If You Were Wrong, Would You Want To Know It?

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

I want merlin to come back and share some of his thoughts on his OP with us.

Merlin, you out there somewhere???

Im sure merlin will come back. As has been pointed to me most people work.

[cucamonga]

Hello everyone.

I hope the title caught your attention as much as the question itself catches mine. Think about it...Let's not kid ourselves, there are certain day to day habits and comfort zones that would completely be altered if we (and I include myself in this) were to do an about face, and come to the conclusion that we were incorrect about something as important and life-altering as our Religious beliefs. Remember Jesus said that we would have to hate our own family members in comparison to our love and devotion to him in order to be his disciple (Luke 14:26). Which I take to mean, it doesn't matter how tough or rocky the decision to go with Truth is, we have to walk that road to find eternity with Him. I doubt if most are willing to make that sacrifice if put to it.

I have pondered this scenario for a good while and can't help but think that most of us take on the religious beliefs of our parents, or whomever raised us. It seems logical, but were they right? Just because we love and respect them doesn't, by a long shot, mean their best effort led us to Truth. And to make matters worse, if we were to come to the conclusion that our parents and/or grandparents were wrong, what does that mean for their souls?!!! That's a hard pill to swallow, and some may want to turn a blind eye to that hard fact of seeking a Truth that wasn't necessarily in line with those that they love. Are we willing to hang our eternal soul on what someone else told us, or does it require some real unbiased soul searching and investigation?...

So to conclude, I would sincerely like to hear the opinions of everyone out in forum land, LDS or other, concerning this first step to Truth and your journey which you may already be on.

I leave you with this quote that I think is painfully appropriate:

"It is a lot easier to see the Truth if you don't already assume that you have It."

In Christian Love,

-Merlin0152

D&C 93:24 And truth is knowledge of things as they are, and as they were, and as they are to come.

All we really think we know, is about how things exist now, and even then, our knowledge is seen through smoky glass, which is then hindered by our own biases and traditions.

1 Corinthians 13:12 For now we see through a glass, darkly;â?¦

Our view of the past is even worse, let alone the future, which can really only be guessed at by men.

So how can we know real truth?

We can ask or listen to someone who we think would know the answer, either because they had been there, gone through it themselves or they had seen it with his own eyes and can testify about it.

Thatâ??s a good starting place, but in the end, it will be our relationship with God that matters, not your parents or your friends.

The best and IMO only why is to seek out and ask God himself to revel truth to us, as he is the only one who perfectly knows the past form the present from the future.

Sometimes the quest is long (like in my case) but the rewards are great.

Seek, and you WILL find.

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

I sometimes wonder if I'm a "countermo" (to borrow Juliann's word). I guess I am, in that if I really think about it, I believe the world would have been better off without Joseph Smith's new religion. That said, I've been around long enough to know that religious experience is intensely personal. I spent 40 years as an active, believing member of the church. I had a testimony. I had deep and personal spiritual experiences. So I believe I know what you're talking about, but then I'm not you, and you aren't me.

I have no interest in counteracting your spiritual experiences. But I have no reason to believe they are any more or less valid than anyone else's.

I dont think any one here is claiming that you personal are trying to invalidate some one elses experiances. I think that the OP may be doing that. We will have to see. You guys have made some great comments though.

[bluebell]

Im sure merlin will come back. As has been pointed to me most people work.

Let's hope he does. To many first time posters never come back.

[merlin0152]

Im sure merlin will come back. As has been pointed to me most people work.

Ahhhhh, such is the case.

2 Thessalonians 3:10 (King James Version)

King James Version (KJV)

10"For even when we were with you, this we commanded you, that if any would not work, neither should he eat."

I have taken a moment out of work to skim through some of the responses, and I must say I didn't expect such a quick turn-around. Props to you guys.

Let me finish getting through the work day and I'll reply more thoroughly to you guys tonight.

It's funny that most people took this as a rhetorical question, and never came right out and said "yes" or "no". My first thought about how one would immediately answer this question in their own mind is unequivocally "YES, of course!", but..... well I've leave that thought until I have more time.

