Share This Episode
Outer Brightness  Logo

Midnight Mormons vs. RFM (Debate Commentary)

Outer Brightness /
The Truth Network Radio
February 5, 2022 9:35 pm

Midnight Mormons vs. RFM (Debate Commentary)

Outer Brightness /

On-Demand Podcasts NEW!

This broadcaster has 165 podcast archives available on-demand.

Broadcaster's Links

Keep up-to-date with this broadcaster on social media and their website.

February 5, 2022 9:35 pm

In this episode, Matthew the Nuclear Calvinist and the Apostate Paul comment on a debate (?) held on November 13, 2021 between the three amigos of the YouTube channel, Midnight Mormons, and Radio Free Mormon. The video has been posted to the Heart of the Matter, the Midnight Mormons, and the Mormon Discussion, Inc. podcast channels and, to date, has racked up 43K views. The pre-debate drama was amped up, perhaps purposefully to draw an audience, and the fireworks continued during the debate. It was not a formal debate, and the participants went off-format for much of the evening, leaving Matthew and I asking whether this was in fact a debate. We comment on that and several of the points made by each side.

Link to the debate:


Your right and and welcome barflies to this episode of the cast, just as always, here's my illustrious renown colleague, pulse apostate Paul I like your pulse to see I think for joining us today on a subset of our brightest. So today were going to be addressing kind of a debate really qualified as an actual debate. Call that the debate that was between RFM for your free Mormon who will be interviewed for one of our earlier episodes and he was having a debate with midnight Mormons so they went to several topics including stress Mormon and other questions so were going to just have have an informal discussion. Always thought about the debate going to ask specific questions about things that were discussed during the debate. So were that's the topic for today something for dryness and where to go ahead and get started so all struggled about the overall debate format. Talk about how they structure the debate may be prose positives and negatives of the debate. Maybe you change we would've wished made to the debate. We are the ones host so overall your thoughts about that. I kinda mentioned in the intro that questionable maybe whether were we would call it a debate, so to speak like we used to say maybe among Christians.

Debating topics of theology. While that's only have to make. It was more. It was more like a town hall debate the it was held at Sean McCranie's campus church in solid city, Utah radio free Mormon is from the Seattle area. I believe in and was down there in Utah for what's called the Thrive conference which is a conference for ex-Latter Day Saints to come together and talk about life after Mormonism from a secular perspective. And so while he was down there she just midnight Mormons had initially challenged Bill real.

It sounded like to debate and I just got handed off to radio free Mormon because Bill real doesn't really care for debate format.

He doesn't think it gives anything accomplished so social McCranie ended up being the moderator he wasn't their first choice, but he was willing to offer up his church to hold the debate and also provided from the church's budget subway and drinks for the entire debate teams as well as for those who came to watch the debate and so you know, kind of in a formal debate that were maybe were used to seeing on like the gospel truth right podcast with Marlon what's his last name is Wilson Milam was in direct so if you use watching a debate like that there's a topic and so each side will debate one topic here. What they did is they threw it out to the those who listen to radio free Mormon podcast or watch the midnight Mormons YouTube channel to crowd source questions that would be posed and then Sean McCranie kind of collated the questions and combined them into forget.

I think maybe eight questions that they tackled during the debate, and I think it in one sense that maybe that was positive. Just like if you watch presidential town hall debate which is this was, more akin to the audience feels more involved maybe than they do and say a formal debate which is often why like formal, they still have question the question answer periods at the end to get the audience involved more but ultimately I think it it ended up covering too much ground to really be effective.

That's my take on what you think Matthew yeah I was and it seemed like it was all over the place and I think a lot of it was still civil thankfully you know I couldn't seem like a lot just fights break out, which is counter was worried about you because whether you know not, you know, he kind of stirs up controversy against the noise, controversial figure. He was himself may be, you know, is that isn't as violent as some of the critics of the other stretch our DNA definitely did feel a little bit kind of all over the place and it felt like it seem like a lot of questions refrain situated like they really wanted a specific answer, but then it was kind of dodged Oreos, twisted. I can rough it was that our family think it was going to give the first question was like okay I want you give us your best case of the book of Mormon.

