--Background

In previous RfM posts, information from sources in-the-know has provided insights helpful in explaining why the Mormon Church has recently begun releasing anonymously-authored apologetic essays, ones which are supposed to serve as official LDS Church replies to problematic areas of its history and doctrine.

One significant inside "leaker" of this information is an individual going by the handle of "epiginosko." (By way of definition, the word "epiginosko" means "to become thoroughly acquainted with, to know exactly, completely, through and thoroughly;" see: "Encyclopedia of Pentecostal Objections and the Refutation of These Objections, Part 3 of 3," at: http://www.bible.ca/tongues-ceased-pentecostal-arguments-refuted.htm)

As reported earlier on RfM, this person is a Mormon Church correlation-committee employee whose actual identity, although known, is being kept confidential here. This individual has direct contact with LDS General Authority/Church Historian and Recorder, Steven Snow, and is regarded by colleagues as respected, informed, forthright, honest and well aware of the problems the essay issues pose to the Mormon Church's image handlers. As also noted earlier on RfM, some of these Church researchers/writers, including this particular individual, get together on occasion to compare notes with one another. information about the generation of the essays has helped, in the past, explain the nature ane effect that the LDS Church's anonymously-authored essays are having on those tasked to write them.

The particular individual mentioned here works within the Church's history-committee system and, from that vantage point, has been judiciously and strategically posting information in various venues about what they know about certain historical matters which are described as being sensitive for the Mormon Church. For instance, it was this individual who publicly noted the following (quoted earlier on RfM):

"The concern going in from the Brethren was how to roll this out without creating a (look-at-all-of-our-problems) page. The Brethren don't want to start faith issues where they don't currently exist, and they are correct that the majority of active and believing Saints don't know or care about this stuff, particularly outside of Utah and the United States.

"The decision was made to incorporate them [the essays] into already-existing areas of the [Mormon Church's official] website and not do a big campaign (outside of the organic interest that will naturally result). From a business perspective, it's probably a wise move. . . . . [I]t's really all about inoculating the next generation. Elder [Steven] Snow has said as much directly to me. They are well aware that skeptics will likely not be satisfied with these answers or their choice of roll-out. It's there for members to see if they are planning lessons, talks, and I know that they are working towards integrating them with curriculum; particularly youth curriculum." . . .

“This much is clear: They [the essays] are not designed to restore people's faith as much as they are designed to lessen future disaffections; Members who come across damning information for the first time and turn to LDS.org to see what the Church says on the matter. The goal is to give them a faithful response while still acknowledging the complexity of the issue.”

("The Debate Over the 13 New Essays?," posted by “epiginosko,” in "New Order Mormon," 10-11 December 2013, at; http://forum.newordermormon.org/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=33954&)start=20)
_____


--Update

I am told that "epiginosko" comes and goes as to their personal internet presence and, thus, it can be something of a challenge to anticipate or track down when and where this person will post on the web. I have been informed that a tactic of "epiginosko" is to at times post information, leave it up for awhile (sometimes for only a short while), then delete the information. It may be that this is an approach being employed by "epiginosko" to keep ahead of, and away from, those who may be sleuthing for the Mormon Church in efforts to identify this poster.

More recent information from "epiginosko" has been brought to my attention involving the current rollout schedule of the essays, as it is being determined by the Mormon Church:

“They [the essays] were scheduled to be released every two weeks through March. However, they typically try post them as quickly as they get the green light from the Quorum. It could be as simple as the Quorum being busy with other things. I dunno. But rest assured, nobody involved were thinking these would be the 'silver bullet' to those who have already gone down the rabbit-hole. The best explanation for these articles is on the comments of the recent 'Mormon Matters' podcast episode which dealt with the Book of Mormon translation article.”

