Gemli explains...

[Rivendale]

Sincerity of a question asked to god is simply a series of turn-key moments designed to arrive at one answer. Sincerity is pivotal through every phase of the testimony building process. Simply using it as proof that the end result is true isn't required because it is self evident to the believer. They merely retcon all information into the belief paradigm and construct their validation around cursory information. Cursory information that adds to the sunk cost that started with the initial Moroni's promise claim.

[Marcus]

Gemli responds to the accusation that he is boring and repetitive...

gemli DanielPeterson

I don't think you're bored as much as defensive.

I remember we had a kitten when I was in knee pants, and if we shined a flashlight on the wall he'd swat at the light, which we'd just move out of the way. The poor thing eventually got so frustrated that he couldn't teach that light a lesson that he ignored the light.

There's a moral in there somewhere.

http://disq.us/p/2y7z2i5

DCP tries a time-honored mopologist strategy, explaining words don't mean what they mean, i.e. loan-shifting, a.k.a. tapir Dan explains horses.

Gemli's not having it. Or maybe he doesn't read the interpreter.

DanielPeterson Mod gemli
19 hours ago edited
gemli: "Well, I admit that you're an expert on fairy tales. That comes in handy when you're trying to defend a theology."

No matter how much you strain to be cute, the word frantic still doesn't mean "having to defend beliefs that by their nature are not defensible."

Nor does purple mean "hydroelectric" or "Cambodian." Just for the record.

−--
gemli DanielPeterson
18 hours ago
But "delusional" does have a meaning, although there are gradations. Some theists can be perfectly pleasant individuals who aren't particularly religious, but who were brought up in a religious environment that still left a mark, if you dig a bit. Some vocal and razzmatazz preachers--Joel Osteen comes to mind--sound sincere to the assembled throng, but I doubt that there's a scintilla of actual belief in their scheming money-grubbing pea brains. I was raised Catholic, although when I reached the age of reason (and common sense, and rational thinking), I dropped the god thing like a hot potato. If there was a god out there who had the advertised powers and wanted me to believe, He should have known that I would take a bit more convincing than the average Joe. So if I don't believe, it's all God's fault. He should visit a Catholic church, say three Hail Mary's and drop a billion bucks in the collection plate.

−----
DanielPeterson Mod gemli
17 hours ago edited
gemli: "But "delusional" does have a meaning."

Let me guess. You think that delusional means "calculus," right? Or that it's synonymous with lasagna? Or, perhaps, that it means "to go for a stroll around the block"?

−---
gemli DanielPeterson
2 hours ago
No, delusional means "...characterized by or holding false beliefs or judgments about external reality that are held despite incontrovertible evidence to the contrary," That describes every religion. But when you throw in Yankee angels, golden plates, seer stones and other such things, us rational folks are going to recommend a wellness check.

You must realize that if you'd been born in New Orleans, you'd probably be a Catholic. Mormons would be just another group that you'd pray for so that God would show them the Light.
http://disq.us/p/2y7yhvw

Ouch.

[drumdude]

I’ve been reading DP’s replies to Gemli. There’s no substance. Zero. It’s entirely ad-hom attacks and lazy arrogant dismissals.

Again, just sad to see a PhD and former BYU professor act so childishly.

[Marcus]

I knew DCP's response to Hitchens had originally motivated his participation, but a few more details have come to light...

DanielPeterson Mod gemli
20 hours ago

gemli: "If Christopher Hitchens couldn't shake your faith"

Mr. Hitchens's effort was, umm, distinctly unimpressive. But then, at least he made an effort.

----
gemli > DanielPeterson
5 hours ago

Unimpressive? I will always remember Christopher Hitchens as the one who introduced me to the Mormon faith. After a brief thought that oh, he must be kidding, I did a bit of research and found that he'd gone easy on you. How could anyone not be attracted to a theology that was such a cultural, psychological, scientific and historical gold mine of everything that was wrong with human beings as a species? If you'd send me a tissue sample, I'd be forever grateful.
http://disq.us/p/2y7yubp

Oh my.

[Rivendale]

Civility alert. Dan has his finger on the trap door button and this might be the one that sends Gemli to the hounds. A tissue sample.

[Physics Guy]

I disagree with gemli that every religion requires belief in things with incontrovertible evidence against them. My own personal religion seems to me to be a counterexample. I believe things that are not implied by any incontrovertible evidence, that's true, but I don't think I believe anything that is inconsistent with any incontrovertible evidence.

I acknowledge that a lot of people who sit in church with me do seem to believe things against what I consider incontrovertible evidence. I'm pretty far out on the liberal end of Christianity. So gemli does have a point. If he said "most religions" instead of "every religion" then I wouldn't object.

