I think that FARMS is largely irrelevant. My guess is that a survey of the faithful would find that fewer than 10% have ever heard of FARMS with a smaller percentage saying they'd ever read anything by FARMS.
Consider how many members in the developing world are likely to have heard of or read anything by FARMS.
I think you are correct. Most members in my ward and stake do not know much about FARMS, at least when I have asked them. About 10-20% of active members are aware.
Besides that, most FARMS publications are in English only (I believe), which rules out most all non-English speakers, and they're written at a high level of pedantic verbosity, which rules out all without a university educated level of English.
Correct on the English but I do not think they are that tough to read.
Plus most member don't give a sh** about the things FARMS gives a sh** about. They are simple folk happy to take the gospel at face value and do not feel the need to be told by some FARMS know-it-all that Prophets cannot be trusted and one must look to FARMS for real answers and understanding.
I don't think FARMS teaches this about the prophets. If they did they would be out of their BYU sponsorship pretty quick.
FARMS is irrelevant in a religion that almost sets the standard for irrelevance.
I know your pet comment is that the LDS Church is soooooo irrelevant but you are wrong. For its size it is fairly relevent, in fact much more then one would expect.
Jason Bourne wrote:I know your pet comment is that the LDS Church is soooooo irrelevant but you are wrong. For its size it is fairly relevent, in fact much more then one would expect.
Jason, considering the size is grossly inflated I find this statement does not fit with reality.
And crawling on the planet's face Some insects called the human race Lost in time And lost in space...and meaning
Jason Bourne wrote:I know your pet comment is that the LDS Church is soooooo irrelevant but you are wrong. For its size it is fairly relevent, in fact much more then one would expect.
Jason, considering the size is grossly inflated I find this statement does not fit with reality.
Well then if it is really smaller it is even more relevant compared to its size. But this is not oa huge issue to me. The Church is fairluy relevant in one way or another to you now is it not? And to me as well. That is what counts for us.
Jason Bourne wrote:Well then if it is really smaller it is even more relevant compared to its size. But this is not oa huge issue to me. The Church is fairluy relevant in one way or another to you now is it not? And to me as well. That is what counts for us.
Very true that it is relevant to the both of us. But I fail to see how it is relevant to mainstream America and/or the world at large.
And crawling on the planet's face Some insects called the human race Lost in time And lost in space...and meaning
They aren't trying to run the church. They are, however, trying to create a church within a church that is more to their liking. While Hugh Nibley was a Chapel Mormon and most contemporary apologists are Internet Mormons, they do have something in common, generally, a disdain for leadership positions and a fascination with what Elder Stanley called the "Deep Doctrinal Vortex". As Elder Maxwell observed, "Speculation seems more fun than consecration." What's better than truly believing you're immortal and destined to have sex for eternity? Believing the same but with the additional self-appointed "Get out of boring church service free" card. As Steve Young was rumored to have been told to forgoe a mission in order to QB the church to fame, there are in fact apologists who have decided to skip the mission in order to save their church with their own philosophical musings. Granted, that's not the norm, but how better ride your way to eternal glory than by pursuing an obsessive hobby or feeding an internet addiction? How convenient that one class of saints get to impress Jehova by running their mouths off against critics and idly pontificating on their own prejudices rather than having to trudge through member missionary programs, missionary splits, and all the seemingly menial tasks that the brethren conjur up to keep the masses preoccupied? Not to mention avoiding the indignity of letting the thinking be done by those who actually hold the keys to the kingdom. Internet Mormons find it far more gratifying to be "prophets of the pew", having the chance to not only one day become Gods, but to self-study their way, at their own pace, and by grading their own papers. Logging onto the FAIR message board to gossip and speculate is a true consecration of one's time and talents. Who else could Jesus have been thinking of when he declared the way straight and the gate narrow than a bunch of internet addcts, gospel hobbyists, and bitter polemicists?
I think that FARMS is largely irrelevant. My guess is that a survey of the faithful would find that fewer than 10% have ever heard of FARMS with a smaller percentage saying they'd ever read anything by FARMS.
Consider how many members in the developing world are likely to have heard of or read anything by FARMS.
I think you are correct. Most members in my ward and stake do not know much about FARMS, at least when I have asked them. About 10-20% of active members are aware.
Besides that, most FARMS publications are in English only (I believe), which rules out most all non-English speakers, and they're written at a high level of pedantic verbosity, which rules out all without a university educated level of English.
Correct on the English but I do not think they are that tough to read.
Plus most member don't give a sh** about the things FARMS gives a sh** about. They are simple folk happy to take the gospel at face value and do not feel the need to be told by some FARMS know-it-all that Prophets cannot be trusted and one must look to FARMS for real answers and understanding.
I don't think FARMS teaches this about the prophets. If they did they would be out of their BYU sponsorship pretty quick.
FARMS is irrelevant in a religion that almost sets the standard for irrelevance.
I know your pet comment is that the LDS Church is soooooo irrelevant but you are wrong. For its size it is fairly relevent, in fact much more then one would expect.
Jason, the world has about 6 billion people. Of these 6 billion, how many in a given day do you think ever even think about the Mormon Church?
