Mundane and Miraculous
I very recently blogged about miracles. I'm very adamant about my belief in miracles. And yet just the other day I read an article titled "'By Small Means': Rethinking the Liahona" in which the authors posit that rather than the ex nihilo wonder we have accepted as true, the Liahona was both a common astrolabe, and a dowry from Ishmael to Lehi's family. I don't see that it's outside the realm of possibility, but I did not find the paper unproblematic. From a scholarly standpoint, its Book of Mormon exegesis was acceptable, if not compelling. It was perhaps dismissive of passages, choosing which ones it favored because they supported the argument. That's shaky logos, but a necessary part of putting the idea into the historical conversation, and it's an idea that shouldn't be dismissed simply because the more spiritual passages of scripture seem to favor a more "magical" explanation. The problem I had with the article begins...