LogGrad98
Well-Known Member
Contributor
20-21 Award Winner
2022 Award Winner
2023 Award Winner
2024 Award Winner
Dude, in 1564 tries it was bound to happen.
This guy is Mormon?
- Thread starter Beantown
- Start date
Dude, in 1564 tries it was bound to happen.
If the test was based on how you treat people in this life, how come anyone who hasn't heard the gospel (most people) is eligible for redemption in the next? That would make this life completely obsolete.
Stating the biggest reason we are here is to gain a body, is circular reasoning... I won't touch on that... Is it possible to be here and not have a body? Thats like passing half the test just by showing up to class.
I do think the gaining knowledge thing has merit... by why then is the learned cynic damned? He had obtained significant knowledge to reasonably doubt the workings of god... So in following one of God's commandments he has broken another.
I think it's unlikely that Mormons have that many more pieces of the puzzle then any other religion. I believe any furthering of celestial knowledge they have... is the result of recent translation and not having the opportunity for doctrine to be tainted. I think we interpret the prophecy of the gathering of 12 tribes, as a gathering of many nations under one doctrine... I feel a more likely interpretation is the gathering of many doctrines and creating one nation.
Thanks for the discussion though...
Gyp Rosetti
Banned
Sounds like a bunch of hocus pocus to me.
A likely outcome...
Logic usually just falls flat dealing with any religion.
From New Testament scriptures alone, Jesus taught that there was a relation between believing and trying to live by his teachings, and actually coming to understand them. Encouraged folks to seek, said they would find. It'll always just look like hocus pocus until you choose faith.
Some folks just choose not to have that faith, and some even seem self-satisfied with that path. Nothing any "religious" person can say will make any difference so long as that is the case.
Funny thing about Christians. They keep hoping others will change. Saying prayers and stuff. Even fundamentalist Christians with ideas of a hell of everlasting torment for those who don't confess Christ in this life will still pray for their unbelieving loved kids/good spouses/parents/friends and hope for them, even after they've "gone on".
Last edited:
Gyp Rosetti
Banned
Mmmmm...I just burned my tongue.
LogGrad98
Well-Known Member
Contributor
20-21 Award Winner
2022 Award Winner
2023 Award Winner
2024 Award Winner
Religion cannot be proven on either side of the argument. No matter how hard anyone tries, they cannot provide objective evidence there is a God, and no matter how hard anyone tries they cannot provide objective evidence there isn't one.
I just thought I would add my amazing grasp of the obvious to help bolster this conversation.
Carry on.
I just thought I would add my amazing grasp of the obvious to help bolster this conversation.
Carry on.
Obviously I would think someone that disagreed with me on a/some passage(s) of scripture does not understand my point of view. I am generally willing to discuss it as long as it's a respectable discussion. If I understand it one way, why would I think I am wrong at the start of a discussion? There have been many passages of scripture I have come to understand better, or in a different way based on conversations with other people. I have generally never changed my mind on anything when it is more of an argument than discussion. I don't know if that answers your question.
It can be proven, it just has to be proven one person at a time. It also depends on what you think objective evidence means. Personally I think everything on the earth that is not man-made is objective evidence that there is a God.
Just adding my amazing disregard for what you think is obvious to keep the conversation going.
Safetydan
Well-Known Member
It didn't really answer my question but, you made some good points. I tend to think that just because somebody disagrees with my point of view doesn't necessarily mean that they don't understand my Point of View. In fact, I feel like it's a requirement to understand a large portion of my POV in order to effectively disagree with me, and vice versa, of course.
Last edited:
GVC
Well-Known Member
What a sanctimonious prick. Maybe you should pull your head out of your ***, you know, because not everyone fits these ridiculous self-serving stereotypes.
You could be the really sanctimonious person here. Is it important for you to believe you're some exception to the rule, because you fancy yourself to be reasonable or logical on your own terms? Inventing systems of belief which might be called ridiculous or self-serving, "sanctimonious", or judgmental of others didn't end when folks first begain not believing other people's religions.
You take your place in the panopoly of hate when you're so touchy you take it so personally that others think they're "right" in what they believe that you just have to roll out invective like this. A system of belief that can sustain our own self-esteem or feeling of self-worth when we realize we're not appreciated or supported very well by some others is useful. Some call it essential to being a "grown-up". It means you really don't just have to blow off when you realize others are smugly believing they're better than you are, which is in fact generally what "others" always do. They have whatever they believe, and they think their belief makes them "better" somehow. Of course if they didn't, they'd be changing it right now. . . So if they think they know what your belief is, they'll imagine theirs is better somehow, or quickly re-invent that fantasy right now.
You should go get yourself some Ambrose Bierce quotes to improve your sense of humor. What I said is descriptive of Christian belief based on the teaching of Jesus. He was not even the first to use this kind of self-conscious tautological "judgment". And of course, almost any other human belief system will find support in the psyche as adherents progressively act out their belief. It's human nature to justify our actions and become mentally invested in believing we do good.
Belief, or disbelief, will tend to follow what we choose to do, leaving others who don't do or "believe" as we do, despised or judged in our wake. . . .
The other, or opposite trend, sometimes called "repentance" in religious terms, or adopting a new ideal of reality in secular terms, takes effort, deliberate effort, after recognisiing something we don't like about what we're doing.
Now, having obviously outdone even myself in this kind of sanctimonious acrimony about all other humans, I think I'll repent and just be a humble unquestioning believer in Jesus and specialize in contructing some kind of frame of mind where I can unconditionally love others, or imagine I do. . . . even you. . . . or at least laugh at myself. But the really sad thing is, I just don't see any way people can really escape being this way. It's the way we are.
Even Ambrose Bierce didn't escape from himself, although it's rumored he tried to, with elaborate efforts. And, seeing that, I long ago grew up and realized how useful it is to fortify our belief/faith with devout christian principles such as realizing that "faith" really isn't supposed to be used as a weopon of self-righteous hypocrisy. Admittedly, this is an advanced concept most "christians" don't pick up on real quick, and in fact a failing that has cost millions of unbelievers their lives. And man, sometimes I wish secular humanists or atheists had an element like that in their creeds. Could have saved millions of believers their lives in the past one hundred years.
Last edited: