The Golden Compass

rayb · Hot Air Balloon

The Golden Compass

hiccups · Future Queen in Zion

Thanks for the head's up here, Ray. I think I'll likely pass on it and definitely will not take the kiddos.

fear of shiz · Profuse Pontificator

I've read The Golden Compass and just started The Subtle Knife. I really enjoyed Compass. I can't pass judgment on the others yet.

I would recommend taking a look at these books for yourselves, though I know my plug is probably not worth much to some of you.

rayb · Hot Air Balloon

Shiz: Were there any parts of it that you thought the religious minded might take offense at?

fear of shiz · Profuse Pontificator

The antagonist is an agent of the "Church", and priests are portrayed as the bad guys. But I got the sense that the Church and priests in question were Catholic. LOL

A key factor in the book was that everyone has a soul--and the antagonists were all about destroying those souls. I suppose some people could interpret that as being a statement that churches are stifling to the soul.

One more thing--these books are more mature than Harry Potter. I wouldn't have my 10 yr old read them. Maybe a young teen. Lyra (the protagonist) is not a squeaky clean hero. But that is also part of her appeal.

I'll share more once I've read the other books, if you want.

beefche · Profuse Pontificator

I haven't read the books and heard about the anti-religion in the books. I've also heard that they've eliminated or toned down alot of that for the movie. I want to see it for a couple of reasons. First, it looked interesting and the special effects look cool. And I'm interested to see how anti it is and then read the books to compare.

rayb · Hot Air Balloon

Interesting. Thanks for pointing out these details. I thought if Snopes didn't attempt to play down the email that's apparently going around, that there was probably some substance to the warning, and your description seems to confirm that--at least in part.

That said, I've seen where religious figures attempting to hold to power can and do mislead and darken the minds of many--something we LDS are at least in theory subjected to when we try to do things like missionary work. :) Christ certainly didn't have a lot of kind words for the people who would/did eventually take over his church (vineyard).

When I was a missionary in Italy, there was a city that was very nonreligious, and the history of the city was one of bloodshed due to catholic schisms. It was interesting how it had affected the people at an almost instinctual level. The missionaries there said that the people distrusted all religion.

--Ray

Dyany · Senior Member

I really liked the first book, thought the writing was great, but about halfway through the 2nd book I realized they were setting the whole series up to prove there was no God, only the machinations of men. The attitude (to me, at least) was far from intellectual and struck me as excessively cocky -- Pullman created his own world with his own rules so he could do exactly what he wanted, with enough obvious similarities to Christianity that the message was not only obvious but heavy-handed. I was so disgusted that I didn't touch the 3rd book and I'm not even sure I finished the 2nd. IMHO, the tendency of people to take the true allegories and then apply the FULL message, including all of the falseness, to the allegorical subject, is far too compelling for the false ideas not to do damage, especially with children/teens. I'm not sure that last sentence makes sense because I'm tired, so sorry in advance.

PollyAnna · Senior Bucketkeeper

It made sense to me Dy... but then we all know what my brain patterns are like... so, I'm not sure I am helping your cause sister...

Pt314 · Senior Member

Read the first book, thought it was very interesting. Very bizarre.

Read the second book, it was much darker and more bizarre. It turned me off when God was the bad guy, and an army is being built up to dethrone and kill God.

I haven't read the third book.

LoudmouthMormon · Profuse Pontificator

Well, I don't know anything about the guy, the book, or the movie. But the trailer did it's job - My wife and I will certainly be seeing it, because dang, it looks cool.

Here's a 7-page review of the author and his work:
http://www.newyorker.com/archive/2005/12/26/051226fa_fact

The novels are set in an alternate version of this universe, in which people travel by zeppelin and refer to electricity as anbaric power. It is a church-burdened world, in which the Reformation led to consolidation, not schism, and the Papacy was moved from Rome to Geneva by John Calvin.
...
In His Dark Materials, the Church is run by a cabal of celibate men who are obsessed with sin and its eradication. The Church employs torture and a doctrine of preëmptive penancea program of self-flagellation that provides its adherents with a kind of get-out-of-Hell-free card, forgiving them in advance for such politically useful sins as assassination.
Here's a portion of an LDS review I found on another board:

If you check the reader reviews of the books on Amazon.com, you notice that the third books is not nearly as admired as the previous installments, and that many readers complain about his agenda overpowering the content. You'd have to look hard to find examples of people who found his reasoning persuasive. Quite simply, he over-generalizes from examples of religion gone bad. (The ever-popular Inquisitorial boogymen) And he quite literally offers nothing (the champagne bubbles) for his characters except the prospect of a bit of guilt and committment free, sex before personal oblivion eventually arrives. If your children are so vulnerable that they need to be protected from exposure to that kind of unsophisticated, shallow argument at this stage, something like His Dark Materials is really the least of their problems.