Below is further information from "epiginosko" on the reasons behind the multi-person construction, the timed release and the current length of the essays (this material from "epiginosko" is presently available on the internet):

"It's [the release of the essays] inoculation, but not deceit. They [previously identified as the First Presidency and Quorum of the 12] believe in the framing that they are presenting. But they are given 50- to 60-page articles written by scholars and, after going through the sausage-grinder, comes out as a two- or three-page article. Their goal is to address the difficulties, but they obviously aren't going to do anything the would damage the Church--and you can't blame them for that. Any step forward is a positive step."

"The plans are to release the longer essays at a later date. Right now the Church History Department is just trying to get these out there as soon as they are approved. The main reason for the current length is because it's about as long as they think the average member will read. Make it too long and only a few people will ever read it.

"I wish I could build your confidence more, but suffice it to say that the main two guys in charge of this project are pretty cool and nuanced. They are definitely in the 'Marlin K. Jensen' camp of Mormonism.

"Of course, this is being put out by the Church, not a disinterested third party or university, so the bias will be blatant. Their primary concerns are addressing the complexities of history without:

"A. Causing faith challenges to those who don't currently have them.

"B. Making it unreadable and inaccessible. Get too scholarly and people start tuning out. Make it too basic and it's just another correlated article. It's a fine balance to strike.

"This project started in 2011. Many hands touch each of these articles, so you will obviously have a lot of different views of how best to present the information with so many 'cooks in the kitchen.' Most of the scholars who have worked on these describe the process as an intense roller-coaster ride of edits and revisions. It's nearly impossible to please everyone. So, what you might believe is 'purposeful omission' could be a matter of presentation and debate over interpretation. Keep in mind that history is not a hard science. It's often subject to conflicting interpretations and gaping holes in the documented record. Unfortunately, all scholars (both critical and faithful) tend to present their arguments as hard fact, so it makes it confusing for those who are just seeking 'the truth.'"

("Tactical Strategy Behind the New Essays," http://forum.newordermormon.org/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=34235&sid=da38c14b1179204bef0aec98e2d61da3
_________________


Below are links to previous RfM posts related to insider-source information on the Mormon Church's anonymous-essay project:

http://exmormon.org/phorum/read.php?2,1120016,1120016#msg-1120016

http://exmormon.org/phorum/read.php?2,1122012,1122012#msg-1122012

http://exmormon.org/phorum/read.php?2,1122370,1122370#msg-1122370

http://exmormon.org/phorum/read.php?2,1125107,1125107#msg-1125107



Edited 13 time(s). Last edit at 01/22/2014 02:56AM by steve benson.

I always enjoy your posts Steve. Thanks for the education!

+++++ 10000000

Poochie the dog. "Let's make him cool....but not too cool. Let's make him edgy...but not too edgy"

Thanks for the update Steve.

Any whisperings on the holland "emergency assignment" hooplah?

You are so not kidding. Propaganda and History Revisionism is their job. Let's just hope epiginosko doesn't get vaporised.

If you ever want to do a movie remake of the book, why pay actors? You can do it as a documentary and film it entirely within 3 blocks in downtown SLC.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/22/2014 11:53AM by NormaRae.

Thx Steve. Keep us posted on any new rollout of essays. Best

Thanks

These essays are not backed up by the CULT in any way. No one is prepared to put their name to them. They are tools for testing the waters while muddying them.

And, not only do they not have any author, these essays are not dated. A good ploy from their point of view so that they are "timeless" and they can hide behind the "we've always thought this way" excuse. Any new convert doing research on lds dot org won't get that it's yet another recently added attempt at washing their history.

I have really noticed that the Gospel Topics section is even muddier than when the initial essays first came out. Now you actually have to search for the items in their a-z list. Nothing actually stands out if you just navigate directly to the Gospel Topics landing page.

Everything is melded together...very slick!!

Where would the average member hear about these essays? Only if they go looking for specific information about them?

I believe the Salt Lake Trib runs an article after they are released? Is this correct?

I'm just wondering if this is something any TBM would see without me pointing it out.

They won't. I think that's the point.

I always laugh at how the church refers to these people as "scholars", when the real scholarly community (university professors and scientists) would laugh at what they come up with. What does the church think makes them scholars? Is it because they went to college, have a doctorate degree? Is it because they study and know all this stuff - but have no real credibility?

