Bushman, Givens, & Muhlstein - What Would Ask Them

[DBMormon]

 

MormonDiscussion Podcast will be interviewing these three men over the next 4 weeks.  What would you ask each of them specifically?

 

These three each have had  a major influence on LDS apologetics over the last year and each have made an effort to both validate the struggler and to answer the tough issues.   Here's your chance to ask them the tough questions.  Yes, part of this helps me with ensuring we cover good material, but it also contributes to apologetic and discussion here now and after the interviews.  If this is an out of line question for here let me know

 

[Duncan]

I would ask Richard Bushman if he gets bored studying Joseph Smith

[Rivers]

I am curious to know about Bro. Givens' view regarding LGBT issues in light of his theological perspectives concerning sin.

[DBMormon]

I will definitely ask those.  I am planning to have as the overarching themes

 

- With Bro. Givens - Terryl - How to help the doubter as the over arching theme using his letter to a doubter as the backdrop.

 

- With Bro. Bushman - How leaders can be better equipped to help those struggling and use his 2008 conference "Joseph Smith and His Critics" as the back drop

 

especially this portion

 

We began by agreeing that criticisms of Joseph Smith should not be dismissed as foolish or purely evil. The negative attacks that disturb first-time readers are usually based on facts, not merely prejudiced fabrications. To play down the force of the criticism, we believe, only convinces the seekers that we do not understand. We appear to be sweeping trouble under the rug. They may have been devastated by a criticism; we must show that we understand why. Consequently, the seminar took as its first principle to state the negative argument as fully and accurately as we can. We try not to minimize the difficulty or prejudice the case against the critic. In no other way can we persuade the doubters that we understand the problem.

Secondly, we try to avoid dogmatic answers. Rather than replace the dogmatic negative attacks of the critics with our own dogmatic answers, we attempt to show that a more positive interpretation is possible. Critics often claim that Joseph’s sins were so egregious as to utterly disqualify him as a prophet. We can understand their viewpoint, but we think there is another side to the story. Rather than destroy the critics, we want to loosen their grip. In the long run, we believe this approach will persuade questioners more effectively than claims to certainty where none is possible. We believe in stating our own strong convictions about the church as a whole, but we do not to pretend to perfect knowledge about complex historical questions.

We know that airing criticisms troubles many Latter-day Saints. Like most Church teachers, the members of the seminar do not want to draw attention to questions that will only unsettle faithful members. But we also feel that silence is not the answer. The absence of instruction troubles questioners more than anything. They feel they have been betrayed because they came through their Church classes ignorant of the devastating information now a few clicks away on the internet. The gaps in their education leave them disillusioned and angry.

To counteract this lack of preparation, the seminar members have taken as our motto the scripture that begins: “As all have not faith, teach one another” (D&C 88:118). We are encouraged by the scriptural recognition that not all have faith, and by the appealing remedy, “teach one another.” For many questioners, loneliness is the heart of the problems. No one seems to understand. We are enjoined by this scripture to find these seekers and bring them into a fellowship of inquiry. We hope that our papers will help Church teachers create safe havens where questions may be asked and answers explored--where we can teach one another.

Edited August 24, 2013 by DBMormon

[Kevin Christensen]

I'd ask what question would you really love to answer that no one asks you.

 

Kevin Christensen

Bethel Park, PA

[CV75]

 

MormonDiscussion Podcast will be interviewing these three men over the next 4 weeks.  What would you ask each of them specifically?

 

These three each have had  a major influence on LDS apologetics over the last year and each have made an effort to both validate the struggler and to answer the tough issues.   Here's your chance to ask them the tough questions.  Yes, part of this helps me with ensuring we cover good material, but it also contributes to apologetic and discussion here now and after the interviews.  If this is an out of line question for here let me know

I would be interested in hearing which of their conclusions they attribute to enlightenment from the Holy Ghost, and how they have experienced the Holy Ghost helping them in their apologetic and rescue activities.

[Rivers]

I just remembered another thing I want to hear from Bro. Givens. This is more important than my previous question. On Bro. Givens' Mormon Stories interview, John Dehlin asked him to share what he admires about the Book of Mormon. Givens said he would talk about that in a later interview but never did. I want to hear Givens express his feelings about the book LDS consider to be the keystone of their religion and how it can strengthen or rekindle faith.

Edited August 25, 2013 by Rivers

[DBMormon]

Keep em coming!!!  I will try to get in most of these as time allows

[volgadon]

For Kerry Muhlstein, what are the three strongest claims against the antiquity of the Book of Abraham, and what are good counter approaches to them. If time doesn't permit, then just one rather than three.

[Freedom]

There are questions that cannot be answered and sometimes apologists perform all sorts of mental gymnastics to justify them. I would be interested in examples of issues that we cannot answer (swords and horses for example) and why these mysteries are not a problem. After 9/11 for example, there were many aspects that could not be explained which has led to all sorts of conspiracy theories.

Edited August 25, 2013 by Freedom

[Tacenda]

There are questions that cannot be answered and sometimes apologists perform all sorts of mental gymnastics to justify them. I would be interested in examples of issues that we cannot answer (swards and horses for example) and why these mysteries are not a problem. After 9/11 for example, there were many aspects that could not be explained which has led to all sorts of conspiracy theories.

