B
ben_dy
Guest
Since July I’ve become obsessed with reading about the history and doctrine of the LDS church. “flameburns623” cited a number of books and publications, some that I had read and others, since that time, have read that seemed to present a ‘fair and balanced’ view of LDS history and doctrines and included caveats in regard to some of the material that allowed me to know, beforehand, just which way the books might be leaning. I have to admit that, for the most part, what I have particularly enjoyed reading are the Journal of Discourses (and, in particular, Brigham Young and Orson Pratt), perhaps because there is within a great deal of ‘speculative’ theology and both a credible history along with the development of doctrine. I’ve also enjoyed reading more ‘recent’ Hugh Nibley & Bruce McConkie, and, I am not too terribly ashamed to admit, the Tanners (although I admit that I am influenced here strongly because I had read of them many years ago in connection with Mark Hofmann - and forgery is a ‘personal interest’, yet not something I personally practice!).
Lately, I’ve had to put a curb on spending so much on books: although the local public library which is directly across the street from the local LDS ward meetinghouse/church has a terrific collection of “pro” LDS literature (perhaps donated by church members? I don’t know and haven’t asked) and so I’ve been spending more time searching for free information on the Internet. Now the majority of information I’ve found is decidedly ‘anti-Mormon’ and much of it is hardly worth a glance.
There are a few of the Tanner books online, however, and I’ve read those and have a growing collection of FARMS essays and reviews - but I am beginning to grow disillusioned with FARMS: once respected LDS writers (in the 1980’s and 1990’s) who have since ‘apostatized’ are treated with nothing but ad hominem attacks (and one review of a work by the Tanners accused THEM of using ad hominem attacks because they had referred to a number of ‘pro-Mormons’ as “apologists” - hardly what I would think of as an ad hominem attack) and I have grown increasingly tired of hearing the term “smug” applied to ex-LDS writers who, a decade ago, were leading authorities on one topic or another.
Earlier today I was on the FARMS website and I noticed, on the right of the page, a “most popular” list of articles and downloaded one entitled " Chattanooga Cheapshot, or The Gall of Bitterness" which I found really puzzling - a lengthy " Review of Everything You Ever Wanted to Know about Mormonism by John Ankerberg and John Weldon". Now I’m familiar with Ankerberg primarily through Karl Keating and so I had no doubt that the book would be of little to no substance yet now, halfway through reading the book, I have to wonder why so much effort was put into discrediting a publication that seems as intellectually challenging and factual as an anti-Catholic Jack Chick comic. Is Ankerberg’s Everything You Ever Wanted to Know about Mormonism the anti-Mormon equivalent of Boettner’s Roman Catholicism? Is that the reason the review of the book so popular on the FARMS website? Even Mr, Keating did not feel it necessary to go to such lengths as Daniel C. Peterson in exposing Roman Catholicism for the ill-informed tome that it is - why does Mr. Peterson go to such lengths to say in 86 (extraordinarily well footnoted) pages what could have been done in two dozen pages? Or is Ankerberg more influential than I think him to be? I had to Google his name to see if he was even still alive (he is, apparently, although late-night, early-morning channel flipping me has not seen his face on television in a long, long time).
So - I have the ‘ant-Mormon’ sites in full force (and although I am sure that there is the possibility that the Tanners are just as anti-Catholic as they are anti-Mormon, the quotations that they site as well as the history seems to check out), I have reservations about FARMS for a number of reasons as they seem to take apologetics to a height of mean-spiritedness at times and unnecessarily attack those who have lost faith - the “FAIR” LDS website, while not officially connected to the LDS church, I don’t think, does seem to be ‘fairer’ than FARMS, and the remainder of the pro-LDS sites seem too ‘clean’ and don’t address genuine issues.
Finding genuine and authentic LDS church doctrine is an entirely different can of worms - you can get some idea from reading The Ensign but it seems more of an LDS ‘Reader’s Digest’ than a publication that asks and answers the ‘tough questions.’
(…continued…)
Lately, I’ve had to put a curb on spending so much on books: although the local public library which is directly across the street from the local LDS ward meetinghouse/church has a terrific collection of “pro” LDS literature (perhaps donated by church members? I don’t know and haven’t asked) and so I’ve been spending more time searching for free information on the Internet. Now the majority of information I’ve found is decidedly ‘anti-Mormon’ and much of it is hardly worth a glance.
There are a few of the Tanner books online, however, and I’ve read those and have a growing collection of FARMS essays and reviews - but I am beginning to grow disillusioned with FARMS: once respected LDS writers (in the 1980’s and 1990’s) who have since ‘apostatized’ are treated with nothing but ad hominem attacks (and one review of a work by the Tanners accused THEM of using ad hominem attacks because they had referred to a number of ‘pro-Mormons’ as “apologists” - hardly what I would think of as an ad hominem attack) and I have grown increasingly tired of hearing the term “smug” applied to ex-LDS writers who, a decade ago, were leading authorities on one topic or another.
Earlier today I was on the FARMS website and I noticed, on the right of the page, a “most popular” list of articles and downloaded one entitled " Chattanooga Cheapshot, or The Gall of Bitterness" which I found really puzzling - a lengthy " Review of Everything You Ever Wanted to Know about Mormonism by John Ankerberg and John Weldon". Now I’m familiar with Ankerberg primarily through Karl Keating and so I had no doubt that the book would be of little to no substance yet now, halfway through reading the book, I have to wonder why so much effort was put into discrediting a publication that seems as intellectually challenging and factual as an anti-Catholic Jack Chick comic. Is Ankerberg’s Everything You Ever Wanted to Know about Mormonism the anti-Mormon equivalent of Boettner’s Roman Catholicism? Is that the reason the review of the book so popular on the FARMS website? Even Mr, Keating did not feel it necessary to go to such lengths as Daniel C. Peterson in exposing Roman Catholicism for the ill-informed tome that it is - why does Mr. Peterson go to such lengths to say in 86 (extraordinarily well footnoted) pages what could have been done in two dozen pages? Or is Ankerberg more influential than I think him to be? I had to Google his name to see if he was even still alive (he is, apparently, although late-night, early-morning channel flipping me has not seen his face on television in a long, long time).
So - I have the ‘ant-Mormon’ sites in full force (and although I am sure that there is the possibility that the Tanners are just as anti-Catholic as they are anti-Mormon, the quotations that they site as well as the history seems to check out), I have reservations about FARMS for a number of reasons as they seem to take apologetics to a height of mean-spiritedness at times and unnecessarily attack those who have lost faith - the “FAIR” LDS website, while not officially connected to the LDS church, I don’t think, does seem to be ‘fairer’ than FARMS, and the remainder of the pro-LDS sites seem too ‘clean’ and don’t address genuine issues.
Finding genuine and authentic LDS church doctrine is an entirely different can of worms - you can get some idea from reading The Ensign but it seems more of an LDS ‘Reader’s Digest’ than a publication that asks and answers the ‘tough questions.’
(…continued…)
