Comfortable ignorance and MD&D

[_mercyngrace]

Log is a doofus. I am convinced log is sockpuppet of jeffk or leeuniverse. Log has been registered for many years yet does not have many posts.

I don't think so. I was in the MAD chat room with him the other night and had a really good conversation for about a half hour. He was very sincere and not at all judgmental like the morons you listed above. He left the Church but came back, but I think he's still somewhat on the fence.

I agree with you, Kevin. I don't agree with Log on a number of issues but I don't think he is JeffK and I'd be absolutely floored to find he was Obiwan/leeuniverse/ldsfaqs.

We've exchanged PMs and he signed them with with his given name. If he were a sock puppet, he would probably have just signed with his username.

Cate

[_bcspace]

Over at MD&D, armchair scholars and autodidactic geniuses are comparing notes about explicit and compelling examples of Book of Mormon names appearing in languages of indigenous peoples in the Americas. Things go smoothly for a time before Brandt Gardner shows up talking sense, and it isn’t before long that someone associates his fancy talkin’ with anti-Mormon discourse.

This whole enjoyable thread was a reminder to me on just how blissfully ignorant you can be when you never leave the confines of what is intellectually comfortable for you. I’ve had one linguistics course and it was pretty brutal, but when I read the OP I started to recall that the number of possible vocal sounds by humans is pretty limited by human anatomy, and that it is just a fact of life that languages that are completely unrelated are going to share some words with the same phonemes. I can’t imagine this ever crossed the mind of a mouth breathing goon like Log, before he tried to jump Cinepro’s case, doesn’t know a thing about linguistic anthropology, but has no problem posting as if he does.

Brandt provides a much clearer and forceful example than what I could ever hope to recall, but the reaction he gets is similar to the one I would have gotten, if I was allowed to participate there.

LDSToronto expressed some time ago his frustration with the regulars of MD&D, wondering why they couldn’t bother to educate themselves by reading a damn book now and then on a topic before trying to opine with an air of authority. He’s right, but he’s just another name to smear over there, and any advice he had to give would be dismissed before LDST could finish typing it.

I’d like to congratulate the mods at MD&D for creating a hotbed of anti-intellectual tribalism that has come to represent the face of Mormon Apologetics.

Hogwash and Poppycock. Not a single example given. Plus, one might not have read the same books but I'll put my erudition up against anyone's here any day. I'd even hazard that the erudition of the blondes portrayed on Legally Blonde is superior to most of the anti Mormons posting here. The bottom line is that you're merely judging based on the fact that others have come to different conclusions than you have rather than the information that led them there.

[_Blixa]

Thankfully, someone finally did what should have been done after Zakuska's first post: consulted a history of the place and people and their interactions with the Mormon settlers. Though cinepro had earlier discussed the way that Book of Mormon name "Limhi" gets transferred to the area's place and the native tribe dwelling there (thus showing up Zakuska's second breathless speculation), Volgadon checks out David Bigler's Fort Limhi, where he finds this reference:

On the first Sunday in April, George Grant preached in the Shoshone language, which produced four for "washing," Te-ah-to-wah, Snag's brother, renamed Lehi, Mopeah, "Horn of hair in the forehead," and Eas-e-to-roat...

(I'm quoting the sentence slightly more fully than Volgadon did)

Te-ah-to-wah.

The discussion didn't even have to get into false cognates.

[_Runtu]

He seems to be one of the few apologists for whom apologetics is not some game, divorced from lived faith. He's genuinely concerned with actual data and incorporating it into his beliefs. His latest book acknowledged the critical issues surrounding the Book of Mormon, but then deals with the data and allows the data to shape his beliefs and understanding. I think he's a good example of a faithful Mormon following Anselm's project of faith seeking understanding. Far too often in Mopologetics the project seems to be "Protecting my faith with BS" or "Faith seeking my esoteric pet project only tangentially related to my faith."

Very well said. Brant is a good man and extremely intelligent, as well as pretty well-read on the subject of Mesoamerica. Although his arguments aren't particularly compelling, he is trying to deal with the actual evidence, and as you say, he's doing so with the intent of informing his faith more than justifying it.

[_Kishkumen]

He seems to be one of the few apologists for whom apologetics is not some game, divorced from lived faith. He's genuinely concerned with actual data and incorporating it into his beliefs. His latest book acknowledged the critical issues surrounding the Book of Mormon, but then deals with the data and allows the data to shape his beliefs and understanding. I think he's a good example of a faithful Mormon following Anselm's project of faith seeking understanding. Far too often in Mopologetics the project seems to be "Protecting my faith with BS" or "Faith seeking my esoteric pet project only tangentially related to my faith."

Very well said. Brant is a good man and extremely intelligent, as well as pretty well-read on the subject of Mesoamerica. Although his arguments aren't particularly compelling, he is trying to deal with the actual evidence, and as you say, he's doing so with the intent of informing his faith more than justifying it.

Well said, both of you.

[_Eric]

I'll put my erudition up against anyone's here any day.

[_Morley]

...but I'll put my erudition up against anyone's here any day.

Incredible. And on any subject. Right?

[Guest]

...but I'll put my erudition up against anyone's here any day.

Perhaps you could start on the Seven Deadly Heresies Speech Is Now Doctrine thread.

(viewtopic.php?p=581506#p581506)

[_Yoda]

I'll put my erudition up against anyone's here any day.

LOL!

[_bcspace]

I see three of you looked up the word "erudition".