Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

30 Excellent

About Bede

  • Rank
    Newbie: Without form, and void

Profile Information

  • Gender

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Just in from the BCC Twitter Anyone have any more details? I always loved his posts.
  2. Peggy Stack does a wonderful explanation in the Salt Lake Tribune. https://www.sltrib.com/religion/local/2017/08/27/denver-snuffers-offshoot-is-drawing-away-mormons-with-the-mantra-god-can-talk-to-you-too-but-will-these-freewheeling-fellowships-last/
  3. This is actually true, according to many studies. https://www.amazon.com/Better-Angels-Our-Nature-Violence/dp/0143122010/ref=pd_lpo_sbs_14_img_1?_encoding=UTF8&psc=1&refRID=VBHR7WT6A4VAE98ZDZJ1
  4. Welch and Roper are solid scholars. Welch is a Book of Mormon expert (more so than Bokovoy, probably by a long shot). Rappleye and Smoot are just kids--give them time.
  5. I’d be interested to see @David Bokovoy response. Did you post this on his (Bokovoy’s) FB page?
  6. LOL, and I graduated from the Ministry of Silly Walks.
  7. Trolling is usually meant to upset multiple people (casting multiple fishing lines into the sea). This is a discussion post regarding something a member of this form said publicly on his Facebook page. You are oversimplifying what I have said in order to reduce it to absurdity. Let me put your mind at ease: I think you should read the OP again. What I said was "not true" was that 1) Bill has not studied *every* problematic issue in Mormonism 2) It is not true that 99% of problematic issues are not shared with general membership. I care because the truth matters, HappyJackWagon. A pawn shop manager can certainly be knowledgeable about church history and doctrine. That isn't what I was disputing. I think you should more carefully read the OP. What I object to is Bill claiming to be 100% absolutely certain about his claim while there are many who are far more knowledgeable than Bill yet remain believers. Why is Bill, a layperson, the expert on Mormonism with 100% accuracy? Thanks, but the truth matters to me.
  8. Please see my correction/edit on post #6 (in green). It does not affect my position as stated in the OP.
  9. I posted that while on my phone and didn’t get the quote right. Let’s not quibble over it: yes Bill actually said that 99% of the secret stuff he knows is not shared with the general membership.
  10. The whole comment about “99%” of the material he has read being unavailable to members is untrue. In fact, @DBMormon is probably aware of that, so it’s therefore a deliberately deceptive thing to say. Edit: This is the misquote, which is not misquoted in the OP. Bill actually said 99% of the material is not shared with the general membership. The OP contains a direct quote and that is the topic of this thread.
  11. @DBMormon in a recent Facebook post you tell a story about a former ward member who contacted you and claimed that you “both know the truth.” While I agree with you that claiming to know what someone else believes is insensitive, your response is, in my opinion, ridiculous. Bill, this is such an insufferably arrogant thing to claim, and it’s not true. But even if it were, many people have read, studied, and even dedicated their lives to the academic study or Mormonism—in other words, far exceeding your “vast” Quinn and Vogel book collection—and yet still remain believers. So here is where people like you usually make excuses “well, they aren’t really believers.” That, of course, is the same arrogant take you attribute to your friend, claiming to know what others believe. So how do you reconcile this? A pawn shop manager who has read a bunch of Quinn and Vogel books and becomes an unbeliever vs. university professors and scholars who have dedicated their lives to these topics and still remain believers?
  12. Are you joking? Turley couldn’t even answer the most basic historical questions when confronted with them in Sweden.
  • Create New...