All 7 Of Jacob Hansen's Siblings Have Left The Church

[MG 2.0]

Maybe consider why multiple unrelated posters who have had a long history of trying to engage with MG have all, independently and at different times, all reached the same conclusion - that he’s a bad faith actor. Further, an A.I. analysis of his posting reached exactly the same conclusion.

He’s been a bad faith actor for many, many, many, years. His board reputation is now irrecoverable. Not only that, MG doesn’t even attempt to try to be different. How he behaves is a conscious and deliberate choice. It’s who he wants to be.

About 10-12 years ago my wife & I were in Utah, and planned to drive from St George through Idaho and eventually into BC. I arranged to meet a couple of people along the way, one of whom was MG. We met for only about 20-30 minutes in a parking lot because we both had other things to do, but during this brief encounter had a nice chat. As far as I was concerned we parted on perfectly friendly terms.

Same here!

Over the next few years I noticed some changes in the online persona of MG, and on at least one occasion asked him to reconsider how he was responding to posters here.

Honestly, I'm the same person I was when I met you. If you read my previous post, however, I think that might help explain things.

His reply left me in no doubt that the MG I was now seeing online was not the pleasant, friendly guy we had met.

I'm sorry that you came to feel that way, malkie.

I was disappointed.

As would I be if I was in your position seeing things as you apparently did.

I've passed by that way since then, but have had no inclination to meet again in person.

I don't think that's the solution. Be that as it may, dang. I'd like to see you again.

Eventually I stopped engaging directly with MG here for reasons that I've mentioned recently on a few threads, including those outlined by IHQ. I don't expect that to change.

Sometimes a mind virus among communities can grow. We see it all around us in these polarizing times.

It is unfortunate. People need to continue to talk and not remain in their silos.

I often am somewhat amazed that I am asked, pestered at times ,for answers to questions, etc., but when I try and reach out and do the same I am either ignored or misinterpreted without any attempt to try and understand.

Just as folks might be interested in me as to how I can possibly believe in the truth claims of the LDS church, I find myself wondering the same thing in reverse...how a person has come to NOT believe. So I ask pointed questions and try and dig a bit deeper. That may offend some people if they are highly sensitive for one reason or another.

I think I've been one of the most vulnerable people here in expressing my thoughts. I would like to see some of that same vulnerability on the part of some folks I've asked to reveal a bit more of their Mormon Story.

You are not one of them, malkie. I've enjoyed reading, from time to time, as you express your thoughts in regards to some of the life experiences you've had in the church and reasons for disbelief. I appreciate that.

Stop by again! I'll treat you guys to lunch as long as there is not more than two of you!

Regards,
MG

[I Have Questions]

Maybe consider why multiple unrelated posters who have had a long history of trying to engage with MG have all, independently and at different times, all reached the same conclusion - that he’s a bad faith actor. Further, an A.I. analysis of his posting reached exactly the same conclusion.

He’s been a bad faith actor for many, many, many, years. His board reputation is now irrecoverable. Not only that, MG doesn’t even attempt to try to be different. How he behaves is a conscious and deliberate choice. It’s who he wants to be.

MG is a jerk.

…

Regards
MG

I agree.

[MG 2.0]

MG is a jerk.

…

Regards
MG

I agree.

I knew I was opening myself up to that.

I actually don't know what to think of you though. Human?

But I'm sure you're not a jerk. How could you be? Not possible.

Regards,
MG

[I Have Questions]

Maybe consider why multiple unrelated posters who have had a long history of trying to engage with MG have all, independently and at different times, all reached the same conclusion - that he’s a bad faith actor. Further, an A.I. analysis of his posting reached exactly the same conclusion.

He’s been a bad faith actor for many, many, many, years. His board reputation is now irrecoverable. Not only that, MG doesn’t even attempt to try to be different. How he behaves is a conscious and deliberate choice. It’s who he wants to be.

About 10-12 years ago my wife & I were in Utah, and planned to drive from St George through Idaho and eventually into BC. I arranged to meet a couple of people along the way, one of whom was MG. We met for only about 20-30 minutes in a parking lot because we both had other things to do, but during this brief encounter had a nice chat. As far as I was concerned we parted on perfectly friendly terms.

Over the next few years I noticed some changes in the online persona of MG, and on at least one occasion asked him to reconsider how he was responding to posters here. His reply left me in no doubt that the MG I was now seeing online was not the pleasant, friendly guy we had met. I was disappointed. I've passed by that way since then, but have had no inclination to meet again in person.

Eventually I stopped engaging directly with MG here for reasons that I've mentioned recently on a few threads, including those outlined by IHQ. I don't expect that to change.

