Professional Antimormons' Efforts: Do They Achieve Their Aims?

[USU78]

Another poster in another thread stated:

 

 

[A]mong the most systematically determined of the anti-Mormons, Jerald & Sandra Tanner, the result of all their hard work was to strengthen the LDS Church.  That was the conclusion of Georgia Tech history professor Lawrence Foster (a non-Mormon) in his "Career Apostates: Reflections on the [Life and] Work of Jerald and Sandra Tanner," Dialogue, 17/2 (Summer 1984), 35-60 (the complete title is Foster’s), published in revised form as “Apostate Believers: Jerald and Sandra Tanner’s Encounter with Mormon History,” in R. Launius and L. Thatcher, eds., Differing Visions: Dissenters in Mormon History (1994), 343-365.   The Dialogue version is available at https://dialoguejour...e_V17N02_37.pdf .

 

 

Take the poll and let us know what you think about that.

[The Nehor]

Their efforts may have been fruitless in this life but in the next they can look forward to a just reward for their works.

[3DOP]

Interesting poll. What IS the "aim" of professional apologists?

 

Assuredly they believe what they are saying. But they usually need to make a buck too. One aim is to find a niche market that will pay the mortgage. When that happens, the books, pamphlets, and talks will keep coming whether the original "aim" is being met or not.

Edited May 19, 2014 by 3DOP

[mnn727]

Well 20+ years ago when I was an investigator, I checked books out of the library (Internet was still young)  by the Tanners and found myself saying "That's not what 'we' believe" (notice the use of 'we' before I even joined - well, I did investigate for over a year and after lesson #3 I didn't miss a Sunday at Church until long after I was baptized). So I then read further and found out that the Tanners were using half truths and twisting things and very creatively using ellipses, so yes, the Tanners are PART of the reason I am a member today.

[Tacenda]

Well 20+ years ago when I was an investigator, I checked books out of the library (Internet was still young)  by the Tanners and found myself saying "That's not what 'we' believe" (notice the use of 'we' before I even joined - well, I did investigate for over a year and after lesson #3 I didn't miss a Sunday at Church until long after I was baptized). So I then read further and found out that the Tanners were using half truths and twisting things and very creatively using ellipses, so yes, the Tanners are PART of the reason I am a member today.

I would love to know what they got wrong, or what half truths they used.  Please CFR, because I really would like to know.  It's not life or death, but it's bugging me that you can say that w/o backing it up.   ETA:  USU78!!  I ran out of posts, what do you mean by Tanner's Opera? 

Edited May 19, 2014 by Tacenda

[USU78]

I would love to know what they got wrong, or what half truths they used.  Please CFR, because I really would like to know.  It's not life or death, but it's bugging me that you can say that w/o backing it up.   

 

Have you never been exposed to the criticisms of the Tanners' Opera?

[omni]

I haven't read a lot of the Tanners, but from what I understand they have pretty solid scholarship to back up most of their claims.  I think the anti-Mormons who actually help the church are the likes of Ed Decker and the Temple Square protesters (and their ilk).  As a young teenager, I remember reading outlandish anti-Mormon tracts from a temple open houses, Temple Square, and the Manti Pageant.  My buddies and I would enjoy passing them around and using them for a good laugh - knowing for dang sure that wasn't what we believed.  For most of my life I assumed all critical attacks on the church were of the same vein and so I would generally dismiss them without digging deeper.   

 

I've heard from a good number of disaffected Mormons, and I can't ever recall one of them making the claim that an EV anti-Mormon ministry lead them from the church.  Instead, I believe these "ministries" are much more effective in preventing other EVs from joining the Church.  What should worry the leadership of the Church are the critical attacks/analysis coming from secular organizations, these in my opinion are far more convincing and effective.

[mnn727]

I would love to know what they got wrong, or what half truths they used.  Please CFR, because I really would like to know.  It's not life or death, but it's bugging me that you can say that w/o backing it up.   ETA:  USU78!!  I ran out of posts, what do you mean by Tanner's Opera? 

its been over 20 years so no, you will not get details from me on this, I didn't keep notes detailing everything,  however all you have to do is open one of their books randomly, read a claim and then do some honest research yourself. The key there is to do HONEST research. I found that the Tanners twisted and turned pretty much all of their claims, at least in the 2 books I checked out.

 

I do remember one of their sets of ellipses removed 4 or 5 paragraphs from something they were quoting out of the JoD making it appear the speaker (B.Y. if I remember correctly) appear to be saying the opposite of what he actually said.

Now, how honest is that?

