Sorry if this isn't a socially acceptable way to contact SB. I have a question and I've seen others use this method here.

I remember reading in your account of a meeting with Elder Oaks or Elder Maxwell that you discussed FARMS and he said it provides intellectual cover for the church.

Can you tell me what you understood that to mean? How exactly does the church think it benefits from apologetics?

Thanks!

Leaders no longer have to take a position on any issue that where they might be proven wrong in time.

Leaders certainly aren't talking about Book of Mormon historicity issues any more. Apologists are out there on the front line giving people ideas, yet they have no real authority and can easily be dismissed 20 years from now.

It's ingenious.

I can't answer for Steve Benson, but allow me to make an observation based upon my experience, and my observations about some of the more intelligent TBM members of my family.

Mormon Apologetics "works" as long as it is not read. In other words, as a TBM, just knowing that there was a think tank of "very smart people" out there somewhere taking on the tougher, inherent theological problems of Mormonism affirmed my faith. After all, why would smart people like that, I reasoned, stay Mormon if it wasn't true?

The existence of Mormon Apologetics means that Mormons don't have to do any thinking of their own. When the Prophet speaks the thinking is done.....and if what "the brethren" say doesn't seem to jive too well with what was said before or with common sense and logic, then more thinking is done by "those really smart guys" doing Mormon Apologetics. At least this is the comfortable notion that a thinking TBM can rely upon to continue on in their denial and laziness.

Mormon Apologetics only poses a problem once the TBM begins to read it. Then the whole thing unravels, or so it did with me.

As for the rest of the world, no one cares about Mormon Apologetics.

+1

I read everything by Hugh Nibley and was considered in my ward to be a rarity. I MUST have been so super smart to follow Nibley's work because he was a genius who knew the deeper depths of Mormonism, and could show the rest of the world how true it was. However, the rest of the world was too "arrogant" to listen to Nibley.

I have also seen some uber TBMs of moderate intelligence froth over the apologetic works. They love them and think that the apologists are so super DUPER smart because the writers have an elevated diction, but the TBMs can't understand what the crux of the argument is.

What is very interesting is that this board shows a lot of people who weren't questioning the church too deeply, read the apologists, and THAT'S how they found out that the church had massive problems that couldn't be overcome.

Whether apologetics is a "net gain" or a "net loss" would be an interesting question to have answered.

My feeling is that the apologists are a "net loss," but the church hasn't figured that out yet.

raptorjesus Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

>
> I have also seen some uber TBMs of moderate
> intelligence froth over the apologetic works.
> They love them and think that the apologists are
> so super DUPER smart because the writers have an
> elevated diction


LOL! That "elevated diction" will get most people most of the time...


> Whether apologetics is a "net gain" or a "net
> loss" would be an interesting question to have
> answered.
>
> My feeling is that the apologists are a "net
> loss," but the church hasn't figured that out yet.


I'm guessing it is a "net win" for LDSinc, only because from what I can see in my own circle apologists are appreciated (if their existence is even known) but not read. It's just enough that they exist. Their existence means many of the smarter TBMs (the lawyers doctors and financial guys) don't have to think about it too much. "That's what the church pays the apologists for," they'll reason. And if retention of these high tithe payers is the point, then it's a "net win".

But in the long run....? Good question. But like someone else said, it's so easy to dispense with any apologist and his work at any time, and replace it with something else more in fashion. They speak and write as men, after all...

(My father-in-law would have loved you for your Nibley affair. He was one of those "moderate intelligence[s]" wowed by fancy diction.)

It's interesting to hear about your different "circle."

I hadn't even read or heard about the apologetics until I went on my mission.

So I can absolutely see how they are a "net win" for at least the short term.

Long term...there might just be other factors that I haven't thought about. Maybe it still is a "net win" because those of us who study our way out are in the minority.

It took me emotional stimuli to really begin to question intellectually.

hmmm.....

. . . a FARMS "fact sheet" that he had faxed to him from Provo. (I still have that faxed propaganda piece, with its "FARMS"-origination I.D. prominently printed across the top of it).

This kind of antic only works with Mormons who don't independently think or research for themselves but who, instead, are willing to bend their minds and their knees to the command of "pray, pay and obey"--and who are conditioned to rely (like underdeveloped children) on apologist handouts provided to them by authority figures in the Mormon Cult (the latter who, by the way, also addictively depend on the same silly handouts, given their own inability and unwillingness to think for themselves).

In other words, this tactic works for most Mormons, at all levels.



Edited 6 time(s). Last edit at 01/12/2011 04:18PM by steve benson.

Or is it that most members who leave, don't study their way out, and FARMS and FAIR had nothing to do with it?

Just curious. I think this is an interesting topic.

. . . questioning and/or substantiating research from outside sources is necessary.

The Mormon concentration camp commandants inculcate this non-critical approach to belief in the minds of their sheep, from cradle to grave, having full confidence that the Mormon herd-mentality will prevail and that the faithful will blindly obey.

What FAIR/FARMS has to do with it is in keeping them penned in--that is, until the few renegades among them decide to peek across the fence, where they spot actual fact, make the appropriate comparison to Mormon fiction and then jump the rails.



Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 01/12/2011 05:33PM by steve benson.

I guess Joseph should have thought about that when he wrote a book that made very specific claims about "history" that could be verified through archeology, DNA, etc.

