What Distinguishes The Evangelical Witness Vs. Lds Testimony

[KevinG]

In another thread there was an unanswered question that unfortunately got bogged down in arguments over whether it had been answered before or not.

For the benefit of those of us who were not privy to theearlier discussions can any self described (non-LDS) Christian explain whytheir belief in a witness from the Holy Spirit leading to knowledge of theclaims of their faith is distinct and by implication more valid than the LDSclaims of testimony from the Holy Spirit that can lead to a knowledge of the truthfulnessof the LDS claims?

For example why is the Spirit witnessing to someone at analter call that they can be saved by declaring Christ their Savior and covenanting as such by beingbaptized into a non-denominational Christian church any more or less valid thana person finding out that they can be saved by testifying Jesus Christ is their Savior and covenanting as such through LDSbaptism?

I apologize if my descriptions aren’t in line with inside languageof respective denominations (or non-denominations) but please don’t let thathang the discussion up. Explain what distinguishes the claims of revelation through the Holy Spirit and makes one more valid in your eyes than the other.

[kolipoki09]

In another thread there was an unanswered question that unfortunatelygot bogged down in arguments over whether it had been answered before or not.

For the benefit of those of us who were not privy to theearlier discussions can any self described (non-LDS) Christian explain whytheir belief in a witness from the Holy Spirit leading to knowledge of theclaims of their faith is distinct and by implication more valid than the LDSclaims of testimony from the Holy Spirit that can lead to a knowledge of the truthfulnessof the LDS claims?

For example why is the Spirit witnessing to someone at analter call that they can be saved by declaring Christ their Savior and covenanting as such by beingbaptized into a non-denominational Christian church any more or less valid thana person finding out that they can be saved by testifying Jesus Christ is their Savior and covenanting as such through LDSbaptism?

I apologize if my descriptions aren’t in line with inside languageof respective denominations (or non-denominations) but please don’t let thathang the discussion up. Explain whatdistinguishes the claims of revelation through the Holy Spirit and makes onemore valid in your eyes than the other.

William Lane Craig explains the evangelical position rather well.

[bluebell]

I loved what Dr. Craig said, thought it was very true. It's so interesting to see that in a lot of things, Evangelicals and LDS have a lot in common.

I do find it interesting that he describes relying upon the witness of the Holy Ghost to know what is true, when there is so much mocking or arguing from some Non-LDS Christians about how unreliable such a witness is. I can't even count the number of times i've had that verse in Jeremiah quoted to me about how untrustworthy the heart is as a refutation of the LDS belief in getting a spiritual witness to know God's truth. They all must be from a different branch of Christianity than Craig is i guess.

[KevinG]

Dr. Craig could have taught that in LDS Sunday School and been greeted with nods of agreement. So what invalidates the LDS claim to validating our claims via the Holy Spirit in the eyes of evangelicals?

I do believe that the Holy Spirit can testify/witness to anyone of any denomination of the divinity of Christ. Which makes the false Jesus claim particularly nasty in my opinion.

On a lighter note: I sometimes have a recurring cynical suspicion that God gave all mankind competing authority claims just to see how we would treat each other.

P.S. its date night so please don't think I'm ignoring any future comments or questions on this thread.

Edited August 19, 2011 by DaddyG

[jo1952]

Dr. Craig could have taught that in LDS Sunday School and been greeted with nods of agreement. So what invalidates the LDS claim to validating our claims via the Holy Spirit in the eyes of evangelicals?

I do believe that the Holy Spirit can testify/witness to anyone of any denomination of the divinity of Christ. Which makes the false Jesus claim particularly nasty in my opinion.

On a lighter note: I sometimes have a recurring cynical suspicion that God gave all mankind competing authority claims just to see how we would treat each other.

P.S. its date night so please don't think I'm ignoring any future comments or questions on this thread.

I was smiling and nodding my head in agreement through his entire interview! His words were quite beautiful to hear. So, now I am more confused than ever. Why DO EV's seem to change gears when it comes to the LDS receiving a witness or personal revelation from the Holy Ghost? The video was excellent; I see no conflict with the LDS.

Regards,

jo

[Rob Bowman]

Since the question in this thread was originally aimed at me, I think I need to reply. However, I have been feeling sick for several hours and will probably have to wait until later, perhaps tomorrow, to respond.

