Why people want to believe there is a god.

[QUOTE][B]I don't see imaginary things amd think that they are real.[/QUOTE][/B]Bald assertion. How can you demonstrate that visions are "imaginary"? [QUOTE][B]When someone wants to believe in something so bad that they can induce such things in themselves subconsciously.[/QUOTE][/B]Cite? Now that we are talking about physical things you can produce research to back your claims. [QUOTE][B]We see this with cases of stigmatia and lycanthropyism.[/QUOTE][/B]I'm talking about the Holy Spirit. Apples and oranges. [QUOTE][B]It's a proven fact that whenever the very religious get any sort of real power they work to impose their beliefs on all. [/QUOTE][/B]That is not a "proven fact" it is a bald assertion, baseless accusation, and ad-hominem attack all rolled into one. [QUOTE][B]That is according to the "Nephites" are there any unbiased sources? The modern day Israelis use the same sort of excuses to justify their ancestors genocide of the Canaanites[/QUOTE][/B]Where are your "unbiased sources" to support your view of history? [QUOTE][B]I've never heard of these people outside of the Book of Mormon.[/QUOTE][/B]I've never heard of you outside of my computer. [QUOTE][B]You're not taken seriously. [/QUOTE][/B]Nor are you. Actually some of the more liberal Christians think members of the LDS are good people. It's hard to drum up support for atheists. [QUOTE][B]The difference is that when the President sends them in it is for self-defence. When your god "orders" such things it is to get rid of a possible alternative belief.[/QUOTE][/B]The event in question was undoubtedly for self-defense. Laban was also a Jew so there is no "alternative belief" to fight there. Your point is refuted. [QUOTE][B]Contradiction. [/QUOTE][/B]Where? [QUOTE][B]You wouldn't be the first to make such a claim[/QUOTE][/B]That's right. The devil works the same way he always has.Also, to say that it has been said before does not make me wrong. [QUOTE][B]that it is easier than you think.[/QUOTE][/B]I do my best. [QUOTE][B]And when did he write this down, after the war ended?[/QUOTE][/B]That is an example of circular reasoning, as your conclusion and your premise (That JS was not a prophet) are the same. The suggestion that he wrote it down after the war is a bald assertion, you have no historical sources that say that he did write it after the war.Actually it would be a miracle if he wrote it after the war because he was killed by a mob in 1844--it might as well have been Shakespeare that wrote it. The prophecy was first recorded in 1832 and mentioned again in D&C 180 in (I think) 1844 and it can be found in the 1856 version of the D&C. If memory serves me correctly, the US Civil War broke out, in South Carolina, after South Carolina became the first state to rebel, in 1861, almost 30 years *after* the prophecy was recorded and at least five years after it was published. Great Britain supplied ships for the Confederacy and sent tactical personnel to advise the South in their land-based military campaigns.About half a century later the same nation called upon other nations (the US among many others) to fight WWI, and that war's sequel.It troubles me that you gleefully leaped to an absurd and impossible "explanation" because you were in such a hurry to "disprove" my position. This is very poor practice. [QUOTE][B]So, you agree that the universe was created by the Big Blue Banana?[/QUOTE][/B]No, but aside from my own religious objections I have no basis to argue against the idea. If you were a true agnostic and you were using good logic you would point out that BBBism might actually be true, or, that you at least cannot, even in theory, prove it wrong. Your turn to prepare to be peeled. [QUOTE][B]The natural world has been the only one to actually proven to exist. [/QUOTE][/B]That does not rule out even the possibility of the supernatural. You are being dishonest with yourself because you have no evidence for or against God yet you insist that there is no such thing. [QUOTE][B]Why should I limit myself in that way? [/QUOTE][/B]Unless you try that possibility you are deliberately limiting yourself. I'm not limiting you I'm giving you options that you refuse to use. [QUOTE][B]Hardly. A wiseman says; "I don't know."[/QUOTE][/B]Unless the wise man actually has a reason to believe one possibility over another. Then he would not be wise to insist he doesn't know, he would be rejecting something out of hand.However, you are not saying that you don't know. You are actively arguing that my religion is false, and some of your arguments are silly and a few are dishonest. You should be like the wiseman and admit that you don't know before you go around bashing my beliefs so much. Then there is a possibility that you might learn these new options that you don't acknowledge exist. It would be much better than keeping yourself in the dark. [QUOTE][B]You have provided nothing real that can't also be used to "prove" anyother fictional creature's existence.[/QUOTE][/B]Bald assertion. You failed to provide BBB's prophecies, scriptures, and (most importantly) the testimony of the Holy Ghost. [QUOTE][B]They were good for them and that is all that mattered.[/QUOTE][/B]If it was good to them why did so many leave their religions behind?Also how is my church forcing anyone, especially native people, to join up? We're just giving them an alternative option. [QUOTE][B]They are forced "for their own good".[/QUOTE][/B]Is that a bald assertion or can you support that? [QUOTE][B]You really don't have a clue. [/QUOTE][/B]Ad hominem.

