When I first appeared on the board I introduced myself, explained that I had written a series on Mormonism; and, after some brief feedback on the matter, I thought that I would chill out and just read posts for a while.

My thinking was that I should get to know people slowly instead of just bursting on the scene. In what I thought was my final post for a season I believe I expressed, “I don’t know if I have much more to say.”

The next thing that happened was a Troll joined the board and invited me to a debate in the debate section. I never did really debate the person. Nor, was it my intention to. Also, because of the strange circumstances of this Troll and I showing up about the same time and instantly engaging in a firestorm, I ended up withdrawing from any debate whatsoever. He, or she, continued the thread by simply cutting and pasting from articles on my site and went about refuting my works.

There is one point the Troll made that has been on my mind ever since; I desire to address that point now; because, it shows the mindset of a Troll.

The Troll asked me, “Have you ever read the New Testament?”

This was in response to a statement in my article in which I questioned the Book of Mormon’s claim of Nephi 4-15-18:


The Troll’s implication was that if I had read the New Testament I would have known that hundreds of thousands of people living sin free lives was what we see in the pages of the New Testament.

This is not the case whatsoever.

There is:
1. Lying: Ananias and Sapphira in Acts 5:3
2. Mistrust: Act’s 11-1-3,
3. Contention: Paul reproved Peter for his behavior: Gal 2:11 When Peter came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he was clearly in the wrong. Also see Act’s 15:39
4. Envy: (Simon wanted a gift to impress people: Acts 8-9-25)
5. Killing: (Paul had Christians put to death; Steven was stoned to death).
6. Rioting: Act’s 19:29
7. Immorality: 1st Corinthians 5:1
8. Lawsuits among believers: 1st Corinthians 6:6
9. Attempted murder: Ac 14:19 Then some Jews came from Antioch and Iconium and won the crowd over. They stoned Paul and dragged him outside the city, thinking he was dead.

The answer to the Trolls question is, “Yes.” I have read the New Testament.

What was the Troll’s point in asking me that question? Is it possible that the Troll was not aware of the sinful nature of New Testament peoples? I doubt it! Some people have a hard time believing that Jesus could live for 33 years without sin. Multiply that by two, then multiply the people living sin free by the hundreds of thousands.

I think the Troll was lying, which is kind of funny in a sick way. Was the Troll promoting the truth, as it were, through lies and misrepresentation. If so, Why?

I do not understand the mindset of a Troll.

_________________
"Asking God if a story is true, with the only acceptable answer being, 'Yes,' may not be a sound method to finding God’s guidance in the matter." — Rich Kelsey
http://richkelsey.org/joseph_smith's_first_vision.htm

This particular, most recent troll, as I see or understand it now Rich, was attempting to point or show to us intellectually lean readers that his religious background incorporated some things that we have not ever even considered in our over all scrutiney. Its a commonly displayed type of behavior that smacks of self held arrogance and faulty thinking mechanisms brought about thru long membership in the organization in question here...the claims asserted or referred to in the 'New Testament' are not supported by intelligent analysis are they? But he/she thinks they are....

_________________
"When authority masquerades as a power, a simple question will unmask it."

"Just because you think, feel, or believe something is true, doesn't make it true!"

"The doubt of your faith, is not God testing you, but truth trying to emerge and free you."

Rich, may God forgive me, but I sometimes give stupid answers to stupid questions. If I've already posted half a dozen remarks on New Testament writings, and then some semiliterate airhead asks me if I've ever read the Bible, I'd be tempted to say, "Gee, I never thought of that." Of course someone involved in apologetics (pro or con or neutral-objective), or discussing religious texts, should be presumed to have read the Scriptures. The question should not be asked. Even if they left out a few verses in their reading, their ability to address the issues, and the fact they quote and reference scriptural passages is sufficient to qualify them for discussing scripture. Troll feces doesn't stick. Ignore ignorance.

Just the same, thanks for your post.
It's useful and helpful for those of us who are not uneducable trolls.

Abinadi

I too sometimes give stupid answers, even if the questions are legitimate. I enjoy telling a whopper now and then.

For example, a blind lady at church was wondering if it was I playing the guitar one Sunday, so she asked me that question.

I answered, “Yes.”

She really cannot see.

Then she asks me, “Did you fight in the Korean War?”

I paused for a moment

Then I said,

“The War!”

“No.”

“I didn’t fight in Korea.”

“I started the War, and when things got heavy I got the hell out of there.”

Ann said: “You’ve got to stop lying.”

So, I’ve never told a lie since. Except, when I posted that picture of myself as a cone-head and said it was the Three Nephites.

Link: http://richkelsey.org/The%20Three%20Nephites.htm

That was kind of a lie.

But… My head isn’t nearly so fat today!

_________________
"Asking God if a story is true, with the only acceptable answer being, 'Yes,' may not be a sound method to finding God’s guidance in the matter." — Rich Kelsey
http://richkelsey.org/joseph_smith's_first_vision.htm

To answer the OP Rich, the mind of a troll is typically as brainwashed as it gets. These aren’t truth seekers or rational people in any form, but more rouge cowboy/cowgirl looking to attack the critical arguments they so readily accept as truth. You must think in their frame to understand them… Mormonism is true… they have felt this truth and they “know” it to be true, so the critic must be wrong. The arguments by the critics have been answered “for a hundred years” and time and "time again have been proven without a doubt to be false", but what they fail to consider as a possibility is that the "feeling" they get is simply hypnosis and what they're told has been proven false hasn't even been acknowledged. Joseph Smith was the greatest man who ever lived to them, and the critic who defames him is a bigot and full of hate for attacking the Mormon faith. They don't read the facts... they only accept what they've been told to accept, as they have no critical thinking abilities... that wasn't the way they were taught to think, but instead fear dictates how they think.

