Sunday, February 13, 2011

Final Shawn McCraney Post (for a while)

My last post about Shawn McCraney illustrated my view that Shawn never really intended to have me or other knowledgeable defenders of the LDS faith on his program, Heart of the Matter.

So yesterday I got a phone call from a friend who, with another friend, spoke with Shawn about his fear of dealing with Mormon scholars, and me in particular.

My friend said that when my name was brought up, his perception was Shawn became visibly angry, responded with a short curt remark about how dumb bringing me up was to do, and then said he chose to not have me on because I am not a "real" Mormon, I just have my own philosophy which I disguise as Mormonism.

"Wow", was all I could say. The absurdity of such a view about me, if the report is accurate (and I believe my friend to be care about details, so I think it is) is almost beyond words. My credentials as a believing Mormon far exceed anything Shawn can throw around about his supposed "40 years as a Mormon". Granted, I have only been a Mormon for 35 years, but those don't include any infancy/pre-teen years. And they include 33 years of very active belief, study and attendance.

Let me elaborate a bit more. I served a two year mission without being homesick a single day. I loved the work. I have been an elder's quorum president 4 times. I served over 5 years in a bishopric as an executive secretary. I served as a counselor in a stake mission presidency for two years. I have repeatedly served as a stake missionary. I am currently in a stake presidency as an assistant clerk. I am also a member of FAIR, an organization which specifically defends the LDS Church from critics by promoting research, which is easily viewed on the FAIR WIKI. In my opinion, the FAIR Wiki is simply the most outstanding religious apologetic database on the Internet, because it fearlessly addresses EVERY criticism of the LDS Church, cites the sources making the claims, and then provides research and links responding to the criticism, acknowledging when a conclusion is one of several theories (such as the location of Cumorah, for example) or a settled fact, as in the case of historical events. It is an amazing resource. And it is definitely "peer reviewed" for facts.

To think that I have taken a chameleon's skin to create my own religious view, outside mainstream LDS belief, is laughable. I am a conservative LDS defender, a believing Mormon who affirms the LDS Church as the only true Church on the face of the Earth in terms of authority and prophetic leadership.

It is my belief that Shawn is not afraid of me from an intellectual or debating standpoint. I believe he is afraid of what he becomes when he is out of control of a situation. People see that on his show constantly when someone calls in and stumps him, or makes a valid point. He gets loud, sarcastic, caustic. He tries to bully his way through the conversation. Listen to his chat with Van Hale. Set aside who was being rude to whom. Doesn't matter. Listen to the tone, responses, sarcasm.

Look back over the years to my specific interaction on air with Shawn. He consistently makes statements and promises to respond. Or like last time, he just re-affirms that he has banned me from calling in. Then he puts forward his crafted position, like this past June, where he wants to present himself to the world as the unafraid, unintimidated crusader against the false doctrines of Mormonism. He will let anyone on his show, not to debate, but to present their views and then review them with pinpoint insight and clarity. He specifically denied his own documented words by saying it is false that he would not allow people such as me to call into his program.

Well, those are my views. Shawn is a complicated person. But he is pretty easy to read, I think, as well. I believe he is a bully, and the last thing a bully wants is someone to step forward who is not able to be bullied or frightened by emotional manipulation.

So don't expect Shawn to have Dan Peterson, Michael Ash, Kerry Shirts, Van Hale or folks like me on the program. Ever. As my friend said, "Shawn hates you. You can see it in how he discusses you." For him to control his anger and sarcasm, I believe, would be impossible for him to manage. The funny thing is just about nobody watches his program. Seriously, nearly no one, relative to the potential audience, is watching. So even if he had a horrible showing, pretty much no one would know. Of course, it would be on disk forever, which may be his fear. Everyone could watch, and certainly it would make his claim of an "encyclopedic knowledge" of Mormonism would be shown for what it really is.

Anyway, I am done talking about Shawn. I never thought he would have me on his program, and it turns out I was right. Call it what you want, at least we Mormons do go talk with the folks who want to engage us about doctrine, history or whatever.


Anonymous said...

As a closet saved Mormon who remains LDS for personal reasons (but no longer participates in the Temple or other utterly unnecessary nonsense), I find both you and Shawn to be less than intellectually honest at times, even though in most doctrinal matters I'd be far closer to Shawn. There's a lot a baggage in LDS Mormonism and Shawn knows exactly where to fire his torpedoes for maximum impact. That said, I can hardly stand the guy and rarely watch his show for the reason already mentioned. I think it's good you're dropping the matter.

