I'm reviewing Dan McClellan's Book "The Bible Says So" Tonight on my BYP LIVE Show

[MG 2.0]

If it was, I wouldn't do it. I have too much integrity to play a stupid game like that. And yes, I will be the judge of that.

Ask Morley and malkie. I've been pretty up front with them recently.

Regards,
MG

You read me well. At least in this instance, indeed you have. I'm happy to see you taking a principled stand on some on these tough questions.

Bravo.

Here's the thing. That's the way I roll. All the time. You can't just give me a compliment on what you see as a 'one off'. Or I guess you can. Thanks for the one off.

Regards,
MG

[malkie]

If it was, I wouldn't do it. I have too much integrity to play a stupid game like that. And yes, I will be the judge of that.

Ask Morley and malkie. I've been pretty up front with them recently.

Regards,
MG

You read me well. At least in this instance, indeed you have. I'm happy to see you taking a principled stand on some on these tough questions.

Bravo.

Ditto. I've been more than a little surprised at the concessions MG has made lately.

[MG 2.0]

You read me well. At least in this instance, indeed you have. I'm happy to see you taking a principled stand on some on these tough questions.

Bravo.

Ditto. I've been more than a little surprised at the concessions MG has made lately.

Eyes wide open. Always have been.

Regards,
MG

[Everybody Wang Chung]

Ditto. I've been more than a little surprised at the concessions MG has made lately.

Eyes wide open. Always have been.

And yet, you still missed the giant 'Exit' sign.

Regards,
Uncle Wang

[MG 2.0]

Eyes wide open. Always have been.

And yet, you still missed the giant 'Exit' sign.

Regards,
Uncle Wang

Not sure what you mean.

Regards,
MG

[I Have Questions]

You read me well. At least in this instance, indeed you have. I'm happy to see you taking a principled stand on some on these tough questions.

Bravo.

Ditto. I've been more than a little surprised at the concessions MG has made lately.

Okay chaps, what specific concessions do you think MG has made lately?

[Morley]

Okay chaps, what specific concessions do you think MG has made lately?

This:

I'm going to attempt to candidly interpret MG's vague concessions about human nature, when asked about church leaders, both specifically by name, and more generally as a group. Interpreted remarks are in bold italics.

• Did you [MG} mean to imply that, because "Wilford Woodruff said nothing until AFTER Heber C.", Wilford may have been simply supporting Heber's lie - that is, he had no prior knowledge of the story about the sword.
  Yes, indeed - there's not a lot of wiggle room to interpret my [MG's] remarks. I [MG} think it's likely that Heber lied, and Wilford covered for him.
• Were Heber and possibly Wilford the only church leaders not always known to tell the truth", or "known to embellish and at times leave out important information when giving narratives/accounts."?
  It doesn't seem likely that Heber and possibly Wilford the only church leaders to lie, especially when under pressure. Other church leaders are likely to have lied also (they were not always known to tell the truth), and to have embellished or omitted important information.
• Have any of the present-day GAs been "not always known to tell the truth", or "known to embellish and at times leave out important information when giving narratives/accounts."?
  Given that former church leaders have lied, perhaps especially when under pressure, it seems unlikely that modern church leaders are any different. This gives rise to the well-known "lying for the lord". Modern church leaders are no more reliable and truthful than earlier ones.

Would you agree? Or are you going to "TTOC"?

Nicely done! I don't have much a quibble with your synopsis. Although with the caveat that I've gone into a bit more depth earlier on why I'm willing to go with you on this.

It took malkie patiently, persistently, and repeatedly asking MG to clarify his position, but MG finally came through in the end with what seems to me to be an intellectually honest statement. This kind of concession is something I've never seen MG do before--at least to this degree.

He did basically the same thing with me, when he provided no pushback on my suggestion that, given his theory, the modern church must be engaging in deception about the angel with the sword in their polygamy essay.

I'll be interested to see if this new approach of his holds. He's already reverting to form a little by saying that he does this all the time--so we'll see.

[I Have Questions]

Okay chaps, what specific concessions do you think MG has made lately?

This:

Nicely done! I don't have much a quibble with your synopsis. Although with the caveat that I've gone into a bit more depth earlier on why I'm willing to go with you on this.

