The Nehor

A lot of the ire he gets comes from correcting misinformation. A lot of his videos are countering apologists who get things wrong about the Bible. He also does some correcting of skeptics who get the Bible wrong. One example of the latter was a video debunking the idea that Jesus was based on the Egyptian goddess Isis. I think the most backlash he gets is from countering what amounts to political and cultural propaganda that abuses the Bible. This for example: A personal favorite is a response to culture warriors dunking on some people (possibly sarcastically) praying to a non-binary God. Always fun to see some mainstream Christians talk about the incomprehensible God with no physical body and insist that God is male thereby going back to the more ‘primitive’ belief that Jews and early Christians held about an embodied God because they need that metaphor to get angry and scream about blasphemy instead of chuckling at the silliness and rolling their eyes and moving on. Gotta demonize those satanic queer people for the blasphemy of saying something we also believe.

So when asked scholarly questions he should bear his testimony? They could grab any rando LDS person for that. Why would anyone want to listen to that? Accurate. It is not based on a philosophical claim or biblical scholarship. The conclusion is based on how historians operate. They take the data they have from a lot of fields (archaeology, textual criticism, etc.) and try to reconstruct what we can say is probable. Also most of this stuff of sociopolitical issues start with him doing a deep dive into the Bible as to what it says about those issues and he is brutally factual there even when the Bible says something he doesn’t like. Then often shares his thoughts on the issue. I don’t think you have spent any time listening to him. You seem to have built up an image of some strawman “enemy within” apostate who you are bitter about because he disagrees with you about your culture war nonsense. It is a historical conclusion. There is some special pleading here that we should definitely factor in the possibility of the supernatural when reaching historical conclusions when it involves Christianity’s traditional claims but no one is going to bat for the miracles of the other wandering wise men of the period or for miracles credited to being performed by polytheistic deities. It is a high bar but supernatural events have to have a LOT of evidence to prove. That is just how historical research works and the evidence for the resurrection is pretty weak. The resurrection narratives are assumed to be later stories because they are later stories. Yes, the idea that Jesus came back to life was prevalent early and the most likely point of origin for those stories is Peter (and possibly Mary). And cases of people seeing dead loved ones aren’t that rare. The empty tomb narrative is also late. There are a few problems with the empty tomb narrative. The biggest one is that is not how crucifixion victims were treated. They were thrown into mass graves. Now is it possible that someone begged for the body of Jesus and got it? Maybe. Or maybe that was a later rationalization. There was no one controlling the story. Peter was around but how was he going to reasonably counter people getting stuff wrong? He was probably dead before the Book of Acts and the gospels showed up. The Pauline letters say almost nothing about the life of Jesus. As far as we can tell Paul was focused on Jesus dying and being brought back to life and what that meant. Paul had one short time with Peter and the two did not seem to get along. I get the impression Peter just wanted him to just go and evangelize anywhere else. Also, there are lots and lots and lots of papers and books and videos by experts discussing the evidence of the resurrection. He didn’t “elide” that interpretive step. He is in line with most of the scholarship. You really have some perverse need to make Dan dishonest. Your flaw is that he presents the scholarship correctly and it doesn’t confirm your favorite dogma and he should support that dogma because that is what good LDS do. You also personalize this as if Dan is the one ruling it out. No, the historical consensus rules it as very improbable and he passes that along. There are plenty of scholars that will tell you what you want to hear. There are big flaws and a priori assumptions in their work too though so if you want to be consistent you would have to throw them out too. The most common one I see thrown around is claiming that the martyrdom of all the apostles/disciples prove it must have been real because no one dies for something they don’t believe is true. No one is claiming that Peter didn’t believe it. Or James. Or Paul. Also as a technical point Peter recanting wouldn’t have saved him. He and other Christians were reportedly being scapegoated for a crime so him disavowing Christianity wouldn’t have led to him being spared. And the rest of the apostles/disciple vanish from the historical record very quickly and accounts of their martyrdoms only pop up centuries later and many include things like dragons so there aren’t a lot of people taking those stories seriously but some apologists love endlessly repeating that they were all martyred when they won’t defend the only accounts we have of them being martyred. That is pretty dishonest. So you haven’t found a flaw in his schtick. Nor do I think you know enough about the state of the field or what Dan actually does to accuse him of dishonesty and trickery. The stuff Dan says is pretty much what Christian clergy who go to good educational institutions learn to get their degrees. This isn’t hidden stuff. Well…..except that clergy rarely share all this with their congregations for……reasons. Probably reasons similar to why you don’t like what Dan says. To be fair I do have one beef with Dan. Why has he not created a t-shirt with his line, “Leave my trans homies alone” on it? I’ll buy it!

