Cinepro's reply to Schryver's post is a classic. Click here to read it.
Besides NOM's, I think one has to look no further than the Democratic Party to identify the enemies within the Church.
Mormons believe in a church run by prophets and seers. You believe that God is running the show. If what you say is true, why do God's prophets stand idly by and say nothing? When did deciding who is an enemy to the church become your call?
Last edited by _Stormy Waters on Fri Jun 08, 2012 6:00 am, edited 1 time in total.
Since you read here Daniel, I have a question regarding your article.
We know how the story of Alma and the sons of Mosiah ends. It finishes wonderfully, in redemptive divine grace. Do we know, though, how to recognize their modern counterparts? And, please, don't doubt that they exist. As President Ezra Taft Benson repeatedly insisted, the Book of Mormon was "written for our day."
So you say you're certain they exist. Can you give us some examples?
The sad part is he leads in with an fictional anecdote:
By the end of the second century before Christ, during the generation or so following the abdication of King Benjamin, Nephite society had undergone several major upheavals.
Someone might tell these Mormons that Nephite society is no more real than Numenorian society.
Whatever appears to be against the Book of Mormon is going to be overturned at some time in the future. So we can be pretty open minded.-charity 3/7/07
MASH quotes I peeked in the back [of the Bible] Frank, the Devil did it. I avoid church religiously. This isn't one of my sermons, I expect you to listen.
I wonder if the Church leadership has yet realised that the people who drive more members away from the Church and prevent more potential conversions are, more than anything else, people like Dan and Will?
The Church needs to migrate to the examples set by Dehlin and Brooks etc and those members marching through the streets telling the world that the Church is wrong to victimise gay people. That's the Church's future and it's about time the head honcho's realised that and got off their well fed, well stipended butts and effected some real change in the institution.
“We look to not only the spiritual but also the temporal, and we believe that a person who is impoverished temporally cannot blossom spiritually.” Keith McMullin - Counsellor in Presiding Bishopric
"One, two, three...let's go shopping!" Thomas S Monson - Prophet, Seer, Revelator
Daniel Peterson wrote:Incidentally, as regards McCarthyism, witch hunts, and Inquisitions? I’m against ‘em.
Reassuring to know, Daniel, and not surprising. Unfortunately, whether you intend to advocate a spiritual McCarthyism or not, your pal William Schryver is holding court on MDDB, where he is taking credit for inspiring your article and advocating sniffing out apostates.
Maybe he didn't get the memo.
Regardless of your avowed opposition to the above-listed items, the potential ramifications of encouraging others to fear secret enemies who may not even realize they are enemies is something you ought to have foreseen and avoided.
"Petition wasn’t meant to start a witch hunt as I’ve said 6000 times." ~ Hanna Seariac, LDS apologist
bcspace wrote: Besides NOM's, I think one has to look no further than the Democratic Party to identify the enemies within the Church.
I am an enemy of the Church? Really? That will be news to my husband, my bishop, and my Stake President.
Chill out dudess. He said you were an enemy within the church. Big Difference.
(Actually, I think it is probably a lot worse than just being a plain old enemy.)
Zadok: I did not have a faith crisis. I discovered that the Church was having a truth crisis. Maksutov: That's the problem with this supernatural stuff, it doesn't really solve anything. It's a placeholder for ignorance.
Cinepro's reply to Schryver's post is a classic. Click here to read it.
Besides NOM's, I think one has to look no further than the Democratic Party to identify the enemies within the Church.
So a member of the Church, who belongs to the Democratic party is an enemy to the Church? Expect for those members who Democrats when it was ok to be Democrats?
Doctor Scratch wrote:Probably John Dehlin, if I had to guess. This is probably a set-up for whatever version of Greg Smith's "hit piece" winds up in the Review.
I had the same impression. It appears to me that Dan and Will have recently become best buds. Will was always 'off his rocker,' but Dan seems to be headed the same direction, which surprises me. I think Dehlin's having the GA stop Smith's article about Dehlin, really freaked Dan out and knocked him off his apologist "rameumptom." Why Dan would publicly become so close to a lunatic like Will boggles the mind.
"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)
