New anti-mormon dvd released on 3/25

[RockyBalboa]

Originally Posted by Archaea

In what aspect do you seek knowledge? You haven't cited one example.

I may not be the brightest bulb in the box, but my interests are diverse and extend across many subjects, most of them have nothing to do with apostasy.

In my interests involving fitness, what aspects of that involve apostasy?

In my linguistic interests, what aspects involve apostasy?

In my interests to understand the Bible, how is that necessarily involve apostasy?

In my interests on math, same question?

In literature, same question?

In travel, same question?

In psychology, philosophy, medicine, law and nature, same question?

Just because a person has interests doesn't make one an apostate. Most of the thematic discussions occurring in Church, I can do in my sleep, so I and others have other interests. If they don't interest you, that's fine. But it is completely illogical for you to associate intellectual curiosity with apostasy. If so, Nibley, B.H. Roberts and Joseph Smith would be deemed apostates.

Your so wanting to be accepting of the apostates view on here, that you don't see their transparent bullshit for what it is. This is a religion thread by the way. I'm amazed you can see the transparency of those in politics, but yet can't when it comes to tearing down the convictions of the LDS believers.

I said NOTHING of your other "intellectual" exploits. Do as you will with your bizarre world.

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by RockyBalboa

Your too narrow minded to see the bullshit for what it is. This is a religion thread by the way. I'm amazed you can see the transparency of those in politics, but yet can't when it comes to tearing down the convictions of the LDS believers.

I said NOTHING of your other "intellectual" exploits. Do as you will with your bizarre world.

Do you ever address a post without hurling an insult?

Tearing down what LDS believe? The LDS belief tent is larger than you will admit. So one man's tearing down is another man's reconstructing and building.

And religion need not separate itself from intellect.

Try addressing the issues without insults. That's a first step in civility. We've been down this road before, but I wonder if you're willing to avoid unnecessary insults. I have many flaws, but a narrow mind other than from you I have not been accused of.

[RockyBalboa]

Originally Posted by Archaea

Do you ever address a post without hurling an insult?

Tearing down what LDS believe? The LDS belief tent is larger than you will admit. So one man's tearing down is another man's reconstructing and building.

And religion need not separate itself from intellect.

Try addressing the issues without insults. That's a first step in civility. We've been down this road before, but I wonder if you're willing to avoid unnecessary insults. I have many flaws, but a narrow mind other than from you I have not been accused of.

I don't relate an Apostates constant attempts at LDS Bashing as seeking knowledge and truth and you have quite vigorously attempted to defend them otherwise in the past.

Have you not yet figured out the difference between seeking knowledge and then seeking to tear down under the false pretense of seeking knowledge? Obviously you have not. They are NOT the same. Learn this and you will be wiser.

Like you said to me a while ago..."Peace be unto you."

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by RockyBalboa

I don't relate an Apostates constant attempts at LDS Bashing as seeking knowledge and truth and you have quite vigorously attempted to defend them otherwise in the past.

Have you not yet figured out the difference between seeking knowledge and then seeking to tear down under the false pretense of seeking knowledge? Obviously you have not. They are NOT the same. Learn this and you will be wiser.

Like you said to me a while ago..."Peace be unto you."

Learn nuance.

First, everybody you deem an apostate is not an apostate. People find themselves in differing states of belief at different times of their lives. In a way, there are two or three who are disaffected, or completely dissociated from Church belief. The remainder here have varying states of association. Unlike you, I see no value in kicking everybody out who does not share a narrow, blind interpretation of Church traditions, culture, policies and doctrines. I find it objectionable for you to label somebody unnecessarily as an apostate. Only a person and his God, and perhaps his ecclesiastical leader is in a position to make that decision.

Second, I am not blind, but choose not to make the same judgment as you. There is a significant nuance in that. I will defend the right of free speech, because in the articulation of thought, I can contrast what I think I know or what I believe to believe. Contrast highlights my own thoughts. With the exception of Aaron Shaf, I find most here have honestly or satirically expressed their viewpoints.

So please explain your belief that anybody is bashing LDS beliefs. We have a broad spectrum. If you would cease from the ad hominems, your perspectives can serve us well. If we need conversion, then perhaps your superior insights will sway us misguided souls. However, attacking us for not seeing the light is a poor tool of persuasion. And if you don't give a shit about us, then why bother?

