There's not a damn Mormon on here worth engaging with...

[_Imapiratewasher]

I am LDS. Getting a decent conversation out of me is a challenge, unless I am talking with a person face to face and about Maths, Physics or Philosophy, where the conversation in always progressive and idea's are shared rather than criticised. I can talk loads and intuitively about most things I think I have come to understand or feel. But writing is totally different. My English is rather poor and processing of text is somewhat difficult. So the point of this is, don't look to me for a decent conversation! Hehe.


Pirate.

[_Moniker]

Hey, Liz, well, seeing that I've been reading this board for almost a year and am quite familiar with a lot of the personalities on and off the board I'm going to comment on his post.

Nehor seems like a nice enough guy - but that's probably because he doesn't seem to take the church all that seriously.

That seems like a reasonable statement, although I know it's false. Nehor takes the Church very seriously -- he doesn't take the board seriously. Nothing offensive about this post, at all. It is difficult to talk to Nehor about the Church -- I've tried repeatedly to talk to Nehor about the HG specifically and made no headway.

Moksha likes to imagine she's a Mormon even though she rejects Mormonism's most fundamental authority claims.

I think he probably meant Harmony...

BCSpace sounds like a total pothead, spontaneously inventing pure nonsense and believing it as though it were a collection of the most profound insights ever.

Agreed! I'd add male chauvinist, as well.

Coggins sounds like one of those older inactive guys who just sits around reading church books, fancying himself a real expert on everything, a guy who's gotten just to that point where Mormonism seems to make sense, but hasn't taken that next step of analysis, which would reveal that it makes no sense at all.

I'd add quite a bit more about Coggins, yet, what is written above seems right on, to me. I've said much more insulting things about Coggins on this board -- and he has spewed it right back at me.

Schryver kind of reminds me of myself as a Mormon, though I'm sure he would snort at that. He says many of the same sorts of things I used to.

Never been LDS -- no real comment on this one. I'd say some nasty things about what he's said to Beastie.

For reasons of charity, Wade's comments probably shouldn't even be responded to, ever.

I'd have a lot more to add about Wade -- and I've probably said it at one time or another on the board.

I've never seen Ray A produce one original, thought-provoking comment on Mormonism, ever.

I would have a lot to say about Ray -- nothing untoward, though.

Charity - 'nuff said.

I've already made it clear to Charity what I think of many of her posts.

So, you see, I've been here for almost a year and have already told many of these posters precisely what Tal has said and MUCH MUCH MORE. He was kinder than I to many of them.

I think he is just not fully aware of all the personalities that are on the board and the different things each brings to the discussion. Yet, perhaps he should look elsewhere if he wants to debate TBMs.

I'm here for the people -- not the debate. :)

[_Jason Bourne]

Maybe there aren't any. Otherwise they would not be Mormons for long, no?

I disagree. Many know of the issues and range from TBM to NOM to Exmo.

When I was a member, for me it was all about becoming one with Christ. I took it most seriously that without charity (small c please) we are of little (or no) value to ourselves or others. I consciously engaged in studying, conversing and instructing with this concept as the heart of the matter. All of the miracles I ever witnessed countenanced this. The greatest miracles were seeing people's hearts change from troubled, turbulant and unkind to peaceable and friendly - even in myself. I knew that keeping outward commandments (and I did keep them) didn't make me a "good" person.

However, I saw very little conscious emphasis placed upon this (developing charity, becoming "born again") while a member (even though, oddly enough, the Book of Mormon is all about this). Lessons taught in church were more about guilt and fear of underachievement. There is little difference her

e.


I agree and this is a complaint of mine. So often we here talks and lessons on the less weighty matters and the greater ones, charity, mercy, meekness, not judging, forgiveness and so on we forget about. Obey and do more and better is often the mantra. All I can say is rather then chuck it in my little corner of the world I try to talk about these things. I think I make a difference there.

Most Mormons here countenance this self righteous air of entitlement bearing little attribute of what they ought to understand.

I am primarilly here to figure out what I am willing to keep from this trainwreck called Mormonism.

Some do some don't. One thing I have learned is when I am scornfull about those who do as you are above I am exactly what I am scornful about. I just try to love am all, even all of you here.

[_Moniker]

I am LDS. Getting a decent conversation out of me is a challenge, unless I am talking with a person face to face and about Maths, Physics or Philosophy, where the conversation in always progressive and idea's are shared rather than criticised. I can talk loads and intuitively about most things I think I have come to understand or feel. But writing is totally different. My English is rather poor and processing of text is somewhat difficult. So the point of this is, don't look to me for a decent conversation! Hehe.


Pirate.

I love our conversations, Pirate. Yet, we've never discussed LDS. :)

[_LifeOnaPlate]

You are about to read my most unbecoming post ever (and that's really saying something :P).

There doesn't seem to be one damn Mormon on here worth engaging with seriously about the church.

Nehor seems like a nice enough guy - but that's probably because he doesn't seem to take the church all that seriously. Moksha likes to imagine she's a Mormon even though she rejects Mormonism's most fundamental authority claims. BCSpace sounds like a total pothead, spontaneously inventing pure nonsense and believing it as though it were a collection of the most profound insights ever.

Coggins sounds like one of those older inactive guys who just sits around reading church books, fancying himself a real expert on everything, a guy who's gotten just to that point where Mormonism seems to make sense, but hasn't taken that next step of analysis, which would reveal that it makes no sense at all. Schryver kind of reminds me of myself as a Mormon, though I'm sure he would snort at that. He says many of the same sorts of things I used to.

