Terryl Givens on Joseph Smith's "alleged con gimmicks"

[_Philo Sofee]

http://www.ijmsonline.org/archives/1512

He says this phrase in conjunction with polygamy, ignoring all other "con gimmicks" such as the Kirtland Banking scheme fraud, and the Book of Abraham. Apologists appear to me to generalize in order to label, which they assume exonerates them from going into details of the blatantly most obvious "con gimmicks" which are easily available on the internet. With wiley words and carefully chosen metaphors as well as rhetorical gimmicks, Givens, once again, as in all his writings, attempts to show Mormonism is unique, yet the same as other religious desires of people, and therefore is perfectly normal and a great choice of religion to make, free of gimmicks. Whee! Sorry, I just am not impressed with the post-Nibley rhetoric of Mormonisms defenders of the faith. It has always been cherry picking and rhetorical gimmicks to attempt to make Mormonism perfectly normal, than which nothing is further from the truth. There is nothing perfectly normal or obvious about truth in Mormonism, Givens notwithstanding.

[_deacon blues]

Givens may be ignorant or he may be deceptive, but his analysis of Parley Pratt’s “Mormonism Unveived” totally ignored the most astonishing part of the religious tract: That is, Pratt’s prophesy of the 2nd coming within fifty years, (if I remember correctly) and of his cursing his detractor with dumbness among other things. I can’t imagine that Givens is ignorant of this.
Thanks Philo, the Givens article was fascinating. The Charles Dickens quote may still be true of the Church today.

[_Philo Sofee]

My good pleasure. I try to keep my eye on Givens as he is one of the most adroit, clever, manipulating neo-apologist in the church these days. By his very education he is far more dangerous to the Mormon youth than most others. His suave, debonair use of clever words is titillating to the mind.... until you actually look at his assumptions. It's why I dub his book "The Crucible of Doubt," his most damning book. When you realize through reading it that everything he says about ALL OTHER SYSTEMS seriously HAS to also be used on Mormonism, but he doesn't, it gives his brainwash clever game away. It's pure hypocrisy, and the fundamental cure for it, (and I have touted this many times and will continue to do so) is the outstanding stellar work of John W. Loftus, "The Outsider Test of Faith," the singular most important book to me in seeing my own hypocrisy as an apologist, and it helped set me on the course of seeing the light I see today. NO ONE......in any religion........ can afford to ignore that mighty book of Loftus... no one.

[_mentalgymnast]

...Givens...is one of the most adroit, clever, manipulating neo-apologist in the church these days. By his very education he is far more dangerous to the Mormon youth than most others. His suave, debonair use of clever words is titillating to the mind.... until you actually look at his assumptions.

Could you be a bit more clear as to what his assumptions are? And why those assumptions are "dangerous to the Mormon youth"?

Regards,
MG

[_Philo Sofee]

Oh just please!

[_mentalgymnast]

Oh just please!

Would I be safe in making the assumption that this is in response to my inquiry? If so, would you care to answer rather than responding in what could be perceived to be a somewhat arrogant manner?

After all, I'm just asking a question that really shouldn't be that hard to answer...especially where you must have had something in mind as you made the statements that you did.

Thanks,
MG

[_Philo Sofee]

You're attempting to be coy about the problem of Givens. Read his book "Crucible of Doubt" and ask yourself, "Did he also apply this to his own religion and view?" That will be your answer to my issue and claim of abject pure hypocrisy on his part. Or else just downright stupid spiritual and religious blindness. Read his book with that question always in your mind.

[_mentalgymnast]

You're attempting to be coy about the problem of Givens. Read his book "Crucible of Doubt" and ask yourself, "Did he also apply this to his own religion and view?" That will be your answer to my issue and claim of abject pure hypocrisy on his part. Or else just downright stupid spiritual and religious blindness. Read his book with that question always in your mind.

I have the book and I've read it.

Now back to my question:

...Givens...is one of the most adroit, clever, manipulating neo-apologist in the church these days. By his very education he is far more dangerous to the Mormon youth than most others. His suave, debonair use of clever words is titillating to the mind.... until you actually look at his assumptions.

Could you be a bit more clear as to what his assumptions are? And why those assumptions are "dangerous to the Mormon youth"?

Regards,
MG

Just answer my questions dude.

Regards,
MG

[_Philo Sofee]

I did answer them.

[_I have a question]

You're attempting to be coy about the problem of Givens. Read his book "Crucible of Doubt" and ask yourself, "Did he also apply this to his own religion and view?" That will be your answer to my issue and claim of abject pure hypocrisy on his part. Or else just downright stupid spiritual and religious blindness. Read his book with that question always in your mind.

You highlight the biggest barrier to having a sensible, grown up, discussion with a Mormon.
With the exception of an extremely small (almost negligible) minority, they will only ever discuss on the basis of applying different standards. Their insistence on being one-eyed renders interaction pointless.