Good Reason

It's okay to be wrong. It's not okay to stay wrong.

Why apologetics don’t really help

With the Internet, more and more Mormons are bumping into the bits of LDS history that you used to have to dig for. As a result, the LDS Church is trying to — if not come clean about its history — explain its history in terms that will placate startled members. But how do you acknowledge the weirdness without freaking people out?

Here’s what can happen when a doubting Mormon goes to an apologist.

5 Comments

  1. This pretty much sums it up!

  2. That is so true it kinda makes me a little sick. The blaming part. . . Arg! You nailed this!

  3. The sarcasm is acknowledged. But here's the problem. Who ever said marrying a 14 year old was wrong? We do not live in the 1840's anymore and people have created their own views of what the standards are for those things. I don't even know where it began, but look apparently it's also okay to talk openly that you're gay. That hasn't always been the case. So why wasn't it okay to talk openly of being gay in 1840 and not okay to marry a 14 year old girl? Hmmm I don't know. I guess the moral police who write politically correct cartoons could tell you. ;-P

    • Oh, I agree that people have settled on different moral codes. I happen to like where we're going with ours, but okay.

      The 14-year-old thing freaks some people out. Maybe 14-year-olds were more tough and frontiersy then, and more capable of being married; on the other hand some 14-year-olds now seem pretty mature and worldly-wise. Isn't it funny, though, that on the one hand some Mormons say "Why do we have to sexualise children? Why can't they be kids and enjoy their childhood?" and then on the 14-year-old bride thing, they're like "Eh".

      My issue was more that JS married other men's wives and sometimes didn't tell Emma. Or maybe God told him to do that, too. In which case God's a bit of a dickbag. Or JS was doing that which was done by other gurus.

  4. “It’s not anti if I tell you about it.”

    Nice punch line.

    This relates to the strategy some of the "meat" eating LDS faithful refer to as “inoculation.” This metaphor doesn’t look so good when you line up the correspondence:

    Physical inoculation means injecting a blunted form of a pathogen into an uninfected body in order to "trick" it into building automatic defenses that kick in upon subsequent exposure to the pure pathogen.

    "Spiritual" inoculation means injecting a blunted form of the truth into an innocent mind in order to "trick" it into building automatic psychological defenses that kick in upon subsequent exposure to the complete truth.

    So, inoculation aligns truth with a pathogen and loss of faith with the contraction of a disease. Yikes!

    Thanks. I’m enjoying you posts.

    Eric

Comments are closed.

© 2017 Good Reason

Theme by Anders NorenUp ↑