Thanks for your response Theodore. You made me think about what support I had for my statement. I realized there is a great deal of decisions I have made about evidence that may not be shared by you (or many others in the world). For example, I accept the Bible as authoritative, and the revelations of Joseph Smith as additional revelation. From that, I believe among many other scriptures I could quote, this one from the Book of Moses teaches that God defines himself as a Father.
” 6 And I have a work for thee, Moses, my son; and thou art in the asimilitude of mine bOnly cBegotten; and mine Only Begotten is and shall be the dSavior, for he is full of egrace and ftruth; but there is gno God beside me, and all things are present with me, for I hknow them all.” (http://www.lds.org/scriptures/pgp/moses/1?lang=eng)
+Kip Twitchell
Kip, Thank you for your sincere reply. I see from your posts that you are a devout person, and I will respect your beliefs.
My position however is that you examine the language of your beliefs.
If you were to say, God forbids something, or that God punishes those that commit certain acts, you are most correctly stating that “You believe” this to be so, As in: I believe, God forbids…or, I believe God punishes.
This is a very different perspective than to state it as a matter of fact.One other point. it is worth pointing out that tha scriptures are stories that are thousands of years old. What are we to make of them today. Take the story of Cain and Abel. Is it not a metaphor for something? Nootice that there is no mention of Abel going to heaven to be with God? Cain seems to be let off pretty lightly by God, considering he committed murder and lied to God about it.
Food for thought,
So Theodore, picking up a very old comment here about having to state “belief” before posting something others consider unknowable; when does something move from being believed to being known? What triggers that? If I state something you consider unknowable, does it mean I don’t know it? Also, certainly facts exists independent of my knowledge or my belief, truth is independent of our understanding, or belief Stating facts then shouldn’t be a problem, should it?
Kip, Any believe system is subjective.
What is under examination here is actually whether humans are capable of comprehending reality or whether we build a representation, a model of reality, in our minds.
This applies to truth as well; is truth knowable, or do we create a perception of the truth with our subjective view that only appears to be a truth.
Much of science which is verifiable and therefore consistently evident is still “provisional”; it builds upon itself in a progressive manner. An example of this is that Einstein did not prove Newton’s Laws wrong, he demonstrated that the laws were only applicable in certain conditions. Many of the things that we think are true are also provisional.
But again, all believe is subjective, yet we continue to incorrectly assert it in a manner that makes in appear to be fact, “God will….”
We don;t “know” God will, we have faith that God will, or we believe God will, But that is no knowing on it without verifiable science.
Kip on Character 
Theodore A Hoppe – 2013-12-05 19:58:16-0500
K Twitchell – 2013-12-08 19:13:34-0500
Thanks for your response Theodore. You made me think about what support I had for my statement. I realized there is a great deal of decisions I have made about evidence that may not be shared by you (or many others in the world). For example, I accept the Bible as authoritative, and the revelations of Joseph Smith as additional revelation. From that, I believe among many other scriptures I could quote, this one from the Book of Moses teaches that God defines himself as a Father.
” 6 And I have a work for thee, Moses, my son; and thou art in the asimilitude of mine bOnly cBegotten; and mine Only Begotten is and shall be the dSavior, for he is full of egrace and ftruth; but there is gno God beside me, and all things are present with me, for I hknow them all.” (http://www.lds.org/scriptures/pgp/moses/1?lang=eng)
Theodore A Hoppe – 2013-12-08 21:19:59-0500
Kip, Thank you for your sincere reply. I see from your posts that you are a devout person, and I will respect your beliefs.
My position however is that you examine the language of your beliefs.
If you were to say, God forbids something, or that God punishes those that commit certain acts, you are most correctly stating that “You believe” this to be so, As in: I believe, God forbids…or, I believe God punishes.
This is a very different perspective than to state it as a matter of fact.One other point. it is worth pointing out that tha scriptures are stories that are thousands of years old. What are we to make of them today. Take the story of Cain and Abel. Is it not a metaphor for something? Nootice that there is no mention of Abel going to heaven to be with God? Cain seems to be let off pretty lightly by God, considering he committed murder and lied to God about it.
Food for thought,
K Twitchell – 2014-11-16 12:43:56-0500
Theodore A Hoppe – 2014-11-16 16:43:48-0500
What is under examination here is actually whether humans are capable of comprehending reality or whether we build a representation, a model of reality, in our minds.
This applies to truth as well; is truth knowable, or do we create a perception of the truth with our subjective view that only appears to be a truth.
Much of science which is verifiable and therefore consistently evident is still “provisional”; it builds upon itself in a progressive manner. An example of this is that Einstein did not prove Newton’s Laws wrong, he demonstrated that the laws were only applicable in certain conditions. Many of the things that we think are true are also provisional.
But again, all believe is subjective, yet we continue to incorrectly assert it in a manner that makes in appear to be fact, “God will….”
We don;t “know” God will, we have faith that God will, or we believe God will, But that is no knowing on it without verifiable science.