Certain people can't ever get it right

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

Ok. I guess we don’t know what it means. I suppose I don’t understand using jargon that I myself wouldn’t understand in context to theology, but then again that might explain why I’m an ex-theist, as Chap would put it.

Hrm. Huck. I gotta tell ya. This whole thing is starting to feel like a larp.

- Doc

[Lem]

....A quick plot summary from Wikipedia which I checked does not present a full picture of the actual value of the story....

Don't I know it. That's why I love my own private library.

[mentalgymnast]

The Mormon "eternal now" idea is sheer nonsense. Feel free to show otherwise by defining it.

I’ve been away from my iPad for a few days, just coming back. Looks like a lot has happened on this thread. My expression of eternal now and it’s meaning parallels some of the things that gadianton and others have posted. Thanks for doing the footwork this time around. Elder Maxwell’s comment:

We cannot do the sums because we do not have all the numbers.

...resonates with me. Back to the Sorites Paradox. We literally do not have the numbers of grains of sand in a heap, and yet we know a heap when we see it. And there is not just one ‘measurement’ that makes a heap. Different heaps have different grain counts. If we take a grain away from any one heap do we still have a heap? Of course. Unless we continue to subtract and at some point subjectively determine that we don’t. But relative to other heaps we may still have a heap. It’s all relative.

We don’t have all the numbers, and when we think we do, we don’t. We can’t measure eternity if it is one eternal round AND WE DON’T HAVE ALL THE NUMBERS. If I’m not mistaken, I think physics guy, with all of his expertise, is pretty much saying this. Aren’t our numbers/measurements contingent on spatial characteristics of a three dimensional structure? What happens when you get ‘outside’ (is that even the right word to use?) of the constraints of this structure? Do our numbers (knowing that it is debatable as to what a number even is or represents) even have meaning at that point?

Does God play three dimensional golf like we do? I doubt it. But he may play golf. Would it look like golf to us? Are there are a lot of other things He does differently? We place our understanding as a template on top of God to then try and understand Him...and eternity. So to say that God is in and through all things and ‘lives’ in the eternal now is not an unreasonable idea to put out there. And it just so happens that LDS doctrine fits in nicely within that paradigm. Look at the Book of Mormon for instance. God knew Mary’s name before she was ever born in the flesh,etc.

One might assume that He does have all the numbers. It is humbling to consider that we don’t. Isn’t it?

We cannot do the sums because we’re do not have all the numbers.

Regards,
MG

One more thing. In the book I referred to upthread, on page 64 third paragraph, we read:

...there is a mismatch between us and reality; the terms and conditions of our inexorable, unending quest to navigate a world in which an imperceptibly graduated landscape must necessarily be perceived through a binary categorical lens.

That being the case, I’ve always found it interesting to watch people take dogmatic positions when it comes to religious, theological, and even scientific positions. I’ve mentioned this before a number of times.

We cannot do the sums because we do not have all the numbers.

This being the case, why is faith in God so unreasonable with certain folks?

Regards,
MG

[Lem]

Just placed the book on hold!

- Doc

I think you'll really like it. His other stories, too.

[Chap]

...out of respect for the people who were once in deadly earnest about this deity, we could just leave that whole bundle of contradictions and fumbling nonsense in the toy cupboard of ideas that once looked worthwhile but turned out not to be, and get on with confronting the real and terrifying problems that currently threaten the entire existence of humanity.

Just a suggestion.

Many of these problems could be alleviated if people had faith in a creator God who has given commandments which if obeyed would help solve a good portion of the world’s ills. Rather than move away from God I think it would be a darn good idea if we were a bit more “deadly earnest” about trying to know and obey Him. But you’re right, there are a lot of people fumbling in a slew of nonsense which results in real problems.

Regards,
MG

Of course. If only everybody did what you say your particular deity (one amongst many) wants them to do, everything would be fine.

But I'm sorry sir, you have to take a numbered ticket and wait your turn to be called. We have such a lot of advocates for different deities in today, so we have to operate a strict queuing system. Of course, as you notice there is a special VID (Very Important Deity) line over there, reserved for deities who turn up in person rather than sending a representative (or, in most cases, several representatives who keep shouting over one another and sometimes starting fist fights), but so far none of them has actually turned up. So we are doing the best we can, and ask you to bear with us.

Next, please ....

[Chap]

Chap,
I happen to agree with your last paragraph.

Why did you quote me saying something I did not say?

Sorry - of course that was MG. But I am glad we see things the same way.

[Morley]

This being the case, why is faith in God so unreasonable with certain folks?

It is faith in your particular definition of God that folks find unreasonable, MG. You repeatedly and obstinately ignore this. You're like a Q-anon Trumpophile whinging to a roomful of Democrats, "Why don't you people believe in politics?"


.

[mentalgymnast]

This being the case, why is faith in God so unreasonable with certain folks?

It is faith in your particular definition of God that folks find unreasonable, MG. You repeatedly and obstinately ignore this. You're like a Q-anon Trumpophile whinging to a roomful of Democrats, "Why don't you people believe in politics?"


.

I’m not referring to just one version of God in this instance. I am referring to gods that teach and exemplify principles of good behavior and loving other people and creations of this earth.

I don’t think that’s too much to hope for.

And I’m not “like” what you would prefer or ‘like’ me to be like. For being a smart guy, you’re awfully simple minded in some of the stuff you come up with. What I would call a binary thinker.

Regards,
MG

[Chap]

gods that teach and exemplify principles of good behavior and loving other people and creations of this earth.

I've never seen a deity doing that. People, sometimes, yes.

Why can't you just get on and teach us yourself, MG? Why do you need a stuffed deity as a ventriloquist's dummy? We can see your lips move ...

[Morley]

It is faith in your particular definition of God that folks find unreasonable, MG. You repeatedly and obstinately ignore this. You're like a Q-anon Trumpophile whinging to a roomful of Democrats, "Why don't you people believe in politics?"

I’m not referring to just one version of God in this instance. I am referring to gods that teach and exemplify principles of good behavior and loving other people and creations of this earth.

Ah, excellent! If any god will do, then no gods will do, too. Most of the teaching and exemplifying of "principles of good behavior and loving other people" comes from other remarkable people, often sans any God.

I don’t think that’s too much to hope for.

Not at all. Thank you for clarifying. I have to wonder though, why do you bother to bring up something so marvelously universal?

And I’m not “like” what you would prefer or ‘like’ me to be like.

You know that it was an analogy, right? If I said you're like a banana who wishes he were an apple, that wouldn't mean that I think you are delicious, or yellow, or need to be peeled and eaten.

I wouldn't like you to be anything, MG. You need to be whatever you are. You know, kinda like a snowflake. (This doesn't mean I think you actually are a snowflake.)

For being a smart guy, you’re awfully simple minded in some of the stuff you come up with. What I would call a binary thinker.

Ha! Please tell me more. Tell me what I think, and how smart or simple-minded I am, and how it all makes me a binary thinker. No, really--this is just like getting my fortune told.

It's more than amusing how everyone who disagrees with you eventually gets called a binary thinker. I can't help but wonder: Is Mrs. Gymnast a binary thinker, too? I'll bet she is.

.