![\"California's](\"https:\/\/wp-media.patheos.com\/blogs\/sites\/186\/2016\/03\/oakland-california-temple-golden-sunset-1021130-gallery.jpg\")
<\/a>\u00a0<\/p>\n
I read just this morning that Latter-day Saint apologetics is literally soaked in hate.\u00a0 Now, obviously, that\u2019s true of me<\/em>.\u00a0 My perpetual rage and my\u00a0 life-long consuming hatred of all who differ from me \u2014 and most especially of religious faiths other than my own (another observation that has recently been made) \u2014 are abundantly documented and are manifest in everything I write and say.\u00a0 But I\u2019m not sure that the same case can be made for Latter-day Saint apologetics more generally.\u00a0 I encourage you to take the links that I provide here below as a representative specimen and to judge for yourself.<\/p>\n \u00a0<\/p>\n First off, this article has just now gone up online as the latest installment in Interpreter: A Journal of Latter-day Saint Faith and Scholarship<\/em>:<\/p>\n Matthew B. Brown, \u201cThe Handclasp, the Temple, and the King\u201d<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n Abstract:<\/strong>\u00a0In this article Matthew Brown examines the possible meaning behind the imagery of the handclasp between God in heaven and the earthly king. He focuses on this imagery as it is articulated in Psalms 27, 41, 63, 73, and 89. He argues that Psalms 41 and 73 feasibly indicate that when the king of Israel was initiated within the precincts of the temple into the office of kingship he passed through the veil of the Holy of Holies (see Exodus 26:33) and symbolically entered into God\u2019s presence.<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n [Editor\u2019s Note:\u00a0<\/strong>Part of our book chapter reprint series, this article is reprinted here as a service to the LDS community. Original pagination and page numbers have necessarily changed, otherwise the reprint has the same content as the original.<\/span><\/p>\n See Matthew B. Brown, \u201cThe Handclasp, the Temple, and the King,\u201d in\u00a0Temple Insights: Proceedings of the Interpreter Matthew B. Brown Memorial Conference, \u201cThe Temple on Mount Zion,\u201d 22 September 2012,<\/em>\u00a0ed. William J. Hamblin and David Rolph Seely (Orem, UT: The Interpreter Foundation; Salt Lake City: Eborn Books, 2014), 5\u201310. Further information at\u00a0https:\/\/interpreterfoundation.org\/books\/temple-insights\/<\/a>.]<\/span><\/p>\n \u00a0<\/p>\n And this brief piecewent up on the Interpreter Foundation\u2019s website on Saturday:<\/p>\n Book of Moses Essays #42: Moses 1 in Its Ancient Context: \u201cThe Words of God\u201d (Moses 1:1\u20137, 35, 40\u201342)<\/a><\/p>\n \u00a0<\/p>\n I think, too, that I failed to call attention to this item, which was posted on the Interpreter website a few days back:<\/p>\n Interpreter Radio Show \u2014 January 31, 2021<\/a><\/p>\n The 31 January 2021 broadcast of the Interpreter Radio Show has now been stripped of interruptions, archived, and posted for your convenience.\u00a0 In this episode, Martin Tanner and Daniel Peterson. discuss the informal witnesses of the Book of Mormon plates as well as the upcoming Witnesses<\/em> motion picture. The second portion of the show was devoted to a roundtable discussion of the upcoming Come Follow Me Doctrine and Covenants lesson #11 (D&C 23-26). (You\u2019ll need, of course, to filter Peterson\u2019s seething anger and unsleeping malice out.\u00a0 But please do listen to Martin Tanner, and make your own judgment about whether his comments are literally soaked in hate.\u00a0 The Interpreter Radio Show can be heard Sunday evenings from 7 to 9 PM (MDT), on K-TALK, AM 1640, or you can listen live on the Internet at\u00a0ktalkmedia.com<\/a>.<\/p>\n \u00a0<\/p>\n And here, once again, are some links to past articles published in Interpreter: A Journal of Latter-day Saint Faith and Scholarship<\/em>:<\/p>\n \u00a0<\/p>\n Andrew C. Smith, \u201cHagar in LDS Scripture and Thought\u201d<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n Abstract: LDS discourse vis-\u00e0-vis Hagar has changed through the years since the foundation of the Church. Her story has been considered and utilized in a number of ways, the most prominent being as a defense of plural marriage. This paper traces the LDS usages of Hagar\u2019s story as well as proposing a new allegorical interpretation of her place within the Abrahamic drama through literary connections in the Hebrew Bible combined with Restoration scripture.