_____'s "The Anti-Mormon Attackers"

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
_Mister Scratch
_Emeritus
Posts: 5604
Joined: Sun Oct 29, 2006 8:13 pm

_____'s "The Anti-Mormon Attackers"

Post by _Mister Scratch »

[MODERATOR NOTE: Keene recently dropped the hammer, which you can read about here. Therefore, I have to edit out in real life information that a person requests be edited out.]

I was perusing over at the FAIR-affiliated FARMS recently, and came across this article. I may perhaps add it to the blog eventually, if I can ever determine how it fits. But in any case, I thought it was an interesting demonstration of FARMS-style rhetoric, or what DCP has recently describes as "just more ad hominems." Anyways, a few choice quotes (you can count the ad hominems and straw men, if you'd like):


The Anti-Mormon Attackers
_____

A further self-recommendation is found in the author's introduction, which is titled, "Aggressive Apologetics: The Growing Mormon Mission." "Holding"1 takes up the theme introduced by Mosser and Owen's essay on the need for better quality evangelical apologetics2 and promises to deliver the goods in the form of "top-notch Biblical scholarship" (p. 10). This level of self-certification makes no concessions to false modesty. Whatever the actual quality of the scholarship here, the author certainly thinks it is formidable.

(bold emphasis added)

The book has a distinct apologetic handbook feel, with the key points being reiterated in summary form at the end of each chapter. This provides the reader with a useful way to survey quickly what Holding thinks he has proven in those chapters.




In contrast to this approach, Holding becomes a staunch and loyal enthusiast for majority opinion or scholarship as soon as it suits his purposes.


Holding cannot claim to be ignorant of the relevant literature since he refers to it,4 yet he fails entirely to interact with it. Is this his idea of "top-notch scholarship"?


A detailed critique of his arguments would run to many pages and would be tedious.


Holding has at least made an effort to justify this assumption with something resembling a structured argument, but that argument turns out, upon inspection, to be fatally flawed by its tendentiousness.
(Isn't this called "Begging the Question"? I.e., "The argument is flawed because it is flawed."?)

I thought this was hilarious:

Where this book really does improve on some of those of its predecessors is in its tone. It neither bristles with hostility, as most earlier productions do, nor drips with insincere, condescending friendliness, as some of the more recent efforts do.
(emphasis added)

This too:
I saw none of the usual accusations of "dishonesty" that conservative Protestant anti-Mormons tend to fling at Latter-day Saints for failing to describe our own faith in terms amenable to the hostile caricatures our opponents have fashioned and prefer. His approach is businesslike and his tone scholarly.
(emphasis added)

Does this remind anyone of FAIR?

He shifts his ground from chapter to chapter and from topic to topic as he keeps his focus on whatever angle of attack seems most profitable at the time.


All in all, I thought this was a very interesting article, which is easily accessible via google. It seems a good example of the smear tactics of which FAIR and FARMS are so fond.

[/quote]
Last edited by Physics Guy on Wed Nov 08, 2006 6:20 pm, edited 1 time in total.
_Runtu
_Emeritus
Posts: 16721
Joined: Sun Nov 05, 2006 5:06 am

Post by _Runtu »

Oh, wait. At first I thought Pahoran was summarizing his style of apologetics.

I wonder if his sense of irony was washed away at his baptism?
_asbestosman
_Emeritus
Posts: 6215
Joined: Tue Nov 07, 2006 10:32 pm

Re: _____'s "The Anti-Mormon Attackers&qu

Post by _asbestosman »

Mister Scratch wrote:
Holding has at least made an effort to justify this assumption with something resembling a structured argument, but that argument turns out, upon inspection, to be fatally flawed by its tendentiousness.
(Isn't this called "Begging the Question"? I.e., "The argument is flawed because it is flawed."?)


