Is scholarly apologetics neccesary?

[The Nehor]

12 hours ago, Teancum said:

Are you sure the leaders urge defense or rather to share positive messages about the church on social media and the Internet.  Can you show me where they repeatedly burger us to defend the church in social media and the Internet.

i can hardly think they would appreciate much of the so called defense that we see on this board.

Apostles call me every week in thankful tears for my good work here.

[Robert F. Smith]

12 hours ago, Teancum said:

Are you sure the leaders urge defense or rather to share positive messages about the church on social media and the Internet.  Can you show me where they repeatedly burger us to defend the church in social media and the Internet.

The LDS Church has had an official presence on Facebook since May 2008.

Handbook 2: Administering the Church (2010), 21.1.22, 

Quote

“The Internet provides ways to express our faith in Jesus Christ, strengthen others, and foster what is useful, good, and praiseworthy. Church members are encouraged to be examples of their faith at all times and in all places, including on the Internet.”
“Express your personal witness of the restored gospel as you feel impressed by the Spirit to do so. The message should be personal and not given as if you were speaking for the Church. “
“Develop your own materials that effectively convey your message.”
“When used appropriately, electronic communication, such as e-mail and Internet postings, can help Church members coordinate the work of the Church, strengthen faith, and minister to the needs of others.”

“When using the Internet and related tools, protect yourself, your family, others, and the Church from the dangers found online. Some of these dangers include viruses, spyware, and other malicious software; identity theft; and pornography. Other Internet dangers include incorrect and misleading information about important gospel principles, excessive time spent on the Internet, and misrepresentation of people’s intent and identity.”

Pres. Dieter Uchtdorf, “Waiting on the Road to Damascus,” April 2011 General Conference, online at https://www.lds.org/topics/internet?lang=eng , and https://www.lds.org/general-conference/2011/04/waiting-on-the-road-to-damascus?lang=eng :

Quote

“With so many social media resources and a multitude of more or less useful gadgets at our disposal, sharing the good news of the gospel is easier and the effects more far-reaching than ever before.”

Elder Russell Ballard, “Sharing the Gospel Using the Internet,” Dec 15, 2007, at BYU-Hawaii, online at https://www.lds.org/ensign/2008/07/sharing-the-gospel-using-the-internet?lang=eng .

Elder David Bednar, “Things as the Really Are,” CES Devotional, May 3, 2009, online at https://www.lds.org/broadcasts/archive/ces-devotionals/2009/01?lang=eng  .

Elder David Bednar, “To Sweep the Earth as with a Flood,” Aug 19, 2014, at BYU Ed Week, online at https://www.lds.org/prophets-and-apostles/unto-all-the-world/to-sweep-the-earth-as-with-a-flood?lang=eng , and at https://www.lds.org/media-library/images/meme-bednar-social-media-1390581?lang=eng&_r=1 .

https://www.lds.org/church/share/goodness?lang=eng&_r=1 (social media)

https://www.lds.org/media-library/social?lang=eng (social media)

https://www.lds.org/media-library/archive-whats-new?lang=eng (social media)

https://www.lds.org/media-library/video/2014-08-1040-social-media-guidelines?lang=eng (social media guidelines) 

https://www.lds.org/media-library/video/2014-08-1030-examples-of-using-social-media-for-good?lang=eng  (social media)

To name but a few, all of which support the principle enunciated in True to the Faith (2004), 38-39, online at https://www.lds.org/manual/true-to-the-faith/civil-government-and-law?lang=eng , “be actively engaged in supporting and defending the principles of truth”
 

i can hardly think they would appreciate much of the so called defense that we see on this board.

Or the cheap shots and whining of the critics who come here.

 

Edited February 6, 2016 by Robert F. Smith

[Teancum]

1 hour ago, Robert F. Smith said:

 

Oh Robert you were doing well till your last comment,

you see through whether you like it or nor there are some very bad examples of defending the church on this board. There are some good ones though as well.   We all (myself included) need to strive to do better and avoid cheap shots.  But for many on the,defense side no critique is valid.   For many the church is simply always correct and what it's leaders say and do is to always are to remain unchallenged.  All criticisms are viewed as cheap shots and whining.   Such generalizations don't go far.   Your comment is as offensive as those who use the "when the leaders speak the thinking has been done" mantra some critics use.

to your substance above....the quotes you gave don't really say go and defend  but are more of the tone I mentioned.   Share your testimony,  the good things of the church and so on.  I will look at some of your links later to see if defending the faith on line is part of what is encouraged.

