CES Letter -- It's impact and what would you change?

[jfro18]

As I've been listening to the Reel/Bennett podcasts (only at the start of #3) I've been thinking about how far reaching the impact of the CES Letter has been... you see it everywhere you go when people talk about why they left, and it's such an easy document to send to people with questions. I have to imagine it's been a part of tens of thousands of people who have left the last 5 years.

It also makes me think about what I would change to make it as "bulletproof" as possible from apologists... and that becomes pretty clear from listening to Bennett or reading the online responses.

From the first episode or so, I would definitely take out/change the following:

I would take out:
Book of Mormon geography issues -- instead of focusing on the possible connections to names of towns around him, I would focus on how the church repeatedly taught that the Hill Cumorah in NY is the BoM one and how they now teach differently as science has shown there's nothing there.

Hill Cumorah/Captain Kidd -- Again, this could be something that JS was familiar with, but it's too weak of an argument to put in a letter that is meant to outline the problems with the church. To me these are secondary issues, so I would leave them out because it gives too much ammo to apologists.

Plagiarism from View of the Hebrews/Late War/Naopleon/Etc -- On this one I wouldn't take the section out entirely, but focus just on the similarities of themes to make the case that Joseph Smith was answering questions that were important to people in his lifetime. I think that's a much stronger argument than trying to piece together verses with similar phrases. Dan Vogel makes a great argument here in that the overriding issues were widely discussed in Joseph's times (mound builders, where Indians came from), so trying to make the direct plagiarism case is not necessary.

I would add:
Anachronisms: Deutero-Isaiah is not mentioned in the CES Letter and I think that is a massive problem that apologists have a very tough time with.

JST plagiarism: This came after the CES Letter, but is another big problem for Joseph Smith's credibility that he was receiving the direct word of God when he keeps getting things wrong or proven to be lifting materials.

I haven't spent too much time thinking about this, but as I've listened there are points that Bennett makes where he's right, and the weakest parts of the CES Letter are also what leads it off. I think approaching these issues semi-chronologically makes sense, but you need the beginning stuff to be strong so people don't get turned off.

Pretty amazing how much damage one nicely produced document has done to the church -- Jeremy Runnels has cost the church more tithing money than probably anyone else in modern times.

Just curious if anyone else had issues they wish were in there or issues they wish were either diminished or removed altogether?

[dogbite]

The CES letter is a very different exit path than the one I followed. It is very much abiut problems within mormonism. As it is addresed to someone inside the Church Education System, that's reasonable. Changing the content of the letter would in many ways be to change its audience too. Which would make it not the CES letter.

My path out ot Mormonism was more out of Christianity generally with a focus on the problems of the Bible that are required as part of LDS canon. So Deutero Isaiah is a thing for me as well.

There are many ways out of Mormonism that reflect the individual's experience. CES can be hard to find your focus issues in because of its sequential design that lacks good TOC or index access. Many if the topics titles are obscure if you dont already know about the issue. Mormonthinks more general topical and cross-referenced structure is better for finding your specific issue.

So id break up and restructure the CES letter and strengthen the cross linking and referencing. I do like its rebuttal section a lot.

A trove of information is only as good as ones ability to find what youre looking for in it. I'd like to see a more comprehensive WIKI approach that lets people take their own self guided exits by researching the topics of their own personal resonance.

[moksha]

I would take out:
Book of Mormon geography issues -- instead of focusing on the possible connections to names of towns around him, I would focus on how the church repeatedly taught that the Hill Cumorah in NY is the BoM one and how they now teach differently as science has shown there's nothing there.

I find the Vernal Holly maps to be thoroughly intriguing. Wish they could be presented in Sunday School.

Hill Cumorah/Captain Kidd -- Again, this could be something that JS was familiar with, but it's too weak of an argument to put in a letter that is meant to outline the problems with the church. To me these are secondary issues, so I would leave them out because it gives too much ammo to apologists.

If you took out the story of Captain Kidd, understanding the connection to the Comoros Islands and its capital of Moroni would not only be lost, but it would make little or no sense to hear Nephites/Lamanites exclaiming "Arrgh, be off with ye matey before I makes ye walk the plank".

Vernal Holly maps - http://www.solomonspalding.com/docs2/vernP3.htm#pg6061

[græy]

Just curious if anyone else had issues they wish were in there or issues they wish were either diminished or removed altogether?

I agree with everything you've written here.

Its been a long time since I've read the CES letter. I'd have to give some thought to how I might restructure it...

[Hagoth]

#1 Leave out the Vernon Holley map.

#2 Put a link to MormonThink.com on the title page.

I do like its rebuttal section a lot.

Me too.

If you took out the story of Captain Kidd, understanding the connection to the Comoros Islands and its capital of Moroni would not only be lost, but it would make little or no sense to hear Nephites/Lamanites exclaiming "Arrgh, be off with ye matey before I makes ye walk the plank".

I think the best use of the Comoros/Moroni thing is when people insist it's just a coincidence you can offer it in trade for the NHM coincidence in Saudi Arabia, thus obliterating the best physical evidence for the Book of Mormon.

[jfro18]

So id break up and restructure the CES letter and strengthen the cross linking and referencing. I do like its rebuttal section a lot.

I agree with this a lot -- many of the rebuttals to the CES Letter completely ignore (whether intentionally or not) that Jeremy Runnels did a massive amount of 'rebuttals to the rebuttals.'

At this point I'm not sure he's going to really change it, but it would be smart of him to find ways to integrate the rebuttals or at least link to them frequently.

I personally like the approach of going right at the church's apologetic claims because it answers a lot of the responses you'll get anyway, but I know that's usually not the best way for someone unfamiliar with the issues to begin with.

[Red Ryder]

I've never read it.

I think Runnels gets too much credit for coming up with the content in it. He really only compiled it from all the various sources out there and marketed under the guise of a correspondence with a CES director.

Personally I don't believe that. He's never disclosed the name of the actual CES director. What's the harm if it's true? If it's false, It makes great marketing fodder!

Whatever...

[jfro18]

I think Runnels gets too much credit for coming up with the content in it. He really only compiled it from all the various sources out there and marketed under the guise of a correspondence with a CES director.

I agree 100% -- I think the Tanners have done way more to expose the church's truth issues than Runnels, but he was able to market it better w/ social media/reddit.

The other thing some point to (Jim Bennett does this heavily) is that Runnels is making good $$ off the CES Letter. I know a lot of work is put into it so it is what it is, but I always take that into account with both critics and apologists. The same can be said for John Dehlin - he does amazing work but he is making quite a nice living from it too. That's not to say it's not deserved as he built that audience up, but I can't help but take it into account when reading/listening to anyone who is making $$ on this (from both critical and apologetic sides).