You know, historicity, archaeology, all that and like basically it was personal experience testimony things like that is like a K1 visa visiting one of these other things that really discussed but he also does at the end it was your best case they felt the best of you deftly that there was some some declaration as a mom on the side of the midnight Mormons for the first question is for sure. So yes I guess we maybe we should talk a little bit about did you did you pay attention at all. In the weeks leading up to this debate and it's okay if you say no because I know you're busy wrapping up your PhD you know you're busy with wedding plans. But did you pay attention at all to the back-and-forth that was happening between the midnight Mormons and and RFM and maybe we should say so. Midnight Mormons as a YouTube channel.

Its three young younger Latter Day Saints Cardin Ellis Brad went back and quickly fell, and they previously had a show called this is the show with a somewhat risqué acronym for the further this is the show and and were removed from the fair Mormon warfare LDS YouTube channel. I think that happened a couple years ago or last year and I came up during the day but there was a back-and-forth between RFM and midnight Mormons as they tried to plan the debate and come up with what the format would be did you pay attention and ammo that any of that as I went on and now I'd like to remember hearing the announcement and then separate ensigns announcement is happening legally. I forgot about the thing that really but they did they did tenant talk about getting the debate how they tried to set up as Behind-the-scenes, it seems that we are to bring up during the debate like that point but guarding ourselves and was definitely less showboating I think on both sides pretty debate to try to make the other side look like they were going to show for you know or were difficult to work with on getting the format and location and time nail down the kind of thing you know if RFM for his part, definitely posted on his Facebook page note updates and stuff like that and midnight Mormons did a responsivity on the channel. The base, it was interesting to unknown blood little bit of bad taste in my mouth… You know okay and if there's some difficulties in getting things lined up back should become left side and that the topics of the debate should be should be focused on, which was interesting because that even before the first question right my Cardin Ellis jumped in and talk about how it was originally a challenge to Bill real and we brought your sixth microphone so you can up. You can just pay it like made like challenged him on the spot.

Sitting in the front row to the park to participate so that I was a little bit bad taste, but I think I was so I think some of that on both sides leading up to what you think about that yet. Of those Ridiculous, like my, my opinion was okay like there's there's drama in the background. I'm sure that their solitary debate because, yeah, everybody wants wants to go their way.

But once you agree upon. You know the format I was in ago that's it either go through the or you can slit or reschedule or you don't show up to the agreed upon format and say throwing last-minute halos change and add something else debate panel.

This is not that I should do it in the it it can about me to that. It's like there wasn't even really like for a book of Mormon debate you noticed as they have thesis in his book of Abraham Scripture and so you know there's a positive and the negative situs people know what they're getting into this debate. It was just like debate know it wasn't a thesis that was important was the people who were debating and that was what strong people so yeah like the fact that he go into it. And there's not really a clear topic of debate. There's many different topics that in me like you if there is two or three topics I've seen that before to you know I like there's debate where they are from the outset a sale Time of this. This is okay.

Cool but Vanessa didn't seem like they really did that sound So you can imagine. First question was, was posed about the book of Mormon and it was posed to the midnight Mormons that I think the roof must be four questions per side and then decide that was asked the question would be given eight minutes to respond and then the other side was supposed to have eight minutes to counter what they had said in response to the question and then the initial side would have another three minutes to counter anything that was said in the rebuttal so that first question was about the book of Mormon. I asked the midnight Mormons to give their their best case for the book of Mormon and as you mentioned, Matthew.

It was basically all three of them just bearing the testimony of their experiences with the book of Mormon and how it's made them feel and how it's impacted their lives and there wasn't a whole lot talked about with regards to historicity. In fact, no quickly made the comment that you don't have to believe that the book of Mormon is historical, which I thought was interesting because I didn't think although I think that the LDS church is headed in that direction. Like the community of Christ did previously. I don't think that the leadership of the LDS church is quite there yet. So I thought it was adjusting to her quickly say that but she also made an appeal to Latter Day Saints to be courageous and defending and holding on to what their ancestors have built in on that. In essence, he was referring to in the past leaders of the of the LDS church pioneers. Those who have built up the LDS church is today and what did you think about about that appeal that he made to the audience.

