The Top Ten and Only Reasons to be a True Believer

[_Themis]

I think he's capable.

I think he is capable, just unwilling.

[_Themis]

Let me make this very clear. The words in scripture are interpreted by our mind which can be greatly influenced by our world view. If the words in the Bible are filtered in such a way that the message that is intended is not picked up by the person reading then the Holy Ghost will not witness to the false interpretation. It is that simple. I asked you to Interpret Romans 10 and 11 to see how you interpret scripture. If you can't interpret at all then the Holy Ghost again will not witness to nothing. The Holy Ghost witnesses to truth. Using your assessment of Romans as a base line we can form an idea of your interpreting skills. If you have none then I suspect that the Holy Ghost knows that.

The only interpretation about the Book of Mormon when one is praying about it, is whether it is true. Most of us believed that it was and were undertaking what it asked. You still make huge assumptions and circular reasoning. Now how do you discern that the HG is witnessing to you if we assume one has got the right interpretation?

[_Themis]

The hardest thing for me to do was to let scripture speak for itself and trust it. When I read some verses it appeared that the message in one area was in conflict with another area. So I learned to trust scripture and set aside those areas and then do research into those topics.

How do you know that it is scripture. You seem to be just assuming it is. For that matter you also assume that a particular God exists. How do you know this? These really are reasonable questions. This is why steelhead is coming to you from a perspective of one who does not believe in the Bible, and how you can show that they should come to believe in it and have faith in the Biblical God.

[_subgenius]

What is he supposed to correct? This is hardly a criticism. What you are proposing is that if you have a spiritual experience, you should accept it at face value and assume that it is real. That is still an interpretation of the experience.

that is what i am proposing...except for the "assume" part.

Calling it "self-evident" doesn't mean that isn't an interpretation.

actually, it does...its kinda how the definition thingy works out for both terms.
Its not a difficult concept - Its like being conscious....there is no doubt or interpretation involved or even possible.

Of course, the problem is that taking spiritual experiences at face value becomes more difficult when you become aware that others are also having them that contradict yours.

you are speaking about a different problem here.

Consider the many people who have taken Moroni's challenge (with pure intent, blah, blah, blah) and either received no answer or "self-evident" confirmation that Mormonism is not true.

i have considered it. it is also not a problem that some would receive different or no answer when compared to my experience.....however, that is not the definition of the religious experience.
again, you are talking about another topic.

[_Franktalk]

Back on topic, can you explain how to interpret this...

I will try.

 3 Behold, I would exhort you that when ye shall read these things, if it be wisdom in God that ye should read them, that ye would remember how merciful the Lord hath been unto the children of men, from the creation of Adam even down until the time that ye shall receive these things, and ponder it in your hearts.

 4 And when ye shall receive these things, I would exhort you that ye would ask God, the Eternal Father, in the name of Christ, if these things are not true; and if ye shall ask with a sincere heart, with real intent, having faith in Christ, he will manifest the truth of it unto you, by the power of the Holy Ghost.

The wisdom of God refers to the truth of God and His message. This is not the wisdom of the world. In fact if any wisdom of the world is used to read scripture you are just about guaranteed to miss the message. So the first IF stands as a definition to use certain tools like your heart or spiritual discernment to read scripture. Failure to do so will result in failure. The second idea centers around the mercy of God. This is a reminder to see scripture through the love of God towards His spirit children. If this is not done then the message will not come as well. Because the message must contain the love of God.

In verse 4 IF you have used the proper tools and methods then God promises to send the Holy Ghost to witness the truth of the message. But of course there is another big IF in this verse as well. It deals with intent. If you have an intent to know truth then that is what you find. But if you are of the world then the world will reflect back at you. If you hate then what you need from the world in order to keep hating will come to you.

1Co 5:5 To deliver such a one unto Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus.

Will God step aside and let you wallow in the world? You betcha.

[_SteelHead]

Which god are you talking about? Ogum?

[_Drifting]

Back on topic, can you explain how to interpret this...

I will try.

 3 Behold, I would exhort you that when ye shall read these things, if it be wisdom in God that ye should read them, that ye would remember how merciful the Lord hath been unto the children of men, from the creation of Adam even down until the time that ye shall receive these things, and ponder it in your hearts.

 4 And when ye shall receive these things, I would exhort you that ye would ask God, the Eternal Father, in the name of Christ, if these things are not true; and if ye shall ask with a sincere heart, with real intent, having faith in Christ, he will manifest the truth of it unto you, by the power of the Holy Ghost.

The wisdom of God refers to the truth of God and His message. This is not the wisdom of the world. In fact if any wisdom of the world is used to read scripture you are just about guaranteed to miss the message. So the first IF stands as a definition to use certain tools like your heart or spiritual discernment to read scripture. Failure to do so will result in failure. The second idea centers around the mercy of God. This is a reminder to see scripture through the love of God towards His spirit children. If this is not done then the message will not come as well. Because the message must contain the love of God.

