Reason, Reason, Reason.

[_Tommy]

Dear JAK,

My heart aches when I think about your continued rebellion against the Most High God. You write, "Information is relevant."

Yes it is. And here is some information for you. God Has a plan for our happiness. He has sent prophets to teach us. He has revealed scripture to guide us. He has given us Hymnals that we might praise his name in song.

Religious mythologies are fiction, Tommy. There are many of them. They don’t agree with one another. They are self-contradictory in their own dogmas. And they substitute doctrine for discovery

.

Only false religious mythologies are fiction JAK. The "mythology" of the restored gospel is true and it is not self-condradictory.

“False teachings of science” are what?

Have you ever heard the theory of evolution, which states that man is a product of apes rather than descendents of Adam and Eve who were placed by God in the Garden of Eden? I have no apes in my genealogy.

You present nothing which supports your various flawed claims.

I have presented my faith and testimony. I also can point you to the scriptures as easily as you can point me to your websites.

Even they don’t agree with one another

And do all your evolutionists agree with one another?

Tommy. As a group, religious organizations are products of fiction, doctrine, and dogma which have undergone doctrinal shifts over time.

And science has never shifted over time?

Anyway, I realize that the world is rife with confusion because the doctrines of men within science and religion abound. This is why it was expedient for God to restore the true gospel. The plurality and contradiction of world religions only serve to punctuate the timeliness of the restoration.

[_rcrocket]

Yes, without knowing better, one would conclude, using this reasoning, that rcrocket is the most credentialed person here.

Thanks! Finally we can speak as friends. I appreciate the compliment! Yes, I am highly credentialed: I work my motorcycle at over 130 mph and can run 50 miles on a hilly trail without stopping in under 9 1/2 hours. That makes me qualified, on this board, to say what I choose.

If you can run 50 hilly miles in under 9 1/2 hours, then you, my friend, are better than credentialed, you are a stud.

I'm training for a marathon, and I'll be happy if I can finish and maintain a 10-minute/mile pace the entire time.

This certainly buys you some street cred in my book.

The Antelope Island 50 mi ultra I was 2nd in my age group.

I just ran the SL marathon. 4:00:03. Nothing to write home about but my age group I was 7th or 17th or something. (It is online; I forget.) It is a great sport. At your age you should easily do 9 minute miles.

Go for it.

rcrocket

[_harmony]

Yes, without knowing better, one would conclude, using this reasoning, that rcrocket is the most credentialed person here.

Thanks! Finally we can speak as friends. I appreciate the compliment! Yes, I am highly credentialed: I work my motorcycle at over 130 mph and can run 50 miles on a hilly trail without stopping in under 9 1/2 hours. That makes me qualified, on this board, to say what I choose.

You drive your motorcycle at over 130 mph? That's not credentialed, crocket. That's nuts!

[Guest]

Dear JAK,

My heart aches when I think about your continued rebellion against the Most High God. You write, "Information is relevant."

Yes it is. And here is some information for you. God Has a plan for our happiness. He has sent prophets to teach us. He has revealed scripture to guide us. He has given us Hymnals that we might praise his name in song.

Religious mythologies are fiction, Tommy. There are many of them. They don’t agree with one another. They are self-contradictory in their own dogmas. And they substitute doctrine for discovery

.

Only false religious mythologies are fiction JAK. The "mythology" of the restored gospel is true and it is not self-condradictory.

You’re not well informed. See: This Website Again

More than 1,000 denominations, sects, and cults have resulted in the period of time since 1517 CE. The Protestant Reformation resulted in doctrines and dogmas which claim to be the true ones. None is reliable including LDS. The claims are bogus.

Recognize:

1 The Protestant Reformation gave rise to your religious group.

2 Religious groups which have different fictions claim theirs is reliable.

3 Realize that none is reliable in that they disagree with one another. One so-called restoration group has no more credibility than any other group which is a resultant following the 1517 CE Protestant Reformation period in religious evolution.

JAK previously:
“False teachings of science” are what?

Tommy stated:
Have you ever heard the theory of evolution, which states that man is a product of apes rather than descendents of Adam and Eve who were placed by God in the Garden of Eden? I have no apes in my genealogy.

No evidence supports an Adam and Eve story any more than any evidence supports an original English language. Evolution of life forms over the history of the earth as well as extinction of others is well documented. Emergence and evolution of language is also well documented.

Read these carefully:

The Ape-Human Connection

Common Ancestry

Our Primate Origins

"Our understanding of the fossil record shows that distinctively human traits appeared neither recently nor all at once. Rather, they evolved piecemeal over a period of roughly 5 million years. By 4 million years ago, humans were habitually bipedal (walking on two legs) yet had brains roughly a third of the size of a modern human's (about the size of a modern ape's brain). By 2.5 million years ago the manufacture of stone tools was common. Large increases in brain size occurred even later. Complex behaviors such as adaptation to a wide range of environments and cultural diversification emerged only within the last 100,000 years." (From Our Primate Origins)

Ignorance about your "genealogy" is irrelevant to historical, scientific discoveries. Wishful thinking is no substitute for information.