Till then

[LifeOnaPlate]

If I was wrong I would want to know it.

Otherwise I'd sit back in security, believing I was "saved" and that I have it made in the shade, no need to do anything more.

[John Williams]

If I was wrong I would want to know it.

Otherwise I'd sit back in security, believing I was "saved" and that I have it made in the shade, no need to do anything more.

You're wrong.

[BishopRic]

When the intent of such a response (I received a spiritual answer that the BofM is not true) is to invalidate my experience (I received a witness that it is true), then I will question that critic's particular experience.

As I might question you regarding your interpretation of your experience. If I were to tell you that if it rains tomorrow, it is a sign from God that you are to go jump off a cliff, I would imagine you would not believe me. Similarly, if a missionary tells an investigator that when they read the BoM and pray, they will get a certain feeling...and that feeling is a confirmation that the book is true, a reasonable person would question the claimed link between the feeling and the assumed truthfulness of the book. I doubt anybody is questioning the existence of the feeling...just the interpretaton of what it means.

Indeed, there is a difference between the two approaches. I have had too many people tell me that they had received a "spiritual" witness that what I had experienced (witnesses of the Church, Joseph Smith, the BofM, etc.) was false. Upon further exploration of why they said what they said, it became apparent that it was more of a debate technique (trying to defuse my witness) than an actual witness on their part.

What you might be assuming here is that everybody believes the sort of feeling you get as a "witness" is the same sort of witness others are receiving to the contrary. This is incorrect. Many of us have come to believe that a subjective feeling is not a good indicator of objective events.

When someone non-LDS says that they have seen Christ work in their lives, they have felt the joy of the Spirit, and seen the hand of God preserving them, I see no particular reason to disbelieve or contradict them. It may or may not be true, but it's not my place to judge those particular things. In fact, I do believe that such things happen quite often.

Glad to hear that.

On the other hand, when I say that I have seen Christ work in my life, I have felt Him speak in the pages of the BofM and the Bible, I have felt Him and the Spirit in the temple, at Church, and in my life in the context of me being a Latter-day Saint, many critics of the Church will not accept that.

I think most of us are fine with the way you feel and the happiness you receive when participating in these activities. And we even understand that part of what brings you happiness is that you believe it is God's plan for all to live. We may not believe that, but certainly grant you the right to live any paradigm you do, as long as it doesn't affect my life negatively, or interfere with my rights to do the same.

And one of the methods they use is to claim that they have a "witness" that Christ has nothing to do with the BofM, or the temple, or the Church, or the mission of Joseph Smith, etc.

Again, only speaking for myself here...but non-LDSers may have their own interpretaion of feelings too -- as you do, and it is simply them doing the best with what they have, or understand. I don't see a problem with them (us) telling you what your feelings mean, just as you might tell us what ours mean.

There's a difference between the two types of experiences. And when someone claims to have an experience whose sole purpose appears to be to counteract mine, then it is appropriate for me to question the motivations of such experiences.

As yours.

I posted earlier that I do not invalidate spiritual experiences others claim to have for themselves. However, not everything that is claimed to be a spiritual experience falls under the "hands off" category, especially when its motivation appears to be to counteract the positives that I have experienced.

Ditto...and it does happen often our way too.

Before you respond, one more item of clarification. It really doesn't matter, for instance, to me if someone says that they feel through the Spirit that the BofM is false, and they don't want to follow it. That's their choice and they can choose whatever path they want. But when they then use that claim to try to invalidate my experience through debate or argument, then I feel it appropriate to respond in kind.

I think a healthy dialogue both ways will serve each of us to understand our feelings better.

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

As I might question you regarding your interpretation of your experience. If I were to tell you that if it rains tomorrow, it is a sign from God that you are to go jump off a cliff, I would imagine you would not believe me. Similarly, if a missionary tells an investigator that when they read the BoM and pray, they will get a certain feeling...and that feeling is a confirmation that the book is true, a reasonable person would question the claimed link between the feeling and the assumed truthfulness of the book. I doubt anybody is questioning the existence of the feeling...just the interpretaton of what it means.

