Metcalfe Schryver Debate Set to Go

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
Post Reply
User avatar
beastie
God
Posts: 14216
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 8:26 pm

Re: Metcalfe Schryver Debate Set to Go

Post by beastie »

Simon Belmont wrote:So, is this thing happening or what? I mean, seriously.


So are you offering to pay for Brent and his children's airfare and lodging?
We hate to seem like we don’t trust every nut with a story, but there’s evidence we can point to, and dance while shouting taunting phrases.

Penn & Teller

http://www.mormonmesoamerica.com

Simon Belmont

Re: Metcalfe Schryver Debate Set to Go

Post by Simon Belmont »

beastie wrote:So are you offering to pay for Brent and his children's airfare and lodging?


To something Brent comes to each year anyway? No. He'll be here anyway.

Simon Belmont

Re: Metcalfe Schryver Debate Set to Go

Post by Simon Belmont »

Kishkumen wrote:
You deceitfully mischaracterized my criticisms of Mopologetics as anti-Mormonism.

Can you defend your lie?



What's gotten into you lately, Kish? Lighten up a bit. My position is that you are mimicking the behavior of anti-Mormonism, not that you are saying anything specific against the Church.

User avatar
Kishkumen
Seedy Academician
Posts: 20979
Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2008 4:00 pm

Re: Metcalfe Schryver Debate Set to Go

Post by Kishkumen »

Simon Belmont wrote:What's gotten into you lately, Kish? Lighten up a bit. My position is that you are mimicking the behavior of anti-Mormonism, not that you are saying anything specific against the Church.


LOL. OK, Simon. Your resorting to fabrications, and then deceitfully modifying them after the fact is about me.

But to respond to your bogus contention--no, I am not mimicking anti-Mormonism. I am standing firm against the lie of Mopologetics, and pointing out that abandoning one's principles (note the nominal form) for a good cause is a self-defeating strategy, as well as perilous for the spirituality of the Mopologist who undertakes it.

And, one of the very worst Mopologetic lies is that criticism of Mopologia is either identical with anti-Mormonism, or close enough, that is must be deceitfully treated as though it were anti-Mormonism. Thus one regularly sees faithful members who are attacked by Mopologists with the false charge of apostasy. It is really sickening to watch, and yet Mopologists have no compunction about it.

Were you familiar with this problem? Do you condone these attacks? You are, after all, going down that road in your attacks on me.
“God came to me in a dream last night and showed me the future. He took me to heaven and I saw Donald Trump seated at the right hand of our Lord.” ~ Pat Robertson
“He says he has eyes to see things that are not . . . and that the angel of the Lord . . . has put him in possession of great wealth, gold, silver, precious stones.” ~ Jesse Smith

Simon Belmont

Re: Metcalfe Schryver Debate Set to Go

Post by Simon Belmont »

Kishkumen wrote:
Were you familiar with this problem? Do you condone these attacks? You are, after all, going down that road in your attacks on me.


No, and I wasn't attacking you. I've just noticed a drastic change in you lately -- a mean spirited one.

User avatar
Kishkumen
Seedy Academician
Posts: 20979
Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2008 4:00 pm

Re: Metcalfe Schryver Debate Set to Go

Post by Kishkumen »

Simon Belmont wrote:No, and I wasn't attacking you. I've just noticed a drastic change in you lately -- a mean spirited one.


Really? You'll have to explain. I haven't noticed, but perhaps you can point out some of this nastiness.
“God came to me in a dream last night and showed me the future. He took me to heaven and I saw Donald Trump seated at the right hand of our Lord.” ~ Pat Robertson
“He says he has eyes to see things that are not . . . and that the angel of the Lord . . . has put him in possession of great wealth, gold, silver, precious stones.” ~ Jesse Smith

Simon Belmont

Re: Metcalfe Schryver Debate Set to Go

Post by Simon Belmont »

Kishkumen wrote:Really? You'll have to explain. I haven't noticed, but perhaps you can point out some of this nastiness.


Seriously?

The Lies of Simon Belmont, Mopologist

Themis
God
Posts: 13181
Joined: Wed Feb 17, 2010 12:43 pm

Re: Metcalfe Schryver Debate Set to Go

Post by Themis »

Simon Belmont wrote:So, is this thing happening or what? I mean, seriously.


Are you really this stupid?
42

User avatar
Kishkumen
Seedy Academician
Posts: 20979
Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2008 4:00 pm

Re: Metcalfe Schryver Debate Set to Go

Post by Kishkumen »

Simon Belmont wrote:Seriously?

