Playing Offense: How To EFFECTIVELY Defend The Faith 

I'm a Latter Day Saint of only 6+ years, and these apologetic topics that Thoughtful Faith is showing recently is wonderful. I have felt alone and wandering over the last 2 years or so... These lessons were/are sorely needed by me. Please keep coming with these "controversial" topics. Thankyou!

Ward radio isn't always totally intellectually rigorous, but I think that's the point. I watch it because it's entertaining and a lot of their guest are actual experts in their fields. It fills a need that I didn't know I had

Contending without anger is defending the faith. Contending with anger is contention. :>)

As a missionary we were taught this from day one. It is very simple. Bear testimony frequently and often.

I agree with Jacob's principal of contending with ideologies. As I've prepared and taught lessons for my Gospel Doctrine class a couple things in the Book of Mormon have really stood out to me: 1. Alma teaches us that we are not to allow wolves to enter our flocks. That we need to drive the out and if possible, $lay them. 2. Mormon points out in the case with Korihor that the people of Ammon and Gideon were more wise than the people of Zarahemla. They bound Korihor and after bringing him to their priesthood leaders escorted him away from their people. This represents a very proactive approach to defending one's faith and flocks. It's not simply ignoring them. It's a complete removal of the influence of the place those ideologies have in your life. Hopefully the RU-vid algorithm likes this version more.

We had a good conversation about this in elders quorum on Sunday. After much debate about what would be considered ‘Christlike’ we just read the articles of faith and the spirit testifies of the good truth of the gospel of Jesus Christ. It doesn’t need defending. It needs to be preached with confidence. That will offend the wicked. The key is to not backpedaling when it does to make society feel better. This gospel is incredible. We don’t need to waste our precious time entertaining the arguments of fools.

Great discussion! I appreciate the idea of giving the youth reasons to believe that truth is important and essential.

Always go on offense. It's always been about who controls the "frame". "The side that wants to win will always beat the side that wants to be left alone". -Auron MacIntyre

As a person who avoids conflict at all cost in most instances, I cringe at the thought of debating someone about my faith. I appreciate this podcast because it gives me strength. I can learn from the bravery of others. I also know that I can allow others to believe what they want to believe. Criticize me, my family and faith and membership in the church will bring out a mother bear. Why evangelicals want to convince me I'm going to hell for believing in the LDS faith, is something I just don't understand. They want to "save" us. I have such a bigger view of this life, the afterlife and God's true plan gives me great comfort. Go for it guys, I'm learning from you.

I believe we should show compassion in the micro and hold standards on the macro. Too many members care more about being accepted by other Christians than they do about proclaiming the truth to the world.

Ward Radio gets views because they are clearly faithful members that aren’t afraid to have fun or confront falsehoods

Great show. Our “defense” apologetic is horrific-case study, the Gospel Topics Essays have driven as many members from the Church as the infamous CES Letter. Our “offense” game is reduced to self-helpy talks. We need richer teaching, meaning, more intimate access to the Lord’s symbols.

Debates are not solely for those doing the debating. I tend not to engage in debating someone to convince them of my perspective because it becomes adversarial. But I enjoy watching them as a means of hearing both sides of an argument by people who are compelled by the side they have chosen.

Thank you Jacob! I have been having a running conversation on this topic for the last 20 years.

How to Have Impossible Conversations by Peter Boghossian and James Lindsay is a good guidebook for dealing with ideologies. In brief, if you make people defend/justify their own ideas and hold them to their own standards of reason and morality, they are more likely to recognize the contradictions and soften their attachment to their ideology rather than further entrench themselves.

We had a good conversation about this in elders quorum on Sunday. After much debate about what would be considered ‘Christlike’ we just read the articles of faith and the spirit testified of the good truth of the gospel of Jesus Christ. It doesn’t need defending. It needs to be preached with confidence. That will offend the wicked. The key is to not backpedal to make society feel better. This gospel is incredible. We don’t need to waste our precious time entertaining the arguments of fools.

It’s not a day of many words. Truth has its own persuasive power. We’re not apologists as much as we are declarers of a message. The message, however, is defensible in academic circles, if needs be. Our scholars implicitly and explicitly do a great deal of this. They lay out the evidence for the hope that is in us even as they push the boundaries of our understanding.

Yes. Tired of playing defense. Jesus said he came not to bring peace but a sword. You don't have to be a pushover. Stand up for your faith, y'all!!

great descussion! I think the best way to help the youth is to help them share the gospel as early and as effectively as they can. Teaching another is often the best way to teach yourself.

