DiscussMormonism.com

Do chime in when you have some thoughts about this, Tobin.

Honorentheos, I agree that LDS feel they understand some things about God very well. But if you ask them about why he allowed WWII, how his grief over the loss of one third of his children affects his daily happiness, whether he plays sports, or if he likes an off-color joke, among many other things, you'll find more acknowledgement of the mystery that still remains.

"Room" is an ambiguous term here. There's room for doubt in most traditions in the sense that they won't cut you off for it. But the teachings of some are more open to accepting or validating doubt than others.

Religious belief in general is rational in the sense that one can make rational space for the possibility of its truth, and there are strong practical reasons to invest in that through faith. So the justification depends in part on the practical side.

Kent wrote:Do chime in when you have some thoughts about this, Tobin.

Honorentheos, I agree that LDS feel they understand some things about God very well. But if you ask them about why he allowed WWII, how his grief over the loss of one third of his children affects his daily happiness, whether he plays sports, or if he likes an off-color joke, among many other things, you'll find more acknowledgement of the mystery that still remains.

"Room" is an ambiguous term here. There's room for doubt in most traditions in the sense that they won't cut you off for it. But the teachings of some are more open to accepting or validating doubt than others.

Religious belief in general is rational in the sense that one can make rational space for the possibility of its truth, and there are strong practical reasons to invest in that through faith. So the justification depends in part on the practical side.

Hi Kent,

My view is that if there is a God (or god-like beings), then they are millions if not billions of years in advance of ourselves. Such beings would be immortal and not subject to disease and death as we are. I also believe that we have more in common with ants than they do with us and our petty attempts to comprehend such beings are much as an ant trying to understand a human-being.

I believe Joseph Smith may have encountered these beings and imposed his own beliefs upon the experience. That would explain why his views changed over time and the different accounts we get of the first vision. I also believe that such beings may have colonized our world and that is at the root of the Adam and Eve myths. And that they have from time-to-time interfered with our species and that is where the accounts in the scriptures (and other accounts) come from. My view is these encounters form the basis for these stories and are merely primitive man trying to grasp at what happened.

Tobin

Tobin wrote:

Kent wrote:Do chime in when you have some thoughts about this, Tobin.

Honorentheos, I agree that LDS feel they understand some things about God very well. But if you ask them about why he allowed WWII, how his grief over the loss of one third of his children affects his daily happiness, whether he plays sports, or if he likes an off-color joke, among many other things, you'll find more acknowledgement of the mystery that still remains.

"Room" is an ambiguous term here. There's room for doubt in most traditions in the sense that they won't cut you off for it. But the teachings of some are more open to accepting or validating doubt than others.

Religious belief in general is rational in the sense that one can make rational space for the possibility of its truth, and there are strong practical reasons to invest in that through faith. So the justification depends in part on the practical side.

Hi Kent,

My view is that if there is a God (or god-like beings), then they are millions if not billions of years in advance of ourselves. Such beings would be immortal and not subject to disease and death as we are. I also believe that we have more in common with ants than they do with us and our petty attempts to comprehend such beings are much as an ant trying to understand a human-being.

I believe Joseph Smith may have encountered these beings and imposed his own beliefs upon the experience. That would explain why his views changed over time and the different accounts we get of the first vision. I also believe that such beings may have colonized our world and that is at the root of the Adam and Eve myths. And that they have from time-to-time interfered with our species and that is where the accounts in the scriptures (and other accounts) come from. My view is these encounters form the basis for these stories and are merely primitive man trying to grasp at what happened.

Tobin

*crickets*

Tobin, one does wonder what our descendants could be like if they managed to keep from killing themselves off for another million years. Technology is increasing by some measures geometrically, meaning the rate of change is getting faster and faster. Looking even in the next 100 years, it's conceivable that our descendants will start to be very different in some ways than we are. The technology to integrate technology with our brains is developing, for example with chips implanted to give limited sight to the blind. It's not much of a stretch to think people will eventually be plugged in to the future version of the internet at that same level, integrated directly in the brain, in a way that will greatly increase intelligence and knowledge. Body technology will keep increasing as well, making much more capable and durable, replaceable parts possible, maybe with neural backups or something, potentially extending lifespans indefinitely.

