My Work Here is Done

[_stemelbow]

Wow, Scratch. I'm greatly encouraged that you're at the very least willing to say you are going to drop the vendetta/hostility approach of your past 6 years. that's a good start. To implement it will be another positive surprise to me. I hope you follow through.

I can't help but to add, I will take this as a concession that your approach has been wrong-headed, self-destructive, and pernicious. And that because of your realization here, you have decided to go about living a more productive life. I truly hope that is the case. I'm a hopeful person afterall, being Mormon and all.

Best wishes.

[_Simon Belmont]

So, now that we have come full circle, are you able to quantify the amount of violence against Mormons that Daniel Peterson has prevented and/or contested?

It isn't quantifiable, no. Why is it relevant?

For example, in what way did Dr. Peterson's article suggesting that the Book of Mormon implicitly refers to Heavenly Mother help "contest" against mob violence against Mormons?

I don't consider that an apologetic piece.

For our viewers at home: Simon Belmont is begging the question here, since by referring to me as "you and your kind," he is equating my disputing the faith-promoting narrative on an internet message board (that nobody is forced to come to and read) with mobs in the 19th century who committed acts of violence against Mormons. He is further begging the question with the implicit premise that such anti-Mormon violence was solely because of Mormons' religious beliefs, as opposed to socioeconomic reasons.

Yes, yes, it's someone else doing it. You aren't contributing at all to the hate, are you DJ?

The reason it is not off-topic is because your underlying premise is that criticism of Mormonism is ultimately based on Satan and his minions fighting against the One True Church, as opposed to criticism of Mormonism being based on its making fantastical claims grounded in Bible fanfic and Joseph Smith's magical tall tales. It is the inherent implausibility of Mormonism that leads to criticism, and Mormonism is not the only magical thinking-based ideology that is subject to rational criticism.

To our viewers at home, DJ is telling me what my premise is, when that is actually not my premise at all. I never said "minions of Satan" or "One True Church." I disagree, and fight against 180+ years of scum and villainy. Now, respectful criticism is healthy, but you guys get all bent when we try to defend ourselves.

I don't know who "you guys" refers to. What is laughable is that Mormon apologetics has become its own religion of bastardized pseudo-Mormonism.

I can tell you really want to talk about something else. But try to stay on topic and don't change the subject.

For our viewers at home: Simon Belmont is begging the question again by referring to "over 180 years" of "anti-Mormons."

How many years of violence, murder, tarring and feathering, extermination orders, profanity yelling at Conference and pageant, endless verbal and written attacks would make it wrong, DJ? 181? 179? 150? How many years make it wrong in your view?

The LDS Church also makes claims of fact that ARE falsifiable.

No, we don't.

[_schreech]

I can't help but to add, I will take this as a concession that your approach has been wrong-headed, self-destructive, and pernicious. And that because of your realization here, you have decided to go about living a more productive life. I truly hope that is the case. I'm a hopeful person afterall, being Mormon and all.

Best wishes.

Maybe if you stopped whining for a second and actually read the threads you post on, you would realize how ridiculous you look:

"But, in conclusion, it really does seem that there is no reason to worry about this anymore. The seas are calm; the Mopologetic leadership is aging and defeated, and so I shall retreat to my cozy den, where I shall yet again become absorbed in my various and sundry academic interests. So long as the key Mopologists refrain from their attacks and viciousness, I shall remain (per the Dean, of course), in my "emeritus" status."

No wonder you are still an active Mormon, your ability to ignore fact and read/hear only what you want to read/hear is somewhat disturbing...I am sad that you continue to feel the need to deceive yourself in order to support sorta-lds-pseudo-apologists - acting like a dimwitted "yes-man" is no way live your life...

[_jon]

For example, in what way did Dr. Peterson's article suggesting that the Book of Mormon implicitly refers to Heavenly Mother help "contest" against mob violence against Mormons?

I don't consider that an apologetic piece.

Let's play 'spot the reason nobody takes Simon Belmont seriously'....

[_stemelbow]

Maybe if you stopped whining for a second and actually read the threads you post on, you would realize how ridiculous you look:

"But, in conclusion, it really does seem that there is no reason to worry about this anymore. The seas are calm; the Mopologetic leadership is aging and defeated, and so I shall retreat to my cozy den, where I shall yet again become absorbed in my various and sundry academic interests. So long as the key Mopologists refrain from their attacks and viciousness, I shall remain (per the Dean, of course), in my "emeritus" status."

No wonder you are still an active Mormon, your ability to ignore fact and read/hear only what you want to read/hear is somewhat disturbing...I am sad that you continue to feel the need to deceive yourself in order to support sorta-lds-pseudo-apologists - acting like a dimwitted "yes-man" is no way live your life...

Thanks for whining about me, Schreech. Just realize I've never been one to just eat up the words of Scratch and assume he's being all honest with us. On this, I prefer to take a more hopeful approach as to why he's decided to make this rather grand change. I'd like to think he's doing it because he's realized how pathetic it was. No man ought to be so vile as he has been. I suppose you are free to take him at his word on this, but since its quite obvious that the "leadership" of the LDS apologetic community is hardly defeated and hardly quieted. even you can see that, right?

[_stemelbow]

Let's play 'spot the reason nobody takes Simon Belmont seriously'....

and yet many here have taken Scratch seriously for years...go figure.

[_jon]

its quite obvious that the "leadership" of the LDS apologetic community is hardly defeated and hardly quieted

CFR

[_stemelbow]

its quite obvious that the "leadership" of the LDS apologetic community is hardly defeated and hardly quieted

CFR

That's cute, jon. You wish me to prove the negative while you let the positive assertion by Scratch go without notice. He's the one with the burden. But if ya like, just head on over to Maxwell institute and read up a little. you'll see the community nor its "leadership" is quieted, as Scratch insists. Proves his reasoning for why he's quitting his vendetta approach sound suspect, no?

[_Buffalo]

The LDS Church also makes claims of fact that ARE falsifiable.

No, we don't.

The church does. Apologists try to bring the falsifiable back into the realm of unfalsifiable, but things like global flood, tower of Babel, Hebrews in the Americas etc are most definitely falsifiable. Much to the annoyance of apologists.

Sadly, just about all the falsifiable claims have been falsified. So it's understandable why you don't want them to be falsifiable anymore.

[_schreech]

Thanks for whining about me, Schreech. Just realize I've never been one to just eat up the words of Scratch and assume he's being all honest with us. On this, I prefer to take a more hopeful approach as to why he's decided to make this rather grand change. I'd like to think he's doing it because he's realized how pathetic it was. No man ought to be so vile as he has been. I suppose you are free to take him at his word on this, but since its quite obvious that the "leadership" of the LDS apologetic community is hardly defeated and hardly quieted. even you can see that, right?

Vile? - CFR...

Please, just stop whining so much, pull your head out of the pseudo-apologists arses and realize that scratch has, once again, made you look like a fool (although you seem to enjoy the negative attention)...The fact that you somehow twisted your little mind into believing that scratch's victory OP was a concession of defeat strongly supports my belief that Mormonism makes people, like yourself, stupid...Next time, avoid the whining and actually just read the posts you are responding to...It will make you look far less idiotic...