Roberts taught that “It requires striving-intellectual and spiritual-to comprehend the things of God-even the revealed things of God. But there are extensive portions of Isaiah that have not been referred to by the Brethren.Įlder B. No more important source, to me, has been the writings of the Brethren.
Even these contrary perspectives are often quite useful. In some instances, observations are mentioned as an aside-or even when arguing an opposite perspective. I have come to expect pearls of wisdom from several of them. Among the exegetes or Biblical scholars, we often find excellent insights. These include books written by Jewish authors or by Christians of other faiths. Some of them specialize on Isaiah, some on particular portions of Isaiah and others cover larger portions of scripture and include Isaiah. There are dozens of commentaries-or exegetical works-on Isaiah. Even where there is much I disagree with. I make no general recommendation of them, but I have no reservations about using things I find interesting and useful. I have searched long and wide through ancient scriptures, translations, commentaries, and lexicons that are written from almost every conceivable angle, and when they helped me make the point I was trying to make, I have used these. Not that opposite points of view are not considered. Scholars do this in every field of study. This is, however, precisely what every scholar does… each looks for those points of view that agree with the premises she or he is trying to make.
We can’t accept just that which is convenient to us as members of the Church. One of my daughters took a class at BYU where the professor suggested that we can’t have it both ways.
0 kommentar(er)
