dennisknapp:
Just for the record let’s take a look at your use (or abuse) of logic…
Originally Posted by amgid
No one can “prove” to anyone that Mormonism is false, because it is true.
Circular reasoning.
Just for the record of your dishonest debating tactics. Pulling quotes out of context and using them to bash somebody is not an honest way to debate with people. That quote comes from the thread called: “Mormon apologetics…”, and it was an appropriate response to the post to which it was given. It was in response to the following nonsensical post by you:
How could someone show Mormons Mormonism is false, if it were? What evidence or proof would you believe? What if God wanted to show you it were false, could He not bring people in your life to do this, or does it HAVE to be a personal testemony?
This question is logically flawed. It presents a ludicrous argument. You are effectively asking the question: “
IF Mormonism is false, what argument would I have to bring to convince you that it is?” That is an absurd question. The obvious answer to that is: “What if Mormonism is
NOT false?” If it is not false, then obviously there is
NO valid argument that you can bring to prove to anyone that it is false. You have to
PROVE that it is false in the first instance, before you can approach with such an argument—and then you would have to rephrase your question anyway, so your entire reasoning absurd from start to finish.
Your question would be like asking someone: “
IF the earth is flat, what argument would I have to bring to convince you that it is?” Well that is a dumb question. It is an idiotic question. The obvious answer to that is: “What if the earth is
NOT flat?” If it is not flat, then obviously there is
NO valid argument that anybody can bring to prove that it is. You would have to
PROVE that it is flat in the first place, before you can approach with such a reasoning—and then you would have to rephrase you question anyway, so the whole line of questioning would be absurd from start to finish. That is how ludicrous you original question was; and the response I had given was appropriate to it. But you are utterly incapable of seeing that. Debating with you is like debating with a grass hopper. The toads swimming in the pond must have more logic and reason running through their heads than you do.
Originally Posted by amgid
I agree that defining the Apostasy in precise theological terms, and exactly how and when it occurred, is a bit difficult to do. But our observations lead us to the conclusion that it did happen. A US judge once said that although I can’t give an accurate legal definition of what constitutes pornography, I can always recognize it when I see it! The same holds true of the Apostasy. I can’t give you an accurate theological description for it, but I can for sure recognize it when I see it. And that is what I observe in the Christian world today.
Argument from silence. Non-sequidor.
The same here. That quote comes from the thread called: “Why are Catholics so interested in the LDS faith?” and it is perfectly appropriate and logical within the context of the thread. That thread contains many posts by me on the same subject, where my views on the Apostasy have properly and logically discussed and developed. The logic of that argument is appropriate within the context of the thread. If people are interested, they can go to that thread (if it has not disappeared) and read it all for themselves to get the full context. Your out of context quotes doesn’t fool anybody.
amgid
:whacky: A very peculiar twist of logic.
