- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
SilentDawning wrote:
By the way Cwald, we may have some divergence of opinion here, but know that I appreciate your comments and look for them when there is a thread started that you participate in, and in which I’m interested. Along with Candice’s comments. You are both intelligent and thoughtful people, and I appreciate your posts.
It has been a good discussion, and I have no problems with what you have said, with your personal beliefs, with your responses to my responses, and that we respectfully disagree on this issue. None at all. It’s why I drifted to this site instead of some of the others. I don’t KNOW anything, I do have a few opinions – and occasionally I need to vent – but I have no interest in pushing what I “believe” on anybody else. I think that is kind of how most folk here look at it.
If the spirit was the ultimate determiner of truth then everyone would get exactly the same answer to every question and be lead in exactly the same path. Since this does not happen it leaves us two possibilities 1. It is not the spirit speaking but our own minds conjuring up what ever we need at the moment.
2. There is no absolute truth and the spirit confirms the truth of all things. Mormon, Catholic, Buddhist, etc.
I choose #2.
This has been an interesting topic. I found a flaw in one of Silent’s arguments (though no flaw in his character, heh). He mentioned (I’m summarizing and apologize if I didn’t get it quite right but I’m often lazy and don’t like to fish for quotations) that it would not be fair or just for reason and logic to be the primary mechanisms to discover truth because some people just don’t have as much in the brains department, and that God wouldn’t do that to dummies because he loves all of us, everyone. This argument supposes variation in this thing we call intelligence, which is easily defended by the volumes of data showing that intelligence is normally distributed in a bell-shaped pattern. Most are average, some are really low and some are really high. Same with reading ability. Same with height. Same with weight. Same with pants sizes. Same with athleticism. Same with other things like “motivation”, “emotional intelligence”, “altruism”. Same with… spiritual intuitiveness? Hmm. That would only make sense, right.
So, would a just God make spiritual confirmation the ONLY mechanism to discover truth when obviously there are some who are naturally better at it than others and some who may never “get” it? But wait, a person can increase their spiritual awareness through prayer, fasting, exercising faith, etc. Yet, a person can also increase their logic, reasoning, and understanding through education, reading, and study. Would God give us only ONE mechanism? By the mouths of two or three witnesses shall truth be established. Maybe the witnesses are spiritual, intellectual, and … intuition? Experience?
IF there is truth to be uncovered, I believe that God requires and expects us to obtain it or understand it by as many modalities as we can. To me, that only makes sense.
It’s the “truth” part that seems slippery to me.
Cnsl1 wrote:
So, would a just God make spiritual confirmation the ONLY mechanism to discover truth when obviously there are some who are naturally better at it than others and some who may never “get” it? But wait, a person can increase their spiritual awareness through prayer, fasting, exercising faith, etc. Yet, a person can also increase their logic, reasoning, and understanding through education, reading, and study. Would God give us only ONE mechanism? By the mouths of two or three witnesses shall truth be established. Maybe the witnesses are spiritual, intellectual, and … intuition? Experience?IF there is truth to be uncovered, I believe that God requires and expects us to obtain it or understand it by as many modalities as we can. To me, that only makes sense.
It’s the “truth” part that seems slippery to me.
I really like this and believe it. I recall a time when my husband was having problems with dealing with people at work. He is mostly a logic man and could not understand why his excellent reasoning with co-workers was not working. So, he started praying about it. That week-end we had gone to Nauvoo and he went to this gift shop and bought this large metal puzzle that I thought was way to expensive. But, he likes puzzles and worked all night on this one. This large metal puzzle had a piece that was heart-shaped. In order to solve this puzzle he had to work that heart-shaped piece all evening and finally got it off. When he did, it finally came to him that the way to deal with his co-workers-Through the heart!! He began to understand this quote:
“People will forget what you say, they will never forget how you made them feel.”
God gave my husband his answer through a means (a puzzle) that he could understand. He started realizing then how important the heart and emotions are when dealing with people.
Cadence wrote:If the spirit was the ultimate determiner of truth then everyone would get exactly the same answer to every question and be lead in exactly the same path. Since this does not happen it leaves us two possibilities
1. It is not the spirit speaking but our own minds conjuring up what ever we need at the moment.
2. There is no absolute truth and the spirit confirms the truth of all things. Mormon, Catholic, Buddhist, etc.
I choose #2.
