The Bottom Line

[_Drifting]

The example I gave of establishing the truth about the Church (and the Book of Mormon was connected with that) was the first proper time I had applied Moroni's promise to anything. Subsequent to that time it has become blatantly obvious that identifying and 'listening' to internal promptings is totally unreliable.
Subgenius is correct in raising therefore, the dilemma that I was then faced with. If the method is unreliable (a position I don't believe subgenius holds personally) then perhaps my learning of the falsity of the Church is also unreliable. I agree. Where we part company is that I then apply other methods of establishing wether the Church is true - like science, consistency, fact checking etc whereas subgenius/the Church would advise ignoring all that and continue applying for Moroni's promise until you get the 'right' answer.

Drifting's steps to the simple truth:
When one is confronted with a question of apparent (or alleged) significant consequence proceed with the following steps in order.

1. Do not study it out in your mind
2. Knowingly utilize at least one incorrect method over several instances.
3. Incorporate frustration and self-desire
4. Revise the method in #2 as correct while denouncing that same method by virtue of step #3
5. Receive result desired (note
6. Take predisposition from step #5 and apply to other methods
7. Proclaim results as a simple truth, a conclusion, a deduction of the highest order.
8. Go forth and denounce the reliability of steps 1 through 7

note: when this method is discovered as self-imploding, simply provide another "revision" that reconstructs the method to fit whatever desired result is intended. Contradiction to actual events in one's life should never be an obstacle to any attempt to inflate one's status on an internet forum. Being perceived as insincere is not a severe enough consequence to cause one to abandon a futile and illogical position.

Now you're just lying.
I told you I complied with the steps Moroni suggested.
That means I did study it out in my mind. Etc.
I know it helps your position if I didn't, but sorry, I complied fully and completely.

[Guest]

Final comment then, since it seems that we cannot have a reasonable discussion:

I am not saying that God is less powerful than the Devil - I'm saying that you cannot guarantee to be able to tell which is which.

You seem to be saying that, because God, by definition, is able to "prevent the Devil from overwhelming our senses, reason, and abilities to perceive which is which", and should be able to "honestly answer the otherwise unencumbered individual unless God is the Devil and evil (which is unacceptable)", he will always do so.

I think that the scriptures indicate otherwise.

You also seem to be saying that God is not evil. I am not convinced that you can be certain that that is true - other than by definition, and always assuming that such an entity exists.

Of course we aren't going to have a discussion about it (at least not with me). I consider the assertion absurd and unacceptable. And I really don't know who you would have this discussion with malkie? I really don't think most Mormons, Christians, Islamists, Jews, and so on would think it at all interesting. Why do you think they would? Your question is essentially, how can we tell the difference between good and evil? Well, the answer is clearly - I know when I see it.

I also do not agree with you that the scriptures demonstrate in any way that God is less powerful than the Devil or that he is impotent, not good (evil), or will lead us astray. I believe God will always answer us, but we may choose not to recognize the answer (due to our encumbered problems) till he has to beat us over the head with it. I certainly don't think the Devil can fool us unless we allow ourselves to be fooled.

Basically, it comes down to what I stated above. Can we distinguish between good and evil? I would say absolutely. Otherwise, there isn't a choice betwen good and evil since we would not know the difference. And we must know for there to be a choice made; otherwise justice is not possible, sin is not possible, and so on.

[_Drifting]

And as I've said, it's a stupid, absurd, ridiculous set of questions. It assumes that the person you are asking believes that God is less power (or equal to the Devil) and that we therefore unable to determine which is which. If you accept God is more powerful than the Devil, then there is no reason to believe that God is unable to prevent the Devil from overwhelming our senses, reason, and abilities to perceive which is which. If God is all powerful, then God should be able to honestly answer the otherwise unencumbered individual unless God is the Devil and evil (which is unacceptable). It is absurd to consider that the Devil (who is less powerful), would be able to so completely fool an individual, who is not otherwise disabled, from being able to tell the difference. By definition, since God is more powerful, it is silly to believe otherwise.

Final comment then, since it seems that we cannot have a reasonable discussion:

I am not saying that God is less powerful than the Devil - I'm saying that you cannot guarantee to be able to tell which is which.

You seem to be saying that, because God, by definition, is able to "prevent the Devil from overwhelming our senses, reason, and abilities to perceive which is which", and should be able to "honestly answer the otherwise unencumbered individual unless God is the Devil and evil (which is unacceptable)", he will always do so.

I think that the scriptures indicate otherwise.

You also seem to be saying that God is not evil. I am not convinced that you can be certain that that is true - other than by definition, and always assuming that such an entity exists.

The problem Malkie is that they don't know. Tobin and subgenius cannot think of any way of distinguishing between a message or influence from God and a message or influence from the Devil.

that's why they beat their chest about the absurdity of the question rather than answering it.

[_malkie]

The problem Malkie is that they don't know. Tobin and subgenius cannot think of any way of distinguishing between a message or influence from God and a message or influence from the Devil.

that's why they beat their chest about the absurdity of the question rather than answering it.

And that in spite of the scriptures that show:

- people (prophets included) have been deceived
- even the very elect [can] be deceived

they are supremely confident that they have not been and cannot be deceived.

There's a word for that!

[_Tobin]

The problem Malkie is that they don't know. Tobin and subgenius cannot think of any way of distinguishing between a message or influence from God and a message or influence from the Devil.

that's why they beat their chest about the absurdity of the question rather than answering it.

And that in spite of the scriptures that show:

- people (prophets included) have been deceived
- even the very elect [can] be deceived

they are supremely confident that they have not been and cannot be deceived.

There's a word for that!

Yes, the word is misunderstanding.

You are misunderstanding things. Allowing oneself to be fooled is not the same as being fooled because you are unable to prevent it. Just because you can be fooled does not mean you will be fooled. That is why knowledge, reason, common sense, understanding, character, integrity, and so on are important factors.

Again, the claim is we can't tell the difference between good and evil. And are helpless to identify it. That is complete non-sense.

[_Drifting]

Again, the claim is we can't tell the difference between good and evil. And are helpless to identify it. That is complete non-sense.

No. The claim is that you don't know if God is speaking to you or some other supernatural or natural force is deceiving you into believing God is talking to you.

Still no answer...

[_Tobin]

Again, the claim is we can't tell the difference between good and evil. And are helpless to identify it. That is complete non-sense.

No. The claim is that you don't know if God is speaking to you or some other supernatural or natural force is deceiving you into believing God is talking to you.

Still no answer...

No, the claim is we can't tell the difference between good (God) and evil (the Devil). It's stupid.

[_Drifting]

No. The claim is that you don't know if God is speaking to you or some other supernatural or natural force is deceiving you into believing God is talking to you.

Still no answer...

No, the claim is we can't tell the difference between good (God) and evil (the Devil). It's stupid.

No, the claim is as I've specified - simpy, clearly and explicitly.

Still no answer...

[_Tobin]

No, the claim is as I've specified - simpy, clearly and explicitly.

Still no answer...

And again, the answer is - the claim is STUPID!!!!

[_Drifting]

No, the claim is as I've specified - simpy, clearly and explicitly.

Still no answer...

And again, the answer is - the claim is STUPID!!!!

Wow, you really don't know.
I thought you were just being coy, or were embarassed by the answer.
But you really have no way of articulating how an individual can tell if God is communicating with them or if it is some other source.

Fair enough.