MADB suspended me for reporting a post?

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
_Blixa
_Emeritus
Posts: 8381
Joined: Fri Mar 23, 2007 12:45 pm

Post by _Blixa »

charity wrote:I hope you are really innocent of knowing just how bad CK's statement was. But it is beyond me how it cannot be perceived for what it was.


Why? What's going to happen to me if I'm not "really innocent" of this "knowledge?" What exactly is the ecclesiastical threat here, Sister Nonjudgemental?
From the Ernest L. Wilkinson Diaries: "ELW dreams he's spattered w/ grease. Hundreds steal his greasy pants."
_charity
_Emeritus
Posts: 2327
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 3:30 pm

Post by _charity »

CaliforniaKid wrote:
As for the God of Joseph Smith being a liar, I find it interesting that nobody else there actually disputed this after I pointed out that this is the teaching of D&C 19, the Book of Abraham, and Joseph's letter to Nancy Rigdon. Instead they turned on the Bible like a pack of wolves. Now you're telling me that my reading of these documents is offensive. How come you're the only Mormon who seems to think so?


I don't see any other faithful LDS posting on this thread.
_CaliforniaKid
_Emeritus
Posts: 4247
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2007 8:47 am

Post by _CaliforniaKid »

charity wrote:
CaliforniaKid wrote:
As for the God of Joseph Smith being a liar, I find it interesting that nobody else there actually disputed this after I pointed out that this is the teaching of D&C 19, the Book of Abraham, and Joseph's letter to Nancy Rigdon. Instead they turned on the Bible like a pack of wolves. Now you're telling me that my reading of these documents is offensive. How come you're the only Mormon who seems to think so?


I don't see any other faithful LDS posting on this thread.


I'm talking about at MADB, charity. But you knew that, didn't you?
_John Larsen
_Emeritus
Posts: 1895
Joined: Fri Jan 12, 2007 7:16 pm

Post by _John Larsen »

The Mods over there have been inactive for a couple of weeks, but that seems to have changed in the last couple of days. I've also noticed that Hammer, Pahoran and Juliann have been absent, but Juliann started posting again in the last couple of days. Coincidence?
_charity
_Emeritus
Posts: 2327
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 3:30 pm

Post by _charity »

CaliforniaKid wrote:
charity wrote:
CaliforniaKid wrote:
As for the God of Joseph Smith being a liar, I find it interesting that nobody else there actually disputed this after I pointed out that this is the teaching of D&C 19, the Book of Abraham, and Joseph's letter to Nancy Rigdon. Instead they turned on the Bible like a pack of wolves. Now you're telling me that my reading of these documents is offensive. How come you're the only Mormon who seems to think so?


I don't see any other faithful LDS posting on this thread.


I'm talking about at MADB, charity. But you knew that, didn't you?


You did notice that the thread was closed right after your offensive post, didn't you? No one had a chance to come back after that.
_CaliforniaKid
_Emeritus
Posts: 4247
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2007 8:47 am

Post by _CaliforniaKid »

charity wrote:
CaliforniaKid wrote:
charity wrote:
CaliforniaKid wrote:
As for the God of Joseph Smith being a liar, I find it interesting that nobody else there actually disputed this after I pointed out that this is the teaching of D&C 19, the Book of Abraham, and Joseph's letter to Nancy Rigdon. Instead they turned on the Bible like a pack of wolves. Now you're telling me that my reading of these documents is offensive. How come you're the only Mormon who seems to think so?


I don't see any other faithful LDS posting on this thread.


I'm talking about at MADB, charity. But you knew that, didn't you?


You did notice that the thread was closed right after your offensive post, didn't you? No one had a chance to come back after that.


I had made the claim that D&C 19 and the other documents have God using deception earlier in the thread, and nobody complained or suggested I was wrong. Instead, they pointed to divine deception (and other crimes) in the Bible. Presumably, they accepted my premise.

And actually, the post where I referred to "the lying God of Joseph Smith" remained unresponded-to overnight. It was not until I reported Kemara this morning that the thread got closed and I suspended. So there was opportunity for people to respond, if they really thought that what I had said was all that offensive.
_Runtu
_Emeritus
Posts: 16721
Joined: Sun Nov 05, 2006 5:06 am

Post by _Runtu »

CaliforniaKid wrote:My post was not specifically addressing Zak. There was another poster just shortly before my post who used the tu quouque argument, as well. His post was the one I was directly responding to.

As for the God of Joseph Smith being a liar, I find it interesting that nobody else there actually disputed this after I pointed out that this is the teaching of D&C 19, the Book of Abraham, and Joseph's letter to Nancy Rigdon. Instead they turned on the Bible like a pack of wolves. Now you're telling me that my reading of these documents is offensive. How come you're the only Mormon who seems to think so?


Your reading is pretty accurate. The God Joseph Smith describes is one of situational morality. Lying is A-OK when He commands it. It's not a horrible insult to accurately describe what Joseph Smith attributed to God.
Runtu's Rincón

If you just talk, I find that your mouth comes out with stuff. -- Karl Pilkington
_asbestosman
_Emeritus
Posts: 6215
Joined: Tue Nov 07, 2006 10:32 pm

Post by _asbestosman »

If your wife asks you if she looks fat, and you tell her no even though she is, are you a liar?

If you were hiding Jews from Nazis and told them you weren't, are you a liar?

If one these instances are the only times you lie, would you be insulted if I said you were a liar?
That's General Leo. He could be my friend if he weren't my enemy.
eritis sicut dii
I support NCMO
_Sethbag
_Emeritus
Posts: 6855
Joined: Thu Feb 22, 2007 10:52 am

Post by _Sethbag »

My Wife: Hey Elohim, does this dress make me look fat?

Elohim: Um, uh, no. No it doesn't.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Nazi: Hey Elohim, are those Jews back there in your closet?
Elohim: Um, uh, no. No, there's no Jews here. [waves fingers] These aren't the Jews you're looking for.
Nazi: [somewhat groggily] these aren't... the jews... I'm looking for... [wanders off]


Ok, does this look pretty contrived and manmade to you? It ought to. This is all manmade stuff. Under what circumstances could one reasonable expect GOD ALMIGHTY to have to tell someone a "white" lie like this? I mean seriously now. God won't tell us whether Noah's Ark was real or mythical, whether Adam and Eve really brought mortality to the Earth through their "Fall" and how that stacks up with evidence of mortality going back billions of years. But he'll tell a "white" lie to get someone out of a jam?

Does this really make any sense to you?
Mormonism ceased being a compelling topic for me when I finally came to terms with its transformation from a personality cult into a combination of a real estate company, a SuperPac, and Westboro Baptist Church. - Kishkumen
_asbestosman
_Emeritus
Posts: 6215
Joined: Tue Nov 07, 2006 10:32 pm

Post by _asbestosman »

Sethbag wrote:But he'll tell a "white" lie to get someone out of a jam?

Does this really make any sense to you?


It makes about as much sense as the atoning for the sins of another, or the necessity of faith.

All that aside, if one views God's deception as white lies, then can you see why we'd find it insulting to call Him a liar whereas mentioning that God sometimes "lies" isn't necessarily the same thing? Furthermore, the phrase "the lying god of Joseph Smith" also seems to be calling Joseph Smith a liar. The word "liar" is too strong when one is talking about white lies. It is insulting.

Anyhow, I'm not agreeing or disagreeing with the MADB decision. I'm just offering another perspective.
That's General Leo. He could be my friend if he weren't my enemy.
eritis sicut dii
I support NCMO
Post Reply