We see through a glass darkly in this life. Perhaps the spirit speaks the same truth to all, but we have to interpret it…leading to the variation by person.Cadence wrote:If the spirit was the ultimate determiner of truth then everyone would get exactly the same answer to every question and be lead in exactly the same path. Since this does not happen it leaves us two possibilities
1. It is not the spirit speaking but our own minds conjuring up what ever we need at the moment.
2. There is no absolute truth and the spirit confirms the truth of all things. Mormon, Catholic, Buddhist, etc.
I choose #2.
Cadence — the part of my argument that I don’t see being answered yet is this — my question was highly specific. I listened, and then, the electrifying experience came to me. To me, the small gap in time between the question and the answer supports the idea that the “answer” was indeed and answer to the question. It wasn’t some dream that happened two days later, or some sudden sparing of my life in a car accident a couple days later — upon which any interpretaion could be thrown. It was a question, and then an immeidate answer. This to me leaves room for very little interpretation. Now, if I said I prayed today, and then two days later I was driving in my car and felt all warm and fuzzy, then I think you might have a case. It might’ve been anything that caused it — such as the beauty of the accidental surroundings in which I found myself. Or perhaps something sentimental I was thinking about.
But in my own case, it was a direct response to a direct question.
Now, regarding the Buddhists and others — I believe that if you asked them “Did you ask specifically if Buddhism is true?” — They would probably say No. They would cite experiences that came as the result of pursuing that philosophy, or Pavlovian experiences where they felt the Spirit while experiencing some aspect of their religion. Then, they jumped to the conclusion their Church was the right one.
I have found one of the hardest things for man/woman to do is to ask that question, specifically, to know whether this whole thing we call Mormonism is in fact true. So many refuse to do it = they think their religion is “true by association”, without setting up the direct question and listening for an answer formula.
By the way, I don’t find these rebuttals offensive from anyone by the way. I hope you don’t find my continued rebuttals offensive either. I’ve noticed that when you get past a couple rebuttals in other online discussion forums, people start getting angry, and sometimes the thread gets closed. I have no animosity here, and welcome your thoughts going forward. And even if you or I ended up changing our minds, that’s OK.
SilentDawning wrote:Cadence — the part of my argument that I don’t see being answered yet is this — my question was highly specific. I listened, and then, the electrifying experience came to me. To me, the small gap in time between the question and the answer supports the idea that the “answer” was indeed and answer to the question. It wasn’t some dream that happened two days later, or some sudden sparing of my life in a car accident a couple days later — upon which any interpretation could be thrown. It was a question, and then an immediate answer. This to me leaves room for very little interpretation. Now, if I said I prayed today, and then two days later I was driving in my car and felt all warm and fuzzy, then I think you might have a case. It might’ve been anything that caused it — such as the beauty of the accidental surroundings in which I found myself. Or perhaps something sentimental I was thinking about.
But in my own case, it was a direct response to a direct question.
Now, regarding the Buddhists and others — I believe that if you asked them “Did you ask specifically if Buddhism is true?” — They would probably say No. They would cite experiences that came as the result of pursuing that philosophy, or Pavlovian experiences where they felt the Spirit while experiencing some aspect of their religion. Then, they jumped to the conclusion their Church was the right one.
Lets me see, you are associating elapsed time with how accurate the spiritual interpretation is. I am not sure from a logical perspective that really makes any difference. I have always understood God answers prayers on his own time. Because a very short time elapsed I do not think that gives any more validity to the argument that it is the spirit. I would be much more inclined to validate the experience by what and how the answer was received as opposed to how quickly it came. It is not to say your experience is not spiritual, I have no way of knowing that. I just know from personal experience and taking a critical viewpoint of others it can not be God telling everyone what they claim. There are to many contradictions with what everyone claims the spirit told them.
As far as people asking specific questions about the truthfulness of their religion I am positive many have and many would say their religion is true. Many people that have followed religious tyrants would tell you they were told that the specific leader or church they were following was true. Yet it turns out they are mislead at times.
Ultimately there is no way to verify spiritual experiences from a logical viewpoint. To really validate something it has to be able to be replicated at any time. Since we are dealing with the metaphysical with things of the spit we are at the whims of that spirit we choose to follow. We can not replicate the experience tomorrow or the next day. It is a matter of faith, do you believe or do you not. Some choose to believe and others like me look for validation. I think it is a personal decision and process we all must go through. My only gripe is when someone will put aside empirical evidence, something that is tangible and verifiable, in place of a warm fuzzy, which in itself is perfectly fine with me, but then claim you are an apostate because you will not do the same is annoying.