A few more tidbits to add to what Steve already said: http://www.mormonthink.com/essays-responses-intro.htm

So why are they not up front in General Conference and discuss the issues and be real prophets, seers and revelators?

It's a real con game with them. How can they live with them selves with such integrity? This "dealing with people in an honest way" takes on a whole new meaning. There is nothing honest in what they are doing.

I can't believe that not one of the 15 in their Thursday meetings is not calling them out on this deception.

I think the church and its operators - including epiginosko with his or her pompous, pseudo-intellectual alias - is getting way too much credit here.

The goal is to deceive. The method of implementation is deceptive and secretive. The men and women involved are deceivers and I do not give them any credit for being deceived themselves, deceiving themselves, or for wanting to protect the deceptive cult they work for.

Nothing good or honest or true has ever come from the Mormon cult.

. . . in such negative terms as being as you describe (and my source is certainly no apologist for the Mormon Church). The information is credible and appreciated. In your perfect world, I'm sure, all sources would dress like Batman and fly through downtown SLC doing battle with the evildoers in spectacular fashion.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 01/22/2014 03:17PM by steve benson.

That's the thing about my perfect world: there is no need for anonymous sources to begin with.

Your perfect world only works in the pages of comic books.

(And, besides, if you actually read what has been provided here, you would know that I have the actual name of the anonymous source who has been providing inside information).



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 01/22/2014 05:02PM by steve benson.

I kind of think about "Deep Throat" in Watergate. He probably was one of the most famous anonymous sources ever. I believe a lot of the reason why he was anonymous is that he had a lot to lose but also what passionate about the truth being discovered.

I'm guessing that Steve's source also has a lot to lose. For one, working for the Church is his livelihood...it pays his bills. That is one reason why I never wanted to work for the church. I don't want my belief system to directly effect my income.

. . . if their cover was blown.

Definitely. Income isn't the only factor. Family, friends and reputation are also huge factors (especially since I assume that they are in UT)

Yep. It's easy to say "you need to release this information, it would mean so and so would be shamed and released", but there are jobs, mortgages, careers involved here. Kids need to eat.

I wonder if Jesus had a such a hard time with just telling the truth.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/22/2014 01:31PM by erictheex.

"Complexity."

They keep using that word. I do not think it means what they think it means.

Or more likely, they're intentionally obfuscating embarrassing issues. Or telling people they're too slow to understand them.

why is it that I doubt you still have reliable sources in the LDS church, you are villain #1 to any believing person. You are 20+ years removed from it, yet still act like you are in the know? Strange, but at least it is not another ramble about grandpa and how he said something to you in the 80's rehashed again and again. This one I could at least read most of it, compared to most of your posts that are so arrogant but I get you play to the ex-lds celebrity just as your grandpa played to the LDS ones. You are more like him than you probably will admit, both of you are extremest in your beliefs and beating a dead horse. I will credit you as at least you are not a racist bigot like him, you simply are just a religious bigot.

In my opinion, there are varying degrees of belief that exist within the walls of the COB and surrounding buildings. Everyone I seem to talk to these days that work at the church (there are several) seem unhappy, frustrated and a bit disgruntled.

Combine that with the degree of belief factor and I believe people are willing to talk.

From a psychological perspective (pure opinion...I'm not a psychologist), I believe Steve probably has passionately ingrained motives to bring out the truth surrounding the church and I doubt those motives will ever leave him.

Just speculating...I don't know Steve personally

Y U so mad, bro?

Incorrect use of anonymity. Do not use puppets, use your regular board name.

Is this purely reactionary, or does the COB have an end-game strategy in mind - a balance point or state that they want to achieve?

How do they see the church in 5, 10, 20 years? Melding with the protestant mass, or holding firm as a distinctive and exceptional religion? I find it hard to believe that they think that they can achieve the latter, but the release of the essays doesn't seem to indicate a clear path forward. More just muddling through.