"Apologetics" - BookofAbrahamDVD | YouTube.com

[_Shulem]

I think it is pretty obvious that this video is intended for the faithful who don’t really know the criticisms, but are just looking for reassurance.

Yep. The faithful (brain dead) members get a pat on the back and are told that all is well in Zion. The school teachers (liars) at BYU have taken care of all the difficult questions and the prophets (cowards) can continue to preach faith in the prophet Joseph Smith.

Don't ya just luv the cult?

Paul O

[_Buffalo]

It's fascinating to see just how little apologists think of lay members. They really think they're stupid sheep. The apologists aren't even trying, because they're sure they don't have to.

[_sanjara]

It's fascinating to see just how little apologists think of lay members. They really think they're stupid sheep. The apologists aren't even trying, because they're sure they don't have to.

It's not that apologists don't think about lay members or that they think members are stupid. And I think most of them are probably trying too. But what they don't think about is presenting the other side of arguments. Their sole purpose is to build faith and to many of them this cannot be done with a critical examination of the arguments in which you have to evaluate arguments from both sides of the issue. It is here that they may be selling members short. It is by avoiding opposing arguments that apologists do too much thinking for members.

This is what you're seeing in most Book of Abraham apologetics. For example, Kevin Graham or George Miller present arguments on the KEP and apologists seem to ignore their arguments, hurl insults, and then champion some technical point that ultimately keeps Joseph Smith in the clear and the faith of the member intact. This may be sincere but I think it's misguided. Intelligent members will see right through this. I'd really like to see a less confrontational approach to LDS apologetics where apologists take a good hard look at both sides of the issue and then present their findings in a fair way.

[_harmony]

I'd really like to see a less confrontational approach to LDS apologetics where apologists take a good hard look at both sides of the issue and then present their findings in a fair way.

When they do this, they tend to lose their testimonies. The one-sided approach works to keep the apologists in the pews too.

[_Fence Sitter]

It's not that apologists don't think about lay members or that they think members are stupid. And I think most of them are probably trying too. But what they don't think about is presenting the other side of arguments. Their sole purpose is to build faith and to many of them this cannot be done with a critical examination of the arguments in which you have to evaluate arguments from both sides of the issue. It is here that they may be selling members short. It is by avoiding opposing arguments that apologists do too much thinking for members.

This is what you're seeing in most Book of Abraham apologetics. For example, Kevin Graham or George Miller present arguments on the KEP and apologists seem to ignore their arguments, hurl insults, and then champion some technical point that ultimately keeps Joseph Smith in the clear and the faith of the member intact. This may be sincere but I think it's misguided. Intelligent members will see right through this. I'd really like to see a less confrontational approach to LDS apologetics where apologists take a good hard look at both sides of the issue and then present their findings in a fair way.

If they did it would no longer be considered apologetics, at that point you would call it scholarship.

[_sanjara]

I'd really like to see a less confrontational approach to LDS apologetics where apologists take a good hard look at both sides of the issue and then present their findings in a fair way.

When they do this, they tend to lose their testimonies. The one-sided approach works to keep the apologists in the pews too.

Alas, Harmony this may be very true in some cases. Looking at both sides has definitely affected my testimony. I can't say I'm your traditional TBM anymore. Although I'm still in the pews I tend now to focus less on the institution and more on core things such as love, forgiveness, neighborliness, etc.

[_sanjara]

Exactly Fence Sitter!

[_brade]

It's not that apologists don't think about lay members or that they think members are stupid. And I think most of them are probably trying too. But what they don't think about is presenting the other side of arguments. Their sole purpose is to build faith and to many of them this cannot be done with a critical examination of the arguments in which you have to evaluate arguments from both sides of the issue. It is here that they may be selling members short. It is by avoiding opposing arguments that apologists do too much thinking for members.

This is what you're seeing in most Book of Abraham apologetics. For example, Kevin Graham or George Miller present arguments on the KEP and apologists seem to ignore their arguments, hurl insults, and then champion some technical point that ultimately keeps Joseph Smith in the clear and the faith of the member intact. This may be sincere but I think it's misguided. Intelligent members will see right through this. I'd really like to see a less confrontational approach to LDS apologetics where apologists take a good hard look at both sides of the issue and then present their findings in a fair way.

If they did it would no longer be considered apologetics, at that point you would call it scholarship.

Bingo!

[_BrianH]

Here, allow me to summarize:

- Most things written by critics are full of inaccuracies.
- Apologists are in a better position now than they ever have been in defending the authenticity of the Book of Abraham.
- It's foolish to value what you learn in school over what you learn from God.
- The things we learn from God are more reliable than the things we learn from our minds.
- The strongest evidence for the Book of Abraham is its English text.
- Be careful with what you read [regarding the Book of Abraham] because 99.9% of it is wrong and "they just have too many wrong things in them".
- There are only a few people who really know both the historical and egyptological sides of the issue.
- Any rational arguments or evidences we put forth must also be tempered by our faith that is given through a witness of the Holy Ghost.

I see a lot of empty assertions here, but no facts to back them up.

You say that LDS apologists are in a better position now than they ever have been in defending the authenticity of the Book of Abraham?

Really?

Okay ...how about you show us some actual reasons to think that your "prophet" at least translated the Book of Abraham's content correctly by providing us with some actual confirmation of those translations. So far, no one has ever done this and the source document is universally recognized by all qualified experts as nothing more than another example of a very common 1st century "breathing permit" as required by the mythological religion of Egypt for a person to enter the afterlife. One wonders WHY the Egyptians bothered to bury their dead with copies of the "Book of Abraham" rather than according to the dictates of their own religion. Perhaps you can explain that.

You are also welcome to visit the "celestial" forum and answer my challene pertaining to Smith's identification of the four canopic jars depicted in facsimile number one in your Book of Abraham.

If you cannot do that, the emptiness of your claims above will remain self-evidnet.

-BH

.

[_Buffalo]

Here, allow me to summarize:

- Most things written by critics are full of inaccuracies.
- Apologists are in a better position now than they ever have been in defending the authenticity of the Book of Abraham.
- It's foolish to value what you learn in school over what you learn from God.
- The things we learn from God are more reliable than the things we learn from our minds.
- The strongest evidence for the Book of Abraham is its English text.
- Be careful with what you read [regarding the Book of Abraham] because 99.9% of it is wrong and "they just have too many wrong things in them".
- There are only a few people who really know both the historical and egyptological sides of the issue.
- Any rational arguments or evidences we put forth must also be tempered by our faith that is given through a witness of the Holy Ghost.

I see a lot of empty assertions here, but no facts to back them up.

You say that LDS apologists are in a better position now than they ever have been in defending the authenticity of the Book of Abraham?

Really?

Okay ...how about you show us some actual reasons to think that your "prophet" at least translated the Book of Abraham's content correctly by providing us with some actual confirmation of those translations. So far, no one has ever done this and the source document is universally recognized by all qualified experts as nothing more than another example of a very common 1st century "breathing permit" as required by the mythological religion of Egypt for a person to enter the afterlife. One wonders WHY the Egyptians bothered to bury their dead with copies of the "Book of Abraham" rather than according to the dictates of their own religion. Perhaps you can explain that.

You are also welcome to visit the "celestial" forum and answer my challene pertaining to Smith's identification of the four canopic jars depicted in facsimile number one in your Book of Abraham.

If you cannot do that, the emptiness of your claims above will remain self-evidnet.

-BH

.

He is summarizing the video, not his own position.