SAT's (spirit assesment tests)

[dantana]

[confident statement with nothing to back it up] The "test" doesn't care about someone hovering on a bubble: a fair and effective test of the type you envision sorts us into an exhaustive set of mutually exclusive categories - bright red lines drawn all over the place.

There can be no "mercy" for someone who misses by a whisker: the important thing is that they missed. Good try but no cigar. God is no respecter of persons.

Okay then, you're starting to catch on. You've been able to classify me as a level one blowhard offender after just a couple of posts. A couple more posts and you'd be able to triangulate a pretty close spot on a pretty big scale. That's what I've been trying to tell you. One cannot just divide the endless combinations of personality types up into just two divisions - Big rock candy mt. for one group, bottomless napalm drip for the other - without some people being borderline fitting in either group.

It would be akin to replacing the Olympic games diving judges with just one guy. Instead of ten guys rating five dives on a scale of zero to one hundred, to three decimal places, we have one guy giving thumbs up or thumbs down on one dive. Everyone either gets a gold medal or ticket home. Trump would like this system as he could just do away with the whole US judicial branch. One punishment for everybody. Death. Whether it be axe murderer or the guy who cheats at Backgammon.

[malkie]

[confident statement with nothing to back it up] The "test" doesn't care about someone hovering on a bubble: a fair and effective test of the type you envision sorts us into an exhaustive set of mutually exclusive categories - bright red lines drawn all over the place.

There can be no "mercy" for someone who misses by a whisker: the important thing is that they missed. Good try but no cigar. God is no respecter of persons.

Okay then, you're starting to catch on. You've been able to classify me as a level one blowhard offender after just a couple of posts. A couple more posts and you'd be able to triangulate a pretty close spot on a pretty big scale. That's what I've been trying to tell you. One cannot just divide the endless combinations of personality types up into just two divisions - Big rock candy mt. for one group, bottomless napalm drip for the other - without some people being borderline fitting in either group.

It would be akin to replacing the Olympic games diving judges with just one guy. Instead of ten guys rating five dives on a scale of zero to one hundred, to three decimal places, we have one guy giving thumbs up or thumbs down on one dive. Everyone either gets a gold medal or ticket home. Trump would like this system as he could just do away with the whole US judicial branch. One punishment for everybody. Death. Whether it be axe murderer or the guy who cheats at Backgammon.

In stating the characteristics of what I see as an extreme "test", I had no intention of classifying anyone, much less a specific person - just looking at how such a system should (!in my opinion!) work.

In the little software testing that I've done, an effective test is one that can have only one of two outcomes: pass, or fail. I like that!

Note also that I was talking in the abstract - I didn't try to specify how many categories there should be, and what constitutes the individual lines that separate them. Beyond my pay grade.

in my opinion, fuzzy lines lead to indefensible and unfair classifications.

[malkie]

[confident statement with nothing to back it up] The "test" doesn't care about someone hovering on a bubble: a fair and effective test of the type you envision sorts us into an exhaustive set of mutually exclusive categories - bright red lines drawn all over the place.

There can be no "mercy" for someone who misses by a whisker: the important thing is that they missed. Good try but no cigar. God is no respecter of persons.

We neatly drew is the key. I do not think the divine to be so clumsy and inept. If there is a difference saved, accepted or not the difference is a fundamental gulf. Instead of basically good I see people as basically becoming. They may become good or become something different. It is true some people are better at becoming good but does that require segregated classes? I doubt it.

I do not think there is good without mercy. Perhaps there is power and understanding without mercy.

I don't share your view of the divine. In fact, I might venture to say that ineptness is one of its defining characteristics.

[huckelberry]

We neatly drew is the key. I do not think the divine to be so clumsy and inept. If there is a difference saved, accepted or not the difference is a fundamental gulf. Instead of basically good I see people as basically becoming. They may become good or become something different. It is true some people are better at becoming good but does that require segregated classes? I doubt it.

I do not think there is good without mercy. Perhaps there is power and understanding without mercy.

