Stack Exchange
log in

Mason Wheeler

 Discussion between haxor789 and Mason…

Imported from a comment discussion on politics.stackexchange.c...
Mason Wheeler
Jan 3 18:27
Egalitarianism is the marketing campaign, nothing more. The true essence of the Left is horror and manmade catastrophe.
Mason Wheeler
Jan 3 18:26
And that's been the story of the political Left ever since: the use of violence and terror, prioritizing tearing down existing institutions over building anything effective, and destructive infighting, turning on those deemed insufficiently Revolutionary at the drop of a hat, regardless of previous contributions to the cause.
Mason Wheeler
Jan 3 18:24
The guy who first said that, Bertrand Barère, ended up falling out with Robespierre and getting killed over it. Robespierre was later killed by his fellow revolutionaries turning on him.
Mason Wheeler
Jan 3 18:22
As we all know, the left-wing won that particular contest. And no sooner had they deposed the king then the revolutionaries turned to horror and oppression. It was leading revolutionaries who, themselves, proclaimed that they would "make terror the order of the day." (Usually a term like "the Reign of Terror" would be a slur invented by political opponents, but these guys were so thoroughly evil that they proclaimed it themselves, out loud!)
Mason Wheeler
Jan 3 18:18
The best way to understand what something is is to look at where it came from. The left-right political divide has its origins in the immediate lead-up to the French Revolution, where the members of Parliament who supported the revolutionary sentiment that was building sat on the left side of the hall, and those who supported preserving the existing order sat to the right.
Mason Wheeler
Jan 3 18:16
If left-wing governments always go authoritarian and totalitarian given the slightest opportunity, then "being egalitarian and not authoritarian" can not be the essence of Leftism. Period.
Mason Wheeler
Jan 3 18:15
Seriously, what part of "your definition does not match reality" do you not understand? This isn't a matter of "someone proposed egalitarianism and did authoritarianism, therefore that person lied/was stupid/whatever." This is "everyone who has tried this has done it this way when they got into power, therefore it is thoroughly dishonest to claim that a definition that dissociates the one from the other is valid."
Mason Wheeler
Jan 3 16:07
The simple fact of the matter is, throughout history, every time individuals and groups that self-identify as left-wing, and act in furtherance of Leftist principles, get into power, they invariably begin to rule in a manner that is authoritarian, totalitarian, and often terroristic. If your preferred definition claims that this is not a characteristic of the Left, but is actually a right-wing thing, your definition does not match reality, and is incorrect and invalid. This is not an opinion; it's a simple fact.
Mason Wheeler
Jan 3 16:07
@haxor789 You're still missing the entire point. You can say "by definition" until you're blue in the face, but it doesn't mean a thing if the definitions bear no resemblance to real-world conditions, as is demonstrably the case here. You have bad definitions. My theory as to why is that the definitions are not being coming from unbiased sources, but from Leftist ideologues who have a vested interest in defining bad things as right-wing to make their opponents look bad. Ad hominem is not a fallacy when the question truly is one of the character of the person.
Mason Wheeler
Jan 3 16:07
@haxor789 The Wikipedia article cites Marius Ostrowski twice and Andrew Heywood once in relation to that point. Ostrowski has a long history as an extreme-Leftist activist, and Heywood writes political science textbooks for universities. These are not reliable sources. As for "what are credible sources," the rule is actually quite simple. If you want to know what people believe in, listen to what they say about themselves, when speaking openly to like-minded people. Not what their enemies say about them, and not what they say to their enemies.
Mason Wheeler
Jan 3 16:07
@haxor789 Your definitions remain incredibly wrong. Where are you getting this nonsense from anyway?!? You haven't cited a single source for any of these definitions, let alone a credible one that originates outside of left-wing academia. And honestly, I haven't even heard these definitions you're using coming from academics, which leads me to wonder if you aren't simply making them up on the spot for the purpose of trolling.
Mason Wheeler
Jan 3 16:07
@haxor789 As I said before, you're getting bad definitions from left-wing academia. And it's producing up-is-down-black-is-white insanity as a result. From the very beginning all the way to modern times the political Left has been marked by a fundamentally authoritarian, totalitarian, and terroristic character. If your definition says otherwise, your definition is wrong. Find a definition that originates outside of left-wing academia.
Mason Wheeler
Jan 3 16:07
@haxor789 "usually right wing, is by definition the more authoritarian side of the political spectrum," Not surprising when it's left-wing academics doing the defining. And yet, as I said, even the simplest levels of real-world observation or unbiased research puts the lie to that bad definition. "and the one that tries to justify rather than dismantle social inequalities." It's called 'wisdom.' Every time the Left tries to "dismantle inequality," they end up making things worse. By their fruits ye shall know them.
Mason Wheeler
Jan 3 16:07
But a funny thing happened when some researchers took the exact same questions and changed nothing except replacing the villain with something the Left hates instead: the responses showed people on the Left to be significantly more authoritarian and repressive in their preferences against their preferred enemies than right-wingers were in their preferences against their preferred enemies. (An outcome which shouldn't surprise anyone who's lived through the last 20 years of American experience!)
Mason Wheeler
Jan 3 16:07
@haxor789 "Being authoritarian and invasive actually is a hallmark of right wing politics." Not even close. That's a slander that's been pushed by left-wing academics for decades, but it's not remotely close to being true. It turns out that it's based on survey questions like "how strongly do you believe that [repressive measure here] should be taken to suppress communism?" which will naturally get a stronger favorability from the Right than from the Left.
 

