Posted on 03/15/2010 12:07:15 PM PDT by Colofornian
Edited on 03/23/2010 6:15:31 PM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]
When Glenn Beck told listeners of his radio show on March 2 that they should "run as fast as you can" from any church that preached "social or economic justice" because those were code words for Communism and Nazism, he probably thought he was tweaking a few crunchy religious liberals who didn't listen to the show anyway. Instead he managed to outrage Christians in most mainline Protestant denominations, African-American congregations, Hispanic churches, and Catholics...
(Excerpt) Read more at swampland.blogs.time.com ...
My God isn’t a tyrant, is yours?
They don’t grasp the absolute holiness of God. Thinking they can be ‘worthy’ on their own shows that.
Godzilla said:
“Why the difference between the teaching of the prophet and your?”
I ask:
Have you stopped beating your wife yet?
A fine demonstration of the logical fallacy known as “Loaded question” or the “plurium interrogationum.”
Nope, God definitely is not a tyrant.
Lady R, when was the last time you thought out of your box?
I have trouble thinking “inside” the box. ADHD has its advantages. :)
Exactly.
not a loaded question at all. the documented teachings of mormon prophets on one side.
The opinion (based upon SOMETHING) on the other.
the “?” is permitting the clarification of the issue - you know, giving the benefit of the doubt that I may have misread something.
Should you decide to answer/clarify is your option, but to try to write it off based upon the incorrect application of a logical fallacy is pretty lame.
Theres a ‘box’?!?
No, the point of the story is not to like God to a tyrant. You said that you didn’t see a problem where my ancestors from 6,000 years didn’t know anything about a gift that God wanted to give them and that without accepting this gift, they couldn’t be saved. And it’s not only about rejecting the gift, but, since it was a book of Differential Equations, I pretty sure that the pre-Kers, who probably could even read, wouldn’t be able to begin to understand what the gift entailed.
I was pointing out the problem with you not seeing the problem.
I believe that God gives everybody a chance to accept or reject His gospel, in this life or next life, before the final judgment day and He also makes sure that they know what they are not accepting. Also, will God punish me for not being able to understand a free gift that I had accepted.
I apologize for not pointing something I thought was obvious.
So, in a nutshell, will God:
A. Punish people for not accepting the free gift they never knew existed or didn’t know where to find it?
B. Punish people from not using the free gift because they didn’t understand the free gift?
C. Think that it’s a problem if we don’t think A and/or B are/is problem(s)?
I have ADHD also as do three of my sons, so I, too, must think outside of the box.:)
(And they say it all with a nice smile and nice disposition, too!)
God is not restricted to your three choices. I DO know that this is NOT God's will.
you have freepmail.
Just WOW!
LOL... I can't see the BOX! Will God the Tyrant damn me to hell because I can't see the BOX??
It is a loaded question, since you automatically assumed that what the other person said was in disagreement with what earlier Mormon leaders have said.
This is what you said:
“Why the difference between the teaching of the prophet and your?”
You phrased you question, not asking if there was a difference between what he had said and what the prophet had said or even being more specific about what the difference was and then asking him to explain to you why there isn’t a difference. No, you declared that there was a difference even though there was no agreement that there was a difference, other than on your part, and you didn’t provide any substantial evidence other then just plopping out a quote, which could have been taken out of context, that there was a difference.
From the omniscient wikipedia:
Loaded question, also known as complex question, presupposition, “trick question”, or plurium interrogationum (Latin, “of many questions”), is an informal fallacy or logical fallacy. It is committed when someone asks a question that presupposes something that has not been proven or accepted by all the people involved. This fallacy is often used rhetorically, so that the question limits direct replies to be those that serve the questioner’s agenda.
not necessarily. I was LDS, I know their boxes and I know how trapped the leadership keeps them in it.
My ‘thinking outside the box’ is a good part of why I saw the illogicality and inconsistency in the LDS pat answers.
Your posts are consistent with the standard arguments of the LDS that I discovered were lacking greatly.
On the bright side, at least you aren’t a troll and are willing to discuss teachings and doctrine. I like that.
LOL...encroaching on mormon territory is he?
you caught that too, eh?
LOL. “Box? What box?”
“oh, you mean that thing that got kicked to the curb?”
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.