Kerry Shirts getting "turned off" to "Mormonism"?

[_ldsfaqs]

Kerry sadly has long held views that go contrary to LDS orthodoxy. Even more sad, he seems to be getting worse as he studies more and more liberal and atheist books, and wholesales accepts their arguments without any critical thinking beyond them.

He shows his "dark side" on Youtube often, in video and in responses. Just look at his latest videos on bias, logic, etc. He completely accepts the Atheist arguments, without realizing that there might be more to the issues which would debunk the atheist arguments.

What bullroar. How would you have any idea about him accepting anything wholesale without any critical thinking? You're making yourself "sad" over something you made up all by yourself. You may be able to spell "critical thinking" but never yet have I seen anything from you that would indicate that you are capable of it.

I've known Kerry for years, and we are friends, even though we sometimes war like enemy's.
He's a good guy, and a great intellectual, and also a great defender of the Faith and Truth. But, like many geniuses in some things, he has flaws in some of his other judgments.

As to your question, Kerry for example rather than critically challenging the atheists judgment of the Christian Apologist or otherwise, especially in areas that are orthodox and true, simply accepts the atheist judgment simply because it sounds at first look to debunk the Christian Apologist's judgment and analysis. And I know he does this because I actually know the arguments and judgments which debunk the atheist judgment and either supports or improves and/or corrects the Christian apologists argument. Thus, he's all too willing to jump on the atheist/liberal critical of religion bandwagon sometimes. This flaw is likely because he's a liberal, thus he has that mental flaw of not stepping beyond the obvious.

As several have said in this thread, they were the same kinds of views which where pre-cursur to their apostasy. I've also warned Kerry of this years ago, like I've warned Consiglieri, but people love their pride. And so you know who I am, I grew up in many religions and no religion, converted to the Church, and in late teens early 20's became anti-mormon and anti-religion, atheist/agnostic, until I put away my judgments and then when ready studied again to find out the actual truth of things. I know the patterns, I know your/his thoughts..... I've been there.

[_ldsfaqs]

As to Kerry.... I want him to know that I'm only concerned for him, and have much admiration for the amount of work he's produced and done, especially as to Mormonism.

But I see him making a serious mistake that everyone does when they loose Faith, begin to belittle parts of it, etc.... that is making the error of believing that mocking the arguments of faith, with a new argument or a supposed newly found "superior" logic, means that you've arrived at the actual truth of a thing.

Kerry, mocking the arguments of the Faithful while sometimes legitimate, will not bring you to the actual truth of things, or a thing. More often than not, the actual truth is beyond the supposed superior argument of the atheist, and ultimately goes back to support the argument of Faith, even if not originally structured or the best argued.

It's like with Mormonism and Anti-Mormonism..... The "basic" telling of things by the Church gives the anti-mormon, or the Mormon who leaves the Faith the false assumption that their "new" or damaging information against the Church found and embraced is the actual truth, when in reality there is actually much more to the story, a degree of truth which ultimately supports the Church's "basic" telling of things and entirely debunks the anti-mormon version of things.

It's really irritating Kerry how you rag on other Christians or the Church and it's members, with your supposed "superior" new found Atheist/Liberal arguments from some book you've read, when all you are doing is debunking one bad argument or incomplete argument with another bad argument that ignores important information which supports the faithful argument more often than not.

Logic has layers Kerry..... The anti-mormon believes he's being "logical". And he is being so TO A POINT. But is his logic based on the full facts and truth? No. A partial telling, an omitting, a perverting, etc. Thus, his ultimate conclusion is false on an issue. You do the same with some of your atheist/liberal books arguments. Generations of Fanatical Islam and IDEOLOGY of Genocide cannot compare to a rare instance of Genocide in the Bible. Apples and Oranges..... Have you so soon forgotten the logic and lessons of Nephi??? How he did something that seems wrong, but was actually right when ALL the facts and logic are considered???

[_Cylon]

But I see him making a serious mistake that everyone does when they loose Faith, begin to belittle parts of it, etc.... that is making the error of believing that mocking the arguments of faith, with a new argument or a supposed newly found "superior" logic, means that you've arrived at the actual truth of a thing.

Kerry, mocking the arguments of the Faithful while sometimes legitimate, will not bring you to the actual truth of things, or a thing. More often than not, the actual truth is beyond the supposed superior argument of the atheist, and ultimately goes back to support the argument of Faith, even if not originally structured or the best argued.

It's like with Mormonism and Anti-Mormonism..... The "basic" telling of things by the Church gives the anti-mormon, or the Mormon who leaves the Faith the false assumption that their "new" or damaging information against the Church found and embraced is the actual truth, when in reality there is actually much more to the story, a degree of truth which ultimately supports the Church's "basic" telling of things and entirely debunks the anti-mormon version of things.

It's really irritating Kerry how you rag on other Christians or the Church and it's members, with your supposed "superior" new found Atheist/Liberal arguments from some book you've read, when all you are doing is debunking one bad argument or incomplete argument with another bad argument that ignores important information which supports the faithful argument more often than not.

You're not actually making any specific arguments for where Kerry is wrong. You're just making a blanket assertion that whenever there's an argument that seems to discredit Faith, it's incomplete, because Faith will bring you to the actual truth.

Logic has layers Kerry..... The anti-mormon believes he's being "logical". And he is being so TO A POINT. But is his logic based on the full facts and truth? No. A partial telling, an omitting, a perverting, etc. Thus, his ultimate conclusion is false on an issue. You do the same with some of your atheist/liberal books arguments. Generations of Fanatical Islam and IDEOLOGY of Genocide cannot compare to a rare instance of Genocide in the Bible. Apples and Oranges..... Have you so soon forgotten the logic and lessons of Nephi??? How he did something that seems wrong, but was actually right when ALL the facts and logic are considered???

