Why I am a Latter-day Saint

[_Quasimodo]

You are putting up a good defence, Kevin, but it all comes down to your own subjectiveness. It's a bit like feeling you should bet on a horse because it has your sister's middle name.

We are all free to do that, but it usually doesn't work out well.

[_Themis]

You've got it right there, negative feelings.

I don't remember being taught that God will send a negative sensation, but don't we already experience both positive and negative sensations all the time. Why should we consider certain positive and negative sensations that look to be more connected to some religious event from God and not the simplest explanation of self generated? Can the body create an experience based on what we may want?

It doesn't need to happen right after we ask the question. It could come hours, days, months, or years afterwards, as long as there's some way to connect the answer to the question.

It's bad enough to interpret a sensation as an answer from God right after you ask the question since it could be self generated, but days or months is much worse.

Can you provide an example of something that would be a clear answer days or months after one asks?

If you ask God a question and get two different answers, then you've got a problem; you have to determine which answer came from God and which did not.

That did not answer the question of how you know an answer came from God. You could get just one answer and you still have the same problem of how you know it is from God and not yourself.

How does one "make up" the rushing sensation that coursed through my entire body in 1976?

Bio-chemistry. What you eat, drugs, lack of sleep, lack of food or water, etc. Can you show that your mind is not capable of creating a rushing sensation? Do we not create feelings just by thinking. I know many get certain types of rushing sensations throughout their bodies when they see a very hot person come up and flirt with them. All kinds of things just by thinking about them cause many kinds of sensations and degrees of sensation. This looks to be evidence the mind is capable of producing these experiences. Especially if we really want them.

Great; tell us how God could "communicate with us in a clear and objective way."

God could show up in person. God could send an angel to communicate with a sincere inquirer. This would be a clear and objective answer, unlike the many sensations people get and interpret in so many different ways.

[_canpakes]

The fact that you need to 'take' (i.e., interpret) God's answer as 'yes' actually bolsters the argument that God is, indeed, a bad communicator, since God otherwise would have the power to explicitly and sufficiently display and make clear the answer to you - be it via a loud, bright and resounding 'YES', spelled out across the sky in iridescent firecracker-like explosions, or any other of a number of significantly less-flashy means.

How is giving someone a positive feeling for a yes answer or, alternately, a negative feeling for a no answer, any worse a job of communicating than spelling the answer "across the sky in iridescent firecracker-like explosions"?

I presume that you are gainfully employed, so let's pose the question in a real-world work environment.

1. You ask your boss for a raise. He says and does nothing, but you feel an incredible rush within wherein you feel that you will be granted the raise. You leave his office with that assumption and eagerly await your next paycheck.

2. You are the pilot of an aircraft. It's stormy outside; you are being driven by the wind and tossed to and fro but the tailwinds have allowed you to arrive 17 minutes ahead of schedule. You wonder if you can land now instead of waiting. You experience only a rush of emotion as you consider your situation. You decide to land now as you believe that the emotional rush tells you that doing so conflicts with no other aircraft.

Where was the clear communication from anyone aside from yourself and your own interpretation in either of those situations? What confirms that you are correct?

Why are you interpreting anything God would tell you? Are you and I 'interpreting' each other here in this thread, or are we plainly communicating using an undeniably clear medium of information exchange? Why could God not do the same?

Maybe the fact that God has to communicate with seven billion people has something to do with it. If you had to communicate with people, and all you knew was that those people were one of those seven billion, and when the possibility existed that you might need to communicate with hundreds or thousands simultaneously, would you use natural language to do it?

Why not? Why couldn't God simultaneously talk to 7 billion people in 7 billion different native tongues or dialects? That seems like child's play for an entity that has, according to some, created an incomprehensibly massive universe bound within the paradox of infinite continuance.

Seriously, why would this be a limitation of God?

You've talked enough about "the circular nature of" my argument, but you've never actually pointed out how it's circular. All you've said is that I assume there is a God at the beginning of my argument, and I assume there is a God at the end of my argument. That's not enough to establish a circular argument. In order to have a circular argument you need a line of inferences that start and end with the same assertion, and there is no such line of inferences in my arguments.

