The Problem with Schryver

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
_Ray A

Re: The Problem with Schryver

Post by _Ray A »

Trevor wrote:No need to feel left out Ray. Even if certain dunderheads don't take you seriously, the fact is that they are dunderheads. You are a very thoughtful and eloquent person. I have long enjoyed reading your posts and your blog entries.


Thanks sincerely, Trevor.

(I just made a slight bold edit for the sight-impaired. There's no hope for the humour impaired.)
_CaliforniaKid
_Emeritus
Posts: 4247
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2007 8:47 am

Re: The Problem with Schryver

Post by _CaliforniaKid »

William Schryver wrote:What a hypocrite you can be at times!

At the risk of peddling a cliché repartee, "Oh, the irony!"

Cheers,

-Chris
_Enuma Elish
_Emeritus
Posts: 666
Joined: Sat Dec 23, 2006 5:18 pm

Re: The Problem with Schryver

Post by _Enuma Elish »

Dear Friends,

I posted the following comment on MA&D, and would like to share it here as well:

Having reread my posts in this thread, I have realized that my comments were excessively harsh. I would like to publicly apologize to Will for over-reacting to his comments. With the loss of my office, files, etc. it had been an especially dramatic week. Hence, given my passion for the issues addressed throughout this thread, I should have simply disengaged, rather than continuing to post.

Sincerely,

--DB

I understand and appreciate Trevor's concerns. For people like Trevor and I, these issues involving scholarship, questions, and spiritual belief are incredibly sensitive matters. Even more so when individuals that we care about have suffered as a consequence of these issues.

Still, I do not believe that Will's intent was as mean-spirited as I had assumed, and I am unfortunately responsible for unintentionally fueling the fire of this discussion.

I would rather that we return to discussing issues pertaining to Mormonism as critics and believers rather than criticize one another.
"We know when we understand: Almighty god is a living man"--Bob Marley
_Trevor
_Emeritus
Posts: 7213
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2007 6:28 pm

Re: The Problem with Schryver

Post by _Trevor »

Enuma Elish wrote:I understand and appreciate Trevor's concerns. For people like Trevor and I, these issues involving scholarship, questions, and spiritual belief are incredibly sensitive matters. Even more so when individuals that we care about have suffered as a consequence of these issues.


Thanks, David. I wish more people like you were willing to express such things. I have been truly heartened by some of my interactions on this board with Daniel, Blair, you, and others. In most of my interactions with higher-profile LDS scholars and apologists, I do not recall seeing the level of disrespect exhibited toward you and me on the MAD thread and this thread. I saw no provocation that I thought would warrant such disrespect.

Enuma Elish wrote:Still, I do not believe that Will's intent was as mean-spirited as I had assumed, and I am unfortunately responsible for unintentionally fueling the fire of this discussion.


Whether it was intended as mean-spirited or not, I maintain that it was poorly executed and ill advised. While I admire your good nature and conscientiousness in claiming partial responsibility for how all of this progressed, I thought your interpretation of Will's words was more than legitimate, it was correct. I have not seen the many sober, circumspect, and unprovocative things Will has written on these fora to those with whom he disagrees that would lead me to another conclusion.

Enuma Elish wrote:I would rather that we return to discussing issues pertaining to Mormonism as critics and believers rather than criticize one another.


While I regret tipping my hand about my real dislike for Will, and I can't very well pretend I didn't mean it at this point, I do think that rhetoric is as important as content in these disputes, and I will continue to voice my disagreement and disapproval, when I think that someone's rhetoric is counterproductive.

I have been a "board nanny" of that type since my early days at a.r.m., through ZLMB and FAIR, and on into MAD and MDB. I have criticized both critics and apologists over this nonsense, as others who have followed my posts can attest. I have criticized the tone of Daniel, Polygamy Porter, Kevin Graham, guy sajer, Scratch, Pahoran, and countless others on both sides. In short, I am not inconsistent in upholding this value (although I can't do it constantly for sure), and this is not purely personal where Will is concerned.

Most of all, it absolutely astounds me that people who openly and vociferously avow Christ as their Great Exemplar should persistently pursue put-downs, mean-spirited comments, and one-upmanship with apparent glee and almost no apparent self-reflection. Finally, if you think you misread Will's behavior toward you, what do you make of the comments he made about me above? What is the difference? Are you right about him not having been mean-spirited toward you, and also right about him blithely insulting me? He's the same guy in both instances, right? We're talking about the same chain of events, too, no?

