How hard is it to believe when you know "the stuff"

[_truth dancer]

Hey MG...

MG: I suppose this is where we'll have to part ways in this conversation. You say "no evidence". In this thread I've brought up the Book of Mormon being an evidence of the restoration. The Book of Mormon still stands. It has withstood the attacks against it. Gosh, you have people such as Vogel and Uncle Dale that have worn themselves weary trying to come up with alternate explanations for the Book of Mormon...and they disagree with each other!!

I see the Book of Mormon, temples, garments, rituals, etc. etc. etc. all as claims.

Anyone can claim anything... and people all over the world DO indeed make amazing claims.

What I am looking for is something that would suggest one group is more true than another.

For example, has anyone ever proved how the Veda's came into existence? NO? Does this mean there is evidence that it is the word of the divine? Has anyone ever shown past lives to be purely imagination? NO. Does this mean there is evidence that it is indeed reality? How about the claims of Scientology? They make some pretty amazing ones, in my opinion.

The fact that billions of people all over the world, with all sorts of beliefs claiming all sorts of things, doesn't mean it is God directed or true, more than any other.

Claiming truth doesn't equal truth, in my opinion.

But so be it. :-)

The fact that many people have different theories or ideas concerning Joseph Smith and the Book of Mormon to me makes it much more clear that he fabricated it. In other words, there are several ways it could have come into existence... the fact that we don't know exactly every detail doesn't matter.

I'm pretty sure there is not a single anthropologist, archaeologist, linguist, or scientist of any kind in the whole world who would even remotely suggest the Book of Mormon is of ancient origin. And even if the Book of Mormon was directly given by God via words appearing in a hat with a stone, the leap to a divine restoration/divine directed/this is the one and only true church/you must perform these rituals/and wear these undergarments/and follow these particular rules, is a big one.

In other words, there are tons of people who claim to receive direction or information from a divine source. (Just look through Barnes and Nobel). None of their books can be proven wrong... so does that mean if the authors start a church it is the one and only true one? The ancient Eastern texts are certainly held as divine by billions of people.. they predate the Old Testament... and have never been proven wrong, nor does anyone know how they were written. So, does that mean the various religions are the one and only true one?

In other words, there is nothing new about the claims of Joseph Smith. (I'm not talking specific claims which vary in all relgions... I'm talking about claiming God is at the helm, there way is the one or only way, the religious texts are true, etc. etc. etc.).

But, MG... I suppose it doesn't matter if you find evidence the LDS church is the one and only true one.

I'm glad you are able to find peace and joy and fulfillment in your beliefs. If it works for you, then I'm glad you are able to hold onto it!

Right or wrong, I need to go with a reality and awareness that feels right in my heart, makes sense in my mind, and gives me a sense of peace in this world. I'm OK if that means I'll end up in OD! :-)

~dancer~

[_guy sajer]

hi guy. you said:

I think that the Jesus myth, on balance, has done far more harm than good as it has been internalized and used by adherents.

MG: key words there being "as it has been internalized and used by adherents."

Regards,
MG

Yes, I agree. But this too points to the problem that the Bible sends all sorts of mixed messages, which makes it easy for different persons to internalize its messages differently.

But it is probably also true that the fact that somebody uses a message for bad ends doesn't necessarily mean that the message is bad; even good messages can be distorted.

I like most (not all) of what I read in the New Testament. I abhor almost everything I read in the Old Testament.

[_guy sajer]

Hi MG...

Don't worry, I would never take anything you say as mean spirited! I know you better than that! :-)

In terms of the temple... this whole thing is a "claim". Nothing more.

Anyone can claim anything. Billions of people, the world over claim they will receive Moksha if they follow the path of enlightenment. The have the ancient texts to back up their claims. Does this make it true? Have you read the claims of Scientology latley? The claims in Islam?

I don't understand why you think claiming something means it is so. Or are you saying it is a possibility? If so, is it any different than any of the other millions of claims that are a possibility?

