Is FAIRMormon.org a Net-Positive or Net-Negitive for the Church?

[Johnnie Cake]

When I was going through my Faith Crises a decade ago...I did what many seekers of truth do.  I doubled downed on the scriptures, prayer and pondering.  I increased my knowledge of church history by reading everything I could get my hands on from Bushman, Brodie, Quinn, Smith, Palmer, Southerton, Brookes, Crompton, Newell and more and then I would cross reference disconcerting information with the FAIR site in the hope that I had merely run into anti Mormon lies and I knew that certainly FAIR would have the answers to expose the new information as lies and I could lay the information aside.  But that wasn't what happened...instead FAIR confirmed that much of the information I was learning was true or it provided apologetic explanations that left me unsatisfied.   I was devastated and the rest is history.

I have spoken with others who have gone through a similar experience...turning to FAIR in the hope of resolving difficulties only to discover instead that FAIR confirm their worst fears.

So I ask, is FAIR a net-positive or net-negative for the church...at the time I saw it as a negative because it confirmed my fears and led me out of the church...however, in hind sight it certainly was a positive for the same reasons. What has been your experience?

[Scott Lloyd]

In my view FairMormon is very much a positive for the Church. I would call it a blessing, in fact. I long ago lost count of the number of times I have turned to the FairMormon website to get the straight scoop on subjects where antagonists of the Church have distorted facts and taken things out of context.

FairMormon is a clearinghouse for truth as it pertains to subjects pertaining to the Church where controversy might arise. If one feels to abandon the faith after having been exposed to the information on the FairMormon site, well, at least he will have done so based on something better than a one-sided, anti-Mormon rendition of the facts.

FairMormon will remain a positive for the Church so long as it continues to be made clear that the organization is not affiliated with and thus does not speak for the Church on any given matter. I took comfort in this knowledge last summer at the FairMormon Conference when a couple of the speakers in the program expressed views to which I take exception.

Edited February 2, 2017 by Scott Lloyd

[Gray]

There is no real data, so it's all speculation. 

[Kevin Christensen]

I think FAIR is an excellent resource, certainly making important information easily available.  It is not the only important resource, but it is one of the essentials for those who want to become better informed.   I grew up in the days of bookstores, libraries, and bound periodicals.  And it was there that I soon learned that the notion of "anti-Mormon lies to be forcefully exposed" was not nearly as useful as the Parable of the Sower, that is, that the same information can yield vastly different harvests all depending on soil, nurture, and time. The same information that causes one wine bottle to break can be stored comfortably and profitably in another.  And as I've mentioned many times, whenever I came across something I did not expect, I learned to ask "What should I expect?", to re-examine my  own assumptions and remove the beams from my own eyes, after which I found I could see much more clearly what is going on.  If the seed grows, if it is a good seed, I should expect change, to have my mind enlightened, and my consciousness expand, rather than to be assured that I will never have to put aside any childish things when I become a man.

I've written a few things for FAIR (one piece on charges of Anachronism in the Book of Mormon, and my detailed study of Biblical Keys for Discerning True and False Prophets), and have read a great deal on the site, including many excellent conference presentations.  I've only been able to attend a couple of times, due to living away from Utah.  But I pay attention regularly and recommend the site to anyone.  I'm thrilled with the ongoing success, and wish that more of the Saints would make better use of what we have.

FWIW

Kevin Christensen

Canonsburg, PA

Edited February 2, 2017 by Kevin Christensen

[JulieM]

33 minutes ago, Johnnie Cake said:

When I was going through my Faith Crises a decade ago...I did what many seekers of truth do.  I doubled downed on the scriptures, prayer and pondering.  I increased my knowledge of church history by reading everything I could get my hands on from Bushman, Brodie, Quinn, Smith, Palmer, Southerton, Brookes, Crompton, Newell and more and then I would cross reference disconcerting information with the FAIR site in the hope that I had merely run into anti Mormon lies and I knew that certainly FAIR would have the answers to expose the new information as lies and I could lay the information aside.  But that wasn't what happened...instead FAIR confirmed that much of the information I was learning was true or it provided apologetic explanations that left me unsatisfied.   I was devastated and the rest is history.

I have spoken with others who have gone through a similar experience...turning to FAIR in the hope of resolving difficulties only to discover instead that FAIR confirm their worst fears.

So I ask, is FAIR a net-positive or net-negative for the church...at the time I saw it as a negative because it confirmed my fears and led me out of the church...however, in hind sight it certainly was a positive for the same reasons. What has been your experience?

I love FairMormon and use their website often as a go to source.  I teach RS and I doubt there's been one lesson I've taught where I didn't use Fair to help me prepare.