Edited May 19, 2014 by mnn727

[USU78]

I would love to know what they got wrong, or what half truths they used.  Please CFR, because I really would like to know.  It's not life or death, but it's bugging me that you can say that w/o backing it up.   ETA:  USU78!!  I ran out of posts, what do you mean by Tanner's Opera? 

 

Opera = plural of Opus.

[Walden]

Anyone whose seen my signature line already knows my answer.....

 

Whether we immoralists do virtue any harm? - As little as anarchists do princes. Only since they have been shot at do they again sit firmly in their thrones. Moral: one must shoot at morals. ~Friedrich Nietzsche, Twilight of the Idols

Edited May 19, 2014 by Walden

[jcake]

I know that I once read a chapter of a Tanner book that used a legit letter that reflected a fairly negative view of a certain event in church history.  I thought it was rather deceitful for them not to have mentioned that there existed other letters regarding that same event that had a completely different version of the event.  And the other letters matched each other.l.  I think they tend to imply that history is less subjective than it actually is.

[USU78]

I know that I once read a chapter of a Tanner book that used a legit letter that reflected a fairly negative view of a certain event in church history.  I thought it was rather deceitful for them not to have mentioned that there existed other letters regarding that same event that had a completely different version of the event.  And the other letters matched each other.l.  I think they tend to imply that history is less subjective than it actually is.

 

Tacenda should find this useful

[strappinglad]

For those like me who may not have read this letter from 37 years ago, I submit this link.

http://www.fairmormon.org/perspectives/publications/jerald-and-sandra-tanners-distorted-view-of-mormonism-a-response-to-mormonism-shadow-or-reality

I'm sorry , but it will take more than 2 minutes to read , more like an hour or so. It resonates with this topic and several others that are currently open. Mfbukowski may agree with a couple of statements on language found therein. For those that have attention difficulties, I recommend bookmarking it so as to read it in bits if necessary.

[Storm Rider]

I believe that every time a topic is mentioned for good or ill it opens the door for another individual to learn more independently.  Bad research, exceptionally twisted  i.e. distorted or lying, etc. all lead to those with honest hearts to learn themselves the reality.  

 

Critics play an important role that should be acknowledged and appreciated. Honest critics open opportunities for improvement and refinement of process.  Poor critics and those who use falsehood only open doors to enlightenment.

[stemelbow]

I believe that every time a topic is mentioned for good or ill it opens the door for another individual to learn more independently.  Bad research, exceptionally twisted  i.e. distorted or lying, etc. all lead to those with honest hearts to learn themselves the reality.  

 

Critics play an important role that should be acknowledged and appreciated. Honest critics open opportunities for improvement and refinement of process.  Poor critics and those who use falsehood only open doors to enlightenment.

Complicating matters is in the end people are going to disagree. Some will see the Tanners as exception scholars no matter the critiques, others will not. In truth many offer something useful when it comes to this type of topic. Everyone takes things too far in some direction and someone will come along and point that out. Some have felt that Nibley creatively bended the rules of scholarship and research as well. On these topics, religious ones, the black and white, as in whose bad and whose good, and sometimes what's bad and what's good, becomes a difficult determine. Its all kind of a pot sitting somewhere between perfect/forthcoming/complete and 100% inaccurate.

[mnn727]

Complicating matters is in the end people are going to disagree. Some will see the Tanners as exception scholars no matter the critiques, others will not. In truth many offer something useful when it comes to this type of topic. Everyone takes things too far in some direction and someone will come along and point that out. Some have felt that Nibley creatively bended the rules of scholarship and research as well. On these topics, religious ones, the black and white, as in whose bad and whose good, and sometimes what's bad and what's good, becomes a difficult determine. Its all kind of a pot sitting somewhere between perfect/forthcoming/complete and 100% inaccurate.

In the case of people doing honest research you are 100% correct, however when someone purposefully misrepresents things or ignores anything that disagree's with their pre-concieved notions - well that's something else entirely

[cdowis]

"Not telling the truth"

 

There is a certain professional antiMormon who continues to speak about the "gold plates" and, on a youtube video, that they weighed between 100-200 pounds, even though he is certainly aware that the report of those who actually handled the plates was that they were 40-50 pounds.

 

He then talks about metal plates sitting on a table where the Tanners invite visitors to move the plates but they are too heavy.  Even though, as professionals,  they are certainly aware that Emma mentions moving the plates out of the way as she was cleaning house.

Edited May 20, 2014 by cdowis

[stemelbow]

"Not telling the truth"

 

There is a certain professional antiMormon who continues to speak about the "gold plates" and, on a youtube video, that they weighed between 100-200 pounds, even though he is certainly aware that the report of those who actually handled the plates was that they were 40-50 pounds.