In terms of those who pass the TRI living a "higher" standard, I completely disagree. They may be living a different standard than others (I don't know others who think drinking tea or coffee would keep them out of heaven), but certainly the TRI questions have nothing to do with one's heart nor do they give any glimpse into the goodness, compassion, care, humility, etc, etc of the interviewee. One can be a pretty nasty, mean spirited, cruel, horrible person and still pass the TRI with flying colors!

But more to the point.... (smile)

MG: yes, but I think it has mainly to do with your own issues and self-created bubble of belief/practice/understanding that you're living inside. I think that it is you that has restricted/conformed your views to a narrow standard/requirement (in regards to what the church should or shouldn't be) and are unable, at least at this point, to see a bigger, broader view of this world we live in.

So, you think my own issues are what is keeping me from believing in the truth claims of the church? (Like I haven't heard this before)! LOL! This and Satan! ;-)

So, you think my self-created bubble of belief/practice/understanding that I am living inside is what keeps me from believing.

You are probably right.... (well not the "practice" part, but certainly belief and understanding).

I have very deep seated ideas of what is good, holy, compassionate, kind, caring, sacred, and loving... I spent a lot of years trying to convince myself that my own understanding/experience/paradigm was askew and that what was bad was good, what was good was bad. It just really didn't work for me. I came to a place where, for my own mental, emotional, physical health and well-being, I had to follow my heart and mind.

But, I do agree that I could really be wrong and maybe I am way off base. I truly do understand that my way may be really off the mark. Still, my brain and heart can't be forced to accept things that seem so wrong, as right; and things that seem so right, wrong. Many years ago I came to terms with the idea that I am not one of the chosen! I'm OK with that.

In terms of my expectations, I don't think these are of my creation. The church makes some pretty big claims. If the church stated things more like: we are one of the ways to finding truth, we sometimes commune with God, the prophet shares his opinion but may at times receive inspiration, we teach the philosophies of men mingled with our best understanding at the time, you don't really need to follow the prophet if you don't think he is inspired, the leaders are just men and our church is not much different than all the others, etc. etc. etc..... well then my expectations wouldn't be quite what they are.

But, having said that... I disagree that I am not able to look at the bigger world in which we live. The reason I do not believe the LDS church claims is BECAUSE I have looked at the larger world. The more I understand the belief of others the more I am convinced that the LDS church is no different than any others. The more I have expanded my knowledge of belief, the purpose of myth, the workings of our universe, the story of humanity, etc. etc. etc., the more I cannot embrace the lds church's claims.

In other words, I am not trying to hold onto a particular belief that may be possible, because ALL of them are equally possible. Rather than convince myself that a particular church is the one and only true one, (which just happens to be the one in which I was raised), I am open to the idea that any one of a million may be the true one since there is virtually no evidence that one is more true or better or divinely inspired any more than any other. Rather than closing my mind to millions of beliefs but one, I am open to the fact that if there is a one and only true one, any one of a million may be it.

I don't see how this is being closed. Unless close minded means not open to a particular church being the one and only when there is no evidence it is so. :-)


~dancer~

Yeah, what she said.

TD has expressed pretty well my sentiments, and I see no need to add to it.

Well said, TD.

[_mentalgymnast]

hi TD. you said:

What I am looking for is something that would suggest one group is more true than another.

MG: more true than another...

1 Consistent with fact or reality; not false or erroneous.
2 Real; genuine.
3 Reliable; accurate

Good luck.

In your thinking, what would it take for you to know that there was one religion or system of thought that was "more true" than another? Apparently not a book of scripture. Apparently not an individual that claims to speak for God. Apparently not a system of practice/belief/structure that doesn't go along with your exacting standards of decency/virtue/compassion/goodness. Apparently not an organization made up and administered by regular human beings. Apparently not an organization started/founded by a man who operated/functioned according to the ways/means/practices of his time that from our perspective would seem weird/dysfunctional. Apparently not an organization that along with the good/honorable/holy/virtuous beliefs/actions of many, has also some not so good people that often don't live up to the Christian virtues that they espouse.

