Lol. Excellent.Bret Ripley wrote: ↑Wed Aug 19, 2026 3:51 pmA Limited Astronomy Theory, if you will.Physics Guy wrote: ↑Tue Aug 18, 2026 1:41 amMm, dunno about that. A big plot weakness in Star Wars is how all the characters keep finding each other In. The. Galaxy.
Even if the galaxy far, far away is much smaller than the Milky Way, it has to be way too big for people to just keep bumping into each other like that.
But maybe all the events take place in popular resorts, and Vader likes cruises. That would raise the odds of meeting by a lot.
Mopologetics and "Star Wars"
-
Marcus
- God
- Posts: 8037
- Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2021 10:44 pm
Re: Mopologetics and "Star Wars"
- Everybody Wang Chung
- God
- Posts: 3819
- Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 1:52 am
Re: Mopologetics and "Star Wars"

“Hey Google, show me 'the Afore’s Ultimate Retreat’ and don’t hold back on the chicken fried steak.”
"I'm on paid sabbatical from BYU in exchange for my promise to use this time to finish two books."
Daniel C. Peterson, 2014
Daniel C. Peterson, 2014
- Doctor Scratch
- B.H. Roberts Chair of Mopologetic Studies
- Posts: 1744
- Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 7:24 pm
- Location: Cassius University
Re: Mopologetics and "Star Wars"
I wanted to circle back to this. The image that drumdude posted reminded me of the scene from The Empire Strikes Back where Vader is ordered to make contact with the Emperor. Vader kneels down on a holograph pad and says, "What is thy bidding my master?" and they have a conversation about Luke Skywalker's threat to the empire. At the conclusion of that brief chat, the Emperor asks Vader if Luke can be turned to the dark side, and Vader replies, "He will join us or die, Master."Kishkumen wrote: ↑Wed Aug 19, 2026 5:23 pmI believe that he engages in apologetics partly because he is concerned for the well-being of other people. While I do acknowledge that no one's motives are completely pure--certainly mine are not--I do know that DCP is concerned about others in his apologetics. Were I to reach out to him today and earnestly ask for help with a question about the Gospel, he would make time to talk to me. He would give his time to help me work things out. I can't count that as a completely selfish thing to do.

So, thinking back to this idea of the Afore offering "help." Is this really done in the genuine spirit of generosity, without strings attached? Or is it a "join us or die" kind of mentality? I mean, if *you* the Reverend posed a question to him, would he really "make the time to talk"? I dunno. Possibly. I think it's a lot more likely that he'd brush you off and tell you that he was too busy traveling or dealing with other matters, and that he'd get back to you when he had time. (And then he never would.) But I think the "help" that you're referring to is the sort of Mopologetics-style "help" where he's been dispatched to deal with wavering members. I can't help but think of the incident he himself described where he spent 4 hours talking with someone but failed to disclose that he was there on official SCMC business, which had "recruited" him to try and salvage this wavering member. The thing is: I think that you can definitely read this as being generous on the one hand. I mean, four hours isn't nothing. He did indeed give up that time. And I'm sure he was sincere in hoping that the wavering guy could have been saved and brought back into the fold. If not, though? "He will join us or die, master." So perhaps "selfish" isn't quite the best descriptor.
But behind all this, I think, is very much that authoritarian culture of the Church: "He will join us or die." There is no room for cordial disagreement: the Church is absolutely correct and "perfect," and going against it makes you the enemy. "Only a Sith believes in absolutes," as Obi-Wan says. And the LDS Church is fundamentally an absolutist organization. So "generous" in a sense, I suppose, but only in service to the "Empire."
"If, while hoping that everybody else will be honest and so forth, I can personally prosper through unethical and immoral acts without being detected and without risk, why should I not?." --Daniel Peterson, 6/4/14