Home Page Forums Support Bad Apologetics

  • This topic is empty.
Viewing 11 posts - 1 through 11 (of 11 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #204312
    Anonymous
    Guest

    Something I am often confronted with that really gets under my skin is when I hear members using what John Dehlin calls “Bad Apologetics” to explain things to others. Examples of this include that polygamy was for widows and spinsters, that the first wives were always consulted, etc.

    How do you respond to these sorts of situations? Do you just let it go and walk away, or do you jump into the conversation and try to offer alternative insight (for example, “I don’t think we will ever know why polygamy was instituted, or whether it was truly from God, but I do think/hope/have faith that [insert your own personal truism here].”)?

    What do you do when you hear someone citing something that is blantantly incorrect about church history? Do you let it go, or take the time to convince them otherwise?

    On one hand, I don’t want to be an agent damaging faith, but on the other, letting such fallacies go can actually be harmful overall, and seems to contribute to a never-ending cycle.

    Thoughts?

    #222083
    Anonymous
    Guest

    I try to judge how harmful it would be to let it stand unchallenged. Often, I let it go; often, I chime in GENTLY and QUIETLY with something like, “I was reading a book/talk by Brother/Sister/Elder/President (Nibley / Bushman / Faust / Wirthlin / Kimball / Snow / Okazaki / whatever) where they said __________” – or “I think that’s an interesting perspective, but I know someone who believed that __________________.” (which is true, since I know myself – *GRIN*)

    Once in HP Group, I disagreed STRONGLY with the instructor about what life will be like in the Celestial Kingdom. He talked about how we feel in the Celstial Room of the temple and equated that with unending peace in the CK. I mentioned that, while I think we will feel internal peace and beauty, our lives still will be full of emotional pain and weeping and sorrow – since we have mutiple accounts of God weeping for the sins of His children. I felt the other protrayal was too much a Protestant image of the harp-playing, cloud-lounging hereafter that I abhor (and, therefore, was false doctrine) – so I thought it was important to offer my own opinion. I had to apologize to the instructor afterward, since he was trying his best and seemed gun-shy after my comment – but I also got lots of quiet agreement from others in the group throughout and after the lesson.

    I think whether or not to interject is subjective; I think HOW to do so is critical – that it always be done softly, meekly and in a quiet voice – and that it address ONLY the point being made, not the person who made it.

    #222084
    Anonymous
    Guest

    I actually disagree in some ways with the comment Ray made in that class. But the need for us to be able to toss out varying perspectives is so important that I am gleeful to think he said it. :-) Seeking affability (1. Easy and pleasant to speak to; approachable. 2. Gentle and gracious) is worthwhile.

    #222085
    Anonymous
    Guest

    Interestingly (or not) bad apologetics have become cultural doctrine.

    My sister tried to gently correct someone close to her on some bad apologetics only to find out that that person had accused my sister of apostasy to a family member.

    I’ve wondered in the past why the brethren don’t make a stand on some of the more egregious examples; maybe “let sleeping dogs lie”.

    #222086
    Anonymous
    Guest

    Its not my responsibility to make sure everyone else is correct all the time. Besides, I’m not sure I know whether something needs to be corrected in their minds or my mind.

    I do feel more responsible to explain to my kids when they hear things that I don’t agree with, to set the record straight…but never in a judging way. I don’t want them to have an example by me of constantly pointing out others mistakes…but I do want them to be taught correctly.

    Kind of like letting schools teach them about evolution or sex ed. I’m ok with them getting info from the schools…but I followup with a private discussion with them on what I think is right and wrong with what those sources taught.

    In HP group, I often don’t feel a need to speak up…let others think what they want, it doesn’t impact my family. I often handle it privately with those interested in hearing what I believe, not publically…but I’m never in a position of responsibility outside my home to warrant my public involvment.

