The Eye of Ra Decimates The Fischers

[_Trevor]

And if all we did was uncritically accept anything whatsoever written by our own, you critics would see unscholarly, noncritical thinking mere brainwash and pablum for faith.

You are right there.

[_Trevor]

Or at least one that fits the FARMS mold?

Every group tends to develop its own sense of the limits of acceptable and ideal discourse, even one composed of supposedly independent researchers and writers.

The guide tries to introduce the Book of Mormon as the fulfillment of Old Testament prophecy and then use it to teach the gospel. Though this may have been the Church's program in times past, it is not the approach used now.

This may be true, and I am not certain what difference it makes. It is an observation, and it will only be a negative criticism in the eyes of those that see this take on the Book of Mormon to be a bad thing.

Unfortunately, the Fischers' system often introduces meat before milk.

This is a complicated issue. Personally, I think the Church's obsession with milk before meat is excessive. When serving as a missionary, I ran across a number of investigators who clearly were ready for meat. In general, however, it is a fair point that a book aimed at those who know very little about a subject would be better served by starting with basics. I don't see the big deal.

[_Tom]

I suppose it's like the USA invading the Cayman Islands

Ray, brilliant. Seriously, that's exactly what a lot of these "reviews" are like. You put it better than I did, but I tried on another thread to sort of make the point about how apologists have supported criticisms of the likes of Sagan for blasting "sitting ducks". But then they turn around and publish their top scholars taking a sledge hammer to their own countrymen's beliefs which are put forth straightforward without detailed scholarly consideration -- as if Jesus would expect that.

Part of the reason for this is summed up by Tvedtness in a later FARMS article explaining his anger over Brenton Y. If they slaughter their own, they can then claim they are "objective." But only they see it that way, the rest of us just see a bunch of schoolyard bullies

I am reminded of a gardening metaphor (see "Introduction," RBBM 1 [1989], and "Doubting the Doubters," FROB 8/2 [1996]).

A small spade or weed fork would have done the job here. I suspect, though, that the Eye of Ra cannot resist an opportunity to do some real damage with the 850D LC Excavator.

[_The Nehor]

It's an inconvenient detail that most prophets have been chapel Mormons, but that doesn't change the fact that apologists are smart enough to recognize the threat.

What threat? How are they a threat? They might no longer believe the words of Nibley, Peterson, and others? A good number have no idea who they even are and fewer have read them. There's no conflict of interest. Those interested in apologetics naturally gravitate towards reading their stuff. Those that don't are hardly a threat.

[_JustMe]

TAK

Gees disparagements were much more about style than content..
Beyond that Fischers work is a fairly inconsequential piece and to take the time to ridicule shows how petty and small Gee must be.

Ah such wonderful uninformed subjectivity about Gee. Ya just gotta love it....

[_TAK]

TAK

Gees disparagements were much more about style than content..
Beyond that Fischers work is a fairly inconsequential piece and to take the time to ridicule shows how petty and small Gee must be.

Ah such wonderful uninformed subjectivity about Gee. Ya just gotta love it....

Thank you for generous platitudes ..

[_beastie]

What threat? How are they a threat? They might no longer believe the words of Nibley, Peterson, and others? A good number have no idea who they even are and fewer have read them. There's no conflict of interest. Those interested in apologetics naturally gravitate towards reading their stuff. Those that don't are hardly a threat.

Chapel Mormons are at higher risk of losing faith when they learn about the "other" church history and issues.

[_JustMe]

Gees disparagements were much more about style than content..
Beyond that Fischers work is a fairly inconsequential piece and to take the time to ridicule shows how petty and small Gee must be.

Ah such wonderful uninformed subjectivity about Gee. Ya just gotta love it....

Thank you for generous platitudes ..

[/quote]

No problem, just followin yer lead.......

[_JustMe]

And if all we did was uncritically accept anything whatsoever written by our own, you critics would see unscholarly, noncritical thinking mere brainwash and pablum for faith

Trevor

You are right there.

Dang rights..... I have seen it almost ad infinitum. We are either accused of being braindead or brainwashed. The point is we inbreed by only quoting other LDS in supportive ways and faith promoting pablum and fluff. FARMS Review destroys this tissue of silliness. But now it takes it in the teeth for actually using brains. Sheesh.

[_Trevor]

Dang rights..... I have seen it almost ad infinitum. We are either accused of being braindead or brainwashed. The point is we inbreed by only quoting other LDS in supportive ways and faith promoting pablum and fluff. FARMS Review destroys this tissue of silliness. But now it takes it in the teeth for actually using brains. Sheesh.

I guess it isn't easy to satisfy people who simply do not like what you stand for.