God and a fraud?

[_barrelomonkeys]

Monkey you have the same problem my wife does, she always thinks other women are judging her. Judgeing her dress, judging her hair, judging the things she says. Am I right in assuming this?

don't worry about it, strike up conversations with these women in your neighborhood and church on topics you care about. Chances are they are going to be interested as well, and if not, oh well.

Gaz

p.s.: bytheway, my wife doesent take my advice in this either.

I'll tell ya what happened last time I did that. :)

Someone mentioned the poor little babies in Japan that were orphans. I mentioned that it was China where girls were orphans and mentioned industrialized nations and the statistics that correlated to low birth rate vs. non-industrialized nations......... also mentioned that America didn't have an issue with this because of our surge of immigrants.

*chirp chirp*

:D

[_Gadianton]

I have a difficult time conceptualizing of a God that would let something OF THIS MAGNITUDE exist/proliferate in the name of his son.

Oh it's tough to imagine. I mean, we can easily imagine hundreds of african women and children being raped and murdered everyday, and God letting something of that magnitude happen. But how could God let they all-pervasive Mormon church grow so big if it isn't true? If it's not true then it's deceived like, a fraction of a fraction of a percent of the world's population. Perish the thought.

Blasphemy of the Son goes on pretty hard core in this world with no lightning bolts.

[_Ren]

Hits too close to home at the moment. I'll get back to you on this Ren. :)

Fair enough Monk. Apologies if it's hitting uncomfortable areas...

I guess all I was trying to do was determine if your idea of hedonism can be distinguished from [the L word]. So far, I can't see any practical difference.
I do think a person could find it 'pleasurable' to force something onto another. I see this all the time...

But if they were taking the 'larger' view, they should be considering the 'pleasure' of the person they would be attempting to force something on...
And I'm sure you're right - hedonism, for the most part, is 'self-regulating' in that respect. I wasn't trying to make any hard and fast accusations - just trying to inspect what could be a 'weak spot' - as we've also done with [the L word] in the past - right?

But - to me - the only way hedonism avoids the potential 'weak spot' I'm concentrating on is to pretty much make itself indistinguishable from [the L word]. As far as I can see...


But anyway - we can carry this on whenever you like. Assuming at all...

[_barrelomonkeys]

Hits too close to home at the moment. I'll get back to you on this Ren. :)

Fair enough Monk. Apologies if it's hitting uncomfortable areas...

I guess all I was trying to do was determine if your idea of hedonism can be distinguished from [the L word]. So far, I can't see any practical difference.
I do think a person could find it 'pleasurable' to force something onto another. I see this all the time...

But if they were taking the 'larger' view, they should be considering the 'pleasure' of the person they would be attempting to force something on...
And I'm sure you're right - hedonism, for the most part, is 'self-regulating' in that respect. I wasn't trying to make any hard and fast accusations - just trying to inspect what could be a 'weak spot' - as we've also done with [the L word] in the past - right?

But - to me - the only way hedonism avoids the potential 'weak spot' I'm concentrating on is to pretty much make itself indistinguishable from [the L word]. As far as I can see...


But anyway - we can carry this on whenever you like. Assuming at all...

Well of course you're absolutely correct Ren! And I think I hashed out why this makes me uncomfortable in our Libertarianism thread... and perhaps it should stay in that thread?

The thing about it is unless everyone is self regulating it all falls apart, no?

Let me ask you this; how do we maximize others pleasure? Does this mean we decide what is pleasurable for the other person? How do we go about doing that?

What if our pleasure is opposite of their pleasurable desires? Seems that there would be an impasse.

[_beastie]

beastie wrote:

[is it]... too much to suggest he intervene to prevent real suffering and death? And you ask me HOW should he stop it? He's an omnipotent being, that's how.



Give him some ideas. Maybe he's listening in.

You're the one suggesting that the god you believe in would not allow a fraud like Mormonism to be perpetrated in his name. I point out that the god you and ever other theist believes in allows a whole lot of horrific stuff to occur without intervening. You ask how he's supposed to intervene, I reply he's omnipotent and can do whatever the heck he wants. You tell me to make suggestions.

This is getting bizarre. You think God would stop Mormonism if it were a fraud somehow. It's that big of a deal to God. Man, what an ego. But we already knew your god has an inflated ego and is a narcissist. God allows horrific tragedies and abuses to occur every day, without fail, to large numbers of people, but he won't intervene over that. But let someone USE THE NAME OF HIS SON fraudulently, man, he's all over that.

beastie wrote:
You seriously suggest God should intervene to prevent (one of many) frauds being perpetrated in his son's name...