 Discussion between depperm and Matthew

Imported from a comment discussion on christianity.stackexchan...
Mason Wheeler
Sep 17, 2024 17:50
Huh. TIL Markdown links don't work in SE chat.
Mason Wheeler
Sep 17, 2024 17:50
That's kind of expected:
"and he said unto himself: Now, for this cause I know that man is nothing, which thing I never had supposed."
— [Moses 1: 10](https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/scriptures/pgp/moses/1?lang=eng&id=p10#p10)
Mason Wheeler
Sep 17, 2024 14:09
But once they do, they know, that testimony is like a fire in their bones (Jeremiah 20:9) and they're willing to take the necessary, sometimes difficult steps to bring their lives in harmony with the Gospel so they can be baptized. It's an amazing thing to witness that transformation in a person, no matter how many times you've seen it.
Mason Wheeler
Sep 17, 2024 14:08
@Wyrsa It's literally a requirement for membership. The missionaries don't let a potential convert get baptized if they haven't prayed and received a testimony of their own. Honestly, that's often the biggest hurdle: so many people, for one reason or another, just can't bring themselves to pray about it.
Mason Wheeler
Sep 16, 2024 21:43
"I mean... are you sure they are not just lacking for words?"

A person could easily be lacking for words. I could buy that. It's a lot less believable that an entire group, a large group consisting of millions of people, are all lacking for words.
Mason Wheeler
Sep 16, 2024 00:48
among those whose language is not understood, as on the day of Pentecost &c and it is not necessary for tongues to be taught to the church particularly, for any man that has the Holy Ghost can speak of the things of God in his own tongue, as well as to speak in another, for faith comes not by signs but by hearing the word of God." (This "day-of-Pentecost" phenomenon, also known as xenoglossia, is well-documented among Latter-Day Saints, particularly missionaries.)
Mason Wheeler
Sep 16, 2024 00:47
@Matthew Honestly, I don't know what the deal is with glossolalia. It was apparently a phenomenon known to the early church, as evidenced by 1 Cor. 14, where Paul cautioned against it. A similar warning was repeated by Joseph Smith, stating that it was possible (though not necessarily common) for Satan to manipulate glossolalia, and that doctrinal revelations would never be given by the Lord through this mechanism. He also wrote that "Tongues were given for the purpose of preaching
Mason Wheeler
Sep 15, 2024 14:17
@Matthew You're referring to the people famous for doing what Paul, in 1 Corinthians 14, cautioned against doing because it's kind of pointless?
Mason Wheeler
Sep 13, 2024 21:15
You ask what benefit being a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints offers that other religions don't? The big obvious one is the Gift of the Holy Ghost. It's changed my life for the better in numerous ways, and one time literally saved my life. And no other faith has this. No one else lives this way, or at least if they do they aren't talking about it.
Mason Wheeler
Sep 13, 2024 21:13
The other thing is, it's not a one-time deal. Those who are baptized and receive the Gift of the Holy Ghost by proper Priesthood authority have the blessing of the companionship of the Spirit of God. Receiving spiritual promptings as guidance to direct and improve your life becomes a normal thing. I've received promptings to do certain things, to make one choice over another, occasionally to not say something that seemed to make perfect sense when I was going to say it, and so on.
Mason Wheeler
Sep 13, 2024 18:42
@Matthew You're still not grasping this. Promptings of the Holy Ghost are not a generic "spiritual/supernatural experience." I've seen people of other faiths talk about what they call spiritual experiences, and they aren't anything like what I'm talking about here. About the only way I can explain it is to reference Plato's allegory of the people in the cave: the qualitative difference is so stark that you can't really grasp it without experiencing it youfself.
Mason Wheeler
Sep 12, 2024 21:08
An actual resolution to the agnostic starting point, for one. The most fundamental point of agnosticism is "I will not affirmatively deny that God exists, but I do not know one way or the other."

