Why don't you just leave the church alone?

[_mentalgymnast]

The evidence in my lived experience -- out in the world -- speaks to the quiet goodness of disbelievers and, unfortunately, to arrogant privilege assumed by believers to look (a) down on disbelievers as broken and untrue...

This is a generalization, of course. There are going to be many believers who are readily accepting of the life paths that others are on and choose to associate and have as friends those that are not of their own faith tradition and/or have no faith tradition at all. In my own family I have those that are close to me that have little or no activity in a faith tradition. I don't look down on them as being broken. They do too much good in the world and put out too much love for me to ignore and/or reject. I think they look at me in a similar way.

How can one reject goodness?

I suppose that's where I and many other folks that are supportive of a belief in a higher power come down at. Are others doing good and being a force of nature for good in the world? Are they actively supporting healthy living and positive relationships? Do they support freedom/liberty and opportunity for all people? Are they actively making their workplaces and communities thriving places to be and live? That's what is important.

...and (b) offer their testimonies in a plea to change while assuaging their God's mandate to testify. These toxic actions diminish intimacy at best, and at worst sever relationships entirely.

Again, another generalization that doesn't apply to all believers. And may I dare say, to the greater part of believers who are living in the world and have been around the block more than once.

Disbelievers, in my experience, seek out healthier and more holistic spiritual guidance, first to heal wounds inflicted by the shadows of religion in family and friend circles, and second to empower with tools to do real good in the world.

This is where I would take even greater umbrage with your generalizations that believers are somehow arrogant and look down on those that are not of their own religious persuasion. Believers are empowered with real tools to do good in the world. Believers are able to move in and about in the world with a healthy spiritual grounding that causes them to do good and seek good.

Unfortunately there are those that live on both sides of the tracks that see the other as the other and just don't want to get along in peace at the end of the day.

Regards,
MG

[_huckelberry]

My personal observation, however, is that those that disbelieve tend towards stridency in defending their position. They will still be there at the end of the day after all the conversation has died down pounding their chests in proclaiming the fact that they have wiped the floor of those that proclaim religious belief in a creator God.

Your personal experience is real to you, MG, so it's real to me too. I respect that your experience is your own.

But I have not witnessed what you describe, and in fact I would violently disagree with your cartoonish characterization of disbelievers pounding their chests long into the night. Perhaps you have spent too much time in places of triage for individuals grappling through stages of grief, such as here and ex-mo Reddit. Indeed, there is a mixed bag of emotion and occasional chest pounding in those places, but that is part of a process and definitely not representative of the end state population of disbelievers.

The evidence in my lived experience -- out in the world -- speaks to the quiet goodness of disbelievers and, unfortunately, to arrogant privilege assumed by believers to look (a) down on disbelievers as broken and untrue, and (b) offer their testimonies in a plea to change while assuaging their God's mandate to testify. These toxic actions diminish intimacy at best, and at worst sever relationships entirely. Disbelievers, in my experience, seek out healthier and more holistic spiritual guidance, first to heal wounds inflicted by the shadows of religion in family and friend circles, and second to empower with tools to do real good in the world.

Dr Moore, I believe your characterization of atheists in general is correct and well worth keeping in mind in these discussions. I could point out that Mentalgymnist had just been told that atheists were mopping the floor with him. This is a bit of an unfriendly comment which probably stirred emotions he expressed with the cartoon image of atheists.

The cartoon might have some relation to a group of atheist campaigners. I think it is better to accept those campaigners as thinkers rather than cartoons even if there are moments when they bring the cartoon image to mind.

[_mentalgymnast]

The cartoon might have some relation to a group of atheist campaigners. I think it is better to accept those campaigners as thinkers rather than cartoons even if there are moments when they bring the cartoon image to mind.

I realize that atheists are thinkers. Just as much so as many religionists. I do think that many atheists, unknowingly or not, seem to be a bit on the arrogant side at times. Thus my response to Gadianton's post.

Regards,
MG

[_Lemmie]

This is a generalization, of course. There are going to be many believers who are readily accepting of the life paths that others are on and choose to associate and have as friends those that are not of their own faith tradition and/or have no faith tradition at all. In my own family I have those that are close to me that have little or no activity in a faith tradition.

They are not YOUR friends, though, as you have mentioned.

Although, truth be told, most folks I talk to in real life are typically approaching issues and other sorts of things with an open heart/mind towards the unknown, the divine, spirituality, faith, etc.I don't have any atheist friends.

It’s conflicts like this that frequently make your comments difficult to take seriously.

[_mentalgymnast]

This is a generalization, of course. There are going to be many believers who are readily accepting of the life paths that others are on and choose to associate and have as friends those that are not of their own faith tradition and/or have no faith tradition at all. In my own family I have those that are close to me that have little or no activity in a faith tradition.