[mfbukowski]

William Lane Craig explains the evangelical position rather well.

Amazing. I agreed with every word.

But I bet he doesn't believe in Moroni 10:4. Why is that??

[Messenger]

For example why is the Spirit witnessing to someone at analter call that they can be saved by declaring Christ their Savior and covenanting as such by beingbaptized into a non-denominational Christian church any more or less valid thana person finding out that they can be saved by testifying Jesus Christ is their Savior and covenanting as such through LDSbaptism?

What Distinguishes The Evangelical Witness Vs. Lds Testimony

What distinguishes these claims of revelation from the Holy Spirit?

First of all, being a non-member for 15 years, AND being a Christian, I can tell you that I have felt the spirit then, especially when it witnessed to me Jesus Christ. Truth is truth. And the fact is he died for all of us, so that we could live forever, but not nesessarity Eternal Life is promised.

After being a member, then not, then being a member again and using those experiences I can witness two things about the fundamental differences between us as representing the LDS church and them are .....

1) Priesthood Authority. This is one of the things that makes the church so true. Having authority on behalf of Heavanly Father is a privelege. When used properly, nothing else will compare to the direction that one feels and the responsibility that he has shared with you.

2) While others can have bits of truth, and even get a witness to that truth via the Holy Ghost, there is no other organization that has the authority to give it as a constant companion.

Edited August 20, 2011 by Messenger

[mfbukowski]

Since the question in this thread was originally aimed at me, I think I need to reply. However, I have been feeling sick for several hours and will probably have to wait until later, perhaps tomorrow, to respond.

And yes, I am the one who originally brought it up.

No hurry at all. I have been waiting for months and months to get your answer- and I would be delighted if you agreed with Dr Craig- but this all arose in your criticism of Moroni 10: 4, so I don't see how you can possibly agree with him.

[Deborah]

1) Priesthood Authority.

I think this is the key. I know many non-LDS who have very firm testimonies of Jesus Christ. They are wonderful people. But they are limited by the lack of Priesthood and ordinances. That to me is the purpose of the church, not so much as the only repository of truth, but the arm of the Lord which blesses the world and enables his people to get those ordinances necessary for exaltation.

[Vance]

William Lane Craig explains the evangelical position rather well.

WOW!!!

I look forward to the seeing contorted and tortuous logic needed to separate that from Moroni 10:3-5.

[Monster]

I would say there is not difference. Both EV and Mormons come from a position of faith. Both are looking for some kind of spiritual witness. Both will most likely get an answer that confirms to what they already believe or want to be true. The same methods are use so I would expect the same result.

[KevinG]

Since the question in this thread was originally aimed at me, I think I need to reply. However, I have been feeling sick for several hours and will probably have to wait until later, perhaps tomorrow, to respond.

Thank you - feel better soon and I look forward to hearing from your informed point of view. I always found more to agree with in discussions with my Southern Baptist neighbor than we ever found to disagree with, but the LDS claims of our Latter-day revelations were always a sticking point that we agreed to disagree over.

[KevinG]

I would say there is not difference. Both EV and Mormons come from a position of faith. Both are looking for some kind of spiritual witness. Both will most likely get an answer that confirms to what they already believe or want to be true. The same methods are use so I would expect the same result.

I've been down this road before with agnostics and atheists. My experience and the experience of many others who were required to change their lives and adapt their behavior towards their newfound beliefs does not jive with your theory that all faith is self fulfilling.

Don't derail this thread. If you want to play the atheists think you are all deluded card do it on your own thread.

[Uncertain]

Here is a Q&A where William Lane Craig addresses the topic of LDS spiritual experiences.

http://www.reasonablefaith.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=8237

I find it the height of irony that he applies his epistemology to Mormon missionary efforts. That is he claims no matter what a *Christian should not be taken in by a sophisticated LDS interlocutor since a "Christian" has a witness of the Holy Spirit that their faith is true hence no matter how logical a Mormon may sound they must be wrong. So more or less he takes the position he described in post #2 and uses it to defeat LDS missionary efforts it makes me chuckle turnabout is fair play .

*Apparently William Lane Craig does not view Mormons as Christians.

