My Work Here is Done

[_Darth J]

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?

It is relevant because you claim that apologetics is a response to violence.

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.

The premise of the article is showing the plausibility that 1 Nephi is an ancient Hebrew text.

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?

Of course I am contributing to the hate. Why, just this morning I tarred and feathered the missionaries as I saw them out walking around.

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 care how you defend yourselves, but what you are defending is not LDS doctrine, but bastardized pseudo-Mormonism.

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.

Your ongoing, unproven premise is that Mormon apologetics is equivalent to what the LDS Church itself teaches and does.

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?

However many it is, I would need some evidence that the persecution Joseph Smith claims to have experienced as a teenager really happened before I was ready to say it was over 180 years.

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

No, we don't.

Is the Book of Mormon a historical record of an ancient Semitic people? [ ] Yes [ ] No

[_jon]

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?

Stem, sometimes you exasperate me.
As has already been pointed out to you, Scratch fought against a particular way of conducting mopologetics - that of character assassination and generally nastiness towards individuals.
As is explicit in his OP he did not fight against the publication of apologia.

Show me where a leading apologist is getting away with the absolute nonsense that Peterson and co used to peddle online. You can't. They have waved the white flag, packed up and gone home. Hopefully to conduct their apologetic activities in a more Christ like and substantive fashion.

[_Buffalo]

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?

Stem, sometimes you exasperate me.
As has already been pointed out to you, Scratch fought against a particular way of conducting mopologetics - that of character assassination and generally nastiness towards individuals.
As is explicit in his OP he did not fight against the publication of apologia.

Show me where a leading apologist is getting away with the absolute nonsense that Peterson and co used to peddle online. You can't. They have waved the white flag, packed up and gone home. Hopefully to conduct their apologetic activities in a more Christ like and substantive fashion.

What nonsense did they used to engage in that they don't do now?

[_Simon Belmont]

It is relevant because you claim that apologetics is a response to violence.

Go read what I said. I said violence among other acts of villainy and hate. You cannot single out one piece of apologetic and apply it to whatever you choose.

The premise of the article is showing the plausibility that 1 Nephi is an ancient Hebrew text.

Okay... you can read too, great. What's your point?

Of course I am contributing to the hate. Why, just this morning I tarred and feathered the missionaries as I saw them out walking around.

If you lived near Joseph Smith in the 1830s, would you participate in the mobs?

I don't care how you defend yourselves, but what you are defending is not LDS doctrine, but bastardized pseudo-Mormonism.

You've been out of the church way too long to lecture me on what my church teaches. Are you sure you were ever a member?

Your ongoing, unproven premise is that Mormon apologetics is equivalent to what the LDS Church itself teaches and does.

Really? Where did I say that? (hint: you won't find this answer in the 1974 Era).

However many it is, I would need some evidence that the persecution Joseph Smith claims to have experienced as a teenager really happened before I was ready to say it was over 180 years.

So, 179 years of violence and murder is okay by you, as long as it's against Mormons. If someone claims 180 years, you'll need to see some proof.

Are you serious?

Is the Book of Mormon a historical record of an ancient Semitic people? [ ] Yes [ ] No

Yup.

Unfalsfiable.

[_stemelbow]

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...

I see you have decided to whine about me instead of answering my question. Pretty typical. Kinda cute how you wish Scratch to come off all noble. Thank ya schreech.

[_Buffalo]

So, 179 years of violence and murder is okay by you, as long as it's against Mormons. If someone claims 180 years, you'll need to see some proof.

You really need to stop lying. Early Mormons experienced comparatively very little violence, and gave worse than they got, were more persecutors than persecuted. Post-Nauvoo Mormons were pretty safe from violence, except for believing Mormons killing and mutilating apostate Mormons or "sinning" Mormons.

[_schreech]

So, 179 years of violence and murder is okay by you, as long as it's against Mormons. If someone claims 180 years, you'll need to see some proof.

Lol - when did the last "murder" of a momo take place? Or are you talking about the violence and murder perpetrated by LDS believers over the last 180 years?

[_stemelbow]

Stem, sometimes you exasperate me.
As has already been pointed out to you, Scratch fought against a particular way of conducting mopologetics - that of character assassination and generally nastiness towards individuals.

He fought against character assassination and gernal nastiness by LDS folks by being far more nasty and taking character assassination to a far deeper level? It'd be nice to be wearing those rose glasses you got when you view Scratch. How is what he has done fighting against any of that? If anything he promoted such activities by doing the very same thing. That is just plain goofy--talk about being exasperated. But now that I see the way you've got it all twisted in your mind I can see how it can be exapserating for you.

As is explicit in his OP he did not fight against the publication of apologia.

So? He has such a personal vendetta, such a near insane spin on Peterson and his words and efforts at times, I can't see how his efforts did much of anything other than catch a few misdeeds or a few mistakes which drowned in a pool of hostile fantasy.

Show me where a leading apologist is getting away with the absolute nonsense that Peterson and co used to peddle online. You can't. They have waved the white flag, packed up and gone home. Hopefully to conduct their apologetic activities in a more Christ like and substantive fashion.

My goodness. This is just silliness. you can't do much but assume the Scratchian position it seems. Well the Scratchian position, he is claiming, is a thing of the past. Let's hope others don't try to take up his hostile post. Hopefully we can move past ridiculous inuendo and personal hatred. Aside from Will I don't think I've seen anything from an LDS apologist to compare to Scratch.

[_schreech]

I see you have decided to whine about me instead of answering my question. Pretty typical. Kinda cute how you wish Scratch to come off all noble. Thank ya schreech.

I see, once again, you have neglected to actually read the post that you responded to - If you could stop your sniveling and whining long enough to actually read the posts you are addressing, you might not come across as a total loon...Once again, feel free to respond to my CFR as soon as you pull your head out of the momo-"defenders" arses long enough to take a breath....Thanks!

[_stemelbow]

I see, once again, you have neglected to actually read the post that you responded to - If you could stop your sniveling and whining long enough to actually read the posts you are addressing, you might not come across as a total loon...Once again, feel free to respond to my CFR as soon as you pull your head out of the momo-"defenders" arses long enough to take a breath....Thanks!

Nice try, schreech. my question was posed to you prior to your CFR, but instead of answering me you went off whining about me and asking for me to support my personal opinion that you'll most likely disagree with. You are an adorable fellow.