mass168 Posted January 19, 2015 Author Posted January 19, 2015 So you have perfect knowledge that the bible speaks for God and that it is translated perfectly and has no errors and you also have no reason to believe that but your faith. You have read all the bible scholarship about scholars not knowing who even wrote the bible and you know how it was all selected by men and debated what to include and not include and you still know it is inerrant because God cannot lie. This is totally circular. You have no argument.Although this idea is in the Bible, it is more of a philosophical argument as I used it. I don't believe God is a liar, and I believe he is all powerful. A God of this sort has to have some way of identifying his authority to us. I think he has revealed that he will not allow false prophecies to come true, for that reason.
mass168 Posted January 19, 2015 Author Posted January 19, 2015 What is a "false prophecy"? It all hinges on your interpretation of true and false, what the prophecy meant, who made it, and that there should BE no "false prophecies". And your "OWN" doubt is the standard for the world. We should not believe what we believe because YOU say that we have "false prophecies" according to YOUR definitions?Gracious calm down, that was a statement of faith. As in, you may show me something from the Bible YOU say is a false prophecy, but I get to make my own choice, just like you.
mfbukowski Posted January 19, 2015 Posted January 19, 2015 Although this idea is in the Bible, it is more of a philosophical argument as I used it. I don't believe God is a liar, and I believe he is all powerful. A God of this sort has to have some way of identifying his authority to us. I think he has revealed that he will not allow false prophecies to come true, for that reason. Totally circular- not a philosophical argument at all. It presumes the bible IS the word of God in the first place AND that it is inerrant. That is really all you are saying- those are your presumptions and that is your conclusion. Because God does not lie, and the bible is perfect, and because God is all powerful he makes sure the bible does not lie. There could be no false prophecies because they are in the bible and therefore inerrant because God makes sure there are none. And you don't see the circularity?
mfbukowski Posted January 19, 2015 Posted January 19, 2015 Gracious calm down, that was a statement of faith. As in, you may show me something from the Bible YOU say is a false prophecy, but I get to make my own choice, just like you. OK so just say you believe in an errant bible and that in principle it cannot be wrong because it is the word of God and you accept that on faith and so there is no argument possible. Don't tell me it is an argument when it is a statement of faith and you will not consider anything else.
mass168 Posted January 19, 2015 Author Posted January 19, 2015 Totally circular- not a philosophical argument at all. It presumes the bible IS the word of God in the first place AND that it is inerrant. That is really all you are saying- those are your presumptions and that is your conclusion. Because God does not lie, and the bible is perfect, and because God is all powerful he makes sure the bible does not lie. There could be no false prophecies because they are in the bible and therefore inerrant because God makes sure there are none. And you don't see the circularity?We have had this discussion before, I have faith in the Bible, there are a lot of natural ramifications. Also, I meant that the idea of God not being a liar has morphed out of a purely religious belief into a more philosophical one for me. If I ever stop being an EV, that is a belief I think I will take with me.
mfbukowski Posted January 19, 2015 Posted January 19, 2015 (edited) duplicate of below Edited January 19, 2015 by mfbukowski
mfbukowski Posted January 19, 2015 Posted January 19, 2015 We have had this discussion before, I have faith in the Bible, there are a lot of natural ramifications. Also, I meant that the idea of God not being a liar has morphed out of a purely religious belief into a more philosophical one for me. If I ever stop being an EV, that is a belief I think I will take with me. Well I don't know of anyone who thinks God is a liar- that is just absurd. Why would anyone worship a liar? But if you just have faith that the bible is inerrant, that's fine for you and I wish you well, and God bless you. I do not share your view, and neither do the others here who are Mormon, so there is no point in simply assuming that we believe that, because we don't You are imposing YOUR perceptions of the universe on us, and we do not accept those perceptions. Central to our beliefs is the idea that "We believe that the Bible is true insofar as it is translated correctly", which in our modern day English, means more like "TRANSMITTED" correctly Joseph re-wrote sections of the bible entirely and entered sections he had considered "missing" and so clearly the word "translated" as we use it now is not what he meant. The fact that the bible is NOT inerrant is a cornerstone of our faith- otherwise we would not believe in continuing revelation. So really there is no basis for discussion here- it turns into a "yes it is"- "No it's not" kind of communication which is fruitless. We are not budging from our beliefs and you are not budging from yours, so I guess we are done unless you have something else to add which we can fruitfully discuss. I wish you well and God bless you! 1
The Nehor Posted January 19, 2015 Posted January 19, 2015 (edited) If I ever find a case in the Bible where I am shown beyond a shadow of MY OWN doubt that it contains false prophecy, I will reject it on the same rule I am quoting you. That's a promise.So for this challenge we have to accept that you have integrity. Not sure I can do that; I think I will pass. Edited January 19, 2015 by The Nehor
mass168 Posted January 19, 2015 Author Posted January 19, 2015 So for this challenge we have to accept that you have integrity. Not sure I can do that; I think I will pass.Well that's just uncalled for, but I forgive you.