The Lies of Simon Belmont, Mopologist


Simon, you lied! It is right there in b&w! I was blown away by your shamelessness.
“God came to me in a dream last night and showed me the future. He took me to heaven and I saw Donald Trump seated at the right hand of our Lord.” ~ Pat Robertson
“He says he has eyes to see things that are not . . . and that the angel of the Lord . . . has put him in possession of great wealth, gold, silver, precious stones.” ~ Jesse Smith

Simon Belmont

Re: Metcalfe Schryver Debate Set to Go

Post by Simon Belmont »

Themis wrote:
Simon Belmont wrote:So, is this thing happening or what? I mean, seriously.


Are you really this stupid?


Just want a straight answer.

Simon Belmont

Re: Metcalfe Schryver Debate Set to Go

Post by Simon Belmont »

Kishkumen wrote:
Simon Belmont wrote:Seriously?

The Lies of Simon Belmont, Mopologist


Simon, you lied! It is right there in b&w! I was blown away by your shamelessness.


First of all. You lie too. You name is not Kishkumen. Most of us here are liars.

Secondly, starting nasty threads about me because of my behavior is like me calling Joseph, schmo, thews, etc. bigots because of their anti-Mormon behavior. You chastised me more than once for that, yet you act exactly the same way.

My ministry may yet be able to help you.

Themis
God
Posts: 13181
Joined: Wed Feb 17, 2010 12:43 pm

Re: Metcalfe Schryver Debate Set to Go

Post by Themis »

Simon Belmont wrote:
Just want a straight answer.


All it takes is some basic reading skills and then just reading the thread. It has also been spelled out to you, but yet you still pretend not to get it.
42

Simon Belmont

Re: Metcalfe Schryver Debate Set to Go

Post by Simon Belmont »

Themis wrote:All it takes is some basic reading skills and then just reading the thread. It has also been spelled out to you, but yet you still pretend not to get it.


Well the thread still exists on the front page, so the issue must be unresolved.

Themis
God
Posts: 13181
Joined: Wed Feb 17, 2010 12:43 pm

Re: Metcalfe Schryver Debate Set to Go

Post by Themis »

Simon Belmont wrote:
First of all. You lie too. You name is not Kishkumen. Most of us here are liars.


How is that lying?

My ministry may yet be able to help you.


Is that what you think you are doing. I don't think you are doing the Church any favors

Well the thread still exists on the front page, so the issue must be unresolved.


That wasn't your question in which I asked just how stupid you must be. Do people really have to try and spell it out, again, to you that Will has said he will not debate Brent at this time. A little reading would have communicated this to you, but then you have shown an extreme amount of bias and hypocrisy in this thread.
42

User avatar
Kishkumen
Seedy Academician
Posts: 20979
Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2008 4:00 pm

Re: Metcalfe Schryver Debate Set to Go

Post by Kishkumen »

Simon Belmont wrote:My ministry may yet be able to help you.


Dude, if you don't want me to get up in your grill, don't be such a doofus. Don't tell obvious lies. Play your criticism of anti-Mormonism straight, and you'll garner more sympathy. But when you act like a douche bag, you don't win any friends, converts, or basic respect. Think about it!

Also, come up with your own damn ideas.
“God came to me in a dream last night and showed me the future. He took me to heaven and I saw Donald Trump seated at the right hand of our Lord.” ~ Pat Robertson
“He says he has eyes to see things that are not . . . and that the angel of the Lord . . . has put him in possession of great wealth, gold, silver, precious stones.” ~ Jesse Smith

User avatar
Brent Metcalfe
Deacon
Posts: 201
Joined: Sat Feb 10, 2007 9:37 pm

Re: Metcalfe Schryver Debate Set to Go

Post by Brent Metcalfe »

Hi folks,

hmmm...

Human reflex, response, or perhaps hubris, can be a curious study.

I continue to read stories about me that I know are false yet are told as truth. Some (e.g., Will) claim that I'm a technical writer, despite the fact that I've never been employed as a technical writer; some (e.g., Nomad) say I only have one child at home, even though I have two; still others (e.g., B.S.) claim that I visit Utah annually, while in reality I haven't been to Utah since 2006 (that's four years ago for the mathematically challenged). :)

If ignorance is bliss, I suspect that more than a few Metcalfe-watchers are enraptured in euphoric asininity.

(B.S.... er, I mean, S.B., or datacycle, or whatever quaint moniker you choose—as I've mentioned before, I have no interest in repartee with anonymous netizens of your ilk.)

Give me a day or so to once again accept Will's invitation—this time with a tad more candid clarity.

