DiscussMormonism.com

It was thinking about this the other day and was curious what others thought. Personally, I think that Mopologetics is practically sunk as far as the Book of Abraham is concerned. John Gee is like a lone voice in the wilderness as far as that is concerned. The next logical step, in my opinion, is for it to get gradually phased out of the canon. In any case, I was just wondering how others are currently interpreting the "ebb and flow" of LDS Apologetics at the moment...

Mister Scratch wrote:It was thinking about this the other day and was curious what others thought. Personally, I think that Mopologetics is practically sunk as far as the Book of Abraham is concerned. John Gee is like a lone voice in the wilderness as far as that is concerned. The next logical step, in my opinion, is for it to get gradually phased out of the canon. In any case, I was just wondering how others are currently interpreting the "ebb and flow" of LDS Apologetics at the moment...

I think the Internet Trump's the others, at least in developed countries with access to modern information exchange.

CKS

I picked Book of Abraham, though obviously the Internet is how people find out about it, so I'm not sure it's fair to pit those two against each other.

CaliforniaKid wrote:I picked Book of Abraham, though obviously the Internet is how people find out about it, so I'm not sure it's fair to pit those two against each other.

Interesting. Why did you select the Book of Abraham? Did you choose it due to the magnitude of evidence against it?

I picked suppression of church history, but I think the internet will play a huge part in this.

I picked the internet. That's how the explosion of all the other damning information will get out.

beastie wrote:I picked the internet. That's how the explosion of all the other damning information will get out.

Hmm. But, I wonder---is this, indeed can this, really be considered a "concern" of Mopologetics? I mean, there's not really anything that either the Church, the Maxwell Institute, or FARMS Diatribe can do about the Internet, right? So is the issue actually handling of, or "suppression" of other materials that's the challenge? I.e., how to Mopologetically respond to charges of such?

The greatest challenge facing LDS apologetics is finding intellectually honest, sincere, civil, ingenuous people to discuss our differences with, as opposed to the endless wading through the fever swamps of fundamentalist populist demagogery, anti and exmo hate screeds, the personal psychological traumas and inner conflicts of ex-members, like (like Martha Beck) who can't deal in a mature and honest manner with their own personal psychological, emotional, and developmental problems, and people like Scratch who have nothing substantive about anything to say about any issue, unless it is a personal smear, innuendo, or insinuation about the character, motives, or intelligence of a Maxwell Institute scholar.

Scratch is the one man National Enquirer of the anti-Mormon Internet community.

Move on, nothing to see here...

Coggins7 wrote:The greatest challenge facing LDS apologetics is finding intellectually honest, sincere, civil, ingenuous people to discuss our differences with, as opposed to the endless wading through the fever swamps of fundamentalist populist demagogery, anti and exmo hate screeds, the personal psychological traumas and inner conflicts of ex-members, like (like Martha Beck) who can't deal in a mature and honest manner with their own personal psychological, emotional, and developmental problems, and people like Scratch who have nothing substantive about anything to say about any issue, unless it is a personal smear, innuendo, or insinuation about the character, motives, or intelligence of a Maxwell Institute scholar.

Scratch is the one man National Enquirer of the anti-Mormon Internet community.

Move on, nothing to see here...

Since apologetics consists, fundamentally, of "defense," I'm afraid that "finding...people to discuss...differences with" misses the boat on this one. Surely such an erudite wordsmith as Coggins would know the basic definition of the word "apologetics."

Anyways, I personally voted for Book of Mormon historicity, as I think that this is really the only area left in which actual pseudo-scholarly "apologetics" can be done. There are still quite a few people rooting around down there, looking for evidence. And, of course, we can't forget David Stewart and the DNA issue.

Hmm. But, I wonder---is this, indeed can this, really be considered a "concern" of Mopologetics? I mean, there's not really anything that either the Church, the Maxwell Institute, or FARMS Diatribe can do about the Internet, right? So is the issue actually handling of, or "suppression" of other materials that's the challenge? I.e., how to Mopologetically respond to charges of such?

They're going to have to escalate their damage control. And it's going to have to get better.