Multiple personalities?

The upper-crust forum for scholarly, polite, and respectful discussions only. Heavily moderated. Rated G.
_JAK
_Emeritus
Posts: 1593
Joined: Sun Jan 14, 2007 4:04 pm

Post by _JAK »

twinkie wrote:Marg,
What is your evidence that I don't have evidence? If I refuse to give you my evidence, you still don't have evidence that I don't have any evidence. You can just assume that I don't have evidence.

That being said, honestly, I don't have any evidence. LOL. I do have a sense of humor though. No, I don't have any evidence of that either.


Obfuscating comment, twinkie.

If you have evidence, and make some claim, it’s your obligation to present the evidence. Failure to do so is failure.

Refusing to give evidence you claim to have is, in itself, evidence that you don’t have anything to present.

Marg is correct in asking you to support with evidence.

It’s a valid conclusion that you have no evidence if you present none.

You can “LOL” all you like. That’s no defense and no support.

JAK
_marg

Post by _marg »

JAk there is a thread in the terrestial forum from truthdancer dealing with free will, ethics and morals. If you have time I'd like to hear your comments on it. I'm going out tonight but if you do comment I will read later. Thanks.
_twinkie
_Emeritus
Posts: 327
Joined: Fri Jan 12, 2007 4:01 am

Post by _twinkie »

JAK wrote:
twinkie wrote:Marg,
What is your evidence that I don't have evidence? If I refuse to give you my evidence, you still don't have evidence that I don't have any evidence. You can just assume that I don't have evidence.

That being said, honestly, I don't have any evidence. LOL. I do have a sense of humor though. No, I don't have any evidence of that either.


Obfuscating comment, twinkie.

If you have evidence, and make some claim, it’s your obligation to present the evidence. Failure to do so is failure.

Refusing to give evidence you claim to have is, in itself, evidence that you don’t have anything to present.

Marg is correct in asking you to support with evidence.

It’s a valid conclusion that you have no evidence if you present none.

You can “LOL” all you like. That’s no defense and no support.

JAK


Thanks for explaining that, Jak.
_Gazelam
_Emeritus
Posts: 5659
Joined: Thu Oct 26, 2006 2:06 am

Twinkie

Post by _Gazelam »

If you take a look at the "Plural Families" thread I relate some of the history behind the Doctrine of Polygamy. There is a large amount of evidence to support the doctrine, includeing numerous journals of the many members who lived at the time.


You make the claim that the Church is true becasue no doubt you have had a witness of the Spirit to the truth of these things. If this is the case you stand in good company. (Matt. 16:13-19)

As for the so call "Learned men" I have a quote by Brigham Young:

"I had only traveled a short time to testify to the people, before I learned this one fact, that you might prove doctrine from the Bible till domsday, and it would merely convince a people but would not convert them. You might read the Bible from Genesis to Revelation and prove every iota that you advance, and that alone would have no converting influence upon th epeople. Nothing short of a testimony by the power of the Holy Ghost would bring light and knowledge to them - bring them in their hearts to repentance. Nothing short of that would ever do."


In making the claim that God doesent exist, they are equaly obligated to prove the non-existence of God. Alma had a similar discussion with a man named Korihor.

Alma 30:37-42
37 And then Alma said unto him: Believest thou that there is a God?
38 And he answered, Nay.
39 Now Alma said unto him: Will ye deny again that there is a God, and also deny the Christ? For behold, I say unto you, I know there is a God, and also that Christ shall come.
40 And now what evidence have ye that there is no God, or that Christ cometh not? I say unto you that ye have none, save it be your word only.
41 But, behold, I have all things as a testimony that these things are true; and ye also have all things as a testimony unto you that they are true; and will ye deny them? Believest thou that these things are true?
42 Behold, I know that thou believest, but thou art possessed with a lying spirit, and ye have put off the Spirit of God that it may have no place in you; but the devil has power over you, and he doth carry you about, working devices that he may destroy the children of God.

There is not a man that has ever existed that can refute the testimony of those that have seen Christ. The scriptures are rife with the testimonies of the prophets, and the words of the prophets sre testified of by the Holy Ghost, whose mission it is to bear witness of these things. (Acts 10:39-48)

Add to this the testimony of Joseph Smith and Sidney Rigdon.: "And now, after the many testimonies which have been given of him, this is the testimony, last of all, which we give of him: That he lives! For we saw him, even on the right hand of God; and we heard the voice bearing record that he is the Only Begotten of the Father." (D&C 76:22-23)

Who can deny this testimony? What evidence do they present to deny it? How does one disprove the testimony of an Apostle of God?

"I have actually seen a vision;" Joseph Testified " and who am I that I can withstand God, or why does the world think to make me deny what I have actually seen? For I had seen a vision; I knew it, and I knew that God knew it, and I could not edeny it, neither dared I do it; at least I knew that by so doing I would offend God, and come under condemnation.

You can accept the witness of the Holy Ghost, or you can deny it, but you canot argue it. The Sadducees and Pharisees taunted Christ for proof, and when he healed men before their very eyes, they denied him still.

Gaz
We can easily forgive a child who is afraid of the dark; the real tragedy of life is when men are afraid of the light. - Plato
Post Reply