mass168 Posted January 19, 2015 Author Posted January 19, 2015 Well I don't know of anyone who thinks God is a liar- that is just absurd. Why would anyone worship a liar? But if you just have faith that the bible is inerrant, that's fine for you and I wish you well, and God bless you. I do not share your view, and neither do the others here who are Mormon, so there is no point in simply assuming that we believe that, because we don't You are imposing YOUR perceptions of the universe on us, and we do not accept those perceptions. Central to our beliefs is the idea that "We believe that the Bible is true insofar as it is translated correctly", which in our modern day English, means more like "TRANSMITTED" correctly Joseph re-wrote sections of the bible entirely and entered sections he had considered "missing" and so clearly the word "translated" as we use it now is not what he meant. The fact that the bible is NOT inerrant is a cornerstone of our faith- otherwise we would not believe in continuing revelation. So really there is no basis for discussion here- it turns into a "yes it is"- "No it's not" kind of communication which is fruitless. We are not budging from our beliefs and you are not budging from yours, so I guess we are done unless you have something else to add which we can fruitfully discuss. I wish you well and God bless you!God bless you as well!
The Nehor Posted January 19, 2015 Posted January 19, 2015 Well that's just uncalled for, but I forgive you.I accepted the Savior years ago and by your logic have been saved. Why would I need or want your meaningless forgiveness?
mfbukowski Posted January 19, 2015 Posted January 19, 2015 God bless you as well! Just fyi there is a thread that just started that his highly relevant to this questionhttp://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/64819-sola-scriptura-mormona/?p=1209457595
mass168 Posted January 19, 2015 Author Posted January 19, 2015 I accepted the Savior years ago and by your logic have been saved. Why would I need or want your meaningless forgiveness?sheesh, what did I say to offend you so personally?
Svawd Posted January 19, 2015 Posted January 19, 2015 I accepted the Savior years ago and by your logic have been saved. Why would I need or want your meaningless forgiveness?Chop, chop, hope you feel better.
