Mopologetics and the Need for "Token" Gentile Scholars

[_John Larsen]

[ quote="ludwigm"]
[ quote="Enuma Elish"]... in my opinion, the FARMS Review is currently the best and most scholarly journal in all of Mormondom. ...[ /quote]
In this sentence we can find the hidden evaluation of all others.[ /quote]

That's true. Just as saying that Mount Everest is the tallest mountain on earth says something about all other earthly mountains. Just as the fact that Microsoft is the biggest software company entails that all other software companies are smaller. Just as giving the Oscar to Slumdog Millionaire as best picture of 2008 entails not giving that Oscar to any of the other 2008 films.
So?

I think You misunderstand something, due to my poor english.

My I present a real example about other mountains?

The Kékes is the tallest mountain of Hungary. This says something about our mountains.
The Kékes is 1024 m high. Our "mountains" are hills, compared to the 4000s of Europe or to the 8000s of the Himalaya.
Our "highest mountain" is only a hill, too. It is our, we like it, we like the smaller ones, there are many beautiful area around them. But they are desperately small.
And we call them mountains.

And the FARMS Review is the best and most scholarly journal in all of Mormondom.
(see more: provincial, countrified, limited, narrow-minded, parochial, small-town)

Don't worry, he got your point.

[_Jason Bourne]

Hi Jason,

Thanks for replying with some substance, rather than just cruel personal attacks.

I believe I typically avoid personal attacks though some tend to slip out at times by most posters myself included. Feel free to point out such "cruel personal attacks" if or when I make them and I will try to do better.

He is a good guy. I also think we should add "or B'hai" here, though.

Yes correct.

I think his pick for Catholicisms was more based on his view that an apostasy was not able to be substantiated.

Why does it need to be substantiated? All he has to do is read and pray.

I am not sure what your point is. Was that a sly personal attack on Waltz and his spiritual quest? Or on LDS for believing one can pray and get answers to prayers?

And unlike the phony characterization Scratch and Gad spin here most LDS apologists are gentlemen (and women) as well. They are quite fine with a person like David Waltz who may be friendly by certainly is not LDS.

Nothing could be farther from the truth. The LDS apologists, in their capacity of apologists, are not typically gentlemen.

I disagree. I see no where near the level of character assassination that you and our mentor Scratch employ. Has there been some from the apologists at times? Sure. Is is the predominant part of what they do? Not in my experience.

How many of these people have you met in real life? Talked to, dined with, had personal email exchanges with?

You should study David's behavior, and emulate it

The apologists should do this no doubt, it would save them a lot of embarrassment.

Some should sure. So should you and Scratch.

[_harmony]

Nothing could be farther from the truth. The LDS apologists, in their capacity of apologists, are not typically gentlemen.

I've never known Stephen Ricks, Noel Reynolds, Davis Bitton, Kevin Barney, John Welch, Matthew Roper, David Paulsen, James Allen, Duane Boyce, Michael Jibson, George Mitton, Gregory Smith, John Clark, Richard Lloyd Anderson, Mel Thorne, Donald Parry, John Butler, Hollis Johnson, or Brant Gardiner to be anything other than a gentleman.

This list is short a few people. Where is Bill Hamblin? Where is Russell McGregor? Where is Robert Crocket? And where are you?

And wasn't Matt Roper the guy who went with Hamblin on the famous trip to the Tanners' store, and stood by while Hamblin was rude to Mrs Tanner? Gentlemen do not stand by when other men are being rude to a woman, especially to an older woman. Perhaps I am thinking of the wrong person, but I seem to recall a story something like that.

[_Jason Bourne]

This list is short a few people. Where is Bill Hamblin? Where is Russell McGregor? Where is Robert Crocket? And where are you?

Dan Peterson IS a gentleman.

And wasn't Matt Roper the guy who went with Hamblin on the famous trip to the Tanners' store, and stood by while Hamblin was rude to Mrs Tanner?

That was Roper and Lou Midgely.

[_harmony]

This list is short a few people. Where is Bill Hamblin? Where is Russell McGregor? Where is Robert Crocket? And where are you?

Dan Peterson IS a gentleman.

Dan gives as good as he gets. If that's your definition of a gentleman, it's not mine. You are much more of a gentleman.

That was Roper and Lou Midgely.

You are right! Thanks for the correction. So... again by my definition, a gentleman does not stand by when a man is being rude to a woman, especially an older woman.

[_Jason Bourne]

Dan gives as good as he gets. If that's your definition of a gentleman, it's not mine. You are much more of a gentleman.