Hold on there, you left out some other assertions. According to you:

- You can determine, with absolute certainty, that God has answered you by your interpretation of a sensation,
- You can determine, with absolute certainty, the meaning of that sensation,
- You can determine, with absolute certainty, that the sensation that you received would have come from God, and only from God.

Canpakes, do you consider Euclid's geometric proofs to be circular arguments? He also started with axioms he assumed to be true, and at the end of his arguments he still assumed those axioms to be true. There's no essential difference between my reasoning and Euclid's; the only difference is the axioms we started with.

The essential difference between your reasoning and Euclid's is that Euclid's proofs can be reproduced by anyone using the same set of tools, with exactly the same result. In contrast, your reasoning does nothing of the sort.

[_canpakes]

How does one "make up" the rushing sensation that coursed through my entire body in 1976?

Bio-chemistry. What you eat, drugs, lack of sleep, lack of food or water, etc. Can you show that your mind is not capable of creating a rushing sensation? Do we not create feelings just by thinking. I know many get certain types of rushing sensations throughout their bodies when they see a very hot person come up and flirt with them. All kinds of things just by thinking about them cause many kinds of sensations and degrees of sensation. This looks to be evidence the mind is capable of producing these experiences. Especially if we really want them.

This, exactly. I believe that the mind is quite capable of doing so. Here's an example:

My background isn't the same as KevinSim's; I'm 'married into the Church'. My spouse, although fairly inactive and not believing in many of the Church's truth claims, comes from a highly active family and a long line of old pioneer stock, and has a fond reverence for LDS childhood. I joined so that I could support my SO regardless of activity level, but I did so while retaining my own beliefs, and my SO knows where I stand. In turn, I've read completely through the Book of Mormon, Book of Abraham, D&C and consumed as much LDS-oriented material as I could find so that I could better understand SO's background.

At one point I remember reading through JSH and experienced an interesting reaction akin to KevinSim's when having reached the part that told of Joseph Smith's visit to the grove and inquiry of God about which religion to choose. At that point I was completely overcome by a flushed, intense emotional sensation probably not very unlike what KevinSim experienced. But, the thing that was apparent from this was not that this sensation was God trying to tell me that the Book of Mormon or any part of Smith's story was necessarily true. On the contrary, nearly everything about the texts and information that I had read seemed to speak plainly and consistently to the idea that the Book of Mormon was fabricated. So what was this emotional rush all about?

This intense feeling occurring at this point during the JSH reading was involuntarily self-generated because I had identified with the concept of wanting to know and understand what 'religious truth' was. Regardless of if Smith's story of his own search was true or false, I completely empathized with that same desire. But the sensation was connected to the process of inquiry as opposed to any particular answer. In retrospect, it could have occurred while in the midst of any other similar story of someone else's 'search for truth'.

I've experienced the same sensation a few other times. Once, it occurred while sitting on a mountainside within California's High Sierras in absolute solitude, watching a thunderstorm play out over a plain 50 miles distant, with not a single sound discernible other than occasional distant, muffled thunder slowly rolling in. I'll admit that at the time, experiencing that highly emotional sensation while watching such a beautiful sight led me to ponder the merits of Pantheism ( ), but I also realized that this singular occurrence could not be guaranteed by myself to be a confirmation of any aspect of Gods existence, or not, or of God's nature if existing, because doing so would be akin to placing limits on possibilities that mortals cannot even imagine or define.

[_Bazooka]

So, here's what I did.
1. I had faith that God existed.
2. I studied the Book of Mormon and gave it thoughtful consideration.
3. I listened with my heart for the whisperings of the Holy Spirit to confirm that what I was reading was true.
4. I prayed sincerely for an answer, whilst having faith that an answer would be granted.
5. I lived completely within the worthiness guidance of the Church.
6. I did this for an extended period of time, 2 years.
7. I did get an answer, but it was the opposite to the one you got.

Now what?

Bazooka, you didn't answer my question. If I "attempt to find out if you asked God the same question I did, in the same way I did, are you going to get offended again and once again bring the discussion to an end"?