Behind the curtain of Oz hides the truth. Joseph Smith wasn’t a good man or even a decent man. The apologist’s argument usually compare Joseph Smith to perfection. “Well I don’t know anyone who is perfect, so blab la bla…” What they fail to consider is when the bar is moved down a few notches below perfection, what Joseph Smith is exposed of is not just shy of perfection, but root evil. In researching the promises made to the parents of young girls who were “given” to Joseph Smith in exchange for eternal bliss in Mormon heaven, they fail to realize Joseph Smith was just a man and only God has that power.

When facts are argued the troll turns a deaf ear and blind eye to the facts and readily accepts the whitewashed version of the spoon-fed lies given to them via controlled sites by the Mormon lie machine. Nothing is what it seems, and what is blatantly obvious is just a misunderstanding when all the theoretical scenarios are presented in a reverse engineered format to take what is considered to be theoretically possible as fact. The arguments from silence that the theoretically possible scenarios are based upon pound the square peg into the round hole to a point where 38 year old Joseph Smith marrying 14 and 15 year old little girls behind his wife’s back under the threat of a flaming sword by God make sense. This makes sense to them… it actually makes sense as God’s will.

So Rich, don’t attempt to understand the level of brainwash in a troll… the one who fears the truth. There is no reason or logic that can undo years of brainwash. The seeker is different, but the troll is confused… pity them and bombard them with facts. Seer stones placed in a stove-pipe hat along with a pagan papyrus aren’t very glamorous when the truth is revealed. Facts tell truth and without facts it’s just another opinion… life isn’t easy, and for those with enough courage to even lurk here they have to want to know the truth somewhere deep down. Kill the trolls with facts… the truth will dictate that Joseph Smith was in fact a false prophet of God… pity them.

_________________
Tim 4:3 For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine..they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear. They will turn their ears away from the truth and turn aside to myths.

Thews,

Thanks for explaining the mindset of a Troll to me. I can only imagine what it could have been like if I had bought into the Jehovah’s Witness faith.

Based upon what you said, I can now more easily understand that Trolls are in a state of delusion. Yet, in the natural, it sure looks like they knowingly use dishonest debate tactics.

Here is a link to a good example of Troll-like-behavior on my site:

Scroll down almost to the bottom of the page, then hold down the ‘Ctrl’ key and hit the ‘f’ key, type in the word lies in the open box.

http://richkelsey.org/comments_on_an_in ... _story.htm

In this example the Troll claims I am lying yet the tables are turned and it soon becomes obvious who is really lying.

Again, it sure looks like he knowingly used dishonest debate tactics.

_________________
"Asking God if a story is true, with the only acceptable answer being, 'Yes,' may not be a sound method to finding God’s guidance in the matter." — Rich Kelsey
http://richkelsey.org/joseph_smith's_first_vision.htm

Rich - Your "article" (book! ) is as thorough or or more so than any of the JW books I have.
You are a champion of JW scholarship. That is no exaggeration.

I see you have been complimented by people who are exceptionally qualified in the analysis and critique of sectarian ecclesiastical claims - consider their commendations to be your "peer review" , so your revelations, explanations, and conclusion stand on solid ground.

Here are my thoughts on the Jehovah’s Witnesses:

The man behind the present movement of “Jehovah’s Witnesses” was Judge Rutherford. He was a very controlling person and he was not a very godly man.

Yet, the initial founder was Charles Russell; under Russell the group was called ‘Bible Students.’

Russell had a way of twisting what the bible meant in a manner that made reading his twisted ‘truths’ exciting!

Today, the Jehovah’s Witnesses continue Russell’s tradition of twisting truth. I see the same spirit involved in the formation of the JWs as I do the LDS church. They were both born out the 'Second Great Awakening.'

P.S. Thank you Abinadi for reading the JW article and commenting on it.

_________________
"Asking God if a story is true, with the only acceptable answer being, 'Yes,' may not be a sound method to finding God’s guidance in the matter." — Rich Kelsey
http://richkelsey.org/joseph_smith's_first_vision.htm

I get "Dawn", a publication by one of the JW break-offs.
I used to get the monthlies from a couple of others.
None of them are as interesting as the main JW.
The main JWs don't like to talk about them, same as Mormons don't like to talk about other Mormon churches.
Each consigns their breakoffs to a worse hell than nonmembers who commit murder and other crimes. That attitude, that "ex-members" are worse than the worst non-members, or as with Muslims, apostates are to be killed, is something that pushed me away from Mormonism a bit faster.

Dawn Magazine, the Dawn Bible Students; interesting!

Randy at freeminds.org introduced me to a Bible Student who went through a work of mine entitled: The Great Disappointment

I was doing research on that subject over 10 years ago; in those days there was almost no information on William Miller and the movement which led to the Great Disappointment of 1844. So, I bought books on the subject, read books from the library, and spoke with people in the know. I found a historian who helped. Also, the Bible Student that Randy had go through my work cleared up a few things. A theologian at a local Seventh Day Adventist Church also answered questions.

Today, all the info is available at Wikipedia; I could have saved years and years of research if I had just waited. The good thing is, I got it right and while my work is a bit dry, I try to spice it up by introducing Timothy Leary and his catchphrase: “Turn on, tune in, and drop out.”

Here is how I begin:


If you are interested, here is a link:

http://www.mmoutreachinc.com/jehovahs_w ... disap.html

_________________
"Asking God if a story is true, with the only acceptable answer being, 'Yes,' may not be a sound method to finding God’s guidance in the matter." — Rich Kelsey
http://richkelsey.org/joseph_smith's_first_vision.htm