Seeing Things Differently -DanP the apologist excuse.

[Marcus]

That's what is so disingenuous. In spite of all people have said he still just defaults to derogatory stereotyping. Every single time.

I may not really know but I wonder if MG really does not intend to make derogatory stereotypes. It is possible his argument is stuck deep enough in a rut that he cannot alter course.

It appears that MG wants an appeal to free agency to be a complete explanation for the degree of suffering in the world and people are not accepting that as an explanation so MG thinks they are rejecting free will despite contrary comments. It might be better if believers admit they cannot completely understand the problem. I like to add that the human inclination for evil is strong enough that we as a family learn through the fact that we are exposed to real possibilities of suffering injury and injustice. I think that explains something but why is the human inclination to evil hard to overcome? I have no access to an answer for that. (yah we descend from primates of an ornery nature)

Don't we though?!! We watched the birds in our backyard today, it was lovely. But I was reminded of last summer when I chased away a grackle that had pinned down a sparrow and was trying to peck its head off. (We had already disposed of several headless sparrows in the previous weeks.) Mean little bastard! But, on the other hand, doing what it was made to do.

Anyway, you have a point about his argument being:

"stuck deep enough in a rut that he cannot alter course." I have noticed that the ingroup vs. outgroup stereotyping is very, very strong with some old school Mormons who live their lives completely surrounded by their ingroup. Heck, when I grew up everyone around me classified people as "members" and "nonmembers," completely!

Also, and this is just my personal theory, but I think that the Wasatch Front passive-aggressive style is so deeply embedded in some LDS people that they genuinely don't notice how offensive it can be. They think it's humorous or acceptable given their (narcissistic) assumption that they alone have the "truth." So I agree that his earnestness might be masking his ability to understand how he is treating others. He's been coming here so long, however, that you really have to wonder why he can't get along, even at a kindergarten level.

It appears that MG wants an appeal to free agency to be a complete explanation for the degree of suffering in the world and people are not accepting that as an explanation so MG thinks they are rejecting free will despite contrary comments.

Yes, he literally doesn't seem to hear what people are saying to him, and your explanation makes a lot of sense.

[MG 2.0]

That's what is so disingenuous. In spite of all people have said he still just defaults to derogatory stereotyping. Every single time.

I may not really know but I wonder if MG really does not intend to make derogatory stereotypes. It is possible his argument is stuck deep enough in a rut that he cannot alter course.

It appears that MG wants an appeal to free agency to be a complete explanation for the degree of suffering in the world and people are not accepting that as an explanation so MG thinks they are rejecting free will despite contrary comments. It might be better if believers admit they cannot completely understand the problem. I like to add that the human inclination for evil is strong enough that we as a family learn through the fact that we are exposed to real possibilities of suffering injury and injustice. I think that explains something but why is the human inclination to evil hard to overcome? I have no access to an answer for that. (yah we descend from primates of an ornery nature)

Do I understand all the ins and outs of free will with all of its ramifications?

Not by a long shot.

But I do believe that free will and moral agency are ‘a thing’. If other folks do believe that we have agency to choose and are not religious, I’m on board with that. It just seemed to me that in this thread the pendulum had swung way to the other side.

Which it did.

I do think that free will does account for what we see in the world and that God knows exactly what’s going on and a plan is in place to save as many people as possible.

Regards,
MG

[MG 2.0]

I’ve been on this thread for a long time.

Long enough!

I’ve enjoyed the interaction with others and again getting a feel and greater understanding from those that are either no longer active in the church, have had their names removed, or are nevermo.

Thanks for letting me come into your community and express my thoughts and opinions on some pretty important topics.

I know we won’t agree, but for me it is the road traveled that I find extremely interesting. The last two or three weeks have been another excursion into a world that I don’t inhabit day to day.

Our realities are different and yet the same in some important ways. But it’s those things we really don’t talk about. Common ground of simply being human.

Time to take another break for a while and get on to some more reading, hiking, etc.

Summer is here!

