The Shiftless, Lazy, Lying Smith Family

[rabanes]

Oh, and BTW, my post was not meant to be a zinger.

I didn't take it as such. That was not at you, not by a ling shot. I understand you presented what you see as very compelling evidence.

LOL. Talk about irony.

It is, isn't it. In so many ways. I guess we can enjoy it from opposite sides. I suppose sort of like sharing the same hot dog, but from opposit ends. HEY -- LEAVE ME SOME SOURKRAUT!!!

1. Straw Man.

2. Reductio ad absurdum

I was really referring to the two basic FAIR arguments that everything sort of boils down to in general.

In other words; just ignore that Joseph Smith correctly restored these portions AND offered an acceptable interpretation at a time when Egyptian was not understood in America. Nice.

Romm, look, this has been done. Mormons keep insisting on this in a vacuum. Look, if you have to keep believing in JS and the BOM, at least go join the Community of Christ! Then, you can let go of what I at least see as the most offensive and troublesome aspects of the Utah Church.

Joseph Smith was right; facts are stubborn things. And especially, I would add, facts that contradict anti-Mormon fairy tales.

Okay Romm. "The truth is out there." You're saying the same thing that plenty of LDS before you have said, only to later come to grips with the truth. Fine. In all sincerity I wish you the best pf all things. My books are there if you want to read my opinion of things. If not, cool.

R.A.

[cksalmon]

A case in point is how some of these people are spreading a truly odd rumor (and I'm sure you'll agree) that I am actually seeking to blend Mormonism with Evangelicalism!! (Yeah, you can close your jaw now). And as proof, they point to my book Inside Today's Mormonism (of all books, can you believe it?). This explains the popular post that's made it's way around the Internet via endless links: Rick Warren Apologist Richard Abanes: Going soft on Mormonism.

Yes, that is a patently ridiculous charge. There wasn't any "true discernment" going on there.

Best.

cks

[Rommelator]

It is, isn't it. In so many ways. I guess we can enjoy it from opposite sides. I suppose sort of like sharing the same hot dog, but from opposit ends.

I suppose so.

HEY -- LEAVE ME SOME SOURKRAUT!!!

Mmm.... Sauerkraut...

I was really referring to the two basic FAIR arguments that everything sort of boils down to in general.

But it is how you referred to it that made it a straw man and an Reductio ad absurdum argument.

Romm, look, this has been done. Mormons keep insisting on this in a vacuum. Look, if you have to keep believing in JS and the BOM, at least go join the Community of Christ! Then, you can let go of what I at least see as the most offensive and troublesome aspects of the Utah Church.

Uh... what?

My books are there if you want to read my opinion of things.

Incidentally, it was, among other things, your discussion on the Book of Abraham that I skimmed through when I saw your book. It seems to me that you relied heavily upon Charles Larson in his book "By His Own Hand Upon Papyrus" and the section in Mormonism - Shadow or Reality? on the Book of Abraham by the Tanners. Is this correct?

[rabanes]

Yes, that is a patently ridiculous charge. There wasn't any "true discernment" going on there.

Yeah, and there are so many more like that. Another "discerner" said I am part of the Luceferian end-times belief system, and implied I haev aligned myself against all Bible-believing Christians, and implied I deny the Second Coming of Jesus Christ. Huh? Ah well. Welcome to my world. At some point I am quite likely to stop writing apologetic books altogether and write on prayer, faith, suffering, Christmas traditions, social work, etc.

RA

[rabanes]

Incidentally, it was, among other things, your discussion on the Book of Abraham that I skimmed through when I saw your book. It seems to me that you relied heavily upon Charles Larson in his book "By His Own Hand Upon Papyrus" and the section in Mormonism - Shadow or Reality? on the Book of Abraham by the Tanners. Is this correct?

Well, those are two of many sources. Add Marquardt, Persuitte, and probably a few others I can't recall, tbh, some footnoted and some probably not footnoted. It's been some years now.

RA

P.S. If we're ever in the same location, we'll go out for a sauerkraut-dog....my treat. My repay for griefing you.

[cksalmon]

It's actually a little reassuring to see that some mainstream Christians eat their own in internecine skirmishes. I think that for too many, it's less about what's right than simply being right, whether it comes to discussions on Rick Warren, Joel Osteen, grace, finding Jesus, Mormons, or creating a play-off in Div IA football.

