"Charles P. Locke" wrote:
> DavidH,
>
> I retract my accusation that you use witticisms to sidestep issues.
DAVEH: Thank you, Perry. But, I sure wish you had posted the comments that made you
feel like I was evading your questions. I'm sure that I have mannerisms of 'speech'
that bother other people, as some TTers have previously alluded to. I don't mind
tuning up my communicating abilities. But without knowing what is bothering you, it
is difficult for me to recognize and correct my deficiencies.
> When I disagree with a LDS, they often cry "Persecution! Persecution! You
> are persecuting me! Whaaa! Whaaa! Whaaa!"
DAVEH: Really?!?!?! Have you actually had that happen to you personally? I have a
hard time imagining any LDS reacting that way, but perhaps there are some. To me,
verbal discussions don't constitute persecution. If you were tar and feathering me,
that would be a different story. To me, that is persecution. You can verbally abuse
me all you want and I don't think I'd consider myself persecuted. In my nearly 5
decades of being LDS, I don't ever recall hearing any LDS person suggest they had
suffered religious persecution.
Interestingly, I've heard other TTers mention pretty much the same thing you are
describing. I wonder if you and they are getting this impression from (anti-Mormon)
books you've read that describe how Mormons believe and act. If so, I would suggest
that they may be giving you the wrong impression. From what I personally know about
LDS people, they are a little tougher than what you suggest above. We do believe that
early members of the Church did suffer persecution, and most of us would be
embarrassed to think what we "endure" today qualifies as persecution. But, maybe I'm
wrong. Perhaps there are some thin skinned Mormons. If so, I am not aware of them.
> And my response is, "When were you beaten for the name of Jesus? When were
> you killed for the name of Jesus? When were you boiled in hot oil? When were
> you crucified upside down? When were you stoned to death? When were you
> impaled?"
>
> It makes me sick, and I find it to be a slap in the face of every martyr
> whose blood has ever been spilled for the name of Christ, to claim that when
> someone disagrees with them, they are being persecuted.
DAVEH: I agree.
> I have not accused you of doing this, but it is a tendency (and obviously
> others have experienced it, too) among LDS to cry "Persecution!" when being
> challenged.
DAVEH: I do not remember any LDS folks on TT making that claim. Nor as I mentioned
above, I've never heard such from any LDS people I've ever known as long as I have
been LDS. So, I will ask you again. Did you really hear an LDS person claim they were
persecuted merely from theological discussions???
> Perry
> >
> >
> >"Charles P. Locke" wrote:
> >
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > The point I was trying to make is that when I bring up controversial
> > > >issues
> > > > > about LDS docrtrine, you often give a cute witticism, and thus avoid
> >a
> > > > > serious response.
> > > >
> > > >DAVEH: I do not recall such, but that doesn't mean I didn't do what
> >you
> > > >say........I have a terrible memory. Give me an example, Perry.
> > >
> > > Just check the post prior to this one, David. You racked up two in that
> >one.
> >
> >DAVEH: Perry, I find your response to be evasive and difficult to
> >understand. WHAT PRIOR POST??? Why did you sidestep the question instead
> >of simply answering it with a cut/paste example or two? There are lots of
> >posts flying around TT, and you are
> >expecting me to know not only which one you are referring to, but also the
> >specific instances within that post?!?!?!?!
> >
> > Please.......If you want to accuse me of something, I'd appreciate you
> >giving me a specific example. There may be a reason I answer the way I do
> >that may not be understood by you. Or it could be that I perceive your
> >question as rhetorical and I'm
> >trying to be amusing with my response. Or heck....perhaps I'm trying to
> >evade you. But until I know what you are referring to, I don't know how to
> >respond. I'm not trying to ignore your questions. I do like to discuss
> >many of these things, so if you
> >don't like the way I answer, say so and ask the question again. If I don't
> >want to answer it, I'll probably say so.
> >
> > > > > Maybe I should accept the fact there are some aspects of
> > > > > Mormon doctrine that are indefensible, and when I bring those up,
> >there
> > > >can
> > > > > be no reasonable response.
> > > >
> > > >DAVEH: Or, it could be that I sometimes tire of rude comments. I've
> >had
> > > >my nose bloodied enough times in TT that perhaps I am sometimes
> >reluctant
> > > >to stick it out again. Again, please give me an example or two.
> > >
> > > I can understand why. When the Bible says that Christians will be
> >prosecuted
> > > for the name of Jesus, LDS take that to mean them.
> >
> >DAVEH: That's interesting you would say that, Perry. Once again you have
> >sidestepped my question.
> >
> > I've heard that comment made previously by other TTers. Now you have
> >made it too. Why?!?!?!?! I personally don't think getting my nose
> >bloodied in TT qualifies as persecution. If I did, I would probably not
> >post anything. Have you heard other
> >LDS folks say that they feel persecuted by simply discussing theology?
> >
> > > Again, see my prior post.
> > >
> > > Perry
> > >
> >
----------
"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.
