Religious Book Exchange

[Roboramma]

rcronk, I've had some experiences that I think are similar to yours. I remember once, for instance, (I think I was nineteen at the time) when I was walking on my grandmother's land in Ontario, looking up at the sky and feeling that god was talking to me, specifically. There were no words involved, just a feeling that some message was being put across, things that I should do, and that god existed. It was an experience that lasted for about two minutes.
At the time it felt quite genuine.

But how do I go from that experience to the conclusion that god was actually talking to me?

I think this experience is really no different from any other experience in that it requires an interpretation. For instance, when I have the experience that I label, "seeing an apple" am I actually experiencing the apple? No, the light that reflects off the apple hits my retina and my brain interprets that light to be an apple. Here's the problem - its actually impossible for the brain to take that data and find the "correct" interpretation of it. Instead it works with what the most likely interpretation is based upon my experience in the world (and its in born assumptions, like the way light behaves).
But sometimes its wrong. I remember once going to a friends house and seeing a bowl of fruit, "Nice! Apples! Can I have one?" I asked walking over to them. He just laughed. When I picked one up, I saw why - it was made of plastic.

So, I don't quibble with the fact that you had a religious experience. I don't find that surprising, and while I don't know how rare it is, I've known a few other people who've told me of theirs. What I wonder about is your interpretation of your experience. How do you know that your interpretation is correct?

One way for me to find out if what I see is actually an apple is to look at it from multiple angles. But with a plastic apple that still might not work. Okay, so I touch it. Does it also feel like an apple? I can bite in to it and taste it - does it taste like an apple?
These are all different lines of evidence that i can use to determine if it is indeed an apple.
But before I can apply them I need a few things. One is to be able to actually go up to the apple to examine it. That's difficult with your experience that you label god.
The other difficulty is that I know what an apple tastes like. I've had them before. If I hadn't, but had heard of apples, I could apply my definition of an apple to my experience to see what it is, "apples are red and round and juicy and taste sweet, etc".
But what is an experience of god like?

The question reminds me of a very different point I heard Richard Dawkins make recently in a lecture. He quoted someone talking about, "why is it that everyone believed the earth was at the center of the universe and the sun revolved around it?"
"well, because that's what it looks like."
"Yes, but what would it have looked like if it had looked like the earth was going around the sun?"

Which I think is a very good point in general. But specifically to what I'm saying, the experience of the two is the same from our perspective (at least to a point) and so what we have left is our interpretation of that experience. So, again, my question is, on what do you base your interpretation of your religious experience?

 

[rcronk]

I understand and agree with your post. The thing that separates these few experiences that
I mentioned from other similar experiences is that at the moment, I just know that it is from God and it's not because of the feelings or because that's what I'm interpreting - it's like a direct connection of spirit to spirit that cannot be interpreted - it just is. To some people who believe we're just a bag of chemicals, that sounds like just a really convincing set of chemical reactions and me interpreting it as REALLY being from God - but it's different. And it's completely unprovable - which is annoying, but necessary.

I have had feelings and experiences where I've felt good or whatever and I have had the chance to interpret what that means or doesn't mean - that's fine. I think that falls into the category you speak of and that RandFan speaks of when he talks about scientific explanation of spiritual experiences. The specific events I mentioned above though were definitely something different and something that I cannot deny. It is, taking your apple experience as an example, like experiencing and comprehending the apple itself - not just the light reflected from it or its molecules interacting with my taste buds, etc.

I'm an engineer and so it drives me crazy to not know how this works or be able to lay it out as a proof for someone, but there it is. I'm stuck with it and cannot logically defend it but it is real and not interpreted.

There was even one time where I received confirmation that the Book of Mormon was the word of God. I was reading through a few passages with a baptist preacher. I felt the distinct and specific confirmation that what I was reading was the word of God and the preacher looked up at me at that same moment and said "This is the word of God." And not only did I know that it is the word of God, but I knew that she knew it too. I also knew that she knew that I knew it - it was really weird, but undeniable. It was as though the Spirit of God had connected with both of us and in so doing, had connected a part of each of us to each other. It was a cool experience and it truly is different than other feel good experiences. It could be that the Spirit of God could be involved in both kinds of experiences but could be performing different functions. Check out this quote about the gift of the Holy Spirit and its effects on people:

"An intelligent being, in the image of God, possesses every organ, attribute, sense, sympathy, affection, of will, wisdom, love, power and gift, which is possessed by God himself. But these are possessed by man in his rudimental state in a subordinate sense of the word. Or, in other words, these attributes are in embryo, and are to be gradually developed. They resemble a bud, a germ, which gradually develops into bloom, and then, by progress, produces the mature fruit after its own kind. The gift of the Holy Spirit adapts itself to all these organs or attributes. It 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 develops and invigorates all the faculties of the physical and intellectual man. It strengthens, invigorates, 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." - Elder Parley P. Pratt, Key to Theology, pp. 96, 97 (4th ed.).

