Can LDS Apologists Be Kind?

[Jeff K.]

I didn't. That's why I added the commentary from the BD and Institute Manual.

Please note the question of the Nasi and how it pertains.

[bookofmormontruth]

An interesting juxtaposition. Does that mean you are hoping to "get a poster suspended" thereby?

No. It was not.

You appear to have leaped to a faulty conclusion.

In reality, it "was a clear attempt" to show you how your posts appear: and that is that you seem to be willing to tolerate more from the attackers than the defenders. If you're going to tut-tut about the "unkindness" of the apologists, then naturally we wonder whether your scoldings will be even-handed or not.

I'm sure you hope that the apologists will see your posts and take a moment to reflect on whether your criticisms might have merit. Is it too much to ask that you might do the same?

I may be a little old-fashioned; after all, I come from a generation for whom loyalty is still a virtue. And I have been around the LDS-themed boards for a long time. I have learned that, regardless of where people stand regarding the Church, anyone can agree or disagree with anyone else about anything; and I have also learned that in the long run, people invariably show where their loyalties lie just by what they agree and disagree with the most.

For me, there is merit in even a flawed defense of the Church of Jesus Christ, and no merit in even a flawless attack. That's my bottom line because that's where my loyalties lie; so I will support even a flawed defense, and I will dispute even a flawless attack (if ever I see one.)

Regards,

Pahoran

I have always wondered if I was born in the wrong time period and I am in awe at the loyalty that the early days of the Church had (Joseph Smith, Hyrum Smith, Brigham Young and Porter Rockwell). We might come from different generations Pahoran, but loyalty is still alive and well.

[why me]

It may seem unfair, but there is a different level of expectation. The critics aren't representing the church or Christ when they speak. For better or worse, the apologists are.

You see mercy, we are at different levels here. First, I don't think that you have been personally attacked by critics. For those of us who have, it is not very pleasant but it is tolerated. It comes with the turf. I have always risen above the critics and their personal attacks. The mods here know that I am on a critic board defending the lds church and they see my posts and how I respond. However, I can understand why an apologist may lose it at times. This board is tame when compared to the critic boards. To be on the critic boards an apologsist must have nerves of steel because they will come across all sorts of posts that range from a nice debate to harsh personal attacks and to name calling.

And we can see Joseph Smith as a model. How did he respond to former friends who left the church and became critical of him? Did he shower the critics with love. What is interesting about Joseph is that when some of the witnesses left the church, he became somewhat aggressive toward them. In fact this is one of the most interesting aspects of church history. If the witnesses were in on a great fraud, JS did not seem to mind attacking them. Interesting. And in an interesting way, that says much about the truth claims of the lds church. Those witnesses saw what they saw and felt with their hands what they felt--the plates and none denied it regardless of how JS treated them when they left and attacked him.

[mercyngrace]

An interesting juxtaposition. Does that mean you are hoping to "get a poster suspended" thereby?

It means I want to know where the lines are which is precisely why I raised the issue here and publicly acknowledged my use of the report button.

Pahoran, I value loyalty. My loyalty is precisely what compels me to seek with whole heart to be an example of the believers.

Edit: Regarding my even-handedness, you may see here that I agreed that the cross posting was not Christ-like.

[mercyngrace]

Please note the question of the Nasi and how it pertains.

I will, thanks!

[why me]

I am just going to make this my only response to this specifically because it is a big issue for the board. Critics use this line of thinking all the time to shut out defenders. By using this do you intend to shut out other defenders publicly? Food for thought.

Nemesis

I suppose that some posters on this forum have this idea that members need to control their emotions when something, someone they love and themselves come under attack in a harsh and mocking way.

When the mormons were attacked by mobs in Missouri and in Nauvoo, the saints formed militias to defend themselves. After awhile they decided not to go to their death like a sheep to a slaughter house. Now they could have controled their emotions and turned the other cheek. But many would have died as a result.

Apologetics need to be verbally aggressive against the enemy at times.

But I can also understand why apologists should attempt to control their emotions and not take the bait that the critics may give.

[why me]

As members of the church, we made covenants to stand as witnesses. Is this board a place where we check those covenants at the door?

Wasn't it the mods who asked for "gentlemanly discussion"?

