| Sophistry |
|
The Dictionary says: Plausable but fallacious argumentation A plausable but fallacious argument A deliberatly invalid argument displaying ingenuity in reasoning in the hope of deceiving someone I have typed the following from the back page of the: Church News * week ending February 7, 2004 Church News viewpoint Endeavoring to badger and entrap Amulek, the lawyer Zeezrom asked if the Son of God would save His people in their sins. Amulek replied, "I say unto you he shall not, for it is impossible for him to deny his word" (Alma 11:34). Zeezrom subsequently distorted Amulek's word and accused him of saying God would not save His people. Zeezrom, of course, left out the crucial phrase "in their sins" and ignored the essential concepts of repentance and the Atonement of Christ. In contending against the restored gospel of Jesus Christ, some self-appointed adversaries might follow the above pattern, wherein they express a doctrine, belief or fact in terms that seem shocking or repugnant while removing it from any clarifying or illuminating doctrinal or historical background or framework. Such a tactic is an example of sophistry, which is a subtle argument that appears plausible or reasonable but, upon careful scrutiny, is found to be unsound and misleading. The word sophistry derives from the Sophists, a group of teachers and philosophers in ancient Greece, some of whom were know for such clever but specious argumentation. The genius of the Book of Mormon lies partly in its ability to identify and highlight age-old sophistries. In another such example, Korihor, the infamous anti-Christ who faced Alma, the chief judge over the Nephites, ridiculed teachings about Christ and prophecy, condemning them as "foolish tradition" and "the effect of a frenzied mind." He disputed the concept of the Atonement, saying "everyman fared in this life according to the management of the creature; therefore every man prospered according to his genious" and "conqurered according to his strength; and whatsoever a man did was no crime."(See Alma 30:13-17.) In something of a variation of the Korihor approach, it is not uncommon for some individuals today to portray themselves as having been naive and simple minded but subsequently having gained greater insight and enlightenment, which led to the abandonment of their faith; that others could also become so enlightened if they would only open their eyes or listen to reason. There are, in actuality, many accomplished and scholarly Latter-day Saints in virtually all honorable disciplines and professions who retain a vibrant and fervent faith, a faith which illuminates, not clouds, their quest for knowledge. Brilliant as they are, they understand the pitfalls of trusting in the "arm of flesh."(See 2 Nephi 4:34.) Through the ages, many academic notions, once widely accepted, have been abandoned or revised when new knowledge has surfaced. And history by itself is a fallible means of determining truth because it comes to us filtered through the prejudices, predispositions and frailties of those who recorded it or those who interpret it. "O the vainness, and the frailties, and the foolishness of men!" the prophet Jacob commented. "When they are learned they think they are wise, and they hearken not unto the counsel of God, for they set it aside, supposing they know of themselves, wherefore, their wisdom is foolishness and it porfiteth them not. And they shall perish. "But to be learned is good if they hearken unto the counsels of God"(2 Nephi 9:28-29). Korihor's contention that "whatsoever a man did was no crime" has a parallel today in the argument of some that God, if He truly is loving and merciful, would not require anyone, Christ or the offender, to suffer for wrongdoing. They dispute the doctrine that "mercy cannot rob justice"(see Alma 42:25), opining that God, if he is merciful, should just dismiss a violation as a justice of the peace might write off a traffic ticket. Such thinking ignores the reality that a law without a penalty affixed is no law at all; it is without verity or potence. If individual had the notion that whatever they choose to do will not matter because any consequences to themselves or others will either be waived or non-existent, there would be no disincentive to commit sin. Without abandoning altogether a belief in God, some subscribe to the sophistry, "Eat, drink and be meerry... and if it so be that we are guilty, God will beat us with a few stripes, and at last we shall be saved in the kingdon of God"(2 Nephi 28:8). God's mercy, of course, is expressed in offering His Son as a propitiation for the demands of justice to be answered. And it is efficacious only for those who manifest through their faith, obedience and sincere repentance a disposition to partake of the divine nature. In all ages, sophistry has been used as a tool by Satan, the "father of all lies" (2 Nephi 2:18). It, therefore, behooves Latter-day Saints to become as knowledgable as they can about the gospel of Christ and other subjects and to augment that learning with the perfect knowledge that comes through seeking the Spirit and hearkening unto the counsels of God. the end I typed this in from the back page of the Church News * week ending February 7, 2004 [Church News Viewpoint] Wendell Haws Eyring Jr. |
| Last Edited: 21 April 2004 - by Wendell |