From: slhw4@cc.usu.edu (Jason Hunsaker)
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
Subject: Re: Mormonism
Date: 5 Nov 92 23:02:04 MDT
Organization: Utah State University

In article <ac=k02aT298R01@JUTS.ccc.amdahl.com>,
 agr00@ccc.amdahl.com (Anthony G Rose) writes:
> slhw4@cc.usu.edu (Jason Hunsaker) writes:
>> No. It does not.  I'll restate it.
>> How does exisiting on one place at one time preclude existence in
>> a higher dimension?
> 
> I am just restating what you prophets say.  Your argument is with them,
> not me.

No it it not.  My question is directed at you.  My prophets have
made know statements regarding higher dimensions.

I'll Ask Again:
How does existance in time and space preclude existence in
dimensions higher than the 3 we exists in?

>>You are not present right now, and yet I can still answer and
>>listen to you.  I can conference call over the telephone and
>>talk to many people simulaneously and listen and answer them and
>>still only be in one place.
> 
> yeah, but you can only answer one person at a time.  If there were
> millions of letters to answer each hour, you would never get caught up.

Yes, because I am not all-powerful.  God is.  So by your
reasoning, if God is all-powerful, then he can not do this.

[...]
>>>>Why just think of all the possibilities if God exites in the 4th
>>>>dimension or even the 5th or 6th.  What kinds of things would he
>>>>be able to do and perceive about a 3-dimensional existence?
>>> 
>>> Do you beleive God exist in this type of dimension?  Or do you belive he
>>> lives on the star "Kolob", as your church teaches?
>>
>>The church does not teach this.  The church teaches:
>>
>>"... the name of the great one is Kolob, because id is *near*
>>unto me ..." (Abraham 3:3. [emphasis mine -JBH])
>>
>>Kolob is *near* to God, not the "same place where God lives".
>>
>>Further on we read that Kolob governs "all those which belong to
>>the same order as" earth (Ibid.) This could refer to planets like
>>Earth specifically, more generally to our galaxy, or even more
>>generally to the 3 dimensional universe as we know it.
> 
> You avoided the question.

No, I corrected your mis-information that LDS teach the God lives
"on the star Kolob".

Speaking of avoiding the question:
How does existence in space and time preclude exising in
dimensions higher than our currect understanding of 3 dimensional
space and our current concept of time?

>>>>>> Where in LDS canon does it state that God has "Millions of
>>>>>> wives?"
>>>>> 
>>>>>    "...God the Father had a plurality of wives..."
>>>>>    (Orson Pratt, The Seer, p.172)
>>>>
>>>>Bzzzzzt  Try again.  _The Seer_ is not LDS canon.
>>> 
>>> Does that mean he was wrong?  Heretical?  That's funny, Brigham said it
>>> too (JoD Vol1 pg 50).
>>> 
>>>>Orson had an interesting idea there, but I find no backup in LDS
>>>>canon for this statement.  Nor do I see any relevance to the
>>>>atonement, or repentance, or salvation.  Nor do I feel in any way
>>>>bound to accept what he said.
>>> 
>>> Do you deny ALL of what the apostles say?
>>
>>Can you only perform binary reasoning and use binary logic?
>>
>>> Why aren't you an apostle if you know more than them?
>>
>>Since when did I claim to know more than them?
>>I only recall claiming not to accept or try to defend some of
>>what they said.  This is a claim that I know more than they?
> 
> If you tell me that what they say is wrong, and then give me a different
> answer, then you obviuosly think that your answer is better then theirs,

No, only that I don't accept their speculations on the specific
issue.  Labeling my beliefs better or worse that someone elses
requires a value judgment.  I'm not willing to impose my beliefs
on someone else as better than theirs without their consent.


> and thus you must know more to come up with a different, but better
> answer, 

Different, yes.  Better, that is a matter of taste and judgement.

>unless you are going to say you are wrong, and that is absurd.

I may very well be wrong.  My beliefs are not set in concrete.  I
am not infallible.  But at present, I find no reason compelling
enough for me to modify my current beliefs.

[...]
>>Speculation is such fun ... and so irrelevant.
> 
> Can you speculate the temperature of an eternal fire?

Yes, but it would be meaningless.

-----------------------------------------------------------------
Jason Hunsaker  -|-  Logan, Utah  -|-  Internet: slhw4@cc.usu.edu
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc