Dan Peterson breaks Church Rules in pursuit of Mopologetics
-
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 13392
- Joined: Thu May 13, 2010 12:16 am
Re: Dan Peterson breaks Church Rules in pursuit of Mopologet
And my hat is off to Daniel Peterson and William Hamblin. They truly have defeated the anti-Mormons. It's kind of a strange twist of fate that the way they have defeated anti-Mormonism is by making it superfluous, but still, a win is a win.
-
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 2390
- Joined: Tue May 24, 2011 8:57 am
Re: Dan Peterson breaks Church Rules in pursuit of Mopologet
-
Last edited by Guest on Mon Jul 14, 2014 7:22 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 13392
- Joined: Thu May 13, 2010 12:16 am
Re: Dan Peterson breaks Church Rules in pursuit of Mopologet
Hasa Diga Eebowai wrote:Darth J wrote:I'm glad to see this brazen admission of having gone full Scientologist. That kind of candor is refreshing.
It's not quite up to the level of putting rattlesnakes in someone's mailbox, but some of us prefer a more milquetoast, passive-aggressive approach to our cultishness.
I just noticed after clicking send that you just beat me to the obvious comparison. If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck.
Thanks,
Hasa Diga Eebowai
I think we may as well start using "blown" to describe ex-Mormons.
And we already have our own Battlefield Earth. It's called Saturday's Warrior.
Should "Mormontologists" replace "Mopologists"? I know that's my new term of art.
-
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 2390
- Joined: Tue May 24, 2011 8:57 am
Re: Dan Peterson breaks Church Rules in pursuit of Mopologet
-
Last edited by Guest on Mon Jul 14, 2014 7:28 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 4085
- Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 12:27 pm
Re: Dan Peterson breaks Church Rules in pursuit of Mopologet
Ceeboo wrote:It seems that you are all misunderstanding this, oh well, kinda cute though.
These empty attacks and personal mocking is quite adorable, I am hoping for better from all of you, though.
Oh well, I plain disagree with all of you, everywhere, on the entire planet.
No offense but you all seem to be missing it completely, amusing! And why the grudge. Let it go.
You come off as completely angry, for what? You're simply not understanding any of this.
Please, let all the hate subside and think of a flower or something like a flower, maybe a few flowers, or perhaps the stem of any flower, or the pot that a flower goes in.....
This has to be the biggest waste of bandwidth I've read in a long time.
"Moving beyond apologist persuasion, LDS polemicists furiously (and often fraudulently) attack any non-traditional view of Mormonism. They don't mince words -- they mince the truth."
-- Mike Quinn, writing of the FARMSboys, in "Early Mormonism and the Magic World View," p. x (Rev. ed. 1998)
-- Mike Quinn, writing of the FARMSboys, in "Early Mormonism and the Magic World View," p. x (Rev. ed. 1998)
Re: Dan Peterson breaks Church Rules in pursuit of Mopologet
Ceeboo wrote:Please, let all the hate subside and think of a flower or something like a flower, maybe a few flowers, or perhaps the stem of any flower, or the pot that a flower goes in.....
Peace,
Ceeboo
Nice Ceeboo.
-
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 4085
- Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 12:27 pm
Re: Dan Peterson breaks Church Rules in pursuit of Mopologet
Hasa Diga Eebowai wrote:This makes the whole situation very worrying and while I don't think the infraction would deserve Church discipline, the offending Bishop should definitely be taken out of a position where he has access to sensitive information about Church members.
I agree completely. DCP's bishop friend has no place as a bishop if he abuses his position in this way.
"Moving beyond apologist persuasion, LDS polemicists furiously (and often fraudulently) attack any non-traditional view of Mormonism. They don't mince words -- they mince the truth."
-- Mike Quinn, writing of the FARMSboys, in "Early Mormonism and the Magic World View," p. x (Rev. ed. 1998)
-- Mike Quinn, writing of the FARMSboys, in "Early Mormonism and the Magic World View," p. x (Rev. ed. 1998)
-
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 1542
- Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2010 3:53 am
Re: Dan Peterson breaks Church Rules in pursuit of Mopologet
Technically, it's a parody of a waste of bandwidth. I thought it was clever.Rollo Tomasi wrote:Ceeboo wrote:It seems that you are all misunderstanding this, oh well, kinda cute though.
These empty attacks and personal mocking is quite adorable, I am hoping for better from all of you, though.
Oh well, I plain disagree with all of you, everywhere, on the entire planet.
No offense but you all seem to be missing it completely, amusing! And why the grudge. Let it go.
You come off as completely angry, for what? You're simply not understanding any of this.
Please, let all the hate subside and think of a flower or something like a flower, maybe a few flowers, or perhaps the stem of any flower, or the pot that a flower goes in.....
This has to be the biggest waste of bandwidth I've read in a long time.
-
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 4085
- Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 12:27 pm
Re: Dan Peterson breaks Church Rules in pursuit of Mopologet
Bret Ripley wrote:Technically, it's a parody of a waste of bandwidth. I thought it was clever.
You're probably right. Sorry, Ceeboo -- I was too dense to get it.
"Moving beyond apologist persuasion, LDS polemicists furiously (and often fraudulently) attack any non-traditional view of Mormonism. They don't mince words -- they mince the truth."
-- Mike Quinn, writing of the FARMSboys, in "Early Mormonism and the Magic World View," p. x (Rev. ed. 1998)
-- Mike Quinn, writing of the FARMSboys, in "Early Mormonism and the Magic World View," p. x (Rev. ed. 1998)
-
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 7625
- Joined: Sun Feb 14, 2010 1:58 am
Re: Dan Peterson breaks Church Rules in pursuit of Mopologet
Hello Rollo!
No need to be sorry.
I offer my apology for placing that post smack in the middle of a rather serious (potentially serious) discussion that has many possible layers of issues, problems, etc.
I will do my best to resist causing further distractions.
But I make no such promises!
Peace,
Ceeboo

Rollo Tomasi wrote: Sorry, Ceeboo --
No need to be sorry.
I offer my apology for placing that post smack in the middle of a rather serious (potentially serious) discussion that has many possible layers of issues, problems, etc.
I will do my best to resist causing further distractions.
But I make no such promises!

Peace,
Ceeboo