Pahoran wrote:Really? Self-awareness is not your strong suit, I take it.
Hey, if you want to flounder in your empty accusations and unsubstantiated claims, don't let me stand in your way. (I know you won't!)
Pahoran wrote:It's at least as substantive as your fallacious, dismissive diatribe.
Hardly.
Pahoran wrote:That's a very safe guess, since that is orthodox, revealed LDS doctrine, and Pahoran is a believing Latter-day Saint.
And yet devils believe. You write as though belief, in and of itself, were a sufficient virtue to save, or that disbelief were a sufficient vice to invalidate anything a person writes that you don't personally agree with (which is essentially Jones' standard). That's too bad, really, since it is absolutely false.
Pahoran wrote:The fact that you have to resort to another example of smearing by association shows that you still don't have anything resembling a valid counter-argument.
I know you are a little slow on the uptake, Pahoran, but the argument is that one's personal assessment of another person's morality is not always a reliable guide, as the Christian assessment of Joseph Smith demonstrates clearly enough. Unfortunately for you, that is not a "smearing by association argument."
Pahoran wrote:Or maybe he doesn't. Still relentlessly trying to smear by association, I see.
Well, you can always simply affirm or deny. You are, after all, so proud of your beliefs, always pugnaciously standing up to anyone who would criticize anyone who defends your professed views. I am surprised that you qualify this with a "maybe." Be loud and proud. If you think Falwell is correct, then don't be shy.
Pahoran wrote:However, since what's good for the goose is good for the gander, and with far better justification: as the guarantor of the scholarly standards of "Cassius University," how do you explain MCB's ridiculous "reinterpretation" (actually a reinvention) of the Book of Mormon, found here?
Pahoran, unlike you, I am not in the habit of defending everything that everyone I associate with writes. But I will say this, MCB's take on the Book of Mormon is no less plausible than your theory regarding priesthood in Alma. The difference is that MCB is so much more, well, human than you are. It is tough to let that disagreement come between the two of us. Whereas you are a bombastic jackass in want of a large injection of human kindness and compassion.
I have little trouble giving you the straight dope, which is something your supposed friends should have done long ago, but may never do.