I think that it is reasonable to believe that Mormonism is not one of many frauds though. Many frauds do not a fraud make.

For the reasons I mentioned initially, I cannot see God perpetuating a lie/fraud of this magnitude.

I know you think it is reasonable to believe that Mormonism is not a fraud. The scientologists, by the way, also think it's reasonable to believe that scientology is not a fraud, yet you called it NUTS.

In the early days of the church, leaders were not shy and politically correct, and were willing to identify the catholic church as the great and abominable whore. Even if you do not go that far, you must admit that it is a fraud, because it claims to be able to perform saving ordinances in the name of Jesus - you know, that guy that God wouldn't allow a major fraud to be perpetrated in his name - and, according to Mormonism, it does not. Hence, fraud. The catholic church overwhelms your Mormonism in terms of magnitude, and yet God is fine allowing this particular fraud to continue.

They are leading people to Jesus. At least within a spectrum of belief and practice.

Well, maybe that's the reason God is allowing Mormonism to continue. You are leading people to Jesus, at least within a spectrum of belief and practice.

Seriously, mg, this is a very weak argument. I think you should retract it. The fact that you can offer a justification for God allowing the other frauds to continue that would also apply to Mormonism and do not recognize it while you're typing it leads me to believe this argument of yours is not well thought out.

by the way, I really want to know why scientology is "nuts", in your opinion.

[_truth dancer]

Hey MG...

I like our conversations as well! :-)

I think the teachings of the LDS church today have reached a stage in their evolution/development where they are on the whole, good and moral. Now, if I lived at/in another time and in another place and observed the disciples of Christ/God functioning within the environmental conditions/culture that made them part and parcel of who they are, I would be tempted to look down on them or tend to judge/criticize them. But I think I would be in the wrong by doing so.

I'm not trying to judge another time or place. I'm talking about today.

I completely acknowledge that what seems right, good, caring, loving, honest, holy to ME, may be wrong, but would God want a person to live in ways that feel unholy? Or agree with beliefs that feel harmful or cruel?

Again, I'm not making a judgment on what is absolutely "good" or "evil"... I'm suggesting that there is value in living in ways one feels/thinks/believes are in the highest good, or most nobel, or most loving and true.


truth dancer wrote:

TD earlier:

Why would God set up a church that inhibits spiritual growth, creates rules that are unhealthy, asks people to do horrible things to each other? Why would God set up a church that makes truth seem like lies, and lies seem like truth? Why would God set up a church that only a handful of humans would possibly believe? Why would God set up a plan that seems so horrible and unfair? Why would God set up a system that feels in opposition to life, existence, and goodness? Etc. etc. etc.

MG: As I said, the church looks less and less the way you describe it as time goes on. The church is a culture within a culture made up of people that live within a given time and space. I don't think it's fair to judge others that are not within our current culture/time/space. I think that if God is involved, it's only to the extent that he has set up a pretty gosh darn good laboratory for learning without a whole lot of interference.

Again I'm not judging them suggesting they should or should not be a specific way. I'm just saying that to me, there are many teachings, doctrines, beliefs that feel very unholy and cruel, not to mention untrue and unreal....even today.

Yes, we all must base our lives on some, "IFs" but to base one's life on a series of HUGE "ifs" that seem nonsensical (to me), doesn't seem wise.

Does that make sense?

~dancer~

[_mentalgymnast]

beastie wrote:

[is it]... too much to suggest he intervene to prevent real suffering and death? And you ask me HOW should he stop it? He's an omnipotent being, that's how.



Give him some ideas. Maybe he's listening in.

You're the one suggesting that the god you believe in would not allow a fraud like Mormonism to be perpetrated in his name. I point out that the god you and ever other theist believes in allows a whole lot of horrific stuff to occur without intervening. You ask how he's supposed to intervene, I reply he's omnipotent and can do whatever the heck he wants. You tell me to make suggestions.

Forget Mormonism for a moment. What would you suggest to God that he/she/it do in order to fix disease, poverty, war, cruelty and abuse, corrupt politicians <g>, and the whole spectrum of bad things that happen on this planet? You're smart, but not omnipotent. Meet God halfway. What would you suggest?

I hear you saying that there is some way that God COULD fix the messy things in the world since he is omnipotent. And since he can't or apparently doesn't want to, you connect this "problem" with God's interference or non-interference with religious practice and belief. Apples and oranges. One deals with the natural state of the world in which we live. Guns, Germs, and Steel sorts of developments and changes. The other has to do with choosing/not choosing God, and to what extent God is worshipped or followed. Differences between the makeup of the apple and the orange could go on.

