Pray-tell when did the words..."Scholars", "Know" & "True" have their meanings changed???

And sheesh...where did ALL of us "Non-Scholars" go WRONG???

http://mormonscholarstestify.org/category/testimonies

Or so it seems to me...

How about we are pseudo-"Scholars" who KNOW we like going to the Chruch that claims it's "True"?

Dearest My Lady Ashteroth of Utah,

I can live with that!

Am thanking Her Highness for sharing such wisdom with me.

Forever Yours,

BTDTEM

I'm sure they could find more than 358 credentialed scholars that can testify to the opposite.

A mormon testimony means nothing to anyone but the bearer.

Or find me only, oh, a dozen or so credentialed non-Mormon scholars who would testify Mormonism is true.

See, this is the basic problem of the BoM Witnesses. They were all friends and family, and possibly co-conspirators. Their testimonies mean very little. Rather, the witnesses should have been people outside JS's circle. Respected people. People who didn't know each other. People who had nothing to gain.

The first thing my stepson sent his father and I was a testimony from someone on that site. He said he thought we'd be able to relate to the person. Why on earth he thought that I have no clue.

I don't recall who it was, but he came across as someone who had stuck his head in the sand for years, and had zero intention of ever taking it out. I was insulted that he thought we were that ignorant. I told him that, and he never sent one of those again.

358 Credentialed "Scholars" are members of a cult.

I only sampled a few of them but, correct me if I am wrong, did 'anyone' say they had a 'spirit, voice, revelation, etc.' specifically, tell them the LDS church, JS or BoM was true????


That is my challenge to all Mormons with a 'testimony' ----- JS had God and a number of 'spirits' appear to tell him. Why can't any other Mormon get something similar versus a 'good feeling' like when we watch The Sound of Music.

This is classic BANDWAGON PROPAGANDA--lots more of smart, scholarly, people say it's true--so it must be true. Of course, the Morg will also use a FAMOUS PERSON ENDORSEMENT--lookie here, I'm the Boner and I joined the Mormons church--it has to be true.

Any guesses as to how many of those BYU scholars would remain employed at the Y if they announced the church was a fucking lie?

Yep -- appeals to both "authority" and "popularity."
Two fallacies in one.
I'm so convinced!


Not.

There are something like 7.5 billion human beings alive at this moment.

If, say, 7 billion of them bear their testimonies and declare that the church is true and the Book of Mormon is the real deal, will that change my mind?

[drum roll..........]

Short answer: no. Long answer: no.

I mean, if they believe--that's great! Have at it! Enjoy! As long as they leave me alone, they can throw in Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny to their belief system and I'm totally cool with it!

This post provides a personal experience and note-exchange I had with Professor Leonard Arrington, who at the time, was the "Church Historian".

I bought and read Brother Arrington's book, "Brigham Young, American Moses" (1985). It impressed me a good deal, as it was far above other LDS authors' gooey biography's of prominent LDS leaders, and provided loads of very interesting stories and facts reg. B.Y. and the church of his era. Also, it attracted national attention by "non-members" interested in learning about the strange Mormons in Utah.

Unfortunately for Bro. Arrington, in one paragraph (long forgotten now) of his book, in one sentence, he wrote something which the--then current--"Brethren" took as a criticism of the church (even though many or most, at that time, lacked a scholarly degree).

WHAM! Bro. Arrington was promptly demoted by these ignorant Brethren from being "Church Historian", and was shipped off to BYU and given some meaningless, demeaning title.

I don't know if Prof. Arrington's name was included in the "358 Credentialed Mormon Scholars who Bore Testimony" (as he was of a different era), but I doubt it. (Besides, the "358" who were included, likely were/are "yes" men to the leading brethren who chose them to prepare this list. (Who would dare say "no" to this request?).

Just before Prof. Arrington was demoted is when I wrote my note to him, admiring his remarkable book. He sent a return hand-written note to me, stating something to the effect that he was pleased that a "colleague" (me), had taken the time and trouble to write to him my appreciation of his work. (Perhaps other "active" leaders of the church were afraid to do so?)

