Why won't the Church Authorities respond to this....?

[_DrW]

Bhodi,

Please have a look at this award winning video and then come back and tell us how the LDS Church is justified in the lies, deceptions and half truths it publishes for consumption by the faithful.

I doubt that even someone of your hard-over fundamentalist bent can justify the kind of Mopologetic obfuscation and deception brought to light by this video.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EReUoXIesMI

I'm not necessarily sure that the Brodie Awards are necessarily that prestigious. I wonder outside of the Mormon critical community who would either know or care, but it is an award in that someone said it was, so I am sure this suffices for you...? I doubt your standards are very high or even existent. Regardless, the OP deals with LDS leadership, your youtube video apologists. The two are not the same. Why are you equating them?

As for religious belief, what is your point? There is little evidence that the Exodus occurred, yet it is the central facet of the Jewish religion, and Jews continue to believe and exist. Some even suspect that the story was allegorical and remain Jewish and devout. Catholics have a very sordid history, yet maintain faith in the Papacy. I do not seem to realize that many, many, many people understand that religion is laced with human imperfections, yet maintain faith regardless, in the face of full comprehension. Your problem seems to be a significant resentment that others find faith where you cannot.

Again you resort to name calling where intellectual practice cannot solve your dilemma. I am LDS. I have been in Bishoprics, hold a valid TR, really like the Temple truth told. I also support same sex marriage, am attending and dues paying member of a Zen Buddhist Sangha, and voted for Barack Obama. I am certainly NOT a fundamentalist, but you NEED to apply the name because otherwise it conflicts with your worldview.

I do not need, or even want your belief to continue with mine. Your opinion does not matter in the slightest, but the mere existence of beliefs that differ from yours is considered a form of insult to you.

Why?

I think you have some significant psychological problems; you should likely stop posting (you plagiarize anyway, what is the point) and really do some serious soul searching.

So, I take it your response is that the LDS Church is justified in lying because some other churches lie as well.

Is that about right?

[_Bhodi]

So, I take it your response is that the LDS Church is justified in lying because some other churches lie as well.

Is that about right?

Not at all. The believer does not believe they are lying, that is the point you, and the OP, will never understand. Oddly enough the believer is more mentally flexible than the skeptic in many cases.

[_DrW]

So, I take it your response is that the LDS Church is justified in lying because some other churches lie as well.

Is that about right?

Not at all. The believer does not believe they are lying, that is the point you, and the OP, will never understand. Oddly enough the believer is more mentally flexible than the skeptic in many cases.

You didn't watch the video, right?

Believers are clearly not "mentally flexible" compared to rationalists. In fact, believers are generally mentally inflexible in that they are often unable alter their basic beliefs even in the light of overwhelming evidence that is contrary to those beliefs.

The fact that believers are forced to engage in "mental gymnastics" to justify their unfounded and sometimes delusional beliefs does not mean that are mentally flexible. It just means that they will be sore the next morning.

[_Bhodi]

You didn't watch the video, right?

I am completely disinterested in apologetics, why watch it? You never did explain why you immediately equated the OP to apologetics, since I am unaware of any GA's who are apologists.

Believers are clearly not "mentally flexible" compared to rationalists. In fact, believers are generally mentally inflexible in that they are often unable alter their basic beliefs even in the light of overwhelming evidence that is contrary to those beliefs.

Not at all. Believers are open to the possibilities of something more than they can conceive. They are open to possibilities. Even the most die-hard fundamentalist admits to something more than they can understand existing. The human mind is a small thing and the ability to conceive of something greater is one of our most redeemable characteristics.

The fact that believers are forced to engage in "mental gymnastics" to justify their unfounded and sometimes delusional beliefs does not mean that are mentally flexible. It just means that they will be sore the next morning.

And yet the believer finds his or her beliefs completely founded and non-delusional. How odd that the believer can exist in both worlds, and thrive even? You should examine the basis of your own animosity and negativity, there might be some envy there. Just a thought.

[_The Erotic Apologist]

Meh. Not only did he not watch the video, he didn't even read the OP.

[_DrW]

The fact that believers are forced to engage in "mental gymnastics" to justify their unfounded and sometimes delusional beliefs does not mean that are mentally flexible. It just means that they will be sore the next morning.

.. And yet the believer finds his or her beliefs completely founded and non-delusional.

Bhodi,

Okay, so you didn't watch the video, and probably didn't read the OP either. But don't you at least read what you write?

Do you really not understand that a delusional individual will not find their unfounded beliefs to be delusional, by definition?

Are you not aware that what you have described here is a characteristic feature of delusional thought?

