Calling & Election made sure: The Case of William Schryver

[_Kevin Graham]

So in other words, Pahoran is full of crap as usual.

I just love how Will's defenders show up out of the blue, take a quick survey of the situation and then jump into all sorts of incoherent apologetics on his behalf.

[_Nightlion]

2007

However, I’m really sorry to disappoint you, but like I told you before, I’ve already got my calling and election made sure, so I really can’t go wrong from here on out unless I shed some innocent blood – and we both know I ain’t gonna find any of that here.

[/quote]

2009

Besides, as I've indicated previously, I have my calling and election made sure. I'd have to shed innocent blood to fall from my exaltation at this point. And we both know I ain't gonna find any of that here.

How can he say the exact same thing two years apart? Is he a 'bot' or not?

[Guest]

That's a brazen lie, as you intend and prefer. The fact is that this clinically depressed mother made a hideously bad decision due to her depressed state, and explained it to herself in terms of her belief system.

Had she been a Baptist, she would have explained it differently, and her children would still be dead, because her mental illness was the determining factor.

...

That's not necessarily true. Her particular religious beliefs could've been a necessary, but not sufficient causal factor in her actions.

Post-partum psychosis is common, after all, and very few of those cases result in murder. It takes a quirky cocktail of means, motive and opportunity where if things happen a little different, maybe nobody dies. There is a certain logic to killing children under 8 given LDS beliefs much in the same way there is in committing suicide to be with God in typical born-again beliefs. That might not represent normative thinking because there is a caveat that says, "but God doesn't want you to do that," but it's easy enough to see where that thinking comes from. In this particular case it is highly speculative and ad hoc to assume the murders would've happened no matter what. You don't know that the murders would've happened in any case and retrofitted to the religion of the person. You simply don't know that. The presumptive case here is that the person's attributed motive actually played a role in their motives.

[_beastie]

Regarding Pahoran's use of a horrific tragedy caused by mental illness to score a polemic point, see this old thread here:



viewtopic.php?p=250630#p250630

[_Spurven Ten Sing]

I just think beastie (still?) has a crush on old GP.

Regarding Pahoran's use of a horrific tragedy caused by mental illness to score a polemic point, see this old thread here:



viewtopic.php?p=250630#p250630

[_beastie]

I just think beastie (still?) has a crush on old GP.

Oh,no doubt. ;)

[_Gadianton]

Pahoran,

I grant the possibility that Will boasts of his call and electiion in order to get a rise out of "the GSTP." I would like to know, however, if your opinion of his work would change if you were to learn that Will truly believes that his call and election is made sure. That you think he intends the claiim as a joke and that this is obviously so could suggest that you find the suggestiion otherwise to be unthinkable.

Would your opinion of Will's work suffer if you were to learn that he were serious?

Nice to see you around, by the way. I hope everything is well with you.

[_3sheets2thewind]

Pahoran,

What is you purpose with this thread?

Do you condone that sacred Temple things be told to the world?

Do you condone that someone, especially a "professional defender" of the LDS use the Lords most precious gift as the butt of a joke?

Even if WS was making a joke, do you approve of said joke?

Do you approve of WS vulgarity i.e. a thousand orgasms? Do you approve of such being used in the defense of all things LDS?

[_beastie]

by the way, I thought this was a funny catch on the old Gino thread I already linked. In the middle of the thread, Beetlejuice1 popped up to accuse me of stalking due to my joke about his wife having to lie back and think about England. Here was Pahoran's comment about my joke:

That was not a "joke," except in some particularly foul-minded anti-Mormon locker room. It was an inexpressibly vile and filthy thing to say.

viewtopic.php?p=251059#p251059

and

Now explain why it is not a vile, inconscionable thing to say to a married man about his sex life, and why any woman with a shred of virtue would think to say such a thing.

viewtopic.php?p=251262#p251262

Now here is his "condemnation" of Schryver's vulgarities:

ince you asked: I am not part of any circle. I also think Will's use of trash-talk is inappropriate and in bad taste. It's also especially unfortunate in that, by determinedly gleaning this handful of trash-talk instances out of thousands of posts, Auntie Jack seems to have managed to (at least temporarily) delayed publication of research to which the trash in question is entirely irrelevant.

viewtopic.php?p=456299#p456299

Compare my one joke in poor taste to Will's history of sexualized insults. Yet my joke was "vile and filthy" and I without a "shred of virtue", while Will is merely "inappropriately trash-talking,"

Pah sure is entertaining when he visits.

[_moksha]

So did he get this Second Anointing on his good looks or having the right family tree? Please do not say it was from the gratefulness of widows.