Mormonism's accomodating nature

[_Runtu]

The Spirit does not testify to falsehood. The Spirit testifies to truth. So a person will never get a witness from the Spirit that says "this is not true."

I did.

[_BishopRic]

The Spirit does not testify to falsehood. The Spirit testifies to truth. So a person will never get a witness from the Spirit that says "this is not true."

I did.

Yeah well that was the spirit of the devil!

~Charity

[_John Larsen]

One way to cut down on 1/7th of the pollution from industry is to shut the factories down on Sunday. All kinds of savings in energy, travel,eet. for people only going to Church, but not shopping, entertainments, etc.

How's that?

Shutting down a factory one day a week would not decrease consumer demand. It would only shift production to other facilities. Each of these facilities would have an environmental footprint that would require the expense of more resources, land and energy to operate. Furthermore, in most production areas, their are startup and close-down costs to production. It is actually a cost and energy savings to keep production going 24 hours in many manufacturing processes. Your proposed solution would be an environmental catastrophe.

John

[Guest]

The Spirit does not testify to falsehood. The Spirit testifies to truth. So a person will never get a witness from the Spirit that says "this is not true."

According to whom, exactly?

Did the Spirit tell you that? Or a man claiming to speak on behalf of the same?

Joseph Smith claimed to have been told, indeed, that certain things were "not true," when he asked about them. Was he wrong to ask?

The Holy Ghost is described in the scriptures as the Testator. That means to truth. You cannot testify to what is false. This is part of the scientiific paradigm,. too You can know what you observe. You cannot know/assume that something is the opposite of what you observe. That is why statistical analyses are never stated as 100%.

Joseph Smith was told by revelation. I don't beelieve there is ever one instance of him saying that he felt the confirmation of the Spirit that something was wrong. His gift as a prophet is something different from the discernment given to those not prophets.

[_the road to hana]

Joseph Smith was told by revelation.

Again, according to whom?

[_charity]

Joseph Smith was told by revelation.

Again, according to whom?

Please stay with the discussion, here. You stated that Joseph Smith claimed to be told by the Spirit that some things were false.

I replied he claimed to be told by revelation, which is not the same thing.

Then you jumped out the question and tried to change the discussion to whether or not he received revelation.

Nice try. But I am not following down your rabbitt track.

[_the road to hana]

Joseph Smith was told by revelation.

Again, according to whom?

Please stay with the discussion, here. You stated that Joseph Smith claimed to be told by the Spirit that some things were false.

I replied he claimed to be told by revelation, which is not the same thing.

Then you jumped out the question and tried to change the discussion to whether or not he received revelation.

Nice try. But I am not following down your rabbitt track.

No rabbit track. Joseph Smith's claims, whether an angel, a spirit/The Spirit, or deity, inspiration, revelation, or otherwise, are according to whom?

[Guest]

Joseph Smith was told by revelation.

Again, according to whom?

Please stay with the discussion, here. You stated that Joseph Smith claimed to be told by the Spirit that some things were false.

I replied he claimed to be told by revelation, which is not the same thing.

Then you jumped out the question and tried to change the discussion to whether or not he received revelation.

Nice try. But I am not following down your rabbitt track.

No rabbit track. Joseph Smith's claims, whether an angel, a spirit/The Spirit, or deity, inspiration, revelation, or otherwise, are according to whom?

If you are going to wiggle out of talking about how inspiration comes because you deny the basic premise, there is nothing to talk about.

Edited to add: Think about this.

#1.I made a statement that the Spirit confirms truth, not error.
#2. You said Joseph Smith said he had been told that things were in error.
#3. I said Joseph claimed revelation about things in error, but not from the Spirit.
#4. You asked, in essence, if anyone could confirm the revelations, or if only Joseph said it.

So if you don't accept inspiritation or revelation in the first place, why are we even talking about this?

[_the road to hana]

Joseph Smith was told by revelation.

Again, according to whom?

Please stay with the discussion, here. You stated that Joseph Smith claimed to be told by the Spirit that some things were false.

I replied he claimed to be told by revelation, which is not the same thing.

Then you jumped out the question and tried to change the discussion to whether or not he received revelation.

Nice try. But I am not following down your rabbitt track.

No rabbit track. Joseph Smith's claims, whether an angel, a spirit/The Spirit, or deity, inspiration, revelation, or otherwise, are according to whom?

If you are going to wiggle out of talking about how inspiration comes because you deny the basic premise, there is nothing to talk about.

Point out where I've denied the basic premise.

Again, Joseph Smith's claims are according to whom?

[_charity]

Point out where I've denied the basic premise.

Again, Joseph Smith's claims are according to whom?

I edited my previous post while you were posting this.

Spiritual confirmation and revelation are by nature private events. Joseph's claims of revelation are according to Joseph, confirmed in individuals by the spiritual witness. So by whom? By Joseph. By me. By other faithful members.