Yeah, I'm not entirely sure if he is Chinese. That is like as I can. Evidence of the truthfulness of the denial of the religion is that you'll always be looking before stapled on it or if he was just kind of trying to appeal to them to say hey don't throw it out as soon as you find something controversial about the fate or something. You don't quite understand what you were the latter I can kinda understand because I probably say the same thing about Christianity and like someone comes along and says what about trilobites.

What about you know what about our keep know about the dinosaur bones in his arms as well. All right like to be Chris anymore and I told her he's my facing on-site okay I think you should really sit down and think about it, study of the various views and not just immediately throughout the entire religion because you find something that's hard to understand, reconcile second kind of understand that. So I would. I'm not really entirely sure what where he was going with that.

You know that there is a soft, as there is a sin in the LDS church is very strong feeling of like tradition, our forefathers, they came across the plains and they suffered severe hardships, and so we can't let them down kind of thing and it's almost like I was, a form of manipulation, I think, to the extent like well, they did all this stuff for you and that you just throw it away so that's kind of what he is gone for yeah measurably agreed that kind of way of thinking that what about you know what's what's the him that we used to sing as Latter Day Saints church of the truth which are fathers of cherished truth is I have slumping at half African alerts via yeah that is heavenly that and what his comment made me think of his back when I was first starting to question the LDS church shortly after my mission was was involved in some online discussion groups. I was discussing one of the. The guys that I discuss things with is the descendent of a very prominent 19th-century LDS apostle who was imprisoned for polygamy and I were having a conversation with with him and he he made a similar comment to what Quaker said, you know that that he would never turn his back on his ancestry back in time of exactly how it how he phrased it but it was similar to me like this.

This dedication to what your ancestors have done is this kind of it it's it's an interesting thing is, built into into Mormonism.

Some of that was kind of interesting that Quaker did that because quite due in particular mentions in his opening.

When I minimize opening comments. But later on I mentioned that he's a convert to the LDS church and converted in 2014. So it's only been Latter Day Saints for seven years or so and so it's interesting that he kinda brought up that that argument for sticking with what the ancestors have created and it is kind of interesting kind of to go against what at least I think Wendy Hinckley may be other prophets of that same but you know there's this there's this notion that Mormonism is about taking whatever taking truth no matter where it comes from seeking truth incorporate that into your life and then you know you reject what is true, but then selecting a butts heads against this idea.

Like well this is what our ancestors believed, so we need to follow the same patterns of cycle. Wait a minute. What if our ancestors were wrong, though. Should we still go with that or stick to the whole key posture, reject what is the real meaning. There is the whole concept of the early church did the apostles message or what's what's the other term that she is in early church history, the rule of faith in others has been handed down from the apostles.

Yes, that's tradition. Brianna is interconnecting a similar argument for tradition within the LDS faith. But if you like you said, if you apply that to broader historic Christianity, then there shouldn't be a need for an LDS restoration per se exactly yet their document early LDS church history sounds like. Not sure what you're thinking about building a diagram of the Christian church is back further and just so one of the other things I thought was interesting in the midnight Mormons opening remarks when they were asked to talk about the historicity of the book of Mormon and the best best argument for it being the word of God. That kind of thing they all reached all three of them mentions modern leftist secularism so they kinda came out arguing against that. What you think of would you think of them couching the debate in terms of Mormonism versus modern leftist secularism. I seen a lot and just in general.

Everybody cutting select their religion is the solution to this problem. I mean, I've heard about it and spoken of like just Christianity in general or Islam or like. Specifically, the reformed tradition in our specific streams of tradition. I feel like everybody feels like they see this growing trend of talking you know the conservative values of a kind of in Western society for so long and now stupidly changing and everyone says what's because of exit. So if you just accept what we have to teach.

That's the solution is like a not going to stop like a mic to say that I wouldn't say the city Christianity. You know what adopting the faith of our fathers is being grounded in a medical faith. That's a good thing, but I guess that it just seems like it seemed like a rallying cry that everybody does. Maybe not everybody but a large part of publisher, season to come afraid of it. So, tapping into the stream of consciousness is a zeitgeist of while there's a lot of things are changing.

