Stake Pres. Ditches Ethics to Smear Tal B.

[_Coggins7]

Scratch attempts to prime yet another abyssal pump:

I am unaware of anything in Tal's postings that referred to Keyes as a full-blown "non-believer." Rather, it merely seems he is more of a liberal/doubter concerning some aspects of the Church, rather like Harmony or Rollo Tomasi, or any number of more liberal LDS.

Here's what Tal actually claimed:

The stake president who, in late 2003, admitted to me (and then, in a separate meeting about a week later, my wife) that he knew Joseph Smith hadn't told the truth about his experiences, but that that was "irrelevant" to him, was named Randy Keyes. I guess he's not the SP anymore.

I don't personally understand staying in a church which you know is a fraud, but I also know that not everyone is like me. I also know that Randy Keyes is a good guy in a lot of ways. He helped me out during the most traumatic experience of my life. I've chatted with him a couple of times during our meeting (while he was still SP, though in non-church situations), and he was always very kind. He'll always be welcome at my house, though I have mixed feelings about his behavior.

1. If Joseph didn't have the experiences in question, then the entire Church is balderdash.

2. Tal came to a completely different conclusion regarding the logical inference to be drawn from admitting that the Fist Vision, Moroni's visitations, the Gold Plates, the translation process, the appearances of Peter, James, and John etc. were fabrications, than did Scratch, who seems to beleive that one can eject Joseph Smith entirely from the Gospel and still be a "Mormon".

Is it that you are not really capable of being coherent and rational Scratch, or is it that the tangled web spun by your own inner conflicts and tortured conscience will simply not allow you nary a second of lucidity?

[_Trevor]

1. If Joseph didn't have the experiences in question, then the entire Church is balderdash.

An excellent statement of your particular point of view, and perhaps of your lack of imagination.

[_mentalgymnast]

Is it that you are not really capable of being coherent and rational Scratch, or is it that the tangled web spun by your own inner conflicts and tortured conscience will simply not allow you nary a second of lucidity?

Brick wall comes to mind.

Regards,
MG

[_Mister Scratch]

Scratch attempts to prime yet another abyssal pump:

I am unaware of anything in Tal's postings that referred to Keyes as a full-blown "non-believer." Rather, it merely seems he is more of a liberal/doubter concerning some aspects of the Church, rather like Harmony or Rollo Tomasi, or any number of more liberal LDS.

Here's what Tal actually claimed:

The stake president who, in late 2003, admitted to me (and then, in a separate meeting about a week later, my wife) that he knew Joseph Smith hadn't told the truth about his experiences, but that that was "irrelevant" to him, was named Randy Keyes. I guess he's not the SP anymore.

I don't personally understand staying in a church which you know is a fraud, but I also know that not everyone is like me. I also know that Randy Keyes is a good guy in a lot of ways. He helped me out during the most traumatic experience of my life. I've chatted with him a couple of times during our meeting (while he was still SP, though in non-church situations), and he was always very kind. He'll always be welcome at my house, though I have mixed feelings about his behavior.

1. If Joseph didn't have the experiences in question, then the entire Church is balderdash.

Which experiences? It seems pretty clear---whether you are a TBM or not---that Joseph Smith did sometimes lie about his "experiences." The above quote does not specify whether the "experiences" in question have anything to do with Joseph Smith's prophethood. If fact, within the context of Tal's posts, I believe this is referring primarily to Joseph Smith's polygamous relationships.

2. Tal came to a completely different conclusion regarding the logical inference to be drawn from admitting that the Fist Vision, Moroni's visitations, the Gold Plates, the translation process, the appearances of Peter, James, and John etc. were fabrications, than did Scratch, who seems to beleive that one can eject Joseph Smith entirely from the Gospel and still be a "Mormon".

What the heck is the "Fist Vision"? Whatever it is, I don't think I like the sound of it. Anyways, I think one can doubt certain facets concerning Joseph Smith and yet still remain a TR-carrying member of the Church.

Is it that you are not really capable of being coherent and rational Scratch, or is it that the tangled web spun by your own inner conflicts and tortured conscience will simply not allow you nary a second of lucidity?

I think it probably has to do with the fact that I see gray areas as gray, rather than strictly black and white.

[_Trevor]

I don't think you'll ever respond clearly and succinctly to this question, any more than Scratch ever responds clearly and succinctly to anything he's asked regarding his psychological biases, fixations, and emotion based frothings regarding the Church.

But the question does have to be asked for argument's sake, doesn't it?

Well, Coggins, I can't knock you on brevity. It is only your intellectual coherence that is lacking.

[Dr. Sunstoned]

I have no lack of imagination. What you seem to lack here, however, is simply critical thinking skills such that you, as Scratch, cannot follow a premise to its conspicuous logical, interential conclusion.

Either that, or the disingenuity on this board has reached crisis proportions. You exmos have two primary agendas: either destroy the Church outright, or turn it into a liberal Protestant social gospel country club. Both are doomed to oblivion, but the second requires torturous intellectual gymnastics that would be better avoided for the more well grounded position that, if Joseph lied about his experiences, the Church evaporates. I observed, personally, Anthony Hutchinson attempt the second line of argument with the Salamander Letter, (which he had, at that time, in the mid-eighties, placed all his hopes upon for the reformulation of the Church into something acceptable to the National Council of Churches).

Here's your sign...

[_mentalgymnast]

MG: To me, it's a no brainer why Pres. Keyes went public.

Scratch: And why is that? ... to label Tal a "liar"?

Calling a spade a spade.

Like I said, I'm taking a wait/see approach. Truth will prevail.

You believe that, don't you? Or is your mind already made up?

Regards,
MG

[_mentalgymnast]

I think it probably has to do with the fact that I see gray areas as gray, rather than strictly black and white.

Mark this ladies and gentlemen. Does this statement match Scratch's track record?

Just asking.

Regards,
MG

[_Mister Scratch]

I think it probably has to do with the fact that I see gray areas as gray, rather than strictly black and white.

Mark this ladies and gentlemen. Does this statement match Scratch's track record?

Just asking.

Regards,
MG

Gee... You're not upset, are you MG? By the way: I'm still waiting for you to explain how Tal's postings constituted a "besmirch" on Pres. Keyes's character. Waiting, oh waiting, for you to offer up an explanation.

[_Trevor]

Gee... You're not upset, are you MG? By the way: I'm still waiting for you to explain how Tal's postings constituted a "besmirch" on Pres. Keyes's character. Waiting, oh waiting, for you to offer up an explanation.

Well, if you imagine that it is a smear to be identified as having doubts about the ludicrous stories and deplorable behavior of Joseph Smith, it must be a smear of the worst kind!