The Hatchet is Passed On to FAIR

[_LifeOnaPlate]

Loap, with all due respect, that's bullsh**. Sorry, but this is pretty obvious.

The appearance of a bodyslam was all too obvious if they actually considered the pros and cons of using "Mr.", and the perported advantage of the use of "Mr." supporting the scholarliness of the article could not possibly have outweighed the perceived slam in the context of LDS culture.

Not only that, but part of their critique included judgment calls on the religious appropriateness of Meldrum's referencing his own revelations, which pretty conclusively removes the critique from the realm of scholarship and into the realm of religious squabble, submarining the whole justification you just asserted.

I ask again: when have you ever seen two factions of LDS apologists refer to the other as "Mr." rather than "Brother", if a title was used at all, in a discussion about LDS belief and religion?

I'll see what I can find out. From what I have seen, most of the people at FAIR have been very concerned about the Meldrum thing, and it has been difficult overall to negotiate. Meldrum himself is not easy to work with, to say the least. Keep in mind that there are people at FAIR who favor different geography theories of the Book of Mormon. Meldrum has introduced his almost-testimony into the discussion. FAIR has approached that aspect from the standpoint that Meldrum goes further than revelation would dictate, in the past, or coming from Meldrum himself rather than through what believing members would see as proper channels. Not that truth only comes from those channels, but that truth announced in behalf of the Church does. If you have a specific problem with the review I would prefer from now on that you cite specific passages you find inappropriate. Generalizing does not help me see where you are getting your perceptions from.

And by the way, the "all due respect" phrase is completely meaningless. :) And I say that, of course, with "all due respect."

[_Gadianton]

I looked through all the issues. It seems more common in the early issues (v. 1-5), but I found such reviews here and there in more recent volumes.

Do you think they took some heat, PR or leadership wise for it?

[_LifeOnaPlate]

Lastly, I am not aware of anything FAIR has written that questions Meldrum's loyalty to the Church. That would be a pretty cheap tactic that should not be stooped to.

LoP,

Basically getting in someone's face and saying, "You're an idiot, but I don't question your loyalty to the church" isn't any nicer or more professional. But I don't agree with what you say in the first place. Meldrum's loyalty has been questioned in a number of accusations and gossip debates over whether he is disobeying supposed requests of church leaders to not use church facilities for his presentation. Something that is between him, his leaders, and the Lord, not the gossipers of FAIR/MAD.

And Seth is right, they chose the hatchet. If you want to see the difference between a hatchet job and a curteous and professional scholarly disagreement, please see Volume 1 of the FROB and contrast Hoskisson's review with Tvedtness's.

I'm not interested in debating your conspiracy theories, and I'm not interested in getting tangled with your non-productive accusations. Give me something specific and concrete or consider me not willing to discuss the matter with you. Thanks.

[_Gadianton]

You know exactly what I'm talking about LoP, and you know as well do if I go over to FAIR/MAD and copy and paste the quotes discussing whether or not Meldrum is following supposed directions he was given not to use church facilities, that it won't matter for you, you'll just make something else up off the top of your head.

You apparently are interested in debating, because you are writing multiple sentence responses here, it's just your interest all of a sudden is over when you've painted yourself into a corner.

[_Tom]

I looked through all the issues. It seems more common in the early issues (v. 1-5), but I found such reviews here and there in more recent volumes.

Do you think they took some heat, PR or leadership wise for it?

I cannot say. Only Prof. Peterson can explain the history of that strange and wonderful publication.

[_Alter Idem]

What I see is a "turf war". I think the scholars are trying to remove the influence the self-taught, non-academics types like Meldrum, Yorgason and others have on the LDS population, that challenge the scholar positions.

While they may think their actions, are well-intentioned, and I'm certain they have a long list of reasons for going after these people, I am skeptical that this doesn't come down to plain pride and competition.

It seems that FAIR/FARMS have been quite agressive in attacking these others they are practically labeling "snake oil salesmen" and working to discredit them. While I don't agree with Meldrum' opinions, I believe he has as much right as the scholars to push his theories--not in church meetings, but he has the right to write books and sell DVDs, as much as the academics have to write their books and make their documentaries.

I say, let the members decide who makes a better case for their theories. And I say that LDS should be very careful about contending with other LDS. If they want to point out the problems with Meldrum's research, then do it carefully, without questioning the man's loyalty to the church--a cheap tactic that should not be stooped to.

I should add that anyone putting out work based on a "scholarly" approach should be willing to allow that material to be looked at and critiqued. In turn, any author can critique the work of those critiquing them, as well. The best approach would be one in which insult or offense is avoided as much as possible, but reviewing books and presentations is the right of anyone who actually reads them.

Lastly, I am not aware of anything FAIR has written that questions Meldrum's loyalty to the Church. That would be a pretty cheap tactic that should not be stooped to.

They have the right to critique, yes. But my complaint is with how it has been done. I stated my concerns at the very beginning when I first read comments from FAIR regarding Meldrum's DVD and presentation. I don't think LDS should attack other LDS.

I think they questioned his loyalty to the church in this piece linked below and I thought it was overly harsh in accusations--especially attacking him for things he wrote in an email(which I don't believe they ever shared publicly--we got their version of it)--from accusing him of setting himself above the current leaders to a nitpicky snipe at his sharing his patriarchal blessing(I have heard GA's in Gen Conf allude to their blessings and no one complains!). They even accused him of being a "sign seeker" and used Joseph F. Smith's words to call him an "imposter"...without actually saying it. Ungentlemanly, if you ask me. I think it was all done to damage and discredit him--not just to correct him.

see here:

http://www.fairlds.org/Book_of_Mormon/MisguidedF.html


Once again, I have not seen his DVD or his presentation, but I seriously question that his presentation is worthy of such attacks as what we have seen. If his presentation or teachings so undermine current leaders and he truly sets himself up as receiving revelation for the church, then I would expect his SP to be holding a court on him. Since this is not the case, I can only surmise that some LDS scholars have blown this out of proportion because they don't like some nobody with no credentials and outside of their circle of academia dabbling in their area of expertise.
If his ideas are so ridiculous and without merit, I don't see why they should feel so threatened by them.

[_Ray A]

http://www.fairlds.org/Book_of_Mormon/MisguidedF.html

# The DVD plants erroneous information, concepts, and expectations in the minds of viewers, making them easier targets for hostile critics when these errors are inevitably trumpeted by enemies of the Church.

I could have sworn that Gad and others are actually supporting Meldrum, and even emailing him encouragement.

That has to bring a smile.

[_Gadianton]

Ray,

It brings a smile to me for sure. And I know what they must be thinking. you've known me a long time though, and no doubt you've seen me weigh in on Book of Mormon matters. But how often?

My interest in Book of Mormon geography has only to do with my interest in fascinating Internet/Chapel distinction. Doubts about the Book of Mormon never registered during the trials of faith that led to my apostasy.

[_Ray A]

It brings a smile to me for sure. And I know what they must be thinking. you've known me a long time though, and no doubt you've seen me weigh in on Book of Mormon matters. But how often?

My interest in Book of Mormon geography has only to do with my interest in fascinating Internet/Chapel distinction. Doubts about the Book of Mormon never registered during the trials of faith that led to my apostasy.

I know exactly why you're "supporting" Meldrum, Gad. For the same reason many others "support" Paul Osborne. I was being a bit flippant in my previous post.

[_Runtu]

Slightly off-topic, but Alter Idem, I am honored to be in your signature line. I had forgotten about that memorable exchange with Hammer. Hilarious.