Three Powerful Books

[_moksha]

Somehow, the dumbest troll of all time managed to convince a mod that calling someone a “troll” is so heinous it shouldn’t be considered free speech.

That is quite a feat of mental gymnastics. Did the mod fully regain the use of his senses later on?

[_Lemmie]

Somehow, the dumbest troll of all time managed to convince a mod that calling someone a “troll” is so heinous it shouldn’t be considered free speech.

That is quite a feat of mental gymnastics. Did the mod fully regain the use of his senses later on?

Lol, you do like to start crap, don't you?!

To answer your question, yes. The mods here are brilliant and wise, beyond comprehension.

[_Temp. Admin.]

Somehow, the dumbest troll of all time managed to convince a mod that calling someone a “troll” is so heinous it shouldn’t be considered free speech.

Material that's reclassified to the Telestial Forum magically becomes considered to not be free speech?

That's news to me.

[_honorentheos]

Somehow, the dumbest troll of all time managed to convince a mod that calling someone a “troll” is so heinous it shouldn’t be considered free speech.

Material that's reclassified to the Telestial Forum magically becomes considered to not be free speech?

That's news to me.

Is calling out a person's behavior as "trolling" or calling a person behaving like a troll a "troll" a personal attack in the way it's typically applied in Terrestrial to justify moving it? I wouldn't think so if the shoe fits, which suggests it's being relegated to a lower traffic forum is at least some type of attempt to curtail or infringe on a person's speech. It's not clear that the action was impartial so...

[_Lemmie]

Somehow, the dumbest troll of all time managed to convince a mod that calling someone a “troll” is so heinous it shouldn’t be considered free speech.

Material that's reclassified to the Telestial Forum magically becomes considered to not be free speech?

That's news to me.

I should have specified, not free speech in the sense that it was not free speech that was allowed in Terrestrial, and therefore would be consigned to a lesser Kingdom.

[_mentalgymnast]

Joseph Smith was a well known treasure digger from a family that itself was well known for being superstitious and constantly looking for a get rich quick scheme.

We know...
We know...

Doc, I’ll say to you what I said to honor earlier:

I do think that it is rather disingenuous to stir all of your grievances into one pot as though by doing that you are increasing the weight of the pot. I’ve seen this over and over again with critics. Each item in the pot needs to ALWAYS be investigated individually to be fair.

I’ve looked as in depth at most of the things in your list just as you have. And honestly, I have come to a place where these things don’t bother me to the extent that they once did. I can move forward in faith with a sense of integrity. That may drive some folks here bananas, but it’s true.

Making a long list as though that, in and of itself, proves anything is unreasonable. Especially when those things in the list, in many cases, have explanations that are actually supportive in moving forward with a reasonable faith in the restoration narrative.

Regards,
MG

[_mentalgymnast]

MG:

Why is belief in Mormonism necessary in your mind? Why is it necessary to even consider it? Your above comment about "choosing faith v. faithlessness" is artificial and wouldn't even come up unless some Mormon missionary came knocking and presented the false dichotomy.

Surely you have to admit that there isn't much by way of evidence to support Mormon claims. The rock and the hat was hidden from view or at least pushed to the side for over 100 years. Dr. Jenkins publicly pointed out to poor departed Dr. Hamblin that there isn't any evidence to support Nephites/Lamanites in the new world. Adam Clarke seems to be more of a father to Mormonism than the god with whom Joseph Smith claimed to be communicating. Today, "revelation" is in the form of scheduling changes and legal documents. President Nelson isn't going around supposedly healing the masses like Joseph Smith supposedly did when there was a cholera outbreak in Nauvoo. Today, the leadership seems more preoccupied with the Wall Street Journal than anything else. The meetings are monotonous. The temple is just more busy work when one realizes that Jesus or President Nelson could easily do the work for all at once. Jesus did it for everyone and so why not temple work for everyone? I guess getting members to give loyalty oaths to the church, over and over again, is a thing.

Pretty much the same response as I gave to Doc and honor. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, it seems to me as though there are folks here that are still functioning in fundamentalist mode. Either-or. Black or white. I’ve always believed that the truth can be found somewhere in the middle.

Well maybe not always, but that’s where I’m coming from nowadays. It took a while to get there, but I feel that it’s a reasonable approach to seeking truth.

Regards,
MG

[_honorentheos]

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, it seems to me as though there are folks here that are still functioning in fundamentalist mode. Either-or. Black or white. I’ve always believed that the truth can be found somewhere in the middle.

Also MG -

At the end of the day it is a matter of who is right and who is wrong, isn’t it? What worries me about the fact that more and more people such as yourself are running about is that over the long haul you and your kind could become a majority.

...

Nothing against you personally and your right to non-belief in God (one that has laws and expectations for humanity), but everything to do with your kind becoming the norm rather than what still is an anomaly/minority.

The long term ramifications of being wrong are catastrophic.

[_Chap]

[...]

Nothing against you personally and your right to non-belief in God (one that has laws and expectations for humanity), but everything to do with your kind becoming the norm rather than what still is an anomaly/minority.

