003 – The One With The Top Ten Worst Apologist Arguments

In this podcast episode, the three Zelphies discuss the top ten worst apologist arguments in all of Mormondom. From FAIR to Jeff Lindsay and LDS.org itself, we see and discuss top-level mental gymnastics in action. We also shamelessly plug our new t-shirst, which you can check out below (Fair warning, they are extremely high fashion).

Additionally, we also all partake in some carnal intercourse over dinner.

Want to listen in an app? Subscribe to our podcast below!

Albert Carrington

Albert Carrington served as a member of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles until he was excommunicated for adultery. During his disciplinary court, Elder Carrington tried to argue that he had only committed "a little folly in Israel!", but the current brethren couldn't be bothered to give him a break. Learn more about Elder Carrington here.

Swagavad Gita

Can’t wait to listen to it on the way home.
Thinker of Thoughts

Fun discussion 🙂

I’d like to see a discussion of the top ten things that apologists accuse apostates of doing, which they do themselves…
ZSH

For me, one of the greatest blunders in apologist responses was from D. Oaks in regards to the Salamander Letter. At the time of purchasing the letter and during all the commotion in which Mark Hoffman was rubbing shoulders with the leaders of the mormon church, Oaks not only defended the authenticity of the letter (can you blame the guy! Plenty of experts had said it was real, it’s not like he had any other method to *discern* if it was true or not.) but he also offered an explanation as to why in the letter it describes the angel moroni as a salamader – “One wonders why so many writers neglected to reveal to their readers
that there is another meaning of salamander, which may even have been
the primary meaning in this context in the 1820s.” Of coarse! “Salamander” doesn’t really mean Salamander, just like “translate” doesn’t mean translate, and “horse” doesn’t mean horse… I think I’m starting to see a pattern here…

Of course as we all know, Mark Hoffman turned out to be a fraud, the letter (along with many other documents) was a forgery and Hoffman ended up killing a bunch of people because of it. If only someone could have prevented all of this with a revelation before it got out of control…

My point is – this is a clear cut example of the apologist experience – The church goers are faced with a bit of new information that contradicts their previous beliefs, apologists come up with an explanation, the church goers “just believe”, but in the end it turns out the apologists were wrong.

Keep up the podcasts, you are fun to listen to. Maybe work on that ending 😉
Dr_Doctorstein

Fun podcast, but go easy on Jeff Lindsay! I’ve been playing with him on Mormanity for years now (under my other nom de web, “Orbiting Kolob”) and I’ve grown rather fond of him. Sure, his arguments are ludicrous, but he’s just such a nice dorky guy ya gotta love him.
Jaasiel Rodriguez

Good work. Buying a horse-shit shirt right now!
Orrin Dayne

I want a baby blue shirt with the Zelph skull logo.
- Dr_Doctorstein
  
  Me too!
- Richard R. Lyman
  
  Me three! That’s the one I keep begging for.
Swagavad Gita

I can give Joseph a break on being a man of his time. But even as a product of his time, he was a con man. I don’t know how the church can defend him with a straight face. Frontier life? What?
Thaumaturgy

Hey guys, in case anyone wants the references for the final #1 (because I just HAD to look it up) — I think these are good, correct me if wrong.

The Meg Stout comment https://runtu.wordpress.com/2010/12/24/secret-wives/ (comments) “Besides this, Emily was by then 70 years old, and knew her way around the English language. Carnal refers to meat. Intercourse refers to commerce or trade (ever visited Intercourse, PA?). Therefore “carnal intercourse” would also be a legitimate description of passing Joseph a platter of turkey or chicken or mutton or beef at a meal, an activity the young Emily had almost certainly engaged in.”

Court case notes (Brian Hales’ site) http://josephsmithspolygamy.org/emily-dow-partridge-evidence-of-sexuality/
td8057

One of the most ridiculous explanations I’ve heard for the book of Abraham is that Joseph used the papyrus as a catalyst for receiving revelation about the life of Abraham.

First of all, that is speculation AT BEST!

Secondly, It is documented that Joseph honestly thought he was translating the characters on the papyrus.

So the best way I can reconcile these two ideas is that god purposefully wanted Joseph to THINK he was translating the scrolls when he actually wasn’t. God was really just revealing it to him. Basically, god was bringing forth a record about Abraham through dishonest means, deceiving his own servant, a prophet!

Why not just use the seer stone for all revelations concerning ancient people? Or have god reveal the book of Abraham in the same way he revealed the book of Moses or in the way Joseph received revelations recorded in the D&C? At least it wouldn’t look dishonest.
December

Can we expect these podcasts to ever hit the Apple podcast app or nah? Xxxxxx