Originally posted by gene90:Straw man.We're off to see the wizard....No, the church quit the practice after a revelation. Yeah, stop it or go to prison. That may be true in BC because in the 1850s some colonies were established there. Therefore those towns will be primarily LDS. Here in the east, and in most of the world, we have no such settlements.Utah.

[QUOTE][B]No, but I find it far more likely, given the circumstances. [/QUOTE][/B]Fair enough. [QUOTE][B]Given these circumstances why was a revelation required? Surely the church could just have said "Hey, our Articles of Faith tell us we need to follow local government laws, these laws make polygamy illegal so we better stop practicing it"? Did God really have to send a miraculous message?[/QUOTE][/B]Polygamy was authorized temporarily by God, it was necessary for such a miraculous message to rescind the practice. Also the First Presidency voted unanimously to approve the declaration. [QUOTE][B]How long did your church members continue to practice Polygamy after it became illegal, especially given your Articles of Faith?[/QUOTE][/B]It was illegal from the beginning according to secular, it is also normally illegal by God's laws except for special purposes, it was practiced quietly in the beginnings of the church and publically when the church reached the relative safety of Utah. It was banned by the Church in 1890.

[QUOTE][B]Exactly, they have to have permission.[/QUOTE][/B]They do not have to have permission to marry they have to live up to certain expectations to enter the temple (I named those in a previous post). This is not control over who can marry and it is not an arranged marriage. When you claimed otherwise you were lieing to support your own beliefs. I find that morally repugnant, it sounds like something you would accuse me of. [QUOTE][B]Missionaries are missionaries.[/QUOTE][/B]That's a nasty stereotype, missionaries are individuals and ours haven't done anything you have accused them off. That's like saying "Jews are Jews" or "Africans are Africans" or "Lawyers are Lawyers", implying that none of the above can be trusted because of some kind of prior stereotype.

I didn't realize this thread was unmoderated.Now that I see I can say whatever I want I feel tempted to let loose but I still have that whole Christian code of conduct so I'll keep that to myself.

Now, tell me, considering that you can easily find that there is a God using Alma's experiment why haven't you tried it? What evidence do you have to "prove" there is no God? Or are you also running on faith?

[QUOTE][B]That may be true in BC because in the 1850s some colonies were established there. Therefore those towns will be primarily LDS. Here in the east, and in most of the world, we have no such settlements.Utah. [/QUOTE][B]I said "in the East"Read the post.Did you realize that you are impossible to debate with because you pay no attention to what anyone has to say? We need to move this discussion to a moderated thread where it will be judged by the moderator according to the forum rules and guidelines. I feel like the quality of my "work" here far exceeds the competition but that isn't being recognized here.[This message has been edited by gene90, 09-05-2002]

