Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your
contribution is not tax-deductible.)
PayPal Acct: 
Feedback: 
Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):
|
[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[ Edit | View ]
[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[ Edit | View ]
[> [> [>
To Name Required -- Lord Veritas, 10:11:57 06/08/06 Thu
Name required, I would not recommend that you debate with Mormon 210, since he usually evades debate topics and distracts people with unapplicable arguments. Already, he has you debating whether or not Time is applicable to God, which has little pertinence to whether or not Jesus is God by nature, or by favoritism. Continue if you want, but do not be surprised if dealing with him is like dealing with someone who refuses to speak anything but German during an oral exam in which English is the subject.
[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[ Edit | View ]
[> [> [> [>
Re: To Name Required -- Mormon 210, 13:52:29 06/12/06 Mon
>Name required, I would not recommend that you debate
>with Mormon 210, since he usually evades debate topics
>and distracts people with unapplicable arguments.
>Already, he has you debating whether or not Time is
>applicable to God, which has little pertinence to
>whether or not Jesus is God by nature, or by
>favoritism. Continue if you want, but do not be
>surprised if dealing with him is like dealing with
>someone who refuses to speak anything but German
>during an oral exam in which English is the subject.
Obviously Lord thinks the world revolves around him/her. If by claiming that I don't debate the topic at hand it would likely be that s/he can't transition his/her arguments and needs to be coddled to make sure we all come to his/her conclusions.
Bottom line is that I came here to discuss language and Lord wants me to study English. S/he can't get it out of his/her head that we've all built broader arguments in the discussion. As an example. Lord's original challenge was to provide evidence that proves Christ was married. I could'nt provide that (and duly noted that) yet I provided evidence that made Christ's marriage plausible he couldn't accept that. He simply wants us to bow down and coddle him and joinn his band of kool-aid drinkers. Sorry Lord-can't do.
Mormon 210
[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[ Edit | View ]
[> [> [> [>
Re: To Name Required -- * Name (required):, 15:02:06 06/30/06 Fri
Its funny seeing a Mormon refer to others as "kool-aid drinkers".
Oh the irony.
BTW, was in SLC a few weeks back and visited Temple square. Amazing architecture!
Equally amazing were the many nubile attractive skinny mormom girls who were around every corner trying to convert me. Apparently sex sells eh? Or maybe it's just my dirty mind lol. Nah... sex (or the suggestion thereof) is a great sales tool no doubt, and not above the Mormon's to try and use it apparently. I felt like I was at an industry trade show where they hired models to suck people into their booths.
The square really was cool though.
Hey, what is that story about the Mormons who led those settlers into the hills to be mercilessly slaughtered??? Heckler's Pass or something? I never knew about that one. Cool stuff.
Happy 4th!
[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[ Edit | View ]
[> [> [> [> [>
Re: To Name Required -- Mormon 210, 20:29:32 07/02/06 Sun
>Its funny seeing a Mormon refer to others as "kool-aid
>drinkers".
What in my religion requires blind faith?
>Equally amazing were the many nubile attractive skinny
>mormom girls who were around every corner trying to
>convert me. Apparently sex sells eh? Or maybe it's
>just my dirty mind lol. Nah... sex (or the suggestion
>thereof) is a great sales tool no doubt, and not above
>the Mormon's to try and use it apparently. I felt
>like I was at an industry trade show where they hired
>models to suck people into their booths.
Actually, the sister missionaries that serve in SLC Temple Square really have no interest in you sexually. The fact that young women would give up personal ambitions in order to teach the faith they believe in at a cost all to themselves for 18 months should remind us of the scripture that "...by their fruits ye shall know them". Rather you would prefer the to self indulge in humantistic diatribe. My guess is that you're simply just a pervert or have motives that are not in the same vain as those taught by the Savior Jesus Christ.
Mormon 210
[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[ Edit | View ]
[> [> [> [> [> [>
Re: To Name Required -- * Name (required):, 09:55:33 07/05/06 Wed
>>Its funny seeing a Mormon refer to others as "kool-aid
>>drinkers".
>
>What in my religion requires blind faith?
Where do i start? you are a funny man!
>>Equally amazing were the many nubile attractive skinny
>>mormom girls who were around every corner trying to
>>convert me. Apparently sex sells eh? Or maybe it's
>>just my dirty mind lol. Nah... sex (or the suggestion
>>thereof) is a great sales tool no doubt, and not above
>>the Mormon's to try and use it apparently. I felt
>>like I was at an industry trade show where they hired
>>models to suck people into their booths.
>
>Actually, the sister missionaries that serve in SLC
>Temple Square really have no interest in you sexually.