So are you claiming that everybody in the church is not reasonable becuase you dont think we questioned the link between the feeling and the assumed truthfulness of the book?

[LifeOnaPlate]

As I might question you regarding your interpretation of your experience. If I were to tell you that if it rains tomorrow, it is a sign from God that you are to go jump off a cliff, I would imagine you would not believe me. Similarly, if a missionary tells an investigator that when they read the BoM and pray, they will get a certain feeling...and that feeling is a confirmation that the book is true, a reasonable person would question the claimed link between the feeling and the assumed truthfulness of the book. I doubt anybody is questioning the existence of the feeling...just the interpretaton of what it means.

Geez, I don't really agree with your comparison.

Anyway, on the Onus thread yesterday I asked you how you were sure you interpreted your "sweat lodge" experience correctly, but the thread took off from there and the question got buried. What say you?

[jwhitlock]

As I might question you regarding your interpretation of your experience. If I were to tell you that if it rains tomorrow, it is a sign from God that you are to go jump off a cliff, I would imagine you would not believe me. Similarly, if a missionary tells an investigator that when they read the BoM and pray, they will get a certain feeling...and that feeling is a confirmation that the book is true, a reasonable person would question the claimed link between the feeling and the assumed truthfulness of the book. I doubt anybody is questioning the existence of the feeling...just the interpretaton of what it means.

Perhaps. I find that if one receives the initial witnesses of the BofM and then acts to confirm them and go for new witnesses, step by step, they grow to understand those witnesses better and better for what they really are. However, if one gets a witness of the BofM (define it as you will) and then does little or nothing else to grow spiritually, that witness will eventually fade or be explained away as subjective.

What you might be assuming here is that everybody believes the sort of feeling you get as a "witness" is the same sort of witness others are receiving to the contrary. This is incorrect. Many of us have come to believe that a subjective feeling is not a good indicator of objective events.

I don't believe in subjective feelings, either. The witnesses I talk about come from many different angles, spiritual, mental, physical, intellectual, observational, etc. When those all come together, it's been, at least for me, pretty reliable.

I think most of us are fine with the way you feel and the happiness you receive when participating in these activities. And we even understand that part of what brings you happiness is that you believe it is God's plan for all to live. We may not believe that, but certainly grant you the right to live any paradigm you do, as long as it doesn't affect my life negatively, or interfere with my rights to do the same.

I've talked to too many people who are still interested in saving me, because I'm deluded, after I've explained myself concerning my spiritual experiences. There are even some fairly open minded critics on this board who have trouble allowing that Mormons can receive salvation precisely because they are Mormons; they can only allow salvation to LDS (in some cases) in spite of being Mormon.

Hence my reaction at times to those who question the validity of my experiences.

Again, only speaking for myself here...but non-LDSers may have their own interpretaion of feelings too -- as you do, and it is simply them doing the best with what they have, or understand. I don't see a problem with them (us) telling you what your feelings mean, just as you might tell us what ours mean.

Anyone can feel free to try to interpret or assign a source to what I've experienced - but it's skating on thin ice.

As a policy, if someone tells me about positive spiritual experiences they've had, I try to be as supportive as possible; since they're personal, I can't (and shouldn't) judge the source. If, however, I get the impression that their responses about their "experiences" are only meant to contradict or counteract mine, then my response is somewhat different. Many of us have had enough experience being shot at to generally recognize such exchanges for what they are.

[BishopRic]

So are you claiming that everybody in the church is not reasonable becuase you dont think we questioned the link between the feeling and the assumed truthfulness of the book?

No. What I believe is that there seems to be a heirarchy (or a priority) of our thoughts and logic. There is a very powerful part of the brain connected to what we call "spiritual events." This section, when stimulated, trumps other sections and processes of the brain.

We see it in many cultures...most notable recently in the suicide bombers. They have had such a powerful "spiritual experience" that they willingly give their life for their conviction in a perceived promise in the afterlife. I imagine most of us question their ability to trump logic on that one...but it is clearly done everyday.

