All anyone will ever need to know about William Schryver and why he cannot be trusted to represent source material in honesty, nor can be be expected to develop apologetic arguments that can withstand the test of time (in most cases 10 minutes):
Challenge for WillWill Schryver's Deception in PunditsWill Loses his Mojo at MADBAnother Gee/Schryver DeceptionNomad's Fawning: ReduxDe Ja Vue: Book of Abraham ApologeticsWill Schryver: Kneel before ZodIntellectual Bankruptcy of Book of Abraham ApologeticsThoughts on Doomsday's AftermathAn Invitation to the KEPHe will banter for days over nothing, but never demonstrate that he has the balls to step up to the plate and actually defend his arguments in the face of scrutiny.
This list is just the tip of the iceberg, as there are plenty more buried in the MADB archives. But one can read through these for days and marvel at the abject stupidity that drives this guy to do apologetics. That, and his hilarious belief that he has God on his side.
You see, none of this has ANYTHING to do with my alleged vulgarity, or misogyny, or anything of the sort. It never has. It has everything to do with the fundamental conflict inherent to the apologist/apostate dynamic. I am simply one of the more eloquent and incisive online defenders of Mormonism
ROFL!!!!
Leave it to Will to transform everything said about him into a massive compliment to his oversized ego. The irony here is that Will is by any standard, a liar and a fraud. I have proved this on numerous occasions and he refuses to respond. He even spent a great deal of time ignoring the numerous complaints about his vulgar comments towards women, but now suddenly chose to focus on the ONLY example that could be argued against, simply because it was edited out by a mod.
So because there was one instance in that slew of examples where a vulgar comment was edited out and is now lost to the world, he saw an opportunity to follow the standard apologetic tactic of focusing on "verifiable proof" and "plausibility" for his case that it never existed to begin with. You see this happens all the time in FARMS reviews. A pseudo intellectual will "review" a work critical of some aspect of Mormonism and focus on virtually none of the arguments. Instead, he will try to mine from the book some frivilous matter to complain about, usually involving that person's character. This is what Will, wade, and droopy have engaged in, and for the most part it seems to have worked because their primary goal here is to take the spot light off the mountian of evidence aside from this one example. Almost everyone in this thread is being led around by the nose by these hacks. No one is addressing the concerns MsJack raised. No, Instead they want to keep pounding on Harmony for "lying." All the evidence supporting her must have been fabricated via some massive conspiracy, too. That's just how the apologetic mind has to think, and so they think accordingly.
But it is clear what Will needs to do. He needs to keep pounding this silly idea that this entire thread is a response to his superior intellect, and has nothing to do with his vulgarity towards women. He just told SImon that he was a "professional" apologist for God's sake, so it is clear he feels his presence is too important for LDS apologists. He thinks he is too "eloquent and incisive" and we just can't have that, so we launched into a concerted campaign, which we all agreed to lie about, just to malign is character!
ROFL!
The fact is we have been allowing Wilbur Schryver to do all that work for us. We can forget all this crap about vulgarity for a second and just deal with the dozen or so threads I have created over the years that call him out for blatant deception. It is an indisputable fact that Will Schryver lies. He has lied from day one to me and others, from teh day he was posting as "Provis." Guess how many times he has responded and explained himself? Zero. Instead, he puts me on ignore because he knows as well as most of us do, that he is a coward who has to resort to literary sophistry as a way to take focus off ridiculous arguments which I have undressed every time he raises them. But he won't deal with me because he isn't a real man. Instead, he goes after the women as if to put on some kind of side show to show how tough he can be. Seriously, the only men I know who talk about women this way are homosexuals or closet homosexuals.