LifeOnaPlate wrote:Doctor Scratch wrote:Hi there, LoaP. As I said to you recently, I believe that you (as of late, anyhow; one can still see vestiges of the old "snarky"--to borrow your term--LoaP) seem to represent a kind of vanguard in Mopologetics, along with people like Bokovoy and (perhaps) the narrator. This is a Mopologetics that eschews smear campaigns and vendettas and that, instead, favors a scholarly professionalism that has been, at best, a secondary concern of the current, reigning Mopologetic regime.
So, apart from your rather bizarre remarks pertaining to me (that seems to be quite some grudge you're carrying, ol' buddy), I think your comments here are laudable.
I don't really think "mopologetics" as you outline it exists as a viable, unedited category, so when you call me a vanguard it doesn't really make sense to me.
Oh, it's not hard to understand. Try this on for size: it's clear that you recognize that there is a problem with some aspects of Mopologetics (or LDS apologetics, or Mormon apologetics, or whatever nomenclature you're willing to accept), and you've resolved to do something about it. Well, I *agree* with you, LoaP. I think it represents a positive new direction for Mopologetics---a "vanguard," if you will. Why you insist on arguing over this is frankly baffling.
Peace.
Same to you, ol' buddy.