I see most religions purporting similar connections -- Mormonism is but one of them. Because they completely contradict logically, it is my conclusion that the interpretation of these experiences are often incorrect.

I think we all have them to a degree, and have all made decisions in our life based on them. For the most part, I think using them is an unreliable method to learn about physical events. Mormons don't seem to have a corner on the "spirituality" market.

[BishopRic]

Perhaps. I find that if one receives the initial witnesses of the BofM and then acts to confirm them and go for new witnesses, step by step, they grow to understand those witnesses better and better for what they really are. However, if one gets a witness of the BofM (define it as you will) and then does little or nothing else to grow spiritually, that witness will eventually fade or be explained away as subjective.

I think this would happen to most any reasonable path chosen. It is exactly how I pursued my new spiritual path as a "Mormon emeritus." Because Mormonism (and probably most religions) pretty much teaches how to live in every way, as I approached each event in my new life, I questioned why I thought like I did. Sometimes it was a rule from church, and I stepped carefully...and a new paradigm arose, and it either worked for me...or it didn't. This extended from dating, drinking, movies, prayer, etc. It was quite a challenge, and took many years to get to where I am today.

I don't believe in subjective feelings, either. The witnesses I talk about come from many different angles, spiritual, mental, physical, intellectual, observational, etc. When those all come together, it's been, at least for me, pretty reliable.

As for me. I think your approach is a good one, and I respect you and anybody else for that effective process.

I've talked to too many people who are still interested in saving me, because I'm deluded, after I've explained myself concerning my spiritual experiences. There are even some fairly open minded critics on this board who have trouble allowing that Mormons can receive salvation precisely because they are Mormons; they can only allow salvation to LDS (in some cases) in spite of being Mormon.

For many exmos, there is an ingrained proselytizing zeal that continues after leaving the church. For some, it is a projection of needing to be accepted for their new beliefs. I don't really resonate with that type, but understand it as a part of their journey.

Hence my reaction at times to those who question the validity of my experiences.

Anyone can feel free to try to interpret or assign a source to what I've experienced - but it's skating on thin ice.

It's just them trying to understand you -- or themselves...it doesn't need to be taken personally.

As a policy, if someone tells me about positive spiritual experiences they've had, I try to be as supportive as possible; since they're personal, I can't (and shouldn't) judge the source. If, however, I get the impression that their responses about their "experiences" are only meant to contradict or counteract mine, then my response is somewhat different. Many of us have had enough experience being shot at to generally recognize such exchanges for what they are.

Well said. I suppose we could call that self-defense. I hope more of us can respect other paths without feeling the need to change them.

[LifeOnaPlate]

We see it in many cultures...most notable recently in the suicide bombers. They have had such a powerful "spiritual experience" that they willingly give their life for their conviction in a perceived promise in the afterlife. I imagine most of us question their ability to trump logic on that one...but it is clearly done everyday.

I am unaware of any studies on the brains of suicide bombers. I am also unaware of any suicide bombers saying their beliefs are a result of a powerful spiritual confirmation that resembles what a latter-day saint would describe as one. Can you point me in the direction of some?

[BishopRic]

Geez, I don't really agree with your comparison.

The only point I was trying to make (probably not very effectively) is that the connection that seems so logical to some is quite illogical to others (myself included). IOW, from most of our upbringing, we have been told that if we get this "good feeling," it means something regarding truth, or historical event(s). The further out of the religious box I get, the more crazy that connection is to me. Yes, many "scriptures" recommend this technique as a truth-seeking tool, but I question their motive.

Anyway, on the Onus thread yesterday I asked you how you were sure you interpreted your "sweat lodge" experience correctly, but the thread took off from there and the question got buried. What say you?

Thanks for the reminder...I did read it. I will respond in detail soon...gotta run for a minute.

[cucamonga]

The only point I was trying to make (probably not very effectively) is that the connection that seems so logical to some is quite illogical to others (myself included). IOW, from most of our upbringing, we have been told that if we get this "good feeling," it means something regarding truth, or historical event(s). The further out of the religious box I get, the more crazy that connection is to me. Yes, many "scriptures" recommend this technique as a truth-seeking tool, but I question their motive.

