So, Dr. Shades, Schryver was just making it up all along?

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
Post Reply
User avatar
Runtu
God
Posts: 16721
Joined: Sat Nov 04, 2006 11:06 pm

Re: So, Dr. Shades, Schryver was just making it up all along?

Post by Runtu »

William Schryver wrote:At any rate, if you sincerely believe the bolded part above to be an accurate description of the truth, it is simply a measure of the degree to which your mind and soul have been negatively impacted by your continuing participation in the Great and Spacious Trailer Park. In fact, matters are getting worse for you with each passing month. And it sincerely saddens me. But it is apparent that whatever is at the root of your pride and growing inability to discern between good and evil not only continues to hold sway in your life, but its influence upon you is steadily increasing.

And frankly, my dear, the company you keep here will only serve to continue to increase the distance between you and your heavenly Father--not at the same pace it has hitherto, but steadily increasing until, before long, you will know nothing of the ways of God.


This is possibly the most clueless thing you have ever said, William. I try to convince myself that you mean well, but honestly, it's getting harder to believe.
Runtu's Rincón

If you just talk, I find that your mouth comes out with stuff. -- Karl Pilkington

User avatar
RockSlider
God
Posts: 6745
Joined: Tue Dec 09, 2008 10:02 pm

Re: So, Dr. Shades, Schryver was just making it up all along?

Post by RockSlider »

William why?

You seem to have taken a change and seem very embittered.

User avatar
Runtu
God
Posts: 16721
Joined: Sat Nov 04, 2006 11:06 pm

Re: So, Dr. Shades, Schryver was just making it up all along?

Post by Runtu »

RockSlider wrote:William why?

You seem to have taken a change and seem very embittered.


Don't tell me you've lost your ability to distinguish between good and evil, too. ;-)
Runtu's Rincón

If you just talk, I find that your mouth comes out with stuff. -- Karl Pilkington

User avatar
RockSlider
God
Posts: 6745
Joined: Tue Dec 09, 2008 10:02 pm

Re: So, Dr. Shades, Schryver was just making it up all along?

Post by RockSlider »

Runtu wrote:
RockSlider wrote:William why?

You seem to have taken a change and seem very embittered.


Don't tell me you've lost your ability to distinguish between good and evil, too. ;-)



seems so.

Will has always been Will, but this seems different some how. I hope its the stress of his upcoming presentation and not something personally worse.

Kevin Graham
God
Posts: 13029
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 12:44 pm

Re: So, Dr. Shades, Schryver was just making it up all along?

Post by Kevin Graham »

Go ahead Liz, pull up his history.
Last edited by Kevin Graham on Sun May 23, 2010 11:14 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Paul Osborne

Re: So, Dr. Shades, Schryver was just making it up all along?

Post by Paul Osborne »

Kevin Graham wrote:Go ahead Liz, pull up his history. Let's see if this will cause his other fallopian tube to collapse as well.


I second the motion and beg Liz to provide us with this delicious list. I have my cut and paster ready to go. I want to spread the word of William Schryver everywhere. I want the General Athorities to be informed. I'll make sure that gets done. I'll be a rat.

Paul O

User avatar
Runtu
God
Posts: 16721
Joined: Sat Nov 04, 2006 11:06 pm

Re: So, Dr. Shades, Schryver was just making it up all along?

Post by Runtu »

I somehow doubt that rehashing all of Will's Oscar Wilde-esque repartee and rapier wit will accomplish much.
Runtu's Rincón

If you just talk, I find that your mouth comes out with stuff. -- Karl Pilkington

User avatar
Trevor
God
Posts: 7213
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2007 12:28 pm

Re: So, Dr. Shades, Schryver was just making it up all along?

Post by Trevor »

William Schryver wrote:It must be a mighty challenge for you to go through your life in this constant stupor of ignorance. <sigh>


Looks to me like he has been keeping company with Droopy. The same disconnection from reality stated in the form of petty insult and with absolute conviction.
“I was hooked from the start,” Snoop Dogg said. “We talked about the purpose of life, played Mousetrap, and ate brownies. The kids thought it was off the hook, for real.”

