Mormon Apologetics & Misogyny: The Case of William Schryver

[_Kishkumen]

Will’s first post on this thread:

For the record, I have only posted here under the handles "William Schryver" and "Will Schryver".

Link: viewtopic.php?p=449299#p449299

OK. So he denies it.

I am not sure I believe the guy, and whatever this WilliamSchryver said would not change my opinion of Will anyway.

And, at this point, I don't particularly care about all of this. Will's track record speaks for itself. The only real disagreement on it is a subjective one.

[_Nomad]

Kiskhumen:

Will's track record speaks for itself.

I agree with you here. His track record on message boards speak very well for itself. I’d say he’s definitely in the top 5 or higher of best LDS online apologists. I’d put DCP at the top, and Bill Hamblin somewhere in there along with Pahoran and Kevin Christensen and Will Schryver. I’m sure there’s some good ones I’m forgetting. Apologies to them. In fact I’m kind of curious about this so I might even start a poll or two.

The only real disagreement on it is a subjective one.

No kidding!

Give Captain Obvious a gold star.

[_Kishkumen]

I agree with you here. His track record on message boards speak very well for itself. I’d say he’s definitely in the top 5 or higher of best LDS online apologists. I’d put DCP at the top, and Bill Hamblin somewhere in there along with Pahoran and Kevin Christensen and Will Schryver. I’m sure there’s some good ones I’m forgetting. Apologies to them. In fact I’m kind of curious about this so I might even start a poll or two.

Well, as one of Will's most dedicated apologists and boosters, you really should start some polls like that. Anything you could do to enhance his notoriety would be very rewarding to you and doubtless he would absolutely eat it up. I say go for it. You can't lose. Certainly we wouldn't think any worse of you than we already do for it. And what do you care about that anyway, right?

As for your estimation of apologists, I would say that it depends on what you are looking for. If you judge effectiveness by how much the apologist is disliked by critics, then I think your list is fairly accurate. And, it seems to me that this must be your chief criterion.

Now, personally, I prefer people who really get me thinking about issues. So, the only person on your list I would rate highly is Daniel Peterson. I don't see that the other guys have contributed all that much to the substantive defense of Mormonism, at least online, and have often done worse by it than many critics have.

No kidding!

Give Captain Obvious a gold star.

Yes. And it is funny that the circle of Will's defenders here is very small, whereas the circle of his critics is populated by both critics *and* apologists. So, I fully grant that moral judgments can be somewhat subjective. Still, I wouldn't trade my side on this question for yours.

[_Nomad]

Yes. And it is funny that the circle of Will's defenders here is very small, whereas the circle of his critics is populated by both critics *and* apologists. So, I fully grant that moral judgments can be somewhat subjective. Still, I wouldn't trade my side on this question for yours.

I think we disagree pretty seriously about whether people like Bliaire Hodges and David Bokvoy are "apologists". To me it looks they're the kind of guy who gets off on sleeping with the enemy. Besides, from what I've heard, neither one of them is neaerly as popular in certain places where it means a lot more to have that kind of popularity.

Now, we do know that Hodges and Bokvoy are VERY popular here. In fact, there are people here pushing to have the H&B show become the leader of LDS apologetics. What was it Doctor Scratch said about it:

It would be mind-blowing if David were to become the de facto leader of the Mopologetic movement. It would be utterly game-changing--a "for real" watershed moment. It would have the potential to completely uproot a major portion of Church membership.

Of course, it would set back some important Mopologetic goals by 25 years or so, but then again, it would make the Church way more attractive to critics, neutral observers, and potential converts.

Link: viewtopic.php?p=441587&sid=b9c788a4615a219d9670b73134d3e9f4#p441587

[_Nomad]

And finally, there's this gem which William lobbed at harmony just over two years ago (3/23/09):

Harmony is just bitter that the daily circle jerks in the Great and Spacious Trailer Park™ are the closest she has come to a bona fide sexual experience in over 40 years.

I simply cannot understand how her husband has resisted the urge to off himself for so long. Of all the men in human history who have felt compelled, no matter the cost, to “stick it out” with a bitch of a wife – Joseph Smith included – if anyone deserves the reward of 72 virgins in heaven, it’s that poor man.

This is another example of where MsJack has been willing to lie on this thread in order to push her agenda. Will denied (in his first post on this thread) that he had written this, and yet MsJack still hasn't taken it out of her post. Neither has she removed the disproven allegation about Will using the "C" word towards harmony.

