LDS Freedom Forum

Elizabeth wrote: ↑April 7th, 2019, 9:49 pm I am surprised Brlenox was banned. May we know why?

Police assisted suicide.

Well, Brlenox, I do admire your sincerity and even your brashness, though at times a weee bit "exceedingly zealous of the traditions of [our] fathers" ... May we all go on in seeking out a relationship with the Lord Jesus Christ as we worship him with all our hearts - despite our differences...

Jonesy wrote: ↑April 7th, 2019, 9:42 pm

ajax wrote: ↑April 7th, 2019, 9:20 pm

Jonesy wrote: ↑April 7th, 2019, 9:08 pm Lol, I think I’ve angered TPTB here now

Nobody cares tbh.

Well, I guess he cared enough to thank you. Talk about poetic justice for all those people banned for breaking rules, especially The Rule. It brings to light precisely what is wrong with it. What some folks feel as (and what could justifiably be) righteous indignation, others...don’t. Talk about a certain type of Pharisee.

Your outrage is misplaced. BrLenox requested the ban. In my opinion, sometimes he had good comments, but more often than not he was in a state of mocking, in my opinion. Though I did admire his zeal, albeit I felt it was misplaced, but I have learned to admire people that have a Saul like attitude, they feel they are doing what is right. As many of us are and to be honest, I used to be very similar to him, so there is that.

Brlenox is interesting. In the past I often found myself at odds with him, but I literally couldn’t tell you what we were at odds about

I'm sort of sad to see him leave. Competition is good. The marketplace of ideas must have competition. A tree strengthens as it pushes against and resists a strong wind. BrLenox was a strong wind.

The reason I'm sad is that he did offer a strong Pharisaical perspective that was necessarily lawyerly presented and as such afforded opportunities to dig deeper to clarify my own thoughts, and to prepare bulletproof, scripturally sound arguments that not even a good Pharisee could outwit.

His entire salvation is staked on the keys of the Brethren.

He chose that hill to die on. He was not going to yield even one inch of that hill, and was willing to give his life in defense of that hill.

I think that hill is not worth fighting for.

Truth has always been authority, and not the reverse. Anytime you hear somebody trying to win an argument because of their authority or the keys they possess, you are receiving a clue that they are misguided, at the very least, and at worst are truly wolves in sheep's clothing, and have designs to eat you.

The hill worth defending, and dying on is the hill labeled "truth". Not the hill labeled "keys".

I tried as patiently as I could to help him see, but he was too committed to defending the wrong hill.

I did appreciate his good efforts and investment of time to express his opinionated viewpoints.

I wish him all the best. Adieu!

But I have a sneaky suspicion he won't be able to resist coming back, if his ban is self-imposed.

topcat wrote: ↑April 8th, 2019, 9:08 am .. and at worst are truly wolves in sheep's clothing, and have designs to eat you.

I think you meant a sheep in wolves clothing in sheep;s clothing

John Tavner wrote: ↑April 8th, 2019, 9:26 am

topcat wrote: ↑April 8th, 2019, 9:08 am .. and at worst are truly wolves in sheep's clothing, and have designs to eat you.

I think you meant a sheep in wolves clothing in sheep;s clothing

I did appreciate his avatar, or whomever's avatar he borrowed! It made me chuckle more than once.

I'm wondering if the straw that broke his back was the Friday announcement reversing the revelation from 3 years before?

Enough of those type of straws have been placed on the backs of the members over the years, that finally this last straw was too much for him to bear.

Kind of hard to keep defending even for members who resolutely are committed to looking the other way.

Hm. I don't frequent here often enough to know thoroughly the goings-on of others besides a general idea of what frequent posters believe and how they post. I recall primarily positive thoughts and feelings about Brlenox's posts, though. I'd rather he stay, but I pray him well.

I learned some good stuff from Brlenox. He was super helpful with health supplements. I know he was struggling with health, and speaking only for myself, I know my posts can be more sour when I'm not feeling well.

topcat wrote: ↑April 8th, 2019, 9:43 am

John Tavner wrote: ↑April 8th, 2019, 9:26 am

topcat wrote: ↑April 8th, 2019, 9:08 am .. and at worst are truly wolves in sheep's clothing, and have designs to eat you.

I think you meant a sheep in wolves clothing in sheep;s clothing

I did appreciate his avatar, or whomever's avatar he borrowed! It made me chuckle more than once.

I'm wondering if the straw that broke his back was the Friday announcement reversing the revelation from 3 years before?

Enough of those type of straws have been placed on the backs of the members over the years, that finally this last straw was too much for him to bear.

Kind of hard to keep defending even for members who resolutely are committed to looking the other way.

Quite the contrary actually we had a really interesting conversation off line about the policy change and his view on why both were inspired.

drtanner wrote: ↑April 8th, 2019, 4:04 pm

topcat wrote: ↑April 8th, 2019, 9:43 am

John Tavner wrote: ↑April 8th, 2019, 9:26 am

topcat wrote: ↑April 8th, 2019, 9:08 am .. and at worst are truly wolves in sheep's clothing, and have designs to eat you.

I think you meant a sheep in wolves clothing in sheep;s clothing

I did appreciate his avatar, or whomever's avatar he borrowed! It made me chuckle more than once.

I'm wondering if the straw that broke his back was the Friday announcement reversing the revelation from 3 years before?

Enough of those type of straws have been placed on the backs of the members over the years, that finally this last straw was too much for him to bear.

Kind of hard to keep defending even for members who resolutely are committed to looking the other way.

Quite the contrary actually we had a really interesting conversation off line about the policy change and his view on why both were inspired.

I also can see why both policies could be inspired. Our intention colors our perception.

I provoked and requested the action and am grateful that my ties here have been severed.

John Tavner wrote: ↑April 8th, 2019, 8:35 am Your outrage is misplaced. BrLenox requested the ban. In my opinion, sometimes he had good comments, but more often than not he was in a state of mocking, in my opinion. Though I did admire his zeal, albeit I felt it was misplaced, but I have learned to admire people that have a Saul like attitude, they feel they are doing what is right. As many of us are and to be honest, I used to be very similar to him, so there is that.

I may have overreacted. I still feel conflicted though.

I always thought brlenox had a purpose in everything he did. Even when he teased or prodded, it was to find where the weak spot was in their ideas or to figure out their real intent—something to that effect. I’m not saying I necessarily agree, but I can’t say their was real any malicious intent either.

Brlenox was one of my favorite posters. I don’t spend much time here, stroll in and try to find a diamond in the rough, and i mean very rough. Miss the good old days but moving onward and upward is a good thing.