Against that, however, I would say that most believers in science believe a lot of false things because they don't understand the stuff in which they want to believe. I'm willing to cut them slack for getting the most important things right even if they're confused about exactly what those things mean. On the same principle I cut slack for the people in church with me. They mostly believe the right important things, and are just confused about the exact scope of what those things mean.

An exception that is getting to me more and more is the whole status of everything outside cis- and hetero-sexuality. I myself am straight and cis but I am getting so tired of religious people bashing on queers as a for-them-painless way of signalling virtue. Don't they have some kind of spider sense that feels how precisely the crosshairs of Jesus's rage against the Pharisees are resting on them? They set heavy loads on people's backs and lift no finger to help them. They swing the hammer to drive in the nails without thinking, the God in whom I am supposed to believe is the one on the cross. But there really are Christian churches that think the way I do on this. I've belonged to them. Religions are not all the same.

I do have to concede further to gemli that Mormonism is out towards one end of a certain spectrum. One of my brothers has described Mormonism as "the most obviously made-up religion". My liberal approach to religions makes me want to defend most religions as having at least some amount of good insight, but I haven't been able to argue against my brother on this one. Some Mormons have surely distilled some good things out of Joseph Smith's scam, and I can believe that an enlightened form of Mormonism might be as wise as any religion—perhaps all the more so for recognizing weaknesses in its founder. I'm not inclined to defend conservative Mormon apologetics. That stuff at least seems to me to fit gemli's criticism.

[huckelberry]

I disagree with gemli that every religion requires belief in things with incontrovertible evidence against them. My own personal religion seems to me to be a counterexample. I believe things that are not implied by any incontrovertible evidence, that's true, but I don't think I believe anything that is inconsistent with any incontrovertible evidence.

I acknowledge that a lot of people who sit in church with me do seem to believe things against what I consider incontrovertible evidence. I'm pretty far out on the liberal end of Christianity. So gemli does have a point. If he said "most religions" instead of "every religion" then I wouldn't object.

Against that, however, I would say that most believers in science believe a lot of false things because they don't understand the stuff in which they want to believe. I'm willing to cut them slack for getting the most important things right even if they're confused about exactly what those things mean. On the same principle I cut slack for the people in church with me. They mostly believe the right important things, and are just confused about the exact scope of what those things mean.

An exception that is getting to me more and more is the whole status of everything outside cis- and hetero-sexuality. I myself am straight and cis but I am getting so tired of religious people bashing on queers as a for-them-painless way of signalling virtue. Don't they have some kind of spider sense that feels how precisely the crosshairs of Jesus's rage against the Pharisees are resting on them? They set heavy loads on people's backs and lift no finger to help them. They swing the hammer to drive in the nails without thinking, the God in whom I am supposed to believe is the one on the cross. But there really are Christian churches that think the way I do on this. I've belonged to them. Religions are not all the same.

I do have to concede further to gemli that Mormonism is out towards one end of a certain spectrum. One of my brothers has described Mormonism as "the most obviously made-up religion". My liberal approach to religions makes me want to defend most religions as having at least some amount of good insight, but I haven't been able to argue against my brother on this one. Some Mormons have surely distilled some good things out of Joseph Smith's scam, and I can believe that an enlightened form of Mormonism might be as wise as any religion—perhaps all the more so for recognizing weaknesses in its founder. I'm not inclined to defend conservative Mormon apologetics. That stuff at least seems to me to fit gemli's criticism.

I am pretty sure that there is nothing in Physics Guy post here which I would disagree with. There is much said there that I respect.

However I am particularly struck by how this is stated.

I am getting so tired of religious people bashing on queers as a for-them-painless way of signalling virtue. Don't they have some kind of spider sense that feels how precisely the crosshairs of Jesus's rage against the Pharisees are resting on them? They set heavy loads on people's backs and lift no finger to help them. They swing the hammer to drive in the nails without thinking,

[Marcus]

Civility alert. Dan has his finger on the trap door button and this might be the one that sends Gemli to the hounds. A tissue sample.

indeed.

[Moksha]

One of my brothers has described Mormonism as "the most obviously made-up religion". My liberal approach to religions makes me want to defend most religions as having at least some amount of good insight, but I haven't been able to argue against my brother on this one.

You might point out to your brother that Xenu dropping atomic bombs in volcanos was a pretty far-out idea.

[Rivendale]

I believe things that are not implied by any incontrovertible evidence, that's true, but I don't think I believe anything that is inconsistent with any incontrovertible evidence.

This is where theists plant their flag. I believe because I believe but there are zero methodologies that can dispute me so I am cool with it.