Sethbag wrote:Stemelbow, my wife and daughter visited a local Christian kilochurch (not quite big enough to be mega yet, but certainly larger than a dekachurch) not that long ago with a sister-in-law of ours. They really got all worked up by the music, the words, and so forth, and my daughter told me how they ended up bursting into tears and crying with very powerful emotion.
First question: was this the Spirit, telling my then-wavering-LDS wife that this local born-again Christian church was in fact the true church?
Several weeks later, they went again, and I went with them. It was a pretty good time. Other than the insipid message of the music, I enjoyed it (it rocked out reasonably well). I definitely felt the heartstrings being pulled, though my overly-analytical mind probably nipped it somewhat in the bud as, rather than just giving myself up to the emotional manipulation, I recognized it and analyzed it in realtime, instead.
In a subsequent conversation with this sister-in-law, she was trying to convince me that this church has the Spirit, and she needs that, and appreciates that. When I didn't look convinced, she reminded me of the time I went and asked me "didn't you feel that? I know you did!"
I simply asked her if she's ever watched a Hollywood chick flick, feel-good-hit-of-the-summer, or whatever. She said of course. And didn't she ever cry, or feel all verklemmt, get all emotional at some point during the movie? Of course.
Well that's because human beings know how to create situations in which emotional responses will be evoked in others. Hollywood chick flicks are absolute proof of this, and they do it all the time. People have got this "set up a situation where we can pull the heartstrings" thing down, probably literally, to a science.
So I asked my sister-in-law, and I ask you now, if Hollywood proves that human beings are very good at setting people up to feel touched, emotional, inspired, heartstrings pulled, etc., how is it unreasonable to assume that churches, such as the local Christian kilochurch, and the LDS one during its various conferences, etc., do the same thing?
In fact, I continued to my sister-in-law, I absolutely know, 100%, that this was human-created emotion rather than some "Spirit" testifying to me, because part of the message they taught the day I went to the Christian kilochurch included references to Creationism, Biblical inerrancy, and the literal Adam and Eve story, which I know to be false.
Boyd K. Packer himself said that emotion and "the Spirit" are so closely linked that we often mistake one for the other. I can't agree with him, because I am convinced that it's all emotion and other psychological phenomena (eg: euphoric states), and there's no "Spirit" at all! But even within the Mormon paradigm, Packer admits people often confuse the two. So how, other than what I read recently on MDD "when you feel the spirit, you just know", can one reliably differentiate between the two?
I see what you're saying, I simply can't see it as attempting to use you. They are attempting to teach that feelings are important to the human experience, in all the cases you allude to. But again, I don't think every good feeling is the Holy Ghost sending a message of truth.