Other functions of the Spirit are to comfort, to testify of truth, and to brings all things to our remembrance.

I sometimes get the feeling that most of the theism that get discussed/argued is man-made and is so limited and doesn't represent the truth about God or the bigger picture. So atheists and others knock down these man-made straw-men and then declare that God therefore no longer exists. Apparently, those who claim to have seen God or His works are quite astounded at the foolishness of men and how infinitely superior God is than we end up painting Him. I guess I'm drifting a bit now so I'll stop.

 

[RandFan]

RandFan - I do have a curiosity question for you. Specifically which parts of Mormon doctrine and commandments are you breaking now, if any? Don't worry, I'm not going to use anything you say against you in any way, I just want to understand more about your experience and this question might help me understand. Of course, you don't have to answer it if you don't want to.

No I don't mind answering but you should note that I'm simply an anecdote. Perfectly fine since I have already voluntered a good deal of my story already.

First, I would like to tell you about my brother. He came out to visit me two summers ago. He was going through a divorce and wanted to get away. I found out alot about my brother that I didn't know. He's a rebel. And an alcoholic. He's promiscious and smokes cigaretes and pot.

When my brother visited I told him that I was an atheist. He damn near died. I had served a mission and was deacon's quorom president, teachers qurom president, priests quruom president, etc., etc. I don't smoke. I've never cheated on my wife. I'm one great big square.

Here's the kicker, my brother and I argued about god and, get this, Joseph Smith. He's a true believer. A true blue Mormon (except for the drinking, smoking and womanizing). I asked him "why"? He just believes it's true. BTW, since that time I've asked a lot of my friends and family who are inactive and drink and/or smoke or whatever and they are all like my brother. I'm the only one I know of that doesn't believe in Joseph Smith.

So what exactly are my sins supposed to tell you? I drink socially a few times a month. That's it.

 

[RandFan]

I just know that it is from God and it's not because of the feelings or because that's what I'm interpreting - it's like a direct connection of spirit to spirit that cannot be interpreted - it just is.

From an epistemological stand point that doesn't make any sense. But that's fine. Let's accept that for the moment. How do you explain all of the other people who have this experience who are not Mormon? I'm not sure how much you know about the field but such experiences have been scientifically studied in quite a bit of detail and are quite real to many sincere people who have experienced them.

Putting aside my experiences for the moment, how do you know that you are different than Native America Spirit walkers/Vision Quest? From those who have practiced Transcendental Meditation and have had profound life changing experiences? From those who have had near death experiences and realized the Catholic/Protestant/Hindu/etc. Church was true. From those who were so sure they were correct that they gave their life for their belief?

You seem to be engaging in special pleading. You seem to be saying, yes, but my case is special and therefore true.

Are you familiar with Susan Blackmore? She had an out of body experience that was so real, so powerful and life changing that she spent much of her years studying the phenomenon. It turns out, Blackmore discovered, that there are rational explanations for these things that have nothing to do with god, spiritual, metaphysical or paranormal.

However,

Many of those who have experienced a vision quests know that their experience is special (real).
Many of those that have experienced an out of body experience know that their experience is special (real).
Many of those who have had an out of Body experience and met Mother Mary or Lord Vishnu know that that tehir experience is special (real).
Of course, yours IS special. Yours IS real, right?

 

[rcronk]

RandFan - I know you're just an anecdote and I appreciate your openness. So, social drinking and church attendance would be the only things different now from when you were active in the LDS church? Anything else? Origins of the church aside, did you agree with the weekly teachings of the LDS church - i.e. living the gospel/commandments, focus on the family, preparedness, golden rule, living a Christlike life, etc.? Did you run into anti-Mormon materials? What started the falling away and how did it progress? You can PM me if you feel that's more appropriate for this discussion. I just want to understand you and your experience better.

Yes, I understand that I cannot logically prove to anyone that my case is different - especially since I'm not in the shoes of others to be able to compare the two experiences. I think your assertion that I'm engaged in special pleading is a straw-man argument, since I've never said anything about these other people - how can I? I've had good spiritual experiences in non-Mormon situations - in non-denominational gatherings, over at the Hare Krishna temple (speaking of Vishnu), etc. Any time truth is discussed, the Spirit of truth can confirm it - we're all children of God and truth is truth, period. It's not a Mormon thing. And a lot of what's taught in all of these places is true. And there are broken, lay teachers in the Mormon church who sometimes teach things that aren't true and the Spirit won't be there to confirm that untruth.