'Why do you doubt your senses?'

'Because,' said Scrooge, 'a little thing affects them. A slight disorder of the stomach makes them cheats. You may be an undigested bit of beef, a blot of mustard, a crumb of cheese, a fragment of an underdone potato.

A Christmas Carol by Charles ****ens

I would never expect anyone to rely on feelings.

The witnesses I have had were ones that went straight to my soul. It would be impossible for me to describe what it was like to anyone; itâ??s like trying to explain salt to someone whoâ??s never tasted salt before. All I know is there can not be two truths which conflict with each other, else I could stand before God at judgment day and ask why he lied to me.

[jwhitlock]

The only point I was trying to make (probably not very effectively) is that the connection that seems so logical to some is quite illogical to others (myself included). IOW, from most of our upbringing, we have been told that if we get this "good feeling," it means something regarding truth, or historical event(s). The further out of the religious box I get, the more crazy that connection is to me. Yes, many "scriptures" recommend this technique as a truth-seeking tool, but I question their motive.

I've had a different experience. "Good feelings" are only valid in conjunction with other approaches, and mostly as additional confirmation, not generally as indicators of truth on their own.

I find quite a few people outside the Church who try to characterize what we experience in this manner; it's not nearly that simple. While a good portion of the very reliable experiences I've had in my life felt good, quite a number of them did not. They were very painful - and very true.

The Spirit works in a number of different ways, and "good feelings" are definately an oversimplification that is not really indicative of the whole process.

[John Williams]

I would never expect anyone to rely on feelings.

The witnesses I have had were ones that went straight to my soul. It would be impossible for me to describe what it was like to anyone; itâ??s like trying to explain salt to someone whoâ??s never tasted salt before. All I know is there can not be two truths which conflict with each other, else I could stand before God at judgment day and ask why he lied to me.

I know exactly what you mean. I've experienced the same things. The problem for me is that such experiences testified to me of things that are demonstrably false. What are you supposed to do then?

[LifeOnaPlate]

Well stated, jwhit. Sometimes the most powerful experiences I've had weren't "good feelings." It's a sad characture of what the Holy Ghost actually is.

[BishopRic]

I've had a different experience. "Good feelings" are only valid in conjunction with other approaches, and mostly as additional confirmation, not generally as indicators of truth on their own.

I find quite a few people outside the Church who try to characterize what we experience in this manner; it's not nearly that simple. While a good portion of the very reliable experiences I've had in my life felt good, quite a number of them did not. They were very painful - and very true.

The Spirit works in a number of different ways, and "good feelings" are definately an oversimplification that is not really indicative of the whole process.

I believe I understand your thoughts here. Please remember I was a BIC member, a successful missionary, bishop, high counselor, and attended the temple about 500 times. I highly doubt your experiences were much different than mine...although I will give you an out because in the end I can't "know" what you have experienced -- as you can't "know" mine.

My "spiritual experiences" today are certainly as powerful, and witnessing to my "truth" as they were while in the LDS church. I don't believe any of them are trustworthy indicators of physical events outside my own history.

[BishopRic]

Anyway, on the Onus thread yesterday I asked you how you were sure you interpreted your "sweat lodge" experience correctly, but the thread took off from there and the question got buried. What say you?

Okay, I've probaly beat the dead horse enough about my beliefs about feelings and physical truth...so with that in mind, I will say that I DO believe in spiritual experiences -- but more on an eastern philosophical level. I believe the experience is a unifying connection to the universe (that part is another thread).

The feeling itself is a good combination of endorphins and other hormonal factors that give a sense of well-being and clarity of thought. It is amplified by other factors such as fasting, certain drugs, music, dancing, sweating, etc. There have been many studies describing this (I'll look some of them up later) as the spiritual centers of the brain light up on a PET scan during the event.

Certainly the "thoughts" experienced during the active event are deemed as enlightening, and many times have such impact that the person believes he has communicated with the "spiritual world." It appears to have crossover effects into the subconscious, and the person hangs on to the concurrent thoughts for a very long time, without knowing why.

