New Mormonism

[Anonymous]

nibbler wrote:

Is the function of the holy ghost to tell someone what is right for them (and for a particular moment in time I might add) or is it to tell someone what is right for everyone?

Let’s say that I receive a clear revelation that I should avoid eating peanuts. Unbeknownst to me and all of humanity I am the first person in history to have a peanut allergy (for the sake of argument).

Do I evangelize my revelation, tell everyone far and wide that eating peanuts is wrong? My revelation might be true for some small minority but for most everyone else my revelation does not apply.

Am I deluded because I’ve decided to avoid eating peanuts even in the face of millions of people eating peanuts to no ill effect? No, the revelation was personal and in my case it was the very voice that I needed to hear.

That brings up an interesting train of thought, Nibbler. Considering the accounts of the first vision, it seems pretty clear that Joseph actually went to ask for forgiveness of his sins. The part about asking which church to join seems to have been added later, sort of as 20/20 hindsight, although he may well have had that question. The assurance that his sins were forgiven certainly is an individual thing. All of us can ask that and some of will probably receive some sort of assurance/revelation that such is the case (but probably not of the vision magnitude Joseph did). So what about which church to join? Was that just for Joseph? That he should join none of them? (He does specify “I should join none of them.”) Expanding on that a bit, many of the revelations in Doctrine and Covenants are for specific individuals. Does Oliver Cowdery’s burning in the bosom mean that applies to everyone or just Oliver? I can’t say that I have ever felt what I would call a burning in the bosom or a stupor of thought, but I have heard others say they have.

I am inclined to believe that individual revelations are just that – individual – and not intended for others. Hence, you and I could receive very different revelations and both be totally right – even if those revelations conflict. Likewise, you can receive a revelation I don’t receive (such as the Book of Mormon being true) and just because God revealed it to you does not mean He will reveal it to me (for whatever reason). This all fits with your peanut analogy.

As a side note, when it was proposed that the Doctrine and Covenants be made smaller, the revelations that were to be removed all dealt with individuals as it was felt that those revelations were specifically for those individuals and not the church as a whole.

[Anonymous]

DarkJedi wrote:

In answer to your other question (and not speaking for DA), I’m not sure. I agree with DA that feelings are not reliable and are too easily confused with our own feelings/emotions and confirmation bias, especially when it is only one individual involved. Frankly I’m not sure the Holy Ghost can or does actually witness of truth, and if it does I’m not sure how and how we’re supposed to know. But I respect that you believe you have had a spiritual witness – you may believe or not believe whatever you like for whatever reason you like.

My experiences weren’t just feelings – they included knowledge – and, in some cases, they involved other people receiving the same knowledge independently and in still other cases, I received objective evidence that God was directly involved in my life and rewarding me for taking a leap of faith. I think it’s condescending to tell someone they can “believe” they witnessed something when they actually witnessed it. It’s like me telling you I saw a car wreck yesterday (which I actually did yesterday) and you replying, “you can believe you saw it for whatever reason you like.” It’s like you’re projecting your own experiences onto me.

[Anonymous]

Roy wrote:

rcronk wrote:

Do you believe the Holy Ghost can confirm truth such that a person can know something is true?

Lowell Bennion’s books suggest a form of compartmentalizing. Spiritual truth and value is of a different sort then empirical scientific truth. One does not pray to know if the answers that they submitted to a math assignment are true. Praying about whether or not a book is historically true would be trying to apply spiritual tools to find historical truth. However praying to know if a certain path or book or teaching is good for you and helps you to be a better person and/or if God would approve is applying spiritual tools to reach spiritual truth.

I disagree with this because of my experiences. I’m a software engineer and I receive many non-spiritual answers to difficult questions dealing with programming. It says the Holy Ghost will reveal the truth of _all things_. I have experimented with that scriptural assertion and found it to be true with many physical world realities. And the answer you got to marry your wife wasn’t the answer to the question “should anyone marry this woman” but “should I marry this woman.” So context matters. When someone asks if the Book of Mormon is true, that’s not dependent upon the context of the person asking it. That truth exists independent of who is asking the question. The Book of Mormon is either what it claims to be or it isn’t. If one person receives a witness of that, it means that person now knows that piece of truth and if they find value in that truth, they might want to share what they witnessed with others. That’s normal. If I see a fire in one part of a building, I have witnessed truth that others haven’t witnessed yet. I will probably run to the other side of the building and tell my friends that they need to get out because the building’s on fire. They might trust me enough to go find out for themselves or they might trust me more and just leave, but it doesn’t mean that the truth I witnessed is only applicable to me or that I just “believe” I witnessed the fire.