Are you really this dense or are you just being a mule on purpose?
Does a hooker have interest in her john? The fact of "intereset" is not relevant to selling sex. An attractive young woman will always have greater success persuading Men to listen to them. And most times they have greater success with the women as well.
This is basic sales tactics. Attractive people generally make better sales people.
I can't believe I had to explain this simple psychology to a bigshot attorney.
Veritas is right. You not only miss the point often times, you also make up straw man arguments so that you can "win" your case.
>The fact that young women would give up personal
>ambitions in order to teach the faith they believe in
>at a cost all to themselves for 18 months should
>remind us of the scripture that "...by their fruits ye
>shall know them". Rather you would prefer the to self
>indulge in humantistic diatribe. My guess is that
>you're simply just a pervert or have motives that are
>not in the same vain as those taught by the Savior
>Jesus Christ.
Jesus Christ of Kolob? I agree. I have no common motive with whoever that guy is lol.
Pervert? I already predicted you would say that. Can't you read???? Apparently not.
At least entertain me with something more witty next time.
I'm gettin bored with your nonsense.
And yeah, I made a lot of typos. Im in a hurry.
[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[ Edit | View ]
[> [> [> [> [> [> [>
Re: To Name Required -- Mormon 210, 11:32:19 07/06/06 Thu
>>>Its funny seeing a Mormon refer to others as
>"kool-aid
>>>drinkers".
>>What in my religion requires blind faith?
Regarding blind faith you replied: Where do i start? you are a funny man!
I remind you that faith is blind (including yours). If not it would be knowledge. Otherwise prove to me Christ exists.
Regarding the tactic you suggest is used by the Church of Jesus Christ regarding women as missionaries at Temple Square you used the following analogy to support your positon in this manner:
>Does a hooker have interest in her john? The fact of
>"intereset" is not relevant to selling sex. An
>attractive young woman will always have greater
>success persuading Men to listen to them. And most
>times they have greater success with the women as well.
>This is basic sales tactics. Attractive people
>generally make better sales people.
In this regard thanks for the PSY 101.MARK 100 refresher, however, I will introduce you to PSY/MAR 401 with this example - I have never bought cat food because the cat had a nice set of tits. I simply bought it because the product met my expectations and goals. The fact that I am faithful purchaser of a particular brand of cat food indicates that I am happy with the intent and value of the product. Use of sex does not always create the expected outcome as was the case with Carl's Jr. Paris Hilton sex sells ad. Carl's Jr. experienced a decrease of sales and after recanting regained market share. This would indicate that the application of sex in the marketing process only lures one to purchase the product, it does not make them a faithful consumer of that product. Similarily, a person who joins the Church of Jesus Christ for the intent of a piece of ass generally won't stay committed to that faith unless the conversion has less topical application and a deeper internalization occurs. To describe my point better, a recent BYU study indicated that in the LDS church, activity (meaning attending Church regularly) is somewhere around 55%, adherence to the tenets of the faith are somewhat lower (indications show around 38%), but the study revealed that belief in the tentet is dramatically higher than activity levels would indicate (estimated at approximately 88%). This would suggest to me that the acceptance of the faith by a large majority of the converts is deeper than what you have expressed in terms topical marketing phsychology. Additionally, the vast majority of missionaries are young men of all shapes and sizes and appearances whose results are not based on their appearance (my personal or anecdotal experience - having seen homely missionaries have baptism success while more handsome ones were not having such success).
I will however provide one marketing tool that is being used at Temple Square, and the Church has been forthright about it with it membership. This is that the use of young women fits this application better because young missionary men are percieved as more aggressive while the sister are perceived as more patient and better listeners.
>I can't believe I had to explain this simple
>psychology to a bigshot attorney.
Bigshot would not describe my level of counsel. I would say "fairly decent at what I do in my area of expertise" describes me better. But this really has no relationship to defense my faith.
>Veritas is right. You not only miss the point often
>times, you also make up straw man arguments so that
>you can "win" your case.
The fact that you or I win a case is not relevant to fact. I am attempting to provide my perspective with regard to centric versions of my faith that you (obviously an expert in the application of my faith) tend to provide.
Regarding your statement on Christ: Jesus Christ of Kolob? I agree. I have no common motive with whoever that guy is lol.
Speaking of divergence, can't you simply accept that Christ is the one for which the Bible was written around and it is the interpretation of that doctrine that we don't agree on? In other words why go off on that road when it has no relevence to the topic.
>Pervert? I already predicted you would say that.
You were correct in your prediction as well I knew you would deny that you weren't a pervert but I guess I was wrong because you never did.
Mormon 210
[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[ Edit | View ]