How many of these people look to Gordon Hinkley for counsel?
How many of these people give a rat's ass about Joseph Smith?
Mormonism has absolutely no relevance, none whatsoever, in the lives of 99.999% of the world's population. How, then, can you claim that it is "fairly relevant?"
Which next begs the question, What kind of plan of salvation is this?
If this is the best God can do in his purpose "Man is that he might have joy," even the most faithful believer has to concede that it is a pretty sorry ass plan.
God . . . "who mouths morals to other people and has none himself; who frowns upon crimes, yet commits them all; who created man without invitation, . . . and finally, with altogether divine obtuseness, invites this poor, abused slave to worship him ..."
Plus most member don't give a sh** about the things FARMS gives a sh** about. They are simple folk happy to take the gospel at face value and do not feel the need to be told by some FARMS know-it-all that Prophets cannot be trusted and one must look to FARMS for real answers and understanding.
Jason Bourne wrote:I don't think FARMS teaches this about the prophets. If they did they would be out of their BYU sponsorship pretty quick.
Well, so far they've gotten away with contradicting prophetic utterance with impunity.
Their attitude is pretty well summarized by a conversation I had with my apologist wanna-be brother. When he was trying to push the LGT on me, I pointed out that LGT contradicts over a century of statements and proclamations by Prophets and Apostles, he simpy said, "They're wrong."
God . . . "who mouths morals to other people and has none himself; who frowns upon crimes, yet commits them all; who created man without invitation, . . . and finally, with altogether divine obtuseness, invites this poor, abused slave to worship him ..."
I don't think FARMS teaches this about the prophets. If they did they would be out of their BYU sponsorship pretty quick.
Well, so far they've gotten away with contradicting prophetic utterance with impunity.
Their attitude is pretty well summarized by a conversation I had with my apologist wanna-be brother. When he was trying to push the LGT on me, I pointed out that LGT contradicts over a century of statements and proclamations by Prophets and Apostles, he simpy said, "They're wrong."
This is a very common theme among apologists. Everything is taken from the so-called prophets and turned on its head, ignoring the infalliability that the church demands on its related prophetic statements.
It is as if a ...cough... new church is trying to take shape. Its a microcosm within a marginalized group, so it does not have enough momentum to really do anything besides bloviate.
Peterson views himself as an intelectual prophet in the same way joe though himself a scholar. Both peterson and joe are considered cranks but peterson tries to hide behind his mediocre track record as a scholar whole joe hid behind the fact no one could translate egyptian.
And crawling on the planet's face Some insects called the human race Lost in time And lost in space...and meaning
Jason Bourne wrote:Well then if it is really smaller it is even more relevant compared to its size. But this is not oa huge issue to me. The Church is fairluy relevant in one way or another to you now is it not? And to me as well. That is what counts for us.
Very true that it is relevant to the both of us. But I fail to see how it is relevant to mainstream America and/or the world at large.
Well I agree it is mostly not, other then as a passing facny, seeing the clean cut youngun's go door to door, the reputation for good health, strong families and so on. But it is not irrelevant either. For its size it is quite well known, has substantial who's who, is always fast on the scene when natural disaster strikes, etc.
I think that FARMS is largely irrelevant. My guess is that a survey of the faithful would find that fewer than 10% have ever heard of FARMS with a smaller percentage saying they'd ever read anything by FARMS.
Consider how many members in the developing world are likely to have heard of or read anything by FARMS.
I think you are correct. Most members in my ward and stake do not know much about FARMS, at least when I have asked them. About 10-20% of active members are aware.
Besides that, most FARMS publications are in English only (I believe), which rules out most all non-English speakers, and they're written at a high level of pedantic verbosity, which rules out all without a university educated level of English.
Correct on the English but I do not think they are that tough to read.
Plus most member don't give a sh** about the things FARMS gives a sh** about. They are simple folk happy to take the gospel at face value and do not feel the need to be told by some FARMS know-it-all that Prophets cannot be trusted and one must look to FARMS for real answers and understanding.
I don't think FARMS teaches this about the prophets. If they did they would be out of their BYU sponsorship pretty quick.
FARMS is irrelevant in a religion that almost sets the standard for irrelevance.
I know your pet comment is that the LDS Church is soooooo irrelevant but you are wrong. For its size it is fairly relevent, in fact much more then one would expect.
Jason, the world has about 6 billion people. Of these 6 billion, how many in a given day do you think ever even think about the Mormon Church?
How many of these people look to Gordon Hinkley for counsel?
How many of these people give a rat's ass about Joseph Smith?
Mormonism has absolutely no relevance, none whatsoever, in the lives of 99.999% of the world's population. How, then, can you claim that it is "fairly relevant?"
Which next begs the question, What kind of plan of salvation is this?
If this is the best God can do in his purpose "Man is that he might have joy," even the most faithful believer has to concede that it is a pretty sorry ass plan.
I have explained this to you in another thread and reiterrated some in a post to Vegas a minute or two ago.
Largely I agree with you on the points you make. But it does have relevance in many ways as noted.