Cognitive Dissonance -- It Sucks

[_Jason Bourne]

By the witness of the Spirit as I said. You, on the other hand, cannot possibly have facts to refute that.

And you do not have fact to prove it. The alleged witness of the spirit is totally subjective either way. It is essentially useless in proving the truth of anything. You can say the spirit tells you it is true and others do and can say they have a witness that either what you believe is false or what they believe is true and their belief contradicts yours. Rational and critical thinking demands more than this. This is why I point out frequently that the history and character of anyone making claims to grand visions and revelation is important when evaluating if their claim can be relied on.

[_Jason Bourne]

..and spread the gospel truths to unwitting members and nonmembers alike! Just today I used my new weapon in my battle against LDS Inc. Using my new iPhone, I showed a Youtube clip of the temple ceremony to a small group of coworkers after one asked about Romney's Jesus jammies. Youtube is not viewable at my workplace, so being able to use the iPhone's EDGE network to show this stuff is powerful.

I ended our little movie time by giving them all the sure-sign-o-the-nail handshake and revealing the secret names of my wife and I.

My joke about the sixth point of fellowship hug at the veil has em rolling in the isles!

So, nope, I leave the cult, but will not leave it alone because the Mormons "leave the world, but can't seem to leave the world alone".

Knock yourself out jackass.

[_charity]

If you are a solid believer and have no doubts or questions then why are you here? On one thread you said God will not give archaeological evidence of the Book of Mormon because it would destroy faith. But you would leap at it if it was there. And id what you say is true then why is there such evidence for the Bible? Charity, I think you have cog dis and you prolific posting on such message boards is evidence of it.

I am probably here because of unresolved childhood conflicts. I wanted to play football, but I couldn't because I was a girl. I love a good scrap, and I love to win. I am very competitive. A lot of what is here is like shooting fish in a barrel, but hey, it's a good game.

What I really said is that I don't know if there will be archeological proofs of the Book of Mormon to the convincing of critics. I think they will deny, and run and hide whatever is found. And I don't there is a lot of time left before the Second Coming. I sort of like the Mayan calendar end of an era and the beginning of a new one thing that is coming up fairly soon.

And then, too, I am wordy. And when people put my name in a post, I sort of feel responsible to respond back.

[_charity]

And no, it is not possible to KNOW that the Church is false. .

Why is that? If one can know it is true in your world why can one not know it is false? Perhaps the Holy Ghost told them it is false? What then?[/quote]

Because, even in science, you can't prove a negative. You can only say that you haven't observed it yet. But then it may pop up. For instance, the ceolacanth. A fish that was supposed to have gone extinct millions of years ago. Nowhere to be found on the earth today. Until they found one.

And we have had this conversation before on the board. The Holy Ghost confirms truth. He doesn't confirm error.

[_ludwigm]

... Mormonism. Islam. Christianity. And a host of other destructive ideologies must be confronted because they're not good for the human condition; they're fantasies and lies.
...
“Six Degrees Could Change the World” on National Geographic is coming next week. It will be science. Religious mythologies abhor science.
The process of educating people begins with the birth of every child. The parents of that child want him/her to follow in the parents’ religious persuasion. Many religious organizations baptize infants. They tend to follow that up with religious education which, of course, is not education but rather indoctrination.
Public education is forced to tread lightly in many locations in the USA on science. Kansas prohibited the use of the word “evolution” in all text books for a time. It was the Kansas State Board of Education.
See: Kansas evolution hearings
See: Kansas education board downplays evolution
See: Kansas Restores Evolution Standards for Science Classes 2001
It’s been a long struggle for education in Kansas and in other states. Look at the popularity of Huckabee in the Bible states. He is a creationist and a biblical literalist. He’s running for President of the US.
Don’t misunderstand me here. I’m for information and education. It’s just that it has always had to struggle against superstition/religion and has often been suppressed in favor of superstition/religion.
Neither you nor I will likely live to see the day when an acknowledged agnostic becomes President of the US who favors open, complete, unfettered information and education absent some (even if vague) expression of certainty about a God myth.
JAK

Kansas?? US?? Presidents of the US?? Huckabee?? GWBush??

