What are these tiers of apologetics? I haven’t heard it framed this way before.Gadianton wrote: ↑Sat Jun 28, 2025 3:57 amThe problem with an Interpreter podcast that extends beyond its technical problems, lack of formatting, and lack of editing, is that it's straightforward tier 3 apologetics. Nobody wants that.
…
The Afore had a good idea years ago with the tier 1 apologetic program translating Arabic medical texts.
Interpreter’s Radio Program Bites the Dust
-
- Sunbeam
- Posts: 75
- Joined: Sat Dec 28, 2024 10:46 pm
Re: Interpreter’s Radio Program Bites the Dust
“The ego is not master in its own house.” - Sigmund Freud
- Gadianton
- God
- Posts: 5528
- Joined: Sun Oct 25, 2020 11:56 pm
- Location: Elsewhere
Re: Interpreter’s Radio Program Bites the Dust
Thank you for asking, Ego. It's been on my mind lately due to some Nazi apologetics going on in SP.Ego wrote:What are these tiers of apologetics? I haven’t heard it framed this way before.
The tiers as some of us see it could be described as a division of labor, although by no means planned; it seems like with some forethought, tiering could be exploited for better gains.
Tier 3 is straightforward arguing for Mormonism.
Tier 2 is publishing papers broadly compatible with tier 3 positions but stand on their own. Not obviously Mormon related.
Tier 1 is work has nothing to with defending Mormonism but rather, builds institution credibility.
Here's the mind-blowing part:
Tier 1 and Tier 3 go together in that the apologetics org puts their name directly on the work. Tier 2 could be done by individuals associated with the org, but the greater the separation from the apologetics organization the better.
Dan's Arabic medical texts were tier 1, building up the credibility of FARMS as scholarly with legit output beneficial to non-Mormons.
Everything Hugh Nibley ever published in Western Political Quarterly, or wherever, was tier 2. Ineffective tier 2 since nobody but himself built upon his work; but every idea he ever had that the secular world could tolerate listening to went right toward one of his big ideas about what the gospel means.
There aren't many Egyptologists, but many Egyptologists are Mormons. To the extent Mormons work to shift Egyptology in a direction that can be exploited for apologetics later they are doing tier 2. Years ago something Gee published was a great example but I can't remember what it was.
If you have any suggestions to improve the framework, feel free to publish them here.
We can't take farmers and take all their people and send them back because they don't have maybe what they're supposed to have. They get rid of some of the people who have been there for 25 years and they work great and then you throw them out and they're replaced by criminals.
-
- God
- Posts: 2170
- Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2020 2:40 pm
Re: Interpreter’s Radio Program Bites the Dust
That's explains it well. On point. That's the reality and obfuscation of Mormon apologetics. Thanks for that.
Myth is misused by the powerful to subjugate the masses all too often.
-
- Area Authority
- Posts: 629
- Joined: Thu May 13, 2021 8:41 pm
Re: Interpreter’s Radio Program Bites the Dust
Roper seems no longer to be affiliated with Scripture Central, at least judging from the "Team" page, just like Jasmin Rappleye:Doctor Scratch wrote: ↑Sun Jun 29, 2025 5:21 pmAnd didn't I just see the Afore plugging some piece by Matthew Roper? Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't Roper's main appointment with Scripture Central? So, he's basically "on loan" to Interpreter in an effort to help them out--sort of like tossing a life preserver to someone who's drowning?
https://scripturecentral.org/team
Something big happened in mopologetics within the last few months...
- Everybody Wang Chung
- God
- Posts: 2686
- Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 1:52 am
Re: Interpreter’s Radio Program Bites the Dust
Ego,
If you want to see some examples of mind numbing Tier 3 arguments, just look at the Interpreter or the comment section of Sic et Non.
Experts say that due to intellectual trauma, reading a Tier 3 argument can shave about 90 minutes off your life.
Apparently, I died in 1643.
If you want to see some examples of mind numbing Tier 3 arguments, just look at the Interpreter or the comment section of Sic et Non.
Experts say that due to intellectual trauma, reading a Tier 3 argument can shave about 90 minutes off your life.
Apparently, I died in 1643.
"I'm on paid sabbatical from BYU in exchange for my promise to use this time to finish two books."
Daniel C. Peterson, 2014
Daniel C. Peterson, 2014
-
- God
- Posts: 2170
- Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2020 2:40 pm
Re: Interpreter’s Radio Program Bites the Dust
Everybody Wang Chung wrote: ↑Tue Jul 01, 2025 4:29 amEgo,
If you want to see some examples of mind numbing Tier 3 arguments, just look at the Interpreter or the comment section of Sic et Non.
Experts say that due to intellectual trauma, reading a Tier 3 argument can shave about 90 minutes off your life.
Apparently, I died in 1643.

Myth is misused by the powerful to subjugate the masses all too often.
-
- God
- Posts: 2103
- Joined: Tue May 23, 2023 9:09 am
Re: Interpreter’s Radio Program Bites the Dust
Has Scripture Central had a purge?Alphus and Omegus wrote: ↑Tue Jul 01, 2025 4:26 amRoper seems no longer to be affiliated with Scripture Central, at least judging from the "Team" page, just like Jasmin Rappleye:Doctor Scratch wrote: ↑Sun Jun 29, 2025 5:21 pmAnd didn't I just see the Afore plugging some piece by Matthew Roper? Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't Roper's main appointment with Scripture Central? So, he's basically "on loan" to Interpreter in an effort to help them out--sort of like tossing a life preserver to someone who's drowning?
https://scripturecentral.org/team
Something big happened in mopologetics within the last few months...
Premise 1. Eyewitness testimony is notoriously unreliable.
Premise 2. The best evidence for the Book of Mormon is eyewitness testimony.
Conclusion. Therefore, the best evidence for the Book of Mormon is notoriously unreliable.
Premise 2. The best evidence for the Book of Mormon is eyewitness testimony.
Conclusion. Therefore, the best evidence for the Book of Mormon is notoriously unreliable.