I can't understand why you are so shallow; you treat all your hated apologists the same. They're all liars.
I challenged you to deal with the evidence that contradicts your claim. So you respond by simply reasserting your original falsehood? And you wonder why you have no credibility?
I don't accept John Gee's or Will Shryver's explanations about the Book of Abraham; I don't buy into everything in FARMS Review
Nor would you need to in order to see deception. There are plenty of apologists who are wrong about these matters, but only a few flat out lied.
; I don't agree with everything Dr. Peterson has written. These are only men or man-made things and are flawed.
Flawed is an understatement. It certainly doesn;y fly when applied to the "lies" critics tell. FARMS and the entire apologetic enterprise is anxious to describe virtually all critics as willful deceivers.
[edited out]
You see, the only difference between us is that I have the courage to say what's really on my mind, and then stand behind it. You resent me for it. You only appear to be less "mean spirited" because you do not have the conviction to stand behind your true feelings and beliefs. You're more concerned with keeping up appearances for the LDS side. But I've been on that side long enough to know that it is full of mean spirited people who justify their attitude by reminding themselves that theirs is the cause of God. Therefore, lying is perfectly OK. Smear campaigns are also OK, so long as it means fewer people falling away from Joseph Smith's Church. The end always justifies the means. Lying is not off limits the same way murder was not off limits for Nephi. It worked for John Taylor and Joseph Smith on the subject of polygamy, and so naturally there will be radical Mormons who use their example to justify their modern deceptions. John Gee and Will Schryver are clear examples, and neither you nor they are in a position to prove otherwise. You cannot deal with the evidence against them. All you can do is attack me for calling a liar a liar. Why? Because they're fellow Mormons. If they were critics, you'd have no problem with it.
You know, you don't deserve this comment. I take it back. You're probably doing the best you can with what you have. I would suggest that you just desist from calling everybody a liar.
Or else...?
There you go again... "everybody"! Dan Peterson, Russell McGregor, William Schryver do not constitute "everbody." Why is one of California's super lawyers"having trouble with the concept of "everybody"?