All I know is what I've experienced in several situations and what the fruits of those experiences have been. So, since the fruits of your experiences are different from mine, I want to understand the differences - that's all. I will never make assertions about someone else's experiences since I have no grounds to do so, since I'm not in their shoes. I can see the fruits of their claimed experiences as evidence though.

 

[RandFan]

RandFan - I know you're just an anecdote and I appreciate your openness. So, social drinking and church attendance would be the only things different now from when you were active in the LDS church? Anything else? Origins of the church aside, did you agree with the weekly teachings of the LDS church - i.e. living the gospel/commandments, focus on the family, preparedness, golden rule, living a Christlike life, etc.? Did you run into anti-Mormon materials? What started the falling away and how did it progress? You can PM me if you feel that's more appropriate for this discussion. I just want to understand you and your experience better.

I have no problem with relating my experiences.

There really is no simple answer as to how I came to not believe. I presume that is typical of most people who stop believing.

First let me say that in many if not most respects I was true believer. That is why I went on a mission. The message of the Church was very compelling to me in many ways. I liked the idea that god was fair and would not doom people to hell for eternity simply because they were born in an area where they didn't get to hear the message. I liked the culture I liked the people. I liked many of the teaching of Christ. I liked the idea of service and caring for others especially those in need.

As to the fall, it would be impossible for me to remember everything and it would take a book to relate all of the experiences that led me to where I am today. I'll provide some key moments in my life.

When I was a kid I realized that people lie to themselves. It's a human trait. We do it all of the time. At some point I became very uneasy with self deception, it bothered me and I made a commitment to myself to not lie to myself. I wish that I could say that I was completely successful at that but I wasn't. I'm still not but I understand what self deception is and I'm capable of recognizing it and I consciously try and avoid it.

When I was in High School I was into martial arts and was a Bruce Lee fan. I learned about his philosophy and how he also eschewed self deception. It was then that I discovered something about group deception. How people will work together to perpetrate fraud (breaking boards and bricks) all the while knowing that it was just BS but not admitting to themselves or each other that they were deceiving themselves. This of course was the Emperors New clothes syndrome. I was aware of it but just not how pervasive. Do you know how pervasive it is? I'll tell you. All people do it. It's been studied to death at universities and by social scientists. It's understood at a very high degree and very precise predictions can be made based on this understanding (hypnosis is a great example).

While still in High School I was introduced to the philosophy of Ayn Rand (hence user name). Rand also understood the power of self deception. She (through her writing) helped me understand that objective means was the only way to find the truth about the material world. I had studied imperialism in school but it was Rand who helped make it real to me.

Believe it or not I did not apply this thinking to Mormonism at this time. My mind was compartmentalized. I kept a critical eye away from my religious belief. My commitment, sadly, was thwarted and I hadn't even realized how easily it had been so.

When I was on my mission two very important things happened to me (I'm only going to relate one of them here, sorry but it was too long). The first was a very odd lesson I gave to a very pleasant fellow at the park. He was a very nice person and very smart. He listened to our discussion intently and asked questions. I was absolutely certain that this was a golden contact. I was very excited and certain that he would be baptized.

After the discussion this gentleman, and he was a gentleman, began to ask questions and offer his own answerers after we gave ours. He talked about the ancient Greeks. I had always thought of them in less than glowing terms. All people who were not Jews were sinful, gentiles. He explained how it was the ancient Greeks who paved the way for modern science and philosophy. How they explored the limits of knowledge and understanding. He explained how many cultures had contributed to enlightenment. He explained epistemology and why it might be important for a person that was going to claim that he or she had the truth to understand what truth is from an epistemological POV. It sounds patronizing now but there was not a patronizing bone in that mans body. I don't know who he was. If atheism was religion then he would have been an angel. Before we parted he told my companion and I that he was an atheist. I was dumbfounded. I honestly thought atheists were perverts or criminals or sleazy types or a slick car salesman. I thought I could discern an atheist.

This was near the end of my mission and it came at a very important and opportune time for me. You see, I was trying to devise a better method to get people to listen to me. After 20 months of a mission it became quite clear to me that unless a person was open to my message then I wasn't going to get anywhere. I needed a hook. Something that would shake them to consider my message. That's all I wanted, an edge. Also there was something bothering me. I had the truth and the spirit of god. Why wasn't this manifest? Why did so many good and decent people not accept my message? Don't get me wrong, I was actually very successful as a missionary, I just didn't know why there were not more people.

So I started thinking about what the stranger had told me about knowledge and the limits of knowledge. Then it hit me like a ton of bricks. These people who were so sure that they were right, assuming that they were wrong and I was right how could they possibly know that they were wrong? A person who has truth, or, sincerely believes that he or she has the truth isn't going to consider something different. WHAT IF THAT WAS ME? How would I know?

