DiscussMormonism.com

Dr. Peterson started a thread on the board-that-must-not-be-named about how people automatically assume that apologists are unscrupulous or delusional. On the flip side, some people seem to believe that all critics are evil and dishonest and hateful.

But I see it differently. From what I've seen, people who discuss these things, on either side, are just a little bit "off." I haven't decided whether discussing apologetics caused them to be a little crazy, or if they came to the discussion that way. But, my goodness, aren't we all just a little nuts? I know I am.

Runtu wrote:Dr. Peterson started a thread on the board-that-must-not-be-named about how people automatically assume that apologists are unscrupulous or delusional. On the flip side, some people seem to believe that all critics are evil and dishonest and hateful.

But I see it differently. From what I've seen, people who discuss these things, on either side, are just a little bit "off." I haven't decided whether discussing apologetics caused them to be a little crazy, or if they came to the discussion that way. But, my goodness, aren't we all just a little nuts? I know I am.

I think it’s funny that you bring this up. My brother was recently in town and he used the bathroom and came out with a puzzled look on his face, holding a handful of papers in his hand. He looked at me and said "you are so weird." The papers were the 1855 "Marriage and Morals in Utah" address given by Parley P. Pratt. He was so amazed and perplexed that that was my bathroom reading material (I also had a copy of the Book of Enoch in there, but he didn't seem to find that as strange).

We are most certainly "off." Who in their right mind spends the amount of money, time and resources to study this stuff that "we" do?

If people could see how many times - with certain posts - I go back and re-check the post to make sure I've said what I wanna say 'just right', they'd lock me away for good.

I've tried on various threads to give certain apologists the benefit of the doubt. Nothing bothers me more than when they refuse to address the issue and instead try to attack and/or analyze the motives of the questioner. Maybe they're just bored. I'm getting bored, too.

Runtu wrote:Dr. Peterson started a thread on the board-that-must-not-be-named about how people automatically assume that apologists are unscrupulous or delusional. On the flip side, some people seem to believe that all critics are evil and dishonest and hateful.

But I see it differently. From what I've seen, people who discuss these things, on either side, are just a little bit "off." I haven't decided whether discussing apologetics caused them to be a little crazy, or if they came to the discussion that way. But, my goodness, aren't we all just a little nuts? I know I am.

Nope, I'm completely sane.

Now if you'll excuse me, I need to go count how many squares are currently on my role of toilet paper again. I think I miscounted last time and besides, someone just took a dump.

Well, I don't usually debate.. although if one more person at MAD tells me Buddhism is a knock off of Christianity I'm going to freak out!

RenegadeOfPhunk wrote:If people could see how many times - with certain posts - I go back and re-check the post to make sure I've said what I wanna say 'just right', they'd lock me away for good.

HAHAHA! :D

OCD?

Runtu wrote:Dr. Peterson started a thread on the board-that-must-not-be-named about how people automatically assume that apologists are unscrupulous or delusional. On the flip side, some people seem to believe that all critics are evil and dishonest and hateful.

But I see it differently. From what I've seen, people who discuss these things, on either side, are just a little bit "off." I haven't decided whether discussing apologetics caused them to be a little crazy, or if they came to the discussion that way. But, my goodness, aren't we all just a little nuts? I know I am.

I love it! "The board that must not be named"....Are you reading Harry Potter, by any chance?

LOL

Oh, and yes, I know I'm more than a little nuts! It's nice to know I'm in good company.

;)

RenegadeOfPhunk wrote:If people could see how many times - with certain posts - I go back and re-check the post to make sure I've said what I wanna say 'just right', they'd lock me away for good.

Too bad they can't just hear your Brit accent, RoP!

Then they would just assume that you know what you're talking about.

;)

silentkid wrote:I've tried on various threads to give certain apologists the benefit of the doubt. Nothing bothers me more than when they refuse to address the issue and instead try to attack and/or analyze the motives of the questioner. Maybe they're just bored. I'm getting bored, too.

AMEN!

I have yet to receive a straight answer as to why they do that! Most of them just claim that they DON'T do it, and merrily continue doing it. (Juliann being a prime example)