[_Bhodi]

Bhodi,

Okay, so you didn't watch the video, and probably didn't read the OP either. But don't you at least read what you write?

Of course. I also read the OP, but consider what you are doing. You are trying to make an argument that my comments are false because I did not read the material, which is incorrect. It is a form of ad hominem, an attempt to avoid the actual argument and make some sort of personal attack against the individual. It is a sign of a weak response that has little support, so external buttressing is brought in, in the form of a personal attack.

Do you really not understand that a delusional individual will not find their unfounded beliefs to be delusional, by definition?

But you operate with the a priori assumption that the beliefs are delusional to begin with, and it is the person holding them who has the problem. This is incorrect. You are the one with the problem that seeks to ameliorate it by labeling those with whom you disagree as delusional. You, and many, many here, desperately NEED the believer to be delusional, or else you are flawed. You’re broken. You’re not working.

The Jew who holds the Seder every Friday, knows that there is scant evidence for the Exodus, but does it anyway…is this man or woman delusional? Of course not, but they find meaning, substance, and fulfillment in their activities. The have faith, faith in what they cannot see or know, faith that there is something out there greater than themselves. They have a connection you do not have. The Eastern Orthodox who believes that the Holy Fire…are they delusional? It seems highly unlikely, much more likely that someone is putting a Zippo to the candle, so if the executive order continues to believe, are they delusional? No. They, like their Jewish cousin, find meaning, fulfillment, and substance in the belief.

You do not, so you HAVE to find these individuals delusional, because otherwise it means there is something wrong with you. Why can’t you find meaning? Why can’t you find substance? Why can’t you find fulfillment? There, naturally, must be something wrong with you, but maybe there is something wrong with him. Maybe you can attack him and alleviate some of the concern for yourself. That is the answer.

You are broken, and I do not know why either. You talk about subjects about which you have no clue. Your commentary on Oman was ridiculously uninformed. If you actually did live there, it is embarrassing that you know so little about a former home. You plagiarized simple information on the Middle East, because you WANT people to think you are smart, when you’re not, but the need outweighed the ethical concerns. This was not the first time either. You have gone on and on about your credentials, posted a bank transfer form (real or photoshopped), bragged about your work, and you still know so little. Why? Why the desperate need for validation? Dirty little secret, I have a more extensive academic and professional resume than you do. But who cares. I never mentioned it, and likely never will again, because it does not matter. I don’t care, and will never brag about it, because it is all an illusion of hubris. My ego does not need buttressing, and I know people who have a more extensive resume than I do. There is always someone better, so why brag? You have not hit this point yet, you need to engage in some serious self-reflection. Something is wrong, and your attacks on the believer are an expression of that.

Are you not aware that what you have described here is a characteristic feature of delusional thought?

I agree, someone is delusional, but not the believer.

Consider, I think most Protestant theology is silly, uninformed, ahistorical, shallow, and dumb. But I do not begrudge their right to believe. I even admire some aspects of their culture. But I have never found the need to comment on it on a Protestant message board, never got involved in opposition of Protestantism of any variety. I do not agree with Catholic, Jewish, or Muslim beliefs, but I greatly respect them. I still have little interaction with them outside of personal study and some sporadic attendance at services here and there. I have beliefs that I practice, enjoy, and let others believe as they see fit. As little respect as I personally have to Protestant theology, I certainly do not consider them inferior, delusional, or in any way lesser as people.

You should really consider why your, and others here, vitriol is so pronounced. I have heard the various silly analogies before “Imagine your family was in a house on fire…”. The problem is not with the believer, but with those who cannot tolerate the thought that others CAN believe.

[Guest]

Bhodi,

Okay, so you didn't watch the video, and probably didn't read the OP either. But don't you at least read what you write?

Of course. I also read the OP, but consider what you are doing. You are trying to make an argument that my comments are false because I did not read the material, which is incorrect. It is a form of ad hominem, an attempt to avoid the actual argument and make some sort of personal attack against the individual. It is a sign of a weak response that has little support, so external buttressing is brought in, in the form of a personal attack.

Do you really not understand that a delusional individual will not find their unfounded beliefs to be delusional, by definition?

But you operate with the a priori assumption that the beliefs are delusional to begin with, and it is the person holding them who has the problem. This is incorrect. You are the one with the problem that seeks to ameliorate it by labeling those with whom you disagree as delusional. You, and many, many here, desperately NEED the believer to be delusional, or else you are flawed. You’re broken. You’re not working.

