High Praise for LDS Scholars and Apologists

[_stemelbow]

Mosser and Owen? We don't like thems either. aren't they evangelical like Hoops? There's no scholarship nowheres near them. Everything they've put out is complete junk just like Peterson. We have no reason to think their opinion holds any credibility and frankly, even if it did hold credibility with other purported scholars then those scholars too would be really bad scholars. So you can't tell me any Mormon has produced any credible scholarship. No way, no how

(Doing my best MrStak impersonation)

[_Chap]

Schmo's point is a serious one.

Then he should make it seriously.

I disagree that a serious point is best made solemnly and without humor.

Have you ever, for instance read Jonathan Swift's 'A Modest Proposal For Preventing The Children of Poor People in Ireland From Being A Burden to Their Parents or Country, and For Making Them Beneficial to The Public'? There he writes:

I shall now therefore humbly propose my own thoughts, which I hope will not be liable to the least objection.

I have been assured by a very knowing American of my acquaintance in London, that a young healthy child well nursed is at a year old a most delicious, nourishing, and wholesome food, whether stewed, roasted, baked, or boiled; and I make no doubt that it will equally serve in a fricassee or a ragout.

I do therefore humbly offer it to public consideration that of the hundred and twenty thousand children already computed, twenty thousand may be reserved for breed, whereof only one-fourth part to be males; which is more than we allow to sheep, black cattle or swine; and my reason is, that these children are seldom the fruits of marriage, a circumstance not much regarded by our savages, therefore one male will be sufficient to serve four females. That the remaining hundred thousand may, at a year old, be offered in the sale to the persons of quality and fortune through the kingdom; always advising the mother to let them suck plentifully in the last month, so as to render them plump and fat for a good table. A child will make two dishes at an entertainment for friends; and when the family dines alone, the fore or hind quarter will make a reasonable dish, and seasoned with a little pepper or salt will be very good boiled on the fourth day, especially in winter.

Swift was not expecting to be taken literally: this was satire. But he was extremely serious.

And there are times, particularly on a message board, when the fact of not replying seriously to an opponent is one of the most effective possible ways of making your view absolutely clear. I think Schmo is often quite good at that.

[_Hoops]

And there are times, particularly on a message board, when the fact of not replying seriously to an opponent is one of the most effective possible ways of making your view absolutely clear. I think Schmo is often quite good at that.

REally? Swift and Schmo? Okay. You are free to defend who you wish, no matter how you twist circumstance to do so.

[_Chap]

And there are times, particularly on a message board, when the fact of not replying seriously to an opponent is one of the most effective possible ways of making your view absolutely clear. I think Schmo is often quite good at that.

REally? Swift and Schmo? Okay. You are free to defend who you wish, no matter how you twist circumstance to do so.

I am sorry to have to say that very few posters on this board, me included, deserve a Swiftian response.

For very many, however, a Schmoian one is entirely appropriate.

[_Blixa]

I am sorry to have to say that very few posters on this board, me included, deserve a Swiftian response.

For very many, however, a Schmoian one is entirely appropriate.

Indeed. And especially in the face of egregious dicfaciousness.

[_Hoops]

Indeed. And especially in the face of egregious dicfaciousness.

If this is what Blixa thinks, then I'm more than willing to revisit, rethink, and review my position.

[_Blixa]

Indeed. And especially in the face of egregious dicfaciousness.

If this is what Blixa thinks, then I'm more than willing to revisit, rethink, and review my position.

I hope you don't think, Hoops, that my comment was meant to imply that you were being dicfacious. Not at all. I just meant to underscore the validity of Chap's comment.

I confess I don't often get the back and forths between you and Schmo and that's why I never intervene in them. I agree with parts of what both of you say, and disagree with other parts, and so setting up where I'm coming from would take longer than any point I might want to make.

In terms of the bigger picture, though, I think both you and Schmo get where I'm coming from so it's all good!

[_harmony]

Read this ye critics of Mormon scholarship and dismay.

Few would criticize Daniel or Gee for their scholarship within their field of expertise. Unfortunately, the criticisms arise regularly from their behavior outside their field of expertise.

Perhaps a new hobby would be advisable?