Dan can be strong on message boards. But from what I see it is mostly in response to aggressive posters.

But I can assure you that were you to chat with him in real life you would think him a gentleman.

[_Mister Scratch]

Nothing could be farther from the truth. The LDS apologists, in their capacity of apologists, are not typically gentlemen.

I've never known Stephen Ricks, Noel Reynolds, Davis Bitton, Kevin Barney, John Welch, Matthew Roper, David Paulsen, James Allen, Duane Boyce, Michael Jibson, George Mitton, Gregory Smith, John Clark, Richard Lloyd Anderson, Mel Thorne, Donald Parry, John Butler, Hollis Johnson, or Brant Gardiner to be anything other than a gentleman.

As Harmony rightly points out, Hamblin, Midgley, Novak, Tvedtnes, Crockett, McGregor, and others are conspicuously absent from the list. (The first four, I believe, are all skinny-l members.) Also: isn't Greg Smith the same guy who nearly got sued over accusing Bob McCue of being an abusive husband. Such a classy crew DCP hangs out with!

There's really no point in trying to converse with you, is there? True to Scratchist dogma, you can never accept my statements as honest. They've always got to be disingenuous, deceptive, concealing something. So why bother?

Don't let the door hit you on the way out, Drama Queen.

[_Daniel Peterson]

As Harmony rightly points out, Hamblin, Midgley, Novak, Tvedtnes, Crockett, McGregor, and others are conspicuously absent from the list.

They're absent because I chose to list people whose behavior as gentlemen is beyond even marginally plausible dispute.

The first four, I believe, are all skinny-l members.

Your belief is incorrect.

Also: isn't Greg Smith the same guy who nearly got sued over accusing Bob McCue of being an abusive husband.

I have no idea; I've never heard anything about such a matter.

In any event, having learned that, in the American legal system, anybody can sue anybody for anything at all, I can't say that learning that somebody was "nearly sued" is quite enough to convince me of that person's guilt.

Don't let the door hit you on the way out, Drama Queen.

Your bogus mask of subtlety has fallen off.

[_Gadianton]

Jason,

I believe I typically avoid personal attacks though some tend to slip out at times by most posters myself included. Feel free to point out such "cruel personal attacks" if or when I make them and I will try to do better.

My reference here was to others, sorry for the confusion. I this case I meant The Nehor and Gaz, who have both been very free with the personal insults.

I am not sure what your point is. Was that a sly personal attack on Waltz and his spiritual quest? Or on LDS for believing one can pray and get answers to prayers?

lol. keep your response in mind here, I have a feeling I'll need to bring it up later. It was a jab, not a "attack" at the notion that all he has to do is simplistically pray.

They are quite fine with a person like David Waltz who may be friendly by certainly is not LDS.

That was to point of this thread, of course they are fine with outsiders who are willing to toe the party line.

I disagree. I see no where near the level of character assassination that you and our mentor Scratch employ.

I deny that I "employ" character assassinations. Can you offer a single example?

Is is the predominant part of what they do? Not in my experience.

My experience differs. When I encountered apologetics, I was somewhat pro-apologist. While I considered myself agnostic/atheist, I had a real problem with most of the other "atheists" I had encountered online. I had even a worse issue with any kind of EV, especially Calvinist, which stemmed back to my missionary days. But as time went on, for many, many reasons, I began to realize that the mopologists -- on the internet at least -- have some serious issues. Over at Times and Seasons, it's a completely different crowd, but I don't know if most of them would be considered "apologists" even though they are clearly Internet Mormons.

How many of these people have you met in real life? Talked to, dined with, had personal email exchanges with?

None. I don't want to take this to "real life" beyond apologetic activity. I have no comment on careers, families, or much else unless it's relevant to apologetics. I judge internet output, and apologetic output in print. I'm sure most of the apologists are decent people in real life, and I'm not looking to judge these people, to "smear" them or spend time getting to know them as people behind the monikers and vindicate them. I'll let Jesus do that. I'm interested in the phenomena of mopologetics.

[_Mister Scratch]

Don't let the door hit you on the way out, Drama Queen.

Your bogus mask of subtlety has fallen off.

ROFL! Ah, right. Sort of like the way your bogus mask of fairness fell off long ago? Or the mask that was meant to hide the fact that you are, at heart, a vindictive character assassin who still gets off on missionary-style "bashing"? Or the mask where you claim that your apologetics actually has something to do with "faith" or "humility"?