Anyway, my Sweat Lodge/Vision Quest experience was quite powerful to me. I had clarity of thought regarding what was true for me...but understanding what I do about it, it specifically allowed me to put my Mormon spiritual experiences in the same perspective -- no "better" or "righter" than any other. It was a feeling, and knowing that allowed me to begin using reason to determine my beliefs about physical events.

[Doctor Steuss]

If You Were Wrong, Would You Want To Know It?

No. My ego is a fragile thing.

[Zoidberg]

"It is a lot easier to see the Truth if you don't already assume that you have It."

Okey dokey.

Let's actually start with the basics. You assume that you actually exist, and that the people around you exist as well.

You are **assuming** that is reality.

So, now that we can get rid of that assumption, let's "find the truth".

Let me hear all about truth, shall we?

Yes! Yes! Let's all get rid of that assumption... I agree. Or, better yet: why don't all of you get rid of the assumption that you exist, and I will continue to assume I exist (along with a few chosen friends). We could totally own the world.

I feel an urgent need to start a new thread.

[jadams_4242]

Hello everyone.

I hope the title caught your attention as much as the question itself catches mine. Think about it...Let's not kid ourselves, there are certain day to day habits and comfort zones that would completely be altered if we (and I include myself in this) were to do an about face, and come to the conclusion that we were incorrect about something as important and life-altering as our Religious beliefs. Remember Jesus said that we would have to hate our own family members in comparison to our love and devotion to him in order to be his disciple (Luke 14:26). Which I take to mean, it doesn't matter how tough or rocky the decision to go with Truth is, we have to walk that road to find eternity with Him. I doubt if most are willing to make that sacrifice if put to it.

I have pondered this scenario for a good while and can't help but think that most of us take on the religious beliefs of our parents, or whomever raised us. It seems logical, but were they right? Just because we love and respect them doesn't, by a long shot, mean their best effort led us to Truth. And to make matters worse, if we were to come to the conclusion that our parents and/or grandparents were wrong, what does that mean for their souls?!!! That's a hard pill to swallow, and some may want to turn a blind eye to that hard fact of seeking a Truth that wasn't necessarily in line with those that they love. Are we willing to hang our eternal soul on what someone else told us, or does it require some real unbiased soul searching and investigation?...

So to conclude, I would sincerely like to hear the opinions of everyone out in forum land, LDS or other, concerning this first step to Truth and your journey which you may already be on.

I leave you with this quote that I think is painfully appropriate:

"It is a lot easier to see the Truth if you don't already assume that you have It."

In Christian Love,

-Merlin0152

I was born into the church, my mother was l.d.s we never were able to be active. Now that i am 54 years

old and have searched and searched for many years, not only my own religon but others as well, i can

say with all honesty that i do now know the truth, i have heard and investigated every possible critics

and naysayers negative comments and beleifs about this church, And i have heard it all. I have proved to

myself beyond any doubt, this is the true work that Jesus Christ wants us to do in its fullness. the

covenants,ordinances,sacrament,baptism,preisthood authority, are all true And nessacery work for

the fullness of times as phrophecied in ancient biblical cannon. My only wish is that if i could only

be able to speak face to face with every doubter in the world, That would be good.

[3DOP]

My parents and grandparents had no religion that they ever thought important enough to share with me. When I became a Protestant Christian in 1977 at age 21, my parents, two brothers and a sister followed almost immediately. My grandfather prayed a prayer for forgiveness that at the time I thought would save him. It still makes me have hope that in his darkness God had mercy on him. He was very good to me and I miss him very much. I wish I had more to give to him. I thought that when I became a Catholic in 1995 my parents would follow as they did before. My sis came in with my wife and kids in '95 after busting up with a Baptist guy, but there was at first vehement resistance from Dad in particular against the idea of becoming Catholic, until 2005. My elderly parents are now both Catholic. I want to know if I am wrong, and have led them and other loved ones astray. So long as we live, it is time to make wrongs right.

Thanks for asking,

3DOP