This isn’t rhetorical overuse. It is calling a rapist a rapist because he raped someone. Rapists, bigots, and fascists are all real things, actual people that are these things. If you reflexively assume it is always hyperbole maybe that is an even bigger problem than the potential for overuse. Swatting someone away is a “no”. Being so insensate that all she remembers is being tired is a “no”. The text message was sent by one person. Others of them showed up. That is rapey behavior and it is RAPE to proceed without an enthusiastic “yes”. This isn’t hard. They knew they were taking advantage of her condition like a lot of rapists do. This is often how rape works. You seem to be trying to define the concept of rape out of existence. Rape apologists are what fuel this kind of conduct. I find your condemnation facile. I don’t. We are talking about Cornell University where protesting on behalf of Gaza gets you deported while raping someone gets you a remedial essay assignment on why what you did was wrong. I won’t hold my breath expecting any form of justice. And seeking justice from God would involve *checks Old Testament* paying her father a fine and having the first guy marry her assuming she was a virgin. If not a virgin…..no crime committed. So not going to hold my breath there either.

I get wanting to hold onto that but while in many ways not brave to eternal struggles (as evidenced in this thread) I do have a strong thirst for knowledge and one thing I learned in a very harsh manner is sometimes the facts don’t match what I want them to. I would like to believe there is a simple or even complex solution to human conflict but as I studied history I didn’t find any way out of the constant conflicts between humans. They are baked into the world we live in. More recently I don’t like that I can’t find any good reason to trust God and have begun to doubt He exists at all. In fact in some ways I hope He doesn’t. If a lot of what His character in scripture is shown as is accurate I don’t trust Him at all and don’t want to live in a world he runs. I am still open to God somehow reaching out to help but am also terrified if He does as it will almost certainly involve breaking me in multiple ways because that seems to be how it works. Then again i think I could cope with a Telestial eternity if He just for the most part leaves us alone. Then again annihilation on death doesn’t carry the same fear for me that it used to. If that is the end then being dead will probably be a lot like what it was before I was born and that wasn’t so bad. I would rather the child not be finished but my wishes mean little in the face of cold reality.

I was talking about that specific kind of eternal rest. I was not conflating it with finding consolation in something in this life. I am glad for almost anything that alleviates suffering. There is already far too much of it. I don’t what minimize what you have gained. I do have a hard time accepting that God’s grace can only be manifest by pouring out suffering everywhere. The idea that humans must be broken in order to learn has a heroic bend to it and overcoming struggles is aspirational. I just find that grace less impressive when the consolation comes from the person who inflicted the suffering in the first place. Or at least allowed it to happen though with an omniscient and omnipotent being I have a very hard time determining a distinction between allowing and acting as both are direct choices made. This is the only way? The best way? Really? It also makes me shudder. If opposition in all things is some unending principle I have little reason to believe suffering and the like will stop in some future state where all will be made right. If the opposition matches the power of the person we might even expect it to get much worse.

A little. He wasn’t very good at it. He was better at it then this kind of really dumb playground insult level. What you said is Trump-level nicknaming. Sleepy Joe Biden. Lying Hillary. Childish and dumb. I mean, if you are going to insult someone put some wit into it. This is just sad.

I think they need to be more blunt. They are worried about offending climate change deniers in their own body. Do they really need this level of coddling?

I assume you mean the New York will be underwater by 2010 prediction as that is the most common one. Which he didn’t make. So their cunning plan was to have this girl call out the UN for failing the future in order to create a global totalitarian dictatorship that *checks notes* no one is seriously agitating for, has no support, and the UN doesn’t have the authority to create. This is conspiracy nonsense. Only the stupidest of fundamentalist evangelical rapture enthusiasts think that all nations are eager to lay down their sovereignty. Why are you doing this?

