Are the Apologists 'Set Apart' by the Brethren?

[_Inconceivable]

I've never been ordained, set apart, nor even blessed by anybody, whether a General Authority or a local leader or a friend or a family member -- to be a professor at BYU or an officer with FARMS or the Maxwell Institute or an "apologist." Period. And I've never heard of anybody who has been.

I'll go with Pokatator's sig line.

[_Inconceivable]

Basta?

[_harmony]

How are we supposed to ask you, Daniel? You left.

I still have e-mail, and my e-mail address is readily available: daniel_peterson@BYU.edu.

Moreover, I haven't completely left this board. Although I won't continue to attempt conversations here any more, I still have the capacity to receive PMs from MDB -- and have received them from several people -- and I also intend to use the board, occasionally, to announce things that I think merit attention.

I'm quite accessible. Anybody could have asked.

To be quite honest, it never occurred to me to contact you that way. I so rarely use the PM function, I tend to forget it's there. And in order to email, I'd have to uncloak, so that's not going to happen.

It's good to "see" you though.

[_Gadianton]

Huh. I hadn't thought of that. If this were the case, would it give them "carte blanche" to "lie for the lord" about their calling?

Well, I don't know what terms would be best. I'm trying to avoid any appearance of engaging in hyperbole here. I will point out this, apologists since the time of Abraham have played fast and loose with their terminology.

http://www2.ida.net/graphics/shirtail/patrairc.htm

In the above link, the apologist Kerry A. Shirts discusses the infamous Biblical episode where Abraham speaks of Sarah as his sister. The apologists have, I think, learned a great deal from Father Abraham's sly use of language.

The Revelation and commandment to Abraham to claim that Sarah was his sister is related in varying--thought not contradictory--terms by the PGP (commandment by the Lord's voice) and Genesis Apocryphon (a dream interpreted by Abraham).

Let's say that an individual apologist, apologist (p) (to borrow a standard algebraic variable) were to respond when asked if he'd been called as an agent of the SCMC, that he had, since he'd been tapped by telephone. This, like Abraham's claim, wouldn't be an "outright lie" because it's true in a sense, yet skirts the intent of the question.

(a dream interpreted by Abraham). Dreams were a regular means of divine communication in the Old Testament, and so Genesis Apocryphon does not need to specify that this one came from God. Rather it leaves the interpretation to Abraham. Since the identification of Abraham and Sarah with the cedar and the palm is an established part of the tradition, this aspect of the dream presents no difficulty.

As you can see, Mister Scratch, apologist (p) can reason in severely convoluted ways that to respond in the misleading sense about SCMC activity has been ordered by God.

Still, it is left to Abraham's ingenuity to devise the "she is my sister" trick

Clearly (p) would invent the "It was just a phone calling" trick by his/her own devices.

In contrast to all other sources, the PGP specifies that God told Abraham what he was to do. He was therefore acting by commandment, and to do otherwise would have been just as much a sin as for Nephi to have failed to kill Laban.

So as you can see, if our hypothetical (p) were not to have answered equivocally, in a concealing and decieving way, then he would be in real trouble with the Lord. It would be just as bad if God commanded a murder, and the murder wasn't carried out.

[_Mister Scratch]

Let's say that an individual apologist, apologist (p) (to borrow a standard algebraic variable) were to respond when asked if he'd been called as an agent of the SCMC, that he had, since he'd been tapped by telephone. This, like Abraham's claim, wouldn't be an "outright lie" because it's true in a sense, yet skirts the intent of the question.

Ah... I think I see where you are going with this, Dr. Robbers. This is an extraordinary revelation.

(a dream interpreted by Abraham). Dreams were a regular means of divine communication in the Old Testament, and so Genesis Apocryphon does not need to specify that this one came from God. Rather it leaves the interpretation to Abraham. Since the identification of Abraham and Sarah with the cedar and the palm is an established part of the tradition, this aspect of the dream presents no difficulty.

As you can see, Mister Scratch, apologist (p) can reason in severely convoluted ways that to respond in the misleading sense about SCMC activity has been ordered by God.

Yes. In essence, this has been my point all along: Is it okay to say, "not one dime of my salary has come from apologetics" when the actual questions is, "have you been paid to do apologetics?" Likewise, is it okay to say, "I have not been set apart as a Mopologist" when the question is, "Have you been ecclesiastically sanctioned in any way whatsoever to engage in Mopologetics?"

Still, it is left to Abraham's ingenuity to devise the "she is my sister" trick

Clearly (p) would invent the "It was just a phone calling" trick by his/her own devices.

I think I see what you're saying.

Let's suppose an apologist is phoned by the Strengthening Church Members Committee. The apologist is given an order by the Committee---e.g., the apologist is told, "Look. We have a problem with a prominent member who is 'struggling' with the Church. We know about your apologetic activities, and we need you to intervene. I don't advise you to deny this request, since this is coming straight from the First Presidency. So, will you help us out? Will you speak to this wavering member?"

Is that how you, too, envision this taking place?

In contrast to all other sources, the PGP specifies that God told Abraham what he was to do. He was therefore acting by commandment, and to do otherwise would have been just as much a sin as for Nephi to have failed to kill Laban.

So as you can see, if our hypothetical (p) were not to have answered equivocally, in a concealing and decieving way, then he would be in real trouble with the Lord. It would be just as bad if God commanded a murder, and the murder wasn't carried out.

Yes. Sometimes God commands us to lie.

[_The Nehor]

The kind of reasoning Scratch and Gad use is the same as that of the rapist that reads a no as a yes.

[_TAK]

Nehor -
Are you speaking from experience ?

[_The Nehor]

Nehor -
Are you speaking from experience ?

Yep, knew a guy in High School who became a rapist. His reasoning was that people never meant what they said when I knew him. Scary guy.

[_antishock8]

Is there a doctrinal difference between being "set apart" and "called" to something via a patriarchal blessing?

Regardless, we can safely assume a faithful Mormon would pray to his god for its guidance and inspiration when it comes to "the kingdom". Whether a fellow church leader would ask the same during a laying on of hands is a different matter.

I would be curious to know if Mr. Peterson ever had a fellow priesthood leader, during the course of laying his hands on his head, ask their god to inspire/guide/help Mr. Peterson in the course of his duties that involve FARMS or the MI in some way, shape, or form.

[_TAK]

Nehor -
Are you speaking from experience ?

Yep, knew a guy in High School who became a rapist. His reasoning was that people never meant what they said when I knew him. Scary guy.

Fascinating..
Your vast experience of a "guy in High School" allows you to compare Scratch and Gad to rapists..

That cog dis of yours must be working at warp speed..