Nice. I'll take my attempts at objectivity elsewhere where they won't be retooled as bombs. Maybe a unified front is the better course of action, since LDS like you enjoy chipping at perceived cracks.

[ttribe]

Nice. I'll take my attempts at objectivity elsewhere where they won't be retooled as bombs. Maybe a unified front is the better course of action, since LDS like you enjoy chipping at cracks.

I didn't read that as a bomb. I thought he was just referring to the discourse between the two groups. Anyway, I appreciated your objective inclusion in the thread...for what that's worth.

[Tsuzuki]

Ahhh, welcome, the Mormon-in-good-standing-occult-embracing-magick-practicing Saint joins us. Good to see you.

Nice to know you haven't put me on ignore yet, like you did Pahoran.

Someone here PLEASE speak to Tsuzuki, who stated: "Read that quote I posted by Brigham Young again. No area of study [i.e., the occult] is forbidden, nor is the application of knowledge gained therefrom. We are judged by our actions, not our interests. . . . I am a Mormon in good standing, and while I have not yet been through the temple, that is one of my immediate goals. . . . And yes, I do practice occult rituals, embrace occult beliefs, and practice magic (I hate the "k" spelling). It should also be noted that there are other Mormon occultists who have gone through the temple. There's an entire Yahoo! message group full of them.

I did say that. What's your point? It's no secret that Mormons place a huge emphasis on education. What makes occultism any less worthy of study than psychology (my academic major) or physics (another interest of mine)? Many occultists (especially chaos magicians) see what they do as a mixture of those two disciplines.

Please. Somoene help him -- who was it that said Mormons have grown out of occult practice and magick ritual in this thread? Well, let's see it.

As a culture, ttribe was right (Mormon occultists are a minority, but we do exist - just as do Mormon dentists), but that still doesn't make it forbidden, and you have yet to provide any objective evidence why it should be. (The magazine and handbook quotes you provided are easily countered.)

[rabanes]

but that still doesn't make it forbidden, and you have yet to provide any objective evidence why it should be.

As I've said. you are a member of a church that from my understanding forbids occult involvement on the level you are discussing. We are not talking, as I also have said, of a a technical, dispassionate, academic study of occult materials for the benefit of furthering one's knowledge base. You stated: "I do practice occult rituals, embrace occult beliefs, and practice magic (I hate the "k" spelling). It should also be noted that there are other Mormon occultists who have gone through the temple."

Such a remark, from my understanding of the LDS leadership's position on the subject, is in serious conflict with your church's teachings. And your ongoing "practice" of occult rituals, "embrace" occult beliefs, and "practice" magick ) I prefer the "k" spelling) places you and the other Mormon occultists outside the place of a Mormon in good standing, let alone a temple Mormon.

And so, again, I appeal to those who are of your own church to make correction to you, if indeed my understanding of LDS church teaching in this area is accurate. If my understanding of the Church's OFFICIAL position on: 1) practicing occult rituals; 2) embracing occult beliefs; and 3) practicing magick is in error, then I stand ready to be corrected by seeing official statements by General Authorities.

R.A.

[ttribe]

And so, again, I appeal to those who are of your own church to make correction to you, if indeed my understanding of LDS church teaching in this area is accurate. If my understanding of the Church's OFFICIAL position on: 1) practicing occult rituals; 2) embracing occult beliefs; and 3) practicing magick is in error, then I stand ready to be corrected by seeing official statements by General Authorities.

Tsuzuki is a known quantity as an outlier around here in terms of his broad interpretation of accumulating a wide swath of education into spiritual matters (whatever the source). However, it is not our place to start "correcting" him for his interpretations. First, like I said before, it is between him, God, and his leadership (i.e. Bishop and Stake President). Second, this board has rules against "calls for repentance".

With all the so-called research you've done on the "insides" of Mormonism, you'd think you'd know our culture a little better.

[Zakuska]

I carried a rabbits foot for years. Does that place me outside TR range?

[rabanes]

ttribe: Second, this board has rules against "calls for repentance".

RA: THAT is something I didn't know.

ttribe: However, it is not our place to start "correcting" him for his interpretations.

