Popular Anti-Mormon Misconceptions

[Who Knows]

And you quite deliberately removed the phrase that removes the ambiguity.

I didn't expect you to believe me. But that's your perogative.

What, you never asserted that Dan was a paid apologist?

In which case, you haven't produced one.  Okay, fine.

Answer these questions, with a simple yes or no:

Is DP an apologist?

Has he gotten paid for apologetics?

It's probably misleading to call him a paid apologist. But he is an apologist who's gotten paid for apologetics.

I suppose I should feel insulted, or something.

Nah, it was just something that I read from JS last night. I thought it was pretty funny that he would write that.

But that's okay.  The important point is that LDS apologists, whether publishing for FARMS or otherwise, are (usually) unpaid.

Fixed.

[William the Conqueror]

A number of false claims are enduring features of the anti-Mormon demimonde.  Here are a few of them:

"The FARMS people are paid apologists."  The fact is that not one of them has received a red cent for their apologetics work.

Does any "Christian," concerned or otherwise, wish to defend these claims?

Regards,

Pahoran

Pahoran,

I simply don't have time to address all of these at once, but I thought I would give the readers of this thread the opportunity to hear responses to these one at a time by the Concerned Christians Discussion board where you recently got the Ultimate Q Ball or as they would say in my Fraternity, you got Blackballed.

Answer - Bob Betts of Concerned Christians:I've never stated, nor heard anyone else state, that the LDS apologists are "paid apologists." What I have stated and stick by is that the top LDS leaders are paid representatives of the church, leaving Mormons no right to judge the paid pastors of other churches. And, of course, Paul defended being supported by Christians when he was in the ministry (1 Tim. 5:18; 1 Cor. 9:3-19). Jesus also told the disciples to accept food and lodging in Luke 10:7 because "the laborer is worthy of his hire." (Luke 10:7)

But, I'd be surprised if FARMS people were paid apologists, since they're not allowed to officially speak for the church anyway.

[AndyOne]

"Do the women, when they pray, remember their husbands?... Do you uphold your husband before God as your lord? 'What!

[Jerubaal]

"Do the women, when they pray, remember their husbands?... Do you uphold your husband before God as your lord? 'What!

[Jerubaal]

Have we all learned to be altogether thus governed? No, we have not. But we are learning it: the men and women of Israel are learning it; but some of them are very dull scholars, and would a great deal rather go off and play than take a lesson; and they whine and cry over it, and sit on the dunce block rather than study and learn their lessons; and they will be dunces, because nothing but foolishness is bound up in their hearts. But many of us are learning to be governed by principle, not passion, and learning that we must become one,

[KevinG]

"Do the women, when they pray, remember their husbands?... Do you uphold your husband before God as your lord? 'What!

[Pahoran]

"Do the women, when they pray, remember their husbands?... Do you uphold your husband before God as your lord? 'What!

[Pahoran]

Pahoran,

I simply don't have time to address all of these at once, but I thought I would give the readers of this thread the opportunity to hear responses to these one at a time by the Concerned Christians Discussion board where you recently got the Ultimate Q Ball or as they would say in my Fraternity, you got Blackballed.

Please do not attempt to turn this thread into a board war. I would hate for it to get closed down before you had an opportunity to--how did you put it--"take Pahoran to the cleaners," wouldn't you?

Answer - Bob Betts of Concerned Christians:I've never stated, nor heard anyone else state, that the LDS apologists are "paid apologists." What I have stated and stick by is that the top LDS leaders are paid representatives of the church, leaving Mormons no right to judge the paid pastors of other churches. And, of course, Paul defended being supported by Christians when he was in the ministry (1 Tim. 5:18; 1 Cor. 9:3-19). Jesus also told the disciples to accept food and lodging in Luke 10:7 because "the laborer is worthy of his hire." (Luke 10:7)

But, I'd be surprised if FARMS people were paid apologists, since they're not allowed to officially speak for the church anyway.

So your only response is to cite an irrelevant Internet anti-Mormon saying that he doesn't make that claim.

Good for him.

Regards,

Pahoran

[Daniel Peterson]

"The FARMS people are paid apologists."  The fact is that not one of them has received a red cent for their apologetics work.

That's not true. DP himself in a thread a few months ago said he has received $$ for apologetics (not much, but more than 'a red cent').