Where other faiths make claims that their version of God exists because of some external evidence that atheists always find some way to explain away, Moroni's promise cited above is very different, and infinitely superior: you can know that God exists *because he will tell you, personally,* and that's something that can't be explained away. No matter what some third party who doesn't know what y…
Mason Wheeler
Sep 12, 2024 20:34
@Matthew on the basis of Article of Faith #8
Mason Wheeler
Sep 11, 2024 18:46
@Wyrsa lovesark.net/2020/08/23/…
Mason Wheeler
Sep 11, 2024 18:45
"The existence of "the Holy Ghost" has not been established."

Wait, what? Are you now not accepting the testimony of the Bible?

"because meditation resulted in a feeling of spirituality."

No. You're blindly trying to liken something you clearly have no experience with to something more familiar by strained analogy. I know what you're describing, and that is not at all the same thing as a spiritual prompting. Not even close.
Mason Wheeler
Sep 9, 2024 18:41
Is there anyone anywhere outside of the Latter-Day Saints that explicitly, by-design builds upon the rock of revelation from God, as mandated by Jesus in Matthew 16?
Mason Wheeler
Sep 9, 2024 18:37
"And if it was, there are many people of completely incompatible faiths that have equally valid "authentication".

Where? Do you have any examples of other faiths that base the foundation of their faith on the witness of the Holy Ghost? Because I've looked, and I haven't found any. Catholics appeal to tradition and an allegedly unbroken line of authority from Christ's time. Protestants claim that such traditions are unnecessary and everything you need is found within the pages of the Bible. (And then lose followers by the millions when sophists come around and claim that there's newer,…
Mason Wheeler
Sep 9, 2024 16:41
@Wyrsa What does the Bible have to say about mockery?
Mason Wheeler
Sep 9, 2024 02:22
That is how God authenticates his word. Not through the works of men that other men can cast doubt upon. Not through evidence that aligns with arbitrary standards invented thousands of years later. It is personal, individual, and unmistakable.
Mason Wheeler
Sep 9, 2024 02:21
But the testimony of the Holy Ghost, the witness of God directly to your spirit, is a thing that can not be denied. There's a reason why Jesus said that blaspheming against it is unforgivable: to do so is to take something that you know with a sure knowledge, with no doubt, given directly from God, and lie about it, akin to denying the existence of the sun in the middle of a cloudless summer's day.
Mason Wheeler
Sep 9, 2024 02:18
Witnesses can be challenged or outright denied. (When Paul said in 1 Corinthians 15 that the resurrected Jesus had appeared to numerous people, including a group of over 500 at once, that meant something to the contemporary Corinthians, but many people today glibly claim that none of these people ever even existed and Paul just made the whole thing up.)
Mason Wheeler
Sep 9, 2024 02:18
@Matthew Not at all; it's the highest bar there is. Even the greatest of miracles, people who don't want to believe can invent ways to explain away. (See Matthew 28: 11-15.)
Mason Wheeler
Sep 8, 2024 22:23
@Matthew ...you didn't even bother looking it up, did you?
Mason Wheeler
Sep 7, 2024 18:32
"What is this "tested and confirmed faith"?"