 

 

 

[Teancum]

From one of the articles By Elder Ballard that Robert links to:

 

https://www.lds.org/ensign/2008/07/sharing-the-gospel-using-the-internet?lang=eng

Things to Avoid

Every disciple of Christ will be most effective and do the most good by adopting a demeanor worthy of a follower of the Savior. Discussions focused on questioning, debating, and doubting gospel principles do little to build the kingdom of God. The Apostle Paul has admonished us to not be “ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation” (Romans 1:16). Let us all stand firmly and speak with faith in sharing our message with the world. Many of you are returned missionaries and can carry on a meaningful conversation in the language you learned on your mission. Your outreach can be international.

As you participate in this conversation and utilize the tools of new media, remember who you are—Latter-day Saints. Remember, as the proverb states, that “a soft answer turneth away wrath: but grievous words stir up anger” (Proverbs 15:1). And remember that contention is of the devil (see 3 Nephi 11:29). There is no need to argue or contend with others regarding our beliefs. There is no need to become defensive or belligerent. Our position is solid; the Church is true. We simply need to have a conversation, as friends in the same room would have, always guided by the prompting of the Spirit and constantly remembering the Atonement of the Lord Jesus Christ, which reminds us of how precious are the children of our Father in Heaven.

May the Lord bless each of you that you will have a powerful influence on those you come in contact with. As I said in the beginning, the power of words is incredible. Let your voice be heard in this great cause of the gospel of Jesus Christ.

[Bernard Gui]

And our good fortune that Dan Peterson just today brought his essay on this very issue to our attention...

http://publications.mi.byu.edu/fullscreen/?pub=2402&index=8

 

 

[TheSkepticChristian]

On 2/5/2016 at 10:46 PM, Calm said:

Both from what I have seen.  Home teaching when it is needed and help with criticisms to keep the door open for faith when it is needed.  Many are worn down when they don't have answers

quoted in Preach My Gospel 

“Our main task is to declare the gospel and do it effectively. We are not obligated to answer every objection. Every man eventually is backed up to the wall of faith, and there he must make his stand” (A Witness and a Warning,4–5).

[The Nehor]

3 hours ago, Teancum said:

But for many on the,defense side no critique is valid.

True.

3 hours ago, Teancum said:

For many the church is simply always correct and what it's leaders say and do is to always are to remain unchallenged.

I am with said 'many'.

3 hours ago, Teancum said:

All criticisms are viewed as cheap shots and whining.

While occasionally wrong I find that generalization to be largely correct.

[Bernard Gui]

5 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

i can hardly think they would appreciate much of the so called defense that we see on this board.

This is where most of us lesser apologists live...  but we hope to improve over time, I reckon.

As my violin professor once said in a master class, "If only the sweetest birds were allowed to sing, the forest would be a very quiet place."

[Scott Lloyd]

18 hours ago, Russell C McGregor said:

Dan Peterson is fond of the following statement by C. S. Lewis:

"Though argument does not create conviction, the lack of it destroys belief. What seems to be proved may not be embraced; but what no one shows the ability to defend is quickly abandoned. Rational argument does not create belief, but it maintains a climate in which belief may flourish."

 

That is a good quote, one of my favorites. And Dan Peterson does quote it often.

But the author is Austin Farrer, not C.S. Lewis.

It does sound like something Lewis would say though.

Edited February 6, 2016 by Scott Lloyd

[TheSkepticChristian]

12 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

That is a good quote, one of my favorites. And Dan Peterson does quote it often.

But the author is Austin Farrer, not C.S. Lewis.

It does sound like something Lewis would say though.

So you think we need to defend the church with rational arguments, historical studies, and peer-reviewed publications? 

 

quoted in Preach My Gospel 

“Our main task is to declare the gospel and do it effectively. We are not obligated to answer every objection. Every man eventually is backed up to the wall of faith, and there he must make his stand” (A Witness and a Warning,4–5).

[Scott Lloyd]

21 minutes ago, TheSkepticChristian said:

21 minutes ago, TheSkepticChristian said:

So you think we need to defend the church with rational arguments, historical studies, and peer-reviewed publications? 

 

quoted in Preach My Gospel 

“Our main task is to declare the gospel and do it effectively. We are not obligated to answer every objection. Every man eventually is backed up to the wall of faith, and there he must make his stand” (A Witness and a Warning,4–5).

So you think we need to defend the church with rational arguments, historical studies, and peer-reviewed publications? 

 

quoted in Preach My Gospel 

“Our main task is to declare the gospel and do it effectively. We are not obligated to answer every objection. Every man eventually is backed up to the wall of faith, and there he must make his stand” (A Witness and a Warning,4–5).

False dichotomy.

No one here is saying that apolgetics is "the main task" or that doing the one precludes doing the other.

And while it is true that "we are not obligated to answer every objection" neither are we forbidden to answer any attack or criticism.

Elder Neal A. Maxwell said, regarding defense of the faith, that there should be "no more slam dunks."

