If plates then God

[MG 2.0]

So, when he designed the plan of salvation, he knew that the result would be physically and sexually abused children, including torture and death.

He knew that pain and evil would be the result of making men/women free agents.

You seem to be suggesting that God could create a world in which free agents did not nor ever will exist.

How would that actually work?

Regards,
MG

[Res Ipsa]

Mormons can really rationalize anything.

You start with the assumption the church is true and do whatever mental gymnastics are necessary to support it.

A number of years ago I chose to believe in a personal creator God. For me, I look to find those things in the world that point towards that God.

The church fits within that paradigm. Not perfectly…from where I sit…but enough to keep on keeping on.

I have a concern for those that jump ship prematurely or jump ship and the to then inverse of what you describe. That is, look for reasons and do the mental gymnastics necessary to rationalize staying out of the church.

Regards,
MG

If you think that last bit is what I'm doing, please point out where you think I'm not approaching the church in a principled and consistent manner.

[MG 2.0]

My answer to my own question is that the fruits of the church had not been universally good. It has produced good fruit and bad fruit. The typical response is to assign all the good fruit to the church and all the bad fruit to the people, but that's an unprincipled and ad hoc approach. In fact, it violates the very scripture you rely on: if the church is of God it cannot produce bad fruit -- period.

I contend that many that leave the church do so because they are unable or unwilling to take the scriptures as their guide and then do their own damn thinking.

Sheesh.

Don’t take that as another ad hominem.

Grow a pair.

The church is composed of human beings. Are you saying that within the gospel/church everyone is going to be perfect? I would hope not. But are there a whole lot of people trying to do their best to live the gospel and be worthy of the fruits of the Spirit?

Yes.

The plates are key to the restoration. (Just throwing that in there…)

Try to stay on topic.

Regards,

[Res Ipsa]

So, when he designed the plan of salvation, he knew that the result would be physically and sexually abused children, including torture and death.

He knew that pain and evil would be the result of making men/women free agents.

You seem to be suggesting that God could create a world in which free agents did not nor ever will exist.

How would that actually work?

Regards,
MG

No. As you claimed, he is all knowing. He knows what will happen. Not just generic pain and suffering. Beaten and raped children.

Again, straw man. Why are you portraying a world without child beating and raping as world totally absent of free agency? Is your God, in whom all things are possible, powerless to create a world of free agents with a single exception for beating and raping children?

The argument from ignorance is still a fallacy, last time I looked.

[MG 2.0]

A number of years ago I chose to believe in a personal creator God. For me, I look to find those things in the world that point towards that God.

The church fits within that paradigm. Not perfectly…from where I sit…but enough to keep on keeping on.

I have a concern for those that jump ship prematurely or jump ship and the to then inverse of what you describe. That is, look for reasons and do the mental gymnastics necessary to rationalize staying out of the church.

Regards,
MG

If you think that last bit is what I'm doing, please point out where you think I'm not approaching the church in a principled and consistent manner.

I’m speaking in general terms. This isn’t all about you.

Let’s keep to the plates. Otherwise start a new thread. I’m being dragged along into peripheral side roads.

Regards,
MG

[MG 2.0]

He knew that pain and evil would be the result of making men/women free agents.

You seem to be suggesting that God could create a world in which free agents did not nor ever will exist.

How would that actually work?

Regards,
MG

No. As you claimed, he is all knowing. He knows what will happen. Not just generic pain and suffering. Beaten and raped children.

Again, straw man. Why are you portraying a world without child beating and raping as world totally absent of free agency? Is your God, in whom all things are possible, powerless to create a world of free agents with a single exception for beating and raping children?

The argument from ignorance is still a fallacy, last time I looked.

Did you read what I said? Res Ipsa, this is becoming somewhat of a waste of time and tedious. You are going around in circles.

Please don’t take that as an ad hominem. It’s not.

In this very post you are responding to I said…and I’ll say it again:

He knew that pain and evil would be the result of making men/women free agents.

Do you enjoy wrapping things up in a never ending pretzel? This does seem to be a common trait of yours.

Please don’t take THAT as another ad hominem. It’s not.

So here we go AGAIN.

How would your preferred world work and what would it look like if it was to be inhabited by free willed human beings?

Regards,
MG

[MG 2.0]

At this point please keep the conversation/discussion pointed towards the plates delivered by the angel Moroni.

Otherwise, this thread is going to go on FOREVER. I have other things to do besides going off on side roads and rabbit trails.

Maybe it would be well if I exited and let others go down those paths at this point…

I’ll hop back in if I can see we’re on topic and not simply rehashing stuff we’ve already talked about.

That is tedious and unproductive.

Thanks for the interesting conversation.

Until later.

