Reexamining personal revelation

[_zeezrom]

Hey man, some of you guys just may not have the force running through your veins, as much as us believers. Not everyone can be a Jedi.

Could be.

Or it could be that I am more like Princess Leah... just not a girl.

I have the force, but would rather use it for building relationships with people than swiping my lightsaber at a fictional guy in a black cape.

I asked my son if he believes in Darth Vader and he says that guy is not real. We are on the right path!

Maybe all this time Mormons have been concerned about exercising the "force" when they didn't even know what it was in the first place!

[_John D the First]

True. My point was is that while it is often assumed that people are interpreting the same nuero-biological experience in a culturally idiosyncratic matter, the fact is we may be dealing with different experiences entirely.

It would be hard to tell if you are having the same experience if other people have different interpretations based on culture, religion, etc (they also come in many different forms and intensities). Sure it may be a possibility that one group is having more legitimate experiences from some unseen being, but I don't see any good reasons to think that, especially for LDS since that is my background. How many of us LDS have had what we believe to be powerful numinous events which we interpreted the same way you have, and for the same kind of reasons, yet now with new understanding have re-evaluated or re-interpreted the meaning of the experiences.

What separates the two groups is hard to tell. But the mere existence of apostates in any tradition does not say much. Those who don't believe like to point to things like confirmation bias and confabulation to explain why people continue in belief, but it could just as easily explain why, despite confirmatory experiences, people persist in unbelief. I am not saying this is the case, but I have no good reason to think that it is not the case either.

I am agnostic about the experiences of others, I can only evaluate my own. The spirit is supposed to be something that defies description, so I am skeptical of those accounts which treat the experiences something that can be easily put into words.

Cheers,

[_Themis]

What separates the two groups is hard to tell.

Two groups? I would think there are many different groups.

But the mere existence of apostates in any tradition does not say much.

Maybe it says a lot more then you might like to think.

Those who don't believe like to point to things like confirmation bias and confabulation to explain why people continue in belief, but it could just as easily explain why, despite confirmatory experiences, people persist in unbelief. I am not saying this is the case, but I have no good reason to think that it is not the case either.

Some, but many who do point it out also realize they may have their own confirmation bias. I see many including myself that wanted to believe,and still would like to. I would rather understand the truth though, if that's possible.

I am agnostic about the experiences of others, I can only evaluate my own. The spirit is supposed to be something that defies description, so I am skeptical of those accounts which treat the experiences something that can be easily put into words.

I to am agnostic about other experiences, which also means that I would need to be agnostic about my own. Many things are hard to put into words, particularly internal subjective experiences. Yet I don't see this difficulty as evidence of some unseen being relating information, rather just the difficulty of imperfect communication methods and our own limitations in our we see and experience the world around us.

[_John D the First]

Two groups? I would think there are many different groups.

Once again I concur with your correction of my phrasing. I’ll have to give you a call whenever I feel the need for more nuance :). Can we just assume I'm just being pragmatic in my word use in these cases?

“Maybe it says a lot more then you might like to think.”

“Like to think”, or think? I sense an assumption that the TBM is dominated by desire and the questioner is more governed only by hard cold rationality. In my experience neither my questioning nor my belief has ever been decoupled from desire.

More to the point, if you can tell me of a group that does not have apostates, I would be curious to investigate the reasons. I may reconsider my position. However, it would be very interesting if I were wrong. It would mean that frequency of assent is in fact be related to the truth value--it would deal a fatal blow to memetics.

“Some, but many who do point it out also realize they may have their own confirmation bias. I see many including myself that wanted to believe, and still would like to. I would rather understand the truth though, if that's possible.”

I don’t know many people who want to believe something that is untrue. So in this you are not unique. I've wanted to disbelieve Mormonism before, but could not.

“I too am agnostic about other experiences, which also means that I would need to be agnostic about my own.”

I can understand that, but they are different. One is first hand, the other is second hand. For me the spiritual experience and confidence in the divine are co-extensive, so this doesn't work in my case.

“Yet I don't see this difficulty as evidence of some unseen being relating information.”

Not in itself of course—but it makes no sense anyways to talk about this experience as “evidence” in the normal sense of the term because we cannot establish what “it” is. That question is immensely personal. Private, not public. I can only leave it between you and your maker.

Moreover, if you’ve decided scientific evidence is the only means to truth, then religion is not for you. It’s not scientific. There is no “evidence” of the divine that could possibly be accepted as valid within the scientific community (unless you want to dive into the paranormal literature).

Thanks for the discussion.

Cheers,

[_Themis]

“Like to think”, or think? I sense an assumption that the TBM is dominated by desire and the questioner is more governed only by hard cold rationality. In my experience neither my questioning nor my belief has ever been decoupled from desire.