Kevin Graham
God
Posts: 13029
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 12:44 pm

Re: So, Dr. Shades, Schryver was just making it up all along?

Post by Kevin Graham »

Told ya it was a ruse. Between him and Gee, there isn't an honest or genuine bone in their collective bodies. It is all about serving the greater good, which is of course, whatever it takes to defend the Church.

It is just strange to me how someone can lie as much as he does and then come here preaching to others about fighting on the side of evil as opposed to the apologetic side of good. Whatever happened to "you shall know them by their fruits,"? When did that translate to "you shall know them by their disloyalty or associations?" Since when was lying and deception a fruit of goodness? This is why I think people like Will and Droopy serve the "anti-Mormon" cause better than any critic ever could.

Yoda

Re: So, Dr. Shades, Schryver was just making it up all along?

Post by Yoda »

Kevin Graham wrote:Go ahead Liz, pull up his history.


Here is the history of the bulk of Will's graphic comments gathered in one thread:

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=9005&start=0&st=0&sk=t&sd=a

I realize that these may not all be in complete context, but I think that those here, particularly those who are priesthood holders, and past priesthood holders, can recognize that the derogatory comments toward women, in particular, were completely inappropriate, not to mention cruel, rude, and vulgar.

By all means, the readers here, LDS and non-LDS alike, are free to judge for themselves the accuracy of our former statements.

Paul Osborne

Re: So, Dr. Shades, Schryver was just making it up all along?

Post by Paul Osborne »

Oh goody, nasty stuff written by the hand of William boy, the official apologist of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints!

Let us thank Salt Lake City for the apologist!

Let us thank Lizz too!

Paul O

User avatar
Darth J
Dark Lord of the Sith
Posts: 13392
Joined: Wed May 12, 2010 6:16 pm

Re: So, Dr. Shades, Schryver was just making it up all along?

Post by Darth J »

liz3564 wrote:
Kevin Graham wrote:Go ahead Liz, pull up his history.


Here is the history of the bulk of Will's graphic comments gathered in one thread:

http://www.mormondiscussions.com/phpBB3 ... &sk=t&sd=a

I realize that these may not all be in complete context, but I think that those here, particularly those who are priesthood holders, and past priesthood holders, can recognize that the derogatory comments toward women, in particular, were completely inappropriate, not to mention cruel, rude, and vulgar.

By all means, the readers here, LDS and non-LDS alike, are free to judge for themselves the accuracy of our former statements.


Brothers and sisters, if there is anyone who has not yet joined in my fasting and prayer for Will Schryver to become the new point man for Mormon apologetics, please do so now.

Let us hope that our faith and prayers will be answered, and that when people think of Mormons defending the faith, Will Schryver will be the first name to comes to their mind.
Last edited by Darth J on Sun May 23, 2010 10:30 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Paul Osborne

Re: So, Dr. Shades, Schryver was just making it up all along?

Post by Paul Osborne »

Yes, blessed be the name of William Schryver! He is the new prophet for the LDS church! Let him guide the saints and show the way of the KEP. The time has come for Monson to step down and let William Shryver take his place.

All in favor of removing President Monson from office and placing William Schyrver in his stead please manifest with your uplifted hand of approval.

Paul O

Yoda

Re: So, Dr. Shades, Schryver was just making it up all along?

Post by Yoda »

Also, Will....I noticed that you conveniently neglected to answer the first portion of the post:

Will--

What bothered me about the FAIR/Trevor incident is that:
a) You talked about Trevor's submission to FAIR in a public forum when it was supposed to be kept private.

b) You mentioned Trevor's real-life name on an Internet forum where he had chosen to remain anonymous.

Both of these acts are unprofessional and "crossing the line" as far as Internet protocol is concerned, in my opinion.

I really don't care what types of criticism you have regarding Trevor's work. For me, it's the lack of respect of Trevor's privacy that I think you owe him an apology for.

