Skip to content

Radio Free Mormon: 103: An Interview with Patrick Mason

Professor Patrick Mason sits down for an interview with Bill Reel and Radio Free Mormon.

We delve into how Professor Mason deals with thorny issues in Mormonism.

Professor Mason is not afraid of the tough questions.



7 thoughts on “Radio Free Mormon: 103: An Interview with Patrick Mason”

  1. I’m “quite comfortable” saying that Mr. Mason is the perfect example of why really smart people believe such patently obvious untrue things.

  2. His applogetics frustrate me because his response address the immediate question, but dont really resolve the isdues for me.
    If you get a chance to interview him again in the future I would live to hear his response to questions like:
    Is Dyanetics Scripture?
    Please compare and contrast L Ron Hubbard and Joseph Smith.
    Are the writings of Ellen White Scripture?
    Is Warren Jeffs is a prophet?
    Was the leader of Heavens Gate a prophet?

    1. wow !!!
      Well that seems like the religious / apologetics version of the candy bar game. You know – where the big sibling tackles the younger – pins them down and starts tapping hard in their forehead or chest yelling at them to name 5 or 10 unique candy bars. And then the push back begins. M&M’s – NOT A CANDY BAR START OVER – Hershey bar – YOU SAID THAT ALREADY START OVER.

      Is Dyanetics Scripture? Warren Jeffs Prophet? Poor answer start over…

      1. The questions are inspired by the following video clip I watch were a person is allowing people to ask questions to determine the rules for a math riddle. The only way people get closer to the rules is by identifying numbers that don’t meet the criteria of the game.

        A similar exercise is needed here. Dr. Mason can come up with all kinds of apologetics to maintain the position wants. The validity of the apologetics can only be determined when applied to things that Don’t fit in the position that is being defended. A person can take a position the the Book of Mormon is scripture because it brings them peace. Well Dyanetics also brings people peace is that scripture too? Dr mason can overlook character flaws in Joseph Smith and still recognize him as as prophet. Is he willing to overlook character flaws in Warren Jeffs too?

        I think we would all find that while the apologetics offered by Dr mason can be used to defend his preferred position, they are so universal that they defend any position and don’t really have any power.

  3. Holy Nonsense! Professor Mason’s word salad is very similar to that of Mormonism’s master of deciept, Hugh Nibley. Both adroitly use complex language as a smokescreen to obscure reality. Like Nibley, Masons rationalizations are painful and my brain now hurts, really bad! Thank God, the recording ended part way!

  4. Neo-apologetics ( Mason’s brand of apologetics) metephors.

    As you take the limit as the length of sides approach zero you can see that a circle has infinite number of sides. However, if you reduce your sampling quantity to four, it is possible to defend a claim that a circle has 4 sides. But why would a person be content undersample information so that they can maintain there position?

    There are multiple levels of solution for a Rubiks cube. Level 1, one could get all the colors on one face correct. This solution ignores the remaining five sides and the position of the tiles on the solved side are likely in the wrong place.
    Level 2 solution, solve one side and the first layer of the adjacent sides. In this solution the color and position of tiles on one face is correct and the first row of the adjacent row is correct. The remaining rows and the last side are ignored. Level three solution is the level 2 solution plus one more row of correct colors. Level for solution is all sides of the cube solved. Apologetics is like stopping at a earlier solution.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *