Dehlin v. Kwaku - An Update

[Calm]

A lot of ZLMB members came from CARM.  I wouldn’t be surprised if that was your first landing place.  It was Big News back then.

[Robert F. Smith]

23 minutes ago, ttribe said:

Well, as I said, I haven't looked at the methodological issues in the subsequent studies. My unresolved concern is that the population from which they draw their data may not be representative of the entirety of the population to which they are attempting to apply their inferences. Perhaps reviewing those studies would allow me to alleviate that concern, but time is not on my side in that regard at the moment.

What is really important is to recognize up front that "losing my religion" is a generic feature of modern culture.  Here is a non-Mormon assessment:

 

[Teancum]

1 hour ago, Robert F. Smith said:

I suppose that there have been many Mormons influenced by Steve Covey's books on effectiveness and leadership, but that is not the same as adopting cult techniques -- and I see none in the LDS Church. 

Most in high demand mind control groups don't see it while they are involved in it. Just ask Steve Hassan who was a Unification or Leah Remini.  I did not see these techniques when I was an active Latter day-Saint.  My wife and I also spent 6 years doing an Amway business.  Did fairly well with it. And I did not see the mind control techniques that were used is what our upline referred to a The System. But I sure see it now, especially after educating myself.  I do not know what you have read on the topic. Maybe more than I have. You refer to yourself as a scholar and I am not sure why as I do not know your background.  But feel free to look at the book I posted. Or not. I am fairly comfortable with my thoughts and position on this. It is not really worth going back and forth about it unless someone is interested in discussing it and it ought to be a thread on its own.

 

 

1 hour ago, Robert F. Smith said:

 

 

I met Covey once at a soiree in Provo, and I got the impression that he thought I lacked effectiveness and leadership qualities. 

Nonsense?  You apparently know nothing of Methodists or other mainline Protestants.  Both my grandad and his eldest son were Methodist ministers, and most of my aunts, uncles, and cousins were Methodist.  I grew up with them.  Their church services, sunday school, and potlucks are pretty much the same as those of the Mormons.  Grandma Smith was head of the Ladies Auxiliary.  They tend to be gracious, non-threatening folks.  At one time, Methodists were dedicated missionaries sent throughout the world.  A couple of my aunts spent decades in the Far East.  As the Methodists have become more woke, their faith has gone into a tailspin.  Their church is now smaller than the LDS Church in the USA.  No one foresaw that back in the day when my Uncle was helping arrange a Billy Graham Crusade in Los Angeles.  I can still recall my Uncle telling me that the Mormons were "sheep stealers."  Of course he knew he was talking to a Mormon.  I didn't even argue with him. 

Yes I know many Methodists and have attended many Protestant meetings.  My wife's family consist of Methodists and Presbyterians. My wife was active in her church for 22 years. Part of the campus crusade for Christ in college.  We have compared and contrasted much and Mormonism has so many more controlling type approached than mainline Protestant faiths do.  If you want we can do a comparison and contrast but I doubt it is worth the time.

1 hour ago, Robert F. Smith said:

 

 

 

 

😎

I used to accept callings, even when I thought I was not quite up to the task, but I was young and foolish.  No one pressured me.  If everyone rejected callings, there would be no LDS Church.  The LDS faith is a communal enterprise.

He was speaking as an ex-Mormon who understood that claims of intellectual apostasy and conversion are blarney.  He rightly understood the process of conversion or deconversion as primarily emotional.  I agree.

Not worth pursuing the rest other than the only emotion I had as my faith in the church fell apart was sadness, desperation in trying to make it work, some anger, mourning my loss and so on. I tried for over 8 years to make it work from the time I concluded that what Joseph Smith claimed was false.

[Teancum]

2 hours ago, smac97 said:

I find Latter-day Saint apologetics to be, like many things, a very mixed bag.  I think there is quite a bit that is very good and persuasive and substantive.

Ok.  I don't find much persuasive at all these days.

 

2 hours ago, smac97 said:

What "conclusions" did Bushman "confirm" about Joseph Smith?

In general that much of his behavior and things he did, the changing story line, polygamy, Kirtland Bank, Changes in the D&C and so on demonstrated to me that I could not trust him and thus could not trust his claims of supernatural interactions with God and angels.

 

2 hours ago, smac97 said:

Also, is it significant in your view that Bushman, who is an excellent scholar and very knowledgeable about Joseph Smith and his foibles, nevertheless continues to operate quite well as a faithful and observant Latter-day Saint?  As a person who affirms the prophetic calling of Joseph Smith and the things restored through him?

No not really. I used to wonder about things like this. But lots of smart people believe things that I don't believe and likely you do not either.

