Typical LDS re-shift. A spammer starts an anti-FR site. Jim addresses it head-on. Who does Reno believe to be the instigator? The anti-FR spammer? (Nope) Instead he puts the collar on Jim: "Surely you knew the firestorm this thread would create."
Instead of Reno holding the spammer site accountable, he blames Jim as the "creator" of a firestorm.
This is the perfect microcosm of what's been happening for 179 years. Before any Christian ever even knew of the word "Mormon," the founding vision of Joseph Smith was: "they [other sects/churches] were ALL wrong; and the Personage who addressed me said that their creeds were an abomination in his sight; that those professors were ALL corrupt" (from Pearl of Great Price, Joseph Smith-History 1:19).
This was never just left as Joseph Smith's opinion. A later generation of Mormons elected to enshrine this statement into the Mormon Scripture "Hall of Fame" -- they canonized it as God's opinion of all non-Mormon sects/churches/members.
LDS leaders then went on to press Christians that they all apostatized -- all, that is, except a 2,000-year-old apostle named John and three Nephite disciples even older than John (they said these people are still wandering the earth somewhere).
The original "anti" was Joseph Smith. He was "anti-Christian." He was against the Christian church, claiming they were wrong, 100% corrupt and embraced 100% putrid creeds. But what do Mormons do? They re-shift the focus. No, it's not Joseph Smith and his leaders who followed who were the protagonists raising up firestorms everywhere they went; 'twas these "antis."
That's been the Mormon narrative all along. It doesn't mean that Christians have never reacted badly in these exchanges. Some/many have. That's also part of history.
But we see in this thread a microcosm of the dynamics involved.
I had no knowledge of the anti-FR spamer or his site until this thread, as was the case w/ many here, thus the genesis, or instigation (if you want to call it that) of the issue from our part. I, as well as others, have noted our dismay for the conduct this guy, thus putting the “collar” on him, not Jim. Jim made some assertions that inferred a wrong scenario. His assertions were not totally clear, thus I was seeking clarification.
Not sure what your problem is here other that to insert yourself into a discussion you have no party to (unless you claim to speak for Jim). You speak of spam, but yet that's exactly what I would classify your post as. Most of your post had nothing to do w/ the matter at hand other than to spam your dislike for Joseph Smith, etc.
I admire this board & the things Jim has done for the board & all of us. Jim & I don't always agree, but I respect his opinions & the opportunity to voice my opinions on various matters here. I'm indebted to the board. Great work has been done here throughout the years & I appreciate that. The perception was that there was a concerted effort on the part of the LDS contingent to bring down the FR. That assertion was clearly erroneous. I was simply asking for further clarification from Jim on the matter.
If you claim to be Jim's spokesperson, do so. Otherwise, quit spamming.