I can even understand that there may have been some type of miscommunication when it came to the details of the FAIR submission. But that is still no excuse to pull it out as a "trump card" in the middle of some immature argument on MAD. Again, it smacks of unprofessionalism toward the organization you belong to, in this case, FAIR.


Are you stating that these allegations are not true, or that I do not know what I am talking about when it comes to this situation? When you referred to my not knowing what I was talking about, you seemed to be referring to the vulgar comments, which I have now cross-referenced.

By all means, if I have misunderstood the situation between you, FAIR, and Trevor, I would love for you to enlighten me. What I posted was how I honestly witnessed what occurred.

Are you stating that Trevor should have had no expectation that his initial notes to FAIR be kept private when he was assured that they would be?

Are you stating that you did NOT mention Trevor's real life name on the message boards? There are records of you doing that.

Are you stating that your "off the cuff" catty remark to Trevor on MAD, utilizing the FAIR submission as a "trump card" in the argument was professional?

Where, exactly, am I off-base, Will?

User avatar
William Schryver
God
Posts: 1671
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 9:58 am

Re: So, Dr. Shades, Schryver was just making it up all along?

Post by William Schryver »

liz3564 wrote:/snip/

Where, exactly, am I off-base, Will?

Life is too short to count all the ways,
so I'll merely repeat what Joe had to say:

On the bottom words are shallow
On the surface talk is cheap
You can only judge the distance
By the company you keep
... every man walketh in his own way, and after the image of his own god, whose image is in the likeness of the world, and whose substance is that of an idol ...

Yoda

Re: So, Dr. Shades, Schryver was just making it up all along?

Post by Yoda »

William Schryver wrote:
liz3564 wrote:/snip/

Where, exactly, am I off-base, Will?

Life is too short to count all the ways,
so I'll merely repeat what Joe had to say:

On the bottom words are shallow
On the surface talk is cheap
You can only judge the distance
By the company you keep


Well, you're keeping the same company I am, Will.

And, I'm really not the enemy. I'm actually probably one of the few people here willing to hear your side.

User avatar
Darth J
Dark Lord of the Sith
Posts: 13392
Joined: Wed May 12, 2010 6:16 pm

Re: So, Dr. Shades, Schryver was just making it up all along?

Post by Darth J »

liz3564 wrote:
Well, you're keeping the same company I am, Will.

And, I'm really not the enemy. I'm actually probably one of the few people here willing to hear your side.


May I reiterate that not only do I want to hear Will's side, I fervently want EVERYONE to hear Will's side.

User avatar
Some Schmo
God
Posts: 15186
Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2007 8:59 am

Re: So, Dr. Shades, Schryver was just making it up all along?

Post by Some Schmo »

William Schryver wrote: Life is too short to count all the ways,
so I'll merely repeat what Joe had to say...

I just realized that when little willy says "it's best to ignore this place" he doesn't actually mean "this place." He just means those arguments that don't support his warped view of reality.
God belief is for people who don't want to live life on the universe's terms.

Brackite
God
Posts: 6323
Joined: Wed Oct 25, 2006 2:12 am

Re: So, Dr. Shades, Schryver was just making it up all along?

Post by Brackite »

thews wrote:
Brackite wrote:Is it just me, or has LDS Apologetics even gone further down hill within the last few years? Who would actually pay money to go hear William "Missing Papyrus" Schryver speak at a Fair Conference knowing what kind of a man he really is?


I can see it now… based on what we have that is 100% wrong, we must conclude it was translated on what’s missing, so that’s why it’s wrong… see? Cause you know, it has to be right, so an argument from silence on what isn’t makes the most sense, and since it can never be proven cause it’s based on what’s missing, it will always be correct. See… BRLLLIANT! Oh by the way, all that stuff we've kept hidden... it'll stay that way cause it shows we're really correct and only we know it... you know ...cause it's hidden from you.