What is it exactly that would meet your exacting criteria for a true church of God? Is any church or organization that man is part of and given the responsibility of managing on a day to day basis going to always achieve perfection and stellar goodness and all around truth according to the three definitions of truth mentioned above?

All the time?

Are you expecting perfection in an organization that claims to be true?

If there are commonalities among various belief systems, is this reason enough to figure that none of them can ultimately and actually be true?

It appears to me that in order for you to accept the claims of one organization/belief system over another you would have to have God produce and personally direct a mini-series on worldwide television, in all languages, which would then verify itself through all the major media outlets in the world simultaneously by the actual word and personal appearance of God himself, as being from him. Kind of like a first vision...but to the whole world at same time.

Would you believe it then?

What would it take? (smile)

Regards,
MG

[_truth dancer]

Hi MG.... :-)

MG: more true than another...

1 Consistent with fact or reality; not false or erroneous.
2 Real; genuine.
3 Reliable; accurate

Good luck.

Do you think it is too much to ask that the one and only true church directed by God "Himself" be a bit more Godly? Or be somehow recognizable as God's one and only true church?

Why would God have a one and only true church if it is virtually no different than any other church? (I know God doesn't need a reason but still I think it is a good question).

In your thinking, what would it take for you to know that there was one religion or system of thought that was "more true" than another? Apparently not a book of scripture.

There are tons of "scripture", religious texts, books of channeled information, divinely inspired stories etc. etc. etc. I don't see any that stands out as more true than any other.

Apparently not an individual that claims to speak for God.

Absolutely not. There are thousands (maybe milions) of people who claim to speak for God. Most of them are in mental hospitals. Others are great at channeling, others are living in moutain tops in India, others are seen on TV every Sunday morning. ANYONE can claim to speak for God. Joseph Smith was not new or unusual in this regard. How would anyone know who is REALLY speaking for God or channeling Jesus Christ (which is what Joseph Smith claimed to do with the D&C).

Apparently not a system of practice/belief/structure that doesn't go along with your exacting standards of decency/virtue/compassion/goodness.

OK...This one gets a little ticky.

As I have said many times, MY personal views may very well be wrong. The ideas of goodness that I hold may be completely sick and incorrect. I understand this. But, this is all I have to go on for my own personal life.

I'll address the larger issue below.

Apparently not an organization made up and administered by regular human beings.

I disagree with this. If there is a one and only true church directed by God himself I do think humans would be involved. (Personally I think God would not eliminate women from the process but yeah, I think humans would be a part of the organization if there were one).

Apparently not an organization started/founded by a man who operated/functioned according to the ways/means/practices of his time that from our perspective would seem weird/dysfunctional.

It depends. As I stated earlier there are thousands of men who make these sorts of claims.

Apparently not an organization that along with the good/honorable/holy/virtuous beliefs/actions of many, has also some not so good people that often don't live up to the Christian virtues that they espouse.

Well, this is true for virtually every religion, organization, faith tradition on the planet so there would have to be something more.

What is it exactly that would meet your exacting criteria for a true church of God?

I'm open to all sorts of things. If God were speaking to "a" particular human being, giving this person direct guidance, and significant information to bring light and peace to the world, giving this person the very power of God (think about this one), yes I would expect something... but I'm not asking for anything particular.

Is any church or organization that man is part of and given the responsibility of managing on a day to day basis going to always achieve perfection and stellar goodness and all around truth according to the three definitions of truth mentioned above?

All the time?

Are you expecting perfection in an organization that claims to be true?

I am not expecting perfection by any stretch of the imagination.

I would expect it to be different than every other organization run by human beings.

You seem to be suggesting a church/organization directed by God is no different than every other organization directed by your average man. I admit I don't get this.

If there are commonalities among various belief systems, is this reason enough to figure that none of them can ultimately and actually be true?

