Online Apologetics and "Collateral Damage"

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
Post Reply
_Mister Scratch
_Emeritus
Posts: 5604
Joined: Sun Oct 29, 2006 8:13 pm

Re: Online Apologetics and "Collateral Damage"

Post by _Mister Scratch »

Daniel Peterson wrote:
Mister Scratch wrote:I'm curious about when DCP will clarify this increasingly problematic statement of Bill Hamblin's

It's Bill Hamblin's statement. Ask him to clarify it.


Is the statement true? Does he "always" include the aforementioned tomfoolery in his articles?

Mister Scratch wrote:Now, DCP has stated that the acrostic was a "one-time only" affair. Obviously, this clashes with Hamblin's statement,

I know of no other acrostics. Do you?

And it seems that you think that joke = acrostic. You must have a different dictionary than I do.


Again: does Professor Hamblin "always" include jokes such as "fake footnotes, comments about space aliens and the golden plates, etc." in the articles he submits to you for publication?
_Daniel Peterson
_Emeritus
Posts: 7173
Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2007 6:56 pm

Re: Online Apologetics and "Collateral Damage"

Post by _Daniel Peterson »

It's Bill Hamblin's statement.

Ask him to clarify it.
_Mister Scratch
_Emeritus
Posts: 5604
Joined: Sun Oct 29, 2006 8:13 pm

Re: Online Apologetics and "Collateral Damage"

Post by _Mister Scratch »

Daniel Peterson wrote:It's Bill Hamblin's statement.

Ask him to clarify it.


I don't need to. It seems to me that you, as editor, would know whether tomfoolery of this kind was being sent to you by your dear old friend Bill Hamblin. Was it or wasn't it?
_Daniel Peterson
_Emeritus
Posts: 7173
Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2007 6:56 pm

Re: Online Apologetics and "Collateral Damage"

Post by _Daniel Peterson »

It's Bill Hamblin's statement.

Ask him to clarify it.
_antishock8
_Emeritus
Posts: 2425
Joined: Sun Jan 27, 2008 2:02 am

Re: Online Apologetics and "Collateral Damage"

Post by _antishock8 »

Daniel Peterson wrote:It's Bill Hamblin's statement.

Ask him to clarify it.


I'm still waiting on a response reference the "2nd Wentworth Letter". So you telling someone else to ask someone else for clarification simply doesn't work. It shifts responsibility, for which, you have no problem no accepting.

Apparently.
You can’t trust adults to tell you the truth.

Scream the lie, whisper the retraction.- The Left
_Daniel Peterson
_Emeritus
Posts: 7173
Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2007 6:56 pm

Re: Online Apologetics and "Collateral Damage"

Post by _Daniel Peterson »

antishock8 wrote:I'm still waiting on a response reference the "2nd Wentworth Letter". So you telling someone else to ask someone else for clarification simply doesn't work. It shifts responsibility, for which, you have no problem no accepting.

Apparently.

I believe you're referring to the second Watson letter?

Elder Watson is in South Africa.

But just ask Scartch. He knows. It seems that Bill Hamblin and I forged it. Scartch knows. Ask Scartch. He's an objective source. And he knows.
_Mister Scratch
_Emeritus
Posts: 5604
Joined: Sun Oct 29, 2006 8:13 pm

Re: Online Apologetics and "Collateral Damage"

Post by _Mister Scratch »

Daniel Peterson wrote:It's Bill Hamblin's statement.

Ask him to clarify it.


Lol. Boy, it must really gall you. I know that you know how this looks, Dr. Peterson. Frankly, I am surprised that you are taking this particular route. I half expected you to try and downplay this embarrassment by telling us all that academics have senses of humor, or that Bill Hamblin has an especially ribald sense of humor, or whatever else.

But, no. Instead, your silence has essentially confirmed the fundamentally goofy and unprofessional nature of FARMS Review. I'm sure all the Liahona-level donors would be delighted to know what you jokers have been doing with their money.
_Daniel Peterson
_Emeritus
Posts: 7173
Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2007 6:56 pm

Re: Online Apologetics and "Collateral Damage"

Post by _Daniel Peterson »

Mister Scratch wrote:Boy, it must really gall you.

LOL. In your malignant dreams, Scartch.

Mister Scratch wrote:I know that you know how this looks, Dr. Peterson.

Like another redundant illustration of your weird malevolent obsession?

Mister Scratch wrote:I half expected you to try and downplay this embarrassment by telling us all that academics have senses of humor, or that Bill Hamblin has an especially ribald sense of humor, or whatever else.

Not all academics have a sense of humor, but Bill Hamblin has one in spades.

Still, it's his comment. So, if you really want clarification of it, ask him.

Mister Scratch wrote:But, no. Instead, your silence has essentially confirmed the fundamentally goofy and unprofessional nature of FARMS Review.

Your standards of "proof" have never been more than a micrometer high on their very best days.

Mister Scratch wrote:I'm sure all the Liahona-level donors would be delighted to know what you jokers have been doing with their money.

Why don't you launch a campaign to inform them that an essentially invisible acrostic appeared in an essay written fifteen years ago but was removed from virtually every copy ever printed, bound, and distributed?

They'll be aghast with shock and horror. It will be a watershed moment in the history of Mopologetics.
_antishock8
_Emeritus
Posts: 2425
Joined: Sun Jan 27, 2008 2:02 am

Re: Online Apologetics and "Collateral Damage"

Post by _antishock8 »

Daniel Peterson wrote:
antishock8 wrote:I'm still waiting on a response reference the "2nd Wentworth Letter". So you telling someone else to ask someone else for clarification simply doesn't work. It shifts responsibility, for which, you have no problem no accepting.

Apparently.

I believe you're referring to the second Watson letter?

Elder Watson is in South Africa.

But just ask Scartch. He knows. It seems that Bill Hamblin and I forged it. Scartch knows. Ask Scartch. He's an objective source. And he knows.


Sure. The What's-his-name letter. I should probably pay closer attention to these details. Thanks for the catch.
You can’t trust adults to tell you the truth.

Scream the lie, whisper the retraction.- The Left
_Ray A

Re: Online Apologetics and "Collateral Damage"

Post by _Ray A »

It's okay, I'm going for a hat-trick, wrong thread again, and I'm not even drinking. LOL.
Last edited by _Ray A on Mon Sep 01, 2008 4:03 am, edited 1 time in total.
Post Reply