The Hatchet is Passed On to FAIR

[_collegeterrace]

What about the testimony bearing that finds it's way to the end of many articles posted by FARMS/MI?

FARMS has published hundreds and hundreds of articles and books. A few dozen examples of testimony-bearing (there are, you say, "many" such) would serve to start the discussion. And if you have any that specifically bear testimony of divine confirmation that, say, the Grijalva is the River Sidon, or that doubled and sealed documents form a parallel to the Book of Mormon plates, or that Canaanite religious symbolism appears in 1 Nephi 11, or that Wadi Sayq was the location of Old World Bountiful, or that the name Nephi is attested in late Egyptian papyri, or the the Maya baktun has a parallel in Nephite prophecy, that would be an especially good conversation starter.

Therein lies the downfall of Fair/Farms/MI.

Mormon members are conditioned to respond to feelings over facts.

Rodney feels genuine to his audience, especially since he uses feelings to back up his facts. I have not seen any of his presentation, but have read he almost has an evangelical flair in his stage persona.

Admit it Danny, Meldrum is more popular with the chapel Mormons than you are!

[_truth dancer]

Then there was the Jack West slides, using the same idea. Lots and lots of "evidences" were presented, some very impressive.

I used these on my mission back in the mid seventies back in Wash. D.C.

We expended alot of energy carting that dang projector and slides around. It wasn't a waste of energy and time, was it?

Amazing the things you'll cart around and show on people's walls as gospel truth when you don't know any better.

On another thread I asked this question of Dr. Peterson:

"I would imagine it might be too much to ask...but...what do you think about Meldrum's theories? Do you see him as being misguided?"

There was no answer. I'm still interested in knowing Dr. Peterson's personal opinion of what's been coming from Bro. Meldrum. Is Bro. Meldrum misguided? It's kind of a BIG DEAL if he is...isn't it?

Truth Dancer made an interesting comment on the same thread:

"A point came up in another thread concerning Meldrum vs. apologists...

Meldrum is clear that he has prayed and received inspiration from the HG concerning his work. I get the impression that he truly believes he is following divine guidance to help the church and the gospel of Christ.

Do the FAIR/FARM apologists similarly make this claim?

Seems to me, Meldrum is in line with Joseph Smith and the teachings of the early church, while the apologists believe Joseph Smith just had a "superficial understanding" of the Book of Mormon.

Is there confusion concerning the message from the HG or is Meldrum the only one who claims to have received divine inspiration from the HG concerning this topic?"

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=7323

Interesting thoughts. I came to a dead end trying to wrap my mind around a positive spin on this one.

Regards,
MG

Hey MG...

I know a few people who also used the Jack West slides... Opps! LOL!

Ancient America Speaks, Christ in America, all used by missionaries under the direction of the Mission President and the LDS church.

Who got this wrong?

Further light and knowledge just doesn't cut it in my opinion. ;-)

It comes back to the Big question... how reliable is the HG?

Assuming prophets and leaders are praying for guidance prior to making big decisions as they teach the world the one and only true gospel of Christ, how did they get it all THIS wrong?

~td~

[_LifeOnaPlate]

That was a good find, Loap, and does undercut my criticism of the "Mr." title. I'm not sure what to think about it now; I do admit, this "Mr. Ostler" thing does undercut my criticism.

From what I understand, FAIR is looking to remove the "MR." from the Meldrum intro, and change the footnote to basically say they will refer to him as "Meldrum" as per standard format etc. for what it's worth I also didn't like the "Mr." thing, and am glad it is likely to be changed. I do believe it was not done to mock, though. It was a failed attempt NOT to mock, in my opinion. So you weren't really off base in part of your criticism, as I agree the "Mr." thing could be changed for the better.

[_Sethbag]

Yeah, I still believe the "Mr." thing in this LDS context is out of place. The Blake Ostler thing doesn't change that - it looks wierd in front of his name too. But it does show that FAIR was wierd about this with an author toward whom they are positively disposed as well, undercutting the claim of malice I'd made. My current interpretation is that this was someone's bad idea to try to make themselves look impartial, or scholarly as you said before.

[_mentalgymnast]

[On another thread I asked this question of Dr. Peterson:

"I would imagine it might be too much to ask...but...what do you think about Meldrum's theories? Do you see him as being misguided?"

There was no answer. I'm still interested in knowing Dr. Peterson's personal opinion of what's been coming from Bro. Meldrum. Is Bro. Meldrum misguided? It's kind of a BIG DEAL if he is...isn't it?

I haven't paid much attention to him. From what I've seen, though, I don't think much of his theories, and I do think he's misguided.

Here's why I think it's a big deal.

http://www.allanstime.com/Spiritual/DNA ... Mormon.htm

and

http://forum.newordermormon.org/viewtop ... 697018692a

The controversy is out there and ongoing and there are good people coming down on one side or the other.

Even though the church at this time takes no official position on the location of Book of Mormon lands in ancient times, they allude or reference the LGT. That is significant, yes?

http://newsroom.LDS.org/ldsnewsroom/eng ... -of-mormon

Many good, honest, and believing members of the church would be more than likely and are going in Meldrum's direction because of the pre-existing culture/teachings of past leaders and authoritative members of the church. But according to you guys, he is misleading these folks. I think we have a difficult situation at hand unless the church as an institution takes an official stand on the location of Book of Mormon lands.

Elder Oaks in expressing some of his thoughts:

...at Brigham Young University. . . . Here I was introduced to the idea that the Book of Mormon is not a history of all of the people who have lived on the continents of North and South America in all ages of the earth. Up to that time I had assumed that it was. If that were the claim of the Book of Mormon, any piece of historical, archaeological, or linguistic evidence to the contrary would weigh in against the Book of Mormon, and those who rely exclusively on scholarship would have a promising position to argue...