Actually mercy the mods here do a good job in checking mocking aggression but their also needs to be an understanding that the tone here is different from the tone on critic boards where lds posters here can also post there. And these emotions from the critic board come here. Will is a case in point as is daniel. I have already stated that posts here can end up hijacked and posted on the critic board where the lds poster is duly mocked. The latest victim was LeSellers who had the misfortune of having his English skills mocked on the critic board.

[mercyngrace]

You see mercy, we are at different levels here. First, I don't think that you have been personally attacked by critics.

You would be wrong in so thinking. But, to be honest, I am more often a victim of "friendly fire" which perhaps explains my lower tolerance for the shots fired from the apologist side.

For those of us who have, it is not very pleasant but it is tolerated. It comes with the turf. I have always risen above the critics and their personal attacks. The mods here know that I am on a critic board defending the lds church and they see my posts and how I respond. However, I can understand why an apologist may lose it at times. This board is tame when compared to the critic boards. To be on the critic boards an apologsist must have nerves of steel because they will come across all sorts of posts that range from a nice debate to harsh personal attacks and to name calling.

"At times" would be nice.

And we can see Joseph Smith as a model. How did he respond to former friends who left the church and became critical of him? Did he shower the critics with love. What is interesting about Joseph is that when some of the witnesses left the church, he became somewhat aggressive toward them. In fact this is one of the most interesting aspects of church history. If the witnesses were in on a great fraud, JS did not seem to mind attacking them. Interesting. And in an interesting way, that says much about the truth claims of the lds church. Those witnesses saw what they saw and felt with their hands what they felt--the plates and none denied it regardless of how JS treated them when they left and attacked him.

I love Joseph Smith but he isn't the model.

[Deborah]

I have always wondered if I was born in the wrong time period and I am in awe at the loyalty that the early days of the Church had (Joseph Smith, Hyrum Smith, Brigham Young and Porter Rockwell).

Keep in mind that the church even then had those who betrayed it. It was heartbreaking to Joseph who valued loyalty. It was the apostates at the time of Kirtland that brought so much persecution on the church and it's apostates today who make is so hard for the church.

[mercyngrace]

Actually mercy the mods here do a good job in checking mocking aggression but their also needs to be an understanding that the tone here is different from the tone on critic boards where lds posters here can also post there. And these emotions from the critic board come here. Will is a case in point as is daniel. I have already stated that posts here can end up hijacked and posted on the critic board where the lds poster is duly mocked. The latest victim was LeSellers who had the misfortune of having his English skills mocked on the critic board.

Perhaps then this board isn't the place for people who are seeking to discuss Mormonism. Perhaps it's just a place for these long-term feuds to continue being hashed out.

PS If you see the edit in my response to Pahoran, you'll note that I condemned the cross-posting.

[Hestia]

Perhaps then this board isn't the place for people who are seeking to discuss Mormonism.

It's not the place for those who are investigating Mormonism. They should be encouraged to go to the official church website. It is a discussion board and one of the few apparently where reasoned discussion can take place.

[why me]

While we're talking about being nicey-nice to those who attack us, might I remind everyone that the Savior himself said this in Matthew 23:27 "Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye are like unto whited sepulchres, which indeed appear beautiful outward, but are within full of dead men’s bones, and of all uncleanness." Christ was kind, but he spared no words for the hypocrites whose task seemed to be to mock and to appear as more intelligent and more knowledgeable than those around them. Reminds me of some of those who attack the church and its members today.

Those who speak of nicey-nice to the critics have not been attacked personally by the critics. Nor have they perhaps defended the church against all sorts of innuendos over and over again on critic boards where church leaders past and present are bashed and mocked and the lds church is put through a ringer. When one defends the lds church for years, the same old same old critique can show its head. It is like being on a hamster wheel. Patience can become in short supply.

[Nemesis]

Perhaps it's just a place for these long-term feuds to continue being hashed out.

There are some unfortunate bitter rivalries that won't ever die. It doesn't help that a core group tends to run back for reinforcement and gloat at what they are doing so the others come running to get their pot shots in.

Nemesis

[mercyngrace]

There are some unfortunate bitter rivalries that won't ever die. It doesn't help that a core group tends to run back for reinforcement and gloat at what they are doing so the others come running to get their pot shots in.