I do think members who learn new info that troubles them, hope to go there and learn it's all anti lies, but they get the truth.  And, we shouldn't shoot the messenger just because it may cause some to even doubt or struggle more.

If members want a fantasy spin and to stay in la la perfect Mormon land, they should go to that site being discussed on the other thread (ldsanswers.org).

I don't know how Fair is funded or if it's all volunteers and private donations that keep it going, but I think it's very much a net positive (at least for me)!

Edited February 2, 2017 by JulieM

[bluebell]

54 minutes ago, JulieM said:

I love FairMormon and use their website often as a go to source.  I teach RS and I doubt there's been one lesson I've taught where I didn't use Fair to help me prepare.

I do think members who learn new info that troubles them, hope to go there and learn it's all anti lies, but they get the truth.  And, we shouldn't shoot the messenger just because it may cause some to even doubt or struggle more.

If members want a fantasy spin and to stay in la la perfect Mormon land, they should go to that site being discussed on the other thread (ldsanswers.org).

I don't know how Fair is funded or if it's all volunteers and private donations that keep it going, but I think it's very much a net positive (at least for me)!

It's been a positive for me as well.  When i first got on the internet and started participating in mormon-focused conversations, people would bring up things that i hadn't ever heard before.  Going to fair and seeing the 'thing' confirmed but the interpretation of it rarely if ever confirmed, was helpful.

I also love Jeff lindsay.  I probably love his site a bit more than fair just because i find it easier to use and more concise for quick answers or references.

[rongo]

1 hour ago, Gray said:

There is no real data, so it's all speculation. 

And anecdotes. Everyone's mileage varies.

I was a FAIR list member for eight years, and absolutely loved it. I don't care for some of the directions FAIR went in (some of their short-lived initiatives, like the "Mormon anti-defamation league," etc.), and I loved it best when we answered questions individually, often with multiple responses from FAIR members. It became more and more Wiki-driven by design (and then blog and podcast), to where many questions were simply answered by sending links to the wiki. It became too time-consuming for me, and caused some friction with my wife because feeling like I had to fully respond to things immediately conflicted with family time (or, if it didn't, it was obvious that my thoughts were elsewhere). 

In my anecdotal experience, FAIR is overwhelmingly a net positive. I have had a lot of new members in my ward recently, and members from the stake I don't know, contact me personally because they have heard that I was with FAIR, and they all think very positively of it. Our last stake president told people, and had me meet with people who wanted to who were troubled by the CES letter and things like that. For those who know about FAIR, nearly all of them have been positively affected by it or think positively about it, in my experience.

Yes, there are people who insist that it was FAIR that directly led to them leaving the Church or losing their belief, but they always say this after time has passed since the loss, and they always, in my experience, have been marinating and percolating in the critical areas of the bloggernacle. 

[Benjamin McGuire]

I have no idea how many people use the website, and get information from the database there. I do know that with FairMormon, I have interacted with thousands of members (and non-members) over the years, and that the experience has been tremendously rewarding for me personally.

Ben McGuire

[Calm]

1 hour ago, JulieM said:

I love FairMormon and use their website often as a go to source.  I teach RS and I doubt there's been one lesson I've taught where I didn't use Fair to help me prepare....

I don't know how Fair is funded or if it's all volunteers and private donations that keep it going, but I think it's very much a net positive (at least for me)!

That is very nice to hear, Julie.  

We are funded solely by private donations, including a small membership fee to have the privilege to spend more leisure time volunteering.  We have one paid employee, part time, the bookstore manager who has nothing to do with apologetics stuff and as far as I know anything else.

-----

obviously we can't tell what people think who don't write us, but the thank yous for helping them in positive ways to be more open or even more committed to continuing faithfulness way outweigh the you have pushed me out of the Church kinds...though we do get those as well on rare occasions.  Now this may be only because people are generally polite or it may be that there are significantly less that end up having more problems with the Church after visiting us than there are those who are the same or have had some issues resolved.

[readstoomuch]

The question is basically the same for the Church History essays.  Does information that is accurate, but tries to bring out the positive or apologetic side of the argument always help people to answer their question or overcome their doubts?  No, not always.  I would have loved to have had FAIR 35 years ago, but it was much harder.  The apologetics that was available was often very poor.  Things that were available that were any good were often photocopied and distributed in an informal matter.  So, did the old system always work?  Nope, but I think there are more people asking questions and that don`t know enough about history to put a context on a piece of information they find disturbing.  

[Robert F. Smith]

2 hours ago, Johnnie Cake said:

..............................

.....................................instead FAIR confirmed that much of the information I was learning was true or it provided apologetic explanations that left me unsatisfied.   I was devastated and the rest is history.

I have spoken with others who have gone through a similar experience...turning to FAIR in the hope of resolving difficulties only to discover instead that FAIR confirm their worst fears.

