Brayden Dotson

@NoDisassemble5 @stackerco Thats just an appeal to skepticism. And thats fine but its not an argument.

@bdots2020 @stackerco As you walk back the timeline of man, you will see that where there is lack of knowledge and understanding there is more suspicion, superstition, irrationality, and appealing to forces that are undetectable, unfalsifiable and indistinguishable from nonexistent

A doctor: “I went to med school.” A prophet: “I speak for God.” This not about whether fallible people who are trained in medicine can know more than me. This is about why someone should still be treated as speaking for God after being wrong in God’s name.

@NoDisassemble5 @stackerco You just did it again: I dont think X is true or Y, so therefore Z probably isn't true either.

@bdots2020 @stackerco thoughts, choices, behavior, actions... there's a much higher probability that this is the case for any believer, than it is that any set of beliefs are actually true. Proving one's beliefs while dealing w/ that precedent is a tall order.

@NoDisassemble5 @stackerco Haha just point out your double standard friend. Each of the points you make relies on nothing more than your distain fro religious beliefs and looks something like this: I dont think X is true or Y, so therefore Z probably isn't true either.

@bdots2020 @stackerco Disappointed. It seemed like we were having a productive conversation, til you turned it into shit slinging. I haven't been emotional once in this exchange. It would appear that my last remark got you emotional.

@NoDisassemble5 @stackerco Guaranteed your response will look like this.

@NoDisassemble5 @stackerco 1. You sound emotional. 2. No it doesn't. You are reading it with your emotions. 3. You sound emotional

@NoDisassemble5 @stackerco 1. Its good enough for me. 2. Not at all. There is tons of good in many cultures and belief systems/philosophies. 3. Still not sure what you are driving at here.

@bdots2020 @stackerco 3. truth claim or not your opinion is not supported by evidence.

@NoDisassemble5 @stackerco 1. True, but it convinced me. I dont care if it convinced you. 2. Everything that bears good fruit is of Christ. 3. I didn't make a truth claim with point 3, so im not sure what you are driving at.

@bdots2020 @stackerco 3.there’s insufficient evidence for any prophet/guru/seer/psychic/palm reader communicating to anything divine m or having any special “gifts”. Especially when you look back through the history of problems w/ things some prophets pushed who are said to have “gift of discernment”

@stackerco @hammerofvision @polysophical @ThoughtfulSaint 1. I'm agnostic to the infinate regress. I think we probably understand it poorly. 2. Your joking right? You dont see the fallacy in that statement?

@bdots2020 @hammerofvision @polysophical @ThoughtfulSaint Protestants don believe in IR. You’re basically a Protestant.

For Latter-day Saints: Which better describes your belief Option 1: God the Father was subordinate to his Father who was subordinate to his father ext (Infinite regress) Option 2: God the Father is the HEAD God of ALL other Gods.

@stackerco @hammerofvision @polysophical @ThoughtfulSaint You know who wouldn't agree? Protesants lol

@hammerofvision @polysophical @ThoughtfulSaint Agree.

From the words of Brigham himself: "I am not going to interpret dreams; for I don't profess to be such a Prophet as were Joseph Smith and Daniel; but I am a Yankee guesser; and I guess that James Buchanan has ordered this Expedition to appease the wrath of the angry hounds who are howling around him." "I am not a visionary man, neither am I given much to prophesying. When I want any of that done I call on brother Heber—he is my Prophet, he loves to prophesy, and I love to hear him." I think without Brigham, Mormonism would not have survived (especially compared to the other would-be successors: Sidney Rigdon, William Smith, James Strang, or 11 year old Joseph Smith III). He was a great leader. Him, Heber C. Kimball, and Orson Pratt actually share a lot of mystical ideas I would say even moreso than they disagree (on things like Adam-God). Joseph was visionary. Brigham was guided by intuition. Orson Pratt was more analytical. Heber C. Kimball was a mix between Joseph and Brigham. I find interesting ideas from them all.

@stackerco 1. Pray about it 2. A healthy tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor can a diseased tree bear good fruit. 3. Personal opinion: As the president of the church (administrator/ holder of keys) you can be called as a prophet and seer but no nessisary have the gift in the same way JS did

@bdots2020 How can you possibly know a fake prophet from a real prophet at this point?

@stackerco The radical notion of... letting people be wrong. Look around. Clearly there is nothing in this world that can claim infalliblity. Earthly infalliblity is oxymoronic

@bdots2020 Know what else is dumb? Trying to make every problem unfalsifiable. Infallibility lets any false prophet off the hook

@raulofmustachio @BasicBaptistGuy Thats his default mode.

@BasicBaptistGuy Bahahaahaaahahhahahahhahahhahahahhahahahhahahahhah!! I’ll just accept the quick victory on this one. You’re already spurging out

Mormons - We have continuing revelation that makes everything clear. Also Mormons 👇👇👇👇👇👇

@carbonmfg @stackerco Every world view breaks down if you try and stretch it all the way back.

@stackerco Infinite regress isn't understood without a framework of eternity and a concept of true oneness at which point the concepts of a divine Council and infinite regress fit together but our mortal brains reject it all. Every religion has this issue, our limited minds can't compute.

Either Joseph Smith is an absolute idiot and uses the worst analogies of all time that make zero sense, or... the simpler option... he actually just said what he meant and you don't like it.

@polysophical @stackerco @RestoredTruth8 It can be read that way. Both sermons start out talking about a head God.

@bdots2020 @stackerco @RestoredTruth8 So finite regress?

Chuck needs to read the whole sermon. That quote is about uncreated intelligences, not a denial of Joseph’s infinite regress that’s clearly taught in the same sermon. In King Follett, Joseph also taught that “God himself was once as we are now.” So you can’t quote the “spirit of man is eternal” line as though it disproves Joseph’s teaching that God progressed. It doesn’t. It just shows Chuck is young and clueless and just trying to cherry pick to win debate points and that you will be foolish enough to not know what the speech was about. Maybe we need to have a discussion about the infinite nature of intelligences.

@JeffBlosil @GordoBlanco76 @ThoughtfulSaint @stackerco @grok Seriously.

@bdots2020 @GordoBlanco76 @ThoughtfulSaint @stackerco @grok Dang that's unfortunate

@GordoBlanco76 @ThoughtfulSaint @stackerco @Grok do you think the ancient Israelites were henothiestic?

@ThoughtfulSaint @stackerco The most unbiblical thing ever. The true prophets of the Bible never taught this nor did Christ. Crazy how anyone who considers themselves Christian could believe that.

@RestoredTruth8 x.com/i/status/20438…

Stacker lacks any ability to read things. But that’s okay you can watch something since that takes less intention. Here ya go buddy youtu.be/SNbe_jD4haY?si…

@stackerco @ThoughtfulSaint No it doesn't. It says the Father of Jesus Christ has a Father. If you want to read it as bottoming out at a Head God it just can't be with Jesus's Father.

@ThoughtfulSaint And in sermon in the grove he talks about how that head would also have a father. You’ve admitted this.