Sl trib headline: Fairmormon adopts a new name and urges a kinder approach in defending the lds church

[ttribe]

On 3/25/2021 at 6:01 PM, carbon dioxide said:

Disappointed in the decision.  I understand not having personal attacks and all that.  One can redo the videos but if you want to reach younger people today on youtube, boring videos of people giving talks and lectures is not going to be successful.  They also need to be entertaining and some sarcasm and other things may be fine.  In the youtube world, success is determined by clicks and views.  If one is surrendering that to the opposition, then the opposition wins at least on platforms like youtube. 

 

On 3/25/2021 at 7:23 PM, Hamba Tuhan said:

Mate, I'm old enough to be the father of younger people, and I'm not interested in watching boring videos of people giving talks and lectures ...

So, you prioritize the entertainment value to you more than a dignified tone befitting the alleged sacred nature of the topic?

[The Nehor]

3 hours ago, ttribe said:

 

So, you prioritize the entertainment value to you more than a dignified tone befitting the alleged sacred nature of the topic?

Apologetics is sacred?

Oh boy, I am going to hell for a lot of blaspheming.

[ttribe]

49 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

Apologetics is sacred?

Oh boy, I am going to hell for a lot of blaspheming.

Presumably, you think the gospel is sacred? Isn't that what apologetics is supposed to be defending?

[Hamba Tuhan]

11 hours ago, ttribe said:

So, you prioritize the entertainment value to you more than a dignified tone befitting the alleged sacred nature of the topic?

I completely reject every aspect of the false dichotomy that you have here crafted.

First, no one said anything about 'entertainment value'. Second, why on earth should the restored gospel of Jesus Christ be boring instead of genuinely exciting and downright enjoyable? Third, why should lectures and talks be the only approach to sacred topics?

Moreover, the demand from the mocking crowd that their smug mockery be met by nothing but a 'dignified tone' is itself risible -- carefully designed to neutralise any defence.

In many cases, the best response to those who launch feeble attacks and then run and hide behind the shield of secular sanctimony is to laugh at them, as Mark Twain so well knew:

Quote

Power, money, persuasion, supplication, persecution -- these can lift at a colossal humbug -- push it a little -- weaken it a little, century by century; but only laughter can blow it to rags and atoms at a blast.

Self-appointed chief apostate John Dehlin getting his super-serious panties in a twist because someone dared -- dared! -- to laugh at him has been one of the funniest things I have observed over the past 12 months. How dare they?

The prophet Joseph was a master of recognising and challenging such sanctimony. You've actually reminded me of one of my favourite anecdotes, recorded by Jedediah Grant:

Quote

After he got through chatting, the Baptist [priest] stood before him, and folding his arms said, "Is it possible that I now flash my optics upon a Prophet, upon a man who has conversed with my Savior?" "Yes," says the Prophet, "I don't know but you do; would not you like to wrestle with me?" That, you see, brought the priest right on to the thrashing floor, and he turned a summerset right straight. After he had whirled round a few times, like a duck shot in the head, he concluded that his piety had been awfully shocked, even to the centre, and went to the Prophet to learn why he had so shocked his piety. The Prophet commenced and showed him the follies of the world, and the absurdity of the long tone, and that he had a super-abundant stock of sanctimoniousness.

 

[Tacenda]

3 hours ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

I completely reject every aspect of the false dichotomy that you have here crafted.

First, no one said anything about 'entertainment value'. Second, why on earth should the restored gospel of Jesus Christ be boring instead of genuinely exciting and downright enjoyable? Third, why should lectures and talks be the only approach to sacred topics?

Moreover, the demand from the mocking crowd that their smug mockery be met by nothing but a 'dignified tone' is itself risible -- carefully designed to neutralise any defence.

In many cases, the best response to those who launch feeble attacks and then run and hide behind the shield of secular sanctimony is to laugh at them, as Mark Twain so well knew:

Self-appointed chief apostate John Dehlin getting his super-serious panties in a twist because someone dared -- dared! -- to laugh at him has been one of the funniest things I have observed over the past 12 months. How dare they?