In verse 4 IF you have used the proper tools and methods then God promises to send the Holy Ghost to witness the truth of the message. But of course there is another big IF in this verse as well. It deals with intent. If you have an intent to know truth then that is what you find. But if you are of the world then the world will reflect back at you. If you hate then what you need from the world in order to keep hating will come to you.

Now here's the rub.
I complied fully with the criteria set out in this scripture. Including having the right intent. Everything I did, why and how I did it, was exactly as specified by Moroni. I had the honest intent of finding the truth and God witnessed to me that the truth is the Book of Mormon is fraudulent.

[_Franktalk]

He just needs to understand that we're trying to isolate the difference between the extremely convincing perception of an "un-twisted" Truth and actual "un-twisted" Truth. He needs to understand that they are distinct and we must need a way to discern between them.

Spiritual discernment

Discernment is not a logical argument. No one can learn discernment. It is a free gift of God once you get to a certain place on your spiritual walk. There is nothing I can do to give you rules for discernment other than the scriptures I have already shared.

Imagine if you would a large container filled with green balls. Then two blue balls are added to the pile. If we ask a color blind person to get or discern the Blue balls we find he can not. They all appear the same to him. The same is true of spiritual discernment but in this case the person who wishes to find the "truth" can not find it unless they obtain spiritual glasses. Having never had spiritual glasses on before it may appear as foolishness to a new person. Now go one step further and say the glasses are not a physical item but a spiritual item. Now the new person has no clue what that means at all. There is nothing in the world that can help you understand what spiritual glasses are. A leap of faith is required and a walk in the spirit. Both of which seem like foolishness to someone of the world.

[_subgenius]

Subgenius,

In answering the above question...

I hope you don't already believe that spiritual experiences are too personal to sufficiently examine. Otherwise, lol, good luck answering a question which undeniably establishes sufficient examination is required to trust a single one of them...

But what the hell am I thinking... You've already proven my point by accepting something could be "self-evident".

...what a silly question to ask when you've already admitted that you accept the one idea which completely rejects the usefulness of any "sufficient examination".

I have never said that a religious experience can not be examined...but that is not what you are framing your argument with.
The fallacies are simple
First you try to sleight of hand define "interpretation" with "discern"...the 2 words have completely different meanings and application. Perception vs giving meaning.
Second you erroneously propose that religious experience require interpretation and provide no support for that position, and in fact, the opposite is true.

So, yes, a religious experience may be examined but that is another topic altogether different from what your argument states.

Now, when it comes to something like Moroni's challenge the argument is simple but your error to date is that this challenge is an examination, or something akin to null hypothesis, or some other non-applicable means.........when clearly it is not.

and lastly, re-read my position on self-evidence to you and my response to Mormon dad

In what possible sense do you mean "self-evident" which applies to all spiritual confirmation of the Mormon paradigm, but does not apply to a single spiritual dis-confirmation of the same paradigm?

I asked you to consider the notion. In other words, things may be internally inspected without contradiction...so it is with the Book of Mormon argument as opposed to what you are trying to put forth.
which we read here in your contention

Within the Mormon paradigm, any method for interpreting religious experience is circularly dependent upon an interpretation of religious experience--begging the question--and is therefore, unreliable as the necessary foundation for Mormon belief.

your contention assumes that a method of interpretation is reliant on another method of interpretation which must equal a self-negating contradiction.
Your assumption that the interpretation is dependent on another is flawed.
Your assumption that the alleged contradiction renders it unreliable is also flawed.

The former is proven by the fact that a religious experience does not have to interpreted. The experience can be discerned without further inspection. Further inspection may be possible but it is not necessary nor does it confirm or deny the experience.

The latter is proven by the fact that self-inspection in and of itself is viable and reliable. Therefore the Book of Mormon, Mormonsim, and using one experience to confirm or deny another experience is valid - even when both experiences are set forth from the same paradigm. Science works quite well on this system.
What you are saying, is that we can not possibly know anything because we can never escape confirming ourselves by ourselves...this is, of course, absurd.
being conscious and then admitting that one is conscious does not become an unreliable means or foundation to believe that one is conscious.

[_Franktalk]

Now here's the rub.
I complied fully with the criteria set out in this scripture. Including having the right intent. Everything I did, why and how I did it, was exactly as specified by Moroni. I had the honest intent of finding the truth and God witnessed to me that the truth is the Book of Mormon is fraudulent.

Let us say this is true. Then what did you do next? What church do you belong to? Was that choice witnessed to? What doctrine do you believe in? Was that witnessed to? Please tell me all about the good fruit that came from this experience.