Isn't your question moot in that I have already responded and provided you with exactly what I did (which is exactly what the Church prescribes one does in order to gain an answer)?


Here is a list of the assumptions you have made in gaining your testimony that God wants you in the Latter-day Saint Church:
1. God exists.
2. God exists and will grant people answers to questions.
3. Feelings you experience are associated to specific questions that you ask.
4, Feelings that are associated to specific questions that you ask are generated by God.
5. One particular sensation that you felt meant "Stay in the LDS Church Kevin".

You asked what alternative explanation could be given to explain the rushing sensation you felt in 1977. I'm not sure you are willing to concede that there are other reasonable explanations, but in reality there are several:
1. It was an adrenaline rush based on you wanting to confirm all the predetermined assumptions you were holding about God and the Church.
2. It was a clever ploy by Satan to keep you in his Church and not let you find out that <insert other religion other than Mormonism) was actually the right one.
3. It was God telling you to take flight but you misread His message.
In reality, you have no reasonable way of determining that your experience was the confirmation you say it was, or one of the three possibilities I have outlined above.

The Church itself is confused on how the Holy Spirit can be identified:

It is a feeling which cannot be described, but the nearest word we have is “burn” or “burning.” Accompanying this always is a feeling of peace, a further witness that what one heard is right. Once one recognizes this burning, this feeling, this peace, one need never be drawn astray in his daily life or in the guidance he may receive.

https://www.lds.org/general-conference/ ... e?lang=eng

What does a “burning in the bosom” mean? Does it need to be a feeling of caloric heat, like the burning produced by combustion? If that is the meaning, I have never had a burning in the bosom. Surely, the word “burning” in this scripture signifies a feeling of comfort and serenity. That is the witness many receive. That is the way revelation works.

Truly, the still, small voice is just that, “still” and “small.”

https://www.lds.org/ensign/1997/03/teac ... t?lang=eng

The Church seems to be saying that, no matter what feeling you feel, it's God telling you the Church is true.

[_KevinSim]

Bazooka, you didn't answer my question. If I "attempt to find out if you asked God the same question I did, in the same way I did, are you going to get offended again and once again bring the discussion to an end"?

Isn't your question moot in that I have already responded and provided you with exactly what I did (which is exactly what the Church prescribes one does in order to gain an answer)?

Fine, have it your way. Bazooka, keep in mind that I did ask you this question twice and didn't get an answer. I'm going to go on the assumption that you won't put an end to the discussion just because you don't like the way it's going.

That's easy. This is precisely where we left off when we were discussing this matter before. I attempted to find out if you really had asked God the same question I had, in the same way that I had. You got offended at my line of questioning and declared that you weren't going to engage with me any more. I wasn't calling you a liar. I was convinced that you genuinely thought you had asked the same question as I did, and in the same way. That doesn't mean you did.

So if I do that now, again, attempt to find out if you asked God the same question I did, in the same way I did, are you going to get offended again and once again bring the discussion to an end?

So, here's what I did.
1. I had faith that God existed.
2. I studied the Book of Mormon and gave it thoughtful consideration.
3. I listened with my heart for the whisperings of the Holy Spirit to confirm that what I was reading was true.
4. I prayed sincerely for an answer, whilst having faith that an answer would be granted.
5. I lived completely within the worthiness guidance of the Church.
6. I did this for an extended period of time, 2 years.
7. I did get an answer, but it was the opposite to the one you got.

Now what?

Surely you know what is next. Having asked God a question, and having received an answer from God, the next step is to ask God another question, in order to get another response. So my next question is, what next question did you ask God, after the question you mentioned, have you received another response from God yet, and if you have, what was it?

[_Bazooka]

Now what?

Surely you know what is next. Having asked God a question, and having received an answer from God, the next step is to ask God another question, in order to get another response. So my next question is, what next question did you ask God, after the question you mentioned, have you received another response from God yet, and if you have, what was it?

You see Kevin, here you are back with those assumptions....

