Polygamy Porter wrote:The most hil-friggin-larious part of the above show was when a caller argued with the old man about ALL of the artifacts that LDS Inc has unearthed AT the Hill Cumorah in upstate NY.. ahh that was a classic... a Chapel Mormon in public arguement with a deranged internet hack wannabee mo'pologist mor[m]on.
With all the uhh... umm...s left in the transcript, it's hard for me to read it without imagining the voice of Red Green and one of his Possum Lodge bumkins. Pretty funny stuff.
"Caller: The Artifacts. Actual pieces of uh of uh... helmets and swords and all kinds of things that were…have been found on the American Continent."
Bwahahahahahah!
"And yet another little spot is smoothed out of the echo chamber wall..." Bond
Sometimes I lesten to his show over the internet. Some of his guests are interesting. Last week I listend to Wil Bagly. I have also been on his show a couple of years ago to talk about my biography. He tried to debate me on priesthood restoration, but it didn't go very well for him. He's generally well informed, but easily distracted and lacks focus. It's a mystery to me how he has managed to stay on the radio all these years.
I do not want you to think that I am very righteous, for I am not. Joseph Smith (History of the Church 5:401)
Dan Vogel wrote:Sometimes I lesten to his show over the internet. Some of his guests are interesting. Last week I listend to Wil Bagly. I have also been on his show a couple of years ago to talk about my biography. He tried to debate me on priesthood restoration, but it didn't go very well for him. He's generally well informed, but easily distracted and lacks focus. It's a mystery to me how he has managed to stay on the radio all these years.
In a world of mediocre talent the bumbling radio jockey is king.
And crawling on the planet's face Some insects called the human race Lost in time And lost in space...and meaning
Dan Vogel wrote:Sometimes I lesten to his show over the internet. Some of his guests are interesting. Last week I listend to Wil Bagly. I have also been on his show a couple of years ago to talk about my biography. He tried to debate me on priesthood restoration, but it didn't go very well for him. He's generally well informed, but easily distracted and lacks focus. It's a mystery to me how he has managed to stay on the radio all these years.
In a world of mediocre talent the bumbling radio jockey is king.
Further, in the mediocre isolated Mormon world of Utah, a bumbling fool can make a living.
The first time I ever heard Dan (Vogel) was when he responded to Van during a Sunstone presentation several years ago...
It was my first visit to Sunstone and I was just learning how Mormon apologetics worked.
I learned a lot that day!
I think Van is a very nice and genuine guy but he was the first person I met who seemed to believe the Book of Mormon was not true but still held to the idea that the church was true. Made me dizzy!
Anyway.. good luck today!!!
~dancer~
Last edited by Bing [Bot] on Mon Jun 11, 2007 12:16 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"The search for reality is the most dangerous of all undertakings for it destroys the world in which you live." Nisargadatta Maharaj
Van does use "uhhh" waay to often. But he is absolutely no "idiot." I've known Van for about half my life. He befriended me when I was an 18 year old kid digging in the documents at the Church Historical Department. He was so rational and laid back about things. It helped me be less extreme in my own judgments. Later, he gave me a job with his short-lived apologetic publication Mormon Issues. (Yes, I'm probably the only person on this board who was once, literally, "a professional apologist.") He's quite intelligent and informed, and very moderate and tolerant in his views. Anyone in one on one conversation with him would have a hard time not finding him reasonable and likable.
Van was actually far ahead of me in his rejection of Book of Mormon historicity. I found his view wrong, and even dangerous; but this didn't affect our relationship at all. He is really, truly a cool guy.
DonBradley wrote:Van does use "uhhh" waay to often. But he is absolutely no "idiot." . . . He's quite intelligent and informed, and very moderate and tolerant in his views.
I'm afraid I'll have to take that with a grain of salt. If that's true, he plays dumb when necessary in order to avoid tough situations. For example, during one of his shows a caller brought up the discovery of the Book of Abraham papyrii and the problems with the Book of Abraham, and Van said he didn't know anything about it.*
So how informed can he be if he can be an apologist for that long and not have heard about the Book of Abraham controversy? Either that or he was purposefully playing stupid, which is another form of obfuscation, in my opinion.
*On another occasion, if memory serves, he claimed to know nothing about Joseph's wives being married to other men.
"Finally, for your rather strange idea that miracles are somehow linked to the amount of gay sexual gratification that is taking place would require that primitive Christianity was launched by gay sex, would it not?"
