Flip Side of the Coin

[_KevinSim]

Seriously. You think inconsistency has nothing to do with anything? I suppose this is also done to protect belief.

I think that the requirement that God be consistent is a poorly thought out and extremely naïve litmus test designed to show that God doesn't exist. We don't require that we ourselves be consistent; why should we require that God be consistent?

Everything in mathematics is completely consistent; either one number equals another number or it does not; either nine is a prime number or it is not; either a three-sided polygon is a triangle or it is not. If you ask a question in mathematics that question has either a yes or no answer. To ask a question in mathematics and get a, "Yes and no," answer is ridiculous. Things in mathematics are so rigorously defined that there are no, "Yes and no," answers.

But in everyday usage you hear people answer, "Yes and no." Not all the time, not even most of the time, but you do hear it, occasionally. Such an answer makes no sense in mathematics; it would be inconsistent in mathematics; but in natural language it might be completely true; it would simply mean that the terms are not rigorously defined; in one sense the answer is yes, and in another sense the answer is no.

I am basing it on your descriptions in this thread on what you think a good God would do and not do. Since he is not doing some of those things he therefore does not exist.

I put no limit on the time it must take God to do the things I've said He'd do. I've said if one asks God a question, fully ready to base the rest of one's life on whatever answer God provides, then God will give that one an answer. It'd be nice if God gave that one an immediate answer, like God gave me, but I certainly don't require God to do that. God can take as long as S/He wants. If one asks God a question and goes a reasonable amount of time without getting an answer, then that one would be wise to go about her/his ordinary life, living the best that s/he knows how to, but keeping in the back of that one's mind the realization that s/he has asked God a question, and is open at any time for God to respond. What else can this person do?

[_KevinSim]

AS far as LDS member being ready for a yes answer. Of course they are. IF they are active and trying to do good and follow what they are taught in church they are more then ready for a yes answer to things like the Book of Mormon.

That's my point! They're ready for a yes answer; they're not ready for a no answer; and until they are they can't count on God giving them the answer God wants them to have.

[_Cylon]

AS far as LDS member being ready for a yes answer. Of course they are. IF they are active and trying to do good and follow what they are taught in church they are more then ready for a yes answer to things like the Book of Mormon.

That's my point! They're ready for a yes answer; they're not ready for a no answer; and until they are they can't count on God giving them the answer God wants them to have.

Well, in that case the LDS church is impeding the ability of church members to be receptive to God's will, because we're not taught to be receptive to a negative answer in the case of the veracity of the Book of Mormon and other foundational church claims. We're taught that we just have to keep trying until we get the right answer.

[_ludwigm]

Tell the truth to people who trust him in what language?

I should start a lot of thread about it.
I've planned to do. I am lazy...

Think Star Wars for a moment.

No, thanks. I watch and enjoy it - once in three years - but nothing to think about.

English is a funny language.

Yes.

All natural languages are funny languages.

Yes, yes, yes.

[_KevinSim]

See if you can will yourself into believing that Santa Claus exists as a real magical being that dwells in a hidden arctic village and delivers presents to children worldwide on Christmas Eve. If you can, then your brain is radically different from mine and most humans'.

Cylon, you've made a good point; I can't. So for me there must be a difference between God and Santa Claus.

[_Chap]

You know what I think?

Talking to Kevinsim about his deity is like listening to OJ Simpson's lawyer, all the time wondering why OJ is just sitting there grinning.

What kind of deity needs a lawyer like that?

[_KevinSim]

Yes, even then. There's no requirement that reality be optimistic. My worldview allows me to accept truths that are unpleasant. If yours doesn't, then I submit that truth is not your overriding concern.

It's not. It's been a very long time since truth was an overriding concern for me. And I guess the question I would ask you is, why is truth an overriding concern for you? There's so much emphasis in this forum on things that are currently true, things that are realistic. I don't emphasize such things at all, nor do I see a good reason why anyone should emphasize them. In order to accomplish great things one has to have some basis in truth and reality, but it certainly looks to me that people who have accomplished great things in the past have been just as firmly based (if not more so) in things that should be, in good things that could be. So I say, go ahead and learn what is true, but also spend a little bit of time thinking of what should be true, and what one would have to do in order to make it true.

My aspiration would be that we should try to do things that will benefit humanity for the longest time possible.

But see, Cylon, you have building some things that will last forever built into that statement. Trying to do things that will benefit humanity for the longest time possible, will be building some things that last forever if that is possible. That's all I ask. I just ask you to not give up on working for the eternal goals; in the meantime you can build as many things as you want that will have finite duration, all the time possibly learning things that will help you build something of infinite duration.

If "forever" turns out to be impossible due to the laws of physics, or if I or any other human prove to be inadequate to the scope of the task, I don't see that as a reason to scrap the whole enterprise.

I agree with that 100%.

[_KevinSim]

You use it to absolve yourself of any feelings of duty or responsibility towards the rest of humanity.

Then I worded my response badly. I didn't mean to say I have no "duty or responsibility towards the rest of humanity"; I meant to say that I don't have to take the whole burden of that duty or responsibility on my own shoulders. I know that I'm incapable of solving all the world's problems, or even of figuring out some way of dividing all those problems between people who are willing to help. But because I believe in a God who does have a plan to benefit as many people as possible, I can go about an ordinary, not guilt-ridden, life, doing my share of the job and not worrying that essential parts of the job are not getting done.

[_KevinSim]

Well, in that case the LDS church is impeding the ability of church members to be receptive to God's will, because we're not taught to be receptive to a negative answer in the case of the veracity of the Book of Mormon and other foundational church claims. We're taught that we just have to keep trying until we get the right answer.

Then they are impeding that ability.

I don't believe in Moroni 10 because the LDS Church teaches Moroni 10; or even because it's scriptural; I believe in it because it makes sense that God would communicate with us in the way described.

It does not make sense that God would give us an answer if we're not prepared for either a yes or a no, so in that case the LDS Church is wrong. Or perhaps I should say that some people in the LDS Church are wrong. I have never been taught that I should keep trying until I get the right answer, nor will I ever tell anyone s/he needs to keep trying until s/he gets the right answer.

[_Cylon]

I have never been taught that I should keep trying until I get the right answer, nor will I ever tell anyone s/he needs to keep trying until s/he gets the right answer.

Well, good for you, then. If more church members thought that way, it would prevent a lot of unnecessary suffering.

I'll respond to your other post later.