LDS

Status
Not open for further replies.
desertgal said:
Well, the problem with the splinter analogy is that, according to rcronk's own argument, god WOULDN'T pull the splinter. He'd require the child to do it for himself or another human to do it. If the splinter remained and festered, that would be the failure of mankind, not a lack of benevolence from god. Ultimately, it's in the child's best interest to leave the splinter in, because god is farsighted, and we all can learn something from a festering splinter, even if we can't understand that due to our mortal short sightedness.

That IS the argument, yes?
Click to expand...

Yes, the child needs to learn it's lesson to the full.:(
 
RandFan said:
In some cultures the fact that trees grew with no visible construction of the trees was evidence that either tiny people or spirits lived in the trees and built them from the inside out.
Click to expand...

Wait, are you telling me that's NOT how trees grow???

All that time I spent making tiny goblets for the tree spirits to drink from were WASTED?!?!
 
rcronk said:
Thanks all for your replies. I'll summarize what I'm hearing from you all:

1. rcronk thinks God exists and is omnipotent and merciful and kind.

2. Horrible stuff happens.

3. If we were omnipotent and kind, we'd stop the horrible stuff from happening - and we're not even close to being perfect.

4. Since God doesn't stop it from happening, He's either a disgusting monster or He doesn't exist.

5. rcronk claims that God doesn't intervene because our eternal progression is more important that our temporary comfort - that our eternal progression is in fact the whole point of our time here on earth. (And rcronk thinks all children and those in need should be taken care of by us.)

6. Yeah... but if we were omnipotent and kind, we'd stop the horrible stuff from happening - and we're not even close to being perfect.

I think we both understand each other's positions and we'll have to agree to disagree for now since the arguments are starting to repeat, but I do thank each one of you for making me think through my beliefs today and I've gotten more insight into them because of you.
Click to expand...


Do you believe god is also omniscient?
 
RandFan said:
In short, you are fitting reality to your bias. That's a primary job of brains. To rationalize the world. Let's go back to the split brain experiments. A subject is given an instruction to the part of the brain that isn't involved with speech. The instruction is to get up and walk to the door. When the other side of the brain is asked why he or she did that the subject will typically rationalize an explanation. "I just felt like it".
Click to expand...
While I'm on the subject, the perception that you, your "self" is a single thing is just an illusion. We are composed of different intentions and even different personalities (no I'm not talking split personalities). Most of us at some time in our life will suffer some degree of neurosis because we can and will hold contradictory beliefs. Back to the split brain patients. For some of these patients, one side of the brain is atheist and the other is theist.

Split brain with one half atheist and one half theist - YouTube

 
Last edited:
rcronk said:
For me, eternal progression means gaining the capacity to love more, becoming less selfish, more patient, more kind, more respectful, more wise, more happy, etc. I don't follow the rest of your post.
Click to expand...

I think of these as life lessons experienced by everyone, they are part of growing up a human being. Some succeed better than others, but it happens whether you follow a religion or not. Fortunately many people do learn from life, they gain experience, grow and mature, making the progression into good people, but the people who deny that pitiful child food are not well rounded or compassionate people, so they are not likely to learn from the lesson of the starving child that you say god wants to teach them. They will carry on as they always have, with no lesson learned.

Meanwhile we still have a child in agony, and a lot of good people around the world upset by the injustice, trying to help however they can. It's no surprise that it triggers discussions like this where people can have genuine difficulty in understanding why others are certain that the child's agony is the choice of a god.

I am an atheist so I am not angry at any god. I really want to understand, and I admire you for being here and making real attempts to explain it, I just seem to be limited by a logical mind that 'cannot compute' the logic of a god letting a child starve. I'd really like to understand, but maybe it's a limitation of my brain, or my compassion that I only see pain and suffering in that photo, not a lesson for eternal progression :(
 
Anecdotes is evidence, and should be treated as such. Not disregarded as so many on this forum chose to do, in favor of waiting for a answer that might come too late.

