Calling Daniel Peterson

[_Gadianton]

I doubt there any direct force involved at all. Barriers yes (you can't gate crash into higher kindgoms), but not force. Any separation in eternity is self generated and probably, to a great degree, self enforced. Beings not capacitated for the higher degrees of glory could not possibly stand that kind of environment. This would be especially true regarding beings at farther ends of the spectrum.

This is just further evidence that, as with so many self styled anti-Mormon intellectuals, your real problems with the Church aren't intellectual at all, but deeply personal, and have little to do with ambiguities and lacuna in Book of Mormon historicity.

Am I reading this right?....

Since no such argument exits except within your own mind ...

The argument exists right here, from one ccoggins.

a) separation in eternity is self-generated by the unrighteous who can't take the heat
b) since a) is true, it is just further evidence that, the present concerns of "self-styled" anti-Mormons are deeply personal rather than intellectual.

Can I argue that because ccoggins will one day gravitate toward the everlasting burnings of the Celestial kingdom because he feels socially comfortable with Abraham, Brigham Young, and the Mopologists on FAIR, that this is further evidence he presently has no testimony or intellectual reasons for believing in the church?

[_beastie]

Can I argue that because ccoggins will one day gravitate toward the everlasting burnings of the Celestial kingdom because he feels socially comfortable with Abraham, Brigham Young, and the Mopologists on FAIR, that this is further evidence he presently has no testimony or intellectual reasons for believing in the church?

Absolutely, it's obviously deeply personal, not spiritual or intellectual.

Besides the fact that, as you pointed out, Coggins simply made this up out of pure speculation and then insisted since I didn't accept it, it meant I didn't leave the church for the reasons I claimed - it also is illogical.

If Mormonism is "true", and a celestial kingdom exists, my parents will surely "get in". They are faithful, devout Mormons who also engage in personal acts of charity and compassion. According to coggin's logic, I simply won't want to associate with my parents anymore. Yet, Mormon theology states that we don't undergo some mystical change upon death, whatever characteristics and traits we manifest here we will manifest there. And in this life, I certainly want to associate with my parents. Their different beliefs and choices don't bother me in the least. So why would I suddenly be averse to associating with them in the next life?

Coggins is spinning just to avoid the obvious, which is that he worships and adores a cruel god.

[_Canucklehead]

The argument exists right here, from one ccoggins.

a) separation in eternity is self-generated by the unrighteous who can't take the heat
b) since a) is true, it is just further evidence that, the present concerns of "self-styled" anti-Mormons are deeply personal rather than intellectual.

Can I argue that because ccoggins will one day gravitate toward the everlasting burnings of the Celestial kingdom because he feels socially comfortable with Abraham, Brigham Young, and the Mopologists on FAIR, that this is further evidence he presently has no testimony or intellectual reasons for believing in the church?

Classic!