DiscussMormonism.com

I've noticed a surge in Mormon apologists on TikTok recently, perhaps in response to the prevalence of so-called anti-Mormon content. However, many of these new apologists rely on outdated arguments. Take 'Latter Day Logic,' for instance. He recently revived the claim that the absence of a Book of Abraham verse in accessible papyrus is because the original roll was over 40 feet long. This argument was debunked years ago, yet this new generation of TikTokers is trying to resurrect these old debunked arguments and breathe life into these fallacies.

In another post, 'Latter Day Logic' threw out the claim that church critics attack the Book of Mormon because of its use of 'Alma' as a male name when everyone knows that 'Alma' is a female name. He then knocked down this straw man by pointing to the discovery of an ancient Middle Eastern headstone where the name 'Alma' is ascribed to the male deceased. He fails to mention or perhaps is ignorant of the fact that 'Alma' was a common male name in Joseph Smith's era. His posts are full of these easy-to-knock-down straw man fallacies.

Furthermore, another common straw man argument used by LDS apologists is the portrayal of critics as uninformed or biased. They often suggest that critics are simply ignorant of historical context or motivated by anti-religious sentiment. For instance, 'ApologistPro' recently dismissed criticisms of Joseph Smith's polygamous marriages as stemming from a lack of understanding of the cultural norms of 19th-century America. However, this overlooks legitimate concerns about coercion and abuse in some of these relationships.

Additionally, many LDS apologists employ the tactic of shifting the burden of proof onto their critics. Instead of providing evidence for their own claims, they demand exhaustive evidence from skeptics. For example, 'FaithDefender' often challenges critics of the Book of Mormon when we seek archaeological evidence for claimed Book of Mormon locations, such as asking for evidence of claims events at said locations such as evidence of bones or war artifacts in and around Cumorah in upstate in New York, while conveniently holding to his claim of it still being an actual ancient Book of Mormon location despite non-existing evidence. This tactic creates a false sense of parity in the debate and distracts from the need for rigorous scrutiny of LDS historical claims."

While I welcome their attempt at defending Mormonism, if they want to gain traction they best become better informed.

Craig Paxton wrote: ↑

Tue Jun 04, 2024 10:44 pm

Furthermore, another common straw man argument used by LDS apologists is the portrayal of critics as uninformed or biased. They often suggest that critics are simply ignorant of historical context or motivated by anti-religious sentiment. For instance, 'ApologistPro' recently dismissed criticisms of Joseph Smith's polygamous marriages as stemming from a lack of understanding of the cultural norms of 19th-century America. However, this overlooks legitimate concerns about coercion and abuse in some of these relationships.

Additionally, many LDS apologists employ the tactic of shifting the burden of proof onto their critics. Instead of providing evidence for their own claims, they demand exhaustive evidence from skeptics. For example, 'FaithDefender' often challenges critics of the Book of Mormon to provide archaeological evidence for every place mentioned in the text, while conveniently ignoring the lack of such evidence for many key locations. This tactic creates a false sense of parity in the debate and distracts from the need for rigorous scrutiny of LDS historical claims."
Get smarter responses, upload files and images, and more.

While I welcome their attempt at defending Mormonism, if they want to gain traction they best become better informed.

Craig, did you misspeak? How or why would critics present archaeological evidence for places that do not exist? Or what places is he speaking of? Oh perhaps that is a round about way of saying maybe the Book of Mormon took place somewhere archaeology has not looked yet. Perhaps a small isolated area not influencing the larger regions.

I suppose the idea of hiding polygamy would have been influenced by 19th century attitudes.

Craig Paxton wrote: ↑

Tue Jun 04, 2024 10:44 pm

I've noticed a surge in Mormon apologists on TikTok recently, perhaps in response to the prevalence of so-called anti-Mormon content. However, many of these new apologists rely on outdated arguments. Take 'Latter Day Logic,' for instance. He recently revived the claim that the absence of a Book of Abraham verse in accessible papyrus is because the original roll was over 40 feet long. This argument was debunked years ago, yet this new generation of TikTokers is trying to resurrect these old debunked arguments and breathe life into these fallacies.

In another post, 'Latter Day Logic' threw out the claim that church critics attack the Book of Mormon because of its use of 'Alma' as a male name when everyone knows that 'Alma' is a female name. He then knocked down this straw man by pointing to the discovery of an ancient Middle Eastern headstone where the name 'Alma' is ascribed to the male deceased. He fails to mention or perhaps is ignorant of the fact that 'Alma' was a common male name in Joseph Smith's era. His posts are full of these easy-to-knock-down straw man fallacies.

