DiscussMormonism.com

Since such amateur polemics and biased silliness about the FARMS Review are being circulated on these boards, I am seriously interested in seeing how one handles Blake Ostler's analysis of the Creation Ex Nihilo doctrine here:
http://farms.BYU.edu/publications/revie ... m=2&id=590

I just read it tonight. I shall withhold my own thinking and feelings so I can see such bright and brilliant analysis of say, oh a Gadianton or a Scartch or even a Joey or Antishock can show how flimsy, stupid, unscholarly, biased, and dismal performance that Ostler demonstrates.

Why would Scratch or Gadianton care about creatio ex nihilo, which is a Protestant/Catholic (as opposed to an atheist) conception? Just curious.

I was wondering the same thing. Maybe take it to CARM?

There are a few Christian critics here, but not very many.

How about DCPs essay on atheists and morality? One of his editor's introductions, I believe. Can't remember the title.

I bet a lot of people here would be game for that one.

CK and gramps,

He states why in the OP. This thread is an obvious response to previous threads. Sheesh.

JustMe wrote:Since such amateur polemics and biased silliness about the FARMS Review are being circulated on these boards, I am seriously interested in seeing how one handles Blake Ostler's analysis of the Creation Ex Nihilo doctrine here:
http://farms.BYU.edu/publications/revie ... m=2&id=590

I just read it tonight. I shall withhold my own thinking and feelings so I can see such bright and brilliant analysis of say, oh a Gadianton or a Scartch or even a Joey or Antishock can show how flimsy, stupid, unscholarly, biased, and dismal performance that Ostler demonstrates.

In case you haven't noticed, JM, Gad and Scratch always put their own thoughts about whatever subject they start a thread about , out there first, so people have something to work from.

They say what they like and what they don't, and why.

So... let's see what you have to say, and why.

Harmony

In case you haven't noticed, JM, Gad and Scratch always put their own thoughts about whatever subject they start a thread about , out there first, so people have something to work from.

They say what they like and what they don't, and why.

So... let's see what you have to say, and why.

My entire point of bring this up is to see what they can do with the serious and significant, instead of picking on the weakest reviews. There are varying qualities of relivews in *any* review publication. Picking the weakest is hardly methodologically significant. Show me you can engage, I already understand you can mock. Take on Ostler or Christensen or someone who is serious.

gramps wrote:
How about DCPs essay on atheists and morality? One of his editor's introductions, I believe. Can't remember the title.

The review of God is not Great .

Be careful. Absolutely do not operate heavy machinery while reading that review.

CaliforniaKid wrote:Why would Scratch or Gadianton care about creatio ex nihilo, which is a Protestant/Catholic (as opposed to an atheist) conception? Just curious.

Well, Scratch I think is more of a TBM with an interest in "perfecting the saints". I don't think he has an interested in trumpeting his personal religious beliefs, drawing attention from critics, and then spinning up a secretive listserve for the purpose of intelligence and launching sneak attacks.

You are correct that as an atheist, I do not really care about "creatio ex nihlo". Further, Blake is a good guy. I am pleased that the FROB has included him, and perhaps he will be a good influence on them. I hope he does not fall prey to the environment of hatred that surrounds him in apologetics.

Gadianton wrote:I hope he does not fall prey to the environment of hatred that surrounds him in apologetics.

Fortunately, Blake doesn't seem to have become a target of hatred to the extent that some of the rest of us have.

But let me just point out, in the spirit of Scartchianism, that Blake's essay on creation ex nihilo is little more than non-step name-calling and ad hominem viciousness, typical of the FARMS Review's on-going campaign of slander, spin, and defamation, and a fundamentally dishonest Mopologetic undertaking that reveals him to be a fraud, a pseudoscholar, and a gossip-mongering degenerate.

There. I hope I've covered the most important bases.

Gadianton wrote:Well, Scratch I think is more of a TBM with an interest in "perfecting the saints". I don't think he has an interested in trumpeting his personal religious beliefs, drawing attention from critics, and then spinning up a secretive listserve for the purpose of intelligence and launching sneak attacks.

ROTFL.

Priceless.

Gad is da man.

Daniel Peterson wrote:Fortunately, Blake doesn't seem to have become a target of hatred to the extent that some of the rest of us have.

It would be hard to hate on the likes of an Ostler. In my mind, he and Kevin Barkey are in a mopologetic category all their own. Are they always right? No. Are they right a lot of the time? Yes. Are they irenic, honest, careful and professional? Almost to a fault.

(Uh oh; I better be careful. I hear "irenic" is something of an insult in these here parts...)