![\"Doomed](\"https:\/\/wp-media.patheos.com\/blogs\/sites\/186\/2024\/07\/0aw1_s9C-scaled.webp\")
<\/a>We were fortunate in casting a remarkable \u201cJoseph Smith\u201d (aka Paul Wuthrich, whom many of you will also know through his leading role in Escape from Germany<\/em><\/a>) in our movie Witnesses<\/em><\/a>. \u00a0And we knew that we would need to be similarly fortunate in our casting of a Brigham Young for Six Days in August<\/em><\/a>.<\/p>\n Paul Wuthrich will reprise his role as Joseph Smith in Six Days in August<\/em>. \u00a0However \u2014 spoiler alert! \u2014 he does not last through the remainder of the story that is told in the new film. \u00a0(I wish that I could say otherwise.)<\/p>\n In this very short video clip, the director of Six Days in August<\/em>, Mark Goodman, tells of finding our Brigham. \u00a0Several of the rest of us needed to sign off on the choice as well, but the decision was very clear to everybody: \u00a0\u201cThere\u2019s Your Brigham: Speaking in Tongues\u201d<\/a>:<\/p>\n Brigham Young had the spiritual gift of speaking in tongues. Six Days in August<\/em> Director, Mark Goodman, found it challenging to find an actor to portray young Brigham Young, at all, let alone one that could speak in tongues! See this amazing audition from John Wilson. In that moment Mark knew, \u201cThere\u2019s Your Brigham!\u201d See the amazing performance of John Wilson and learn about the even more amazing man and prophet called of God\u2013Brigham Young.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n And, while still on the subject: \u00a0Don\u2019t miss this event in Orem, Utah, which will be held on the evening of Wednesday, 25 September: \u00a0\u201cUnveiling History: Six Days in August<\/em> Fireside.\u201d<\/a><\/p>\n I\u2019m quite routinely dismissed in certain circles as a mere \u201capologist.\u201d \u00a0I don\u2019t mind the term, though I regret the dismissal.<\/p>\n I believe that apologetics, as such, is inevitable. \u00a0Stripped of specifically religious elements, it\u2019s merely the advocacy or defense of a position. \u00a0Scholars advocate and defend positions all the time, as they should<\/em>.<\/p>\n Some may also be aware that I\u2019ve been known to distinguish between what I call positive apologetics<\/em> and what I term negative apologetics<\/em>. \u00a0I want to be very clear about that distinction:<\/p>\n By negative apologetics<\/em>, I don\u2019t mean attacking other positions, let alone assaulting other people \u2014 to say nothing of mere nastiness and mean-spiritedness. \u00a0I realize that my image, in certain quarters, is that I\u2019m a vicious, hardhearted, conscienceless, polemical hack. \u00a0But even if that characterization were accurate \u2014 which it isn\u2019t \u2014 it would have nothing at all to do with what I\u2019m saying here.<\/p>\n What I mean by negative apologetics<\/em> is the defense of a position \u2014 whether religious or not \u2014 against attack. \u00a0It can easily be compared to playing defense in football. \u00a0I judge it to be essential, and I regard it as just as justifiable, both morally and intellectually, as what I\u2019ve called positive apologetics<\/em>.<\/p>\n So what is positive apologetics<\/em>? \u00a0What I mean by the term is the provision of affirmative reasons for holding a position. \u00a0It is the development and exposition of reasons for accepting a proposition or adopting a belief. \u00a0One might compare it to a football offense.<\/p>\n I see absolutely no reason to regard one as legitimate and the other as illegitimate. \u00a0Both are necessary and both are perfectly fine, just as both offense and defense are fair and necessary. \u00a0Of course, in football as in apologetics, both offense and defense can be well executed or poorly executed. \u00a0Both can be done according to the rules (of logic, of sound scholarship, of fair play, of the NFL) and, unfortunately, both can sometimes fall afoul of the rules. \u00a0But the occurrence of fouls in football doesn\u2019t render illegitimate the idea of offense or of defense, let alone the game itself. \u00a0Bad drivers don\u2019t prove driving wrong. \u00a0And mistaken or bad-faith or disingenuous or uncivil arguments don\u2019t, as such, invalidate apologetics, whether positive or negative.<\/p>\n Suppose that Scientist X argues that nature is more important than nurture in the formation of human personality. \u00a0He cites evidence and reasons to support his claim. \u00a0In that case, he is doing something essentially like positive apologetics.<\/p>\n But Scientist Y disagrees and publishes an article disputing Scientist X\u2019s evidence and reasons.<\/p>\n It would be rather odd if Scientist X, while still holding his view, were to chastely decline to defend his own position, declaring such defense morally illegitimate. \u00a0But if he were to respond by attempting to rebut Scientist Y\u2019s objections, he would, in that case, simply be doing a form of negative apologetics. \u00a0As well he should.<\/p>\n It is entirely legitimate to argue that the Three Witnesses to the Book of Mormon are credible. \u00a0Such an argument would be positive apologetics. \u00a0It is every bit as legitimate to seek to rebut claims that Oliver Cowdery denied his testimony, that Martin Harris was an unstable loon, or that David Whitmer isn\u2019t credible. \u00a0Such an argument would be negative apologetics.<\/p>\n And that is what I mean by the terms.<\/p>\n To repeat: Both positive and negative apologetics are, in my judgment, entirely legitimate \u2014 just as offense and defense are entirely legitimate in football and just as both batting and fielding are entirely legitimate in baseball. \u00a0A chess player is entirely within her rights to be playing both defensively and offensively. \u00a0In fact, she had better do so!<\/p>\n Look at what I\u2019ve just found in the Christopher Hitchens Memorial \u201cHow Religion Poisons Everything\u201d File<\/em>\u2122! \u00a0It\u2019s from Fox 4 News in Kansas City: \u00a0\u201cKC Temple Run hosts 5K for local charities\u201d<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n For the 13th year in a row, thousands participated in the annual 5K Temple Run, a free event hosted and funded by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints<\/a> in Kansas City, Missouri. This year, the run partnered with Mother\u2019s Refuge, a local charity aimed to provide a safe home for pregnant and parenting young moms and babies who do not have a stable place to live.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<\/a>
(Wikimedia Commons public domain image)<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<\/a>
(LDS.Media Library)<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n