DiscussMormonism.com

Be that as it may, it is what it is, right?

grindael wrote:

Be that as it may, it is what it is, right?

He admits that he's a weasel. Again.

I feel it unnecessary, especially in a public forum which has a reputation for being critical of the church and its leadership, to criticize and/or find fault with the Brethren. Same holds true to the church and its mission. Those in the audience that are respectful of that position will understand and not pursue their own agenda (finding fault with the Brethren) by using intimidation, 'gotcha questions' or other means, to try and 'force' me to do so. And yes, I know I will be called a weasel, or the like, by some folks for taking this position.

So be it.

grindael wrote:I love how the weasel can mind read the "critics" and claim what they like or do not like. Another silly assumption by the weasel.

mentalgymnast wrote:

I have a question wrote:When you demonstrate, consistently, the ability to interact with posters on this board with integrity and intellectual honesty...

Still not going to answer my questions, I see.

I have a question wrote:...I'll reply in kind.

You're usually pretty upfront. I don't understand what's up with not answering my questions. Especially where you have now evaded doing so three or four times, if I'm not mistaken.

I have a question wrote:Until you do, you're simply a troll who serves merely as a foil to show the lurkers the imbecilic nature of apologetics.

Repeat that enough times and you and your ilk will believe it.

I have a question wrote:At your next temple recommend interview you'll be asked if you are honest in your dealings with your fellow man.

Thanks for that heads up. Although, truth be told, it's only been a few months ago that I had the TR interview. I remember that question quite well. It's one that I take seriously.

I have a question wrote:You aren't [honest].

I am.

I have a question wrote:Your answer should be no.

I hope you understand how silly you're sounding right about now.

I have a question wrote:Well, if you're being truthful to your God that is.

Here's the thing, IHAQ. I believe that 'my' God is 'your' God too. And I wouldn't lie to my God or yours.

I have a question wrote:I'll asses samples of your postings over time to see if you are capable of being a poster with whom it's worth interacting.

Oh my. Aren't you the arrogant one? I didn't correct your "asses" misspelling. I thought it was appropriate to leave it as it is...considering who's mouth it's coming from.

I have a question wrote:Of course, for the benefit of the audience you claim to have...

They are your audience too, IHAQ. I don't lay claim to having any 'groupies'...although my bet is, that you do.

I have a question wrote:I reserve the right to point out to them when you're talking out of your ass...

Not sure if you're tongue in 'cheek' here. (Pun intended)

But I think you may be.

I have a question wrote:...but I'd request you don't reply to me until I've signed off on your probation.

I'll do whatever I dang well please.

What's a male board nanny called?

This has evolved into an unproductive use of time, wouldn't you say?

Just say you don't want to answer the questions rather than saying you did. Here they are again:

First iteration:

If you don't mind me asking, which went first...Christianity or the Mormon Flavor of Christianity? Did the shelf building in Christianity act as a catalyst in bringing down Mormonism...or vice versa? I would imagine/think that one of the two went down first.

Second iteration:

What I'm asking is what was the order in which the "obvious evidentiary conclusion [didn't] support what [you] wanted to believe in the first place." Which took the fall first? Christianity or the Mormon Flavor of Christianity? Did one impact/cause the fall of the other...or did they both take the fall off the shelf at the same time?

Then you said:

I’ve answered/responded/replied to your question/enquiry. You might not like/agree/understand/comprehend my answer, but an answer you have had.

I asked you to at least cut and paste your answer...since I apparently either missed it or didn't "comprehend" it, as you said.

Anyway, I'm willing to let you off the hook if you are hesitant about sharing your experience. I understand that it is difficult to do in a public setting. Vulnerability has its risks.

I ought to know, right?

Regards,
MG

mentalgymnast wrote:

Doctor CamNC4Me wrote:Another claim, and then an abstraction. Same ____, going on 11 years, different day.

- Doc

I know it drives you nuts.

Be that as it may, it is what it is, right?

Regards,
MG

mentalgymnast wrote:Again. And again.

*last bump

grindael wrote:

*last bump

Why lie? You never tell the truth so there is no reason to believe you this time, poor little weasel.

Lemmie wrote:...he's pretending someone isn't answering his questions...

Lemmie wrote:...[MG made] two extremely crude jokes, and then to comment on how satisfying it was to do that even though he knows he shouldn't, is about as hypocritical as a person can be.

Lemmie wrote:I'm thinking his calling people "purveyors of sin and sodomy" was just projection of his own conflict, not an actual observation of others.

Doctor CamNC4Me wrote:...if you really had a moderate position, anywhere, you'd simply recall a thread or post and link it...[/i].