Dan Vogel versus the late Ted Chandler

[_Quasimodo]

Hi vessr.

I bowed out of posting on this thread for the same reason that Bret Ripley did. I have been reading along, though, and I have enjoyed it thoroughly!

It seems you've received some great information from some great people.

Please let us know if you come to some final conclusions.

Thanks for the thread.

[_TomHagen]

Actually, Mormonism started with Joseph Smith seeing and speaking with God. Perhaps you should brush up by studying Mormonism and its origins. It seems you simply don't know what you are talking about. From what I can gather bcuzbcuz, your lack of ability to comprehend something as simple as that and your failure to seek and speak with God has left you as your are. Such a pity. I feel so sad for former Mormons that couldn't even grasp the basics.

Hi everyone, first post here. So yes, I'm a noob.

Tobin, with respect, I must be honest in that it seems that you are the one who doesn't fully grasp what is being said here. Vessr is saying he can't pray and wishes to verify the Book of Mormon story by valid external evidence as a logical exercise. The topic is about helping vessr do this. Your advice - that he MUST pray and that external evidence will avail him nothing - does not add to his quest, but only seeks to frustrate it by telling him he's wrong. You repeat this with nothing but assertions of the validity of your method, and demean other methods as failing to "grasp the basics."

There also appears to be a logical fallacy in your approach. The position that God is there to answer prayers is an affirmative position that must be established with objective evidence. No such evidence exists. To try it oneself removes the objectivity, and introduces confirmation bias.

You also speak as though it is the "former Mormons" who bear the burden of proof in establishing that the Book of Mormon is not true. You are attempting to switch the burden of proof. It is you who must prove that it is true. Vessr is inviting you to do so, and in response you give a condescending challenge to abolish all objectivity in the exercise and introduce confirmation bias. When he and others explain that he does not wish to do this, you belittle them and the objective standard they wish to maintain.

This is typical, in my experience, of those who do not wish to actually face the objective evidence. However, that evidence never goes away.

Answer me this: why would God create a system of alleged "truth" that is so at odds with objective evidence? Would you, as a parent, set up a system of punishment and reward for your own child wherein you tell them that they must reject and ignore the objective evidence - that the sky is not blue, that gravity does not make things fall, and that a hot stove will not burn them - just to test their belief in you? And then punish them when they insist upon telling you that the sky is, in fact, blue? Pardon me, but that is clinical narcissism resulting in a sick form of child abuse.

This is the ultimate paradox of Mormonism in my view: it preaches a God that has infinite love and understanding for his children, yet who then creates a "plan of salvation" that demands ignorance of fact and reason. How exactly does the ignorance of fact and reason help us become more godlike? Wouldn't the judicious use of our faculties in evaluating conflicting evidence actually ADD to our intelligence? Paradox.

[_Tobin]

TomHagen,

Thank you for your thoughtful comments, but we aren't talking about anything like that here. As I've discussed with vessr in another thread, we are literally talking about a person claiming to have seen God, an Angel, and had a gold book drop in his lap. I don't know about you, but this is not an every day (or any day) occurence in my world. If I may be so bold, it is not unreasonable to state that thse claims are patently absurd. The ONLY way they could ever be reasonable is if something similar happens to you. And that is exactly the proposition that Mormonism makes. Either God shows up and tells you it is true, or I'm sorry - it's NOT!!!

Now you can logically analyze Mormonism, its history, and its scriptures from now till the Second Coming. The fact is that we are talking about some rather radical and far fetched claims. Without some substantial experience that such things happen, it is really a waste of time to analyze Mormonism any further. It would seem that it is a fraud and an obvious one. And if you have that kind of experience, then what is your analysis going to show you that you have not experienced for yourself?

[_vessr]

Tobin, I agree that TomHagen’s comments were thoughtful. If fact, I thought they were very thoughtful.

We certainly ARE talking in this thread about the points that TomHagen shared. I think he knows that the Mormon claim is “about a person claiming to have seen God, an Angel, and had a gold book drop in his lap.” I think he agrees that, if true, that “is not an every day (or any day) occurence . …” He probably also agrees with you that a reasonable person could feel that the Mormon claim is “patently absurd” and would only “be reasonable is if something similar happens to” one of us. I think he understands that Mormonism is either true or it is not.