The question about whether people with so much power, coming so fast, can keep from destroying themselves is a difficult one. With the rate of change increasing, seemingly a lot faster than the wisdom to deal with it, and the destructive power available to individuals and groups also increasing, it seems a potentially increasingly unstable mix.

You believe beings who have managed to survive that have visited. Interestingly some who don't believe that, who think the accounts of visits aren't convincing, have used the premise of lack of evidence of such advanced being to argue intelligent life always ends up killing itself off. But who knows?

Kent wrote:Honorentheos, I agree that LDS feel they understand some things about God very well. But if you ask them about why he allowed WWII, how his grief over the loss of one third of his children affects his daily happiness, whether he plays sports, or if he likes an off-color joke, among many other things, you'll find more acknowledgement of the mystery that still remains.

We've gotten far afield.

Would you agree the answer to the question, "What is God's purpose in the plan of salvation?" is easily answered by most Mormons as "to bring to past the immortality and eternal life of man"? And to believe they know this about God is to believe they have justified reasons for trusting God?

Kent wrote:Religious belief in general is rational in the sense that one can make rational space for the possibility of its truth, and there are strong practical reasons to invest in that through faith. So the justification depends in part on the practical side.

Religious belief is rational in that....

1 - One can make rational space for the possibility of its truth

2 - There are strong practical reasons to invest in (religious belief) through faith

3 - Justification depends, at least in part, on this practical side

Aren't you arguing for a deontological form of justification for religious belief in this case?

Honorentheos, sure, LDS are confident that God's purpose is benevolent, based on a number of things, including the one you point out, given the LDS understanding of what eternal life means in that context.

I wouldn't call the justification I mentioned deontological, if that means based on duty or obligation. It can be treated as prudential or pragmatic.

Kent wrote:Tobin, one does wonder what our descendants could be like if they managed to keep from killing themselves off for another million years. Technology is increasing by some measures geometrically, meaning the rate of change is getting faster and faster. Looking even in the next 100 years, it's conceivable that our descendants will start to be very different in some ways than we are. The technology to integrate technology with our brains is developing, for example with chips implanted to give limited sight to the blind. It's not much of a stretch to think people will eventually be plugged in to the future version of the internet at that same level, integrated directly in the brain, in a way that will greatly increase intelligence and knowledge. Body technology will keep increasing as well, making much more capable and durable, replaceable parts possible, maybe with neural backups or something, potentially extending lifespans indefinitely.

The question about whether people with so much power, coming so fast, can keep from destroying themselves is a difficult one. With the rate of change increasing, seemingly a lot faster than the wisdom to deal with it, and the destructive power available to individuals and groups also increasing, it seems a potentially increasingly unstable mix.

You believe beings who have managed to survive that have visited. Interestingly some who don't believe that, who think the accounts of visits aren't convincing, have used the premise of lack of evidence of such advanced being to argue intelligent life always ends up killing itself off. But who knows?

I have hope and belief that such things are possible. I don't know that they are for certain, but such is my faith. I suppose when I die and if I find I still am conscious, then I will be very gratified to know such things are real and honored and grateful to have been preserved (hopefully surrounded by my loved one that have gone before). If not, then I guess it really doesn't matter since I won't be conscious of anything.

My view at present is that Mormonism may have a basis in fact, but not necessarily how Mormons themselves view it. I think they employ a very primitive view of God in their daily worship and statements of belief. I think our understanding has moved past such things and Mormonism sorely needs to update itself to view itself with a more modern approach. I think they are slowly moving in that direction, but it would serve them well to update their language and views based on the world we live in today.

There's a logic to that, not one that would have been as plausible in Joseph Smith's day as it is now. Human technology has changed in ways not imagined since then, and will no doubt continue to.

Bazooka wrote:*crickets*

Bazooka, Dude.....

Can't see how that's called for.