If this trend continues, US will **
** please tell me an antonym of cap, defy, eclipse, efface, exceed , flog, outdo, outshine, outstrip, overshadow, pass, surmount, surpass, top, or transcend

Fortunately, I'm living in Europe. We are forward by 7-8 hrs in time zone, and two hundred years forward in thinking. I'm sorry, again and again.

[_beastie]

A lot of what is here is like shooting fish in a barrel, but hey, it's a good game.

LOL!

Yes, Charity, you whup us with your hands tied behind your back.

[_Ren]

A lot of what is here is like shooting fish in a barrel, but hey, it's a good game.

"It's true because the spirit told me it is"
*BANG* "DIE FISH!!" MAAHHHAAAHHHAA!

[_Jason Bourne]

And no, it is not possible to KNOW that the Church is false.

Why is that? If one can know it is true in your world why can one not know it is false? Perhaps the Holy Ghost told them it is false? What then

I think I mispoke. I meant it is just as possible to KNOW the Church is false as it is to know the Church is true.

Because, even in science, you can't prove a negative. You can only say that you haven't observed it yet. But then it may pop up. For instance, the ceolacanth. A fish that was supposed to have gone extinct millions of years ago. Nowhere to be found on the earth today. Until they found one.

And LDS, me, you any of them, cannot prove a positive through the subjective thing LDS call a testimony.

And we have had this conversation before on the board. The Holy Ghost confirms truth. He doesn't confirm error

Allegedly the Holy Ghost can warn us of danger and other pitfalls as well as give us a stupor of thought that is a no answer. Allegedly the Holy Ghost can tell me a decision I have made say on a career choice is the wrong decision so the Holy Ghost can confirm a negative. You are simply wrong there. But the main point is the so called witness of the Holy Ghost is simply subjective and that is it. It cannot hbe used to prove anything either way.

[_the road to hana]

And no, it is not possible to KNOW that the Church is false. .

Why is that? If one can know it is true in your world why can one not know it is false? Perhaps the Holy Ghost told them it is false? What then?

Because, even in science, you can't prove a negative. You can only say that you haven't observed it yet. But then it may pop up. For instance, the ceolacanth. A fish that was supposed to have gone extinct millions of years ago. Nowhere to be found on the earth today. Until they found one.

And we have had this conversation before on the board. The Holy Ghost confirms truth. He doesn't confirm error.[/quote]

According to you.

Not necessarily according to the Holy Ghost.

I could say, "The Queen of England doesn't do thus-and-such." But that doesn't necessarily make it so.

[_charity]

A lot of what is here is like shooting fish in a barrel, but hey, it's a good game.

LOL!

Yes, Charity, you whup us with your hands tied behind your back.

Why would you assume that I was referring to you? You are really intelligent, well read, articulate. You actually discuss issues. I don't agree with you on hardly anything, but I respect your abilities.

On the other hand, the "fish" are the one who only know they are opposed to the Church and their arguments are mostly "neener neener I found this on an anti-Mormon website and I can cut and paste." And they tend to display their ignorance of many issues. I would give examples, but then that might make some particular posters feel insulted. Oh, yes, and they can't express themselves without name calling. And when you call them on something, they ignore it. One example comes to mind. One poster cupt and pasted a link to Jeff Lindsay's website in the plagiarism thread. Evidently only reading the word "plagiarized" in the google search, he/she didn't even read the article to know it was pro-Mormon. That poster never acknowledged that big goof. Talk about a fish in a barrel!

This is something that I have noticed. I make a comment which could apply to a limited number of posters, but others take it as though it applies to themselves. If you don't think you are a "fish" why would you think I meant you? I most frequently make statements that aren't absolutes. "A lOld Testament of what goes on here" does not say it all is.

So, I would think the reasonable response there would be, from you, anyway, "Yep, there are some people here who don't present the anti-Mormon cause very well. I am glad I am not one of them."