Question for Mo Experts

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
Post Reply
Morley
God
Posts: 2340
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 6:17 pm

Re: Question for Mo Experts

Post by Morley »

Bret Ripley wrote:
Sat Feb 04, 2023 7:45 pm
I think any time you meet someone who considers a person to be God's living mouthpiece on earth, there's a fair-to-middlin' chance you are dealing with someone willing to take a hard pass on ethical considerations: doing the good work of managing expectations leaves little time for hobbies.
I think this sums it up, Bret.
MG 2.0
God
Posts: 5722
Joined: Mon Aug 30, 2021 4:45 pm

Re: Question for Mo Experts

Post by MG 2.0 »

Morley wrote:
Sat Feb 04, 2023 7:48 pm
Morley wrote:
Sat Feb 04, 2023 7:31 pm
I have read and re-read.

If it's so obvious, show me.
MG 2.0 wrote:
Sat Feb 04, 2023 7:39 pm
Aargh.

I’ll leave it others to determine whether or not I’ve adequately covered the bases.
Ha! At last we agree! You can't show where you did it. I can't show where you did it. We will leave it to everyone else to not be able to show where you did it.
As in other similar situations on this board I am happy to let my words stand as they are. As I’ve said, Morley, I’m not going to waste my time repeating what I said earlier. You, of course, can say that I didn’t answer your questions or adequately cover the topic at hand (as much as can be done in a short amount of time on a message board), and I can say I did.

This is not my first go around with this particular form of deflection.

And as I’ve said, I am willing at this juncture to leave it as it is and let others decide for themselves as to whether or not I’ve made a good case for this particular topic at hand.

I believe I have.

I do appreciate the civility exercised during this conversation. I would not be hesitant, as a believer, to return for more conversation based on yesterday and today’s exchanges thus far.

Of course with the implicit knowledge that there will be the temptation on the part of critics to ignore evidence and go around in circles if there is nowhere else to go. 🙂

I’ll give you the final word.

Regards,
MG
Marcus
God
Posts: 6755
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2021 10:44 pm

Re: Question for Mo Experts

Post by Marcus »

Morley wrote:
Sat Feb 04, 2023 7:57 pm
Bret Ripley wrote:
Sat Feb 04, 2023 7:45 pm
I think any time you meet someone who considers a person to be God's living mouthpiece on earth, there's a fair-to-middlin' chance you are dealing with someone willing to take a hard pass on ethical considerations: doing the good work of managing expectations leaves little time for hobbies.
I think this sums it up, Bret.
I agree. The best recent example I've seen of this is Midgley's assertion that the prohibition on black members was in place as long as it was because without it, the Mormon church would have become known as "a black church" and it wouldn't have been as widely accepted as he thinks it is.

I feel dirty just writing out Midgley's opinion, but he said it with apparent sincerity. Trying to justify Mormon history gets pretty sickening.
Morley
God
Posts: 2340
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 6:17 pm

Re: Question for Mo Experts

Post by Morley »

Marcus wrote:
Sat Feb 04, 2023 8:32 pm
Trying to justify Mormon history gets pretty sickening.
No kidding. Unfortunately, defending the Mormon contemporary often isn't any more savory.
drumdude
God
Posts: 7250
Joined: Thu Oct 29, 2020 5:29 am

Re: Question for Mo Experts

Post by drumdude »

MG 2.0 wrote:
Sat Feb 04, 2023 7:43 pm
Honestly, you folks could run around in circles all day long…or until hell freezes over. :lol:

“Let’s beat that horse to death!”

Again. And again.

Regards,
MG
It's important to note that what's posted here is indexed on google and shows up in search results.

The results of many discussions here is viewed by people interested in Mormonism, both inside and outside the church. And can influence their decision to join, stay, or leave.

Just as DCP thinks it's important to give the church's side of the story, I think it's important to give both sides of the story.
User avatar
malkie
God
Posts: 1729
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 2:41 pm

Re: Question for Mo Experts

Post by malkie »

drumdude wrote:
Sat Feb 04, 2023 9:36 pm
MG 2.0 wrote:
Sat Feb 04, 2023 7:43 pm
Honestly, you folks could run around in circles all day long…or until hell freezes over. :lol:

“Let’s beat that horse to death!”

