Science is a tool that can be abused!

[_Chap]

... I was in the state of mind as outlined by Joseph Smith. I know that many exmo hate the man. That is because they don't understand the rules he had to live by. Once you understand the rules so you can strip away the things he said and did as a result of the desires of those around him what is left is pretty good stuff.

And guess how you decide what were 'the things he said and did as a result of the desires of those around him"?

You got it. The pretty bad stuff. (Of course his own desires, such as not having to work for a living any more, being respected by lots of followers, and going to bed with lots of women, played no part in the bad stuff.)

As for the rest:

Franktalk knows he has the truth because he feels good about it.

And, when he once told these other coupla guys about the way he thinks, they said it felt good to them too, and yeah, they had sorta had those ideas themselves, so that was really cool.

[_The CCC]

There are a few on this site that say theory is indeed fact. Just ask Spotlight if evolution is fact he will be glad to tell you.

The redshift of distant starlight is interpreted as an expanding universe. It seems you are just as caught up with declaring things fact as the rest of them.

Evolution is a fact. The explanation of that fact is a theory.

The Red Shift is a fact. The explanation of that fact is the Theory of the Red Shift.


All you have to do is come up with a better explanation of those observed facts. Good luck with both.

Gene expression is a fact. Populations do have some more fit than others to adapt. Mutations do happen. These are observed facts. But to now make the leap and say that all life on this earth is a result of these processes is a belief system. It does not matter if I have additional data or not. The best guess of a group of people is still a best guess no matter how well you wrap it up and place lipstick on it.[/quote]

All you have to do is produce a life form that doesn't conform to those processes. Good luck with that.
A theory is not a guess.
SEE http://www.scientificamerican.com/artic ... nce-words/

[_Franktalk]

And guess how you decide what were 'the things he said and did as a result of the desires of those around him"?

First you discover what truth is. Then you discover what the rules are we should be following. Using these you can sort out what is true from that which is not helpful.

Like multiple marriage, there is nothing wrong with it. But men linked it with some advantage to go to some special heaven. That is wrong. And the chances are that multiple partners are not going to be able to keep their promises. It just gets to impossible as you add more people. So a vow to a person is hard to keep but a vow to multiple people would be just impossible. So the real truth that we should keep our vows should guide us in our behavior and choices.

The way I see it if Joseph was sleeping with a bunch of women and the women really wanted to make it mean something then where are all of the offspring? I mean look at Brigham Young. You can trace back his kids. Where are Joseph's? Kind of seems phony to me. Like he married them but did not have intercourse. You seem to me to be a person who requires evidence. So show me the evidence. People chatting about Joseph is pretty much like the internet. You can find what ever you want, it does not have to be real.

[_Franktalk]

All you have to do is produce a life form that doesn't conform to those processes. Good luck with that.
A theory is not a guess.
SEE http://www.scientificamerican.com/artic ... nce-words/

Soon man will be able to make entire strands of DNA from raw material. Man will make all of the parts to make what we call life. It is information. Evolution will not be required. Evolution is only required if you reject a designer. I believe the earth was seeded by an intelligent being.

So when man makes life in a test tube will you consider a designer? Or are you of the opinion that we are the only intelligent life in the entire universe?

[_Quasimodo]

All you have to do is produce a life form that doesn't conform to those processes. Good luck with that.
A theory is not a guess.
SEE http://www.scientificamerican.com/artic ... nce-words/

Soon man will be able to make entire strands of DNA from raw material. Man will make all of the parts to make what we call life. It is information. Evolution will not be required. Evolution is only required if you reject a designer. I believe the earth was seeded by an intelligent being.

So when man makes life in a test tube will you consider a designer? Or are you of the opinion that we are the only intelligent life in the entire universe?

When people create genetically modified life forms (they are doing that now commercially with plants) it is still evolution. Selective breeding is also evolution. The process of artificial evolutionary selection does not negate the evolutionary process. In fact, it proves that it works. Whether the selection process is driven by nature or by man, it's still evolution.

Wheat from wild emmer, Arabian horses from wild horses, dogs from wolves, domestic cattle from wild aurochs and domestic cat breeds are all forms of human selection and exist because the natural laws that govern evolution make it possible.

[_Chap]

... like multiple marriage, there is nothing wrong with it.

Er, yes there is. If older, wealthy and influential men are allowed to marry large numbers of women - and encouraged to do so, which is what happened in the days of Brigham Young - then a corresponding number of young, poor and socially unimportant men will be deprived of the chance of marrying. That has obviously deleterious social effects. In the FLDS (Warren Jeffs) version of Mormonism, surplus young men were actually expelled from the community which was the only life they had ever known ...

