OMG I agree with Orr!! If ever there was a sign that the end of the earth is near..this must be it! :)
The word "Cult" and it's definition is a matter of perspective. But in general it refers to a group which purports to be part of a larger organization but whose beliefs/philosophy etc. is at odds with the larger organization's beliefs. Thus from the perspective of the Mormons, most Christian churches are cults, and from the perspective of evangelical churches the Mormons (and Jehovah's Witness, etc.) are cults.
From a strictly objective viewpoint, it is fair to say that Mormon theology is at odds with traditional orthodox Christianity as currently practiced by both the Catholic, Eastern Orthodox and Protestant churches.
As much as Mormons would like to claim the title of "Christian" for political and evangelical reasons, the truth is that their theology bears little if any resemblance to what the Catholic and Protestant churches teach and that theology has been pretty consistent for the last 1500 years or so.
For a time I also ran EPB's 100mb service from my home. Excellent performance and service.
Moment of Time...
Since we using the "moment" for religious purposes then let's use the Hebrew definition
"In the Hebrew calendar, a moment (rega) is 1/76 of a part (chelek), or 5/114 of a second in standard units." (Courtesy of Wikipedia)
Seems like that should be long enough for anyone :)
What! A group of heathen atheist idolaters waiting with bated breath to read about proofs for God and the religious right, as quiet as the response to prayer uttered from the lips of an innocent child.
Hello? Where is everyone...please give us one, just one solid, logical, empirical proof for the existence of God which will compel our belief. We beg of you, dazzle us with holy brilliance, let God's power be seen and heard in your divinely crafted, Holy Spirit filled, response, vetted against the almighty's own storehouse of his omniscience. We patiently await an answer to our plea. In other words...either put up, or shut up.
I agree with most of what you said, I know what you are driving at with proof of a negative, however, in certain cases I can prove a negative..for instance I can prove that I have no money in my pocket simply by turning it inside out and letting you examine it.
For Orr, if you want to invoke logic, the let's assume, for the moment, that observation of the universe proves some type of intelligent design...what if I were to tell you that I believe a supernatural designer created everything we see, but that the Christian God is only one of his minions and has been feeding us lies this whole time and claiming for himself the works that another designer created ... let's call it supernatural plagiarism, how would you go about proving me wrong? For any proof that offer, I could claim that your god is just usurping the works and thoughts of another even more powerful god...ultimately the only thing you could fall back on is your "feeling" that yours must be the true one...which, of course, is no proof at all.
I'm sorry Ken but your "proofs" and assumptions are wrong on many levels.
Most importantly, not knowing something does not imply that any old fairy tale will suffice to explain it. There are many things which I do not know, but a simply lack of knowledge is not the same thing as evidence for the divine.
Christian "truths" violate the most basic premise of reason since all of them flow from the assumption of divine, extra dimensional being which violates all of the known laws of science.
EaTn, Let me try this a different way. Every time someone like yourself proposes the existence of a divine being, a flurry of posts appear here asking for evidence of such a claim. None is ever forthcoming. As a result the only basis for your belief is simply that you want to believe it is true, in other words, faith.
What the rest of us find incredulous is not your belief in God, but rather that you are proposing that belief in something which has no evidence to support it, is some how to be preferred over believing in what the evidence out there shows is an accurate representation of the universe that we live in! You would have us forgo the use of our senses, our ability to gather and analyze facts, to exercise reason and logic in favor of make believe and fantasy!
Simply put, belief in the supernatural is absurd. I enjoy a good magic show, whether it's Penn and Teller or David Copperfield or just some street performer, but even when I don't understand how they accomplish their magic, I'm not silly enough to actually believe the magic itself is real.
Religion, gods, angels, devils, heaven, hell, souls and spirits are nothing more than our imaginations run wild..they have no evidence to support them and anyone who truly believes that they exist is, at best, just being ridiculous.
EaTn, With respect, you have no soul to save, whether you are good or not is entirely dependent on you. You have one life to enjoy and in which to contribute something to your fellow man...this one. No eternity of bliss and no possibility of perpetual suffering.
At least that's what all the evidence points to..everything else is just wishful thinking with no more support than belief in unicorns, leprechauns, nymphs and fairies. While I admit it can be kind of fun to contemplate their existence I certainly wouldn't let belief in them control my actions in this life.
More to the point under discussion, if Jesus was married it then certainly would introduce some interesting possibilites for discussion. Most evangelical Christians would probably agree that the "divine" purpose of marriage is procreation, if Christ was married and did not produce any children, you'd need to reexamine that assumption, and of course, if he did produce children, then you have the whole concept of salvation called into question. Also if he didn't have any children then you have to ask yourself if he and the wife ever engaged in sex...which then raises the issue of birth control (certainly we wouldn't want to argue for an impotent Jesus, would we?)...another thought would be, if Jesus was married...who performed the ceremony? I mean Jesus wasn't exactly in the good graces of either the Jewish priesthood or the Roman government, was he?...just thoughts :)
EaTn, of course it does...the sin nature for which Christians insist we need a sacrifice is passed through the male line (not the female), if Jesus were married and had any children they would not inherit a sinful nature and thus would not require Christ's sacrifice to get into heaven ... I think that would throw Christianity a pretty big curve ball don't you?