Mopologetics & Excommunication

[drumdude]

I have a hard time believing that some of the writings of LDS apologists were not designed to be used in some aspect of the disciplinary proceedings of the LDS Church.

Bishops and Stake Presidents don’t have time in their busy schedule to research all of this stuff.

If I remember correctly, Dehlin’s excommunication was the result of some of his ward members compiling a dossier on him.

[Doctor Scratch]

I must confess that I read very similar thoughts nearly six years ago. See here.

The Proprietor’s post is essentially a repeat of his 2018 post with a few changes. Did he provide a link to the “denunciation” he was ostensibly responding to in 2018? No. Why not? Does he provide a link six years later? No. Why not? Does his 2024 post use the church’s current terminology in this area, such as church membership councils and withdrawal of church membership? No. Why not? Has he even read the General Handbook in recent years?

The “Thoughtful Faith” channel is shamelessly attacking several church members right now with “disgusting” videos.

Very helpful, Tom--thank you. I am astonished at the memory you have for such things, but you're right--the whole thing appears to be essentially a cut-and-paste, with very little in the way of new material. Quite lazy!

And by any chance would you happen to have a link to the "disgusting" videos you mention?

[Doctor Scratch]

And of course, this begs the question: How/why are the Interpreter movies any better than Decker’s film?

Because Decker's films were more vitriolic and less fantasy-based.

A valid point, but does that really affect "quality"? I mean, Pasolini's controversial film Salo is arguably "vitriolic" and "less fantasy-based," but does this make it a "lesser" film somehow? Incidentally, Salo actually can be read as a commentary on Mopologetics..... Perhaps an Interpreter-funded remake is in order?

[Doctor Scratch]

I have a hard time believing that some of the writings of LDS apologists were not designed to be used in some aspect of the disciplinary proceedings of the LDS Church.

Indeed. I recall David Bokovoy saying that, during some interview he had at BYU, that someone had compiled a "creepy dossier" of various posting he'd done on the various message boards, with the intent being to discredit him and prevent him from being hired at BYU. And this was still clear back when Bokovoy was on friendly terms with the Mopologists, though as I learned from a "source," there were suspicions swirling around him due his apprenticeship with David Wright.

[Tom]

I must confess that I read very similar thoughts nearly six years ago. See here.

The Proprietor’s post is essentially a repeat of his 2018 post with a few changes. Did he provide a link to the “denunciation” he was ostensibly responding to in 2018? No. Why not? Does he provide a link six years later? No. Why not? Does his 2024 post use the church’s current terminology in this area, such as church membership councils and withdrawal of church membership? No. Why not? Has he even read the General Handbook in recent years?

The “Thoughtful Faith” channel is shamelessly attacking several church members right now with “disgusting” videos.

Very helpful, Tom--thank you. I am astonished at the memory you have for such things, but you're right--the whole thing appears to be essentially a cut-and-paste, with very little in the way of new material. Quite lazy!

And by any chance would you happen to have a link to the "disgusting" videos you mention?

Here’s a recent one: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=RqokkPVnFIg

[Moksha]

One of the unnamed victims of an excommunication is the Love of God.

One thing that separates LDS excommunications from the Spanish Inquisition, is that you can expect the LDS excommunications.

[Gadianton]

Because Decker's films were more vitriolic and less fantasy-based.

Maybe progressively they did, but his original cartoon showing the plan of salvation was pretty accurate. If I didn't know about it, and it was shown to me as if it were produced by a Mormon producer and not directly by the Church, I'd find it believable.

[Philo Sofee]

I must confess that I read very similar thoughts nearly six years ago. See here.

The Proprietor’s post is essentially a repeat of his 2018 post with a few changes. Did he provide a link to the “denunciation” he was ostensibly responding to in 2018? No. Why not? Does he provide a link six years later? No. Why not? Does his 2024 post use the church’s current terminology in this area, such as church membership councils and withdrawal of church membership? No. Why not? Has he even read the General Handbook in recent years?

The “Thoughtful Faith” channel is shamelessly attacking several church members right now with “disgusting” videos.

Very helpful, Tom--thank you. I am astonished at the memory you have for such things, but you're right--the whole thing appears to be essentially a cut-and-paste, with very little in the way of new material. Quite lazy!

Hold on now dear Dr. Scratch. It is Herr Peterson practicing his plagiarism as to remain sharp with his skills.

[Doctor Scratch]

Because Decker's films were more vitriolic and less fantasy-based.

Maybe progressively they did, but his original cartoon showing the plan of salvation was pretty accurate. If I didn't know about it, and it was shown to me as if it were produced by a Mormon producer and not directly by the Church, I'd find it believable.

Here’s the thing: the cartoon from The Godmakers is the greatest piece of Mormon cinema of all time. Period. I mean, feel free to offer up a counter-argument: no one will do it. Especially not the Mopologists, who are absolutely terrified at having their films compared to Decker’s. I can’t quite put my finger on the reason why, but I find this very funny. The Mopologists freely admit that Mormon cinema is “terrible,” but amidst the dreck, what is worthwhile? I submit that, in terms of entertainment value, accuracy, and pretty much any measure you can drum up, the God Makers cartoon kicks the Interpreter movies’ asses on every level. And do you know what? The Mopologists will not even *attempt* to counter this claim, because they know how right I am. It may sting to acknowledge the truth, but that cartoon is the GOAT when it comes to Mormon cinema.

If I’m wrong, feel free to offer up an alternative. The Mopogists are cowards and will not touch this with a ten-foot pole. The best they’ll offer up is some irrelevant and off-topic retort: “See! The anti is praising the God Makers cartoon! That proves bias!” The problem here, as I have already intimated, is that this sort of response offers no alternative, and no counter explanation. “Biased”? Yes: biased in favor of better, more high-quality filmmaking. If I’m wrong, let them prove it.

[Moksha]

The so-called "Godmakers" was harmful because it revealed sacred LDS doctrine to non-members, potential members, and members who had not gone through the temple. Of course, the members who had not yet gone to the temple would denounce it as a lie because it sounded so preposterous.

In that sense, it was harmful and vitriolic to the Church. As a judge on the 9th Circuit Court said today, the Mormons Saints are within their rights to be deceptive because of the blessings they give.

Dr. Peterson's video set out to harm no one. He wants to show that no one should doubt the divinity of Joseph and Brigham and does so with a fantasy-laced story to promote faith belief. It is as benign as Peter Pan having the audience repeat the mantra, "I do believe in fairies" to revive Tinker Bell. However, it is more wholesome since the Disney movie Frozen apparently had a gay-friendly theme hidden somewhere inside, that could be sleuthed out by LDS minds.