An Empirical Study of the Book of Mormon promise

[maupayman]

This is very basic thusfar, but I thought this would be an interesting study to undertake Moroni's promise to read the Book of Mormon and then ask if it be true.

I am wondering if a study could be done on this promise. For example, we could take 100 people and have them read the Book of Mormon, while unaware of its history and Moroni's promise, and then tell them to pray to know if it is true. Another group could be given a missionary type explanation of the BoM and then told to read and pray about it etc.

Do you think the HG would confirm to people under this type of a study? Do you think there would be a difference between the two groups responses?

[nicolasconnault]

This is very basic thusfar, but I thought this would be an interesting study to undertake Moroni's promise to read the Book of Mormon and then ask if it be true.

I am wondering if a study could be done on this promise. For example, we could take 100 people and have them read the Book of Mormon, while unaware of its history and Moroni's promise, and then tell them to pray to know if it is true. Another group could be given a missionary type explanation of the BoM and then told to read and pray about it etc.

Do you think the HG would confirm to people under this type of a study? Do you think there would be a difference between the two groups responses?

I'm sure the Holy Ghost works even when under empirical scrutiny. However I'm dubious about the design.... Expecting 200 respondents to read a 529-page book and then to pray about it, then to report sincerely what they've felt, that's a tall order. Mortality (drop-out rate) would be very high, and I think you might even struggle to obtain a valid sample in the first place.

Intriguing idea though, I think it has merit I'm just wondering what results you are expecting, and what you would do about them?

[maupayman]

I'm sure the Holy Ghost works even when under empirical scrutiny. However I'm dubious about the design.... Expecting 200 respondents to read a 529-page book and then to pray about it, then to report sincerely what they've felt, that's a tall order.

I don't think people have to read the entire book to ask, do they? That's not what we were taught in the MTC.

Mortality (drop-out rate) would be very high, and I think you might even struggle to obtain a valid sample in the first place.

Intriguing idea though, I think it has merit I'm just wondering what results you are expecting, and what you would do about them?

Yeah, i have yet to work out any details, not that I can carry out a study anyways. Just thinking out loud really. The number of threads dealing with subjectivity in spiritual experiences is what got me thinking about it. I was curious if LDS would accept findings in a study of the spirit, or if they think that God would withhold spiritual manifestations from people in this type of setting.

[thesometimesaint]

maupayman:

Self reporting is notoriously bad as a measure of truthfulness. How can you tell when a politician is lying? When his/her mouth is moving.

[mfbukowski]

In my opinion, the spiritual question answered in praying about the Book of Mormon is "Should I join the LDS church"? or something close to that.

I don't know that you understand what "Moroni's Promise" really entails.

I mean are you trying to do archaeology by asking people's opinion of the BOM?

That's what it sounds like.

The whole premise sounds confused to me.

And you could not keep the "promise" secret since it is mentioned in the volume itself.

[Analytics]

This is very basic thusfar, but I thought this would be an interesting study to undertake Moroni's promise to read the Book of Mormon and then ask if it be true.

I am wondering if a study could be done on this promise. For example, we could take 100 people and have them read the Book of Mormon, while unaware of its history and Moroni's promise, and then tell them to pray to know if it is true. Another group could be given a missionary type explanation of the BoM and then told to read and pray about it etc.

Do you think the HG would confirm to people under this type of a study? Do you think there would be a difference between the two groups responses?

An objective, empirical study of the Book of Mormon

[cinepro]

I'm sure the Holy Ghost works even when under empirical scrutiny.

Actually, I've only heard the opposite.

If the Holy Ghost were operable under empirical scrutiny, then it would be fairly simple to organize studies that determine whether the perceived influences of said Ghost are a result of an authentically powerful supernatural spirit, or a placebo effect.

For example, you could compare rates of healing and improvement in hospitals in areas of high LDS concentration with areas of low LDS concentration. Or you could track healing rates for non-LDS compared to LDS compared to LDS who receive blessings. As with any study, there would be many factors that would need to be controlled for, but with enough data, it could be interesting (and much more informative than the current methodology that relies primarily and anecdotal evidence focusing on positive outcomes).

As for a test of Moroni's promise, I'm fairly certain such a test has been going on for the last 180 years. Unfortunately, depending on how you define the promise and the expected result, the test results can be interpreted either way.

And any test should keep in mind the different factors illustrated by the Bayesian-Moroni calculator.

[SilverKnight]

This is very basic thusfar, but I thought this would be an interesting study to undertake Moroni's promise to read the Book of Mormon and then ask if it be true.