You both misrepresent evolution and demonstrate you fail to understand it with regard to the evolution of life forms on this planet. Evolution of life forms, civilizations, and cultures are firmly documented among the informed and well educated.

Your God assertion has not been established and is in fact discredited by information. You have presented no evidence for your God claim. Others who make different God claims have also failed to establish their claims. Truth by assertion fails.

Absent credible, tested, and skeptically reviewed evidence, claims such as yours should be disregarded. Ancient scripts of religious context and claims should be disregarded and recognized as unreliable.

Review the following:

Evolution

Evolution & Fact

From this website read the following:

"It is time for students of the evolutionary process, especially those who have been misquoted and used by the creationists, to state clearly that evolution is a fact, not theory, and that what is at issue within biology are questions of details of the process and the relative importance of different mechanisms of evolution.

It is a fact that the earth with liquid water, is more than 3.6 billion years old. It is a fact that cellular life has been around for at least half of that period and that organized multicellular life is at least 800 million years old. It is a fact that major life forms now on earth were not at all represented in the past.

There were no birds or mammals 250 million years ago. It is a fact that major life forms of the past are no longer living. There used to be dinosaurs and Pithecanthropus, and there are none now.

It is a fact that all living forms come from previous living forms. Therefore, all present forms of life arose from ancestral forms that were different. Birds arose from nonbirds and humans from nonhumans.

No person who pretends to any understanding of the natural world can deny these facts any more than she or he can deny that the earth is round, rotates on its axis, and revolves around the sun."

JAK previously:
You present nothing which supports your various flawed claims.

Tommy stated:
I have presented my faith and testimony. I also can point you to the scriptures as easily as you can point me to your websites.

Your bias is irrelevant. Why? It lacks consensus which is fundamental to discovery. Also, it is fundamental in discovery that consensus is achieved by testing, skeptical review, further testing, and accumulation of additional evidence. It's an on-going and continuous process for reliable discovery.

You fail to establish reliability. Muslims also have “scriptures” which they claim to be true. The Muslim claim is no more and no less reliable than your claims. Theirs, as well as yours, lack consensus which can be found through skeptical review and testing.

Tommy stated:
And do all your evolutionists agree with one another?[/color]

Does the Internet work? Are you reading my post? Have I quoted you?

"Scientific method is a body of techniques for investigating phenomena and acquiring new knowledge, as well as for correcting and integrating previous knowledge. It is based on gathering observable, empirical, measurable evidence, subject to specific principles of reasoning

Although procedures vary from one field of inquiry to another, there are identifiable features that distinguish scientific inquiry from other methods of developing knowledge. Scientific researchers propose specific hypotheses as explanations of natural phenomena, and design experimental studies that test these predictions for accuracy. These steps are repeated in order to make increasingly dependable predictions of future results. Theories that encompass wider domains of inquiry serve to bind many specific hypotheses together in a coherent structure. This in turn aids in the formation of new hypotheses, as well as in placing groups of specific hypotheses into a broader context of understanding."

See this for additional discussion beyond what I quoted above.

The answer to your question is that there is significant agreement among scientists regarding scientific method and reliability.

In addition, there is significant disagreement in religious mythologies. You, for example, don’t agree with Muslim doctrine (assuming you know any of it). You don’t agree with other doctrines in the more than 1,000 Christian doctrines which have been a result of the Protestant Reformation.

Religious myths lack consensus. They lack reliability.

JAK previously:
Tommy, as a group, religious organizations are products of fiction, doctrine, and dogma which have undergone doctrinal shifts over time.

Tommy stated:
And science has never shifted over time?

Discovery and consensus about information are continuous. Conclusions in science are tentative conclusions. That is, they are subject to skeptical review, and subject to further testing.

That which makes science reliable is the scientific method. I reproduced a part of that above.

The inherent problem with religious myth is that it relies on truth by assertion. Today, science relies on the method described previously. Discovery results from accurate, reliable facts which continue to be found.

Your computer works as a result of applied science. (I use that example only because it is our common denominator in these discussions. I could use many other examples from other areas.)

Religion is unreliable in that religious pundits (such as you) have fundamental disagreement. Worse, religious pundits claim that their particular religious myths are the correct myths. Generally, they fail to recognize even that they embrace or believe myths. They, like you, make a variety of God claims for which the can offer nothing of skeptical review, testing, and honest intellectual analysis.

Science, on the other hand, uses all of those devices to distinguish what is reliable from what is not. Medical science (where available) improves the quality of human life and extends the length of human life.

Religion substitutes doctrine/dogma for honesty and research. Hence, religion is unreliable and religious claims should be disregarded.

Tommy stated:
Anyway, I realize that the world is rife with confusion because the doctrines of men within science and religion abound. This is why it was expedient for God to restore the true gospel. The plurality and contradiction of world religions only serve to punctuate the timeliness of the restoration.

No evidence for God claims has been established. They rely on ancient scripts and ignorance inherent in those scripts. They also rely on interpretations which lack agreement.