Anonymous said...


I have to admit I haven’t watched Shawn’s show for a long time. It doesn’t surprise me that he would say on the air that he wanted to debate LDS members on live TV and than later never follow though. This is all too typical of the man; say one thing than do another. The one trick pony he’s brought to town is tired and worn out.

The last time I watched his show I was shocked at how terrible he looked. The man is a walking heart attack. Also, during the show he only had two callers and much of the last half hour was spent reading emails. At the end of the show during the closing credits when the camera panned over the studio audience half the seat were empty. Some how the man doesn’t get it, no one cares.

Our little anti Mormon poster child has lost his luster.


Anonymous said...

I tried to listen to his show today but his domain has expired as of 3/22. Lynn

David Ferrell said...

Just a couple questions for you, Bob.

1. What does the LDS church believe is God's ultimate goal?

2. Do you feel more loved by God because he makes much of you or because he enables you to make much of Him?

Bob said...

1. To bring to pass the immortality and eternal life of man is God's mission, work and glory.

2. This question needs to be framed by saying these two choices do not represent what makes me feel MOST loved by God, which of course is the gift of His Son Jesus Christ, His Death, resurrection and willingness to shed his grace on me to forgive my sins and allow me to return to God.

Having said that God's personal investment in me shows me he loves me. I can't make anything of God, I could only come to recognize His greatness, and then only after He enlightened me through the power of the Holy Spirit to be able to recognize those things. I have nothing which can make God anything, except possibly to declare His greatness and goodness.

So your two choices really are wholly contingent on God making something out of me. So logically I should be most thankful for that, though once enlightened by the Spirit, I think a person is truly daunted and awed by the God who saved them, and we feel an obligation to give him the one thing he cannot create: our obedience.

Thanks for the question.

Anonymous said...

Of course he wouldn't let you on his show. He has banned you from it, STALKER!

A few months ago you vowed not to talk about him and yet you keep on. You are obsessed with the man!

Bob said...

Again, the generosity of the biased view.

I have tried to put Shawn behind me, as he is not a legitimate source of information for or against the LDS faith. I have pretty much ignored him other than 1 post in 18 months. The most recent posts were only to put in context Shawn's reneging on his promise(on TV) of allowing persons on his show to actually present their views themselves, and he to interact with them.

So I don't really know what to tell you. Stalker. Maybe a corn stalk. You know, out in my own field. I haven't seen Shawn in person or attempted to contact him to interact with him for a long time. I have no interest. I don't watch his show except very occasionally, and then never completely. He just adds nothing to the Mormon v. Non-Mormon debate. I respond at so much greater of a depth than his evidence or arguments, and I publish my notes and references online. Anyone who refuses to interact with the best evidence is nothing more than a polemicist. There is nothing scholarly about yelling at people, refusing to engage the arguments or evidence. And hate speech has a way of drawing everyone into the mud. He can play wherever he likes. Sorry if it is "stalker"-esque to report on breeches of one's word. I haven't written a blog article about SM for 2 months. No plans for the future to do so, either. He is repeating himself, and I don't need to respond. His arguments weren't good the first time, and he cites those shows as if they provided any facts. BTW, why did he not just close his previous blogs, but actually took the content off the Internet? Because he lost virtually every argument. It is not his forte', so he feels no compunction to keep his word about openly engaging in a fair manner the doctrines of Mormonism. He quickly learned that the defenders of Mormonism knew more than he did, and made him look bad in any exchange with them, so he has progressively isolated himself from interaction with Mormon apologists. I wear being "banned" as an award from Shawn. It is his acknowledgment that he needs to keep folks like me away from him.

In other words, Shawn is the stalker. He needs to keep track of his "enemies" (from his prospective), and have his staff keep us away.

So get your stalker analogy correct. SM stalker. Follows Mormons and Mormon leaders, constantly attacks them, attacks their faith, flying into the "Mecca of Mormonism" each week just to do so.

Remind me, what does a stalker do?
Peace and out.

Reza said...

I'm from Sweden and read with pleasure your blog. I laughed when I read the post. Is not Shawn a coward. Anyone with common sense realize that.

TheCruel said...