Edited to add relevant section from the above link:

"My knowledge of Christianity’s truth, while supported by strong arguments, is not ultimately based on those arguments but on the witness of God Himself. If, therefore, I find myself confronted with a well-prepared and articulate Mormon who blows away my arguments and presents a case for Mormonism that I can’t answer, I should not apostatize, since I have the witness of the Holy Spirit to Christianity’s truth and so realize that although I’ve lost the argument, Christianity is nonetheless the truth (and I need to be better prepared next time!)."

LOL

Best,

Uncertain

Edited August 20, 2011 by Uncertain

[KevinG]

Here is a Q&A where William Lane Craig addresses the topic of LDS spiritual experiences.

http://www.reasonabl...Article&id=8237

I find it the height of irony that he applies his epistemology to Mormon missionary efforts. That is he claims no matter what a *Christian should not be taken in by a sophisticated LDS interlocutor since a "Christian" has a witness of the Holy Spirit that their faith is true hence no matter how logical a Mormon may sound they must be wrong. So more or less he takes the position he described in post #2 and uses it to defeat LDS missionary efforts it makes me chuckle turnabout is fair play .

*Apparently William Lane Craig does not view Mormons as Christians.

Best,

Uncertain

Oh boy. Revelation for me but not for thee. I visualize someone sticking fingers in their ears and yelling loudly "You are wrong because I can't hear you"!

Edited August 20, 2011 by DaddyG

[altersteve]

My knowledge of Christianity’s truth, while supported by strong arguments, is not ultimately based on those arguments but on the witness of God Himself. If, therefore, I find myself confronted with a well-prepared and articulate Mormon who blows away my arguments and presents a case for Mormonism that I can’t answer, I should not apostatize, since I have the witness of the Holy Spirit to Christianity’s truth and so realize that although I’ve lost the argument, Christianity is nonetheless the truth (and I need to be better prepared next time!).

One must wonder how he would respond if a Latter-day Saint were to use that same statement.

Pathetic.

[KevinG]

One must wonder how he would respond if a Latter-day Saint were to use that same statement.

Pathetic.

That is a very disappointing position for a "scholar" to take.

I know most people won't believe me but as an LDS convert I am always open to finding out that there is more out there than I have found, be it Mormon, Christian, Muslim, Jewish, Buddist, or some heretofore earthly church other than my own. However in 24+ years of being a Latter-day Saint the Holy Spirit has not informed me that I was in need of another church organization since my conversion from Methodism to Mormonism.

[Rob Bowman]

Many evangelicals speak about “the testimony of the Holy Spirit” and affirm that in some sense they know that Christianity is true because of that testimony or witness. Is this idea analogous to what the LDS Church teaches with regard to the Holy Ghost revealing that the Book of Mormon is true, per Moroni 10:4?

Since evangelicals vary among themselves in their doctrinal understanding of such questions, I cannot rule out that some evangelicals may think about the testimony of the Holy Spirit in a way that is analogous to the Mormon testimony of the Holy Ghost to the Book of Mormon. However, in general, I think the two views are quite dissimilar in some important respects.

For evangelicals (generally speaking), the revelatory work of the Holy Spirit has four foci:

