Is Seattle's version of the Church a caricature?

[Quisqueyano]

Originally Posted by Quisqueyano

Of course we can never take anything at face value. Suspicion and doubt is always the best policy.

Not that you care SU. But this is interesting.
http://farms.byu.edu/pdf.php?filenam...&type=cmV2aWV3

[SeattleUte]

Originally Posted by Quisqueyano

Of course we can never take anything at face value. Suspicion and doubt is always the best policy.

I thought I was the one taking "Book of Mormon Studies" at face value.

[SeattleUte]

Originally Posted by Quisqueyano

Not that you care SU. But this is interesting.
http://farms.byu.edu/pdf.php?filenam...&type=cmV2aWV3

How ironic, my nemesis, Daniel Peterson, defender of the faith.

[creekster]

Originally Posted by SeattleUte

How ironic, my nemesis, Daniel Peterson, defender of the faith.

Now that's funny.

I thought you might enjoy it.

[Robin]

Originally Posted by SeattleUte

How ironic, my nemesis, Daniel Peterson, defender of the faith.

SU, going mano a mano with the Farms boys shows a lot more determination than I would ever have.

And I have to wonder why you do it. I will share my thoughts and feelings here because there seems to be a core group of people who can talk about stuff respectfully and civily, and some good can come from it, even if that good is ultimately the realization that in spite of our differences of belief, we are essentially fighting the same good fight (with the exception of Waters, who thinks he knows me better than I know myself, and has suggested that I accept his view of my person over my own self-deceived version).

But you won't find any of that over on the FARMS page... or am I wrong?

[Robin]

Originally Posted by creekster

Now that's funny.

I thought you might enjoy it.

Creekster, is that you on the chalk bike in your photo?

[creekster]

Originally Posted by Robin

Creekster, is that you on the chalk bike in your photo?

No. I found the photo somewhere on the internet. My wife thinks it is ridiculous which I thought made it appropriate for me.

[Archaea]

I sure thought that BH Roberts didn't lose faith, but those who have lost faith, take solace in a GA who "appeared" to have lost faith.

Interesting. Each finds what one wants.

[SeattleUte]

Originally Posted by Robin

SU, going mano a mano with the Farms boys shows a lot more determination than I would ever have.

And I have to wonder why you do it. I will share my thoughts and feelings here because there seems to be a core group of people who can talk about stuff respectfully and civily, and some good can come from it, even if that good is ultimately the realization that in spite of our differences of belief, we are essentially fighting the same good fight (with the exception of Waters, who thinks he knows me better than I know myself, and has suggested that I accept his view of my person over my own self-deceived version).

But you won't find any of that over on the FARMS page... or am I wrong?

You're right. I have not posted over there a great deal; sometimes I'll write something in another context and think that maybe this particular piece might generate some intrest over there. I find the crowd over there too polarized and set in its ways for my taste, both apologists and anti-Mormons (though I will say the antis are fewer in number than what I saw when I was last over there last year this time). It's not that I expect the antis to compromise their positions by any means; I object to their narrow focus on these subjects such as the B of A scrolls that grow old very fast because there's only so much there there. They're mirror images of the people they despise.

I will say, however, that this Apostasy thread of mine over there (still high on the best seller list) has been illuminating to me, because it has helped to confirm certain thoughts I've been refining during the process of working on my novel, thoughts about Christianity and its different permutations and its tortured, though symbiotic relationship with Classical philosophy. Those guys dwell in irrelevant minutia (as far as I'm concerned) and I will concede that in general they know a lot more of the detail than I do about the subject matter. But it's nice to make certain points and see them essentially stand up as the FARMS boys blather about this minutia that amount to red herrings.

Also, Peterson occasionally says some interesting things about ancient history and philosphy in general, and face it, he's the grand duke of Mormon "study and research" on ancient documents, theology and history bearing upon the Church; it's fun to cross swords with such a person very occasionally. One of the glories of the Internet is that it makes such things possible. I mean, he and Dan Vogel go at it over there too. They are like the seep dog and the coyote. It's kind of funny.

[creekster]

Originally Posted by SeattleUte

Also, Peterson occasionally says some interesting things about ancient history and philosphy in general, and face it, he's the grand duke of Mormon "study and research" on ancient documents, theology and history bearing upon the Church; it's fun to cross swords with such a person very occasionally. One of the glories of the Internet is that it makes such things possible. I mean, he and Dan Vogel go at it over there too. They are like the seep dog and the coyote. It's kind of funny.

Robin asked WHY you do it. You sort of answered but you should be clearer. As a litigator I think I can say that the nub of it is a chance to cross swords. Sometimes a good argument is simply fun. Even if you don't know what your talking about (referring to me, not you SU). There may be ancillary reasons, but I suspect that chance to have a good ole barrom brawl is the biggest one.