Other Religious Forgeries

[mentalgymnast]

Now it’s your turn. Help me see the error of my ways.

Regards,
MG

Oooo. Frozen by a slider right at the knees.

Please review the terms of engagement set by you in our last conversation. Turns are not a thing.

Apparently I’ve offended you somewhere along the line. Sorry about that. I did take issue with your ‘projection’ accusation and came back at you on that. And I think you may(?) have taken offense thinking that I thought the less of you for being an atheist. Or something else...

But whatever.

I do tend, nowadays, to sometimes let something slip that I should have or should be remembering. This may be one of those times.

Onward and upwards.

Regards,
MG

[Kishkumen]

I was responding to believing MG's point that communicating through plates was somehow the best way for the Mormon God to communicate His holy decrees. I think direct communication would obviously be better with less chance of miscommunication. However, it would make the story "behind the music" a little less exciting for sure. And that is probably why the mysterious plates that no one could see, except the chosen faithful, was put into the story. It generated a little buzz probably.

Maybe the Mormon God wanted to generate a little p.r. excitement for his strange work? Why merely communicate directly when some mystery can be added to the mix, generating some anticipation for the release of the chloroform in print? We need more magic and mystery and ghost committees ....

Too bad the product was as mundane as it turned out to be. God should have developed his characters a little more, giving them a little more depth. Maybe a little more work on some of the stories to make them a little more exciting? Perhaps have the stripping warriors save some fair virgins from the evil lamanites? Anyway, the Mormon God needed some more help and this is why I don't think Shakespeare took part in the ghost committee.

Yes, well, evidently stone tablets were what God chose to communicate holy decrees to Moses, and such precedents tell us a lot more about the whys concerning the gold plates than do practical considerations such as the ones you raise. How many people were permitted to see the stone tablets stored in the Ark of the Covenant?

As for the mundaneness of the work, I have to disagree. Robbers, secret conspiracies, angels? This is mundane stuff? I don't agree. Naturally, every person is entitled to their own taste, but murder, human sacrifice, and huge cataclysms are not usually seen as boring stuff lacking spice.

[Doctor Steuss]

What about the Bible? The New Testament specifically. It stands on weaker ground that the Book of Mormon.

Lol.

[Res Ipsa]

Oooo. Frozen by a slider right at the knees.

Please review the terms of engagement set by you in our last conversation. Turns are not a thing.

Apparently I’ve offended you somewhere along the line. Sorry about that. I did take issue with your ‘projection’ accusation and came back at you on that. And I think you may(?) have taken offense thinking that I thought the less of you for being an atheist. Or something else...

But whatever.

I do tend, nowadays, to sometimes let something slip that I should have or should be remembering. This may be one of those times.

Onward and upwards.

Regards,
MG

Came right out of his shoes trying to reach that wicked curve. That's three strikes.

The "offended" gambit is a tired and worn cliché. It's a red herring.

[Fence Sitter]

What about the Bible? The New Testament specifically. It stands on weaker ground that the Book of Mormon.

Lol.

I know, right? Since the Book of Mormon depends entirely on the Bible, it's hard to fathom how it can be on better ground than the Bible.

[mentalgymnast]

Apparently I’ve offended you somewhere along the line. Sorry about that. I did take issue with your ‘projection’ accusation and came back at you on that. And I think you may(?) have taken offense thinking that I thought the less of you for being an atheist. Or something else...

But whatever.

I do tend, nowadays, to sometimes let something slip that I should have or should be remembering. This may be one of those times.

Onward and upwards.

Regards,
MG

Came right out of his shoes trying to reach that wicked curve. That's three strikes.

The "offended" gambit is a tired and worn cliché. It's a red herring.

Anyone ever told you you’re a pretty smart guy?

Regards,
MG

[Lem]

Apparently I’ve offended you somewhere along the line. Sorry about that. I did take issue with your ‘projection’ accusation and came back at you on that. And I think you may(?) have taken offense thinking that I thought the less of you for being an atheist. Or something else...

But whatever.

I do tend, nowadays, to sometimes let something slip that I should have or should be remembering. This may be one of those times.

Onward and upwards.

Regards,
MG

Came right out of his shoes trying to reach that wicked curve. That's three strikes.

The "offended" gambit is a tired and worn cliché. It's a red herring.

A two-fer, because we also got the 'I'm an 'old man, feel for me cause my memory's slipping' schtick.

[mentalgymnast]

Came right out of his shoes trying to reach that wicked curve. That's three strikes.

The "offended" gambit is a tired and worn cliché. It's a red herring.

A two-fer, because we also got the 'I'm an 'old man, feel for me cause my memory's slipping' schtick.

I’m not making excuses or trying to cover for anything. I honestly couldn’t see what his big deal was. And honestly, I don’t think there was one. What I do think is that you folks like to do/say anything to try and deflect/derail from the conversation and make the the person you see as the opposition look as something less than you in some form or fashion.

And I know there isn’t anything I can do about it other than to point it out. At the end of the day, you WILL have your way. At least in this forum where you are part of an overwhelming majority of disbelievers in the restoration of the gospel.

Minority opinions, especially when they are faith based, are going to be squashed rather easily/bluntly, and with brute force.

God is an inconvenience which must be disposed of and thrown away. And those that believe also.

I do believe, however, that the minority position needs to be expressed...however ‘silly’ and unreasonable it may appear to or sound to the intelligentsia that inhabit this board.

There may be some that lean towards faith rather than doubt here, although I’m sure it would take a lot to bring them out of the woodwork. With the likes of you scampering around looking for any perceived fault to pounce upon.

Regards,
MG

[Lem]

A two-fer, because we also got the 'I'm an 'old man, feel for me cause my memory's slipping' schtick.

I’m not making excuses or trying to cover for anything. I honestly couldn’t see what his big deal was. And honestly, I don’t think there was one. What I do think is that you folks like to do/say anything to try and deflect/derail from the conversation and make the the person you see as the opposition look as something less than you in some form or fashion.

And I know there isn’t anything I can do about it other than to point it out. At the end of the day, you WILL have your way. At least in this forum where you are part of an overwhelming majority of disbelievers in the restoration of the gospel.

Minority opinions, especially when they are faith based, are going to be squashed rather easily/bluntly, and with brute force.

God is an inconvenience which must be disposed of and thrown away. And those that believe also.

I do believe, however, that the minority position needs to be expressed...however ‘silly’ and unreasonable it may appear to or sound to the intelligentsia that inhabit this board.

There may be some that lean towards faith rather than doubt here, although I’m sure it would take a lot to bring them out of the woodwork. With the likes of you scampering around looking for any perceived fault to pounce upon.

Regards,
MG

In an homage to Res Ipsa's object lessons, I'm calling it. After three strikes, this is simply a dead ball technical. 2 FT, and possession returns to the OP. Or maybe a flagrant 2, if that last strike was really a foul ball tip and your flagrant offense occurred during play. In which case, you're not just out in left field, but completely off the premises.

(I know I'm mixing metaphors, but the bracket just came out. It's time for some basketball.)

[mentalgymnast]

I'm calling it.

You can’t do that. You’re not the ref.

As I said...scampering around...

Regards,
MG