1. The Holy Spirit convicts people of their sins (John 16:7-11). This means that the Holy Spirit stirs in the hearts of people the awareness that they are indeed sinners—that they are lost, under condemnation, and in need of divine mercy. We are all already objectively guilty of sin, but the Holy Spirit, if you will, makes us feel guilty—not with false guilt or in a destructive way, but a breaking of pride and self-justification.
2. The Holy Spirit convinces people to trust in Christ as Lord and Savior (John 16:13-14; 1 Cor. 12:3). The Holy Spirit not only makes us aware of our need for mercy, he makes us aware of our need for Christ. As we hear the gospel, as we read the New Testament and become acquainted with Jesus, the Holy Spirit moves in people’s hearts to warm them toward Jesus. They see not merely facts about Jesus; they see that Jesus is someone who loves them, who died for them, and who is utterly trustworthy. They are moved to turn to him in humility, to bow before him as Lord and to trust in him as Savior.
3. The Holy Spirit assures believers in Jesus Christ that God loves and accepts them as his adopted children (Rom. 8:14-17; 1 John 3:24; 4:13). Having confessed our sins and trusted in Christ as Savior and Lord, the Holy Spirit assures believers that God loves them and accepts them. This confidence is not for them merely a doctrine to which they assent but something personally relevant and applicable to them. They move from believing “Jesus died to atone for sins” to “Jesus died for me”; from believing “God loves and accepts as his children those who believe in Christ” to “God loves and accepts me as his child for Christ’s sake.” It is like the difference between intellectually recognizing that a man you haven’t seen for years is your father to knowing that your father loves you.
4. The Holy Spirit illuminates the minds of believers in Christ to recognize, accept, and apply the truth that the Holy Spirit has already revealed in Scripture (1 Cor. 2:9-15). For example, when a believer in Jesus Christ reads in Scripture that bearing false witness is sin, the believer, illuminated by the Holy Spirit, recognizes that this is God’s word, accepts it as such, and responds by reflecting on ways that he needs to change, if any, to live faithfully to that teaching. When a believer reads that Christ commissions his disciples to make disciples of all nations, the believer is moved by the Holy Spirit to want to have a part in carrying out that commission. This does not mean that the believer always understands Scripture correctly. Far from it. Having the Holy Spirit does not make a believer infallible. If the believer does not read the Bible, the Holy Spirit’s illumination will obviously do that believer no good. If the believer does not learn how to read the Bible properly, or if he brings a personal agenda to the text, he will make mistakes or exhibit blind spots in his understanding of the Bible. In general, though, those who truly trust in Christ experience the Bible opening up to them and their own hearts being willing to accept and apply what it teaches.

A person who is convinced of his sin and need for mercy, who trusts in Christ as Lord and Savior, who is confident that God loves and accepts him for Christ’s sake, and who experiences the Holy Spirit’s illumination of the Bible as God’s word, clearly is convinced that Christianity is true. He knows that it is true personally and “existentially,” because for him Christianity is really all about his saving relationship with God through Jesus Christ as experienced by the indwelling presence of God the Holy Spirit. His confidence in the gospel is not limited to his mastery of theology, his exegetical facility, or his knowledge bank of answers to tough questions, because he has a personal relationship with God. This is what evangelicals, in general, mean by the testimony of the Holy Spirit.

Now let’s talk about what the testimony of the Holy Spirit does not mean for evangelicals (again, generally speaking).

1. It does not mean that evangelicals pray to know whether some assertion of fact is true. We don’t pray to know whether Jesus was a real person, or whether he rose from the dead, or whether the Gospel of Luke was true Scripture. Evangelicals, generally speaking, do not encourage nonbelievers to pray to know if something is factually true. The only partial exception to this would be that evangelicals will sometimes encourage nonbelievers who are close to being convinced that the gospel is true, but who have doubts, to try praying and expressing honestly what is on their mind. “God, I’m not quite sure if you’re really there, but if you are, and if Jesus is your Son, I want to know it.” Such a prayer leaves entirely open how God might respond, or what he might use to bring full acceptance of the truth of the gospel.
2. It does not mean that evangelicals appeal to their possession of the Holy Spirit as an answer to intellectual objections to the Christian faith. “Don’t Romans 3 and James 2 disagree about justification and works?” “Your question doesn’t matter because I have the Holy Spirit and I know Christianity is true.” We just don’t reason this way. (If any individuals evangelicals do, they are out of sync with evangelicalism as a whole.) We may remain personally confident that God loves us in Christ even if we are not knowledgeable enough to address such objections, but we don’t substitute our Spirit-instilled trust in the gospel for answers to such questions.
3. It does not mean that evangelicals pray to know what denomination is the one true form of Christianity or to know which theological tradition to accept. “I prayed about whether to accept Calvinism or Arminianism, and the Holy Spirit witnessed to me that Calvinism is true.” No Calvinist would ever say such a thing. “I have a testimony from the Holy Spirit that the Southern Baptist Convention is the one true church in America today.” Not only would no Baptist appeal to the Holy Spirit’s testimony in this way, no Baptist would ever make such a claim about the SBC. Now, an evangelical might pray for wisdom to make good decisions about which church to join, but they would understand “wisdom” in this context as a sound understanding consistent with biblical principles, not as a private revelation that is independent of (or even contrary to) Scripture.
4. It does not mean that evangelicals test new revelations (or revelations new to him) by praying for a spiritual witness. When an evangelical first encounters Islam, he does not pray to know if the Qur’an is true. Nor does he seek a spiritual testimony to know if Mary Baker Eddy’s Science and Health is scripture. Nor would he pray to know if he should accept Oral Roberts or Kenneth Hagin as prophets of God. (For the record, I consider both these men to have been false prophets.) Having come into a relationship with God through his Son Jesus Christ by the work of the Holy Spirit, an evangelical puts all religious claims outside the Bible to the test of fidelity to the Bible. It doesn’t matter to us whether the claim comes from Thomas Aquinas or Thomas S. Monson. This isn’t a double standard, because we also don’t pray to know if the Bible is the word of God. Generally speaking, evangelicals accept the Bible as the word of God because it is through the New Testament (produced by Christ’s apostles and their associates) that they come to know Jesus Christ, and in turn they find in the Gospels that Jesus regarded Scripture (which at the time was the Old Testament) as the unerring word of God. Evangelicals may have ancillary apologetic arguments to defend various parts of the Bible, but our confidence in the Bible as a whole is tied to our confidence in Jesus Christ.

