RFM v. Midnight Mormons—Debate

[Kishkumen]

Personally I think that God will look upon our hearts AND what we've done with our minds. He will be the one to determine our future state and progress. It's just that I don't think RFM has anything really to offer in this respect inasmuch as having knowledge concerning the three questions I asked Philo that remained unanswered.

Regards,
MG

What does one thing have to do with the other? RFM is not here to please you and make up stories on demand to suit you. He doesn’t know, and neither do the Brethren. The difference is that he knows his limits, whereas the Brethren are willing to assert what they do not know as if they did. That is not RFM’s problem. The Brethren don’t know facts about God any better than anyone else.

[hauslern]

I wonder how MM deal with science especially dna and humans and apes
https://humanorigins.si.edu/evidence/genetics

The pastor at my brothers church had his dna checked with Ancestrary. They found neanderthal there.
If you accept Genesis there must have been some incest going on. And if a universal flood some incest among the animals.

[Rivendale]

Passive aggressive.

No.

Humble enough. See this is what religious people do. They victim blame people who never "get" the religious experience. They were not humble enough. We really share the basic nervous system and sensory perception as humans. For one to suggest and even boast they have somehow breached the invisible world due to their diligence and humbleness is the ultimate in hubris. You should shout it from the roof tops. I did it! I did it! I found a way to communicate with an invisible unfalsifiable world which conveniently agrees with me.

What you think of people that choose to believe in deity is of course up to you.

Regards,
MG

The problem with that is...... you are dictated by Christianity and Mormonism that every member a missionary. You are the one claiming that you have breached the impenetrable barrier. Now you must distribute your knowledge. Unless you're a sadist and want to see failure.

[MG 2.0]

Personally I think that God will look upon our hearts AND what we've done with our minds. He will be the one to determine our future state and progress. It's just that I don't think RFM has anything really to offer in this respect inasmuch as having knowledge concerning the three questions I asked Philo that remained unanswered.

Regards,
MG

What does one thing have to do with the other? RFM is not here to please you and make up stories on demand to suit you.

True that. As far as it goes...

He doesn’t know, and neither do the Brethren.

You, of course, are free to think that. I believe otherwise.

The difference is that he knows his limits...

I would agree.

...whereas the Brethren are willing to assert what they do not know as if they did.

I think that it's a mixed bag in this department. That's why we each must ask God whether or not His truth is what is being taught. If you get a NO answer in your heart and mind on a particular issue, then you need to go with YOUR heart and mind. And it seems as though you do.

That is not RFM’s problem. The Brethren don’t know facts about God any better than anyone else.

I think that this is the 'land' where most critics and disbelievers live. But you don't have to keep repeating yourself. It almost goes without saying that this is where you're coming from nowadays. But if it helps you to repeat it, then go for it. Don't take it personally, but the words that come out of the mouths of critics and disbelievers are fairly predictable. I'm sure you would say the same for believers.

Regards,
MG

[Alphus and Omegus]

It's just that I don't think RFM has anything really to offer in this respect inasmuch as having knowledge concerning the three questions I asked Philo that remained unanswered.

Let's review what the three questions were:

Who or what is God? If He exists, what is our relationship to Him? Does He have a plan for His children?

You think that these questions are the most basic things that people need to answer but, in fact, they are based on a series of totally unsupported assumptions:

1) That at least one god exists
2) That there is not more than one god
3) That the god which may exist was not created by some "grandpa in heaven"
4) That the single god which may exist is actually a male
5) That the god which may exist is morally good
6) That moral goodness is a thing which exists independent of the god's existence
7) That humans are the offspring ("children") of this hypothetical male god
8) That the hypothetical god is even aware, much less cares about what tiny, short-lived, insignificant beings like us think or want
9) That finite, insignificant humans could ever come into contact or know the mind of being(s) that exist outside of space-time
10) That Judaism is not a madeup variant of Canaanite paganism, itself a descendant of superstitious desert animist beliefs
11) That ancient Christianity was actually Mormonism, even though there is literally zero evidence for this
12) That Mormonism is not a mishmash of American and European Protestant philosophies blended with 19th century frontier superstition and primitive scientific understandings.

To say that one does not know the cosmic answers is actually the height of humility. To believe that you personally know these answers is the height of arrogance. To say that you believe some stuffy old men in Salt Lake know these answers is extremely gullible. They have no way of knowing the answers to your questions. They certainly cannot make arguments for the assumptions upon which your questions are predicated.

[Alphus and Omegus]

One thing we did learn from Midnight Mormon is that LDS apologetics is actively campaigning against secularism. Pretty sure Cardon Ellis and Kwaku had a plan regarding what should happen if those freedom-loving religionists had managed to get hold of VP Mike Pence during the peaceful tour of the US Capitol. Secularism is ruining the country by draining the precious bodily fluids of America and reducing its masculinity. Strong boots of Mormon Elders are needed to do some dusting against those secularists that RFM and his side support when they are not burning LDS chapels.

Fundamentalist religion has collapsed upon itself. Its ideas are obviously insupportable by evidence. So all that's left is identity.

No wonder that DezNats are gaining ground in LDS Mormonism.

[Alphus and Omegus]

I didn't watch the whole thing - perhaps what I chose to watch was exceptionally bad, but I found it rather boring, and lasted only a few minutes.

My biggest observation from what I did watch is that the moderator had no idea at all about how to ask a question that could reasonably be answered. He rambled for 30-40 seconds, stringing together a bunch of ideas and qualifiers, then verbally stuck a question mark at the end, leaving the participants to figure out what on earth he was getting at.

Did I just get an especially bad couple of minutes, or were all of the moderator's questions like this?

Almost all the questions were this way. They were the very worst part of the debate, in my opinion. Their scatter-shot format allowed the MM's to avoid any actual factual assertions and to just argue emotion and identity.

[MG 2.0]

To say that one does not know the cosmic answers is actually the height of humility. To believe that you personally know these answers is the height of arrogance.

I don't think that I would figure the answers out to 'cosmic answers' on my own. But to rely on those that I believe to be called of God is NOT arrogant. It takes humility to do so. The natural man, including me, doesn't lightly take guidance from someone else that claims to speak on behalf of God.

To say that you believe some stuffy old men in Salt Lake know these answers is extremely gullible. They have no way of knowing the answers to your questions.

Unless, of course, God called these men to guide and direct our paths in these troubled and unpredictable times. And to show us the path back to His presence. I do agree that if these men aren't called of God then they are no more worthy of my attention than whatever moral/ethical teachings you might have to share. I'm in a different place than you in regards to how I view the leaders of the LDS church.

They certainly cannot make arguments for the assumptions upon which your questions are predicated.

It depends, doesn't it?

Regards,
MG

[Alphus and Omegus]

Unless, of course, God called these men to guide and direct our paths in these troubled and unpredictable times. And to show us the path back to His presence. I do agree that if these men aren't called of God then they are no more worthy of my attention than whatever moral/ethical teachings you might have to share. I'm in a different place than you in regards to how I view the leaders of the LDS church.

To even begin to claim that they could be called of God, you have to get through those 12 questions. And none of them are proven in Mormonism. So really your belief is just emotion.

[MG 2.0]

You think that these questions are the most basic things that people need to answer but, in fact, they are based on a series of totally unsupported assumptions:


2) That there is not more than one god

Everything rests on this. And it's been the most debated question ever since at least the days of the early Israelites. And I would add, what is the nature and character of that God.

I think the only sure way to know whether or not this is true is if God reveals himself to mankind. Too many folks have tried to figure this out on their own and have come away with all kinds of contradictory theories. Some of them being in your list.

Regards,
MG