Jump to content
Seriously No Politics ×

Do you REALLY know?


Ceeboo

Recommended Posts

Posted

ultimately I guess it comes down to faith - the belief in things that are unseen. I'm still trying to figure it out myself though :P

Ultimately it is impossible to "know" ANYTHING with absolute certainty. So we have to settle for less than absolute certainty in order to do anything worthwhile.

Posted

ultimately I guess it comes down to faith - the belief in things that are unseen. I'm still trying to figure it out myself though :P

Faith is not really belief, though. The Greek word in the Bible is pistis, and it means 'trust, loyalty.'

Christ asks us to trust Him enough to follow His directions loyally. Then, when they work, we have evidence of our faith.

It really is like trusting a person enough to jump off a cliff with the assurance that He will catch you.

If He does, then you KNOW.

Posted

Pure knowledge can be communicated by the Holy Spirit, but it is only pure at the time it is received. At this particular time, the information is accepted and believed by the recipient, but afterwards it must be re-interpreted and recalled again and again. Experiences and time slowly eat away at this stored "knowledge", and confirming evidence or repetitions of the experience must come time after time to keep the knowledge fresh. Without this, the statement "I know [such and such] is true" is an expression of hope and faith in the original experience. The reason why we don't use the word "hope" anymore is because its meaning has changed over time, and now connotes doubt or wishful thinking.

Personally, there are very few things that I can confidently say I "know" with absolute certainty. One of them is that God exists, knows me and loves me beyond the ability of words to describe. The experience that led me to "know" this is still as vibrant in my mind as it was when I received it, so no words can better describe this principle than the words "I know". For most other principles of the Gospel, I often say that I "know" they are true, but in reality it is more a very strong faith and confidence, and I am still hoping, waiting and working for that pure knowledge to be communicated to me.

By the way, as one of the posters has already said, I don't think that most LDS who say "I know the Church is true" have really considered the full meaning of what they are saying.

Posted

Pure knowledge can be communicated by the Holy Spirit, but it is only pure at the time it is received. At this particular time, the information is accepted and believed by the recipient, but afterwards it must be re-interpreted and recalled again and again. Experiences and time slowly eat away at this stored "knowledge", and confirming evidence or repetitions of the experience must come time after time to keep the knowledge fresh. Without this, the statement "I know [such and such] is true" is an expression of hope and faith in the original experience. The reason why we don't use the word "hope" anymore is because its meaning has changed over time, and now connotes doubt or wishful thinking.

Personally, there are very few things that I can confidently say I "know" with absolute certainty. One of them is that God exists, knows me and loves me beyond the ability of words to describe. The experience that led me to "know" this is still as vibrant in my mind as it was when I received it, so no words can better describe this principle than the words "I know". For most other principles of the Gospel, I often say that I "know" they are true, but in reality it is more a very strong faith and confidence, and I am still hoping, waiting and working for that pure knowledge to be communicated to me.

By the way, as one of the posters has already said, I don't think that most LDS who say "I know the Church is true" have really considered the full meaning of what they are saying.

Dang, I like your posts!! :P

Posted

Ultimately it is impossible to "know" ANYTHING with absolute certainty. So we have to settle for less than absolute certainty in order to do anything worthwhile.

I have to disagree with you there.

And now, as pertaining to this perfect atonement, wrought by the shedding of the blood of God
Posted

Question:

How can/does one place confidence in what they happen to 'know' now?

And can what they 'know' now change again?

There is always a risk involved in any commitment whether it's to a person, an organization, knowledge or what one understands God to be.

How can one place confidence in a marriage based on two people 'knowing' they love each other when the statistics show that there is a good chance that 'knowledge' may change over time?

I think one takes risks like this because of the value it adds to one's life.

Do you think it would be better not to commit when one believes one 'knows' something just in case one is wrong?

Posted

The lds faith is the only faith that does say you can actually know though.

Really? this interests me enough to issue a CFR, please.
Posted

Thank you all for the thoughts/perspectives.

Please know that although I am not responding to the contributions made, I am indeed reading them all (Thanks again)

Peace,

Ceeboo

Posted

Really? this interests me enough to issue a CFR, please.

Moroni 10
:

5 And by the power of the Holy Ghost ye may
know
the truth of all things.

6 And whatsoever thing is good is just and true; wherefore, nothing that is good denieth the Christ, but acknowledgeth that he is.

7 And ye may
know
that he is, by the power of the Holy Ghost; wherefore I would exhort you that ye
deny not the power of God; for he worketh by power, according to the faith of the children of men,
the same today and tomorrow, and forever.

Posted

Every time you hear a religious person say they 'know' something about their faith/religion/god, you can substitute the term 'strongly believe' for a more accurate statement.

Did you say every time? Are you really sure?

Posted

Hey Y'all (Missed you :P )

I started this topic somewhere else and got very little response (perhaps that is because it is a stupid topic, I dunno) but I wanted to pose it here and see what happens.

Setting the table:

One used to be LDS and 'knew' the LDS Church was true.