Here's DP btw:

I've occasionally received fairly minimal payments for "apologetic" articles or for certain editorial tasks (the totals of which, broken down, almost certainly don't reach minimum wage)

Probably twice, I think, or perhaps three times, I've received honoraria of $50.00 or so for articles on Mormonism that appeared in books and that could perhaps, very broadly speaking, possibly be considered somewhat apologetic. In each case, I was surprised. (I've published several dozen articles on Mormonism.)

Other than that, zip.

I'm paid a fairly minimal amount for certain editorial work -- that's "editorial" as in "editing" -- but never, otherwise, for my Mormon-related writing.

If there is an editorial staff at FARMS, that is compensated for their efforts in reviewing and publishing apologetic articles, how is it a blatent lie/falsehood/myth to characterize them as paid apologists. They are apologists, and they are paid.

FARMS has a small staff of professional editors. (I'm not one of them. My job consists of a professorship in Islamic studies and Arabic and the academic editorship of a four-part dual-language translation series.) These professional editors help to produce books and journals. They are no more apologists because they edit the books than the printers are who print the books or the binders who bind them. They are paid to edit. If they write, they do it on their own time.

Peterson said he is paid to write apologetic material, in addition to payments for his editorial tasks.

No, Peterson did not. And if he had said it, he would either have been lying or insane.

On other topics raised on this thread:

I myself have the temple endowment ceremony memorized, and have had it memorized for years.

I received my endowments in (gasp!) early 1972, and there has never been anything in the endowment ceremony since that time stating that men would decide whether or not their wives entered heaven.

My son will enter the Missionary Training Center on 2 August, bound for Nagoya, Japan. Nagoya is on the east coast of Japan. The notion that missionaries are sent only to Christians and only to the western part of the country is utterly false.

[mig22]

this has to be the funniest thread of them all......

apologetics "explanations"

its a lie we get paid...well i was paid one two three times....but we dont get paid! so stop lying

[Ron Beron]

My son will enter the Missionary Training Center on 2 August, bound for Nagoya, Japan. Nagoya is on the east coast of Japan. The notion that missionaries are sent only to Christians and only to the western part of the country is utterly false.

Congratulations on your son going to Japan. I served my mission in Japan Tokyo, 1975-1977 and your son is going to have a great time. Tough, but great.

[Dr. Shades]

My son will enter the Missionary Training Center on 2 August, bound for Nagoya, Japan. Nagoya is on the east coast of Japan.

Really? That's where I served my mission. Cool!

Of course, I was there from 1990-1992, so I'm sure things have changed, but hearing about your son's call sure brings back memories.

[Daniel Peterson]

this has to be the funniest thread of them all......

apologetics "explanations"       

its a lie we  get paid...well i was paid one two three times....but we dont get paid! so stop lying

Good grief. One hundred and fifty entirely unexpected dollars scattered among dozens of very lengthy, complex, and heavily footnoted articles written over more than twenty years, and you think that makes me a "paid apologist" in anything more than the most boneheadedly literalistic and misleading sense?

At least I'm glad it amuses you.

The little baby down the street is amused by a bobbing balloon with a funny face on it. He laughs and laughs and laughs.

*****

Thanks for the congratulations. My son is absolutely thrilled. He's had a passion for Japanese cinema, Japanese food, and Japanese novels for several years already. He claimed that he had no preference as to where he went, and he reacted very calmly when he opened the envelope, but he's plainly ecstatic.

[Pahoran]

this has to be the funniest thread of them all......

apologetics "explanations"       

its a lie we  get paid...well i was paid one two three times....but we dont get paid! so stop lying

That is indeed hilarious. As in, hilariously inaccurate.

The controversial assertion is that "FARMS people are paid [i.e. professional] apologists" and therefore untrustworthy.

The accusation is false.

The fact that DCP received perhaps three unexpected payments of $50 does not go any distance towards supporting it. Inter alia, he can hardly be accused of writing apologetic articles for money he wasn't expecting to get.

Regards,

Pahoran

[hondo]

Japan was a hot place to go in the early 90's for people in my stake as 3/4 of everyone who got mission calls went there. My brother and his three friends were the only exceptions.

[AndyOne]

Inter alia, he can hardly be accused of writing apologetic articles for money he wasn't expecting to get.

Oh, come on! Sure he can! Although it's an extremely weak, even illusory, point that doesn't even begin to justify the amount of space it's taken up on this thread. But it can be done. Where would half the people be on this (and that other board) if Dr. Peterson weren't around to pester!

