2nd annointings and Elder Packer - does it explain anything?

Post by **_beastie** » Sat Jan 26, 2008 5:17 am

Bob fails miserably when he actually tries to defend LDS truth claims, like the historicity of the Book of Mormon, so all he has left is to try and make a case that critics are rotten human beings, hypocrites and cowards. It's sad and pathetic, but it's all he has.

_rcrocket · Post by **_rcrocket** » Sat Jan 26, 2008 5:17 am

Runtu wrote:
rcrocket wrote:
Runtu wrote:Bob,

I'm still curious as to why you couldn't verify the GA information. It took me less than 5 minutes.

I'm still curious why you spend so much time on this board, why you post anonymously, and why your life at home is different than your life here?

Bob,

Everyone here knows my name, including you. And my home life is not much different from what I post here.

Ok. "X" out the last half of my comment. The first half remains. A nice guy nonetheless. You are destroying yourself in this filthy public pursuit of finding yourself.

rcrocket

_rcrocket · Post by **_rcrocket** » Sat Jan 26, 2008 5:20 am

beastie wrote:Bob fails miserably when he actually tries to defend LDS truth claims, like the historicity of the Book of Mormon, so all he has left is to try and make a case that critics are rotten human beings, hypocrites and cowards. It's sad and pathetic, but it's all he has.

I don't really recall making such an argument. I rather like and respect Dr. Quinn, Dan Vogel, Brent Metcalfe, Fawn Brodie and what they produce. I don't agree with lots of it but I appreciate what things they bring to light that are new and intelligent. There are others as well.

What I do not like are vulgar, pretentious, humorlous and anonymous stalkers. On any subject.

rcrocket

Post by **_beastie** » Sat Jan 26, 2008 5:23 am

It's kind of fun having Beastie as my own personal stalker, vulgar, attacking and very personal (wife and kids not excluded from the attack). Really, it doesn't bother me. I enjoy it. I'm sorry that you are mad at me. I'll do better.

I rather do like that C. Ray, never refuted, article.

Nice dodge, bob. You clearly insinuated that *I* was the person who had revealed personal information about your wife and children. Now you're pretending you were referring to my joke that your wife must have laid back and thought of England seven times for you to have seven kids (a fact everyone on the board knew). Unless I have psychic abilities and your wife really did lay back and think of England seven times, and hence, I am revealing personal information about your wife, no, I am not your "stalker". Certainly my joke was in poor taste, but stalking? Particularly in the context of the comments of this thread? Please.

C. Ray article, totally refuted, unless you're going to jump on Noah's ark with zak:

http://mormondiscussions.com/discuss/vi ... c&start=42

Post by **_Runtu** » Sat Jan 26, 2008 5:26 am

rcrocket wrote:Ok. "X" out the last half of my comment. The first half remains. A nice guy nonetheless. You are destroying yourself in this filthy public pursuit of finding yourself.

rcrocket

I wonder if you see yourself as doing something more noble in your public sniping at those you deem your enemies.

_rcrocket · Post by **_rcrocket** » Sat Jan 26, 2008 5:30 am

beastie wrote:
Nice dodge, bob. You clearly insinuated that *I* was the person who had revealed personal information about your wife and children. Now you're pretending you were referring to my joke that your wife must have laid back and thought of England seven times for you to have seven kids (a fact everyone on the board knew). Unless I have psychic abilities and your wife really did lay back and think of England seven times, and hence, I am revealing personal information about your wife, no, I am not your "stalker". Certainly my joke was in poor taste, but stalking? Particularly in the context of the comments of this thread? Please.

C. Ray article, totally refuted, unless you're going to jump on Noah's ark with zak:

http://mormondiscussions.com/discuss/vi ... c&start=42

There was no "insinuation." I stated it clearly. You, my friend, are a stalker -- a malicious purveyor of personal information meant to hurt.

Post by **_beastie** » Sat Jan 26, 2008 5:35 am

There was no "insinuation." I stated it clearly. You, my friend, are a stalker -- a malicious purveyor of personal information meant to hurt.

You are a liar. You are fully aware that you have NO evidence that I revealed personal information about your wife and children. You are simply making up this accusation out of thin air.

You do realize that Jesus is watching you lie, don't you? And angels are taking notes? And this will all be played out on some big movie screen in the sky one day?

Post by **_Bond...James Bond** » Sat Jan 26, 2008 5:39 am

rcrocket wrote:Ok. "X" out the last half of my comment. The first half remains. A nice guy nonetheless. You are destroying yourself in this filthy public pursuit of finding yourself.

rcrocket

Heaven forbid he "finds himself". And how dare he break a few eggs while working on the Runtu omelette?

*rolleyes*

Post by **_Bond...James Bond** » Sat Jan 26, 2008 5:41 am

rcrocket wrote:There was no "insinuation." I stated it clearly. You, my friend, are a stalker -- a malicious purveyor of personal information meant to hurt.

Where exactly did that come from?

(And why do beastie and Runtu seem to be the ones to catch so much flak? I mean good hell. Ther's quite a few posters who are alot more abrasive, overbearing, smartalecky, profane, etc etc than them (me included)....why do they catch so much flak? Seriously?)

Post by **_Runtu** » Sat Jan 26, 2008 5:45 am

Bond,

None of this really matters, you know. Bob is who he is, and I'm who I am. We just disagree about a lot of things.