How many posters on MD were once apologists?

[_sock puppet]

Returning to the OP, I'd like to give it a twist:

How many currently active LDS apologists (as opposed to simply active LDS) were once critics who used to post on Mormon Discussions?

I mean, I'd like to know if I am running a significant chance of losing 10% of my gross income by hanging around here.

Don Bradley is a noteworthy defector from the critics' camp.

Professor, your careful wording of that sentence about Don is truly striking. You did not say he'd joined the ranks of the apologists, just that he'd defected from the critics.

[_wenglund]

To me, it makes sense that some former apologists would lose faith in the restored gospel because much, if not all of LDS apologetic involves matters that aren't very relevant, though quite distracting, to growth in faith.

Also, the mode of interactions between apologists and critic/doubters (i.e. war of words), and somewhat unavoidably the heavy reliance on the human mind and emotion, also doesn't lend itself very well to growth in faith.

In short, if an apologist's mind and heart become intensely distracted by spiritual irrelevancies, and become heavily reliant on the "arm of flesh" mentioned earlier in the thread, particularly if often engaged in rancorous and counterproductive contention, it shouldn't come as a surprise that it would have a deleterious affect on their faith--and this in a way that they don't even realize the real cause and effect.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[_MrStakhanovite]

Science is the best method for discovering truth.

Explain to me how science discovers mathematical truths.

But science, unlike religion, is not afraid to abandon errors when they're made known.

This is patently false, I can think of two errors right off the top of my head that have been abandoned; the Comma Johanneum and the Donation of Constantine.

[_MrStakhanovite]

Another person who doesn't understand what the word "evidence" means.

Those three arguments can constitute as evidence of a Creator, and two of those arguments can't be used as evidence for invisible fairies. Deal with those arguments or concede Mile's point.

[_Aristotle Smith]

But science, unlike religion, is not afraid to abandon errors when they're made known.

This is patently false, I can think of two errors right off the top of my head that have been abandoned; the Comma Johanneum and the Donation of Constantine.

If funding is on the line, scientists are pretty hesitant to abandon their errors. Plus, the statement shows a remarkable ignorance about philosophy of science and how scientists actually operate. I mean as one small example, take Kuhn. A large part of his argument hinges on the argument that scientists are NOT likely to abandon their errors.

[_Buffalo]

This is patently false, I can think of two errors right off the top of my head that have been abandoned; the Comma Johanneum and the Donation of Constantine.

The Comma Johanneum is used ALL the time by Christians. Scholars have abandoned it, but not necessarily the body of Christian believers.

And let's not even mention all the epistles of Paul that weren't written by Paul, or Deutero Isaiah that wasn't written by Isaiah.

[_Buffalo]

If funding is on the line, scientists are pretty hesitant to abandon their errors. Plus, the statement shows a remarkable ignorance about philosophy of science and how scientists actually operate. I mean as one small example, take Kuhn. A large part of his argument hinges on the argument that scientists are NOT likely to abandon their errors.

Scientists inevitably abandon errors once they have been shown to be errors. The competition in the marketplace of scientific research guarantees that sooner or later, erroneous hypotheses WILL be rooted out by someone eventually. Scientists won't continue to hold on to them once disproven

[_MrStakhanovite]

The Comma Johanneum is used ALL the time by Christians. Scholars have abandoned it, but not necessarily the body of Christian believers.

I hope you don’t expect to get away with comparing the entire body of Christians with just scientists? Any Christian who has a decent education about their own scriptures is well aware of the Comma Johanneum, not to mention trained Christian scholars.

And let's not even mention all the epistles of Paul that weren't written by Paul, or Deutero Isaiah that wasn't written by Isaiah.

Why does it even need to be mentioned?

[_Buffalo]

I hope you don’t expect to get away with comparing the entire body of Christians with just scientists? Any Christian who has a decent education about their own scriptures is well aware of the Comma Johanneum, not to mention trained Christian scholars.

Yes, but that would be a tiny minority.

Why does it even need to be mentioned?

Because they're no more valid than the Comma Johanneum

[_MrStakhanovite]

Yes, but that would be a tiny minority.

Compared to the vast swaths of the population that are trained scientists, amirite?

Because they're no more valid than the Comma Johanneum

Walk me through this, Because Paul did not author 1st and 2nd Timothy, this invalidates the epistle’s contents how?