If you don't care, why read the thread and post in it, Simon?

Why are you here doing nothing, when you could be here replying to Darth J. who put up a well thought out *substantive* post in response to your usual inane and vacuous comments. (and God only knows why Darth J. bothers with you)

Darth J. wasting his precious time on Simon

It's interesting to see Apologists like Simon and USU clamor to be first in line to be considered victims. Hold your heads high gentlemen.

Is it time to coin a new word?

If the LDS church completely takes over the country or the world, do we call it a "Morwellian" society?

Excellent.

I too am disturbed by the nihilism that prompts Simon to express apathy at the dissipation of USU78's humanity in the maw of the monster of Mopologetics. Clearly Simon is daily slipping further into that abyss from which he cannot return to "care" about the suffering of others and the loss that is felt every time Mopologetics claims another victim.

You may not weep for USU78, Simon, but we will shed more than a tear for you. Turn back.

Kish,

It seems like the more we reach out to Simon, the harder he kicks. I can't tell if these are the death throws of his apologetic career or if he is going down that jaded spiral.

A typical Scratchian Phrase



Well what does that have to do with USU78's opinion and the way you interpret it?



I do not want that, either; but it has nothing to do with USU78's opinion, or with your character-assassination post about it. Unless, of course, you imagine that USU78 has the power to create such an Orwellian LDS-themed nightmare.



No. It is another ploy to satisfy your need to get as much attention as possible from as many people as possible. This time it failed miserably.



Well then, that must mean your interpretation of his expressed opinion is correct, right? Is the fact that you are not alone your definitive answer, Scratch? If that is the case then I am not alone in liking the marvelous taste of Mellow Yellow -- that must make it the definitively the number one soda, right?



No, Scratch... I am anti-Critic as you are anti-Apologist.

Then maybe you should double down on your efforts to counter critics instead of Doctor Scratch.

He is a critic. A critic of both the Church and LDS apologetics.

He is a critic of Mopologetics. I haven't seen that he spends much time criticizing the LDS Church per se.

It is true. He appears to be past feeling. I refuse to give up, though, Stak. We must not abandon him to a fate worse than death.

Simon, I don't know if you read Mr. Stak's earlier post on Abraham Heschel’s introduction to The Prophets. I'm going to requote some of the bits Stak excerpted for us and ask you read them very carefully:

It's simple, Simon Skains. USU78's remark stems from a notably TBM mindset that has its basis in paranoia and a deep need to control all facets of human society.



Consider your response Exhibit A re: the "toxicity" I described.



No... Especially given the fact that my assessment isn't based on his "expressed opinion." It's based on the general shift in subject and tone in his posts over the past few years. Why, do you disagree? Do you think that he's grown more reasonable, decent, and Christ-like over the years?



Sure you're getting angrier. You're practically frothing at the mouth:

I'm trying to convert Simon to Mormonism. I think that would be a nice change from his current religion.

Good luck. Mopologia is a counterfeit gospel that is tailor-made to satisfy the voraciousness of a sickly ego that will self-destruct if it ever confronts the possibility of not being right in the name of this pseudo-Mormonism.

It is not clear to me that Simon ever lets the facts get in the way of his preconceived notions. Has he watched this devolution of USU78 that others of us have watched from front row seats, as it were?

Really? According to whom? You? I am a lifelong member, and have seen no such paranoia and "deep need to control all facets of human society." You are making this up, pure and simple.



It is another ploy for you to garner as much attention as possible. Else, why are the only types of threads you post attack threads? Where are the love threads? Where are the compliment threads? Is your heart so hardened that you have no compassion left?



Of course it is! And you interpreted it, put a negative spin on it, and posted an attack thread over here. You are as guilty as you claim the "Mopologists" are -- you're just on the other side of the fence.



Your false dichotomy will not work here. USU78 has remained unchanged for the most part.



So, you agree with Joseph's bigotry? That will be nice ammunition for the future. Here are a couple of gems from you.

I don't think so. If you weren't "paranoid," you'd be far more willing to post using your IRL name, ala DCP, Mike Ash, Hamblin, Schryver, Wade Englund, etc., etc., etc. The fact that you've clung so tenaciously to your pseudonym is enormously revealing in terms of your paranoia, actually.

And yes: I realize that you're going to say, "Well, hey! Look at you!" I'll simply point out that no critic I'm aware of has ever engaged in the wholesale interference in people's lives that's summed up by, say, Louis Midgley's assault on the Tanners, or John Tvedtnes's attempt to interfere with Thomas Murphy's tenure proceedings, or Louis Midgley's attempts to have Meldrum's book pulled from the shelves of Deseret Book.

Plus, LDS paranoia is evident in many other facets of the Church, perhaps most noticeably in the secret temple ceremony and the secret Church finances.



I recently posted a congratulatory thread to Dean Robbers.



No. You're distorting the evidence, Simon Skains.



The prove it.



I disagree with Joseph's methods, and with a lot of his posts. He's clumsy.



That's a "gem," too, and I don't deny it. How could I, when I'm singling in on acts of his that are undeniably evil? Is it "derogatory" to point out that Dr. Peterson has engaged in a smear campaign against D. Michael Quinn? Why, *yes*, it is!

That has nothing to do with paranoia, unless you are "paranoid" too. You have never revealed your IRL name, and I do not imagine you ever will.



Is it? What about the fact that you've clung so tenaciously to yours?



The Tanners shouldn't have become anti-Mormons if they didn't want to be ridiculed by LDS Scholars. It is very simple.



Murphy produced dishonest materials towards the Church which cast the Book of Mormon in a bad light. If he did not want people to ridicule him or question his academic dishonesty, he shouldn't have produced what he produced. See how simple this is?



Another teaching that apostates just do not understand. No wonder you left. The temple ceremonies aren't "secret," any worth member can participate.



A veiled attempt to undermine another member's interests. Not noble at all. Tell me another thread you composed that wasn't an attack thread.

If you are so bent out of shape about apologists attacking anti-Mormons, why do you participate in the same behavior that you so loathe?



Sorry. I am not. You say this every time you get backed into a corner by me, Scratch Skains.



I don't care that much. I only care about the fact that you loathe apologetics for the very same behavior that you imitate here.



No, Scratch. He's a d***a**. Just say it. He really, truly, is a d***a**.



I play by the known rules of whatever event I am taking place in. I do not simply make up "my own rules" each time, like you do.



So, again, we see that you believe that it is "evil" for LDS Apologists to behave exactly like you behave here.

And what about D. Michael Quinn... why do you always defend him? You don't even know him.

What on earth does that mean?

Do you know him? Or his work?