My Work Here is Done

[_Simon Belmont]

"Were it not for apologetics, critics, anti-Mormons, and tireless violence and bigotry of 180+ years would have gone uncontested."

That is exactly what I said. That is exactly what I mean. "Contested" does not mean "prevented."

Anti-Mormons are clearly responsible for the lack of a vast pre-Columbian civilization of Hebrews who practiced Christianity. It was the anti-Mormons who made the Book of Mormon not true.

That non sequitur is neither here nor there. Anti-Mormons are responsible for 180+ years of brutal physical, verbal, and written attacks. They are responsible for the behavior perceived in LDS apologetics. LDS apologetics is a response to anti-Mormons. No anti-Mormons = no apologetics.

Thus contradicting your entire post, wherein you lionize what "apologetics" supposedly does.

Information doesn't "speak." In fact, information doesn't do anything other than exist. It it neither bad nor good.

So what you're saying is that the LDS Church makes no claims of fact.

Huh? You said falsifiable claims. The LDS Church makes no falsifiable claims.

Liz,

I think that my OP addressed your questions.

But it didn't address mine.

Other than Darth J's grasping at straws, I haven't ever seen a good justification for the behavior of 180+ years of critics, anti-Mormons, and religious bigots.

[_Doctor Scratch]

Simon, I highly encourage you to publish your Joseph Smith articles. I encourage you pursue a doctoral degree, and to publish a lot more, so that one day you'll arrive at a position from which you can exert some kind of sway over the way that Mopologetics is conducted. At that time, provided that you still believe that polemical viciousness and rhetorical abuse are good ways of addressing critics, I'm sure Dean Robbers will summon me out of my Emeritus status in order to confront your work.

[_Gadianton]

I'd like to wish everyone a glorious Sunday on this beautiful October afternoon, with the hint of Autumn in the air

Indeed, it is the Autumn season for Mopologetics as the research paradigm of the MI collapses and in general, as Mormon Studies becomes the only game in town.

[_honorentheos]

I can't practice my religion in peace because internet message boards like this one criticize the non-falsifiable claims of the LDS church I have so faithfully served and sacrificed for though-out my life. As punishment for your sins, I have been commanded by the Lord to declare to you - "Kristen Schaal is a horse!!!"

I guess once he's left the stage and the drone has cleared your ears it's almost funny...

[_Darth J]

"Were it not for apologetics, critics, anti-Mormons, and tireless violence and bigotry of 180+ years would have gone uncontested."

That is exactly what I said. That is exactly what I mean. "Contested" does not mean "prevented."

I see. So Mormon apologetics has contested against tireless violence, just not successfully (since successfully contesting against violence would prevent it).

Anti-Mormons are clearly responsible for the lack of a vast pre-Columbian civilization of Hebrews who practiced Christianity. It was the anti-Mormons who made the Book of Mormon not true.

That non sequitur is neither here nor there. Anti-Mormons are responsible for 180+ years of brutal physical, verbal, and written attacks. They are responsible for the behavior perceived in LDS apologetics. LDS apologetics is a response to anti-Mormons. No anti-Mormons = no apologetics.

What you mean by "non sequitur" is that you want to talk about evangelical Christian anti-Mormonism, not secular criticism of Mormon truth claims.

Thus contradicting your entire post, wherein you lionize what "apologetics" supposedly does.

Information doesn't "speak." In fact, information doesn't do anything other than exist. It it neither bad nor good.

I agree. Secular criticism of Mormon truth claims is morally neutral. Therefore, it is absurd to impugn immoral motives to discussing the overwhelming information from various fields of study indicating that Mormonism's truth claims are not credible.

So what you're saying is that the LDS Church makes no claims of fact.

Huh? You said falsifiable claims. The LDS Church makes no falsifiable claims.

You know that master's in philosophy you have that we hear so much about? At any point, did they explain that falsifiability is a principle that applies to claims of fact?

Other than Darth J's grasping at straws, I haven't ever seen a good justification for the behavior of 180+ years of critics, anti-Mormons, and religious bigots.

See, the thing is that I didn't try to justify the mobs that attacked early Mormons or anything like that. I am just saying that it is damned stupid for you to try to equate disputing the claims of the LDS Church on the internet with tarring and feathering the early Mormons. And it is also damned stupid for you to try to lump all questioning of the teachings and practices of the LDS Church with rabid Ed Decker types.

