Non-Celestial Posts "Dynastic Marriages-Doctrinal Quest

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
Post Reply
_beastie
_Emeritus
Posts: 14216
Joined: Thu Nov 02, 2006 2:26 am

Post by _beastie »

The New Testament provides a model for Christian behavior. Among other things, it provides for the exit, not embrace, of dissenters. I don't see really most posters here as "clingers." It seems to me that if a poster acts one way on Sunday and another way on this board, I can point to that inconsistency as an impeachment.

For example, if I hosted an Amway board and boosted its products, but in real life disparaged it to my friends and family, it seems that somebody who posted on my board could point to that inconsistency as an impeachment.


The New Testament, like the rest of the Bible, is full of contradictions. It also exhorts inclusion.

The problem with your Amway example is flawed. Jason and Harmony aren’t “hosting an Amway” board and “boosting its products” in terms of their involvement in Mormonism, unless, of course, you count simply being active in the LDS church as the equivalent. They are taking whatever good out of Mormonism they can, while retaining their right to disbelieve and criticize other aspects of it. To act as if it is unacceptable to do so is to put the LDS church in the class of a cult that will not tolerate dissent. Of course, that is probably more reflective of reality than the internet Mormons who pretend Mormonism is a big ole’ tent.

In fact, I always appreciate when posters like you expose that lie for what it is.

The folks I tend to challenge as to their motivations are usually not folks like you. You state clearly, often in a classless, meanspirited and humorless way, that your beliefs are consistent with your conduct. (Nobody will every accuse you of class or culture.) So, really, there isn't much I can point to as to you. (Sorry for the split infinitive.)


How strange that you feel qualified to make pronouncements on what I’m like in real life, particularly since we’re all “second city” characters to you, without real lives. In real life, I simply don’t discuss religion at all, unless someone else initiates the discussion. don’t think it’s a polite topic in general. The only place I discuss religion and my atheism is on internet boards specifically designed for such interactions. I also have my own sense of humor. I thought referring to Will’s Super Duper Countenance Detector was humorous, as was referring to your wife laying back and thinking of England. Of course you won’t recognize the humor in these comments.

But since you seem to be claiming that you behave in real life exactly like you do on the internet, can we assume that you have the habit of calling people in real life liars, hypocrites, cowards and sociopaths?

But, others here aren't quite there. Infymus accepts hometeachers and his family doesn't believe him. Others claim to be active members of the church and yet challenge the church here.

It just seems to me that if somebody REALLY REALLY believed what they were posting here, their life would reflect it. Instead, what happens is that people REALLY REALLY believe in the truthfulness of the Chuch but have chosen to live their lives as sinners -- often a divorce seems to be the explanation (but not always). They need to come to boards like this to replace the community they lost when they were faithful. Therein lies my challenge -- resign and walk the talk. But, they can't. And so they are weak. And so I discredit their argument as disingenuous -- saying one thing but doing another. Saying false things about Joseph Smith's purported immoral behavior but, on the other hand, holding recommends, paying tithing and attending church -- something Dr. Sajer plainly observed in his exchange above.


I’m assuming that “sinning” to you means saying critical things about church leaders. Again, thanks for exposing the Big Lie so often repeated at MAD. In real life Mormonism, found in the chapel, it’s true – criticizing one’s leaders is SIN.

Aside from that, are you so simple minded that, to you, the comments people make about Joseph’s polyandry constitutes “saying false things about Joseph Smith’ purported immoral behavior”? Surely you’re able to, at least on some level, recognize the complexity of ambiguity of that particular situation? But it’s possible you are not capable of recognizing it.

What’s funny about this is that other believers will adamantly insist that Joseph Smith may have sinned, but it’s not up to us to judge, and, besides, whether or not he sinned has NOTHING to do with whether or not he’s a prophet.

