Christoid Logic

[Pat Mustard]

What I was getting at in regards to Mormonism, there would have to be profound doubts about ALL of it.

All the revelations were changed. Many/most more than once.

The Book of Mormon has been altered thousands of times.

Vast tracts of Doctrines and Principals and Pearl of Great Price have been deleted and superseded, and calling attention to that can earn an excommunication.


So, our hypothetical 'Mormon_Lady" would have a vastly more difficult time here as compared to the actual Catholic_Lady we do have.

Actually CL has the exact same problems, its jst that the rcc has had 1500 years practise at handwaving away all the contradictions, revisions and nonsensical bits rather than moronisms 150 years.

[Pat Mustard]

Of course, the Big Bang Theory doesn't even have something coming from nothing.  It's instead everything condensed into a singularity which then exploded.  The how/why that singularity formed is, to date, impossible to determine because known physics breaks down at that point.  But the theory most definitely doesn't have stuff magically coming into existence.  The stuff was already there.  It just violently (and hotly) expanded.

So he didn't even know what he was attempting to argue against.

The BBT is one of the more silly theories of creation.  It was dreamed up by a Catholic priest so that explains part of its silliness.

The process of creation is still happening, even in galaxies that are dying like ours and Andromeda.

You sir are wrong. This is what msgr Lemaitre had to say when Pius XII tried to appropriare the big bang for religion:

“As far as I can see, such a theory remains entirely outside any metaphysical or religious question. It leaves the materialist free to deny any transcendental Being… For the believer, it removes any attempt at familiarity with God… It is consonant with Isaiah speaking of the hidden God, hidden even in the beginning of the universe.”

As i said a while back he verbally bitch slapped his boss for being stupid.

[God of Mr. Hanky]

There are certain things in Catholicism that are non negotiable. These are official doctrinal teachings on faith and morals. They can be found in the Catechism. Beyond that, Catholics are free to believe what we want so long as we stay true to our well formed conscience.

You should tell that to the Irish conference of bishops. Thy're happy to claim 84% of the country is catlick based off dodgy census data, even though their own nuber crunching gives a figure in the low 20s.

People really have been leaving the once-dominant Catholic church in Ireland and in record numbers, for at least these few good reasons:

http://www.irishcentral.com/news/leading...72611.html

http://www.vice.com/en_uk/read/symphysio...sation-092

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magdalene_...in_Ireland

[God of Mr. Hanky]

What I was getting at in regards to Mormonism, there would have to be profound doubts about ALL of it.

All the revelations were changed. Many/most more than once.

The Book of Mormon has been altered thousands of times.

Vast tracts of Doctrines and Principals and Pearl of Great Price have been deleted and superseded, and calling attention to that can earn an excommunication.


So, our hypothetical 'Mormon_Lady" would have a vastly more difficult time here as compared to the actual Catholic_Lady we do have.

Actually CL has the exact same problems, its jst that the rcc has had 1500 years practise at handwaving away all the contradictions, revisions and nonsensical bits rather than moronisms 150 years.

Yes, it's so tough being late to the party as the Mormon church is, being an organization which is determined to compete with other organized world religions. Back in the day people had few better options for dealing with their unanswered questions, their fear and their lonliness than through their religious ideas and practices. When that failed, and a traveler walked in, assertively promising the benefits of a more powerful / benevolent god, then of course he was welcomed. Fewer people were educated enough to detect fallacious arguments, and different viewpoints didn't travel fast, therefore the errors of LDS errors during the past 150 years would have gone unnoticed. If only Joseph Smith was there 2000 years ago, then maybe the magic underwear business wouldn't seem nearly so weird today!

Therefore, nothing, but nothing is more important to the interests of a powerful religious organization than the ignorance of its followers - whenever it has the power to make people less intelligent, it will use it specifically for that purpose, and then it will use the population to make it more powerful. This axiom has held true in the behavior of church officials since the earliest history of xtianity, 2000 years ago.

[robvalue]

Indeed. Apologists rely on the ignorance of their audience in the fields of logic and science.

[vorlon13]

And the Mormons seem to be uniquely 'gifted' in documenting EVERYTHING; malfeasance, corruption, craven revisions, poorly thought out edicts, the whole mess of it.

And then over the decades, they've published a huge damning pile of it, and then they have to deal with folks finding the old versions of EVERYTHING and asking those damn inconvenient questions.

I'm not saying the other religions weren't as bad or worse, but for many, 1 or 2 thousand years erases a heap of evidence. The Mormons (bizarrely) have documented a tremendous amount of their machinations and contrivances and corruption.


It's truly a wonder.

[RobbyPants]

I accept evolution/big bang so I disagree with that part of it. But I do agree that God does not need to come from anything because He is supernatural and is outside of the dimension of time. He had no beginning.

Of course, accepting that something could be supernatural and be outside of time then allows for the universe to be (at least partially) outside of time, and not need a beginning. Saying it only counts for God is special pleading, and allowing it to count for both basically leaves us with an indeterminate answer due to both claims being nonfalsifiable.

[ignoramus]

Well at least we've got a working title for Gods' job description.
He's an "interdimensional timetravelling cosmic terraformer".

He spontaneously combusted himself into being because he's just that good!~ Fuck You Laws of Nature! I made you! I can take you away!

[MysterMenace]

I accept evolution/big bang so I disagree with that part of it. But I do agree that God does not need to come from anything because He is supernatural and is outside of the dimension of time. He had no beginning.

The Big Bang singularity also does not need to come from anything because it also is supernatural and outside the dimension of time (unless you are using some peculiar, self-satisfying definitions).
God is actually unnecessary and extraneous.

[Wyrd of Gawd]

The BBT is one of the more silly theories of creation.  It was dreamed up by a Catholic priest so that explains part of its silliness.

The process of creation is still happening, even in galaxies that are dying like ours and Andromeda.

You sir are wrong. This is what msgr Lemaitre had to say when Pius XII tried to appropriare the big bang for religion:

“As far as I can see, such a theory remains entirely outside any metaphysical or religious question. It leaves the materialist free to deny any transcendental Being… For the believer, it removes any attempt at familiarity with God… It is consonant with Isaiah speaking of the hidden God, hidden even in the beginning of the universe.”

As i said a while back he verbally bitch slapped his boss for being stupid.

The BBT = a silly theory of creation cooked up by a silly Catholic priest.