Anyone seen Vogel's new video exposing Hales' goofy apologetics?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rjao6DiN2DY

I planned on watching it today. I will return and report.

so who is this vogel guy ?
I'm not familiar with him.

His hypothesis is that Joseph Smith was a "pious fraud" and that he produced the BOM for the same reason that acolytes in the Middle Ages produced artifacts known to be frauds (i.e. splinters from the cross, the Shroud of Turin).

He came here years ago and a train wreck ensued that he blamed on someone's lousy cabdriving (I was just parked at the crossing, honest Lamanite!). Steve Benson tried to defend some of his work, but the PF claims left him cold as well...

He's still a regular on the latest reincarnation of the old FAIR board (where Denial C. Peterson is still the Apologist 'n Chief); in fact if you go to that site (board nanny software won't let me name it, presumably because of troll fight problems), there's a thread he's posted on that very subject.

Okay, I risked a new bullchip filter and read through the thread; Vogel's reached the point where JS's sexual consummations of his "plural marriages" isn't in doubt for him (congrats, Dan, but you've still got a lot of work to do in the area of cognitive dissonance). There are many within the apologist community for whom it is.

BTW, the last time I made a comment in a thread about Vogel, he showed up here and bragged about his success. I won't argue that he has his followers, but so does [deleted].

Finally, all the reports about Vogel are that he has much better manners than I do...

Cabbie needs to get his memory checked.

For the record, Benson commended Vogel for his work that examined the link between the Book of Mormon Lamanite fairytale narrative and popular ideas of Smith's day relating to the origin of Native Americans.

However, Benson did not buy into Vogel's "pious fraud" nonsense about Joseph Smith.

In reality, when Vogel came to the RfM board to defend his "pious fraud" theory, Benson severely took him to task, disputing Vogel's claim that Smith was supposedly a well-meaning and sincere Mormon believer who nonetheless was also a deceiver supposedly in service of God's higher purposes.

Quoting Smith's own words and the observations of others who personally knew and interacted with him, Benson made it quite clear that, historically speaking, Smith was a knowing, conscious and deliberate deceiver who disdained and mocked his gullible followers in private.

If Cabbie is going to tell his tales, he should get his facts straight first.

I'll dust off the old teaching credential and suggest you spend more time with some remedial reading lessons and less time on the histrionic nonsense you keep filling the board with.

Here's what I wrote:

>Steve Benson tried to defend some of his work, but the PF claims left him cold as well...

Steve and I were corresponding at the time, and he did give Vogel credit for his research, but not for the Pious Fraud hypothesis.

Roadkill...



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/20/2016 11:47AM by SL Cabbie.

He actually DID defend some of Vogel's work specifically and as follows:

"One of the elemental and genuine eye-openers for me coming to the realization that the Book of Mormon was a 19th-century, man-made creation rooted in early American Native American lore mixed with Biblical myth was Vogel's powerful, exceptionally well-documented' Indian Origins and the Book of Mormon' (Salt Lake City, Utah: Signature Books, 1986). I highly recommend it to those interested in history, archaeology and how frontier America "explanations" of supposed Native American origins were slapped together by Smith & Co. in a work of clumsy fiction, otherwise known as the Book of Mormon." (posted by: steve benson, Date: August 25, 2015 02:29AM)

"Reading Dan Vogel's, 'Indian Origins and the Book of Mormon". Devastating.'" (posted by: steve benson, Date: August 16, 2015 01:05AM)

No, ma'am, that's not "histrionic nonsense." That's just history.

Yeah, we watched it. It sounds to us like this is celestial group marriage. If A is secretly married to B thru Z, and B and R are each married secretly to X, etc. etc. then we can extrapolate that it may be very difficult to establish parentage of any of the people in this group. Also, why are we hung up on Joseph Smith? Brigham Young and the mormon leaders that followed made no effort to hide what they learned from Mr.Smith.

Exactly right. The same cast of polyandrous characters that the apologists deny JS was shtupping, openly shacked up with Brigham, Kimball, et al. after the dirtbag Smith's demise.

They are hung up on JS because of Helen Mar.

they are hung up on Joseph because he was the one who got the rough polyandrous stone rolling

Love your name, Polly!

Why such strong feelings against Vogel for holding a different opinion than yours? Doesn't seem rational to me. And why is that no one wants to discuss his video?

I'll hazard a guess there are some unresolved "Mormon issues" on your part...

Vogel came here and attempted to co-opt the "board hierarchy" and when that fell flat (his narcissism was involved in his trying to "convert" folks to his pious fraud crapola), he ran back to the LDS apologists' board and dissed RFM...

It looks to me like your "codependency" is involved in that Vogel was offered the opportunity to "grow and re-examine" his claims (and declined) and you would have him "stay stuck" in the nether world between brainwashed Mormonism and authentic recovery.

George Orwell: "Most political language is the defense of the indefensible."

/mirror voice off

So I guess I’m still not going to hear any discussion about the video.

SL Cabbie: Your anger for Vogel seems boundless to the point of attacking someone who you don’t even know. Puzzlement! Your rambling seems incoherent to me.

You could use an elementary lesson in identifying emotions.

Contempt is what I feel; right now, however, your "projection mechanism" is working overtime (and I've got the clinical background to make that statement). I would suggest some "I statements" might offer you a "learning experience."