...In contrast, if the Book of Mormon only purports to be an account of a few peoples who inhabited a portion of the Americas during a few millennia in the past, the burden of argument changes drastically. It is no longer a question of all versus none; it is a question of some versus none.

...on Book of Mormon historicity, may influence some members of the church that know his personal views. But I don't know that he's speaking for the church as he carefully expresses those views. I appreciate Matthew Roper's article found at:

http://farms.BYU.edu/publications/revie ... m=2&id=505

...but the disclaimer at the beginning:

The views expressed in this article are the views of the author and do not represent the position of the Maxwell Institute, Brigham Young University, or The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

...leaves everything up in the air as far as officialness is concerned...then Meldrum comes in and presents a scholarly/researched (from his point of view and that of many others) theory that dovetails with the cultural teachings of many that have been brought up thinking that there is one Cumorah vs. two, and so on.

When you have folks that claim to rely on the witness of the HG and their position parallels Joseph Fielding Smith's (Doctrines of Salvation, Vol.3, pages 232-243)...and then you have the folks at FAIR/FARMS doing their stuff and doing it without claiming the witness of the HG is involved in their presentation as it relates to the way things are/were in regards to LGT, etc., it makes things a bit dicey and confusing for many people who take the time to investigate.

My assumption is that there are members of the church in good standing and are people of faith and testimony who more than likely to choose so-called evidence which correlates with their preexisting cultural expectations/teachings than they are in choosing those viewpoints that present evidence from a purely academic/scholarly viewpoint.

I suppose the question could be asked, "Does it matter?"

I stated at the beginning of my post that this whole controversy is a "big deal".

Maybe it's not. But it sure is for many folks.

President Hinckley said something to the effect that the only evidence of the Book of Mormon that really counts as being definitive is that which is found within the covers of the book.

This may well be the case.

Regards,
MG

[_mentalgymnast]

It comes back to the Big question... how reliable is the HG?

Assuming prophets and leaders are praying for guidance prior to making big decisions as they teach the world the one and only true gospel of Christ, how did they get it all THIS wrong?

Things do get messy at times. You have to sort through it.

Regards,
MG

[_JustMe]

Daniel Peterson

Plainly, FAIR hates, fears, and despises Blake Ostler, and wishes to marginalize him and to distance him from the Church.

When I chaired the panel on Mormonism and philosophy at the most recent FAIR conference that included Jim Faulconer and Brian Birch, as well as Blake, I could sense the hostility that everyone there, and particularly the FAIR leadership, felt toward him. There was a noticeable increase in the frequency of of words containing the letter "s" used both immediately prior to and just after the panel, which, I'm sure, represented a conscious imitation of the sound of a viper -- thus indicating their opinion of him.

It was horrifying. I think they owe him an apology.

I was there also. The revulsion against Ostler was second only to that of you. None of you belong there, but you are included for comic relief. Certainly nothing you have to say is significant enough to video record, let alone write down. None of us wanted you there. Yet you keep showing up. What we need for next year's FAIR is you and Mr. Itch, er Scratch to hold a debate in person on the significance of FARMS duplicity and inability to make inroads into real scholarly peer reviewed journals. That might prove significant enough for us at FAIR to quit inviting any of you back.

[_Daniel Peterson]

FARMS has published hundreds and hundreds of articles and books. A few dozen examples of testimony-bearing (there are, you say, "many" such) would serve to start the discussion. And if you have any that specifically bear testimony of divine confirmation that, say, the Grijalva is the River Sidon, or that doubled and sealed documents form a parallel to the Book of Mormon plates, or that Canaanite religious symbolism appears in 1 Nephi 11, or that Wadi Sayq was the location of Old World Bountiful, or that the name Nephi is attested in late Egyptian papyri, or the the Maya baktun has a parallel in Nephite prophecy, that would be an especially good conversation starter.

Therein lies the downfall of Fair/Farms/MI.

Mormon members are conditioned to respond to feelings over facts.

I take it you've now withdrawn Accusation A in order to resort to contradictory Accusation B?

[_JustMe]

mentalgymnast

When you have folks that claim to rely on the witness of the HG and their position parallels Joseph Fielding Smith's (Doctrines of Salvation, Vol.3, pages 232-243)...and then you have the folks at FAIR/FARMS doing their stuff and doing it without claiming the witness of the HG is involved in their presentation as it relates to the way things are/were in regards to LGT, etc., it makes things a bit dicey and confusing for many people who take the time to investigate.

I simply don't think this is so at all. I have never felt anything getting dicey from either FAIR or FARMS presentations. At all.

[_JustMe]

mentalgymnast

Seems to me, Meldrum is in line with Joseph Smith and the teachings of the early church, while the apologists believe Joseph Smith just had a "superficial understanding" of the Book of Mormon.

I haven't noticed it in this manner at all... Joseph Smith was quite clear in the Times & Seasons after seeing the book of travels in Yucatan by Stevens and Catherwood, that the Nephite civilizations and cities were in Quirigua, and Izapa, and Palenque, among others. His knowledge, exactly as ours incidentally, was a line upon line and precept by precept. There is nothing saying that God has to do a complete data dump into anyone's mind.
And, the internal evidence of the Book of Mormon itself shows that the extent of the civilization was a few hundred miles, not covering over two entire continents. A new book out by a Dr. Lund Mesoamerica and the Book of Mormon; Is This the Place? is quite a good start for this. He shows many problems with the Great Lakes North American ideas for the Nephites, and several ways that Mesoamerica fits the Book of Mormon.