Do You Believe in "God"?

[Lord J Esq]

I don't care how much you disagree, it doesn't change facts.

Oh, Sentenal, I wish you could see the look on my face! It's kinda like: ^_^
Sometimes I seriously wonder if you Republicans get together in secret every night just to laugh your asses off at us dumbfounded liberals who scratch our heads that you guys can flip-flop, blow with the wind, and talk out of both sides of your mouth without even breaking a sweat, and always keep a straight face while you're doing it!

"Woop! The Republicans don't like facts; they like faith! O snap, now they like facts again! Whoosh! Nope...time for faith! Zing!"

It's too rich... Sometimes, I simply must bow to the absurd. Well played, Sentenal! Well played indeed!

[Exodus]

Corruption in church is nothing new.

[Sentenal]

Josh, things like that get me mad.

[Burning Zeppelin]

Corruption in a government isn't anything new either

[Mystik3eb]

You are a different Christian religion than Mormonism. You have first-hand experience at being anti-, if not simply very non-Mormon. You'll realize that the Mormon church has more enemies, legitimate enemies, than any other religion...except perhaps Jehovah Witnesses, and Judaism (though I'm not sure if that's more their culture, blood, or religion). Of course they're gonna put out numbers that make the LDS church look like liars or worse. There is so much anti-Mormonism out there it's ridiculous. I've seen thousands of the arguments and points made against the church, and they're mostly either misinterpreted/misunderstood or direct lies/manipulation. For these points people have brought up against the LDS church, I have been able to provide a legit LDS belief or fact that either proves the person wrong, or answers their question. Sure, there are some questions Mormons can't answer, but there are a helluva lot less than other Christian religions. But no one's attacking most of those other religions, are they? At least not the way the Mormons are attacked.

I want you to go ahead and meet the people in the LDS church who 'put out' these numbers and talk to them for a few minutes, get to know them a bit, find out about their life and personality, who they are and such. Do the same with most active members. You'll find that they are good, honest people who believe in what they're doing and how they're living with all their heart, just as much as you do. The church is full of honesty, no matter how much untruth may be present in its doctrine or whatever.

If you're not willing to go through the effort to try to really prove me wrong, then you don't really have the grounds to call me biased and incorrect when I've known these people my whole life, and know them to be good honest people. The best people I know are Mormon, and I've met my fair share of people. Those numbers are not lies, I promise you.



...oh, the corrupted book thing. Well ok, here. No, you guys don't call the Mormon books corrupted. You guys call it bullshit. Is that much better? Not really. I see no more reason for these books to be any more bullshit than the bible, and there definetely hasn't been corruption with these books, since I can get copies of them all as old as when they were first published. No such situation with the bible. It's hard to believe the New Testament, with all it's enemies and antagonists, hasn't been corrupted in some way, never mind the Old Testament. Sure it's possible...but think about it, is it really likely? Really?

I'd like to see someone point out legitmate godly features of the Song of Solomon, properly named "Bible Porn" by some friends of mine (LDS, yes). Point out doctrine, principles, revelations, any of that good religious stuff. Point out a reason God would want people to study it and memorize it and live by it. Song of Solomon was written by an older, wicked Solomon and put in simply because he was a king who initially followed God.

And J, I was laughing too.

[Lord J Esq]

Sentenal, you're a decent enough guy, and obviously I mean no offense to you personally, but you've got to wake up and see what a ridiculous position you're putting yourself in. Either you support factual truth all the time, or not at all. Your being such an insistent champion of the facts in this thread is in stark contrast to most of our other encounters, where you argue from a faith-based perspective and any unflattering facts pile up in your epistemological rubbish bin. This juxtaposition of contradictory tactics makes you look insincere. You're saying that you can have your cake and eat it too, but the cold hard truth is that you cannot be in favor of respecting the facts only when they agree with you. The Republicans in Washington and the evangelical Christian right in particular have been pulling this shit for over twenty years, and look what's come of it. Just look where we are today. And look at what dupes they've made of well-meaning people like you! If you want to be taken seriously by groups outside your own, then give people a reason. Think of your credibility, man! How do you think I define "decent enough guy," anyhow?

[Sentenal]

Firstly, you still don't know what your talking about.

And secondly, your still on the pretext of corrupted until proven legit.

Mystik, your not even worth my time arguing with you.  'OMG, Mormons have enemies, so me is going to label anything that disputes the claims of Mormon as anti-mormon!!'  Mormons are attacked because they considered themselves Christian, when they just piss on our beliefs, and try and gain acceptance as "Christians".  There is a difference between toleration and acception.

