This kind of bad reasoning needs to stop MD&D/FAIR

[_MsJack]

Can we talk about anything besides DCP?

/report
/askmoderatorstothreadsplit

in my opinion.

[_Sophocles]

Dear God, can this bad reasoningdie the death is deserves?

It's like this:

Anti = "opposed to."
Mormon = "The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints."

Hence an anti-Mormon is anyone who is opposed to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

What is it with lawyers who try to ply their trade to apologetics and becoming some of the most ineffectual dilettantes on the scene?

That's one thing the apologists have in common with the general authorities. They may not actually be lawyers, but they do see themselves as something like legal advocates for the church. All they care about is ensuring that their client gets every consideration to which they believe it is entitled.

So their approach is very much patterned after the old law school saying: "If the law is against you, argue the facts. If the facts are against you, argue the law." (Often followed by some version of "If both are against you, pound the table and yell like hell/call the other lawyer names/attack the plaintiff, etc.")

In this instance, current usage is against Pahoran, so he argues the etymology. Another situation might call for the reverse. It's not about consistency, it's not about truth, it's about winning.

[_brade]

Dear God, can this bad reasoningdie the death is deserves?

It's like this:

Anti = "opposed to."
Mormon = "The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints."

Hence an anti-Mormon is anyone who is opposed to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

What is it with lawyers who try to ply their trade to apologetics and becoming some of the most ineffectual dilettantes on the scene? In any case, Pahoran is correctly parroting the FAIR Wiki here:

It is somewhat strange that critics of the Church wish to somehow divest the term "anti-Mormon" of its clear meaning. It is composed of two elements:
1) the prefix anti-
Noun: "A person who is opposed to something, such as a group, policy, proposal, or practice"
Adjective: Opposed
Preposition: Opposed to; against.


2) ...and Mormon, as a colloquial term for The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

But the slow witted kiwi and the FAIRWiki have fallen into anold fallacious mistake that the etymology of a word is a factor at all as to the meaning behind it’s use. For a good counter example to this poor thinking would be running a similar analysis on the English word ‘television’. The prefix means “far” and the suffix means “sight”, but no one in the English speaking world understands the word ‘television’ to literally mean “far sight”.

Etymology is used to understand the origins of a given word, it doesn’t give any insight into contemporary meaning. I don’t get how a bunch of adults who act so sensitive to context can’t stop form making basic errors in plain reasoning by ignoring how language is really used.

Critics complain about the use of “Anti-Mormon” because they feel groups like FAIR use it as a code word to dissuade people from even considering a source, poisoning the well as it were, pointing out the etymology of a word doesn’t explain anything.

Hey, watch this:

"Anti" means "opposed to" and "Mormon" means "The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints". Hence an anti-Mormon is anyone who is opposed to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

Jeffrey Holland, Apostle of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints tells us this:

Let me add another element to this view of the dispensation. Because ours is the last and greatest of all dispensations, because all things will eventually culminate and be fulfilled in our era, there is, therefore, one specific responsibility that falls to those of us in the Church now that did not rest quite the same way on Church members in any earlier time. We have a responsibility to prepare the Church of the Lamb of God to receive the Lamb of God—in person, in triumphant glory, in His millennial role as Lord of lords and King of kings.

And, Nephi makes the following report in The First Book of Nephi chapter 13-14:

And it came to pass that the angel spake unto me, saying: Look!..And he said unto me: Behold there are save two churches only; the one is the church of the Lamb of God, and the other is the church of the devil; wherefore, whoso belongeth not to the church of the Lamb of God belongeth to that great church, which is the mother of abominations; and she is the whore of all the earth...And it came to pass that I beheld that the great mother of abominations did gather together multitudes upon the face of all the earth, among all the nations of the Gentiles, to fight against the Lamb of God.

So, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is the Church of the Lamb of God. And, anyone who does not belong to the Church of the Lamb of God belongs to the Church of the Devil. And the Church of the Devil is against - opposed to, you might say - the Church of the Lamb of God. Therefore, all nonmembers are members of an organization that's opposed to the Church of the Lamb of God. Therefore, all nonmembers are anti-Mormon. Amiright?

[Guest]

So their approach is very much patterned after the old law school saying: "If the law is against you, argue the facts. If the facts are against you, argue the law." (Often followed by some version of "If both are against you, pound the table and yell like hell/call the other lawyer names/attack the plaintiff, etc.").

But they might even have some law (epistomological issues as suggested by Givens*) and some facts (as suggested by Stem) in their favor. But their response is still to pound the table and yell like hell. The church needs to get some better "lawyers." As suggested by Stak and Kish.

ETA *I have this backwards, corrected several posts below.

[_brade]

So their approach is very much patterned after the old law school saying: "If the law is against you, argue the facts. If the facts are against you, argue the law." (Often followed by some version of "If both are against you, pound the table and yell like hell/call the other lawyer names/attack the plaintiff, etc.").

But they might even have some law (epistomological issues as suggested by Givens) and some facts (as suggested by Stem) in their favor. But their response is still to pound the table and yell like hell. The church needs to get some better "lawyers." As suggested by Stak and Kish.

Hey, lulu, when you talk about epistemological issues suggested by Givens, what are you referring to?

[_Buffalo]

Hey, lulu, when you talk about epistemological issues suggested by Givens, what are you referring to?

Isn't that the idea that God purposefully withholds evidence that would make Mormonism credible because if it were too obviously true it would destroy agency?

The problem with this stance is you could use it to justify belief in literally any crackpot idea. Also, it conflicts with the idea of pre-mortal agency, which seems to have been unimpeded by knowledge.

[_bcspace]

I define "anti Mormon" as one who intentionally lies, misleads, or distorts regarding Mormonism. Simple reasoned opposition technically qualifies as per the English usage but to distinguish, I usually refer to them as "critics". There are very few outspoken critics of the LDS Church. In fact, I can't think of a single one off the top of my head right now. There are many many anti Mormons.

[_SteelHead]

I define "anti Mormon" as one who intentionally lies, misleads, or distorts regarding Mormonism.

By your definition aren't a good number of the brethren and most of the apologists anti-Mormon?

Prime example: Holland in the recent interview lying about (Mitt's involvement in) past temple ceremonies, amongst other things.

2nd Example: GBH's interview on the "As man is God once was, as God is man may become" thing....

Does that make GBH, and JRH anti-mormons?

[_Darth J]

I define "anti Mormon" as one who intentionally lies, misleads, or distorts regarding Mormonism.

Therefore, the Correlation Committee, the Newsroom, Dallin H. Oaks, Jeffrey R. Holland, Gordon B. Hinckley, Wilford Woodruff, Joseph Smith, Hyrum Smith, the Nauvoo City Council, FAIR, the Maxwell Institute, Mormon Voices, and you are all anti-Mormons.

[_Darth J]

/snip

So, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is the Church of the Lamb of God. And, anyone who does not belong to the Church of the Lamb of God belongs to the Church of the Devil. And the Church of the Devil is against - opposed to, you might say - the Church of the Lamb of God. Therefore, all nonmembers are members of an organization that's opposed to the Church of the Lamb of God. Therefore, all nonmembers are anti-Mormon. Amiright?

I bet if you were to volunteer that observation in, say, Gospel Doctrine class, you would get a significant number of heads nodding approval and agreeable follow-up comments.