Shall I repost the one - and after an extensive google search I could only come up with one - quote from Erastus Snow so we can debate what he said and whether it has any value as precedent? Maybe then we'll get back to more meaningful misconceptions.

By the way, Pahoran, you should check out the rest of that talk! Elder Snow was (at least if the talk is representative) a real misogynistic, man of his times - which, IMO, indicates that his view (if read to suggest that men DO have a veto power over their wives exaltation) may have had a lot to do with his own view of women, not his correct understanding of doctrine.

We had one of these perennial high counselor types who spoke in our ward a few times. He always said the most outrageous things - liked the deep, deep doctrine. I remember Sunday dinners when we'd sit around and talk about his Cleon Skousenesque sermons on preparing for the end times, and my parents would respond: "Oh, that's just Brother X, he's a little much but he's got a great heart." I wonder, in the early, more chaotic, years of the church whether there weren't quite a few Brother Xs in the general leadership. Unfortunately, LDS are such good record keepers that the words of such leaders are there to scrutinize, but without anyone to say "Oh, that was just Brother X ...."

[MorningStar]

Daniel Peterson does not get paid for apologetics.

I had a friend who was in poverty and because her husband would not get and keep a job, I told her if she wanted to get a job to afford necessities, I would watch her son for absolutely nothing. I was happy just to see food on her table and enough diapers for her son. I was not getting paid to watch her son and never expected to. When things improved for them, she later insisted on giving me $50. We argued over it for a while and she ended up throwing the money at me and running away. I didn't consider this as being paid for watching her son because that was not the arrangement, but I considered it a gift of gratitude for the help I gave her.

There was no arrangement for Dr. Peterson to be paid and someone sending an unexpected check in the mail for all his hard work does not make him a "paid apologist". Someone just decided to reward him for his contributions he gave, expecting nothing in return.

[AndyOne]

Someone just decided to reward him for his contributions he gave, expecting nothing in return.

$50 for a thoroughly researched and footnoted article borders on offensive - maybe just the thanks would be better.

[Calm]

Depends on how it was given--a check with a note of "take your wife out to dinner on us" is a nice thank you gift, imo.

[MorningStar]

Someone just decided to reward him for his contributions he gave, expecting nothing in return.

$50 for a thoroughly researched and footnoted article borders on offensive - maybe just the thanks would be better.

People can offend me with $50 anytime! I'll get over it eventually.

[AndyOne]

--a check with a note of "take your wife out to dinner on us" is a nice thank you gift, imo.

$50 - for what? A nice romantic dinner at Chili's?

Bottom line is that it's pittance - nothing - akin to not getting paid at all, which is the point some have not been getting on this thread.

[MorningStar]

--a check with a note of "take your wife out to dinner on us" is a nice thank you gift, imo.

$50 - for what? A nice romantic dinner at Chili's?

Bottom line is that it's pittance - nothing - akin to not getting paid at all, which is the point some have not been getting on this thread.

Yeah, that was the point we were making. He's not getting paid. A $50 thank you is not payment for writing the articles.

[Catholic Girl]

Okay CG, let's apply your dictum to a case you and I are both familiar with.

A while back, you claimed that LDS missionaries in Japan only serve in the western part of the country, where most of the Christians live.

[Catholic Guy]

The funny thing is they have to use extra-Biblical sources to sustain their argument.

Say, Catholic Guy, what is your feeling on the Apocrypha? Do you agree with Jerome's assessment that they are useful for instruction, but not for doctrine, or do you think they are doctrinal?

Sorry it took so long to respond to your question about St. Jerome and the Apocrypha. That would make a great new thread; you should use this question to ask if sola scriptura Protestants agree with your statement about St. Jerome and the view of extra Biblical traditions and teachings in the early church. First give the quote from St. Jerome on the issue and what source it comes from, and then ask the question. This will bring up topics about the doctrinal value of the Apocalypse of Peter, The Protoevangelium of James, Acts of Paul and Thecla, ect. and quite a few other Apocryphal works including the Gnostic, Judiastic, Docetic, Ebionitic, Nestorian, and Abyssinianes writings.

[Markk]

Hi

To say that apologists do not get paid is the whole truth for most of them, and mostly true for all of them.[/QUOTE]

Classic