SPECIAL PLEADINGS

G + O + D = GOD
Greatest Observations about Deity.
D&C 93: 1: Know that I AM.
MarkMyWords
Posts: 1113
Contact:

SPECIAL PLEADINGS

Post#1 » Mon Nov 02, 2015 5:07 pm

SPECIAL PLEADINGS:

“Special pleading is a form of fallacious argument that involves an attempt to cite something as an exception to a generally accepted rule, principle, etc. without justifying the exception – from the Wikipedia.”

When it comes to philosophical arguments and scientific theories, special pleadings are permitted, but they have to be JUSTIFIED.

What does it mean for a special pleading or an exception to be justified? How does such a thing become justified?

An exception or a special pleading is justified by observational evidence or by a preponderance of the evidence. A special pleading is also justified when a NEED for its existence has been established by the scientific evidence or the philosophical argument.

For example, most honest deep-thinking philosophers, scientists, and theologians readily see the NEED for a Designer, Programmer, and Engineer Builder when it comes to a Genome of any kind. It is so clear that a Genome NEEDS a Designer, Programmer, and Engineer that a NEED for a “special exception” has been generated by the scientific evidence itself. The same exact thing can be said about the First Living Cell. It’s so clear from the scientific and philosophical and mathematical evidence that such a thing had to be Designed, Programmed, and Built by some kind of Intelligent Entity, that once again a NEED has been generated for some kind of “special pleading” for an Intelligent Designer as a solution for the NEED.

Scientific observation, physics, and mathematical models have demonstrated that the Big Bang and this Universe are effects. The scientific conclusion that this universe is an effect generates a NEED for its Cause. We actually NEED some kind of “special pleading” or “special exception” to act as the Cause of our universe, according to the scientific evidence and scientific conclusions.

So, once it has been established by scientific evidence and logical reasoning that there is a philosophical and empirical NEED for some kind of “special exception” Designer or First Cause, then the next step is to try to find a Cause or a Designer that is JUSTIFIED by the available observational evidence and scientific evidence. Special pleadings are permitted into philosophical arguments and theoretical proofs, but they have to be JUSTIFIED.

Most of the world will agree that if a NEED for a “special pleading” ever arises, the Biblical God is the most JUSTIFIED solution.

Why?

It’s because many people have seen the Biblical God, talked with the Biblical God, and even walked with the Biblical God. The Biblical God has written commandments in stone for us to follow with His own finger. In the case of Genomes, the first living cells, and this universe, the Biblical God has actually stood up and said, “I did it.” The Biblical God has actually fessed up to doing the job. The Biblical God has pleaded guilty to doing these things! It doesn’t get more JUSTIFIED than that! That’s quite a special pleading! In any court of law, an admission of guilt is sure to get the individual convicted of the deed.

Whenever the NEED for a “special pleading” arises, most people in the world consider Allah from the Muslim religions to be the next-most logical and JUSTIFIED candidate. If a NEED for a Designer or a First Cause is ever generated by the scientific evidence or a philosophical argument, then Allah is a JUSTIFIED candidate also.

It is interesting to note that among people who are neutral where the Christianity vs Islam debate is concerned, they consider God the Father (Elohim) in the Bible to be the same exact person or entity as Allah from the Quran; whereas, Christ Jehovah (the son of God the Father) seems to be excluded only to the Bible. Jehovah in the Old Testament is the same God as Jesus Christ in the New Testament; and, I have taken to calling him Christ Jehovah.

If we can agree that Elohim (God the Father) and Allah are the same exact God, then Allah Elohim pretty much becomes the only JUSTIFIED designer or first cause whenever scientific evidence, scientific theories, and philosophical arguments generate the NEED for a first cause or for a designer. Remember, special pleadings are permitted in philosophical arguments so long as they are JUSTIFIED.

The pink unicorn and the flying spaghetti monster don’t qualify because they are not JUSTIFIED by the available observational evidence, scientific evidence, revelatory evidence, theological evidence, and philosophical evidence. Likewise, nobody has ever seen the gods of other religions or received revelations from the gods of other religions, so these gods are hard or impossible to JUSTIFY as any kind of “special exception” or “special pleading”, whenever there is a NEED generated for such a “special pleading”.

Darwin Max Bagley

--

Download a PDF Copy:

http://ldssoul.com/wp-content/uploads/2 ... ADINGS.pdf

MarkMyWords
Posts: 1113
Contact:

Re: SPECIAL PLEADINGS

Post#2 » Mon Nov 02, 2015 5:08 pm

Image

Enoch
Site Admin
Posts: 274
Contact:

Re: SPECIAL PLEADINGS

Post#3 » Mon Nov 02, 2015 6:07 pm

NICE.