RA: I actually assumed that if you as LDS in good standing saw someone delving into an area as dark as the occult, which church leaders have warned its members about, you'd WANT to offer correction and bring back an erring brother who is seemingly going in a very troublesome and potentially spiritually dangerous direction. Would you say the same of fornication? Would you say the same of using God's name in vain? How about R-rated, oh heck, X-rated movies? What about breaking the Word of Wisdom if someone were a temple Mormon? Let's change the specifics a bit and see what we come up with

Tsuzkifictiontoon:

I am a Mormon in good standing, and while I have not yet been through the temple, that is one of my immediate goals. . . . And yes, I do watch pornography, embrace premarital sex, and usually practice sex while drunk (but only beer/wine). It should also be noted that there are other Mormon fornicators who watch porn and get drunk, who have gone through the temple. There's an entire Yahoo! message group full of them.

ttribe:

Tsuzkifictiontoon is a known quantity as an outlier around here in terms of his broad interpretation of sexual practice (whatever the conditions). However, it is not our place to start "correcting" him for his interpretations. First, like I said before, it is between him, God, and his leadership (i.e. Bishop and Stake President). Second, this board has rules against "calls for repentance."

And what would you say about a Bishop and Stake President who knew about such conduct and did nothing? I'm sorry, I seem to have read a WHOLE LOT of stuff about church discipline from the GAs and also our responsibilities for each other. Now, you say no? Well, I do admit on this issue, I am now completely befuddled. I shall have to start at some point looking into it all. But for now, ttribe, given your response and the complete lack of word from anyone else here including any FAIR or FARM person, I can only assume that practicing occult rituals, embracing occult beliefs, and practicing magick is perfectly acceptable in Mormonism, at the very least, it is tolerated by an apparent cross-section of Mormons in good standing (including LDS apologists) who simply take a "Well, whatever, it's between them and God" approach. I would very much like to be contacted by any official representative of FAIR or FARMS to discuss this issue of occultism within Mormonism and the tolerance/acceptance of it among not only Mormons in good standing, but Temple Mormons.

R.A.

[Tsuzuki]

As I've said. you are a member of a church that from my understanding forbids occult involvement on the level you are discussing. We are not talking, as I also have said, of a a technical, dispassionate, academic study of occult materials for the benefit of furthering one's knowledge base. You stated: "I do practice occult rituals, embrace occult beliefs, and practice magic (I hate the "k" spelling). It should also be noted that there are other Mormon occultists who have gone through the temple."

Such a remark, from my understanding of the LDS leadership's position on the subject, is in serious conflict with your church's teachings. And your ongoing "practice" of occult rituals, "embrace" occult beliefs, and "practice" magick ) I prefer the "k" spelling) places you and the other Mormon occultists outside the place of a Mormon in good standing, let alone a temple Mormon.

And so, again, I appeal to those who are of your own church to make correction to you, if indeed my understanding of LDS church teaching in this area is accurate. If my understanding of the Church's OFFICIAL position on: 1) practicing occult rituals; 2) embracing occult beliefs; and 3) practicing magick is in error, then I stand ready to be corrected by seeing official statements by General Authorities.

R.A.

In oder to turn this into a meaningful conversation, you're going to have to be specific about which rituals, practices, and beliefs you're talking about when you say "occult". Any practice can have magical/occult significance by simply being invested with it. As I mentioned earlier, those practices which are forbidden are such independent of occult significance. The temple recommend interview has to do with issues of ethics and morality, not whether or not the interviewee thinks they can influence reality through acausal means.

) I prefer the "k" spelling)

I was not aware that you were a disciple of Aleister Crowley. For the most part, it's him and those influenced by him who prefer eating Special K.

[rabanes]

I was not aware that you were a disciple of Aleister Crowley. For the most part, it's him and those influenced by him who prefer eating Special K.

Disciple is far too string a word. As for the Special K crack, I'd very much enjoy seeing you say this among serious Crowleyites. Now, as for specific practices -- you're the one who practices them. You're the one who practices occult rituals, embraces occult beliefs, and practices magick. If you wish, list them all. And again, my friend, this is a meaningful conversation you should be having with your own church members, not me, IMHO.

RA

[cksalmon]

In oder to turn this into a meaningful conversation, you're going to have to be specific about which rituals, practices, and beliefs you're talking about when you say "occult". Any practice can have magical/occult significance by simply being invested with it. As I mentioned earlier, those practices which are forbidden are such independent of occult significance. The temple recommend interview has to do with issues of ethics and morality, not whether or not the interviewee thinks they can influence reality through acausal means.

You really are a living, breathing, posting instantiation of Mormonism's embracing of occultism, Tsuzuki.

I have no idea why your compatriots don't throw you under the bus. Perhaps because you mirror Joseph Smith's worldview so consistently?

