The death of the Mormon Apologist - RIP 1832-2015

[_KevinSim]

Apologetics cannot withstand the sanitizing sunlight of the Information Age, as accelerated by the Internet, nor the accompanying questions and counter arguments.

I welcome "the sanitizing sunlight of the Information Age." There's very little about what that sunlight has revealed that I have ever bothered to dispute; instead I simply disagree that that kind of stuff has a significant effect on whether or not people should believe in God as described by the LDS Church.

[_Tobin]

KevinSim,

These self-congratulatory threads are the height of conceit and arrogance on the part of the critics. It isn't that the critics haven't been responded to and answered. It is that they reject the response and refuse to engage. Instead, they dismiss anyone that responds on this forum as something else and so they feel that they have won. The reality of the situation is far from that.

[_KevinSim]

I am extra concerned. Just a handful of years ago you could find DCP darting for this forum and similar forums when an apologist rebuttal was needed. The OMIDs would take the damn ball and run. I miss that courage. No courage anymore.

I hope I have that courage. Throw that ball at me, and see if I run with it!

[_kairos]

Have we considered as one poster did that Mormonism as religion is one gigantic house of cards- if it collapsed, i mean really collapsed the entire western states economies of utah, az, idaho ,nev? will collapse as well-think of it-no byu-CLOSED; no temples in ut -CLOSED; business doen by the church -CLOSED;jobs held by Mormons related directly to the religion, eg BYU prof/institute teacher-GONE BYE BYE! housing for all those Mormons with church related jobs- FORECLOSED; 80,000 mish called home with no jobs or future in sight-HOMELESS and BROKE!

how close is this to happening-what will be the tipping point?

[_KevinSim]

These self-congratulatory threads are the height of conceit and arrogance on the part of the critics. It isn't that the critics haven't been responded to and answered. It is that they reject the response and refuse to engage. Instead, they dismiss anyone that responds on this forum as something else and so they feel that they have won. The reality of the situation is far from that.

Tobin, thanks for the pointers on this topic. It's totally possible that the critics have refused to engage in the discussions that you have tried to have with them, but my experience is that they at least start to engage when I put points in, so I will post here and see if my posts generate any discussion.

[_just me]

Kevin, do you see yourself as an apologist? I ask because I wouldn't have put you in that category.

[_KevinSim]

Critics pointed out that it appeared that the defenders of the faith just couldn't stand the heat in the kitchen when the other cooks were secular exmormon critics, unencumbered by having to justify untenable Biblical beliefs.

I will concede that it's much easier to defend LDS beliefs against Evangelical critics than it is to defend them against "secular exmormon critics," but at least in the last couple of years I have at least seemed to have no trouble defending LDS beliefs against both types of critics.

(by the way, these were the same defenders who, by and large, either supported Pahoran's posting style or were silent in the face of it)

To be perfectly honest, I'm not really familiar with "Pahoran's posting style," so I can't comment on it.

I suspect that the withdrawal from these types of fora has been encouraged by church leadership, who probably didn't like what they were seeing or hearing about how defenders of the faith were coping.

I've heard nothing but encouragement to get involved with Internet discussion forums, from church leadership. I'm not sure that the Mormon Discussions Board is exactly the forum they had in mind, but I've been going on the assumption that it was.

Of course none of them will ever admit it's because that they've been dealt a losing hand of cards.

I hear something like this and it makes me think of a conversation between the Ed Harris character and one of his co-workers during "Apollo 13"; the co-worker makes the statement that the other man should probably prepare for the worst debacle NASA had ever undergone; the Ed Harris character replies that the Apollo 13 story in his opinion represents NASA at its finest hour. I don't at all feel like I've been "dealt a losing hand of cards."

[_KevinSim]

Have we considered as one poster did that Mormonism as religion is one gigantic house of cards- if it collapsed, i mean really collapsed the entire western states economies of utah, az, idaho ,nev? will collapse as well-think of it-no byu-CLOSED; no temples in ut -CLOSED; business doen by the church -CLOSED;jobs held by Mormons related directly to the religion, eg BYU prof/institute teacher-GONE BYE BYE! housing for all those Mormons with church related jobs- FORECLOSED; 80,000 mish called home with no jobs or future in sight-HOMELESS and BROKE!

how close is this to happening-what will be the tipping point?

I really doubt this will ever happen. At any rate, if it was a possibility, it's still a long, long way off.

The idea that seems to be put forward by posts such as this is that there are relatively large numbers of Latter-day Saints who are even concerned with the issues critics on this discussion forum think are so incredibly important; I suspect that, on the contrary, the vast majority of Latter-day Saints, like my wife (and like, to some extent, myself) simply don't care about such issues. And as long as such a vast majority exists, the mentioned institutions will survive.

[_KevinSim]

Kevin, do you see yourself as an apologist? I ask because I wouldn't have put you in that category.

Just me, that's a good question, so I took a look at the definition of apologist at "http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/apologist?s=t". It says, "a person who makes a defense in speech or writing of a belief, idea, etc." I have certainly made a defense in writing of a belief, so I think that indeed makes me an apologist. Why would you hesitate to put me "in that category"?

[_Mayan Elephant]

lostindc, i hear what you are saying. the apologists (i never considered kevin to be one, by the way) have left all the venues where they do not control the conversation. that isn't unique to the apologists though. the bloggernacle started doing that a long time ago. m* and bcc, among others strictly protected the conversations and deleted comments and banned posters. fair was very quick to do the same. mad too. they were able to grow and thrive by hosting very narrow bands of thought and conversation.

i think Facebook and their little blogs and communities give the apologists what they need and want, which is - the center of attention wherever they write or opine. it is a model that works, especially among Mormons. and especially among exmormons where participants are actually looking for a new leader to at be the center of their crap.

i also do not think this means the death of the apologist. they are busier and more opinionated than ever. they just restrict their comments to areas that do not tolerate scrutiny. this site is unique in that it does not immediately ban or edit comments. if you look at movements in the exmormons or venues where the apologists play, they do not look like this place.