+ 1

[Storm Rider]

There are questions that cannot be answered and sometimes apologists perform all sorts of mental gymnastics to justify them. I would be interested in examples of issues that we cannot answer (swards and horses for example) and why these mysteries are not a problem. After 9/11 for example, there were many aspects that could not be explained which has led to all sorts of conspiracy theories.

 

I always wanted a sward. I could see myself on the back of a harse waving my sward above the foe. You are now released to your standard, more intelligent conversation. Carry on.

[iriemon]

^{Uhh, yea....ask Kerry Muhlstein, if his position has changed, now that his youtube videos have been discredited by DR's. Cooney, and Dieleman, both UCLA professors of Egyptology? They flaty deny the idea that Abraham was a known legend in Egypt, or that the scrolls have anything to do with Abraham. Dr. Cooney goes so far as to give her opinion on Muhlstein and his videos:}  

 

^{"I watched the three videos, and I don't agree with any of it. The Ancient Egyptians had no concept of Abraham, so I don't know where he gets these comparisons. And no, most Egyptologists do not agree, despite what Kerry says. I know Kerry, but I do not have much respect for his work. Now I have even less. The fact that he is digging in Egypt is even more worrisome....this PHd was awarded before I got to UCLA, although I know that Kerry finished his text based dissertation after only 2 years of language training, which is rather laughable"}

[Craig in Austin]

I would ask, "what question would you like to ask Joseph Smith?"

[CA Steve]

I would like to ask Bro. Bushman his views on "No Man Knows My History" and what he thinks of Fawn Brodie as a historian.

[Freedom]

I would like to ask Bro. Bushman his views on "No Man Knows My History" and what he thinks of Fawn Brodie as a historian.

He does quote her in his book but mostly to establish that even she acknowledged that cultural influences on Joseph Smith. In an earlier book, he accuser her of seeing things that are not there.

[Darren10]

Critics ridicule Muhlstein for claiming that ancient Egyptian scrolls have the name ABRAAM on them. The critics say it is all part of a magical encantation and in no way related to Abraham of the Bible. I'd like him to respond to those critics.

[omni]

Critics ridicule Muhlstein for claiming that ancient Egyptian scrolls have the name ABRAAM on them. The critics say it is all part of a magical encantation and in no way related to Abraham of the Bible. I'd like him to respond to those critics.

David Bokovoy is a critic?

[Rivers]

David Bokovoy is a critic?

He is a critic of the missing scroll theory.

Here is a an article in which he duscusses his views about the BOA. There are two parts.

http://www.withoutend.org/book-abraham-apologetic-war-pt-1/

http://www.withoutend.org/book-abraham-apologetic-war-pt-2/

[Darren10]

David Bokovoy is a critic?

I originally saw the criticism / critique on CARM. And, yes, Bokovoy is a critic in this sense as well. In his words, Muhlstein is doing harm and bringing embarrassment to LDS apologists regarding the Book of Abraham.

Edited August 27, 2013 by Darren10

[Darren10]

To be certain, I thought Bokovoy made some very good ciritical points but his overall conclusion I'm a bit skeptical. I'd love to hear Muhlstein respond to this criticism.

Edited August 27, 2013 by Darren10

[Darren10]

A crucial claim of Gee's article is that ABRACAM (Magical 8.8)/ABRAAM (384:1.6) refer to the biblical Abraham in such a way as to prove the historicity of Joseph Smith's Book of Abraham. Unfortunately, he fails to acknowledge that his alleged references occur within series of magical abracadabra words.

That's essentially Bokovoy's argument against Muhlstein.

That's from the CARM website and mentioned article and I'd link it but I do believe Mormon Dialogue has asked folks not to link there do to it having pictures of the temple ceremonies and/or garments.

Edited August 27, 2013 by Darren10

[omni]

He is a critic of the missing scroll theory.

Here is a an article in which he duscusses his views about the BOA. There are two parts.

http://www.withoutend.org/book-abraham-apologetic-war-pt-1/

http://www.withoutend.org/book-abraham-apologetic-war-pt-2/

Yeah, I realize that...it was said tongue in cheek, but I was on my phone and couldn't add any emoticons.

[Buckeye]

Bill,

 

This could be asked of any of the scholars, but I have Givens specifically in mind.  I'm intrigued by his idea that agency and faith only exist in a sphere were there is sufficient evidence and lack of evidence to allow one to choose what they believe.  I'm paraphrasing there.  You should obviously use his actual statement.

 

Here is the question: at least for us mortals who cannot claim possession of absolute truth (though we may aspire to it), in a world in which there is sufficient evidence and lack of evidence to allow us agency, are we required to honor our fellow man's choices as equal to ours, even and especially if they choose differently?  As one example, is someone who looks over the evidence and concludes the BOM is a fraud making just as valid a decision as someone who concludes the BOM is true? 

[cinepro]

There are questions that cannot be answered and sometimes apologists perform all sorts of mental gymnastics to justify them. I would be interested in examples of issues that we cannot answer (swords and horses for example) and why these mysteries are not a problem. After 9/11 for example, there were many aspects that could not be explained which has led to all sorts of conspiracy theories.

 

 

Not to derail, but what after 9/11 couldn't be explained?