You have to keep people completely blind of those verifiable issues, to win over their "spirits."

The most damning evidence against FAIR occurs when you scroll to the bottom of the article and read the "cited sources".

example: http://en.fairmormon.org/Book_of_Abraham/Joseph_Smith_Papyri

how many non-lds sources can you see here?


Endnotes
1.[note] Joseph Smith, History of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 7 volumes, edited by Brigham H. Roberts, (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 1957), 2:235, 236, 348–351. 236, 348 BYU Studies link
2.[note] John Gee, "Some Puzzles from the Joseph Smith Papyri," 2007 FAIR Apologetics Conference (Sandy, Utah). (Link forthcoming.)
3.[note] The 11-part series, written by Dr. Hugh Nibley and entitled "A New Look at the Pearl of Great Price", began in the January 1968 Improvement Era and ran in every issue until May 1970 (with the exception of December 1969 and February 1970). Nibley's series has been available as a FARMS reprint (N-NEP) since 1990, and several chapters became part of Nibley's book Abraham In Egypt.
4.[note] Joseph Smith, History of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 7 volumes, edited by Brigham H. Roberts, (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 1957), 2:236. BYU Studies link
5.[note] Michael H. Marquardt, "A Book Note — Hugh Nibley's Abraham in Egypt" (2000).
6.[note] John Gee, A Guide to the Joseph Smith Papyri, 23.
7.[note] "In 1906, while visiting Nauvoo, President Joseph F. Smith related to Preston Nibley his experience as a child of seeing his Uncle Joseph in the front rooms of the Mansion House working on the Egyptian manuscripts. According to President Smith, one of the rolls of papyri "when unrolled on the floor extended through two rooms of the Mansion House." This would have been sometime between 1843 when the Mansion House was completed and the prophet's death in June 1844, one or two years after other parts of the papyri had been cut up and placed under glass. - See Hugh Nibley, "Phase I," Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought 3 no. 2 (Summer 1968), 101. See also Hugh Nibley, "New Look at the Pearl of Great Price," Improvement Era 71 (March 1968), 17–18. and Hugh Nibley, "Judging and Prejudging the Book of Abraham," Nibley archive, 1979, 6-7; reprinted as an appendix in Robert L. and Rosemary Brown, They Lie in Wait to Deceive, vol. 1, ed. Barbara Ellsworth, rev. ed. (Mesa, AZ: Brownsworth, 1982), 236—245.
8.[note] John Gee, "Research and Perspectives: Abraham in Ancient Egyptian Texts," Ensign (July 1992), 60–?.; John Gee, "Abracadabra, Isaac and Jacob (Review of The Use of Egyptian Magical Papyri to Authenticate the Book of Abraham: A Critical Review by Edward H. Ashment)," FARMS Review of Books 7/1 (1995): 19–84. off-site PDF link
9.[note] Hugh W. Nibley, "Phase One," Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought 3 no. 2 (Summer 1968), 101. off-site
10.[note] Gee, A Guide to the Joseph Smith Papyri, 12–13.
11.[note] John Gee, "Facsimile 3," lecture given at the FARMS Book of Abraham Conference (16 October 1999), personal notes of conference talks by Michael Ash; see also, John Gee, "The Ancient Owners of the Joseph Smith Papyri" (Provo: FARMS, 1999), 1.

When the Captain would ask a question, the Borg guy would press his hand to his ear to receive an answer from the hive. HE HAD NO CAPACITY TO ANSWER SIMPLE QUESTIONS!

And I can vouch for everything Benson said. Mormon apologetics exists so that the truth-seeker can be impressed with pseudo-academic responses having no basis in fact. Also, they soothe the average member and allow his "faith" to be justified by imaginary facts which live in the minds of Mormon "experts" at BYU.

It is absolutely enfuriating to discuss simple facts with people who say "There were three witnesses." And you say, "Yes, but research proved that these witnesses signed prepared statements AND these statements said they saw plates from an angel. They later confirmed they saw the plates with their spiritual eyes, i.e., in a vision..."

TBM: Well, the experts have all the answers. Those sources are probably suspect. Probably enemies of the church spreading lies.

ME: Aren't you interested in hearing the explanation.

TBM: It wouldn't make any difference. I have faith.

ME: Faith in what? False statements?

TBM: Bears testimony. Arrgghh!


Anagrammy

It looks impressive with its big words and half page paragraphs all endorsed and blessed by the church through BYU, FAIR and the impressive sounding Neil A Maxwell Institute.

And if all you are doing is just quickly looking for information to disprove something some idiot mormonbasher has said, this is all the comforting that you need.

I am no scholar or scientist, but when I read Hugh Nibleys book that my parents had lying around many years ago, I tought to myself- wow! This guy isn't telling the truth. I don't even remember the specifics, but it was the way he went about spinning in circles, just like when you are trying to get out of trouble when you're hand is in the cookiejar.

And when I started needing real answers I went to FAIRLDS and to FARMS and even SHIELDS and came away shaking my head. They went to such lengths to cloud the issues that it really did become clear that the people who were telling the truth were the so-called AntiMormons.

So for all intents, all apologetics does for the faithful is to assure them that there are church approved scholars who have the answers, providing you don't actually read their work, and especially providing that you need the answer to confirm your commitment to the traditions of your fathers.

Their job is to obscure, and they are passably successful with people who have been trained since birth to swallow BS without gagging.