The notion that we should never, ever defend the faiith of the Saints when it is attacked, and basing it upon the above quote, is altogether wrong-headed thinking. The above quote does not say that.

[TheSkepticChristian]

10 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

No one here is saying that apolgetics is "the main task" or that doing the one precludes doing the other.

but many spend hours writing books and articles defending the church, they spend more time defending the church than preaching the gospel.

11 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

And while it is true that "we are not obligated to answer every objection" neither are we forbidden to answer any attack or criticism.

. and why is it necessary? Shouldn't the holy ghost be enough? Does Moroni 10 include "answer some objections"? 

 

 

[Scott Lloyd]

18 minutes ago, TheSkepticChristian said:

but many spend hours writing books and articles defending the church, they spend more time defending the church than preaching the gospel.

 

Without knowing specifically whom you have in mind, it is difficult to respond to that.

I know that some prominent individuals are criticized for defending the Church, but I would reject the notion that they spend more time doing that than they do in preaching the gospel.

I don't see how you could know a thing like that in any case.

Furthermore, often times apologetics is engaged in by way of preaching the gospel. I reject your compartmentalism in this respect.

Quote

. and why is it necessary? Shouldn't the holy ghost be enough? Does Moroni 10 include "answer some objections"? 

The Holy Ghost most often influences people when invited to do so through faith and prayer. It will not impose itself on to someone unbidden. Moroni 10 does not say that it will

What defense of the faith does in so many cases is to keep the playing field level so that an individual will believe there is hope in going to God in prayer and inviting the influence of the Holy Ghost. What the enemies of the Church try to do is talk individuals into believing there is no point in doing so.

Please read the quotation again from Ausin Farrer that Russell quoted above. I don't think you have paid much attention to it.

Edited February 6, 2016 by Scott Lloyd

[juliann]

30 minutes ago, TheSkepticChristian said:

but many spend hours writing books and articles defending the church, they spend more time defending the church than preaching the gospel.

. and why is it necessary? Shouldn't the holy ghost be enough? Does Moroni 10 include "answer some objections"? 

 

 

The first clue should be how often "the church" quotes apologetic articles or uses apologists (see the Essays). A recent Gen Conf talk advised members to go to historians if they had history questions. When you can come up with some instances where the HG has answered a series of questions then get back to us. What this really is about is a false notion of the purpose of the HG coupled with a notion that no one needs to be able to explain the gospel.

[Robert F. Smith]

11 hours ago, Teancum said:

Oh Robert you were doing well till your last comment,

you see through whether you like it or nor there are some very bad examples of defending the church on this board. There are some good ones though as well.   We all (myself included) need to strive to do better and avoid cheap shots.  But for many on the,defense side no critique is valid.   For many the church is simply always correct and what it's leaders say and do is to always are to remain unchallenged.  All criticisms are viewed as cheap shots and whining.   Such generalizations don't go far.   Your comment is as offensive as those who use the "when the leaders speak the thinking has been done" mantra some critics use.

to your substance above....the quotes you gave don't really say go and defend  but are more of the tone I mentioned.   Share your testimony,  the good things of the church and so on.  I will look at some of your links later to see if defending the faith on line is part of what is encouraged.

Your cheap shot was " i can hardly think they would appreciate much of the so called defense that we see on this board"

A sincere inquiry would never be accompanied by an insult of this kind.  You asked the question.  I answered it.  So now you claim that it was not a real answer and come up with all manner of silly excuses and false accusations.  It is clear that only a yokel thinks that his club is always right and everyone else wrong.  Only those who know nothing about the actual source of the quote ever use "when the leaders speak the thinking has been done."

Your initial statement that " Are you sure the leaders urge defense or rather to share positive messages about the church on social media and the Internet.  Can you show me where they repeatedly burger us to defend the church in social media and the Internet," indicates how out of touch with reality you are.  These statements by the Brethren have been ubiquitous in recent years.  You just don't listen to them.

[Robert F. Smith]

8 hours ago, Bernard Gui said:

" i can hardly think they would appreciate much of the so called defense that we see on this board."

Thus spake Teancum

This is where most of us lesser apologists live...  but we hope to improve over time, I reckon.

As my violin professor once said in a master class, "If only the sweetest birds were allowed to sing, the forest would be a very quiet place."

 

Edited February 7, 2016 by Robert F. Smith

[Robert F. Smith]

8 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

That is a good quote, one of my favorites. And Dan Peterson does quote it often.

But the author is Austin Farrer, not C.S. Lewis.

It does sound like something Lewis would say though.

Lewis was specifically quoting Farrer.

[The Nehor]

10 hours ago, TheSkepticChristian said:

So you think we need to defend the church with rational arguments, historical studies, and peer-reviewed publications? 

