DiscussMormonism.com

I haven't read MAD for a while (as work demands 18/7 these days) but this week on a quick tour again I see Shades is mentioned at least twice on the first page. One topic is his Chapel/Internet Mormon hypothesis, that I see is also being discussed here. The second thread is titled: Shades of Dr. Shades and is discussing the fact that some Mormons (especially family members) question your "testimony" if you have questions, even if you are still Mormon in belief and practice. I do not see, on several examinations, what it has to do with Dr. Shades in any way. Now someone is asking questions about that too:

Quote from MADB post:
"Maybe I'm out of the loop on the current status of "Dr. Shades" (haven't interacted with him for a while)...... but, I alway's remember him being simply a long time former Mormon, who's been a long time anti-mormon???

So, I'm not getting the OP??? Is he now claiming to be a faithful LDS?"

_____end of quote____


I can state with absolute certainty, from what I read on this board, that Shades is definitely not claiming to be "faithful LDS", at least on the Internet. Is Shades banned on MAD or can he go and respond? If not, it might be fun to discuss the question here. Is Shades Mormon?

Of course, I could be mistaken on this as I can't keep track of every poster's beliefs and also there are some that surprise me for sure (Mr./Dr. Scratch springs to mind. Who would have ever guessed...).

xxx
xxx
xxx

Nightingale wrote:The second thread is titled: Shades of Dr. Shades and is discussing the fact that some Mormons (especially family members) question your "testimony" if you have questions, even if you are still Mormon in belief and practice. I do not see, on several examinations, what it has to do with Dr. Shades in any way.

Although several respondents mistakely thought the OP referred to disbelievers and fence-sitters, the OP actually referred to apologists who share their Internet Mormon ideas in front of their Chapel Mormon family members and then have their testimonies questioned as a result.

I can state with absolute certainty, from what I read on this board, that Shades is definitely not claiming to be "faithful LDS", at least on the Internet.

That's right. Nor anywhere else, either.

Is Shades banned on MAD or can he go and respond?

Yes to the first half, no to the second. Juliann "Transcript" Reynolds would rather cut off a limb than dare allow me to post there again.

Why were you banned, Shades? Did you actually break the rules?

Nightingale wrote:Is Shades Mormon?

Oddly, I think Shades is a Mormon. I'd take his Internet/Chapel paradigm and stretch it a bit to include "apostates," which is what I think was the overarching goal from the beginning of the whole exercise.

It's simply a matter of degree.

Dwight Frye wrote:Why were you banned, Shades? Did you actually break the rules?

No, I didn't break any rules. I was banned just for being me.

AlmaBound wrote:I'd take his Internet/Chapel paradigm and stretch it a bit to include "apostates," which is what I think was the overarching goal from the beginning of the whole exercise.

Nope, that was never the overarching goal, from the beginning of the whole exercise or otherwise.

It's simply a matter of degree.

No. It's simply describing the two brands of believers.

Dr. Shades wrote:Nope, that was never the overarching goal, from the beginning of the whole exercise or otherwise.

It's simply a matter of degree.

No. It's simply describing the two brands of believers.

Whoops - I meant the overarching goal of the founders of the religion.

You've just hit upon what I see as the results, at least in part.

You see, I think Smith and Co had an agenda from the beginning that was far from "piously fraudulent."