And get over your idea that attacking a religion is attacking the people of the religion.

[Lord J Esq]

You're talking to me? Or Mystik?

Edit: Whoops. I see your reply was posted at the same time as mine. That'd mean you were talking to Mystik. My bad...

[Sentenal]

Yeah, I was talking to Mystik.

Josh, please, if you have a question about something I've said, in relation to this, post it (as in quote it), and I will clarify.  I don't know exactly what you are refering to.

[Lord J Esq]

I quoted the money line a couple of posts ago. You were telling Mystik that disagreeing with the facts doesn't make them go away. And I laughed--I really did, just like the ^_^ I typed--because it was so characteristic of the very worst in neocon politics, like a page straight out of The Art of War (As Told by Karl Rove):

Chapter 1: Agree with the facts when they agree with you[/list:u]So, in this thread you were arguing with Mystik about denominational growth statistics. Many of the Christians I meet tell me that the religion they hate more than any other, even Islam, is Mormonism, so I'm not surprised to find you heatedly committed to this debate. And to help you out, you produced some factual support for your position. It's great to see you relying on facts to prove a point. Assuming they are legit, you completely shut down that line of the debate.

What's not so great to see is that you're not nearly so respectful of the facts when you're on the losing end of them. Correct me if I am wrong, but I have never, not once, in all the threads on the Compendium, changed your mind by using facts. I think deep down you respect the power of factuality, considering how you leapt to wrap yourself in supportive facts in this thread, as well as taking into account that you mentioned in another thread that you think more highly of me than of other liberal scumbags, which presumably is not because of my witty charm, but because I put so much effort into factual citation and logical consistency in its application. Yet, when the facts conflict with your religious beliefs, you become monumentally unresponsive to factual arguments. That's the problem with religious fundamentalism--with emphasis not on the word religious, but on fundamentalism.

The unique neoconservative movement that currently has its first (and last) hold on supreme power across nearly all aspects of American society, has made such a mockery of the truth, and such a pauper of those who argue factually, and I just don't want to see you grow up into the same sordid ideology. The neocons lie out their asses, and ordinary people lap it up because they can't tell the difference. Sometimes all you need to prove a point is a very simplistic factual chain, but most truths in life are subtle and require a thorough awareness and interpretation of a slew of specific facts. But who has the patience to sit through that kind of a debate anymore? It's all smoke and mirrors nowadays:

• Some nutjob comes out and says evolution is wrong, and the factual reply is a long boring biology lesson that nobody wants to hear. And now evolution is on trial! Point, neocons.
• Practically every Republican in the Senate comes out and demands an "up-or-down" vote on Bush's Supreme Court nominees, until Harriet Miers comes along, and nobody in the media thinks to call bullshit on this contradiction because rhetoric trumps the facts. So Miers gets the boot and up comes Judge "Dredd" Alito, and boom! It's back to the "up-or-down" meme! Point, neocons.
• The talking heads on Faux News prattle on and on about how global warming is a fairytale and liberals care about caribou and fish more than people. So we continue to wreck the planetary biome without regard to the future wellbeing of our species or that of any other, and the pundits will keep right on blathering about what a myth it all is until the water is up to their fucking ears and they drown to death through their big open mouths. Point, necons![/list:u]The facts get no respect, because all that really matters is what people perceive the truth to be. Neocons and religious fundies figured it out twenty years ago that baldfaced lying is the easiest way to persuade a very large group of people. And, depending on my mood, it makes me laugh or weep...because it's utterly absurd.
  
  The facts are important to me. I think the only time I've ever lost my temper in my two years of posting on the Compendium is when Daniel Krispin, with a straight face, denied the history of Christianity and made up a Disney version of it, to which he adhered unflaggingly. The icing on the cake? He claimed to be a student of history! Bald. Faced. Lie. But ordinary people believe that sort of thing, because pied pipers like Krispin are intelligent, adamant, and claim to have some experience in the matters at hand, and that all adds up to an enticing package. That's why I went so utterly out of my way to expose him, and why I was so furious when that bullshit of his hit the fan of Christian sexism throughout history. It's slightly pathetic to lose your temper while sitting in a chair and staring at a screen, but if Captain Picard could do it, I figure we're all entitled from time to time.
  