 

2 hours ago, smac97 said:

I had a somewhat similar experience, except it involved my father and it went the other way.  While I was in the Army and on my mission I would pose various doctrinal and historical questions to him (in my letters).  At the time (1991-1995), the Internet was not really a thing, but he had "LDS Infobases," a CD-ROM-based compilation of digitized books about Church doctrine, history, and so on.  I was amazed at its scope: 1,800 books!  My dad also had a personal library of many hundreds of volumes about church history and doctrine.  And he spent years as a Gospel Doctrine instructor for our ward.  He was therefore quite happy to take my questions and compile resources and quotes and citations into nice digestible summaries for me.  In doing so he regularly reminded that the leaders of the Church were very flawed, but that we can take that as evidence in favor of the Restoration.  He spoke of Jesus in his premortal state calling flawed men to be prophets, and during His ministry on earth He called even more flawed people.  These flawed men were, and are, part of the overall plan.

I returned home from my mission in 1995, at which point I almost immediately started reading online apologetics.  I think it was "Zions Lighthouse" that I joined at the time, and after some years I wandered over here.

I cannot emphasize enough that is is not just flaws. I do not and did not expect perfection out of the leaders.  But it goes beyond that.

 

2 hours ago, smac97 said:

Really?  I found this part fascinating, and quite unique in terms of an earthly organization "operating" :

Pres. McKay sought, and apparently received, revelation from God.  That seems pretty special.

So President McKay received a revelation that then was not the time but now the Church seems to have a position that this was never a revelation from God nor God directed and we can just ignore what past leaders said as speculation. See this  is problematic for me.  Just does not work for me.

2 hours ago, smac97 said:

Again, I'm grateful to my dad on this point.  His sense is that the Lord gives the Brethren pretty broad latitude to govern the Church according to their best lights, including previously-revealed principles.  He is also quite persuaded that the Brethren are seeking, and receiving, quite a bit of revelatory guidance.

Ok.  I am glad he can make it work.

2 hours ago, smac97 said:

Faith as a "crutch" doesn't seem to work, as it connotes a temporary mode of assistance.  Instead, faith is supposed to be a permanent part of our journey.  "For we walk by faith, not by sight." (2 Cor. 5:7).

Thanks,

-Smac

Crutch is probably the wrong word. Rather I would say faith is simply used by all religions because they have to use it because they lack evidence. So of course you walk by faith. It's mostly all you have. At least currently that does not work for me either.

[Teancum]

46 minutes ago, smac97 said:

Huh.

Actually, now that I think on it, I think I may have started out on CARM ("Christian Apologetics and Research Ministry") run by Matt Slick.  Man, I haven't thought of that place in years.

I'm trying to recollect if I was on the UTLM board.  Typing the acronym ("UTLM") does seem familiar.  But I don't think I did anything on AOL boards.

These don't ring a bell.

I did venture onto the exmormon.org board a few times.  Yeesh.  

Thanks,

-Smac

ZLMB was indeed started around 2000 or 2001 and it was because a bunch of us, along with Dan Peterson, were posting heavily on the Tanner's message board UTLM (Utah Lighthouse Ministery).  When we all got the boot Pacumeni (Scott Pierson) started ZLMB. 

[smac97]

6 minutes ago, Teancum said:

Crutch is probably the wrong word. Rather I would say faith is simply used by all religions because they have to use it because they lack evidence.

With respect, I disagree.  I think there is plenty of evidence.  What we are lacking is empirical and definitive proof.

Atheists exercise as much faith in denying the existence of God as theists do in declaring the existence of God.  

6 minutes ago, Teancum said:

So of course you walk by faith. It's mostly all you have.

Well, I think there's quite a bit more than that for me.  

6 minutes ago, Teancum said:

At least currently that does not work for me either.

I respect that.

Thanks,

-Smac

[SeekingUnderstanding]

11 minutes ago, smac97 said:

Atheists exercise as much faith in denying the existence of God as theists do in declaring the existence of God.  

Are you saying you find your “faith” that Thor does not exist is comparable in size and scope to your faith that Jesus is your savior?

Edited March 3, 2022 by SeekingUnderstanding

[Teancum]

13 minutes ago, smac97 said:

With respect, I disagree.  I think there is plenty of evidence.  What we are lacking is empirical and definitive proof.

We will have to agree to disagree.

13 minutes ago, smac97 said:

Atheists exercise as much faith in denying the existence of God as theists do in declaring the existence of God.  

No this is an old canard.  Atheists do not declare there is no God.  They just lack belief in God. There is no faith. If evidence of God were sufficient and atheist would believe. Atheists reject faith in the supernatural.

