The Book of Mormon *shouldn't* be proven factual

[_zeezrom]

...if he were he would appear to everyone, not just a very small few.

And how would he go about appearing to everyone and proving to everyone that he is God?

[_sock puppet]

Solid, indisputable evidence of God's existence is compatible with free-will/agency.

H.

Let's forget about Mormon doctrine for a second. I'm trying to imagine a world in which we all know God. I'm sorry, I cannot even begin to fathom it. The only thing that I begin to feel is conformity and it sucks!

Sounds like you don't want the CK, so stop sweating it.

[_sock puppet]

I don't know. Women are finicky, zee. And certainly your godess just may be having a woman's problem during that moment when she shows herself and her mood just may be a little unpredictable. I think that she will come with outstretched arms and give you a nice big hug and draw you close to her breast.

Screw you.

The best sentence in the English language, when directed at why me.

[_sock puppet]

As I recall LDS teachings, in the post-life spirit world, spirits will be taught the gospel and free to accept or reject it there, with the same disposition towards such that they have here (this is the explanation to counter the suggestion that those not exposed to it in this life are lucky, they could live how they wanted here and then accept the gospel in that spirit world and be saved anyway).

I remain unconvinced that it would be "wonderful" to have evidence of God's existence. Maybe the far reaching effects are too complex for me to grasp? I see what you are saying about agency and knowing how we might be rewarded and all, but I fail to see how all this would make my life wonderful.

I foresee a knowledge of God making the earth a little darker, actually. I have this vision of a Tolkien world with mists of darkness and an all seeing eye. It frightens me to think of a world in which we all know God with assurance. Maybe this explains my inability to go back to church and enjoy it?

Zee, sock makes a great point, so I hesitate to add to it. In the pre-mortal world we apparently were in the presence of God and were able to exercise free-will/agency, evidenced the teaching that a full third of the spirit children of God chose to follow Satan.

Solid, indisputable evidence of God's existence is compatible with free-will/agency.

H.

To cop a phrase, "the truth shall set you free". Why would that not be the case about whether god exists or not?

[_sock puppet]

What prevents you, or anyone, from making choices in a world where God is known to everyone?

H.

I haven't even gotten to the choices bit yet. I'm still thinking God's educational logistics.

How would God make herself known to us in the first place? Will she infuse our minds with data or will she do like presidential candidates, traveling around giving motivational speeches?

I can't help but think I would be extremely disappointed, no matter how she decides to show herself to all of us. It is likely she would not be what I had been hoping for. How depressing.

You suspect that god will not be as grandiose as you have imagined?

That says alot about the whole 'god' concept, doesn't it?

[_sock puppet]

Alma 32 neatly dissects faith into hoping for something, without evidence. That doesn't make the something real outside the realm of self-induced emotion. What it means is that the 'faithful' have identified an emotional need. A need for a powerful, benevolent being to watch over them, protect them, and right the wrongs done to them. This is due to basic human insecurity and a varying sense of what is 'unjust' in our world. Hoping there could be some such being comforts (another emotion) the one who hopes for such.

Alma 32 describes a step by step process that eventually ties in with Jesus' Parable of the Sower. This will still probably never satisfy those looking for "hard empirical evidence" (let's say, of the Dawkins type), but it does describe another kind of evidence, which is just as real to those who experience it fully. It's saying that we have a choice: we can let faith grow, or we can let it die. And in my view it grows stronger and stronger in the direction we choose, so that those who grow in faith eventually come to a perfect knowledge (in that thing), and those who let it die, grow more and more convinced that it's either all a lie or a fantasy - until they know nothing of the word of God, and may even mock and scorn it.

Hey, Ray.

What is a perfect knowledge in a thing?

Why cannot a perfect knowledge be had of it through empirical observation alone? Why does their need to be evidence-less hoping for it as a prerequisite?

21 And now as I said concerning faith—faith is not to have a perfect knowledge of things; therefore if ye have faith ye hope for things which are not seen, which are true.
22 And now, behold, I say unto you, and I would that ye should remember, that God is merciful unto all who believe on his name; therefore he desireth, in the first place, that ye should believe, yea, even on his word....

26 Now, as I said concerning faith—that it was not a perfect knowledge—even so it is with my words. Ye cannot know of their surety at first, unto perfection, any more than faith is a perfect knowledge.
27 But behold, if ye will awake and arouse your faculties, even to an experiment upon my words, and exercise a particle of faith, yea, even if ye can no more than desire to believe, let this desire work in you, even until ye believe in a manner that ye can give place for a portion of my words...

28 Now, we will compare the word unto a seed. Now, if ye give place, that a seed may be planted in your heart, behold, if it be a true seed, or a good seed, if ye do not cast it out by your unbelief, that ye will resist the Spirit of the Lord, behold, it will begin to swell within your breasts; and when you feel these swelling motions, ye will begin to say within yourselves—It must needs be that this is a good seed, or that the word is good, for it beginneth to enlarge my soul; yea, it beginneth to enlighten my understanding, yea, it beginneth to be delicious to me.
29 Now behold, would not this increase your faith? I say unto you, Yea; nevertheless it hath not grown up to a perfect knowledge.
30 But behold, as the seed swelleth, and sprouteth, and beginneth to grow, then you must needs say that the seed is good; for behold it swelleth, and sprouteth, and beginneth to grow. And now, behold, will not this strengthen your faith? Yea, it will strengthen your faith: for ye will say I know that this is a good seed; for behold it sprouteth and beginneth to grow.
31 And now, behold, are ye sure that this is a good seed? I say unto you, Yea; for every seed bringeth forth unto its own likeness.
32 Therefore, if a seed groweth it is good, but if it groweth not, behold it is not good, therefore it is cast away.
33 And now, behold, because ye have tried the experiment, and planted the seed, and it swelleth and sprouteth, and beginneth to grow, ye must needs know that the seed is good.
34 And now, behold, is your knowledge perfect? Yea, your knowledge is perfect in that thing, and your faith is dormant; and this because you know, for ye know that the word hath swelled your souls, and ye also know that it hath sprouted up, that your understanding doth begin to be enlightened, and your mind doth begin to expand...

38 But if ye neglect the tree, and take no thought for its nourishment, behold it will not get any root; and when the heat of the sun cometh and scorcheth it, because it hath no root it withers away, and ye pluck it up and cast it out.
39 Now, this is not because the seed was not good, neither is it because the fruit thereof would not be desirable; but it is because your ground is barren, and ye will not nourish the tree, therefore ye cannot have the fruit thereof.
40 And thus, if ye will not nourish the word, looking forward with an eye of faith to the fruit thereof, ye can never pluck of the fruit of the tree of life.

So, if I want something bad enough, even in the absence of evidence for it I'll eventually move from daydreaming about it incessantly (neurosis) to believing it exists and acting upon it (psychosis, if not a complete schizophrenic break with reality)?

[_Bob Loblaw]

Isn't it funny how the things we aren't supposed to have evidence for are the same things we don't have any evidence for?

[_sock puppet]

Isn't it funny how the things we aren't supposed to have evidence for are the same things we don't have any evidence for?

Convenient? No doubt.

I don't think that anyone has said that the authors of the Bible were dim-witted. They were able to weave some pretty astute observations about human beings into the narratives.

[_zeezrom]

You suspect that god will not be as grandiose as you have imagined?

That says a lot about the whole 'god' concept, doesn't it?

I suspect God won't be what makes sense to me. It might make sense to someone else...

[_zeezrom]

Isn't it funny how the things we aren't supposed to have evidence for are the same things we don't have any evidence for?

Actually, this is pretty funny.