I have been following LDS for a long time. I have chosen that I have found many good friends and nice people there and I respect their beliefs. I cannot say I believe in them myself fully though. I do find it all very interesting though. And the real world that most people seem unwilling to grasp, might be stranger than we think.

That is why I like the approach of just being kind. No reason to trample someone in the belief that your own truth might be the best thing for everyone else. Coming here of course, is an indication that you are ready to have those beliefs shaken, and I have learned much from coming to this forum. Critical thinking is bound to lead to more truths, if you truly chose to think critically about all facts. But faith remains faith and facts remain facts when all debates are said and done.
 
Last edited:
kblood said:
Anecdotes is evidence, and should be treated as such. Not disregarded as so many on this forum chose to do, in favor of waiting for a answer that might come too late.

I have been following LDS for a long time. I have chosen that I have found many good friends and nice people there and I respect their beliefs. I cannot say I believe in them myself fully though. I do find it all very interesting though. And the real world that most people seem unwilling to grasp, might be stranger than we think.

That is why I like the approach of just being kind. No reason to trample someone in the belief that your own truth might be the best thing for everyone else. Coming here of course, is an indication that you are ready to have those beliefs shaken, and I have learned much from coming to this forum. Critical thinking is bound to lead to more truths, if you truly chose to think critically about all facts. But faith remains faith and facts remain facts when all debates are said and done.
Click to expand...
I agree with your post but have to take a bit of exception. Sure anecdotes are evidence. Just not very good evidence. First there are limits to our ability to fully understand and comprehend reality (see Epistemology). Second, people want to believe all kinds of different things and tend to see the evidence that confirms what they believe. So we have anecdotes of alien anal probes and anecdotes of psychics and anecdotes of seeing Bigfoot and leprechauns. Finally, the brain is a very falible device. It's amazing in what it can do but on average most people aren't that good at discerning truth of many things. Add ego and self serving and you've got a recipe for disaster.

To paraphrase Aaron Ra, if I saw a full sized living velociraptor walking down my street I'd believe that anecdote. But if after a few days there was no further evidence of the animal I'd consider that I could have been deluded. Oddly enough people are deluded without even knowing it. Some people even believe that they know they are god because of parietal lobe seizures and until a doctor lets them in on the secret they don't know any better (see temporal lobes of god).

There might be a god but we know far too much about how people fool themselves and/or the limits of our knowledge and brain pathology to rely on 3rd party anecdotes of anything extraordinary without evidence.

Somebody tells you they found Bigfoot and need investment money to share the secret with the world, do me a favor, get some evidence.
 
RandFan said:
I agree with your post but have to take a bit of exception. Sure anecdotes are evidence. Just not very good evidence. First there are limits to our ability to fully understand and comprehend reality (see Epistemology). Second, people want to believe all kinds of different things and tend to see the evidence that confirms what they believe. So we have anecdotes of alien anal probes and anecdotes of psychics and anecdotes of seeing Bigfoot and leprechauns. Finally, the brain is a very falible device. It's amazing in what it can do but on average most people aren't that good at discerning truth of many things. Add ego and self serving and you've got a recipe for disaster.

To paraphrase Aaron Ra, if I saw a full sized living velociraptor walking down my street I'd believe that anecdote. But if after a few days there was no further evidence of the animal I'd consider that I could have been deluded. Oddly enough people are deluded without even knowing it. Some people even believe that they know they are god because of parietal lobe seizures and until a doctor lets them in on the secret they don't know any better (see temporal lobes of god).

There might be a god but we know far too much about how people fool themselves and/or the limits of our knowledge and brain pathology to rely on 3rd party anecdotes of anything extraordinary without evidence.

Somebody tells you they found Bigfoot and need investment money to share the secret with the world, do me a favor, get some evidence.
Click to expand...