Do you think the HG would confirm to people under this type of a study? Do you think there would be a difference between the two groups responses?

MFB has it right.

And I might add that the people in your study would almost certainly fail the "real intent, having faith in Christ" clause of Moroni's Promise.

In my opinion, the spiritual question answered in praying about the Book of Mormon is "Should I join the LDS church"? or something close to that.

Praying to know if the Book of Mormon is true, is really praying to know: "Will I be happy and spiritually fulfilled in the LDS church."

So the answer to your question is no.

Simply reading and praying to know if the Book of Mormon is true, (with zero interest in actually joining mormonism) would yield nothing.

However, reading and praying about the Book of Mormon, in addition to learning all about LDS doctrine, the Plan of Slavation, coming to church, participating in activities, fellowshipping with members, coupled with a sincere desire to receive a spiritual witness, may indeed result in a witness from the Holy Ghost (for some people).

Moroni's Promise is not a chemical reaction that can be duplicated in laboratory conditions.

[Calm]

I was curious if LDS would accept findings in a study of the spirit, or if they think that God would withhold spiritual manifestations from people in this type of setting.

It does seem like something along the lines of looking for a sign rather than acting on a promise made by God on a personal level.

How would one measure sincerity of desire as opposed to just going through the motions as instructed by the study leader since the individuals didn't choose to act on their own, but were randomly selected.

I see too many variables that would need to be controlled for that can't really be controlled for assuming that God would answer the sincere prayers in a fashion that would fit within the study's time limits.

[Jason]

It does seem like something along the lines of looking for a sign rather than acting on a promise made by God on a personal level.

How would one measure sincerity of desire as opposed to just going through the motions as instructed by the study leader since the individuals didn't choose to act on their own, but were randomly selected.

I see too many variables that would need to be controlled for that can't really be controlled for assuming that God would answer the sincere prayers in a fashion that would fit within the study's time limits.

Quoted for truth. The only empirical study you can do on the Book of Mormon promise is one where you can exactly measure sincerity of desire - in other words, you can only do it for yourself.

[Questing Beast]

This is very basic thusfar, but I thought this would be an interesting study to undertake Moroni's promise to read the Book of Mormon and then ask if it be true.

I am wondering if a study could be done on this promise. For example, we could take 100 people and have them read the Book of Mormon, while unaware of its history and Moroni's promise, and then tell them to pray to know if it is true. Another group could be given a missionary type explanation of the BoM and then told to read and pray about it etc.

Do you think the HG would confirm to people under this type of a study? Do you think there would be a difference between the two groups responses?

Actually, the promise is dependent on asking if the BofM is NOT true. I never got a distinct answer until I finally questioned the validity of the book's asserted origins. Then I knew, as much as anyone can know anything. It isn't "true" that way: anymore than the Edit: No temple content. Review the board rules.

The BofM is "true" in the same way that any scripture is "true". True principles being taught are the whole purposed of scripture. And what is it for? "To make bad men good and good men better". If leading them to believe in Jesus Christ accomplishes that then that is a good outcome. But some real devils garbing themselves in "saintly" clothing have claimed belief in Jesus Christ. So professing Christ crucified means nothing by itself.

A correct study would be, as already suggested, to compare religious texts in separate groups; having the same number of readers "pray" to know if what they have read is supposed to be inculcated into their lives; or more specifically, if they ought to join the religion whose scriptures it is that they have just read, etc. And if you conducted that kind of test, what you'd find is a roughly equal number of people out of each group who got affirmative answers and negative ones; and probably a similar number mocking the whole thing, etc. That's because praying to "know", and going by your feelings, is utterly subjective to a complex of causes and effects in the individual life of the seeker. And we all know that our feelings can change for a complex of reasons, anytime.

We are sapient beings. Our intellect, our skepticism, is never to be dispensed with in preference for feelings. Facts in evidence should always be obtained, added to and weighed in the balance. The best interpretation should confirm our feelings. If not, then it is our feelings that should be questioned, not the collected and self-controlling facts in evidence. We should always go with the conclusions we reach after an honest inquiry into the facts in evidence: not with some agenda of preconceived expectations to confirm feelings we already have or want to have, etc....

[SilverKnight]

Actually, the promise is dependent on asking if the BofM is NOT true.

NOT quite.

Maximus would like to give you a lesson on antiquated speech patterns...

[maupayman]

In my opinion, the spiritual question answered in praying about the Book of Mormon is "Should I join the LDS church"? or something close to that.