Quote:I think it is a personal decision and process we all must go through. My only gripe is when someone will put aside empirical evidence, something that is tangible and verifiable, in place of a warm fuzzy, which in itself is perfectly fine with me, but then claim you are an apostate because you will not do the same is annoying.
Hopefully I’m not creating that perception of intolerance for your views. I respect the place you’re at, and have been interested in hearing your perceptions of my own interpretation of what I’ve come to believe, and why.
However, I do believe that time elapsed between question and answer does carry some validity — just as pulling the trigger on a gun immediately propels a bullet. The probability of some other force propelling the bullet, other than pulling the trigger, goes down dramatically due to the immediacy of the response from the trigger pull.
However, I realize we aren’t talking about triggers and firings here, and we are talking about probabilities. We’re talking about spiritual matters, and really, they just ain’t clear. I’ve often debated why, and I think it may well be because the lack of clarity in spiritual matters gives God wiggle room to save souls who don’t accept the gospel in this life. If everyone knew for sure, with scientific and objective evidence what the truth is, he would have to be more punitive when they don’t take advantage of that truth if it was presented in glaring, scientific clarity.
In delaying the clarity of truth to the afterlife, when we see our spirits ARE eternal, that there IS spirit world, that there IS a resurrection, many may well accept the gospel there — with little accountability for their lack of commitment in this life due to the unreliable transmission of truth. So the ambiguity of truth in this life spares God of having to condemn those who don’t necessarily embrace it; there will be yet another opportunity in the next life, when there is more evidence to support the concept fo the gospel.
Cadence wrote:If the spirit was the ultimate determiner of truth then everyone would get exactly the same answer to every question and be lead in exactly the same path. Since this does not happen it leaves us two possibilities
1. It is not the spirit speaking but our own minds conjuring up what ever we need at the moment.
2. There is no absolute truth and the spirit confirms the truth of all things. Mormon, Catholic, Buddhist, etc.
I choose #2.
Cadence, I love how firmly reliant you are in the secularist/scientific world-view, and I truly mean no disrespect thereby.It’s my opinion that our minds are not rational, and every logical reasoning process begins with postulates that we basically pull out of a hat, particularly when the subject is something not objectively verifiable. SilentDawning has made some excellent comments along these lines already.
I am curious about the postulates you stated for the logic train that resulted in your leading sentence above. Perhaps we could discuss them? Reason being, I find it difficult to agree with your conclusion. Of course you can assert it as flat-out truth, but I’m struggling with it.
I believe both #1 and #2 are accurate enough, though I think #1 is worded a bit weakly and I think #2 is limited to the horizons of the secularist viewpoint.
I think irrationality is key to understanding life, the universe and everything. Where would we be without Pi, Phi, or e?
HiJolly
cwald wrote:
I just don’t trust the “spirit” – asI believe it works on what we have already been programed to believe and our experiences make us bias to those emotional feelingsWell, I don’t really have much wisdom, but that’s never kept me from commenting so far….
😆 Anyway, I agree with you ’bout our minds and programming and bias. I think this is why having “clean hands” (personal belief that we are ‘worthy’) and “pure heart” (integrity) are so critical, as the Psalmist says.
http://scriptures.lds.org/en/ps/24/3-5#3 It also explains how someone as ‘evil’ as Aleister Crowley could do some of the things he did. It’s relative to what the mind believes — I mean REALLY believes.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aleister_Crowley cwald wrote:Well, one more thing first – I think it all comes down to what that word “true” means. I stay LDS because i believe the church is “true” – but that probably means something different for me than perhaps it means for another. I am a buffet mormon and I don’t apologize for it and I don’t feel guilty about it because I “THINK” I understand what the spirit means when it told me that “the church was true.” It is a tough, deep spiritual concept that one must search and find for oneself – its not to be had in SS or BRM Mormon Doctrine – IMO.
I agree. I think the Church is true like an arrow is true — straight and useful, fully functional. That’s the best way I can describe it.HiJolly
SilentDawning wrote:Why are these spiritual experiences not enough to keep myself, or others with similar confirmations, enthusiastic and willing to serve wherever we’re asked to serve?