Yes, treating anecdotes as evidence should not make it more than that. Anecdotes alone treated as conclusive evidence can be a slippery slope indeed.
 
Janadele said:
The Spirit children of our Heavenly Father who are waiting to come to this earth to obtain their mortal bodies will all have the opportunity to do so before this earth is celestialized.
Click to expand...

Before the earth is WHAT?

gabeygoat said:
Ah, I hate to be the one to do this, but is it at all possible to get Robin her own thread? This doesn't really seem to have anything to do with LDS?
Click to expand...

Seconded.
 
A question to RandFan:

The initiator of this thread is, as you probably have seen, claiming a hollow earth theory in another thread. Can you, as an ex-Mormon, cleansed in the fires of rationality, confirm or falsify whether this is actual Mormon doctrine, Rand?
 
Derail on Near Death Experiences split to here.

The topic of this thread is LDS, please try to keep to it.

Thank you!
Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: zooterkin
 
GeneMachine said:
A question to RandFan:

The initiator of this thread is, as you probably have seen, claiming a hollow earth theory in another thread. Can you, as an ex-Mormon, cleansed in the fires of rationality, confirm or falsify whether this is actual Mormon doctrine, Rand?
Click to expand...

Yes, please, RandFan.
I find this thread a mine of information.
 
She also popped in on the 911 forum and spouted Steven Jones trutherisms.

Way up this thread I mentioned using ground penetrating radar to find the vault the plates were returned to in the west face of Hill Cumorah.

A decade or two ago a good chunk of the west side was landscaped for the Pageant. Huge light and sound poles were installed. I wonder if the church was worried that the vault would be accidentally rediscovered before its time?
 
GeneMachine said:
A question to RandFan:

The initiator of this thread is, as you probably have seen, claiming a hollow earth theory in another thread. Can you, as an ex-Mormon, cleansed in the fires of rationality, confirm or falsify whether this is actual Mormon doctrine, Rand?
Click to expand...

pakeha said:
Yes, please, RandFan.
I find this thread a mine of information.
Click to expand...
I know of the tradition. The lost tribes of Israel are considered there. I honestly don't know if it is official doctrine. I doubt it. In any event, the history of the Israelites as told in various ancient texts is largely fictitious and the lost tribes probably a way to inflate their historic numbers.

I did find links on line but nothing official so far.

ETA: Hold on, looks like there was something in the BofM & D&C. Good luck wading through the crap.
 
Last edited:
RandFan said:
ETA: Hold on, looks like there was something in the BofM & D&C. Good luck wading through the crap.
Click to expand...

My gut feeling is that you won't find any mention of the hollow earth in either book, or any statement that it's official doctrine because, well, it isn't.

The only connection on that site seems to be the fact that a link to something about the Book of Mormon and D&C appears on a page which also happens to mention the hollow earth. I don't see that the author is claiming a connection?

The best connection I could find was what I said in this post, starting with John Cleve Symmes, with a revival around the turn of the 20th century:
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=8929343&postcount=47
 
Thanks, RandFan. I will, however, not explore the depths of that site. One quick glance had me hiding away behind my bookshelves... ;)
 
Thanks for the links, RandFan and Pup.
At the end of the day it seems the hollow earth isn't LDS doctrine, then.
 
Pup said:
My gut feeling is that you won't find any mention of the hollow earth in either book, or any statement that it's official doctrine because, well, it isn't.

The only connection on that site seems to be the fact that a link to something about the Book of Mormon and D&C appears on a page which also happens to mention the hollow earth. I don't see that the author is claiming a connection?

The best connection I could find was what I said in this post, starting with John Cleve Symmes, with a revival around the turn of the 20th century:
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=8929343&postcount=47
Click to expand...
Pup, who is the expert authority here on Mormonism. Me or you? Okay, it's me. Don't do that! :o

I actually figured that if anyone were to correct me it would be you. :) I should have looked a bit closer. Mea culpa and thanks.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom