Is the Book of Mormon Divinely Inspired?

[Physics Guy]

Much if not most of what most people know or believe, about anything, comes from childhood indoctrination. Very few people will ever speak any language as well as the one (or ones) they learned before around age eight.

This does strongly suggest that any impression one has that one’s own childhood religion is more correct than alternatives is likely to be an illusion. It doesn’t suggest at all, though, that whatever one learned must be wrong. Learning to appreciate other languages, or other religions, doesn’t really mean rejecting one’s own.

[I Have Questions]

How did you determine that was God, as opposed to something self-generated, or an entirely different supernatural entity?

In the canonised version of the first vision, even Joseph does not claim that god spoke to him. The church has run with the inference that the two "personages" were god the father, and Jesus. But I think it's significant that Joseph does not say who they were.

For all we know, they could have been Screwtape and Wormwood. Yes, I know that the supposed relationship between the senior devil and the junior tempter was said to be that of uncle/nephew, but if Screwtape had been a real "devil", surely he would not have flinched at the lie that Wormwood was his son.

You’re quite right. Smith was hedging his bets. He doesn’t clarify whether or not he saw them in a dream or not.

[I Have Questions]

How did you determine that was God, as opposed to something self-generated, or an entirely different supernatural entity?

First, what do you experience, ever, that isn't self generated? So seems like a useless question.

Okay, so your experience of God was self-generated. Do I have that right?

[I Have Questions]

How did you determine that was God, as opposed to something self-generated, or an entirely different supernatural entity?

I don't know if it's God. I'm assuming the name, but it seems to align with the ideas of Crist, insofar as I have understood Crist. I learn over time and by testing it.

Okay, so it could be literally anything, including your own thoughts and subconscious mind. Got it. What you’re doing is retrospectively assigning luck, good fortune, quick wittedness etc to a supernatural entity simply because you want to believe a supernatural entity exists. If you’re going to do that you need to assign the examples of bad luck, misfortune, slow wittedness etc to that supernatural entity’s negligence. You can’t be half pregnant.

[Valo]

I just so happen to have been born into a LDS background.

Dawkins, a high priest in his religion, stating a normal and obvious fact as if it were profound.

[Valo]

I don't know if it's God. I'm assuming the name, but it seems to align with the ideas of Crist, insofar as I have understood Crist. I learn over time and by testing it.

Okay, so it could be literally anything, including your own thoughts and subconscious mind. Got it. What you’re doing is retrospectively assigning luck, good fortune, quick wittedness etc to a supernatural entity simply because you want to believe a supernatural entity exists. If you’re going to do that you need to assign the examples of bad luck, misfortune, slow wittedness etc to that supernatural entity’s negligence. You can’t be half pregnant.

You have no idea what you are talking about. Get a clue and drop the arrogance and maybe you can start making sense.

[Valo]

What's your point? First in LDS narrative you can't have the companionship of the Holy Ghost when 3 years old or essentially from life. I've had that gift since birth. Second, in no instance when I was three or six or seven was I thinking anything Mormon or was it in my mind. I was oblivious. These experiences happened. I just so happen to have been born into a LDS background.

Okay. You also wrote this, earlier:

...Yet the message of the Book of Mormon, insofar as it has not been edited, was meant to come forth as another witness of God's purposes and doctrine of salvation...

Of all the possible books you could have decided were from god, you have concluded the one from the religion that you were born into is the one from god, even though you are sure that the LDS religion has had no impact on the feelings you have experienced as coming from god. Do you see how unlikely it is that the LDS church has no impact on how you interpret your feelings?

My point is that while your beliefs are yours and you have the right to interpret them as you wish, your story is not believable to me. Your god does not exist for me, and your experiences all have very natural explanations, in my opinion.

But thank you for sharing your feelings and experiences, it has been very interesting to read. I hope you appreciate reading others' points of view as well, as you will find a fascinating variety of stories and backgrounds here.

One last question, why do you use the spelling 'crist'?

I have rejected the LDS religion as false and don't sustain the leaders as prophets seers and revelators. I've rejected a huge portion of what I was taught as a child yet you think I've only accepted the Book of Mormon as true because of my upbringing? That makes no sense. Why would I reject my religious upbringing but not the Book of Mormon if I was just being influenced by my religious upbringing?

Because I believe the Book of Mormon contains ideas that come from Crist doesn't mean I've chosen one book. I don't accept everything written in the Book of Mormon. It's not about dogma or doctrines. It's about a spirit, a pattern, an ideal and Crist is a spirit whether in pattern form or some other form, it exist as a reality. This spirit can be found in many places, not just the Book of Mormon.

There is always going to be a way to explain the experiences we have with God as mere nothing. It's subtle. It's not about certainty or dogma. But it is about patterns that although I can't show you the patterns I've experienced except as a witness, all I can do is tell you the patterns I've experienced. I can't explain how I receive information I do not know. Yet it happens. There is no easy explanation even though you suggest it's all normal and explainable. Not from my experiences anyway.

It's drains me immensely to interact with most people on this forum because there is so much arrogance and pride.

Crist is an old English way of saying Christ before the silent H was added. The H is unnecessary and I'd rather remove the H so I can give homage to Crist and His involment with His creation today just as anciently.

[huckelberry]

My point is that while your beliefs are yours and you have the right to interpret them as you wish, your story is not believable to me. Your god does not exist for me, and your experiences all have very natural explanations, in my opinion.

But thank you for sharing your feelings and experiences, it has been very interesting to read. I hope you appreciate reading others' points of view as well, as you will find a fascinating variety of stories and backgrounds here.

There is always going to be a way to explain the experiences we have with God as mere nothing. It's subtle. It's not about certainty or dogma. But it is about patterns that although I can't show you the patterns I've experienced except as a witness, all I can do is tell you the patterns I've experienced. I can't explain how I receive information I do not know. Yet it happens. There is no easy explanation even though you suggest it's all normal and explainable. Not from my experiences anyway.

It's drains me immensely to interact with most people on this forum because there is so much arrogance and pride.

Crist is an old English way of saying Christ before the silent H was added. The H is unnecessary and I'd rather remove the H so I can give homage to Crist and His involvement with His creation today just as anciently.

Valo, People can express abrasive points of view here. Some are hostile to religious faith. I do not find myself noticing arrogance much. Perhaps I am so arrogant that other pride just seems normal to me. It is also possible I have had discussions with people with different points of view all my life and assume it is normal. Not everybody feels that way. It is possible that it is human to react to someone saying something one seriously disagrees with by feeling there must be something wrong with them. It might feel like the other person, unlike oneself, is arrogant and proud.

Interesting observation about spelling.

[huckelberry]

Dawkins, My ancestors worshiped Thor and Wotan yet I do not. There must be more involved than children repeating parents. A desire to understand religious change as well as stability could lead to better understanding of people. Now it is possible to see naturalistic explanations for the change. Those as well as possible spiritual influence are going to have a lot more to do with why people have religion than the simplistic observation that it is parental indoctrination.

[Marcus]

Dawkins, My ancestors worshiped Thor and Wotan yet I do not. There must be more involved than children repeating parents. A desire to understand religious change as well as stability could lead to better understanding of people. Now it is possible to see naturalistic explanations for the change. Those as well as possible spiritual influence are going to have a lot more to do with why people have religion than the simplistic observation that it is parental indoctrination.

The question was why a person who grew up Mormon but denies any Mormon influence would settle on the Book of Mormon as God's true word. That's a very specific example of parental influence, and not intended to address the general question of why people have religion.

(Although I'm not sure who Dawkins is, so maybe I am missing what your comment is referring to!!)