Nemesis

No. It doesn't.

For the record, I post by the same username on every LDS forum I frequent. I don't do sock puppets. And I do not post on MDB.

WYSIWYG.

[mercyngrace]

Sure, discussions can get heated; but that is in the nature of debate. If you don’t like the heat, you get out of the kitchen. But that is part of the cut and thrust of debate.

One quick last comment...

It's not about liking, fearing, or being offended by "the heat". It's about whether the heat is productive in terms of the ultimate goals that we as LDS share.

At least that's my take.

[bookofmormontruth]

Keep in mind that the church even then had those who betrayed it. It was heartbreaking to Joseph who valued loyalty. It was the apostates at the time of Kirtland that brought so much persecution on the church and it's apostates today who make is so hard for the church.

I agree 100%.

Apostates serve a purpose for there must be an opposition in all things so I believe they do more good than harm in today's world. For honest truth seekers see through the lies and can distinguish between dark and light despite the facade of lies that are perpetuated by those who cannot leave the Lord's Church alone. Hence why so many are drawn to comment on LDS boards yet they will say it is for this reason or that. We know the real reason.

Apostates and the likes fit the same mold like they always have. We also know the same patterns that lead to apostasy even though they conveniently believe they don't fit in that predictable category. Attacks are easily done behind a computer, but should we be concerned the attacks will take on as the early days of the Church?

Prop 8 and the vile protests made me think so. So easy it is to take your hate on the Lord's Church - always has and always will be.

[Nemesis]

One quick last comment...

It's not about liking, fearing, or being offended by "the heat". It's about whether the heat is productive in terms of the ultimate goals that we as LDS share.

At least that's my take.

What works for the goose may not work for the gander. I guess what I have been trying to say in a nice way is that posters need to conduct themselves how they see fit not tell others how they should post. That's the moderation team's job.

Nemesis

[bookofmormontruth]

What works for the goose may not work for the gander. I guess what I have been trying to say in a nice way is that posters need to conduct themselves how they see fit not tell others how they should post. That's the moderation team's job.

Nemesis

And I will also try to say this in a nice way, but who moderates the moderation team?

[Nemesis]

And I will also try to say this in a nice way, but who moderates the moderation team?

No one by design, we also run independently of eachother. Its total meyham!

Nemesis

[WalkerW]

Cate, I'm happy to share my email address with you and any others in the forum so we can keep in contact.

bokovoy@brandeis.edu

Warm wishes to all,

--DB

You'll be back. You always come back.

Like all good apostates, you just can't leave it alone.

[mfbukowski]

Apostates serve a purpose for there must be an opposition in all things so I believe they do more good than harm in today's world.

You mean "Oppostates"?

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

You'll be back. You always come back.

Like all good apostates, you just can't leave it alone.

He is back right now.

[bookofmormontruth]

You mean "Oppostates"?

ROFL! I like!

[David Bokovoy]

You see mercy, we are at different levels here. First, I don't think that you have been personally attacked by critics. For those of us who have, it is not very pleasant but it is tolerated. It comes with the turf. I have always risen above the critics and their personal attacks. The mods here know that I am on a critic board defending the lds church and they see my posts and how I respond. However, I can understand why an apologist may lose it at times. This board is tame when compared to the critic boards. To be on the critic boards an apologsist must have nerves of steel because they will come across all sorts of posts that range from a nice debate to harsh personal attacks and to name calling.

And we can see Joseph Smith as a model. How did he respond to former friends who left the church and became critical of him? Did he shower the critics with love. What is interesting about Joseph is that when some of the witnesses left the church, he became somewhat aggressive toward them. In fact this is one of the most interesting aspects of church history. If the witnesses were in on a great fraud, JS did not seem to mind attacking them. Interesting. And in an interesting way, that says much about the truth claims of the lds church. Those witnesses saw what they saw and felt with their hands what they felt--the plates and none denied it regardless of how JS treated them when they left and attacked him.

Despite the fact that I am done with online message boards, I cannot leave this thread undone. Do me a favor and ban me for too much preaching, but this battle is far too important to me personally and I refuse to surrender. It is true that the Prophet Joseph on occasion became aggressive with former believers. But was this aggressive tact in those instances the correct approach? In truth, the Lord on occasion had to remind the Prophet not to engage in such behavior.

