Calling Daniel Peterson

[_Mister Scratch]

The Good Professor

You've publicly (and falsely) accused me of various kinds of viciousness and blatantly unethical behavior, but you never tire of that sort of mockery.

The Good Professor stated on that earlier thread that the Maxwell Institute maintains a kind of "blacklist" of folks to whom they will not issue a reply---ever. This "blacklist" apparently contains the name of Kevin Graham/Dartagnan. Perhaps you are on it too?

I doubt that I "stated" anything of the kind.

I have no reason to believe such a thing to be true, have never entertained the thought, and would be enormously surprised if it were so.

Please stop the hyperbolic misrepresentations.

If I recall correctly, I simply noted that "Kevin Graham" is known to one or two of the people at the Institute -- he's been a persistent and quite harsh critic of them -- and speculated that, if someone failed to respond to something that "Kevin Graham" wrote to him, that might maybe perhaps possibly be because that individual simply didn't feel like getting involved with "Kevin Graham" again.

So am I therefore to understand that the person who oversees the website's content is someone who knows Kevin Graham? Who, pray tell, might this individual be?

[_Daniel Peterson]

So am I therefore to understand that the person who oversees the website's content is someone who knows Kevin Graham?

You can understand that if you like. It's not true, but untruth has never stopped you in the past.

Who, pray tell, might this individual be?

Sorry. I like my friends. They don't deserve your obsessive calumnies.

[_Daniel Peterson]

Incidentally, I'm going out in a few minutes. Be sure to grab your binoculars. I'll be taking the Explorer, I think.

Did you find anything useful in my garbage cans yesterday?

[_Mister Scratch]

So am I therefore to understand that the person who oversees the website's content is someone who knows Kevin Graham?

You can understand that if you like. It's not true, but untruth has never stopped you in the past.

Sheesh! Why so cagey? It's just an innocent question, Prof. P.! Here's another: How many people are responsible for answering the "Contact Us" feature? How many are responsible for the website's content?

[_Daniel Peterson]

Sheesh! Why so cagey?

Because you're you, and because of the way you've maligned me for a year or two.

I won't help you in any way to slander anybody else.

You'll have to do it on your own.

[_Coggins7]

Yes, I know that, in your world, God will punish me for believing the wrong things by forcibly divorcing me from my loved ones and refusing to let me ever see him or my heavenly mother ever again. God is wise and just. Surely I deserve as much, just as surely as God deserves your love and devotion for his wisdom and justice.

If you are "divorced" in eternity from your loved ones, it will only be because that which was above your head in this life was not above theirs.

[_beastie]

If you are "divorced" in eternity from your loved ones, it will only be because that which was above your head in this life was not above theirs.

And what loving God wouldn't forcibly divorce family members for that reason?

Just remember, if the EVs are right and you burn in hell for eternity, it's only because something was above your head.

[_Coggins7]

If you are "divorced" in eternity from your loved ones, it will only be because that which was above your head in this life was not above theirs.

And what loving God wouldn't forcibly divorce family members for that reason?

Just remember, if the EVs are right and you burn in hell for eternity, it's only because something was above your head.

I doubt there any direct force involved at all. Barriers yes (you can't gate crash into higher kindgoms), but not force. Any separation in eternity is self generated and probably, to a great degree, self enforced. Beings not capacitated for the higher degrees of glory could not possibly stand that kind of environment. This would be especially true regarding beings at farther ends of the spectrum.

This is just further evidence that, as with so many self styled anti-Mormon intellectuals, your real problems with the Church aren't intellectual at all, but deeply personal, and have little to do with ambiguities and lacuna in Book of Mormon historicity.

[_beastie]

This is just further evidence that, as with so many self styled anti-Mormon intellectuals, your real problems with the Church aren't intellectual at all, but deeply personal, and have little to do with ambiguities and lacuna in Book of Mormon historicity.

My loss of faith was due to the fact that God refused to affirm for me that Joseph Smith was a true prophet OR that the LDS church is the "one true church". The only answer I got to those prayers was dead silence.

So, by the church's own methodology, I am perfectly justified in not believing in the church at all.

[_Gadianton]

I doubt there any direct force involved at all. Barriers yes (you can't gate crash into higher kindgoms), but not force. Any separation in eternity is self generated and probably, to a great degree, self enforced. Beings not capacitated for the higher degrees of glory could not possibly stand that kind of environment. This would be especially true regarding beings at farther ends of the spectrum.

This is just further evidence that, as with so many self styled anti-Mormon intellectuals, your real problems with the Church aren't intellectual at all, but deeply personal, and have little to do with ambiguities and lacuna in Book of Mormon historicity.

Am I reading this right? Did Coggins just speculate that the separation within the degrees of glory, a supposed event in the future and far from uncontroversial will be self-inflicted, confort levels with truth, glory, righteousness and all, and then claim this virtually baseless speculation (which is nearly baseless or at least highly speculative within even Mormon teachings) is evidence that critics in the here-and-now merely have social problems rather than theological ones? A rather hilarious position. Those who I have heard voice similar opinions on the next life, in contrast to Coggins, who is again cart before horse, come to believe self-separation in the next life is a possibility based on their observations from this life, birds of a feather and so on.

Is this the same guy who spends much of his posting time calling critics to the carpet for not ever offering even a modicum of substance?