<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n \u00a0<\/p>\n Stephen O. Smoot, \u201cHelp for the Troubled \u201cYoung Mormon\u201d\u201d<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n Review of Adam S. Miller,\u00a0<\/em>Letters to a Young Mormon. Provo, Utah: Neal A. Maxwell Institute for Religious Scholarship, 2014. 78 pp. $9.95.<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n \u00a0<\/p>\n Neal Rappleye, \u201c\u201cUntil the Heart Betrays\u201d: Life, Letters, and the Stories We Tell\u201d<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n Review of Adam S. Miller.\u00a0<\/em>Letters to a Young Mormon. Provo, Utah: Neal A. Maxwell Institute for Religious Scholarship, 2014. 78 pp. $9.95.<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n \u00a0<\/p>\n Neal Rappleye and Stephen O. Smoot, \u201cBook of Mormon Minimalists and the NHM Inscriptions: A Response to Dan Vogel\u201d<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n Abstract:\u00a0Biblical \u201cminimalists\u201d have sought to undermine or de-emphasize the significance of the Tel Dan inscription attesting to the existence of the \u201chouse of David.\u201d Similarly, those who might be called Book of Mormon \u201cminimalists\u201d such as Dan Vogel have marshaled evidence to try to make the\u00a0<\/em>nhm\u00a0inscriptions from south Arabia, corresponding to the Book of Mormon Nahom, seem as irrelevant as possible. We show why the\u00a0<\/em>nhm\u00a0inscriptions still stand as impressive evidence for the historicity of the Book of Mormon.<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n \u00a0<\/p>\n Julie M. Smith, \u201cA Note on Chiasmus in Abraham 3:22-23\u201d<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n \u00a0<\/p>\n Stephen D. Ricks, \u201cA Nickname and a Slam Dunk: Notes on the Book of Mormon Names Zeezrom<\/em> and Jershon<\/em>\u201c<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n \u00a0<\/p>\n Robert F. Smith, \u201c\u201cIf There Be Faults, They Be Faults of a Man\u201d\u201d<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n Review of John S. Dinger, ed.,\u00a0Significant Textual Changes in the Book of Mormon: The First Printed Edition Compared to the Manuscripts and to the Subsequent Major LDS English Printed Editions<\/em>\u00a0(Salt Lake City: Smith-Pettit Foundation\/Signature Books, 2013); with foreword by Stan Larson; 418pp+ xxxvi; hardbound edition limited to 501 copies; ISBN 978-1-56085-233-9<\/span><\/p>\n \u00a0<\/p>\n A. Keith Thompson, \u201cFashion or Proof? A Challenge for Pacific Anthropology\u201d<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n Abstract:\u00a0This article is a call to Pacific anthropologists to write the story of the origin of mankind in the Pacific a bit larger and perhaps to look scientifically for additional explanations. Is it possible that the early diffusionists may have gotten some things right, albeit for the wrong reasons?<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n \u00a0<\/p>\n Royal Skousen, \u201cA Brief History of Critical Text Work on the Book of Mormon\u201d<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n \u00a0<\/p>\n ***<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n \u00a0<\/p>\n Here I share with you some items that are quite unrelated to anything above:<\/p>\n \u00a0<\/p>\n First, a piece in Meridian Magazine<\/em> by my economist-friend Mark Skousen that some of you might find of interest:<\/p>\n \u201cKnow the Signs of the Financial Times\u201d<\/a><\/p>\n \u00a0<\/p>\n Some might find this Financial Times<\/em> article interesting, too, since it expressly mentions Senator Romney\u2019s membership in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints<\/a>.\u00a0 For the record, I have some major disagreements with it:<\/p>\n \u201cMitt Romney is the model for a new Republican party\u201d<\/a><\/p>\n \u00a0<\/p>\n Two very contrasting views of the pre-1978 priesthood restriction:<\/p>\n \u201cWhether the temple and priesthood restriction was\u00a0mistaken\u201d<\/a><\/p>\n \u201cApostles, Prophets, and God\u2019s Former Priesthood Restriction\u201d<\/a><\/p>\n \u00a0<\/p>\n Sigh.\u00a0 I wish this weren\u2019t necessary.\u00a0 But it is<\/em>:<\/p>\n \u201cJonathan Neville sows doubt, blames others\u201d<\/a><\/p>\n \u201cAnother round of Jonathan Neville vs. Royal Skousen\u201d<\/a><\/p>\n \u201cThe desolate Heartland theory\u201d<\/a><\/p>\n \u201cOversimplification again\u201d<\/a><\/p>\n \u00a0<\/p>\n ***<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n \u00a0<\/p>\n And, finally, here are two even more<\/em> unrelated items, regarding vaccinations and the novel coronavirus:<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n \u00a0<\/p>\n