"Keep a Journal: How else are you going to get a good look at who you were?"

Tuesday, August 29, 2006

The following was posted 10 days ago at a.r.m.f. No reply has yet been seen to this post. Either no-one has read it...or nobody cares.

I wrote it in response to a couple of "anti-bots" we seem to have...traffic from these individuals seems to have slowed somewhat since I posted it. I wonder what I'll do for an encore?


----- Original Message -----
From: "Brian"
Newsgroups: alt.religion.mormon.fellowship
Sent: Sunday, August 20, 2006 1:57 AM
Subject: Look at it this way...please!
> Ok...lemme say up front that I am LDS.
>
> I read the Book of Mormon...daily.
>
> I went on a mission...to the Bible Belt, of all places.
>
> I won't say I've "heard it all before"...but I've heard most of it at
> least twice.
>
> In the interest of keeping a peaceful, rational and informative dialog
> going; I'm going to remind some of our non-LDS group members that they
> need to be certain of which side of "blind, irrational, hidebound,
> robot(ic), unhearing, unthinking, controlled, sheeplike...etc, etc, etc."
> they are ON.
>
> Yes -- I know there's very little commonly accepted evidence for the
> Historical Authenticity of the Book of Mormon.
>
> Yes -- I know there are seeming contradictions in the BoM and in LDS
> doctrine and practices. I realize we vary (sometimes widely, sometimes
> not) from "accepted Christian doctrine and practice".
>
> Yes -- I know there's been a lot of "authoritative" writings by learned
> scholars showing "beyond refutation" that Joe Smith was a liar, the BoM
> was a fraud, we're all "spiritually enslaved" dupes...as you can probably
> guess, I've even read quite a bit of it. Granted, I haven't read any
> "anti" for almost 20 years. Quite frankly, it gets boring after a while.
> (you listening, Nancy?)
>
> Mind you, I didn't know until recently that the BoM had such a colorful
> and convoluted publishing history. (thanks Craig!) I mean seriously;
> translated and published in the 1830's...and we had to wait until 1981 to
> finally have the definitive edition? Oy.
>
> Now...my point:
>
> You might stop for a few moments and consider...Atheists.
>
> They too have their websites, their tracts and pamphlets, and their
> crusaders...
>
> --and what, do you suppose, might they be crusading against?
>
> Well, some seem to have a jones for organized Religion in general...but
> here in the western world their efforts seem to be focused mostly on
> Christianity (and yes, they lump US in with the rest of ya).
>
> Well...if you're going to attack Christianity, you have to attack the
> Founder.
>
> ...and everything that's been written about Him.
>
> So consider this:
>
> Every arguement, EVERY arguement you might use against the BoM about
> its origins, accuracy, integrity, language, grammar, doctrine,
> consistency...whatever.
>
> These arguements have been used and ARE being used today against the
> validity of the Bible. After all, if the Bible isn't true, then the
> Christian Religion is a fraud, see? Discredit the Bible (and yesyesyes
> that is precisely what the Atheist movement in the US believes it has done
> and is doing) and the whole Christianity Myth goes away like smoke in the
> wind. Then the people will be FREE!
>
> Yah, whatever...
>
> So:
>
> If you're wondering what's going on in the hidebound, sheeplike,
> irrational, controlled, "spiritually enslaved" mind of the average (but well
> read, I grant you) LDS member of this group...I invite you to spend an
> hour or so reading from this site: www.atheists.org . Start your hour
> with their onsite google search on the word "bible".
>
> I'm serious people! Your faith is not so shaky that you're going to
> re-think "accepting Jesus as your personal saviour", is it?
>
> Probably not.
>
> Now ask yourself:
>
> Did this change your beliefs in any way?
> Would reading MORE of it change your mind?
> You might be surprised to find that you have already heard some
> of the arguements the Atheists have made. You might even find
> arguements for which you have no ready response. You may want
> to seek out a "Christian Apologetics" site for some "anti-anti Christian"
> viewpoints on those...
>
> Ok, I'm kidding about that last one...
>
> But you see my point, right? You've read the Bible, you know it to be the
> Word of the Lord. You know He lives. You know He willingly gave up His
> life at Calvary for the sins of the whole world. Reading some
> "authoritative" atheist writings on why this is all just a silly myth
> (yep, they use the word "myth") isn't going to budge you one inch. Unlike
> the Atheists, your knowledge of the Truth of the Bible has far more to do
> with your relationship with God, and much less to do with what "learned
> men" have to say about the Bible, or God, or our Saviour.
>
> I've read the Book of Mormon. I'm still reading it. I know it to be the
> Word of the Lord. I know it was translated by the Prophet Joseph Smith by
> Divine direction. I know we have a living Prophet at the head of the
> Church today. My knowledge is NOT based on what you or anyone else (pro
> OR anti) has to say about the Book of Mormon...my knowledge stems from
> personal witness and a daily acquaintance with the Book. To be blunt:
> God told me it was true. As I study, He is still telling me. His voice
> is heard in the Scriptures; in the Book of Mormon, and in the Bible. It
> is the same voice.
>
> It's not that we aren't listening, or that we don't/can't/won't
> understand...It's just that, like you, we find what the "learned and wise"
> critics have to say about our Scriptures is, well......irrelevant.
>
> Thanks to all for your time and thoughts.
>
> B.

Wednesday, August 09, 2006

Grant had a car accident on Saturday last.

As near as I can tell from not actually being an eyewitness: He was waiting at the intersection at Scott & 72nd when the car in front of him stopped suddenly (it's a very busy intersection). He and his '92 Pontiac firefly 5 door were not moving very fast, so he stopped with plenty of room to spare...

...the BMW following him did not stop.

Nothing against the driver of the other car; these things happen. Personally, I think talking on a cellphone may have played a part somewhere...but that's just me. Grant may not see enough compensation to replace the firefly. ICBC will only give him "fair value"...which is somewhat reduced at present as there was previous damage to the front end of the firefly. ICBC will probably write off the car, but there is almost no way Grant can afford to replace the car for what their claims adjusters will give him.

He spent most of the night at Delta hospital; in considerable pain but without obvious spinal damage. Evidence of soft tissue damage 'tho; he's going to spend an uncomfortable few weeks or months. He's already been through a few rather painfull days thus far.

The capper was the new job he started this week. AND Kathy being 10 months pregnant.

He's being tested...ain't it obvious??

Kinda puts my own (comparatively minor) problems into perspective, no?