Until later,

Regards,
MG

[Gadianton]

Children die before eight and go to heaven. What will that look like? I’m willing to leave that in the hands of a creator that I believe exists.

Sure. In other words, it makes no logical sense that "this life is a test to learn in the school of hard knocks" if half of the school dies before the first class begins. Out of the gate, your explanation of life's purpose, to learn and grow, fails for half of everyone born.

What you're saying is that you don't have an explanation for what we see on the ground, you have an explanation for perhaps a small number of situations, or at least idealized stories about a few situations, and for everything else you have faith that God will make it work or that God is fair.

Anyone can have faith that their model that doesn't explain anything will explain everything one day.

And it was highly disingenuous of you to brush off my attempt to show how you misunderstand the atheist objection to free will defenses, and just say analogies can fail and quote what an A.I. has to say about analogies. This is the liar in you MG. Unfortunately, it's your most recognizable feature, at least on a message board.

[Gadianton]

but I think that the Wasatch Front passive-aggressive style is so deeply embedded in some LDS people that they genuinely don't notice how offensive it can be

after ^ this post came this post:

I’ve enjoyed the interaction with others and again getting a feel and greater understanding from those that are either no longer active in the church, have had their names removed, or are nevermo.

[Gadianton]

Do I understand all the ins and outs of free will with all of its ramifications?

Not by a long shot.

Okay you told the truth at least. You don't understand anything about free will and its ramifications. You are conflating a whole range of objections to the plan of salvation as Mor(m)ons teach it, as objections to free will.

You don't seem to understand that Christians generally bring up free will in context of arguing about God in the abstract, how to reconcile omnibenevolence and omnipotence with the existence of evil. You're putting forward a God with his unique plan of happiness, the great test, as presented in the pre-earth life to the spirits who would one day go to earth. As people point out flaws in Mormon-specific beliefs about this test, you take it as objections to free will based on their needs as determinists who want everything to be perfect like Satan did. It's totally childish.

Half of what is being discussed has nothing to do with free will. Saying most spirits don't get far enough along in life to be tested has nothing to do with free will, yet that's how you take it -- every objection to the specifics of the Mormon plan you are taking as a problem free will addresses. I think this is probably due to your general lack of education. You know there is something out there in theism land with free will answering objections to the problem of evil, and just assume that this probably covers all the details of the highly elaborate Mormon plan of salvation. You're not even taking the time to understand what people are telling you, assuming this has to be right.

[honorentheos]

...any creator God that we could believe in would have to be one that allows for free will/agency to be primary in the operations of any sort of plan that may have ended up getting the final go ahead for planet earth.

...The earth itself works according to natural means/law and is what it is and does what it does.

These are contradictory ideas.

[Marcus]

Good grief. You even lie to yourself. Here's what you said:

As for your question, you know full well Morley already answered it.

Marcus, I’m not going to engage with you on this...

You don't need to. You have no comeback because our points have already been made.

[Marcus]

but I think that the Wasatch Front passive-aggressive style is so deeply embedded in some LDS people that they genuinely don't notice how offensive it can be

after ^ this post came this post:

I’ve enjoyed the interaction with others and again getting a feel and greater understanding from those that are either no longer active in the church, have had their names removed, or are nevermo.

Definition....followed by example.

[Gadianton]

So you and Gadianton are down to the level of calling out “Liar!!” now, huh?

Because after a while, somebody should call out the lies for what they are. Such as when you repeatedly say:

You folks will do just about anything to see free will as a gift given by God as an anathema.

This is lying, and it's intended as an insult. You generally stoop to "that level" quickly yourself.

But the lying goes much deeper. The whole "Build your own God" project has a tremendous built-in moral hazard, and when I called the BYOG workshop dumb, MG responded:

Free expression. A form of free will.

We hear this a lot lately: "Donald Trump is free to express himself that the election was stolen!", "if he's lying about it, he's free to lie about it, it's not a crime!"

There is a tremendous incentive to invent the God that justifies whatever you want to believe, rather than what you really see "on the ground". It's a great topic for shameless people because there are no boundaries. Believe whatever you want, that's what we're here on earth to do!