"We seldom get into trouble when we speak softly. It is only when we raise our voices that the sparks fly and tiny molehills become great mountains of contention."
One
of the challenges in defending one's faith is dealing with critics
who launch the Big List attack. This entails throwing out dozens of
short arguments to create the impression of an overwhelming barrage
of logic and facts that decimate the faith in question.
The
Big List is loaded with barbed questions that weren't written in
search of a genuine answer. They are intended to draw blood. If there
is a good defense to one, never mind, there are many more to be shot
in different directions.
As
with many topics in fields like history, science, and religion, the
issues raised in popular attacks are often complex and require
digging into details to answer questions properly.
Even
for those who are prepared to answer questions on a wide variety of
topics, the time it takes to lay a foundation and properly answer a
question can be taken by the instantly impatient critics as an
admission of weakness and confirmation that they are right, and then
it's time to move on to the next attack and the next.
If
reasonable answers are promptly provided for some attacks, or if the
alleged weakness on further examination actually proves to be
evidence in favor of the faithful position, the response can be
ignored as new attacks from the Big List are hurled out.
This
doesn't just happen in anti-Mormon attacks. Attacks on many other
faiths use the same approach.
Interestingly,
attacks on some aspects of modern science by religious
fundamentalists or young earth Creationists also may rely on the Big
List approach, much to the exasperation of scientists who know there
are good answers to the attacks, but often may not be able to
adequately deal with the barrage of questions from critics not really
interested in the answers.
Some
scientists call the tactic the "Gish
Gallop"
after Duane Gish, a Creationist noted for hurling numerous brief
arguments to overwhelm opponents in debates on evolution.
There’s
a common tactic used by creationists, and I’ve encountered it
over and over again. It’s a form of the Gish Gallop: present
the wicked evolutionist with a long list of assertions, questions,
and non sequiturs, and if they answer with “I don’t know”
to any of them, declare victory. It’s easy. We say “I
don’t know” a lot.
Jack
Chick’s Big
Daddy tract is a
version of the creationist list, and contains a fair amount of
fantasy as well. You know what they believe will happen: they’ll
ask that one question that the scientist can’t answer, and then
they’ll have an epiphany, a revelation, and realize that all
their science is a lie, at which time they’ll resign from their
university position and join a good bible-believin’ church.
It
happens to me all the time, too. At one talk I gave, there was a
woman at the door who had printed a 5-page, single-spaced list of
questions, and she was telling everyone going in to ask me to answer
them — I invited her to come in and listen to the talk and ask
them herself, and she ran away.
I’ve
had a Canadian creationist do the same thing, and then I talked to
him for several hours in the hallway after the talk. He seemed
stunned and angry that I actually had answers for most of his
questions.
I
have been confronted by people with questions (more like ignorant
assertions) about biology, who once I’ve answered them and
reveal that I’m a biologist, switch to asking me about geology
and the Big Bang, to get me into a corner where I’d have to
say, “I don’t know.”
This
approach, often launched by some of the same religious folks who like
to denounce The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, is
painfully familiar to me.
By
the way, for the record, I believe in God and believe that He is the
Creator, yet believe that science and religion will ultimately be
compatible when properly understood. I have no problem with the earth
being billions of years old and with evolutionary tools being part of
God's toolkit for preparing a planet like ours for the miraculous
spectrum of life that we have here.
While
I disagree with the arguments used by many Creationists, as one who
loves science, I definitely believe that the majesty of the cosmos
and the many intricacies of life cannot be reasonably explained as
mere accidents, but are evidences of a remarkably clever and artistic
Creator.
So
while I do not share some of PZ Myers views, I can related well to
the frustration of being hit with Big List attacks from religious
critics not really interested in understanding or dialog.
One
of my first experiences in helping to teach the Gospel after
graduating from school and taking my first job in Appleton,
Wisconsin, involved a young college student, a new LDS convert, who
had been given volumes of anti-Mormon literature by her former
pastor.
She
came in with a stack of books, relying especially upon a thick tome
published by a popular anti-Mormon organization.
She
asked one pointed question after another, all of which turned out to
have reasonable answers, in my opinion, that we were able to offer on
the spot. We dealt with them one at a time, turning to answers from
the scriptures, when appropriate, or making points based on logic or
other sources of information.
