Location: A simple man leading a complicated life....
Exp:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Azure
Like someone else said....they probably don't keep tabs on which houses they have visited, and who told them not to come back.
Personally, unless someone is intentionally being rude, or trying to force their belief on me....I'll always be respectful.
The two gals that taught me over that summer had moved and 2 guys were assigned to my area later that year. I was merely trying to let them know i wasn't interested. If they hadn't pressed further they wouldn't have gotten my answer.
I looked up the "Christian Minister and Mormon critic" Bob Larson, who is featured in that little video (the guy with the beard stuffing his face in the beginning).
Apparently, at one point in his career he performed exorcisms over the radio.
His ridicule of Mormon anything seems kind of funny, knowing that. Quite similar to listening to a Sasquatch salesman cracking wise about the habits of the kooky folks who ride unicorns to work.
I looked up the "Christian Minister and Mormon critic" Bob Larson, who is featured in that little video (the guy with the beard stuffing his face in the beginning).
Apparently, at one point in his career he performed exorcisms over the radio.
His ridicule of Mormon anything seems kind of funny, knowing that. Quite similar to listening to a Sasquatch salesman cracking wise about the habits of the kooky folks who ride unicorns to work.
Personally I find it a bit annoying when ministers try to tell everyone how certain beliefs are 'cults'...whatever.
Look after your own church/beliefs first. Something that many of them forget to do.
I'm not trying to be rude, this is just out of curiousity.
If someone who is not religious, and does not go to church, does not go to hell, then why do people choose to be religious? And why do they force it on others?
No clue.
That exact belief gives me comfort in the choices I've made spiritually. If there is something after life on earth I'm confident I will be worthy despite not going to any church or claiming any religion.
__________________ I am in love with Montana. For other states I have admiration, respect, recognition, even some affection, but with Montana it is love." - John Steinbeck
Again, I was in Utah quite a bit in the 80's and there was no shortage of Mountain Dew. Not every mormon wears the underwear. That's patently false. I'm sure many Mormon's refuse to handle money or work on Sundays....which is something not unique to Mormonism by the way. That said, there are plenty of Mormons who go to stores and buy caffeinated beverages in normal underwear on Sundays.
Once again, I was generally speaking on my specific experience. The 7-11 near BYU had decaf slurpees. I did not say every mormon wears the underwear but there were enough walking around the pool change rooms to get my attention. I am sure they have relaxed as much as other religions on some of these customs in more recent times. Don't say I am BSing if I am just stating my opinion. Good to hear that the mormons are like you and me on any given Sunday! Don't forget I am speaking from an experience many years ago and things do tend to change!
Rathji or Displaced Flames fan, can you really not have caffeine? If so, what is the reason for this?
I don't know anything about Mormons...
If you ask 10 Mormons this questions you will get half saying yes and half saying no and all of them having different reasons.
Being addicted to any substance is against the word of wisdom. It violates your body and removes your free will. Caffeine is not specifically named as a forbidden substance, but if you need it to function then you are addicted.
Many people, including a large number of Mormons, consider caffeine as a banned substance for Mormons for a few reasons, some of which include:
- It is addictive so you shouldn't be having any of it
- Coffee and Tea are disallowed, and they think it is because of the caffeine( which isnt why really, since we can't drink decaf)
__________________
"Wake up, Luigi! The only time plumbers sleep on the job is when we're working by the hour."
Question: When did the LDS start sending missionaries door to door? In what year?
As long as there has been a LDS church there have been Missionaries who have left there families to teach others about Christ. The church was formed in the mid 1800's, I dont have the exact date handy but I am sure you could wiki it.
__________________
"Wake up, Luigi! The only time plumbers sleep on the job is when we're working by the hour."
You are the second person to offer that and so far no takers. Not surprising since this thread has been dominated by people who want to make fun of something different from themselves. Typical really.
I mean, why attempt to understand something when it's so much more 'fun' to believe the misinformation?
I'm not mocking whats different, like most here I'm mocking them BANGING on my door and trying to push it in my face.
Why should I attempt to understand something which is another version of something I don't believe in.