Finally, let me draw some contrasts between the typical evangelical view, as I have described it above, and the typical Mormon view.

1. Moroni 10:4 is often cited by Mormons as an appeal to people who already believe in Christ to pray for the Holy Ghost to enable them to accept the Book of Mormon as factually true. Evangelicals reject this appeal because they don’t agree with the practice of praying for revelations of factual knowledge. Of course, evangelicals also have specific reasons for viewing the Book of Mormon as false scripture.
2. Mormons sometimes appeal to their testimony of the Holy Spirit as negating a particular objection or criticism of their beliefs. Evangelicals don’t do this, in general, because the testimony of the Holy Spirit is focused on their personal relationship with Christ and is not a general epistemological principle.
3. Mormons commonly claim to have a testimony of the Holy Ghost that the Book of Mormon is true, that Joseph Smith was a prophet of God, and that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is the one true church on the earth today. Evangelicals reject this claim on the general principle that one does not settle the question of which version of Christianity is true by appealing to or receiving a private religious experience (even one you think is from the Holy Spirit). Again, evangelicals have various specific objections to the Mormon religious truth claims.
4. Mormons also cite Moroni 10:4 as promising that a person may know that additional revelation is from God by praying to God for a spiritual witness from the Holy Spirit. Evangelicals reject this appeal on the principle that a Christian should not pray for a private revelation or spiritual experience as to the truth of an alleged new revelation.

[mfbukowski]

For those who are interested in the original thread, it was quite easy to find

http://www.mormondia...entry1209000797

I wish I was more skilled at linking to particular posts, but ones which are quite relevant are:

229

268

517

There are many many others relevant- these are some- the thread is quite long and on various topics, so tracking the argument back is not easy.

90-95

170 p 9

173

182

188

189

191

196

215

219

220

221

222

233

268

297

307

493

517

In post 229, I think the first post where "altar call" was used, I said:

That's why I deliberately brought up the situation where one is in an Evangelical meeting and an altar call is made.

Something must be happening in that moment in which the person feels the inspiration that they should go forward and "accept Christ".

THAT is "personal revelation" or a "testimony" or whatever you want to call it- and I am certainly willing to call it "legitimate". Any inspiration which brings one closer to Christ, I am convinced, is from the Lord.

We can only speculate, but I suppose that Rob would say something like "but in this case, the inspiration was one way- the individual did not take an active position and pray for the revelation - it was a free gift from God".

And he may be right about that. God definitely inspires and directs us without "solicitation" in many instances, I am convinced.

But I am also convinced that he hears and answers prayers and teaches us "wisdom" - and I don't see how Rob can deny that since such things are said on Evangelical websites by the hundred.

The reason I personally know that the Bible preaches the "right Christ" is because I have had that testimony (I am convinced) which Rob talks about.

The difference is that I also have a testimony that the BOM and LDS church are "true".

For me, if the LDS church preaches a "false Christ" then so does the Bible. Besides, the Bible is an ancient document which is full of who knows what. One could not possibly know it was "doctrinal" for anything without a testimony.

You can make all the historical arguments you want (incidentally, all of which are defective) about the "truth" of the Bible but none of those can prove that Jesus was in fact the Son of God, that he died for our sins, or that repentance and belief in him will allow us to return to our Father.

You can only know that by personal revelation.

Edited August 20, 2011 by mfbukowski

[mfbukowski]

I am going to be very busy between now and Monday.