That's not good is headed in and saying hey we got there we got the solution for that night. It seems almost like a salesman tactic a little bit of you know a little bit of manipulation and maybe even not a conscious relationship lately. Personally, just do it on their worldview they see this problem and in the LDS church and the what is taught by others. Church leadership led by revelation. That's how to solve that problem. So you can't really attribute motives behind why they contact them is interesting and may be maybe it's just because no young generation.

There is kenneling time establishment.

You know, growing the like.

No more conservatives that are even religious that are going against what the media tells them and what is been kind of been forcing you know almost propaganda SQL type of formations being given out there, so maybe there are some consciously tapping into that because there you know that the two of them were Ben's years on the shareholder Eldon is, but deafly not gins the guy going on. You will guess nationalities are there. I don't think he's think is quite Gen X is probably millennial. Yeah, it was interesting that did kinda come out and try to guitar RFM is coming from this modern leftist secular approach and I don't know that that's wholly unwarranted for them to do that just was interesting that they did in the end, just kind of in connection with that. I watched the so the debate went out as a live stream on YouTube on the heart of the matter channel which is shown the crane's channel and when I tuned in to watch it on the lifestream. The thumbnail was up there.

Mormonism versus Christianity a debate which I thought was interesting because I grab a screenshot of insanity. Matthew goes like this is interesting because RFM is not a Christian.

As far as I know. And if you want to hear the three of us talked with Arafat and the two of us talk with RFM about that you can listen to that episode radio free Mormon of our podcast, but it was this instrument that that had that thumbnail up there and then when when once the debate was over the thumbnail was was updated and it was like a Vegas is now like midnight Mormons versus RFM a debate or something like that side, I can wonder the background for why it was initially tagged as Mormonism versus Christianity. If that was an attempt to work the algorithm and get more get more viewers as they were searching for Mormonism versus Christianity during the daytime. I don't know but it was interesting was it just the thumbnail photo or was also the title of the I don't remember you I think it was just thumbnail. Maybe it was an interdisciplinary business to recycle all elected, and he realized all you RFM is Chris way I could be in my sending any other thoughts on on anything from the debate before I go on and asked some of the questions are really are good to go. So one of the things that with that everybody. I think found interesting is that the three midnight Mormons came in wearing bulletproof vests on the outside of their clothes when did you think about that.

Yeah, it was very strange it. It seemed like it was like several I quite a while. Went by before they would address to write who first brought it up. If Sean is as of the like. Well maybe if I was strapped in double progress like you guys are. I can't remember who said it yeah was weird is like they just showed up wearing elected and pointed out, it's almost like noise. It is like a victim complex thing you know, like they feel like they're there being persecuted for the state. No, I don't know what he does about me. I don't know for sure. I do know that among the more secular progressive Mormon and ex-Mormon crowd, but the radio free Mormon is a part of a few years back. There was a meaning that was put out. It's from the movie inglorious pastors which is a Quentin Tarantino movie and it's that there's a scene in which a Nazi officer is beaten to death by blows to the head in the movie and the when when this is the show was first coming on being posted to YouTube the meme was made a video mean was made with the acronym for this is the show put on put next to the baseball bat or were whatever was being used to pummel the head and that in the movie and in the John the land who runs the Mormon stories podcast hits.

His name was tagged next to the Nazi officer and so that that when that meme was posted.

It got a lot of attention in the ex-Mormon world.

I guess online and so that was that was kinda brought up.

I think Jim and some pre-debate discussions between RFM and Bill real and then I have listened to kind of the midnight Mormons predebate show that they did where they kind of responded to some the things that been set on on RFM's Facebook wall and and enmeshed in the podcast of the Mormonism life that goes out on Wednesday nights and so was I think it midnight. Mormons don't think that meme is a very big deal. Others think it's proposing violence towards John Glenn someone that the progressive Mormon community really cares for and has gotten a lot of benefit from his podcast in the work that he does so it's it's kind of a sore spot. I would say between the two, like the apologetics community and ends the progressive Mormon community. The next Mormon community and that came up, and so in the in the predebate show the midnight Mormons were talking about how they had received death threats, and so them showing up in the bulletproof vest I guess was there statement you look we received death threats and been quick to runs a party planning company called young and dumb and plans for college parties all throughout Utah and even made the statement in the predebate show that that he was gonna throw some money at the security guys that do security for his college parties and make sure that there was adequate security of the debate so not sure whether he actually did that or not but that was the statement that was made.

