DiscussMormonism.com

I’ve been (re)reading the LoF, and just stumbled on this quote that really stood out to me (for whatever reason):

What testimony have men, in the first instance, that there is a God? Human testimony only.
[…]
Is the knowledge of the existence of God a matter of mere tradition, founded upon human testimony alone, until persons receive a manifestation of God to themselves? It is.

Lectures on Faith (Deseret Book Company, Salt Lake City, UT, 1985) Pg 37


There're two aspects of this quote that have me torn. On the one side, this form of blatant honesty is... refreshing (and, in a way, surprising). It isn't often you hear this type of clear-cut admission that the existence of G-d is based on human testimony and tradition. Usually there are individuals that will try to use laws of thermal dynamics (inappropriately) or other such things as evidence for the existence of G-d. But, to just come out and say: “it’s based on human testimony and traditions” is really refreshing.

However, there is the secondary aspect. Why should I/we/anyone believe these traditions? What do we do when G-d doesn’t manifest Himself to us/others? Traditions and human testimony hardly seem sufficient when faced with the absence of G-d manifesting Himself.

Great post, Steuss. Got me thinking about this quote from President Hinckley:

"We of this Church do not rely on any man-made statement concerning the nature of Deity. Our knowledge comes directly from the personal experience of Joseph Smith."

In the end, unless we've had personal visitations from the divine (and apparently at least one of us has), we are really leaning on the arm of the flesh, as it were.

Doctor Steuss wrote:I’ve been (re)reading the LoF, and just stumbled on this quote that really stood out to me (for whatever reason):

What testimony have men, in the first instance, that there is a God? Human testimony only.
[…]
Is the knowledge of the existence of God a matter of mere tradition, founded upon human testimony alone, until persons receive a manifestation of God to themselves? It is.

Lectures on Faith (Deseret Book Company, Salt Lake City, UT, 1985) Pg 37


There're two aspects of this quote that have me torn. On the one side, this form of blatant honesty is... refreshing (and, in a way, surprising). It isn't often you hear this type of clear-cut admission that the existence of G-d is based on human testimony and tradition. Usually there are individuals that will try to use laws of thermal dynamics (inappropriately) or other such things as evidence for the existence of G-d. But, to just come out and say: “it’s based on human testimony and traditions” is really refreshing.

However, there is the secondary aspect. Why should I/we/anyone believe these traditions? What do we do when G-d doesn’t manifest Himself to us/others? Traditions and human testimony hardly seem sufficient when faced with the absence of G-d manifesting Himself.

Pretty accurate but your quote is from the Q&A for this point:

"We have now clearly set forth how it is, and how it was, that God became an object of faith for rational beings; and also, upon what foundation the testimony was based which excited the inquiry and diligent search of the ancient saints to seek after and obtain a knowledge of the glory of God; and we have seen that it was human testimony, and human testimony only, that excited this inquiry, in the first instance, in their minds. It was the credence they gave to the testimony of their fathers, this testimony having aroused their minds to inquire after the knowledge of God; the inquiry frequently terminated when rightly pursued, in the most glorious discoveries and eternal certainty."
(Lectures on Faith 2:56)

God does manifest himself to people. What was being said is that the initial interest in God is cultivated by human testimony and teachers. Then they inquire to know more. This is not odd at all. In every dispensation we know of the founder turned back to the faith of those who came before to find God (with the exception of Adam who knew God already).

The Nehor wrote:[...]

Pretty accurate but your quote is from the Q&A for this point:

"We have now clearly set forth how it is, and how it was, that God became an object of faith for rational beings; and also, upon what foundation the testimony was based which excited the inquiry and diligent search of the ancient saints to seek after and obtain a knowledge of the glory of God; and we have seen that it was human testimony, and human testimony only, that excited this inquiry, in the first instance, in their minds. It was the credence they gave to the testimony of their fathers, this testimony having aroused their minds to inquire after the knowledge of God; the inquiry frequently terminated when rightly pursued, in the most glorious discoveries and eternal certainty."
(Lectures on Faith 2:56)

God does manifest himself to people. What was being said is that the initial interest in God is cultivated by human testimony and teachers. Then they inquire to know more. This is not odd at all. In every dispensation we know of the founder turned back to the faith of those who came before to find God (with the exception of Adam who knew God already).