I don't share your view of the divine. In fact, I might venture to say that ineptness is one of its defining characteristics.

Malkie, the question why do you see it that way pops immediately to my mind. I then realize I made my proposal with no justification. I could say I look to the wonder of the universe and the beauty of life appearing in all this vastness. I realize one can see problems in all this life.One could imagine it better.I imagine the project of creation to entail difficulties. I also notice God does not operate as a helicopter parent.Perhaps that can be seen as inept. I cannot insist you are complete wrong but I was looking at reasons not to expect the sort of arbitrary judgement you point to. It seems uncreative and thus a bit counterproductive.

That might be moreso if one thinks of the goal of human involves helping each other not just winning a race.

[malkie]

I don't share your view of the divine. In fact, I might venture to say that ineptness is one of its defining characteristics.

Malkie, the question why do you see it that way pops immediately to my mind. I then realize I made my proposal with no justification. I could say I look to the wonder of the universe and the beauty of life appearing in all this vastness. I realize one can see problems in all this life.One could imagine it better.I imagine the project of creation to entail difficulties. I also notice God does not operate as a helicopter parent.Perhaps that can be seen as inept. I cannot insist you are complete wrong but I was looking at reasons not to expect the sort of arbitrary judgement you point to. It seems uncreative and thus a bit counterproductive.

That might be moreso if one thinks of the goal of human involves helping each other not just winning a race.

Thanks for your thoughful reply, huck.

Just to be clear, my PoV is atheistic, and any comments I make here that may seem to contradict that stance are purely hypothetical, and/or based on "for the sake of arguement, let's say that the Mormon/Christian god exists".

Although I generally agree that beauty is subjective, I expect that we would largely agree that the universe contains copious amounts of beauty.

You, I believe, see that beauty as the result of the designs of a benevolent god. I see it as the arbitrary, fortuitous effects of the laws of nature that govern this universe, coupled with a human psyche that finds beauty in certain patterns and anti-patterns.

The universe, however, also contains almost unimaginable horrors, and you don't have to go far or look hard to find examples here on earth.

I see these horrors as the arbitrary, unfortunate effects of the laws of nature that govern this universe, coupled with a human psyche that revolts from certain patterns and anti-patterns.

in my opinion, if this is the best that the creator god can do, the creation would have been best left as a thought experiment, and never implemented.

If the Mormon idea of "intelligences" is correct, then one intelligence became the first god, and progenitor of all the rest down to Elohim and Jehovah. I think that, rather than arrogantly going ahead with creation, it should have sat in quiet contemplation, waiting for a superior intelligence, with superior ideas, to also spontaneously attain godhood. First is not necessarily best.

[I Have Questions]

That is: I'd like for someone to give a thought experiment on how a testing station in the spirit world could work. Since only about .0001% of the 100 billion people who have existed so far are going to get a shot at the one true gospel in this mortal life

And keep in mind, around 70% percent of current Mormons will leave the Church.

What a crappy plan. It appears that the very best and brightest were the 1/3 who left.

Bizarrely, the surest way of achieving success as per the Mormon version of the purpose of life, and the best way of securing your family remains together for eternity, is for you and your extended family to have nothing whatsoever to do with Mormonism in this life. Don’t entertain the missionaries, shun it all completely. Then, when you’re all dead, some muppets who have paid ten percent of their income their entire life, have expended significant amounts of time doing busywork at Church instead of spending time with their own family like you have, will do a load of proxy work for you to ensure you can enjoy all the eternal benefits that they’ve been working hard for, without any of the risk of individual family members falling by the wayside.

That’s the Mormon test, are you and your parents daft enough to join when there’s a much safer way built in?

[dantana]

Bizarrely, the surest way of achieving success as per the Mormon version of the purpose of life, and the best way of securing your family remains together for eternity, is for you and your extended family to have nothing whatsoever to do with Mormonism in this life. Don’t entertain the missionaries, shun it all completely. Then, when you’re all dead, some muppets who have paid ten percent of their income their entire life, have expended significant amounts of time doing busywork at Church instead of spending time with their own family like you have, will do a load of proxy work for you to ensure you can enjoy all the eternal benefits that they’ve been working hard for, without any of the risk of individual family members falling by the wayside.

