefits for same-sex partnerships (e.g., granted to federal government workers in June 2009). In California they have succeeded in getting the gay lifestyle into elementary school curriculum with the proviso that kids cannot opt out (passed May, 2009). And in Montana they have succeeded in getting a school district to consider sex education for young children that includes instruction on same-sex intercourse.It may surprise you to learn that none of these accomplishments is the ultimate objective of homosexual activists. Their grand prize is to repeal the federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) signed into law in 1996 by President Bill Clinton. DOMA states that the federal government recognizes marriage as between a man and a woman, and that no state can be forced to recognize same-sex marriages from other states. The activists are working hard on getting DOMA repealed. One of their covert operatives, an activist judge named Joseph Tauro from NY, recently ruled that DOMA is unconstitutional. Don’t be misled about activists’ reasons for repealing DOMA. Repealing DOMA is not about allowing gay couples to marry for the sake of being married. It is about normalizing homosexuality. Even some activists who read this post will be surprised to learn this fact. It is not about marriage; it is about getting society to approve of the homosexual lifestyle. If DOMA is repealed, I predict that our fundamental understanding of marriage will gradually be transformed. Indeed, transforming marriage may very well be an objective of some activists. According to the words of one gay activist, after winning the “fight for same-sex marriage and its benefits, . . . [we’ll] redefine the institution of marriage completely, to demand the right to marry not as a way of adhering to society's moral codes but rather to debunk a myth and radically alter an archaic institution” (Michelangelo Signorile, OUT Magazine, December, 1994).
If our society allows a radical altering of the divinely appointed institution of marriage, this will, as stated in the Proclamation on the Family, “bring upon individuals, communities, and nations the calamities foretold by ancient and modern prophets.”
As Latter-day Saints we have a moral obligation to support Judaeo-Christian values and, in particular, traditional marriage. Find out what’s going on in your schools and communities and get involved.
When Charlie Bolden was appointed chief of NASA, President Obama gave him 3 mandates (direct quotes from Mr. Bolden):1. “He wanted me to re-inspire children to want to get into science and math.”In my opinion, great.2. “He wanted me to expand our international relationships.”In my opinion, good (International Space Station).3. “Third, and perhaps foremost, he wanted me to find a way to reach out to the Muslim world and engage much more with predominantly Muslim nations to help them feel good about their historic contribution to science, math, and engineering.”What!? Islam has been in the throes of scholarly and scientific darkness since the 13th century AD. In Truth and Science, chapter 4, I mention Islam’s important yet limited contributions to science. I also point out that a Islamic religious backlash against scholarship during the Middle Ages resulted in the death of Muslim scholarly learning and progress. Now, having made the previous point, I will say that Islamic scholars were indirectly responsible for the re-awakening of classical Greek science and learning in the West. Islamic scholars like Avicenna and Averroes (Latin names) preserved and commented on Aristotle’s works, and it was their writings that re-introduced the West to the lost teachings of Aristotle (i.e., rationalism, empiricism) around 1200 AD. The rediscovery of Aristotle's works helped bring the West out of the Dark Ages, but to associate this accomplishment with NASA is quite a stretch.The President ought to leave recognition of Islam’s contributions to the history writers and let NASA concentrate on space science.
How well do you know this woman? Do you want her to be the next Supreme Court justice? She's never been a judge, and her paper trail is short, but is that enough to prove that she is not a clear and present danger to the Constitution?
Share your feelings in this online poll.
Sometimes respect and honor take a while. In 1543 Polish astronomer Nicolaus Copernicus published his groundbreaking work De Revolutionibus Orbium Coelestium (On the Revolutions of the Celestial Spheres). That book proposed an astronomical model that put our sun, not the earth, in the center of the solar system. He published it in the same year as his death so as to avoid retribution from the Catholic Church. When he died, Copernicus was laid to rest in an unmarked grave, a most unassuming burial for such an important figure in modern science.Copernicus finally got the respect he deserves. In May 2010 (nearly 500 years later) his body was exhumed and he was given a hero’s burial in the tomb of the cathedral where he labored as a church canon and doctor. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/after-467-years-copernicus-gets-a-heros-burial-1980493.htmlIn 1632 Italian astronomer Galileo Galilei published his work Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems. The book argued in a somewhat hypothetical manner, that the sun, not the earth, is at the center of the solar system. Galileo was eventually arrested and given a trial by the Inquisition. He was guilty of heresy, of openly supporting and teaching sun-centered theories (heliocentrism). He was put under house arrest.Galileo finally got the respect he deserves. In October 1992, Pope John Paul declared that the Inquisition had incorrectly convicted Galileo. In 1998 (over 400 years after Galileo death), the Church erected a statue of Galileo in the Vatican walls and the current Pope Benedict praised his contributions to astronomy. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/12/23/vatican-rewrites-history_n_153232.htmlFinally there is Isaac Newton. Newton was an accomplished biblical scholar and theologian. He espoused two views that were considered vehemently heretical by most of Christendom (and still are). He believed that the Father and the Son are separate individuals. He also believed that there was an apostasy during his lifetime and that the true church of Jesus Christ was not upon the earth. He looked forward to its restoration.Unfortunately, Newton has not yet gotten the respect he deserves for these two theological viewpoints. It may be a while before that respect comes – like, say, the Second Coming. At the Second Coming when the whole earth learns the truth about the godhead and the Restoration, I think Newton will get the respect he deserves. Of course, among the latter-day saints, he has already gotten the respect he deserves. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isaac_Newton's_religious_views
|
RSS Feed