Darth J wrote:You don't know "anything" I do, because you don't know me. You can only go by what is on this message board (and some old things on the former MADB).
What do I do on this message board that you object to?
Oh settle down. I'm mostly just playing around. But in truth I have objected to a few things you've done here. your exploitations of autism ring a bell.
Assuming for argument's sake that your characterization has some meaningful relationship to objective reality:
If Joseph Smith exploited the conditions people were born with, would that cause him to lose the priesthood?
Droopy wrote:1) "...as good an intellectual exercise as it is, irrelevant to the kind of serious discourse possible only with natural language.
There are too many shadings, nuances, coloration, and permutations of language meaning and context for such a narrow, deductively confined argument strategy."
Ahahaha!
2) Droopy is offering the classic St. Augstianian theodicy*, who was not, as best I can tell, Mormon. This theodicy is all but abandoned in theology for reasons I hope Droopy can address, but it does occasionally appear in popular fundamentalist apologetics like Ravi Zacharias' writings.
And the continuity between the theodicy and mine (LDS) is what, precisely?
Nothing is going to startle us more when we pass through the veil to the other side than to realize how well we know our Father [in Heaven] and how familiar his face is to us
- President Ezra Taft Benson
I am so old that I can remember when most of the people promoting race hate were white.