Ward Radio gets views because they are happy, they're smiling and laughing. They are not bored or boring.

Our offense is preaching the gospel. We are to clarify our teachings and to explain them to all who will listen. This is our offense.

Jesus was downright vicious in John 8 and Matthew 23. Our church barely even acknowledges these verses even exist anymore. Why?

Hallelujah 🙌🏻!!!!! The daily jesus devotional has been a huge part of my transformation, God is good 🙌🏻🙌🏻. I was owing a loan of $49,000 to the bank for my son's brain surgery, Now I'm no longer in debt after I invested $11,000 and got my payout of $290,500 every month…God bless Ms Susan jane Christy❤️

Your criticism Jacob, is founded through your reaction of some of our worse enemies (yes I call them enemies) toward apologetic style from Fair is necessary and thank goodness pioneered by Fair.

Football great Reggie White was asked why he, an ordained minister, played such a violent game. He said God doesn’t ask us to be wimps.

There are many scriptures right now that you cannot read in church without deeply offending a huge chunk of the members. So those scriptures never get read anymore at church. Alma 5, 1 Timothy 2, John 8, D&C 132...just for starters. There is a huge problem if the church membership can no longer stomach many parts of scripture anymore. Huge problem.

Excellent. Thanks

Never worry about optics, get the simple core truths correct and the truth will prevail on its own merits.

Peace is not possible with those who do not want peace.

We love your work, Jacob!

I like to ask questions that force them to evaluate their assumptions. That’s a simple and non aggressive way to be on the offense.

I have used fair mormon as a resource about three times. They have so many topics with which I am morally opposed to. They are total squishes on evolution, Brigham Young, and the reliability of scripture.

Point on the football metaphor, players are specialized. ALL gifts are needed in their proper sphere.

The way we "contend" or rather respond to others with regard to the gospel depends on the situation and one should seek guidance from the Holy Ghost on not only what to say but how to say it. I recommend Elder Robert D. Hales' talk on "Christian Courage" in the October 2008 General Conference for further context.

The problem is that extreme orthodoxy, by definition, abandons the fruits doctrine. It puts the cart before the horse by saying that if a tenet was commanded through a divine, though imperfect, channel then it must be accepted and promoted as divine, itself. And that approach is utterly inconsistent with many of the changes the Church has undergone in its history, or the obvious error and spiritual danger manifest in taking blind loyalty to its logical extreme (Mountain Meadows and Blood Atonement, for example). The question is, what are you defending? Eternal principles or absolute obedience to current leaders? Sometimes those aren’t the same, but they both matter and the give and take of it is a complete mess. So please, defend your beliefs but don’t forget to seek to understand where someone else is coming from and show respect and empathy for those differences. People have always had differences in opinion, even at the Q15 level. Some of those differences are out of bounds with current teachings, but who’s to say what going to change in the future.

I believe people confuse confrontation with contention. There is a difference. We are to contend for our faith - stand and give a ready defense. Confront false teaching using scripture and our testimony. It includes to contend against those who are contentious. I also focus more on a mindful apologetic approach. Call out what needs to be called out. Confront what needs to be confronted, and always being mindful. Not easy to do all of the time.

Christian Apologist Frank Turek asks people something like - If Christianity were true would you become a Christian? He's trying to suss out their true intentions. If they're only really wanting to argue or what it usually is - avoid consequences to their sin by denying it all, then what's the point? I think a similar, gently asked question or questions can help set the tone before things get contentious. Or even if it shows it's worth your time at all.

In police work there is a saying to use the minimum amount necessary to subdue a suspect or criminal. The same is true in the gospel. Christ told the Pharisee lawyer "Thou are not far from the Kingdom of God". But He could also embarrass the wicked critics and Pharisees who were trying to kill and destroy Him, and we're never s a satisfied with an answer, no matter how good it was, or how many times it was given; like many of our critics today.

John the Baptist called the pharisees a “generation of vipers”…and Christ said that John was among “the greatest in the kingdom of heaven” I think the truth can be expressed in many ways. A frontal assault is rare, but there are instances where it might be called for. I think of Peter insisting that he wasn’t going to let Jesus die, and he was rebuked by the Savior: “Get behind me Satan”. Pretty dang harsh. Was it ‘Christlike’ when he said that?

The book of mormon has several examples of its figures using apologetics, that’s why gideon was killed, he confounded nehor via apologetics

Preach nothing but faith and repentance. We lds members are so soft. Helaman 6 is our day. We are the soft Nephites discussed.