Kind regards,

</brent>


http://mormonscripturestudies.com
(© 2010 Brent Lee Metcalfe.)
------------------------------
The thesis of inspiration may not be invoked to guarantee historicity, for a divinely inspired story is not necessarily history.
—Raymond E. Brown

User avatar
RockSlider
God
Posts: 6712
Joined: Tue Dec 09, 2008 10:02 pm

Re: Metcalfe Schryver Debate Set to Go

Post by RockSlider »

Geeze Brent, we were just getting used to his slumming back to the trailer park for some attention, now his head will shoot back up to the super stardom status of apologist extraordinaire knowing that you still care.
Dang might be a whole month or more now before he graces these back alleys, seeking out Paul's opposition again.

Paul Osborne

Re: Metcalfe Schryver Debate Set to Go

Post by Paul Osborne »

Dang might be a whole month or more now before he graces these back alleys, seeking out Paul's opposition again


Hey, I don't think a debate between Metcalfe and Schryver is in season right now. It's just too early. Besides, if Schryver fails to pick up support he may just drop the whole thing and the Cipher theory will go away into obscurity. Metcalfe would then win by default without having to do anything. Like I've said, sit back and see who sides with Schyrver and who doesn't. An endorsement from Wade is a mere drop in a bucket. Schyrver has his work cut out for him in order to pick up real votes. It's a win or loose situation for him as the LDS Cipher election draws nigh. How do you think William will feel when he loses the election for Chief BofA Apologist? He will be in no mood for a debate.

Paul O

User avatar
Nomad
Bishop
Posts: 504
Joined: Sat Feb 21, 2009 1:07 pm

Re: Metcalfe Schryver Debate Set to Go

Post by Nomad »

Kishkumen wrote:... Dr. Hauglid to come out of lurk mode and caution Will about the risks of throwing around the word "conclusively.")

Typical behavior here. Hauglid was expressing reservations about a single item (the "fifth degree of the second part" line). That thing had nothing to do with Schryver's FAIR presentation. Nothing at all. It was one small observation among many in a post that dealt with the Williams Abraham manuscript.

Hauglid agrees with Schryver's thesis of the EAG dependency question.

You, sir, are an intentional deceiver of the ignorant masses here in Wonderland.[/quote]
... she said that she was ready to drive up to Salt Lake City and confront ... Church leaders ... while well armed. The idea was ... dropped ... [because] she didn't have a 12 gauge with her.
-DrW about his friends (Link)

User avatar
Nomad
Bishop
Posts: 504
Joined: Sat Feb 21, 2009 1:07 pm

Re: Metcalfe Schryver Debate Set to Go

Post by Nomad »

beastie wrote:I'd greatly appreciate a link to a post wherein one of your followers clearly and accurately identifies the "meaning and purpose" of the KEP.

The meaning of the KEP is that they are dependent on a previously received Book of Abraham.

Their purpose appears to be an exercise or an experiment in producing some kind of cipher conforming to something they (Smith, Phelps, Cowdery, etc.) believed to be like the "pure language" of the ancients.

There, that wasn't that hard.
... she said that she was ready to drive up to Salt Lake City and confront ... Church leaders ... while well armed. The idea was ... dropped ... [because] she didn't have a 12 gauge with her.
-DrW about his friends (Link)

User avatar
Nomad
Bishop
Posts: 504
Joined: Sat Feb 21, 2009 1:07 pm

Re: Metcalfe Schryver Debate Set to Go

Post by Nomad »

Brent Metcalfe wrote:Hi folks,

hmmm...

Human reflex, response, or perhaps hubris, can be a curious study.

I continue to read stories about me that I know are false yet are told as truth. Some (e.g., Will) claim that I'm a technical writer, despite the fact that I've never been employed as a technical writer; some (e.g., Nomad) say I only have one child at home, even though I have two; still others (e.g., B.S.) claim that I visit Utah annually, while in reality I haven't been to Utah since 2006 (that's four years ago for the mathematically challenged). :)

If ignorance is bliss, I suspect that more than a few Metcalfe-watchers are enraptured in euphoric asininity.

(B.S.... er, I mean, S.B., or datacycle, or whatever quaint moniker you choose—as I've mentioned before, I have no interest in repartee with anonymous netizens of your ilk.)

Give me a day or so to once again accept Will's invitation—this time with a tad more candid clarity.

Kind regards,

</brent>


http://mormonscripturestudies.com
(© 2010 Brent Lee Metcalfe.)
------------------------------
The thesis of inspiration may not be invoked to guarantee historicity, for a divinely inspired story is not necessarily history.
—Raymond E. Brown


What is your occupation?

How old are your children?

Just curious.
... she said that she was ready to drive up to Salt Lake City and confront ... Church leaders ... while well armed. The idea was ... dropped ... [because] she didn't have a 12 gauge with her.
-DrW about his friends (Link)

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 7 guests