For reasons of charity, Wade's comments probably shouldn't even be responded to, ever. I've never seen Ray A produce one original, thought-provoking comment on Mormonism, ever. Charity - 'nuff said.

Where are the Mormons you can have a rational conversation with about Mormonism?

What of Jason Bourne and Doctor Steuss?


*ah, I just read the ensuing posts. That slightly answers the question.

Tal, you might believe that Mormons skip around your posts or take little digs at your music career because the "facts" you promulgate are so self-evident that whoever disagrees with you must be crazy or stupid. It's very difficult to have an honest, open discussion with someone who, when disagreed with, tells you you're an idiot, that you're in "outer space," and generally acts like a pompous ass. If people don't like to engage in deep, detailed discussion with you the problem may include your own attitude. You fluctuate between arrogant, naïve, over-simplistic, but under it all is always some kind of strange crankiness. Forgive me for not being too interested in your epistemic views, but the fruit I see you bearing is far from delicious, it's rather repulsive.

[_Tal Bachman]

Where are the Mormons you can have a rational conversation with about Mormonism?

Because your opening posts are lessons in unfocused verbosity, and then you rarely do much more than post an opening post.

As I recall, in the past, I offered to go mano to mano on any point you wished. After all, I am a multiple-published FARMS author, multiply-published in my professional field, a former college (well community) professor and admitted to the US Supreme Court and have appeared there. But, you demurred. You just like to pick your adversaries.

Start a new OP; try to limit your bleh to one particular topic, and let's have at it.

rcrocket

---Rcrocket - sorry, I have no idea who you are, and I don't remember a challenge to go mano-a-mano. Maybe I demurred because I thought it would be pointless after watching you answer "where?" questions with "because" clauses lol. If that post wasn't a joke....I rest my case.

Inconceivable - I found your post very moving. I hear what you're saying.

Thanks.

[_Tal Bachman]

And Tal,
Perhaps there hasn’t been a wealth of things from you worth engaging

---Yeah, maybe...

We all have our little “pet topics.” Mine are more-so ancient Judaism and first century Christianity (and early Christian mysticism), and of course early Mormon history (in particular OP Rockwell).

---Why OP Rockwell, if you don't mind me asking?

All-in-all though, I don't engage in "apologetics" here, as that's not why I participate on this board. I'm in it for the chicks.

---Which chicks?

That, and once your ego enters a thread, it's kind of hard to find room to squeeze in a post (unbecoming statements like company, don't they[?]).

---Not so sure - this post of yours is sensible...

[_Inconceivable]

I agree and this is a complaint of mine. So often we here talks and lessons on the less weighty matters and the greater ones, charity, mercy, meekness, not judging, forgiveness and so on we forget about. Obey and do more and better is often the mantra. All I can say is rather then chuck it in my little corner of the world I try to talk about these things. I think I make a difference there.

I spoke of it while a member. Every lesson I taught, every interview I gave, every (damn) corrolation meeting, every young men's outing, reading scriptures with my family, the way I conducted my business with all of my clients, how I approached God in prayer or gave a blessing. Sure, I'd get distracted at times, but this was my home base.

I wasn't a zealot by any means, but I reminded those I had stewardship over that this (being a follower of Christ) was what is was really about - not teaching and organization skills, the location of an activity or what kind of refreshments, the value of a senum in today's dollars or where the hell Zarahemla might be located.

I could tell when something of value would settle in. It was those times when, after the closing prayer in Gospel Doctrine, most of the class would sit peacefully and not leave for a few minutes (and be late for priesthood). You know what I'm talking about.

I kept it simple.

So..

Why not here?

[_rcrocket]

---Rcrocket - sorry, I have no idea who you are, and I don't remember a challenge to go mano-a-mano. Maybe I demurred because I thought it would be pointless after watching you answer "where?" questions with "because" clauses lol. If that post wasn't a joke....I rest my case.

Thanks.

That certainly is untrue; I don't answer questions with "because." Go ahead. Just carry on with your sycophants. That's all you want.

[_Tal Bachman]

I am not sure what to make of the fact that you left me out.

---What you can make is that I'm not all that familiar with your posts. Maybe you're the one devout Mormon on here who doesn't sound like an asylum inmate, I don't know.

Frankly, and I think I can be frank since you are, I find many of your comments naïve and immature. You have tunnel vision. On a recent thread you made a long list of what the Church had changed. Sorry I have not had time to respond to that. Some of the things you listed were valid. A number were just plain silly.

---Well, this might be an excellent starting point for a fruitful discussion with you. Why don't you tell me which things you've never heard were changed, and I'll give you evidence that they were? Then, presumably like other church defenders on here, you can refuse to acknowledge my points, resort to red herrings like talking about a song I wrote once, and then announcing that you find my posts "naïve" (oh wait - nevermind). That's a lot easier than actually acknowledging you got something wrong, isn't it?

It's like all the Mormons on here have been coached by the same half-wit...I don't get it. I had some big, deep conversations while I was a Mormon with people...I can't believe they were this bad...I don't get it.

But I understand how difficult this is. In a Church that teaches pretty much black and white it is hard to be an in betweener. And often, after one reaches a point where for them the Church is just not what they thought it was they often end up where you and many others are at. Few seem to be able to be a NOMer sort of like I have chosen.

---Only the special few, no doubt :P[/b]