But you say that one “can logically analyze Mormonism, its history, and its scriptures from now till the Second Coming” but that it would be “really a waste of time to analyze Mormonism any further.” I disagree, particularly if the person is an honest seeker of truth and is willing to study all things out in his mind. If he has a hope that there is a God willing to hear and answer his prayers, then of course he is going to do that, as well. But even if he doesn't believe in prayer, at least he’s studied it out in his mind, which is half of the requirement.

Yes, I agree that Mormonism seems like “a fraud and an obvious one.” But it is worth studying out the various ways it might be a fraud before reaching any definitive conclusion. For all we know Tom is a praying gentleman and may already have applied the prayer test to this, or will when he’s ready. But, you ask, “what is your analysis going to show you that you have not experienced for yourself?”

Such analysis is going to give the honest investigator of truth as much clarity as he can gather before making a decision to go any further towards a supernatural explanation, should that end up being his inclination. If there is a God, he gave us minds to reason with and to study things out. That’s a Mormon proposition.

In sum, I felt that TomHagen’s response was honest and respectful. He articulated exactly what I was trying to say. That I subsequently have tried to pray about it doesn’t change the facts that I couldn’t pray about it to begin with. I genuinely, whether with or without prayer, to begin my efforts “to verify the Book of Mormon story by valid external evidence as a logical exercise.” He’s right about the topic of this thread, unlike the other thread, was to help me examine the valid exidence for my study. Whether I pray or not, I seek that external evidence to help me come to my own conclusions.

You and I may disagree with Tom that there is “a logical fallacy in your approach. The position that God is there to answer prayers is an affirmative position that must be established with objective evidence.” But he is right that no “such evidence exists.” And I am also concerned about the objectivity factor he describes—that prayer can introduce a confirmation bias. It was prayer that got me into my born again mode. It was prayer that caused me to be willing to be baptized as a member of the Mormon Church. And it was by prayer that I decided that the Sealed Portion of the Book of Mormon had been revealed. That praying got me into a lot of hot water, including excommunication from the Mormon Church. So, prayer may a factor in arriving at a truth, or it may be a hindrance and distraction.

I also think his point is valid regarding where the burden of proof lies. When we are talking about studying things out in our minds, the burden of proof lies with those and with that which are irrational, as you acknowledge Joseph Smith’s claims are. Then, after we study things out in a rational way, we can decide whether the next step is valid – the prayer part. I do believe that prayer, for the most part, introduces subjectivity into any experiment with truth. Will you, Tobin, respond to his challenge?:

“Answer me this: why would God create a system of alleged "truth" that is so at odds with objective evidence? Would you, as a parent, set up a system of punishment and reward for your own child wherein you tell them that they must reject and ignore the objective evidence - that the sky is not blue, that gravity does not make things fall, and that a hot stove will not burn them - just to test their belief in you? And then punish them when they insist upon telling you that the sky is, in fact, blue? Pardon me, but that is clinical narcissism resulting in a sick form of child abuse.”

[_Quasimodo]

TomHagen, welcome to the board!

Reading your first post, I think you will be a thoughtful and interesting member. I'm looking forward to more of your posts.

[_SteelHead]

The Book of Mormon can be condensed into two thoughts. A set of golden records retrieved after a laborious, convoluted, 4 year process from which the scriptures we now have were not translated, as they weren't even present for the majority of the translation. Making the whole golden record nothing more than superfluous baggage lugged around conveniently by Moroni.

The most perfect book on the earth, containing the fullness of the gospel of Jesus Christ, that contains absolutely zero of the doctrines and teachings, that make Mormonism unique.

[Guest]

For all we know Tom is a praying gentleman and may already have applied the prayer test to this, or will when he’s ready.
....
And I am also concerned about the objectivity factor he describes—that prayer can introduce a confirmation bias. It was prayer that got me into my born again mode. It was prayer that caused me to be willing to be baptized as a member of the Mormon Church. And it was by prayer that I decided that the Sealed Portion of the Book of Mormon had been revealed. That praying got me into a lot of hot water, including excommunication from the Mormon Church. So, prayer may a factor in arriving at a truth, or it may be a hindrance and distraction.

