• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Religious Book Exchange

I thought we heathens weren't supposed to have access to that? Sure, I've been wanting to read it.

ETA: Thanks for the link!
 
They let this heathen read it so I guess it's open to all heathens. :-) There's some really good stuff in there - I have thoroughly enjoyed it.
 
rcronk said:
A few people from JREF have decided to read religious books in search of truth using the methods described by those books instead of the scientific method. I have done this with two of these books and have actually gained knowledge through using this method.
Click to expand...
"Knowledge"? I think we would all accept that you gained knowledge. I think you could get knowledge corresponding with Charles Manson or talking to a schizophrenic about his day.

Here is what I would like to know:
  1. Did you gain truth?
  2. If you think so, how would you know?
 
From the other thread:

Cronk, scientists, including social scientists, anthropologists, behaviorists, neuroscientists and others tell us that the phenomenon of gaining a [subjective] testimony of the truthfulness of a thing is actually well understood.

If a person is sincere in trying to discern whether or not the Catholic Church is a the one true church and that person reads the scriptures, goes to church and follows the rules then he or she will come to have a powerful witness that it is indeed true. It is so powerful that people will die for it.

Problem is, there is nothing about Mormonism that is unique in this aspect
Click to expand...
Bear in mind that to work the person performing the exercises must seriously entertain that the religion, philosophy or metaphysical truth could be true.
 
Last edited:
rcronk said:
Pick a religious book and follow the above instructions and report your findings here. Report what truth you have found rather than things you disagree with. I want this thread to be focused on the positives we experience, not be a bashing bigot-fest.
Click to expand...
You do realize that you have come to a skeptics forum?

I'm happy to be respectful but I will respond in a critical fashion if and when I feel it appropriate. This goes to the very heart of what JREF is all about.

People focus on the positives and believe Sai Baba is god, that Kevin Treadu isn't a liar and con man, that Uri Geller can bend spoons.

Sorry cronk, telling the truth is not bigotry.
 
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?
 
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.
Click to expand...

So what do you say to the many Christians who think you are a nut for number 5?
 
rcronk said:
Tanstaafl and Charlie - which religious books will you each be reading?
Click to expand...
I did read the bible mostly (old new testaments, skipping the psalms and begats) way back in my early teen years. It was the biggest thing that pushed me towards atheism (and I thank jeebus for that).

My view of religion is too jaundiced for me to read anything religious and give it the proper critical review. Plus, I'm about a year behind in my current reading list.

Charlie (talk is cheap, reading takes effort) Monoxide
 
cyborg - I haven't spoken to a Christian who thinks I'm nuts for #5 but if I did meet someone like that, I'd probably ask them if they've read it themselves and ask them what they learned from it.
 
rcronk said:
cyborg - I haven't spoken to a Christian who thinks I'm nuts for #5 but if I did meet someone like that, I'd probably ask them if they've read it themselves and ask them what they learned from it.
Click to expand...

And if they did and considered you a blasphemous insult to Christianity?

I mean do you think of us as blank slates or something? Like we're just waiting to be filled up with a religion? You see I doubt you could persuade someone who is not already ameanable to the type of fallacious logic believers engage in but already shares most of your beliefs. Yet you quite bizarrely seem to have picked up the idea that because you read a book and it helped you it must have been the book alone - it could not have possibly been the combination of person and book. Therefore you now have the idea that if everyone else were to read the same book then the same results would follow. You figure that this was good enough for you so it should work for everyone else.

That's not going to happen.
 
Okay, I've started reading the D&C. One down, 137 to go.

This is gonna take a while...
 
cyborg - If they think belief in another testament of Christ is blasphemous, then I chalk it up as ignorance or stubbornness on their part. Actually it's millions of people who have read a book and have received the same results. I've personally invited thousands of people face to face in Chile to try it out and about a hundred of them sincerely accepted the challenge and have received a spiritual confirmation that matches what I received. Two or three that I know of personally haven't yet received an answer, but my experience so far has been that they are not sincere - and that's based on my own experience coupled with evidence of a lack of sincerity in the person.