And he still refuses to take responsibility for the perception of being a bad faith actor that he has given multiple, unrelated posters, across a wide time span. It’s everybody else’s fault, apparently. Trumpism 101 - blame everyone else.

[MG 2.0]

About 10-12 years ago my wife & I were in Utah, and planned to drive from St George through Idaho and eventually into BC. I arranged to meet a couple of people along the way, one of whom was MG. We met for only about 20-30 minutes in a parking lot because we both had other things to do, but during this brief encounter had a nice chat. As far as I was concerned we parted on perfectly friendly terms.

Over the next few years I noticed some changes in the online persona of MG, and on at least one occasion asked him to reconsider how he was responding to posters here. His reply left me in no doubt that the MG I was now seeing online was not the pleasant, friendly guy we had met. I was disappointed. I've passed by that way since then, but have had no inclination to meet again in person.

Eventually I stopped engaging directly with MG here for reasons that I've mentioned recently on a few threads, including those outlined by IHQ. I don't expect that to change.

And he still refuses to take responsibility for the perception of being a bad faith actor that he has given multiple, unrelated posters, across a wide time span. It’s everybody else’s fault, apparently. Trumpism 101 - blame everyone else.

Have a nice day, IHQ.

Regards,
MG

[Marcus]

Maybe consider why multiple unrelated posters who have had a long history of trying to engage with MG have all, independently and at different times, all reached the same conclusion - that he’s a bad faith actor. Further, an A.I. analysis of his posting reached exactly the same conclusion.

He’s been a bad faith actor for many, many, many, years. His board reputation is now irrecoverable. Not only that, MG doesn’t even attempt to try to be different. How he behaves is a conscious and deliberate choice. It’s who he wants to be.

About 10-12 years ago my wife & I were in Utah, and planned to drive from St George through Idaho and eventually into BC. I arranged to meet a couple of people along the way, one of whom was MG. We met for only about 20-30 minutes in a parking lot because we both had other things to do, but during this brief encounter had a nice chat. As far as I was concerned we parted on perfectly friendly terms.

Over the next few years I noticed some changes in the online persona of MG, and on at least one occasion asked him to reconsider how he was responding to posters here. His reply left me in no doubt that the MG I was now seeing online was not the pleasant, friendly guy we had met. I was disappointed. I've passed by that way since then, but have had no inclination to meet again in person.

Eventually I stopped engaging directly with MG here for reasons that I've mentioned recently on a few threads, including those outlined by IHQ. I don't expect that to change.

Especially not while he defines our forum as a "toxic wasteland"!!!!! But seriously, I recall your original comment. I think you hit the nail on the head when you said "the MG I was now seeing online was not the pleasant, friendly guy we had met."

He mentioned that he has engaged well with honorentheos, but that's not true. When honorentheos disagreed with him he was nasty and mean to them, as he is to anyone holding a different, especially non-LDS position. The discussions about olive gardens and the book mg recommended honor read come to mind, as two prime examples of mentalgymnast's inappropriate attacks. And of course, who can forget his statements that those who leave the LDS church are liars, but more especially, "purveyors of sin and sodomy"?!!!!

[MG 2.0]

About 10-12 years ago my wife & I were in Utah, and planned to drive from St George through Idaho and eventually into BC. I arranged to meet a couple of people along the way, one of whom was MG. We met for only about 20-30 minutes in a parking lot because we both had other things to do, but during this brief encounter had a nice chat. As far as I was concerned we parted on perfectly friendly terms.

Over the next few years I noticed some changes in the online persona of MG, and on at least one occasion asked him to reconsider how he was responding to posters here. His reply left me in no doubt that the MG I was now seeing online was not the pleasant, friendly guy we had met. I was disappointed. I've passed by that way since then, but have had no inclination to meet again in person.

Eventually I stopped engaging directly with MG here for reasons that I've mentioned recently on a few threads, including those outlined by IHQ. I don't expect that to change.

Especially not while he defines our forum as a "toxic wasteland"!!!!! But seriously, I recall your original comment. I think you hit the nail on the head when you said "the MG I was now seeing online was not the pleasant, friendly guy we had met."

He mentioned that he has engaged well with honorentheos, but that's not true. When honorentheos disagreed with him he was nasty and mean to them, as he is to anyone holding a different, especially non-LDS position. The discussions about olive gardens and the book mg recommended honor read come to mind, as two prime examples of mentalgymnast's inappropriate attacks. And of course, who can forget his statements that those who leave the LDS church are liars, but more especially, "purveyors of sin and sodomy"?!!!!

And now the pile on. Contextual corruption and mismanagement mixed with continued Social Contagion. It results in a 'mind virus' of sorts.

It's a very difficult thing to overcome.