The Missing Papyrus theory camp for the BofA is the most fun, because it has a non-existent lost Papyrus serving as the source. It is magical and fun.
"And I've said it before, you want to know what Joseph Smith looked like in Nauvoo, just look at Trump." - Fence Sitter

Nimrod
midnight rambler
Posts: 1923
Joined: Tue Nov 17, 2009 4:51 pm

Re: So, Dr. Shades, Schryver was just making it up all along?

Post by Nimrod »

Brackite wrote:Is it just me, or has LDS Apologetics even gone further down hill within the last few years? Who would actually pay money to go hear William "Missing Papyrus" Schryver speak at a Fair Conference knowing what kind of a man he really is?

Oodles of the faithful. Cognitive dissonance is so disconcerting to the human mind that it will grasp at all sorts of straws for an explanation that doesn't require it to compromise its irrational, emotional 'beliefs'.
thews wrote:I can see it now… based on what we have that is 100% wrong, we must conclude it was translated on what’s missing, so that’s why it’s wrong… see? Cause you know, it has to be right, so an argument from silence on what isn’t makes the most sense, and since it can never be proven cause it’s based on what’s missing, it will always be correct. See… BRLLLIANT! Oh by the way, all that stuff we've kept hidden... it'll stay that way cause it shows we're really correct and only we know it... you know ...cause it's hidden from you.
That's the ticket. Keep moving the target.
Brackite wrote:The Missing Papyrus theory camp for the BofA is the most fun, because it has a non-existent lost Papyrus serving as the source. It is magical and fun.

Absence makes the heart grow fonder. Never so true as applied to apologists and facts--absence of facts is an essential element to apologetics.
--*--

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

Re: So, Dr. Shades, Schryver was just making it up all along?

Post by Nomad »

Dr. Shades wrote:
RockSlider wrote:As for your Book of Abraham work, I hope your presentation goes well for you and your upcoming book is a success.

Back to the O.P., I don't believe that Will has an upcoming book.

You are a very curious character, Dr. Shades. You remain convinced, despite all the evidence that seems to point to Schryver's bona fides.

Now I admit I haven't taken the time to read every single post on this thread, but I tried to look for yours, and I could not see where you had provided any kind of logical reasoning to explain the evidence of Will's extensive and long-term involvement in the KEP project.

Do you actually believe that Schryver has not been working with Hauglid and Gee? Because I have confirmed, from people who are in a position to know, that he has not only been working with them, but that they have been very impressed at how he seems to have quite the knack for seeing things that others have missed. Things that were there all the time, right in front of everyone, but people (including Hugh Nibley) somehow couldn't see the forest for the trees. Certainly he could be wrong about all of these things, and that will certainly be judged in course of time, but the evidence that he is doing something seems obvious to everyone but you.

Do you honestly believe that William is lying about having examined, on more than one occasion, the Joseph Smith papyri and the Kirtland Egyptian papers? Because, I have an acquaintance who works directly with Marlin Jensen and Rick Turley at the Church history library. He confirms that Schryver has indeed been granted access to those things, at least once last year as well as earlier this year. In fact, he says that there is quite a bit of excitement building about what William is doing. He even told me that Elder Jensen, in remarks made last week at a fireside in Kansas City (iirc) made specific reference to some of these new findings!

But YOU think it’s all a big charade. How strange!

Why do you think Schryver would fabricate such a blatant lie? You must have some thoughts on WHY he would do such a thing. What would be his motivation? What could he possibly hope to gain?

I can understand you not believing that Will’s findings will have anything of substance to contribute to the Book of Abraham discussion. What I do not understand is why you continue to hold to your opinion that everything he has said all along has been “made up.”

It will be very interesting to see your reaction if and when you are proven to have been wrong.






By the way (this is a question for everyone here) what are your opinions about what Schryver will be talking about? What is this all about, in your opinion? What could he possibly have to say that hasn’t already been said? What angle could he be taking that would be new and different? Any ideas?
... 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: cognitiveharmony, Craig Paxton, Fence Sitter, Fifth Columnist, Google [Bot], reflexzero and 32 guests