Okay, here at least is a specific argument. But Nephi is really not the best example to bring up. When ALL the facts and logic are considered, it makes no sense that the Lord would make him kill Laban when he was already unconscious and not a threat. In fact, it makes the rest of the narrative make less sense than if he had left him alive. He chops off the guy's head, and then takes his clothes off the body? Who in their right mind would think that Laban's clothes covered in blood would be a good disguise? How in the world would that not cause Zoram to look a little closer, or at least call someone to get him help? "Uh, Mr. Laban, dude, I know you wanted the plates and everything, but you're drenched in blood, you might want to have someone look at that."

As for genocide in the Bible being rare, I think you need to read the Old Testament again. There may be only one instance where the Bible says the Israelites were successful in committing genocide, (even though that story is completely wrong; the Israelites never wiped out the Canaanites, in fact, they probably were Canaanites to begin with) but that's only because that was the only time in their history when they (by their own story, at least) were militarily strong enough to completely dominate their enemies. But in the rest of the Old Testament there are all sorts of pronouncements that Israel's enemies will be destroyed, they just didn't have the power to actually follow through on it.

Also, I think one Dan Peterson might take issue with your characterization of Islam having an ideology of genocide.

[_ldsfaqs]

You're not actually making any specific arguments for where Kerry is wrong. You're just making a blanket assertion that whenever there's an argument that seems to discredit Faith, it's incomplete, because Faith will bring you to the actual truth.

Well, we are not actually dealing with any "specific" statement he has made here other than an example in the OP, and I've added my two cents from my own experience and observations with him.

Thus, obviously, yes, I'm making assertions.

Okay, here at least is a specific argument. But Nephi is really not the best example to bring up. When ALL the facts and logic are considered, it makes no sense that the Lord would make him kill Laban when he was already unconscious and not a threat. In fact, it makes the rest of the narrative make less sense than if he had left him alive. He chops off the guy's head, and then takes his clothes off the body? Who in their right mind would think that Laban's clothes covered in blood would be a good disguise? How in the world would that not cause Zoram to look a little closer, or at least call someone to get him help? "Uh, Mr. Laban, dude, I know you wanted the plates and everything, but you're drenched in blood, you might want to have someone look at that."

Laban was a head government leader hell bent on killing Nephi's family and others he felt like killing, thus it makes every sense that Nephi would kill the scumbag. And you're actually telling me it makes no logical sense???

Ever heard of it being dark out? Ever heard that a head CAN be chopped off without getting much if any blood on the clothes? Ever heard that Laban's clothes might have been colorful already? Ever heard of "miracles", the Lord blinding mens vision temporarily, or maybe they were drunk also? All kinds of things make the story entirely reasonable. You need to experience LIFE a little more if you think it's not a reasonable story.

As for genocide in the Bible being rare, I think you need to read the Old Testament again. There may be only one instance where the Bible says the Israelites were successful in committing genocide, (even though that story is completely wrong; the Israelites never wiped out the Canaanites, in fact, they probably were Canaanites to begin with) but that's only because that was the only time in their history when they (by their own story, at least) were militarily strong enough to completely dominate their enemies. But in the rest of the Old Testament there are all sorts of pronouncements that Israel's enemies will be destroyed, they just didn't have the power to actually follow through on it.

The wicked WILL ultimately be destroyed.... Further, enemy's were often destroyed, even if it wasn't Israel doing the destroying. Thus, you are wrong. God is not mocked. The wicked don't get away with their actions, either in this life or the next. You would do well to start figuring that out.

Also, I think one Dan Peterson might take issue with your characterization of Islam having an ideology of genocide.

And as usual, the liberal anti-mormon mind cannot comprehend basic facts and details.
I specifically said FANATICAL ISLAM..... not Islam. But, what's new, more ignorance, misrepresenting, false judgments, etc.

But, I will say while I partially embrace Dan's views on Islam "followers" in a general sense, that many follow a "nicer" Islam, I see serious problems with the religion itself, it's founding, etc., that if it's in any way on the side of light, it's "barely" so. I tend to hold the views of some others that know Islam more intimately, the evil's inherent within it. But, I won't condemn it wholesale like some do.

[_just me]

But, I will say while I partially embrace other's views on Mormonism "followers" in a general sense, that many follow a "nicer" Mormonism, I see serious problems with the religion itself, it's founding, etc., that if it's in any way on the side of light, it's "barely" so. I tend to hold the views of some others that know Mormonism more intimately, the evil's inherent within it. But, I won't condemn it wholesale like some do.

Just checking.

[_ldsfaqs]

Your premise fails on it's face..... You can't compare the evils found within Islam to the so-called evils found within Mormonism.

You are completely in la la land if you do..... and need to get a reality check.

[Guest]

-

[Guest]

-

[_sansfoy]

Kerry always came across as an intelligent, if a little quirky, Mormon. I've watched a number of his videos on Youtube and actually enjoyed them. He has some interesting ones on Kabbalah.It doesn't surprize me if he is getting a little sick of Mormonism and if the cognitive dissonance is beginning to hit him. Some things really don't make sense about Mormonism and the lack of any real revelations for over a hundred years is one of them. They try to spin every change as revelation even when it is demonstrably proven that the changes were made for other reasons. Changing apostles to be witnesses of the name of Jesus Christ instead of witnesses of Jesus Christ and their lame attempts at claiming their experiences with God are too sacred to be talked about while maintaining their innuendo through silence isn't convincing.

I wish Kerry the best and agree with his sentiment.

Thanks,

Hasa Diga Eebowai

He seems like the sort of guy who wants to cut his teeth on the meat. How it must erode the spirit to drag himself to church every week to consume skim milk for three hours.

[Guest]

-