The prophet Joseph was a master of recognising and challenging such sanctimony. You've actually reminded me of one of my favourite anecdotes, recorded by Jedediah Grant:

 

I feel sorry for any of your congregation that you minister to that suffers a faith crisis if you hold this attitude. I have another view of you then I did before. You didn't respond to my post to you the other day, which made me wonder. Clearly you lost the ability to see past JD and he is your nemesis. 

I hope you read carefully April's Liahona with articles about those that suffer in the church with belief struggles, I appreciate so much that the church and FairLatterDaySaints is turning this corner. But wonder if it will matter to you, the information in the articles.  

ETA: I think the church rising above is the way to go. So you don't think the twitter video that Kwaku El shared of JD being attacked is wrong? Or have you seen it? It shows a guy with a baseball bat beating JD and bludgeoning him. And this is harmless, give me a break. Try putting yourself in their shoes, and think of their families that could be harmed as well. 

The DezNats could very well have a loony person in it that might consider harming JD or Jeremy Runnells. DezNats do follow Kwaku El. https://www.abc4.com/news/local-news/deseret-nation-alt-right-mormon-militants-or-twitter-truth-defenders/

Edited March 28, 2021 by Tacenda

[The Nehor]

12 hours ago, ttribe said:

Presumably, you think the gospel is sacred? Isn't that what apologetics is supposed to be defending?

The gospel is sacred. Apologetics is an academic exercise in creating an intellectual defense of the gospel. The gospel is sacred while our explanations for its truthfulness are not. They may be inspired and helpful or misguided and detrimental or mendacious and perverse or anything in between. There is a concern for idolatry here.

There is definitely the danger of idolatry as well if apologetics is seen as a sacred work as it becomes more important than what is really important. Have some more C.S. Lewis:

Quote

“There have been men before … who got so interested in proving the existence of God that they came to care nothing for God himself… as if the good Lord had nothing to do but to exist. There have been some who were so preoccupied with spreading Christianity that they never gave a thought to Christ.”

Claiming normal labor is holy is also too often license to indulge in vices if they seem to further the ‘holy’ work.

Edited March 28, 2021 by The Nehor

[JustAnAustralian]

6 hours ago, Tacenda said:

I feel sorry for any of your congregation that you minister to that suffers a faith crisis if you hold this attitude

You don't think there's a difference between people who are having a faith crisis, and people who are actively trying to pull people out of the church (including by causing faith crises)?

[Meadowchik]

28 minutes ago, JustAnAustralian said:

You don't think there's a difference between people who are having a faith crisis, and people who are actively trying to pull people out of the church (including by causing faith crises)?

There's nothing necessarily wrong with either. What seems more important imo is honesty and kindness, in or out of the church.

[JustAnAustralian]

18 minutes ago, Meadowchik said:

There's nothing necessarily wrong with either. What seems more important imo is honesty and kindness, in or out of the church.

That's not answering my question 

[Freedom]

I found the videos well made and entertaining, but I could have done without the snide remarks. Here is hoping the same people who made these videos will remake them with the same degree of entertainment but with added sprinkles of charity. Perhaps a bit challenging to pull off when the material you are addressing will automatically be dissed. 

[Meadowchik]

2 hours ago, JustAnAustralian said:

That's not answering my question 

I wasn't answering the question you posed her. I was commenting on it. IMO it's kinda the wrong question.

LDS effectively try to lead people away from their existing churches, to essentially have faith crises regard their existing faiths, that their church is wrong (in apostasy) and their faith is incomplete.

But in the realm of ideas and belief, that's not wrong, is it? I think what's wrong is when it happens by way of unkindness or dishonesty. Unkindness and dishonesty are wrong whether they are used to further Mormonism or hinder Mormonism.

[JustAnAustralian]

2 minutes ago, Meadowchik said:

IMO it's kinda the wrong question

Not really. The implication was that he would treat people having a faith crisis in a derisive way. Almost as if they were saying that people having faith crises would be openly hostile to the church rather than just struggling.

