Censorship Rampage over Bott

[_Willy Law]

"We don't know why" is the only card the church has to play.
If they admit it was wrong then they have to admit that;
A. Past prophets and apostles knowingly lied by claiming the ban as "a commandment from God", doctrine or God's word.
or
B. Past prophets and apostles can not tell the difference between personal impressions/thoughts and divine inspiration.

I don't see how the church can ever say anything other than "we don't know why."
By the way the answer is both A and B.

[_Infymus]

It's really pathetic to watch them eat their own. But at least they are being consistent with both friend and foe. Anyone who doesn't parrot the current dogma - even if that dogma states to absolutely lie about the origins of the priesthood ban - is immediately attacked.

Even watching Dan Peterson get in on this is disgusting.

What I find interesting is that I would assume that most of these students at BYU are indeed chapel Mormons. And being less than 25 years old, I'm pretty sure that they haven't been exposed to the larger portions of Cult history. And so when a BYU professor who is twice their age + parrots teachings he had growing up, he's attacked by members around him who are quite ignorant of the facts.

But the kicker here is people like Peterson. A man who absolutely and unequivocally knows, KNOWS the truth (no matter how much he should deny it, he's been on these boards for a decade) - yet parrots his Cult leaders in order to retain his position and of course the filthy Lucre that flows up from the tithe payers and down into his bank account.

[_harmony]

But the kicker here is people like Peterson. A man who absolutely and unequivocally knows, KNOWS the truth (no matter how much he should deny it, he's been on these boards for a decade) - yet parrots his Cult leaders in order to retain his position and of course the filthy Lucre that flows up from the tithe payers and down into his bank account.

Man's gotta eat. Gotta pay the bills.

You didn't seriously think he would ever jeopardize that, did you? I mean, seriously... I expected nothing from him and so was not surprised when I got nothing. It's not like he's personally got a stake in it...

[_Jason Bourne]

I am amazed, and pleased, with Julianne's remarks. I think they are spot on.

[_bcspace]

Ditto. This is why the Church bothers me so much, it is just dishonest at its core.

Incorrect. However, some of it's most staunch defenders have shown themselves to be dishonest to the core.

[_Maxrep]

Kevin

I told Julian that you have been "escorted" off the dance floor.

[_harmony]

I am amazed, and pleased, with Juilann's remarks. I think they are spot on.

Agreed and agreed.

[_Kevin Graham]

Except for her remark about my alleged racist remarks against Muslims. Good grief, I haven't said anything in YEARS about Islam, and the things I said back then are absolute historical truths. I didn't attack Muslims, I attacked the credibility of Muhammed as a prophet. He condoned rape, slavery etc. Dan Peterson wasn't able to refute anything I said on the subject. In fact he conceded that most of what I said was true; he just didn't like the fact that I was bringing it up for the same reasons he is upset with Randy Bott for stating truths about LDS doctrines. These people seem to think truths should never be explored without an apologetic tour guide. Dan was always there to "soften" the import of Muhammed's actions, with the usual excuses like saying what he did was normal for tribal leaders of the time. Well, so what? Why should I be faulted for holding him accountable for his actions and revealing to the ignorant what Islam's founder condoned? He also said Jesus wasn't crucified, which throws the atonement out the window. But Dan still thinks Muhammed could have been a true prophet of God.

[_Kevin Graham]

Kevin

I told Julian that you have been "escorted" off the dance floor.

Thanks.

[_Mary]

I am amazed, and pleased, with Juilann's remarks. I think they are spot on.

Which particular remarks Jason. I am not permitted to visit the Mormon Discussions Board, and so am finding this quite frustrating. Are you referring to the remarks Kevin made in his opening post, if so which ones, because (perhaps I'm a bit dense) I can't work out which comments are Kevin's and which are Julian's.