I've come to the same conclusions as you. All alleged LDS callers seems to be very uneducated or otherwise completely misinformed. Some of his callers say stuff like "we are saved by our works!" at very opportune times which happen to fall into his agenda so perfectly that I'm forced to conclude that they were fake callers.
He doesn't love the truth, and instead he is determined to condemn good individuals over non-issues. I mean, when it comes to DNA evidence against the Book of Mormon (and issues like that), I can fully understand the opposition. But if you're going to object to Mormons being Christians... it's just plain silly.

Tom said...

I have enjoyed your videos on YT. It is nice to see what lengths you will go to defend your cult.

Anonymous said...

I was raised lds and when i met Jesus i left the church for good. Bob, you can sound greatly intellectual as the greatest authors but the only people that agree with you are men that are content with following mans teachings. The only true church, Bob, is Jesus. Jesus is the church! something for you to ponder on...if you have to do all these church ordinances to make it to heaven isnt that the same as saying only mormons go 2 heaven? How ridiculous.

Anonymous said...

You are right Tom. Check out this link.

Bob said...

I seem to be receiving a lot of comments from "anonymous" lately. I will remind everyone that I require some name unless doing so would endanger your life or the item is neither controversial or polemical, which doesn't happen that much on a decidedly polemical blog like this.

So, if you have not seen your stuff post, odds are that I am holding it back or deleted it. Put your name on it.


Bob said...

I must confess, I have spent years doing research and responding to Shawn McCraney and many others because I am really just afraid they might be right! NOT!!!!

Look, closet "saved" Mormon, Jesus-Church non-LDS, whomever, the real cults are those nuts out there who have not a single clue about what it means to bring your beliefs in line with a thoughtful study of scripture. It is so pathetically self serving.

I have repeatedly posted on Hebrews 5:9:
Jesus is the savior of all those who obey him.

Throw in James 2:24:
"Ye see then how by works a man is justified, and not by faith only."

Then Romans 5:18:
" by the righteousness of one the free gift cam upon all men unto justification of life."

and of course Romans 6:16:
"Know ye not, that to whom ye yield yourselves servants to obey, his servants ye are to whom ye obey; whether of sin unto death, or of obedience unto righteousness."

And so remember how he started his letter to the Romans:
Romans 1:18:
"For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven agaainst all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness;"

So while the "faith only" and "once saved, always saved" or Calvinists may delude themselves that the Mormons have it wrong, the truth is the Mormons have it exactly correctly.

Oh, one last thing. Unlike every other supposedly "Christian" Church, LDS theology is in fact completely inclusive of everyone who has ever lived in terms of making the choice to accept the gift of salvation available. So by very definition it cannot be "ridiculous" like the nameless dude above stated. His faith, on the other hand, does limit who will ever have a chance at salvation, let alone dramatically limits the numbers of those saved.

Now THAT is truly ridiculous.

Peace, out.

Bob said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Bob said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Wendy said...

Bob, I love that my comment annoyed you so much. The only reason i didnt put my name on my comment is because i thought it did it automatically from when you sign into your google acct.You should keep it simple when you speak. Mormon is not the best way to be and it is certainly not the only way to get to heaven. That simple.

Anonymous said...

First of all I did not realize CAPS was on. Secondly, let us discus the priesthood. I came to Christ from an Orthodox Jewish background, my maternal grandfather is a Levi (by Jewish Law it gets passed down by patron lineage, thus I am not a Levi), According to Scripture Aaron, and his descendants are priests (Aaron is from the tribe of Levi), not the descendants of Joseph. in the fictional BOM, we read of Nephi from the line of Joseph serving as priest, explain this please! According to the Word of God Jerusalem was where God placed His name, and that is where His service was to be done, if this fictional Nephi was a priest, he would not have erected another temple in the BOM lands, when this would go against the Hebrew Faith? If Nephi was so godly, we would never have done this. Furthermore in Deut., and Rev. we read that we shall not add, or take away from the Word of God, and yet the subtitle of the BOM is ANOTHER TESTAMENT OF JESUS CHRIST, the word another means, according to Merriam-Webster "being one more in addition to one or more of the same kind". Furthermore How Can Joseph Smith the false prophet be a priest according to my families line, when he is not eve Jewish? A Jew once taught "since God's gracious gifts and calling are irrevocable" (Romans 11:29 HCSB). Again a Jew taught "1I say the truth in Christ, I lie not, my conscience also bearing me witness in the Holy Ghost,

2That I have great heaviness and continual sorrow in my heart.