There are a few things that the skeptics, atheists, naturalists, materialists, and Darwinists don't realize.

They don't realize that the Scientific Method was originally created by scientists, who were Christians who believed in the Biblical God, as a means of studying God's Creation and worshiping God. The Scientific Method was created to study God's Creations and as a means of worshiping God. The Scientific Method wouldn't have existed without the Christinan scientists who believed in God and believed that science itself could reveal God to us in greater depth.

The skeptics don't realize that Religion and Theology are an integral part of the Science of Philosophy. In fact, in many countries of the world, Religion and Theology were the only form of Philosophy, for centuries or millennia of time. The Study of God is an integral and legitimate form of Philosophy. Therefore, the Study of God requires no special exception and no special pleading in order to justify its inclusion into the Science of Philosophy. Originally, the Science of Philosophy was the Study of God or the Science of God.

The atheists' attempts to exclude God from the Science of Philosophy and to exclude God from various philosophical discussions and logical arguments is in fact the "special pleading" that is taking place in every philosophical and logical argument that we seem to come across in modern times. The atheists keep pleading and pleading and pleading for us to exclude the Biblical God from the Science of Philosophy, from Philosophical Discussions, and from every logic argument that is presented. Excluding God is a "special pleading" that the atheists and skeptics put up intrinsically in every one of their arguments and philosophical proofs, and they demand that we go along with it in violation of the rules of logic and in violation of the fundamental foundations of the Science of Philosophy.

The atheistic approach to Philosophy and their constant special pleadings are not justified.

MarkMyWords
Posts: 1113
Contact:

Re: SPECIAL PLEADINGS

Post#4 » Tue Nov 03, 2015 7:32 am

In response to the original post in this thread, Kevin Lackey wrote:

That has got to be among the pinnacles of confirmation bias, circular reasoning, question begging, and arguments from ignorance that I have ever seen. I am in awe.


I used the definition of "special pleading" from wikipedia that clearly stated that "special pleadings" are permitted in philosophical arguments if they are JUSTIFIED, and then I went from there.

I think I adequately stated why my "special pleadings" are NEEDED and JUSTIFIED.

I believe that according to the rules of philosophical debate I JUSTIFIED my special pleadings. Now, can Kevin justify his special pleadings that he periodically makes? I think not.

What do the rest of you think? Have I made my case, or does it still need work?

Darwin Bagley



Isaiah
Posts: 111

Re: SPECIAL PLEADINGS

Post#5 » Tue Nov 03, 2015 8:42 am

A rebuttal:

Kevin Lackey wrote:

That has got to be among the pinnacles of confirmation bias, circular reasoning, question begging, and arguments from ignorance that I have ever seen. I am in awe.


And the atheists are never guilty of confirmation bias? Give me a break!

Well, I guess Kevin might be right, now that I think about it. Atheists are never guilty of confirmation bias because they never have anything to confirm.

Your reasoning seemed pretty linear and straight-forward to me, Darwin. You established a need, and presented a justified solution. That's the way science works. The atheists ignore science and observational evidence in order to get around God or away from God, philosophically and spiritually. The science and personal observations carry a lot more weight than philosophical and logical argumentation. The atheists in contrast employ circular logic in order to get around science and God, so that they don't have to consider evidence from these sources.

Begging the question? God has provided to us revelations to show us that He exists -- the Book of Mormon, Bible, D&C, and Pearl of Great Price. God has also revealed Himself to us through nature and science. There is scientific evidence for God's existence, such as the genome and the first living cell. However, the atheists are right when it comes to the universe -- what was there before the universe is too distant and too intangible for science to get at. If you input the Scriptures and the Book of Nature or the Book of Science as the premises, then it is logical to form the conclusion that God exists; and, then it isn't begging the question. The conclusion is in fact supported by the premises.

Darwin you also seem to be infinitely more knowledgeable about God, religion, science, and spirituality than Kevin; so, if anyone is arguing from ignorance, it would be the atheists and Kevin.

I'm in awe, but for different reasons than Kevin's. I'm in awe of God and everything that He can do. In comparison to that, the atheists and skeptics are nothing!

Enoch
Site Admin
Posts: 274
Contact:

Re: SPECIAL PLEADINGS

Post#6 » Tue Nov 03, 2015 10:17 pm

Don't let the skeptics and the atheists fool you!

