My Work Here is Done

[_why me]

My dear friends and colleagues: it is with a full heart that I hereby announce my having accepted "emeritus" status at Cassius University

In other words, you failed and are being moved aside to a position where you can't get in the way.

Since DCP is no longer taking his bait, he has more or less realized that his purpose for the boards is more or less gone. One just can not be starting threads about one individual without that individual replying without seeming to be a stalker.

[_why me]

I can see that things, for some people, are getting rather heated and personal, and I regret that. I hope that the moderators will split off those comments which are clearly antagonistic to the spirit of my OP. I made an effort to leave names out of my OP for good reason, and I think it's something of a bummer that others--who surely meant well--have opted to steer things in a more specific, personal direction. I would prefer that mention of some specific individuals be eliminated from the thread. If this seems like too much work or effort, I understand, but I just wanted to throw my two cents out there.

Once again, I'd like to wish everyone a glorious Sunday on this beautiful October afternoon, with the hint of Autumn in the air.

The Problem is that one may have difficulties separating oneself from past posts or threads. True, you sound rather kind and sincere on this thread. But that can not separate you from the scratch of the past. Like I said before a few years ago, I am sure that you are a great guy in person. But on the boards you went over the top with your threads about daniel. Moderation in all things is not such a bad motto when it comes to inidividualized threads.

[_moksha]

Apologetics is a response to critics. No critics = no apologists. There is not a simpler truth than that.

Just like without pickles and sardines there would be no pickle and sardine sandwiches. Doesn't mean we would not still have the munchies.

[_Yoda]

Apologetics is a response to critics. No critics = no apologists. There is not a simpler truth than that.

Just like without pickles and sardines there would be no pickle and sardine sandwiches. Doesn't mean we would not still have the munchies.

Pickles and sardines? Yuk!

How about peanut butter and jelly?

Or, if you're going with the fish analogy, smoked salmon and cream cheese!

;-)

[_Droopy]

David Bokovoy thinks.

So do I and many others.

He wrestles mentally with many issues of religion.

So do I and many others.

His writing reveals this.

So does mine and that of many others.

But perhaps more importantly, absent from his writings is the scorched earth approach that is so typical of many of the MI/FAIR ilk.

Whatever.

You are right, Droopy, Bokovoy is liked by critics, despite his philosophical and theological differences with Mormon critics. He is respected by critics because of the very manner in which he comports himself in his approach to the points raised by critics, and in dealing with the critics personally.

He is an antithesis to the approach so taken by DCP/Hamblin/Midgley/Schryver.

In other words, due to some of his ideological leanings, the secular critics of the Church have taken him as their mascot.

I hope you all did a prenup for this one, as both sides may need it at some future day.

[_Yoda]

In other words, due to some of his ideological leanings, the secular critics of the Church have taken him as their mascot.

I think it's just a matter of simple civility. David does not resort to personal attacks when he debates.

[_Droopy]

In other words, due to some of his ideological leanings, the secular critics of the Church have taken him as their mascot.

I think it's just a matter of simple civility. David does not resort to personal attacks when he debates.

Yes he has, but he uses a passive-aggressive style as over against a more direct form of assertion. He split with Will years ago on the "United Firm" thread over perfectly legitimate criticism of his economic ideology that had no personal rancor associated with it at all. On certain cherished nostrums, he can be very thin skinned.

He's a mascot of the anti-Mormon secular Left now, and will remain so until he openly distances himself from them.

[_Yoda]

Yes he has, but he uses a passive-aggressive style as over against a more direct form of assertion. He split with Will years ago on the "United Firm" thread over perfectly legitimate criticism of his economic ideology that had no personal rancor associated with it at all. On certain cherished nostrums, he can be very thin skinned.

That may be, but he still outwardly expressed his respect for Will's work on the Book of Abraham project as recently as 6 months ago. And, even though he did reprimand Will for his treatment of women on MDB, he was STILL quick to assert that he liked Will as a person, and was simply disappointed that the whole thing had happened.

He's a mascot of the anti-Mormon secular Left now, and will remain so until he openly distances himself from them.

I'm curious. Do you lump ALL critics on this board as "anti-Mormon secular Leftists"?

Also, why do you feel that critics have taken David on as a "mascot" simply because they have voiced the opinion that David debates fairly?

I have seen David "wipe the floor" with critics from an aspect of strictly debate. He is extremely knowledgeable about the gospel. And yet, he manages to do that while not pouncing on his opponent in a personal way, and is able to maintain friendships with those he disagrees with. Why do you see this as a bad thing?

[_jon]

Dr Scratch,

"Now this is not the end. It is not even the beginning of the end. But it is, perhaps, the end of the beginning."
Sir Winston Churchill, Speech in November 1942
British politician (1874 - 1965)


It is certainly the end of Mopologetics getting away with fighting substance with nonsense.

Bravo.

[_Some Schmo]

David Bokovoy thinks.

So do I and many others.

He wrestles mentally with many issues of religion.

So do I and many others.

His writing reveals this.

So does mine and that of many others.

CFR