Is one ordained, like missionaries, by the church, to go on offense, or do you just get to pick the topics you want to attack that you've personally discerned are being Mormon'd wrong - like your video disclaimers indicate.

It takes a great deal of time and thought to get around the simple words of Jesus.

Perhaps the debate wasn’t for the debaters but for earnest seeker’s listening to the debaters “ arguments “ and the spiri behind them.

The Restoration of the Gospel of Jesus Christ wouldn't be necessary if the churches in existence prior to the Restoration had the fullness. Pointing that out (playing offense) highlights the importance of the Restoration.

Have you ever attempted to get Halverson on? It would be interesting to see you two discuss the proving contraries and offense vs defense stuff

I think we’ve been trying too hard to “fit in” instead of leading out. Check out the book Sister Saints by Colleen McDannell - for most of the 20th century we tracked main stream socially acceptable American “Christianity” in preaching a woman’s place and took away the teeth, the financial autonomy, of the Relief Society and adopted the Leave It To Beaver vision of righteousness setting up a perfection in the home abandoning the poor and the needy.

Great discussion!

Never thought I'd hear a Metal Gear Solid: Revengeance reference in a Thoughtful Faith video

The music waiting for the premiere gives me Kahoot vibes.

LeGrand Richards was all about offense! In general conference! He would do debates too. Also, this guy reminds me of Travis Anderson from Missionary Discussion. 😅

Love it!

I like contrasting our ideas against others. The problems i run into with contrasting with modern day Christianity is their beliefs on specific doctrines vary so widely and its so convoluted, i cant made a solid steelman argument for the person im discussing with.

There are formal debates and informal. I watch a lot of sports commentators debate on tv. These people sometimes debate and disagree passionately. I’m convinced these debates matter not because of truth, but because they allow people to reckon and establish respect. Maybe the particular topic doesnt matter now, but am I going to be percieved as trustworthy to listen to when the topic does matter. In the church context I wonder if we are ceding respect by not contending. Bible bashing or harsh debate is not going to directly convert anyone, but I wonder if not doing it results our message not being taken seriously in the future. In other words some people won’t take our message seriously unless we stand up for ourselves.

Sometimes I wonder if instead of arguing about theology (though that certainly has a place too), what if we contend against the fact that many of these people witnesses in ways that are not Christ-like (He said if they are not against us, they are are with us) and try and persuade everyone to work together to stand against the actual darkness rising around us.

If you don't agree with Hansen, he'll fist fight you.

In the age of the internet, you will be on the defensive for the rest of the life of the church. Just pay your 10% and carry on.

Can u give a list of the books u mention pls.

Jacob, what is the Joseph Smith quote you mentioned that every member should know?

On a physical level it says in Alma 48:14-15 14 Now the Nephites were taught to defend themselves against their enemies, even to the shedding of blood if it were necessary; yea, and they were also taught never to give an offense, yea, and never to raise the sword except it were against an enemy, except it were to preserve their lives. 15 And this was their faith, that by so doing God would prosper them in the land, or in other words, if they were faithful in keeping the commandments of God that he would prosper them in the land; yea, warn them to flee, or to prepare for war, according to their danger; So should this also apply through words? Nobody likes people like Jeff Durban that says your going to hell if you don't do this! We should have knowledge through revelation and study, and defend ourselves when challenged. But to attack anothers faith for no reason is not good. Let's share what we know. I think Christ was hard with the pharisees because they claimed authority but we're not living according to their knowledge therefore hypocrites. Do people come back to church because they recognise the truth you are teaching and therefore get a spiritual witness? Yes calling them cancer, is defending the church. We both need the spiritual witness and deep understanding of the Bible, why Bible? Because other Christians don't care what the book of Mormon is saying so you proves it's validity through correct interpretation of the Bible. The youth doing institute class will help defend against attacks, if you don't have answers then someone like Jeff Durban can cause you to doubt.

According to your behavior Jacob the playbook is attack videos, backbiting, whining, preconceptions being elevated to the level of facts, and a bad hair dye job. You have a formidable intellect, but your fear is your blind spot.

God told Joseph that all other religions are abominations. Are we treating them as such or are we trying to build bridges with them?