 

https://www.atheists.org/activism/resources/about-atheism/

 

Quote

 

Atheism is one thing: A lack of belief in gods.

Atheism is not an affirmative belief that there is no god nor does it answer any other question about what a person believes. It is simply a rejection of the assertion that there are gods. Atheism is too often defined incorrectly as a belief system. To be clear: Atheism is not a disbelief in gods or a denial of gods; it is a lack of belief in gods.

Older dictionaries define atheism as “a belief that there is no God.” Clearly, theistic influence taints these definitions. The fact that dictionaries define Atheism as “there is no God” betrays the (mono)theistic influence. Without the (mono)theistic influence, the definition would at least read “there are no gods.”

 

 

 

13 minutes ago, smac97 said:

Well, I think there's quite a bit more than that for me.  

I respect that.

Thanks,

-Smac

 

[Robert F. Smith]

5 hours ago, Teancum said:

Most in high demand mind control groups don't see it while they are involved in it. Just ask Steve Hassan who was a Unification or Leah Remini.  I did not see these techniques when I was an active Latter day-Saint.  My wife and I also spent 6 years doing an Amway business.  Did fairly well with it. And I did not see the mind control techniques that were used is what our upline referred to a The System. But I sure see it now, especially after educating myself.  I do not know what you have read on the topic. Maybe more than I have. You refer to yourself as a scholar and I am not sure why as I do not know your background.  But feel free to look at the book I posted. Or not. I am fairly comfortable with my thoughts and position on this. It is not really worth going back and forth about it unless someone is interested in discussing it and it ought to be a thread on its own.

Sorry, I just don't see a hint of "mind control" in the LDS experience, and you say that you didn't either when you were an active Latter-day Saint.  However, you and your wife selling Amway does raise red flags, and it reminds me of the LDS FBI agent, Richard Miller, who sold Amway from the trunk of his car, and who ended up going to prison for espionage (see https://bycommonconsent.com/2020/09/28/the-clergy-privilege-in-mormon-cases-the-strange-case-of-richard-w-miller/ ).  

5 hours ago, Teancum said:

Yes I know many Methodists and have attended many Protestant meetings.  My wife's family consist of Methodists and Presbyterians. My wife was active in her church for 22 years. Part of the campus crusade for Christ in college.  We have compared and contrasted much and Mormonism has so many more controlling type approached than mainline Protestant faiths do.  If you want we can do a comparison and contrast but I doubt it is worth the time.

We do need to see professional research on why one religion succeeds (for a time at least), while others do not.  Most ignore the reality that, if it is not of God, it will ultimately come to nothing (this was the approach of the great Rabbi Gamliel of the Sanhedrin in Acts 5:34-39).  Since you believe that the LDS faith is false, then it ought to come to nothing in the long term.

I used to hang out with the InerVarsity Fellowship and campus crusade for Christ students at a university I attended.  Nice people.  Brought great speakers to campus, and published some excellent materials (I have a number of their books in my personal library).  I see no thought control techniques among them or the LDS.

See, by the way, Christopher C. Jones, “’We Latter-day Saints are Methodists’: The Influence of Methodism on Early Mormon Religiosity,” master’s thesis, (Brigham Young University, 2009).

5 hours ago, Teancum said:

Not worth pursuing the rest other than the only emotion I had as my faith in the church fell apart was sadness, desperation in trying to make it work, some anger, mourning my loss and so on. I tried for over 8 years to make it work from the time I concluded that what Joseph Smith claimed was false.

You should never have to apologize for your decisions, as long as you feel comfortable with them -- a clear conscience.  Lots of people move into and out of religions and other groups every day.  There is no need to play the blame game.  In fact, I seldom find LDS members playing that blame game.  Most people are compassionate and understanding.  Yes, there are some few who are not.  So what?  That is to be expected.

Edited March 3, 2022 by Robert F. Smith

[Rajah Manchou]

On 3/1/2022 at 8:53 AM, Hamba Tuhan said:

A few years ago, one of my former housemates and I went camping. I could tell that something was off from the beginning. He was both less fun and less interesting. But it was only on the drive back home that he let me know that he'd left the Church. Then he pulled that offensively patronising 'I won't tell you what I've discovered because then you would leave the Church too' schtick. I called out the arrogance inherent in that statement and assured him that there was close-to-zero possibility that he knew anything I didn't already know. But he had to stick by the narrative that his deconversion hadn't been a choice in any way and that I would inevitably follow him into apostasy if he didn't mercifully leave me in my state of blissful ignorance. 

