The MADhouse on Sunstone

[_SteelHead]

Look, dude. When your concept of the universe depends on the adventures of pre-Columbian Hebrew tapir ranchers in Guatemala who simultaneously practiced the Law of Moses and Protestant Christianity, and a demigod from Kolob who brought the human race into mortality 6,000 years ago in Missouri, and the power to rub magic cooking oil on the heads of sick people being restored by a Yankee treasure hunter, you have pretty much forfeited the right to use "the exaltation of nincompoopery" as a term of derision for other people.

I tried to make this my Sig........ Too long.

:(

[_Cicero]

Oh, yeah? Well maybe if I had gotten my fair share of those milk strippings, I would still be a believing member of the Church, Cicero!!!!!!

Well, that's your own fault Darth. You can't blame the church for the fact that you were just too weak and stupid to fight for your fair share of . . . er . . . milk!

[_Philo Sofee]

Blixa: What do you think of this comment made by Duffy in the article? I get what he is saying, and I definitely see far too much blind faith in science on forums like RFM (particularly from Steve Benson), but do you think he is using the term "Postmodernism" appropriately?

I highly doubt Steve Benson has too much blind faith in science. I suspect you have a misunderstanding. One can have respect for the scientific method without having blind faith in science.

There is never blind faith in science. It is built on observation, not faith. This is a religious point of view with deliberate misunderstanding of science and its paradigm.

[_marg]

I just noticed this thread on MD&D : http://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/58336-vote-on-the-first-vision-at-sunstone/

It starts with a discussion of a particular panel on the first vision (the panelists were Dan Vogel, Mark Thomas, Todd Compton, and John-Charles Duffy). A multitude of posters then start mocking Vogel and Sunstone in general. CaliforniaKid then jumps on to defend Sunstone, and a massive MADhouse pile-on ensues. It's a very depressing read.

Re pile ons...the same thing happens here. It's a group-think mentality thing I guess. Even if one doesn't like to see pile ons and views them as off topic to the point of being an irritation to read..the mods here do nothing about it when they are reported.

[_Cicero]

And here is Will's take on Sunstone (in response to post by Seth Payne):

I initially became aware of Sunstone not long after my marriage in 1982. I formed my first impressions of the symposium/magazine on the basis of those who, in the early 80s, attempted to "turn me on" to what it had to say. The kinds of people who were advocating for Sunstone back in the 1980s when I was in the old Farmington Second Ward were those whom I knew to be "on the fringe" of orthodoxy; young LDS who fancied themselves the intellectual superiors of their ward and stake leaders. I remember asking our wise old stake patriarch (Milton J. Hess) about something I had read in an issue of Sunstone. He did not discourage me from expanding my knowledge of things, but I will never forget how I felt when he quoted from the Book of Mormon:

"2 Nephi 2: 28-29:

O that cunning plan of the evil one! O the vainness, and the frailties, and the foolishness of men! When they are learned they think they are wise, and they hearken not unto the counsel of God, for they set it aside, supposing they know of themselves, wherefore, their wisdom is foolishness and it profiteth them not. And they shall perish.

But to be learned is good if they hearken unto the counsels of God."

I have heeded his implied counsel ever since then.

My impression is that Sunstone has, for the most part, moved past that vitriolic 1990's phase

Wolves learn how to adapt their attacks to the specific prey they seek. But, of course, you know that.

To their credit, the MD&D moderators told Will to knock it off.

[_Cicero]

Yes, I know. I'm genuinely sorry about that. I don't know how you redress a problem like that on a free speech board. I wish there were a Mormon-themed forum with genuinely balanced moderation.

I agree that would be nice, but very hard to achieve in practice. Unfortunately there are a great deal of people on all points of the belief spectrum that value picking fights, making cheap shots and scoring points over genuine discussion. I sincerely try not to instigate such things, but some people (e.g., Bill Hamblin and Droopy) bring out the worst in me.

It's difficult to achieve genuinely balanced moderation without perma-banning people like that, but where do you draw the line?

And then there is the fact that the topic is Mormonism. There are some unavoidable issues (for lack of a better word) about Mormonism that often make it difficult to for folks on different points of the belief spectrum to engage one another civilly (one true church, history of persecution of the Saints, broken families due to apostasy, gay Mormons committing suicide to name just a few . . . )

John Dehlin is trying to create a "safe place" within Mormonism, and he is relentlessly criticized and mocked for doing so; apologists like Greg Smith call him a wolf in sheeps clothing while folks on RFM accuse him of being a paid puppet of the Church (I'm not making that up).

[_Bob Loblaw]

Hamblin sounds like one of those teenagers desperate to be in the popular crowd but not quite "cool" enough to be invited to parties. So, on Friday nights, they sit at home, alone, posting on message boards how stupid the popular people are and insisting they're too cool to ever go to one of those parties.

But inside they are aching to be let into the popular circle.

[_Dr. Shades]

[MODERATOR NOTE: All posts by and regarding stemelbow have been split into a new thread at:

http://www.mormondiscussions.com/phpBB3 ... 5&p=618416

If you wish to comment about him, or if you are him, please post in that thread. From this post forward, please keep all posts in this thread focused on the Mormon Dialogue & Discussion board's opinions about and reactions to the recent Sunstone Symposium. Thank you.]