Some anyway and that it did come up in the debate Nino Cardin Ellis like cited statistics from Wikipedia page that according to him, had statistics from the FBI crime unit showing that bombings of LBS chapels have been up since 20 of 2017.

Quite significantly, so I have them within two other Gnostic mother not that's the case I do know that when I was when I was younger and living in Utah. I don't know if you remember this at all. Matthew but kind of around the September 6 when that all went down when the six LBS dollars were excluded from the church that seems like there was an uptick in bombings of chapels about time to in the 90s. So an error that I don't really remember September 6 until two as I was like what 90 tuition Jewish summer so I was like five or six out to know nothing about nothing like Siana. I recall that I don't really hear many stories. I like the district is being bombed.

But I'm sure it happens.

I do remember cedar stories when I was around 13 or 14 which would've been around that time of the September 6. Not sure if they were connected but it's just it is interesting that as more and more information comes out about the LDS church and the other church hiding information from its members that maybe there's an uptick in in violent acts against LBS chapels. I hope that's not the case at but there was some back and forth during the debate, with each side kind of accusing the other of worse crimes of violence or whatever towards one another so that was that Nick had a disappointment to my eye and I know that's that's kind of happened to you in the past is quite good these debates as he brings up the Crusades. Other atrocities of Christians of committed and in a cycle. How is it relevant like I was around the leg again.

We know a lot of messed up stuff is been done in the name of her sanity and you know atheism and basically any-ism. We can think of that's been co-opted for these yeah these terrible things, but has relevant to the debate based on listening. However, this contrast to Jesus when he million national born and raised in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, headquartered in commonly referred to as the all of us have left that religion drawn to faith in Jesus Christ. Podcast brightness six, John 19 calls Jesus, the true light which gives light to everyone you found life beyond Mormonism brighter than we were told in the light, we have is not our own comes to us from without is to share our journeys of faith God has done in joining us to his son. Stations about all aspects of the transition years challenges noise and everything in between that you found this and hope you stick around so church artists was nothing that came up because RFM talked about faculty talk a lot about his his kinda central central theme. I think that he was trying to cross into the midnight Mormons as he spoke with them and to them during the debate was that they don't know the extent to which the LDS church has hidden things from people that they kind of brush that stuff off. She thought maybe too glibly because they are young and they weren't in were a part of the church LDS church during the descent 70s and 80s when the when the Lotta stuff definitely was hidden and the other kind of brush them off as a Boomer you know who it out and then and made the case that look we've we've known all of the stuff all along one of the things that he brought up is the way that the translation process for the book of Mormon has been portrayed visually and church magazines and in publications where no artistic ring ring renderings of Joseph Smith sitting at a table with the golden plates in front of him running his fingers over the characters was presented sometimes with him wearing spectacles which were supposed to be determined by them and you know he made the case that when it came when it started to be known through the Internet that she had use a serous the same seer stone that he had used two try to find buried treasure prior to becoming a prophet and leader of the church to do the translation of the book of Mormon that the people start to question Weiser this this discrepancy between what is been presented to us visually even even if there were articles about the seer stone here and there in a church publication like like the church news or or the unsigned occasionally. Maybe once every 10 years. Visually it was very much presented that she was looking at the gold plates while translated so he made the case that the church land the artists you know, look, look, we we commissioned artists to do renderings and they did. They do what they do artistically recant.

Take accountability for what they do, even if it's not historically accurate with what's your take on that. I don't know if maybe can correctly that I don't think that this church is actually officially come out and thrown artists of the divorce rate the kind of turbine apologist enough can explain it that way like fair apologists say that there artistic renditions are not meant to be historically accurate center about maybe maybe the church has commences know you're right. Thanks for the clarification has been the apologist] sunsets, and that's a sticky issue because I do kind of agree with RFM that even though the picture has never been said, this is historically exactly what is happening the way that we were taught about it in the weights shown in books and no magazines enzyme where adjustment is a plates on the table.

