>>>> And suddenly I am ignorant?
>>Oh no. You've been that way for a long time.
With witty repartee like this a guy could get a lot of sleep.
>>>>Believe what you will, I could care less, you (collectively with the Anti’s on this
>>>>thread) are trying to “Prove” a religion (which by definition requires faith) “Wrong”
>>>>which of us is the ignorant one?
>>So is the Bible intelligible, or not? Do we have archaeological findings, or not?
Apparently, it is unintelligible to some.
Did you see my post to ColorCountry? (http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/1622778/posts?page=705#705) Have you ever heard of Chiasms? Be honest now, did you know about them before I brought it up?.
>>Silly. You don't really believe Mormonism at all. If you did, you would expect it to
>>meet up with reality. But you don't expect that. You merely expect it to give you
>>certain emotions.
So, now your not only smarter than me, you are a psychic too, Miss Cleo, is that you?
I believe what I believe; you only have my words and my actions to see what that is.
I had an interesting discussion with a Chinese gentleman who claimed to be of the “church of science” (you can make a church out of anything by adding the church modifier to it) I told him and I will tell you, “True science is merely another form of Theology, since we are studying what God left for us to study.”
Mormonism does meet up with reality, the question is, what is reality? I have my perceptions, you have yours, somewhere in between is reality. One of us may be closer than the other, but reality probably escapes us both.
Did you want to have a philosophical discussion, or not?
Oh, I see, I am too dim to have any perceptions, well, since I am barely sentient, why are you bothering to even talk to me?
I will leave it to the readers of this forum to decide if I am a logical being or not, I believe my posts speak for themselves, so do yours.
Just a note about having such high opinions of your self, I read it somewhere,
“Those who put themselves on a pedestal often find it hard to get down to get a drink”
I see your new book "101 Clever Comebacks" is serving you well.
Have you ever heard of Chiasms? Be honest now, did you know about them before I brought it up?
Incidentally, there are Mormons who've noticed that chiasms appear in Smith's other writings. The particular author I linked to doesn't seem to get that if Smith wrote like that, it doesn't count for ancient authorship.
So, now your not only smarter than me, you are a psychic too, Miss Cleo, is that you? I believe what I believe; you only have my words and my actions to see what that is.
If you believed Mormonism the same way you believe George Bush is President of the United States, you would expect everything to match that. But you don't. That's all irrelevant to you, otherwise you wouldn't think it's impossible to prove Mormonism wrong. Which necessarily means you don't think it's true in the sense of being, you know, true.
I told him and I will tell you, “True science is merely another form of Theology, since we are studying what God left for us to study.”
Unless it conflicts with a burning bosom, in which case we stop studying and start saying "I know Joseph Smith was a prophet, I know the church is true..."
Mormonism does meet up with reality, the question is, what is reality? I have my perceptions, you have yours, somewhere in between is reality. One of us may be closer than the other, but reality probably escapes us both. Did you want to have a philosophical discussion, or not? Oh, I see, I am too dim to have any perceptions, well, since I am barely sentient, why are you bothering to even talk to me?
If we have our own "perceptions" and no objective basis for assessing them, just how are we supposed to have any kind of discussion?
"Oh, I see," anyone who disagrees with you simply denies that you have perceptions at all and personally insults your sentience. And since personal insults are bad, we should all do the polite thing and agree with everything you say.