No, it is an accurate description of that biblical text. Dan takes his professional work seriously. If the facts give someone reasons to doubt the culprit is reality. LOL, have you watched Dan’s videos (Grok doesn’t count)? Or read any of this books? He is very methodical. He does his best to avoid spin. He will tell you what the text says and what the intentions appear to be based on the majority of the scholarship. He does this even when he dislikes what the Bible is saying. The irony is that a lot of his opponents attack him claiming he is a Mormon shill. Occasionally he has a good laugh about that and says that Mormon viewers don’t like what he is saying about as much as most Christians do. He is talking about Christians in general and yeah, he does do that because that is what the data points to. He won’t lie or obscure things to make people feel better. He is good at his job. So you’re just gonna assume Grok gave you the full context there then? You do know he is still active and participating in the Church right? He did put out a video as to why he doesn’t do a lot of textual criticism of the Book of Mormon, his views on the book, and some linguistic work he did do on the Book of Mormon: Oh, and if you want to have a lot of fun look up his video on trans issues.

I don’t accept the false dichotomy that there is a binary choice between God’s plan and embracing nihilism. Most atheists aren’t nihilists. Just because Hobbes had a negative take on people doesn’t mean I have to. And Hobbes ignores the fact that humans have always had societies and some form of government even if it was more informal so when did that nihilistic take apply?

Not just stand by. Deliberately put them in harm’s way and then not intervene. An active choice not to intervene. Good point, I don’t want to do that work. That is sick. If that is the highest righteousness then the laws of the cosmos I live in are depraved and sick. The hero of Omelas isn’t to be found in the ones who walk away. It is the person who hopefully one day goes in and rescues the suffering child and lets Omelas burn it that is the result. We find God’s rest in suffering and death. That is really screwed up. I don’t find the idea that someone suffered more than me edifying anymore. I can be grateful to someone who suffered more but it seems like God’s highest honor is to suffer and die for Him. A God of Martyrdom and Pain. Why do I want to be like this guy? Then my eternal reward is to allow the suffering of my own children forever and ever because that is the only way to find happiness and eventually get to do the same to my grandchildren? What kind of screwed up MLM is this? Excuse me, I would like off of the ride now please!

The video did lay out the timeline you say they omitted and I suspect the DA is playing ‘fast and loose’ with the facts. https://people.com/cornell-jane-doe-s-family-swatted-at-home-12164905 Not according to her attorney. Which you did just now by saying that mobocratic outrage was “utterly wrong”. You dismiss the mobocratic injury/murder attempt on the female victim and then tut about people being upset at the male perpetrators who, even if this isn’t something that can be criminally prosecuted, are still RAPISTS. She appears to have consented to the first two guys…..dubiously. Then those guys invited more guys in on the fun. You know who does that? Big Rapey Raper McRapersons. And those offended by the idea that they might be held accountable are targeting the victim with violence…..repeatedly. This is not new. This happens in many publicized sexual assault cases. The misogynists act to intimidate, silence, harm, or kill the victim. IT BAD. IT RAPE CULTURE. Please stop carrying water for them. K thx bye

I’m not sure that is faith anymore if it expects nothing. That is like saying I trust someone completely knowing they are unreliable when I am in need. What is the trust based on? Maybe just being reliable in another life? Yep. And being told that I am so fortunate doesn’t help. It is like saying you should be happy. God could have made it so much worse and even did for a lot of people throughout history and up to this day. So I should trust God because he could have made it so much worse and he did for many of his children? That is supposed to be a consolation for anyone with empathy? Yeah, if God seems to make overhyped promises of prosperity and joy here and I find it underwhelming then I have a hard time getting excited about more promises that could also be overhyped. I just sometimes wonder if God is even needed in that equation.

I used to think there was. When my faith started to ebb after failed revelation I experimented and found that with the right mental and emotional stimulation I could replicate what I used to call revelatory experiences. So I went looking for continued reasons to press on elsewhere.