He's cast. Only through it and even as recent as the Prophet of the restoration movie the day they shot him looking at the plates and so it does make it seem like yeah that's actually happened and so this idea that when you find out now. Like most of the time it was in the same room as the boxer was hidden under a cloth or something like he was he looking at the place I think it does. It's it's kind showing a bat facing the church to be like you know to continue to push out in official material pictures are just not accurate even even if there's nothing there to say that in it and I never really see anything either like a Kansas claimant says disclaimer this is an artist rendition is not historically accurate account of an action that you don't see anything that just shows you the picture that started happening say WHAT this one seems like it happens and then was only eight years.

Members found out South Park. Or, you know, for the Internet that this action had happened.

He had space in the other hat I knew Mormons myself when I was a kid who thoughts is stupid that Joseph and his face that and then like you know that's actually happening. All you had a space that seer stone inside the hat and there's different accounts as to what you actually see what is stressful opening in the actual letters would unfurl or whatever. Yes, not quite what those paintings depict. And so it does feel, like the, the rug is being pulled under you. When you find that out and some people can know they can work through it like all admit that it's not that of the deal. Personally suck. That's not what broke Michelle feel like but it is just, like it's coming when you it's it's a little glimpse into how the sausage and you know that you get a final product to see what's there to get a tiny little glimpse like oh it's not quite exactly thought it was like for some people that's kinda just opening the door and there so many other things that are much more serious at the other districts doesn't teach so I think that in himself is not illicitly worry about, but it is, opening yourself up to this new idea. Like oh base what out as a kid isn't exactly reality so that kind of starts on the path of exploring other things at work quite as they were depicted to us.

So yeah, I know it's like to really stick on that is a really big deal is kind of not really a big deal but yeah, for me personally I selected as a springboard into church history, and learning more about the church and burning at the church history, whitewashed.

So what are your thoughts on that.

I think you made a good correction on the it is that it was the apologists that were arguing that the church can't really control what the artists do once they commission them. I member when I first saw that that argument made – that did not have to go probably leading fair. I did it didn't sit well with me because wine I'd I don't think that the LDS church is just commissioning artists to paint or draw something and saying, do whatever you want, Nina. I think that they probably do give some guidelines. This is what were looking for the steeple.

We want presented. You know I maybe wrong and I'm not involved in the LDS church's artistic department, but I have a hard time believing that that they're just telling the artist that we want we want a painting of Joseph Smith translated the book of Mormon. Do whatever you want, you know, historically accurate or not. I don't think that's kind of the correct the guidance to giving but also like you pointed out, even if it's not intimacy apologists that are kind of throwing the artists under the bus. RFM made the case, I think he's right that in the debate that the LDS church still chose to publish those pictures in their official publications magazine do most of us, not Canon. You know though the magazines are considered to be Scripture and so no Latter Day Saints should be treated as such but they did choose to publish the pictures that depict him running his fingers over the plates and and and and something that's very much not like what the historical record shows so let's see so I mentioned earlier the midnight Mormons used the term Boomer a lot and talk about Jen's even they made the case that many of the many of the arguments against the LDS church of generational what you think about that argument doesn't stand it's it's kind of hard to really paint an entire generation with a broad brush, thinking there is something to it though. Just because millennial's engines ear just so used to being having the Internet and having access to all this information that maybe we just naturally grow up understanding that things change quickly. You know, and neither some level of adaptability. There where you pick up new information and replace quickly with new information comes out. Maybe there is that kind of idea just admitted the Internet you know computers being accessible to everybody that maybe we are no more amenable to to change to where maybe older generations when I see stuff like this that have been taught for decades and decades.

They find out less untrue. That's more of a shock to them because they're less you know able or willing to accept information so maybe there is something kind of know there's there's some kind of substance to that. But to say that the arguments only are tired of their only convincing to Boomer boomers or other older generations.

I something it really holds much weight because yeah like like I said earlier I don't think the argument about the artist rendition of the translation of a quorum. That alone was enough to like destroy my testimony but but it did make me start to question more like okay what else was I taught in church that maybe isn't completely conforming to what history tells us, you know, so I did start to make me think more critically about about certain things and that maybe that's a trait to memorials. Jen's these are more willing to question things rather than just accept it. You know what were told that I don't know what I you anything about that. The generational argument. Yeah, I think I think you made some really good points there about an agenda.

