Horse and Chariots--Another Apologist Red Herring

[_Quasimodo]

Actually, it has nothing to do with me in fact. I'm the anti/ex-mormon's worst nightmare. Someone that is completely unimpressed by anything you might say that would detract from the fact that there is a God. I'm happy to discuss the topic with them, but I know they are completely mistaken about the existence of God. I'm as sure of that fact as I am there is a Sun.

Actually, you are a critic's dream. Your lack of self reflection and fuzzy logic point to serious self doubts. It's apparent to anyone that reads your posts.

Please continue.

[_SteelHead]

I keep telling you I am chosen. God and I walk, talk, and hang daily. When I asked him about you he said something about condescending something something, but I couldn't make it out real clear as he was busy rocking a mean riff.

[_Tobin]

Actually, you are a critic's dream. Your lack of self reflection and fuzzy logic point to serious self doubts. It's apparent to anyone that reads your posts.
Please continue.

Let me make an observation. When you don't state a criticism or argument; you fail the bar of being a critic (or interesting to talk to). Launching unsolicited cracks from the peanut gallery when you don't venture a position does not say much about you other than you enjoy cheap shots without exposing your views to a fair response.

[_Runtu]

Let me make an observation. When you don't state a criticism or argument; you fail the bar of being a critic (or interesting to talk to). Launching unsolicited cracks from the peanut gallery when you don't venture a position does not say much about you other than you enjoy cheap shots without exposing your views to a fair response.

You haevn't articulated a position other than a retreat into subjectivism. Then you project your subjective "truth" by condemning the rest of us for not having the same subjective experience. That's pointless.

[_Quasimodo]

Actually, you are a critic's dream. Your lack of self reflection and fuzzy logic point to serious self doubts. It's apparent to anyone that reads your posts.
Please continue.

Let me make an observation. When you don't state a criticism or argument; you fail the bar of being a critic (or interesting to talk to). Launching unsolicited cracks from the peanut gallery when you don't venture a position does not say much about you other than you enjoy cheap shots without exposing your views to a fair response.

LOL! This is not a peanut gallery. It's a discussion board. I was responding to your styling yourself as "the anti/ex-mormon's worst nightmare", which I found a little over the top (and humorous) considering the content of your posts.

If you take the time to read the posts here you will understand my views. You may respond to any of those at any time you wish or not respond. Your choice.

[_SteelHead]

Let me make an observation. When you don't state a criticism or argument; you fail the bar of being a critic (or interesting to talk to). Launching unsolicited cracks from the peanut gallery when you don't venture a position does not say much about you other than you enjoy cheap shots without exposing your views to a fair response.

You haevn't articulated a position other than a retreat into subjectivism. Then you project your subjective "truth" by condemning the rest of us for not having the same subjective experience. That's pointless.

And Runtu scores!

The peanut gallery goes wild!!!!!

[_Tobin]

You haevn't articulated a position other than a retreat into subjectivism. Then you project your subjective "truth" by condemning the rest of us for not having the same subjective experience. That's pointless.

You seem to fail in the comprehension department. So, to help you - I know it is hard sometimes to follow when I don't do outlines for the simple-minded.

Position 1) Detractors of the Book of Mormon will not acknowledge their mistakes. Example: Barley was state as being present in the Book of Mormon. Detractors stated that barley was unknown in pre-Columbian America. This is factually untrue.

Position 2) The Book of Mormon is a spiritual guide to get people to seek God. Detracting from this purpose by pointing out supposed flaws in the text without taking into account it's main thesis is not a relevant criticism. After all, if there is really a God, how does the fact the Book of Mormon failing to mention potatoes relevant in light of that?

Now since then, we have delved into things such as knowing if one believes in God; or what should be a good basis in faith in Mormonism, but this is a website comment board. Sue me for wandering off my initial positions if you want.

Anyway, try to keep up with the discussion. I'm not going to do an outline for you everytime. :)

[_LDSToronto]

Yes to every experience has to be interpreted, or yes to most memebrs have never had anything close to God appearing to them, or yes you have seen God.

Yes, yes, and yes - or more succinctly, "Yes".

Tobin,

Thank you for your honesty. Not many of us are brave enough to admit that God has visited us, for fear of ridicule. I, too, have seen God, face to face, as sure as I would see any man standing before me. It remains my most sacred experience.

H.

[_SteelHead]

You haevn't articulated a position other than a retreat into subjectivism. Then you project your subjective "truth" by condemning the rest of us for not having the same subjective experience. That's pointless.

You seem to fail in the comprehension department. So, to help you - I know it is hard sometimes to follow when I don't do outlines for the simple-minded.

Position 1) Detractors of the Book of Mormon will not acknowledge their mistakes. Example: Barley was state as being present in the Book of Mormon. Detractors stated that barley was unknown in pre-Columbian America. This is factually untrue.

Position 2) The Book of Mormon is a spiritual guide to get people to seek God. Detracting from this purpose by pointing out supposed flaws in the text without taking into account it's main thesis is not a relevant criticism. After all, if there is really a God, how does the fact the Book of Mormon failing to mention potatoes relevant in light of that?

Now since then, we have delved into things such as knowing if one believes in God; or what should be a good basis in faith in Mormonism, but this is a website comment board. Sue me for wandering off my initial positions if you want.

Anyway, try to keep up with the discussion. I'm not going to do an outline for you everytime. :)

So little barley is present in the western hemisphere, big whoopity do. So was green grass and blue skies. Finding people in the America's does not further the BOMs validity, nor does finding "little barley" which is decidedly different from European barley. Now do something real tricky and produce a large Jesus worshiping, christian from Jewish population anywhere in the western hemisphere with smelting, chariots, and which writes in reformed Egyptian. Have them create large fortified cities, metal swords, and population growth never paralleled any where at any time. One in which the hunter gatherers out reproduce the agrarian society. Also have as a central teaching that "god punishes the wicked" by having the wicked ultimately succeed and dominate over the righteous.

Then you will have something.

You still didn't answer my question about describing god so we can see if we hang with the same dude. But as you have demonstrated nothing but hubris and arrogance in this thread, whatever god you saw wouldn't have been Jesus as his was a message of humbling oneself.

[_Themis]

Again, still don't want to answer 'yes' huh?

Is that necessary. I do think they have found a species of barley related to the barley we know, but I doubt you know or care much about any details surrounding it as long as you think it means what you think it does in relation to your religious beliefs.

And I think I'm sufficiently aware of the facts in this case.

I agree that you think you are, just as you think you are about God.

Clearly you did. Let me explain in simple terms, when you are called of God, you feel the way, but when you are chosen you experience God in a very real way that you do not doubt. Paul the apostle experienced this as has many of the saints. Without that, you are simply a believer and easily swayed. As I'm sure, this is the case with you. In Matt 22:14, the Lord states as much - "For many are called, but few are chosen."

I didn't miss it. I just know you don't really know what you are talking about. Could you be more specific on the difference between feeling and experiencing God, or what you think is God.

Actually, it has nothing to do with me in fact. I'm the anti/ex-mormon's worst nightmare.

I guess I have nothing to worry about since I am neither. :)

Someone that is completely unimpressed by anything you might say that would detract from the fact that there is a God. I'm happy to discuss the topic with them, but I know they are completely mistaken about the existence of God. I'm as sure of that fact as I am there is a Sun.

You can believe what you want. I don't recall making any declarations about the existence of God. I just wonder why someone who claims to have seen him behaves in such UN-Christlike ways here.