Did William Schryver Post as "Wheat"?

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
Post Reply
_Ray A

Did William Schryver Post as "Wheat"?

Post by _Ray A »

I think that the evidence bears this out. Slick Willie is known to create sockpuppets to back him up. And that's precisely what "Wheat" did in Book of Abraham threads. Check it out yourself by doing a search on "Wheat". You'll be amazed at how much this mysterious figure "Wheat" knows about Book of Abraham apologetics. That's because "he" was Will's "Dorothy Dixer" sockpuppet.

But Will did actually express his opinions through his sockpuppet. Here are some examples:

As far as Heber C. Kimball's proposed solution to pressing social problems _ sounds good to me. Hang a few gays, prostitutes, child molesters, defrauders, and the like in the public square, and before too long you'll have produced a much more hospitable environment for making and raising families.

Start with the apostates ... Sun Jul 27, 2008 12:37 pm


It's just that Runtu Hoffman has taught them all how to play this game, and now that they've found how much fun it can be, they just don't want to stop.

Sun Jul 27, 2008 12:43 pm


Do you know anyone else who has referred to "Runtu Hofmann"?

Your willingness to express yourself in this fashion is admriable in a certain sense. However, I think it is extremly naïve as well _ especially when spoken within the context of this message board. From what I have observed, there is little or no hope of diminishing the level of antipathy between the two parties. Sure, it's one thing to see Millet (and others of like mind) attempting to find *common ground* between Mormons and Evangelicals _ a situation where the differences are mostly at the doctrinal level. But the stakes of the contest between Mormonism and traditional Christianity pale in comparison to that between believing LDS and apostates. In the eyes of believers, apostates are mostly despicable traitors who will stoop at nothing to discredit their former faith _ even using conciliatory language and tones as they systematically seek to undermine the faith of their former brethren. In the eyes of apostates, believers are deluded fools whose willingness to blind themselves to the *truth* is both worthy of denigration as well as probably threatening to societal progress in general. They are a cancer on the body politic. They must be eradicated. Almost without exception, that is the underlying attitude of most apostates who participate here.

So it is a battle to the death, as it were.

I personally wouldn't have it any other way. In the long run _ for believers _ there is no way to accommodate the apostate in the Kingdom of God. And for apostates, there is no way to accommodate the Kingdom of God in their world. (Fri Aug 22, 2008 12:32 pm)


Will's contradictions:

I'm not even a church-going LDS and I know that.
(Sat Feb 23, 2008 2:28 pm)


I think I’m a 100% orthodox chapel Mormon in almost every way I can imagine. And the folks I have known in the various wards and stakes I’ve lived in are, with some exceptions, pretty much just like me. (Fri Sep 19, 2008 12:27 pm)


Will can't even maintain a consistent sockpuppet.

What does this tell us? It tells us that William Schryver is prepared to resort to outright deception. It tells us that, despite his "charming" rhetoric, a very unstable man belies his "orthodox" persona, which he presents on the MAD board so he won't get banned. If only the Admin on MAD knew how devious this person really is, and what a lying, two-faced liar he is.

With apologists like Will, why did the Tanners ever bother to write anything?

So put your hand on your Bible and Book of Mormon, and tell us now, Will - Did you create the "Wheat" sockpuppet???
>
>
>
_Kevin Graham
_Emeritus
Posts: 13037
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 6:44 pm

Re: Did William Schryver Post as "Wheat"?

Post by _Kevin Graham »

Will is Mormonism's next Derrick T. Evenson. This guy pulled similar stunts with the Tanners, was equally indignant towards those who dared disagree with his pet theories, was eventually marginalized by his own, and eventually left the faith.

I mean it is one thing to use a sock puppet to get into enemy territory for a brief stint, but to use several different names on your home turf is just weird. It proves he thinks he is important. He has to put on a show and has to give the illusion that he has tons of supporters cheering him on. He's even willing to go into battle with David Bokovoy, the Church's only bonafide Bible scholar, to try saving face with an imaginary fan club.

I get the sense that most people over there wishes he would just shut the hell up. He's an absolute embarrassment.
Post Reply