That’s the Mormon test, are you and your parents daft enough to join when there’s a much safer way built in?

Yeah, I would think though that god would have thought of that and adjusted his judgement algorithm to close that loophole. There may be some ways around it though. - The writings say that god is also an eternal un-created intelligence, just like the rest of us. What the writings don't say though is, as Rivendale pointed out, there is nothing to distinguish him from us. So just like us he is stuck inside a meat pop-sickle and has to rely on sensory equipment to figure out what's going on out there. I'm no expert on it but I would think that solipsism theory would be in play for Mormon god too.

Anyway, since Mormon god is in essence a spaceman, and apparently, in his endeavor to evaluate souls he can't just eyeball the souls CPU - if he could then there would be no need for the SAT's - he would just send us off to our final destination without the testing. So, how to game the system - Mormon god can't read soul chip schematics but he probably has the technology to read thoughts. Two words then - signal jammer. If you don't have access to one of these, lead lining in your basement should work. Go down there, plot out your strategy, whether it be death-bed conversion, spirit-world conversion or whatever. Just be careful to not think about it when you're not in your safe room.

[bbbbbbb]

And keep in mind, around 70% percent of current Mormons will leave the Church.

What a crappy plan. It appears that the very best and brightest were the 1/3 who left.

Bizarrely, the surest way of achieving success as per the Mormon version of the purpose of life, and the best way of securing your family remains together for eternity, is for you and your extended family to have nothing whatsoever to do with Mormonism in this life. Don’t entertain the missionaries, shun it all completely. Then, when you’re all dead, some muppets who have paid ten percent of their income their entire life, have expended significant amounts of time doing busywork at Church instead of spending time with their own family like you have, will do a load of proxy work for you to ensure you can enjoy all the eternal benefits that they’ve been working hard for, without any of the risk of individual family members falling by the wayside.

That’s the Mormon test, are you and your parents daft enough to join when there’s a much safer way built in?

Right on! I suggested such a scenario once to a couple of Mormon missionaries who came to my door and they were utterly flummoxed.

[huckelberry]

Bizarrely, the surest way of achieving success as per the Mormon version of the purpose of life, and the best way of securing your family remains together for eternity, is for you and your extended family to have nothing whatsoever to do with Mormonism in this life. Don’t entertain the missionaries, shun it all completely. Then, when you’re all dead, some muppets who have paid ten percent of their income their entire life, have expended significant amounts of time doing busywork at Church instead of spending time with their own family like you have, will do a load of proxy work for you to ensure you can enjoy all the eternal benefits that they’ve been working hard for, without any of the risk of individual family members falling by the wayside.

That’s the Mormon test, are you and your parents daft enough to join when there’s a much safer way built in?

Right on! I suggested such a scenario once to a couple of Mormon missionaries who came to my door and they were utterly flummoxed.

I remember being taught and I think it is reasonable that one's chances of correctly accepting the gospel in the afterlife are a result of actions in this life now. If so your safety is not improved by avoiding the gospel now.

[bbbbbbb]

Right on! I suggested such a scenario once to a couple of Mormon missionaries who came to my door and they were utterly flummoxed.

I remember being taught and I think it is reasonable that one's chances of correctly accepting the gospel in the afterlife are a result of actions in this life now. If so your safety is not improved by avoiding the gospel now.

That does, indeed, create something of a conundrum. We have billions of souls who have lived, and are living now, on this earth whose names will never be recorded nor any memory of their existence on this earth retained. These poor souls seem to have been predestined for eternity away from any of the three kingdoms because nobody could ever be baptized by proxy for them. Do you think that they might have been "less valiant" in their pre-existence such that their lives on earth are actually eternally vain and meaningless?