The LDS Faith is one of simplified faith, for the purposes of promoting faith, not

[Solon]

Originally Posted by ChinoCoug

Our approach is the right approach.

Historians of Christianity have discovered that theology came on the scene only after revelation was gone (See Roger Olson, The History of Christian Theology).

Respectfully, I'm not sure historians have been able to pinpoint the departure of revelation. In the first generation of apostles, early Christian leaders had to make decisions on how to best implement Jesus' commands and teachings. Those who wrote the gospels were forced to remember and interpret the words and life of Jesus. Would this not be theology, even before the blatantly philosophical apologia of Justin Martyr in the mid second century?

Originally Posted by Indy Coug

Well, when God hides up the Gold Plates, doesn't physically reveal Himself to mankind on even a localized, let alone universal basis, and so on and so forth, I think the answer is pretty clear.

When God repeatedly instructs us to pray and receive revelation about the truth of things, again it's pretty clear that academic or intellectual considerations are secondary or tertiary.

I firmly believe this is God's design and not the result of a group of theological traditionalists being overprotective of its doctrine. I don't see any signs that God will suddenly have the development of the doctrine of His church primarily driven by
academia/intellectualism rather than the current established method of revelation through those in authority.

That isn't to say that academic study can't enhance or build upon spiritual understanding, but it isn't going to be the prime mover.

Maybe the paradigm shifts during the Millennium.

While I don't doubt that what you describe is the contemporary mindset, many intellectuals feel that the LDS church has shifted away from initially academic/intellectual roots. Indeed, the old-time apostles and GAs were a different breed of intellectuals than those who deliver General Conference talks today (e.g. Orson Pratt's 1849 New Jerusalem pamphlet logically and intellectually lays out the case for the New Jerusalem being built in Missouri.)

It's not just a matter of anti-intellectualism; it's the notion that LDS leaders have abandoned their epistemological foundations for touchy-feely emotionalism. Not that it isn't their prerogative (they are, after all the leaders). It just strikes the intellectually minded as incongruous that a church with deep roots in individualism, millenialism, and intellectual bravado has shifted so far.