Taking pot shots (hell, Mormonism, LDS, faith, Christianity)

[nutshell]

LDS theology is too slippery for me to identify in the first place and then to compare it to something else is just not worth whatever energy I put into it.

Since the one who stated this refused to have a discussion, I'll throw it out for the general audience.

What do you think he meant when he said this? Was his statement and refusal to answer questions just an attempt to take a pot shot at the LDS on this forum?

[standing_alone]

Originally Posted by nutshell

What do you think he meant when he said this?

"I don't really know anything about LDS theology and am too lazy to put forth such an effort."

Was his statement and refusal to answer questions just an attempt to take a pot shot at the LDS on this forum?

Very well could be both.

[YmirGF]

Originally Posted by Some sadsack

LDS theology is too slippery for me to identify in the first place and then to compare it to something else is just not worth whatever energy I put into it.

Originally Posted by nutshell

What do you think he meant when he said this?

The esteemed writer is stating that LDS theology is something they simply cannot wrap their head around for some reason. (I am not sure why that is as LDS theology is pretty straight forward -- heck, even a child can understand quite a bit of it.) It is because they cannot comprehend elements of LDS theology that they cannot compare it to their own stilted sense of "acceptable" theology. (I rather suspect a "you wrong; me right" mentality.) Further to this, without having understood squat about the LDS view of reality the exceedingly intelligent writer states that it is not worth their very important time or effort into understanding LDS theology. (In essence they have slammed the barn doors closed without checking where the horses were or if there are any horses at all. Not terribly prudent, actually.)

From this we can surmise a few points:

1. The person does not have an open mind (In fact it could be an altogether foreign concept.)
2. The writer does not have the intellectual integrity to attempt to explain their prejudice. (This likely stems from a deeply egotistical personality who is approaching the definition of genuine arrogance.)
3. The writer is simply not the brightest crayon in the pack... by a long shot.
4. The writer is an unlikely candidate for conversion to the Mormon faith, lol.
5. The writer most likely suffers from deeply held belief structures that are extremely rigid and they are incapable of changing. I call it the "house of cards syndrome".

Originally Posted by nutshell

Was his statement and refusal to answer questions just an attempt to take a pot shot at the LDS on this forum?

Gosh, do you think? Heaven's to Betsy -- I'd say that is a "given".

[angellous_evangellous]

Originally Posted by nutshell

Since the one who stated this refused to have a discussion, I'll throw it out for the general audience.

What do you think he meant when he said this? Was his statement and refusal to answer questions just an attempt to take a pot shot at the LDS on this forum?

Some history of this garbage is in order.

I created a thread that attracted some LDS members, to which I replied (clearly stating that I was NOT TAKING A "POT SHOT"):
Christian: The Need for a Fresh Word from God

Originally Posted by angellous_evangellous

I had no idea that the OP would appeal to Mormons. Of this I am completely innocent.

By the way, I don't mean to be hostile in the least, but I don't think that Mormonism escapes Plato in the slightest. Unless there is a complete revision of LDS thought, it will remain Neo-Platonic for the forseeable future.

When asked to explain by Nutshell,

Originally Posted by angellous_evangellous

Nope, sorry. I've got too much to do now.

EDIT: By the way, I don't mess with LDS theology anymore. Too slippery for me to identify in the first place and then to compare it to something else is just not worth whatever energy I put into it.

I don't want to get into a debate with any LDS member over a comment that I made in passing that was completely irrelevant to my argument.

I also no longer discuss LDS theology here due to several issues in the past - I'm what happens when cousins marry...

I will make no further comment on this topic.

[YmirGF]

Originally Posted by angellous_evangellous

I will make no further comment on this topic.

Daddy?

Well, if the truth be told, it is fairly well known that you are not terribly supportive of LDS theology. Now knowning the source it does explain the cavelier comment in a better context. Ok, ok... I take back point #3 ... as you are a pretty bright fellow. I suppose that it just underscores the fact that we all have our off moments.

Heck, even though everything I write is quite deliberate and intentional, I know that once or twice in the past two years i wished later that I have phrased something a bit differently.

Don't let me down again, ok, or I will have to give a full and frank report to Mommy and then you are gonna be in the dog house for quite awhile.

[angellous_evangellous]

Originally Posted by YmirGF

Daddy?

Well, if the truth be told, it is fairly well known that you are not terribly supportive of LDS theology. Now knowning the source it does explain the cavelier comment in a better context. Ok, ok... I take back point #3 ... as you are a pretty bright fellow. I suppose that it just underscores the fact that we all have our off moments.

Heck, even though everything I write is quite deliberate and intentional, I know that once or twice in the past two years i wished later that I have phrased something a bit differently.

Don't let me down again, ok, or I will have to give a full and frank report to Mommy and then you are gonna be in the dog house for quite awhile.

.....

[nutshell]

Originally Posted by angellous_evangellous

Some history of this garbage is in order.

I created a thread that attracted some LDS members, to which I replied (clearly stating that I was NOT TAKING A "POT SHOT"):
Christian: The Need for a Fresh Word from God


When asked to explain by Nutshell,



I don't want to get into a debate with any LDS member over a comment that I made in passing that was completely irrelevant to my argument.

I also no longer discuss LDS theology here due to several issues in the past - I'm what happens when cousins marry...

I will make no further comment on this topic.

You are misleading with your post because the comment was not in the Christian only version of your thread, but the one open to everyone. So whatever you had to say in the other thread (which didn't answer my question) didn't apply to what I was asking in the relevant thread.

A pot shot indeed.

Sorry you had to make it personal and reveal yourself.

I'd still like to hear others' opinions.