I'm sure that could included as well.

I don't know that you understand what "Moroni's Promise" really entails.

I mean are you trying to do archaeology by asking people's opinion of the BOM?

That's what it sounds like.

No, i'm not trying to do archaeology. I don't really see where you got that from either.

The whole premise sounds confused to me.

And you could not keep the "promise" secret since it is mentioned in the volume itself.

So, give them a section to read that doesn't have the promise.

[Questing Beast]

@SilverKnight: Ha, Ha. You are aware that Joseph Smith was "aping" KJV biblical English. The Bible has been translated/interpreted many, many times since into more modern lingo precisely because of the ungrammatical nature of the KJV causing difficulties. It would have been a simple thing for Joseph Smith to have rendered it: "...ask God, the Eternal Father, in the name of Christ, if these things are true;" Why insert the redundant word "not"? As I have ever been in pursuit of truth, and it has never been in my nature to avoid truth in order to excuse some desired but forbidden thing: why should this cause any trouble? Yet I read the BofM cover-to-cover well over two-dozen times and innumerable times more in total readings in part (as I have done just now): and never at any time did I feel any confidence in my conclusions until I questioned the historicity of it; the actual history (in the light of as many facts held in evidence as possible) of how it came to be, etc. Once I was willing to do that without fear of the consequences - because I determined to face whatever consequences should arise out of what I learned - only then, only now, have I accepted an "answer" vis-a-vis what the BofM actually is. So too, the Bible. And the result for me is a broadening of my religious feelings to include all of them as valid so long as the professors of faith use religion to improve the world around themselves, beginning WITH themselves. Any religion whatsoever can work to do that.

So, Mormonism for the Mormons; Islam for the Muslims; Judaism for the Jews; Catholicism for the RCC and Orthodox, et al. the "original" (most venerable) Christian denominations: even the "Eastern" religions for those billions who adhere thereby, etc. If anyone has "received" an answer that says the BofM is "true", ergo the other scriptures and religions of the world are not true (or are somehow less valid in spirituality and pursuit of a godly life), then I will say it forever: that such an answer does not come from "God": because "God" does not divide people but seeks rather to unite us in all things....

[SilverKnight]

@SilverKnight: Ha, Ha. You are aware that Joseph Smith was "aping" KJV biblical English.

-SNIP-

because "God" does not divide people but seeks rather to unite us in all things....

Don't overdo it.

I was merely pointing out that the insertion of the word "not" in Moroni's Promise is a grammatical flourish very common in antiquated speech and classic literature.

Whether Josepm Smith was plagiarizing the Bible, making up a work of 19th Century American English fiction, or having divine revelation beamed to his brain from the Creator of the Universe, it would be quite expected for him to phrase the promise in such a way.

Do you not understand?

Are we not literate men?

Is the Book of Mormon not true?

[LDS Guy 1986]

This is very basic thusfar, but I thought this would be an interesting study to undertake Moroni's promise to read the Book of Mormon and then ask if it be true.

I am wondering if a study could be done on this promise. For example, we could take 100 people and have them read the Book of Mormon, while unaware of its history and Moroni's promise, and then tell them to pray to know if it is true. Another group could be given a missionary type explanation of the BoM and then told to read and pray about it etc.

Do you think the HG would confirm to people under this type of a study? Do you think there would be a difference between the two groups responses?

I think that either way the numbers would remain reasonably the same, the invitation extended by Moroni in Moroni 10:3-5 will be reached by reading the BoM anyway. We also publish it in the introduction because we want to focus on the fact that we do not ever expect someone to take the word or writings of men as truth without confirmation of it truth through the Holy Ghost.

The main objective here is that men are capable of error and the Holy Ghost is incapable of error. We must be weary of what men present to us, but if the Holy Ghost reveals to us something is true we can trust it 110%.

The Holy Ghost only need a sincere desire to seek truth, whether that sincerity is from the Moroni invitation or not is irrelevant.

[Questing Beast]

@SilverKnight: Those are all different than saying: "ask if these things are not true". In order for it to be the same it would have to read: "ask: Are these things not true?" But the BofM is not a grammatical book anymore than the Bible is. And thus we have silly problems with literalists such as myself. All I can say is that I get a much clearer answer by "asking" from the literal perspective than from the rhetorical one.

(forgive my going on; I love to talk; but you'd not know it most likely if we shared the same room because unless someone is already "geared up" to discuss such things I hardly say a word....)