[Anonymous]

nibbler wrote:

Is the function of the holy ghost to tell someone what is right for them (and for a particular moment in time I might add) or is it to tell someone what is right for everyone?

Let’s say that I receive a clear revelation that I should avoid eating peanuts. Unbeknownst to me and all of humanity I am the first person in history to have a peanut allergy (for the sake of argument).

Do I evangelize my revelation, tell everyone far and wide that eating peanuts is wrong? My revelation might be true for some small minority but for most everyone else my revelation does not apply.

Am I deluded because I’ve decided to avoid eating peanuts even in the face of millions of people eating peanuts to no ill effect? No, the revelation was personal and in my case it was the very voice that I needed to hear.

Context matters. Details matter. Humans overreach and jump to judgements rather than just describing exactly what happened. “I heard a bomb explode!” Instead of “I heard a loud noise!” For example. If the revelation includes you in it, then you can share it that way. If the revelation doesn’t include you, like “The Book of Mormon is the word of God.” Or “The Book of Mormon was translated by the power of God.” Then that just stands on its own.

[Anonymous]

churchistrue wrote:

rcronk wrote:

Interesting conversation. So what if someone claims to have received a witness of some of these fundamental truth claims of the LDS church after doing their own studying? Are we ok with that stance or do we think they’re deluded or what? Isn’t that the guidance that the Book of Mormon, Bible, and D&C give?

I would never personally say that person is deluded.

But when people say things like, “feelings can be deceptive” to someone witnessing of a revelation they received, that’s saying that they are deluded, misguided, without having any evidence whatsoever of that assertion of delusion.

[Anonymous]

amateurparent wrote:

Quote:

rcronk wrote:

Interesting conversation. So what if someone claims to have received a witness of some of these fundamental truth claims of the LDS church after doing their own studying? Are we ok with that stance or do we think they’re deluded or what? Isn’t that the guidance that the Book of Mormon, Bible, and D&C give?

Both my brothers and I will be together this weekend.

Older brother served a mission, married in the temple. Prayed and studied about the church. He is in the process of converting to Judaism. He questions himself and his belief system constantly.

Younger brother also studied and prayed about the church. He feels he has been give a witness of truth of the gospel. He prays daily and has become very sure of his own righteousness in all actions. He has wondered why he hasn’t been made bishop yet. He feels that he has a lot of valuable insight that could help other people live more righteously.

I never understood the term Self Righteous until dealing with younger brother. Older brother is so much easier to be around. I’m not saying Younger Brother is wrong in his belief and faith, he just doesn’t recognize any path other than his own. I do wish he was a little less sure of every answer.

We each have our own journey. God gives us different answers. Not everyone reads the BOM, prays about it, and gets the same answer. That is the truth that doesn’t get talked about. It is a truth that should make us tread very softly around other beliefs. God is in their lives too. God speaks to all his children.

I read and prayed about the Book of Mormon while in high school and got no answer. I went through more of life and read and prayed later on and got several powerful answers. There’s more than just the truthfulness of the item in question as input for receiving an answer about it. According to the recipe, sincerity, faith, desire, and God’s will (receiving the answer at the best time to maximize progression) also act as inputs to that answer and when all are aligned, the answer comes. I’ve witnessed it hundreds of times in multiple settings – dozens of which I witnessed within myself. It might be just as prideful and self-righteous to judge your younger brother the way you are. Maybe not. I know nothing of the situation or your or his heart so I can’t say, but it’s a possibility. I am prideful and self-righteous a lot because of my own weakness, fear, and pain.

[Anonymous]

rcronk wrote:

DarkJedi wrote:

In answer to your other question (and not speaking for DA), I’m not sure. I agree with DA that feelings are not reliable and are too easily confused with our own feelings/emotions and confirmation bias, especially when it is only one individual involved. Frankly I’m not sure the Holy Ghost can or does actually witness of truth, and if it does I’m not sure how and how we’re supposed to know. But I respect that you believe you have had a spiritual witness – you may believe or not believe whatever you like for whatever reason you like.