In my opinion? It’s because of the ‘natural man’, whose heart is untrue. I think that the point of much of the spiritual path is to overcome that state of being, to ascend to something more constant, more divine. That, and to have joy in this life. Which is also an aspect of the Divine…
SilentDawning wrote:That’s a scary thought which rocks central beliefs. Believe me, if I could be a member of a different Church, believing wholeheartedly God wanted me to be there, it would be a relief sometimes. The tithing, time commitment, and feeling that I’m never ever doing enough….my house would be paid off, etcetera as most Church don’t teach “the sacrifice of all things being necessary to produce faith enough for salvation”.
Yes, indeed. Many of our beliefs need to be rocked. I hope you will read my intro:
http://forum.staylds.com/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=174 SilentDawning wrote:Somehow, I can’t accept that the Lord would tell me to join this Church if it was full of falsehoods, such as an erroneous claim it was the only true and living Church, the statement that turning altogether away from the Priesthood means no forgiveness of sins, the claim of His appearing to Joseph Smith and telling him none of the other churches were correct…..I can’t phathom why a just and loving God would tell someone to align themselves with such extensive untruths. And how can a Church like this be a church blessed by God with such outright deceptions such as that…
I think you’re right, God didn’t tell you anything wrong. But so many times we put more into God’s mouth than we really ought to!
SilentDawning wrote:Quote:“So my opinion is we HAVE to change the entire focus and way we view the church.”
Question — what is the new focus you’re talking about?
I think it’s kinda like this. Remember back when you were only 5 or 6 years old? At that age, I thought my dad was the best, strongest, smartest, most powerful man on the earth. I really believed it. I would actually come to blows with other kids who didn’t agree with me.
😳 Later as time went on, I found out more and more the real man that he is. And it was not a ‘cheapening’ or ‘demeaning’ of who he used to be in my mind, nor did I love him any less. In fact, as I got older, got married, had kids (and now grandkids), I understood the REAL dad better and better as he truly, really is. And he’s awesome, flaws and all. I *understand* him so much better, now. And I love him so much more — though at the age of 6 I thought I couldn’t love him any more than I already did.
That’s a new focus. A really useful, special new focus. A beautiful thing. To me, my understanding of the Church is like that.
SilentDawning wrote:Also, are you suggesting the Lord has so many different Churches to serve the needs of a diverse group of people on earth? That there really is one universal church in the end?
According to the Book of Mormon, there are only two churches, ultimately. I personally believe that there is no better church in the world than the LDS Church. For me. I also believe that all spiritual paths (“the church of the Lamb of God”) all feed into the Church of the Firstborn. Trust me, there’s a lot that goes into that opinion.
HiJolly
SilentDawning wrote:Quote:I think it is a personal decision and process we all must go through. My only gripe is when someone will put aside empirical evidence, something that is tangible and verifiable, in place of a warm fuzzy, which in itself is perfectly fine with me, but then claim you are an apostate because you will not do the same is annoying.
Hopefully I’m not creating that perception of intolerance for your views. I respect the place you’re at, and have been interested in hearing your perceptions of my own interpretation of what I’ve come to believe, and why.
I do not think you are intolerant at all. Besides it is very difficult to offend me.
SilentDawning wrote:However, I do believe that time elapsed between question and answer does carry some validity — just as pulling the trigger on a gun immediately propels a bullet. The probability of some other force propelling the bullet, other than pulling the trigger, goes down dramatically due to the immediacy of the response from the trigger pull.
mmm… I guess I would say your brain can come up with answers in a split second as easily as an hour or two. But again I would not discount your experience. I just believe the brain can do funny things to you. It can make anything seem very real at times.
SilentDawning wrote:However, I realize we aren’t talking about triggers and firings here, and we are talking about probabilities. We’re talking about spiritual matters, and really, they just ain’t clear. I’ve often debated why, and I think it may well be because the lack of clarity in spiritual matters gives God wiggle room to save souls who don’t accept the gospel in this life. If everyone knew for sure, with scientific and objective evidence what the truth is, he would have to be more punitive when they don’t take advantage of that truth if it was presented in glaring, scientific clarity.
Lack of clarity in spiritual matters? Now I am going to get myself in trouble. You are coming from the point of view that God is speaking and it is just a matter of us understanding what he is saying. First you need to be able to accept that god does not speak and then see if he does. This is why individuals find the workings of God in small occurrences. The assumption is he is there and speaking to me so it is just a matter of me hearing him. We then see God in the smallest of coincidence because we have been told he is always there. This has been our conditioning since we were young. Personally I think he is there, but I think he says very little. It is for us to work it out in this life. Again this is just my belief based on the evidence and observations I have made in my life. I really do not know for sure, I just have what I see before me.