[Skylla]

Questing Beast:

Please review the board guidelines. Temple content isn't allowed here.

Skylla

[TAO]

In my opinion, an empirical test would not work.

The test involves a response of the Holy Spirit - which only comes with faith.

If you are doing empirical testing, you are not really showing any faith.

Therefore, the test would not work.

That is unless the subjects don't even know they are part of a test, that is.

[paulpatter]

This is very basic thusfar, but I thought this would be an interesting study to undertake Moroni's promise to read the Book of Mormon and then ask if it be true.

I am wondering if a study could be done on this promise. For example, we could take 100 people and have them read the Book of Mormon, while unaware of its history and Moroni's promise, and then tell them to pray to know if it is true. Another group could be given a missionary type explanation of the BoM and then told to read and pray about it etc.

Do you think the HG would confirm to people under this type of a study? Do you think there would be a difference between the two groups responses?

I think you deserve credit for an interesting, intriguing idea. As you say, you are only in the preliminary stages of the study's design. A critical factor, it seems to me, will be the cultural/social/economic/politica/religious composition of the samples. The credibility of the results will hinge on that factor.

[nicolasconnault]

I think you deserve credit for an interesting, intriguing idea. As you say, you are only in the preliminary stages of the study's design. A critical factor, it seems to me, will be the cultural/social/economic/politica/religious composition of the samples. The credibility of the results will hinge on that factor.

Not entirely. No study can ever have a perfect sample. Being able to reproduce the study with various samples is more realistic and usually a good indication of the validity of the original study. You can never entirely tease out all the extraneous variables.

[Hamba Tuhan]

The major problem with any proposal to subject God to an 'empirical study' is that God is not some inanimate and dispassionate natural force, like gravity. He's a person. And a parent. And very, very smart.

To create an imperfect analogy, it's like proposing to determine if Mum is real based upon whether or not she gives every child who asks a biscuit. I mean, shouldn't a loving, concerned parent give every single child the exact same biscuit every single time one of them asks? To be consistent and empirical and all?

The problem is that Mum knows her children. She knows that one of them is diabetic and shouldn't have a biscuit at all. She knows that one of them has already sneaked five biscuits earlier in the day. She knows that one of them just wants it so that he can feed it to the dog. She knows that one of them refused to eat both his breakfast and his lunch. She knows that one of them has been working hard all day and both needs and deserves a biscuit. She knows that one of them will kindly give the biscuit to the little girl next day. And on and on. Consequently, her responses to her childen are not the same. Not the same amongst children and not the same from one moment to the next even when it's the same one asking. A child who gets a biscuit on Tuesday may not get one on Friday because Mum knows her children and what they need and why they're asking and what they're going to do with their biscuits.

And so God, the Man of Holiness, the Eternal Father, is never going to satisfy those who need Him to be a giant machine who can be tested and prodded and then manipulated.

[CV75]

Do you think the HG would confirm to people under this type of a study? Do you think there would be a difference between the two groups responses?

Yes, the Holy Ghost would confirm to people who pray with real intent, by His definition, so there would be no difference between the two groups' responses--both would depend on the participants' real intent.

[paulpatter]

Not entirely. No study can ever have a perfect sample.

I agree and have not said anything to the contrary. What I have said is that the composition of the sample is of paramount importance if the findings of the study are to have any credibility.

: Being able to reproduce the study with various samples is more realistic and usually a good indication of the validity of the original study.

If the sample in the original study was not properly constituted, replicating its findings would be meritless.

: You can never entirely tease out all the extraneous variables.

Again, I agree. But in the proposed study "teasing out" (or at least screening for) such "extraneous variables" as anti-religionists, ultra-liberals and ultra-conservatives, satan worshippers, etc., would be essential. Knowing how to do that--with an acceptable degree of accuracy--would be a major challenge.

[maupayman]

The major problem with any proposal to subject God to an 'empirical study' is that God is not some inanimate and dispassionate natural force, like gravity. He's a person. And a parent. And very, very smart.

This is what I was thinking, would LDS even give any validity to empirical study results in spiritual matters. My guess is that they would not.

And so God, the Man of Holiness, the Eternal Father, is never going to satisfy those who need Him to be a giant machine who can be tested and prodded and then manipulated.

I agree, though I think you are looking at it differently than I. My suspiscion is more that people need to be led down a path, before they receive an "answer" that the BoM is true. In other words, I think they must first want the story to be true. I have trying to think of ways this could be tested, though I don't think many LDS would accept a study of the spirit anyways.