My experiences weren’t just feelings – they included knowledge – and, in some cases, they involved other people receiving the same knowledge independently and in still other cases, I received objective evidence that God was directly involved in my life and rewarding me for taking a leap of faith. I think it’s condescending to tell someone they can “believe” they witnessed something when they actually witnessed it. It’s like me telling you I saw a car wreck yesterday (which I actually did yesterday) and you replying, “you can believe you saw it for whatever reason you like.” It’s like you’re projecting your own experiences onto me.

I guess I’m not sure what you’re referring to as “knowledge” here. I have often heard the witness of the Holy Ghost referred to as a feeling or an impression, and have also read on rare occasion that people heard an actual voice. This is different, of course, from the first vision and angel Moroni type of revelations described by Joseph Smith. I can’t say that I have every heard anyone else describe a revelation through the Holy Ghost as a “knowledge” and I can’t say that I have ever experienced anything more than a feeling (although sometimes a very intense feeling). Can you more fully describe what you mean?

And, no, seeing an accident with your eyes and hearing it with your ears is not the same as feeling it. I also saw an accident yesterday – I didn’t feel it or feel impressed there was an accident. Other people also saw the accident. We all believe because we saw it. None of us felt it that I am aware of. My wife believes there as an accident because I told her I saw it – but were I a pathological liar she may not believe me, her choice. I can’t choose to believe or not believe the accident, I saw it – but I don’t have to believe you did.

[Anonymous]

DevilsAdvocate wrote:

I believe in God but I’m not sure what exactly to think about the Holy Ghost at this point. Even if he actually exists more or less as described in the Bible it still makes more sense to me that he would be much bigger and more important than Mormonism because the idea that God the father, Jesus, the Holy Ghost, Satan, and countless angels and demons would theoretically be so concerned about whether or not people believe in one relatively insignificant religious sect that represents less than 2% of the people (that self-identify as LDS) in the US and much less than 1% of the population worldwide seems like a colossal waste of life experience and a poorly designed arrangement overall. I actually do believe that personal revelations are possible mostly because of the number of accounts I have heard where people appeared to know things that would have been very unlikely for them to guess entirely on their own. However, I definitely don’t believe revelations like this will typically favor Mormonism in a unique way and I don’t believe they will happen for everyone on demand the way Moroni’s promise implies.

The Holy Ghost interacts with all of God’s children, not just LDS people. It testifies of _all_ truth.

DevilsAdvocate wrote:

Why should people feel completely sure that any spiritual witness is a good way to know exactly what is true or not and not simply an induced emotional reaction triggered in their own mind to confirm their bias because they desperately want to believe something is true from the outset?

That question is chock full of unsupported assertions and judgements. It’s kind of insulting too. But I’m pretty abrasive myself so I take no offense.

DevilsAdvocate wrote:

What about all the Church members and investigators that sincerely pray for answers without ever receiving any? What about all the people that receive different and contradictory answers that Islam, the Catholic Church, etc. are the true path approved by God or even that the LDS Church is explicitly false? Even if especially strong warm fuzzy feelings about the LDS Church actually did come from God, the Holy Ghost, etc. in some cases that wouldn’t necessarily mean that this is the one and only true church on the face of the earth because it could simply mean that God doesn’t care that much what people believe and is happy to let them believe what they want to or even that he thinks it would be good for them to belong to the Church at that time in a way that doesn’t necessary apply to everyone in a universal way.

See my answer above regarding the inputs to getting an answer that I’ve found to be necessary. I didn’t receive an answer in high school when I prayed. Personally, I lacked just about every prerequisite for getting an answer and probably I needed to go be a heathen atheist for several years to humble me before receiving an answer when it would be best for my progression.

[Anonymous]

This time I’m speaking as a moderator. This is a place for supportive discussion to help people stay LDS because that’s what they want. It is not a place to argue or assert that one individual’s point of view is superior to any other person’s point of view regardless of how much testimony any individual has. Rcronk your posts are dangerously close to crossing a line of respect for the points of view of others who have not had the same experience you have whether you think they should have or not.

