Apologetics is another way of saying 'convoluted testimony'

[_Bee Eff]

Years before I came across apologetics on the internet I had strong doubts. It seemed like members had become "elaborate excuse makers for the lord". Reading apologetics for the first confirmed that initial impression.

Just remember that all the other religions have their own apologists as well, they (apologists in general) are often the Pharisees and Sadducees in my opinion. This doesn't make them all bad, but quite a few probably are a little high on their own import.

[_Gadianton]

bee eff,

Can you be a little more clear on what you consider to be "thinking?" I believe there are a number of positions I could play that will force you to deny your God and Savior. Those who know me, know there is nothing more satisfying to me than to see my friends deny their faith. I'd like the chance to help you abandon the foolish traditions of your fathers.

[_karl61]

Years before I came across apologetics on the internet I had strong doubts. It seemed like members had become "elaborate excuse makers for the lord". Reading apologetics for the first confirmed that initial impression.

Just remember that all the other religions have their own apologists as well, they (apologists in general) are often the Pharisees and Sadducees in my opinion. This doesn't make them all bad, but quite a few probably are a little high on their own import.

Antiquity of the Jews (a.k.a. my spin on the hebrew Bible) by Josephus is apologetics.

[_Chap]

Possibilities exist that allow the LDS Church to be true, that is good enough for me. I don't need a solid secularly based secientific evidentiary argument to support my belief, the possibility that it is true suffices in the presence of my personal spiritual experience.

BF is of course is free to talk about his 'personal spiritual experiences' as much as he wants.

But what goes in inside BF's head is not very interesting to anybody else, so let's leave those experiences out of this for the moment.

More interesting would be these questions:

1. Does the proposition ""the LDS church is true" entail (in BF's view) the truth of any facts about the world outside BF's head? (E.g. that certain events involving material objects happened in certain places at certain times)

2. If the answer to the first question is yes, could we have a list of some of those facts? (I would speculate that they would include Joseph Smith finding real gold plates at one end of the historical spectrum, but it would be interesting to know what facts about ancient history BF might also believe to be entailed by the "truth" of the LDS church, such as perhaps a universal flood, successive colonisations of the New World by "Jaredites' and "Nephites" and so on.)

[_Sethbag]

Bee Eff, please listen to this audio from Warren Jeffs, and listen especially at the following locations:

0:27 where he instructions them to pray to Heavenly Father
2:05 where he asks them if these "words of the prophets" feel right
3:37 where another guy discusses that the priesthood of God is everything, and that the Holy Spirit is that power of that priesthood - of course it's the FLDS men's priesthood he's talking about, but he sounded like any LDS GA as he spoke. He next discusses being filled with the Holy Spirit of God.
Just before 9:00 he talks about how they have a prophet to administer the laws and ordinances to them.

And then listen to this audio also from Warren Jeffs.
0:14 he instructs them to pray about it (plural marriage amongst the FLDS)
0:53 he refers to trusting in the Prophet and the Lord, with a living faith, that they will be prepared to "abide this law"
2:23 he starts relating an anecdote about how a girl went to the Prophet, and asked to be given a husband, and the Prophet "revealed" that she was to be a plural wife, and told her to whom she belonged. Then he tells about a young man who went and asked the Prophet for a wife, and then that afternoon a girl went in and asked for a husband, and the Lord told the Prophet that the girl was to belong to the man
4:10 or so he says God will guide the Prophet to make sure she's given to the right husband, etc.
6:33 or so faith in the Lord Jesus Christ, and in his Prophet (Rulon Jeffs, and then Warren Jeffs) is the way to celestial life

What's my point? My point is that he uses the same kind of language, talking about the same Lord, the same Jesus, the same Spirit, the same Holy Spirit, the same word Prophet, etc. And it's all the FLDS Prophet, the FLDS version of things, that he's talking about. He really believes it, and so do they. He really believes that they receive confirmation of the truth of their beliefs through the Holy Spirit.

Obviously, from the LDS point of view, these people are committing abominations in the Lord's sight. It's inconceivable from the LDS point of view that the FLDS receive an actual, true witness through the Holy Spirit that their beliefs and practices, and Prophet, are true. And yet you can't tell the FLDS this. No Siree, to them it's all patently obvious that they're right - because of the spiritual witness that they've had.

How do you know that your spiritual witness is more reliable than theirs? It's patently obvious when looking at the FLDS that they are able to spin a tale about the Holy Spirt, and induce "spiritual" feelings in their own members, which they interpret as the actual Holy Ghost. They "feel" the Spirit, just like you claim to feel the Spirit.

What I'm telling you is that the spiritual feelings you feel are just as manmade and man-induced as the ones the FLDS feel. You really should consider carefully just why you're convinced that, although the FLDS spiritual confirmations are obviously bogus, yours aren't, and you can tell that they aren't, because if they were, you'd know.

I think it's axiomatic that almost nobody on Earth who believes they've had a spiritual confirmation of their church's truthfulness believes that there's a possibility that they're wrong, and yet almost everyone on Earth who believes they've had a spiritual confirmation of their church's truthfulness is pretty darn sure that the spiritual confirmations others have received (ie: from other churches that aren't true) are either flat out wrong, or at least they are mistaken in their interpretation of it.

