tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1860308562279203907.post7743279949986327809..comments2024-01-20T05:27:34.690+01:00Comments on Toward an LDS Cinema: Mormon Paradoxes (i.e. literary fodder) part 1Trevorhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00817545149801983520noreply@blogger.comBlogger16125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1860308562279203907.post-27317532322124457752008-07-05T18:30:00.000+02:002008-07-05T18:30:00.000+02:00Not to revert to an old subject here, but I was re...Not to revert to an old subject here, but I was reading the parable of the ten virgins and I thought of another paradox I thought was worthy of listing here. That is that we are commanded to prepare for the future, but also to take no thought for it. I know some of the relevant counsel here applies best to missionaries and other full-time preachers, but there may be a good subject somewhere Adam K. K. Figueirahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00332366019568841848noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1860308562279203907.post-33514381501014715352008-06-21T01:51:00.000+02:002008-06-21T01:51:00.000+02:00Trevor,I recommend that you get on Amazon.com and ...Trevor,<BR/><BR/>I recommend that you get on Amazon.com and order People of Paradox right now (unless you are really strapped for cash). It is required reading for someone like you (a Mormon "artist," if you will).<BR/><BR/>Givens talks about four paradoxes in Mormon thought, and then he discusses how these paradoxes play out in Mormon intellectual thought, architecture, music and dance, theater Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1860308562279203907.post-79198467759008446392008-06-20T22:57:00.000+02:002008-06-20T22:57:00.000+02:00Bryan,I'm of course fine with the title, though yo...Bryan,<BR/><BR/>I'm of course fine with the title, though your suggestion is noted. I think you're assuming that the word "Mormon" holds an institutional meaning, whereas I think that the word is far more colloquial than 'LDS.' Both, however, suggest in my mind the theology in practice.<BR/><BR/>That being said, I thought that my discussion of Shklovsky was clear enough about seeking the tension Trevorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00817545149801983520noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1860308562279203907.post-18132945419194911022008-06-20T22:04:00.000+02:002008-06-20T22:04:00.000+02:00Because I said I would, I want to list another par...Because I said I would, I want to list another paradox here. <BR/><BR/>We are taught to be valiant defenders of Christ, family, and liberty, but also to turn the other cheek. Missionaries should use the scriptures to teach, but not Bible Bash. We are to use boldness, but not overbearance. <BR/><BR/>Some of these things may have more to do with a "fine line" or a contextual decision than with Adam K. K. Figueirahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00332366019568841848noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1860308562279203907.post-64290065921741865952008-06-20T19:33:00.000+02:002008-06-20T19:33:00.000+02:00Bryan, I'm happy to elaborate, but first I wanted ...Bryan, <BR/><BR/>I'm happy to elaborate, but first I wanted to say something about your last comment. <BR/><BR/>I think you pointed out an interesting aspect of these paradoxes, namely that many of them are not so confusing from a gospel perspective. I've said before that all truth is found in paradox. I think that's a natural extension of the requirement for opposition in all things, but divine Adam K. K. Figueirahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00332366019568841848noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1860308562279203907.post-47666789566415415652008-06-20T12:49:00.000+02:002008-06-20T12:49:00.000+02:00Perhaps the post would have been better titled "Pa...Perhaps the post would have been better titled "Paradoxes a Mormon Might Perceive," or some such idea, rather than "Mormon Paradoxes," which imply institution-wide doctrinal conflicts the Church has yet to resolve.<BR/><BR/>A Mormon might perceive a paradox regarding issue #1, but it is an issue the Brethren and others have addressed in official Church events/publications. Therefore, speaking inBryanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08014603435354864124noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1860308562279203907.post-64341607157595624332008-06-20T06:46:00.000+02:002008-06-20T06:46:00.000+02:00You know, I recently attended a sacrament meeting ...You know, I recently attended a sacrament meeting in which one of the young men speaking quoted Buddha. I was surprised how offended people weren't. I expected that to cause a stir.<BR/><BR/>I've never heard Buddha quoted from the pulpit before, but I've noticed many instances of the general authorities using the writings of non-LDS authors to teach various doctrines and principles. I even Adam K. K. Figueirahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00332366019568841848noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1860308562279203907.post-41898063855713327142008-06-19T20:22:00.000+02:002008-06-19T20:22:00.000+02:00That's exactly the kind of thing I'm talking about...That's exactly the kind of thing I'm talking about, Adam. <BR/><BR/>That's something to fill Volumes and VOLUMES.