I dunno, I think everyone that explores Mormon history has had moments when we choose not to share something with someone we love. In one case, sharing my thoughts on history did lead to a deconversion. I'm more careful now, and I don't feel I'm more careful because of arrogance. Its mostly because exploring church history was extremely painful for me in the beginning.

1 hour ago, Robert F. Smith said:

That quote from John Dehlin admits that there are a range of reasons why people adopt the LDS faith.  The reverse is also true, even though I get many denials of the fact on this board -- people unwilling to admit that there is a wide variety of reasons why LDS members might leave the faith.

I served my mission in Africa. When the question of blacks and the Priesthood was inevitably asked, the investigator wasn't asking it because "i'm just curious, this is totally fine". The question was usually framed in a way that sounded more like "why on Earth should I?" Having had that conversation with hundreds of people that really struggled to answer that question with a "YES, i should!", I don't feel it's fair to spin this as white people being unintentionally demeaning because they are woke and out of touch. 

I wonder how Kwaku would answer the question "why on earth?" if it was asked him by a sincere investigator of the church in Africa, someone that didn't know where Cottonwood Heights was and had no clue who the Fresh Prince of Bel Air is. By framing it that way he sounds just as demeaning and out of touch as Dehlin.

outside the bubble they both are in, Dehlin and Kwaku come across as extremely tone-deaf

Edited March 3, 2022 by Rajah Manchou

[Robert F. Smith]

4 hours ago, Rajah Manchou said:

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

outside the bubble they both are in, Dehlin and Kwaku come across as extremely tone-deaf

Yes, and they have every right to be tone deaf, or whatever.  We need to be frank and open about our religious history, less concerned about the consequences of telling the truth.  The Tanners, for example, did a great service to the LDS faith by furiously publishing anything they could get their hands on.  There will always be casualties along the way to the truth.  It is inevitable.

[Tacenda]

Well, I think the more I learned the more damage, in my old age. But if you're talking the younger generation will have heard of this since they were young, it won't be a blow to their minds, that might be right for the most part.

I never had a problem with Brigham Young's polygamy while very young growing up because I'd heard it was to take care of the widowed women. But thinking now, I didn't know the true story and how Brigham Young married already married women with living husbands, very young wives and left a few of his wives in poor living conditions. According to one story I heard, he walked down the street and didn't know his young son, but that might be a rumor. And I didn't know of the other leaders marrying teenagers while they were in their 50's or something, that's just wrong.

So I believe that the youth now might still get the stories through rose colored glasses.

Edited March 3, 2022 by Tacenda

[bluebell]

15 hours ago, Calm said:

A lot of ZLMB members came from CARM.  I wouldn’t be surprised if that was your first landing place.  It was Big News back then.

I had completely forgotten about CARM!  Is it still around?

[Harry T. Clark]

9 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Yes, and they have every right to be tone deaf, or whatever.  We need to be frank and open about our religious history, less concerned about the consequences of telling the truth.  The Tanners, for example, did a great service to the LDS faith by furiously publishing anything they could get their hands on.  There will always be casualties along the way to the truth.  It is inevitable.

Being frank and open is a nice change from what it was in the past.

[juliann]

9 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Yes, and they have every right to be tone deaf, or whatever.  We need to be frank and open about our religious history, less concerned about the consequences of telling the truth.  The Tanners, for example, did a great service to the LDS faith by furiously publishing anything they could get their hands on.  There will always be casualties along the way to the truth.  It is inevitable.

Which they often published with ellpses to hide anything favorable. It was ubiquitous. For the life of me, I don't understand why they are given plaudits when they whitewashed as much as the church ever did. 

[Paloma]

Sometimes I wonder how anyone could believe in God and the community of faith at all, when I think of church history, religious wars and even the uncharitable ways we can respond to each other!

What a shameful history and what messed up people!  (As you know, I come at this from a nonLDS Christian perspective - and there's not a lot of difference IMO when you think of all the horrific incidents and wars that come from 'religious' misplaced zeal and boundary maintenance throughout the centuries.)

While I believe in the absolute value of the 'community of faith', it's probably because of my view of human frailty starting with myself and extending to church leadership that I'm not and can't see myself belonging to a church that has any kind of what I see as 'intermediary' role between the individual believer and God.  (Having said that, please don't think I'm saying that you LDS believers don't have a strong direct faith and connection with God ... I see that you do!!  I just can't believe that God has instituted an organization - or to put in another way - has organized an institution - that mediates our access and 'right relationship' with Him in any way.)

