WITNESSES CRASHES AND BURNS!

[Sledge]

Critics have never plausibly accounted for the unwavering testimony of those fine folks. Welp. There it is.

https://cesletter.org/debunking-fairmor ... esses.html

- Doc

Please share with us your unwaivering testimony of the CES letter.

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

Critics have never plausibly accounted for the unwavering testimony of those fine folks. Welp. There it is.

https://cesletter.org/debunking-fairmor ... esses.html

- Doc

Please share with us your unwaivering testimony of the CES letter.

Is that what I did, or did I provide a counter to the ‘reviewer’s’ assertion? Also, you still haven’t answered my question I posed to you with regard to the Painesville Telegraph article. It’s bad form to make a poster have to ask you to answer the question four or five times.

- Doc

[Sledge]

Is that what I did, or did I provide a counter to the ‘reviewer’s’ assertion? Also, you still haven’t answered my question I posed to you with regard to the Painesville Telegraph article. It’s bad form to make a poster have to ask you to answer the question four or five times.

- Doc

I answered in the other thread.

Now, tell us more about how the CES letter is infallible scriptura.

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

Mr. Daniel C. Peterson, who can’t seem to sate his obsessive stalking of this site, unironically lambasts the single-time registrants on Rotten Tomatoes with this panicked post on his vanity blog:

At an online location that is sympathetic to the half-star down-voters (and very hostile to me personally), it’s been pointed out that very many of the folks who have had positive things to say about Witnesses at “Rotten Tomatoes” are first-time reviewers. The insinuation is that their comments and ratings are, thus, of no value. In fairness, though, I have to report that my sampling of the half-star down-voters failed to find a single one of them who had a history at “Rotten Tomatoes” prior to trashing Witnesses. And, candidly, I’m not even sure how many of them there actually are. It would not be at all difficult, I expect, for a small group or even a single individual possessed of middling social media skills and a burning, driving, obsessive animus to register multiple times on “Rotten Tomatoes” and, repetitively thereafter, to post myriads of really short negative comments attached to abysmally low ratings. In fact, I think it likely that something very much along those lines has actually happened. For instance: Would multiple people, independently, have come up with the idea of falsely using the names of friends of mine (e.g., Louis M and Hugh N and Blake O) and of commenters here at Sic et Non who have definitely not seen the movie (such as gemli and FredK and noelh)? A similar phenomenon commonly occurs, in an impotent and somewhat pathetic way, with the rating of comments to this very blog.

I don’t recall any ex-Mormon or anti-Mormon personality calling for people to post reviews at the Witnesses RT page, unlike Mr. Peterson throatily calling for Mormons to post 5-star reviews. The self-unawarenss is, unfortunately for Mr. Peterson has become so routine it barely raises an eyebrow these days. Luckily for the portly producer, MG is fighting the good fight here, and trying his best to keep attention diverted from this sleight of hand. But alas, some of us are amused by reviews like this one by ‘Ryan D’ who heretofore couldn’t muster a review at any point in his life:

Very inspirational and honest movie. I loved how historically accurate the movie was and how open and honest the producers were regarding the hardships of the early members of the LDS church. The actors were fantastic. Very moving!

- Doc

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

Is that what I did, or did I provide a counter to the ‘reviewer’s’ assertion? Also, you still haven’t answered my question I posed to you with regard to the Painesville Telegraph article. It’s bad form to make a poster have to ask you to answer the question four or five times.

- Doc

I answered in the other thread.

Now, tell us more about how the CES letter is infallible scriptura.

You didn’t.

- Doc

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

Andrew E., who has dropped exactly zero reviews on Rotten Tomatoes prior to some rather strident assertions and one masterful example of testimonkeying wrote:

Whether you are spiritually immersed or superficially acquainted with the origins of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, you must see this movie. Do not deny yourself seeing this masterful and powerful telling of one of the most important divine manifestations of modern time as believed by over 16 million people on the earth today. This is the story of four witnesses who were enwrapped in God's glory who saw an angel displaying all the artifacts essential to their spiritual testimony of the translation of the Book of Mormon for which each copy has included their witness that has propelled this book to be swept across the earth in over 100 translations. Latter-day Saints understand the vital nature of the 12 Witnesses of the truthfulness of the Book of Mormon. Covering only Joseph Smith and the Three Witnesses in this movie—those four who undeniably declared their witness that they did see an Angel and heard God's voice command them to testify of the truth of the book—is a challenge that was successfully achieved in this production. The team did not suppress telling the good and the bad; they were unashamed, fearless, and unprecedented in their portrayal of the complex story associated with this key cornerstone of the foundation of this modern religious movement. The consequent trials of faith and the poignant pain of persecution of the four of them and the teetering of so many in the Church is realistically presented. Every early challenge from those outside and inside of the Church—including even by the Three Witnesses themselves—has, without varnish, been covered. When each of the Three Witnesses felt their role in the Church was being diminished or doctrines were beyond the simple start of the Church—even to the point that they lost their membership in the Church—yet their testimonies remained intact for the rest of their lives. Their testimony was not purchased by money nor prestige. Their unequivocal and uneasy life of witnessing has been the seed of a new world religion. This is a worthy witness of four decidedly human persons called to bear a burden no others of this era have borne. It is an authentic, unforgettable, and moving experience seen from the true view of the Witnesses themselves, notwithstanding the trashing by past and present detractors of the validity of their witness. That can only be believed by a witness given by God as decided in the silent chambers of one's soul. - Andrew F. Ehat Director and Research Historian The Joseph Smith Research Institute

https://rsc-legacy.BYU.edu/authors/ehat-andrew-f



- Doc

[Bought Yahoo]

- Doc

Like cartoons? So do I. Me and my jammies.

[Philo Sofee]

MG
Now, tell us more about how the CES letter is infallible scriptura.

Please do show where anyone here has ever described it thusly. In other words, to mirror the other board's which shall not be named, policy...CFR

[Sledge]

Please do show where anyone here has ever described it thusly. In other words, to mirror the other board's which shall not be named, policy...CFR

There is no accountability on this board. I ask for proof someone plagiarized... nothing but boasting. I ask for proof that I engaged in ad hom... nothing but boasting.

So no.

[Sledge]

Like cartoons? So do I.

I like traditional animation. None of this Toon Boom, mass produced crap.