Mormon Apologetics & Misogyny: The Case of William Schryver

[_Shulem]

Does anyone here judge Paul Osborne?

Would they like me to give a sampling of his best quotes? None of which have been seriously challenged by the same people who would make Will an "offender for a word"?

You're not keeping track of my more nastier statements, are you? Jesus.

Anyway, yes, I've been a bad boy and have said some mean things towards the church and some of the general authorities but they deserve it. Those bastards live deliciously off the members of the church and never stand fully accountable for the flaws and lies of Mormonism.

And William Schryverass is a cipher-hole. That's damn smelly, wouldn't you say?

Nite, Ray -- sleep tight and don't forget to you-know-what before you go to sleep.



Paul O

[_Shulem]

Paul O. does not pretend to be anything other than what he is. He can be rude, angry, sarcastic, and profane--and he owns it. Mr. Schryver, on the other hand, is all of those things, plus misogynistic and a stalker--but he denies all of this and claims he's the victim of some demonic conspiracy to silence his unparalleled brilliance. There's no comparison.

I agree. The difference between me and Schryver-ass is that I'm an honest person and he's a rotten Goddamn liar.

That makes me more of a Christian than Schryver-ass! He's a Goddamn hypocrite too. And he's sort of ugly. That pony tail doesn't help at all. He needs to lop that sorry thing off and get a makeover. He looks kind of greasy. I'd never touch him even with gloves on.

Paul O

[_consiglieri]

This thread is priceless. http://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/581 ... esentation

An apt and hilarious thread summary, robuchan.

It does seem Will has trouble dropping Royal Skousen's name enough.

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

... I believe he's a far better person than the "demon" he's portrayed as being here. It pains me to read of the vilification.

"Villification" of Mr. William is nothing more than quotes and actions by the him that his buddies wish they could forget.

- VRDRC

[_Emma Smith]

This thread is priceless. http://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/581 ... esentation

An apt and hilarious thread summary, robuchan.

It does seem Will has trouble dropping Royal Skousen's name enough.

Also, Schryver's new form of writing is giving me night terrors.

[Aristotle Smith]

Paul presents himself at face value, no pretenses or apologies.

I have a very good friend who has taught me a valuable lesson. When you take the initiative to be the first to throw your own shortcomings out on the table, you control the conversation.

For example, he will raise his hand in elders quorum and say, " I know there is a special place in hell for people like me, but I have to ask this question..." . He then will launch a heavy duty round that puts the entire scope of the lesson into a tailspin from which no pilot can recover.

The beautiful thing about not being a believing member is that there is no need to present yourself as a facade that matches a predetermined mold.

[_Blixa]

This thread is priceless. http://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/581 ... sentation/

Schryver is so jealous of Don Bradley he can't stand it. He hates his guts. Bradley's nice as pie to Schryver. Talks to him like the kid that just got cut from the team. Good luck, buddy, keep working, you'll make it next time.

Schryver: Hey Bradley, me and Skousen are going to rip both your Book of Abraham presentation and your Book of Mormon book to shreds. Hah! PS I'm about to publish my Book of Abraham stuff finally.

Other guy: Bradley's brilliant and should do church firesides.

Schryver to other guy: Seriously?

Schryver: oops (Skousen just busted my balls), let me clarify. I want to review the Book of Abraham article. Skousen wants to review the Book of Mormon book. He will not be working together with me on anything (nor will anyone else in the world with a PhD).

Bradley in his sweet voice: no probs Will, but Skousen never mentioned anything about reviewing my book.

Shryver: (balls busted again) oops let me clarify my clarification. Skousen does not want to review your book at all. I'm the only one with a grudge against you, I guess.

Bradley: luv ya too Will. Come over anytime and I'll give you tips on how you can get your work published.

Schryver: GREAT NEWS EVERYONE I'M GOING TO GET MY WORK PUBLISHED!!! ...(muttering in a low tone so no one hear's the rest) ... on my blog...

Thanks for that enjoyable summary!

[_MsJack]

This thread is priceless. http://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/581 ... sentation/

Don Bradley: intelligent, thoughtful, classy, sensitive, loves Jesus, looks oh-so-handsome in a suit.

Mormon ladies: he's single.

[_Cicero]

Sounds like an interesting book.

[_Kevin Graham]

Skousen is not an authority on anything related to the Book of Abraham. Not even close. He is considered an authority on the Book of Mormon manuscripts because the Church only allows people with a certain kind of bullet proof testimony to examine and analyze them. But it has nothing to do with his superior training in text criticism. He is a linguist.

Schryver is barking up the wrong tree here, which is quite the spectacle.

Someone should remind him that he fled the MAD forum a year ago when I was pounding his precious cipher theory to smithereens. He tried desperately to get others to stop talking to me about it because I "wasn't worth the time," and I caught him in so many lies about what he had argued that he was forced to respond with personal jabs which got so bad that the mods had to kick him out. He stayed away from the forum up until the week I was banned about a month ago.

Suddenly, he shows up as if nothing had happened. As if my absence had nothing to do with his reemergence. As if everyone is just supposed to pretend he's an authority on something. As if he has any credibility to anyone anymore.

What a pathetic coward this numbskull is.