There is no more reason to censor Pulman than there is to clip Alma 30 out of the Book of Mormon.

Personally, I find Harry Potter a far superior bit of writing than
His Dark Materials. The Potter books kept getting deeper and richer, revealing an astonishing depth of authorial vision, where as His Dark Materials badly bungles the conclusion, in its self-indulgent, shallow didacticism. As young adult fantasy, I also find the Bartimaeus Trilogy by Jonathon Stroud far superior at every level.
And maybe most importantly, here's the context surrounding his "My books are about killing God" quote:
I've been surprised by how little criticism I've got. Harry Potter's been taking all the flak. I'm a great fan of J.K. Rowling, but the people - mainly from America's Bible Belt - who complain that Harry Potter promotes Satanism or witchcraft obviously haven't got enough in their lives. Meanwhile, I've been flying under the radar, saying things that are far more subversive than anything poor old Harry has said. My books are about killing God.
LM

Janey · Senior Member

I had another favorite fantasy author whose books I read repeatedly. As I got into my 20s, I noticed that religion was always the bad guy in his books, particularly the newer series. As soon as he introduced a priest into the storyline, you knew you'd met the corrupt, stupid, pervert who was the center of all things evil. I finally quit reading him and gave away his books. It was a bummer, because I liked his writing style. But the way he treated religion irked me enough that I didn't like his books anymore.

My folks never talked to me about it because they never read his books. But I managed to not be convinced by his argument anyway. I had enough good examples of religious people in my life to not be taken in by his caricatures.

Talking to your kids about what the books try to teach is good. Providing your kids with good examples of religious people and a religious lifestyle is even better.

PollyAnna · Senior Bucketkeeper

Hubby found a similar trend in some of his book authors... (Noticed after he joined the church though)... Wonder if yours was one of his same authors???

rayb · Hot Air Balloon

Orson Scott Card mentions in his opinion writing quite often his frustration with sophisticated SCIFI and fantasy authors who make god and religion a bad guy... or they don't mention god at all, and then claim to try to be going for realism.

It's an interesting concept to me.

--Ray

Cocobeem · Keeper of the Holy Grail

Does this movie cover all three of his books? If it has a result like The Wave, where you suddenly realize you've been caught up on the "wrong team" ... that could be cool...

My two oldests will prob. see it with their dad, so I better get ready to talk about it...

Plus it opens on my birthday... I think it's a sign...

rayb · Hot Air Balloon

I think the movie is about the first book. If it's popular enough, I'm sure there will be sequels.

--Ray

Cat Herder · Understander of unimportant things

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,305487,00.html

-- Edited by Cat Herder at 11:55, 2007-10-29

Cat Herder · Understander of unimportant things

I couldn't get the formatting right after posting the link in my previous post, so here is what I was trying to say.

I had never heard of this series or the movie until seeing this thread. My response, major yawnfest. No way no how am I going to wast time or money on the books or movie... Since it has Nicole Kidman involved, I may as well just donate money directly to the Church of Tom Cruise...

The novelist has said they are in response to C.S. Lewis' "The Chronicles of Narnia," the popular children's fantasy series of which "The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe" is the first book written by Lewis to teach Christian ideals to kids.

"I loathe the 'Narnia' books," Pullman has said in previous press interviews. "I hate them with a deep and bitter passion, with their view of childhood as a golden age from which sexuality and adulthood are a falling away." He has called the series "one of the most ugly and poisonous things" he's ever read.
You know, folks are free to write about what they want to, but I can guarantee you this particular author will never have close to the same impact the author he so despises has had... Talk about sour grapes... this guy probably cheered when Darth Maul killed Qui Gon... rolleyes

Cocobeem · Keeper of the Holy Grail

"...ugly and poisonous..." ??? Sheesh, that guy is mad at somethin'! The more I read, the more I'm turned off by the whole thing.

rayb · Hot Air Balloon

How do the Chronicles of Narnia promote the idea that adult sexuality is a falling away from some golden age?

