sethpayne Posted February 15, 2013 Posted February 15, 2013 (edited) I knew Elder Maxwell, and I've come to know all or most of his family. They don't seem to share your view.Sorry for the complete derail but this phrase reminded me of something. Senator, I served with Jack Kennedy. I knew Jack Kennedy. Jack Kennedy was a friend of mine. Senator, you're no Jack Kennedy. Edited February 15, 2013 by sethpayne
Darren10 Posted February 15, 2013 Posted February 15, 2013 Did he know you were connected with FAIR? If not, that is very amusing, still amusing even if he was.The ward librarian following me on Sunday has been bringing in Abraham Divided for reading material when things get slow, never would have occurred to me to ask him if he knew about MI otherwise. When I told him about The Interpreter, he got real excited as well. Bit by bit, we are taking over the world. I introduced the Interpreter to my Gospel Doctrine class and shared content from two articles regarding temple worship. The timimng was perfect since I was called to be the Gospel Doctrine teacher right about the time when Jesus appeared to the Americas at the temple in Bountiful. The reception of the Interpreter has definitely been positive. One way to promote the Interpreter was to show my soft cover book on vuolume 1. They're great purchases for 6 bucks and, of course, the money helps aide the cause. 1
Wiki Wonka Posted February 15, 2013 Posted February 15, 2013 I was called to be the Gospel Doctrine teacher right about the time when Jesus appeared to the Americas at the temple in Bountiful. I see that you are somewhat older than I am.WW 3
volgadon Posted February 15, 2013 Posted February 15, 2013 The timimng was perfect since I was called to be the Gospel Doctrine teacher right about the time when Jesus appeared to the Americas at the temple in Bountiful.Wow, and I thought bishops serve for a long time. 1
volgadon Posted February 15, 2013 Posted February 15, 2013 I see that you are somewhat older than I am.WWHa, we posted at the same time.
Wiki Wonka Posted February 15, 2013 Posted February 15, 2013 I introduced the Interpreter to my Gospel Doctrine class and shared content from two articles regarding temple worship. The timimng was perfect since I was called to be the Gospel Doctrine teacher right about the time when Jesus appeared to the Americas at the temple in Bountiful. The reception of the Interpreter has definitely been positive. One way to promote the Interpreter was to show my soft cover book on vuolume 1. They're great purchases for 6 bucks and, of course, the money helps aide the cause.I actually brought a copy of Volume 1 to Church to show to my bishop, but before I got a chance, my HP group leader asked if he could borrow it. He took it home and then next Sunday he asked if he could keep it and tried to pay me for it. I told him he didn't need to reimburse me and that he could just keep it, because it didn't cost much. So the next week I brought in a copy of Volume 1, again intending to show it to the bishop. A different High Priest asked to borrow it. He took it home, and the next week he insisted on reimbursing me for it.My bishop still hasn't seen it.WW 2
Darren10 Posted February 15, 2013 Posted February 15, 2013 Two High Priests in my ward have copies of Interpreter Volume 1. They borrowed them from me, and then wanted to keep them after they started reading them. They insisted on reimbursing me and wanted to know if there were more volumes.WWI'm sure I'm preaching to he choir but direct them to Amazon and purchase a copy for themselves.
Darren10 Posted February 15, 2013 Posted February 15, 2013 I actually brought a copy of Volume 1 to Church to show to my bishop, but before I got a chance, my HP group leader asked if he could borrow it. He took it home and then next Sunday he asked if he could keep it and tried to pay me for it. I told him he didn't need to reimburse me and that he could just keep it, because it didn't cost much. So the next week I brought in a copy of Volume 1, again intending to show it to the bishop. A different High Priest asked to borrow it. He took it home, and the next week he insisted on reimbursing me for it.My bishop still hasn't seen it.WW
Darren10 Posted February 15, 2013 Posted February 15, 2013 Wow, and I thought bishops serve for a long time.LoL - I've been serving for about 6 months now.
Darren10 Posted February 15, 2013 Posted February 15, 2013 (edited) LoL - I've been serving for about 6 months now.I'm NOT one of the three Nephites. Just want ot make that clear. Edited February 15, 2013 by Darren10
Darren10 Posted February 15, 2013 Posted February 15, 2013 I see that you are somewhat older than I am.WWOK, I've been caught. Me and the two other Nephites....... 2
Darren10 Posted February 15, 2013 Posted February 15, 2013 I believe it is time that people come to the reality that under the likes of Peterson, Hamblin, and yourself, the Institute was getting a very large black eye via fourms like this.Ouch! Hey, what did I...ouch! Stop tha...ouch! 1
Bill Hamblin Posted February 15, 2013 Posted February 15, 2013 But, I have read plenty of Daniel Peterson and I do not see this "viciousness" that some others seem convinced is there. I have to wonder if they really read many of your articles...John Dehlin was once ranting on about ad hominem and meanness of classic FARMS apologetics. I asked him to show me an example of what he considered ad hominem or mean in my writings. He couldn't provide a single specific example. Turns out, he had not read anything I had written. But he had cosmic certainty that everything I wrote was an ad hominin hit piece. It was very revealing. 1
Calm Posted February 15, 2013 Posted February 15, 2013 I believe it is time that people come to the reality that under the likes of Peterson, Hamblin, and yourself, the Institute was getting a very large black eye via fourms like this. How in the world has Lou contributed to the MI getting a very large black eye via forums like this when he just barely started posting in this forum (and I don't believe he's posted elsewhere) a few days ago?