The Jew who holds the Seder every Friday, knows that there is scant evidence for the Exodus, but does it anyway…is this man or woman delusional? Of course not, but they find meaning, substance, and fulfillment in their activities. The have faith, faith in what they cannot see or know, faith that there is something out there greater than themselves. They have a connection you do not have. The Eastern Orthodox who believes that the Holy Fire…are they delusional? It seems highly unlikely, much more likely that someone is putting a Zippo to the candle, so if the executive order continues to believe, are they delusional? No. They, like their Jewish cousin, find meaning, fulfillment, and substance in the belief.

You do not, so you HAVE to find these individuals delusional, because otherwise it means there is something wrong with you. Why can’t you find meaning? Why can’t you find substance? Why can’t you find fulfillment? There, naturally, must be something wrong with you, but maybe there is something wrong with him. Maybe you can attack him and alleviate some of the concern for yourself. That is the answer.

You are broken, and I do not know why either. You talk about subjects about which you have no clue. Your commentary on Oman was ridiculously uninformed. If you actually did live there, it is embarrassing that you know so little about a former home. You plagiarized simple information on the Middle East, because you WANT people to think you are smart, when you’re not, but the need outweighed the ethical concerns. This was not the first time either. You have gone on and on about your credentials, posted a bank transfer form (real or photoshopped), bragged about your work, and you still know so little. Why? Why the desperate need for validation? Dirty little secret, I have a more extensive academic and professional resume than you do. But who cares. I never mentioned it, and likely never will again, because it does not matter. I don’t care, and will never brag about it, because it is all an illusion of hubris. My ego does not need buttressing, and I know people who have a more extensive resume than I do. There is always someone better, so why brag? You have not hit this point yet, you need to engage in some serious self-reflection. Something is wrong, and your attacks on the believer are an expression of that.

Are you not aware that what you have described here is a characteristic feature of delusional thought?

I agree, someone is delusional, but not the believer.

Consider, I think most Protestant theology is silly, uninformed, ahistorical, shallow, and dumb. But I do not begrudge their right to believe. I even admire some aspects of their culture. But I have never found the need to comment on it on a Protestant message board, never got involved in opposition of Protestantism of any variety. I do not agree with Catholic, Jewish, or Muslim beliefs, but I greatly respect them. I still have little interaction with them outside of personal study and some sporadic attendance at services here and there. I have beliefs that I practice, enjoy, and let others believe as they see fit. As little respect as I personally have to Protestant theology, I certainly do not consider them inferior, delusional, or in any way lesser as people.

You should really consider why your, and others here, vitriol is so pronounced. I have heard the various silly analogies before “Imagine your family was in a house on fire…”. The problem is not with the believer, but with those who cannot tolerate the thought that others CAN believe.

Bhodi,

In reading your post above, the term "hoisted by one's own petard" comes to mind. Out of consideration for all your hard work, I will not be responding to you further on this issue because I could not underscore my point more effectively than you have. Well done.

[_Bazooka]

I agree, someone is delusional, but not the believer.

Consider, I think most Protestant theology is silly, uninformed, ahistorical, shallow, and dumb.

This is from the Church's 'Gospel Principles' manual Chapter 31 "Honesty"

There are many other forms of lying. When we speak untruths, we are guilty of lying. We can also intentionally deceive others by a gesture or a look, by silence, or by telling only part of the truth. Whenever we lead people in any way to believe something that is not true, we are not being honest.

Hoisted by ones own petard indeed...

[_Bhodi]

I agree, someone is delusional, but not the believer.

Consider, I think most Protestant theology is silly, uninformed, ahistorical, shallow, and dumb.

You ignored the end of this thread of thought...

"Consider, I think most Protestant theology is silly, uninformed, ahistorical, shallow, and dumb. But I do not begrudge their right to believe. I even admire some aspects of their culture. But I have never found the need to comment on it on a Protestant message board, never got involved in opposition of Protestantism of any variety."

The anti-Mormon mindset is very odd. I can think of no legitimate psychological practice where people are expected to obsess, for years, over the source of their anger. In fact this is completely contrary to any recovery method I have seen, but this is the normal operating method of the type of antagonism that both you and many, many here use as justification for their continued obsession with Mormonism. The above is a further reflection of that.

Hoisted by ones own petard indeed...

Yes, because the problem is always someone else. Consider the type of person who has no beliefs in a religion, does not like it, and does not respect it, yet this person demands, repeatedly, that the religious belief in which they have nothing but antagonism, should change to support their opinions. What type of narcissism drives this obsession, the desire to subjugate the faith which they hate with such intensity?

Both you and Dr. W, among others, have a very unhealthy obsession that is causing you psychological harm. The OP is evidence of that. I could not care less of you believe or disbelieve in Mormonism, that is completely irrelevant, but you do need some sort of help.

Do you appreciate the irony, in agreeing with Dr. W that I had been “Hoisted by ones own petard”?