This was the beginning of breaking down the compartment that held my religious belief. I finally opened my eyes and was willing to think skeptically and critically about Mormonism.

It took years but it was a natural progression after that. What's odd is that now that I'm an atheist it is amazing to see just how close my experience is with those who have left Catholicism or any other religion.

The mind is a powerful thing that can convince itself that it is about to get 20 virgins, or that it has seen god or angels or whatever. How can you be sure that your special experience is in fact pointing you to the truth?

BTW, the notion that well, there is truth everywhere is a double edged sword. Perhaps your experience is simply due to the fact that there is some truth to what you are experiencing. If others can be mistaken for this reason then so can you. In the end this is just your brain struggling to reconcile that which can't be reconciled. In the end this explanation doesn't begin to adequately explain why people sacrifice so much for for what they believe the truth is. What if it is you that are wrong? How would you know? You don't even know what they are experiencing. You only know the "fruits" which includes self sacrifice, life time of service and death.

RandFan

 

[rcronk]

Thanks. That helps me to understand your point of view a bit more. I understand your question "How can you be sure?" And I think I have to assume that you have not had the same experience as I have had or you wouldn't ask that question. I know that just sounds like a true believer - I get it. But the experience I had was in fact undeniably true. Until you have had such an experience, you'll always doubt if such an undeniable experience could happen. Now that could be true believer syndrome - or it might actually be true. Why reject the possibility that it might be true with no reason to reject it except for fear and assumption that since some people are strongly deceived that others might actually have an experience? It is possible - so take the risk of finding out for yourself or walk away from it because it's safer.

And yes, it is true that people can deceive themselves to the point of dying for the wrong thing - that's just taking responsibility for your own condition. We are all responsible for the sins we commit and the blinding effects of those sins. For example, the virgin-seeking terrorists at Beslan were high on morphine and other drugs to help them follow through with the whole thing. They had deceived themselves, but I'm sure that a lot of sin was involved in that self deception. I have had blinding sin in my life too - not quite as extreme though. I have deceived myself and blinding sin was involved in that deception also. Ironically, that blindness led me to atheism.

It is possible that there is a God and that He could give me a direct revelation that is outside of myself. So the strange thing to me is that becoming atheist means rejecting that whole possibility. Why limit myself and prevent myself from finding that knowledge? That's the whole point of this thread. I guess it's because people have told you that it's too risky or scary because you might deceive yourself. I guess that's true, but it seems that all things that are of any real worth involve a significant level of risk. I took the risk and it has paid off big time in my life.

Again, knowledge of God is subjective and it's designed to be that way so that one man can't prove God exists and then everyone else just relies on that one man's proof - that kind of ruins the whole point of earth life. It's a personal and individual journey. Each of us is responsible for seeking and finding our way. I choose to take the risk and I have therefore found joy beyond anything I have ever found any other way and it has made me a more generous and kind person and has helped me to see things more clearly than I ever have before.

Again, because someone says to me "you can't prove to me that you had a real experience with God" doesn't mean I walk away from it. It just means that I can't prove it. So what? I am unwilling to completely throw away the possibility just because of fear. I can only conquer self deception by facing it.

 

[RandFan]

Thanks rcronk,

I have a few observations.

First, sincere and decent people all over the world every day ask for the truth and that leads many to religions other than Mormonism. Let me share with you an anecdote. One that was influential to me. I had recently moved into a new ward while I was on my mission and was introduced to a new converts mother. Through this new member we were able to get an opportunity to present the discussions (to the mother). When we told the mother of Joseph Smith reading James 1:5. She became very excited and told us that her husband had recently left her and she had become homeless. She was sleeping in her car. Her daughter was not living with her at the time. She told us that one night she prayed to god and when she was finished she felt she should just drive so she did. After awhile she grew tired and pulled the car over to sleep.

In the morning she woke across the street from a church (not Mormon). The rest of course is history, her history. She started attending that church, gained fellowship, and found a job through a member.

She was very open about the Mormon Church and accepted that it contained truth but she could never join because she knew that god had directed her to her new life and her new church.

I was sincere all of my life. I prayed to god and asked him for truth. If we accept that god answered your prayer the way he promised in James 1:5 then we must also accept that he does not for others.

I recently finished reading V. S. Ramachandran's A Brief Tour of Human Consciousness.

Get it. Read it.

We know that there are otherwise intelligent and sincere people who are rational but who know things to be true that are demonstrably not true.

There are people who know that their birth mothers are not their birth mothers, when they see their birth mothers that is. Funny thing is, when the birth mothers call these individuals on the phone the individuals know that it is their birth mothers.