Originally posted by gene90:Bald assertion. How can you demonstrate that visions are "imaginary"?I know the difference.Cite? Now that we are talking about physical things you can produce research to back your claims.ZetaTalk: Stigmata
404: Not Found | World Allergy Organization
Miracles - The Miraculous Hoaxhttp://www.wwnorton.com/college/psych/abpsych/im/ch10-12.pdf
Joe Nickell Miracles » Internet Infidels
http://www.jueta.ch/english/psoriasis_treatment.html
http://www.arthursmithphd.com/chapter3.htmI'm talking about the Holy Spirit. Apples and oranges.Both are a form of self-delusion.Where are your "unbiased sources" to support your view of history?In most cases there are outside and unrelated sources which do show that a certain event has occured. Do you have any?I've never heard of you outside of my computer.Than that is a further example of your delusions since if I don't exist tham you are arguing with yourself, and losing. Nor are you. Actually some of the more liberal Christians think members of the LDS are good people. It's hard to drum up support for atheists.Not true. There are far more atheists in the world than there are Mormons. The event in question was undoubtedly for self-defense. Laban was also a Jew so there is no "alternative belief" to fight there. Your point is refuted.Irrelevant. Heretics are fair game as well. That's right. The devil works the same way he always has.And of course it is always the other who is "influenced" by the "devil".Also, to say that it has been said before does not make me wrong.It doesn't make you right either.I do my best.It takes too much effort to hate. You maybe surprised to know that I don't hate you, though, I don't love you either. That is an example of circular reasoning, as your conclusion and your premise (That JS was not a prophet) are the same. The suggestion that he wrote it down after the war is a bald assertion, you have no historical sources that say that he did write it after the war.And none that he actually wrote them before either.Actually it would be a miracle if he wrote it after the war because he was killed by a mob in 1844--it might as well have been Shakespeare that wrote it. The prophecy was first recorded in 1832 and mentioned again in D&C 180 in (I think) 1844 and it can be found in the 1856 version of the D&C. If memory serves me correctly, the US Civil War broke out, in South Carolina, after South Carolina became the first state to rebel, in 1861, almost 30 years *after* the prophecy was recorded and at least five years after it was published. Great Britain supplied ships for the Confederacy and sent tactical personnel to advise the South in their land-based military campaigns.[/b]Or so your church fathers have told you.About half a century later the same nation called upon other nations (the US among many others) to fight WWI, and that war's sequel.Tell me of a time when there wasn't talk of war? It's like predicting that the Sun will appear in the morning.No, but aside from my own religious objections I have no basis to argue against the idea. If you were a true agnostic and you were using good logic you would point out that BBBism might actually be true, or, that you at least cannot, even in theory, prove it wrong. Your turn to prepare to be peeled. As an agnostic I'm open to actual proof, you offer none.That does not rule out even the possibility of the supernatural.Maybe not, not I won't be holding my breathe waiting.You are being dishonest with yourself because you have no evidence for or against God yet you insist that there is no such thing.Actually I have stated that I don't belief that there is any evidence for or against the existence of a creator of the universe. It is quite apparent that people makeup their gods and you are no different.Unless you try that possibility you are deliberately limiting yourself. I'm not limiting you I'm giving you options that you refuse to use. Did you try ALL of the religions in the world?Unless the wise man actually has a reason to believe one possibility over another. Then he would not be wise to insist he doesn't know, he would be rejecting something out of hand.So, in order to understand life you first must try death?However, you are not saying that you don't know. You are actively arguing that my religion is false, and some of your arguments are silly and a few are dishonest.You are actually showing that your religious beliefs are no different than when someone believes in the toothfairy.Bald assertion. You failed to provide BBB's prophecies, scriptures, and (most importantly) the testimony of the Holy Ghost.Irrelevant, the BBB doesn't need such superstitious nonsense. Ad hominem.Only if it weren't true. BTW, an ad hominem would be if I had said that you were a moron who didn't have a clue. See the difference?

Originally posted by gene90:
I said "in the East"

​

Read the post.

​

Did you realize that you are impossible to debate with because you pay no attention to what anyone has to say? We need to move this discussion to a moderated thread where it will be judged by the moderator according to the forum rules and guidelines. I feel like the quality of my "work" here far exceeds the competition but that isn't being recognized here.They moved because they wanted to be left to their own.It wouldn't matter which forum this was in. You would get the same results.You will never "convert" any of us here for the simple fact that you offer nothing we haven't already seen and thought about to some great extent. It is not as if I woke up one day and said "I will stop believing now.", I am over 39. How old are you?