Have you picked a book yet? Based on your previous comments, I don't think you're sincere, so perhaps it's better not to attempt the experiment at this point. You can do whatever you want to though.

Tanstaafl - Cool. Did you learn anything new from your reading? Did you see anything that matched what you already know to be true?

Ryokan - When you get back, I'll need some help on the next section of the Dhammapada. In the context of this section, how exactly do you define "heedfulness"?
 
Last edited:
rcronk said:
Tanstaafl - Cool. Did you learn anything new from your reading? Did you see anything that matched what you already know to be true?
Click to expand...


I already had a general idea of what sort of things Joseph Smith claimed. I knew it was true that he claimed such things, so in that sense, yes.

I'm now up to 6; slowly getting there.
 
I just finished section 10. That was a great one!

I had heard something about this before, how they hid some of the pages that Joseph Smith had "translated" earlier, to see if a second "translation" would be the same as the first, the assumption being if he was just making it up as he went along they wouldn't match.

So naturally, knowing he could never pass such a test, JS concocts a revelation wherein Jesus tells him not to translate those pages again.

The amazing thing to me is that anyone bought this dodge.
 
Charlie Monoxide said:
I did read the bible mostly (old new testaments, skipping the psalms and begats) way back in my early teen years. It was the biggest thing that pushed me towards atheism (and I thank jeebus for that).

My view of religion is too jaundiced for me to read anything religious and give it the proper critical review. Plus, I'm about a year behind in my current reading list.

Charlie (talk is cheap, reading takes effort) Monoxide
Click to expand...

Actually the Psalms are about the only part of the bible I would rate parts of as "well written". They're worth reading in the same fashion that one might read Shakespeare's sonnets or Homer's Illiad. The rest is about as literary (and informative) as a Tom Clancy novel.

Since the truth the OP is speaking of having discovered (in the Book of Mormons) is not provable using the scientific method I am unclear as to how he knows it's true... but then if you believe in angels bearing golden tablets I guess anything goes.
 
rcronk said:
cyborg - If they think belief in another testament of Christ is blasphemous, then I chalk it up as ignorance or stubbornness on their part.
Click to expand...

They're really going to give a crap what you think are they heathen?

I mean it's not like they're justified or anything by the little copyright notice at the end of Revelation that says God does not give you the right to create derivative works...

Actually it's millions of people who have read a book and have received the same results.
Click to expand...

Or so they say. But then it's not like anyone has ever lied to fit in. Nah, that never happens. People just don't lie about things like that do they? That would be ridiculous of course.

I've personally invited thousands of people face to face in Chile to try it out and about a hundred of them sincerely accepted the challenge and have received a spiritual confirmation that matches what I received
Click to expand...

Yep, I believe that. Clearly must be real then. Absolutely must be to do with the BOM. Clearly. Obviously.

Two or three that I know of personally haven't yet received an answer, but my experience so far has been that they are not sincere - and that's based on my own experience coupled with evidence of a lack of sincerity in the person.
Click to expand...

Well of course you think it does but then you clearly must also think the world is full of non-Mormon religious liars in that case. All those people receiving answers that must clearly be false eh? Goddamn f***ing liars.

Have you picked a book yet? Based on your previous comments, I don't think you're sincere, so perhaps it's better not to attempt the experiment at this point.
Click to expand...

I really do not have any idea what you think is going to suddenly happen this time that hasn't happened before. As such I don't get your point at all. I fail to see what you hope to achieve. You may find poorly written stories using 'medieval' style English compelling - I find them boring and stupid.

I really don't think you grasp this so I will repeat: I find religious writings pretentious nonsense on the whole and Mormonism laughably poor as a religion specifically. What magic do you think will happen exactly that will change reality in some way that will make me conducive to accepting one of the most patent examples of a bloke making complete crap up on the spot and passing it off as godly revelation? I am actually quite at a loss here so you're really going to have to help me out here.
 