I find myself wondering  how the Crusades could have happened and been supported by beloved 'historic' saints like Bernard of Clarvaux (who wrote 'O Sacred Head now wounded').  That's just one example among so many of how God's people have had blinders on in terms of understanding God's mission in the world (and I recognize that's my view, and who am I to say?).  We have biblical examples over and over again of how very flawed many of the Israelite kings, priests and prophets were.  And then there are the New Testament disciples and leaders.  Not hard to believe what we read over and over again "There is none righteous, no not one".  

I know that I've been heartbroken the last few years to see the sinful acts and brokenness of some of my favourite authors - Brennan Manning, Jean Vanier, Ravi Zacharias.  I struggle with being tempted to just discount everything they've stood for and written (mostly depending on the nature of their "sin" and whether or not they've hurt vulnerable people other than themselves) - but then I remember that God really does work through very flawed people including myself and I look for His wisdom, discernment and compassion.

Bottom line here ... for me, it's no wonder that people turn their backs on God if and when we see and judge Him through people - through those who claim to follow Him and represent Him.

[Teancum]

15 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Sorry, I just don't see a hint of "mind control" in the LDS experience, and you say that you didn't either when you were an active Latter-day Saint. 

Yes as noted most do not see it until they are free of it. That is why I didn't. Plus one needs to educate themselves on the methods.

15 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

 

 

However, you and your wife selling Amway does raise red flags, and it reminds me of the LDS FBI agent, Richard Miller, who sold Amway from the trunk of his car, and who ended up going to prison for espionage (see https://bycommonconsent.com/2020/09/28/the-clergy-privilege-in-mormon-cases-the-strange-case-of-richard-w-miller/ ).  

Well its a good thing we got out of it right? 😁

15 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

We do need to see professional research on why one religion succeeds (for a time at least), while others do not.  Most ignore the reality that, if it is not of God, it will ultimately come to nothing (this was the approach of the great Rabbi Gamliel of the Sanhedrin in Acts 5:34-39).  Since you believe that the LDS faith is false, then it ought to come to nothing in the long term.

I used to hang out with the InerVarsity Fellowship and campus crusade for Christ students at a university I attended.  Nice people.  Brought great speakers to campus, and published some excellent materials (I have a number of their books in my personal library).  I see no thought control techniques among them or the LDS.

See, by the way, Christopher C. Jones, “’We Latter-day Saints are Methodists’: The Influence of Methodism on Early Mormon Religiosity,” master’s thesis, (Brigham Young University, 2009).

You should never have to apologize for your decisions, as long as you feel comfortable with them -- a clear conscience.  Lots of people move into and out of religions and other groups every day.  There is no need to play the blame game.  In fact, I seldom find LDS members playing that blame game.  Most people are compassionate and understanding.  Yes, there are some few who are not.  So what?  That is to be expected.

 

[Maestrophil]

16 hours ago, SeekingUnderstanding said:

Are you saying you find your “faith” that Thor does not exist is comparable in size and scope to your faith that Jesus is your savior?

I don't waste a shred or thought or time arguing about, disproving, or posting about Thor, Zeus, Santa, or any other entity I don't believe in.  I believe there are Atheists like this too in relation to the Judeo-Christian God, who don't spend effort, time, or 'faith' on the matter - but there is a large contingent, or at least a very vocal contingent who evangelize, attack, and engage in polemics to defend their Atheistic creed. 

[Harry T. Clark]

20 minutes ago, Maestrophil said:

I don't waste a shred or thought or time arguing about, disproving, or posting about Thor, Zeus, Santa, or any other entity I don't believe in.  I believe there are Atheists like this too in relation to the Judeo-Christian God, who don't spend effort, time, or 'faith' on the matter - but there is a large contingent, or at least a very vocal contingent who evangelize, attack, and engage in polemics to defend their Atheistic creed. 

This sounds about right.  There are always politicians/evangelists in every group.  Some people are hard wired to want to get people to join in whatever they are doing at the moment.

[bluebell]

47 minutes ago, Paloma said:

Sometimes I wonder how anyone could believe in God and the community of faith at all, when I think of church history, religious wars and even the uncharitable ways we can respond to each other!

What a shameful history and what messed up people!  (As you know, I come at this from a nonLDS Christian perspective - and there's not a lot of difference IMO when you think of all the horrific incidents and wars that come from 'religious' misplaced zeal and boundary maintenance throughout the centuries.)

While I believe in the absolute value of the 'community of faith', it's probably because of my view of human frailty starting with myself and extending to church leadership that I'm not and can't see myself belonging to a church that has any kind of what I see as 'intermediary' role between the individual believer and God.  (Having said that, please don't think I'm saying that you LDS believers don't have a strong direct faith and connection with God ... I see that you do!!  I just can't believe that God has instituted an organization - or to put in another way - has organized an institution - that mediates our access and 'right relationship' with Him in any way.)