Speaking of grasping at straws, to what extent do you feel that Mormon apologists are justified in contradicting the teachings of the Church in order to (purportedly) defend it?

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=15412&start=84

P.S. You'll remember that this is the thread in which the guy in charge of the FAIR wiki told you that I am not quote mining.

P.P.S. Simon, did the existence of this message board prevent you from going to church today?

[_Simon Belmont]

I see. So Mormon apologetics has contested against tireless violence, just not successfully (since successfully contesting against violence would prevent it).

I'm glad you finally understand. It's an ongoing contest, and as long as there are anti-Mormons behaving in the ways in which they wrote the book, there will be apologists to contest their actions and words.

Again, no critics/anti-Mormons = no apologists. If you want apologetics in the LDS church to go away, you know what you and your kind must do.

What you mean by "non sequitur" is that you want to talk about evangelical Christian anti-Mormonism, not secular criticism of Mormon truth claims.

No. What I mean is bringing up Book of Mormon geography in this thread is completely off topic.

I agree. Secular criticism of Mormon truth claims is morally neutral. Therefore, it is absurd to impugn immoral motives to discussing the overwhelming information from various fields of study indicating that Mormonism's truth claims are not credible.

The way in which it is "discussed" is often vile, offensive, and condescending -- people act this way, not information alone. Anti-Mormons wrote the book on this behavior over 180 years ago, and you guys are mad at apologists for taking a small cue from anti-Mormon behavior? That's laughable!

You know that master's in philosophy you have that we hear so much about? At any point, did they explain that falsifiability is a principle that applies to claims of fact?

DJ, you're struggling here.

The LDS Church makes claims of fact which are not falsifiable.

See, the thing is that I didn't try to justify the mobs that attacked early Mormons or anything like that. I am just saying that it is f*****g stupid for you to try to equate disputing the claims of the LDS Church on the internet with tarring and feathering the early Mormons. And it is also f*****g stupid for you to try to lump all questioning of the teachings and practices of the LDS Church with rabid Ed Decker types.

You mean like you and the other anti-apologists do the exact same thing? In other words, when a perceived wrong is done to... I don't know... Meldrum, you believe it is a problem with all LDS apologetics.

Speaking of grasping at straws, to what extent do you feel that Mormon apologists are justified in contradicting the teachings of the Church in order to (purportedly) defend it?

You're welcome to begin a thread on this off topic subject. I won't be participating, but I am sure the rest of the anti-Mormons here will love to laugh and guffaw with you on such a thread.

P.P.S. Simon, did the existence of this message board prevent you from going to church today?

Yes.

Simon, I highly encourage you to publish your Joseph Smith articles.

It's pretty hard to get published. I doubt it will ever happen.

I encourage you pursue a doctoral degree, and to publish a lot more, so that one day you'll arrive at a position from which you can exert some kind of sway over the way that Mopologetics is conducted.

I am not a good enough writer to pursue a Ph.D. I know my limitations.

Also, "the way [a]pologetics is conducted" is defined by 180+ years of vile, terrible, violent behavior from critics. They wrote the book on the behavior.

At that time, provided that you still believe that polemical viciousness and rhetorical abuse are good ways of addressing critics, I'm sure Dean Robbers will summon me out of my Emeritus status in order to confront your work.

As long as anti-Mormons believe that attaching a Book of Mormon to a rope and dragging it down the street yelling profanities during General Conference is a good way of addressing the Latter-day Saints, I'll be there to confront their work.

[_sock puppet]

P.P.S. Simon, did the existence of this message board prevent you from going to church today?

Yes.

Please explain in detail the mechanism of how MDB prevented you from going to church today.

[_honorentheos]

P.P.S. Simon, did the existence of this message board prevent you from going to church today?

Yes.

Please explain in detail the mechanism of how MDB prevented you from going to church today.

It takes a lot of time to say, "Kristen Schaal is a horse!" in a truly effective manner.

[_Doctor Scratch]

I wish you well in your endeavors, Simon. Admittedly, I have no idea how you posting here is supposed to have any effect whatsoever on the guy in the YouTube video you linked, but I assume you have a plan. Hopefully, you'll post a link to a video of you confronting the guy, so that we can cheer you on towards success.

[_Yoda]

Please explain in detail the mechanism of how MDB prevented you from going to church today.

I'm actually rather curious about that, myself. You have an iPad, Simon! Surely you can post on MDB during Sacrament Meeting if you want to. LOL