Exaltation for single women

[Hamilton Porter]

I'm sure men and women who don't want it can opt out.

[mfbukowski]

1 minute ago, Teancum said:

But here is the difference.  I do not claim to be one of "those who knows..." you and many true believer here do. In spite of all your mystical philosophy.

Nope.  I specifically say I do not KNOW your alleged "truth".

I get my own testimony.

YOU are the one who thinks there is one truth based on your logic and science and seeks converts to your allegedly "scientific" point of view, which is actually LONG dead logical positivism.  Every post you make is fossilized logical positivism.

Keep throwing them fossils! 

Eventually you will see they are made of.............., uh.... jello.

 

The inventor of that view even repudiated it!

 

[Teancum]

20 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

Nope.  I specifically say I do not KNOW your alleged "truth".

I get my own testimony.

YOU are the one who thinks there is one truth based on your logic and science and seeks converts to your allegedly "scientific" point of view, which is actually LONG dead logical positivism.  Every post you make is fossilized logical positivism.

Keep throwing them fossils! 

Eventually you will see they are made of.............., uh.... jello.

 

The inventor of that view even repudiated it!

 

Read some Sam Harris.

[pogi]

22 hours ago, Stargazer said:

Yep. He can certainly worry, but I don't think he needs to worry excessively. If he has enough faith...

If your wife chooses another after you die, well, there's nothing to worry about if you were faithful to your covenants.

Loving my wife for who she is and wanting to be with her (and not another) has nothing to do with "faith".     Sure, we could probably be happy with different spouses.  I don't believe in soul-mates.  But we are taught that the Lord respects our agency in who we decide to marry and that he seals his blessing upon us for eternity.  It is no small choice.  It is no small commitment.  To have made that eternal commitment and have it taken from you is no small thing.  You seem to be diminishing the value of being sealed to the person of your choice and the commitment/promise of eternal companionship by suggest that "there is nothing to worry about".  Yes, yes, there is something to worry about.  To commit ones soul to be bound to another for all eternity and have that stripped from you for reasons beyond your control and not due to any unfaithfulness on your part is a problem, regardless of how much you strive to diminish such sacred things.    

22 hours ago, Stargazer said:

Of course we're worried about things we don't understand.

Then quit diminishing people's genuine concerns and worries and quit diminishing the sacred covenants of eternal commitment to an individual (and not just an idea) as if it doesn't matter - as if that individual doesn't matter! 

 

 

[pogi]

52 minutes ago, Hamilton Porter said:

I'm sure men and women who don't want it can opt out.

It was taught that opting out meant losing your eternal exaltation.    Some who refused to enter into polygamous marriage because they loved their wife and didn't want to hurt her were told that if they truly love their wife they would enter into polygamy or lose their wife in the eternities.  Highly coercive - not much of a fair choice under such threats and pressure.    Joseph Smith himself apparently was coerced by threatening his very life.  

I am probably going to be downvoted for using the word "coercive", but I don't know what else to call it.   For those who downvote me, it is your job to try and justify the coercion, but I don't think you will have much success as suggesting it was something other than coercion. 

Edited March 28, 2023 by pogi

[mfbukowski]

2 hours ago, Teancum said:

Read some Sam Harris.

Oh I have.

Meh.

Same old..... jello.

[The Nehor]

3 hours ago, Hamilton Porter said:

I'm sure men and women who don't want it can opt out.

Is that what I am doing?

[Hamilton Porter]

38 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

Oh I have.

Meh.

Same old..... jello.

Sam Harris is the worst. He took advantage of the Islamophobia wave. He gained some religious Christian fans (in spite of his disdain for Christianity) because of it.

Now he is popular among neo-Nazis.

https://www.salon.com/2021/06/05/how-the-new-atheists-merged-with-the-far-right-a-story-of-intellectual-grift-and-abject-surrender/

Edited March 29, 2023 by Hamilton Porter

[Hamilton Porter]

3 hours ago, pogi said:

It was taught that opting out meant losing your eternal exaltation.    Some who refused to enter into polygamous marriage because they loved their wife and didn't want to hurt her were told that if they truly love their wife they would enter into polygamy or lose their wife in the eternities.  Highly coercive - not much of a fair choice under such threats and pressure.    Joseph Smith himself apparently was coerced by threatening his very life.  

I am probably going to be downvoted for using the word "coercive", but I don't know what else to call it.   For those who downvote me, it is your job to try and justify the coercion, but I don't think you will have much success as suggesting it was something other than coercion. 

Like Elder Oaks said, God's not gonna make you do anything you don't want. So chill.

[pogi]

24 minutes ago, Hamilton Porter said:

Like Elder Oaks said, God's not gonna make you do anything you don't want. So chill.