I find myself wondering  how the Crusades could have happened and been supported by beloved 'historic' saints like Bernard of Clarvaux (who wrote 'O Sacred Head now wounded').  That's just one example among so many of how God's people have had blinders on in terms of understanding God's mission in the world (and I recognize that's my view, and who am I to say?).  We have biblical examples over and over again of how very flawed many of the Israelite kings, priests and prophets were.  And then there are the New Testament disciples and leaders.  Not hard to believe what we read over and over again "There is none righteous, no not one".  

I know that I've been heartbroken the last few years to see the sinful acts and brokenness of some of my favourite authors - Brennan Manning, Jean Vanier, Ravi Zacharias.  I struggle with being tempted to just discount everything they've stood for and written (mostly depending on the nature of their "sin" and whether or not they've hurt vulnerable people other than themselves) - but then I remember that God really does work through very flawed people including myself and I look for His wisdom, discernment and compassion.

Bottom line here ... for me, it's no wonder that people turn their backs on God if and when we see and judge Him through people - through those who claim to follow Him and represent Him.

Beautiful words.  They reminded me of a few verses in our book of scripture which I think can apply to all of us.  And I do believe that we are asked to deal with the weaknesses of each other, as well as our own weaknesses, so that we never forget the bolded portion.

Doctrine and Covenants Section 1:

The weak things of the world shall come forth and break down the mighty and strong ones, that man should not counsel his fellow man, neither trust in the arm of flesh—

But that every man might speak in the name of God the Lord, even the Savior of the world;

That faith also might increase in the earth;

That mine everlasting covenant might be established;

That the fulness of my gospel might be proclaimed by the weak and the simple unto the ends of the world, and before kings and rulers.

Behold, I am God and have spoken it; these commandments are of me, and were given unto my servants in their weakness, after the manner of their language, that they might come to understanding.

And inasmuch as they erred it might be made known;

And inasmuch as they sought wisdom they might be instructed;

And inasmuch as they sinned they might be chastened, that they might repent;

And inasmuch as they were humble they might be made strong, and blessed from on high, and receive knowledge from time to time.

[ttribe]

35 minutes ago, Maestrophil said:

I don't waste a shred or thought or time arguing about, disproving, or posting about Thor, Zeus, Santa, or any other entity I don't believe in.  I believe there are Atheists like this too in relation to the Judeo-Christian God, who don't spend effort, time, or 'faith' on the matter - but there is a large contingent, or at least a very vocal contingent who evangelize, attack, and engage in polemics to defend their Atheistic creed. 

Perhaps those same people are reflecting back the fact that they are being evangelized, attacked, and engaged using polemics by people of faith?

[Maestrophil]

47 minutes ago, ttribe said:

Perhaps those same people are reflecting back the fact that they are being evangelized, attacked, and engaged using polemics by people of faith?

I am sure there is some truth to that as well.  I also assume many perceive being evangelized, attacked, and engaged using polemics when that isn't happening too. It's much too complex an issue to boil down to platitudes and simple blanket statements, right?  I am sure there as many shades of different approaches to faith as there are people. 

 

I believe if we were all just kinder and more respectful of other's agency on all sides, we'd all be much happier.

Edited March 3, 2022 by Maestrophil

[smac97]

4 hours ago, bluebell said:

I had completely forgotten about CARM!  Is it still around?

Yep: https://C***.org/

They just posted this article yesterday: Did God ever desire the building of multiple temples?

Quote

The LDS (or Mormon) Church builds temples throughout the world, claiming that these buildings are a continuation of Biblical temple worship. Leaving aside, for the moment, the fact that temple worship is already fulfilled in Christ, having been an Old Covenant type and shadow pointing forward, there is another matter worth discussing. Even in the Old Testament, when God Himself established a temple, did God ever desire for there to be more than one temple to His name? Did God wish for many temples in various places? The biblical answer is a clear and resounding “no.”

Meanwhile...

https://www.jpost.com/opinion/op-ed-contributors/was-there-a-jewish-temple-in-ancient-egypt-318363

Quote

Was there a Jewish temple in ancient Egypt?

There was a whole colony of them, they built their houses and it seems set them around a small temple, at least according to the papyri.

By STEPHEN GABRIEL ROSENBERG

 

Published: JULY 1, 2013 22:57

 

Just a hundred years ago, they were searching for it desperately. German, French and Italian archaeological expeditions were mounted to comb the lower stretches of Elephantine Island in the Nile River, in southern Egypt, but without success. They had been activated by the publication in 1911, two years earlier, of papyrus documents from the area that contained personal stories of members of a Jewish military colony in the area from the 5th century BCE. According to the document, there had been a temple in their midst of the colony. But where, exactly? Was it real or a myth ? Where was the colony, exactly, and why was it there at all?

