Jump to content

cinepro

Contributor
  • Content Count

    10,535
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by cinepro

  1. The Church leader would certainly be acknowledging that the term "Mormon" is understood to apply to whatever it was discussing.
  2. You and I are both speaking about this hypothetically. We are both participating under aliases. Life is good. I'm not fan of Dehlin. I've been critical of him for 20 years. I think he's a dunderheaded doofus. I think his interviews are meandering and oftentimes filled with non-sequiturs. But I can only imagine the feeling of seeing a video of an actor labeled "(insert cinepro's real name)" brutally clubbed to death. Maybe that's no big deal to others. I think it's a big deal.
  3. Whoever created the video made one huge mistake. Setting aside the general tastelessness, they should not have labeled the people "John Delin" and "Jeremy Runnells." Those characters should have been named "Mormon Stories" and "CES Letter." The other entities are labeled as things and groups, such as "FAIR" and "TITS." They should have maintained that across the board. Naming specific people was a huge mistake.
  4. The way social media works is that if you share something (without commenting otherwise), you are endorsing what you share.
  5. I have to admit, I love how TITS took all the conversations and defenses of the last few days ("They don't support the acronym...", "They are just being edgy like the youth want...", "This is the new direction of apologetics...") and did a "Hold my root beer" with a video of a guy labeled "John Dehlin" getting his head bashed in with a baseball bat labeled "TITS" (referring to the This Is The Story podcast), with FAIR labeled as an encouraging onlooker. I've been following apologetics for 30 years (since the days of "The Truth about the Godmakers" and Dan Petersen's "Offenders for a Word")
  6. Wow. I'm trying my best to see the upside in these videos, but I'm just not seeing it. If this is the type of content that will save the youth of the Church, then I have to admit I am hopelessly out of touch. I honestly can't believe these are being released under the FAIR brand. I've seen Kwaku pop up on different things over the years, and I think he has a problem with his focus. I'm all for being entrepreneurial and exploring different options, but at some point, you need to pick your lane. I mean, is this really the Instagram post of someone who aspires to defend the Church as an apol
  7. Somehow I've ended up in the Mormon Stories Facebook group, and if anyone ever needs evidence for mental illness among former members of the Church, their reactions to this could be exhibit A. I think the theory du jour is that this is a plan by President Nelson to increase his control over Church members during the pandemic, with an additional dose of gaslighting thrown in...because it's always "gaslighting."
  8. If you don't have a dog in the fight, then it probably isn't Confirmation Bias. It would more likely be an Availability Bias, where things that are more recently emphasized and discussed come to mind more quickly, so when you hear a statement in General Conference you link it to things that have prominently been in the news (like the upcoming US election.) Availability Bias
  9. When it comes to the Second Coming, I think this is one of the best talks I've heard:
  10. While it's great that it was dismissed, I am disappointed that it wasn't dismissed based on the merit (or lack thereof) of the accusation.
  11. Not sure if this ever got discussed here, but since it was such a big discussion back in 2018, I wanted to make sure everyone saw how this turned out.
  12. The true value of a theory (and some might say the only value of a theory) is the effect it can have on someone that doesn't already believe it. So tell me: what is the value of your new "reworked EmodE" theory to someone that isn't already committed to the idea that the Book of Mormon is true? You might be thinking that the more complex this theory gets, the more convincing it is because that makes it less likely for 19th century authors to have created it. But I'm not sure it works that way for someone who doesn't already believe in the supernatural nature of the creation of the book.
  13. I agree. Reading old Ensigns (1970s - 1980s) is definitely more towards the "BYU Studies" end of the spectrum. Articles where you can actually learn stuff. Now it's almost full-Watchtower.
  14. I might be missing something, but it seems extremely odd for someone who has been on this forum for two weeks to accuse someone else of being a sock puppet. I mean, even if JasonMonroe were a sock puppet, if it were someone whose time on this forum predated August 3, how would you even know who it was?
  15. I predict that six months from now, that will be part of the apologetic theory.
  16. If people filling in gaps on the facsimiles with made-up stuff and overestimating their ability to translate the Egyptian and therefore deceiving people bothers you, I have terrible news.
  17. Assuming the "angel Moroni raising" you refer to was outdoors, outdoors is much safer than indoors. Especially if you're singing and spending a lot of time near people indoors. https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.04.20053058v1
  18. It might be more correct to say that apologetics is dancing with science, and science is leading.
  19. Uh, that's what I said. It is most honest to say that we don't know where the BoM came from. Unfortunately, that doesn't help the believers' case. I would also be wary of being overconfident in the "EModE findings" and what they mean. I don't know how long you've been in the apologetics game, but things like that have a way of circling back and biting you in the behind.
  20. It's not Richard's job to explain who wrote the Book of Mormon. Even if we don't know who did it, that doesn't mean that "God did it" is the logically compelling argument. It simply means that we don't know who did it, or how Joseph did it. It is enough for Richard to simply say that the evidence doesn't support your theory about the origin of the book. Sure, his "Joseph did it" theory may not satisfactorily explain what you present as evidence that there is "Early Modern English" in the book, but I'm pretty sure your "God did it" theory also doesn't satisfactorily explain it either.
  21. Here's a picture they posted. I don't remember which language they said.
  22. Today my nephew was doing a Zoom chat to open his mission call. His sister had printed it out so he could read it to us all. He started at the top and went paragraph by paragraph, until he got to this part: "You are hereby called to serve as a missionary in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. You are assigned to labor in the Capitol Hill Autonomous Zone." I admit it. I laughed.
×
×
  • Create New...