Moreover being uncomfortable--and judgmental--about someone else's anger is pretty diagnostic of a dysfunctional upbringing.

I am angry at the excesses of LDS, Inc., and my advice to you if you're going to pass judgment on that reality is stay out of my headlights. You're new here, and I recommend a lot more recovery before you attempt to speak with any degree of authority.

SL Cabbie Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I am angry at the excesses of LDS, Inc., and my
> advice to you if you're going to pass judgment on
> that reality is stay out of my headlights. You're
> new here, and I recommend a lot more recovery
> before you attempt to speak with any degree of
> authority.

Damn. If Mormon apologist are a kettle then you are a pot Cabbie. Daniel C. Peterson couldn't have done it better. Well, he could have done it less direct and with more snobbishness.

Damn. Calling someone's recovery small and your authority great. Seems like the worst kind of sponsor here. Love the road rage and attempted road kill. I'm sure Polly is fine. They don't sound like the deer in your headlights you would like them to be.

I notified ADMIN about that personal attack likening me to Denial C. Peterson. That was pretty classless. DCP has actually run like a banshee on the two or three occasions we've locked horns on the Internet. I even trolled his site one time, posting a link to a video by Thomas Murphy. Tom, a PhD anthropologist, was threatened with excommunication years ago which drew a huge protest at Temple Square on the newly purchased Main Street Plaza. That was before LDS Inc. put the kibosh on the First Amendment by spending several million in tithing revenue. Danny Boy didn't pull my post, probably realizing I'd give him some publicity here--or on the Salamander Society site--and he's shrewd enough not to keep digging when he's deep in the doggie do.

There's an excellent recent interview with Murphy out there, BTW...

Anyway, this post wasn't pulled, and the message was I "could take care of myself." I said okay, that I'd try to mind my manners, but Elder B. wasn't going to like what I'm going to say.

Cabdriver Confession: I've never bothered to read any of EB's writings since one of my "consultants" (a PhD psychologist) said their opinion was he was "an obvious mood disorder" from the way his postings "cycled."

I'm not qualified to pass on that one, but the "untreated LDS narcissism" with that ad hominem attack is pretty obvious (in the narcissist's playbook, the first maxim is "The rules don't apply to me").

The other obvious diagnosis is a bit of what we call "testosterone poisoning." An allegedly newish sort comes in with a provocative moniker--multiple marriages?--and then acts a bit nonplussed when the thread receives little attention.

Cue up Elder B. hopping on his high horse and charging to the lady's "rescue," but unfortunately a dearth of facts to accompanied his horsemanship...

Bone up on the facts next time, and you might do better there, Elder...

Facts are the engine additive in the ol' police interceptor, honest.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 10/27/2016 12:43PM by SL Cabbie.

Mr. Cabbie: Are you one of the hierarchy here? What is your purpose in making such off the wall comments?

You'll have to ask others, but I regularly have people come to town and buy me lunch, etc. after connecting with me off-board. Several, including "Still Anon," met me when they were cab customers.

I'm going to keep those other confidences at this point, however, even though many of the regulars know my "inner circle," including the old-timers in ADMIN. That includes a close friend who hosts another sight and is a licensed clinical social worker (LCSW).

Now given that I've acquired a fair amount of actual clinical training (grad level, honest), I'll point out that your "attention getting" ploy of asking about the "hierarchy" of the board is evidence of some perceptual issues you might want to address. If your were truly sophisticated, you would've observed the board dynamics first, rather than engage in "drama llama" tactics.

Feel free to defend Dan Vogel, however. I did engage him when he came here because he objected--on "semantic grounds"--to folks who were referring to Joseph Smith as a pedophile. But that wasn't during the initial brouha he brought down upon himself; it was much later, and he promptly ran back to the FAIR board hollering about how RFM had mistreated him.

To address the issue from a clinical and technical standpoint, JS wasn't a pedophile (since his targets weren't children but rather adolescents), but his defense of Joseph Smith as a "genuine believer"--which purveyors of "Pious Frauds" were--is ludicrous. JS was a sexual predator, period.

Here's an excellent example from the historical record, and I'm promise the don't teach it in Sunday School.

http://www.mrm.org/law-interview

Finally, to borrow some advice an old sponsor gave me ("Here's some more good advice you can ignore"), I'll suggest if you're serious about "recovering from Mormonism," you'll put the focus back on yourself and restrain from judging others until you actually have some authentic recovery under you.

SL Cabbie Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Finally, to borrow some advice an old sponsor gave
> me ("Here's some more good advice you can
> ignore"), I'll suggest if you're serious about
> "recovering from Mormonism," you'll put the focus
> back on yourself and restrain from judging others
> until you actually have some authentic recovery
> under you.

I'd like to know what the fuck "authentic recovery" is from the "authority" but I don't think I could get his sponsorship.

Back up to Olympus he rides.

I stayed at a Holiday inn once....

SL Cabbie. I have always enjoyed your insight. You are one of many here who I respect and would like to meet. I imagine you having great conversations with me. Jung had great wisdom about ego. A maxim of mine is to never take any issue of another personally. Just a consideration...

Only Hales I ever met was in boot camp. He has the smallest junk I've even seen. Guess he never went through an endowment.

Question: How does Vogel deal with Smith's being arrested for fraud - for claiming he could find treasure with a dousing rod and taking people's money?