  And, to a much lesser degree, it's the same story here. Here you are, rolling out some facts, because in this case they support your fervently pro-Christian, anti-anti-Christian ideology in your beef with Mystik. Here you are, innocently proclaiming to him, "I don't care how much you disagree, it doesn't change facts." And I'm supposed to take you seriously--which I certainly would, except for my concern that you don't actually care about factuality, and that tomorrow we'll be in another thread, I'll drop the dread F-Bomb on you--F for Facts--and it'll have no impact whatsoever, just as has been the case in the past.
  
  Which brings me to the point I made in my last post. If you want to be taken seriously by people outside your circle, you have to be consistent in your support for the facts. As it currently stands, you are not consistent in your support for the facts. Instead, you are consistent in your support for your religious beliefs...and only tangentially does your preference for factuality figure in to your arguments. Therein lies the problem.
  
  Hey, I'm all for seeing you put your head on straight. I like having mutual respect with people across the aisle...but only if it's deserved. If you don't want to be taken seriously by people who don't agree with you, it's your choice to make.

[CyberSarkany]

I still think nature ~ god...
The last posts took me an hours to understand lol

[Silvercry]

“It's all Christianity people! The little, stupid differences mean nothing next to the big, stupid similarities!”
-Bart Simpson.

Hey, wisdom is wisdom, whether it comes from Shakespeare, George Orwell, Master Yoda, or an animated 10-year old boy.

[Sentenal]

Josh, are you refering to our debate on the size of government?  Or the nature of Christianity?  I don't remmber you ever giving any facts to show that Christianity is evil, or facts showing big government is the only way for society to work.

[Lord J Esq]

Josh, are you refering to our debate on the size of government?  Or the nature of Christianity?  I don't remmber you ever giving any facts to show that Christianity is evil, or facts showing big government is the only way for society to work.

=)

I know a loaded remark when I see it. I don't want to ruffle your feathers, and I'm not going to cheese you off on a delicious Friday evening with an oblique attack on your religion or political theories. Just to pull everything together, I think what I've been saying thus far is wildly off-topic for this thread, and that might be what has thrown you off. I will gracefully postpone this until the issue has a more concrete impetus to be brought up. Hopefully, no harm done.

[Mystik3eb]

...I'm probably gonna regret this...

Exodus is right about typical religionists. I've had first hand experience being one of those people, and knowing several others like them. And living in Silicon Valley in California gave me the opportunity to meet tons of people, just as stubborn, in tons of different religions. This would be the reason I've decided to basically abandon pursuing my argument about Mormonism with Sentenal. I realized his location, and you'd be more successful teaching a fish to not swim than teaching a Southern Christian any form of positive truth about Mormonism. Tell them all the losses they've suffered, and all the corruption that has been 'found' (most of which turns out to be bullshit, in my experience) and they'll eat it up; tell them good things that make the Mormons look good in any way and the opposite reaction follows (it's exactly the same as the political game Democrats and Republicans play). The way they refer to Mormons reminds me of the way Southerners referred to Blacks back in the day when they were taught how inferior, and all other sorts of rubbish, blacks were. Very few of them listen to reason, and grasp at any possible bit of info out there that supposedly disproves Mormons as a whole. (Oh, and by the way, I know all this about Southern Christians because I currently reside in Louisiana, and have acquaintances who either visited or went on missions to other southern states, and it's the same story every time)

...and then there are the other Christians, most of who simply disagree with Mormonism, much like how they disagree with most other Christian sects...and they call many of the LDS teachings' blasphemous. That's about the extent of disagreement most Christians outside of the South have, in my experience.

Oh by the way, my parents have lost jobs, friends, and family members simply because they became/were Mormons. Anti-religion and not anti-member? I don't think so. Not all the time, at least.

...yeah, this post was probably a mistake, but I stand by what I've said. And if there's gonna be anymore replies starting with the words "No, you're wrong," I sure hope there's gonna be good stuff in there worth reading, unlike most the replies I've received on this subject. I'm definetely open to correction, as I've shown in the past, but tell me why I'm wrong, instead of simply saying "No, you're wrong, I'm right" and talking about a small survey that doesn't really compare to other facts. If that response is all I'm gonna get, then this is indeed my final post on the subject. Rest assured, I'll keep reading these, and I'll let you know when you've convinced me.

I know it doesn't seem like it, but I actually really dislike getting into heated arguments with people I'd love to respect and agree with...but I can't see a point be made that I'm strongly under the impression is false and just let it sit. Either I need to be corrected, or the person needs to see their falsity. One of my weaknesses, I suppose. Or a desire to spread more truth among people of this world where it seems to be lacking...*shrug*