No one “makes us” pay our taxes either, yet it is a requirement and not voluntary.  Is that what you mean?
Or, are we to presume that these men (and angel) were not speaking for God?  

[mfbukowski]

1 hour ago, Hamilton Porter said:

Sam Harris is the worst. He took advantage of the Islamophobia wave. He gained some religious Christian fans (in spite of his disdain for Christianity) because of it.

Now he is popular among neo-Nazis.

https://www.salon.com/2021/06/05/how-the-new-atheists-merged-with-the-far-right-a-story-of-intellectual-grift-and-abject-surrender/

His ethical theory is stone age. Seems he never even heard of compatiblism.  Same old stuff: no coherent epistimolgy. "It's all brain chemicals" -> of course what else would it be? What CAUSES the chemical reaction? Something "outside" your headLike maybe a bear or .... God?

He's in there with Hutchins, Dennett and the usual suspects.

Meh.

Edited March 29, 2023 by mfbukowski

[Calm]

1 hour ago, Hamilton Porter said:

Like Elder Oaks said, God's not gonna make you do anything you don't want. So chill.

But that doesn’t mean the reverse that we will therefore get what we want…

[Hamilton Porter]

Just now, Calm said:

But that doesn’t mean the reverse that we will therefore get what we want…

Yeah it will. Just chill.

[Calm]

57 minutes ago, pogi said:

No one “makes us” pay our taxes either, yet it is a requirement and not voluntary.  Is that what you mean?
Or, are we to presume that these men (and angel) were not speaking for God?  

I believe there is also for some a sense of being required to truly lose oneself, changing into someone who will want what God wants even if right now we strongly dislike or even hate it…Stepford Wife type of transformation rather than digging deeper to find the true eternal nature of who we are.

[Calm]

3 minutes ago, Hamilton Porter said:

Yeah it will. Just chill.

That is so reassuring.  

[The Nehor]

3 hours ago, Hamilton Porter said:

Like Elder Oaks said, God's not gonna make you do anything you don't want. So chill.

God commands me to do things I don’t want to do all the time.

[mfbukowski]

9 hours ago, Teancum said:

You need to read some Sam Harris.  He was a student of Rorty and challenged a lot of Rorty's views. heci out the Moral Landscape. Harris argues morals can be based on science.  I am not convinced your paradigm is correct. In fact I think it is quite flawed.

Of course morals can be EXPLAINED by evolution: totally valid.  Same problem- God can create through evolution. 

There's nothing in that statement that advances your case.

You lay down assertions and never back them up with a coherent argument, like probably this one.

On what areas did Harris challenge Rorty?  Sorry but that typo destroys the meaning of the sentence:

"heci out the Moral Landscape."

Please clarify.

Where are the flaws in my paradigm?  Paradigms are not "correct", that statement in itself shows you don't understand what they are.

They are interpretations which cannot be proven- nothing CAN be unless they must be attached to a theory of what "correct" even means.

You are putting out drive-by smoke screens with no follow up to defend your position.

Edited March 29, 2023 by mfbukowski

[mfbukowski]

1 hour ago, The Nehor said:

God commands me to do things I don’t want to do all the time.

How do you know he does?

[Hamilton Porter]

9 hours ago, Teancum said:

Harris argues morals can be based on science.

He thinks Jews brought the Holocaust on themselves by their exclusive religious practices. What does he know about morality?

[Hamilton Porter]

1 hour ago, The Nehor said:

God commands me to do things I don’t want to do all the time.

not in the eternities.

[Hamilton Porter]

4 hours ago, mfbukowski said:

He's in there with Hutchins, Dennett and the usual suspects.

Dawkins's science is really good at least, even though he's clueless on history and philosophy. Selfish Gene was awesome; Blind Watchmaker is one of my favorites.

 

[Calm]

3 hours ago, mfbukowski said:

heci out the Moral Landscape."

My guess is “check out the…”

[The Nehor]

2 hours ago, mfbukowski said:

How do you know he does?

Psychic communications, sometimes called the Holy Ghost.

[The Nehor]

2 hours ago, Hamilton Porter said:

not in the eternities.

I have my doubts about this statement.

[manol]

14 hours ago, Hamilton Porter said:

Like Elder Oaks said, God's not gonna make you do anything you don't want.

 

8 hours ago, Hamilton Porter said:

not in the eternities.

I agree with you.  Not because that's what is clearly taught in the scriptures nor because I've somehow "figured out" how it can all work out for everyone, but because the impression I get from those who have been to the other side and lived to tell the tale is that the difference between the very best of here and what is common There is HUGE, even if the specific details which might apply to this thread are not described.

Here is a twenty-minute compilation video that might shift one's perception just a little bit:

 

Edited March 29, 2023 by manol