You just are the argument against the claim that Mormonism outgrew magickal practices. You instantiate a significant argument against Mormonism.

This is your guy, Mormons.

Am I to take him seriously? Is his occultism perfecty acceptable within Mormonism?

He thinks it is. I'm personally not interested in his justification(s).

cks

[Cold Steel]

"A Fundamentalist is someone who has stopped listening."

This is so true, and in so many different ways.

As far as the LDS church goes, it will either change with the times, like the Community of Christ, or it will not.

If it does, it will delegitimize itself and find a nitch in the ebb and flow of Protestantism. If it doesn't, it will fill the entire Earth.

[ttribe]

ttribe: Second, this board has rules against "calls for repentance".

RA: THAT is something I didn't know.

ttribe: However, it is not our place to start "correcting" him for his interpretations.

RA: I actually assumed that if you as LDS in good standing saw someone delving into an area as dark as the occult, which church leaders have warned its members about, you'd WANT to offer correction and bring back an erring brother who is seemingly going in a very troublesome and potentially spiritually dangerous direction. Would you say the same of fornication? Would you say the same of using God's name in vain? How about R-rated, oh heck, X-rated movies? What about breaking the Word of Wisdom if someone were a temple Mormon? Let's change the specifics a bit and see what we come up with

Tsuzkifictiontoon:

I am a Mormon in good standing, and while I have not yet been through the temple, that is one of my immediate goals. . . . And yes, I do watch pornography, embrace premarital sex, and usually practice sex while drunk (but only beer/wine). It should also be noted that there are other Mormon fornicators who watch porn and get drunk, who have gone through the temple. There's an entire Yahoo! message group full of them.

ttribe:

Tsuzkifictiontoon is a known quantity as an outlier around here in terms of his broad interpretation of sexual practice (whatever the conditions). However, it is not our place to start "correcting" him for his interpretations. First, like I said before, it is between him, God, and his leadership (i.e. Bishop and Stake President). Second, this board has rules against "calls for repentance."

I'd ask that you not attribute quotes to me in which you have editorialized people's names. That is dishonest and completely unacceptable and if I don't see a retraction from you in a very short period of time, you can bet I will do all I can to see you are banned from here.

And what would you say about a Bishop and Stake President who knew about such conduct and did nothing? I'm sorry, I seem to have read a WHOLE LOT of stuff about church discipline from the GAs and also our responsibilities for each other. Now, you say no?

We don't "out" each other, if that's what you're suggesting.

Well, I do admit on this issue, I am now completely befuddled. I shall have to start at some point looking into it all. But for now, ttribe, given your response and the complete lack of word from anyone else here including any FAIR or FARM person, I can only assume that practicing occult rituals, embracing occult beliefs, and practicing magick is perfectly acceptable in Mormonism, at the very least, it is tolerated by an apparent cross-section of Mormons in good standing (including LDS apologists) who simply take a "Well, whatever, it's between them and God" approach.

This conclusion of yours that the occult is "perfectly acceptable", etc. is complete crap but is certainly within your bag of tools as a lying anti who will stop at nothing to see this Church destroyed. Do the ends justify the means Richard? Honestly, I cannot see how you sleep at night.

I would very much like to be contacted by any official representative of FAIR or FARMS to discuss this issue of occultism within Mormonism and the tolerance/acceptance of it among not only Mormons in good standing, but Temple Mormons.

Since you are fabricating the phenomenon, don't hold your breath.

[ttribe]

You really are a living, breathing, posting instantiation of Mormonism's embracing of occultism, Tsuzuki.

I have no idea why your compatriots don't throw you under the bus. Perhaps because you mirror Joseph Smith's worldview so consistently?

You just are the argument against the claim that Mormonism outgrew magickal practices. You instantiate a significant argument against Mormonism.

This is your guy, Mormons.

Am I to take him seriously? Is his occultism perfecty acceptable within Mormonism?

He thinks it is. I'm personally not interested in his justification(s).

cks

CKS - I am disappointed in you. I thought you would know better.

[Bernard Gui]

You really are a living, breathing, posting instantiation of Mormonism's embracing of occultism, Tsuzuki.

I have no idea why your compatriots don't throw you under the bus. Perhaps because you mirror Joseph Smith's worldview so consistently?

You just are the argument against the claim that Mormonism outgrew magickal practices. You instantiate a significant argument against Mormonism.

