DiscussMormonism.com

I made a poll about some of the most awesome people I know: Mormon Apologists. They are unique in that they rarely communicate uncertainty or remorse. They will call you out on your use of faulty logic while defending the idea that an individual can translate golden plates by reading words off of a magical rock that has been placed in a hat. They will claim that the translated book is a historical account, even the part about the guy (Ammon) that cut off a bunch of arms with his non-steel sword and the part about the Jaredite submarines that were lit with glowing rocks that were touched by the finger of Jesus. They will find a way to justify anything in Mormonism because they know that Mormonism is true. They are rad. Vote in my poll, please.




***************************************

I don't believe that Mormons really believe all of Mormonism. Some of them believe very little of it (I'm talking real life as well). When it comes to things like "strange ships/submarines and shining stones" (to quote a Nibley phrase), they must really be thinking that Superman might be true as well.

I believe the prime factor in Mormon belief is based on Moroni 10. That "burning in the bosom" is what makes tolerating absurdity easier. (And to anticipate Will's obvious coming question, a "burning in the bosom" could mean anything from heartburn to a mystical experience.)

Enter the apologist: He/she takes the absurdities seriously. Floating Jaredite toilets crossed the seas, and how can I forget to add - Michael Coe now accepts that!!! The apologist is someone who keeps dancing and celebrating long after others have left the party, and the lights have gone out. He's convinced the party is still on, and he's wondering why everyone has left. The apologist, like the Elder watchman, analyses the magical powers in a coke bottle, and becomes convinced there's really something to this.

The Gods Must Be Crazy. (It's a bit long, but funny.)

I voted that "I was wrong" are the hardest words for an apologst to utter, in fact, impossible. Because to do so would mean the end of faith, and a realignment of one's personal universe.

I'm quite certain I've used each of those, or a form thereof, in apologetic debate. Few and far between for sure, but that's a function of usually having one's ducks in a row.

I'm glad I could choose all three because I couldn't decide on just one.

"I don't know" is actually very common in my experience. "I don't know why God segregated His own Church." "I don't know why Native American DNA looks Asiatic, but I believe that Native Americans are Near Eastern in origin anyway."

Some Schmo wrote:I'm glad I could choose all three because I couldn't decide on just one.

they are one in purpose.

karl61 wrote:

Some Schmo wrote:I'm glad I could choose all three because I couldn't decide on just one.

they are one in purpose.

HA!

I'm aware of the source of your frustration, SK. And, I share it. They're quite rude at times, amateur Mormon apologists.

KA

JohnStuartMill wrote:"I don't know" is actually very common ...

Do You insinuate GBH ?

I chose "I was wrong" because many people of whom definite answers are expected will naturally find it hard to give up the very thing that defines their raison d'etre.

I think you should have included.. Thus saith the Lord.

Its tough to dance around that.