See Moroni 10: 3-5.

"How do you respond to the many, many Christians who have "tested and confirmed faith" but assert that LDS is heresy?"

I respond that I've never seen a single one of them follow the instructions given in Moroni 10: 3-5.
Mason Wheeler
Sep 7, 2024 18:28
"Even the doubters were given a sign."
And he called them on it well before it happened. (Again, see Luke 16: 29-31. What do you think he was talking about with those highly specific words in the last verse?) I didn't say that they would not receive any signs; I said that they do not create faith. Which is precisely what happened.
Mason Wheeler
Sep 7, 2024 13:11
"Besides, if miracles aren't useful, why should I believe Joseph Smith?"

This question is such a complete non sequitur that it's hard to even know where to start. No one believes Joseph Smith because of his claims to have received miraculous visions. We believe because of tested and confirmed faith.
Mason Wheeler
Sep 7, 2024 13:05
to telling his disciples that signs shall follow those who believe. There's a consistent through-line here: Miracles do not create true, vital faith. That is not their purpose, and seeking to use them that way is an abuse of miracles.
Mason Wheeler
Sep 7, 2024 13:04
@Matthew It's not me you're disagreeing with; it's Jesus himself, as I explained above. He consistently denounced your way of thinking, from sending away the people who wanted to follow him after he fed the multitude, to the parable of the rich man and Lazarus, (Luke 16:29-31 is especially relevant to your specific example,) to calling those who seek after miraculous signs as evidence that they should believe in him "wicked and adulterous,"
Mason Wheeler
Sep 6, 2024 21:13
You are still completely missing the point about the miracles. I've explained it clearly twice now, and you keep circling back around to refocus everything on the part that it is a mistake to focus on.
Mason Wheeler
Sep 6, 2024 20:21
"...so what you're saying is Jesus was really a space alien with advanced technology?"

I'm saying nothing of the sort. I'm saying that many of the miracles associated with Jesus can be easily counterfeited today with modern medical knowledge, therefore it's a mistake to use them as a foundation for your faith and claim that they can't be counterfeited.

"God promises two ways of verifying the *true* message; fulfilled prophesies (which AFAIK LDS lacks)"

You should study this more. There's no lack of fulfilled prophecies among the modern-day prophets.
Mason Wheeler
Sep 6, 2024 03:07
If you're trying to build your faith off of miracles, that's a very good way to be deceived, and is the precise opposite of how Christ told us it's supposed to work in Mark chapter 16: signs will follow those who believe. Signs and miracles do not precede and create faith; they arise as a result of it, and Jesus specifically called out those who demand a sign as a condition of belief as "wicked and adulterous" in Matthew chapter 16.
Mason Wheeler
Sep 6, 2024 03:04
Why not? In our modern age, doctors perform what one might reasonably refer to as "counterfeit resurrection" *literally every day.* It's even frequently referred to, in the vernacular, as a "medical miracle" or "miracle of modern medicine."

Jesus cured the sick. We can do that today. Jesus reattached a severed ear; we can reattach *entire limbs* today. Jesus was born to a woman who became pregnant without ever having sex. We can do that today too.
Mason Wheeler
Sep 6, 2024 03:03
> [resurrection] involves a miracle that seemingly cannot be counterfeited.
 

 Discussion on question by Felix An: W…

Imported from a comment discussion on christianity.stackexchan...
Mason Wheeler
May 29, 2024 01:01
@NigelJ More to the point, it's only fairly recently that slavery became a matter of lifetime service. In biblical times, slavery was a contract of employment, to serve someone for a certain number of years, often for the purposes of paying off a debt, after which they would go free.
 

 Discussion on answer by T.E.D.: What …

Imported from a comment discussion on history.stackexchange.co...
Mason Wheeler
May 21, 2024 14:54
So under a northern migration theory, we'd expect to see the ancient capitol in Alaska or Cascadia, with civilization spreading out from there. And there is, in fact, a clear "high society center point" of Native American civilization... but it's thousands of miles away from where northern migration theories say it "should be," waaaaay down in Mesoamerica!