I don't think so. Isn't he saying that the article is flawed because of its bias (it does not fairly consider a reasonable, opposing point of view)?
That's General Leo. He could be my friend if he weren't my enemy.
eritis sicut dii
I support NCMO
_harmony
_Emeritus
Posts: 18195
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 1:35 am

Re: _____'s "The Anti-Mormon Attackers"

Post by _harmony »

Isn't he saying that the article is flawed because of its bias (it does not fairly consider a reasonable, opposing point of view)?


Which pretty much describes the FARMS articles I've read.
_wenglund
_Emeritus
Posts: 4947
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 7:25 pm

Re: _____'s "The Anti-Mormon Attackers"

Post by _wenglund »

Scratch: All in all, I thought this was a very interesting article, which is easily accessible via google. It seems a good example of the smear tactics of which FAIR and FARMS are so fond.


Nothing you quoted of _____ can in any reasonable way be viewed as a "smear". As such, and ironically, you are the one doing the smearing of FAIR and FARMS, if not _____.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-
_Rollo Tomasi
_Emeritus
Posts: 4085
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 12:27 pm

Post by _Rollo Tomasi »

Runtu wrote:Oh, wait. At first I thought Pahoran was summarizing his style of apologetics.

Me, too.

Hey, _____, what's the real deal?
"Moving beyond apologist persuasion, LDS polemicists furiously (and often fraudulently) attack any non-traditional view of Mormonism. They don't mince words -- they mince the truth."

-- Mike Quinn, writing of the FARMSboys, in "Early Mormonism and the Magic World View," p. x (Rev. ed. 1998)
_Mister Scratch
_Emeritus
Posts: 5604
Joined: Sun Oct 29, 2006 8:13 pm

Re: _____'s "The Anti-Mormon Attackers&am

Post by _Mister Scratch »

wenglund wrote:
Scratch: All in all, I thought this was a very interesting article, which is easily accessible via google. It seems a good example of the smear tactics of which FAIR and FARMS are so fond.


Nothing you quoted of _____ can in any reasonable way be viewed as a "smear". As such, and ironically, you are the one doing the smearing of FAIR and FARMS, if not _____.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-


_____ is a hack and a wannabe. A thing such as a review is pretty small potatoes, and his poor attempt at logic and exegesis in this instance are remarkably lame. I suspect that what we're seeing in this article is somebody trying to make an impact---i.e., someone who wants to impress the more "bonafide" scholars at FAIR, and yet who is failing pretty miserably. Of course, there are other ways to get people's attention....
_wenglund
_Emeritus
Posts: 4947
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 7:25 pm

Re: _____'s "The Anti-Mormon Attackers&am

Post by _wenglund »

Mister Scratch wrote:_____ is a hack and a wannabe. A thing such as a review is pretty small potatoes, and his poor attempt at logic and exegesis in this instance are remarkably lame. I suspect that what we're seeing in this article is somebody trying to make an impact---i.e., someone who wants to impress the more "bonafide" scholars at FAIR, and yet who is failing pretty miserably. Of course, there are other ways to get people's attention....


Thanks for further demonstrating my point. -Wade Englund-
_Mister Scratch
_Emeritus
Posts: 5604
Joined: Sun Oct 29, 2006 8:13 pm

Re: _____'s "The Anti-Mormon Attackers&am

Post by _Mister Scratch »

wenglund wrote:Thanks for further demonstrating my point. -Wade Englund-


Oh, I see! You're holding up your mirror again. And thus, by mirroring Pahoran, you yourself have become a slobbering, bootlicking ass-kisser. Bravo, Wade! Yet another coup!
_OUT OF MY MISERY
_Emeritus
Posts: 922
Joined: Wed Oct 25, 2006 2:32 pm

Re: _____'s "The Anti-Mormon Attackers&am

Post by _OUT OF MY MISERY »

Mister Scratch wrote:Oh, I see! You're holding up your mirror again. And thus, by mirroring Pahoran, you yourself have become a slobbering, bootlicking ass-kisser. Bravo, Wade! Yet another coup!


I am laughing out loud !!!!!!!!!
When I wake up I will be hungry....but this feels so good right now aaahhhhhh........
Post Reply