LDS II: The Mormons

[Janadele]

Janadele and Skyrider44, how can you know that your Scriptures are the Word of God...

Vortigern, We all have such knowledge within us, our Spirit knows... just listen.

 

[Akhenaten]

Truth remains truth regardless of how many times the foolish and the ignorant rant and rave against it.

Indeed.

And yet they cling to their silly superstitions and proselytise them at us anyway.

Go figure.

 

[Craig4]

Vortigern, We all have such knowledge within us, our Spirit knows... just listen.

Odd, my spirit knows when it is having smoke blown up its ass.

 

[Slowvehicle]

As you keep repeating Craig. Do you think continually asserting incorrect opinions will somehow make them correct? Not so. Truth remains truth regardless of how many times the foolish and the ignorant rant and rave against it.

...and the truth is that Jesus, said to be said to be the christ, is said to have specifically repudiated the idea of marriage in heaven...in the xianist bible. (Nor is he ever said to have said a single word about homosexuality.)

If your "scriptures" claim otherwise, your "scriptures" disagree with the xianist bible. Which is the subject, in a thread entitled "CHRISTIAN SCRIPTURES".

 

[Craig4]

My irony meter just turned gay.

Are we talking talking like male bridal dress consultant gay or lesbian rebuilding a carburetor in her bathtub gay?

 

[Foster Zygote]

As you keep repeating Craig. Do you think continually asserting incorrect opinions will somehow make them correct? Not so. Truth remains truth regardless of how many times the foolish and the ignorant rant and rave against it.

That's your defense mechanism against facts that you don't like. Just as with the transparently obvious fraud of the Book Of Abraham, anything that doesn't affirm the magical beliefs that you've convinced yourself must be true is automatically classified as false.

 

[Slowvehicle]

Vortigern, We all have such knowledge within us, our Spirit knows... just listen.

Even though your "scriptures" contradict the xianist canon (the "CHRISTIAN SCRIPTURES"), "your spirit" knows that youir "scriptures" are the "word" of 'god'?

I thought it was not possible for there to be contradictions, or alterations, in "eternal law"...

 

[Foster Zygote]

Are we talking talking like male bridal dress consultant gay or lesbian rebuilding a carburetor in her bathtub gay?

Just as long as it isn't ambiguously gay. I like my beer cold, my TV loud, and my homosexuals fa-lam-ing.

 

[Shalamar]

Vortigern, We all have such knowledge within us, our Spirit knows... just listen.

Nope. Terribly sorry. All just made up nonsense.

I'm not interested in deluded cults.

 

[Craig4]

This thread is putting me in the mood to break my own rule about not engaging missionaries or proselytizers unless they engage me first. I know where I can find some Mormon missionaries and I have to go to the train station tomorrow anyway. Yes a conversation about the past physical culture of the Americas might be interesting.

 

[desertgal]

Vortigern, We all have such knowledge within us, our Spirit knows... just listen.

"The spirit hears what it wants to hear, and disregards the rest..."

 

[Akhenaten]

"Lie, lie, lie"

 

[I Ratant]

This thread is putting me in the mood to break my own rule about not engaging missionaries or proselytizers unless they engage me first. I know where I can find some Mormon missionaries and I have to go to the train station tomorrow anyway. Yes a conversation about the past physical culture of the Americas might be interesting.

.
I would ask them about the Pre-Columbian museum at Salt Lake City... a continent wide civilization should have left -some- heaps of artifacts...
Maybe an alcove in the museum there?
A cabinet in a hallway?
An index card file?
One 4 x 6 card listing all the artifacts?

 

[Fishstick]

If I wanted to read fiction about non-omnipotent gods,messiahs with severe drawbacks and creation stories that make no sense, I'd go back to reading Discworld. Same thing, more entertaining.

 

[MikeG]

"The spirit hears what it wants to hear, and disregards the rest..."

I've generally found that Floyd and Zeppelin lyrics explain just about everything.

.........with an occasional smattering of Simon and Garfunkel!

 

[skyrider44]

I don't know if there's a formal term for it; but concentrating on a single word in someone's argument that isn't even central to the argument . . .

It is central to the argument because he has misidentified the institution that is an integral part of the discussion. Setting the Latin aside, that is what is known as a cheap shot.

Mature debaters refer to their opponents/institutions by their correct names.

 

[Akhenaten]

It is central to the argument because he has misidentified the institution that is an integral part of the discussion. Setting the Latin aside, that is what is known as a cheap shot.

Mature debaters refer to their opponents/institutions by their correct names.

I prefer "Cult of Mormonosity" myself.

 

[abaddon]

It is central to the argument because he has misidentified the institution that is an integral part of the discussion. Setting the Latin aside, that is what is known as a cheap shot.

Mature debaters refer to their opponents/institutions by their correct names.

I don@ see why. CJCLDS precisely matches the definition of a club.

 

[RoboTimbo]

Mature debaters refer to their opponents/institutions by their correct names.

So as not to run afoul of the mature debating rule, should we refer to belonging as a "choice"?

 

[Slowvehicle]

It is central to the argument because he has misidentified the institution that is an integral part of the discussion. Setting the Latin aside, that is what is known as a cheap shot.

Mature debaters refer to their opponents/institutions by their correct names.

It is NOT the "central argument" because "he" has pointed out, repeatedly, in a thread entitled "CHRISTIAN SCRIPTURES" that at least two (2) doctrines of whatever-you-want-to-call-the-people-who-decided-to-alter-the-xianist-bible-and-follow-Joe-Smith either directly contradict, or are utterly unsupported by the canonic xianist bible (or, for that matter, the Deuterocanon).

Are you claiming that your mob is not a "group of persons organized for a social...or other purpose"? (RHWUD2, p.391)

Does this mean that as a "mature debater", you will henceforth and forevermore, on this and any other forum, abjure the use of the inherently pejorative (and attestedly untrue) construct "...choose to become faithless..."?

I offered you a deal--which you ignored. I know that I would keep my end, if you say but the word. What say you?