Facsimile 3

[_Drifting]

You are a fallible man. You could be wrong and be making a mistake.

Granted, but I can only do my best as God gives me the light to see it.

Correction, as you assume God gives you the light to see it.
What if God is trying to speak with you through science etc to tell you Mormonism is not the right path, you don't appear to be listening...

[_Darth J]

This current thread is starting to remind me of another thread: http://www.mormondiscussions.com/phpBB3 ... =1&t=21389

[_Chap]

It is very simply. Human beings are imperfect, fallible and aren't God's sock puppets. That means we aren't perfect and know all that God knows like a proper sock puppet should. Seems pretty obvious doesn't it.

However, the contention the critics (such as yourself) make, which is completely absurd, is that magically Mormon prophets are something different. For some reason, they should be something other than imperfect fallible human beings and should be God's sock puppets instead.

I see tobin is still making this classic example of a straw-man argument. No one is suggesting Joseph has to be perfect. We accept he is fallible and capable of error, but that has never been the issue. The nature of the mistakes you want to attribute to him and God is. This is why your sock puppet comments have never been relevant to anything here.

And yet I see you and others here make it over and over again. I'm just going to post the Sock Puppet Theory (SPT) every time you do it now.

But ... surely Tobin talked with the Panda, and the Panda said stuff to him (about Mormonism being true, Joseph Smith being a prophet of the Panda, and so on).

Now Tobin is saying that stuff to us.

Therefore Tobin is the Panda's sock puppet.

[_Themis]

And yet I see you and others here make it over and over again. I'm just going to post the Sock Puppet Theory (SPT) every time you do it now.

That will be a quick and easy way for everyone to know tobin is bringing up his straw-man argument again. Thanks.

[_Samantabhadra]

Tobin perhaps it would help if you articulated the "SPT" precisely, because I for one don't really understand the argument.

[_Tobin]

Tobin perhaps it would help if you articulated the "SPT" precisely, because I for one don't really understand the argument.

Sock Puppet Theory (SPT). It is the absurd idea held by many critics on this forum that instead of Mormon prophets being mere fallible human beings, they are instead God's sock puppets. They automatically are perfect and know all that God knows instead. Basically, they should be the "smartest" people on the planet because they are Mormon prophets. They should know everything there is to know about everything (science, philosophy, the scriptures, the gospel, God and so on). They wouldn't have their own biases, preconceptions, lack of knowledge, disinterest, weaknesses, and so on to prevent them from fully understanding or comprehending the truth.

It is ridiculous position, but there it is. I've decided that when one of the critics on this forum asserts this non-sense, I'll just label their argument as SPT and leave it at that.

[_Bob Loblaw]

When a prophet makes a mistake, we call that human nature. When everything a prophet says is wrong, we call that "not a prophet."

[_Tobin]

When a prophet makes a mistake, we call that human nature. When everything a prophet says is wrong, we call that "not a prophet."

Prophets are merely messengers. It is up to us to determine if the message is genuine or not.

[_just me]

When a prophet makes a mistake, we call that human nature. When everything a prophet says is wrong, we call that "not a prophet."

Prophets are merely messengers. It is up to us to determine if the message is genuine or not.

There are no prophets in the LDS church. There are presidents.

[Guest]

Prophets are merely messengers. It is up to us to determine if the message is genuine or not.

It's pretty easy to determine that Joseph Smith's message isn't genuine. You appear to believe that God is some practical joker who makes his true church look completely bogus and then, for no reason at all, demands that you ask him if it's true or not.

When the spirit conflicts with reason and clear evidence, it's probably not the spirit.