...

The papyrus scrolls were specific. The Jewish colonists lived in peace with their Egyptian neighbors, and they kept the Jewish laws.
...
There was no record of this Jewish colony in the history books, nothing in the works of Jewish historian Josephus Flavius, and nothing in the Talmud or any official Jewish records, nothing at all except in the papyri that had been found in 1893. So the world was desperate to see if they were correct. Had there really been a Jewish temple in Egypt in the 5th century BCE?  IN 1893 the American adventurer C.E. Wilbour acquired a hoard of documents from the locals on Elephantine Island. He could not read the Aramaic texts, so he stored them in a sealed metal trunk, which passed to his daughter on his death in 1896. She eventually passed them on to the Brooklyn Art Museum in 1947. However, other papyri on the subject had come into the hands of British and German scholars in 1901 and 1903, and were quickly translated and published by the Germans in 1911.

 

Among other details, the documents described a shrine standing in an open courtyard with an altar on which animal sacrifices were offered. It had stood before the conquest of Egypt (in 525 BCE.) by the Persians and Cambyses had spared it, although destroying other temples.

It remained standing until about 400 BCE, when the Persians were driven out by the Egyptians. (It had been destroyed at one time by the priests of Khnum, who had an adjoining temple, but it was rebuilt again a few years later, on the orders of the Persian governor.

...
THIS WAS the story and the European expeditions were desperate to find the temple, but after WWI they lost interest and it was not till 1967 that another expedition was mounted. This was not to search for the temple, but to record all the pagan temples that had been built at this important site in southern Egypt.

 

They recorded many Egyptian temples of various periods but, after many years, also found what they called “the Aramaic village.” This was a series of mud-brick houses, in ruins, that were lined up along two sides of a central site with a fine plaster surface, and a small building paved in fine tiles.

 

Luckily, Hebrew University professor Bezalel Porten had published his plan of the Jewish colony houses, based on the papyrus documents, and the German team recognized that what they had found were the Jewish houses around the temple site, all as Porten had predicted from the documents.

 

The temple itself was small, in fact only half of it remained, but it had a fine tile floor in two layers, indicating that the first had been destroyed and then replaced. It stood in a courtyard of fine plasterwork, while the houses only had crude mud floors. So this was the temple, and the papyri were true.

 

The final discovery was only made in 1997, but it indicated a small Jewish temple in southern Egypt, built to serve a Jewish colony that acted as garrison to defend the southern approach to the rich country of Egypt.

See also: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elephantine_papyri_and_ostraca#Jewish_temple_at_Elephantine

And this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Land_of_Onias

Quote

The Land of Onias (Greek: Ὀνίας)^[1] is the name given in Hellenistic Egyptian, Jewish, and Roman sources to an area in Ancient Egypt's Nile delta where a large number of Jews settled. The Land of Onias, which included the city of Leontopolis (Λεόντων πόλις), was located in the nome of Heliopolis. While accounts differ on the details, it is known that the Jews of Leontopolis had a functioning temple, distinct from and contemporary to the one in Jerusalem, presided over by kohanim (priests) of the family of Onias IV, for whom the "Land of Onias" is named. Like its predecessor the Jewish Temple at Elephantine (destroyed in the 4th century BCE), the Temple at Leontopolis was the only Jewish sanctuary outside of Jerusalem where sacrifices were offered.  Aside from a somewhat uncertain allusion of the Hellenist Artapanus,^[2] only Josephus gives information about this temple.^[3] The Talmudic accounts are internally contradictory. The establishment of a central sanctuary in Egypt was probably undertaken in response, in part, to the disorders that arose in Judea under Antiochus IV Epiphanes, the desecration of the Temple at Jerusalem under his reign, the supplanting of the legitimate family of priests by the installation of Alcimus, the personal ambition of Onias IV, and the vast extent of the Jewish diaspora in Egypt that created a demand for a sanctuary of this nature.

Seems like the Latter-day Saints and many others have been pointing to these additional temples for years.  Jeff Lindsay (2004), Jared Ludlow (2007), Evidence Central (2021), Pearl of Great Price Central (2019), FAIR (date uncertain), and the oh-so-awesome Robert Boylan (2019) are a few examples.  From Robert's blog:

Quote

Gabriel Hughes, an Evangelical Protestant, made the following “arguments” against the Book of Mormon:
...

