Introducing .... Buckeye

[_Buckeye]

Howdy. I’m fairly new the LDS message board scene. Most of my time has been spent at MADB.

It is sometimes argued by critics that the church should not teach anyone the gospel without first informing them of, for lack a better phrase, “the dirt.” Not being sure where to begin here, I thought I’d introduce myself by trying this out. So here are some reasons you should ignore everything I have to say:

1) I swore once. Just once, but it was a big one.
2) At a family reunion when I was a kid (eight or nine If I recall correctly) I stole a polished rock from the campground store so I could skip it across the river. I got caught.
3) I threw a baseball through my window once on accident.
4) I sometimes picked on my younger siblings growing up.
5) I sometimes struggle getting out of bed in the morning.
6) I have lied, and continue to lie, to my children about Santa Clause, the Tooth Fairy, and El Cucuy.

I could go on, but you get the gist. Looking at the above list, I don’t expect anyone to respond to this post. But if you do, please be sure to include your bad history so that if I’m ever persuaded by your logic, I can at least fall back to impeaching your character.

[_Bond...James Bond]

Welcome Buckeye! Hope you enjoy your time here.

[_OMWO2]

Here is my dirt; I am a former Mormon! Nuff said.

Your dirt means nothing as long as you aren't also trying to tell me that you personally spoke with god, want to sleep with my wife AND daughters, command me to give me 10% to get into heaven etc... You get my drift!

[_Dr. Shades]

OMOW2 is right. All the stuff you posted would only matter *IF* you also claimed that God told you to do all those things.

[_guy sajer]

Howdy. I’m fairly new the LDS message board scene. Most of my time has been spent at MADB.

It is sometimes argued by critics that the church should not teach anyone the gospel without first informing them of, for lack a better phrase, “the dirt.” Not being sure where to begin here, I thought I’d introduce myself by trying this out. So here are some reasons you should ignore everything I have to say:

1) I swore once. Just once, but it was a big one.
2) At a family reunion when I was a kid (eight or nine If I recall correctly) I stole a polished rock from the campground store so I could skip it across the river. I got caught.
3) I threw a baseball through my window once on accident.
4) I sometimes picked on my younger siblings growing up.
5) I sometimes struggle getting out of bed in the morning.
6) I have lied, and continue to lie, to my children about Santa Clause, the Tooth Fairy, and El Cucuy.

I could go on, but you get the gist. Looking at the above list, I don’t expect anyone to respond to this post. But if you do, please be sure to include your bad history so that if I’m ever persuaded by your logic, I can at least fall back to impeaching your character.

I've been known to operate my little factory at times (actually, big factory in my case). I'm obviously a more vile sinner than you are.

[_Buckeye]

OMOW2 is right. All the stuff you posted would only matter *IF* you also claimed that God told you to do all those things.

I take it then that you would find irrelevant anything that Joseph did but which did not claim God told him to do - such as destroying the Expositor's press?

[_Dr. Shades]

I take it then that you would find irrelevant anything that Joseph did but which did not claim God told him to do - such as destroying the Expositor's press?

Not necessarily. In that case, I would look for a generalized pattern of pathological lying.

[_guy sajer]

OMOW2 is right. All the stuff you posted would only matter *IF* you also claimed that God told you to do all those things.

I take it then that you would find irrelevant anything that Joseph did but which did not claim God told him to do - such as destroying the Expositor's press?

I'd expand this a bit and make it more general--one's behavior (particularly the extent to which one actually practices what he preaches) is a useful "signal" in evaluating one's claims to act and speak on behalf of deity.

Destroying a printing press that revealed one's pattern of adulterous affairs and sexual misconduct/exploitation is indeed a useful signal in judging the validity of Joseph Smith's claims.

[_Buckeye]

OMOW2 is right. All the stuff you posted would only matter *IF* you also claimed that God told you to do all those things.

I take it then that you would find irrelevant anything that Joseph did but which did not claim God told him to do - such as destroying the Expositor's press?

I'd expand this a bit and make it more general--one's behavior (particularly the extent to which one actually practices what he preaches) is a useful "signal" in evaluating one's claims to act and speak on behalf of deity.

Destroying a printing press that revealed one's pattern of adulterous affairs and sexual misconduct/exploitation is indeed a useful signal in judging the validity of Joseph Smith's claims.

Since you and the good Doctor gave similar responses, I'll respond just once.

First, why is someone's integrity (actually practicing what he preaches) a "signal" for evaluating whether they speak for deity? Can you point me to anyone who speaks for deity? Can you then compare that person's integrity against the integrity of non-annoited persons?

Second, I would agree that to judge someone we must "expand" the analysis and look at their behavior "general[ly]". Would you agree then, that to judge Joseph (or Brigham or whomever), we can't merely show one side of them - either their successes or their failures, but we must show both their successes and failures? It seems hypocritical for critics to lambast the church for not telling the "whole story", when their stories are themselves so one-sided. I guess facts that show Joseph or the church in a good light, while true, just aren't very useful.

[_cksalmon]

Hey Buckeye--

I remember you from across the way. Welcome to the board.

Chris