DiscussMormonism.com

DCP started a thread at MAD in response to a spam email he received. Apparently some guy shared his experience whereby a Muslim Imam said Muslims are supposed to kill all non-Muslims. My mother sent me the same email some time ago; it had to have been early last year. Most of her spams I just ignore but this one I responded: "Mom, don't believe this crap."

So for the record, I agree with Dan on this one.

I only disagree with Dan when he is wrong. He asserted that I attack him just for the sake of it, and Kerry tried lumping himself into Dan's category as well.

I do have some corrections for Bil Hamblin, however. He and I are trading comments on Kerry's blog. The latest podcast about jihad.

dartagnan wrote:I only disagree with Dan when he is wrong. He asserted that I attack him just for the sake of it, and Kerry tried lumping himself into Dan's category as well.

I do have some corrections for Bil Hamblin, however. He and I are trading comments on Kerry's blog. The latest podcast about jihad.

Paranoia strikes deep in the heartland, but I think it's all overdone.

The reason why Dan thinks you attack him just for the sake of attacking him, is because he thinks he's never wrong. Well, he might have been wrong once or twice, but certainly not on anything having to do with Islam. So of course you aren't attacking his argument because it's wrong, since he's never wrong, so it has to be a character flaw of yours. Shame on you. Tsk Tsk.

DCP reminds me of Rainman. Impressive in one particular way, but mostly retarded.

"Gotta watch church, Sunday 4:30... Definitely 4:30..."

dartagnan wrote:I do have some corrections for Bil Hamblin, however. He and I are trading comments on Kerry's blog. The latest podcast about jihad.

And here's the link to it: Comments on Kerry's recent blog entry

It appears that "The Backyard Professor" has brought the "battle" over to the fittingly named MADboards. I would be interested to learn what DCP thinks about e=MC2's podcast on the phallus of God. Anyhow, here is his post:

e=mc2 wrote:He [i.e., Kevin G.] already has begun, sigh..... He's working on correcting the notorious and ill-known pseudo-intellectual Bill Hamblin over on my blog. I pasted a very nice radio interview podcast of Hamblin's and Graham has come out squealing about how wrong Bill is all over the place about oh just everything. Hamblin obvious has NOT yet taken classes of caliber or credit from the university guru stud scholar Graham, so obviously Hamblin is misinformed. And my suspicion is Hamblin simply learned from you oh lousy Islam scholar Herr Doktor Peterson!

I told Kevin to act like a grown up instead of a stupid sputtering kid in a mud puddle on my blog or I was going to cut his snideness out. It'll just make him a martyr for Shades sake........ poor baby anyway.

Why does e=mc2 seem to have it in for Shades?

I responded there:

Kerry, Bill is a big boy. If his rebuttals to my objections are valid, then they will stand on their own merits. For someone who is supposed to be lacking knowledge and scholarly presentation, I think I make my objections pretty well clear in a reasonable and compelling manner. But then, you already know this. This is why you, along with the MAD mod, will do everything possible to shut down discussion before it can get off the ground. Bill and Dan’s credentials do not guarantee the accuracy of their presentations, as I have demonstrated on numerous occasions. So keep harping on the irrelevant if you must. I would think that scholars confident in their opinions wouldn’t constantly require protection from their faithful worshippers; and yes, you do tend to extend infallibility to the Nibleys and Peterson's in LDS academia; anyone who has a Ph.D it seems.

As far as my comments on other message boards go, you’re the one who keeps bringing up my name in a venue where you know I cannot respond. But don’t worry. I went ahead and corrected yours and Dan’s false assumption that I would defend some email spammer’s anti-Islam rant. Some people would take this as evidence that you have me all wrong - but only some.

Certainly not those who believe you have “proved through archaeology” that God has a penis extending like the sea.

Anyway, this is your blog so you can wield all the power you want and shut this exchange down. But then you would miss out on a great opportunity in seeing Bill mop the floors with me. Unless of course, there is some other outcome you’re afraid of.

And don’t be absurd about snideness. All I said was that Bill was in error on some issues and you deleted this out. Good lord Kerry, you cannot even consider the possibility that the BYU Islam apologists could be wrong. You’re not open to that huh? I wonder if Bill is.

---------------------

Let's see if Kerry has the guts to let my post stand. I think he senses another embarrassing refutation for one of his idols, and he thinks he will hold it against him if it happens on his turf. That seems to be what the MAD mods are always worried about; and for good reason since DCP and Bill have bothed threw down their ball and threatened to leave the forum because of there being more criticism than they could handle.

