sock puppet wrote:Why were mood rings and pet rocks so popular in the 1970s? Seriously, there is an emotional need to be 'taken care of'. Mormonism, like most religions, tell you how to live your life. It puts you back into the prepubescent, serene life. Less worries, just do as you're told. When one considers that he or she is truly responsible for his or her decisions, and thus station in life, it is sobering and for many, it is depressing. Much easier, emotionally, to just do what you are told, with the hope that some grand magistrate will after this life right all wrongs you have endured and suffered in this life. It is also comforting to think that death might not be final, that you might get to 'see grandma' again.
Why is it so popular with academics and "brights" who obviously are aware of these things?
sock puppet wrote:when you consider all the facts and circumstances as a whole, Mormon apologetics is a colossal failure.
If it is so plainly obvious what a fraud Mormonism is, why is it so popular?
Simon, you might keep in mind that Mormonism's growth occurred during the era when the Church was pretty much able to keep the history out of sight. Pandora's box has been opened in the last 20-25 years, and the growth has planed off.
sock puppet wrote:Why were mood rings and pet rocks so popular in the 1970s? Seriously, there is an emotional need to be 'taken care of'. Mormonism, like most religions, tell you how to live your life. It puts you back into the prepubescent, serene life. Less worries, just do as you're told. When one considers that he or she is truly responsible for his or her decisions, and thus station in life, it is sobering and for many, it is depressing. Much easier, emotionally, to just do what you are told, with the hope that some grand magistrate will after this life right all wrongs you have endured and suffered in this life. It is also comforting to think that death might not be final, that you might get to 'see grandma' again.
Why is it so popular with academics and "brights" who obviously are aware of these things?
Are you saying that academics and "brights" do not have emotional needs? Do not have a need to validate the 'faith of their fathers' (rather than realize that their fathers fell victim to Mormonism)?
Last edited by Guest on Thu Jun 02, 2011 4:52 pm, edited 1 time in total.
sock puppet wrote: Are you saying that academics and "brights" do not have emotional needs? Do not have a need to validate the 'faith of their fathers' (rather than realize that theif fathers fell victim to Mormonism)?
Are you saying that you don't have emotional needs? Or that you have emotional needs but are able to see past them, while (at least) hundreds of people more intelligent than both of us combined cannot?
sock puppet wrote: Are you saying that academics and "brights" do not have emotional needs? Do not have a need to validate the 'faith of their fathers' (rather than realize that theif fathers fell victim to Mormonism)?
Are you saying that you don't have emotional needs? Or that you have emotional needs but are able to see past them, while (at least) hundreds of people more intelligent than both of us combined cannot?
I do have emotional needs, but I find that they are better fulfilled in ways that do not involve unfounded mythologies.
Buffalo wrote:If there are mistakes in his assessment of the money digging issue (or any other) feel free to correct him.
I didn't think it was a serious attempt at summarizing the issue at all. Was it? With that, what's the point of quibbling about it, if a seemingly un-serious attempt was made by someone who claims it was all serious? I've a number of times how such attempts at discussion go. That's why I commented on how SP's posts aren't even responsive. But oh well. If you guys think SP's rendition was thoughtful, and "correct" then so be it. Can't really fight against the absurd.
Love ya tons, Stem
I ain't nuttin'. don't get all worked up on account of me.