It took malkie patiently, persistently, and repeatedly asking MG to clarify his position, but MG finally came through in the end with what seems to me to be an intellectually honest statement. This kind of concession is something I've never seen MG do before--at least to this degree.

He did basically the same thing with me, when he provided no pushback on my suggestion that, given his theory, the modern church must be engaging in deception about the angel with the sword in their polygamy essay.

I'll be interested to see if this new approach of his holds. He's already reverting to form a little by saying that he does this all the time--so we'll see.

I’m sorry but I don’t see it. Malkie tried to clarify what MG was saying, did all the legwork, and it’s resulted in MG saying “I don’t have much of a quibble…” That’s a long way short of “Yes Malkie, I agree with those statements 100%”. Try this, get MG 2.0 to agree that the current Prophet, and current Apostles, have lied, or have likely lied, to the members, and that it is wrong of them to have done so. Then we can talk about MG shifting ground.

[MG 2.0]

This:

It took malkie patiently, persistently, and repeatedly asking MG to clarify his position, but MG finally came through in the end with what seems to me to be an intellectually honest statement. This kind of concession is something I've never seen MG do before--at least to this degree.

He did basically the same thing with me, when he provided no pushback on my suggestion that, given his theory, the modern church must be engaging in deception about the angel with the sword in their polygamy essay.

I'll be interested to see if this new approach of his holds. He's already reverting to form a little by saying that he does this all the time--so we'll see.

I’m sorry but I don’t see it. Malkie tried to clarify what MG was saying, did all the legwork, and it’s resulted in MG saying “I don’t have much of a quibble…” That’s a long way short of “Yes Malkie, I agree with those statements 100%”. Try this, get MG 2.0 to agree that the current Prophet, and current Apostles, have lied, or have likely lied, to the members, and that it is wrong of them to have done so. Then we can talk about MG shifting ground.

Five examples?

One thing to make clear. I think that full disclosure of all things at any and all times is potentially harmful. There are times when certain things are better off being held closely to the chest until the time is right. Otherwise more harm than good can be done. That is where there is a matter of trust and patience involved.

Now in regards to the angel and the flaming sword story we have multiple witnesses. Just as we do in early Nauvoo and Utah polygamy. In regards to polygamy we see some people with certain motives saying certain things and other people with conflicting motives saying other things. We then end up with conflicting stories/views that end up traveling through time up until our day. The flaming sword? That's a tough one to swallow. An angel? Not as tough if you believe in heavenly beings.

I'm willing to cut some slack in this instance/story because I don't know how much embellishment there is to the story over time. Joseph was reported to have seen an angel with a flaming sword. Whether he did or whether he didn't the 'greater good' was accomplished in encouraging the practice of polygamy in the early days of the church. Was that a good thing? Various opinions and various objectives/motivations.

How much was truth and how much was essentially untrue in regards to the angel with the sword? I can go either way. But if there was an angel in this instance I would have to trust that God knew what He was doing. But from the outside looking in it is troublesome I must admit.

I'm hesitant on going 100% good or 100% bad on things that come down to us through the lens of history which often have many moving parts and some that are hidden from view. Others are willing to take a stronger position in some situations and examples where historical figures are concerned. I think each example and situation needs to be looked at separately and in depth.

Anyway, five examples?

Regards,
MG

[Marcus]

This:

It took malkie patiently, persistently, and repeatedly asking MG to clarify his position, but MG finally came through in the end with what seems to me to be an intellectually honest statement. This kind of concession is something I've never seen MG do before--at least to this degree.

He did basically the same thing with me, when he provided no pushback on my suggestion that, given his theory, the modern church must be engaging in deception about the angel with the sword in their polygamy essay.

I'll be interested to see if this new approach of his holds. He's already reverting to form a little by saying that he does this all the time--so we'll see.

I’m sorry but I don’t see it. Malkie tried to clarify what MG was saying, did all the legwork, and it’s resulted in MG saying “I don’t have much of a quibble…” That’s a long way short of “Yes Malkie, I agree with those statements 100%”. Try this, get MG 2.0 to agree that the current Prophet, and current Apostles, have lied, or have likely lied, to the members, and that it is wrong of them to have done so. Then we can talk about MG shifting ground.

You'll notice he's already equivocating on what he said that people appreciated as a concession that the modern church was engaging in deception. in my opinion, he's trying to repair his reputation as someone who is intellectually dishonest without actually being intellectually honest.