Chap wrote: Dream on, Dude. First you have to answer any question she may yet think of, such as 'what kind of action by God are you thinking of?'.
There - saved her a post.
Chap, I have answered all such questions from the Hoops. I am just highlighting (again) that Hoops holds others to a higher standard than she is prepared to hold herself, at least in terms of question:answer ratio's...
“We look to not only the spiritual but also the temporal, and we believe that a person who is impoverished temporally cannot blossom spiritually.” Keith McMullin - Counsellor in Presiding Bishopric
"One, two, three...let's go shopping!" Thomas S Monson - Prophet, Seer, Revelator
Panopticon wrote:I will repeat: I'm not calling for a world without death. I'm saying that a world in which 2,000,000 Chinese people die in a flood is total BS. If there is a God, I can't imagine why he wouldn't intervene to prevent such catastrophes. On a micro level, I have a hard time with God not saving this family from the tornado.
Why? You want all death to be the same? No one ever suffers, because suffering is bad? No one ever dies what we would assume was prematurely? Death is the enemy?
(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.
Chap wrote: Dream on, Dude. First you have to answer any question she may yet think of, such as 'what kind of action by God are you thinking of?'.
There - saved her a post.
Chap, I have answered all such questions from the Hoops. I am just highlighting (again) that Hoops holds others to a higher standard than she is prepared to hold herself, at least in terms of question:answer ratio's...
I think Hoops's chance of anybody bothering to respond to her would be much increased if she ever wrote a substantive post or two setting out her own views in continuous prose. But all we get is one-line interjections, frequently amounting to no more than 'You're dumb', or "No I don't".
Where is the interest in participating in a conversation like that? It seems clear that Hoops is basically here to heckle. The 'foe/ignore' option is beckoning.
Zadok: I did not have a faith crisis. I discovered that the Church was having a truth crisis. Maksutov: That's the problem with this supernatural stuff, it doesn't really solve anything. It's a placeholder for ignorance.
Buffalo wrote:So what Hoops is arguing here is that God behaves exactly as if he didn't exist at all. Is that right, Hoops?
How would you expect God to behave if he didn't exist at all? If you won't answer that question, I won't answer yours.
(See? Another Hoops post saved!)
Zadok: I did not have a faith crisis. I discovered that the Church was having a truth crisis. Maksutov: That's the problem with this supernatural stuff, it doesn't really solve anything. It's a placeholder for ignorance.
Hoops wrote:No WE did not fail. I didn't. You didn't. Adam and Eve did.
Maybe you can reference someone who has not failed?
I understand we have all failed since then. But the cards were stacked against us. My point is, that Adam and Eve failed. Instead of replacing Adam and Eve and starting again God allowed for all humans to be born into a fallen world full of horrific pain and suffering. Maybe you and I and all others would have failed. Maybe, since apparently God knew ahead of time Adam and Eve would fail, that all humans would be born into a fallen world, then perhaps the replacements would have failed as well. Perhaps God knew we would all fail.
But if He knew does that not open another conundrum?