    #222087
    Anonymous
    Guest

    swimordie – ironically, the phrase I was thinking was “don’t cast your pearls before swine.” 😆

    My own view is that I correct misinformation based on a series of principles:

    what is the mistaken notion I feel compelled to correct? Is it completely wrong (proven to be wrong), or just unlikely (other theories are more compelling).

    how should I bring it up? This depends on what I’m bringing up. If it’s inaccurate info, I might just say “That’s not correct” and explain why. If it’s speculative, I might say, “Some disagree. Here are some alternate viewpoints.” If it’s laughably stupid, I probably will just enjoy a private chuckle.

    who said it and in what context? Is this just one person with a mistaken notion (easy to correct) or a GD teacher who wandered off the reservation? If it’s just one person, it’s easier to correct. When there are others there, it gets more complicated.

    who is the audience? If I’m having a conversation with just one person, I usually debunk the myth. If it’s GD, it depends. Some teachers get rattled. Others are excited to have new info brought in. I try not to blow a teacher’s confidence. Sometimes I confirm what they say (“yes, I’ve read/heard that too” so they feel confident) then bring in a dissenting view (“and more recently I read that . . . ” as if I’m building on their comment).

    I keep the idea in the back of my mind that I’m a guest in the teacher’s class. But then other times, I think that the misinformation has to be clarified for the class members’ benefit. It’s a fine line.

    #222088
    Anonymous
    Guest

    From a new thought, quantum mechanics perspective…it’s all an illusion anyway! 😆

    Somewhat tongue-in-cheek, but when you think about it, what do we really “know” to be true, anyway? I think most of the time, if we feel the need to correct somebody, it’s really our ego needing to be “right.” So if the points being made by the other are not going to harm them or me, I really don’t think it’s my place to challenge them. I’m probably just as “wrong” as they are anyway!

    😆

    #222089
    Anonymous
    Guest

    I find that it usually depends on my mood as to whether I decide to correct someone or not. Am I feeling argumentative, or is it better to just to skip class and let others try to feel the spirit?

    #222090
    Anonymous
    Guest

    I agree with Heber13’s view that it isn’t my job to go around making sure everyone in the world is correct. And like Rix said, I am probably wrong too. So I am not so sure I can fix everyone else anyway :-)

    I do chime in though. I usually try to come in gently by saying something like “well … it might be a little more complicated than that.” And then bring up a few extra details from history books, and maybe mention some alternative viewpoints. I get positive responses most of the time.

    It’s how you say it, not so much what you say. If we are threatening or aggressive, people throw up the defenses.

    #222091
    Anonymous
    Guest

    My wife will quickly slip in from time to time to see what I’m reading/listening to. I think that she is somewhat hopeful that I have at least come back to some reading of things Mormon.

    Of course it hurts her when I’m on the abrasive Mormon sites, and she quickly leaves, unwilling to have any part of it. However, the other night she sat here and listened to the whole of John’s recent interview with Mormon Expressions … not saying a word, playing like she was busy on her computer.

    I knew this was something that would give her a new found hope of me going back. The mere fact that she sat and listened to the whole of it was unusual for her.

    The next day I said something to her about wondering if I could go back, under the circumstances she had heard from John. She got all excited and the following burst out;

    “You can NOT go back and say anything!”

    The uncontrolled response surprised her as much as me … we laughed.

    This, obviously is one of the topics which I need to consume, ponder and gain some control over before considering dropping back in.

    #222092
    Anonymous
    Guest

    Great discussion and Hawkgrrrl I really loe your approach.

    Here is a classic form of bad apologetics that really irks me:

    http://www.ldschurchnews.com/articles/57752/Paleontologist-defends-the-Book-of-Mormon.html

    This is a retired BYU professor, in paleontology no less!!!! I was down right excited when I saw the link and thought, ohh goody some really interesting stuff. But sadly no. At least according to the article (and I will search and see if I can find a the full text of his talk, it was at the FAIR conference) (and of course this link IS to the Church News so what did I expect?? 8-) ). Anyway, all the article reports is the standard set of explantions for the standard problems like: steel, cows, horses, pigs etc.

    Why the heck bother with a “scientist” for hecks sake! I guess the thinking is that if a real paleontologist says it, then the explanations must be absolutely accurate and we can have full confidence in them???

    Grrrr. 👿

    I would have loved to read about his own research and how he fits all of that in to his faith. Sorry I had to bring it up but it really irks me.

Viewing 11 posts - 1 through 11 (of 11 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.