harmony wrote:Notice he's not willing to go on record about exactly where Bushman goes off the rails.
You are exactly right, harmony. Will's main apologetic tactic is to keep the target vague and moving. For example, his Reverse Cipher Theory of the KEP. Will's kept the details hidden, so that the possibility always remains (however unlikely).
No one gained more from NAMIRS decision not to publish Will than Will himself. The pre-publication reviews of his article would have either been conducted by vagueness co-conspirators or insisted on details that Will knows would be the death of his Theory. Will should send MsJack a big internet thank you.
I think that Bushman is a bridge that the apologists are testing.
The LDS Church needs something to 'bridge' the gap between their mythical JSJr and the historical/factual JSJr that has come tumbling out through the internet. The Church needs some way of reconciling the two JSJr's. To date, Bushman has provided the best possible bridge, perhaps the very bridge that the Correlation Committee will cross. But in caution, it wants that bridge thoroughly tested, and the older generation of orthodox Mormons (those that can only accept the mythical JSJr) to pass. This won't happen until the bridge is tested more and the Church is in the hands of younger generations that have already begun to be inoculated against the implications the factual JSJr. I think it will be at least 2020 before Correlation Committee can feel comfortable in crossing the Bushman bridge. By 2020, enough of the old Mormons will be senile or dead and the vetting of the impact of Bushman on younger generations of Mormons complete.
Will is that type of younger, orthodox Mormon (thinning ranks) who could face a personal schism with the LDS Church, fashioning himself a 'true' Mormon when he does. That is because, for Will, the mythical JSJr is the 'true' JSJr, despite the historical facts.
Ironically, Will's clinging tighter to his orthodox Mormonism in the face of the factual JSJr is something that could very well be his LDS undoing. As the Church changes and Will does not, there could come a point he can no longer reconcile the two.
Will is, with DCP and Hamblin, one of the founders of Mormon Interpreters--a project and even a title suggestive that they are more true Mormons than the NAMIRS/Bradford-led with which they are no longer in good graces. Better for the OCD orthodox Mormons to stay 'true' to that orthodoxy than to follow a pied-piper like Bradford, even if he has the auspices of 'official'.
Hellmut wrote:Well, the Quislings were the latter-day Spartans. They fought in the battle of Berlin knowing that they would meet their doom.
Morley wrote:Apparently my knowledge of history is inadequate.
Let's take this a paragraph at a time. Please explain the above, Hellmut.
Thanks for the question, Morley. Quisling was a Norwegian national who became the head of the Nazi puppet regime in Norway. As such his name has become synonymous for traitors.
The Norwegian Nazis were a tiny minority but they did recruit a number of SS volunteers, which were organized in the Viking and Nordland SS Divisions. The SS Division Nordland participated ultimately in the senseless defense of Berlin when everything was already lost. Therefore, it is factually wrong to refer to Quislings as cowards.
A brave traitor is worse than a cowardly traitor. The Quislings' treason as well as their bravery promoted genocide and subjugation. Therefore courage in the service of evil is a vice.
For the purposes of this message board, and this refers only to the first use of the phrase in the other thread, not the quotes, it is uncivil and unreasonable to imply that Mormon skeptics and dissidents are Quislings. It is not only a malicious and slanderous insult but it trivializes the evil in which Quislings participated. It is unethical to instrumentalize the holocaust to damage our rhetorical opponents in a matter of religious differences, which are a matter of conscience.
I will admit that I am quite sensitive about these matters. I am afraid that the original remark crossed the boundaries of propriety by a long shot.
I'm aware of the etymology of 'quisling.'
Even with your distorted history (I'm not aware of any group known as 'the Quislings' in the Battle of Berlin), it's ridiculous to refer to Norwegian Nazis in Germany as analogous to the Spartans at Thermopylae.
Morley wrote:I'm aware of the etymology of 'quisling.'
Even with your distorted history (I'm not aware of any group known as 'the Quislings' in the Battle of Berlin), it's ridiculous to refer to Norwegian Nazis in Germany as analogous to the Spartans at Thermopylae.
Of course, there are differences between Norwegian Nazis and Spartans but not in the context of that despicable statement, which instrumentalizes the holocaust.
The story goes that bushman asked for packer to give him a blessing before he proceeded to knock out rsr. i am not sure how many pages of rsr bkp read before he tried to figure out whether he gave bushman a blessing or a curse, but one thing is sure. richard bushman is a heavyweight Mormon who gives credibilty , as much as one can , to Mormon history. he is callled on by the media-cnn, msnbc, cpr, fox, bbc etc to give impressions on issues Mormon. consequently WS is really taking on someone who could crush him with one phone call if he so desired. i can't see bushman giving ws the time of day, although he probably would because bushman is a gentleman. ws is just a fly to be flicked away, an annoyance not to be taken seriously in just about any area of Mormon history.
as an army officer, my fellows could easily identify the ass-kissing officer always trying to look good in front of the generals. ws reminds me of that type. sorry to report most of the ass-kissers were passed over for promotion.