There's something strange about 'the Mormon debater'

[_Tal Bachman]

Life

Mormonism presents itself, at its very foundation, as a "true or false" religion. All the nonsense built up on top of that since, all the stupid ad hoc postmodern jazz Nibley introduced via Popper, all the stupid Kuhnianism since, all that stuff is just mindgames that otherwise intelligent people play on themselves when they can no longer take Mormonism on its own black-and-white, true-or-false terms, but are desperate to keep believing. It's all BS. It's like loathing liver, so you slather it in peanut butter, whipped cream, and tabasco sauce just to try to choke it down. But in the end, it's still liver, and people who call it liver are telling the truth. Your entree doesn't become "tabasco sauce" just because you needed to hide the liver from yourself with tabasco sauce; and neither does Mormonism cease being a black-and-white fundamentalism just because guys wandering around in an intellectual fog start wishing it were otherwise.

If Joseph Smith didn't actually hang around with back-from-the-dead Palestinian Jews, if a homicidal "angel" (wth?) didn't really force him to have secret sex with his female followers, if he didn't actually "translate" (Smith's word) Egyptian hieratic, and a hundred other things, the religion Smith started has no more claim to being true than any other....it is a fraud, Life. There's no way around this.

Now certainly, there is lots of "grey" in the multitude of areas in which Mormon doctrine is a farrago of contradictions riven with embarrassing, telling gaps (no word yet on stem cell research, but very specific instructions on....EARRING wear). These vast regions of confusion and nothingness are sandboxes for the imaginations of the faithful to play in. There they can create any sandcastle of "truth" they want. And perhaps that is what you're talking about. Wanna be for stem cell research? No problem. Wanna be against it? No problem - etc.

But underneath those sandboxes is an organization which claims EXCLUSIVE authority from the creator of the entire universe. It, supposedly, is "the way", and nothing else is "the way". That's not "my experience"; that's what Mormonism has claimed[i] from the very beginning until now. I invite you right now to produce even one scrap of authoritative LDS doctrine which says different.

Of course you won't, because they don't exist. But will that make a difference to you? Only you can say for sure...

[/i]

[_The Nehor]

More comments on my masturbatory habits too.

You do make an awfully good straight man. When you set things up so well, who can blame those that go for the rim shot? (Surely you don't see any sexual innuendo there, do you?)

NO, no, no no no yes yes a bit a bit.

[_Gazelam]

It's like loathing liver, so you slather it in peanut butter, whipped cream, and tabasco sauce just to try to choke it down.

Your supposed to use grilled onions silly.

[_LifeOnaPlate]

Life

Mormonism presents itself, at its very foundation, as a "true or false" religion. All the nonsense built up on top of that since, all the stupid ad hoc postmodern jazz Nibley introduced via Popper, all the stupid Kuhnianism since, all that stuff is just mindgames that otherwise intelligent people play on themselves when they can no longer take Mormonism on its own black-and-white, true-or-false terms, but are desperate to keep believing. It's all BS. It's like loathing liver, so you slather it in peanut butter, whipped cream, and tabasco sauce just to try to choke it down. But in the end, it's still liver, and people who call it liver are telling the truth. Your entree doesn't become "tabasco sauce" just because you needed to hide the liver from yourself with tabasco sauce; and neither does Mormonism cease being a black-and-white fundamentalism just because guys wandering around in an intellectual fog start wishing it were otherwise.

If Joseph Smith didn't actually hang around with back-from-the-dead Palestinian Jews, if a homicidal "angel" (wth?) didn't really force him to have secret sex with his female followers, if he didn't actually "translate" (Smith's word) Egyptian hieratic, and a hundred other things, the religion Smith started has no more claim to being true than any other....it is a fraud, Life. There's no way around this.

Now certainly, there is lots of "grey" in the multitude of areas in which Mormon doctrine is a farrago of contradictions riven with embarrassing, telling gaps (no word yet on stem cell research, but very specific instructions on....EARRING wear). These vast regions of confusion and nothingness are sandboxes for the imaginations of the faithful to play in. There they can create any sandcastle of "truth" they want. And perhaps that is what you're talking about. Wanna be for stem cell research? No problem. Wanna be against it? No problem - etc.