A good portion -- if not the majority -- of the lecture is/was devoted to how the tradition was passed (and the knowledge). Not much of it dealt with people who had actually had the witness (other than perhaps Adam, and If I recall correctly, a brief mention of Noah).

Unfortunately, we come back to, "What do we do when G-d doesn’t manifest Himself to us/others? Traditions and human testimony hardly seem sufficient when faced with the absence of G-d manifesting Himself." I would like to believe you (and some days, I actually do) that G-d does indeed manifest Himself to people. But, (D&C 46:13-14 aside), what about those of us who don't see Him? What is it about the human testimonies and traditions from those who have that is any different than the many other mythoi within society?

Doctor Steuss wrote:A good portion -- if not the majority -- of the lecture is/was devoted to how the tradition was passed (and the knowledge). Not much of it dealt with people who had actually had the witness (other than perhaps Adam, and If I recall correctly, a brief mention of Noah).

Unfortunately, we come back to, "What do we do when G-d doesn’t manifest Himself to us/others? Traditions and human testimony hardly seem sufficient when faced with the absence of G-d manifesting Himself." I would like to believe you (and some days, I actually do) that G-d does indeed manifest Himself to people. But, (D&C 46:13-14 aside), what about those of us who don't see Him? What is it about the human testimonies and traditions from those who have that is any different than the many other mythoi within society?

That is in my opinion a correct reading of the entire Lecture but this Lecture was devoted entirely to how the knowledge of God was passed down to us and how it is transmitted. Paul would agree that there has to be a Preacher and without one nothing can be taught. The later Lectures (particularly Lecture 7) discuss much more on how faith is maintained.

This is in harmony with the account in Alma of the seed of faith or having even a desire to believe and letting it work within you.

One of the most compelling reasons for me to accept God (or try to atleast) is the human testimony. That it is a unique human experience to have faith in a God.

I'm a weirdo?!

barrelomonkeys wrote:One of the most compelling reasons for me to accept God (or try to atleast) is the human testimony. That it is a unique human experience to have faith in a God.

I'm a weirdo?!

No, that doesn't make you a weirdo. Humans seem to have an innate desire to believe in something beyond the visible universe. On a very basic level, it's a comforting thought to believe that this life is not all there is.

Runtu wrote:

barrelomonkeys wrote:One of the most compelling reasons for me to accept God (or try to atleast) is the human testimony. That it is a unique human experience to have faith in a God.

I'm a weirdo?!

No, that doesn't make you a weirdo. Humans seem to have an innate desire to believe in something beyond the visible universe. On a very basic level, it's a comforting thought to believe that this life is not all there is.

The question becomes is that a divine attribute or leftover evolutionary garbage that serves no purpose?

Nice post Steuss. This is my main issue with religion in general, and Mormonism specifically. I have not had any manifestations of God in my life THAT I CAN RECOGNIZE. There is a possibility that they are there, but not in a way that I can honestly say "That came from God". I've felt strong emotion before (usually during tear-jerker faith promoting stories) but not lightning bolts, no still small voice answers to prayers, nada. Not pre-mission, during the mission or post mission. (and I was an obedient and hard working missionary too (DL, ZL and AP-sorry for tooting my horn(not that it means much on this forum)))For most of my life, I counted the occasional chills during a Faith-Promoting Rumor as a witness of the spirit. But then I had to admit that I felt the same feelings while reading fictional books and dramatic movies, so I couldn't really call that "the spirit". So part of me feels I'm "off the hook" so to speak because how can I be blamed for doubting when I have nothing to go on? Joseph once stated that if it hadn't happened to him, he wouldn't have believed it either (or something along those lines).

Steuss, I have quoted the Buddha in his Kamala Suta a number of times before, but the essential wisdom of it bears repeating:

Do not go upon what has been acquired by repeated hearing; nor upon tradition; nor upon rumor; nor upon what is in a scripture; nor upon surmise; nor upon an axiom; nor upon specious reasoning; nor upon a bias toward a notion that has been pondered over; nor upon another's seeming ability; nor upon the consideration, ‘The monk is our teacher.’

... when you yourselves know: 'These things are good; these things are not blamable; these things are praised by the wise; undertaken and observed, these things lead to benefit and happiness,' enter on and abide in them."