The atheists go through just as much intellectual and philosophical finagling to eliminate God from their point of view as the theists do to include God into their point of view.

The real question is, "Which point of view has the most evidence to support it? Which point of view is true and matches with the true reality of things?"

To answer that question, starting listing which point of view has the most observational evidence and scientific evidence to support it. Seeing is believing. It's really that simple!

On the one hand, you have the philosophical point of view of the atheists that concludes that God does not exist.

On the other hand, you have the philosophical point of view from the theists that concludes that God does exist.

They both can't be right.

However, each side is just as equally convinced that they are right, thus you end up with a stalemate or a tie.

Then it's time for a tie-breaker.

Turn to observational evidence and scientific evidence in order to break the tie.

Which philosophical point of view has the most scientific evidence to support it?

Which philosophical point of view has the most direct and indirect observational evidence supporting it?

If you answer those two questions honestly and truthfully, then you will have your answer as to which philosophical point of view is legitimate and justified by the evidence.

It will have no real meaning to you if I answer those questions for you. You have to answer them for yourself in order for it to have any impact on you whatsoever. If you get stuck, ask God.

Enoch

MarkMyWords
Posts: 1113
Contact:

Re: SPECIAL PLEADINGS

Post#7 » Tue Nov 03, 2015 10:49 pm

Another response from the opposing point of view.

Kevin Lackey wrote:

Begging the question - That any of the books of Scripture that you reference are actually from god.
Begging the question - That god actually exists and reveals himself to man.
Confirmation Bias - Towards Abrahamic religions, and lds theology.
Circular Reasoning - That god exists and therefore justifies the exception, any more than any other thing we can posit.
Argument from ignorance - That no religions outside of the Abrahamic tradition have "revealed" scripture or gods that have revealed themselves to man.

I could go on, but you get the gist.


I like this response, actually, for what it reveals. Do any of you have a response?

I think I have already responded to Kevin with more than he wanted or was ready to hear.

Thank you Kevin once again for your input and for your bravery and courage in taking us to task.

I got the gist. Did you get the gist?

--
--

I got the impression a year or so ago that this problem would never be resolved through philosophical debate. I realized then and there that I, personally, would have to turn to scientific evidence and observational evidence and personal revelation from God, if I ever wanted to know the truth.

Since then, I have found book after book after book full of scientific evidence that show that God is needed and that God exists. I know that God exists because of the scientific evidence for God's existence that I have seen, observed, and read. I have also read a large number of different philosophical proofs that show that God exists. They weren't as convincing, but they did show to my satisfaction that the existence of God is philosophically defensible.

The best proof of God's existence, though, has come from personal revelation and from the revelations of the other Latter-day Saints who live around me and interact with me. God has revealed Himself to us, through many different ways and means. That reality is impossible to deny.

I have LDS friends who have used their priesthood to raise their own children from the dead. I have experienced miraculous physical and spiritual (psychological) healing from priesthood blessings. I have LDS friends and relatives who have seen and talked to the spirit of their dead mother. I have LDS friends who have had visions, and revelations, and manifestations. They are seers. There are other Latter-day Saints I know who have been given the gift of charity. They radiate forgiveness and love. I know of many Latter-day Saints who have seen our resurrected Lord Jesus Christ and talked with Him.

These revelations of God prove that God exists. They are observational evidence of God's existence. These revelations of God prove that the Book of Mormon and the Bible are true. They also prove to me that Kevin is wrong in his assertions and his conclusions. Once again, I'm going to go with God on this one, rather than Kevin.

MarkMyWords
Posts: 1113
Contact:

Re: SPECIAL PLEADINGS

Post#8 » Tue Nov 03, 2015 11:57 pm

I had to be willing to go looking for God long before I was able to find Him.

For years, I refused to look at anything to do with God, so naturally I became skeptical and eventually became atheist.

Atheism of any kind is built upon a refusal to look at and accept any evidence that proves that God exists. The proof of God's existence was always there -- I just refused to look at it and accept it. I was afraid of it, actually. I got very good at excluding anything and everything that proved that God exists. I put on my atheistic blinders, and they really did work!

One day, I woke up and realized that I didn't like where the road was taking me, so I decided to turn around and go the other way. It has been a slow recovery. I took years to dig that pit and crawl into it. So, it has taken me a few years to crawl back out of it.

I know for a fact that Kevin Lackey and my other atheist friends can crawl out of the pit and find God. If I can do it, then they can do it. But, they are never going to be able to do it, until after they want to do it.

