How Do Mopologists Explain the Holocaust?

[Doctor Scratch]

There have been some very interesting discussions underway lately. For example, Dr. Stakhanovite has persuasively argued that Mormonism lacks intellect “richness” and depth— a point that, ironically, echoes a complaint that Dr. Hamblin made about the “new” Maxwell Institute.

And over at “Sic et Non,” Dr. Peterson is exploding with indignation—even going so far as to break from his Newport Beach vacation in order to respond—claiming that Mormonism is “breathtaking.” What is his argument, you might ask? He doesn’t have one. Instead, he quotes from Terryl and Fiona Givens. Quite lame.

Elsewhere, though, he has seemingly exposed the moral paucity of the “Restoration” via this shockingly crass remark about the Holocaust:

Billy Shears: "Life being finite makes every moment precious."

I can imagine the camp commandant at Dachau explaining that joyous truth to new arrivals. I visualize them going off to their assigned barracks with a newfound spring in their steps and a song on their lips. Life in Warsaw and Amsterdam had been so dull, seeming to go on forever. Now, though, it was fresh and charged with meaning.

I *bet* very much that the Mopologist in Chief can “imagine” this, since it’s pretty much the epitome of demented sadism. But this poses enormous problems for him. Remember: he has said repeatedly that his father’s visit to the death camps was *very* important. Well, why? If the claims of the Restoration are true, then all the people who “went up the stack”—to use Midgley’s terminology—are living it up in Heaven at this point. Viewed from the standpoint of Mopologist belief, why is the Holocaust so terrible? Because it represents a violation of agency? It can’t be bad because lives were cut short, because per LDS belief, life is infinite.

The basic problem for the Mopologists is that their theology removes all seriousness from tragedy. It doesn’t matter if people suffer or die horribly because they’ll be reborn as perfected beings on the other side of the veil.

I think this also helps to explain the Mopologists’ vindictiveness and cruelty: it might sting now, but we’re all going to be resurrected, right? So it’s all in good fun for them. Or so it would seem.

It’s worth noting Midgley’s peculiar fixation on Holocaust victims, and his repeated recommendations that people go and “have a look” at the various death camps—and his rueful comments about failing to “complete the tour,” as it were. Again: why? Does he want to immerse himself in the worst kind of human evil? Does he want to “school” himself somehow? Or, instead, does he view these camps as massive “resurrection staging grounds,” and thus “marvels” to be gazed upon with wonder?

There is a lot more that one could say about this. I think of Dr. Hamblin’s K-word-laced rant on RfM, and of DCP heading over to a Jewish blog to tell the proprietor that Jews should “get over it” when it comes to the issue of doing proxy baptisms for Holocaust victims. Because that fixes it, right? Suddenly, the Holocaust isn’t so bad because Joseph Smith and the Plan of Salvation have rescued everyone from the abyss.

This is massively disrespectful to the pain, grieving processes, and traditions of others, but it’s also par for the course when it comes to the Mopologists. At the end of the day, it’s impossible to overlook the fact that the movement is headed up by a guy who openly ridiculed the Jewish wedding ceremony while on a youth trip to Israel.

[huckelberry]

"Life being finite makes every moment precious"

This quote from Peterson is presented with no context. It does not sound like a proposition that he would make but a proposition from an atheist (I have heard it more times than countable) which Peterson views as inadequate to compare to the possibilities of suffering in the world. Peterson would be saying that the suffering of the holocaust asks for a much more substantial balance than the observation that every moment is precious.

The problem is difficult enough that no quick shot answer will be adequate. I do not know what all Peterson may have been looking at.

[Moksha]

I think of Dr. Hamblin’s K-word-laced rant on RfM, and of DCP heading over to a Jewish blog to tell the proprietor that Jews should “get over it” when it comes to the issue of doing proxy baptisms for Holocaust victims.

Who was the editor of that particular publication? I know I could use a good editor to save me from my own stupidity, but it would have to be one who recognized the extent to which Dr. Hamblin and I could go beyond the bounds of reasonable decorum. A Bozo editor would egg me on and splash me with seltzer water. What a monumental gaffe to use such terms in public. Good thing the standards for a BYU professor are different from a sportscaster.

[drumdude]

Midgley’s comment about “Jews going up the stack” with a like from DCP was the last straw. They have lost any trace of humanity by defending Joe’s sex cult. The thought of spending any more time reading what those people write makes me nauseous.

I no longer read SeN and I avoid the DCP topics here. Highly recommended.

I actually agree with the poster about us focusing too much on DCP. It’s not healthy to be exposed to that level of evil on a daily basis.

[Res Ipsa]

I’m still stuck at how the Holocaust is any sort of refutation of the opening sentence. Life can still be precious even under horrendous circumstances. Is this a Sic et Non sequitur?

[Doctor Scratch]

"Life being finite makes every moment precious"

This quote from Peterson is presented with no context. It does not sound like a proposition that he would make but a proposition from an atheist (I have heard it more times than countable) which Peterson views as inadequate to compare to the possibilities of suffering in the world. Peterson would be saying that the suffering of the holocaust asks for a much more substantial balance than the observation that every moment is precious.

