Coggins7 wrote: Because, marg, as in so many other things, the availability of objective, observable, empirical proof of the claims of the gospel would destroy the necessity of faith in the Lord Jesus Christ and all the challenges, difficulties, and intellectual, psycholgical, and spiritual struggle this intails and implies.
We both agree there is no empirical evidence of the plates. But you started off this discussion saying that you'd provide plausible explanation such that a fair minded observer could review it and appreciate your position as being a possibility. So I've been asking you for the
reasoning not the empirical evidence.
Do you think you are being fair in this discussion..to any "fair minded observer"? You've asserted there must be "faith" to be exalted. But what is the reasoning for this? Why should there have to be "faith" in the plates existence in order to be exalted? The plates could still exist and be available for examination and yet faith would still be necessary for God belief, because plates would not be proof of a God. If a God exists he/she/it gave mankind brains with which to reason. If a God exists, why should it create obstacles and make reasoning difficult or challenging?
Isn't your explanation for lack of physical evidence of the plates an explanation of convenience? Does it truly make sense that a God would play games when doing so serves to hinder rather than aid in providing understanding? Wouldn't it be better for God and mankind, if he/she/it was upfront and as honest as possible, whenever possible?
Let's look at the evidence. J.Smith claimed the plates existed. The plates are purported to have existed on earth for a long period of time, and mortal men wrote on them. But they no longer exist and the explanation you give me is that J. Smith claimed that a dead man who lived in previously times transformed into an angel and took them away to another realm.
Do you think this is a reasonable explanation that all fair minded observers should accept? Do you think another explanation is possible? Do you think it might be possible that J.Smith was lying? Do you think that the explanation you gave ..is equal in plausibility to the explanation that J.Smith probably was lying?
It would also end our eternal progression within the context of a "mortal probation", as understood in church teaching, as no further process of growth embedded in a background of potential doubt, and challeges to one's faith which cannot be simply refuted by pointing ostensively or empirically to plates, God, the Ark of The Covenant, or whatever, would be possible.
I'm asking for "reasoning", I'm not asking for empirical evidence.
We know their was a T. Rex because we have his bones. We can know there is a God, with certainty, through direct communicatin with him, or revelation. We don;t see God empirically; he doesn't come to church physically, walk around the streets and teach, or throw lightning bolts at the wicked in plain view of CBS Evening News. But if he did, the Plan of Salvation, as understood in the restored Gospel, would be, for all intents and purposes, negated, and our purpose for being here short circuited. I don't need to have faith in the existence of T. Rex, not only because we have proof of its existence empirically, but more to the point, because the existence of T. Rex has no relevance or importance whatever to the great questions of the human condition, which normally are set out as who am I, why am I here, and where am I going?
You may have a need to answer the questions of "who am I, why am I here, and where am I going?" But asserting answers doesn't make those answers close to truth, they only provide you with comfort.
In other words: What is the ultimate metaphysical nature of the self, what is the meaning and purpose of existence and the self's embeddedness in it, and what happens to the individual and his/her consciousness after the death of the physical body?
It may not be a comforting idea to you, but what may happen after death is the same as what happens to you before death, that you simply have no consciousness and it won't bother you. You are bothered now, because you fear death.
The existence of Dinosaurs, or of Quasars, or of the laws of Newtonian mechanics, or the functioning of the endocrine system, or the mating habits of Trap Door Spiders, are all interesting, and all demonstatable empirically, but have nothing to do with those great questions of the human conditon that the Gospel exists to answer and with respect to which, faith is required both to aquire and maintain.
Loran, whatever gets you through the night as Lennon sang..is alright but this discussion is not about making that. It is about you offering "plausible explanations" to critics, to fair minded observers to counter their criticisms that J. Smith lied about his claims regarding the church.