This is your guy, Mormons.

Am I to take him seriously? Is his occultism perfecty acceptable within Mormonism?

He thinks it is. I'm personally not interested in his justification(s).

CKS is right. I suggest someone get a rope.

Bernard

[Tsuzuki]

Disciple is far too string a word. As for the Special K crack, I'd very much enjoy seeing you say this among serious Crowleyites.

I do all the time. It's a pet peeve of mine. To their credit, though, most of the Thelemites I know have a good sense of humor.

Now, as for specific practices -- you're the one who practices them. You're the one who practices occult rituals, embraces occult beliefs, and practices magick. If you wish, list them all.

Magic 101:

Magic (or whatever you want to call it) is basically the activity of influencing reality through acausal means. You can think of it as manufacturing syncronicity, or meaningful coincidence. People who are often seen as "lucky" are naturals at it.

The ability to do this is believed to be in the unconscious mind, so symbolism is employed to access it. The form this symbolism takes is mostly irrelevant, as long as your unconscious can understand it. You could employ ritual, dance, music, chanting, breakfast, lunch, picking your nose, or literally any other action, as long as it symbolizes your intention. I like sigilization, the creation of abstract graphical symbols from written statements, because they are quick, impromptu, and creative. The basic idea is to get your conscious mind off your intention so that your unconscious can go to work.

The next part of magic is the altered state of consciousness, called "gnosis" by some, needed to push your intention into manifestation. The point here is to quiet the conscious mind long enough for the symbolism of your intention to be sent to the unconscious. If symbolism is the gasoline, then this is the match. Again, anything that quiets the mind can be used to do this, from Zen style meditation to a good workout. Personally, I like hardcore trance techno.

Anyway, congratulations. You are now a magician.

And again, my friend, this is a meaningful conversation you should be having with your own church members, not me, IMHO.

RA

You're the one who asked.

(And if you'll bother to use the search feature, you will see that this conversation has already taken place multiple times.)

[Tsuzuki]

You instantiate a significant argument against Mormonism.

Or an even greater argument in favor of it, if it is indeed a restoration of all things, as it claims to be.

[cksalmon]

CKS - I am disappointed in you. I thought you would know better.

Know better than what, exactly?

Take it up with your resident occultist, ttribe. Disavow it, perhaps?

Note: I didn't quote RA's inflammatory and imaginative "conversation." And I do unequivocally disavow that. You should realize that this appears to be indicative of Abanes's methodology. He tends, apparently, to be a very imaginative fellow.

Wait!? Will he now send a threatening email to the owners of MADB for "defamation"?

Frankly, if you wish to be disappointed in me, at least do so on legitimate grounds. Tzusuki is a self-admitted occultist. I honestly and forthrightly disdain that, frankly.

Goodness.

You need to stake out a position of unequivocal truth and defend it, come what may. That's what I attempt to do.

Best.

cks

[cksalmon]

Or an even greater argument in favor of it, if it is indeed a restoration of all things, as it claims to be.

See what I mean, ttribe? He believes he actually embodies the Mormon "restoration of all things" by aligning himself with "chaos magick."

Again, this is your guy. Not mine.

cks

[ttribe]

Know better than what, exactly?

Take it up with your resident occultist, ttribe. Disavow it, perhaps?

Note: I didn't quote RA's inflammatory and imaginative "conversation." And I do unequivocally disavow that. You should realize that this appears to be indicative of Abanes's methodology. He tends, apparently, to be a very imaginative fellow.

Wait!? Will he now send a threatening email to the owners of MADB for "defamation"?

Frankly, if you wish to be disappointed in me, at least do so on legitimate grounds. Tzusuki is a self-admitted occultist. I honestly and forthrightly disdain that, frankly.

Goodness.

You need to stake out a position of unequivocal truth and defend it, come what may. That's what I attempt to do.

Best.

cks

So, now you are castigating me for not coming down hard on Tsuzuki? Is that what's going on? So, I am following the rules of the board, and I'm to be blamed for not going after him because I believe he is in error for following after any type of occult practice (which I've said at least three times) but I'm not speaking out to the degree which you would find satisfactory? You've been around here long enough to know what Tsuzuki's style is like; have you no one in your family that you just kind of roll your eyes, let them say what they're going to say and move on? Let it go cks, he's not representative of any significant portion of the population of LDS membership and I, personally, denounce any such practice as outside the lines of Church teachings.