Defending Mormonism for fun and profit

[_Daniel Peterson]

The impetus for my showing up here was to say the following:

Folks like Bitton, Peterson, McGuire, Juliann, sometimes base their church defenses on claims that it is not clear that we can actually "know" anything at all.

I'll let Ben and Juliann speak for themselves, but, in my case (and, I'm very nearly as confident, in the case of my late long-time friend Davis Bitton), this statement is flatly false.

I hold no such view, and never have.

I said it above, but don't want it to be entirely lost quite yet. (To this point, the person who made the claim doesn't appear to have seen my comment.)

[_harmony]

The impetus for my showing up here was to say the following:

Folks like Bitton, Peterson, McGuire, Juliann, sometimes base their church defenses on claims that it is not clear that we can actually "know" anything at all.

I'll let Ben and Juliann speak for themselves, but, in my case (and, I'm very nearly as confident, in the case of my late long-time friend Davis Bitton), this statement is flatly false.

I hold no such view, and never have.

I said it above, but don't want it to be entirely lost quite yet. (To this point, the person who made the claim doesn't appear to have seen my comment.)

What exactly do you think a person can "know", Poster Who Uses DCP's Name? If you really are Daniel C Peterson, PhD, professor at BYU, what exactly do you think a person can "know" about the church? ('Know' in the sense that one may "know" the sun will rise tomorrow in the east?)

[_Mercury]

The impetus for my showing up here was to say the following:

Folks like Bitton, Peterson, McGuire, Juliann, sometimes base their church defenses on claims that it is not clear that we can actually "know" anything at all.

I'll let Ben and Juliann speak for themselves, but, in my case (and, I'm very nearly as confident, in the case of my late long-time friend Davis Bitton), this statement is flatly false.

I hold no such view, and never have.

I said it above, but don't want it to be entirely lost quite yet. (To this point, the person who made the claim doesn't appear to have seen my comment.)

Dan, this opinion in which you state you do not hold is very common amongst those defending Mormonism and other faith-based flimflam.

It is used as the last bit of dodgery after all other half baked defenses have been exhausted. it is stated in the fashion of "My belief in Mormonism is valid because one is unable to truly define what is true, therefore my version of determining truth is the only valid way of determining truth".

Your mistake is that you believe that Mormonism is a valid world view. Your second mistake is believing that you can prove something unsupportable and false to be true.

You do not neccesarilly use this argument but I am sure in your tool belt of BS justifications you carry it.

[_Daniel Peterson]

Just trying to make sure that my response here is not buried.

[_The Nehor]

How come you don't mention Nephi or Alma? Is that an implicit acknowledgement that, yeah, even Mormons can separate fiction from reality when it comes down to it?

I would have put them in as well but I wanted to minimize controversy about my point.

[_guy sajer]

Those who argue that nothing is "knowable" appear to employ a rather narrow definition of "knowledge." I'm glad that aerospace engineers who designed the 737 I just flew in did a good job at guessing.

I think that for Mormonism (and religious claims in general), the more relevant question is whether anything is "knowable" through spiritual witness.

After all, Moroni 10:5 promises us that we might know the "truth of all things" by the power of the spirit. (Funny, believers don't seem to have much faith in this promise, given that they actually go to school to gain knowledge rather than simply asking the Spirit to reveal it to them.)

This is, I think, an empirical question and could be tested through some kind of carefully designed experiment.

There are any number of informal tests out there viz the power of the spirit to reveal "truth." Frankly, the failure rate I've observed doesn't give me a whole lot of confidence in the revelatory power of the Spirit nor in the validity of Moroni's promise.

[_Daniel Peterson]

I see that Mr. Bachman has been in today to post a list of a hundred sillinesses here.

Perhaps he'll have time, at some point, to read my flat denial of the claim he made earlier on this thread -- the claim that he has been making about me in various venues for the past year or two. I've denied it everywhere else, but he keeps repeating it. So I thought I would deny it here, too. (Hope springs eternal.)

Folks like Bitton, Peterson, McGuire, Juliann, sometimes base their church defenses on claims that it is not clear that we can actually "know" anything at all.

I'll let Ben and Juliann speak for themselves, but, in my case (and, I'm very nearly as confident, in the case of my late long-time friend Davis Bitton), this statement is flatly false.

I hold no such view, and never have.

[_mbeesley]

I see that Mr. Bachman has been in today to post a list of a hundred sillinesses here.

Perhaps he'll have time, at some point, to read my flat denial of the claim he made earlier on this thread -- the claim that he has been making about me in various venues for the past year or two. I've denied it everywhere else, but he keeps repeating it. So I thought I would deny it here, too. (Hope springs eternal.)

Folks like Bitton, Peterson, McGuire, Juliann, sometimes base their church defenses on claims that it is not clear that we can actually "know" anything at all.

I'll let Ben and Juliann speak for themselves, but, in my case (and, I'm very nearly as confident, in the case of my late long-time friend Davis Bitton), this statement is flatly false.

I hold no such view, and never have.

Here, Tal, is an example of a time when you have misrepresented something DCP believes or said. Can you provide a link to an example where DCP ever said anything that can fairly be construed as concluding that it is not clear that we can "know" anthing at all? If not, then you are exposed as a fraud and you should dismantle your spin machine.

Sincerely,
Mark Beesley

[_LifeOnaPlate]

I see that Mr. Bachman has been in today to post a list of a hundred sillinesses here.

Perhaps he'll have time, at some point, to read my flat denial of the claim he made earlier on this thread -- the claim that he has been making about me in various venues for the past year or two. I've denied it everywhere else, but he keeps repeating it. So I thought I would deny it here, too. (Hope springs eternal.)

Folks like Bitton, Peterson, McGuire, Juliann, sometimes base their church defenses on claims that it is not clear that we can actually "know" anything at all.

I'll let Ben and Juliann speak for themselves, but, in my case (and, I'm very nearly as confident, in the case of my late long-time friend Davis Bitton), this statement is flatly false.

I hold no such view, and never have.

Enter LifeOnaPlate, perennial DCP back-patter and sycophant extraordinaire. I believe Tal was asking for examples of how he was misrepresenting DCP. Perhaps this is a good example.

But I defer now to his majesty, DCP.

[_The Nehor]

LOAP, when do I get my paycheck for doing this?