But trust me, I want in big time on this thread!

[Messenger]

I would say there is not difference. Both EV and Mormons come from a position of faith. Both are looking for some kind of spiritual witness. Both will most likely get an answer that confirms to what they already believe or want to be true. The same methods are use so I would expect the same result.

I appreciate your opinion. Normally I wouldn’t go into this kind of detail regarding the subject, but I've told other people for a while, and perhaps its time to give a little more of my experiences.

I've had discussions with stake presidents, and even one G.A. about what it feels like when one has had his or her membership taken away or had their records removed. Why this is significant is because church members truly believe that the Holy Ghost is given as a constant companion at the confirmation blessing after baptism. Although I am a member now, I will tell you the experience of this convert joining the church at 15 years old, then leaving it 15 years later, and then rejoining it a few years after that. Having my records remove and becoming a non-member was probably one of the biggest mistakes I have made. I suppose it was easier for me to consider leaving the church, because my family is all non-members. I didn’t have any true family pressure to stay a member plus I felt like I already had a pretty good relationship with Heavenly Father that I had gained as a Christian before I was 15 years old. So, when things got tough, and some local leaders did some pretty questionable things (which have been reported to a G.A.) during a time of great tragedy in my life, and after a lot of thought, I sent in my letter.

I always thought I would have the same feelings and connection that I had before - I had complete faith in myself that I would. But the when my records were removed I will tell you that I felt a piece of my spiritual self was gone - like a light switch that was turned off. In fact, I don’t think people realize, especially members of the LDS church, just how interconnected we are to the knowledge, inspiration, and answers to prayers because of the gift of the Holy Ghost. In fact, I actually got the impression that there are definite personalities on the other side of the veil that are assigned to us. In a way, I suppose they act a lot like Home Teachers to us. When my records were removed, I had every intention of feeling joy. But instead, I had a final spiritual experience from one of those who was a steward in my life from the other side. I felt his sorrow and his disappointment in himself for not figuring out how to do more in my situation. Of course, it wasn’t his fault at all, it was mine. Ironically, the day I became a non-member, I knew without a shadow of a doubt that the church was true.

It took years to get back. In many ways I was still being blessed financially because the personal tragedy that I was going through. I was blessed with many friends and I had a wonderfully popular business that was both profitable and rewarding. These blessings I was getting helped me get through the tragedy. And there were definite times that I felt the Holy Ghost on more than one occasion. But for the most part, I was alone spiritually, yet quite popular in every other way. I’m sure Satan was trying to throw as much worldly money, fun and friends at me to keep me a non-member. However, after you have had the spirit removed from your life, it does something to you, after having felt that. I suppose it’s a lot like losing a loved one, or having a member of your family die. You get used to having it around, and don’t realize what it does for you, and the direction it gives – I suppose a person thinks all that is coming from themselves. Then, all of the sudden after years of having it..... It turns off. I suppose people can feel anger at that kind of loss. They may even curse God, start a new church or constantly looking for truth in strange places. Some will find pieces of it, but they will not have the fullness of it until they are members again. Perhaps I was lucky to never blame Heavenly Father for my own stupidity. It was my fault, and I never stopped praying to get it back. And he did find a way for me to get back - It was a long way back, and more painful than the original tragedy in my life.

Now, 10 years later after being re-baptized, I feel even closer to Heavenly Father than ever before. And I have a new outlook on people who do things a bit contrary to their callings - especially Bishops and Home Teachers. It’s simply this.... I am here to be the best person I can be. That means most of the time I fail, and you are an example to me. But, once in a while, when you fail, that means that I am an example to you. And if my example is the only reason why I am here, my duty as a member of Christ's church is fulfilled; even when my example of how not to be is seen by all. If that helps anyone, then I freely give it.

There has been no greater joy in my life than being a member of this church and taking a part in it - sometimes officially, sometimes unofficially. Some may ask …. “Have I been rewarded for coming back?” Absolutely! I have had the privilege of feeling the love that he has for me, and feeling all of my sins just vanish along with the guilt and pain of the few years of being away. He has blessed me with the knowledge of my future, and my past. He has told me of my short comings, and how to overcome them. Is there any greater love than the love of God for his children? I ask you, what would it be like to feel, have it witnessed to you, the actual Celestial love he has for you while being in a mortal body? Perhaps I have earned this knowledge, perhaps more likely, I share some micro-fragment of commonality in our personal tragedies – Only he didn’t give up. In the end, it was him not giving up that allowed me to come back. Perhaps I haven’t earned a thing. Perhaps I owe my life to him.