There were some adults who entered Narnia. I find it interesting how there's always a constant insinuation--stepping over the line here... and how atheism is (more often than not... at its core) really an intellectual attempt to justify hedonism.

--Ray

LoudmouthMormon · Profuse Pontificator

Two things:

* My wife and I are going to see it. Dang, but it looks cool. I go nuts over these 'alternate reality' type movies, and my wife goes nuts over anything with talking animals fighting each other.

* I just bought The Chronicles of Narnia off of Amazon.com for $7, and those will be the next 7 books I read to my kids.

LM

Cocobeem · Keeper of the Holy Grail

Yeah, my two oldest read all the Chronicles (rewarded with a special dinner with Mom after they completed them

) and when LoudMouth posts, then I want to see it again...

fear of shiz · Profuse Pontificator

OK, I've finished book two, The Subtle Knife. There are passages that, taken out of context, can be considered anti-religion. For instance, one character states that churches exist to "take away all the good feelings from life." (not an exact quote) And yes, the books are leading towards a "second war in heaven" to dethrone God. However, while I don't think the author is a fan of organized religion, the books have some very definite and powerful spiritual themes. These books are not about dethroning God, they are about opposing any human organization that "uses" God as a tool to gain power. The antagonists of this trilogy are the "false priests who oppress."

I liked this explanation, found here

Pullmans stance on religion is that of a hatred of how humanity has corrupted the true meanings of God... the Authority of His Dark Materials is the human, misrepresentation of God, which has been used to justify all kinds of cruelty between human beings. Dust, on the other hand, is the presence of the true God, who exists at the core of Christianity, and indeed every other religion when all the frivolous bits we have tacked on are stripped away. Dust is Love, hope, life lived to its fullest, conscious thought. It is everything that every religious leader has ever taught their followers to embrace, and to practice. Dust is everywhere, part of everything. We cannot exist without it. It is a presence that cannot be comprehended by any being, because it is beyond any of us to do so.

I'm really enjoying these books, and hope no one will discount them before giving them a chance.

fear of shiz · Profuse Pontificator

One more thing: Pullman is drawing from the story of Adam and Eve and the Fall of Man, an ancient story that has been retold many times--among them Paradise Lost, which Pullman cites as part of his inspiration. This is a story that should have special significance for Latter-day Saints. Why not see if you can gain a new perspective on it?

PollyAnna · Senior Bucketkeeper

Just making sure we are saying that what someone decides when it comes to personal preference does not necessarily have to be questioned, right...??? My son certainly did not "discount" these books before giving them a chance, but I certainly trust his sense of right for him, and I would hope others he might have contact with would respect that. He has shown himself to be very level headed when it comes to literature... and he reads about 4-5 books a month.

I feel similarly about members that are discussing this topic... Let's allow everyone to state preferences without being challenged, please.

fear of shiz · Profuse Pontificator

I'm not questioning those who have read the books and didn't like them. I just want people to give them a chance, and not dismiss them based on rumor or prejudice. Didn't the Harry Potter books get a bad rap from so-called Christians? Wasn't that hype overdone?

Pt314 · Senior Member

fear of shiz wrote:

I'm not questioning those who have read the books and didn't like them. I just want people to give them a chance, and not dismiss them based on rumor or prejudice. Didn't the Harry Potter books get a bad rap from so-called Christians? Wasn't that hype overdone?

I agree with you. You should investigate something before prematurely criticizing it.

I had fun reading the first two books of this series, but it just became too much for my tastes at the time.

TitusTodd · Senior Member

Since first seeing the trailers for the movie, I've wanted to see it and I probably will on DVD (like most movies I watch with a few exceptions). These books are works of fiction so should they be taken so seriuosly? I've read several books over the years that have something against religion to a level, or authority, or government and etc. Even more books did not follow my real life belief system. If someone has a habit of taking a work of fiction seriously, perhaps they shouldn't read books contrary to their belief system (which would probably exclude a heck of a lot of books).

As a kid I didn't initially connect The Chronicles of Narnia with Christianity but began to see it after further readings of the series as I got older. Even after I could see it, it never made me feel more religious or something to that effect. It was neat to see the parallels and that CS Lewis used that inspiration and such but my testimony was not furthered by it. I wouldn't want to read any literature that glorifies evil and sinful practices - dwelling in dark places is not good - but it doesn't sound like Pullman's books are like that (?).