I'm not exactly sure what you are asking. I think there are common beliefs among most religions and I am open to one being the one and only true church of God. I do not think this is true at all, but it certainly could be. If there was a one and only true church directed by God, I would think there would be some sort of evidence that God is at the helm.

It appears to me that in order for you to accept the claims of one organization/belief system over another you would have to have God produce and personally direct a mini-series on worldwide television, in all languages, which would then verify itself through all the major media outlets in the world simultaneously by the actual word and personal appearance of God himself, as being from him. Kind of like a first vision...but to the whole world at same time.

Not really ... God doesn't need television or languages or the media.

What God (I'm using this term not as a person, human, male), did do was give us a universe and a world where everything speaks of truth. The very universe, the galaxies, the stars, the earth itself, life in all its amazing forms.... ALL give us understanding of truth. The more we can observe the more we see the very essence of everything that exists.

This is not exclusive to a bunch of men, or a particular race, or certain folks who follow a particular leader. It is everywhere for everyone in everything.

Would you believe it then?

I do believe what "God" has created (the very universe) is as close to truth as we will ever get. Knowing that we will continue to expand our awareness as we are able to observe more.

What would it take? (smile)

If God needed/wanted/desired/demanded/whatever "an" organization under "his" control, (this makes no sense to me), then I am open to all sorts of ways this would be recognized. Maybe it would be an organzation that brought peace to the world? (Don't know of one). Or had insights into healing some of the serious illness of our world. (Scientists do this) Maybe it would show up as people who have a deep understanding of happiness beyond the average person? (Buddhism may qualify). Maybe there would be evidence of a deep understanding of how the universe works? Or how we can bring a new awareness to humankind. I could go on and on and on and on... my point is not that there is some specific way we would notice, only that it seems to me there would be some distinguishing feature to help us know it is directed by GOD.

But here is my difficulty.... we have this amazing universe that provides us a glimpse of truth. in my opinion, any truth that is given by GOD, would reflect the truth we can observe in everything that exists. The idea of a one and only true church with God's power given to a few certain men (who may or may not be decent, Godly men), doesn't make sense to me at all.

Is not God's power in every seed? In the oceans? In the creation of a child? Is it not in the formation of a galaxy, or an exploding star? Is it not in the love we experience? Is it not in the formation of a mountain or the song of a bird? I do not see this need for some organization directed by God. I do not see a need for "God's power" whatever that is. I do not understand the idea that God needs to give certain men authority over others. It just doesn't seem to fit into the truth of our universe in any way I can see.

So, there you go! :-)

~dancer~

[_mentalgymnast]

hi TD. very well thought out post. I do appreciate your thoughts.

MG:What is it exactly that would meet your exacting criteria for a true church of God?

TD...I would expect something... but I'm not asking for anything particular...there is some specific way we would notice...

MG: well, I don't know where else to explore from here TD. It's been a fun conversation! It was worthwhile for me. You always have a way/perspective that causes me to think in new directions.

I suppose we could say as some others have, that truth is a knowledge of the past, present, and future and things as they "really are". Whoever has a corner/edge on the market in these three areas is doing well to share what they believe to be the truth... then it's up to those that populate the planet to make choices as to their own "truth". It's only when we go beyond the veil of death (assuming that we do) that we'll find out just how close we were.

Best wishes,
MG

[_truth dancer]

Hi MG...

Yes... as always I love conversing with you! You make me think and explore and ponder new ideas. (Even if I don't quite get them)! LOL

I suppose we could say as some others have, that truth is a knowledge of the past, present, and future and things as they "really are". Whoever has a corner/edge on the market in these three areas is doing well to share what they believe to be the truth... then it's up to those that populate the planet to make choices as to their own "truth". It's only when we go beyond the veil of death (assuming that we do) that we'll find out just how close we were.

I like this!

The bottom line is, we each do our best to figure out a way to manage our lives in this world. :-)

Blessings always,

~dancer~