Faithful TBM to doubter in 6 hours on ex-Mormon Reddit

[Res Ipsa]

Thanks Philo. What a nice thing to say.

Yeah don't push it too much...

I count on you to keep me humble.

[Philo Sofee]

Yeah don't push it too much...

I count on you to keep me humble.

LOL! We all know it is rather the other way around...

[KevinSim]

Here is my post that you responded to. Note your name, with the arrows that are hyperlinks:

Marcus, that's all you needed to say. I hadn't realized that the arrows were hyperlinks.

And here is YOUR post, where you quoted my words from above AND INCLUDED THE LINK, but removed your linked quotes from my comment, and then said you didn't know what i was referring to .

All I did was click on the double quote button, and try to include enough of your post to provide context for our discussion. I didn't deliberately exclude any links; I couldn't have, since I didn't realize the up arrows were links.

If you are really this unknowledgable about how forums work, then educate yourself.

I have educated myself.

However, since you have now tried this delaying tactic with a minimum of FOUR people in this thread, the odds are much greater that you are just playing games.

I beg to differ. The odds are much greater that I simply didn't understand what up arrows were. There was no intent to delay anything. I was just frustrated because people were asking me questions about things I had said in response to other people's posts, and I couldn't for the life of me figure out what those other people's posts were. Now that I've read them I've realized that those other people's posts were actually saying the same thing, criticizing me for making sweeping generalizations about atheists as a whole. My answers were similar (not as identical as implied) because the issues the other posters had brought up were the same issues.

[Marcus]

Here is my post that you responded to. Note your name, with the arrows that are hyperlinks:

Marcus, that's all you needed to say. I hadn't realized that the arrows were hyperlinks.

And here is YOUR post, where you quoted my words from above AND INCLUDED THE LINK, but removed your linked quotes from my comment, and then said you didn't know what i was referring to .

All I did was click on the double quote button, and try to include enough of your post to provide context for our discussion. I didn't deliberately exclude any links; I couldn't have, since I didn't realize the up arrows were links.

If you are really this unknowledgable about how forums work, then educate yourself.

I have educated myself.

However, since you have now tried this delaying tactic with a minimum of FOUR people in this thread, the odds are much greater that you are just playing games.

I beg to differ. The odds are much greater that I simply didn't understand what up arrows were. There was no intent to delay anything. I was just frustrated because people were asking me questions about things I had said in response to other people's posts, and I couldn't for the life of me figure out what those other people's posts were. Now that I've read them I've realized that those other people's posts were actually saying the same thing, criticizing me for making sweeping generalizations about atheists as a whole. My answers were similar (not as identical as implied) because the issues the other posters had brought up were the same issues.

Oh good grief. You wrote a lot of words but somehow managed to say almost nothing about the actual issue.

I didn't deliberately exclude any links;

Did you even read what you quoted above ?

And here is YOUR post, where you quoted my words from above AND INCLUDED THE LINK, but removed your linked quotes from my comment, and then said you didn't know what i was referring to .

the issue was --You removed the QUOTES from my comment, and then said you didn't know what QUOTES i was talking about, and then you said the QUOTES weren't there! it wasn't an issue of arrows.

My answers were similar (not as identical as implied) because the issues the other posters had brought up were the same issues.

No, your "almost identical" responses were to other posters who were making entirely different comments. that was the point.

Just drop it-- every round of your explanation is just another round of you avoiding the issues. the discussion has moved on.

[malkie]

I count on you to keep me humble.

LOL! We all know it is rather the other way around...

Would you guys ... well, need I say it?

(talk about mutual admiration society )

[Philo Sofee]

LOL! We all know it is rather the other way around...

Would you guys ... well, need I say it?

(talk about mutual admiration society )

Welllll...... it might just be a guy admiration thing......

[KevinSim]

So, you’re picking Grant over JFS, BY, JT, various apostles and countless church publications that mirror JFS’s view of evolution and the gospel?

Doc, did JFS ever reverse Grant's position after he became president of the Church? Sure JFS wrote books opposing Darwin's theory. Lots of apostles write books that are very helpful for the Church. But there is a weight that the words of the Prophet have that the words of the apostles don't match. As far as Brigham Young, John Taylor, and "various apostles and countless church publications" go, what exactly do they say that is so at odds with Darwin's theory?

I think you can start posting under your real handle, MG.

Why are posters here so convinced I'm MG? I've heard of MG, and maybe read two or three of his posts, but I'm not him.

[Philo Sofee]

So, you’re picking Grant over JFS, BY, JT, various apostles and countless church publications that mirror JFS’s view of evolution and the gospel?

Doc, did JFS ever reverse Grant's position after he became president of the Church? Sure JFS wrote books opposing Darwin's theory. Lots of apostles write books that are very helpful for the Church. But there is a weight that the words of the Prophet have that the words of the apostles don't match. As far as Brigham Young, John Taylor, and "various apostles and countless church publications" go, what exactly do they say that is so at odds with Darwin's theory?

I think you can start posting under your real handle, MG.

Why are posters here so convinced I'm MG? I've heard of MG, and maybe read two or three of his posts, but I'm not him.

The actual question is why do you continue pretending you don't know yourself MG?

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

So, you’re picking Grant over JFS, BY, JT, various apostles and countless church publications that mirror JFS’s view of evolution and the gospel?

Doc, did JFS ever reverse Grant's position after he became president of the Church? Sure JFS wrote books opposing Darwin's theory. Lots of apostles write books that are very helpful for the Church. But there is a weight that the words of the Prophet have that the words of the apostles don't match. As far as Brigham Young, John Taylor, and "various apostles and countless church publications" go, what exactly do they say that is so at odds with Darwin's theory?

Figure it out yourself you unimaginative carp. We have this amazing god-tool called Google.

https://en-academic.com/dic.nsf/enwiki/11766315

Why are posters here so convinced I'm MG? I've heard of MG, and maybe read two or three of his posts, but I'm not him.

Aaaaand this is why I point out just how fundamentally dishonest and prone to lying Mormons are. MG, for the fiftieth time you do, in fact, represent Mormonism, the Mormon priesthood, and yourself when you post here and lie through your teeth. Just stop.

- Doc

[KevinSim]

And yes they conscientiously cut down the last one. It was in their blood. They were conditioned to cut down trees. They were indoctrinated to think that was their main focus in life.

Rivendale, are you saying that people who are conditioned to do things (who have them in their blood), do them conscientiously? I'm not even sure I disagree with that. Doing something conscientiously is doing what one is convinced is right, and it's totally possible that the Easter Island residents were convinced cutting down those trees was the right thing to do. But I would hope that we've made some intellectual progress since then, and that our consciences prompt us to ask institutions questions before we give them our blind obedience.