Sethbag wrote:Charity, I'm not sure what we're arguing about, but I'll do my best to hold up my end of it. ;-) You implied that the believer's response to FPRs is to smile politely while recognizing that they were incorrect, and that the alternative to this, as you believe Mr. Scratch meant, was to wallow in misery thinking everyone is lying or out to deceive.
I would hope not. But that is what I see. All this talk about how the General Authorities allow disinformation sure sounds the claim of deception like deception.I
don't think it's a fair characterization to assume that the critic's attitude is necessarily that the church is out to lie and deceive. There is room in the critics' tent for people like myself who recognize that the church leaders actually believe what they say, and that they're just wrong about it. I believe Joseph Smith knew he was making it up as he went along, but his successors actually believed it all. I believe GBH has a firm testimony that the church is true. He's wrong, though.
I can accept that as a valid point of view of a critic who is not motivated by bitternes and a need to justify his/her lack of belief.
I agree with the notion that FARMS is more about people knowing that "smart people" have looked into things, and still believe it's true, than it is about actually finding real proof, and real evidence, for the church's claims.
This I do not agree with you on. I frankly do not know how to explain the rejection of the studies done by FARMS people which tend to support the Book of Mormon. All I can think (and let me say I realize this is very much paradigm driven) is that their minds are made up and they don't want to hear anything contrary to their beliefs.
The thing is, I don't think DCP and the others are lying.
Thank for that. I think you are in a small company of critics, however.
I don't see liars behind every bush. I see people who actually believe the church is true, and actually believe that the Book of Mormon will someday be vindicated, who assume that there must be a way to explain all the problematic things, etc. So they scurry away trying to do these things, and the LDS faithful who even know FARMS exist look to them and think hey, some smart people are working on all of these questions, and they still believe in the church, so there must be a good reason for it.
And I am one who looks at what they produce and accept. But these evidences do not not convince me. I am already convinced by a high power.
I don't see liars behind every bush. What I see is the blind leading the blind. I see deceived people (deceived, ultimately, by Joseph Smith) leading other people to join in and support the deception, but they don't think it's deception, they think it's revelation and faith and all the rest.
Some may think. Some of us know.
Look at the Book of Abraham apologetics. The Book of Abraham is so transparently and obvious fraudulent that it's not even funny. Joseph Smith undoubtedly deceived his followers when he held it up to his followers as the translation from the ancient Egyptian papyrus in his possession of a real story that had been penned by Abraham. This cannot be doubted by anyone except the true believers who need for the book to be true. So now we have Book of Abraham apologetics attempting to legitimize defense of an obvious fraud. They are supporting the continuation of a deception, but they do it believing they are supporting the defense of something that's true. They're wrong, though. You can Nibley up all the parallels you want, but Joseph Smith still invented the Book of Abraham and passed it off as a true translation.
I don't believe the Book of Abraham was a "translation" any more than the Book of Moses was. If you can't read the correspondences with ancient Abrahamic literature and wonder at the way in which Joseph Smith was able to produce the same principles, then I wonder if you aren't the blind. But we can disagree on this without animosity.
Disinformation is disinformation even when it's given with belief.
I would like you to show me some disinformation. Facts, please.
If the GAs know that the faith promoting rumors are simply false, they ought to do more to inform members of that fact, and to take a firmer, more quotable stand against such false rumors being circulated by sunday school teachers, seminary teachers, fireside speakers, and whatnot. There is undeniably a tradition of faith promoting rumors in the LDS church, and the GAs seem to do essentially nothing at all to discourage it.
Except speak against it as Elder Packer has done specificially. I don't think it is the misison or purpose of the General Authorities to try to figure out what is being mistakenly thought or taught by every single member. We are told to study the scriptures and teach the doctrine. Joseph said he taught the people correct principles and let them govern themselves. The General Authorities aren't called to be prophets, seers and micromanagers.
To an extent this has even been institutionalized, as in the earlier Book of Mormon edition cited earlier in this thread, containing photos of Mesoamerican ruins and such with an implication that these were Book of Mormon sites. I remember quite a few years back watching a film produced by the church about Book of Mormon archeology, showing ruins containing what were claimed to be LDS-style baptismal fonts, stone boxes, and the like, all in the service of "proving" that the Book of Mormon is archeologically sound.
I wouldn't disagree with showing that such things existed in the right time and place without pointing to Chichen Itza and saying, "This is Zarahemla."
What I disagree with is that the LDS church leadership are actually setting out to lie and deceive. I believe that the LDS leadership truly believe in the church, and believe it's true, and believe that what they do is for the best, and that protecting peoples' testimonies is of vital importance for their salvation and so forth. That doesn't stop them from being wrong, however, and I'm now convinced that they are in fact wrong.
And this makes us on different sides of the fence, but we don't have to be enemies. I appreciate your candor and civility.