The problem is difficult enough that no quick shot answer will be adequate. I do not know what all Peterson may have been looking at.

My apologies, Huckelberry--I've amended my original post for clarity's sake. You're right--the italicized portion *was not* from Peterson; it was from Billy Shears, who was arguing the atheist position.

[Doctor Scratch]

I think of Dr. Hamblin’s K-word-laced rant on RfM, and of DCP heading over to a Jewish blog to tell the proprietor that Jews should “get over it” when it comes to the issue of doing proxy baptisms for Holocaust victims.

Who was the editor of that particular publication? I know I could use a good editor to save me from my own stupidity, but it would have to be one who recognized the extent to which Dr. Hamblin and I could go beyond the bounds of reasonable decorum. A Bozo editor would egg me on and splash me with seltzer water. What a monumental gaffe to use such terms in public. Good thing the standards for a BYU professor are different from a sportscaster.

I don't know. Maybe Scott Gordon? Or someone else at fair? The commentary is still posted at the FAIR website.

[Doctor Scratch]

I’m still stuck at how the Holocaust is any sort of refutation of the opening sentence. Life can still be precious even under horrendous circumstances. Is this a Sic et Non sequitur?

I wondered that, too. If anything, the notion of "life being finite" renders the Holocaust in a far more horrific light than the Mopologists' beliefs, which tend to trivialize things like this. Not only will the victims be resurrected, but, if they accept the teachings of the Restoration (so the argument goes) they will also get to become gods. It occurs to me that the Mopologists don't really need a valid version of theodicy. Rather, they need to explain how the Plan of Salvation creates space for a meaningful and impactful mortal life. Midgley often says that this is a "mortal probation," meaning that all earthly experiences--including Stalinist Russia, the Spanish Inquisition, 9/11, the Crusades, and, yes, the Holocaust--are all little more than a "waiting room" type of experience--at least, per the apologists. It's a test, and even if you don't "get it" the first time around, then you'll have a chance after you die to accept the teachings of the Restoration. But the effect is the very seriously undercut the seriousness of all these tragic historical events. It's no wonder that the Mopologists are so flippant about so much of this stuff.

[Gadianton]

I wondered that, too. If anything, the notion of "life being finite" renders the Holocaust in a far more horrific light than the Mopologists' beliefs, which tend to trivialize things like this.

You and Billy Shears both make some great points. The irony of ironies is DCP's adoration for free-market economics. Remember the bust of Adam Smith that he has on his desk, displayed just a little more prominently than his bust of Joseph Smith?

The basis for all theories about markets is scarcity. There is no scarcity in his Mormon theology. "Eternal round" should be "eternal bubble". Imagine a bubble in the housing market, or electric vehicles. In "Added Upon", these kinds of bubbles just continue on forever. If a 200k$ house is now 400k$ in just a few years, its price just keeps climbing like that without ever correcting. Glory heaps upon glory forever.

You'd think at some point DCP would sit back and wonder if all this is too good to be true.

[DrStakhanovite]

Ah Dr. Scratch and Dean Robbers! There you two are, I’ve heard back from that particular seller and they have accepted the University's generous offer. We’ve finally managed to secure a first edition of Franciso de Alvarado’s ‘Castilian-Mixtec Dictionary’, the catalog for our upcoming ‘Indigenous Languages of the Americas Initiative’ continues to grow.

I do have to mention though, on the topic at hand, that Dr. Scratch’s comments reminded me of some observations made by the Classical scholar Moses Hadas:

True pagan tragedy has no villains because it has no unquestioned code of morality. Each of two alternative courses of conduct has powerful sanctions, and the hero must make his choice and take the consequences imposed by the rejected sanction. In this sense Christian tragedy is impossible; when there can be only one right, the man who defies it is the villain.

While some might find “the implications, entailments, and disclosures of the Restored Gospel radical and utterly, breathtakingly, profound”, I can’t help but feel what makes the “Restored Gospel” so “radical” is that it more or less presents a nearly fatalistic universe where everything works out for the best because eventually all moral ambiguity is thought to be dispelled and every agent is given more than ample opportunity to accept the Gospel, especially postmortem when it’s truth will have been overwhelmingly demonstrated.

If one were to “strongly suspect” that the “factors in recently declining conversion rates” and “some retention problems among young Latter-day Saints” can be attributed to “our failure to adequately exhibit the exciting and radical depth of Mormonism” than you have a major problem on your hands, because the actual world people live in is ambiguous and just trying to live one’s life in even the most conventional fashion will result in innumerable instances of moral ambiguity and personal confusion.

Nothing taught by LDS Churches helps a person navigate the vagaries of the world and how could it? The loudly consistent theme from the Book of Mormon is that if one is humble, meek, and clings to God’s covenants, then they shall be richly rewarded by heavenly blessings and if they become arrogant and ignore those same covenants, it shall be to their ruin.

How can the “Restored Gospel” actually appreciate the scope and meaning of genocide? Where is the loss? What of culpability? What does this mean for us? To these questions, I feel any Latter Day Saint who only has recourse to Latter Day Saint scripture can only respond in the most spiritually tepid of manners.