And one more thing. My methodology would pass the scholarly standard before yours ever will. It was clearly good enough to draw several email requests from Davis Bitton, who wanted my help for his Grant Palmer review. Tvetdness asked for permission to quote me in his upcoming book, and a couple of scholars on th B-Hebrew list have complimented me for hanging in the debate even though I have no formal training in Hebrew. Hell, even you have my exhaustive study on anthropomorphisms, linked to your webite.

And yes, you should be embarrassed with that "I proved God ejaculates" podcast. No scholar worth his salt would make such a ridiculous presentation, and you're pretending to have a stranglehold on scholarly methodology? I can tell you that Mark Smith is very upset in the way LDS apologists have misused his work. He would probably lay an egg after hearing your spastic, self-gratifying misrepresentation of his beliefs.

The difference between us is that I am not insecure in my research or opinions. I spell them out everywhere on the web. You hide behind personal blogs and the apologetic vanguard at MAD.

Yeah I just checked that blog dart...what a laugh.

Hey Kerry....You can't call anyone silly until you prove God ejaculates (and I want evidence...at least a blue dress worth [Monica Lewinsky reference])

dartagnan wrote:And one more thing. My methodology would pass the scholarly standard before yours ever will. It was clearly good enough to draw several email requests from Davis Bitton, who wanted my help for his Grant Palmer review. Tvetdness asked for permission to quote me in his upcoming book, and a couple of scholars on th B-Hebrew list have complimented me for hanging in the debate even though I have no formal training in Hebrew. Hell, even you have my exhaustive study on anthropomorphisms, linked to your webite.

And yes, you should be embarrassed with that "I proved God ejaculates" podcast. No scholar worth his salt would make such a ridiculous presentation, and you're pretending to have a stranglehold on scholarly methodology? I can tell you that Mark Smith is very upset in the way LDS apologists have misused his work. He would probably lay an egg after hearing your spastic, self-gratifying misrepresentation of his beliefs.

The difference between us is that I am not insecure in my research or opinions. I spell them out everywhere on the web. You hide behind personal blogs and the apologetic vanguard at MAD.

Kevin,

I've been around long enough to remember when you were a well-respected LDS apologist with excellent scholarship. So, what happened, dude? How did you suddenly become this wannabe poseur?

"BYU Islam apologists."

Good grief.

Have fun, Bill.

Posted by: Daniel Peterson | April 26, 2007 at 01:34 PM

And one more thing. My methodology would pass the scholarly standard before yours ever will. It was clearly good enough to draw several email requests from Davis Bitton, who wanted my help for his Grant Palmer review. Tvetdness asked for permission to quote me in his upcoming book, and a couple of scholars on th B-Hebrew list have complimented me for hanging in the debate even though I have no formal training in Hebrew. Hell, even you have my exhaustive study on anthropomorphisms, linked to your webite.

And yes, you should be embarrassed with that "I proved God ejaculates" podcast. No scholar worth his salt would make such a ridiculous presentation, and you're pretending to have a stranglehold on scholarly methodology? I can tell you that Mark Smith is very upset in the way LDS apologists have misused his work. He would probably lay an egg after hearing your spastic, self-gratifying misrepresentation of his beliefs.

The difference between us is that I am not insecure in my research or opinions. I spell them out everywhere on the web. You hide behind personal blogs and the apologetic vanguard at MAD.

Posted by: Kevin Graham | April 26, 2007 at 01:42 PM

"BYU Islam apologists."

Well, initially I thought maybe Toronto's ridiculous hagiography of Muhammad wasn't the same impression of Muhammed shared by Hauglid. But then I found out it was. Then I thought Maybe Hauglid's patently absurd belief that jihad was always defensive, wasn't necesaarily shared by Peterson. But then you indicated in email that since you edited that piece, you agreed with it. And now Hamblin makes the absurd claim that the Crusades "caused" the conflict with Islam (completely ignoring the fact that Islam had wiped out roughly two-thirds of Christendom; some might consider this a "cause" of conflict) and that the dhimmis could "do whatever they wahnted." This is demonstrably false by the testimonies of those who suffered under the Islamic system of subjugating non-Muslims.

Sorry, but this Islamic apologetics. So who is left at BYU to give a balanced presentation of Islamic issues?

I plan to write up a detailed response to his interview, now that I have listened to it thoroughly and have taken notes. But as I said, I am one-handed at the time being.

Posted by: Kevin Graham | April 26, 2007 at 01:55 PM