Should Mopologists "listen carefully to those who leave the Church"?

[Doctor Scratch]

Exactly. It remains to be seen as to how the junior Elder Holland will carry out his father’s instructions. It seems to me, though, that there would be zero risk involved in ex’ing the Interpreter President. It would teach a powerful lesson to the Mopologists about the need to treat wayward members with *actual* charity and it would represent perhaps the biggest sign ever that the Church actually cares about trying to make things right. And the Afore could simply go through the repentance process and make his way back into the good graces of the Church. He’s pretty much guaranteed to do so: he thinks it’s the only way he’s going to get eternal access to endless travel and dining experiences, so he *WILL* repent if he is ex’ed. There is a small chance that, due to intransigence, he would rebel and go full-blown angry apostate, but that would involve totally throwing away everything he did in his life, so like I said: it would be a very low-risk move for the Church, with a potentially huge payoff.

[Philo Sofee]

It got to the point that I didn't even want to talk to the apologists, let alone listen to them. Their version of missionary Gospel teaching is whacking the hell out of you intellectually with the scriptures - remember the pure GLEE the Afore spoke of when having his Bible bash on his mission?! So, sure let the leaders try to get the members to be charitable, but we all know they are only going to fake it for appearance sake. They don't want apostates among them for anything. The parable fits Mormons to a T. The Mormon will go out of his/her way to go past the apostate walking on the other side of the road in a hurry instead of being a Good Samaritan and helping out, whether physically, spiritually, or psychologically. We all already know that, and so I think Peterson is being disingenuous in his remarks.

[I Have Questions]

When was the last time that the Afore listened carefully and with respect, to someone whose views about Mormonism were at odds to his own?

Here is a good example of the Afore speaking about people who hold different views to his own, with respect and demonstrating that he has listened carefully to them…

As I periodically do, I call your attention to recent photographs from the construction site of the Cody Wyoming Temple, where, as its impassioned opponents direfully predicted, the massive 9,950-square-foot building — larger than most of the private homes that surround it in Park County — has indeed hidden the surrounding mountains and obliterated the clouds and the stars of the sky while it looms menacingly over the humble cottages and the tiny shops and cafes of the terrified common folk of Cody. (Especially alarming, I think, are the two distant shots that were taken on 4 May 2026.) The photographs do not confirm (but they also don’t refute) rumors that the Church has stripped the surrounding area of all greenery, dammed the Shoshone River, diverted the river into deep shafts and pits that have been excavated on the temple grounds for forges and armories and machinery, and begun to settle large numbers of orcs across the Bighorn Basin.

[drumdude]

Moreover, as we’ve become more and more aware, human memory is a malleable thing, affected by the “rememberer’s” current mental, emotional, psychological, social, and ideological state. Such things need to be taken into account.

A recent comment about, well, me will illustrate the point. It comes from someone with whom I was once somewhat acquainted. We would encounter each other at annual FAIR conferences, which he attended from out of state, and, although we weren’t close, our interactions were friendly. Since then, his circumstances have changed considerably. He has, for example, left the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, perhaps (or so it seems to me) with some anger and bitterness — I think, too, that there have been some other personal challenges, of which I know very little — and, among other things, he has become a moderately active participant on what I call the Peterson Obsession Board.

…

Before I sat down to write this blog entry, I asked my wife whether she remembered my having told the story. She did. I asked whether, in telling it, I had ever boasted of my brilliant triumph over the hapless Jehovah’s Witness official. For what it’s worth, she could not remember my having done so. Had I not, rather, always used it as a regrettable cautionary tale? That, she says, is how she’s always heard me tell it. It’s how I remember telling it, as well. It’s how I’ve always thought about it.

There was one experience in particular…there was a Jehova’s Witness who came and he and his supervisor were confronting the missionaries. They had me come and deal with them. Well, I creamed them. Just frankly it was embarrassing. They just weren’t that good. And I just beat them into the ground.

https://youtu.be/XtpPi3q07MM

On either side of this story, Dan tells about how much he hated it. But to me that seems a bit like the cockroach in the ice cream. Dan is absolutely gloating. “Creamed. Embarrassing. Beat into the ground.”

Come in, Dan. If the main message you wanted to send was that you felt awful being right, this was not the way to communicate it.

The real lesson is that there are no winners in a Bible bashing session. But DCP still has his 19 year old missionary mindset that he’s defending the one true church. He still thinks that he “won.” He hasn’t learned a thing.

[I Have Questions]

I seem to recall Peterson proudly retelling an anecdote where he and Midgley decided to attend a non Mormon religious event in their area...