[Eldwynn]

I've been down this road before with agnostics and atheists. My experience and the experience of many others who were required to change their lives and adapt their behavior towards their newfound beliefs does not jive with your theory that all faith is self fulfilling.

Don't derail this thread. If you want to play the atheists think you are all deluded card do it on your own thread.

I think atheist/agnostics make a good point. Very many different religions DESCRIBE a similar subjective experience of "knowing" that their god is communicating with them. Many EV's and Mormons among other religious followers (and even non-religious people) describe a similar experience. I think at least a possible conclusion to this conundrum is that this "subjective feeling" can be explained as a product of the human mind (which Neuroscience is proving more and more every day).

You may disagree with this conclusion, but I certainly find it to be both logically sound and rather reasonable, as well as adding a very real and different perspective to the thread (a perspective which, by the way, is more popular than Mormonism itself, according to the Pew Research Center). As such I find it a little harsh to discount it.

Edited August 20, 2011 by Eldwynn

[Eldwynn]

Double post... the lag on this forum is rather frustrating lately.

Edited August 20, 2011 by Eldwynn

[ldsfaqs]

First of all, being a non-member for 15 years, AND being a Christian, I can tell you that I have felt the spirit then, especially when it witnessed to me Jesus Christ. Truth is truth. And the fact is he died for all of us, so that we could live forever, but not nesessarity Eternal Life is promised.

After being a member, then not, then being a member again and using those experiences I can witness two things about the fundamental differences between us as representing the LDS church and them are .....

1) Priesthood Authority. This is one of the things that makes the church so true. Having authority on behalf of Heavanly Father is a privelege. When used properly, nothing else will compare to the direction that one feels and the responsibility that he has shared with you.

2) While others can have bits of truth, and even get a witness to that truth via the Holy Ghost, there is no other organization that has the authority to give it as a constant companion.

Hey... Welcome to the club..... Were you anti-mormon and anti-religion also when you left the Church? I was to a degree, then humbled myself and did some "true" objective study and comparison.

I would have to pretty much agree with your analysis, but add one little clarification.

The Priesthood Authority and the Gift of the Holy Ghost makes ALL the difference. Both are the power to both "know" of an assurity, and "proclaim" of an assurity God's actual truths.

Without those two powers, we are just men on our own making our "best guesses" as to God's truth, gaining only glimpses of the Holy Ghost.

When one is acting under the Gift of the Holy Ghost in the Name of God and by the Power of His Priesthood, pure unadulterated revelation flows. While humans can still make mistakes, it flows so freely that as a collective of Saints, the full truth is sustained and manifested, while human weakness just falls away.

Without those two powers, men gain and take power unto themselves, they begin to corrupt the purity, the pure source, hence the Apostasy.

I would also add, that without the most top source, the "Watchmen" with the keys, the key-stone of Prophets and Apostles, the house begins to crack and tumble. Parts of the Foundation may stay intact, such as Christ the sure cornerstone, but all the details and other parts of the foundation begin to be lost. Hence the need for a restoration, to restore the entire foundation, and rebuild the house fully, and properly, every stone where is should be.

I would also like to add that in Mark 9 & Luke 9 Christ and the Apostles recognize there is a distinction between just any believer and those in the Church, those who have God's authority and are called to the work. However, Christ also explains that other believers are "also" His Children, and should not be offended. He that is not against us is for us. Anti-mormons should really study these verses, because Christ actually says directly that those who are "anti" other believers will be entirely cast into h***..... not just their offending body part, but their entire souls. Thus, he says they better cut that part off.

But anyway, these verses make clear that others have access to the Holy Ghost, and can also serve God according to their abilities, even though they be as "children" compared to the true servants. Christ said, he that is not against us can only be for us. This statement makes clear about condemning really anyone of the Light. We shouldn't do it. Thankfully, the Church is True, and we don't have ministry's and other efforts to destroy the Faiths of others. We follow God's actual truths, anti-mormons especially do not, they serve the dark side.

Edited August 20, 2011 by ldsfaqs