“Seek and expect miracles.” - President Nelson Trying to lower or get rid of expectations is really pushing against the grain of scripture, prophetic counsel, and the whole vibe of church culture and admonitions. I mean, sure, there are the “and if not” admonitions that sometimes you won’t get it but my brain can’t work on this level. How do you fully expect the best and all kinds of miracles and then shift to a kind of resigned stoicism and then go back to optimistic expectations? Wouldn’t just a more moderate realism be more palatable than advocating for a roller coaster ride. I sincerely envy the people I see in Church (and elsewhere) that can seem convinced the best will happen and then it very often doesn’t and then in the next situation they seem to think the best will happen again. HOW DOES THAT BRAND OF OPTIMISM SURVIVE BEING ALMOST PERPETUALLY WRONG?

I wish the scriptures were better at teaching that instead of effusively talking about being blessed in all things both temporal and spiritual or pouring out blessings that there is not room to receive and the regular ‘if then’ statements that obedience leads to prosperity. The prophets should probably have stuck with the “underpromise and overdeliver” bit instead of the opposite.

Some people take “mourn with those that mourn” to mean explain why the person shouldn’t be mourning and their mourning is wrong and bad.

No, that is how magic works in some fiction. It is not how ritual magic was supposed to work historically and even that varied from culture to culture. A lot of Jewish and Christian ritual magic involved being morally pure and upright before God and not being in that condition meant that it wouldn’t work or (in extreme cases) it would drive you insane or even kill you. Being contingent on obeidence is not unique to ‘approved’ religious ordinances. I don’t believe that the reason clergy was professionalized was due to the complexity of ordinances. Even if it was the whole of the Torah suggests that complex ritual ordinances are not something God despises. Our temple ordinances are not exactly simple and quick. Not all forms of ritual magic require some perfect language. This was a thing in Jewish magical practice for a while especially when they were convinced the Hebrew language was divine and many believed it was a key to understanding how God created everything. I think it is more a resistance to change. People generally don’t like change. I’m a pretty bad Latter-Day Saint by most standards at this point. As I said Ritual magic is often much more involved than the . If you like horror movies the movie “Dark Song” is about two people doing an extended Abramelin ritual, a Kabbalistic magic meant to summon your guardian angel to grant a request. It is reportedly very dangerous…hence why it is a horror movie. Another form of magic or possibly a religious rite that has strange parallels to some LDS rites is the practice of Jewish Merkabah mysticism. Based on Ezekiel’s chariot throne visions it is an attempt to descend and reach the throne of God. You have to pass a bunch of guardian angels and these angels are not the loving kind. They are the “kill all humans” kind. It requires all kinds of ritual purifications and learning secret signals and passwords you have to use to get there. If you fail you might be expelled, might be driven insane, or might die. Even if you succeed you might be wounded. If you succeed you approach the throne and can measure the form of God…possibly inspired by how Ezekiel had exact measurements of things in his writings and the Book of Revelation does the same thing with its space station sized city of New Jerusalem. Some scholars have pointed out that Paul’s being caught up to the third heaven thing sounds a bit like a Merkabah trek through heaven. This could mean the thorn in his side might even refer to being metaphysically wounded by a guardian angel. You were also not supposed to share Merkabah experiences with non-initiates which might explain why Paul was so cagey about relating the experience. He starts out talking in the third person and then admits it was him and he seems to have only done so to prove his legitimacy. Earlier in the letter we read of “super apostles” coming after Paul and teaching some other stuff. Did Paul break his silence in order to hold on to the congregation? We know Paul had an ecstatic experience in the Book of Acts that led to a lot more Gentile proselyting. Was that the same experience? So is Merkabah a religious rite? A magical ritual? Something in between?