Regards,
MG

[Res Ipsa]

My answer to my own question is that the fruits of the church had not been universally good. It has produced good fruit and bad fruit. The typical response is to assign all the good fruit to the church and all the bad fruit to the people, but that's an unprincipled and ad hoc approach. In fact, it violates the very scripture you rely on: if the church is of God it cannot produce bad fruit -- period.

I contend that many that leave the church do so because they are unable or unwilling to take the scriptures as their guide and then do their own damn thinking.

Sheesh.

Don’t take that as another ad hominem.

Grow a pair.

The church is composed of human beings. Are you saying that within the gospel/church everyone is going to be perfect? I would hope not. But are there a whole lot of people trying to do their best to live the gospel and be worthy of the fruits of the Spirit?

Yes.

The plates are key to the restoration. (Just throwing that in there…)

Try to stay on topic.

Regards,

What you contend about people who leave the church is the least on-topic thing said in this thread. Maybe think about leading by example?

You were the one who claimed that the church could not produce bad fruit. You quoted the scripture at me, not the other way around. You are now contradicting the very scripture you quoted at me. The church is composed of humans beings. In fact, I'd go farther: the church is necessarily composed of human beings. And, according to you, because the people that make up the church are human beings, they necessarily will produce bad fruit. But, as the scripture says, a good tree cannot produce bad fruit. Therefore, either the scripture is wrong or the church is a bad tree.

If the scripture is wrong, then your response to my reductio that suggests the possibility that the church was founded by the opposition is invalid. A bad tree could bring forth good fruit, and so faith would still be required even if the plates were available for inspection today. If the church is a bad tree, then my suggestion that the church could have been founded by the opposition is entire valid. Either way, your response to my reductio is invalid.

See, perfectly on topic. All of it is an argument to refute your claim about the need for plates, but not too much plates. It's much more complex than taGriffey's argument my counterexample, but also much more fun.

[Res Ipsa]

If you think that last bit is what I'm doing, please point out where you think I'm not approaching the church in a principled and consistent manner.

I’m speaking in general terms. This isn’t all about you.

Let’s keep to the plates. Otherwise start a new thread. I’m being dragged along into peripheral side roads.

Regards,
MG

Didn't say it was. It was a polite request to allow me to correct bad arguments.

[Res Ipsa]

No. As you claimed, he is all knowing. He knows what will happen. Not just generic pain and suffering. Beaten and raped children.

Again, straw man. Why are you portraying a world without child beating and raping as world totally absent of free agency? Is your God, in whom all things are possible, powerless to create a world of free agents with a single exception for beating and raping children?

The argument from ignorance is still a fallacy, last time I looked.

Did you read what I said? Res Ipsa, this is becoming somewhat of a waste of time and tedious. You are going around in circles.

Please don’t take that as an ad hominem. It’s not.

In this very post you are responding to I said…and I’ll say it again:

He knew that pain and evil would be the result of making men/women free agents.

Do you enjoy wrapping things up in a never ending pretzel? This does seem to be a common trait of yours.

Please don’t take THAT as another ad hominem. It’s not.

So here we go AGAIN.



How would your preferred world work and what would it look like if it was to be inhabited by free willed human beings?

Regards,
MG

Of course I read what you said. I disagreed with your characterization of what God knows. I think that's within the paradigm of acceptable argumentation.

Silly man. Of course claiming that my argument is circular is not an ad hominem. The subject is clearly my argument, which is not me personally. Well done!

But is it? Show me the circle. If you can show that it's actually circular, I'll either explain why I think it's not, fix it, or abandon it as not worth the trouble.

Yes, I know what I'm responding to. I'm not talking about the general concept of pain and evil. As I've repeatedly stated, I'm talking about a very specific harm and evil: beaten and raped children. You claimed your God is all knowing, which means he knows in advance which children will be beaten and abused. God gets to keep all the other harm and all the other evil and, as a consequence, all the other free agency for his children. Is God powerless to protect innocent children from this specific harm and evil, or does he choose to subject them to it for the benefit of the child abusers?

My argument is not a never ending pretzel. In fact, I summarized for you exactly what I was doing so you could follow along. It starts with your claim about plates but not too much plates being necessary for the plan of salvation and follows its logic to contradictory or absurd results. Yes, it can't be responded to with a clever quip and a winkie face, but it's not endless or pretzely.

As I deny that I'm wrapping things up in a never ending pretzel, your question about enjoyment is moot. Your impatience with my style of argument is really not my problem.

I'll say it another way: what your question attempts to do is an invalid shifting of burdens of proof. I do not claim to be a God for whom all things are possible. I am neither all knowing nor all powerful. I don't have a preferred world. I would prefer that innocent children not be beaten and raped. Does your God have the power to create such a world with free agency sufficient to fulfill the plan of salvation? Given all the available freedom and choice in the world, are beaten, raped and tortured children necessary to the plan of salvation?