Toxic wasteland? I think that is actually the result. Ideas and alternate points of view are squelched with the hope/goal of eradication. There is only one shade of gray that is acceptable.

The virus runs amok and runs free. If someone didn't at least make an effort of lessening the effects of the virus it would continue run amok with absolutely no restraint. As it is, for those not infected, alternate viewpoints are able to hopefully take root...or at least cause/initiate introspection and deeper thinking when someone steps in/up and says, "Wait, hold on here!"

My hope is that uninfected individuals will do their own study and research rather than relying on the words of some random anti-Mormon folks on the internet that apparently have nothing better to do than bash the CofJCofLDS and its leaders.

Granted, some bashers come across a bit nicer than others.

Regards,
MG

[huckelberry]

I think Stigs comment is reasonable. With no desire to actually adjudicate the conflict I do find myself thinking that being faced with a whole cluster of people with hostile comments as MG was can be difficult and unsettling.it is not a situation where calm judgment is easy.

Maybe consider why multiple unrelated posters who have had a long history of trying to engage with MG have all, independently and at different times, all reached the same conclusion - that he’s a bad faith actor. Further, an A.I. analysis of his posting reached exactly the same conclusion.

He’s been a bad faith actor for many, many, many, years. His board reputation is now irrecoverable. Not only that, MG doesn’t even attempt to try to be different. How he behaves is a conscious and deliberate choice. It’s who he wants to be.

Perhaps so but I find my interest in the question Fades long before the ending of the thread that keeps going on and on and on about it.

[MG 2.0]

Maybe consider why multiple unrelated posters who have had a long history of trying to engage with MG have all, independently and at different times, all reached the same conclusion - that he’s a bad faith actor. Further, an A.I. analysis of his posting reached exactly the same conclusion.

He’s been a bad faith actor for many, many, many, years. His board reputation is now irrecoverable. Not only that, MG doesn’t even attempt to try to be different. How he behaves is a conscious and deliberate choice. It’s who he wants to be.

Perhaps so but I find my interest in the question Fades long before the ending of the thread that keeps going on and on and on about it.

You're another one I'd like to meet in real life, huckelberry. You seem to have your head attached to the right place.

Others? Not so sure at times.

Regards,
MG

[Marcus]

Maybe consider why multiple unrelated posters who have had a long history of trying to engage with MG have all, independently and at different times, all reached the same conclusion - that he’s a bad faith actor. Further, an A.I. analysis of his posting reached exactly the same conclusion.

He’s been a bad faith actor for many, many, many, years. His board reputation is now irrecoverable. Not only that, MG doesn’t even attempt to try to be different. How he behaves is a conscious and deliberate choice. It’s who he wants to be.

Perhaps so but I find my interest in the question Fades long before the ending of the thread that keeps going on and on and on about it.

He does seem to have a skill for turning a thread to himself doesn't he? But, that is classic troll behavior:

Encounters with trolls often follow this pattern:

Do something that adheres to the letter of the law, while violating the spirit of the law to provoke a reaction
When called out on their behavior, attempt to control the flow of the conversation or public perception...

The overarching strategy of the troll is to expend as little of their own energy as possible, while simultaneously defeating their target through emotional or mental exhaustion...

The troll’s goal isn’t to defend any particular point of view. The troll’s goal is to frustrate, harry and tire their target by twisting their own words back at them, forcing their target to defend themselves from their own words.

https://www.lee-dohm.com/2017/02/03/tro ... responses/

That's incredibly accurate. Being able to disingenuously use an A.I. is just icing on the cake.

But getting back to your topic,

...I thought I would try and pick up the question of Hansens' faith pyramid again. I did watch the presentation and though I can see a line of logic he follows there are other lines of consideration which should not be avoided. Yes logically a belief in a creator and in Jesus would undergird a belief in the church. If those are lacking then of course faith in the LDS church fails.

Hansen presents this as if a person approaches the possibility of God, reviews argument and evidence and makes a sure decision that God exists. I think everybody posting here and widely about the world realize that even if they value the arguments they are not a sure thing. There are alternative understandings regarding all arguments for the existence of God. The arguments against God are not frivolous...

Of course if you come to doubt the Book of Mormon as real history this faith confirmation takes a real blow. It is a shock that may make a person rethink all of their religious beliefs with a variety of possible results....

I hope you don't mind I excerpted the part I wanted to respond to. I think you are absolutely right that doubts about Mormon things can open up doubts across the board in terms of belief. Then people start thinking, but it's not leaving the LDS church that may result in a person deciding to be agnostic, it's the thinking that accompanied it.

As a believer I value the role of personal spiritual experience and awareness....

Even as a nonbeliever I also "value the role of personal spiritual experience and awareness", and If I recall correctly, we've talked about that before. I appreciate your take on this, thank you.