This very same person is no longer LDS and now 'knows' the LDS Church is not true.

Question:

How can/does one place confidence in what they happen to 'know' now?

And can what they 'know' now change again?

Peace,

Ceeboo

The scriptures are clear on this is so many places it would be hard to list them all. Many believe that some were merely mimicking others, and never really had a testimony of the gospel at all. But as many churches believe, men can fall from grace. So things I know and on other topics or theologies I believe and have faith. I

Posted

The scriptures are clear on this is so many places it would be hard to list them all. Many believe that some were merely mimicking others, and never really had a testimony of the gospel at all. But as many churches believe, men can fall from grace. So things I know and on other topics or theologies I believe and have faith. I

Posted

Also, you don't need to lose your memory to lose your knowledge. What you know currently, you may only strongly believe tomorrow, sort of believe next week, and doubt next month.

In my opinion, this is the main reason why 'faith without works is dead'--because trust which isn't exercised starts to become just theoretical and then vague, and then it dies.

Posted

Personally? It would be in the hundreds for sure. As a missionary, I worked with a woman in her 60s who exemplified this commandment for me. If anything, the burdens of her mortal life were lifted from her as she embraced the Restored Gospel, and she became innocent and pure like a littl child.

In a previous area, my companion and I helped a cantankerous old lady return to activity, and she became once again filled with life and wonder and excitement just like a little child.

When I was very young, our mean old neighbour joined the Church in his 80s, and it softened him up into the sweetest old man.

When I was a deacon, our stake patriarch, then also in his 80s, used to take us on a six-day backpack camp each year, and one could hardly tell the difference between him and us 12 and 13 year olds.

And yes, I'm talking about their 'faith' in all of this, too.

And I haven't even got to some of the people in my current ward who possess heartfelt, childlike faith.

I don't doubt that the specific examples you provide are accurate, but the number is too small to be credible in the context of inductive reasoning. I do doubt, however, your claim that you have personally met "hundreds" of individuals in their 40s, 50s, 60s, etc., who "[became} as little children" (Matt. 18:3). I don't think that's possible, but if it is, I'm happy for you.

Posted

I think we find whatever truth we are looking for.

I would say "create" rather than "find" but that's pretty close!

Posted

I would say "create" rather than "find" but that's pretty close!

Create is a good description too.

Posted

Create is a good description too.

No, we don't "create truth". What we create is a world-view, a unique epistemological work of art on which we are constantly working, and through which we make sense of everything we perceive.

Posted

No, we don't "create truth". What we create is a world-view, a unique epistemological work of art on which we are constantly working, and through which we make sense of everything we perceive.

Hmmmm

Yes, but we all do this collectively when we are talking about science. That's why I distinguish between what is true for us subjectively and what is true objectively- for all of us. You may see a vision which you know is from God- but I can't verify that you are not lying, except by the spirit. That is your "subjective" reality. But we can both agree when we look out a window that that thing over there is a pine tree, even though all we are "really" seeing is light reflected into our eyes. That would be "objectively true"- that we together see a pine tree outside the window. And really that is all science is- collective observations collected and replicated by many many people. Put all these collective observations together, add collective human wisdom and art, etc. and you have human "culture" which is really nothing more than all the collective observations and wisdom of humanity.

The problem is that we cannot know anything other than what humans can know.

We cannot know what bats know about catching insects with sonar, although it is "truth" in a sense I suppose. (See my siggy)

So postulating anything beyond what we as humans can know becomes irrelevant to us.

It would be like arguing about the "color" of radio waves- which are as much a part of the electromagnetic spectrum as light is- but we cannot know that, it it makes no sense to even discuss it because we cannot experience it.

"Truth" is about sentences, not about some "reality" which we cannot in principle experience, and sentences are true or false based on their context.

Posted

I would say "create" rather than "find" but that's pretty close!

Truth is revealed, and can only be known by revelation.

Posted

Moroni 10
:

5 And by the power of the Holy Ghost ye may
know
the truth of all things.

6 And whatsoever thing is good is just and true; wherefore, nothing that is good denieth the Christ, but acknowledgeth that he is.

7 And ye may
know
that he is, by the power of the Holy Ghost; wherefore I would exhort you that ye
deny not the power of God; for he worketh by power, according to the faith of the children of men,
the same today and tomorrow, and forever.

I am not curious about whether or not LDS claim one may know the truth, I already know about that. I am curious about his claim that LDS are the only faith that claims we can know the truth.
Posted

I am not curious about whether or not LDS claim one may know the truth, I already know about that. I am curious about his claim that LDS are the only faith that claims we can know the truth.

Hmmm, I am a bit suspicious of that reply. Your post #31 suggests you might be backpedaling! :P But in answer to your above statement, I think that all religions claims that you can "know," but their way of "knowing" is different. Evangelicals for example claim that you can "know" on the basis of scripture alone; and they overlook the problem of "knowing" that the scriptures are true in the first place. Mormons are the only ones as far as I know who claim that the "knowing" takes place by a miraculous process and is a gift of the Holy Ghost.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...