DiscussMormonism.com

This is, of course, a favorite saying among some LDS when confronted by those who seek answers about the LDS church from non-members.

Yet, on the front page of MAD, there are two posts asking for information about other religions: Zoroastrianism and Scientology. As may be predicted, the thread on Scientology is full of scornful and mocking posts. I suspect that at least with the latter, the intent was to open up a post for just such a purpose (much like smac's "evangelizing baptists" post from yesterday). A couple of posters have noted the hypocrisy (using nicer language, of course).

For a religion that claims such persecution, I would hope that members as represented by the posters on MAD would avoid the over mocking of other religions.

Interesting to see how easily the alleged victim becomes a bully when given the chance.

It never ceases to amaze me how "weird" everyone else's religions are, but their own religion is perfectly normal.

skippy the dead wrote:Interesting to see how easily the alleged victim becomes a bully when given the chance.

Exactly. Just ask a Mormon missionary about the JW's. When I was on my mission (sorry for the cliché), all the elders had their own copies of the JW Bible and were eager to answer questions about the Chevy.

Why not talk to both?

LifeOnaPlate wrote:Why not talk to both?

You are still here? I thought your daddy was dropping you and your friends off at the hannah montana concert.

LifeOnaPlate wrote:Why not talk to both?

Or better yet, read consumer reports.

John Larsen wrote:

LifeOnaPlate wrote:Why not talk to both?

Or better yet, read consumer reports.

I would definitely talk to a Ford about Chevy's. They are going to tell me things about Chevys that Chevy doesn't want me to know. Then I would buy a consumer report. Then I'd talk to some people who own both. Then, yes, I may buy/rent/lease and drive one for a while. Then I'm going to buy/rent/lease a Toyota and a Ford and so on. So that after the years go by, I might know a thing or two about Chevys.

Why would you talk to Ford? That kind of thought process is bunk.

I think a better analogy is, why ask a guy who claims to represent God about God, when there is no evidence that God even exists? What, then, does this guy who claims to represent him, actually have to say about it?

Forget Ford and Chevy. I represent a car company called Goobertywoober. I can hand you a slick, glossy information sheet about Goobertywoober's cars, how great they are, how good of mileage they get, what available options there are, etc. In order to buy a Goobertywoober car, however, you have to pay me up front, in installments lasting many years, and yet you will not take delivery until some ill-defined time in the far distant future. Oh, and I can't actually show you a Goobertywoober car in person, or let you test drive one, because I haven't got any actual examples of it - just the brochures. In fact, none of the Goobertywoober dealerships have any cars on hand at all. To be honest, there's no good evidence, other than my say-so and my glossy brochures, that Goobertywoober car company even really exists and makes actual cars. You just have to take my word for it, and take out the checkbook.

Forget why would I ask a Ford dealer about Chevy. Why would I ask a Goobertywoober dealer about Goobertywoober? What does he actually know, that has any credibility at all?

These LDS leaders stand up and claim to act in God's name, and by his authority, and to represent him, and there's no evidence that God even exists at all, and plenty of reason to suspect that he doesn't. Why would anybody ask LDS leaders about God? What do they know, that has any credibility? Nothing.

skippy the dead wrote:This is, of course, a favorite saying among some LDS when confronted by those who seek answers about the LDS church from non-members.

Yet, on the front page of MAD, there are two posts asking for information about other religions: Zoroastrianism and Scientology. As may be predicted, the thread on Scientology is full of scornful and mocking posts. I suspect that at least with the latter, the intent was to open up a post for just such a purpose (much like smac's "evangelizing baptists" post from yesterday). A couple of posters have noted the hypocrisy (using nicer language, of course).

For a religion that claims such persecution, I would hope that members as represented by the posters on MAD would avoid the over mocking of other religions.

Interesting to see how easily the alleged victim becomes a bully when given the chance.

I absolutely condemn those posts as do many other good members of the Church. On the other hand, there isn't a whole lot wrong with discussing the theological weaknesses of another faith.

But, your post is really remarkable. You and others basically are here to throw turds on the roof of the synagogue and mock the faith of many. Why condemn what you see on MAD when you do the same here? And, anonymously I might add.

rcrocket wrote:You and others basically are here to throw turds on the roof of the synagogue and mock the faith of many. Why condemn what you see on MAD when you do the same here? And, anonymously I might add.

Great imagery. You should be a writer.

by the way, my name is Jared. Nice to meet you, Bob.