Makes one wonder exactly what kind of a conspiracy this is? How far does it go? Who all has been involved? We know of at least five people: MsJack, Kevin Graham, harmony, MrStakhanovite, Spurven Ten Sing, and very possibly beastie and liz. All of those people are long time Schryver haters, and many of them have strong vendettas against Will. Not surprsing then to see them all banding together for a common cause--even if it does entail lying.

[_ludwigm]

I’d say he’s definitely in the top 5 or higher of best LDS online apologists.

There is a Hungarian saying, about Little Sammy, who is an archetype of the jewish child, protagonist of many joke.

- Samuel! I don't know if you are now boasting or you are lamenting...

(Generally, jokes seldom can be translated properly. I hope this is passed.)

[_beastie]

This post was not made by Will, but by someone who made an account here and then just made this one post. Will has already denied having ever posted as “WilliamSchryver”.

Here’s the link to the post: viewtopic.php?p=229889#p229889

As you can see, the poster (“WilliamSchryver” – no space between the names) only made one post at MDB.

You guys have so many lies in this thread it’s hard to keep up with all of them.

From what I have seen, Will hardly ever uses sexually tinged comments. I haven’t seen him do it at all for a long, long time. People have been citing the same handful of his posts where there were sexual allusions for years now.

Am I using a sexual reference when I call this thread a big circle jerk? No, I’m not. I’m just using the term according to its common metaphorical meaning.

LOL. "Hardly ever"???

Either you're Schryver or you have drunk deeply from the well of kool-aid.

[Tator]

I agree with you here. His track record on message boards speak very well for itself. I’d say he’s definitely in the top 5 or higher of best LDS online apologists. I’d put DCP at the top, and Bill Hamblin somewhere in there along with Pahoran and Kevin Christensen and Will Schryver. I’m sure there’s some good ones I’m forgetting. Apologies to them. In fact I’m kind of curious about this so I might even start a poll or two.

Oh, I so hope you are right. If you are right, and Will is one of the best top 5 online apologists, along with Pahoran, then that bespeaks two things that delight me, since silver hammer gave us a glimpse of how apologists intend to handle this.

1 - If Schryver, to say nothing of Pahoran, are in the top 5, then LDS apologetics is in desperate shape. Even more desperate in the eyes of believers than critics, if they think these two are top-notch.

2 - The future Des News article I imagine will be even more delightful, if one the "top 5 apologists" has a history of calling women bitches - including Emma Smith.

It will be like Christmas.

[_beastie]

This is another example of where MsJack has been willing to lie on this thread in order to push her agenda. Will denied (in his first post on this thread) that he had written this, and yet MsJack still hasn't taken it out of her post. Neither has she removed the disproven allegation about Will using the "C" word towards harmony.

Makes one wonder exactly what kind of a conspiracy this is? How far does it go? Who all has been involved? We know of at least five people: MsJack, Kevin Graham, harmony, MrStakhanovite, Spurven Ten Sing, and very possibly beastie and liz. All of those people are long time Schryver haters, and many of them have strong vendettas against Will. Not surprsing then to see them all banding together for a common cause--even if it does entail lying.

Will also denied calling Emma a champion bitch, and only retracted his denial when he had no other choice. He also denied, and still denies, calling KA a whore, despite the clear evidence. And, by the way, he called her a whore after he realized it was a case of mistaken identity, according to his statements on this thread.

Will's denials aren't worth the paper they're written on. The only reason that I am withholding judgment on the C word even is due to Rollo's statement.

by the way, I'm still waiting for the evidence that shows that critics react like this simply in response to excellent apologia. I'm waiting to see where, say, Brant Gardner has so been maligned, due to his Book of Mormon work. You know Brant, the guy that has published a multi-volume work on the Book of Mormon???

[_Kevin Graham]

Well, there should be no more room to doubt whether Nomad is Will's sock puppet.

I’d say he’s definitely in the top 5 or higher of best LDS online apologists.

These kinds of statements aren't even funny anymore, they're just dumb.

And Bokovoy doesn't count as a real apologist he says. Bokovoy produces a scholarly apologetic on a monthly basis, for years. He's arguably the first legitimate LDS Bible scholar. That's saying something. Who the hell is Schryver? Schryver has done nothing but misrepresent the hell out of an obscure set of documents called the KEP.

How can Will be considered an apologist at all when he never engages a debate? Bokovoy gladly debates the issues, and he and I have done so many times in the past. Schryver doesn't really produce apologetic arguments if you think about it. His sole claim to fame is his silly cipher presentation which he even admitted wasn't intended to do apologetics so much as it was intended to explain the true meaning of the KEP. That turned out to be an embarrassing flop, as it was dismantled as quickly as it was hyped up, and Will sat by and watched it happen without trying to defend his arguments.