 

He then talks about metal plates sitting on a table where the Tanners invite visitors to move the plates but they are too heavy.  Even though, as professionals,  they are certainly aware that Emma mentions moving the plates out of the way as she was cleaning house.

That jerk!

It's fair to point out, though, that although there were witnesses who reported a lighter weight and such, it's that this "antiMormon" thinks they were either mistaken, in on the ruse, lying about having even seen plates. I can't quite say that that's lying. Its playing fast and loose with evidence, I guess. But everyone has their biases and come to their conclusions largely based on those biases. He/she has to come up with something to help discredit Joseph, after all to him/her the real fact is Joseph was a fraud, I'm guessing.

Edited May 21, 2014 by stemelbow

[sethpayne]

Their efforts may have been fruitless in this life but in the next they can look forward to a just reward for their works.

 

Yeah right.  Like it or not, Gerald and Sandra Tanner are responsible for leading more than a few people out of the Church.  Indeed, I can't think of many critical arguments which do not have at least some beginning with the work of the Tanners.

 

I'm certainly not endorsing their historiographical methods.  But I would not doubt their effectiveness.

[mfbukowski]

Went to the temple the other day, and was handed a name slip.

 

"Walter Martin" 

 

 

Then I looked at the birth date.

 

1792

 

Phew!

[teddyaware]

Went to the temple the other day, and was handed a name slip.

 

"Walter Martin" 

 

 

Then I looked at the birth date.

 

1792

 

Phew!

You know, I would be absolutely delighted to do the temple work for the anti-Mormon Walter Martin (wonder if anyone already has?). He's going to have to eat a lot of grow, but he's still a beloved son of God. I'm confident you actually feel the same way.

Edited May 21, 2014 by teddyaware

[mfbukowski]

For those like me who may not have read this letter from 37 years ago, I submit this link.

http://www.fairmormon.org/perspectives/publications/jerald-and-sandra-tanners-distorted-view-of-mormonism-a-response-to-mormonism-shadow-or-reality

I'm sorry , but it will take more than 2 minutes to read , more like an hour or so. It resonates with this topic and several others that are currently open. Mfbukowski may agree with a couple of statements on language found therein. For those that have attention difficulties, I recommend bookmarking it so as to read it in bits if necessary.

Excellent article- thanks for the link!

[mfbukowski]

Miley Cyrus has built a career on bad publicity.

[mfbukowski]

You know, I would be absolutely delighted to do the temple work for the anti-Mormon Walter Martin (wonder if anyone already has?). He's going to have to eat a lot of grow, but he's still a beloved son of God. I'm confident you actually feel the same way.

Sure I do!

 

I just didn't want the slip to start on fire in my pocket.  

[Guest]

Interesting poll. What IS the "aim" of professional apologists?

 

Assuredly they believe what they are saying. But they usually need to make a buck too. One aim is to find a niche market that will pay the mortgage. When that happens, the books, pamphlets, and talks will keep coming whether the original "aim" is being met or not.

Their "aim", in some cases if not most is to right perceived wrongs. Just as many young televangelists start out wanted to do what they believe to be the right thing. Then reality sets in and they soon find that to reach a larger audience you need assistance from others. Soon money is collected, books ad papers are written and more notoriety is wanted. Then the day comes that it s learned that there is a profit to be made, and that I might be able to quit my job and do this for a living. So are ex-Mormons, some, never-mos, but one thing in most cases comes to past, I have got to be more cutting edge, if I want to continue. This is when many if not most become more aggressive, and more jugular in their approach. This is when the money starts to flow, be it in radio, books, websites, whatever.

Right out of the gate, after joining the Church in Germany, I was exposed to books and papers concerning Mormonism. The more I sought out materials about the Church, without looking I found anti-information (if you will). Upon retuning to the U.S., and growing up in the part of the country I did, the more I encounter those who loved me who out of concern wanted me to know what they had found. While at FT Benning, GA, I encountered a pilot who flew missions with me on medivac (I was a crew chief), who had designs after the Army to enter into full time ministry against Mormonism. Before long (and to address the OP) I had to approach my superior officers, on my own behalf and at the request of others (as all flights had to others on board) because they grew tired of his harassment over com likes while in flight. As a result of this and other circumstances, I was exposed to authors like the Tanners, Decker and John Smith of an anti-Mormon newspaper or letter that would always find it's way into my locker, aircraft or duffel bag.

Then comes the Internet and Walter Martin site, CARM, Mormon Discussions and the rabbit hole of money to be made...not just attacking Mormonism but many other faiths as well. But as with most it is the "Mormonism Forum" that leads the stable in traffic and donations. So to make it short finally...yes their efforts help our cause by creating sympathy in our behalf. It puts strain upon their own families and their crusades even take a toll within their families. It is sad.