For example, in a revelation dated 16th December, 1833, the Lord informed the Prophet Joseph Smith that if the President of the United States would not respond to the way the Saints were treated in Missouri, that God would “arise and come forth out of his hiding place, and in his fury vex the nation” (D&C 101:89). This would happen in the Lord's due time. However, by the time Joseph was incarcerated in Liberty Jail, the Prophet had seen enough and as the President of the Church, prayed to God asking the Lord to fulfill this specific promise and smite the Church’s enemies:

"O God, where art thou? And where is the pavilion that covereth thy hiding place? How long shall thy hand be stayed, and thine eye, yea thy pure eye, behold from the eternal heavens the wrongs of thy people and of thy servants, and thine ear be penetrated with their cries? Yea, O Lord, how long shall they suffer these wrongs and unlawful oppressions, before thine heart shall be softened toward them, and thy bowels be moved with compassion toward them? O Lord God Almighty, maker of heaven, earth, and seas, and of all things that in them are, and who controllest and subjectest the devil, and the dark and benighted dominion of Sheol—stretch forth thy hand; let thine eye pierce; let thy pavilion be taken up; let thy hiding place no longer be covered; let thine ear be inclined; let thine eheart be softened, and thy bowels moved with compassion toward us. Let thine aanger be kindled against our enemies; and, in the fury of thine heart, with thy bsword cavenge us of our wrongs” (D&C 121:1-5; emphasis added).

The Lord then took the opportunity to school the Prophet in the importance of exercising patience and love with one’s enemies even in the most extreme cases of persecution. These famous verses from the D&C are often quoted, but seldom in their proper historical context, which includes the Prophet using his authority unrighteously to call upon God to fulfill his promise to “arise and come forth out of his hiding place":

“We have learned by sad experience that it is the nature and disposition of almost all men, as soon as they get a little authority, as they suppose, they will immediately begin to exercise unrighteous dominion. Hence many are called, but few are chosen. No power or influence can or ought to be maintained by virtue of the priesthood, only by persuasion, by long-suffering, by gentleness and meekness, and by love unfeigned; By kindness, and pure knowledge, which shall greatly enlarge the soul without hypocrisy, and without guile. Reproving betimes with sharpness, when moved upon by the Holy Ghost; and then showing forth afterwards an increase of love toward him whom thou hast reproved, lest he esteem thee to be his enemy” (vv. 39-43).

The Lord's way is very clear and apologists who do not follow this pattern do considerable harm: "by persuasion, by long-suffering, by gentleness and meekness, and by love unfeigned; By kindness, and pure knowledge, which shall greatly enlarge the soul without hypocrisy, and without guile"

And lest anyone assume that with “sharpness” here means with anger and/or cruelly, the Church, via Elder H. Burke Peterson has taught:

The most ". . . misunderstood and misused scripture is Doctrine & Covenants 121:43, which reads, 'Reproving betimes with sharpness, when moved upon by the Holy Ghost; and then showing forth afterwards an increase of love toward him whom thou has reproved, lest he esteem thee to be his enemy.'

"Perhaps we should consider what it means to reprove with sharpness. Reproving with sharpness means reproving with clarity, with loving firmness, with serious intent. It does not mean reproving with sarcasm, or with bitterness, or with clenched teeth and raised voice. One who reproves as the Lord has directed deals in principles, not personalities. He does not attack character or humiliate or demean an individual." H. Burke Peterson, "Unrighteous Dominion in Marriage," Ensign, July 1989.

The Lord has provided a pattern and those who attempt to defend the Church against "apostates" have a responsibility to follow that pattern. The Lord did not always sanction Joseph’s anger towards critics and non-believers, even when his and others lives were literally in danger. How, therefore, can an online LDS apologist whose life is no way in danger claim the right to respond harshly to criticism raised against the Church?

Such actions clearly do no reflect the inspired counsel we receive today from our leaders. Moreover, some of the examples in which Joseph acted harshly towards critics directly contributed to his own suffering.

[WalkerW]

Despite the fact that I am done with online message boards, I cannot leave this thread undone. Do me a favor and ban me for too much preaching, but this battle is far too important to me personally and I refuse to surrender. It is true that the Prophet Joseph on occasion become aggressive with former believers. But was this aggressive tack in those instances the correct approach? In truth, the Lord on occasion had to remind the Prophet not to engage in such behavior.

