Mormons are ashamed of their own beliefs

[_Pahoran]

Your prophets, seers and revelators are the source...

Here is my favorites from Elder M.E. Peterson:

Snipped your "favorites."

You are evading the question, schreeeeeeeeeeeeeeech. That was clearly not anything like "original research;" you cut and pasted that collage from somewhere.

Where was it?

Or if you're shy about admitting which anti-Mormon website does all your thinking for you, please at least provide the titles, authors and page numbers of the books cited by the website you're plagiarising.

Thanks,
Pahoran

[_Buffalo]

Your prophets, seers and revelators are the source...

Here is my favorites from Elder M.E. Peterson:

Snipped your "favorites."

You are evading the question, schreeeeeeeeeeeeeeech. That was clearly not anything like "original research;" you cut and pasted that collage from somewhere.

Where was it?

Or if you're shy about admitting which anti-Mormon website does all your thinking for you, please at least provide the titles, authors and page numbers of the books cited by the website you're plagiarising.

Thanks,
Pahoran

Elder Mark E Peterson: Antimormon.

You heard it here first!

[_Pahoran]

Buffalo,

You buffaloed us with:

"Less valiant in the pre-mortal existence" was taught openly over the pulpit and was the official doctrinal reason. It was treated as fact.

And I replied:

In which case, given that everything "taught openly over the pulpit" of General Conference has been recorded and is available on line, it should be trivially easy to support your assertion.

That's right; this is a CFR.

I'm asking for an actual reference to an actual statement. Don't just try to duck out by pointing to an entire large body of material and then run away.

and now you whine:

This is what's known as moving the goal posts.

Moving the goalposts (or shifting the goalposts) is an expression meaning changing the target of a process or competition by one side in order to gain advantage.[1]

No, I am not "moving the goalposts"

You said it was "taught openly over the pulpit." You said it was nothing less than "the official doctrinal reason." Now there might indeed be participants in this forum who can be buffaloed with that kind of unsupported bluster, but no informed Latter-day Saint has ever heard of an "official doctrinal" anything that was "taught openly over the pulpit" but never heard of in General Conference.

So can you back up your claim or not?

Regards,
Pahoran

[_Buffalo]

Buffalo,

You buffaloed us with:

"Less valiant in the pre-mortal existence" was taught openly over the pulpit and was the official doctrinal reason. It was treated as fact.

And I replied:

In which case, given that everything "taught openly over the pulpit" of General Conference has been recorded and is available on line, it should be trivially easy to support your assertion.

That's right; this is a CFR.

I'm asking for an actual reference to an actual statement. Don't just try to duck out by pointing to an entire large body of material and then run away.

and now you whine:

This is what's known as moving the goal posts.

Moving the goalposts (or shifting the goalposts) is an expression meaning changing the target of a process or competition by one side in order to gain advantage.[1]

No, I am not "moving the goalposts"

You said it was "taught openly over the pulpit." You said it was nothing less than "the official doctrinal reason." Now there might indeed be participants in this forum who can be buffaloed with that kind of unsupported bluster, but no informed Latter-day Saint has ever heard of an "official doctrinal" anything that was "taught openly over the pulpit" but never heard of in General Conference.

So can you back up your claim or not?

Regards,
Pahoran

I never said anything about general conference. That's where you moved the goal posts.

Hope this helps.

[_Pahoran]

Or if you're shy about admitting which anti-Mormon website does all your thinking for you, please at least provide the titles, authors and page numbers of the books cited by the website you're plagiarising.

Thanks,
Pahoran

Elder Mark E Peterson: Antimormon.

You heard it here first!

Not from me, you didn't. Are you really this obtuse?

Can you really not grasp the fact that quote mining by an anti-Mormon website does not entail that the sources it is abusing are themselves anti-Mormon?

Or are you in fact intelligent enough to realise that, but unscrupulous enough to misrepresent it?

Regards,
Pahoran

[_Pahoran]

I never said anything about general conference. That's where you moved the goal posts.

Hope this helps.

That's right; you didn't.

You asserted that there was an "official doctrinal reason" that was "taught openly over the pulpit." Funny, isn't it, that with all that official doctrinal status, it never found its way into a General Conference talk?

Of course you never said anything about General Conference, because General Conference talks are reported. And that restrains your ability to freely fabricate.

That's it, isn't it?

Regards,
Pahoran

[_Buffalo]

Not from me, you didn't. Are you really this obtuse?

Can you really not grasp the fact that quote mining by an anti-Mormon website does not entail that the sources it is abusing are themselves anti-Mormon?

Or are you in fact intelligent enough to realise that, but unscrupulous enough to misrepresent it?

Regards,
Pahoran

You know very well the context of that Mark E. Peterson talk. I think we all do. Using CFR as a blunt weapon doesn't help your position.

[_schreech]

That was clearly not anything like "original research;" you cut and pasted that collage from somewhere.

Where was it?

Or if you're shy about admitting which anti-Mormon website does all your thinking for you, please at least provide the titles, authors and page numbers of the books cited by the website you're plagiarising.[sic]

Really? That is the best you could come up with...really? You can't even address the quotes but instead to choose to whine about where I might have gotten them...They came straight from the writings of your "prophets, seers and revelators", sorry that bothers you...

I actually keep a store of these quotes and the relevant talks (where applicable)...So, now that we have gotten past you pathetic (but not unexpected) dodge and weak attempt at insult, would you like to address the fact that the people you look to for leadership from elohim have, on many occasions, claimed that "Negros" were less valiant in the pre-existence.

Are you ashamed of the fact that LDS leaders taught these things? I am having trouble understanding why I am in trouble because you are uncomfortable with these teachings...

[_malaise]

It's fun to watch Pahoran fall apart when confronted with the words of Church leaders. At least his abusive rhetorical style is entertaining.

[_Pahoran]

Really? That is the best you could come up with...really? You can't even address the quotes but instead to choose to whine about where I might have gotten them...They came straight from the writings of your "prophets, seers and revelators", sorry that bothers you...

I note that for the third time, you have refused to provide sources for your cut-and-paste job.

That can mean only one of two things: Either you don't know where the website you plagiarised them from sourced them, and you are embarrassed to admit it, or you do know it, but you know that the sources themselves would actually weaken your argument, so you refuse to cite them.

Which is it?

You see, schreeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeech, the fact is that sources are relevant. (Informed people know this, just as they know about British spelling, and see no need to advertise their ignorance by putting "sic" after a word that has been spelt in the British way.) Indeed, you know they are relevant too, which is why you keep chanting your "prophets, seers and revelators" mantra. And that is why it is perfectly legitimate for me to ask you to cite your sources.

And it is precisely because they are relevant that I expect you to keep ducking and dodging the question.

Regards,
Pahoran