So I ask, is FAIR a net-positive or net-negative for the church...at the time I saw it as a negative because it confirmed my fears and led me out of the church...however, in hind sight it certainly was a positive for the same reasons. What has been your experience?

I don't know whether FairMormon is a net postive or net negative for the LDS Church, Johnnie, but I like the fact that they are committed to telling the truth (whatever that is).  Tell the truth and let the chips fall where they may.  FairMormon is not part of the LDS Church and is not beholden to any one POV.  Their annual Conference is an excellent mixer for a variety of POVs and books at sale prices.  I have had wonderful conversations with anti-Mormons there (Rob Bowman, for example).

It all comes back to one's personal testimony.  What is it based on?  Mormon folklore or fact?  Or on the Holy Spirit?

[Gray]

50 minutes ago, rongo said:

And anecdotes. Everyone's mileage varies.

I was a FAIR list member for eight years, and absolutely loved it. I don't care for some of the directions FAIR went in (some of their short-lived initiatives, like the "Mormon anti-defamation league," etc.), and I loved it best when we answered questions individually, often with multiple responses from FAIR members. It became more and more Wiki-driven by design (and then blog and podcast), to where many questions were simply answered by sending links to the wiki. It became too time-consuming for me, and caused some friction with my wife because feeling like I had to fully respond to things immediately conflicted with family time (or, if it didn't, it was obvious that my thoughts were elsewhere). 

In my anecdotal experience, FAIR is overwhelmingly a net positive. I have had a lot of new members in my ward recently, and members from the stake I don't know, contact me personally because they have heard that I was with FAIR, and they all think very positively of it. Our last stake president told people, and had me meet with people who wanted to who were troubled by the CES letter and things like that. For those who know about FAIR, nearly all of them have been positively affected by it or think positively about it, in my experience.

Yes, there are people who insist that it was FAIR that directly led to them leaving the Church or losing their belief, but they always say this after time has passed since the loss, and they always, in my experience, have been marinating and percolating in the critical areas of the bloggernacle. 

Anecdotes are helpful, but they can't really give us the big picture. We know from anecdotes that some people feel like FAIR was helpful, and others feel that FAIR was not. I don't think we could get a real answer to the question in the OP, though. 

[Tacenda]

I went to FAIR at the beginning of my questioning. Since I was actually told during a temple recommend interview, during the time I found out about JS's wives, that I wasn't to question it, I could wonder about it, but never question. 

I don't know how I ran onto FAIR, but certainly wasn't looking for it, I was probably on an anti site that mentioned it and linked it. So I go there and see that they accept questions. I happen to get the famous Gregory Smith. We conversed a few times, I even saved his email to me. The only problem was that he was way over my head a lot of the time. Now maybe I would understand a bit better after being broken in by members on here!

I did find things on FAIR I'd never heard about when checking for answers, but I guess like Robert says above, it all comes down to our own testimonies. It's time to buck up and decided if we have a testimony through the spirit, or through others' glossed over testimonies. 

[stemelbow]

It's a positive to put information out there, and address difficulties. 

Always.  Who cares how many stay or leave as per the difficulties.  We can't hide them, pretend they aren't there or whatever. 

[Nevo]

16 minutes ago, rongo said:

I was a FAIR list member for eight years, and absolutely loved it.

I was a list member for about eight weeks. It wasn't my cup of tea, but I still think FairMormon has a lot of good people and does some good work. I wish it was better but I am glad it exists. There is a need for it. Unless and until the Church commits more resources to addressing the sorts of questions that show up in the CES Letter, it will be up to grassroots organizations like FairMormon to step in, "ready always to give an answer." In this age of disenchantment, LDS apologists have their work cut out for them.

[Sky]

I don't really see FAIR as a net positive or negative for the Church.  Those who want to believe can find lots of reasons, and those who stop believing can also find lots of reasons.  Lots of factors can influence how we process the information, and the final outcome from that.  People are complex.  

Overall though, I'm glad that FAIR is here.  It won't keep everybody from leaving that reads critical information, but it still provides resources and possible answers to hard questions.  In the end, it's still a matter of faith.  

[rongo]

15 minutes ago, Gray said:

Anecdotes are helpful, but they can't really give us the big picture. We know from anecdotes that some people feel like FAIR was helpful, and others feel that FAIR was not. I don't think we could get a real answer to the question in the OP, though. 

True, if what we're looking for is a scientific measurement of FAIR's exact, objective effect. In reality, all of us in our lives deal with the anecdotes that affect us. If we personally have positive experiences with something, then we are well-disposed towards it. If negative, then the opposite.

[JLHPROF]

I think in order to be a net positive or net negative FAIR would need to reach an awful lot more members.
I doubt most of our millions of members have even heard of it.  Fortunately, the same can be said of the more popular anti sites as well.

