Dan Peterson breaks Church Rules in pursuit of Mopologetics

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
Post Reply
_stemelbow
_Emeritus
Posts: 5872
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2011 8:40 pm

Re: Dan Peterson breaks Church Rules in pursuit of Mopologet

Post by _stemelbow »

Darth J wrote:Did I mention that we're not a cult?


The cult of DJ with his angry disciples.
Love ya tons,
Stem


I ain't nuttin'. don't get all worked up on account of me.
_Darth J
_Emeritus
Posts: 13392
Joined: Thu May 13, 2010 12:16 am

Re: Dan Peterson breaks Church Rules in pursuit of Mopologet

Post by _Darth J »

stemelbow wrote:
Darth J wrote:Did I mention that we're not a cult?


The cult of DJ with his angry disciples.


So, stemelbow, explain to me the ethical philosophy whereby inducing a bishop to violate his legal agreements with the church he serves is consistent with being a disciple of Jesus Christ.
_Molok
_Emeritus
Posts: 1832
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 4:31 am

Re: Dan Peterson breaks Church Rules in pursuit of Mopologet

Post by _Molok »

stemelbow wrote:
Molok wrote:God, you're such a one note dip****. It's not even worth the effort to creatively insult you anymore.


Why would you ever want to insult someone anyway, Molok?

Well, gee, that's kind of an open ended question, isn't it? Lots of reasons, but rather than list every reason I would want to insult any person on the planet, why don't we just focus on why I insult you? That's an easy one. It's because even though I've never been a Mormon, I enjoy reading this forum, and have for the past few years. It's right up there with Reddit on the list of top websites I visit. But every so often, you have to show up and pollute every thread you can. So, instead of the nice reading experience I usually get, I'm treated to you saying the same thing in every thread over and over, etc.

None of this has to do with you being a Mormon, or supporting DCP, or even that I don't agree with your views on seemingly anything that is talked about on this forum. Contention among posters can be some of the most compelling reading here! So it's not like I want some hivemind here. I don't only want to see posts from people I agree with or like. The problem with you is not that you're annoying. You're worse than that. You're boring.
_Doctor CamNC4Me
_Emeritus
Posts: 21663
Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2009 11:02 am

Re: Dan Peterson breaks Church Rules in pursuit of Mopologet

Post by _Doctor CamNC4Me »

Darth J wrote:You know, Liz, one time a police officer pulled me over for going 40 in a 25 mph zone. And I said, "Yeah, but the speed limit doesn't apply if you are going to the grocery store." And he said, "The sign says 25 mph." And then I said, "But I needed to see if I left the iron on at home." And he said, "The sign says 25 mph." And I said, "But I really needed to go 40 mph." And he said, "The sign says 25 mph."

This went on for a while, and then I told him, "You're just saying I went over the speed limit because you don't like me, and I think you're being disrespectful for accusing me of violating the speed limit just because the sign says 25 and I was going 40."

And guess what? He finally agreed that the posted speed limit didn't mean that you are only allowed to go 25 mph where I had been driving! Yay!!!!


Well, Ms. Liz can type things.

Because she can type things we're supposed to believe whatever nonsense she types.

It's kind of like Mormonism. Just say something and it's valid because it was said.

- Doc
In the face of madness, rationality has no power - Xiao Wang, US historiographer, 2287 AD.

Every record...falsified, every book rewritten...every statue...has been renamed or torn down, every date...altered...the process is continuing...minute by minute. History has stopped. Nothing exists except an endless present in which the Ideology is always right.
_Ceeboo
_Emeritus
Posts: 7625
Joined: Sun Feb 14, 2010 1:58 am

Re: Dan Peterson breaks Church Rules in pursuit of Mopologet

Post by _Ceeboo »

Hey Molok! :smile:

Molok wrote:It's because even though I've never been a Mormon, I enjoy reading this forum


Really!

Interesting. I always thought you were an X-Mo!

Cool stuff!

Peace,
Ceeboo
_Molok
_Emeritus
Posts: 1832
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 4:31 am

Re: Dan Peterson breaks Church Rules in pursuit of Mopologet

Post by _Molok »

Even better Ceeboo, I'm an ex fundie Christian!
_Ceeboo
_Emeritus
Posts: 7625
Joined: Sun Feb 14, 2010 1:58 am

Re: Dan Peterson breaks Church Rules in pursuit of Mopologet

Post by _Ceeboo »

Molok wrote:Even better Ceeboo, I'm an ex fundie Christian!


Really!

How did you end up hanging out on a Mormon board, like me?

(Considering that this thread couldn't possibly get more bizarre, I figured it would be okay to continue our conversation here. Plus, it would help get the thread to somewhere north of 50 pages, 1,000 posts and well over 11,000 reads!) :smile:

Peace,
Ceeboo
_Molok
_Emeritus
Posts: 1832
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 4:31 am

Re: Dan Peterson breaks Church Rules in pursuit of Mopologet

Post by _Molok »

*
_Ceeboo
_Emeritus
Posts: 7625
Joined: Sun Feb 14, 2010 1:58 am

Re: Dan Peterson breaks Church Rules in pursuit of Mopologet

Post by _Ceeboo »

Molok wrote:*



.
_sock puppet
_Emeritus
Posts: 17063
Joined: Fri Jul 23, 2010 2:52 pm

Re: Dan Peterson breaks Church Rules in pursuit of Mopologet

Post by _sock puppet »

Darth J wrote:There is nothing in LDS Church policy that gives the bishop over a given ward authority to police total strangers who claim to be bishops, over whom the bishop has no ecclesiastical authority whatsoever, because the bishop feels that this stranger is somehow acting outside of conformity with how a bishop should act. This particular apologia of yours would have it that bishops are watching over the world at large on the Church's behalf.

Not only do LDS policy and doctrine (e.g., that book abbreviated as "D&C") not support this assertion, it would mean that LDS bishops decide for themselves what is or is not within the scope of their role as bishop over a given ward. That would make the revocable license agreement---which is a legal document, not a religious document---totally meaningless.

Maybe that's why they don't call bishop's GAs--bishops' authority for the church is not general, but limited in geographic scope.
Post Reply