If plates then God

[MG 2.0]

This is confusing.

And you are still misrepresenting what I actually said. That may be why you’re confused.

Regards,
MG

[MG 2.0]

Marcus, I might consider his comment not well thought out or well considered. However it probably is a result of his being unwilling to see that the selection of leaders is generally not inspired or reflective of some special divine selection. Individuals who should not be youth leaders can become such. Better safeguards and power limits are appropriate and needed.

Could this be simply one example of a more general situation: I wonder if the apologist sometimes paints him/herself into a contradictions corner, such that escape requires that one or other of a pair of extremely bad choices must be selected and justified.

Or that there really wasn’t a contradiction to begin with. See my response to huck.

Regards,
MG

[drumdude]

I have amply demonstrated that there really is no other option I a world in which free will exists other than the option of a ‘bad things happen to good/innocent people’ world. There is no other alternative.

I agree with you that free will necessitates the ability for people to inflict harm on others.

But you are ignoring the harm that is done to people independent of any free will. The harm that is done by nature and chance.

In those cases, Christians tend to use some very asinine argument like “all that suffering leads people to God. That’s why God allows children to get cancer and tsunamis to kill thousands.”

[Res Ipsa]

I've never seen the kind of blithe acceptance of child abuse as being a necessity that MG 2.0 demonstrated.

I have amply demonstrated that there really is no other option I a world in which free will exists other than the option of a ‘bad things happen to good/innocent people’ world. There is no other alternative. And that’s where we’re at.

Child abuse is horrendous. I’ve made that clear.

Holding an omnipotent and omnicient God responsible for his creation does not let us mortals off the hook for our own choices. More than one person in a chain of events that results in horrific harm can be held morally responsible for the result.

I don’t have a problem with holding God responsible for His creation. And I agree that people should be held accountable for what they do wrong. Not God. God does too. The scriptures are abundantly clear on that point.

We are responsible for our own sins.

Regards,
MG

Yes, you absolutely have a problem holding your God responsible for his creation. You don't hold him responsible at all for the fact that, according to what you choose to believe, he sent many of his spirit children down to earth at a specific place and at a specific time knowing, with 100% certainty, that they would be beaten, raped, tortured and murdered. From the place of an omniscient God, it's no different than pushing a child in front of a speeding car. Yet you rationalize away this horrible act of cruelty with a wave of your hand. (Gee, compared to eternity, the suffering is almost insignificant.)

What, the God-inspired scriptures don't hold God accountable for his own actions? Color me shocked.

Repeatedly invoking the fallacy of the secluded middle is no answer. The abuser is responsible for abusing the child. God is responsible for giving the abuser access to the child, knowing with certainty that the child will be abused. It's not just one or the other -- it's both.

[Marcus]

Huckelberry, what do you think about mg saying that the LDS god may inspire leaders to call pedophiles to leadership positions, specifically so that they can sin on the job (sacrificing a child or multiple children) and be caught, and therefore get the blessings associated with repentance and forgiveness?

huckleberry, before you answer consider the fact that Marcus is doing the same thing IHAQ just did and I had to correct him on it. She is misrepresenting and then reconstructing what I’ve said into something else. Then building her argument on top of a faulty foundation. I’m not going to waste my time with her at this point.

But keep in mind that what she is arguing for and calling me out for is not even what I’m arguing/saying. She’s twisted it into something else. My comments and thoughts throughout the thread have been, on her part, purposefully been twisted and probably ignored in the sense that she has taken what she wants and disregards the rest.

If you choose to reply to her, good luck!

Regards,
MG

And there it is, the classic mentalgymnast ad hominem attack when mg feels cornered and can't come up with a way to explain his nonsensical positions. It's so predictable.

[Rivendale]

Free will has nothing to do with the number of fawns that I routinely see dead and have to remove from Mormon cemeteries where they get trapped by the chain link fences separating them from their mothers.

[MG 2.0]

And there it is, the classic mentalgymnast ad hominem attack when mg feels cornered and can't come up with a way to explain his nonsensical positions. It's so predictable.

Incorrect.

Regards,
MG

[MG 2.0]

I have amply demonstrated that there really is no other option I a world in which free will exists other than the option of a ‘bad things happen to good/innocent people’ world. There is no other alternative. And that’s where we’re at.

Child abuse is horrendous. I’ve made that clear.



I don’t have a problem with holding God responsible for His creation. And I agree that people should be held accountable for what they do wrong. Not God. God does too. The scriptures are abundantly clear on that point.

We are responsible for our own sins.

Regards,
MG

Yes, you absolutely have a problem holding your God responsible for his creation. You don't hold him responsible at all for the fact that, according to what you choose to believe, he sent many of his spirit children down to earth at a specific place and at a specific time knowing, with 100% certainty, that they would be beaten, raped, tortured and murdered. From the place of an omniscient God, it's no different than pushing a child in front of a speeding car. Yet you rationalize away this horrible act of cruelty with a wave of your hand. (Gee, compared to eternity, the suffering is almost insignificant.)

What, the God-inspired scriptures don't hold God accountable for his own actions? Color me shocked.

Repeatedly invoking the fallacy of the secluded middle is no answer. The abuser is responsible for abusing the child. God is responsible for giving the abuser access to the child, knowing with certainty that the child will be abused. It's not just one or the other -- it's both.

I don’t have a problem holding God responsible for a plan in which we come to earth and make real choices. Choices that matter. We are accountable for those choices. Choices do have consequences. God will reward the wicked and the righteous according to their deeds while in the mortal body. Jesus (God) loves children. He has prepared a way that all will be well for them. They will be taken under His care. They will be compensated.

I am waiting for you to come up with an alternative plan that values complete free will to choose and does not include the horrors of this world.

You’ve had a whole lotta’ pages to do so.

This whole thing is not rocket science. The plan of salvation is rather simple in some respects. But because of the easiness of the way many stumble and often fall.

You have trust issues with God. That much is clear.

Regards,
MG

[MG 2.0]

Free will has nothing to do with the number of fawns that I routinely see dead and have to remove from Mormon cemeteries where they get trapped by the chain link fences separating them from their mothers.

Free will in the case of animals such as deer, mice, pigs, fish, etc., present an interesting study in instinct vs. conscious thought and awareness don’t they?

It is good of you to remove them.

Regards,
MG

[MG 2.0]

I have amply demonstrated that there really is no other option I a world in which free will exists other than the option of a ‘bad things happen to good/innocent people’ world. There is no other alternative.

I agree with you that free will necessitates the ability for people to inflict harm on others.

But you are ignoring the harm that is done to people independent of any free will. The harm that is done by nature and chance.

In those cases, Christians tend to use some very asinine argument like “all that suffering leads people to God. That’s why God allows children to get cancer and tsunamis to kill thousands.”

During this thread I have not ignored what you say.

Short answer.

Regards,
MG