Religious Claims Cannot Be Falsified

[_Darth J]

Your comment only makes sense in the context of claiming that belief in the LDS Church has superior truth value because more people are going to listen to it.

What terrible reading comprehension. i didn't say anything about more people going to listen to it.

"In the mean time we'll see how well the claims of Mormonism ring in the ears of others too."

My point is merely you can go and promote any old story you want. In the wake of that Mormonism will still go out to promote its own religion. Your reading comprehension is proven abysmal again.

But what would be the basis for choosing Mormonism over any other old story, since you are so opposed to evidence other than "faith"? Since you based your belief in Mormonism on the "evidence" of your "faith," how is a person who does not already have faith in Mormonism arrive at a belief in Mormonism?

How are these people supposed to determine whether their interpretations of their spiritual experiences are accurate if they (a) don't already have faith in Mormonism and (b) are supposed to have "faith" in a vacuum, and uncouple their interpretations of their experiences from objective reality?

Wait, wait: let me guess. Is it that we have faith that our faith is true?

However, I stand corrected. Assuming that your post should be read in a context that has some kind of coherent meaning was indeed a straw man.

Sadly straw man is the name of your silly little but obviously hostile game.

And we all hate straw men, so I will henceforth refrain from imputing some kind of cogent, intelligible meaning to your banter, since that would be responding to a point that you are not making.

[Guest]

-

[_The Mighty Builder]

All this can end now, Quasimodo and I (given the time) are going to start an Internet Religion that far exceeds anything a God/Mormon Man God/Man made Religion can provide.

Basically if you have an Internet connection you are SAVED. If not you're Damned.

[_sock puppet]

Until 18 months ago, I was a believing Mormon just like you, Stem. I know for sure that faith is not evidence. And I would know it even if I'd never had faith, because I know what evidence is, and faith doesn't meet the definition, other than evidence for your internal state of mind.

Perhaps you left 18 mos ago because you don't understand faith. it didn't comport with you very well. It wasn't surely evidence. If that was the case to me, I'd probably be gone too. But sadly, I simply can't deny the evidence I've recevied via spiritual experience. if you only understood...

I don't understand faith.

Thank God I don't 'understand faith'.

[_Drifting]

Faith is confidence or trust in a person or thing, or a belief that is not based on proof. In religion, faith is a belief in a transcendent reality, a religious teacher, a set of teachings or a Supreme Being. Generally speaking, it is offered as a means by which the truth of the proposition, "things will turn out well in the end," can be enjoyed in the present and secured in the future. This faith appeals to transcendent reality, or that reality which is beyond the range of normal physical experience (e.g. the future).

Ah, I get it now - Faith is another word for gambling...

[_Some Schmo]

This has been a very interesting and informative thread. I had no idea Joe and Brigham were stool pushers, but it totally makes sense to me. In fact, as soon as I read it, I had a spiritual witness or the truthfulness of it. Given the church's stand on homosexuality and how much they try to stamp it out, it's obvious that in reality, they're still in the closet. Hopefully the church one day has the courage to come out and openly admit how gay it is.

I am so moved right now. This has been a profound spiritual experience for me. Imagining Joe and Brigham 69ing each other and taking turns sucking santorum fills me with the holy spirit like little else in my life has. I'm getting all misty here. Thank you for this precious revelation.

[_sock puppet]

I didn't mean to offend you at all. I simply think your faith was misunderstood by yourself.

What basis do you have for thinking that?

Buffalo, you are so damned persistent. I know you have already learned this, but the essence of stem is having no basis for what he things.

[_Buffalo]

What basis do you have for thinking that?

Based on your dogmatic claims that my faith is not evidence--little do you know.

If a lifelong member of the GOP quits in disgust and becomes a Libertarian, did he never understand the GOP?

You can't even articulate the believing position correctly - it's not your faith that is supposed to be evidence, it's the spiritual witness you received. I used to consider that evidence too - until new evidence made me reconsider.

[_Buffalo]

Based on your dogmatic claims that my faith is not evidence--little do you know.

Buffalo, he knows you didn't understand it based on your failure to share his cherished beliefs.

Apparently so.

[_stemelbow]

What terrible reading comprehension. i didn't say anything about more people going to listen to it.

DJ responds quoting me as if I contradicted myself: "In the mean time we'll see how well the claims of Mormonism ring in the ears of others too."
DJ, lets think this through. I know you don’t have time for thinking things through at all, but this really isn’t that hard. You claimed I appealed to the bandwagon fallacy explaining your position thusly: “Your comment only makes sense in the context of claiming that belief in the LDS Church has superior truth value because more people are going to listen to it.”

You are being silly. I did not say anything about more people listening to the message of Mormonism at all. I didn’t even say Mormonism is correct in this. Your reading comprehension is so pervasively poor. I now get the projection that you often resort to when you whine about my reading abilities. Sadly it appears you’re just so blinded by your agenda and hostility you simply won’t pause to read and pay attention to me. Its adorable though. That’s for sure.

[quote=”DJ”]But what would be the basis for choosing Mormonism over any other old story, since you are so opposed to evidence other than "faith"? Since you based your belief in Mormonism on the "evidence" of your "faith," how is a person who does not already have faith in Mormonism arrive at a belief in Mormonism?[/quote]

Seriously? I thought you were Mormon once. I actually thought you had been on a mission at some point. And you ask this? Do you understand at all what experiences make up faith. Faith is based on something. Its not just arbitrary guessing. For most people who join up they join up because they feel they ought to attribute their experiences as evidence or reason to believe. Those experiences make up faith. I would say every person has some faith. Many don’t realize it though.

How are these people supposed to determine whether their interpretations of their spiritual experiences are accurate if they (a) don't already have faith in Mormonism and (b) are supposed to have "faith" in a vacuum, and uncouple their interpretations of their experiences from objective reality?

What a ridiculous set of questions considering the comments I’ve made.

And we all hate straw men, so I will henceforth refrain from imputing some kind of cogent, intelligible meaning to your banter, since that would be responding to a point that you are not making.

It does seem that you often go on and on arguing things I did not even say. This thread, again, serves as a fine example of that. Thanks.