[Anonymous]

DarkJedi wrote:

I guess I’m not sure what you’re referring to as “knowledge” here. I have often heard the witness of the Holy Ghost referred to as a feeling or an impression, and have also read on rare occasion that people heard an actual voice. This is different, of course, from the first vision and angel Moroni type of revelations described by Joseph Smith. I can’t say that I have every heard anyone else describe a revelation through the Holy Ghost as a “knowledge” and I can’t say that I have ever experienced anything more than a feeling (although sometimes a very intense feeling). Can you more fully describe what you mean?

There are many examples of what the Holy Ghost can do besides it being a feeling of peace. Here’s a starting point:

“The gift of the Holy Ghost…quickens all the intellectual faculties, increases, enlarges, expands, and purifies all the natural passions and affections, and adapts them, by the gift of wisdom, to their lawful use. It inspires, develops, cultivates, and matures all the fine-toned sympathies, joys, tastes, kindred feelings, and affections of our nature. It inspires virtue, kindness, goodness, tenderness, gentleness, and charity. It develops beauty of person, form, and features. It tends to health, vigor, animation, and social feeling. It invigorates all the faculties of the physical and intellectual man. It strengthens and gives tone to the nerves. In short, it is, as it were, marrow to the bone, joy to the heart, light to the eyes, music to the ears, and life to the whole being.” – Parley P. Pratt

I have, through my own experiences, found the above description to be true.

DarkJedi wrote:

And, no, seeing an accident with your eyes and hearing it with your ears is not the same as feeling it. I also saw an accident yesterday – I didn’t feel it or feel impressed there was an accident. Other people also saw the accident. We all believe because we saw it. None of us felt it that I am aware of. My wife believes there as an accident because I told her I saw it – but were I a pathological liar she may not believe me, her choice. I can’t choose to believe or not believe the accident, I saw it – but I don’t have to believe you did.

I’m saying that my experiences with the Holy Ghost are more powerful than seeing or hearing something physically. No, you don’t have to believe me, you could instead find out for yourself if it can be more than just a peaceful feeling, firsthand. I did, and it has been life-changing.

[Anonymous]

DarkJedi wrote:

This time I’m speaking as a moderator. This is a place for supportive discussion to help people stay LDS because that’s what they want. It is not a place to argue or assert that one individual’s point of view is superior to any other person’s point of view regardless of how much testimony any individual has. Rcronk your posts are dangerously close to crossing a line of respect for the points of view of others who have not had the same experience you have whether you think they should have or not.

I’ll be careful. My experiences are just as valid as other people’s experiences, aren’t they? I’m not saying I’m right and others are wrong, I’m expressing what I’ve experienced and learned through those experiences. Others have asserted that I am a victim of confirmation bias and am deluded by my feelings simply because because I desperately want them to be true. I actually don’t care if people assert that about me because I realize they’re speaking from a position of ignorance about me and what I’ve actually experienced. I think that the experiences, respect, and warnings should go both ways.

Quote where I’m disrespecting others points of view so I can learn and improve and I will change.

[Anonymous]

Quote:

Rcronk wrote: It might be just as prideful and self-righteous to judge your younger brother the way you are. Maybe not.

In this case, the “MAYBE NOT” applies.

[Anonymous]

amateurparent wrote:

Quote:

Rcronk wrote: It might be just as prideful and self-righteous to judge your younger brother the way you are. Maybe not.

In this case, the “MAYBE NOT” applies.

Ok. You’re a better person than me.

[Anonymous]

Rcronk wrote:

Quote:

“Ok. You’re a better person than me.”

My DH just read the exchange and replied,

“Probably”.

Made me laugh.

[Anonymous]

amateurparent wrote:

Rcronk wrote:

Quote:

“Ok. You’re a better person than me.”

My DH just read the exchange and replied,

“Probably”.

Made me laugh.

Nice. I really am quite broken because of my travels in life, so I’m serious about you being a better person. But it’s ok because I’m working on it. Thanks for your patience while I do that in front of you all.

What’s a DH? Is there a glossary of acronyms somewhere? I’ve figured out SP and a couple others, but the rest are quite mysterious to me.

[Author]

Posts