So, I am not embarrassed about telling people they should resign if they do the things they do here. I say that in my physical face life as well and all who know me in the church were I reside understand. Because I am deeply read in the doctrine and history (but, again, not perfect and not complete), I am not hesitant to do so. But, like I do here, I make efforts to rise to challenges as I invite a resignation. I have had only one person respond to my invitation for a resignation on doctrinal grounds -- and that person ran an anti-Mormon ministry out of one of California's largest evangelical churches and wanted to retain her membership so that home teachers, bishops and missionaries would continue to drop by.


What a delight you must be to have in a ward. So tell me, what do people in your real life ward do that results in your “inviting” them to resign?

Again, I have to say, it’s always a delight when someone like Bob exposes the Big Lie the internet Mormons love to repeat. There is no Big Tent in Mormonism. You believe the right things and, above all else, you don’t criticize the leaders.


by the way, the only time I referenced your children was indirectly in my statement saying I bet the only way your wife could stand to have sex with a misogynist like you was to lay back and think of England. And, of course, I did apologize for that bad joke, but that’s hardly making a vulgar reference to your children.
We hate to seem like we don’t trust every nut with a story, but there’s evidence we can point to, and dance while shouting taunting phrases.

Penn & Teller

http://www.mormonmesoamerica.com
_rcrocket

Post by _rcrocket »

liz3564 wrote:In order for us, as Moderators to act, though, we need SPECIFIC information. If you are unwilling to provide us that information, then basically, I think you are just whining to hear yourself whine.

I'm not saying this to be mean. If you feel you are being stalked or that your family is in jeopardy, I want to see you get the help you need. I have told you this many times, and I stand by it.

But YOU have to meet us half-way, and thus far, you have not done that.


I don't need any help. Since when have I ever asked you to remove anything published about me? You offered in a PM to provide me what details you might have had about the one poster who posted the names of my children, and I declined.

I'm telling you once again, here and now, although I don't relish the vulgar references your board denizens make to my young children, I have not asked Board mods to take any action and don't intend to do so.

I simply criticize the personal stalking tactics of Road to Hana, Beastie (not Blixa - don't let me confuse things; sorry Blixa) and Scratch because their assertions of my relation with my wife, padding of my expertise, document manipulation and inability to be a lawyer of any credibility is offered to show the superciliousness of their rhetoric. They can't combat on the merits.

I wish the death threats on my cell phone (my number is posted on my ward's web site) would stop, but I take it in stride as the price of dealing with dishonorable people.

rcrocket
Last edited by _rcrocket on Thu Feb 28, 2008 10:35 pm, edited 1 time in total.
_rcrocket

Post by _rcrocket »

beastie wrote:How strange that you feel qualified to make pronouncements on what I’m like in real life


I don't. I have no clue who you are or what you are like in real life. I criticize your posts. They demonstrate thinly read knowledge on all topics except perhaps Mormon archaeology. They are humorless and at times vulgar. And they show that you let your button be pushed and then you fly off the handle.

But, whether you are such a buffoon in real life I don't know.
_beastie
_Emeritus
Posts: 14216
Joined: Thu Nov 02, 2006 2:26 am

Post by _beastie »

I wonder how a psychiatrist would classify someone who:

1 - regularly insults individuals, calling them liars, hypocrites, cowards and sociopaths while at the same time taking exaggerated offense to comments such as "your wife must have laid back and thought of England" in order to have sex and conceive children

2 - views people who speak anonymously as not having real lives and being the equivalent of "second city" characters

3 - exaggerates to the point of gross distortion events that occurred in the past - such as accusing people of "stalking" him when they simply post responses to him on an internet board, or accusing someone of making vulgar references to his children when the ONLY reference made to them is "your wife must have laid back and thought of England"

4 - believes it is his right, because he is superiorly informed, to "invite" people to exit the Mormon church

One or two labels immediately come to my mind, but I'm not a psychiatrist.
We hate to seem like we don’t trust every nut with a story, but there’s evidence we can point to, and dance while shouting taunting phrases.

Penn & Teller

http://www.mormonmesoamerica.com
_beastie
_Emeritus
Posts: 14216
Joined: Thu Nov 02, 2006 2:26 am

Post by _beastie »

I don't. I have no clue who you are or what you are like in real life. I criticize your posts. They demonstrate thinly read knowledge on all topics except perhaps Mormon archaeology. They are humorless and at times vulgar. And they show that you let your button be pushed and then you fly off the handle.

