Radio Free Mormon & Backyard Professor Take Elder David A. Bednar to the Limit

[Philo Sofee]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SK5C9CBEC6w&t=2421s

Radio Free Mormon and I had a very good live presentation demonstrating the disquieting discussion Elder Bednar had with the college folk at BYU-I a few months back. Our live session last night demonstrated with quite frankly impeccable good evidence that Bednar appears to just be lost in trying to make a strong argument against reasonable doubts of his unreasonable stances on so many "doctrinal truths" the Church is supposed to have. We take him apart one truth by one truth until the house is gone. Come have a look and enjoy the show.We leave nothing undone.
Thank you to all those who came and enjoyed the chat also. It was a very good chat night.

[mcjathan]

Link to Part 1?

[Philo Sofee]

Link to Part 1?

Ah, yes, sorry!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ogTXg6hFZBg&t=2898s

Please give us a like when you finish, thanks! We appreciate your support.

[wenglund]

Could you also provide a link to Bednar's speech that is being critiqued? Never mind. I located it myself:

Part 1 Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nZag8VIAHBY
Part 1 Text: https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/stu ... 1?lang=eng

Part 2 Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2cPEcJreKBc
Part 2 Text: https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/stu ... 2?lang=eng

Thanks, Wade

[Everybody Wang Chung]

Could you also provide a link to Bednar's speech that is being critiqued?

Thanks, Wade

Wade, good to see you again! Hope you've been well.

[wenglund]

Wade, good to see you again! Hope you've been well.

Glad to be back, and I am looking forward to productive dialogue.

Thanks, Wade

[Res Ipsa]

Welcome back, Wade.

[consiglieri]

Your dreams were your ticket out!

[wenglund]

Here is my piecemeal critique of the critics:

In the opening of the linked Mormon Discussion Inc. vlog, RFM makes an astute comment. He intimated that Bednar's talk was "very confusing," and that he (RFM) had to listen to it and read it several times in order to "understand what he (Bednar) was really talking about." and that, reasonably, he (RFM) needed to understand what Bednar was talking about before he could critique what Bednar had said. RFM figured the he and Kerry had "gotten to that point."

Well, we will have to wait and see if RFM and Kerry accurately understood Bednar as they supposed. I had my doubts going into this given that I had just recently listened to RFM's "critique" of a talk by Jared Halverson, which, to me, so missed the mark as to leave me wondering if we had heard the same talk.

Anyway, RFM begins by identifying Bednar's thesis as: "It is unreasonable to claim that faith in Jesus Christ is unreasonable."

Actually, this is the second half of Bednar's thesis. The first half is: "I wholeheartedly and emphatically reject Korihor’s arguments that belief in Jesus Christ and His mortal mission is the result of foolish traditions and frenzied and deranged minds. I testify that we come to know many things through means other than sight, especially spiritual things."

I am just guessing at this point, but this critical omission may factor heavily into whether or not RFM/Kerry accurately comprehended Bednar's message.

RFM then mentions that Bednar "goes over five things that Joseph Smith introduced...basic doctrines of the LDS church that everybody already knows. He tries to brush them off, make them shiny, put them in this new context, and try and get people to recognize that these doctrines prove that Joseph Smith was a prophet of God."

However, if you do a search of Bednar's text for the word "prove", you will find only 2 instances, with the first being included in a quote from Austin Farrer: “Though argument does not create conviction, the lack of it destroys belief. What seems to be proved may not be embraced, but what no one shows the ability to defend is quickly abandoned. Rational argument does not create belief, but it maintains a climate in which belief may flourish.”

This suggest something quite different than what RFM claimed was Bednar's intent, thus drawing into question the accuracy of RFM's understanding of what Bednar said.

The second instance was a quote from the Book of Abraham: “And we will prove them herewith, to see if they will do all things whatsoever the Lord their God shall command them.” (Abr 3:25)

Again, this isn't anything close to what RFM claimed was Bednar's intent. raising more doubts about the accuracy of RFM's comprehension.

RFM then said that Bednar is positioning his message as "giving a scholarly defense." I find this an odd perception since Bednar invited the Spirit and open his remarks by quoting Austin Farrer in which there is admitted that "rational argument does not create belief, but it maintains a climate in which belief may flourish.” In fact, Bednar clearly states what he is positioning to do: "My purpose is not simply to make a rational argument for the truthfulness of the restored gospel and Church of Jesus Christ in the latter days. Rather, I hope to discuss with you spiritually essential truths in a way that may allow belief to flourish." The title of his talk also gives a glaring clue: "That ye may believe." Does this sound like "scholarly defense" to anyone but RFM?

(to be continued)

Thanks, Wade Englund

[Everybody Wang Chung]

Wade, can we at least agree that Bednar needs to lighten up a little bit?

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=FUEmheSPd_o