3For I could wish that myself were accursed from Christ for my brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh:

4Who are Israelites; to whom pertaineth the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service of God, and the promises;

5Whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God blessed for ever. Amen. (Romans 9)
So thus Christ can not go against His word can He? 19God is not a man, that he should lie; neither the son of man, that he should repent: hath he said, and shall he not do it? or hath he spoken, and shall he not make it good? (Numbers 23)
Furthermore, There is not three gods, nor was Elohim promoted to his position of God by being obedient, dying and promoted to God. The Hebrew word Echad, means one in the plural sense. Example "The two shall be one flesh" in Genesis 2:24, God is ONE GOD IN THREE SEPARATE BEINGS, God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit. God existed before creation, and Christ and Satan are not brothers, Christ is not a created being, according to Scripture "In these last days, He has spoken to us by [His] Son, whom He has appointed heir of all things and through whom He made the universe." (Hebrews 2 HCSB), "15 He is the image of the invisible God,
the firstborn over all creation;

16 because by Him everything was created,

in heaven and on earth, the visible and the invisible,

whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities—

all things have been created through Him and for Him.

17 He is before all things, and by Him all things hold together." Colossians 2, HCSB), thus being said, Satan, a fallen angel, a created being, is not brothers with God the Son. Furthermore, a "church" claiming to be founded on the truth of God, would never say such vile things in regards to coloured people, as this does not match up to what God's word say. Christ would have looked middle eastern, when He was on earth, given the fact He is Jewish. On top of that there are coloured priests in the true Aaronic priesthood, they look like Arabs, because they are Jews from Yemen, furthermore, there are priests who are dark skinned as they are of Sephardic origin, not Ashkenazic. So there you go proof that your cult is not true! Please make a response via email

Bob said...

To my anonymous Jewish commentator:

I get the feeling you were not a very active Jew, right? I don't mean this as an insult, rather you display a lack of understanding of the Pentateuch.

Moses taught that, prior to the priesthood being given to Aaron and Levi, that it was God's will that all Israel be made a "kingdom of priests", (Ex 19:6), the exact sentiment taught by Christ to make believers "Kings and Priests to God and his father" (Rev 1:6, repeated in Rev 5:10 & Rev 20:6). Here is a list from the Shields-research website of Israelite locations where sacrifices were performed:
2. Here is a list of the major Israelite cultic centers, shrines, locations for the tabernacle, and temples, which were in operation during biblical times, based on archaeological and/or textual evidence:

Mosaic Tabernacle {-13C}
Gilgal {-13C}
Ebal {-13C}
Shechem {-12C}
Shiloh {-12C to -11C}
Kirjath-jearim {-11C}
Gibeon (-11C to -10C)
Megiddo (-10C)
Jerusalem(-10C to 1C)
Arad {-10C to -7C}
Lachish {-10C to -8C}
Dan {-10C to -8C}
Bethel (-9C)
Beer-Sheba {-8C to -7C}
Elephantine/Aswan {-6C to -4C}
Shechem/Mt. Gerizim (Samaritan)
Leontopolis/Tel Yehudia by Onias (near Heliopolis) {-160 to 73} which replaced/united several other Jewish temples in Egypt

Note that in Elephantine, we have a probably valid claim of a second temple run by Levitical priests.

I do think you miss the point of God restricting the priesthood. Such restrictions are God's decision, regardless of how he qualifies it.

The Melchizedek priesthood is superior to the Levitical priesthood. Margaret Barker, non-LDS expert on OT temple use for conferring the Melchizedek priesthood, has written extensively on the subject. Since sacrifices were being made by holy men prior to the conferral of the Aaronic priesthood (Abraham, Moses, Jethro, etc.), some priesthood authority did exist legitimizing such sacrifices. The Book of Mormon claims this priesthood for its officials (Alma 13:6-20)which it makes clear is the Melchizedek priesthood (Alma 6:14). So offering sacrifices does not violate the Aaronic priesthood's charge any more than David eating from the alter of the temple violated the sanctity of the Temple.

Lastly, your theological theories are purely based on an eisogetic, or self-serving, tip to theology, not the Bible. You don't come away reading the Bible with the Trinity. You do, however, come away with the LDS view of the Godhead. I can provide dozens of scholars, and have, who will say the Trinity is not found anywhere in the Old Testament, and is at best only hinted at in the New Testament. One hit scriptural supports don't provide any actual support of your doctrine of Satan as simply a fallen angel. Let's place your tangential citation to the explicit teachings of the Bible.

