Gad, what would have been a more appropriate response from FARMS? Not addressing the book at all? Writing a positive review of the book?
If FARMS hadn't reviewed the book we could accuse them of turning a blind eye to the perpetuation of faith promoting rumors (and fallacious reasoning) among members.
If FARMS had reviewed the book positively we could accuse them of giving a thumbs-up to an extremely problematic book just because it promotes faith.
Tell me, what would have been the right move on FARMS's part?
A FARMS Hitchenesque Attack on a Chapel Mormon
-
_Manfred
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 191
- Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 1:32 am
-
_The Dude
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 2976
- Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 3:16 am
Re: A FARMS Hitchenesque Attack on a Chapel Mormon
Manfred wrote:Gad, what would have been a more appropriate response from FARMS? Not addressing the book at all? Writing a positive review of the book?
If FARMS hadn't reviewed the book we could accuse them of turning a blind eye to the perpetuation of faith promoting rumors (and fallacious reasoning) among members.
If FARMS had reviewed the book positively we could accuse them of giving a thumbs-up to an extremely problematic book just because it promotes faith.
Tell me, what would have been the right move on FARMS's part?
Gad is sure to have a better answer than me, but here's my 2 cents.
It's true that they are in a tough spot representing this sham of a religion. The right move would be to just walk away from it all. Barring that, they would be savvy to avoid drawing attention to the embarrassing things members do and say. They don't have time to police fast and testimony meetings like some kind of inquisition, so why give time to any type of internal thought policing? There are all sorts of procedural excuses they could make.
"And yet another little spot is smoothed out of the echo chamber wall..." Bond
-
_Gadianton
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 9947
- Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2007 5:12 am
Re: A FARMS Hitchenesque Attack on a Chapel Mormon
Hi Manfred, those are good questions. It's not for me to say what an appropriate FARMS response should be. They are there own organization, this is a free country, I'm happy with them speaking to the dictatates of their own conscience -- revealing as those dictates may be.
One thing DCP tends to claim about FARMS is how scholarly FARMS is. Well, you know, a few years back I remember a couple of guys in southern Utah trepanated themselves based on their odd study of Egyptology. I doubt that any serious, scholarly Egyptology periodicals picked up the story and refuted their reasoning. It would be unusual for an important peer-reviewed journal to spend their time refuting or even reviewing hobbyists at all. Now if FARMS is a polemics journal, well then...:)
Sure, it's in the realm of possibilities. But, hey, this book has been out since 2002, ever hear of it? I have yet to ever see a critic on a message board, FARMS aware or not, attack the church for any of the vanity authors FARMS has unleashed the 50 calibers on.
One thing DCP tends to claim about FARMS is how scholarly FARMS is. Well, you know, a few years back I remember a couple of guys in southern Utah trepanated themselves based on their odd study of Egyptology. I doubt that any serious, scholarly Egyptology periodicals picked up the story and refuted their reasoning. It would be unusual for an important peer-reviewed journal to spend their time refuting or even reviewing hobbyists at all. Now if FARMS is a polemics journal, well then...:)
Manfred wrote:If FARMS hadn't reviewed the book we could accuse them of turning a blind eye
Sure, it's in the realm of possibilities. But, hey, this book has been out since 2002, ever hear of it? I have yet to ever see a critic on a message board, FARMS aware or not, attack the church for any of the vanity authors FARMS has unleashed the 50 calibers on.
Lou Midgley 08/20/2020: "...meat wad," and "cockroach" are pithy descriptions of human beings used by gemli? They were not fashioned by Professor Peterson.
LM 11/23/2018: one can explain away the soul of human beings...as...a Meat Unit, to use Professor Peterson's clever derogatory description of gemli's ideology.
LM 11/23/2018: one can explain away the soul of human beings...as...a Meat Unit, to use Professor Peterson's clever derogatory description of gemli's ideology.
-
_Gadianton
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 9947
- Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2007 5:12 am
Re: A FARMS Hitchenesque Attack on a Chapel Mormon
'cmon dude, I bow to the man who owned FAIR's top geneticist.
Lou Midgley 08/20/2020: "...meat wad," and "cockroach" are pithy descriptions of human beings used by gemli? They were not fashioned by Professor Peterson.
LM 11/23/2018: one can explain away the soul of human beings...as...a Meat Unit, to use Professor Peterson's clever derogatory description of gemli's ideology.
LM 11/23/2018: one can explain away the soul of human beings...as...a Meat Unit, to use Professor Peterson's clever derogatory description of gemli's ideology.
-
_Gadianton
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 9947
- Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2007 5:12 am
Re: A FARMS Hitchenesque Attack on a Chapel Mormon
Shades wrote:I wonder: How would a fan of Weight, an uninitiated Chapel Mormon, react upon seeing this?
Oh, I think Chapel Mormons would be pretty upset about it. I mean, in a sense, FARMS has become an anti-Mormon press themselves. You could take this essay and put the Tanners' name on it and the only thing that might come across as suspicious is the complete lack of compassion in it.
Lou Midgley 08/20/2020: "...meat wad," and "cockroach" are pithy descriptions of human beings used by gemli? They were not fashioned by Professor Peterson.
LM 11/23/2018: one can explain away the soul of human beings...as...a Meat Unit, to use Professor Peterson's clever derogatory description of gemli's ideology.
LM 11/23/2018: one can explain away the soul of human beings...as...a Meat Unit, to use Professor Peterson's clever derogatory description of gemli's ideology.
-
_Danna
Re: A FARMS Hitchenesque Attack on a Chapel Mormon
Hammering the book in the FRoB is pretty much overkill for yet another Faith-Promoting Rumor. There are internet sites devoted to this sort of thing, such as this one at SHIELDS.
Have they done this to any of Paul H. Dunn's books? Now that would be interesting, and much more relevant.
Have they done this to any of Paul H. Dunn's books? Now that would be interesting, and much more relevant.
-
_harmony
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 18195
- Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 1:35 am
Re: A FARMS Hitchenesque Attack on a Chapel Mormon
Danna wrote:Have they done this to any of Paul H. Dunn's books? Now that would be interesting, and much more relevant.
That would be a fast track to see their stake president. "Speak no evil of the Lord's annointed, even if it's true!"
Probably not a good idea for our good friends at FARMS/MI.
(Nevo, Jan 23) And the Melchizedek Priesthood may not have been restored until the summer of 1830, several months after the organization of the Church.
-
_Dr. Shades
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 14117
- Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2006 9:07 pm
Re: A FARMS Hitchenesque Attack on a Chapel Mormon
Gadianton wrote:I mean, in a sense, FARMS has become an anti-Mormon press themselves. You could take this essay and put the Tanners' name on it and the only thing that might come across as suspicious is the complete lack of compassion in it.
OUCH!!
Dean Robbers, that was, quite literally, the most scathing rebuke of FARMS that I've ever read in my life.
I could feel the impact from here.
"Finally, for your rather strange idea that miracles are somehow linked to the amount of gay sexual gratification that is taking place would require that primitive Christianity was launched by gay sex, would it not?"
--Louis Midgley
--Louis Midgley