[RockyBalboa]

Originally Posted by Archaea

Learn nuance.

First, everybody you deem an apostate is not an apostate. People find themselves in differing states of belief at different times of their lives. In a way, there are two or three who are disaffected, or completely dissociated from Church belief. The remainder here have varying states of association. Unlike you, I see no value in kicking everybody out who does not share a narrow, blind interpretation of Church traditions, culture, policies and doctrines. I find it objectionable for you to label somebody unnecessarily as an apostate. Only a person and his God, and perhaps his ecclesiastical leader is in a position to make that decision.

Second, I am not blind, but choose not to make the same judgment as you. There is a significant nuance in that. I will defend the right of free speech, because in the articulation of thought, I can contrast what I think I know or what I believe to believe. Contrast highlights my own thoughts. With the exception of Aaron Shaf, I find most here have honestly or satirically expressed their viewpoints.

So please explain your belief that anybody is bashing LDS beliefs. We have a broad spectrum. If you would cease from the ad hominems, your perspectives can serve us well. If we need conversion, then perhaps your superior insights will sway us misguided souls. However, attacking us for not seeing the light is a poor tool of persuasion. And if you don't give a shit about us, then why bother?

Then you and I disagree, because there are those on here who do not honestly seek to knowledge and wisdom. They seek to denigrate, mock and do anything but uplift.

You can explain away anything to fit your paradigm of thought and defense simply because that's what you're paid to do and when to school for. I'm not a professional arguer like you are. I imagine with the bizarre intensity you use in stubbornly keeping the stances you do, that you quite obviously never seen the simplest of things because unless it's deep and complicated you won't bother.

So in speaking of learning nuance I'd be happy to mail you a hand mirror.

[RockyBalboa]

Originally Posted by Archaea

Learn nuance.

First, everybody you deem an apostate is not an apostate. People find themselves in differing states of belief at different times of their lives. In a way, there are two or three who are disaffected, or completely dissociated from Church belief. The remainder here have varying states of association. Unlike you, I see no value in kicking everybody out who does not share a narrow, blind interpretation of Church traditions, culture, policies and doctrines. I find it objectionable for you to label somebody unnecessarily as an apostate. Only a person and his God, and perhaps his ecclesiastical leader is in a position to make that decision.

Second, I am not blind, but choose not to make the same judgment as you. There is a significant nuance in that. I will defend the right of free speech, because in the articulation of thought, I can contrast what I think I know or what I believe to believe. Contrast highlights my own thoughts. With the exception of Aaron Shaf, I find most here have honestly or satirically expressed their viewpoints.

So please explain your belief that anybody is bashing LDS beliefs. We have a broad spectrum. If you would cease from the ad hominems, your perspectives can serve us well. If we need conversion, then perhaps your superior insights will sway us misguided souls. However, attacking us for not seeing the light is a poor tool of persuasion. And if you don't give a shit about us, then why bother?

Then you and I disagree, because there are those on here who do not honestly seek to knowledge and wisdom. They seek to denigrate, mock and do anything but uplift.

You can explain away anything to fit your paradigm of thought and defense simply because that's what you're paid to do and when to school for. I'm not a professional arguer like you are. You're well refined in Professional Grade A Bullpuckey and making it sound okay. I imagine with the bizarre intensity you use in stubbornly keeping the stances you do, that you quite obviously never see the simplest of things because unless it's deep and complicated you won't bother. I've not once said anything of stifling free speech by the way. I simply can see what you cannot and for that I am thankful.

So in speaking of learning nuance I'd be happy to mail you a hand mirror.

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by RockyBalboa

Then you and I disagree, because there are those on here who do not honestly seek to knowledge and wisdom. They seek to denigrate, mock and do anything but uplift.

You can explain away anything to fit your paradigm of thought and defense simply because that's what you're paid to do and when to school for. I'm not a professional arguer like you are. I imagine with the bizarre intensity you use in stubbornly keeping the stances you do, that you quite obviously never seen the simplest of things because unless it's deep and complicated you won't bother.