Calm Posted January 19, 2015 Posted January 19, 2015 (edited) You can't make a mistake when you speak for God. I will not now or ever back down from that. Fine, just don't insist that is our belief as well and thus everything written by our leaders or in our scriptures must be interpreted through that lens. Edited January 19, 2015 by calmoriah 1
mass168 Posted January 19, 2015 Author Posted January 19, 2015 (edited) Fine, just don't insist that is our belief as well and thus everything written by our leaders or in our scriptures must be interpreted through that lens.Ok I won't insist that it's your belief. Although, you'll have to excuse me for finding it odd that Sacrament prayer has to be restarted after a slip up, and yet you're allowed error in scripture. What message are you trying to send about God, is he orderly or not. That's what happens in my brain when I see these juxtapositions. Edited January 19, 2015 by mass168
mfbukowski Posted January 19, 2015 Posted January 19, 2015 Ok I won't insist that it's your belief. Although, you'll have to excuse me for finding it odd that Sacrament prayer has to be restarted after a slip up, and yet you're allowed error in scripture. What message are you trying to send about God, is he orderly or not. That's what happens in my brain when I see these juxtapositions. Look, I see a lot of very "odd" things in EV beliefs. Shall we start? 3
Calm Posted January 19, 2015 Posted January 19, 2015 (edited) Ok I won't insist that it's your belief. Although, you'll have to excuse me for finding it odd that Sacrament prayer has to be restarted after a slip up, and yet you're allowed error in scripture. What message are you trying to send about God, is he orderly or not. That's what happens in my brain when I see these juxtapositions. And if someone makes a sincere effort and still doesn't get it just right after several tries, the bishop will often approve it as okay because sincere intent is shown. It does not help your understanding if it is only superficial but you are trying to use it as if it was all inconclusive of our beliefs and practices down to the finest nuance. Edited January 19, 2015 by calmoriah
mass168 Posted January 19, 2015 Author Posted January 19, 2015 And if someone makes a sincere effort and still doesn't get it just right after several tries, the bishop will often approve it as okay because sincere intent is shown. It does not help your understanding if it is only superficial but you are trying to use it as if it was all inconclusive of our beliefs and practices down to the finest nuance.My apologies on that particular issue. I was just talking to one of my LDS friends the other day who has been in the same ward for 23 years. They said they had never seen the bishop do that, after I asked. I was not attempting to be dishonest. I will try to do better at simply asking, does such and such happen in the Church? Can we also recognize that LDS do the same thing to EV's though?
Calm Posted January 19, 2015 Posted January 19, 2015 My apologies on that particular issue. I was just talking to one of my LDS friends the other day who has been in the same ward for 23 years. They said they had never seen the bishop do that, after I asked. I was not attempting to be dishonest. I will try to do better at simply asking, does such and such happen in the Church?Well, if they had never had someone stumble over the prayer more than three times there would have been no need. I do not assume you are being dishonest in your misrepresentations, I don't believe that you don't really believe you understand things. I would much sooner say you are arrogant than dishonest. I would be impressed if you lose the habit of telling us what we believe. Can we also recognize that LDS do the same thing to EV's though? Do you mean some LDS assume they understand EV belief when they don't? I certainly agree. I never assume I know what someone believes, I always assume I am missing nuance. The only time I state something as if it doesn't have nuance and I should be corrected if I am wrong is to point out how something is written in a confusing manner or because someone is be a relentless arrogant critic (and that includes some LDS) and I am tired of the game so attempt to see if they get the message of what they are doing by doing it the same. 1
mass168 Posted January 19, 2015 Author Posted January 19, 2015 Well, if they had never had someone stumble over the prayer more than three times there would have been no need. I do not assume you are being dishonest in your misrepresentations, I don't believe that you don't really believe you understand things. I would much sooner say you are arrogant than dishonest. I would be impressed if you lose the habit of telling us what we believe. Do you mean some LDS assume they understand EV belief when they don't? I certainly agree. I never assume I know what someone believes, I always assume I am missing nuance. The only time I state something as if it doesn't have nuance and I should be corrected if I am wrong is to point out how something is written in a confusing manner or because someone is be a relentless arrogant critic (and that includes some LDS) and I am tired of the game so attempt to see if they get the message of what they are doing by doing it the same.I asked what the record is, they said 7 tries that they could remember Thanks
The Nehor Posted January 19, 2015 Posted January 19, 2015 (edited) sheesh, what did I say to offend you so personally? Nothing, I just like annoying trolls. Edited January 19, 2015 by The Nehor
mass168 Posted January 19, 2015 Author Posted January 19, 2015 Nothing, I just like annoying trolls.Well this troll objects.
Tacenda Posted January 19, 2015 Posted January 19, 2015 I asked what the record is, they said 7 tries that they could remember ThanksI'll never forget a mentally challenged young man, probably in his late 20's, that blessed the Sacrament. He got most right but kept stumbling. He had to do it 2 or 3 times. I just really wanted the bishop to give him a pass. But finally he got it nearly perfect. But how hard that would be, especially having the younger man's parents in the audience. Poor bishop, It would be terribly difficult to not just say they did it good enough.
Recommended Posts