The Top Ten and Only Reasons to be a True Believer

[_Drifting]

I have already stated that a spiritual experience can come from two sources. One from the light and contains truth. The other source is not reliable and may lie to you. Unless you can discern between the two then one may accept a lie as the truth.

And how do you discern between the two?

When the spiritual experience agrees with the current brand of Mormonism it's from the source of light and truth. Unless and until the official policy changes, in which case it is then from the source of lies.

Hope that clears it up for you.

[_subgenius]

1. Personal religious experience.
2. Personal religious experience is reliably interpreted by Mormonism.
3. Personal religious experience is reliably interpreted by Mormonism.
4. Personal religious experience is reliably interpreted by Mormonism.
5. Personal religious experience is reliably interpreted by Mormonism.
6. Personal religious experience is reliably interpreted by Mormonism.
7. Personal religious experience is reliably interpreted by Mormonism.
8. Personal religious experience is reliably interpreted by Mormonism.
9. Personal religious experience is reliably interpreted by Mormonism.
10. It is impossible to question reasons 1 through 9.

Most Mormons I know can never get past reason #1... But, I love a challenge. So, I formally request anyone to find flaw--or room for development--in the following argument:

Qualifications:
By "interpretation", I mean to discern or perceive religious meaning or significance which may justify specific religious claims.
By "personal religious experience", I mean any experience which would lead someone to discern or perceive religious meaning or significance which may justify specific religious claims.
By "reliable method", I mean any method which does not lead to contradiction.
By "problematic discrepancies", I mean any disagreement between interpretation of any religious experience.

Premise: Religious experience requires interpretation.

Contention: Within the Mormon paradigm, any method for interpretation of religious experience is circularly dependent upon the interpretation of a personal religious experience and is therefore, unreliable as the necessary foundation for Mormon belief.

In other words...
1) Within Mormonism, there is no reliable method for interpreting and resolving problematic discrepancies between interpretations of spiritual experiences.
2) Mormonism, in nearly every significant aspect, relies upon the claim that there are reliable methods to interpret spiritual experiences which resolve these discrepancies.
3) Until these discrepancies are resolved, judgment concerning whether Mormon interpretation can be trusted over contrary interpretation, at best, cannot be made in favor of Mormonism, if any judgement can be made at all.

Simple enough?

Yep, but I suspect many will still miss the point and maybe ramble on about the perceived problems in atheistic methods of interpretation, but certainly to distract from direct response to my argument by explaining what follows from the presupposition that Mormonism serves as a reliable interpreter. Sorry, this is the first and foremost supposition I question. I've specifically framed my argument from a perspective independent of these sectarian interpretations, so if you miss it, expect my words to sound repetitive. I hope we can simply talk about emotion and avoid many of these contingent distractions, which often involve emotional accusations.

It's not so difficult. Dispute or respond directly to my argument.

And yes, I realize this is an attempt to make a sweeping upheaval of all Mormon thought. I am an ex-mormon, after all.

Let the dissonance roll...

you certainly have gone the long way around the barn to attempt an old argument about moroni's challenge.

for starters
your premise (and listed qualification #2) is flawed.
religious experience does not always require interpretation...more likely, it hardly ever requires interpretation.
consider the notion of "self-evident".

so, to keep with the barn...you took some shots at the side of the barn, and then tried to paint the target afterwards

simple enough?

In other words...
1) Within Mormonism, there is no reliable method for interpreting and resolving problematic discrepancies between interpretations of spiritual experiences.
2) Mormonism, in nearly every significant aspect, relies upon the claim that there are reliable methods to interpret spiritual experiences which resolve these discrepancies.
3) Until these discrepancies are resolved, judgment concerning whether Mormon interpretation can be trusted over contrary interpretation, at best, cannot be made in favor of Mormonism, if any judgement can be made at all.

not just "in other words" but "on another topic"

1) short answer = the reliable method is authority. However, if you are attempting to state that there is no objectivity from which resolution must surely come from, then you are ignoring the paradigm of this subject.
2) that statement is not true, and it is a regurgitation of what is proposed in statement #1
3) Not sure what you are saying, but it seems like your position is that if Mormonism provides the method for resolution then that method is inappropriate when attempting to resolve Mormonism in and of itself.
Kinda like when the FBI investigated itself regarding what happened at Ruby Ridge and found that they had done nothing incorrectly.
This seems satirical, but it is completely reasonable, plausible, and possible.
Self inspection, self examination and self resolution are not uncommon, unattainable, or unavailable methodologies - nor are they the source of any "contradiction".

[_Franktalk]

Indeed. In fact, I know people that would say the exact same thing about the two sources. But they believe that the true source is evangelical Christianity and spiritual experiences that say that Mormonism is true are from the "other source".

This is indeed the world we live in. I think that many people when they do get some touch from the Holy Ghost take everything they ever thought about God and think it is true. This in the face of some very limited communication. It is very hard not to give an experience more than what is there. I just trust God that if I need more He will supply it.

[_Drifting]

Indeed. In fact, I know people that would say the exact same thing about the two sources. But they believe that the true source is evangelical Christianity and spiritual experiences that say that Mormonism is true are from the "other source".

This is indeed the world we live in. I think that many people when they do get some touch from the Holy Ghost take everything they ever thought about God and think it is true. This in the face of some very limited communication. It is very hard not to give an experience more than what is there. I just trust God that if I need more He will supply it.