Tanstaafl - The story is that the people who stole the writings were planning on changing it so that Joseph couldn't produce anything that would match what they had modified. So, it could be that he was telling the truth, or it could be that he just couldn't reproduce the same text and was lying. Why do you by default pick that he's a fake with no evidence one way or the other? It seems that you've already made up your mind about what happened and so you're just cherry picking anything that matches your preconceived notions. That's not sincerity, it's prejudice. I thought we lived in a society of innocent (or at the very least unknown) until proven guilty. Have you really only found this one negative thing so far and nothing positive? If so, perhaps it would be better for you to stop now until you can look at this fairly - without prejudice. It seems that prejudice and bias are what hold a lot of people back when seeking the truth in general. The first time I read the Book of Mormon, for example, I was just looking for a way to not have to keep the commandments and just go do what I wanted to do, so I was looking for anything I could find to convince myself that it was false. I was not sincere in wanting to know the truth, I just wanted to prove it wrong. That didn't work and it doesn't work in the scientific method either - I've seen pathological science before and watched professors cherry pick data to support their own preconceived notions. I've even handed them evidence counter to their preconceived notion and they've rejected it without even investigating. So I'm asking for the same objectivity going into this experiment that science demands from scientists using the scientific method. Fair enough?

BlackKat - There are things that can be known outside the scientific method and so to limit oneself to the scientific method is to limit one's ability to acquire knowledge. Don't get me wrong, I love the scientific method and it is extremely useful and should continue to be used for everything it can be used for. Do you have kids? Do you love them? Do you know it? Is loving them important? Can it be proven through the scientific method? If it can't, does that make it false? You may not be able to prove it to anyone else, but you can know it for yourself.

cyborg - Your original point was that it was just me having this experience with the Book of Mormon and that I was being dumb for thinking that if I read a book and had this experience that others might have the same experience that I (just one person) did. I addressed your claim by giving telling you that many others have had similar experiences, not just me. You ignored that I had addressed your concern and decided to just call them all liars. By doing so, you have made a huge assertion that is based on nothing. If you want to drop your prejudice and pick up a book, I invite you to do so.
 
cronk, I'm quite sincere in wanting to know the truth. That's why I'm here at the JREF forum. But, sorry, your explanation makes no sense at all. These people saw themselves as possibly getting a great revelation from god. But not having given up rationality entirely, they feared that Joseph Smith, who was known for questionable claims about treasure seeking before this, might be tricking them. So it is perfectly plausible that they would test him. Even if Smith feared they had altered the text (how? white out? erasers? I think someone would notice) he could have just re-translated a different section, which had not been vulnerable to altering. But he didn't because he couldn't, and he cooked up this lame "revelation" to cover his ass.

I actually am quite interested in reading this. But I won't check my brain at the door while I do it. If you have evidence for the truth of any of this, I'd be happy to look at it. The writings themselves are not proof, and feelings you get when you read it aren't proof either.

There is, however, a great deal of archaelogical and DNA evidence that the book of Mormon is false.
 
Take a look around www.fairlds.org. It has discussions and papers about DNA and many of the other common topics people bring up about Mormonism. It seems that they do a pretty good job of being objective and logical in their arguments.

I don't expect anyone to check your brain at the door, just their prejudice. You have to admit that it's possible that he's a fraud and that I'm delusional, however, it's also possible that he's not a fraud and I'm telling the truth. In a court of law, we review evidence of guilt before throwing someone in jail. We don't just take someone off the street and with no evidence say "well, he's obviously guilty" and toss them in jail as you have just done with Joseph Smith. I'm just asking that you do some objective fact finding before you make your conclusions. That's all.
 
The claims made by Smith take the phrase "extraordinary claims" to the extreme. So it would take very, very extraordinary evidence to even take such claims seriously.

And since I've lived in Mesa, AZ for the past 11 years, I've been exposed to a great deal of the claims of Mormonism, and the level of evidence for those claims. And as far as DNA, there's no question that the indiginous peoples of America were not descended from the Hebrews.

I am still quite interested in the remainder of the contents of the D&C, from the standpoint of better understanding what many of my neighbors believe. What I believe doesn't affect the usefulness of this exercise from that point of view.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom