structurecop Posted October 10, 2009 Posted October 10, 2009 Good point, maybe the pre-Angelic non-horn blowing Moroni. The one Moroni in the pictures that looks thick with his arm draped over the plates.Sounds too difficult to make into sugar cookie form. I prefer the flying, trumpet blowing Moroni.
ttribe Posted October 10, 2009 Posted October 10, 2009 Good point, maybe the pre-Angelic non-horn blowing Moroni. The one Moroni in the pictures that looks thick with his arm draped over the plates.Actually, I think he was sarcastically suggesting the "salamander" form that Hoffman alleged through his forgery.
structurecop Posted October 10, 2009 Posted October 10, 2009 Actually, I think he was sarcastically suggesting the "salamander" form that Hoffman alleged through his forgery.Oooh, this is even better than what I was thinking.
ttribe Posted October 10, 2009 Posted October 10, 2009 Oooh, this is even better than what I was thinking.Great...the last thing I needed to do was give you any ideas.
structurecop Posted October 10, 2009 Posted October 10, 2009 Great...the last thing I needed to do was give you any ideas.You can get gummi-salamanders at Toys-R-Us. Hmmmn...
lostindc Posted October 10, 2009 Posted October 10, 2009 You can get gummi-salamanders at Toys-R-Us. Hmmmn...I have never seen a white gummi salamander anywhere
LifeOnaPlate Posted October 10, 2009 Posted October 10, 2009 Luckily the Alpha Males from this board don't lower themselves to such tactics.Unluckily, John Larsen has yet to sound off on Danna's many evident errors. Makes me real angry.
Calm Posted October 10, 2009 Posted October 10, 2009 Good point, maybe the pre-Angelic non-horn blowing Moroni. The one Moroni in the pictures that looks thick with his arm draped over the plates.Oh man, I need some sleep. I thought you were talking about the plates of sugar cookies.....or maybe I'm just hungry.
juliann Posted October 10, 2009 Posted October 10, 2009 I prefer to call myself "Empress Danna", thankyou,Now what's this talk of a good spanking... or am I on the wrong board...Pages of misquotes, errors and strutting has come to this. In the words of the man you falsely maligned.....pathetic.
John Larsen Posted October 10, 2009 Posted October 10, 2009 Unluckily, John Larsen has yet to sound off on Danna's many evident errors. Makes me real angry.? Please explain.
John Larsen Posted October 10, 2009 Posted October 10, 2009 <--------Alpha maleHey John,How is the picnic planning coming along? Have you thought about sugar cookies in the form of Moroni?You know how to tell someone is an apostate? They have picnics on Saturdays with their children. But seriously, you got me. Nice one. I am now embarrassed that I would ever take my family to the park. Do you know the worst part of being an apostate? All of the gnashing of teeth I have to endure while watching the joys and bliss of the saints. The dental bills are horrendous. Once again, congratulations on elevating the Mormon cause.
consiglieri Posted October 10, 2009 Posted October 10, 2009 BTW, John should be the last one complaining about tactics, perhaps he can remind us how the "Mormons crawled out of Missouri," care to discuss these ideas in further detail?If John won't, I will.John did not claim as his own view that the Mormons "crawled" out of Missouri. John was responding to the argument that Elder Holland's use of the word "crawl" when talking about Mormons leaving the Church was not pejorative.To show that the word "crawl" can indeed be reasonably construed to be pejorative, John put the shoe on the other foot, and asked if Mormons would think it pejorative to say that the Mormons "crawled" out of Missouri. John was not making fun of the persecutions suffered by the Mormons in Missouri.He was simply pointing out that the use of the word "crawl" to leave a certain place has pejorative connotations.And the effectiveness of his argument seems to be born out by the fact that you have taken umbrage over his use of the term.The more you bring it up, lostindc, the more you prove John right.All the Best!--Consiglieri
Redefined Posted October 10, 2009 Posted October 10, 2009 If John won't, I will.John did not claim as his own view that the Mormons "crawled" out of Missouri. John was responding to the argument that Elder Holland's use of the word "crawl" when talking about Mormons leaving the Church was not pejorative.To show that the word "crawl" can indeed be reasonably construed to be pejorative, John put the shoe on the other foot, and asked if Mormons would think it pejorative to say that the Mormons "crawled" out of Missouri. John was not making fun of the persecutions suffered by the Mormons in Missouri.He was simply pointing out that the use of the word "crawl" to leave a certain place has pejorative connotations.And the effectiveness of his argument seems to be born out by the fact that you have taken umbrage over his use of the term.The more you bring it up, lostindc, the more you prove John right.All the Best!--ConsiglieriVery well said! I think favorite is the word "umbrage". . . I have rarely even come across that word in conversation. . . great observation.
Deborah Posted October 10, 2009 Posted October 10, 2009 John did not claim as his own view that the Mormons "crawled" out of Missouri. I take exception to saying the Mormons crawled out of Missouri when they were driven. Words like "fled", "escaped" or "immigrated" would be more appropriate.