Thank you, vessr. And thank you as well, Tobin. I do appreciate the warm welcome.

To address the points above, I will confirm that I was, once, a praying gentleman, and prayed with frequency to seek the "Lord's" guidance on matters ranging from testimony to finding the proverbial lost car keys. It was, however, the objective evidence I referenced earlier that led me to realize that prayer was little more than an exercise in self-affirmation, and that the popular narrative of Mormon theology was baloney (or "bologna," in keeping with the refined tone of this forum ).

My attempts at prayer to discover or gain a testimony of truth never left me with more than a vague, warm feeling in my chest that I equated with the "burning of the bosom." A devout TBM would say "well, duh! That's what it's SUPPOSED to feel like!" However, I received this sensation on conflicting points and questions. On many occasions, I would ask if "X" was right, and get the feeling, then I would ask if "not X" was right - and get the same feeling. Before long, I realized that how I felt about "X" usually had a lot to do with - *surprise!* - how I felt about "X" when I prayed.

I would then spend an inordinate amount of time praying, trying to clear my head of everything and discern the tiniest differential in the sensation to see if that teeny, tiny difference was perhaps the "Spirit." I would even specifically ask for the "stupor of thought" if something was wrong. Lo and behold, I found that I would get the stupor of thought about "Y" when I thought I should...until I rethought things, considered the benefits of "Y" and asked again, in which case I would get the burning feeling - all in the same prayer experience. This then led me to berate myself internally for being unable or unworthy to receive the Spirit's confirmation, and would often just end up feeling lost and like I should just follow my leaders and my wife, since they always seemed to know what to do.

Yet over the years, I have seen many friends and loved ones make important, life-altering decisions based on claims that the Spirit positively, absolutely gave them a confirmation that they should do "X," when it was quite obvious that they should not do "X" when looked at objectively. Such decisions included marriages that ended in divorce in record time, going back to an abusive husband and then leaving him weeks later, investing in Ponzi schemes, buying a new house before the old one even had an offer - only to later lose both in foreclosure - and other idiocies like this. All of these decisions were made by people who were devout followers of the gospel who had, indeed, spent a lot of time praying about it. But it became clear to me that for THOSE people, they were interpreting their own deep desires and hopes as "the Spirit."

I have finally come to the conclusion that I alluded to in my earlier post: this kind of constant deciphering of what is and what is not "the Spirit" is just too d*mned hard and ridiculous to come from a loving "Father in Heaven." This is informed by my own experience as a father. I would never invent a game for my children where they are required to decipher a series of random and conflicting messages which may or may not have anything to do with anything in order to reach a goal. I certainly would not establish a system wherein my children's entire future of happiness and success or failure and misery depended upon their ability to decode my capricious nonsense. I would make it VERY clear, and tailor it in a way that each child could best understand. As a loving parent, I would want my children to have clear messages and instructions that they could follow FOR THEMSELVES. They would still be able to choose whether to follow them, but I would not make success or failure contingent upon their ability to decipher my nonsense, or upon their blind trust that one of their siblings can decipher it.

Why would God - a "perfect parent" in Mormon theology - employ such a capricious, arbitrary system that virtually guarantees failure on all but those who literally stumble upon the right answer? It doesn't make any sense. Moreover, as I already implied, if the purpose of our journey here is to become more godlike, I fail to see how that involves ignoring cold, hard facts in favor of the absurdity mentioned by Tobin. If we are here to be tested, then what is proven by ignoring what our own brains tell us, eschewing our own learning, and just going along with what another person claims is the right answer? Isn't that actually cheating? To not use your own knowledge and experience, but rather rely upon the answer of another?

And now I've gone almost completely off-topic. So let me bring it back: objective evidence - the kind that vessr is seeking - is the only way to resolve this. It is the only way to see something for what it is, outside your own biased, subjective experience. As for Tobin's thesis that in order to confirm the Joseph Smith account, one must experience it themselves, then Tobin is correct: it is a fraud, because God has only given that experience to a select few with highly suspicious motives.

[_TomHagen]

TomHagen, welcome to the board!

Reading your first post, I think you will be a thoughtful and interesting member. I'm looking forward to more of your posts.