The way I see it if Joseph was sleeping with a bunch of women and the women really wanted to make it mean something then where are all of the offspring? I mean look at Brigham Young. You can trace back his kids. Where are Joseph's? Kind of seems phony to me. Like he married them but did not have intercourse. You seem to me to be a person who requires evidence. So show me the evidence.

In the Temple Lot case, the Salt Lake City church actually submitted to the court a number of affidavits from women married to Joseph Smith, who made it plain that they had had normal marital relations with Smith. There is other testimony too. Even the church's recently published essays no longer attempt to exclude sexual relations from Smith's relations with other women than his legal wife Emma.

http://www.i4m.com/think/history/joseph_smith_sex.htm

Did you not know about this?

[_spotlight]

For one thing what came to me over time as interpretation of the scriptures I did not want.

So? How do you know that simply being something you don't want makes it real? It could just be a compulsive belief on your part. I know a lot of people that act in this manner that think the thing they least want to do is the right thing to do.

The information was so far off from what the majority of people believe, it just seemed weird. So what I received was not a confirmation.

What does seeming weird have to do with whether or not anything relates to reality? Quantum Mechanics and relativity are pretty weird Frank.

Over time and more information the whole set of information started to make sense. It explained so much about people and why we do what we do.

Familiarity is a magician that is cruel to beauty but kind to ugliness.
- Ouida

Why do I have a suspicion that what you are describing is very superficial at best?

I did not expect it but I did meet a few others that took the same journey and they also received the same information. In a way this was confirmation of what I received. The chances that a small group of people would draw these same ideas independent of each other is pretty remote.

Really? Please show your math here. This could be used to justify the Heaven's Gate (comet Hale Bopp) tragedy. You realize that there are 7.4 billion people in the world right? This is not a startling coincidence Frank.

The other common item was the method of the journey and the complete abandonment of this world. But of course without the personal experience even this to the outside world means nothing. There is nothing to observe. There is nothing to test.

Thanks for your honesty here. Unfortunately it does nothing to strengthen your argument or support your position.

One can not go on an inward journey as a test. The very idea that it is a test destroys the attempt.

Oh how nice. And why would this be the case? Really Frank, pull your head out...

This access to truth is not made to be discovered by the world.

So again you admit that you have to agree with your outcome beforehand. You have your conclusion and it is based upon nothing at all and you have some vague experiences that you fashion to support your preconceived conclusion. You absolutely admit this here. If the conclusion is forced to follow the evidence then this test destroys the attempt.You have invented your own test for truth that has no basis in anything other than your superstitious ideas. Great Frank.

But the access must be on the earth for those who desire it.

So astronauts in orbit about the earth are restricted from participating. Great Frank, that makes so much sense.

But one must be unhappy with the world to start the quest. If there is attachment to any part of the world then the journey does not start.

No doubt. These little cultish movements always seem to prey upon those in severe times of stress.

Where I thought science failed me in providing answers to the difficult questions I also thought religion failed as well.

Adults are content with not having answers to every question under the sun. Little children on the other hand supply made up answers from their imaginations.

So I took the path as outlined by Jesus in the New Testament.

And that path besides being vague and subject to multiple interpretations itself is only recorded in second hand accounts. Keeps getting better all of the time, Frank.

But when I did so I was in the state of mind as outlined by Joseph Smith.

Or at least you imagined this to be the case.

I know that many exmo hate the man. That is because they don't understand the rules he had to live by. Once you understand the rules so you can strip away the things he said and did as a result of the desires of those around him what is left is pretty good stuff.

Like cell phones disguised as stones and superhuman strength to heft 200 lbs of gold as though it was made of styrofoam. Way kewl!

The temple endowment in its original form is his best work.

Yes, his best *cough* plagiarized *cough* work.

It is on the level of the Revelation written by John.

What's amazing is he wrote it before the discovery of LSD. Could have been shrooms though.

Both are symbolic and when you figure out the symbolism it leads to truth about us.

You can read whatever you want to into some vague text but the creation of the symbolism along with its interpretation is you Frank.

[_spotlight]

... like multiple marriage, there is nothing wrong with it.

Yeah sure Frank.
http://human-nature.com/science-as-culture/walker.html

[_spotlight]

Evolution is only required if you reject a designer.

A designer is only required if you reject evolution.

I think, therefore I am. - DesCartes

I am, therefore I think.

Conclusion first - evidence interpreted to support conclusion.

Evidence first - then conclusions drawn from the evidence.




Makes so much more sense to reverse things sometimes, especially things that are wrong.

[_Franktalk]

Did you not know about this?

Sure, don't care.