Tweet
What do you make of his apparent interest in the "historical issues" saga going on these days?
His recent fireside address to CES instructors is making the rounds. In it, he does the same kind of pulpit pounding angry voice talk about historical issues that he did in conference a few years back.
I listened to a John Dehlin podcast this last week from last summer where he gives his personal history. I was fascinated by the part where he talked about meeting with Elder Holland. He met with him twice. The first time, JD felt like he came away thinking "man this really gets it". Elder Holland told him he appreciated his work, acknowledged the difficult historical issues, told him the church really wants his community inside the tent of the church even if they can't believe the same way, etc, etc. Then just a couple months later, Holland gave that talk in church where he rips doubters of the BOM. JD said he remembered feeling a little shocked and confused.
What I don't get about Holland is that he seems to be going back and forth. Reaching out to the ProgMo community at times, but then setting himself up as their biggest enemy at others. He really seems to be making it personal with some things, and I'm wondering what the psychology behind that is.
If anyone GA is aware of the historical issues, it's Elder Holland. He seems to be in the discussion a lot. His son, David Holland is a scholar that's involved in Mormon Apologetics, and if I'm not mistaken he's one of those on the liberal end of the spectrum that is more in the Maxwell Institute/Bokovoy corner than in the Dan Peterson/Bill Hamblin corner in terms of scripture historicity. I would love to be a fly on the wall when Elder Holland and his son talk shop.
I just saw this blog today that goes into some of this.
https://runtu.wordpress.com/2015/02/...ffrey-holland/
His recent fireside address to CES instructors is making the rounds. In it, he does the same kind of pulpit pounding angry voice talk about historical issues that he did in conference a few years back.
I listened to a John Dehlin podcast this last week from last summer where he gives his personal history. I was fascinated by the part where he talked about meeting with Elder Holland. He met with him twice. The first time, JD felt like he came away thinking "man this really gets it". Elder Holland told him he appreciated his work, acknowledged the difficult historical issues, told him the church really wants his community inside the tent of the church even if they can't believe the same way, etc, etc. Then just a couple months later, Holland gave that talk in church where he rips doubters of the BOM. JD said he remembered feeling a little shocked and confused.
What I don't get about Holland is that he seems to be going back and forth. Reaching out to the ProgMo community at times, but then setting himself up as their biggest enemy at others. He really seems to be making it personal with some things, and I'm wondering what the psychology behind that is.
If anyone GA is aware of the historical issues, it's Elder Holland. He seems to be in the discussion a lot. His son, David Holland is a scholar that's involved in Mormon Apologetics, and if I'm not mistaken he's one of those on the liberal end of the spectrum that is more in the Maxwell Institute/Bokovoy corner than in the Dan Peterson/Bill Hamblin corner in terms of scripture historicity. I would love to be a fly on the wall when Elder Holland and his son talk shop.
I just saw this blog today that goes into some of this.
https://runtu.wordpress.com/2015/02/...ffrey-holland/