God works within the natural world. The natural world takes its course. It is difficult to see/observe what God's objectives are behind the scenes. His ways truly are inscrutable.

C'mon beastie, help God out. What could an omnipotent being do to fix things?

This is getting bizarre. You think God would stop Mormonism if it were a fraud somehow.

I do.

God allows horrific tragedies and abuses to occur every day, without fail, to large numbers of people, but he won't intervene over that.

Help him fix it beastie.

But let someone USE THE NAME OF HIS SON fraudulently, man, he's all over that.

As I've mentioned before, I believe the CofJCofLDS is a special case. We may have to agree to disagree on that.

I know you think it is reasonable to believe that Mormonism is not a fraud. The scientologists, by the way, also think it's reasonable to believe that scientology is not a fraud, yet you called it NUTS.

Yes. But there is some good that comes out of it. Belief systems are along a spectrum of goodness and light.

In the early days of the church, leaders were not shy and politically correct, and were willing to identify the catholic church as the great and abominable whore. Even if you do not go that far, you must admit that it is a fraud, because it claims to be able to perform saving ordinances in the name of Jesus...

Beastie, I said earlier (I'm assuming you read my post): "It is/was a long time for an apostate church to be functioning as though it were the true church of Christ. And it still makes that claim. Of course the LDS church would say that God has made it known that the fullness of God's truth/church is not on the earth and thus the Catholic Church is apostate. But hey, you've got to first get people to listen...then to believe. No small feat."

Could God have come out and said it any earlier?

...you know, that guy that God wouldn't allow a major fraud to be perpetrated in his name - and, according to Mormonism, it does not. Hence, fraud. The catholic church overwhelms your Mormonism in terms of magnitude, and yet God is fine allowing this particular fraud to continue.

No. He has spoken out against it. Those that have eyes to see and ears to hear and have the opportunity to do so are being shown that the Catholic Church is an apostate Christianity.

So God has stepped in and exposed a fraud for what it is as a result of restoring Christ's church in its fullness.

Seriously, mg, this is a very weak argument. I think you should retract it. The fact that you can offer a justification for God allowing the other frauds to continue that would also apply to Mormonism and do not recognize it while you're typing it leads me to believe this argument of yours is not well thought out.

I believe it is. You have not convinced me otherwise. Keep trying!

Regards,
MG

by the way, I really want to know why scientology is "nuts", in your opinion.

This may help:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientology_controversy

Scientology controversies might be better discussed on another thread. I'm not personally interested in investing the time to discuss it though.
MG

[_beastie]

As I've mentioned before, I believe the CofJCofLDS is a special case. We may have to agree to disagree on that.

Special pleading. Circular reasoning.

You're essentially saying that one of the reasons you believe the LDS church is true is because God wouldn't allow a fraud of such magnitude to exist.

When pointed out that other religious frauds of equal or greater magnitude exist, you say that the LDS church is a special case.

When you, yourself, say that God allows these other frauds to exist because they, in their own way, bring people to Jesus in a certain way, and then it's pointed out to you that the same could be said of LDS, you again, say the LDS is a special case.

The only reason it's a special case is because you believe it's true. Hence, your entire argument is circular reasoning. The LDS church is exempt from the logic you apply to other faiths because it's true, and the fact that you exempt it from the logic you apply to other faiths is evidence it's true.

I repeat, this is not well thought out.

You tell me to specify what God could do about atrocities, and then assert I'm supposed to help God. Perhaps that is the same expectation he has for fraudulent faiths. I'm dead certain that EV critics would assert that they are helping God by demonstrating the falsity of the LDS church, the same way you think the LDS church demonstrates the falsity of the catholic church.

by the way, I am familiar with the beliefs of scientology. I'm asking you what YOU believe to be NUTS.

[_truth dancer]

Hi MG... :-)

OK... you say that God stepped in to enlighten people with information that the Catholic church is not the true church... but it took a long time? Eighteen hundred years or so?

Well, maybe God is allowing the LDS church to go on for two thousand years before he steps in and tells the world that it is wrong.

Or maybe all the folks that suggest the LDS church is wrong are in tune with God and in reality, God has indeed sent the message to the world that the LDS church is not the true church.

Or maybe God is helping us learn about the universe and nature so we will forget the nonsense of the past and live in harmony with reality as we let go of harmful myths.

~dancer~

[_beastie]

Another point - the televangelist that you think God allows to continue using his son's name fraudulently because they do lead people to Jesus in some way are also usually teaching their flock that the LDS church is of satan.

But God allows that?

God does work in mysterious ways, I guess.