Another Anti-Mormon Who Just Doesn't Get It

[_beastie]

Wade,

I'm not contesting that the process of faith, like any other process, may have a beginning, middle, an end. I am contesting the fact that you have attempted to limit Moroni's promise to the BEGINNING of the process of faith, which flatly contradicts the promise itself:

by this you may know the truth of ALL THINGS.

Finally, while the following propositions are obviously different--i.e. "Is the Book of Mormon true" and "Is the Church is true", I trust that the rational reader will understand that context is important, and will likely be aware that context establishes relationships that lend themselves to strong inductive correlations between the propositions, and as such you will not be stunned by the reasonable suggestion, which Beastie's sister came to and most every convert I am aware of as well, that confirmation of one proposition is tacit confirmation of the other proposition--particularly when it is understood that the confirmations are more seeds of faith than conveyance of certainty of knowledge.

But, evidently, Beastie thinks otherwise, which explains why she lost faith, while those of us who correctly understand the process of faith, and use it as it is designed, continue to grow therein, thus confirming in part, my hypothesis.

If the confirmation of one is a tacit confirmation of the other, then we wouldn't see the offshoots of Mormonism, throughout history and today, that we do, in fact, see.

I was a sincere person, praying to know the "truth of all things". God did not clearly answer that prayer - even if Wade's assertions are all correct. God did not clearly answer that prayer. If he had clearly answered that prayer, I would not have needed to be convinced by my sister.

Hence, revelation is unreliable.

[_Scottie]

If one has doubts whether the process of growth in faith has a BEGINNING, MIDDLE, and END, and whether these distinctions are artificial or scriptural, may I suggest that rather than uncritically taking the baseless and contrarian opinion of someone who eventually failed the process of growth in faith, instead open the topical guide for the scriptures and search words like gate, enter, strait, baptism, path, way, plan, endure, end, final judgement, salvation, exaltation, etc.

Wade, I would argue that faith has a beginning, middle and end. I certainly don't believe there is an "end" to faith. Faith is something that can always be improved on.

I believe that faith, like many things in human life, is cyclical. I also believe that human nature will naturally discover new information, move to different phases of life, etc which necessitates the beginning of faith all over again.

[_Some Schmo]

Thanks, do you think I should show my integrity by living out my fantasies from my 'hate the world' goth phase?

Are you sure it was just a phase? (That is, the 'hate the world' part as opposed to the 'goth' part).

I don't see any inconsistency. I hold that insulting someone does not show integrity (whether you mean them or not).

OK, so you admit you lack integrity. Check. At least you are honest about that. Kudos.

It's a paraphrase.

I recognized you were paraphrasing what you think I mean; that's way I criticized your reading comprehension. Why do you suppose I challenged you to find instances where I conveyed that idea (which I claimed you misinterpreted... see how this goes)?

Oh wait, you've done that (or at least, you chose passages you thought meant that), and you also refused to acknowledge what I meant in favor of what you want it to mean to fulfill whatever idea you have about me. We don't have to do it again, if you don't want to, but I'm willing if you are.

Nah, I'll pass. Sounds like too much work.

Have a good day.

Not surprised at all.

You have a good day as well.

[_Some Schmo]

I certainly don't believe there is an "end" to faith.

I sure wish and hope there is. The world would be a much better place.

[_Gadianton Plumber]

I certainly don't believe there is an "end" to faith.

I sure wish and hope there is. The world would be a much better place.

Faith is an end to itself. It will eventually end you.

[_wenglund]

I clearly remember the day I finally was able to accept that the answer to my prayer – is the LDS church the one true church – was “no”. I’d been in spiritual and emotional agony about this for a long time. It was a long, tiring journey. I kept trying to think of different ways to be able to get a “yes” answer from God. Maybe if I prayed one more time. Maybe if I fasted. Maybe, maybe, maybe. Nothing worked.

Then one day I was out running, and, as usual, in my heart I was pleading to God to answer my prayer. Suddenly the thought came to me clearly: you already know the answer.

And I did. I knew the church wasn’t true. I just could not accept it. But at that moment, I accepted the answer. And at that moment, I felt a huge, glorious release. I felt joy and peace. I felt as if the world had suddenly been lifted off my shoulders.