God can overcome everything and forgive everything, except for your own lack of desire to repent and find God. If you have no desire to repent and no desire to find God, then there is absolutely nothing that God (or any of the rest of us) can do to help you. Them's the rules!

God will force no man to repent. God will force no man to like Him. And, God will force no man into Heaven. God can't get past your lack of desire. If you don't want His mercy, love, grace, and salvation, He's not going to force you to take it.

One day, I had to decide for myself that I was going to try to become God's advocate, instead of the Devil's Advocate. I had to make that conscious and deliberate choice for myself. Nobody else could to that for me.

Since Kevin sincerely loves philosophical debate, I encourage him to try a thought experiment. Change teams. From now on, try to find ways to defend and prove the existence of God. That's what I did. That's what I did!

I was interacting with LDS Apostates online, and even though I was no longer LDS in my heart or soul, I could see that the LDS Apostates were lying and that they had never read any of the LDS Scriptures, or if they had read them didn't understand them. I started correcting their errors. After a while, I slowly found my way onto God's team and found myself as one of God's advocates. From there, my testimony of the LDS Church and the witnesses or inspiration from God began to increase and multiply.

If you are really serious about finding God, then change teams and try to become God's Advocate. Try to create interesting and convincing philosophical proofs of God's existence, if you like philosophy. If you like science, then go out and discover all of the scientific proofs of God's existence that you can find. If you like religion or spiritual stories, then dig into the Book of Mormon, D&C, Bible, and Pearl of Great Price. There is no limit to what you can do and what you can find, once you have changed teams and become one of God's advocates!

Isaiah
Posts: 111

Re: SPECIAL PLEADINGS

Post#9 » Wed Nov 04, 2015 8:06 am

Kevin Lackey wrote:

Begging the question - That any of the books of Scripture that you reference are actually from god.
Begging the question - That god actually exists and reveals himself to man.
Confirmation Bias - Towards Abrahamic religions, and lds theology.
Circular Reasoning - That god exists and therefore justifies the exception, any more than any other thing we can posit.
Argument from ignorance - That no religions outside of the Abrahamic tradition have "revealed" scripture or gods that have revealed themselves to man.

I could go on, but you get the gist.


Whether he meant to do so or not, Kevin revealed a very important and essential principle to us.

Every dedicated and true theist, theologian, religious person, and believer has to "beg the question". They have to start with the assumption and conclude that God does exist, that God is knowable, and that God is findabe before God will start to reveal Himself to them. Those are the rules or the conditions that God Himself has set up for us to follow.

Kevin is calling it, "begging the question". Theists and the believers call it "taking a leap of faith". It's the same thing.

You have to be willing to take that leap of faith, conclude beforehand that God really does exist and is truly findable, before God will trust you with His revelations and insights. You have to trust God, believe in God, and have faith in God before you can actually find God. God uses this as a filtering process to keep the wicked, the sinful, the unbelievers, and the agnostic philosophers out of His Kingdom and out of His Church. It works. These people deliberately keep themselves out of God's Kingdom and out of The Church of Jesus Christ.

In order to find God and have Him revealed to you personally, you have to assume beforehand that the Book of Mormon and the other LDS scriptures are actually from God. You also have to assume beforehand that God actually exists and will actually reveal Himself to you. You deliberately have to give evidence for God greater weight and value and priority over evidence against God. You have to develop a bias towards God, before you can find Him and before He will reveal Himself to you. You truly do have to jump to the conclusion that God exists and that therefore His existence justifies any exceptions that the skeptics and philosophers might throw at you.

You have to beg the question, and keep begging the question, day in and day out, before God will open up to you and start to reveal Himself directly to you. It's a decision. It's a choice. And, it's a choice that only you can make for yourself.

In our every word and deed, we reveal to ourselves and to the world what we want most. Kevin, here, has revealed to all of us what he wants most. That much is clear. From Kevin's input we can clearly see that he, too, is begging the question and jumping straight to the conclusion that God does not exist. Kevin is also apparently reaping the rewards of that decision or choice.

Isaiah
Posts: 111

Re: SPECIAL PLEADINGS

Post#10 » Wed Nov 04, 2015 8:15 am

Wikipedia:

Begging the question (petitio principii) – providing what is essentially the conclusion of the argument as a premise.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies

What Kevin calls "begging the question" is what the scientists call hypothesizing or forming a hypothesis. The scientists have to start with the conclusion that their hypothesis is right, and then they have to go out and find premises or proofs to support their hypothesis or their conclusion. It's what they do. You can do the very exact same thing in your search for God.

It's only logical.

Return to “Proof of God”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

cron