That's not to state I plan to read the books (though now I'm curious) or am going to encourage my kids to read them. I probably would not allow my kids to read them without my having read them first or reading the books with them. Right now they are not on our "to read" list and there's a good chance they never will be (so many others are on there at this time).

LoudmouthMormon · Profuse Pontificator

Some words of council from Brigham Young, directed at parents that tremble and shrink at the thought of an athiest trying for the souls of their children:

Shall I sit down and read the Bible, the Book of Mormon, and the Book of Covenants all the time?" says one. Yes, if you please, and when you have done, you may be nothing but a sectarian after all. It is your duty to study to know everything upon the face of the earth, in addition to reading those books. We should not only study good, and its effects upon our race, but also evil, and its consequences.

I make these remarks to lay the foundation for principle in the minds of the people; and if you do not yet understand what I would be at, I will try to illustrate it still further. For example, we will take a strict, religious, holy, down country, eastern Yankee, who would whip a beer barrel for working on Sunday, and never suffer a child to go into company of his age, never suffer him to have any associates, or permit him to do any thing or know anything, only what the deacon, priests, or missionaries bring to the house; when that child attains to mature age, say eighteen or twenty years, he is very apt to steal away from his father and mother; and when he has broken his bands, you would think all hell was let loose, and that he would compass the world at once.

Now understand it - when parents whip their children for reading novels, and never let them go to the theatre, or to any place of recreation and amusement, but bind them to the moral law, until duty becomes loathsome to them; when they are freed by age from the rigorous training of their parents, they are more fit for companions to devils, than to be the children of such religious parents.

If I do not learn what is in the world, from first to last, somebody will be wiser than I am. I intend to know the whole of it, both good and bad. Shall I practise evil? No; neither have I told you to practise it, but to learn by the light of truth every principle there is in existence in the world."
- Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, 2:34.

-- Edited by LoudmouthMormon at 09:46, 2007-10-30

salesortonscom · Wise and Revered Master

I was watching the news this morning and it seems the athiests are up in arms because they feel the athiestic themes of the book were too toned down for the movie in order not to offend Christains. The theologian they interviewed pointed to this as evidence of the books true intentions.

Frankly, the trailer looked a bit dark for my liking. I don't watch that many movies anymore and rent even fewer so I probably wouldn't have seen this anyway.

Cat Herder · Understander of unimportant things

LM, isn't that kind of a harsh response to those who don't have the desire to see this movie or read the books? That is probably taken a bit out of context, as Brigham Young was cautioning parents to remember they have to raise their children in the world... that to do so is not the same as making the of the world.

As said, we had never heard of these books or movie until this thread. Are we really going to be at a disadvantage for not opting to entertain ourselves with them? I think not. Otherwise, unless one exposes him / herself to every book or movie or theatrical presentation that is out there, they are incomplete.

Shiz, like I said, people are free to write whatever they want... and people are equally as free to choose what they read or view with no questions asked. Just because people don't hop on the bandwagon of whatever the latest bestseller / movie combo is doesn't mean they are opting not to hop on because of of "rumor or prejudice." It is more likely what is appropriately termed personal preferences and decisions.

p.s. I don't think much of Milton's Paradise Lost is based on sound doctrine...

Cocobeem · Keeper of the Holy Grail

LM- That reference from the JD didn't match up to what I could find... do you have a "title" to the talk or could you re-check the reference? I liked the quote, by the way.

rayb · Hot Air Balloon

I agree with Cat. It is not a point of weakness to choose to avoid stepping on a spiritual landmine.

--Ray

LoudmouthMormon · Profuse Pontificator

Cat Herder wrote:
LM, isn't that kind of a harsh response to those who don't have the desire to see this movie or read the books?

Oh, most absolutely it would be too harsh a response. But I wasn't pointing it at disinterested parties. I was pointing it at "parents that tremble and shrink at the thought of an athiest trying for the souls of their children". Not sure if that's anyone here or not.

But yeah, let me back off from the passion and pointing. It's more of a "halleluliah - Brigham seems to think the way I do" sort of a quote. I got no problems with people who are finding other diverse parenting strategies to focus on. The strategy that seems to work well for me and my kids is age-appropriate discussions along the lines of "here's what some evil looks like - what do you think about it?"

It is not a point of weakness to choose to avoid stepping on a spiritual landmine.