Evidence demonstrates that religious notions are inventions of men. Principles of physics are genuine discoveries. Generally, these principles are tested continuously and found to be reliable. Gravity is reliable (for example).

No evidence supports your claim regarding “the true gospel.” It’s another example of truth by assertion.

There was no LDS prior to the 1800s CE. It’s a product of the Protestant Reformation. Claims made in its behalf are further example of truth by assertion. It’s claims are merely along side other claims and are no more reliable than any other religioius claims.

The doctrines confirm the “...plurality and contradiction of world religions...” (Your words) “Restoration” is a doctrine. Historically, it’s merely one of many religious myths. In the context of religious mythologies, it has a relatively short existence.

Few other religious group have more dissatisified members as suggested by the number of Internet websites found in this Google Search.

JAK

[_JAK]

Anyway, I realize that the world is rife with confusion because the doctrines of men within science and religion abound. This is why it was expedient for God to restore the true gospel. The plurality and contradiction of world religions only serve to punctuate the timeliness of the restoration.

There are several restorationist groups.

See this website. Scroll down for some specific denominations.

No credible evidence for God is established in any religious denomination. It's an assertion absent corroboration.

JAK

[_harmony]

Anyway, I realize that the world is rife with confusion because the doctrines of men within science and religion abound. This is why it was expedient for God to restore the true gospel. The plurality and contradiction of world religions only serve to punctuate the timeliness of the restoration.

There are several restorationist groups.

See this website. Scroll down for some specific denominations.

No credible evidence for God is established in any religious denomination. It's an assertion absent corroboration.

JAK

Psst. JAK. You're arguing with a puppet.

[_Runtu]

Anyway, I realize that the world is rife with confusion because the doctrines of men within science and religion abound. This is why it was expedient for God to restore the true gospel. The plurality and contradiction of world religions only serve to punctuate the timeliness of the restoration.

There are several restorationist groups.

See this website. Scroll down for some specific denominations.

No credible evidence for God is established in any religious denomination. It's an assertion absent corroboration.

JAK

Psst. JAK. You're arguing with a puppet.

I was gonna say the same thing. I did that once, too. Felt rather foolish.

[_Roger Morrison]

Anyway, I realize that the world is rife with confusion because the doctrines of men within science and religion abound. This is why it was expedient for God to restore the true gospel. The plurality and contradiction of world religions only serve to punctuate the timeliness of the restoration.

There are several restorationist groups.

See this website. Scroll down for some specific denominations.

No credible evidence for God is established in any religious denomination. It's an assertion absent corroboration.

JAK

Psst. JAK. You're arguing with a puppet.

Maybe so, but what an opportunity for JAK to spread "truth"! Great sites & links! IF one was of a suspicious nature, one might think Tommy & JAK were one and the same person!?!? Ya know what i'm sayin'? (I don't think that, by the way :-)

Whatever, me thinks Tommy--and his think-alikes--looks "Dumber an' Dumber" with each post, thanks to JAK. Warm regards, Roger

[_Jersey Girl]

Anyway, I realize that the world is rife with confusion because the doctrines of men within science and religion abound. This is why it was expedient for God to restore the true gospel. The plurality and contradiction of world religions only serve to punctuate the timeliness of the restoration.

There are several restorationist groups.

See this website. Scroll down for some specific denominations.

No credible evidence for God is established in any religious denomination. It's an assertion absent corroboration.

JAK

Psst. JAK. You're arguing with a puppet.

Maybe so, but what an opportunity for JAK to spread "truth"! Great sites & links! IF one was of a suspicious nature, one might think Tommy & JAK were one and the same person!?!? Ya know what I'm sayin'? (I don't think that, by the way :-)

Whatever, me thinks Tommy--and his think-alikes--looks "Dumber an' Dumber" with each post, thanks to JAK. Warm regards, Roger

I'm pretty sure that JAK knows exactly who/what he's posting to here.

Jersey Girl

[_harmony]

Maybe so, but what an opportunity for JAK to spread "truth"! Great sites & links! IF one was of a suspicious nature, one might think Tommy & JAK were one and the same person!?!? Ya know what I'm sayin'? (I don't think that, by the way :-)

Whatever, me thinks Tommy--and his think-alikes--looks "Dumber an' Dumber" with each post, thanks to JAK. Warm regards, Roger

I guess if one gets their jollies from arguing with a toy, I have no objection. It's just that JAK usually comes across as very intelligent, but right now, he just looks silly to me (kinda like he's having a conversation with a blow-up doll).

It's like if Jason Bourne all of a sudden only wrote posts based on what he thought Jason Bourne, the movie character, would actually say, instead of as he does now with his real personality and thoughts. Tommy isn't a person; Tommy is a caricature, a shadow, a silouette of the real Tommy. He only says what his puppetmaster thinks Thomas Monson would say. He's making fun of us on this bulletin board, and of the LDS church. For JAK to "instruct" him is like JAK instructing the puppet: useless. The puppet is simply a tool with which to ridicule us. Until the guy pulling his strings actually reveals himself, with his own thoughts and personality, engaging Tommy is simply engaging the puppet, a totally useless task.

But by all means, continue.