We humans are incredibly short-sighted this way. Anyhow, Bee Eff, your own spiritual confirmations are man-induced in the exact same way as the FLDS's and everyone else's is too. And you apparently can't see the truth of my statement for the same reason Warren Jeffs wouldn't either.

ps: Oh, by the way, check out between 6:00 and 6:30 or so in the first video where he says that the husband will tell the wife how he wants everything to be done, and all she has to do is obey. It's really puke-inducing.

[_The Dude]

Welcome, Bee Eff! I see a lot of MADites visiting here. How wonderful this is.

now, unless you are willing to concede your "thinking" as being a fallaceous belief, I am not obliged to concede that my religious beliefs are fallaceous beliefs.

Come on, Bee Eff. Your set of very specific religious beliefs about God and Savior and the meaning of the eternities is a lot more ornate and assuming than the vague notion that "thinking" is real. Belief in thinking is nearly universal and vague, unlike belief in God. It's hard for humans to escape the illusion of "thinking" and it doesn't make a lot of difference anyway as long as you don't become a psychopath (lol). But escaping the illusion of god is a good deal easier and has a lot going for it, as long as you don't become a psychopath. <wink>

Things make a lot more sense without religion and god. I don't see where "thinking ain't real" gets you.

...the possibility that it is true suffices in the presence of my personal spiritual experience.

Hmmm... I don't know how to interpret this.

It sounds like, "the experience was so wonderful that you will take any possibility of its truthfulness and run with it." Naked hope, essentially.

This is interesting because most Mormons mean their spiritual experiences to serve as evidence. They seem to get this epistemology from church meetings and the teachings of prophets.

[_Bee Eff]

Welcome, Bee Eff! I see a lot of MADites visiting here. How wonderful this is.

I was invited because a friend was concerned I was going to become banned due to an interaction I had with a perceived "favorite" at MAD.

now, unless you are willing to concede your "thinking" as being a fallaceous belief, I am not obliged to concede that my religious beliefs are fallaceous beliefs.

Come on, Bee Eff. Your set of very specific religious beliefs about God and Savior and the meaning of the eternities is a lot more ornate and assuming than the vague notion that "thinking" is real. Belief in thinking is nearly universal and vague, unlike belief in God. It's hard for humans to escape the illusion of "thinking" and it doesn't make a lot of difference anyway as long as you don't become a psychopath (lol). But escaping the illusion of god is a good deal easier and has a lot going for it, as long as you don't become a psychopath. <wink>

Things make a lot more sense without religion and god. I don't see where "thinking ain't real" gets you.

Thinking is indeed a nearly universal and vague belief. There is a set of very specific cognitive beliefs about thinking and the meaning of behaviors is a lot more ornate and assuming than the vague notion that "religion" is real. Have you never delved into any of the cognitive schools of psychological thought? If the general populace were to put the same emotion and effort behind their approach to psychology, you would see that the concept of "thinking" really is the exact same as the concept of "religion" as far as the arguments are concerned. Just because you "feel" and have experience that you term "thinking" does not mean that it actually exists, it is a mass delusion that is nearly universally accepted because of supposed nearly innerant (in the opinion of the deluded mass) authorities. I am an atheist if the concept of "thinking" is the deity we are discussing.

The concept of "thinking" has held back A.I. it has severely stunted our ability to truly understand the human condition. Religion did that during the dark ages and still does it to a point today. The concept of "thinking" has almost as significant an impact on advance today as religion does.

As to religion being detrimental, it has shown to be a key factor in the aiding of recovering addicts. The reason is that religion allows one to believe that one is capable of doing something that one believes oneself is capable of, it overrides the limitations falsely placed on onesself. If religion could be applied without the negative restraints that exist in most current religion, restraints I believe are more societal belief and thus taint most people's view of their own religion (including Mormons oftentimes), religion could open doors that would otherwise take much time to overcome.

]...the possibility that it is true suffices in the presence of my personal spiritual experience.

Hmmm... I don't know how to interpret this.

It sounds like, "the experience was so wonderful that you will take any possibility of its truthfulness and run with it." Naked hope, essentially.

This is interesting because most Mormons mean their spiritual experiences to serve as evidence. They seem to get this epistemology from church meetings and the teachings of prophets.

Personal experience is personal evidence. It is strong, but it is not general evidence and cannot be used in an honest persuasion, in my opinion. I state that I have personal experience as an explanation of why I personally grasp at a "long shot" possibility, not as a persuading argument. Most of my post was merely a statement of my opinion, not intended to do more than to present my view of apologetics and the degree of doubt that would need to be presented to myself to impact my belief.