Of course, I still grieved for the church. I still struggled to figure out just what I did believe. Leaving the church was frightening. But I was never again in that emotional and spiritual agony.

While I respect your personal belief, I do find your stated experince instructive. Instead of engaging in the process of growth in faith as it is designed, you appealed to yourself for the answer to your question. You shifted from trusting in God and the process he has extablished for becoming like him, to trusting yourself. Is it any wonder that you not only concluded that the Church isn't true, but that God non longer exists for you, and you have taken his place in your own mind.

In a way, I can see how that transition could lift quite a weight off your shoulders--when, instead of relying of God and his established kingdom in meeting the rather lofty expectation of becoming like God, you had but yourself to rely on in meeting the rather easy expectation of becoming yourself.

To each their own.

Anyway, back to testing my hypothesis...

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[_The Nehor]

Are you sure it was just a phase? (That is, the 'hate the world' part as opposed to the 'goth' part).

Yes, because it ended.

OK, so you admit you lack integrity. Check. At least you are honest about that. Kudos.

No, I said that insulting someone does not show integrity. Insulting someone does not remove the possibility of integrity. In terms of integrity, insults are neutral.

[_beastie]

http://lds.org/ldsorg/v/index.jsp?hideN ... 82620aRCRD

Moroni’s Promise
Elder Cook

The Book of Mormon offers a remarkable promise to those seeking knowledge of the truth. Over the years, I have heard members and missionaries offer a variety of explanations about its meaning. A close examination of the three key verses—Moroni 10:3–5 [Moro. 10:3–5]—will show us that their meaning is far more profound than many of us might have thought.
In addition to the great promise in these verses which helps those who are investigating the gospel to gain a testimony of the Book of Mormon, the process Moroni teaches here can be used in confirming all truth. This is a process we can go through every time we wish to have eternal truth confirmed.

The Scope of the Promise
Moroni now tells us something that is of great value to all seekers of any kind of truth. In verse 5 [Moro. 10:5], the promise of confirmation is expanded far beyond verifying that the Book of Mormon is true (as important as that is to us). Here we are told:
“And by the power of the Holy Ghost ye may know the truth of all things.”
Thus, while a first-time reader and ponderer may receive the needed confirmation of the book’s divine origin, members who long ago passed that milestone may have other new truths added to their spiritual store as they search the scriptures and follow the process described in Moroni 10:3–5 [Moro. 10:3–5]. The promise is extended to confirming “the truth of all things” (emphasis added); there is no restriction on the amount of truth we may receive through this process.
If we will follow on a regular basis the process that Moroni outlines, we will receive much more revelation from the Lord. Spiritual impressions will be imprinted more indelibly upon our minds and our hearts. We will see things that we have never seen before. We will understand things we have never understood before. Further, reading the scriptures with these added insights will cause us to repent and improve our lives.

[_beastie]

While I respect your personal belief, I do find your stated experince instructive. Instead of engaging in the process of growth in faith as it is designed, you appealed to yourself for the answer to your question. You shifted from trusting in God and the process he has extablished for becoming like him, to trusting yourself. Is it any wonder that you not only concluded that the Church isn't true, but that God non longer exists for you, and you have taken his place in your own mind.

In a way, I can see how that transition could lift quite a weight off your shoulders--when, instead of relying of God and his established kingdom in meeting the rather lofty expectation of becoming like God, you had but yourself to rely on in meeting the rather easy expectation of becoming yourself.

So a thought clearly forms in my mind while I am praying, and you assert that means I shifted from relying on God to relying on myself.

I feel 100% confident that if I had told the story in a way that ended with my faith being affirmed, you would immediately assume GOD was the source of the answer that came to my mind.

I feel peace and joy when I accept this answer, and you assert that it’s because I no longer had to worry about becoming like God.

I feel 100% confident that if I had told the story in a way that ended with my faith being affirmed, you would immediately assume GOD was the source of the peace and joy that came to me.

More from Elder Cook’s talk:

Confirming Truth
Verse 4 [Moro. 10:4] identifies yet another important principle: if we want an answer from God, we will move ourselves out of a neutral position and let our desire to believe that God can help us begin to work in us.

One way to understand verse 4 [Moro. 10:4] is to note that the scripture does not say we are to ask whether these things are true or not, but that we are to ask “if these things are not true.” What is the difference?