But, whether you are such a buffoon in real life I don't know.


Once again, this coming from the man who uses Cyrus Gordon as a source and claims the Maya had no written language. And yes, I have buttons that can be pushed and infrequently fly off the handle. While I was genuinely irate at your manifest misogyny, I must admit that having my button pushed and flying off the handle was truly worth it, as we've gotten to enjoy the spectacle of you accusing me of being a stalker and making "vulgar references" to your children. You look ridiculous. It's been a real insight into how your mind works, as have your latest posts on this thread, which enable us to know that you are just as much of a buffoon in real life as you are on this board.

I'm still waiting details on the members of your ward you "invited" to exit the Mormon church. What had they done? Where did your "invitation" take place? My god. I can't believe a stake president actually though it was a good idea to make someone like you a bishop. Your poor ward.
We hate to seem like we don’t trust every nut with a story, but there’s evidence we can point to, and dance while shouting taunting phrases.

Penn & Teller

http://www.mormonmesoamerica.com
_the road to hana
_Emeritus
Posts: 1485
Joined: Wed Dec 06, 2006 4:35 pm

Post by _the road to hana »

rcrocket wrote:Again, to Mr. Hana: Untrue. I have explained it all before.


Explained what?

Are you denying that you ever posted here under an anonymous screenname?

Are you denying that your bio on your law firm's website ever erroneously listed you as having graduated "summa cum laude" from BYU?

Are you denying that you are uncomfortable with other people accessing or revealing your in real life information?

Are you denying that you are uncomfortable with other people posting anonymously here?

What, exactly, is untrue?

Here's what I think.

I think you posted as Lee Bishop, Bishop Lee, etc., and either think that technically, you weren't anonymous, since some people knew who you were, or that you are hoping to deny ever having posted under those names at all.

I think you assume that since it was an error and a minor thing on your law firm's website that you were incorrectly listed as having graduated summa cum laude, that you are trying to assert it never happened. Either that, or you are misrepresenting, hoping that no one can provide evidence of the same.

I accept your explanation that it was a typo, or a simple error, and even will give you the benefit of the doubt that it was not intentional padding of a resume. If that's what you're suggesting you "explained," I accept that. But denial that it ever was incorrect and then corrected is untruthful.

So, what exactly is "untrue?"
The road is beautiful, treacherous, and full of twists and turns.
_beastie
_Emeritus
Posts: 14216
Joined: Thu Nov 02, 2006 2:26 am

Post by _beastie »

Fill in the blank with personality disorder of choice:

_____ needs a lot of attention, and will make statements designed simply to provoke attention, even if it negative

_____has fantasies of superiority, morally as well as educationally

_____is devoid of empathy

_____engages in distortions to the point of deception

_____often criticizes others, but can’t stand to be criticized by others

_____feels entitled to special privileges, like telling other people to leave the Mormon church
We hate to seem like we don’t trust every nut with a story, but there’s evidence we can point to, and dance while shouting taunting phrases.

Penn & Teller

http://www.mormonmesoamerica.com
_the road to hana
_Emeritus
Posts: 1485
Joined: Wed Dec 06, 2006 4:35 pm

Post by _the road to hana »

rcrocket wrote:I wish the death threats on my cell phone (my number is posted on my ward's web site) would stop, but I take it in stride as the price of dealing with dishonorable people.

rcrocket


You wish to be given the benefit of the doubt, and you need to give it to others in return.

I can only speak for myself, but as I have pointed out to you before, my motivations are not dishonorable. I have only pointed out to you your vulnerability in posting in real life information online so that you will take greater steps to prevent stalking, cyber or real, from happening to you or your family.

It's disingenuous to post links to your law firm's website here and then be upset if someone has access to your cell phone number by way of your ward's website.