At least telemarketers and door to door salepeople can offer me something actually real, even though I have a no solicitation sign and subscribe to no call lists
I looked up the "Christian Minister and Mormon critic" Bob Larson, who is featured in that little video (the guy with the beard stuffing his face in the beginning).
Yeah, I'd say he was a whacko as well.
The host, whose name is John Safran, is an interesting dude. Looking him up he's gotten into all sorts of mischief including doing an A Current Affair-style investigation of the Australian version of A Current Affair that ended up getting banned from Austrailian television and the government trying to keep it off the internet as well. Quite hilarious. I think I've become a fan of his.
Seems the Athesists werent treated too greatly by the Mormons...
I am a pretty tolerant person, you can do whatever you want, and believe whatever you want and thats fine by me, but it just irks me when people try to push their beliefs on me. Dont get it wrong, going door to door to talk about your religion IS trying to push your beliefs.
Muslims, Jews, Hindu... never had any of them try to convert me.
BTW I dont donate to overseas charitys that are christian based either, as I dont like the idea of them using my money to push their religion onto underprivileged children. There are lots of charitys that are not religion based.
Considering some of the comments like 'agnosticism is the only rational belief'...there are some people here who only hate the door-to-door solicitors because of what they're preaching.
Good on you if you would treat everyone the same.
Man you really love to attribute your biases don't you. Now you're saying that because I think skeptical agnosticism is the only rational belief system I would be okay with atheists and agnostica banging on doors? Wrong again. While I may share their philosophy I still disagree with banging on people's doors to share it with them. Luckily most atheists and agnostics don't feel the need to do so.
I find it difficult to take you very seriously with your argument style. Try to stop attributing things to people that aren't supported by the evidence.
By the way my assertion about rationality is based on the fact that sceptical agnosticism is the only belief system where you do not have to 'believe' something you can't prove. Even atheists have to 'believe' there is no god. They certainly can't prove it.
__________________
onetwo and threefour... Together no more. The end of an era. Let's rebuild...
Question: Do mormons believe that everyone who is NOT mormon goes to hell? Is this how all religions are?
No, that's not what all religions believe if you mean do all Alliance adherents believe that non-Alliance will go to hell, or do all Baptists believe that you have to be a Baptist to avoid hell.
No, that's not what all religions believe if you mean do all Alliance adherents believe that non-Alliance will go to hell, or do all Baptists believe that you have to be a Baptist to avoid hell.
Well, that's somewhat true. While individual adherents may not subscribe to the belief and baptists might allow that pentecostals could gain entry or Anglicans accept presbyterians in heaven, it is the central teaching of Christianity that you need to accept Jesus as your Lord and Saviour on pain of losing your immortal soul forever.
Well, that's somewhat true. While individual adherents may not subscribe to the belief and baptists might allow that pentecostals could gain entry or Anglicans accept presbyterians in heaven, it is the central teaching of Christianity that you need to accept Jesus as your Lord and Saviour on pain of losing your immortal soul forever.
Which would make you a Christian....baptists are usually Christians, well you get where I'm going with this.
That's not entirely correct. Atheists loosely fall into one of two schools of thought:
Strong atheists assert that there absolutely is no god. This is what you're referring to, although there are very, very few people who hold this philosophy. Even Richard Dawkins does not make that assertion.
Weak atheists, who form the vast majority of non-believers, simply state that there is no evidence for the existance of a god, therefore having such a belief is irrational.
Quote:
They certainly can't prove it.
The burden of proof belongs to those claiming that something exists, not those who deny its existance given the lack of evidence. It's also impossible to disprove the Invisible Pink Unicorn, the Flying Spaghetti Monster, or the Tooth Fairy.
People who are polite, friendly and just want to talk? ewwwww, sic the dogs.
I've never met a mormon I didn't like. I got alot of respect someone who goes through the they deal with and is still an optimistic, friendly individual.
I've never dealt with one in the door-to-door medium, I would like to meet one.
Honestly, I deal with them the same way I deal with anyone who I don't know coming to my door. I look through the peephole, and unless they are a neighbour, cute girl, or look like they are in dire need of medical assistance, I just walk away without opening it.
