A FARMS Hitchenesque Attack on a Chapel Mormon

[_Gadianton]

http://mi.byu.edu/publications/review/? ... m=1&id=757

From the Review, volume 21, comes a bit of a break from the new paradigm of the Book of Mormon as Moby Dick. Donald Enders and Jennifer Lund team up against the deceased Gordon Weight, a humble, simple man of the printing trade and ruthlessly "do violence" to his testimony of the Book of Mormon.

Let me ask you this, who has heard of Gordon Weight? What harm has this man's well-intentioned work of testimony done to anyone? And this tag team apparently even gave pause to their project, possibly constrained by the Spirit to show charity,

Because the author is deceased and unable to respond, we hesitate to critique this work

But perhaps the still small voice was ignored, and the critics proceeded anyway. Of course, they do give the token "he probably meant well". Hey, that's something, just as often the FARMS reviewer will criticize the Chapel Mormon for trying to get rich publishing crap.

Weight's argument,

The completion of the printing of the Book of Mormon in a very short time period, so that it could be available to the early saints on the day the Church was organized, comprises one of the most astounding events that ever took place in the history of the Church.

Well, as with every other claim of a miracle, I mean, what are you going to expect? But let the consideration of Brother Weight's faith be done with as little charity and sensitivity as possible from his fellow Saints,

A review based on rules of logic and evidence obviously outside the author’s expertise may come across as harsh

One can envision one of the four "new atheists" talking down on believers here implying they are unsophisticated rubes, unfamiliar with logic.

Therefore, our remarks are based on the rigor that we wish the author himself had employed

OMG, never again can an apologist get on the case of an atheist for appealing to his/her own "logic" and "rigor" in dismantling faith claims.

The errors in this booklet are too numerous to deal with individually, but we have selected the most crucial points and most “ridiculous” suppositions for discussion below.

So in other words, they cherry picked the worst parts to tear apart and make fun of.

Of all Weight’s claims, his suggestion concerning the miraculous appearance of paper at the print shop is perhaps the most outrageous.

Sure, as was feeding thousands with one loaf and a fish, or "translating" the Book of Mormon with a magic rock.

Miracle on Palmyra’s Main Street introduces a series of claims based on faulty logic, dubious sources, and flagrant errors, all dressed in the rhetoric of promoting faith and strengthening testimonies.

Holy crap. Sounds like Christopher Hitchens, drunken with the jealousy of Satan wrote this, does it not?

I guess it goes to show you that apologists are no better than the critics are when it comes to pissing on someone elses faith, even a fellow member of the church's.

[_Tom]

Very good observations, Gadianton. I cannot help but be reminded of the Eye of Ra's decimation of the Fischers or John Tvedtnes' pulverization of Brenton Yorgason's book, Little Known Evidences.

[_Dr. Shades]

Truly a shameless display.

Although the intended audience is most likely their fellow Internet Mormons, I wonder: How would a fan of Weight, an uninitiated Chapel Mormon, react upon seeing this?

[_cinepro]

For some reason, I always find it saddest when well-meaning Chapel Mormons get the FARMS treatment.

And by "saddest", I mean "most entertaining".

[_The Dude]

And by "saddest", I mean "most entertaining".

lol

[_Doctor Scratch]

I agree, Dr. Robbers. This article was needlessly cruel---so much so that I wondered how it managed to pass through FARMS's "rigorous" peer review process. Increasingly, it seems that the apologists are interested in dismantling the humble testimonies of the bygone era and in replacing them with a form of cancerous gnosis (hence my remarks elsewhere that Mopologetic Mormonism has a streak of gnosticism in it).

[_Black Moclips]

"..It is unfortunate that so many people through the years have accepted the [booklet’s] or [insert religious manuscript of your choice] assertions uncritically and that a look at the actual evidence may have the opposite effect of what [Weight] or [author from above] intended..."

Words to live by.

[_DarkHelmet]

I always thought FARMS was placed out on the perimeter to defend the church from scholarly attacks. Why have they turned their swords inward to attack the very testimonies they are supposed to defend? I read somewhere that a GA said the job of FARMs is to use shields, not swords. They are using their shields to defend the perimeter from outsiders, while unleashing their swords on perceived threats from inside the perimeter. If I were TBM, I would be concerned about this rift between the apologists and the chapel Mormons. A house divided cannot stand.

After looking over the review, it appears Weight's book is the typical silly faith promoting Mormon book that any critic would laugh at, but why would FARMS bother attacking it?

[_bcspace]

Gadianton misses the mark again by assuming (largely) independent FARMS apologists carry much weight in the Church.

[_Sethbag]

I always thought FARMS was placed out on the perimeter to defend the church from scholarly attacks. Why have they turned their swords inward to attack the very testimonies they are supposed to defend?

Because these testimonies, when printed in books like Weight's (note: I haven't read the book), appear flimsy and ill-conceived, and FARMS recognizes that. They know that the church needs to put its best foot forward, not really dumb arguments that anyone with access to some facts can debunk and make look silly.

I read somewhere that a GA said the job of FARMs is to use shields, not swords. They are using their shields to defend the perimeter from outsiders, while unleashing their swords on perceived threats from inside the perimeter. If I were TBM, I would be concerned about this rift between the apologists and the chapel Mormons. A house divided cannot stand.

After looking over the review, it appears Weight's book is the typical silly faith promoting Mormon book that any critic would laugh at, but why would FARMS bother attacking it?

Because the FARMS folk know that the typical silly, faith-promoting book by chapel Mormons cannot withstand the light of critical scrutiny, and so they'd rather be the ones to scrutinize them critically, rather than wait for the antis to rip the author a new one. They at least can act supportive towards the author's testimony, while hopefully leading to improvement of the level of logic and evidence and rational argument and so forth used in such books.

Let's face it, when church members say really stupid and indefensible things in an attempt to defend their testimonies, it doesn't do the church any favors, because people will see through those stupid and indefensible things, and the testimony expressed via them will be discredited.

Of course, this is the same FARMS crowd that latches onto possible missing papyrus, or mnemonic device theory, and so forth, so go figure.