[Tacenda]

deleted

Edited March 29, 2021 by Tacenda

[Meadowchik]

13 minutes ago, JustAnAustralian said:

Not really. The implication was that he would treat people having a faith crisis in a derisive way. Almost as if they were saying that people having faith crises would be openly hostile to the church rather than just struggling.

Regardless of where someone is in relation to their faith, honesty and kindness are the better way. That's the answer to both sides. Neither the apologists or critics do favors by being unkind or dishonest.

[Tacenda]

5 minutes ago, Meadowchik said:

Regardless of where someone is in relation to their faith, honesty and kindness are the better way. That's the answer to both sides. Neither the apologists or critics do favors by being unkind or dishonest.

Yes to this. John Dehlin says he's going to try to do these things, hope he does too. I hate anyone trying to tear down someone's beliefs, true or not, they are a person's belief and it's unkind to take that part of them and shred it. Life is already hard enough.

Edited March 29, 2021 by Tacenda

[ttribe]

15 hours ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

I completely reject every aspect of the false dichotomy that you have here crafted.

First, no one said anything about 'entertainment value'. Second, why on earth should the restored gospel of Jesus Christ be boring instead of genuinely exciting and downright enjoyable? Third, why should lectures and talks be the only approach to sacred topics?

Moreover, the demand from the mocking crowd that their smug mockery be met by nothing but a 'dignified tone' is itself risible -- carefully designed to neutralise any defence.

In many cases, the best response to those who launch feeble attacks and then run and hide behind the shield of secular sanctimony is to laugh at them, as Mark Twain so well knew:

Self-appointed chief apostate John Dehlin getting his super-serious panties in a twist because someone dared -- dared! -- to laugh at him has been one of the funniest things I have observed over the past 12 months. How dare they?

The prophet Joseph was a master of recognising and challenging such sanctimony. You've actually reminded me of one of my favourite anecdotes, recorded by Jedediah Grant:

 

Interesting response. 

[carbon dioxide]

On 3/27/2021 at 6:31 PM, ttribe said:

 

So, you prioritize the entertainment value to you more than a dignified tone befitting the alleged sacred nature of the topic?

I guess it depends what you want to accomplish and what audience you want to reach.  I am not a fisherman but I know that you need different kinds of bait to catch different fish.  Those videos seemed to get a lot of traffic.  I do think that is one of the goals if one does a youtube channel.  Are these good videos for sunday school?  Probably not.  Are they good for youtube?  I think so.  

Edited March 29, 2021 by carbon dioxide

[Bob Crockett]

On 3/28/2021 at 6:46 AM, Hamba Tuhan said:

I completely reject every aspect of the false dichotomy that you have here crafted.

First, no one said anything about 'entertainment value'. Second, why on earth should the restored gospel of Jesus Christ be boring instead of genuinely exciting and downright enjoyable? Third, why should lectures and talks be the only approach to sacred topics?

Moreover, the demand from the mocking crowd that their smug mockery be met by nothing but a 'dignified tone' is itself risible -- carefully designed to neutralise any defence.

In many cases, the best response to those who launch feeble attacks and then run and hide behind the shield of secular sanctimony is to laugh at them, as Mark Twain so well knew:

Self-appointed chief apostate John Dehlin getting his super-serious panties in a twist because someone dared -- dared! -- to laugh at him has been one of the funniest things I have observed over the past 12 months. How dare they?

The prophet Joseph was a master of recognising and challenging such sanctimony. You've actually reminded me of one of my favourite anecdotes, recorded by Jedediah Grant:

 

I've done a fair amount of apologia and have published twice in FARMS review and once in Sunstone in defense of the Church.   It seems to me that FAIR's recent turn to smug mockery and personal attacks is about as offensive as one can be without using the "F" word to demonize your opponents. Wait -- what? 

[Tacenda]

Great podcast, I think most here would be proud of Kwaku. He did a good job and represented very well, that made me think. I also think RFM and Bill Reel did a good job and kept it all respectful.