The artificial intelligence MEGATHREAD

[Limnor]

That makes sense. Earlier you suggested starting with the biblical text itself instead of abstract attributes. What did you have in mind? Earlier I mentioned “love” because the commandments are said to be summed up in “love” and God is said to “be” love.

All I mean by the Bible is that it's common ground for Mormons and Christians. If we accept the Bible as the starting point, there are constraints. We can rule out God as a rock, and a potato, and a dog, even if I can have AI come up with a 10,000 volume work to legitimize the great mythology of the RPD deity. We can rule out Zeus and Thor. Our starting point is, suppose the Bible is the revealed word.

Your suggestion of Augustine's love I still need to get back to. It's an important observation and I think I can use it to show you way Plantinga types don't have much to offer.

Augustine’s observation about love points toward a relational understanding of God grounded in the text rather than abstract definitions of greatness. That seems like common ground. The difference, I think, is whether that relational love is better expressed in a triune God from eternity past or in separate beings progressing toward godhood and in various stages at any given time. I’ll admit I’m still working through how the Mormon understanding of the trinity would work within that model.

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

Patriarchalists don’t need to be coherent. They only really believe in hierarchy.

Way to shrink wrap everything dude. Yep, we're all dumb and stupid patriarchalists (had to check the spelling since I never use that word).

So the flavors of the dayto refer to those that believe are patriarchalists and bigots. Got it.

Why in the world do you not have any faith man? That is, in the intelligence of a thinking/intelligent believer that thinks differently than you?

The common thread, at the end of the day, among critics, is that those that believe have been duped, are stupid, or can't pull their head out of the sand (being polite). How is that not 'holier than thou'?

And even arrogant?

Regards,
MG

QED

[malkie]

Every time you think that there's no more straw left in the -man, MG finds a way to beat some out of the -horse.

[Limnor]

Why in the world do you not have any faith man? That is, in the intelligence of a thinking/intelligent believer that thinks differently than you?

The common thread, at the end of the day, among critics, is that those that believe have been duped, are stupid, or can't pull their head out of the sand (being polite). How is that not 'holier than thou'?

And even arrogant?

Regards,
MG

QED

Such an odd argument. Let’s review:

Critics often imply believers are duped or unintelligent. That implication is arrogant. Therefore critics should have “faith” in believers’ intelligence.

What?

[MG 2.0]

QED

Such an odd argument. Let’s review:

Critics often imply believers are duped or unintelligent. That implication is arrogant. Therefore critics should have “faith” in believers’ intelligence.

What?

Another way of saying this is to give 'the other' the benefit of a doubt. That they/you have done their due diligence and are moving forward with a sense of integrity/honesty.

I often get vibes from critics as I observe them here and in other venues that this is lacking on their part.

Would I be wrong? I'm not referring only to myself and the vibes I get from critics but also the way they speak of others...for example, Jacob Hansen a while back. Believers are looked at as somehow deficient and not capable/willing to exercise the same scrutiny that enlightened critics have.

I can't count the number of times on this board when I've been told/asked and or had it inferred that to believe in the Restoration narrative is crazy. "How can you believe such stuff!"

Those that believe in the mission and purpose of both Joseph Smith and Jesus Christ and have confidence in a Heavenly Father to whom we are related and accountable to for our actions are like you, with the exception that we have testimonies of what we see as being true.

We are constantly found at fault and/or in error for that. Critics, of course, give their reasons for spending the time that they do offering up criticism of the church, it's doctrines, and its members/leaders...but I find those reasons somewhat questionable.

You would think that they would just 'live life' and enjoy NOT being a member of the church (or their inactivity or never Mo status) and let others do their own thing and let them share with others what has brought happiness and joy to them.

Gosh, you're free to do the same and we're not faulting you for doing that if you were to so choose.

You might think that on a board such as this that folks would spend more time talking about the ways in which they have found true happiness and joy in their own lives rather than being critical of those that have found/experienced the same.

Essentially, at the end of the day, that's what is going on.

Live and let live folks!

By the way, I have no idea what QED means. Something not good, I suspect.

Regards,
MG

[Marcus]

QED

Such an odd argument. Let’s review:

Critics often imply believers are duped or unintelligent. That implication is arrogant. Therefore critics should have “faith” in believers’ intelligence.

What?

I sometimes try to figure out the mental gymnastics of a troll's engagement. Inevitably, when a mental gymnast emphatically calls out others for being [insert any attribute], it is because the mental gymnast is projecting back comments he has recently received about his [insert any attribute]. This renders the logic of his statements secondary to the need to insert something along the lines of "nuh uh, you are."

[Limnor]

I can't count the number of times on this board when I've been told/asked and or had it inferred that to believe in the Restoration narrative is crazy. "How can you believe such stuff!"

…

Live and let live folks!

By the way, I have no idea what QED means. Something not good, I suspect.

Regards,
MG

Yes it is puzzling, I agree. I’d lean more towards delusional than dumb, though.

Based on your posting history here, I’d interpret your “live and let live…” comment as leaving something out. That is “…except when someone disagrees with me.” Also, posting a long critique of critics in order to ask critics to stop criticizing is interesting.

I suspect you either looked up or know what QED means but just in case: in this context it essentially means your post proves Doc Cam’s point.

[MG 2.0]

Folks, if you come to the forum and see the name of certain posters as the latest person(s) to make a comment you can be pretty gosh darn sure that they 'dropped in' to troll and follow me around.

Almost as though they are receiving notifications, "MG just posted, get in there quick!"

Is that possible? Can phones or computers be set up to give an audible sound when an 'antagonist' posts?

I ask, because it's almost like clockwork. Literally. I'll make a post and it's not two minutes later that one of a select group of posters will jump in and crap on what I've said. I have to wonder how can that be?

They can't be sitting by their computer or have their tablet or phone on hand at all hours of the day...can they?

Apparently they can...and they do.

Am I really worth all that?

Regards,
MG

[Limnor]

Such an odd argument. Let’s review:

Critics often imply believers are duped or unintelligent. That implication is arrogant. Therefore critics should have “faith” in believers’ intelligence.

What?

I sometimes try to figure out the mental gymnastics of a troll's engagement. Inevitably, when a mental gymnast emphatically calls out others for being [insert any attribute], it is because the mental gymnast is projecting back comments he has recently received about his [insert any attribute]. This renders the logic of his statements secondary to the need to insert something along the lines of "nuh uh, you are."

Yeah it’s really odd but somehow fascinating as well. Sometimes I think MG is really an ex-Mormon who is seeking to make the church look bad through his behavior.

[MG 2.0]

I sometimes try to figure out the mental gymnastics of a troll's engagement. Inevitably, when a mental gymnast emphatically calls out others for being [insert any attribute], it is because the mental gymnast is projecting back comments he has recently received about his [insert any attribute]. This renders the logic of his statements secondary to the need to insert something along the lines of "nuh uh, you are."

Yeah it’s really odd but somehow fascinating as well. Sometimes I think MG is really an ex-Mormon who is seeking to make the church look bad through his behavior.

That you and Marcus often find yourselves in agreement and/or supporting each other speaks volumes and tells me all I need to know.

It is fascinating how certain posters will jump in to support each other in their common objectives and pursuits.

I found myself wanting to trust your judgement and behavior as being honest and above board. It has been increasingly difficult to do so.

Regards,
MG