Everyone is different so I can't say where we all will fall in regards to how objective or unbiased we may be, but I do see those whose desire to believe is stronger then their desire for the truth, tend to be more close minded. Some to the extent that mountains of evidence cannot change their belief. An example would be a young earth or literal world wide flood.

More to the point, if you can tell me of a group that does not have apostates, I would be curious to investigate the reasons. I may reconsider my position.

I am unaware of any.

I don’t know many people who want to believe something that is untrue. So in this you are not unique.

I think it is related to how much we want to believe, and I think their are a good number that may not want the truth if it is different then what they already believe. The greater we desire to believe the less open minded we tend to be, making such that more evidence would be needed to change ones belief, and in some cases no amount of evidence is sufficient.

I've wanted to disbelieve Mormonism before, but could not.

I can accept that. I've have never wanted to disbelieve in the church.

I can understand that, but they are different. One is first hand, the other is second hand. For me the spiritual experience and confidence in the divine are co-extensive, so this doesn't work in my case.

It's hard to be agnostic of other experiences if they conflict with our own interpretation, unless we are also agnostic to some degree about our own, or at least open to the possibility that our interpretations are not accurate. Confidence in ones interpretation of spiritual experiences is also a common theme even though they may conflict with others.

Not in itself of course—but it makes no sense anyways to talk about this experience as “evidence” in the normal sense of the term because we cannot establish what “it” is. That question is immensely personal. Private, not public. I can only leave it between you and your maker.

This is of course the reason that the experience is to subjective and unreliable to be certain or know that the meanings we attach to them is accurate. I'm not necessarily saying we can't come to conclusions or beliefs about them, but it would be wise to be open minded to the possibility they may be wrong. I see to many in the church and out who won't consider that possibility(not that I am making that accusation about you).

Moreover, if you’ve decided scientific evidence is the only means to truth, then religion is not for you. It’s not scientific. There is no “evidence” of the divine that could possibly be accepted as valid within the scientific community (unless you want to dive into the paranormal literature).

It depends on what kind of truths we are talking about. The problem I see is not that scientific evidence is the only means to truth, which it isn't, but that the spiritual should not trump scientific or physical evidence. Although there may be no physical or scientific evidence of the divine, that does not preclude science from the equation, since if God/Gods/supernatural do exist, then the potential is there for evidence to surface. Say the papyri was translated by Egyptologists and found to contain the story of Abraham as told in the Book of Abraham, or how about the Gold plates were left behind and eventually translated by experts to show that Joseph's story of the Book of Mormon is contained in those plates. Now that would be some definite evidence.

Thanks for the discussion.

I appreciate your thoughts.

[_catalinakid]

Personal revelation is not necessarily a warm feeling, my last revelation took me to the pit of my grief. I wept for a month and now I find I can weep no more as I help my beloved fight a battle against the cancers as it now unfolds in various medical centers. I was warned ahead of time, that I might be useful and do the right thing, that her life may even be saved by early detection. It's no wonder to me that a year ago the Spirit witnessed to me to go back to Church and be sealed to my wife before it is too late.This is PERSONAL revelation. Revelation to me, a lowly screwup, from Him, on what needs to be done to secure eternal happiness for my family.

Zeezrom are you sealed to your wife? I think you are, I maybe wrong but if you are, how can you even ask these questions?

catalina, I am sorry for the pain and anguish you are going through with your wife's cancer. I sincerely hope she makes a full recovery.

As for how can you even ask these questions. I am sealed to my spouse and I have asked and answered these questions. It's simple, I wanted to know my religion in an effort to be a better person. It's not my fault that in the midst of it all I discovered that the whitewashed history I had been taught was not the real story. I decided I could not longer believe, otherwise I would be force to lie to my church leaders, my children, and my wife. All of these were unacceptable. What good is a sealing if you have to live a lie?

I'm sorry to jump to conclusions. I've never been inside a Temple, never held a TR. My problem is not unbelief, it's addiction. I could never understand how people that had no WoW problems (mine were deep, way deep) could dwindle in unbelief after having been endowed and sealed to their families. I'm kind of a hardhead when it comes to discerning the Spirit and when Heavenly Father lays a revelation on me through the Spirit, he bonks me pretty hard with it. There is no doubt about it when it happens. I've actually been yelled at because I made Him weary with my prayer. My wife is very sensitive and can see, feel and hear the Spirit while sitting next to me when it happens.

Zeezrom, going to the mountains to commune with HF is not a bad idea. I went to sea for 3 years in my little sailboat with just my wife and 3 cats, to escape my addictions and ended up communing with HF. There is a better chance to commune with HF with no whitenoise of the world about you to interfere with the connection. My wife is always telling me to be still, be patient and listen.