Mormon certainly speaks of the Lamanites as the enemy of the Nephites, but he also takes pains to show his readers that even more dangerous than hereditary Lamanites were those who were apostate Nephites who had become Lamanites * *My Thoughts - Today, ex-mormons fill that role to a large extent in that they tend to be more rabid in their opposition to the Church, its teachings and leaders than do atheists. They often join with Evangelical Christianity, and some use their prior knowledge of the Church and its culture to reinforce their arguments. John Dehlin would be a prime example of one who uses his prior knowledge of the Temple and the Missionary program of which he once was a part. This could be interpreted as "He knew (or knows) the language," For John, to attack the Church by using other disaffected ex-mormons is like shooting fish in a barrel. Jacob 7:4 And he (Sherem) was learned, that he had a perfect knowledge of the language of the people; wherefore, he could use much flattery, and much power of speech, according to the power of the devil. That they were of the order of Nehor (Alma 21:4) suggests that they were once Nephites. In Alma 43:6 we read that the Lamanites were led predominantly by Amalekites and Zoramites (ex-Nephites.) How did Joseph Smith know when he supposedly "wrote" the Book of Mormon that the main enemies of the Church would infact be ex members?

Inviting others to think about the implications of their theology is reasonable. Telling them “let’s do your family history to see how many of your ancestors you think Jesus created just to send to hell before North American Protestantism found your ancestral line” is probably contentious.

I'd argue that being a Peacemaker is referring to Christ being the Prince of Peace, it is a call to be disciple-makers. It is not a call to sit down an capitulate with the devil or his creeds.

I am sure Christian apologists are shaking in their boots watching these two dorks

The problem with defending Mormonism is that it can’t be done without ambiguity, poetic license, justification of serious moral dilemmas, and in many cases, deception by omission.

❤

Best, Great, Good, Fair, Worst Fair Mormon

The Temptations of Christ show us how Christ responded to this test of mortality. Christ had prepared Himself all His life so that he was ready for Satan and the Pharisees. He knew the scriptures and had the Holy Ghost in abundance. Yearly he and his family went to the temple and by age 12 He knew more than all the scholars and doctors of the Law.

How to effectively defend your faith: Be like Jesus! :)

I think debate strikes your ego and that is why you do it. That is why you are the debate master.

Nobody takes you seriously because one of your favorite lines is "we are kind, so we must be right".

I'm just so tired of this "realm of apologetics". It's too much. It too often just feels like shouting into the void or yelling at rocks. I think I've been living on the internet too long. I need to go touch grass. 😂

Can’t play offense without the truth on your side.

Jackson Helen Williams Deborah Harris Anna

Defend the faith of Joseph Smith. So sad.

To defend a religion that believes in the wisdom of man and not the power of God, cannot be defended in the Christian life. 1Cor 2:5 That your faith should not be in the wisdom of men but in the power of God. Mormonism is full of men in power, so many focus on Joseph Smith and the current prophets that they forget who God is. No one has ever seen God, but look who you believe, a man who says he has seen God. Christians know that God is too brilliant and radiant for anyone to see Him, His glory overpowers any creature, His light is too bright it would overwhelm, His power and might is so grand that is cannot be comprehended. but yet, Mormonism tries to bring Him down to man's level and it doesn't work.

It’s so odd, the words of Jesus teach of peace and forgiveness and charity…..and the words of other Mormon scriptures talk about contention and violence and hatred. It’s clear who you really worship

To be clear, apologetics is an echo chamber. Apologetics only works for those that already believe. Your clumsy apologetics don't stand up to basic reasoned arguments let alone basic historical scrutiny. You're going to have a hard time finding anyone to debate your nonsense because "what's the point?" Mormonism is so completely debunked and plainly disingenuous that no sufficiently educated "expert" would waste their time.

This guy sounds extremely naive. Grow up a little, then try again.

It sounds like you two enjoy the ego stroke of hearing your own apologetic voices teaching your philosophical version of Mormonism. The brethren are silent and no one hired you as part of the strengthening church members committee. You have misinterpreted the call share the gospel and your desire to police the members and ex Mormons or post Mormons.

Why does The "Restored" Church of Jesus Christ need sooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo much defending??

i just reread Alma 30 today (about Korihor) and how he was attacking the members and even Alma for their beliefs. I watched/read Alma bear his testimony (vs 38) and then go on the offensive in vs 40. Throughout the rest of the chapter he is not seeking to destroy Korihor - he left it to Korihor's own agency to insist on a sign when Alma clearly did not want to offend the Lord and abuse his Priesthood authority by punishing this man. My takeaway was BOLDNESS in offensive without vindictiveness is not contention. I liked@godsoffspring4195's comment, below. I agree with it.