Jen's the millennial's amenity more used to things changing quickly and being okay with that. Be more comfortable with it. There's probably probably is something there, but I think and also I think there's some and also I'm I'm not Boomer but I'm old enough to remember Nina when John Glenn was still doing more Mormon stories as a leading even if maybe not Orthodox, believing Latter Day Saints and still trying to make the argument that people should stay in the LDS church, even knowing the hard things and trying to make the case to in the terms as you put it inoculate the younger generations with the harder stuff so that they wouldn't be is challenged by it. And so that would you know that was just like 13 years ago that he was making that case and so now you Tennessee that playing out with the Jen's the maybe the millennial's are the midnight Mormons. The millennial's is playing out with the millennial midnight Mormons were there like I've we've known about all the stuff we talked about in seminary.

You know it's not it's not difficult for us. It doesn't bother maybe challenging a little bit better stock to make us leave the church kind of attitude and no I even had taken that attitude as well. Like towards the end of my time in the LDS church. I was an instructor and the others corpsmen and it and a counselor, and the elders quorum presidency and minimum we would go through lessons. Occasionally, something difficult from somebody would've seen something difficult on the Internet they would they would raise a question, write about something that was being presented and so now they were there were times when I made statements like to know.

Hey, I knew about all that I know about all the stuff now I've learned about on the Internet it's not it's not shaking me what you think about that taking that approach like a there's all this difficult stuff about the LDS church that looks makes it look like you know what was what was presented to us as history is not actually accurate history, but I know that all the stuff now it's it's not an mainly the church what you think about that approach to be like for someone personally like to maintain a testimony or need is like trying to convince other people stay in church for someone personally. Yeah, I mean we both encounter people.

The discussion groups that are like that.

I have read every anti-Mormon book on the market and there's nothing they can phasing in and it seems also like a badge of honor. You know that they did take this nothing to face. I mean if they're not convinced or not convinced you know but a lot of times you can have overwhelming evidence staring you right in the face you know and can still refuse to accept the truth so I'm not going on nothing like a insulting intelligence are so thick that but you know I do.

As Christians we do believe that God tested make the truth known to you, you know like were all kind of apart from Christ were all kind of failed under this kind of steels of darkness and then you know where all were all kind of just no swimming around in the dark, hardware trying to cling on something for a lot of people. Mormonism is acting the cling onto it like it doesn't matter what kind of things controversial things and run into the they still cling on the something something keep some in the church that gives her testimony strong and like I try to do that to mail cards in my head of this crisis but there is just so much evidence piling up just things that didn't make sense and I could just put on the shelf, but Mark suggests shelves collapse.

As I got in on what I'm doing anymore. So nice. We do see it is not an uncommon thing, but I also tend to think that a lot of the eldest apologetics lease was very telling you to set earlier affair is that a lot of their arguments are just not very convincing for someone who is desperately trying to hold on.

It can be convincing to them. You know, like, it's like what you know when you're when you're looking for something looking for a hammer, everything starts to look like a hammer, things of the sector of the cling on any argument that ulcers her feet even if under critical examination makes no sense or just falls apart though still stick to it because it's good enough is, how it seems, so I don't I can answer your question, I can reroute that does answer my question and and and like I said I took the same approach towards the end of my my time in the LDS church. I tried to his word, be trying to bolster myself, bolster my confidence.

I think even though like you said there was, like this mountain of things on the on the shelf.

The board that was like piling up in spilling over and collapsing the shelf, but I did.

