From My Informant: Oaks "Apoplectic" at FAIR & FARMS

[_Doctor Scratch]

Gramps's belief is that Oaks is a liar. I for one agree with him. Plus, I think Oaks is a fool. You think I am obligated to prove that claim? No. My claim is belief--which I admit I can't prove. Get used to the fact that the men you pay 10% of your income to are liars, frauds, and fools.

I’m thinking you have misunderstood my point regarding there remains possibility. I don’t try to prove my point by the fact that there are possibilities. I’m suggesting that in these discussions, for those who wish to prove the Church false, whatever that would mean, they have to extinguish possibility in order to accomplish their claims of “the Church is false”. That’s a tall order.

Indeed it is, stemelbow, which is why I'm delighted that you're allowing for the possibility that my informant's allegations are true, and that Elder Oaks really is livid over recent happenings in the world of Mopologetics. I appreciate your decency and openness, stem.

[_stemelbow]

Indeed it is, stemelbow, which is why I'm delighted that you're allowing for the possibility that my informant's allegations are true, and that Elder Oaks really is livid over recent happenings in the world of Mopologetics. I appreciate your decency and openness, stem.

I"m quite open. I'm even open to the possibilty that Oaks has lied. We all have, afterall. I don't' know if one lie gives a fair reason to lable someone a liar. Liar would have no meaning if that were the case--we're all liars on such grounds.

Unfortunately for your case you don't really have anything but some made-up story about someone who thinks he/she might know that Oaks took exception to something and thus, it seems, over-reacted. I suppose anything is possible, but now you're just rolling our rumors much like those silly tabloids. hey they have their audience too.

[_stemelbow]

It is an approach that will never work, IMNHO. If all things are possibly true, then there is no reason to disbelieve anything....seems like a foolish way to go through life.

Hi Madeleine,

that's not really my position. I have faith in Christ, for instance. I can't prove the guy named Jesus who lived 200 years ago in and around the area of Jerusalem is the LORD. Its my faith. If someone wants to offer a critique arguing that He is not the LORD, then all I have to do in response is explain that there remains possibility beyond the conclusion drawn via the critique. You see someone might say, "well there's no evidence that Jesus actually rose from the dead". Now I might try to go find some pieces of evidence which might include eye witness testimony or something, but since my true evidence is via faith, for my belief, then to maintain my belief I don't' really have to do much of anything but suggest just because there is no evidence, as one might claim, doesn't mean it didn't happen. The critique simply doesn't extinguish possibility. In this the critique is merely offering the subjective reasons for people not to believe. And for me, not believingis a reasonable take. I can't disabuse someone of that.

[_badseed]

[
Elder Oaks said he does not know what life will be in the next life, when you're married to more than one wife for eternity. That does not mean he doesn't have any knowledge regarding whether those who are sealed for eternity will be together for eternity or not.

Oaks doesn't know like we all don't really 'know'. His actions thought suggest that he has some idea of what will happen. If not why be sealed to more than one wife for eternity? If the Brethren really know nothing about what will go on then why are only men allowed to be sealed to multiple women? Is is merely a case of continuing on course until told otherwise?

[_harmony]

Is is merely a case of continuing on course until told otherwise?

Bingo!

Which explains, among other things, the lack of inspiration at the top of the LDS food chain.

[_Doctor Scratch]

Can someone explain to me why the MDD apologists--including Bill Hamblin, who often works in Israel, and Dr. Peterson, who has frequently expressed outrage at any insinuation that he might be an "anti-Semite"--are making Hitler jokes on this thread?:

http://newsroom.LDS.org/article/elder-o ... ocumentary

Looks like I got an answer:

Heil Mitchell!

A supplemental note for those who may imagine -- or, more realistically, who may simply be aware of the idiotic fantasies of a certain obsessive nutcase who pretends to imagine -- that the use of "Heil Mitchell" here indicates sympathy for, or a cavalier attitude toward, Nazism: It doesn't. Instead, it's meant to poke satirical fun at a certain malignant loon who seeks, for reasons known only to him (and perhaps to the mental health professionals who care for him, if he's fortunate enough to have such), to portray the Maxwell Institute and Mormon apologetics as evil, secretive, conspiratorial, vengeance-driven, and the like (rather like the Nazi Party of the 1920s).

So, he's saying that his, Pahoran's, and Hamblin's means of satirizing a "portrayal" of the MI as "secretive, conspiratorial," etc., is to start acting like Nazis? Okay. Strikes me as somewhat tasteless, but whatever floats your boat, I guess.

In any case, I think a fun exercise would be to put some of the apologists' more noteworthy outbursts side-by-side:

Jews have precious few friends in the world.

Heil Mitchell!

I get mad every time I think about those Kikes. The Kikes are so clannish; and they wear funny cloths. Those stupid Kikes always do what their Rabbis tell them. They think they should be obedient to God. What mindless Kikebots.

Heil Mitchell!

Some sense of humor on these guys!

[Guest]

I get mad every time I think about those Kikes. The Kikes are so clannish; and they wear funny cloths. Those stupid Kikes always do what their Rabbis tell them. They think they should be obedient to God. What mindless Kikebots.

Heil Mitchell!

Seriously, did Bill Hamblin actually say this?! Even if he was joking, this would get him fired from any state or federal job and most places in the private sector. If he worked for me, I would have canned his ass regardless of whether he was joking. Is he insane? I'm starting to miss Will Schryver.

[_schreech]

So, he's saying that his, Pahoran's, and Hamblin's means of satirizing a "portrayal" of the MI as "secretive, conspiratorial," etc., is to start acting like Nazis? Okay. Strikes me as somewhat tasteless, but whatever floats your boat, I guess.

Some sense of humor on these guys!

Will the LDS mockery of the children of Israel never end? They continue to baptize their ancestors against their wishes, declare themselves members of their tribes, adopt their legends as the basis for their pseudo-christian faith and NOW they think they are clever by adopting Nazi-isms in order to deflect criticism....what a classy bunch of guys...the fact that these guys are the defenders(???-lol) of the faith always brings a smile to my face...

[_beastie]

Seriously, did Bill Hamblin actually say this?! Even if he was joking, this would get him fired from any state or federal job and most places in the private sector. If he worked for me, I would have canned his ass regardless of whether he was joking. Is he insane? I'm starting to miss Will Schryver.

If I recall correctly, the comment was made in the context of trying to demonstrate the evils of anti-mormon bigotry.

[_sethpayne]

For the record, though, I'm not aware of anyone in the seminar who was either homosexual

Must've been my earrings and muscular wife that tipped them off.

Ha!

Awesome.