Bottom line, non empirical knowledge is demonstrably fallible. Which is why we have people dying for god and blowing up buildings in the name of god.

Parsimony dictates that your special knowledge is really not all that special. You, like everyone else with special knowledge, just think that it is.

By the way, the people who see the world the most clearly are schizophrenics. That's the truth. I know it sounds counter intuitive but there is problem in your premise. I would recomend catching up on those great old greek philosophers and watch this video. Watch part 2 also.

The Temporal Lobes and God - Part 1

 

[articulett]

RandFan - Yes, I have gained the following knowledge, the following is a partial list:

1. That God exists and is my father
2. That God Loves me and cares about me
3. That God listens to my prayers and hears every word of them
4. That Jesus Christ understands me
5. That the Book of Mormon contains the word of God and contains truth

I know that these things are true subjectively through a spiritual manifestation that is undeniable and that I can't give to you or prove in any way in and of itself other than you trying it for yourself.

I know that these things are true objectively through the change of my being into a person who is more giving, loving, patient, kind, etc. because of the knowledge I gained above.

I would expect that a logical person would not reject possibilities blindly and so therefore they would at least consider the possibility that God exists even if they cannot prove it directly.

Yes, I know this is a skeptics forum. I'm skeptical of the idea that the scientific method is the only way to acquire truth and knowledge. A man can learn that he loves his children and have no way of proving it to another man but that doesn't mean that the love he has for his children doesn't exist since it can't be proven by the scientific method.

Which book do you choose?

Read Creative Visualization... same method. Read about confirmation bias... faith and feelings may make you feel like you know truth... but people have been using these tricks for eons to make themselves believe all sorts of things. I think if you read most any book and "pray to know if it's true"--you can find "signs" and feelings leading you to believe that it is.

Some people are so convinced of their books truth that they drive airplanes into buildings for their god. I think it's problematic when your methods for determing the truth are as valid as methods people use to determine different truths, ya' know. In fact, I'd go with the evidence... not faith or feelings or anecdote if you wanted to know the actual truth that was the same for everybody.

Read anything by Bob McCue if you want to understand how cults and religions such as Mormonism get people certain that their woo is true. Or read anything by a former preacher and current atheist-- by Dan Barker. Unless believing you have the "truth" is more important than whether you might be believing a lie. I'd rather not know whether something is true than to believe a lie.

 

[rcronk]

RandFan - I can believe that God would lead someone to another church as a stepping stone in their life. I have seen that in the lives of some of my immediate family - leading them to the Hare Krishna temple for a time. Their lives have been blessed and they have progressed in ways they personally couldn't have currently in the LDS church because of their own personal situations and weaknesses. Sure, some can follow their own misguided feelings that really aren't from God - I agree with you. It seems I'll never be able to prove to you that God has expressed Himself to me in a way that I cannot deny and that I'm not mislead. Oh well. I just try not to let myself be motivated by fear and because of that, I have found greater joy in my life. Comparing my way of thinking to someone who blows up babies is a bit offensive. You actually cannot comment on my experiences - you have no proof and no input whatsoever other than my own word combined with other people's philosophies. I testify that my experience is true and that you have been scared away from the truth by the philosophies of men - just like I was. I guess if we both find ourselves no longer conscious after dying and just being eaten by worms, you can say "I told you so" and I'll agree with you.

articulett - You misunderstood the instructions. You pick a book that claims to be from God and read it yourself. You don't pick a book that doesn't claim to be from God and tell me to read it.

All - stop assuming that you know what I experienced. You don't have any idea and you don't have any evidence - not even subjective personal evidence. Finding God is a personal journey and you can determine if someone is on the right path by their fruits. People blowing up children would be an example of bad fruit. If you're really scared that you'll be mislead into blowing up children, then sure, don't seek God. I don't think either of you would be misled to that point though. It seems invalid to assume that because one person blows up kids in the name of God that nobody can find the true God. That is incorrect.

 

[Roboramma]

It seems I'll never be able to prove to you that God has expressed Himself to me in a way that I cannot deny and that I'm not mislead. Oh well. I just try not to let myself be motivated by fear and because of that, I have found greater joy in my life. Comparing my way of thinking to someone who blows up babies is a bit offensive. You actually cannot comment on my experiences - you have no proof and no input whatsoever other than my own word combined with other people's philosophies. I testify that my experience is true and that you have been scared away from the truth by the philosophies of men - just like I was. I guess if we both find ourselves no longer conscious after dying and just being eaten by worms, you can say "I told you so" and I'll agree with you.

