MG & JLHPROF: From Whence Come Spiritual Experiences?

[_mentalgymnast]

You keep promoting blind faith and miss the other.

I would strongly disagree. I am not promoting a blind faith. I am promoting a reasoned and thoughtful faith. At the end of the day, faith can't be adequately demonstrated to make total sense. I get that. So as a person of faith I realize I may appear as "blind". Especially to those who have come to believe that only what is directly observable IS ALL that can be seen.

Regards,
MG

[_mentalgymnast]

IHAQ,

Thank you for a pretty much definitive summary of the MG / Choice 1 position regarding manifestations of the spirit, faith based discernment of truth, and associated transcendent phenomena that seem so central to the worldview of the faithful.

Thanks for sticking with it.

Nobody does it better.

Agreed! Thanks, ihaq-- and thank you DrW, for a great thread.

And thank you Lemmie for letting it run its course with relatively little interference on your part. It made it easier to try and keep to the conversation without being sidetracked.

Regards,
MG

[_Lemmie]

IHAQ,

Thank you for a pretty much definitive summary of the MG / Choice 1 position regarding manifestations of the spirit, faith based discernment of truth, and associated transcendent phenomena that seem so central to the worldview of the faithful.

Thanks for sticking with it.

Nobody does it better.

Agreed! Thanks, ihaq-- and thank you DrW, for a great thread.

<trolling snipped>
MG

Your response does not lend itself to a productive/civil conversation and/or discussion. It does lead us down a road that ultimately leads to a cul-de-sac/dead end where we find ourselves going round and round wasting each other's time. Rather than leading us in an unproductive/uncivil direction, you might want to add substantively to the discussion?

[_Themis]

I've considered this. That is always a possibility. It seems as though at the end of the day we're left to wonder, as I mentioned. I think it is this sense of wonder that causes a certain degree of questioning along with the feeling of confirmation. Yes, I think both can coexist and even come into conflict with each other.

I think that is at least partially the reason IHAQ observes me bouncing around a bit trying to put my thoughts together in regards to, what to me, is a rather difficult thing to actually conceptualize and clearly describe and talk about.

That was one of the reasons I was a bit hesitant to do so.

Regards,
MG

Yes you don't really know. That is one of the main points of this thread. A lot of my comments are not about proving your beliefs false.

[_mentalgymnast]

<trolling snipped>
MG

Your response does not lend itself to a productive/civil conversation and/or discussion. It does lead us down a road that ultimately leads to a cul-de-sac/dead end where we find ourselves going round and round wasting each other's time. Rather than leading us in an unproductive/uncivil direction, you might want to add substantively to the discussion.

Way to stick it to me, Lemmie. Well played. You're a pro.

Suggestion? You ought to try and be original instead of cut and pasting someone else's words.

Anyway, again, thanks for being relatively unobtrusive in this thread except for your little 'bit' back towards the beginning.

Regards,
MG

[_Themis]

You keep promoting blind faith and miss the other.

I would strongly disagree. I am not promoting a blind faith. I am promoting a reasoned and thoughtful faith. At the end of the day, faith can't be adequately demonstrated to make total sense. I get that. So as a person of faith I realize I may appear as "blind". Especially to those who have come to believe that only what is directly observable IS ALL that can be seen.

Regards,
MG

You would be wrong. Blind faith is beliefs and actions in which you have poor to no evidence for. This is the case with your religious beliefs. You have little to no physical evidence, and your posts about the spiritual establish you don't really know and admit you could be wrong. This means no good evidence whether your beliefs are true or not. This is the kind of faith asked for by the LDS religion, even if they claim you can eventually know.

[_Lemmie]

IHAQ,

Thank you for a pretty much definitive summary of the MG / Choice 1 position regarding manifestations of the spirit, faith based discernment of truth, and associated transcendent phenomena that seem so central to the worldview of the faithful.

Thanks for sticking with it.

Nobody does it better.

Agreed! Thanks, ihaq-- and thank you DrW, for a great thread.

<trolling snipped>
MG

<more trolling snipped>
MG

Your response does not lend itself to a productive/civil conversation and/or discussion. It does lead us down a road that ultimately leads to a cul-de-sac/dead end where we find ourselves going round and round wasting each other's time. Rather than leading us in an unproductive/uncivil direction, you might want to add substantively to the discussion.

[_DrW]

IHAQ,

Thank you for a pretty much definitive summary of the MG / Choice 1 position regarding manifestations of the spirit, faith based discernment of truth, and associated transcendent phenomena that seem so central to the worldview of the faithful.

Thanks for sticking with it.

Nobody does it better.

Agreed! Thanks, ihaq-- and thank you DrW, for a great thread.

To be fair, it should also be recognized that MG stuck with it as well - as did you, sock, Themis and others, helping to tease out a candid glimpse into the Choice 1 mindset and worldview, with all the rationalization and shelf stacking it entails.

Looks a though JLHPROF decided not to engage, despite earning a mention in the OP title, more or less abandoning MG in what all should recognize as hostile territory. I, for one, will keep this abandonment in mind next time JLHPROF sees fit to post an expression of his religious faith and his solidarity with the LDS Church.

[_I have a question]

I concluded the Book of Mormon wasn’t what it purported to be. I prayed about that conclusion and asked if I was right. I received the qualitative burning in the bosom I described earlier.

Spiritual phenomena, or self induced feeling....

When you say you "received the qualitative burning in the bosom", did you consider it to be from an outside source or self induced?

Regards,
MG

That’s irrelevant per your premise.
- the burning in the bosom is a qualitative differentiator between spiritual phenomena and self induced. Therefore if I had a qualitative burning in the bosom (and clearly I did) it is, per you, definitively and recognisably ‘spiritual phenomena’ not self-induced, regardless of any pre held beliefs.

Or, again per your premise.
- the burning in the bosom would manifest as a spiritual phenomena and be recognisable as such as a contradiction to a pre held belief.

Either way, where I thought it came from, where I think it came from, is entirely besides the point per your asserted premises for differentiating between spiritual phenomena and self induced sensation. You asserted that if one receives a qualitatively different burning in the bosom, this is the key differentiator between a spiritual experience and a self induced one.

I had a qualitatively different burning in the bosom which, per your assertions, must be spiritual phenomena not self induced, regardless of any other factors. Otherwise your assertion, that you can tell the difference between spiritual phenomena and self induced sensations because of a qualitatively different burning in the bosom, becomes utterly refuted.

It’s a simple as this:
Either I had a spiritual phenomena confirm to me that the Book of Mormon is false, or your assertions are false. Take your pick. There is no third option, because the creation of a different option would still refute your assertions on this thread thus far.

[_mentalgymnast]

Either I had a spiritual phenomena confirm to me that the Book of Mormon is false, or your assertions are false. Take your pick. There is no third option, because the creation of a different option would still refute your assertions on this thread thus far.

So, in essence, you're left to wonder. It is a world of abiguity, isn't?

Regards,
MG