Redefined Posted October 10, 2009 Posted October 10, 2009 I take exception to saying the Mormons crawled out of Missouri when they were driven. Words like "fled", "escaped" or "immigrated" would be more appropriate.The whole point is about Holland's inappropriate use of the word.
lostindc Posted October 10, 2009 Posted October 10, 2009 If John won't, I will.John did not claim as his own view that the Mormons "crawled" out of Missouri. John was responding to the argument that Elder Holland's use of the word "crawl" when talking about Mormons leaving the Church was not pejorative.To show that the word "crawl" can indeed be reasonably construed to be pejorative, John put the shoe on the other foot, and asked if Mormons would think it pejorative to say that the Mormons "crawled" out of Missouri. John was not making fun of the persecutions suffered by the Mormons in Missouri.He was simply pointing out that the use of the word "crawl" to leave a certain place has pejorative connotations.And the effectiveness of his argument seems to be born out by the fact that you have taken umbrage over his use of the term.The more you bring it up, lostindc, the more you prove John right.All the Best!--ConsiglieriSave it Consiglieri,The Mormons were violently attacked and even murdered as they were forced out of Missouri. Start to realize there is a big difference between discussing critics crawling and those who have been murdered or forced from their homes in Missouri and using the word crawl to describe their exodus. Take up the cause all you want but you have no credibility in my book and I desire to have no credibility in your book. I do not respect John and you and I don't ask that you respect me. In fact, I would go as far as saying that you disgust me when you attempt to justify the use of the word crawl to describe those LDS that were violently forced from Missouri. You stay classy.Hail to Pitt beat the Huskies
lostindc Posted October 10, 2009 Posted October 10, 2009 You know how to tell someone is an apostate? They have picnics on Saturdays with their children. But seriously, you got me. Nice one. I am now embarrassed that I would ever take my family to the park. Do you know the worst part of being an apostate? All of the gnashing of teeth I have to endure while watching the joys and bliss of the saints. The dental bills are horrendous. Once again, congratulations on elevating the Mormon cause.Congrats on elevating the anti-Mormon cause.
LifeOnaPlate Posted October 10, 2009 Posted October 10, 2009 John, just telling you to return and report!
consiglieri Posted October 10, 2009 Posted October 10, 2009 Hail to Pitt beat the HuskiesYour heart is as black as three feet down a wolf's gullet.
juliann Posted October 10, 2009 Posted October 10, 2009 To show that the word "crawl" can indeed be reasonably construed to be pejorative, John put the shoe on the other foot, and asked if Mormons would think it pejorative to say that the Mormons "crawled" out of Missouri. Yes, it is always educational to elevate self-importance by elevating your own hurt feelings to the level of real life mob violence, rape and murder. Here's that other word...pathetic.BTW, the Saints were made to crawl and would probably do it again because of a witness like Elder Holland's. So you can trivialize a horrific historical incident and minimize it to assuage hurt feelings over a figure of speech but John should be thankful he will never encounter more than words.
LifeOnaPlate Posted October 10, 2009 Posted October 10, 2009 btw, where did Danna go? (She may just be busy, but she was keeping up pretty well, I didn't notice her say she wouldn't be returning for a while.)
John Larsen Posted October 11, 2009 Posted October 11, 2009 Yes, it is always educational to elevate self-importance by elevating your own hurt feelings to the level of real life mob violence, rape and murder. Here's that other word...pathetic.BTW, the Saints were made to crawl and would probably do it again because of a witness like Elder Holland's. So you can trivialize a horrific historical incident and minimize it to assuage hurt feelings over a figure of speech but John should be thankful he will never encounter more than words.Excellent point! Many saints did indeed literally crawl out of Missouri! They suffered horrifically! And yet, even though the term was entirely physically accurate in its description, the term itself has such nasty connotation that it wouldn't be acceptable to use if even if precisely and factually employed.
Pahoran Posted October 11, 2009 Posted October 11, 2009 Evidently Elder Holland's talk struck a nerve. Or more than one.Evidently it was a 1 Nephi 16:2 moment.For John, Danna and many others.Regards,Pahoran
Hamba Tuhan Posted October 11, 2009 Posted October 11, 2009 We finally got our Conference broadcasts Saturday and yesterday, and I have now seen Elder Holland's sermon. I kept waiting to hear something, anything, to justify and/or explain the outpouring of vitriol from the apostates. Finally, it struck me. Considering the number of threads one regularly sees on RfM which insist that Church leaders are fully aware of the 'fraud' but forge ahead nonetheless because it advances their personal agenda of greed, power, and position, Elder Holland's testimony either suggests (Heaven forbid!) that some Church leaders actually believe or, more likely, has to immediately be relegated as one more attempt to perpetuate the fraud. They can't leave it alone because it either undermines or beautifully supports their grand assumptions about how things must work. Hence, Danna's desperate and dishonest attempts to show that Elder Holland lied and John's insistence on being offended by a word which made perfect semantic sense but was spoken by a man whom he already despises.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.