{"id":260,"date":"2005-09-15T05:49:00","date_gmt":"2005-09-15T11:49:00","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.ourthoughts.ca\/?p=260"},"modified":"-0001-11-30T00:00:00","modified_gmt":"-0001-11-30T07:00:00","slug":"minimalistic","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.ourthoughts.ca\/2005\/09\/15\/minimalistic\/","title":{"rendered":"Minimalistic"},"content":{"rendered":"
I made a comment<\/a> over at another blog regarding President Hinckley’s challenge. Someone got ruffled by it and stated the following. Since there have been 45 comments since mine and it’s been nearly a day, I thought I’d post my response here instead of threadjacking.<\/p>\n …your determination to popularize the view that President Hinckley has not asked us to read the Book of Mormon by the end of the year rests on an extremely minimalistic and legalistic reading of his words.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n After two and a half years, it seems my real-life reputation for semantics has finally caught up to my Bloggernacle reputation. It sure is nice to be recognised, even if it is with such an obvious statement. I think my new motto should be: superfluousness is for the birds.<\/p>\n Oh, and for the record, I am not sure I’d go so far as to say that commenting a month apart on two different blogs on this topic qualifies as determination. Okay. I concede. It may have been three blogs. I haven’t been keeping track. It wouldn’t be the first topic I’ve commented two or three times about. Perhaps this one must be unique.<\/p>\n I made a comment over at another blog regarding President Hinckley’s challenge. Someone got ruffled by it and stated the … Continue reading Minimalistic<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-260","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized"],"yoast_head":"\n