For example, in a revelation dated 16th December, 1833, the Lord informed the Prophet Joseph Smith that if the President of the United States would not respond to the way the Saints were treated in Missouri, that God would “arise and come forth out of his hiding place, and in his fury vex the nation” (D&C 101:89). This would happen in the Lord's due time. However, by the time Joseph was incarcerated in Liberty Jail, the Prophet had seen enough and as the President of the Church, prayed to God asking the Lord to fulfill this specific promise and smite the Church’s enemies:

"O God, where art thou? And where is the pavilion that covereth thy hiding place? How long shall thy hand be stayed, and thine eye, yea thy pure eye, behold from the eternal heavens the wrongs of thy people and of thy servants, and thine ear be penetrated with their cries? Yea, O Lord, how long shall they suffer these wrongs and unlawful oppressions, before thine heart shall be softened toward them, and thy bowels be moved with compassion toward them? O Lord God Almighty, maker of heaven, earth, and seas, and of all things that in them are, and who controllest and subjectest the devil, and the dark and benighted dominion of Sheol—stretch forth thy hand; let thine eye pierce; let thy pavilion be taken up; let thy hiding place no longer be covered; let thine ear be inclined; let thine eheart be softened, and thy bowels moved with compassion toward us. Let thine aanger be kindled against our enemies; and, in the fury of thine heart, with thy bsword cavenge us of our wrongs” (D&C 121:1-5; emphasis added).

The Lord then took the opportunity to school the Prophet in the importance of exercising patience and love to one’s enemies even in the most extreme cases of persecution. These famous verses from the D&C are often quoted, but seldom in their proper historical context, which includes the Prophet using his authority unrighteously to call upon God to fulfill his promise to “arise and come forth out of his hiding place":

“We have learned by sad experience that it is the nature and disposition of almost all men, as soon as they get a little authority, as they suppose, they will immediately begin to exercise unrighteous dominion. Hence many are called, but few are chosen. No power or influence can or ought to be maintained by virtue of the priesthood, only by persuasion, by long-suffering, by gentleness and meekness, and by love unfeigned; By kindness, and pure knowledge, which shall greatly enlarge the soul without hypocrisy, and without guile. Reproving betimes with sharpness, when moved upon by the Holy Ghost; and then showing forth afterwards an increase of love toward him whom thou hast reproved, lest he esteem thee to be his enemy” (vv. 39-43).

The Lord's way is very clear and apologists who do not follow this pattern do considerable harm: "by persuasion, by long-suffering, by gentleness and meekness, and by love unfeigned; By kindness, and pure knowledge, which shall greatly enlarge the soul without hypocrisy, and without guile"

And lest anyone assume that with “sharpness” here means with anger and/or cruelly, the Church, via Elder H. Burke Peterson has taught:

The most ". . . misunderstood and misused scripture is Doctrine & Covenants 121:43, which reads, "Reproving betimes with sharpness, when moved upon by the Holy Ghost; and then showing forth afterwards an increase of love toward him whom thou has reproved, lest he esteem thee to be his enemy."

"Perhaps we should consider what it means to reprove with sharpness. Reproving with sharpness means reproving with clarity, with loving firmness, with serious intent. It does not mean reproving with sarcasm, or with bitterness, or with clenched teeth and raised voice. One who reproves as the Lord has directed deals in principles, not personalities. He does not attack character or humiliate or demean an individual." H. Burke Peterson, "Unrighteous Dominion in Marriage," Ensign, July 1989.

The Lord has provided a pattern and those who attempt to defend the Church against "apostates" have a responsibility to follow that pattern. The Lord did not always sanction Joseph’s anger towards critics and non-believers, even when his and others lives were literally in danger. How, therefore, can an online LDS apologist whose life is no way in dangesr claim the right to respond harshly to criticism raised against the Church?

Such actions clearly do no reflect the inspired council we receive today from our leaders. Moreover, some of the examples in which Joseph acted harshly towards critics directly contributed to his own suffering.

If you are truly finished online, then send me your would-be thread posts: choosedawright@yahoo.com.