God, if he exists and if the feelings I interpreted as answers were in actual fact answers from him and if I interpreted those answers correctly.....then God doesn't care what Church I'm in because it's utterly irrelevant to any eternal progression. An atheist who does good because his moral instinct drives him to help others has a better chance of getting into heaven than a Mormon who has all his ordinances in place but who does good because he is following instructions or because he is frightened sky daddy will be cross.

Now....do I need to keep asking God questions until I get a response that lines up with what you want to believe? Or can you just see that your experience is no different (other than to you) than the experiences of lots of other peoples experiences which have resulted in different outcomes?

[_KevinSim]

Surely you know what is next. Having asked God a question, and having received an answer from God, the next step is to ask God another question, in order to get another response. So my next question is, what next question did you ask God, after the question you mentioned, have you received another response from God yet, and if you have, what was it?

You see Kevin, here you are back with those assumptions....

We're starting with someone who recognizes the need to ask God a question in order to get a kernel of truth that someone can count on, and who therefore asks God if some organization is true (or if God wants her/him in some organization, or something like that). I think it's quite reasonable to assume that if that someone gets the answer that that organization is not true, that that someone should keep on asking God if some other organization is true. I mean, knowing the LDS Church is false is valuable; it keeps the someone away from an organization that God considers harmful; but it doesn't tell the someone where s/he should go, how that someone should live her/his life. So why wouldn't you ask God some further question, about another organization, to find out if God wanted you in that other organization? Or, if you're beginning to suspect that God might not want you in any organization at all, why wouldn't you ask God that? Why wouldn't you ask God if God even wants you in an organization? I don't care what questions you ask God, as long as you keep asking God questions until you narrow down just what exactly God wants you to do in your life.

God, if he exists and if the feelings I interpreted as answers were in actual fact answers from him and if I interpreted those answers correctly.....then God doesn't care what Church I'm in because it's utterly irrelevant to any eternal progression.

There you go; there's the question for you to have asked, or to ask, then. Have you asked God whether God cares what church you're in? Have you asked God whether what church you're in is relevant to any eternal progression?

An atheist who does good because his moral instinct drives him to help others has a better chance of getting into heaven than a Mormon who has all his ordinances in place but who does good because he is following instructions or because he is frightened sky daddy will be cross.

This isn't a discussion about who will get into heaven and who won't. To be perfectly honest, it has been decades since I've had any worries at all about whether or not I'd get into heaven. This is a discussion about finding out the will of God in one's life so one can align one's life with that will.

Now....do I need to keep asking God questions until I get a response that lines up with what you want to believe?

This isn't about getting a response that lines up with what I want to believe. I'm simply pointing out that if what you want to do is align your life with God's will, and you ask God if God wants you in one church and God tells you no, then you've made a little bit of progress, but the lion's share of your voyage of discovery still lies before you, and you need to ask God about other options just as much as you needed to when you asked God about the first church in the first place. Finding out that the LDS Church is false is a fine first step, but it only tells who what God doesn't want you to do; it doesn't tell you what God does want you to do. So ask God about the Seventh-Day Adventists, or the Roman Catholics, or about the Sikhs, for all I care. Or ask God if God wants you to be a hermit at the North Pole! I don't care what you ask God as long as you ask God something to narrow down what God wants you to do with your life.

[_Bazooka]

I don't care what you ask God as long as you ask God something to narrow down what God wants you to do with your life.

I did, that's why I said....

God, if he exists and if the feelings I interpreted as answers were in actual fact answers from him and if I interpreted those answers correctly.....then God doesn't care what Church I'm in because it's utterly irrelevant to any eternal progression.

...because that is what He told me.

Now what?

[_KevinSim]

I don't care what you ask God as long as you ask God something to narrow down what God wants you to do with your life.

I did, that's why I said....

God, if he exists and if the feelings I interpreted as answers were in actual fact answers from him and if I interpreted those answers correctly.....then God doesn't care what Church I'm in because it's utterly irrelevant to any eternal progression.

...because that is what He told me.

Now what?

There are a lot of ifs in that second quote. When did you lose your certainty that there is a God, or that those feelings you "interpreted as answers were in actual fact" from God, or that you'd interpreted those answers correctly?