I think Brigham is railing against parents who try to protect their kids from knowledge that these landmines exist. You can describe a landmine without walking on one.

Cocobeem wrote:
That reference from the JD didn't match up to what I could find... do you have a "title" to the talk or could you re-check the reference?
I almost passed out when my first online JoD didn't have the quote anywhere near 2:34. Did some anti make it up? Was I a deluded dupe? But it wasn't searchable, and the searchable one found it, volume 2, page 94. Odd place to find a searchable JoD, I can't even identify the webpage's language. Norweigan? Dutch? But if you type in "whip their children for reading novels" and click "Haku", it takes you right there.

-- Edited by LoudmouthMormon at 13:24, 2007-10-30

salesortonscom · Wise and Revered Master

I talked with my wife about this during lunch. We've opted not to see the movie. Not that we think it will convert our kids to atheism but I really don't want the creep who wrote the books and who has made some pretty nasty comments making a dime off me. But truth be told, the movie didn't really interest me anyway so I probably would not have gone and seen it.

fear of shiz · Profuse Pontificator

Cat Herder wrote:

p.s. I don't think much of Milton's Paradise Lost is based on sound doctrine...

Have you read it?

LoudmouthMormon · Profuse Pontificator

salesortonscom wrote:
I really don't want the creep who wrote the books and who has made some pretty nasty comments making a dime off me.

Ordinarily, this is hugely important to me as well. I'm not interested in financially supporting critics of my church, by doing things like seeing September Dawn, for example. Where facts are invented, and other facts are ignored, and the worst possible picture is painted and passed off as reality.

But I'm not so passionate about it here, for 2 reasons:
1- The athiests are howling and gnashing teeth at how toned down the movie was, so everyone could make a buck. What better way to get under their skin that to run endless droves of christian kids through the theater on Sat, and then into church on Sun?

2- He's not really lying or ignoring evidence. He's produced his worldview, and seen it turned into a movie. I disagree with his worldview, but I don't really mind him making a buck off me exposing myself to it. I'm all about the open exchange of ideas.

I'll tell ya all about it after I see it.

LM

Cocobeem · Keeper of the Holy Grail

Guess I'll look it up in my dad's "real life" volume 2... I couldn't get that Swedish or whatever site to work.

I'da seen September Dawn if it had played in my town. grr...

Cat Herder · Understander of unimportant things

fear of shiz wrote:

Cat Herder wrote:

p.s. I don't think much of Milton's Paradise Lost is based on sound doctrine...

Have you read it?

I admit I confused Milton and Paradise Lost with Dante and The Divine Comedy. I have read portions of both works, but it has been many years ago. Milton was at least 300 years later, but still close to 150 years prior to the Restoration.

Even if Pullman claims one of his source ideas is Paradise Lost, why should Pullman's work have special significance to LDS? It isn't a derivation of Paradise Lost... And, Paradise Lost itself is really only of significance to us as LDS in that it shows that The Lord was gradually preparing the hearts and minds of people for certain doctrines and beliefs that had been lost more than a millenia earlier. Paradise Lost, while portions of which may truely be inspiring, is hardly scripture.

fear of shiz · Profuse Pontificator

I wasn't saying Paradise Lost should have any special meaning for LDS. I was saying the story of the Fall and of Adam and Eve should. Paradise Lost is just one re-telling of that story.

I have finished all three books now. I love these books. Well-written, with lots of action and suspense, and wonderful characters.

And the message of these books is not to look for happiness "elsewhere," but to build Heaven here and now, and to live as what we are, not as what we wish we were, or as someone else wants us to be. I was reminded of the concept of Zion--the idea of each person giving his unique talents to make life and the world the best it can be.

Another message was the power and importance of love--love conquers all.

And those who would see cold rationalism in these stories are wrong. Indeed, a strong theme is that mystery and magic and wonder are vital to life--indeed, that cold rationalism leads to cold indifference and death. Marvelous trilogy.

rayb · Hot Air Balloon

interesting. I have a neighbor who's reading the same series... she wasn't so upbeat about it.

Cat Herder · Understander of unimportant things

fear of shiz wrote:

I wasn't saying Paradise Lost should have any special meaning for LDS. I was saying the story of the Fall and of Adam and Eve should. Paradise Lost is just one re-telling of that story.