Furthermore, another common straw man argument used by LDS apologists is the portrayal of critics as uninformed or biased. They often suggest that critics are simply ignorant of historical context or motivated by anti-religious sentiment. For instance, 'ApologistPro' recently dismissed criticisms of Joseph Smith's polygamous marriages as stemming from a lack of understanding of the cultural norms of 19th-century America. However, this overlooks legitimate concerns about coercion and abuse in some of these relationships.

Additionally, many LDS apologists employ the tactic of shifting the burden of proof onto their critics. Instead of providing evidence for their own claims, they demand exhaustive evidence from skeptics. For example, 'FaithDefender' often challenges critics of the Book of Mormon to provide archaeological evidence for every place mentioned in the text, while conveniently ignoring the lack of such evidence for many key locations. This tactic creates a false sense of parity in the debate and distracts from the need for rigorous scrutiny of LDS historical claims."
Get smarter responses, upload files and images, and more.

While I welcome their attempt at defending Mormonism, if they want to gain traction they best become better informed.

This is actually helpful for the rest of us. This cannot stand in the long run. The more they continue on with outdated information, the more who will leave in time as they mature...

I’ve noticed the recent increase of LDS apologists on TikTok too. I have to wonder if it’s their lame attempt to try to catch the McClellan wave?

If so, it’s not working. Check out the subscribers Latter Day Logic, Interpreter Foundation and Scripture Central have compared to McClellan.

Latter Day Logic:
https://www.tiktok.com/@latterdaylogic

Dan McClellan:
https://www.tiktok.com/@maklelan

Interpreter Foundation:
https://www.tiktok.com/@interpreterfoundation

Scripture Central:
https://www.tiktok.com/@scripture.central

The solution to pollution is dilution.

Flood the market with pro-LDS propaganda, doesn’t matter how low quality the videos are.

Everybody Wang Chung wrote: ↑

Wed Jun 05, 2024 2:13 am

Scripture Central:
https://www.tiktok.com/@scripture.central

Oh gag I forgot about Scripture Central, she doesn’t even recognize that the church she is apologizing for is so distant from the pre internet Mormon church as to be unrecognizable.

She would justify Nelson calling for all members to begin wearing a Roma Tomato on their heads if it came from his mouth. She has abandoned all logic and skepticism.

Everybody Wang Chung wrote: ↑

Wed Jun 05, 2024 2:13 am

I’ve noticed the recent increase of LDS apologists on TikTok too. I have to wonder if it’s their lame attempt to try to catch the McClellan wave?

If so, it’s not working. Check out the subscribers Latter Day Logic, Interpreter Foundation and Scripture Central have compared to McClellan.

Latter Day Logic:
https://www.tiktok.com/@latterdaylogic

Dan McClellan:
https://www.tiktok.com/@maklelan

Interpreter Foundation:
https://www.tiktok.com/@interpreterfoundation

Scripture Central:
https://www.tiktok.com/@scripture.central

One of my local friends, never-Mo and atheist, brought Dan up out of the blue as an awesome TikToker. I had to laugh at the cool circumstance of having known Dan through this board for ages, and here he is a genuine phenomenon!

drumdude wrote: ↑

Wed Jun 05, 2024 2:24 am

Flood the market with pro-LDS propaganda, doesn’t matter how low-quality the videos are.

Church apologists have done this with the written word for decades. This will eventually garner the Church with the reputation of big fibbers.

Moksha wrote: ↑

Fri Jun 07, 2024 6:28 am

drumdude wrote: ↑

Wed Jun 05, 2024 2:24 am

Flood the market with pro-LDS propaganda, doesn’t matter how low-quality the videos are.

Church apologists have done this with the written word for decades. This will eventually garner the Church with the reputation of big fibbers.

Eventually?

Moksha wrote: ↑

Fri Jun 07, 2024 6:28 am

drumdude wrote: ↑

Wed Jun 05, 2024 2:24 am

Flood the market with pro-LDS propaganda, doesn’t matter how low-quality the videos are.

Church apologists have done this with the written word for decades. This will eventually garner the Church with the reputation of big fibbers.

Fibbers with fabulous fibers flowing finely following fat deposits on flabby buttocks.