Again. And again.

Regards,
MG
It's important to note that what's posted here is indexed on google and shows up in search results.

The results of many discussions here is viewed by people interested in Mormonism, both inside and outside the church. And can influence their decision to join, stay, or leave.

Just as DCP thinks it's important to give the church's side of the story, I think it's important to give both sides of the story.
Look at the bottom of the index page for any forum to see who is looking at the forum - usually a handful of board members logged in, a couple of bots, and perhaps as many as 50-60 "guests" - 46 guests when I started writing this.

We are always writing for a bigger audience than the members of the board.
You can help Ukraine by talking for an hour a week!! PM me, or check www.enginprogram.org for details.
Слава Україні!, 𝑺𝒍𝒂𝒗𝒂 𝑼𝒌𝒓𝒂𝒊𝒏𝒊!
MG 2.0
God
Posts: 5722
Joined: Mon Aug 30, 2021 4:45 pm

Re: Question for Mo Experts

Post by MG 2.0 »

drumdude wrote:
Sat Feb 04, 2023 9:36 pm
MG 2.0 wrote:
Sat Feb 04, 2023 7:43 pm
Honestly, you folks could run around in circles all day long…or until hell freezes over. :lol:

“Let’s beat that horse to death!”

Again. And again.

Regards,
MG
It's important to note that what's posted here is indexed on google and shows up in search results.

The results of many discussions here is viewed by people interested in Mormonism, both inside and outside the church. And can influence their decision to join, stay, or leave.

Just as DCP thinks it's important to give the church's side of the story, I think it's important to give both sides of the story.
Totally agree!

Regards,
MG
huckelberry
God
Posts: 3449
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 3:48 pm

Re: Question for Mo Experts

Post by huckelberry »

Marcus wrote:
Sat Feb 04, 2023 8:32 pm
Morley wrote:
Sat Feb 04, 2023 7:57 pm


I think this sums it up, Bret.
I agree. The best recent example I've seen of this is Midgley's assertion that the prohibition on black members was in place as long as it was because without it, the Mormon church would have become known as "a black church" and it wouldn't have been as widely accepted as he thinks it is.

I feel dirty just writing out Midgley's opinion, but he said it with apparent sincerity. Trying to justify Mormon history gets pretty sickening.
Marcus, I do not think there is any actual justification for the policy but Midgleys assertion is a pretty concise statement of some thought or perhaps just feelings which would have been in back of and supporting the policy.(well that and assumptions of white superiority)
Doctor CamNC4Me
God
Posts: 9836
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 2:04 am

Re: Question for Mo Experts

Post by Doctor CamNC4Me »

huckelberry wrote:
Sat Feb 04, 2023 10:34 pm
Marcus wrote:
Sat Feb 04, 2023 8:32 pm

I agree. The best recent example I've seen of this is Midgley's assertion that the prohibition on black members was in place as long as it was because without it, the Mormon church would have become known as "a black church" and it wouldn't have been as widely accepted as he thinks it is.

I feel dirty just writing out Midgley's opinion, but he said it with apparent sincerity. Trying to justify Mormon history gets pretty sickening.
Marcus, I do not think there is any actual justification for the policy but Midgleys assertion is a pretty concise statement of some thought or perhaps just feelings which would have been in back of and supporting the policy.(well that and assumptions of white superiority)
This is literally Mormon heaven:

Image

You can’t make this stuff up.

- Doc
Morley
God
Posts: 2340
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 6:17 pm

Re: Question for Mo Experts

Post by Morley »

MG 2.0 wrote:
Sat Feb 04, 2023 8:18 pm
This is not my first go around with this particular form of deflection.
Oh, I'm well aware of that. Your I-answered-this-somewhere-but-i'm-not-gonna-show-you shtick gets old. It joins your strategy of giving a link to a book and saying the answer is there. But as often as you do it, one would think you'd get better at it. Your unwillingness to just link to, or at least summarize, the argument you claim to have made is pretty transparent.
Post Reply