I don't expect you to answer. You are probably doing the right thing in simply moving on.
“I was hooked from the start,” Snoop Dogg said. “We talked about the purpose of life, played Mousetrap, and ate brownies. The kids thought it was off the hook, for real.”
_Kevin Graham
_Emeritus
Posts: 13037
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 6:44 pm

Re: The Problem with Schryver

Post by _Kevin Graham »

Having reread my posts in this thread, I have realized that my comments were excessively harsh. I would like to publicly apologize to Will for over-reacting to his comments. With the loss of my office, files, etc. it had been an especially dramatic week. Hence, given my passion for the issues addressed throughout this thread, I should have simply disengaged, rather than continuing to post.


I want to throw up.

It looks like David has taken a step back, has seen how exercising integrity can sometimes hurt the tribe and has decided to take one for the team; trying to neutralize an embarrassing moment in Book of Abraham apologetics by pretending he was the attacker instead of the victim.

I'm reminded of abused women who report an incident and then later say it was their fault.
_Ray A

Re: The Problem with Schryver

Post by _Ray A »

Trevor wrote:
I have been a "board nanny" of that type since my early days at a.r.m., through ZLMB and FAIR, and on into MAD and MDB. I have criticized both critics and apologists over this nonsense, as others who have followed my posts can attest. I have criticized the tone of Daniel, Polygamy Porter, Kevin Graham, guy sajer, Scratch, Pahoran, and countless others on both sides. In short, I am not inconsistent in upholding this value (although I can't do it constantly for sure), and this is not purely personal where Will is concerned.


You can add Ray A to that too, Trev. On this you have been very consistent.
_Enuma Elish
_Emeritus
Posts: 666
Joined: Sat Dec 23, 2006 5:18 pm

Re: The Problem with Schryver

Post by _Enuma Elish »

Hey Kevin,

I haven't changed my position. And I still maintain that it is an important point to fight for. I'm still preparing a lengthy paper that illustrates why I reject the argument that the Book of Abraham influenced Genesis 1-2 and will soon post it online.

I also strongly oppose any attempt to ostracize and/or villainize anyone who comes to reject weak apologetic arguments for Mormonism. The truth must prevail.

Whether critic or believer, we would do well to remember that we're dealing with very sensitive issues. I overreacted, and I believe we can all, myself included, express ourselves with a bit more kindness.

I'm not much one for drama, and would much rather discuss issues than individuals.

best,

-DB
"We know when we understand: Almighty god is a living man"--Bob Marley
_Kevin Graham
_Emeritus
Posts: 13037
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 6:44 pm

Re: The Problem with Schryver

Post by _Kevin Graham »

I'm not much one for drama, and would much rather discuss issues than individuals.


Unfortunately that isn't possible with Schryver. He's been lecturing to his imaginary audience in "Pundits" for years now. Whenever anyone dares disagree with him, all hell breaks loose. Thank God Ck has the patience to endure his stupidity.
_Ray A

Re: The Problem with Schryver

Post by _Ray A »

I thought this might be a nice reminder here:

Another objection I have is that these proceedings are a matter of killing the messenger for the message. In my articles I discussed evidence that suggests that some traditional understandings of Mormon history and scripture are in need of revision. The sorts of difficulties I discussed are real. Many scholars have recognized them. And many members of the Church have accepted nontraditional solutions to them similar to mine. The questions and evidence cannot be pushed out of view or made innocuous by disciplinary actions. It is necessary for these issues to be talked about openly and the discussion should go forth without threat of punishment. Punishment especially should be avoided when scholars, such as I, have tried to be constructive. I have had no desire whatsoever to injure our--my!--religious tradition and community. My only desire has been to be honest with regard to the evidence as I have seen it and suggest how this may be viewed positively within our tradition. I would urge you to reread my articles with an eye open to my positive assertions and solutions. You may not accept them, but a positive and constructive attitude is there.

Another reservation I have about these proceedings has to do with the connectedness of my Mormon studies with my professional activity and thought. I am an assistant professor of Hebrew Bible and ancient Near Eastern studies at a highly respected university which is committed to freedom of scholarship. There I teach courses on the Hebrew Bible, on ancient Near Eastern history, and on the languages and thought of the peoples of the ancient Near East, and I conduct research in these areas. The views expressed about the Bible in my articles that you have read are the things that inform all of my professional research and are things that I teach my students every day. My views about Joseph Smith's scriptures have grown out of this and prior professional activity and preparation. The Church's investigation of my scholarship is an indictment of and an attack on my profession and scholarship at large. It is an attack which will contribute to the characterization of the Church as anti-intellectual.


David Wright Speaks.
_Kevin Graham
_Emeritus
Posts: 13037
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 6:44 pm

Re: The Problem with Schryver

Post by _Kevin Graham »

Will post in another thread about this
Post Reply