So in speaking of learning nuance I'd be happy to mail you a hand mirror.

Since you claim the ability to see into the hearts and minds of distant posters, identify those who do not seek truth and knowledge, outside of Shaf is just a mindless jerk. Be prepared to defend your claims, because you are judging person without the aid of much, except for some posts.

I see simple things, but choose not to comment upon the simple, mundane as they may be noteworthy to experience but not especially distinctive enough for further discussion. Complexity adds beauty for me.

And the mirror argument is just an insult, from which I've asked you to refrain.

[RockyBalboa]

Originally Posted by Archaea

Since you claim the ability to see into the hearts and minds of distant posters, identify those who do not seek truth and knowledge, outside of Shaf is just a mindless jerk. Be prepared to defend your claims, because you are judging person without the aid of much, except for some posts.

I see simple things, but choose not to comment upon the simple, mundane as they may be noteworthy to experience but not especially distinctive enough for further discussion. Complexity adds beauty for me.

And the mirror argument is just an insult, from which I've asked you to refrain.

Like I said...you can make anything sound cool and right with the way in which you communicate. It's a very interesting way of coersion. One of which I reject.

If you want me to proffer a defense, all one has to do is go back and do various searches, and you will have all the proof you need. There is no need for me to expound upon the obvious, though sometimes I admittedly feel compelled to do so.

The ONLY differences I see between Aaronshaf and SeattleUte are intelligence and style points. Other than that they both see to cause upheavel when it comes to the beliefs of LDS. There's nothing in seeking knowledge and truth about what they do.

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by RockyBalboa

Like I said...you can make anything sound cool and right with the way in which you communicate. It's a very interesting way of coersion. One of which I reject.

If you want me to proffer a defense, all one has to do is go back and do various searches, and you will have all the proof you need. There is no need for me to expound upon the obvious, though sometimes I admittedly feel compelled to do so.

The ONLY differences I see between Aaronshaf and SeattleUte are intelligence and style points. Other than that they both see to cause upheavel when it comes to the beliefs of LDS. There's nothing in seeking knowledge and truth about what they do.

Seattle provides the worldview. If LDS are unwilling to stand and understand the worldview, we will cease to have legitimacy. We can have his watered down version of the worldview in the comfort of friends, or we can experience without that comfort. His view is not going to disappear because we ignore it.

I don't view Seattle as trying to cause upheaval, except with those silly enought to get riled up by some of his blindspots. He still has LDS relatives and will continue to have connection to the LDS faith for the remander of his life. Aaron is simply a mindless nothing. There is a wide chasm between the two.

And in seeking out a worldview defined by existing culture, Seattle in his own way is seeking truth and knowledge for himself.

The point is, you could find wisdom in the perspectives of others and if you chose to be more contemplative and diplomatic, we might find wisdom in your perspective. It is a false dichotomy that because somebody does not agree with me, he must be of the devil. I do not find your perspective to be Satanic, but simply one of a myriad of possibiliities. You see those who do not agree with you as apostates and of the devil. Are you not old enought to disbelieve that notion now?

[RockyBalboa]

[QUOTE=Archaea;67748]Seattle provides the worldview. If LDS are unwilling to stand and understand the worldview, we will cease to have legitimacy. We can have his watered down version of the worldview in the comfort of friends, or we can experience without that comfort. His view is not going to disappear because we ignore it.

I don't view Seattle as trying to cause upheaval, except with those silly enought to get riled up by some of his blindspots. He still has LDS relatives and will continue to have connection to the LDS faith for the remander of his life. Aaron is simply a mindless nothing. There is a wide chasm between the two.

And in seeking out a worldview defined by existing culture, Seattle in his own way is seeking truth and knowledge for himself.

The point is, you could find wisdom in the perspectives of others and if you chose to be more contemplative and diplomatic, we might find wisdom in your perspective. It is a false dichotomy that because somebody does not agree with me, he must be of the devil. I do not find your perspective to be Satanic, but simply one of a myriad of possibiliities. You see those who do not agree with you as apostates and of the devil. Are you not old enought to disbelieve that notion now?[/QUOTE

Like I said, the only difference between the 2 are intelligence and style points.

That's it.

You and I are simply just not going to agree here.