But underneath those sandboxes is an organization which claims EXCLUSIVE authority from the creator of the entire universe. It, supposedly, is "the way", and nothing else is "the way". That's not "my experience"; that's what Mormonism has claimed[I] from the very beginning until now. I invite you right now to produce even one scrap of authoritative LDS doctrine which says different.

Of course you won't, because they don't exist. But will that make a difference to you? Only you can say for sure...

[/I]

So black and white. You're clinging to that "all true or all false thing" like it's some kind of long lost top ten pop hit. Kuhn? Popper? Child's play.

[_msnobody]

What is the point of debating Mormonism, for believing Mormons?

LDS missionaries are told explicitly not to Bible bash. LDS GA's constantly tell members that conversion "only comes through the sweet spirit of God", not through debate. The Book of Mormon Jesus criticizes religious "disputations". Most Mormons can't help but regard those who have left or rejected Mormonism as either too dumb to understand "the gospel", or too evil to stick with it - making it even more pointless, from the Mormon's perspective, to debate.

Most crucially, to engage in debate is to tacitly concede that (empirically-discernible) facts and logic impose constraints upon what one may justifiably believe; but this is just what Mormonism denies.

Mormon theology might pay lip service to "studying it out in your mind", but any question is decided in the end by "feelings" taken to be divinely-given, and/or simply crediting what "the prophet" said. Hinckley made this point himself in his "Loyalty" GC talk a few years ago.

So what are all these online Mormon "debaters" even doing, really?

They are trying to defrag their hard drive from conflicting clusters of information.

[_why me]

If people would just let Mormons be Mormons, our internet chats about Mormonism would improve dramatically. I see no problem in what Mormons believe. If one does not believe in Mormonism, it may be time to accept that fact and let others who still believe, believe.

Discussions about Mormonism on the internet are like being in a hamster wheel. Nothing fruitful comes from the discussion but the wheel still turns. Mormonism will be around for quite some time and this is because, there is no smoking gun that fired the silver bullet to kill it off. Now if a Book of Mormon manusript was found written by Sidney, Joseph, Hyram etc, now that may do it. But at this moment, no smoking gun just a lot of smoke.

[_Boaz & Lidia]

I don't know about everyone else. I'm mostly trying to keep entertained.

Try switching hands for a while.

[_Boaz & Lidia]

If people would just let Mormons be Mormons, our internet chats about Mormonism would improve dramatically. I see no problem in what Mormons believe. If one does not believe in Mormonism, it may be time to accept that fact and let others who still believe, believe.

Fine, Mr. admitted inactive Jack Mormon.

Perhaps a good start would be by keeping the Mormon trash off my front porch and my neighbors.

I just don't understand why Mormons will not let non Mormons BE non Mormons.

[Guest]

..So what are all these online Mormon "debaters" even doing, really?

Contending for the faith as per the scriptures. In addition, I think there is a big difference between teaching the gospel and not allowing others to control the discussion unchallenged, both of which we are asked to do.

29 For verily, verily I say unto you, he that hath the spirit of contention is not of me, but is of the devil, who is the father of contention, and he stirreth up the hearts of men to contend with anger, one with another.
30 Behold, this is not my doctrine, to stir up the hearts of men with anger, one against another; but this is my doctrine, that such things should be done away.

(Book of Mormon | 3 Nephi 11:29 - 30)

bcspace, if you have read the Book of Mormon, you do not understand it (at least as a Mormon).

Good points, Tal.

[_Blixa]

..So what are all these online Mormon "debaters" even doing, really?

Contending for the faith as per the scriptures.

29 For verily, verily I say unto you, he that hath the spirit of contention is not of me, but is of the devil, who is the father of contention, and he stirreth up the hearts of men to contend with anger, one with another.
30 Behold, this is not my doctrine, to stir up the hearts of men with anger, one against another; but this is my doctrine, that such things should be done away.

(Book of Mormon | 3 Nephi 11:29 - 30)

Blixa, if you have read the Book of Mormon, you do not understand it (at least as a Mormon).

Just slip of the keyboard, I know, but please don't confuse me with bcspace. After all, "angles are silent notes taking," so I'm sure they lurk on message boards. I wouldn't want the celestial transcript to get borked.