[QUOTE][B]I know the difference.[/QUOTE][/B]Then what is the difference? Would you like to debate this point or make snide remarks?(Bare links with no supporting discussion are discouraged in the forum guidelines and unworthy of a response) [QUOTE][B]Both are a form of self-delusion.[/QUOTE][/B]That too is a bald assertion with no supporting evidence that contributes nothing to the debate. [QUOTE]The Forum Rules: [B]Debate in good faith by addressing rebuttals through the introduction of new information or by providing additional argument. Do not merely keep repeating the same points without elaboration.[/QUOTE][/B]There may be no enforcement here but I'm not going to participate without obedience to the rules. [QUOTE][B]In most cases there are outside and unrelated sources which do show that a certain event has occured. Do you have any?[/QUOTE][/B]Yes. The Holy Spirit demonstrates the validity of the work. Of course there are more secular arguments in favor of its validity: Hebrew names, chiasmas, 11 witnesses, where JS got 70 pounds of gold, that Civil War prophecy, etc. But those don't mean as much to me as the spiritual witness and unless you manage to completely rule it out, rather than fighting back with bald assertions and circular arguments, I'm going to continue using that as the basis of my arguments. [QUOTE][B]Than that is a further example of your delusions since if I don't exist tham you are arguing with yourself, and losing.[/QUOTE][/B]I don't see you as winning because you haven't contributed anything. (Though you've offended me and JS prophesying after the CW was a real hoot!) That's why I would prefer to have moderation: we're never going to even agree on who won otherwise. Count that as another of my "delusions" if you like [QUOTE][B]It doesn't make you right either.[/QUOTE][/B]But you insist that I am wrong. On what is your opinion based? Faith? [QUOTE][B]And none that he actually wrote them before either.[/QUOTE][/B]See? That's the worst part of having a debate with you. You make things up to suit you. D&C records that it was recieved in 1832. This is based upon a historical search of the journals of the early members. Proof that the prophecy predates the war is that it was published in 1856.You implied that my church fathers invented the whole thing after the fact. That's yet another circular argument. You presuppose it is invalid and then you use it as your conclusion. You don't actually have any evidence anywhere in your thought process.

quote:

---

As an agnostic I'm open to actual proof, you offer none.

---

[/B]An agnostic would not presuppose that I am wrong.Also I have offered you instructions on how to get your own proof, you just haven't accepted it. [QUOTE][B]Did you try ALL of the religions in the world?[/QUOTE][/B]I didn't have to. Although my church teaches that there are elements of truth in all religions, it also teaches that it is the correct one, to the exclusion of others. Because I have a spiritual witness of the validity of the church, there was no longer any need.However, you are obligated to search until you find it. [QUOTE][B]Only if it weren't true.[/QUOTE][/B]I disagree with you therefore it is an ad-hominem.

Gene90Please don't worry about offending my religious beliefs - you wont so go for it when you've got time!

[QUOTE][B]They moved because they wanted to be left to their own.[/QUOTE][/B]They moved because they were being killed. [QUOTE][B]It wouldn't matter which forum this was in. You would get the same results.[/QUOTE][/B]No, in another forum the thread would be judged. [QUOTE][B]You will never "convert" any of us here for the simple fact that you offer nothing we haven't already seen and thought about to some great extent.[/QUOTE][/B]Oh really? Well right now I'm here because my personal beliefs were tasteless attacked, for no reason, by schrafinator, and also because I don't see any logical basis for your beliefs either. I'm not looking for converts here I'm looking for a good debate. I haven't found it. You are too prone to lieing, too prone to dodging points, too prone to unfounded claims and too prone to using lousy arguments. [QUOTE][B]It is not as if I woke up one day and said "I will stop believing now."[/QUOTE][/B]That's what it looks like to me. You haven't even given consideration to the POSSIBILITY that you are wrong. You're more hard-headed than I am, probably more hard-headed than any YEC that lived. [QUOTE][B]am over 39.[/QUOTE][/B]Great. [QUOTE][B]How old are you?[/QUOTE][/B]Twenty. Does it matter? Yes I have seen you attack YECs based upon age. This YEC did not have an impressive grip on science and yet you stooped to that old, traditional, age-based ad-hominem. You could have utterly laid ruin to his points, easily. But you resorted to a variant of "I'm older than you" and celebrated victory. I knew you would ask me, hoping that it would give you some kind of edge. Perhaps in your own mind. Perhaps I converted because I'm naive and idealistic--unlikely because some people convert older than you.The fact is that your being twice my age doesn't count for much to me. I've seen enough of your arguments to judge how good your logic is and I'm not that terribly impressed. I've seen enough of your one-liners and some cheap shots and humor where there should have been arguments to know that in a moderated forum things would have been pretty even. Unfortunately I have academic responsibilities that cause me difficulty in keeping up with your posts. I'm sure you have a career to advance as well but you're outpacing me in volume.Also, for the record, the ages of other participants do not impress me either. A 30 something can type as much drivel as a twelve year or a sixty year old. It's all the same to me.[This message has been edited by gene90, 09-05-2002]