You're misrepresenting the argument. The point isn't that you are the same as "people blowing up babies". The point is that there's no way for anyone (yourself included) to distinguish between the experience that they have and the experience that you have when you feel that god is communicating with you.
If you feel differently, please explain how you can know that your experience is different from theirs. Because I just don't see it.

That doesn't, by the way, mean that I think your experience is the same in the way of the truths that you felt you saw or were informed of, etc. Its only in the way that it feels that I think your experience and those of other religous people are the same. The reason that I make that conclusion is the same as the reason that when my friend and I both eat icecream and she describes what it tastes like, I can conclude that she is having a similar experience to me.

All

- stop assuming that you know what I experienced. You don't have any idea and you don't have any evidence - not even subjective personal evidence.

The evidence we have is your own description. It's also neuroscience - some of which randfan has referenced in this thread. It's also other people's descriptions of their experiences, which happen to match your description.

Finding God is a personal journey and you can determine if someone is on the right path by their fruits.

Assuming that there's a god.

People blowing up children would be an example of bad fruit. If you're really scared that you'll be mislead into blowing up children, then sure, don't seek God.

The fear isn't only "blowing up children". It's making false conclusions, even harmless ones. I think I speak for many other posters here when I say that we want to know the universe as it is.
There are, I'm sure, many people who have had purported religious experiences that you might not consider "evil", but would still consider wrong. How would you distinguish them, if not by their fruit?

I don't think either of you would be misled to that point though. It seems invalid to assume that because one person blows up kids in the name of God that nobody can find the true God. That is incorrect.

Of course that's incorrect. But because some people blow themselves up in the name of god, and are sincere about it we have to wonder if their way of knowing, of coming to truth, is questionable or not.
If God wasn't talking to them, we have to ask if, when others describe their experience of god in a similar way, if God is talking to them either.

 

[rcronk]

Well, the terrorists in Beslan were on Heroin and other drugs and were doing things that were detrimental to society in general. I would assume that again, by their fruits, ye can know them.

So, if I receive inspiration and act on it and I become a more patient, kind, giving person, I can trust that inspiration is good regardless of its origin. I cannot prove to others or deny myself that this was from God instead of myself. So it is just a try it out in faith issue. If that's too scary for some, fine.

Matching descriptions only tell us that the experiences were similar, not the same. I guess fruits are the only thing we have when trying to do anything where spirituality and science cross paths.

Yes, this process depends upon the person going through the process - thus it is subjective and thus you'll get a mix of people's conditions in your results as you try to look at it scientifically.

I guess I'm asserting that there is a way to receive truth and knowledge other than through the physical scientific method, but it is too scary for some to depend upon. I have found it to bear fruit and have done so by facing those fears and finding out that there is another way to gain knowledge. I cannot prove it. I can only invite others to try it and see what happens.

I understand your point of view and I really wish I could give you something more than just an invitation, but I don't think I can.

 

[RandFan]

I would assume that again, by their fruits, ye can know them.

"Fruits"? You mean like the people who give their entire life to god and help people? These people who know that they are right? These people who are not Mormon?

So, if I receive inspiration and act on it and I become a more patient, kind, giving person, I can trust that inspiration is good regardless of its origin.

And I keep telling you, your story is a dime a dozen. In fact, it is rather pedestrian as inspirations go. Some people sell all that they have and go and serve their fellow man for all of their lives. Some of those people volunteer at prisons, youth centers, hostels for dying people, etc. Many are not Mormon. I've met these people and they take their religion very seriously.

You cheapen their belief.

So it is just a try it out in faith issue.

Bingo. Faith.

"Now faith is the subsistence of things hoped for, the evidence or conviction of things not seen."

Every religious person has that.

If that's too scary for some, fine.

This is a cheap shot and very disappointing. It is believers who turn to god for comfort. Religion is just a security blanket.

Now you are just engaging in ad hominem. Typical.

Matching descriptions only tell us that the experiences were similar, not the same.

You miss the point, why does god give sincere, honest, decent people who pray, different experiences than you? Are you just special?

I guess fruits are the only thing we have when trying to do anything where spirituality and science cross paths.

Again, Catholics, Hindus, Sikhs, Muslims, Buddhists all have good fruits. You assume that your "fruits" are different than other people's fruits. This is human nature. It's expected.

Yes, this process depends upon the person going through the process - thus it is subjective and thus you'll get a mix of people's conditions in your results as you try to look at it scientifically.

Then what good is it? God said that he will give to all men liberally and upbraideth not. I'm a decent and honest person. I served a mission honorably. I prayed, paid tithing, sacrificed my time, and asked god with nothing wavering.

I guess I'm asserting that there is a way to receive truth and knowledge other than through the physical scientific method, but it is too scary for some to depend upon.