Another argument against the Book of Mormon relates to there being (valid) temples outside of Jerusalem, another old canard that modern scholarship has soundly refuted. As Hughes writes:

 

The Book of Mormon talks about worship and sacrifice conducted in Hebrew temples in the Americas prior to Jesus’ appearance. This is also a contradiction of Scripture, for God had chosen the place of the temple, and that place was Mount Moriah in Jerusalem (1 Kings 11:36, 2 Chronicles 3:1). (p. 99 n. 66)

 

 

Commenting on temples and other cultic sites outside of Jerusalem, including that of Elephantine (see Jeff Lindsay’s discussion here), Jarl E. Fossum, retired professor of New Testament at the University of Michigan, wrote the following:

 

It has become increasingly clear that the Deuteronomic requirement that God should be worshipped in only one place was not recognized at once and by all. There were post-Deuteronomic temples of Jews in Egypt, both in Elephantine and Leontopolis, and possibly also in Transjordan and Babylonia. For the possible existence of a Jewish temple at the Transjordanian centre of the Tobiads, see A. Spiro, “Samaritans, Tobiads, and Judahites in Pseudo-Philo”, PAAJR, 20, 1951, pp. 314 f.; cp. P.W. Lapp, “The Second and Third Campaigns at ‘Araq-el-‘Emir”, BASOR, 171, 1963, pp. 8 ff For the possible existence of a Jewish temple in Babylonia, see L.E. Browne, “A Jewish Sanctuary in Babylonia,” JTS, 17, 1916, pp. 400 ff.; cp. Early Judaism, Cambridge, 1929, pp. 53 ff. See also Cross, Jr., “Aspects”, p. 208; Coggins, pp. 101 f., 112 f. Regarding the Elephantine colonists, the epistolary intercourse between these immigrants and the authorities in Jerusalem shows that the former were not regarded as schismatics. Rowley, “Sanballat”, p. 188 (= Men of God, p. 268), does not think that the Jerusalem authorities would have found the building of the Samaritan temple so unacceptable, since they would not like to have Northerners worshipping in Jerusalem. (Jarl E. Fossum, The Name of God and the Angel of the Lord: Samaritan and Jewish Concepts of Intermediation and the Origin of Gnosticism [Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr, 1985; repr., Waco, Tex.: Baylor University Press, 2017], 37 n. 27, emphasis added)

 

For more on the Temple at Elephantine, see:

Israelite Temples outside Jerusalem (from The Pronaos blog)

 

 

Lessons from the Elephantine Papyri Regarding Book of Mormon Names and Nephi's Temple (from LDS apologist Jeff Lindsay)

For a recent scholarly work on Elephantine, including the temple and how the officials at Jerusalem accepted the validity thereof, see:

Gard Granerød, Dimensions of Yahwism in the Persian Period: Studies in the Religion and Society of the Judaean Community at Elephantine (Beihefte zur Zeitschrift für die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft volume 488; Berlin: De Gruyter, 2018)

Philip Jenkins (!) likewise wrote about these temples, in February 2019.

And yet in March 2022 CARM is declaring "There was only ever supposed to be one temple."

Robert Boylan's conclusion is apt: "While critics of the Book of Mormon like Hughes {Edit: and CARM} continue to repeat old canards which have long been refuted and not engage with the serious scholarship and research in favour of the Book of Mormon, Latter-day Saints are justified in not taking them seriously."

Thanks,

-Smac

[Calm]

5 hours ago, bluebell said:

I had completely forgotten about CARM!  Is it still around?

Yes, it is.

[bluebell]

3 hours ago, smac97 said:

Yep: https://C***.org/

They just posted this article yesterday: Did God ever desire the building of multiple temples?

Meanwhile...

https://www.jpost.com/opinion/op-ed-contributors/was-there-a-jewish-temple-in-ancient-egypt-318363

See also: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elephantine_papyri_and_ostraca#Jewish_temple_at_Elephantine

And this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Land_of_Onias

Seems like the Latter-day Saints and many others have been pointing to these additional temples for years.  Jeff Lindsay (2004), Jared Ludlow (2007), Evidence Central (2021), Pearl of Great Price Central (2019), FAIR (date uncertain), and the oh-so-awesome Robert Boylan (2019) are a few examples.  From Robert's blog:

Philip Jenkins (!) likewise wrote about these temples, in February 2019.

And yet in March 2022 CARM is declaring "There was only ever supposed to be one temple."

Robert Boylan's conclusion is apt: "While critics of the Book of Mormon like Hughes {Edit: and CARM} continue to repeat old canards which have long been refuted and not engage with the serious scholarship and research in favour of the Book of Mormon, Latter-day Saints are justified in not taking them seriously."

Thanks,

-Smac

Oh man.