3 Replies to “Mormonism LIVE: 063: First Vision Apologetics”

  1. Enjoyed listening to this episode. I left the FMC (MC stands for Mormon Church. You can figure out what the F stand for) 45 years ago, followed by my wife and five kids several years later. We’ve been extraordinarily happy ever since, and I hardly ever listen to anything about Mormonism, but my wife told me about your podcast so I thought I’d try it out while working in the garden.

    I’m retired from a career as an optical physicist (degree from BYU). During my career I invented lots of stuff and I’m named as the inventor on several dozen patents; as such I’m aware of the patent process. Often, the patent committee would agree that an idea was good, but we didn’t want to patent it because we didn’t want to make the public disclosure and the idea was easy to hide in a product and so a subsequent court case would be hard to prove. On the other hand, we didn’t want to let someone else patent it, either. So we would sometimes decide not to patent the idea, but to publish it (make a public disclosure) so as to prevent others from patenting it. And when we published, we would pick some obscure magazine that nobody reads, and put it there, thus meeting the legal requirement of public disclosure without actually telling anyone about the invention.

    Sound familiar?

    It occurs to me that the rat bastards in the Mormon Church play this same game. They mention the 1832 account of the first vision in some obscure footnote in a document that average Mormons will never read (or are told *not* to read) and then strut their shit saying they’ve made a public disclosure and nobody can accuse them of lying or covering up.

    Good god! Listening to your podcast was triggering. It brought back a flood of emotions over the last decade of how very much I hate this fucking cult and the way they lied to me, and then lied about lying.

    BTW, I grew up in Kent WA. I think we may have met as kids. Small world.

  2. Did anyone else notice that Bill Reel literally used the “No True Scotsman” argument at least twice within 10 minutes after RFM explained that it was a logical fallacy?

    I don’t feel like relistening, but something like this:

    “no true critic blah blah blah…..”
    “no reasonable person blah blah blah….”

    RFM, did I correctly identify those as examples of the “No True Scotsman” fallacy?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.