Is this possible? How?

[_GoodK]

"I don't care" posts are so freakin lame. In the world of online message boards, the only legitmate way to express true apathy is by, and read closely please, NOT POSTING.

Amen.

[_asbestosman]

But can you test whether there was a global flood? Yes.

No you can't. As soon as you bring God or other very powerful agents into the picture, then everything becomes unfalsifiable. Maybe Satan did it.

:O

Did you forget the 'wink' smilie?

edit - did shades disable smilies?

I didn't forget the 'wink'. Somtimes being ambiguous enough to make you question my sanity is part of the fun. 8)

Yes, it looks like smilies are off. Oh well.

[Guest]

:( 8) :D :O ;)

Edit: NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[_wenglund]

What crappy members. They are obviously too lazy to do any research.

That is un-characteristically judgemental of you. My parents and several of my siblings are likewise unfamiliar with much of the list, but it isn't because of laziness or crappy membership, but because their lives have been filled with improving themselves, living good and descent lives in accordance with their beliefs in the gospel, supporting, raising, and taking care of their families, charitable service in the communities, doing their home and visiting teaching, etc.. In other words, they have other priorities than researching the thinks on the list.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[_wenglund]

I would venture to guess that they are also unfamiliar with Judah's inadvertant sexual relations with his daughter-in=law (who he mistook for a prostitute), or Joseph coming to fist-to-cuff with his brother William during a study group in Nauvoo, or Brigham Young's sentiments about dogs in his bedroom, or a host of other historical issues that are irrelevant to belief in the restored gospel of Christ (at least in the minds of many of us believers).

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Except that, unlike you, they all saw quite clearly how these things would (if true) be quite relevant to belief in "the restored gospel". That's why they so emotionally reacted.

Evidently, members aren't as monolithic as some may suppose, and we differ in terms of what we deem relevant, important, and emotionally effecting. I celebrate that diversity.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[Guest]

What crappy members. They are obviously too lazy to do any research.

That is un-characteristically judgemental of you. My parents and several of my siblings are likewise unfamiliar with much of the list, but it isn't because of laziness or crappy membership, but because their lives have been filled with improving themselves, living good and descent lives in accordance with their beliefs in the gospel, supporting, raising, and taking care of their families, charitable service in the communities, doing their home and visiting teaching, etc.. In other words, they have other priorities than researching the thinks on the list.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Blixa was being sarcastic. She was echoing the statements that apologists make when informed that some members are unaware of certain material about the Church.

Didn't you participate in the Cult thread, Wenglund? Rcrocket said something very similar, and I'm pretty sure Coggins did as well in that thread. That's the common mantra seen on MAD when this topic is discussed.

[_It occurs to me . . .]

What crappy members. They are obviously too lazy to do any research.

That is un-characteristically judgemental of you. My parents and several of my siblings are likewise unfamiliar with much of the list, but it isn't because of laziness or crappy membership, but because their lives have been filled with improving themselves, living good and descent lives in accordance with their beliefs in the gospel, supporting, raising, and taking care of their families, charitable service in the communities, doing their home and visiting teaching, etc.. In other words, they have other priorities than researching the thinks on the list.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Wade, Blixa was merely channeling the collective voices of MAD apologists. But then you knew that didn't you? Who of us hasn't been told the same thing when we stated that there were certain facts of the restoration of which we were unaware?

[_krose]

Tarski, did you happen to ask about the age of the earth?

I've recently taken to surveying people (relatives, missionaries, etc.), asking what they believe about things such as evolution, the flood, age of the earth, LGT, and the existence of a large non-Lehite population that absorbed the Lamanites. I do it in a non-confrontational way, so I don't bring up Book of Abraham issues or Smith's polygamy. It's strictly information gathering, to gauge where most LDS believers are in comparison to Internet apologists. So far there is a wide gap.

[_The Nehor]

What crappy members. They are obviously too lazy to do any research.

That is un-characteristically judgemental of you. My parents and several of my siblings are likewise unfamiliar with much of the list, but it isn't because of laziness or crappy membership, but because their lives have been filled with improving themselves, living good and descent lives in accordance with their beliefs in the gospel, supporting, raising, and taking care of their families, charitable service in the communities, doing their home and visiting teaching, etc.. In other words, they have other priorities than researching the thinks on the list.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Wade, Blixa was merely channeling the collective voices of MAD apologists. But then you knew that didn't you? Who of us hasn't been told the same thing when we stated that there were certain facts of the restoration of which we were unaware?

I should point out as I coined the 'crappy' label that it was meant to refer to Infymus.

[_wenglund]

...a host of other historical issues that are irrelevant to belief in the restored gospel of Christ

Heh. Tarski's items are EXACTLY the sort if things that ARE relevant to testing the claims of the otherwise unfalsifiable claims of a given religion.

Can you test whether Joseph Smith actually saw god? no. But can you test whether he was trustworthy? Yes. Can you test whether Jesus turned water into wine? no. But can you test whether there was a global flood? Yes.

And when those 'testable' claims turn out to be false, what does that say about the rest of the 'untestable' claims?

I agree that the listed items can be used as "tests". Where we likely may disagree is on what the listed items may actually be "testing", how much weight the listed items may be given in "testing" whatever, whether the "test" is worthwhile or a priority, and what inductive conclusions, if any, may be drawn from the "test" regarding other things.

Clearly, the fact that familiarity with the items on the list have influenced some members to leave the Church, and have either unaffected or positively influenced the faith of other members, and points inbetween, gives credence to what I am suggesting.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-