After
about 40 minutes of this, she grew impatient and said something like,
"Look, maybe you've got answers for the questions I’ve
raised, but there are hundreds more arguments in this book. How can
the Church be true when there are so many arguments against it?"
I
said that it's easy to make arguments against anything. I reminded
her of the days of early Christianity when there were numerous false
witnesses against Christ, when there were paid witnesses who said
that the tomb had been raided by Christians to fake the Resurrection,
when all the elite religious leaders of the Jews spoke against
Christ, and when the whole Roman world seemed to speak against Christ
and the Christians.
There
were volumes and volumes of arguments against the Church back then,
too. "If you were living them, how could you see past the
massive arguments and recognize the divinity of the Son of God and
the truth of Christianity?"
Unwilling to acknowledge the
importance of a spiritual witness, she returned to her anti-Mormon
books. I pointed out that while we had examined only a few of the
arguments, the ones she had raised had reasonable answers, and some
even demonstrated a lack of integrity on the part of the authors.
Her
answer surprised me: "I don't care. Even if only 10% of that
book is true, that's enough to prove the Church is false."
Ah,
the fallacy of the Big List, a key tool in the Adversary's arsenal.
Impress them with shear volume, wear them out with endless attacks,
and many will succumb, overwhelmed by the image and impression of
strength.
A few years ago I received a letter from a former
LDS member explaining why he and his wife were leaving the Church. In
that letter, he acknowledged that there may be "excuses" to
deal with each anti-Mormon argument when taken individually, but that
taken together as a whole, the case against the Church is
overwhelming.
He
then listed a barrage of arguments, mentioning DNA and the Book of
Mormon, anachronisms, 4,000 changes in the Book of Mormon, racism,
polygamy, the Temple and masonry, etc. — problems that each can
be dealt with if one takes the time to understand the issues and
examines the assumptions behind them.
Even
then, one must be willing to recognize that there always will be some
gaps in our understanding and that no amount of evidence and study
will remove the need for faith or replace the power of a witness from
the Holy Ghost.
But
in many cases, there are answers, sometimes powerful answers that
turn apparent weaknesses in the Book of Mormon, for example, into
strong evidence for authenticity. Such insights do not come from a
superficial glance at the text and related literature. Sadly, he
became another victim of the fallacy of the Big List.
There
are tough arguments, indeed. DNA
and the Book of Mormon
is an example of this. For a meaningful understanding of the issues,
one must identify assumptions and evaluate information from a variety
of perspectives. In so doing, one can come away with a better
understanding of what the Book of Mormon is and what it is not.
But
the Adversary would have us just fold based upon a superficial
examination: "Wow, there's no obvious Jewish DNA in the
Americas. End of story!"
The Gospel is true, and the Book
of Mormon is a divine, authentic book of scripture, in spite of
whatever mountains of books and brochures against it the enemy can
mount. And Jesus is the Son of God, no matter how many false
witnesses and PhD's and celebrities take a stand against Him.
It's
not about who can shout the loudest and longest, but Whose gentle
voice we listen for amidst the senseless shouting of men.
Jeff Lindsay has been defending the Church on the Internet since 1994, when he launched his
LDSFAQ website under JeffLindsay.com. He has also long been blogging about LDS matters on
the blog Mormanity (mormanity.blogspot.com). Jeff is a longtime resident of Appleton,
Wisconsin, who recently moved to Shanghai, China, with his wife, Kendra.
He works for an Asian corporation as head of intellectual property. Jeff and Kendra are the parents of 4 boys, 3 married and the the youngest on a mission.
He is a former innovation and IP consultant, a former professor, and former Corporate Patent
Strategist and Senior Research Fellow for a multinational corporation.
Jeff Lindsay, Cheryl Perkins and Mukund Karanjikar are authors of the book Conquering
Innovation Fatigue (John Wiley & Sons, 2009).
Jeff has a Ph.D. in Chemical Engineering from Brigham Young University and is a registered US
patent agent. He has more than 100 granted US patents and is author of numerous publications.
Jeff's hobbies include photography, amateur magic, writing, and Mandarin Chinese.