Simon Belmont: This is what "quote mining" means

[_Yoda]

Liz, darling, you are under the impression that I consider Simon Belmont to be my arch-nemesis in a battle for the souls of mankind, rather than my straight man in a comedy routine.

Maybe he thinks you're his straight man? :P

[_Darth J]

Liz, darling, you are under the impression that I consider Simon Belmont to be my arch-nemesis in a battle for the souls of mankind, rather than my straight man in a comedy routine.

Maybe he thinks you're his straight man? :P

Do you feel that would account for his never-ending cries of bigotry and persecution, and his taking umbrage at anyone daring to claim to understand what "his" church teaches?

Did you, Liz, a believing Mormon, find it humorous to contemplate the Savior, while in the Garden of Gethsemane, forming a vagina so He could be raped trillions of times? Was that just a snappy comeback to a critic of the Restored Gospel? Do you think that would be a good one-liner to start off a talk in sacrament meeting?

Or are you just saying that Simon Belmont's entire presence on this board is a manifestation of Poe's Law?

[_Yoda]

Or are you just saying that Simon Belmont's entire presence on this board is a manifestation of Poe's Law?

That is exactly what I am saying.

[_Chap]

Gosh, I didn't know what Poe's Law was till I looked it up - http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Poe%27s_Law:

Poe's Law was originally formulated by Nathan Poe in August 2005.[2] The law emerged at the Creation & Evolution forum on the website Christianforums.com.[3] Like most such places, it had seen a large number of creationist parody postings and these parody posts were usually followed by at least one user starting a flame war (a series of angry and offensive personal attacks) thinking it was a real post. Nathan Poe summarized this pattern in his original formulation of the law:

“ Without a winking smiley or other blatant display of humor, it is utterly impossible to parody a Creationist in such a way that someone won't mistake it for the genuine article. ”

The law caught on and has since slowly leaked out as an internet meme. Over time it has been extended to include not just creationist parody but any parody of extreme ideology, whether religious, secular, or totally bonkers.

Very appropriate ...

[_Darth J]

Or are you just saying that Simon Belmont's entire presence on this board is a manifestation of Poe's Law?

That is exactly what I am saying.

I agree with you that it is impossible to tell for certain if Simon Belmont is a real follower of Mormon apologetics or a parody of one.

You may draw your own conclusions as to what that says about Mormon apologetics.

[_sock puppet]

Or are you just saying that Simon Belmont's entire presence on this board is a manifestation of Poe's Law?

That is exactly what I am saying.

I agree with you that it is impossible to tell for certain if Simon Belmont is a real follower of Mormon apologetics or a parody of one.

You may draw your own conclusions as to what that says about Mormon apologetics.

I think Simon is a real follower of Mormon apologetics. I think he sees his defense of Mormonism here as his 'mission.' I think he is sincerely disheartened that he has not been able to convince all of us critics to either convert back to believing or to stop talking about Mormonism online. (If he is just a parody, then DCP got one over on me and I'll readily admit it.)

[_Darth J]

(If he is just a parody, then DCP got one over on me and I'll readily admit it.)

If he is just a parody, then either:

(a) someone who wants to make followers of Mormon apologetics look ridiculous is doing an ingenious job of it; or

(b) someone who is a real follower of Mormon apologetics is shooting himself in the foot.

I am kind of surprised to see Liz take a cheap shot like this and say Simon Belmont is a parody. First Mattie attacks Stemelbow, and now this.

[_asbestosman]

I find it interesting that a couple of TBMs, asbestosman and liz, have found the need to try to stop a thread in which Simon cannot stop himself. Could it be that each of them realizes Simon's testimony is just about to implode and they fear it may happen before their eyes in this very thread if they do not intervene to save Brother Simon?

It could be that private pleas by them to Brother Simon to stop have gone unheeded.

Or, have liz and asbestosman convinced Brother Simon to remain quiet for now--but fear that Brother Simon will be baited into coming back into the thread by Darth J's provocative posting, if it continues?

Oh brother. Here's Sock once again ironically whining about whiners.

I just wanted to give Simon an out. Why? Well, because most people who are embarrassing themselves need an out--sort of like what EAllusion did for mfbukowski. Expecting someone, anyone, to admit they were wrong is foolhardy--even those of us who try have natural blind-spots. The reverse works too. Maybe they see something I don't (and need a reasonable out I agree with).

Simon has not contacted me. I don't think he's ever communicated with me except in the open.

I think it's odd that when Simon currently gives a reasonable response about the Atonement (even if it was fed to him), he is criticized for doing so. In my mind that goes from comedy routine to drawing blood (not physically, mechanically of course ;) ). Could this bloodlust be the counterpart of what you accuse Liz and I of doing? Could it be that you think Simon's testimony is about to die and therefore must work at all costs to knock it down? Why? Do you get warm fuzzies? Extra beers in the afterlife? Do you know of anyone who "realized" (became convinced) that the church wasn't true due to people shoving it down his throat? If getting Simon to "realize" the church isn't true is your goal, then maybe, just maybe, you could do it in a way similar to the way you've convincingly explained your position to others.

I'll give you this though: When I don't like someone it's probably more fun to shove facts down his throat and watch him choke. It's like getting revenge for the times he annoyed me.

for what it's worth, I'm not really here to convert, or protect anyone's testimony any more than I'm here to destroy it. I also believe in teasing people to some extent for their foolishness and will tolerate being teased in my turn. If I'm protecting Simon it's not because I'm afraid he's losing his testimony. It's because there are so few TBMs here and I wish there were more. Not necessarily more like Simon or more like me or more like Liz or whatever. I just want more in general. Just think of the benefit to you: fresh meat.

[_Chap]

... there are so few TBMs here and I wish there were more. Not necessarily more like Simon or more like me or more like Liz or whatever. I just want more in general. Just think of the benefit to you: fresh meat.

Hmmmm .....




Edited to add:

But hey! jo1952 says I'm a nice guy. So that should bring them flooding in ....

[_sock puppet]

I find it interesting that a couple of TBMs, asbestosman and liz, have found the need to try to stop a thread in which Simon cannot stop himself. Could it be that each of them realizes Simon's testimony is just about to implode and they fear it may happen before their eyes in this very thread if they do not intervene to save Brother Simon?

It could be that private pleas by them to Brother Simon to stop have gone unheeded.

Or, have liz and asbestosman convinced Brother Simon to remain quiet for now--but fear that Brother Simon will be baited into coming back into the thread by Darth J's provocative posting, if it continues?

Oh brother. Here's Sock once again ironically whining about whiners.

So that all whining might stop. Keep drinking stem's Kool-Aid. Next week it will be Lime flavored I hear.