Please don't do this. It's very insulting. I don't accuse you of being too scared to let go of religion.

I have found it to bear fruit and have done so by facing those fears and finding out that there is another way to gain knowledge. I cannot prove it. I can only invite others to try it and see what happens.

Been there, done that. It makes you feel good and can convince you that it is true but it is internal.

If sincere and honest people can know things that are demonstrably untrue then parsimony says that you are likely wrong. You are no different than all of the other true believers who believe in different religions.

I understand your point of view and I really wish I could give you something more than just an invitation, but I don't think I can.

I wish you the best. I wish I could get you to consider that you are as likely wrong as all of the other true believers with all of those "fruits".

 

[articulett]

rconk... we have former Mormons here... you are transparent to them as well as to me. You want to inspire and teach others, but you are clueless as to what you have to learn and how you are doing the same thing that all woo do. It's dishonest, for one. And it's obvious. You want us to read the woo that you are promoting as being words from god, but you don't want to read anyone else's book supposedly inspired by god because you think you happen to have stumbled onto the "right" one. "Gee willikers, everybody, lets try reading religious books and following instructions--say, I learned that Joseph Smith is a true prophet-- he says so himself!"

People who read the Quo'ran and follow the directions have inner feelings that it's true too. They'll even hasten their own deaths and those of others so great is their faith--

The book of Mormon is a very silly book with everything regarding genetics and the supposed history of America disproven by actual facts. But of course, you've been brainwashed, so this is all demon temptation and yada yada trying to tempt you away from your silly truth. If you are lucky, you may one day feel fortunate for whatever made you stumble across this forum and give you back your brain. If we're unlucky, you'll spawn a lot passing on your gullible genes and nonsensical memes into many others.

Look, hadn't you better be getting ready for your planet Kolob adventures with your multiple wives instead of hanging out on a skeptic's forum where you might (gasp) bite from the tree of knowledge.

We don't take orders from gods and we don't take orders from the people who speak for him and we're probably more well read than you in many forms of religious literature (skeptics always are for some reason). Religions, prophets, gurus, and men have been claiming to get revelations for eons-- the problem... no evidence that any exist... lots of evidence that humans are delusional, mistaken, wrong, and very easy to manipulate in the manner you tried to inflict upon us.

However, former believers, tend to be fabulous forum members. So if you ever get a clue...

 

[articulett]

Oh, and we're not afraid of blowing up kids-- it's just that we get this kind of woo all the time. Most of have pretty great morals (and secular societies are less dysfunctional on average) despite our general lack of belief. Many of us have been believers. We just would rather not know something than believe a lie. And we see how readily people, such as yourself, are fooled.

What brought you to this forum? Have you seen any of Randi's videos. He can get people to believe all kinds of things... and he does... but only to show them how techniques like what you are doing are used by everyone. Really, check out his clips. Those are great fruits. You are just so transparent and naive, and I can only hope it's because you are young. You tell us not to make assumptions about you, but you have given us no reason to respect your honesty, integrity, or your intelligence. You sound like every woo. You seem very interested in what you can teach (inflict) and clueless as to your similarity to other woo. You whine that we're prejudging you, and yet you've prejudged us all and made up a strawman version of why skeptics don't see that you have "the truth" while pretending it's because we are afraid because that's what your church tells you. What makes your "ruth" more true than all the woo except that it feels right to you...just as successful religions brainwash their members into feeling.

Look, if you could know for certain that what you were believing is untrue, would you want to know. What if I could show you actual evidence showing that Joseph Smith is not a prophet and there is nothing magical special or true about what he says-- would you even want to know. Or would you rather just keep believe that special you as the real true woo from the invisible magical creator of the universe (who knows how it's all going to turn out anyhow, right?)

If you want to be taken seriously, watch this clip (your turn to learn and not preach) and tell us how your story is more likely to be true and why.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fDp7pkEcJVQ

Why don't you trying listening to other people the way you want them to listen to you.

 

[cyborg]

If someone says that we're afraid to believe it's almost certainly a sure sign of their own emotional insecurity being projected onto us.

Humans are so predictable.

 

[rcronk]

RandFan - you told me you are afraid of self deception - I'm not making that up. If it's not true or I misunderstood, then I apologize - either way, my delivery sucked so I apologize for that. Good is good regardless of whether or not it's Mormon or not. I've been saying this over and over. Truth is truth, good is good. Mormonism doesn't have a monopoly on either. The only thing Mormonism claims to have that's different than any other religion is authority - 1 God organizes 1 church. Men disagree and fight and split up into thousands of churches.

articulett - Please re-read this thread. I am reading a Buddhist text right now and finding truth in it. I am not trying to teach or inspire, I am inviting anyone who wants to, to pick a religious book, read it, ponder it, and pray about it. If you're not interested in doing that, please leave or lurk. Kolob is a star, not a planet. I only have one wife - if I had more than one, I'd be excommunicated from the LDS church. This is a skeptic forum where people demand proof before believing something - I get it. So why do you make assertions about me and my beliefs and experiences with no physical evidence other than guessing about me based on comparing my experiences with others? Why the double standard? If you want to see rebuttal to your 30-year old anti-Mormon literature, please see www.fairlds.org.