Many years ago, my good friend Lou Midgley and I drove up to the Salt Lake Valley one Sunday night to spend the evening at an evangelical Protestant church. The good folks there were showing an anti-Mormon film of some kind, and Lou and I wanted to see it. We hoped simply to sit quietly in the back and watch.

Sure.

However, we had committed an elementary, naïve, and obvious mistake: We went to the event dressed in conventional Latter-day Saint church clothes — with white shirts and ties, no less. We might as well have been carrying flashing neon copies of the Book of Mormon. Nobody else in the place, not even among the women, was wearing either a white shirt or a tie. None were dressed in what most Latter-day Saints would recognize as “Sunday best.” All were clad in pretty casual attire.

But that wasn't deliberate, right? Just "naïve".

After the showing of the film, which, to be honest, I can’t even remember, we were swarmed by aggressive evangelicals trying to save our souls. Well, actually, I don’t know that saving our souls was high on their list of priorities; they were quite aggressive and not especially nice. (It was something of a best-practices demonstration on how not to save souls.) They deployed a number of pretty standard evangelical anti-Mormon arguments, and the conversation, such as it was, was going nowhere in particular. If we responded to one critique, another was immediately offered in its stead.

So instead of quietly slipping away immediately the film had finished, you waited long enough to attract attention.

One of the most assertive of our hosts decided to concentrate on the doctrine of the Trinity. We weren’t Christians, he said, because we didn’t believe in biblical trinitarianism. (For some of my thinking on the subject of biblical trinitarianism, which may perhaps surprise a few, see “Notes on Mormonism and the Trinity.”) He unleashed a torrent of proof texts and assertions and condemnations that scarcely permitted time for response.

Eventually, I managed to get in an edgewise word. So as to slow him down a bit, I asked him exactly what he understood by “the Trinity.” He explained to me that there is only one God, that God is one being who manifests himself in different modes or aspects, sometimes as Father and sometimes as Son and sometimes as Holy Spirit.

I responded that, yes, by the standard of mainstream traditional Christianity, my Latter-day Saint view of the Godhead is indeed heretical. I think that I remember him smiling in triumph. But then I pointed out that, again by the standard of mainstream traditional Christianity, he too was a heretic. I told him that his view was an expression of Sabellianism, or what is sometimes called “modalistic monarchianism.” Sabellianism was a third-century heresy that denied the existence of real, distinct persons within the Trinity. It viewed the one God as, if I may, something of an actor, one who simply puts on this or that mask, according to whatever would serve at the time. Sabellianism was rejected by most Christians anciently and is still considered a false doctrine.

He protested against my description of what he had said, claiming that his was true, biblical, trinitarianism.

“Actually,” said one of the others who were standing nearby, “I don’t think you’re right. Maybe you need to talk with Pastor.”

And then others joined in. Eventually with considerable animation. While they were going back and forth — I’m not making this up, although it seems almost like something in a slapstick comedy — Lou and I slipped out. Unnoticed, so far as I could tell.

I'd like to hear the other side of the story to hear what really happened. But I guess it was so unmemorable for the evangelicals that they never gave it a second thought after that.

[Everybody Wang Chung]

Folks, you truly cannot make this stuff up.

Over at the Afore’s blog, in a post ironically titled "False Momories and Social Media," the Afore is at it again. And no, for the record, the "false memory" isn't his own recollection of holding the Second Watson letter, and the "social media" part isn't about liking Pitbull's boner music video. Instead, the Afore is desperately trying to convince his small, gullible claque of crazies that Philo Sofee is lying out of pure, bitter anger.

The always classy and circumspect Afore claims Philo is suffering through "tough times," a situation he openly admits he knows absolutely nothing about. But hey, why let a total lack of facts ruin a perfectly good character assassination? The Afore decided to speculate on it anyway. Twice:

He has, for example, left the church, perhaps (or so it seems to me) with some anger and bitterness — I think, too, that there have been some other personal challenges, of which I know very little — and, among other things, he has become a moderately active participant on what I call the Peterson Obsession Board.

And then, the pinnacle of patronizing condescension:

I’m not angry at the fellow. Just sad. He’s gone through a lot, and he may, by now, actually believe what he’s saying.

What kind of absolute asshat publicly broadcasts that someone is dealing with "personal challenges" just to paint them as a unhinged apostate. Seriously, is it possible for anyone to be more violently disconnected from reality than the Afore?

[I Have Questions]

Folks, you truly cannot make this stuff up.

Over at the Afore’s blog, in a post ironically titled "False Momories and Social Media, the Afore is at it again. And no, for the record, the "false memory" isn't his own recollection of holding the Second Watson letter, and the "social media" part isn't about liking Pitbull's boner music video. Instead, the Afore is desperately trying to convince his small, gullible claque of crazies that Philo Sofee is lying out of pure, bitter anger.

