I hate to break it to you Simon, but if you truly studied Church history you would know that we LDS have a long and storied tradition of violence, murder and assassination orders and massacres. Come on Simon, study.
Who is "we?"
You aren't part of us.
Nice dodge, Simon. "We" means LDS, of which I am a member. I agree that you are not part "of us". Most LDS don't intentionally deceive others by lying, creating fake Facebook accounts, fabricating a story about your thesis, etc., etc.
Yes, Simon. You are not part "of us".
"I'm on paid sabbatical from BYU in exchange for my promise to use this time to finish two books."
Equality wrote: The response of believers like Simon and stem and droopy just drives your point home with even greater force. I think the apologists don't realize how many people read these boards but never post. They form judgments about the participants. There are so many who never post but who are influenced by these boards. I think, on balance, the apologists come off very badly to those who are open-minded and searching for truth.
Yes, it seems, it isn't these vile creatures -- it's the Mormons themselves who perpetuate hatred.
Right.
Whatever perceived bad behavior anyone takes issue with concerning LDS apologists, remember this: critics and anti-Mormons wrote the book on the behavior. Apologetics is a response to criticism. No critics = no apologists; there isn't a simpler truth than that.
Are you trying to counter my argument, Simon, or reinforce it?
"The Church is authoritarian, tribal, provincial, and founded on a loosely biblical racist frontier sex cult."--Juggler Vain "The LDS church is the Amway of religions. Even with all the soap they sell, they still manage to come away smelling dirty."--Some Schmo
I don't think you're correct, Simon. I think you would be hard-pressed to find a serious apologist who agrees with your claim that "no critics=no apologists." Some of the more respectable apologists, like Richard Bushman, have suggested that apologetics is necessary due to problematic aspects of Mormonism itself. I doubt very much that any of the Maxwell Institute apologists are enmeshed in their work for the reasons you've been describing on this thread. Furthermore, I'm left to wonder what it is you expect to accomplish via your repeated assertions.
"[I]f, while hoping that everybody else will be honest and so forth, I can personally prosper through unethical and immoral acts without being detected and without risk, why should I not?." --Daniel Peterson, 6/4/14
Doctor Scratch wrote:Furthermore, I'm left to wonder what it is you expect to accomplish via your repeated assertions.
He's hoping he'll gain a testimony of the truth of his BS in the process of repeatedly bearing it.
If he's interested in defending the apologists, my recommendation is that he register immediately on the Mormon Dialogue board. Bill Hamblin is getting his ass handed to him by Mike Reed and George Miller, and he is desperately in need of support.
"[I]f, while hoping that everybody else will be honest and so forth, I can personally prosper through unethical and immoral acts without being detected and without risk, why should I not?." --Daniel Peterson, 6/4/14
