Joey wrote:So given the seemingly concensus that there is no evidence nor support for weddings/marriages, for whatever terms, ever being performed in the ancient Jewish temples, is it fair to conclude that if any church teaches or infers such was the case, that church should be accused of being deceitful?
Being wrong isn't the same as being deceitful. One does not automatically track the other.
(Nevo, Jan 23) And the Melchizedek Priesthood may not have been restored until the summer of 1830, several months after the organization of the Church.
And just when you least expect, the humanity rears its pretty little head.
My sincere commendations to you, harmony, for defending the right. I only wish "the right" was always so clear to your mind as it apparently was in this case.
When I think Daniel is being unfairly attacked, I say so. I've said so often here. Notice that I've never said the same in your case. That should tell you something.
(Nevo, Jan 23) And the Melchizedek Priesthood may not have been restored until the summer of 1830, several months after the organization of the Church.
Joey wrote:So given the seemingly concensus that there is no evidence nor support for weddings/marriages, for whatever terms, ever being performed in the ancient Jewish temples, is it fair to conclude that if any church teaches or infers such was the case, that church should be accused of being deceitful?
Being wrong isn't the same as being deceitful. One does not automatically track the other.
Being wrong with the benefit of knowledge is being deceitful! Conveniently claiming ignorance is not much better!
"It's not so much that FARMS scholarship in the area Book of Mormon historicity is "rejected' by the secular academic community as it is they are "ignored". [Daniel Peterson, May, 2004]
Logic has to do with the structure of arguments, not with the evidence that does or does not "breathe fire into" the logical formulae.
In fact, this happens fairly frequently. Many scientific theories have been advanced without any real evidence behind them, and the evidence came later.
Let me give you a potential real-world example.
Suppose I declare that there is life on the fourth planet of a sun in a certain sector of the Andromeda Galaxy.
Somebody then responds, quite correctly, that there is no evidence to support my claim.
Does that prove that there is no life on the fourth planet of that sun in that sector of the Andromeda Galaxy?
Hardly.
Does it prove that I'm lying?
No.
If I persist in my claim, does that prove that I'm lying?
No. I may believe that I have sufficient reason for my claim. I may even have sufficient reason for my claim, unknown or unrecognized by my critic.
Daniel Peterson wrote:Logic has to do with the structure of arguments, not with the evidence that does or does not "breathe fire into" the logical formulae.
In fact, this happens fairly frequently. Many scientific theories have been advanced without any real evidence behind them, and the evidence came later.
Let me give you a potential real-world example.
Suppose I declare that there is life on the fourth planet of a sun in a certain sector of the Andromeda Galaxy.
Somebody then responds, quite correctly, that there is no evidence to support my claim.
Does that prove that there is no life on the fourth planet of that sun in that sector of the Andromeda Galaxy?
Hardly.
Does it prove that I'm lying?
No.
If I persist in my claim, does that prove that I'm lying?
No. I may believe that I have sufficient reason for my claim. I may even have sufficient reason for my claim, unknown or unrecognized by my critic.
Yes! I remember when Marshal Applewhite hid behind this same reasoning in taking many people with him on the Hale Bob comet. Who could prove that he was lying???
Deceivers don't place a real value on common sense and hope their targets don't as well. Knowledge is not a character of desire for them!
"It's not so much that FARMS scholarship in the area Book of Mormon historicity is "rejected' by the secular academic community as it is they are "ignored". [Daniel Peterson, May, 2004]
harmony wrote:Now wait a minute. This particular attack isn't fair.
Many many people have received what they consider to be divine insight, some on a regular basis. Whether in the temple or outside of the temple isn't really relevant to the gift when it comes. I've received it several times. I've related a few of those times on this board, but not all. It's not fair to slam Daniel for saying he has received answers to his questions while in the temple. I've received answers to my questions while pacing the floor in my living room, bawling my eyes out. Perhaps most people don't receive answers in the temple, but to dogpile onto Daniel when he says he has and demand what those personal answers were isn't fair.
Hello Harmony,
I do not recall anyone attacking Dr. Peterson in the manner you described. However, that aside, you make my point perfectly. Thank you, Madame.
Very Respectfully,
CamNC4Me
In the face of madness, rationality has no power - Xiao Wang, US historiographer, 2287 AD.
Every record...falsified, every book rewritten...every statue...has been renamed or torn down, every date...altered...the process is continuing...minute by minute. History has stopped. Nothing exists except an endless present in which the Ideology is always right.
Joey wrote:Yes! I remember when Marshal Applewhite hid behind this same reasoning in taking many people with him on the Hale Bob comet. Who could prove that he was lying???
Deceivers don't place a real value on common sense and hope their targets don't as well. Knowledge is not a character of desire for them!
RockSlider wrote:I suppose my Software Engineering career of 30+ years has left me with a very myopic understanding of logic/logical
If there's a logical fallacy in my explanation, feel free to identify it.