Thanks, Quasimodo. I am here to learn the uncomfortable, and see the flaws in my own thinking. If I can make meaningful contributions, all the better.

[Guest]

Thanks Tom for your response, but I think you are making a number of assumptions here that are not necessarily true.

For example, I highly doubt that

Why would God - a "perfect parent" in Mormon theology - employ such a capricious, arbitrary system that virtually guarantees failure on all but those who literally stumble upon the right answer?

is true. As far as I can tell in Mormonism, the purpose of life is merely to exist and received a body. Whether it be for 2 seconds or for 100 years. Also, very few of the vast majority of humans that have lived on this planet have ever heard of Mormonism, so it is very doubtful that joining Mormonism is essential to God in this life.
So you are right.

It doesn't make any sense.

Moreover, as I already implied, if the purpose of our journey here is to become more godlike, I fail to see how that involves ignoring cold, hard facts in favor of the absurdity mentioned by Tobin.

Again, this is something I very seriously doubt is our purpose here. Do we learn to create planets, order things around with our minds and so on? In what way are we little gods on this planet and learning to become more god-like exactly? I believe the purpose of life beyond existing is to learn to accept and love one another, treat them with respect, and do our best in whatever circumstances we find ourselves. If anything, it isn't to become god-like at all, but to become more humane.

If we are here to be tested, then what is proven by ignoring what our own brains tell us, eschewing our own learning, and just going along with what another person claims is the right answer?

I fail to see any expectation along these lines. God provides evidence (proofs) in our lives that we can choose to follow in our search for him, or we can choose not to. These tests as you characterize them are simply challenges in our way that improve our humanity. We would be pretty awful creatures without some challenges and weaknesses to overcome.

Isn't that actually cheating?

No, it is just the nature of existence. I can't think you would dispute that everyone that is born has at least some of these things in their lives.

To not use your own knowledge and experience, but rather rely upon the answer of another?

Again, that isn't what is being taught or you are missing the point. When we love one another, and do our best for each other - we grow closer to God than by doing anything else we can do. If you want the best answer to many of the world's ills it lies in that. And that is what the Lord is trying to teach us.

God has only given that experience to a select few with highly suspicious motives.

And I disgree. I believe God has touched many lives and people have risen to meet their challenges and have been great examples as God has inspired and motivated them. People like Martin Luther King Jr, Fred Rogers, Rosa Parks, and Gandhi to name just a few. If you wish to know God and be like him, aspire to be like these people were at their best and make the difference they did.

[Guest]

I also think his point is valid regarding where the burden of proof lies. When we are talking about studying things out in our minds, the burden of proof lies with those and with that which are irrational, as you acknowledge Joseph Smith’s claims are. Then, after we study things out in a rational way, we can decide whether the next step is valid – the prayer part. I do believe that prayer, for the most part, introduces subjectivity into any experiment with truth. Will you, Tobin, respond to his challenge?:

“Answer me this: why would God create a system of alleged "truth" that is so at odds with objective evidence? Would you, as a parent, set up a system of punishment and reward for your own child wherein you tell them that they must reject and ignore the objective evidence - that the sky is not blue, that gravity does not make things fall, and that a hot stove will not burn them - just to test their belief in you? And then punish them when they insist upon telling you that the sky is, in fact, blue? Pardon me, but that is clinical narcissism resulting in a sick form of child abuse.”

Then I think you are missing what I'm saying. We have some very distinct claims here and I hardly think God is hiding anything from us. If we are blind to them, I believe it is something we are doing to ourselves. The thing that you need to recognize is that there are many good, wonderful and miraculous experiences in life and these come from God. Hold on to these. Cherish them and seek more of them in your search for the truth and God, but don't blind yourself to them because of what are merely matters of perception only. In fact, it is unlikely that any of what Mormonism tells us could be true at all without these experience and a God that really does interact with us in this way and provides us with them. It is also my belief our best impulses and desires come from God as does our earnest desire to learn the truth.

So what are we really seeking then? Yes, ultimately seeing and speaking with God is the destination, but that is hardly all of it. It is like following a trail of bread crumbs - going from one good thing to another. Remember, as Isaiah teaches - it is precept upon precept, line upon line, here a little, there a little, until we come to a fullness of the truth. The journey is just as important if not more so than the destination.