That could easily be a very codependent relationship I am reminded of this old blog post I saved:

Fun Fact*: Jane Doe has been doxxed online and is receiving regular death threats and threatening phone calls in general. On Tuesday she was swatted. Someone called in a false 911 call about her family’s home reporting that shots had been fired. The clear intent was that someone would get injured or killed. Police approached with weapons drawn scaring everyone and the family is now blocking out their windows and increasing security. A nice warning from all the rapists and rapist supporters that women should not try to hold men accountable for their crimes. We sure do love our misogyny don’t we? And some people say rape culture isn’t real. What clowns they must be. *Fact is actually not fun at all

Then how do you react when God doesn’t provide a home, clothing, and food and everything necessary? Or they weren’t and/or aren’t being cared for in a loving environment? If you put God in front of a family court to testify about how He trusted his children to mortal parents he knew were abusive or would be abusive God would have to say that he did do that. God would be judged an unfit and negligent parent. You can appeal to a larger context where everything will eventually made right or things will be healed but that is cold comfort to those enduring pain now. And then God is going to have to send those children to spirit prison/hell to ‘fix’ their unbelief in this loving God that put them in that situation because they are horrible sinners by virtue of having been born. It is a pretty screwed up way to run things.

I didn’t say it did but in this context where she was the one who was much more insensate the idea that she forced herself on them is ridiculous and counters the facts of the case as reported. The more pointed thing is that in a group sex encounter it is very difficult for one person to assault or rape two people at once especially for an AFAB person. The whole point of my ‘edited’ explanation is to make people think about that without outright describing why because it would likely get me perma-banned from this site. Yes, men can be raped. Orgasming is not proof of consent. It is very weird that you seem to want to make the assailants who were answering text messages about free sex with a drugged up girl into co-equal victims. For anyone interested this is a consistently good source for information on prominent legal cases reported by lawyers and they released a video this morning on the case and the DA comes off REALLY badly:

Do you seriously need an anatomy lesson in order to see how very unlikely that equivalence is? Well, I suppose someone has to tell you sometime. You see smac when a mommy and a daddy love each other very much…… …..and when the mommy and daddy decide to expand this and invite other people to join….. …..realistically two at a time with each woman due to limits of flexibility…….. ……and a woman would be less likely to be able to initiate if out of her mind on drugs. I also doubt the guys were as drunk and/or drugged out as the victim. Ketamine massively inhibits libido. Alcohol degrades”performance”. Your attempt to make those who planned this rapefest as somehow morally equivalent to the victim is disgusting and misogynistic.

No, it takes a lot to prosecute someone from profiting off actual abuse or tragedy. Alex Jones spent years actively encouraging his followers to harass the families of the victims of the Sandy Hook shootings as crisis actors and frauds before they could organize a civil case and it still isn’t over yet years late as he tries to hide money, delay the payout, and dodge responsibility. That was causing active harm. This is just trying to threaten based off of probably imaginary evidence of imaginary abuse cases Ballard hopes will garner sympathy for him as he spins a web of conspiracies supposedly closing in on him. Those still supporting him are too stupid to connect basic dots and realize that he is claiming he is sitting on evidence of active and potentially ongoing abuse and holding it close to protect himself. If he was the hero he plays in his really bad movie he would release that data to try to save the children instead of leaving them in peril to protect themselves. Assuming they actually care about abuse victims at all.

Correction: Clearly it also really annoys you so it accomplishes more. I suspect the Church left it out because the Church knows that acknowledging climate change is real irks a disturbingly large portion of their membership and forces them to choose between two things they have made a large part of their identity and it hurts to deal with that kind of thing. So publishing it that way could have pushed people towards a decision point. I have no idea how you imagine Cato’s comments were worthless. Keeping Carthage in the public’s mind was part of the reason the Third Punic War happened. I am not saying Cato’s comments were vital to that happening but it was part of a larger effort to keep that potential threat in mind. And Billie Eilish? The conservative callout of quasi-legitimate hypocrisy to discredit her and ignore the more important “F—- ICE!” element of her message as Native Americans are being swept up and detained in ICE raids because ICE goons are so stupid and badly trained that they don’t know what tribal IDs are or they are so racist they just don’t care. ‘This person isn’t perfectly consistent in everything and is therefore bad’ while you are an apologist for government goons rounding people up without due process. Oh, and F—- ICE. May they all end up in the gulags they built for others. Reprehensible trash humans led by reprehensible trash humans and supported and cheered on by reprehensible trash humans.