RockSlider wrote:Also realize that David B. and William have had a fairly long running and involved series of discussions about the United Order ...
You don't know what you're talking about.
I have had virtually no discussions with David concerning the United Order, online or elsewhere. I participated very little on David's very first Law of Consecration-related thread, and never again afterwards.
Truth be told, I agree with 98% of David's perspectives on the Law of Consecration.
I thought myself the wiser to have viewed the evidence left of such a great demise. I followed every step. But the only thing I ever learned before the journey's end was there was nothing there to learn, only something to forget.
Pay heed to this list, my friends. It is probably the most insightful, substantive, and useful set of statements Will will ever post on this board.
Will Schryver wrote:
I don't consider publishing LDS apologetic articles a particularly hard or impressive thing to do. Not that there are not some very impressive LDS apologetic articles--there most certainly are. I guess I just don't consider it a very important field of endeavor, all things considered. I've come to the conclusion that apologetics is overrated when it comes to the question of fostering faith in God, the restoration, etc. In my opinion, that can only come from personal revelation. `
I honestly could not care less if I never publish a scholarly and/or apologetic article. I am not and have never pretended to be a "scholar." If I could do it all over again, knowing what I now know, I would still not choose to become a scholar. My interests and aspirations lie elsewhere. `
The only reason I have written or am currently writing articles slated for publication is that I have been repeatedly beseeched, importuned, and otherwise strongly entreated to do so. Therefore, in order to fulfill my prior commitments, in consequence of the petitions made to me, I will follow through to the extent I have promised.
Last edited by Guest on Fri May 13, 2011 9:07 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"Petition wasn’t meant to start a witch hunt as I’ve said 6000 times." ~ Hanna Seariac, LDS apologist
Runtu wrote:For me, there's been no fallout whatsoever. I had the highest respect for David before, and I still do. He's one of the finer people I know.
I will never understand people who enjoy hurting others, but at least I've stopped letting it get to me.
Are you ever going to desist with this incessant whining? What a freaking wussy you are sometimes ...
I thought myself the wiser to have viewed the evidence left of such a great demise. I followed every step. But the only thing I ever learned before the journey's end was there was nothing there to learn, only something to forget.
I have to say I am a little surprised by your tack here. It does not seem to represent well David Bokovoy's point of view at all. "Respect" really isn't the right word. I doubt that David "respects" much of what goes on on this board anymore than Will does. What seems to concern David, in my view at least, is that apologists treat others respectfully. There is an important distinction to be made there.
I see validity to your points to some extent. I don't know if respect is the best word, after consideration, either. But it does seem that David has taken issue with the way Will treats critics, just as much as the way Will may treat LDS defenders, or commentors. My impression was David's objection towards Will is as much inter as intra-
Furthermore, I would be very surprised if David were to hold something akin to a grudge against Will. I would bet that he continues to treat Will like a brother in Christ, as it were. It is strange to me that you would assign more significance to their small differences than either one of them probably would.
You may be right. I don't know whether David holds a grudge or not. I have gotten that impression just from reading his posts to and about Will, but I could be wrong.
Love ya tons, Stem
I ain't nuttin'. don't get all worked up on account of me.
RockSlider wrote:Also realize that David B. and William have had a fairly long running and involved series of discussions about the United Order ...
You don't know what you're talking about.
I have had virtually no discussions with David concerning the United Order, online or elsewhere. I participated very little on David's very first Law of Consecration-related thread, and never again afterwards.
Truth be told, I agree with 98% of David's perspectives on the Law of Consecration.
That's probably a sign that some posters have grouped certain others with Will. I find that practice has been a hindrance overall.
Love ya tons, Stem
I ain't nuttin'. don't get all worked up on account of me.
Runtu wrote:For me, there's been no fallout whatsoever. I had the highest respect for David before, and I still do. He's one of the finer people I know.
I will never understand people who enjoy hurting others, but at least I've stopped letting it get to me.
Are you ever going to desist with this incessant whining? What a freaking wussy you are sometimes ...
I think the problem is that Runtu has been affected by exposure to a religion called Christianity. It affects some people that way. Some LDS apparently have caught it quite badly, so far as I can see. Fortunately there are many shining examples of people who have had the balls to stand out against all this "love one another", "do good to them that hurt you", "turn the other cheek" and "forgive them for they know not what they do" baloney. Its all just so ... so gay.
Zadok: I did not have a faith crisis. I discovered that the Church was having a truth crisis. Maksutov: That's the problem with this supernatural stuff, it doesn't really solve anything. It's a placeholder for ignorance.
Tator wrote: ...but I have always wondered how we got Bill out of William, Jack out of John, Bob out of Robert and I especially wonder how we got Dick out of Richard.
Why would we try? If they love each other, let them do what they want.
God belief is for people who don't want to live life on the universe's terms.
Chap wrote:I think the problem is that Runtu has been affected by exposure to a religion called Christianity. It affects some people that way. Some LDS apparently have caught it quite badly, so far as I can see. Fortunately there are many shining examples of people who have had the balls to stand out against all this "love one another", "do good to them that hurt you", "turn the other cheek" and "forgive them for they know not what they do" baloney. Its all just so ... so gay.
Best. Post. Ever.
"Petition wasn’t meant to start a witch hunt as I’ve said 6000 times." ~ Hanna Seariac, LDS apologist