They are not YOUR friends, though, as you have mentioned.

Although, truth be told, most folks I talk to in real life are typically approaching issues and other sorts of things with an open heart/mind towards the unknown, the divine, spirituality, faith, etc.I don't have any atheist friends.

It’s conflicts like this that frequently make your comments difficult to take seriously.

No contradiction here except that which exists in your own head.

You twist(words) and shout. Yet again.

You would like to twist my words so as to make it appear as though I am not readily accepting of others.

Let me be clear...for you...I readily accept the life paths that others have chosen within the parameters that I mentioned earlier.

Regards,
MG

[_Maksutov]

I do think that many theists, unknowingly or not, seem to be a bit on the arrogant side at times.

Fixed it for you.

[_Mormonicious]

Because KSL works for Satan and Rusty the Tin Man does NOTHING about it.

Latter-day Saint bishop jailed, accused of having images of child sex abuse

KAYSVILLE — A Latter-day Saint The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints bishop faces potential criminal charges for allegedly possessing and distributing what investigators described as “child sexual abuse material.”

Timothy James Hallows, 61, was booked into the Davis County Jail for investigation of eight counts of enticing a minor by internet or text. Hallows has served as bishop of the Wellington Ward in the Kaysville Utah Stake of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

Hallows “admitted to distributing child sexual abuse material” on Skype and to sexual gratification to prepubescent children, according to a police affidavit filed Thursday in 2nd District Court.

STUPID damned Mormons

All HAIL Google GOD and her son eBay and the holy toaster youtube

https://www.ksl.com/article/46657458/la ... -sex-abuse

[_I have a question]

Because KSL works for Satan and Rusty the Tin Man does NOTHING about it.

Latter-day Saint bishop jailed, accused of having images of child sex abuse

KAYSVILLE — A Latter-day Saint The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints bishop faces potential criminal charges for allegedly possessing and distributing what investigators described as “child sexual abuse material.”

Timothy James Hallows, 61, was booked into the Davis County Jail for investigation of eight counts of enticing a minor by internet or text. Hallows has served as bishop of the Wellington Ward in the Kaysville Utah Stake of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

Hallows “admitted to distributing child sexual abuse material” on Skype and to sexual gratification to prepubescent children, according to a police affidavit filed Thursday in 2nd District Court.

STUPID ____ Mormons

All HAIL Google GOD and her son eBay and the holy toaster youtube

https://www.ksl.com/article/46657458/la ... -sex-abuse

How many Bishops is that now?

From the article...

Microsoft Online Operations filed a complaint on Oct. 6 with the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children that a user uploaded and made publicly available child sexual exploitation material to or from a Skype account. Phoenix police initially investigated the cases because the IP address tracked to a Holiday Inn in Arizona. Investigators determined it belonged to Hallows.

A search warrant was issued at Hallows’ home on Wednesday. The affidavit says investigators located “thousands of images of pornography, including many images of child sexual abuse.”

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints appears to be considering a new policy that would call for children ages 8 to 11 to have regular “interviews” with a member of the bishopric, like older youth and adults do.

The church’s internal research division has sent a survey to some rank-and-file members to assess their feelings about the potential change:

Should it happen at all?
If so, should the interviews be conducted by a male priesthood leader or a member of the Primary Presidency?
Should a parent be present?
What topics should be covered? Should a child’s personal “worthiness” be discussed?
I received some of the screenshots below from a reader who contacted me directly, and some from a person in a discussion group I am part of, who gave me permission to share them anonymously. Both recipients of the survey were deeply concerned about the proposed changes and urged the Church not to move forward with them.

https://religionnews.com/2019/07/12/exp ... -as-8-why/

Members should not be giving Bishops access to their children.

[_Mormonicious]

No, no, no IHQ, the problem is not that a Mormon bishop is acting like Holy Horny Joe with little girls and boys. That's not NEWS. Hell, we all accept that as a Norm. The story is that the Mormon church's own News outlet supported Satan by NOT using "the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints" in the Leader of the Article.

Come on IHQ, see the big picture

STUPID damned Mormons

All HAIL Google GOD and her son eBay and the holy toaster youtube

[_Res Ipsa]

Fair enough. I would assume that unlike me you are not a fan of William Lane Craig.

https://www.reasonablefaith.org/writing ... principle/

Where do you see his logic breaking down?

Regards,
MG

Why would I consider Craig an expert on whether "that sounds right" is a reliable guide to greater understanding? Is he some kind of neuroscientist? Has he studied how the brain works?

"That sounds right" is nothing more than a reflection of one's biases and beliefs. It is not a reliable guide to understanding the meaning of life, the universe and everything.

I note that others have addressed Craig's logic. I see no reason to treat him as having expertise on this question.