 

quoted in Preach My Gospel 

“Our main task is to declare the gospel and do it effectively. We are not obligated to answer every objection. Every man eventually is backed up to the wall of faith, and there he must make his stand” (A Witness and a Warning,4–5).

Do you really want a discussion board where we appeal to faith routinely? I for one can do it. I do not think you will like the results.

[Bernard Gui]

3 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Thus spake Teancum.

So sorry. The formatting of the post made it appear that it was your statement. I thought it was uncharacteristic, but that you might be having a bad day. My mistake.

 

 

Edited February 7, 2016 by Bernard Gui

[Teancum]

8 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Your cheap shot was " i can hardly think they would appreciate much of the so called defense that we see on this board"

A sincere inquiry would never be accompanied by an insult of this kind.  You asked the question.  I answered it.  So now you claim that it was not a real answer and come up with all manner of silly excuses and false accusations.  It is clear that only a yokel thinks that his club is always right and everyone else wrong.  Only those who know nothing about the actual source of the quote ever use "when the leaders speak the thinking has been done."

Your initial statement that " Are you sure the leaders urge defense or rather to share positive messages about the church on social media and the Internet.  Can you show me where they repeatedly burger us to defend the church in social media and the Internet," indicates how out of touch with reality you are.  These statements by the Brethren have been ubiquitous in recent years.  You just don't listen to them.

The comment about them not appreciating much of what comes off as defense here is accurate.  Just read the quote I posted from Elder Ballard and then examine much of the tone from many of the defenders here.  So it was not a cheap shot.

my use of the thinking has been done quote was to demonstrate a bad example from the critics.   I never use it.  It is as offensive as much of the one liners and other things some defenders here write while likely thinking they are cute, witty, smart and scoring points.

i have read or heard most of the quotes from the leaders you posted,   I see little to nothing in there that warrants much of the defense and the style in which it is offered at least by many defenders here.

i never said your answer was not a real answer.  I said I did not see what you said in them and I would review your links.

And you might be surprised at how much of what the brethren say that I do listen to.   Listening and always agreeing however are two different  things.

i apologize if my comments are/were offensive to you.

 

 

Edited February 7, 2016 by Teancum

[Scott Lloyd]

32 minutes ago, Teancum said:

The comment about them not appreciating much of what comes off as defense here is accurate.  Just read the quote I posted from Elder Ballard and then examine much of the tone from many of the defenders here.  So it was not a cheap shot.

my use of the thinking has been done quote was to demonstrate a bad example from the critics.   I never use it.  It is as offensive as much of the one liners and other things some defenders here write while likely thinking they are cute, witty, smart and scoring points.

i have read or heard most of the quotes from the leaders you posted,   I see little to nothing in there that warrants much of the defense and the style in which it is offered at least by many defenders here.

i never said your answer was not a real answer.  I said I did not see what you said in them and I would review your links.

And you might be surprised at how much of what the brethren say that I do listen to.   Listening and always agreeing however are two different  things.

i apologize if my comments are/were offensive to you.

 

 

Whether they would "not appreciate much" of it is something you can't know definititively. That is a comment stemming not from fact but from your own bias. And it is classic well poisoning. 

[Teancum]

2 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

Whether they would "not appreciate much" of it is something you can't know definititively. That is a comment stemming not from fact but from your own bias. And it is classic well poisoning. 

We all have bias I suppose.   Nor can you know they would.  The premis of Robert's posts seemed to imply such.  Thus my response.   I don't see that as poisoning the well at all.  I will own it as my opinion.

[Freedom]

Apologetics gets the discussion started, but I find a lot of it has the sole agenda of defending the church rather than finding the truth. Of course, apologetics is responding to critics who throw out a lot of garbage so it serves a different purpose than pure academic research. I will not find the true meaning of the original manuscripts of Genesis 1, but I will find out the flaws in the critics argument against the church doctrine on the chapter. 

[Scott Lloyd]

10 minutes ago, Teancum said:

We all have bias I suppose.   Nor can you know they would.  The premis of Robert's posts seemed to imply such.  Thus my response.   I don't see that as poisoning the well at all.  I will own it as my opinion.

You are entitled to your opinion. But you asserted it was "accurate," implying it was more than just subjective opinion but objective statement of fact -- which you can't say absent a direct attestation by the Brethren themselves. 

[Teancum]

13 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

You are entitled to your opinion. But you asserted it was "accurate," implying it was more than just subjective opinion but objective statement of fact -- which you can't say absent a direct attestation by the Brethren themselves. 

Neither of us can.  But I did provide a quote by Elder Ballard regarding how LDS posters should behave online.  I guess you can decide whether you and others here fall outside of what he suggests.  Personally I think my assumption is accurate.