The long term ramifications of being wrong are catastrophic.

Lordy lordy! He done did Pascal's Wager all over again! Better believe in God, because if you don't and you turn out to be wrong you are in big, big trouble.

The difficulty here is that according to several of the versions of the Abrahamic religions, in the context of which MG is evidently intending us to understand his use of the English word 'God', it is essential not only to believe in the existence of the entity supposedly referred to by that word, but to get his characteristics exactly right. Thus, for instance, here is one of the historical creeds of western Christianity included in the Book of Common Prayer of the Church of England. It clearly excludes Mormons from salvation, even though they do believe in an entity with origins in the Abrahamic tradition.

So any old 'God' won't do, will it? How are we to know which way to turn to avoid the 'long term ramifications of being wrong'?

The Athanasian Creed (Quicumque vult ...)

Whosoever will be saved, before all things it is necessary that he hold the catholic faith. Which faith unless every one do keep whole and undefiled, without doubt he shall perish everlastingly. And the catholic faith is this: that we worship one God in Trinity, and Trinity in Unity; neither confounding the Persons, nor dividing the Essence. For there is one Person of the Father; another of the Son; and another of the Holy Ghost. But the Godhead of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, is all one; the Glory equal, the Majesty coeternal. Such as the Father is; such is the Son; and such is the Holy Ghost. The Father uncreated; the Son uncreated; and the Holy Ghost uncreated. The Father unlimited; the Son unlimited; and the Holy Ghost unlimited. The Father eternal; the Son eternal; and the Holy Ghost eternal. And yet they are not three eternals; but one eternal. As also there are not three uncreated; nor three infinites, but one uncreated; and one infinite. So likewise the Father is Almighty; the Son Almighty; and the Holy Ghost Almighty. And yet they are not three Almighties; but one Almighty. So the Father is God; the Son is God; and the Holy Ghost is God. And yet they are not three Gods; but one God. So likewise the Father is Lord; the Son Lord; and the Holy Ghost Lord. And yet not three Lords; but one Lord. For like as we are compelled by the Christian verity; to acknowledge every Person by himself to be God and Lord; So are we forbidden by the catholic religion; to say, There are three Gods, or three Lords. The Father is made of none; neither created, nor begotten. The Son is of the Father alone; not made, nor created; but begotten. The Holy Ghost is of the Father and of the Son; neither made, nor created, nor begotten; but proceeding. So there is one Father, not three Fathers; one Son, not three Sons; one Holy Ghost, not three Holy Ghosts. And in this Trinity none is before, or after another; none is greater, or less than another. But the whole three Persons are coeternal, and coequal. So that in all things, as aforesaid; the Unity in Trinity, and the Trinity in Unity, is to be worshipped. He therefore that will be saved, let him thus think of the Trinity.

Furthermore, it is necessary to everlasting salvation; that he also believe faithfully the Incarnation of our Lord Jesus Christ. For the right Faith is, that we believe and confess; that our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, is God and Man; God, of the Substance [Essence] of the Father; begotten before the worlds; and Man, of the Substance [Essence] of his Mother, born in the world. Perfect God; and perfect Man, of a reasonable soul and human flesh subsisting. Equal to the Father, as touching his Godhead; and inferior to the Father as touching his Manhood. Who although he is God and Man; yet he is not two, but one Christ. One; not by conversion of the Godhead into flesh; but by assumption of the Manhood into God. One altogether; not by confusion of Substance [Essence]; but by unity of Person. For as the reasonable soul and flesh is one man; so God and Man is one Christ; Who suffered for our salvation; descended into hell; rose again the third day from the dead. He ascended into heaven, he sitteth on the right hand of God the Father Almighty, from whence he will come to judge the living and the dead. At whose coming all men will rise again with their bodies; And shall give account for their own works. And they that have done good shall go into life everlasting; and they that have done evil, into everlasting fire. This is the catholic faith; which except a man believe truly and firmly, he cannot be saved.

[_Themis]

I’ve looked as in depth at most of the things in your list just as you have. And honestly, I have come to a place where these things don’t bother me to the extent that they once did. I can move forward in faith with a sense of integrity. That may drive some folks here bananas, but it’s true.

I recall you saying you could not reconcile the problems you were aware of and decided to stop worrying about it and just believe. If that makes you happy go for it, but don't pretend you are a truth seeker.

Pretty much the same response as I gave to Doc and honor. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, it seems to me as though there are folks here that are still functioning in fundamentalist mode. Either-or. Black or white. I’ve always believed that the truth can be found somewhere in the middle.

Well maybe not always, but that’s where I’m coming from nowadays. It took a while to get there, but I feel that it’s a reasonable approach to seeking truth.

By your own admission you gave up on seeking truth. Essential to seeking truth is being open to being wrong and willing to change belief to adjust to the facts. You have even admitted to not seeking facts/truth with some of the most important areas of Mormonism like the Book of Abraham, where you admitted you knew little about the problems surrounding it.