I still have his letter (now a collector's item?).

Maybe one of you out there who has access to this list will report whether or not his name is on it. It is the church's loss if they didn't claim him as such, but I kind of hope he didn't contribution his name (if he was asked). (Maybe he is a bigger--more forgiving--person than I, reg. the slight they made to him, or even has passed away to a much deserved rest.)

Well Satan is on the list so maybe that's something to cheer about. I also here Satan is a *gasp* homosexual.

Here ya go Polly...

http://mormonscholarstestify.org/2620/leonard-j-arrington

Or so it seems to me...

He died in 1999. They pieced together some quotes in 2011 making it seem he willingly contributed.

Most of them seem to be from BYU or "private scholars..." Yeah, no.

If anyone is curious, I'm sick and have some time on my hands. 110 of these 385 "scholars" listed a university other than BYU, the church education system, or SVU as their research institution. Of those 110, over half were from UVU, Utah State, the University of Utah or Weber State. So yeah...false advertisement majorly.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/17/2016 10:36PM by woodsmoke.

"More Doctors Smoke Camels" ad
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gCMzjJjuxQI



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/18/2016 12:14AM by anybody.

It looks like scholars are like anyone else. They'll believe anything if their paycheck depends on it.

My southern orthopaedic surgeon also believes in a Christian God and a 6,000 year-old earth. He keeps telling me, "I'm prayin' for your son!" Yet he apparently went to university and medical school, and became a specialist and a surgeon. Even the most educated people can retain idiocy in certain lock-boxes and pigeon holes of their minds. Russ Nelson did it. You spin some people around and see that some sides of their bodies have never been exposed to the sun and are getting disease and rot.

See EXMormon scholars testify:

(Google it - it's on a website whose name is a banned word here)

We might ask, what is the point of the MST website anyway? Here is what is expressly stated:

"There are some who may feel that people of education and learning can’t be religious. It is hoped that these testimonies will help dispel that myth, educate, and give  insights into the thoughts and feelings of LDS scholars."

Well, first of all the premise is empirically false. The fact that scholars can indeed be religious can be affirmed by a simple statistical survey, and no one believes that scholars cannot be religious. Moreover, the same method would reveal, as does the MST website itself, that such scholars can believe in Mormonism. But, of course, this is not the point.

The real question is whether such scholars can "rationally" be religious, or "rationally" believe in Mormonism. If such rationality allows the "evidence" of one's subjective feelings, and excludes only beliefs that are contradictory, then here again, we might say, O.K. in forming beliefs, it is arguably rational to follow the dictates of your experience and intuitions, so long as they are not self-contradictory. But do not confuse this brand of rationality with the rationality of objective evidence--which is what scholarship and education are all about!

In the purely subjective and personal view of "rationality" there is no nexus between the facts of one's education or academic expertise, and the accompanying religious or Mormon faith. This very disconnect makes MST entirely meaningless at best and fraudulent at worst. What MST is really trying to communicate is the proposition, "If Mormon scholars can believe, so can you." But that is the fraudulent part, because the beliefs of these scholars are not scholarly based, but rather psychologically based.

Suppose I said: "There are some who may feel that people of wealth cannot be Democrats. It is hoped that these testimonies will help dispel that myth." What then follows are "testimonies" of wealthy people who indeed profess to be Democrats. Case closed. But it doesn't follow that being wealthy somehow "supports" being a Democrat, or that there is some nexus between wealth and being a Democrat. The mere fact that such is possible does not have the slightest significance in supporting Democrats per se. Similarly, the mere fact that it is possible for someone to be educated and a Mormon has no significance whatsoever with respect to the validity of Mormonism, or even as a rational motivation for a non-scholar to believe in Mormonism; just as the observation that some wealthy people are Democrats does not provide any rational motivation for being a Democrat.