<BR/><BR/>How do we negotiate this?Trevorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00817545149801983520noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1860308562279203907.post-21463014509756503242008-06-19T20:19:00.000+02:002008-06-19T20:19:00.000+02:00I came across something that made me think of this...I came across something that made me think of this paradox: that we claim to be the only true church built on revelation, but acknowledge that personal revelation is available to people of any faith.<BR/><BR/>In other words, God gives us the only authorized prophecy/priesthoods yet is no respecter of persons.Adam K. K. Figueirahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00332366019568841848noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1860308562279203907.post-41315041827578323032008-06-19T16:52:00.000+02:002008-06-19T16:52:00.000+02:00For the record, the purpose of the post was to spe...For the record, the purpose of the post was to speculate paradoxes which Latter-day Saints could expand upon/explore/question through their art. You may not agree with some of these paradoxes, and you have the right to, but that's not my point for the post. <BR/><BR/>Our art, I believe, would be enriched by acknowledging paradox and exploring it there. This tension makes the work of great Trevorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00817545149801983520noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1860308562279203907.post-38679255215755686612008-06-19T16:23:00.000+02:002008-06-19T16:23:00.000+02:00Trevor,Have you heard of or read Terryl Givens' Pe...Trevor,<BR/><BR/>Have you heard of or read Terryl Givens' People of Paradox?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1860308562279203907.post-88665171475616726642008-06-18T21:17:00.000+02:002008-06-18T21:17:00.000+02:00I hope I'm not interrupting, but this whole discus...I hope I'm not interrupting, but this whole discussion reminds me of this verse: <BR/><BR/><I>For man is spirit. The elements are eternal, and spirit and element, inseparably connected, receive a fulness of joy.</I><BR/>Doctrine and Covenants 93:33<BR/><BR/>Given the above, it makes sense that the most sacred/joyful/godlike act we can participate in as mortals involves both physicality (element) Adam K. K. Figueirahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00332366019568841848noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1860308562279203907.post-23619082864976196672008-06-18T20:47:00.000+02:002008-06-18T20:47:00.000+02:00Oh, absolutely. Without desire and arousal in the...Oh, absolutely. Without desire and arousal in the first place, it's pretty difficult for the experience to be mutually beneficial for husband and wife. But I think we would agree that there's a difference between "wholesome" and "unwholesome" desire, the latter being rooted in purely selfish gratification, fantasizing about other partners, or seeking to enforce dominion or authority over the Bryanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08014603435354864124noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1860308562279203907.post-25473801689898088152008-06-18T20:31:00.000+02:002008-06-18T20:31:00.000+02:00Bryan,I don't mean to reduce all sexuality down to...Bryan,<BR/><BR/>I don't mean to reduce all sexuality down to carnality. That isn't my intention at all. It is a holy covenant above all and should be treated that way. <BR/><BR/>But I hope that we are all aware there is inherently a physicality and carnality (meaning desire-driven) to it. <BR/><BR/>Before I was even engaged I remember hotly debating the nature of sex in a Temple Marriage withTrevorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00817545149801983520noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1860308562279203907.post-87279956969751862892008-06-18T19:56:00.000+02:002008-06-18T19:56:00.000+02:00In response to #1, I would posit that there has be...In response to #1, I would posit that there has been a strong movement within the Church to move sexual intimacy from a carnal act to one of profound spiritual significance. There's Doug Brinley's book "Between Husband and Wife" and Elder Holland's <A HREF="http://www.familylifeeducation.org/gilliland/procgroup/Souls.htm" REL="nofollow">"Of Souls, Symbols, and Sacraments,"</A> just to name a fewBryanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08014603435354864124noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1860308562279203907.post-20311246946721711862008-06-18T18:44:00.000+02:002008-06-18T18:44:00.000+02:00This might be an outgrowth of your #2, but what ab...This might be an outgrowth of your #2, but what about the command to bring others out of darkness while not straying from the light?Adam K. K. Figueirahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00332366019568841848noreply@blogger.com