The Lord does not ask us to prove that the teachings we have read are true, or that they are not true. That is the kind of objective approach one might take in the academic, scientific world. However, that is not the best way we learn truth from the Lord.

The Lord offers us the opportunity to let him confirm truth already in our hearts. But in order to confirm religious truth, one must at least have the idea, or the thought, or the belief (however small) that he has found something true, and then pray to receive the Lord’s confirmation.
Verse 4 [Moro. 10:4], then, is the Lord’s invitation, through Moroni, to thus confirm truth. To ask “if these things are not true” implies a degree of acceptance that comes as a result of our pondering the teachings of the Book of Mormon that we have received. Notice again the importance of that very first step—remembering the mercy of God to us since the Creation—and then the next step, which is to similarly ponder and receive the teachings of the Book of Mormon. Surely such pondering of these teachings will bring to mind their truth, their power, their goodness. Thus, it is now tantamount to praying, “Father, I believe that I have received truth. Please tell me if this is not so.” This kind of humble petition is motivated by our faith in Christ, by our faith that he will let us know whether our feelings are correct concerning the Book of Mormon or whether we have been deceived. Thus, our prayer, in essence, is a request for a confirmation of our own conclusions from our pondering. The Lord may not respond exactly how and when we expect, but still our obedience to these conditions qualifies us to receive an answer; this is the scope of the process described in these verses.

In fact, in D&C 9:8–9, the Lord tells us even more about receiving this confirmation of truth:

“But, behold, I say unto you, that you must study it out in your mind; then you must ask me if it be right, and if it is right I will cause that your bosom shall burn within you; therefore, you shall feel that it is right.”

“But if it be not right you shall have no such feelings, but you shall have a stupor of thought that shall cause you to forget the thing which is wrong.” (emphasis added).

The Lord’s invitation for us to test the principles of the gospel in our mind and heart is very broad and generous. As the boy Joseph Smith learned, our Father “giveth to all men liberally, and upbraideth not” (James 1:5) when we ask in faith. For example, the Lord has made it plain in a number of scriptures how he feels about the Book of Mormon; he and his prophets testify to us that it is true (see, for example, Moro. 10:28–29; 2 Ne. 33:10–11; D&C 17:6; D&C 18:2–3). Yet he still invites every reader to seek personal confirmation from him of these testimonies.

According to Elder Cook, we are supposed to study it out in our mind. We are supposed ask for confirmation of our own conclusions from our pondering.

Yet, when I did exactly that, and listened to the thought that came to me in the midst of prayer, and felt peace and joy in response to that thought, Wade tells me I stopped relying on God.

[_wenglund]

Wade,

I'm not contesting that the process of faith, like any other process, may have a beginning, middle, an end. I am contesting the fact that you have attempted to limit Moroni's promise to the BEGINNING of the process of faith, which flatly contradicts the promise itself:

by this you may know the truth of ALL THINGS.

Understandably, in your state of significantly diminished faith, you are confusing the "Holy Ghost" (the means by which we may know the truth of ALL THINGS) with "asking God in prayer". The Holy Ghost works in various ways, whether ostensively through direct answers to prayers (Moroni 10), or experiencially when people comply with the principles and ordinaces and commandments of the gospel (Alma 32).

If the confirmation of one is a tacit confirmation of the other, then we wouldn't see the offshoots of Mormonism, throughout history and today, that we do, in fact, see.

This fallaciously assumes that people will invariably draw the same rational conclusion and not change their minds about the conclusion. Your own personal story negates that fallacious assumption.

I was a sincere person, praying to know the "truth of all things". God did not clearly answer that prayer - even if Wade's assertions are all correct. God did not clearly answer that prayer. If he had clearly answered that prayer, I would not have needed to be convinced by my sister.

Hence, revelation is unreliable.

I don't doubt in the least your sincerity. What I question is whether you correctly understood the process of growth, and correctly used the process of growth. I believe you were mistaken on both accounts, and as such failed to recognize the Alma 32 confirmations from God. Again, it isn't revelation that is unreliable, but people unreliably using it. Those who actually correctly get the nature of revelation, and who have properly used it in their growth in faith, find it to be quite reliable.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-