On this particular post, you bet I agree.

Especially when FARMS features this article anew . . .

Despite what most all the religious authorities in the I-15 Corridor in the Intermountain West suggest, is this really what the early Christians believed and taught?

I stayed up till one in the morning . . . thinking . . . thinking . . . thinking . . . about this fundamental Truth of the universe:

That ye may know, and believe, that the Father is in me, and I in him (John 10:38).

• I realize that John 10, John 14, and John 17, etc. are an epicenter for evangelicals and LDS in the intermountain West.
• And googling “perichoresis” this morning, I didn’t realize that whole internet sites carry this theme.

http://www.perichoresis.org/

http://theperichoresis.wordpress.com/2008/07/17/perichoresis/

• Up in northern Idaho, Leithart writes some interesting thoughts, too.

http://www.leithart.com/archives/000074.php

• How about this?  I would like to take Liethart and Kruger on a fishing trip here in Southeastern Idaho and listen to them hash it all out.

Such marvelous, marvelous, marvelous truths in Scripture.

Thinking of heart issues . . .

et

I listened to David singing “Be Still My Soul” through the Day of Praise blog.  Thanks.  So here is my question:  did Katharina, born 310 years ago, actually believe that the One who ruled the waves and winds while He dwelt below . . . did she actually believe that the Lord she wrote of in this hymn is the Most High (Elyon) mentioned in Psalm 46?

Do LDS believe this today when they passionately sing this hymn?

Pop over at Urim and Thummim.

But I hunger for ancient Israel’s understanding of God rather than ancient England’s understanding of Gods.

Today, Scott sent me this song link to God and God alone.

If I were right in the middle of this cathedral’s music, I am sure I would be weeping tonight.

Tomorrow, Lord’s Day, we are jumping into all the implications of perichosis, jumping ahead to John 14 and John 17 – one in each other.

And “That we all may be one.” 

But does this post by ecubishop describe what John is talking about?

Can you imagine reading this verse every time you came to work?  What kind of thoughts would this quote by Paul generate for you, seeing it day after day? (more…)

Brian Hales writes in the book, Mormon Fundamentalism (Orem, UT:  Millennial Press, 2008):

In writing about Mormon fundamentalists, I am aware that they prefer to be called “fundamentalist Mormons.”  In choosing the terms I use, I do not wish to convey my disrespect.  Yet for me, a true “fundamentalist Mormon” would embrace the whole of the Church’s fundamental teachings, not just a specialized version of one or two principles, and the need for proper priesthood authority to perform valid ordinances, including baptism, would exclude freelance baptism (those performed without genuine authority) as a gateway to becoming “Mormons.”  These two concerns limit my ability to refer to “Mormon fundamentalists” as “fundamentalist Mormons.”  All major religions have “fundamentalist” factions attached to them, and the Mormon variety shares many parallels with their counterparts of other spiritual traditions.  In that context, they easily qualify as “Mormon fundamentalists.”

– Brian C. Hales, May 2008

Though I am an outsider, this conversation is intriguing.  Brian sounds like a “fundamentalist Mormon,” insisting on fundamentals.  Am I wrong on this?

Find out more at his website, Mormon Fundamentalism.

I actually agree with a statement that Dr. Millet made in his latest book, Holding Fast (Deseret, 2008). (more…)