HiJolly wrote:Cadence wrote:If the spirit was the ultimate determiner of truth then everyone would get exactly the same answer to every question and be lead in exactly the same path. Since this does not happen it leaves us two possibilities
1. It is not the spirit speaking but our own minds conjuring up what ever we need at the moment.
2. There is no absolute truth and the spirit confirms the truth of all things. Mormon, Catholic, Buddhist, etc.
I choose #2.
Cadence, I love how firmly reliant you are in the secularist/scientific world-view, and I truly mean no disrespect thereby.It’s my opinion that our minds are not rational, and every logical reasoning process begins with postulates that we basically pull out of a hat, particularly when the subject is something not objectively verifiable. SilentDawning has made some excellent comments along these lines already. HiJolly
Never thought of myself as a secularist. To much liberal thought goes along with the term for me personally. I just believe you go with the evidence and observation, you follow the path that has proven results regardless of ideology. So I guess I do lean to the scientific.
HiJolly wrote:I am curious about the postulates you stated for the logic train that resulted in your leading sentence above. Perhaps we could discuss them? Reason being, I find it difficult to agree with your conclusion. Of course you can assert it as flat-out truth, but I’m struggling with it. HiJolly
No such thing as flat out truth. I was just trying to point out if there is one truth and God speaks only the truth then it seems logical that he would speak exactly the same to everyone and everyone would get the same answer. So are there varying degrees of truth which accounts for all the varying theology’s or is God not speaking and we make it all up. Very black and white approach I know.
HiJolly wrote:I believe both #1 and #2 are accurate enough, though I think #1 is worded a bit weakly and I think #2 is limited to the horizons of the secularist viewpoint. HiJolly
Again my very black and white approach. I am not very good at nuance.
Cadence wrote:[
No such thing as flat out truth. I was just trying to point out if there is one truth and God speaks only the truth then it seems logical that he would speak exactly the same to everyone and everyone would get the same answer. So are their varying degrees of truth which accounts for all the varying theology’s or is God not speaking and we make it all up.
My “jump in” here is that I like this line of thinking. I think it seems clear that since there are SOOO many people claiming they have been told by “God,” or “Spirit” such and such…and that the message is so contradictory, that I too take the approach that “spiritual feelings” for me are just that —
spiritual feelings. If I try to give it meaning beyond that, I risk interpreting it wrong because there are so many variables. And I’m sorry (to those this might offend), but I find the attitude of “my spiritual witness is the right one and yours is wrong because it contradicts mine,” quite arrogant and naive.
But that’s just me…
😆 
Cadence wrote:If the spirit was the ultimate determiner of truth then everyone would get exactly the same answer to every question and be lead in exactly the same path. Since this does not happen it leaves us two possibilities
1. It is not the spirit speaking but our own minds conjuring up what ever we need at the moment.
2. There is no absolute truth and the spirit confirms the truth of all things. Mormon, Catholic, Buddhist, etc.
I choose #2.
I personally see this as very straight forward and simple to understand. I agree with the premise.
SilentDawning wrote:…But in my own case, it was a direct response to a direct question…Now, regarding the Buddhists and others — I believe that if you asked them “Did you ask specifically if Buddhism is true?” — They would probably say No. They would cite experiences that came as the result of pursuing that philosophy, or Pavlovian experiences where they felt the Spirit while experiencing some aspect of their religion. Then, they jumped to the conclusion their Church was the right one.
My acquaintances who are not LDS have prayed to know if there religion was true and if they belong to the “true” church” and they had a spiritual confirmation of “YES”. How do I know they have prayed and asked and had a spiritual experience? Because I have
asked them about itand they have told me so. I believe them. I would no sooner discount their spiritual experience and spiritual witness of truth than I would any faithful LDS member. It is that simple to me. I do not believe we have a monopoly on the spirit, and (wait for it) I don’t believe we have a monopoly on “the Truth” – regardless of what our church leaders may say or what one may interpret them as having said. I DON’T BELIEVE IT. I don’t believe THE CHURCH teaches this anyway – in fact I’m not sure THE CHURCH believesthat we are the ONE AND ONLY TRUE CHURCH and the only pathway to heaven. Sure, 80% of the faithful LDS members would say so, and you will here it every week in church service— but does that make it so?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.