Friday, July 8, 2022

Dan's (former?) form of apologetics

This is one of several posts I never published, but maybe it will be helpful for some readers to review Dan's style of apologetics in the hope that he will announce a meaningful course correction.

In other words, I hope this post is relegated to the dustbin of history because Dan renounces his past and become open to multiple faithful working hypotheses.

_____

Someone sent me Dan's scholarly comments on the Carthage movie, including this gem: "I'm hoping that this repulsive piece of speculative historical revisionism will soon fade into the obscurity that I believe it abundantly deserves, and I'm very reluctant to give it even the slightest degree of publicity." 

He's not just reluctant; he's very reluctant. 

Which apparently means he has to tell all his followers about it.

But Dan's characterization looks like a Freudian slip, because it applies to the M2C and SITH theories he's been promoting for decades.

_____

Recently, a two-part podcast by RFM (a former LDS apologist turned critic, who is hoping to leave his law practice to work full time as a critical podcaster) discussed Dan's history advocating for M2C.

Below the transcript from one caller who related his experience with Dan. 

Dan's defenders will object to me citing an "anti-Mormon" podcast, but the experience related by this caller is not uncommon. Active members of the Church have related similar experiences to me. They stay in the Church despite Dan because they reject Dan's mode of apologetics and the SITH/M2C narrative he promotes.

I'm hoping that Dan will change his mode of apologetics, but if he doesn't, I hope more Latter-day Saints recognize that Dan doesn't represent the Church.

I hope more Latter-day Saints reject Dan's form of apologetics instead of rejecting the Church. 

_____

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y4tYNWFkO6o&t=5928s

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RoTsWIbTy2M&t=4451s




No comments:

Post a Comment