The always classy and circumspect Afore claims Philo is suffering through "tough times," a situation he openly admits he knows absolutely nothing about. But hey, why let a total lack of facts ruin a perfectly good character assassination? The Afore decided to speculate on it anyway. Twice:

He has, for example, left the church, perhaps (or so it seems to me) with some anger and bitterness — I think, too, that there have been some other personal challenges, of which I know very little — and, among other things, he has become a moderately active participant on what I call the Peterson Obsession Board.

And then, the pinnacle of patronizing condescension:

I’m not angry at the fellow. Just sad. He’s gone through a lot, and he may, by now, actually believe what he’s saying.

What kind of absolute asshat publicly broadcasts that someone is dealing with "personal challenges" just to paint them as a unhinged apostate? Seriously, is it possible for anyone to be more violently disconnected from reality than the Afore?

This from the guy who only days ago was explaining how vital it was to listen carefully and with respect to those who leave the Church. Folks, you really cannot make this up.

[drumdude]

Folks, you truly cannot make this stuff up.

Over at the Afore’s blog, in a post ironically titled "False Momories and Social Media, the Afore is at it again. And no, for the record, the "false memory" isn't his own recollection of holding the Second Watson letter, and the "social media" part isn't about liking Pitbull's boner music video. Instead, the Afore is desperately trying to convince his small, gullible claque of crazies that Philo Sofee is lying out of pure, bitter anger.

The always classy and circumspect Afore claims Philo is suffering through "tough times," a situation he openly admits he knows absolutely nothing about. But hey, why let a total lack of facts ruin a perfectly good character assassination? The Afore decided to speculate on it anyway. Twice:

He has, for example, left the church, perhaps (or so it seems to me) with some anger and bitterness — I think, too, that there have been some other personal challenges, of which I know very little — and, among other things, he has become a moderately active participant on what I call the Peterson Obsession Board.

And then, the pinnacle of patronizing condescension:

I’m not angry at the fellow. Just sad. He’s gone through a lot, and he may, by now, actually believe what he’s saying.

What kind of absolute asshat publicly broadcasts that someone is dealing with "personal challenges" just to paint them as a unhinged apostate? Seriously, is it possible for anyone to be more violently disconnected from reality than the Afore?

It’s a direct view into DCP’s provincial petty little worldview. Where apostates always find unhappiness and tragedy after leaving Mormonism. And acne-faced 19 year old Mormon missionaries “destroy” adult ministers of other faiths.

It’s quite sad and childish, to be quite frank.

[malkie]

Folks, you truly cannot make this stuff up.

Over at the Afore’s blog, in a post ironically titled "False Momories and Social Media, the Afore is at it again. And no, for the record, the "false memory" isn't his own recollection of holding the Second Watson letter, and the "social media" part isn't about liking Pitbull's boner music video. Instead, the Afore is desperately trying to convince his small, gullible claque of crazies that Philo Sofee is lying out of pure, bitter anger.

The always classy and circumspect Afore claims Philo is suffering through "tough times," a situation he openly admits he knows absolutely nothing about. But hey, why let a total lack of facts ruin a perfectly good character assassination? The Afore decided to speculate on it anyway. Twice:

He has, for example, left the church, perhaps (or so it seems to me) with some anger and bitterness — I think, too, that there have been some other personal challenges, of which I know very little — and, among other things, he has become a moderately active participant on what I call the Peterson Obsession Board.

And then, the pinnacle of patronizing condescension:

I’m not angry at the fellow. Just sad. He’s gone through a lot, and he may, by now, actually believe what he’s saying.

What kind of absolute asshat publicly broadcasts that someone is dealing with "personal challenges" just to paint them as a unhinged apostate? Seriously, is it possible for anyone to be more violently disconnected from reality than the Afore?

I think, too, that there have been some other personal challenges, of which I know very little - in Prof Peterson's life. Or perhaps not - his holier-than-thou life may have insulated him from "challenges".

I’m not angry at Prof Peterson. Just sad. He may actually believe what he’s saying.

[I Have Questions]

I think, too, that there have been some other personal challenges, of which I know very little - in Prof Peterson's life. Or perhaps not - his holier-than-thou life may have insulated him from "challenges".

I’m not angry at Prof Peterson. Just sad. He may actually believe what he’s saying.

Preaching one thing whilst practicing the opposite, is a very Mormon thing to do. It’s a very Peterson thing to do. I like pointing out his hypocrisy.