The distance between Christianity and the 4 Gospels

[MG 2.0]

Go upthread a few posts. Already said that. Good to have it reinforced though.

doubtingthomas made some good points earlier. Dovetails with what I’m saying.

Regards,
MG

You can't claim Mormonism is just science, or follows a scientific method.

I didn’t. I’m not.

I think that it is evident that the church responds in one way or another to scientific exploration and trends.

And that’s what I said upthread.

It posits many magical things that aren't verified.

Yep.

Regards,
MG

[Morley]

I think that it is evident that the church responds in one way or another to scientific exploration and trends.

What was their response to the to the science saying there was no global flood?

[MG 2.0]

I think that it is evident that the church responds in one way or another to scientific exploration and trends.

What was their response to the to the science saying there was no global flood?

I’ve commented on this upthread.

Regards,
MG

[Morley]

I think that it is evident that the church responds in one way or another to scientific exploration and trends.

What was their response to the to the science saying there was no global flood?

I’ve commented on this upthread.

You commented on what individuals who were (or are) in the Church had to say [in response to the to the science saying there was no global flood]. You didn't comment on what the Church had (or has) to say. As you've acknowledged, they're not the same.

[MG 2.0]

I think that it is evident that the church responds in one way or another to scientific exploration and trends.

What was their response to the to the science saying there was no global flood?

I’ve commented on this upthread.

You commented on what individuals who were (or are) in the Church had to say [in response to the to the science saying there was no global flood]. You didn't comment on what the Church had (or has) to say. As you've acknowledged, they're not the same.

I’ve given a possible scenario/rationale for why we haven’t heard or seen much from the church in this matter within the last ten years or so. We’ve seen it before. If something isn’t focused on or mentioned it tends to go away or at least become somewhat rare in general discourse. Even those things that may have at one time seemed to be doctrinal in nature.

As I said earlier, there were certain ideas and ‘doctrines’ that were carried into Mormonism from Protestant sources. Some of those traditions/doctrines/practices stuck and some didn’t. For example, speaking in tongues.

Worldwide baptism at the time of Noah as an artifact from Protestantism and Christian tradition? I’m suggesting that this is a possibility. And it stuck. Until it didn’t. Or at least it’s not paraded around as much as it once was. And the fact of the matter is, we even have bits and pieces of the nineteenth century religious milieu seeping into the scriptural text of the Book of Mormon.

Blake Ostler would not be surprised a bit.

By the way, for what it’s worth, here is some more reading for those that are interested dealing with the compatibility of science and Mormonism. This is stuff I read years ago. David Bailey is getting a bit older along with the rest of us. Except, of course, the young whipper snappers like Marcus.

https://sciencemeetsreligion.org/

Regards,
MG

[Morley]

None of that has anything to do with your claim or my question.

[MG 2.0]

None of that has anything to do with your claim or my question.

No concern to me. I’m not here to do your bidding. I said what I wanted to say, and I’m sticking to it.

Truth is, it’s probably not what you wanted to hear. Whatever.

Are all of you critics arrogant and self conceited to the point that you believe you’re always the center of attention and focus? And that your demands are always to be acknowledged and that others…the sheep…acquiesce to your personal preferences?

Sheesh.

I’m not here to do your beckoning. I do my thing, you do yours.

Now and then we might come close to meeting in the middle somewhere.

Your arguments, and those of others, recently in this thread, more or less put you into a sticky wicket of sorts. Like I said, binary thinking. Little or no peripheral vision.

Regards,
MG

[malkie]

It would be difficult to make a clearer statement of intent (or lack thereof) to discuss.

[honorentheos]

None of that has anything to do with your claim or my question.

No concern to me. I’m not here to do your bidding. I said what I wanted to say, and I’m sticking to it.

Truth is, it’s probably not what you wanted to hear. Whatever.

Are all of you critics arrogant and self conceited to the point that you believe you’re always the center of attention and focus? And that your demands are always to be acknowledged and that others…the sheep…acquiesce to your personal preferences?

Sheesh.

I’m not here to do your beckoning. I do my thing, you do yours.

Now and then we might come close to meeting in the middle somewhere.

Your arguments, and those of others, recently in this thread, more or less put you into a sticky wicket of sorts. Like I said, binary thinking. Little or no peripheral vision.

Regards,
MG

Binary thinking.

There is a creator God, and that God looks more or less like what Mormonism claims. 1

Evidence to the contrary? This is a closed gate, sorry. 0

The Moon and Sixpence was my first Maugham. But many Maughams did follow and never did they disappoint.

[IHAQ]

No concern to me. I’m not here to do your bidding. I said what I wanted to say, and I’m sticking to it.

Truth is, it’s probably not what you wanted to hear. Whatever.

Are all of you critics arrogant and self conceited to the point that you believe you’re always the center of attention and focus? And that your demands are always to be acknowledged and that others…the sheep…acquiesce to your personal preferences?

Sheesh.

I’m not here to do your beckoning. I do my thing, you do yours.

Now and then we might come close to meeting in the middle somewhere.

Your arguments, and those of others, recently in this thread, more or less put you into a sticky wicket of sorts. Like I said, binary thinking. Little or no peripheral vision.

Regards,
MG

Priceless.