mentalgymnast wrote:Subjective observation of a large organization tells something about what is at the core. The reason I bring up the PEW study and the positive benefits to individuals and society as a result of the church moving abroad in the world is mainly to bring home the observation that:
A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit.
Matthew 7:18
This would be incorrect. This actually represents the absolutest POV. People can be good and bad, just as a church can do bad and good. The LDS has done both just as Joseph Smith has. I would not view it as evil.
There are those critics who would call the church itself evil or a cult. I think that the evidence demonstrates otherwise.
I don't view it as either.
No, this doesn't prove the the LDS church is God's church or that God exists, but it does show that the gospel and plan of salvation/exaltation as taught by the CofJCofLDS produces results that are exemplary.
Exemplary is to subjective, and your bias is coming through again. I think Members are good people and the church teaches people to be good for the most part.
There is something special/unique about the church and its mission/purpose in the world. The number of temples scattered throughout the world and their purpose speaks visually of this fact.
There are lots of unique in the world. This doesn't mean much unless you can show how it is related to the church core truth claims.
Your view is that the Book of Mormon is not true and that Joseph Smith made it all up. You have defaulted to evidence which supports your POV. This in turn acts as a support to your conclusion that Joseph then made up a religion. You've chosen to either ignore evidence that doesn't support your personal worldview or downplay it and ask for more.
That's a huge assumption, one that is completely wrong. I would rather the church be true, so any evidence in favor of it I would be more then willing to evaluate.
Yet your evidence is acceptable and without reproof and the final word.
I never said that, nor do I think that. I don't know many here that would either, but interesting that you seem to think there is.
I think that everyone has a bias one way or the other and looks for evidence that will "float their boat".
It works both ways.
Of course it works both ways, but apologists never seem to want to acknowledge two things. One that bias is not equal from one individual to another, nor does it mean some can do better at minimizing this bias. The other problem is you are talking to people who at least at one time if not even now have bias in favor of the church who have concluded based on the evidence, both physical and spiritual, that the church is not what it claims.
What are you really seeking for as a sign that God exists, and why do you seek to circumnavigate any and all evidence, physical or spiritual, that would point you towards a personal God?
Incorrect. I would not mind at all to find out God existed. You seem to be the one who can not handle the opposite, so even with lack of evidence you want to default to belief that God exists.
You seem to be a strict and very dogmatic materialist in need of absolute and incontrovertible proof without any reproach, through your five senses exclusively.
Not at all. See above for my response to your scripture quote. The problem I see with apologists is that they want to ignore the physical senses which have proven much more reliable to what they think is communication from the divine, yet can't show any reliable consistency from it.
OTOH, I would surmise that you are convinced that you are doing everything the "right" way/fashion in your own search for truth and those of us that seek faith with understanding are the folks barking up the wrong tree and being duped by those that seek power and prestige. That someday if we are bright enough and honest enough with ourselves, we'll see the light.
You seem to be the one who is trying to convince yourself the church is true. I have been there. I have lived and done it the LDS way for a very long time. I think I may have some understanding of LDS faith. It's new understanding that I realize it was a blind faith, which is not what I considered to be a good faith.
It all comes down to choice and evidence that meets the individual criteria of the seeker. It is a personal path that we each must travel alone. As our paths cross, we either find ourselves in agreement or disagreement.
I could not choose to believe the church is true any more then I could choose to believe in most of the other deities, supernatural, Bigfoot, etc people claim exist. The choice I did make that got me where I am today is the choice of wanting the truth and following the evidence where ever it lead. If it where t9 lead back into the church them great, but I think it almost impossible considering the evidence both spiritual and physical that I am aware of. I do agree that some have made a choice to believe regardless of the evidence. I would say Zee's wife is probably heading down this path right now. If they do end up happier then great. I am not really here to change what you want to believe.