I started my rule when I had 3 consecutive nights where my dinner was interrupted by knocks on my door from sales people / religion pushers.
It may be impolite to clearly be home and not answering the front door, but my mailbox is constantly full of junk, the highways are full of billboards, and my inbox is full of spam. I don't need people showing up for face to face meetings as well.
__________________
"Isles give up 3 picks for 5.5 mil of cap space.
Oilers give up a pick and a player to take on 5.5 mil."
-Bax
To me, it makes no difference how kooky, culty or wacky anyone's religion appears to me, or is in actuality. I recognize people's freedom to religious conviction. I might make fun of it in private company, but that's my right of free speech.
However, I consider solicitation of religion, or "evangelism" to be invasive, arrogant and frankly intolerant to my right to free religious conviction, and in turn I'm not tolerant of that practice. If they catch me on a good day, I simply don't answer the door... if I'm in a mood, I tell them exactly how I feel about their trespassing and solicitation. I do the same with telemarketers and door-to-door salesmen, so its not an anti-Mormon thing. Like Flashpoint said, I get inundated with enough junk advertising, spam mails, and solicitation over the phone, I don't want it at my door.
Last edited by Thunderball; 05-12-2008 at 02:09 PM.
That's not entirely correct. Atheists loosely fall into one of two schools of thought:
Strong atheists assert that there absolutely is no god. This is what you're referring to, although there are very, very few people who hold this philosophy. Even Richard Dawkins does not make that assertion.
Weak atheists, who form the vast majority of non-believers, simply state that there is no evidence for the existance of a god, therefore having such a belief is irrational.
The burden of proof belongs to those claiming that something exists, not those who deny its existance given the lack of evidence. It's also impossible to disprove the Invisible Pink Unicorn, the Flying Spaghetti Monster, or the Tooth Fairy.
Yeah, I 've heard all that before, but then the question is, what differentiates an agnostic from a 'weak atheist'. Weak atheist is just a politically charged term for atheists trying to make agnostics feel like they're wrong. I don't know if you've read the God Delusion, but as far as I'm concerned Dawkins way overstates the level of confidence in the "no God' evidence as far as I'm concerned.
And yes I recognize that it is impossible to 'disprove' the existence of God on scientific terms, that is exactly why I say to be a true atheist who asserts that there is no God, you must be willing to believe without conclusive evidence. A sceptical agnostic does not have to do so. My position is summarized as follows. I strongly doubt the existence of God and see no conditions requiring the existence of God for the universe to exist, but acknowledge that the matter is beyond scientific proof, and will simply operate as though there is no supernatural agency directing life or responsible for the human condition.
I leave the possibility of such an agency existing open, but find the question intellectually uninteresting as there is no effective way of testing the hypothesis. (other than killing yourself, which seems rather extreme given the alternatives)
Anyway, I really dislike the term 'weak atheist', because it is just a term that atheist zealots like Dawkins take at those who recognize that the scientific search for truth can't even investigate the existence of a supernatural agency (i.e strong agnostics, if you will)
Quote:
Burden of Proof
What it boils down to is the burden of proof. Let’s say you assert that, “Flying Spaghetti Monsters exist”.
That is a statement. You are stating something as fact and you have a burden of proof to prove that Flying Spaghetti Monsters do indeed exist.
Now I say, “I reject your claim”.
Now, I did not offer a statement. No statement of fact was offered. I simply choose not to accept your statement. I have no burden of proof in rejecting your statement.
But now Bob comes along. Bob’s a nasty bugger who loves to eavesdrop. He is infuriated by the suggestion that Flying Spaghetti Monsters exist and states, “Flying Spaghetti Monsters do not exist.”
Whoopsy daisies, Bob just stepped into a huge pile of philosophical ass-kicking.
Why? Because he went beyond rejection of a statement into offering a statement of his own.
By stating that Flying Spaghetti Monsters do not exist, he now assumes burden of proof to prove the nonexistence of Flying Spaghetti Monsters.
This may seem like a minor detail. It isn’t. The repercussions are humongous. If atheism does indeed state that God doesn’t exist, there is a burden of proof on atheists. If they simply reject the theist statement, then there is no burden of proof.