volgadon Posted February 15, 2013 Posted February 15, 2013 OK, I've been caught. Me and the two other Nephites....... Stop wasting time on this board and get back to changing tires in the desert. 2
Calm Posted February 15, 2013 Posted February 15, 2013 John Dehlin was once ranting on about ad hominem and meanness of classic FARMS apologetics. I asked him to show me an example of what he considered ad hominem or mean in my writings. He couldn't provide a single specific example. Turns out, he had not read anything I had written. But he had cosmic certainty that everything I wrote was an ad hominin hit piece. It was very revealing.And apparently it's enough to just imagine everything that Lou would have written if he had discovered the joys of message boards long ago to condemn him as opposed to actually having anything to point to as an example of him embarrassing MI. 1
William Schryver Posted February 15, 2013 Posted February 15, 2013 (edited) Seeing defenders of the faith putting themselves in the 'pig pen' and entering into childish rants with apostates is what is an ammbarassment to Elder Maxwell's name and legacy.Something is certainly an "ammbarassment." And your mythological narrative of the interaction between apologists and critics is duly noted.Dr. Peterson being the chief apologist, if only in the lens of the common folk ...I see the part of the mythological narrative concerning the nature of "commercial apologetics" is filtering down to the lower ranks.Mormon Studies: What "real scholars" do (ostensibly gratis). It asserts that it is entirely disinterested in the truth claims of Mormonism, and denies any ill-intent if its arguments tend to question them.Commercial Apologetics: Anything, written by anyone, that appears to defend the truth claims of Mormonism.... may I suggest in silence?Yes, we understand that the silencing of Mormon Apologetics is the prime directive. Edited February 15, 2013 by William Schryver
why me Posted February 15, 2013 Author Posted February 15, 2013 John Dehlin was once ranting on about ad hominem and meanness of classic FARMS apologetics. I asked him to show me an example of what he considered ad hominem or mean in my writings. He couldn't provide a single specific example. Turns out, he had not read anything I had written. But he had cosmic certainty that everything I wrote was an ad hominin hit piece. It was very revealing.I have this feeling that someone's informant has been feeding John wrong information. Or the person who had hired the informant has been feeding John. Too bad that John did not go to the source, the apologists themselves.
Darren10 Posted February 15, 2013 Posted February 15, 2013 Stop wasting time on this board and get back to changing tires in the desert.
Darren10 Posted February 15, 2013 Posted February 15, 2013 I have this feeling that someone's informant has been feeding John wrong information. Or the person who had hired the informant has been feeding John. Too bad that John did not go to the source, the apologists themselves.Receiving wrong information is one thing, acting on it in a manner which essentially you end up bearing false witness against your neighbor is another. Still another when one apparently repeats these steps and seems competely void of comprehending how bad doing this is. 1
why me Posted February 15, 2013 Author Posted February 15, 2013 Receiving wrong information is one thing, acting on it in a manner which essentially you end up bearing false witness against your neighbor is another. Still another when one apparently repeats these steps and seems competely void of comprehending how bad doing this is.I think that John actually believed it. The myth that Dan is a demon in disguise is an antimormon internet chant that is alluded too many times.
Darren10 Posted February 15, 2013 Posted February 15, 2013 I think that John actually believed it. The myth that Dan is a demon in disguise is an antimormon internet chant that is alluded too many times.Yet how much has he looked into Dan's writings? It's not like they are stashed in a top secret compartment on the internet. Dehlins been demonizing Peterson for quite a while now. how do you do that while claiming you desire Christlike love for all?Furthermore, I cannot phathom how he can still believe this supposing he read through this thread, which I think he has.Luv ya', Dehlin!!! 1
BFUBFBEO'Brien Posted February 15, 2013 Posted February 15, 2013 I think a lot of people confuse directness with meanness. Dan can be direct (and witty), but he is not malicious.Direct, and also confident. Intellectually confident, rhetorically confident, etc. Somehow much of the culture of questioning internet Mormonism has got a bee in its bonnet about any pro-church assertion put forth without a gauze of hems and haws swathing it. It's taken as a personal affront to say to questioners that "Joseph Smith had reasonable and natural reasons for emphasizing different aspects of the First Vision in different accounts" instead of, say, "it's definitely puzzling that the accounts are so different and the church has been very foolish and wrong to emphasize only the one it likes." 2
Calm Posted February 15, 2013 Posted February 15, 2013 (edited) I cannot phathom how he can still believe this supposing he read through this thread, which I think he has.He's been reading the board since he last posted, he was online about 19 hours ago. Whether it was this thread or not, I don't know. Edited February 15, 2013 by calmoriah
Wiki Wonka Posted February 16, 2013 Posted February 16, 2013 He's been reading the board since he last posted, he was online about 19 hours ago. Whether it was this thread or not, I don't know.The discussion appears to have moved from here to Facebook.WW
Recommended Posts