No, I don't think so. I'm keeping in mind what you said in your thesis about God knowing how to preserve humanity.
I don't think such a God is likely, but even if one is, I don't think reliance on the belief in God is going to help.
Why do you think so, Meadowchik?
Why DON'T you think so?
It's like talking to a completely useless psychotherapist:
PATIENT: I am seriously considering cutting your head off with a chainsaw because all you do is to repeat everything I say, but framed as a question..
THERAPIST: So you are seriously considering cutting my head off with a chainsaw?
Maksutov:
That's the problem with this supernatural stuff, it doesn't really solve anything. It's a placeholder for ignorance.
Mayan Elephant:
Not only have I denounced the Big Lie, I have denounced the Big lie big lie.
Kevin , what sort of thing did you have in mind that people could do to produce God?
I have no idea. But if God doesn't exist, humanity needs Her/Him, like they've never needed anything else, so we'd have to find a way.
huckelberry wrote:I think the idea of people producing a god is absurd.
Huckelberry, it doesn't matter if it's absurd or not; it's still necessary. It still must be done by conscientious people, if conscience means anything at all.
It is also absurd to expect finite creatures to create a life continuing forever.
Huckelberry, how does a finite creature go about becoming aware that it is finite?
IHAQ, I don't believe I've ever said my goal was the preservation, forever, of earthly humanity. Just the preservation, forever, of humanity.
Well now you need to explain what you mean by “humanity” and which bits of earthly humanity aren’t included.
What you seemed to be saying was that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints teaches that the Earth will have an end then earthly humanity would also have an end. Am I wrong? Were you saying something else? My point was that even if the Earth has an end, humanity doesn't have to end. Humans can travel off planet, or God can take humans off the planet.
IHAQ wrote:
I'm not sure that's a hard fact.
Can you think of a good thing that doesn’t also come with a consequence?
Yes, the example you gave is a good thing that doesn't have to have the consequence you mentioned. If all the members of a family let Jesus into their lives, then Jesus can transform them into a cohesive group that doesn't have the mentioned rivalries.
Ironic that you call me MG and tell me I, a Latter-day Saint, am "fundamentally dishonest and prone to lying," Doc, or should I say IHAQ? It's clear as day that you and IHAQ are one and the same, and yet you call me dishonest because you say that KevinSim and MG are one and the same. What does that say about your own honesty, IHAQ? See, I can play the same game. I don't have a clue how I can prove I am not MG (other than what other posters have said about our different theologies and writing styles) and I suspect that you also don't know how to prove you're not IHAQ. Am I right?
So, thanks for explaining why the Mormon church is superfluous to this world?
Doc, how does the position of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints on same sex couples raising children, make that church superfluous to this world?
So, thanks for explaining why the Mormon church is superfluous to this world?
Doc, how does the position of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints on same sex couples raising children, make that church superfluous to this world?
Kevin, how could your parent-post in the linked thread be perceived as making the Mormon church irrelevant in matters of gay couples raising children?
Doc, how does the position of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints on same sex couples raising children, make that church superfluous to this world?
Kevin, how could your parent-post in the linked thread be perceived as making the Mormon church irrelevant in matters of gay couples raising children?
- Doc
good job, Doc. at this point, this is the only rational way to respond.