If one were to post fake apologetics to "the other boar

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
Post Reply
_maklelan
_Emeritus
Posts: 4999
Joined: Sat Jan 06, 2007 6:51 am

Re: If one were to post fake apologetics to "the other

Post by _maklelan »

Mister Scratch wrote:???? I don't see what you're point is here, Mak. There is a lengthy thread on this very board dealing with topic of FROB and peer review. Perhaps you should read it and get caught up to speed? In any case, nothing you've said undoes my central criticism of LDS apologetics, which is, ironically enough, that it is in many ways decentralized. It exists to help Mormonism, and yet the LDS Church practically disavows it. People with scholarly credentials such as Hamblin and Peterson engage in apologetics, but are reluctant to adapt the label of "LDS Apologist." Go ahead and ask them on MAD if you don't believe me. Ask DCP if he considers himself an "apologist."


I could care less about the title apologist. Who on earth gives two cents about whether or not they like the name? This thread has to do with posting fake articles on the MAD board to get a good laugh. I explained that we generally take a good hard look at stuff and not just welcome everything that appears to support our faith. Perhaps you also need to be brought up to speed, because the church now owns FARMS.
I like you Betty...

My blog
_beastie
_Emeritus
Posts: 14216
Joined: Thu Nov 02, 2006 2:26 am

Post by _beastie »

I do not believe there are careful checks amongst apologists. Sorenson's work is riddled with problematic uses of sources, and has not been challenged by other apologists. For heaven's sake, a layperson like me was easily able to find two extremely serious errors (regarding metallurgy), and the apologists that posted on FAIR at the time apparently were completely unaware of any problems.
We hate to seem like we don’t trust every nut with a story, but there’s evidence we can point to, and dance while shouting taunting phrases.

Penn & Teller

http://www.mormonmesoamerica.com
_truth dancer
_Emeritus
Posts: 4792
Joined: Tue Oct 24, 2006 12:40 pm

Post by _truth dancer »

I think Nibley's work is another good example of apologetic work that goes largely uncriticized.

Apologists have sort of disregarded it but certainly won't come out and admit a lot of it was, less than valuable.

~dancer~
_moksha
_Emeritus
Posts: 22508
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 8:42 pm

Post by _moksha »

Enuma Elish wrote: I’ll simply take your word on it that DNA analysis stomps out any chance for the Hemispheric model.

Truth be told, I would just as soon that it did.

With a brother at Oxford, perhaps the two of you could work on a theory, whereby the remains of the Nephites dropped into the sea when the land changed at the end of the First Age. I doubt the Dude would attempt to take on that one.
Cry Heaven and let loose the Penguins of Peace
_MormonMendacity
_Emeritus
Posts: 405
Joined: Wed Nov 15, 2006 12:56 am

Re: If one were to post fake apologetics to "the other

Post by _MormonMendacity »

maklelan wrote:I explained that we generally take a good hard look at stuff and not just welcome everything that appears to support our faith.

You should care about the label "apologist", Mak, because judging from your fractured posts here you don't know what it means. I suggest that you try to really figure out what the topic is in a thread and then address it instead of playing Board dilettante like you did in your response on the WhyGodHatesAmputees post.

All I could hear was your cohorts crying "rubbish" if nomos had posted such a fractured response.
"Suppose we've chosen the wrong god. Every time we go to church we're just making him madder and madder" --Homer Simpson's version of Pascal's Wager
Religion began when the first scoundrel met the first fool.
Religion is ignorance reduced to a system.
_Enuma Elish
_Emeritus
Posts: 666
Joined: Sat Dec 23, 2006 5:18 pm

Post by _Enuma Elish »

With a brother at Oxford, perhaps the two of you could work on a theory, whereby the remains of the Nephites dropped into the sea when the land changed at the end of the First Age. I doubt the Dude would attempt to take on that one.


I would love to out smart the Dude.

Believe it or not, I could handle the oceanography component, but would lose interest on the geography side of things. Besides, what would a Brother-in-Law at Oxford have to do with Nephites dropping into the sea? The man does Stem Cell Research.
_The Dude
_Emeritus
Posts: 2976
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 3:16 am

Post by _The Dude »

Enuma Elish wrote:
With a brother at Oxford, perhaps the two of you could work on a theory, whereby the remains of the Nephites dropped into the sea when the land changed at the end of the First Age. I doubt the Dude would attempt to take on that one.


I would love to out smart the Dude.

Believe it or not, I could handle the oceanography component, but would lose interest on the geography side of things. Besides, what would a Brother-in-Law at Oxford have to do with Nephites dropping into the sea? The man does Stem Cell Research.


Because all the reasearch on the First Age was done at Oxford by professor JRR Tolkien. He's the one who translated the Elven plates into English, which we now possess as the Quenta Silmarillion. In this most sacred record it is told how after the final battle against Melkor, the northwestern-most part of Middle Earth sank into the sea. Perhaps the Nephite civilization went with it, along with the principal Noldor and Sindar (Elven) kingdoms. The Book of Mormon doesn't say anything about Elves and Orcs, but following the precedent of allowing unmentioned "other" civilizations to account for the prevelence of Asian DNA in Native Americans, this should not be a problem.

Maybe your brother-in-law could access some of professor Tolkien's unpublished notes and uncover further evidence in favor of the MEGT (Middle-Earth Geography Theory). Rather than try to take down this theory, I would bolster it with my most sincere cheerleading.
_maklelan
_Emeritus
Posts: 4999
Joined: Sat Jan 06, 2007 6:51 am

Re: If one were to post fake apologetics to "the other

Post by _maklelan »

MormonMendacity wrote:
maklelan wrote:I explained that we generally take a good hard look at stuff and not just welcome everything that appears to support our faith.

You should care about the label "apologist", Mak, because judging from your fractured posts here you don't know what it means. I suggest that you try to really figure out what the topic is in a thread and then address it instead of playing Board dilettante like you did in your response on the WhyGodHatesAmputees post.

All I could hear was your cohorts crying "rubbish" if nomos had posted such a fractured response.


Then address my arguments in that thread.
Last edited by Guest on Tue Jan 09, 2007 1:31 am, edited 1 time in total.
I like you Betty...

My blog
_maklelan
_Emeritus
Posts: 4999
Joined: Sat Jan 06, 2007 6:51 am

Post by _maklelan »

truth dancer wrote:I think Nibley's work is another good example of apologetic work that goes largely uncriticized.

Apologists have sort of disregarded it but certainly won't come out and admit a lot of it was, less than valuable.

~dancer~


Actually Nibley is heavily criticized by many LDS scholars. Professor Jackson wrote a review of one of his books that is often quoted by anti-Mormons as proof that we don't even support our own scholars. What do they want, that we support them or not? The reason people don't hear about the criticism is because they don't read what we write.
I like you Betty...

My blog
_The Dude
_Emeritus
Posts: 2976
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 3:16 am

Post by _The Dude »

(Maklelan- while you're here, may I make a suggestion. It would help if you use an avatar on the MAD board because I sometimes confuse you with "Mordecai" and I don't think you want that. At least, I wouldn't want to be confused with "Mordecai".)
Post Reply