I agree.
We are truly fortunate that God agrees with what we believe, no matter what we believe, and takes the time to tell us so by making us feel...something.

[_Franktalk]

I agree.
We are truly fortunate that God agrees with what we believe, no matter what we believe, and takes the time to tell us so by making us feel...something.

If that was the case then the Christian religion would have collapsed long ago and would have been replaced with something more "reasonable". But it has not died under its own weight. That spark of truth keeps it alive. Oh man does twist it for sure. But that witness can't be denied. The power in that experience cuts through all of the logic and reason you can muster. Where the Holy Ghost is consistent the interpretation of man is all over the map. From the outside all of this religious stuff appears as nonsense. That is why we have a personal witness, to circumvent the world and provide that straight line to truth. But as everything else it is man who screws it up.

For the record you don't agree with anything I say. Why do you use this style of post?

[_Drifting]

I agree.
We are truly fortunate that God agrees with what we believe, no matter what we believe, and takes the time to tell us so by making us feel...something.

If that was the case then the Christian religion would have collapsed long ago and would have been replaced with something more "reasonable".

Why? God seems to positively reinforce belief, regardless of what that belief is. That seems to explain exactly why Christianity lumbers on.

For the record you don't agree with anything I say. Why do you use this style of post?

Erm...because you're wrong...

[_Dad of a Mormon]

I agree.
We are truly fortunate that God agrees with what we believe, no matter what we believe, and takes the time to tell us so by making us feel...something.

If that was the case then the Christian religion would have collapsed long ago and would have been replaced with something more "reasonable". But it has not died under its own weight. That spark of truth keeps it alive. Oh man does twist it for sure. But that witness can't be denied. The power in that experience cuts through all of the logic and reason you can muster. Where the Holy Ghost is consistent the interpretation of man is all over the map. From the outside all of this religious stuff appears as nonsense. That is why we have a personal witness, to circumvent the world and provide that straight line to truth. But as everything else it is man who screws it up.

For the record you don't agree with anything I say. Why do you use this style of post?

This seems to be an odd response because Mormonism says, in fact, that it did collapse long ago and had to wait until Joseph Smith came to be "restored".

More importantly, and I think this has been emphasized repeatedly without any reasonable answer, is that there is no way given to be sure that you are connected to this "straight line to truth". It is possible to be fully convinced that you are connected, but you are really connected to another "source". Other than just reassuring us that you are connected to the right source and others that disagree are connected to a wrong source, we have no way of knowing this for ourselves and religious experience can't help us.

[_Drifting]

More importantly, and I think this has been emphasized repeatedly without any reasonable answer, is that there is no way given to be sure that you are connected to this "straight line to truth". It is possible to be fully convinced that you are connected, but you are really connected to another "source". Other than just reassuring us that you are connected to the right source and others that disagree are connected to a wrong source, we have no way of knowing this for ourselves and religious experience can't help us.

You are saying the same as I am, but you are doing so far more eloquently.

[_Dad of a Mormon]

More importantly, and I think this has been emphasized repeatedly without any reasonable answer, is that there is no way given to be sure that you are connected to this "straight line to truth". It is possible to be fully convinced that you are connected, but you are really connected to another "source". Other than just reassuring us that you are connected to the right source and others that disagree are connected to a wrong source, we have no way of knowing this for ourselves and religious experience can't help us.

You are saying the same as I am, but you are doing so far more eloquently.

Thanks. Not sure I agree, but still, thanks. I am hoping that if Franktalk sees the same idea posted different ways that he might be able to see the crux of the problem and address it. I think so far he has convinced himself that he has addressed it and continues to repeat his same points over and over.

I think that all of us would agree that it would be great to be able to bypass the messy process of examining claims, evaluating evidence, using logic, etc. and connecting to a perfectly reliable truth transmitter. It would make my life so much easier. Also, I want to be a billionaire. Really, really bad.

[_Franktalk]

This seems to be an odd response because Mormonism says, in fact, that it did collapse long ago and had to wait until Joseph Smith came to be "restored".

No, the gospel needed to be restored. I am sure that personal revelation has occurred since the garden. In this church period the Holy Ghost has been promised to us. Before that I don't know. But for all the spiritual events recorded in scripture I am sure there were millions more not recorded. The guide book for spiritual revelation has been in scripture since Christ walked the earth. The Book also tells us how to discern one from another. But to some they are just words on a page.

More importantly, and I think this has been emphasized repeatedly without any reasonable answer, is that there is no way given to be sure that you are connected to this "straight line to truth". It is possible to be fully convinced that you are connected, but you are really connected to another "source". Other than just reassuring us that you are connected to the right source and others that disagree are connected to a wrong source, we have no way of knowing this for ourselves and religious experience can't help us.

I have stated how to test a spirit. It is in scripture. I have also stated that we are not to add or subtract from the experience. If this is done then one can rest on the message as truth. But be aware there is no canned message for all except the core gospel. Anything of a personal message should not be considered truth for the world or truth for the church. Many people want to do their own thing and want confirmation from God. They are not willing to wait. Just look at the prophets in scripture. They waited years between events and many cried out when God went silent. Even Abraham did not wait for the promised child. Are we more than Abraham?