Why did I ever read beyond the slaying of Laban?

[_Drifting]

You and I both missed it.

How did I miss my own reasoning?

That's right up there with:
"What is the meaning of life?"

[_Gordon]

That's right up there with:
"What is the meaning of life?"

Ok...

I enjoy your posts

[_Chap]

Oh yes wise master,
I'm sure you would love me to follow, whilst you lead.

Foolish sarcasm doesn't become anyone.

In reaction to patronising nonsense like this, it was fairly appropriate:

Try to follow along, will you?

[_Themis]

I do. However, I can attribute those sensations to reality...or at least to my personal experiences.

To be clear I am not suggesting the sensation is not part of reality. Now the experience is essentially devoid of meaning other then I feel a sensation. That you are doing a religious activity is where you attach the meaning that the experience is related to the activity, so you then attach another meaning that is coming from God, even though there are other possibilities. Now of course you have to attach what you think or want to meaning to be since the sensation really doesn't provide one. This could be the church is true, or the Book of Mormon is true, or Monson is God's prophet, or Wicca is true, or Buddhism, etc.

They did. In fact, my father was the bishop when I was eight. Yet, I don't recall foreknowledge of the type of witness I first had (whilst not seeking for it). I'm sure you will simply chalk it up to a change in my memory to suit the need, though...

I still have a hard time believing someone like you would not already have been exposed to LDS ideas about feeling the spirit of God. Even if a child hadn't, I would think it likely they would attach meanings based on what they were doing at the time, and their world view, especially religious views they have already been exposed to and accept. As to self memory alteration, it is quite common, although in this instance most of us don't remember where or when we were exposed to certain ideas.

As I stated, in my experience, the experiences aren't the same. Furthermore, I explained how easy it is to relate such experiences to a divine source, but to attribute it to differing things.

Well we obviously have had very different experiences with those outside of the LDS religion.

I will refer to Moses's own experience in Moses 1:12-22. He was able to tell the difference between the source of the experience.

While his statement that the spirit had not fully left him wouldn't be universally objective, his statement regarding the ability to look upon the figure might be, and the contrasting statements of God and the Devil most certainly would be.

Assuming Moses was a real person, he is telling the difference by what his world view is, but then the story has God showing up in great glory and Satan not. It is also not a good example since your experiences are not the same as the story, or most people's.

Some claim to have witnesses against the LDS Church, which critics don't seem to question (since it supports their stance), but question witnesses for it.

I don't think this is really true. I don't accept that one has prayed and God told them the church is not true anymore then I do the opposite.

However, I was suggesting that certain 'evidences' against truth claims are subjective (For instance why an individual thinks a command from God to slay Laban is abhorrent), yet you seem to have no problem rejecting a truth witness because it's subjective.

I agree this is subjective, but I don't reject LDS truth claims based on this or others like it. This story is not really the same as questioning some truth witness about Scientology or Mormonism. The story has problems even believing members like Consig have brought up. I doubt few if any have rejected LDS truth claims on this story or others like it, but if they do I would think it a little rash. It can be a start for some though.