The pronoun "This" in the original post was somewhat ambiguous as to what it was referring to.

fear of shiz wrote:

I was reminded of the concept of Zion--the idea of each person giving his unique talents to make life and the world the best it can be.

I thought Zion meant "the pure in heart".

TitusTodd · Senior Member

...but to build Heaven here and now, and to live as what we are, not as what we wish we were, or as someone else wants us to be.

There's no doubt we should strive to build heaven here and now but the very term build is a work in progress and thus are we ever where we should be or want to be and is there anything wrong with that? Actually, if we aren't striving for something greater or better of ourselves aren't we just merely existing aimless in the world?

I guess to atheists in general, religion creates undo stress in an attempt to reach a mythical heaven after this life. So many dos and don'ts in an attempt to reach a better place while living in a rule constricted, joyless life in the here and now. I don't know much about Pullman and how he lives his life but I wonder how he defines and structures his existence. To me, my religion provides me guidelines that help me avoid pitfalls as much as possible while it points me towards where true joys exist - family and service.

rayb · Hot Air Balloon

Interesting questions Titus.

Mama Fortuna would say her immortality was to be remembered by the Harpy (an immortal) whom she caught. :)

I also agree that we shouldn't destroy this world in an effort to get to the next... but if one really understands the nature of god and what he wishes for his children, then clearly that's not going to happen... the pursuit of happiness is entirely compatible with the caring for this world, and creating a better future for children, and being religiously motivated... at least that's been my experience.

--Ray

fear of shiz · Profuse Pontificator

Cat Herder wrote:

I thought Zion meant "the pure in heart".

I was referring to the concept of Zion as in the perfect society on Earth--the thing which Enoch built and Joseph Smith strived for.

Cat Herder · Understander of unimportant things

fear of shiz wrote:

Cat Herder wrote:

I thought Zion meant "the pure in heart".

I was referring to the concept of Zion as in the perfect society on Earth--the thing which Enoch built and Joseph Smith strived for.

What is the difference between Zion as in "the pure in heart" and the city of Enoch, the Nephite civilization for a couple hundred years after Christ's appearance to them, and what Joseph Smith was working towards (but which the people as a whole then and we as a whole now have yet to live up to)?

If we're going to define Zion as "the perfect society on Earth", then the provisio must be included that only a Zion people can build a Zion society. Each of the Lord's anointed prophets, from Adam to the present day with Pres. Hinckley, have sought to establish a Zion society by teaching and exemplifying the principles necessary for people to be living and adhering to for qualifying as a Zion people.

There are quite a lot of good articles about Zion and Zion society at the Church's website.

PollyAnna · Senior Bucketkeeper

fear of shiz wrote:
[IMO] those who would see cold rationalism in these stories are wrong. Indeed, [also IMO] a strong theme is that mystery and magic and wonder are vital to life--indeed, [more opinon] that cold rationalism leads to cold indifference and death. Marvelous trilogy. [again IMO]
edited by Polly...

Shiz, would you like to self-edit this to reflect this "statement" to be your personal opinion not fact, or would you like me to edit it for you in a similar manner to the above quote??? It's your choice...

This is also fair warning to anyone participating that wants to start a "I'm right/You're wrong" war in a thread I moderate, these kinds of comments will be edited from here on out. I already asked nicely that we not start that silliness. You are ALL certainly welcome to your views and opinions (and I personally see interesting points in all the comments), however PLEASE state your comments as such.

In addition I would like to remind everyone that this thread does not reside in a doctrinal area of the forum... This is current events people! Let's take the "doctrinal discussions" to other forum areas.

fear of shiz · Profuse Pontificator

It goes without saying that when I state something it is my opinion--it is what I consider to be true, and one of the reasons I bother to post it here is so that others can consider it and take it or leave it. Do we need to add "IMO" to every fetchin' sentence we post on Bountiful?

-- Edited by fear of shiz at 05:31, 2007-11-01

fear of shiz · Profuse Pontificator

One more thing: the "doctrinal discussion" was mostly me trying to clarify why I felt that a LDS could find something of value in these books. I had to explain what I meant several times, as Catherder was misunderstanding me (something he seems to do often).

TitusTodd · Senior Member

I have an easy way to take care of the IMO situation, Shiz. Just put "the above is the opinion of the author" in your sig line. smile

A mixing of topics is bound to happen occasionally. As long as it doesn't make a complete turn to another topic I don't see the problem.

-- Edited by TitusTodd at 09:05, 2007-11-01