I continue to recommend that you post anonymously. But since you refuse to do so, you should accept the consequences without blaming it on others. And you should cease criticizing others who value their privacy and that of their family members.

If you are the victim of any stalking, it isn't coming from me. And you have to accept responsibility for enabling it.
The road is beautiful, treacherous, and full of twists and turns.
_rcrocket

Post by _rcrocket »

beastie wrote:
I don't. I have no clue who you are or what you are like in real life. I criticize your posts. They demonstrate thinly read knowledge on all topics except perhaps Mormon archaeology. They are humorless and at times vulgar. And they show that you let your button be pushed and then you fly off the handle.

But, whether you are such a buffoon in real life I don't know.


Once again, this coming from the man who uses Cyrus Gordon as a source and claims the Maya had no written language. And yes, I have buttons that can be pushed and infrequently fly off the handle. While I was genuinely irate at your manifest misogyny, I must admit that having my button pushed and flying off the handle was truly worth it, as we've gotten to enjoy the spectacle of you accusing me of being a stalker and making "vulgar references" to your children. You look ridiculous. It's been a real insight into how your mind works, as have your latest posts on this thread, which enable us to know that you are just as much of a buffoon in real life as you are on this board.

I'm still waiting details on the members of your ward you "invited" to exit the Mormon church. What had they done? Where did your "invitation" take place? My god. I can't believe a stake president actually though it was a good idea to make someone like you a bishop. Your poor ward.


The Maya had no written language. The Mayan language is based upon glyphs. I've seen the argument for abstract concepts but it is a minority position. For decades the Mayan language has been known to be glyph-based.

Cyrus Gordon was a qualified and respected Brandeis professor. I have repeatedly said that his views are not mainstream, but he has not been soundly discredited either. He has some pretty good theories about old world contacts with the Americas -- theories I have personally confirmed at the National Museum of Anthropology in Mexico City in discussions there.

I have not been a misogynst. Just because I think your posts show that you are a fool and thinly read does not mean I hate women. What other proof do you have that I dislike women?

Your continued references to my personal life show that you just can't hold an argument. My wife, my children, my ward and my stake president have absolutely nothing to do with my argument except to say that I am consistent with the way I post and I live. At least I try to be.
_beastie
_Emeritus
Posts: 14216
Joined: Thu Nov 02, 2006 2:26 am

Post by _beastie »

The Maya had no written language. The Mayan language is based upon glyphs. I've seen the argument for abstract concepts but it is a minority position. For decades the Mayan language has been known to be glyph-based.


Yes, their language is based on glyphs. I'm unconvinced you understand the nature of those glyphs, as those glyphs enabled the Maya to express any idea in writing as accurately as they could orally. Just like our written language enables us to do.

Why don't you go read Michael Coe's Breaking the Maya Code before you make any more of a fool of yourself.

Cyrus Gordon was a qualified and respected Brandeis professor. I have repeatedly said that his views are not mainstream, but he has not been soundly discredited either. He has some pretty good theories about old world contacts with the Americas -- theories I have personally confirmed at the National Museum of Anthropology in Mexico City in discussions there.


Oh, do tell. You saw sculptures that looked "negroid".

I have not been a misogynst. Just because I think your posts show that you are a fool and thinly read does not mean I hate women. What other proof do you have that I dislike women?


I never referred to the way you treat me as proof of your misogyny. I understand that you have other motives for that. No, my evidence was that you were clearly trying to insult Scratch by referring to him repeatedly as Ms. Scratch.

Your continued references to my personal life show that you just can't hold an argument. My wife, my children, my ward and my stake president have absolutely nothing to do with my argument except to say that I am consistent with the way I post and I live. At least I try to be.


You have completely lost it. I am referring to your personal life because you brought it up.

You are unraveling.

But, aside from that, it almost appears as if you are saying that one's personal life is irrelevant to the arguments here. And yet all you can talk about is other people's personal lives.
We hate to seem like we don’t trust every nut with a story, but there’s evidence we can point to, and dance while shouting taunting phrases.

Penn & Teller

http://www.mormonmesoamerica.com
Post Reply