[_Bee Eff]

Bee Eff, please listen to this audio from Warren Jeffs, and listen especially at the following locations:

0:27 where he instructions them to pray to Heavenly Father
2:05 where he asks them if these "words of the prophets" feel right
3:37 where another guy discusses that the priesthood of God is everything, and that the Holy Spirit is that power of that priesthood - of course it's the FLDS men's priesthood he's talking about, but he sounded like any LDS GA as he spoke. He next discusses being filled with the Holy Spirit of God.
Just before 9:00 he talks about how they have a prophet to administer the laws and ordinances to them.

And then listen to this audio also from Warren Jeffs.
0:14 he instructs them to pray about it (plural marriage amongst the FLDS)
0:53 he refers to trusting in the Prophet and the Lord, with a living faith, that they will be prepared to "abide this law"
2:23 he starts relating an anecdote about how a girl went to the Prophet, and asked to be given a husband, and the Prophet "revealed" that she was to be a plural wife, and told her to whom she belonged. Then he tells about a young man who went and asked the Prophet for a wife, and then that afternoon a girl went in and asked for a husband, and the Lord told the Prophet that the girl was to belong to the man
4:10 or so he says God will guide the Prophet to make sure she's given to the right husband, etc.
6:33 or so faith in the Lord Jesus Christ, and in his Prophet (Rulon Jeffs, and then Warren Jeffs) is the way to celestial life

What's my point? My point is that he uses the same kind of language, talking about the same Lord, the same Jesus, the same Spirit, the same Holy Spirit, the same word Prophet, etc. And it's all the FLDS Prophet, the FLDS version of things, that he's talking about. He really believes it, and so do they. He really believes that they receive confirmation of the truth of their beliefs through the Holy Spirit.

Obviously, from the LDS point of view, these people are committing abominations in the Lord's sight. It's inconceivable from the LDS point of view that the FLDS receive an actual, true witness through the Holy Spirit that their beliefs and practices, and Prophet, are true. And yet you can't tell the FLDS this. No Siree, to them it's all patently obvious that they're right - because of the spiritual witness that they've had.

How do you know that your spiritual witness is more reliable than theirs? It's patently obvious when looking at the FLDS that they are able to spin a tale about the Holy Spirt, and induce "spiritual" feelings in their own members, which they interpret as the actual Holy Ghost. They "feel" the Spirit, just like you claim to feel the Spirit.

What I'm telling you is that the spiritual feelings you feel are just as manmade and man-induced as the ones the FLDS feel. You really should consider carefully just why you're convinced that, although the FLDS spiritual confirmations are obviously bogus, yours aren't, and you can tell that they aren't, because if they were, you'd know.

I think it's axiomatic that almost nobody on Earth who believes they've had a spiritual confirmation of their church's truthfulness believes that there's a possibility that they're wrong, and yet almost everyone on Earth who believes they've had a spiritual confirmation of their church's truthfulness is pretty darn sure that the spiritual confirmations others have received (ie: from other churches that aren't true) are either flat out wrong, or at least they are mistaken in their interpretation of it.

We humans are incredibly short-sighted this way. Anyhow, Bee Eff, your own spiritual confirmations are man-induced in the exact same way as the FLDS's and everyone else's is too. And you apparently can't see the truth of my statement for the same reason Warren Jeffs wouldn't either.

ps: Oh, by the way, check out between 6:00 and 6:30 or so in the first video where he says that the husband will tell the wife how he wants everything to be done, and all she has to do is obey. It's really puke-inducing.

Possibly, but I am content in my personal delusion, and will attempt to convince others to enjoy the delusion I enjoy.

[_Bee Eff]

Possibilities exist that allow the LDS Church to be true, that is good enough for me. I don't need a solid secularly based secientific evidentiary argument to support my belief, the possibility that it is true suffices in the presence of my personal spiritual experience.

BF is of course is free to talk about his 'personal spiritual experiences' as much as he wants.

But what goes in inside BF's head is not very interesting to anybody else, so let's leave those experiences out of this for the moment.

More interesting would be these questions:

1. Does the proposition ""the LDS church is true" entail (in BF's view) the truth of any facts about the world outside BF's head? (E.g. that certain events involving material objects happened in certain places at certain times)

2. If the answer to the first question is yes, could we have a list of some of those facts? (I would speculate that they would include Joseph Smith finding real gold plates at one end of the historical spectrum, but it would be interesting to know what facts about ancient history BF might also believe to be entailed by the "truth" of the LDS church, such as perhaps a universal flood, successive colonisations of the New World by "Jaredites' and "Nephites" and so on.)

My post responded to a position on apologetics. Your entire post takes my statements out of context. My statements were not intended to be more than an explanation of my personal position on apologetics. Perhaps your overiding desire to attack my belief is more an obsession than anything. Perhaps you should seek some psychological aid in overcoming your need to jump up and attack religious beliefs.

[_Bee Eff]

bee eff,

Can you be a little more clear on what you consider to be "thinking?" I believe there are a number of positions I could play that will force you to deny your God and Savior. Those who know me, know there is nothing more satisfying to me than to see my friends deny their faith. I'd like the chance to help you abandon the foolish traditions of your fathers.

Anything that is not observed by anyone other than yourself, and even your personal observation of your own personal "thoughts" is questionable as actual personal evidence as this perception is a part of the questionable concept.