I mean, come on, we've got a high percent of members who have never even read the official Church essay pages on these controversial topics.  I doubt very much they are reading Fair or Mormonthink, or any others.

It could be an interesting experiment...ask in Sunday School next week how many have ever used the FAIR website or even heard of it?

[Buckeye]

FAIR is a positive for me. I gain insight from others' wrestle with difficult issue. Most everyone I've read on FAIR takes that wrestle seriously.

Also, FAIR posts and authenticates lots of controversial sources. That helps when members I know dispute whether a document is real. For example, the 1949/1951 First Presidency letter on the Priesthood ban is pretty tough to find online. It's not on the church's website and is not cited in the church's essay on the racial ban. But FAIR does post the document. I've known members who wouldn't trust the document if I hadn't shown it to them on FAIR.

[emeliza]

I went to Fair and Jeff Lindsay before joining the church when I was investigating and it was a positive for me.  

I cant comment how it would be having grown up not knowing the history of the church and such and finding out.  I think those issues tend to come from people who only ever learned the A (strictly good and primary) version of the church instead of the C (good and bad or normal) version. 

[rongo]

29 minutes ago, emeliza said:

I went to Fair and Jeff Lindsay before joining the church when I was investigating and it was a positive for me.  

I cant comment how it would be having grown up not knowing the history of the church and such and finding out.  I think those issues tend to come from people who only ever learned the A (strictly good and primary) version of the church instead of the C (good and bad or normal) version. 

We had a question from a very hostile questioner once, and Lou Midgley and I responded to him. Contrary to caricatures about Lou and his manner that critics of FAIR/FARMS like to throw around, Lou was very helpful and understanding. Both Lou and I were able to get the man to acknowledge problems with his assumptions (this was in several correspondences) and he genuinely changed his outlook. He ended up getting baptized in Sierra Vista, AZ! 

We also got a question from a tortured questioner whom I recognized as my Sunday School teacher from my high school years in the Chicago area. He was thrilled and surprised to hear from me, and a little embarrassed that he had laid himself bare like that unwittingly with someone he knew being aware, but we (and others from FAIR) talked with him via email about his concerns. I don't know the ultimate outcome of that, but that was one experience I remember. 

JHLPROF:

I think in order to be a net positive or net negative FAIR would need to reach an awful lot more members.

I doubt most of our millions of members have even heard of it.  Fortunately, the same can be said for the more popular anti sites as well.

This is very, very true as well. 

[pogi]

For what it is worth, FAIR has been a positive for me.

[Johnnie Cake]

5 hours ago, Tacenda said:

I went to FAIR at the beginning of my questioning. Since I was actually told during a temple recommend interview, during the time I found out about JS's wives, that I wasn't to question it, I could wonder about it, but never question. 

I don't know how I ran onto FAIR, but certainly wasn't looking for it, I was probably on an anti site that mentioned it and linked it. So I go there and see that they accept questions. I happen to get the famous Gregory Smith. We conversed a few times, I even saved his email to me. The only problem was that he was way over my head a lot of the time. Now maybe I would understand a bit better after being broken in by members on here!

I did find things on FAIR I'd never heard about when checking for answers, but I guess like Robert says above, it all comes down to our own testimonies. It's time to buck up and decided if we have a testimony through the spirit, or through others' glossed over testimonies. 

Your lucky...I got Louis Midgley...😝  And on a bad day at that

Edited February 3, 2017 by Johnnie Cake

[carbon dioxide]

No site is perfect and FAIR is not perfect but its a good resource for many issues.  Clearly it is better than NOTHING. The LDS Church does not address most of these issues at all on their website.  SOMEBODY has to do it.  The best thing is to not rely on one source but many sources.  Get as many points of view as possible and do your own research as well.  I think many people however demand a higher standard for pro-LDS things than anti-stuff.  It seems those opposed are allowed to make mistake after mistake after mistake and that is ok as long as they hit a bullseye occasionally.  For pro-LDS, even if it hit a bullseye it is never good enough. 

[Freedom]

FAIR is certainly a great resource. some of the scholarship is a bit week, but it is not like there are millions of dollars of government grants funding scholars to properly research all the issues. The purpose is to respond to critics, to give a different perspective. Those who contribute do a good job of showing that there is more to the story. The article on Jesus and Satan being brothers, for example, is an excellent resource that covers all the material quire effectively. The people i know who are not satisfied with FAIR are consistently looking for something that does not exist. They want a God that has a 2017 social standard. They expect that what is socially acceptable today represents the pinnacle of perfection, the top of the human evolutionary chain.

In responding to critics on various sites and to my own online contributions, I have been able to go to FAIR to fill in the gaps or to provide a reference that I have forgotten.