I had tried to cannot bolster myself by saying I know I know all the stuff now and it is not a big deal but it it was a big deal. I thought there was. There was some irony. I know we mentioned earlier that that the midnight Mormons kind of came out argument against leftist secular what they call it modern leftist secularism right they came out kinda guns a blazing against modern leftist secularism end and tried to pin Matt as a moniker on RFM, but there's irony in them trying to do so because RFM know he was, although he might be in a left-leaning political have no idea. One of the statements that he made in the debate. I don't know if he was being facetious was that the US is America's greatest country in the history of the world. They had a big big applause for that and not sure if he was being facetious. They are not, but they try to pin this moniker on them and but he's the one sitting there going hey truth matters right and he was the one presenting facts and a philosophical position that's that's often tied with modern leftist secularism is postmodernism or truth doesn't matter. There is no truth that you can discover and words don't matter and don't mean anything. They don't have reference to actual reality. So it was just kind of ironic. I thought that that they came out guns blazing out against RFM and his lawyer going hey truth matters – like he said there are statements that you know maybe you know you have to have a historical view of the book along like you said earlier, unique and just believe whatever you want about it yet doesn't get more yell postmodern and that and also there is a, the Quaker made a later about he says how you envision there's a possibility of mending rates and in the celestial kingdom or some like that's deftly not traditional Mormonism that's so yeah edge is very strange. Some of the other things of the midnight Mormons did was they criticize RFM and his cortical attacks on the LDS church because he's an atheist or an agnostic and they tried to get him to state his position on whether or not there is a God and he he came out with the agnostic position is that I don't know what you think about click click is criticizing his attacks on the LDS church because he's an atheist or agnostic because he doesn't believe that a valid response to the to the critiques that he raised wire-to-wire were not, and I think it's just a classic ad hominem attack like you know your acts. Therefore your argument is valid is correct definition of ad hominem attack.

So yeah I don't think it really is. I think you can you can, when addressing a comment you can say well from your position, you see it this way you know you so maybe you can kind of discuss a topic like that and in and in a debate, but to just flat out say while you're on is your your your this does McGaw sensing alike. What if yes, is that if the argument is true.

Doesn't matter. You know who says that if there is it's when atheist or Christian or not any other kind of theist or a non-theist, a spiritual person. If the criticism is valid and he should try to address that, instead of yeah try to use that person and their belief structure as a weapon against them. So about you when using the datalink reviews. There was an ad hominem attack and and and and they didn't really address the items that he had raised to be fair to them.

Radio for Mormon only occasionally addressed things that they had said he would have had a message that he was putting forward and kinda kinda seems to stick to a script and every time he was given the like. So I don't know, like to set up the very beginnings.

I don't think it was really a debate per se, but the final question I have in them will wrap up quick to during the debate kinda tried to nail down what what LDS might mean when they they claim to know something in their testimony would you think about his attempts to do so and it didn't really go anywhere.

The other two midnight Mormons like maybe will do a show on that. So did you did you think about that is that when nice Document like what it means to know something is can like defendant under culture or something like that. Yeah, didn't really make sense to me like I do not I can like philosophy and thinking about the status of the field of study.

Further, I was stunned alike instead of a study to talk about with how you know something is called epistemology. So I'm kind of interested in actually discussing that. But it does seem to like an odd place to have. You know, a fundamental debate on what epistemology is like that docket itself to be the entire debate document like okay as a as a secular in a someone who is not a believer anymore is not nontheistic but RFM assumedly I'm not sure exactly what he believes but he's definitely sees not Christian but many boys and some cut God's like how how do you know how do you trust what you know is true. I think that's a fascinating thing to for them to debate about in and of itself begat to try to knock that down and like five or 10 minutes or something that is not possible and as far as my eldest believe when they say they know something.

Their testimony usually it's more equivalent to what most people would say is believed or I you know I consider to be sure, rather than what most people say they know you something is verifiable something that's, you know, irrefutable. Eldest of all using Masson's so yeah the whole thing. That was can ask a strange way your thoughts level.

Yeah, I agree that I'm scanning curious where he was going with it to go back and listen to seem to me like it was around the time that they were trying to nail down exactly what RFM believed, and he said I don't know is characteristic was quickly trying to lead into a discussion, more of a back-and-forth with with RFM, but what no means to try to find some common ground and say you know neither one of us is claiming to know perfectly. You know maybe I don't know is interesting.

So any any final thoughts on on the debate. The format recommendations for our listeners would recommend that they they watch the delay. I don't know if you like.

If you know these people and you're interested in them.

I'll be something worth watching, but it's kind of like so I'm a big fan of theirs is challenging to cold-weather media and the and it's like state made Nicholas on movie reviews and stuff and it's like if you they also made their own film called space, as I would only recommend space G see everything else because if you don't see harassing everything else you're not getting any of the jokes.

Space Is one big inside joke so neck in a sense, it's like if you know about the controversies that are fan quake you like you hungry, you are interested in the LDS apologetics community

Get The Truth Mobile App and Listen to your Favorite Station Anytime