Job 1:6 Who comes to God? All of his sons. And who is among them? Satan.
Hebrews 12:9 Who is the father of Spirits? God the Father.
Does Jesus have a spirit? Yes. Are satan and his angels spirits, as are men? Yes. Are we humans spirit brothers of Jesus? Yes

So, does that make Satan the spirit brother of Jesus? Yes, it does. But that means nothing.

Thanks for writing.

Geemee said...

God is Spirit as God's Word say's, Never flesh, yet Power-mongers like LDS listens to a lying Con-man Smith's word over God's Word that their works is better that faith in God.
Satan deceived Smith to change who God is, who Jesus is and who a Christian is. What an attack from Satan with Smith behide him to call all Churches an abomination to strike at God from the heart of Mormonism where Satan sit's and laughs how stupid God and man are while Mormon souls awaken after death takes them in the hands of a laughing Devil and his hot temper to their intrusion because Hell was prepared for Satan and it's Demons.
As time goes I have seen deceiving artwork of Smith being changed from a Smith hiding his lying face in a hat to a Smith deciphering with no hat around when conjuring up stories.
Smith loved changing the good into bad. Changing burial papers of a dead Priest to the conjured Book of Abraham. What a low-down liar.
City names he has changed there names to deceive like,
Jacobsburg to Jacobugath.
Tecumseh to Teancum.
Rama to Ramah and many more. Pure conjured up slop.
Do you hear Satan laughing? If not then Satan has his fingers in your ears till death pulls them off. Your going to regret not taking the time to honor the truth that is in the Holy Bible that Satan don't want you to hear or see.
I know in your eyes Satan has changed me into a horrible nasty thing and that the Bible is full of garbage. That's to be expected because that is the way Satan Hates.and works which Mormonism much follow. But remember the choice is yours to listen to God or the conjured up god of the Book of Mormon.

Choose well, Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it. Matthew 7:14

Anonymous said...

The church is great!.... until you really need it and then they kick you out like if you are trash and then you realize that Jesus is not with you, oh wait! then you realize Jesus is not there and you have you remember he is always with you and HE is all you need. So, Bob, you sound exactly like I did. Just try not following the rules and you will see how it goes. It is not so pretty. It is pretty nasty, and do you know why? Because everything comes from a nasty person who was a sex addict and a liar. I had to get out to find Jesus. Try, just try....Tania

Bob said...

Sorry for your experiences, but I am not really anything like you. I don't mean to insult you, but I learned long ago the leaders of the Church are fallible men, so when things don't go how I might want with them, I am OK with that. I still believe the priesthood of God is only available in the LDS Church, and I have had irrefutable experiences with it which confirms that. Furthermore, I have had many spiritual experiences of other things which reinforce my faith. And I would hope, if nothing else, the many years of my blog posts where I take on all issues and exam them at great depth, documents that I am not suffering from a "blind obedience" type of faith. It is easy to believe when you get at the core issues. Confusion, on the other hand, leads to sadness.
Again, sorry for your experiences. It is hard to have faith when you think you know better than God what experiences would be best for you. Good luck with your journey.

Bob said...

I am always curious where folks like you come from. You start by quoting John 4:24, the updated, correct English translation, I might add, but then you fall back into the erroneous interpretation of the verse which NO SCHOLARS ANYWHERE would confirm. The passage is not saying God has no body. It is not even addressing the issue of physical nature at all. It is stating that God's nature is a Spiritual nature, just as ours must be if we are to worship him as God desires us to worship. Since you start with that error as the basis of your argument against the LDS position, of course everything else looks wrong. But you are the one who is wrong. Pick up "Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics", page 270 for an exact explanation, or you could use "The Translators Handbook on the Gospel of John", published by the United Bible Societies, page 122-123, or you could look up Roger's and Roger's "The New Linguistic and Exegetical Key to the Greek New Testament", published by Zondervan, page 189. I trust all of these highly regarded, non-LDS Protestant and/or Evangelical textbooks are sufficient to prove to you "emphasizes the character and nature" of God, the same, btw, as John 1:1 shows the nature of Jesus.
The other stuff is old anti-Mormon junk long since responded to. No time to waste. Get your theological house in order first, and if you still have some twisted logic which correctly incorporates the right understanding of the nature of God as taught in the Bible, which is also consistent with LDS views, then we can address these bogus issues. But you have much bigger fish to fry, theologically, with your own errors that you should not be casting stones anywhere else.
Thanks again,