Dan McClellan On The Joe Rogan Show

[MG 2.0]

You may want to go into a bit more detail. Time stamp. What did he say exactly? Context within the rest of the interview?

You're just throwing stuff out there.

Regards,
MG

TTOC

You lose. That response says a lot in this particular instance. I doubt you actually listened to the full interview. Or any of it, for that matter.

Regards,
MG

[Everybody Wang Chung]

TTOC

You lose. That response says a lot in this particular instance. I doubt you actually listened to the full interview. Or any of it, for that matter.

Regards,
Fibber

Listened to the whole thing. I know for a fact you didn't. You never do, you just cross your fingers and lie to everyone that you did. Solid episode, though, although anyone looking for actual historical evidence of the Book of Mormon is going to be sorely disappointed.

[MG 2.0]

You lose. That response says a lot in this particular instance. I doubt you actually listened to the full interview. Or any of it, for that matter.

Regards,
Fibber

Listened to the whole thing. I know for a fact you didn't. You never do, you just cross your fingers and lie to everyone that you did. Solid episode, though, although anyone looking for actual historical evidence of the Book of Mormon is going to be sorely disappointed.

Give evidence that you did. Particularly on the topic you brought up dealing with Book of Mormon historicity. Show you've got some balls.

My guess is that some will be disappointed to hear Dan McClellan talk as much as he does about being an active, tithe paying, member of the church. He even talks about the possibility of going back and doing some contract work for the church.

It's possible to be data driven and still believe in that which is faith based.

That's the lesson to be learned here.

Good podcast. By the way, Ian is an ex member of the church. Served in leadership positions including in a Stake Presidency if I'm not mistaken. Jim Bennett is active in the church and sings in the Tabernacle Choir. They are a great duo.

They've done quite a few episodes with Greg Prince. He's a treasure.

Regards,
MG

[Everybody Wang Chung]

[MG 2.0]

<image snipped>

Quite the missionary work there Wang. You represent the critics well.

Your friend,
MG

Edited to indicate image removal instead of implying a direct quote.
-c-

[I Have Questions]

Your last sentence verbalized what I have been trying to wordsmith without success. Most of the Dan's critics regarding biblical critique are puzzled why he adheres to an even more bizarre belief system and his privacy around it breeds deep resent from both sides of the faith fence. I wonder what his out is?

I’ve been thinking something similar. If the historical claim is the basis for the church’s authority, doesn’t that claim to authority collapse if the historical fact is removed? I wonder how, or even if, McClellan reconciles this.

I think you’re absolutely right. If the Book of Mormon is not 100% what it claims to be (and it isn’t) then every claim to “truthfulness” and “authority” that follows has no legitimacy.

[MG 2.0]

I’ve been thinking something similar. If the historical claim is the basis for the church’s authority, doesn’t that claim to authority collapse if the historical fact is removed? I wonder how, or even if, McClellan reconciles this.

I think you’re absolutely right. If the Book of Mormon is not 100% what it claims to be (and it isn’t) then every claim to “truthfulness” and “authority” that follows has no legitimacy.

You don't know for a fact that the Book of Mormon is not what it claims to be.

Did you watch or listen to the interview with Dan McClellan on the Inside Out podcast? If so, what did you think? Do you still respect him or is he now on your 'naughty list'?

Regards,
MG

[Limnor]

I think more than a “naughty list,” McClellan is on a “puzzling list.” I find it puzzling that he would grant authority, time, and money (acknowledging Gad’s comment: So you pay 10% of your income to a prophet who only knows something is wrong after everyone else stops doing it?) to an organization whose claims to divine authority rest on historical events he regards as having no basis in historical fact.

[I Have Questions]

I think more than a “naughty list,” McClellan is on a “puzzling list.” I find it puzzling that he would grant authority, time, and money (acknowledging Gad’s comment: So you pay 10% of your income to a prophet who only knows something is wrong after everyone else stops doing it?) to an organization whose claims to divine authority rest on historical events he regards as having no basis in historical fact.

I don’t know Dan’s personal position with regards to tithing etc. but I agree that I don’t know how a person can tread both paths - that the Book of Mormon isn’t what it claims to be, but the Church is. It makes no sense to me and I couldn’t rationalise those two things in an intellectually honest way. Maybe Dan can.

[MG 2.0]

I think more than a “naughty list,” McClellan is on a “puzzling list.” I find it puzzling that he would grant authority, time, and money (acknowledging Gad’s comment: So you pay 10% of your income to a prophet who only knows something is wrong after everyone else stops doing it?) to an organization whose claims to divine authority rest on historical events he regards as having no basis in historical fact.

Did you listen to the Inside Out podcast? Do you think that Dan's positions are simply 'shrink wrapped' into "historical events he regards of having no basis in fact" without associated interrelated inquiries that result in faith ? Why do you think that he would have to question divine authority? You know his public position on some things. His positions are based on data. I think he also acknowledges that there may be further data that can come over time and further inquiry.

Regards,
MG