Originally posted by gene90:Then what is the difference? Would you like to debate this point or make snide remarks?It is called using your reason.There may be no enforcement here but I'm not going to participate without obedience to the rules.And that is your problem.This is basically all you keep saying."Human life and destiny is always endangered when prophets of
whatever sort demand, 'Frage nicht, glaube!' Do not question.
Believe!"
-Jack ForstmanYes. The Easter Bunny demonstrates the validity of the work. Of course there are more secular arguments in favor of its validity: Hebrew names, chiasmas, 11 witnesses, where JS got 70 pounds of gold, that Civil War prophecy, etc. But those don't mean as much to me as the furry witness and unless you manage to completely rule it out, rather than fighting back with bald assertions and circular arguments, I'm going to continue using that as the basis of my arguments.I don't see you as winning because you haven't contributed anything. (Though you've offended me and JS prophesying after the CW was a real hoot!) That's why I would prefer to have moderation: we're never going to even agree on who won otherwise. Count that as another of my "delusions" if you like Of course.But you insist that I am wrong. On what is your opinion based? Faith?That you base it all on your faith and nothing else.See? That's the worst part of having a debate with you. You make things up to suit you. D&C records that it was recieved in 1832. This is based upon a historical search of the journals of the early members. Proof that the prophecy predates the war is that it was published in 1856.Or their accounts of it occured. There is no other accounts. and there is no evidence that they were "revised" either.You implied that my church fathers invented the whole thing after the fact. That's yet another circular argument. You presuppose it is invalid and then you use it as your conclusion. You don't actually have any evidence anywhere in your thought process.It wouldn't be the first time that some church founders "revised" their accounts.An agnostic would not presuppose that I am wrong. You do that yourself.Also I have offered you instructions on how to get your own proof, you just haven't accepted it.I don't take drugs and I'm mentally healthy so it wouldn't work.I didn't have to.Isn't that a bit hypocritical? Although my church teaches that there are elements of truth in all religions, it also teaches that it is the correct one, to the exclusion of others. Because I have a spiritual witness of the validity of the church, there was no longer any need.Yes, it is a bit hypocritical.However, you are obligated to search until you find it. There can be no further search when none are left. I didn't look at just one or two, like you did. I looked at the majority of them and they all were the same.The lyrics maybe different, but the melody is the same. Read the first post in this thread again and you will see why.

Ok TB. I'm getting kind of exhausted of this right now, though I think it's winding down. I'll get around to it eventually. I do apologize for ripping on your beliefs and Christianity at large. That there is an apostasy is our doctrine but it is wrong to boast of it or even imply that others are wrong for worshipping God as their conscience dictates. (LDS AoF)

Originally posted by gene90:No, in another forum the thread would be judged and my superior epistemology would win out.[/b]Philosophy in and of itself is not proof of anything. That is why it isn't a hard science and only one step in the process.Oh really? Well right now I'm here because my personal beliefs were tasteless attacked, for no reason, by schrafinator, and also because I don't see any logical basis for your beliefs either. I'm not looking for converts here I'm looking for a good debate. I haven't found it. You are too prone to lieing, too prone to dodging points, too prone to unfounded claims and too prone to using lousy arguments.If you see an honest opinion as lying than that is your problem, amoung many.That's what it looks like to me. You haven't even given consideration to the POSSIBILITY that you are wrong. You're more hard-headed than I am, probably more hard-headed than any YEC that lived.You more than prove that your beliefs are wrong, because you have created your god in your own image.Twenty. Does it matter? Yes I have seen you attack YECs based upon age. This YEC did not have an impressive grip on science and yet you stooped to that old, traditional, age-based ad-hominem. You could have utterly laid ruin to his points, easily. But you resorted to a variant of "I'm older than you" and celebrated victory. I knew you would ask me, hoping that it would give you some kind of edge. Perhaps in your own mind. Perhaps I converted because I'm naive and idealistic--unlikely because some people convert older than you.There is something to be said for experience. Some gain wisdom as they get older, and some just get older.