DAVEH: > Hmmmmm......and what do YOU perceive to be my > "heart", DavidM???
I think you are a very secure and serious Mormon who enjoys listening to Protestants try and defend viewpoints that don't make much sense to you. :-) I think you miss having someone like Glenn around here to entertain you. :-) DaveH wrote: > Furthermore.......I'm not quite sure why being polite > (at least that is how I perceive 'polished' should be > defined in this instance) is a problem. Would other > TTers prefer I be obnoxiously offensive in my posts? No, we don't want obnoxious, but polished can mean a little bit more than just polite. You are polite almost to a fault. That's my own personal take. Some might find you just right. Sometimes people are so polite and can speak so correctly that you really don't know what they really think inside. Do you know what I mean? DAVEH: > I'm bewildered at that, DavidM. How can being > polite be offensive? What is it I do that would/could > offend another. I have bent over backwards to be > respectfully polite and courteous, I think. Come on, Dave. Take yourself out of the picture for a minute. Can't you imagine someone who is so polite and sugar coated that it becomes simply obnoxious? If so, then just imagine that you tend to lean toward that end of politeness. Don't get me wrong. I would rather you be leaning a little bit that way rather than toward the angry and impolite side, but if you are wanting to understand why some people are offended by you, I think it does lie in this polished veneer that causes them to misjudge you at first. Personally, I like people that are not afraid to say upfront what they think. Others often find such individuals obnoxious, but I especially like them because I can see exactly where they are at. So even though I might say you are a little too polite sometimes, don't change on my account. I tend to be biased toward those who are frank. Furthermore, there are some on TruthTalk that need to be much more like you in this regard. So you do serve as an example for all of us in this matter. Far be it from me to corrupt that good example. :-) DAVEH: > Other TTer's have alluded to my ignorance. If I > were to rebut their comments, it would be easy for > them to point out specific instances of my ignorance Unfortunately, I think those who did simply wanted to offend you. I do not think you should rebut such comments. David Miller wrote: > I think some might even think you are considering > leaving Mormonism. DAVEH: > LOL.....Are you serious??? Is there anybody > in TT who really believes that?!?!?!?! Not after they have had some interaction with you, but at first, yes, I think many on TruthTalk thought at first that perhaps you were. DAVEH: > You are a classic example of what I explained above, > DavidM. It doesn't seem to matter what I say in TT, > you too apparently have assumed otherwise. Let me state > this FTR ONCE AGAIN: I am not in TT to find an > excuse to leave the LDS Church. You are misunderstanding me. I don't think you are looking for a reason to leave the LDS. I don't think I have ever thought that, but it does seem to me that some TruthTalkers thought that about you at first. When I say that I thought you were interested in Truth, that means being interested in evidence even if it might shake your current paradigm in life. For example, if there was some clear evidence that shook my Creationist beliefs, or something that seemed to shake my concept of Jesus Christ, or the early church, etc., I would be on top of that information like a bull dog on a bone. Your lack of interest in the Book of Abraham material surprised me because my expectation was that you would be curious to consider the matter. I didn't mean that I thought you were looking for a reason to leave Mormonism. DAVEH: > You make it sound like it is my fault other TTers > think we are a cult. That has been preached by > Protestants who are apprehensive of Mormonism for > well over a century. I have encountered Mormons in other situations and have had Bible studies with them, visited their meetings, prayed with them, etc. But no Mormon has interacted with me as much as you have. In those other situations, we are talking about maybe a few weeks or maybe a month at the most before we no longer talk to each other. In this forum, I have been discussing with you for years. I realize that we have never met, but there is no doubt in my mind that no Mormon has influenced me more about what Mormonism is than you have. Other Protestants have labeled Mormonism as a cult, but most of them misrepresent certain aspects of Mormon teaching, and in those areas where they have not, there is simply nothing so persuasive as getting it straight from the horses mouth as they say. I must admit one thing, and that is that Blaine exposed more serious aspects about Mormonism's cultish behavior than you have, but his stay here was somewhat short, so I still consider you the primary influence in my life for understanding Mormonism. DaveH wrote: > Look at how many books in your library have branded > us as a cult! Dave, I think you misunderstand the nature of my reading. I don't have more than a few books that might label Mormonism a cult. Most of my Mormon books are written by Mormons in favor of Mormonism, by authors like Joseph Smith, B.H. Roberts, Lucy Mack Smith, and John Gee. There are a few on the other side, such as Larson's book about the Book of Abraham, but they are definitely in the minority. Peace be with you. David Miller, Beverly Hills, Florida. ---------- "Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed.