Nice strawman video. It's funny, but still a strawman. People have the wrong idea about God and so they take that wrong idea, easily knock it down and proclaim atheism as truth without any evidence other than a strawman god on the floor. Oops!

cyborg - Re-read the thread, RandFan said he was afraid of self-deception, I reiterated that fear. I did not project it or invent it. If I'm wrong about it or misunderstood him, I apologize. I already apologized for my delivery though, which was less than friendly - I must have been in a mood yesterday.

all - Please either try the experiment or revert to lurk mode.

 

[RandFan]

RandFan - you told me you are afraid of self deception - I'm not making that up.

It's possible I mispoke but I don't think so.

If it's not true or I misunderstood, then I apologize

Thank you.

- either way, my delivery sucked so I apologize for that. Good is good regardless of whether or not it's Mormon or not. I've been saying this over and over. Truth is truth, good is good. Mormonism doesn't have a monopoly on either. The only thing Mormonism claims to have that's different than any other religion is authority - 1 God organizes 1 church. Men disagree and fight and split up into thousands of churches.

The problem is that you want the good to prove something. "Fruits" as it were.

The "fruits" don't prove anything other than a person is good.

Your view is very simplistic. The men who "fight" were often good and decent men. The Mormon church looks fondly to Martin Luther and other reformers. Yet they caused the further fractioning of the Church. They "fought" for very valid reasons. The bible is not always clear about many important subjects. Is slavery ok for instance? It's not clear in the bible. In fact, it looks to be ok.

 

[RandFan]

cyborg - Re-read the thread, RandFan said he was afraid of self-deception...

Since you have reiterated this after you had apologized I'm going to have to ask you to demonstrate this. Where did I say that I was "afraid" of self-deception?

Even if I did, wouldn't that be better than be "comfortable" with self-deception?

I'm waiting for that reference.

all - Please either try the experiment or revert to lurk mode.

I think the experiment to be fundamentally flawed. I would like to comment on that.

 

[rcronk]

RandFan - "When I was a kid I realized that people lie to themselves. It's a human trait. We do it all of the time. At some point I became very uneasy with self deception, it bothered me and I made a commitment to myself to not lie to myself. I wish that I could say that I was completely successful at that but I wasn't. I'm still not but I understand what self deception is and I'm capable of recognizing it and I consciously try and avoid it." As I suspected, I misread your statement - you were uneasy with self deception, not afraid of it - I read afraid when it became a reason for leaving the church but what you described was that you thought you were deceiving yourself by turning a blind eye to parts of the religion. I was answering cyborg by reiterating it because I didn't know if he would read the apology and explanation I gave to you in your part of my reply. Again, I apologize.

I agree that people can self deceive and groups can too. It's funny that I'm on the side against 9/11 conspiracy theories and they have group self deception too. One thing I have found in working through issues with the 9/11 CT's is that they stop digging when they hit what they want to hit. As soon as the evidence looks like their government is out to get them, they stop digging. And yes, this digging dysfuntion can be found on all sides when the person in question loves their agenda more than the truth. I wonder if you and I could talk through the issues you found one at a time in PM's? I would like to know what you found and how deep you went on each item. I have investigated anti-mormon claims and have found, in my experience, that the anti's stopped digging as soon as it looked like the LDS church was a fraud. As I continued to dig a little deeper and found that they had missed things or assumed or relied on flawed logic or whatever. Would you be willing to go through these issues with me one at a time?

I think the experiment is perfect because only whose who really want to find God find him, those who don't want to find him for whatever reason, don't. He only wants those who want to be with him to be with him. He doesn't want anyone to feel compelled by physical proof, etc. He wants an honest personal search that cannot be borrowed from someone else as we do with the scientific method. The purpose is not to have everyone find God - the purpose is for people to choose of their own free will what they want in life and hereafter without any compulsion whatsoever. And those who didn't find him here only because they knew not where to look or were deceived will have a chance to accept or reject him after this life. That's my point of view on it anyway. If it were scientific, the purpose would be to prove that God exists and that's a different reason and goal altogether. Anyway, I'm just rambling and I'm sure I've said something else offensive, so I'll apologize in advance.