What Distinguishes The Evangelical Witness Vs. Lds Testimony

[Rob Bowman]

DaddyG,

I didn't say "revelations of knowledge and wisdom." However, the delivery system does include revelation, specifically that found in the Bible.

God also uses our Spirit-illuminated minds as we examine the facts of nature and history in the light of his revelation in Scripture to learn truth that isn't found specifically in the Bible. God uses other people, experiences, our meditation on Scripture, even the criticism of outsiders, to move us toward a fuller and more accurate understanding of his truth. Prayer is our way of submitting ourselves to God in all of these processes.

Sorry I didn't understand. What is the delivery system for other revelations of knowledge and wisdom from God if not the Holy Spirit?

[KevinG]

Rob, please be patient with my understanding of your terms. I am not trying to misrepresent what you have taught in any way and you have every opportunity to clarify here on this board.

"God also uses our Spirit-illuminated minds as we examine the facts of nature and history in the light of his revelation in Scripture to learn truth that isn't found specifically in the Bible. God uses other people, experiences, our meditation on Scripture, even the criticism of outsiders, to move us toward a fuller and more accurate understanding of his truth. Prayer is our way of submitting ourselves to God in all of these processes."

This sounds very consistent with the LDS doctrines of the gifts of the Spirit. (Particularly verse 18 below)

Doctrine and Covenants 46:13 To some it is given by the ^aHoly Ghost to know that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, and that he was crucified for the sins of the world.

14 To others it is given to ^abelieve on their words, that they also might have eternal life if they continue faithful.

15 And again, to some it is given by the Holy Ghost to know the ^adifferences of administration, as it will be pleasing unto the same Lord, according as the Lord will, suiting his ^bmercies according to the conditions of the children of men.

16 And again, it is given by the Holy Ghost to some to know the diversities of operations, whether they be of God, that the manifestations of the ^aSpirit may be given to every man to profit withal.

17 And again, verily I say unto you, to some is given, by the Spirit of God, the word of ^awisdom.

18 To another is given the word of ^aknowledge, that all may be taught to be wise and to have knowledge.

19 And again, to some it is given to have ^afaith to be healed;

20 And to others it is given to have faith to ^aheal.

21 And again, to some is given the working of ^amiracles;

22 And to others it is given to ^aprophesy;

23 And to others the ^adiscerning of spirits.

24 And again, it is given to some to speak with ^atongues;

25 And to another is given the interpretation of tongues.

26 And all these ^agifts come from God, for the benefit of the ^bchildren of God.

- - -

I note that your use of Spirit in "Spirit illuminated mind" (itself an extra biblical term) is capitalized. Is that an intentional referral to the Holy Ghost? If so what distinguishes the idea of LDS gaining a knowledge of all things through the gifts of the Spirit distinct from the Evangelical idea of receiving knowledge through a Spirit illuminated mind?

Edited August 23, 2011 by DaddyG

[CV75]

While I understand Rob's position given his frame of reference, I don't share his conclusions given my frame of reference as a Latter-day Saint.

I understand and agree, but the relationship with Christ in relation to "all things" and the role of the Spirit in establishing this for the saints are firmly laid out in the Bible as well as LDS scripture. I don't understand why this is rejected in the evangelical philosophy/ies, presumably authoritatively described in the posts on this tread. Where is the threat in the Spirit bearing witness of all things pertaining to Christ, including the words in the Bible? Otherwise the Bible is true only because, or to the extant that, someone according their own judgement and independent of the Spirit (or somehow non-consciously implanted by the Spirit like programming a computer), believes it is.

[Ahab]

I chose to use a different example precisely because I wanted you to consider the reasoning I use apart from the Book of Mormon. But you would have none of it.

I concede the fact that you are using some "reasoning" to arrive at your beliefs, but my point is that using reasoning alone isn't enough to determine what is scripture.

Your criticism here is based on a false dichotomy: Either it's my wisdom or it's God's wisdom.

Or it's not really "wisdom" at all and you just think it is because of your reasoning.

But if God enables me to have some wisdom, it is in that sense my wisdom, i.e., I would be (to that extent) wise.

True, but how do you know God is truly giving you wisdom rather than you just thinking he is.

Point blank: Where does your knowledge of things that are true come from?

In other words, can you determine what is true, without God's help, or do you need God to help you know what is the truth?

If you can admit that you need God's help... because you realize that without God you could be wrong... then what's all the hubbub about not wanting to admit that you go to God to ask for his help when you want to know the truth about ANYTHING???

The Bible describes a number of human beings as wise; there's nothing wrong with humans drawing on the wisdom they gain as long as that wisdom is based on the fear of the LORD (as Proverbs repeatedly says).

Where does wisdom come from, Rob? How can you get some if you want more than you have?

Joseph Smith realized that he needed more wisdom than he had to arrive at an understanding of truth, and who did he go to?

Come on, Rob. Go ahead and let your light shine so that everybody can see it.

In any case, I was not relying on my own wisdom. I was relying on God's wisdom, because God has revealed in the Bible how we ought to test prophetic claims. I simply follow his directions in the matter. To do otherwise would be...unwise.

How did you first discover that God had revealed that in the Bible?

I know someone who wrote something in the Bible said something about that, but how did you find out that what that person said was true and in fact came from God?

From God, right? Can you admit that, or do you think it came from someone or somewhere else?

If you can admit that your knowledge of the truth regarding the Bible came from God, in the first place, then don't you think it would be a good idea to get your knowledge from God concerning other things that are true, too?

You don't have to keep going back to the Bible, the Bible, the Bible, as if the Bible should be your source for all truth, and if you try it really won't work because the knowledge of all truth isn't contained in the Bible. Instead, just go to God, who is the source of the Bible as well as all other scripture, like the Book of Mormon, the D&C, the PoGP, and wherever else any truth can be found, etc.

[Vance]

Of course, I explicitly denied limiting the knowledge and wisdom Christians may receive from God to matters about Christ and sin. We simply disagree on the "delivery system."

Which is not surprising to me. The problem is your attempt to separate what Moroni says and what is in the Bible.

1 Cor 2:10 But God hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit: for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God.

11 For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God.

12 Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God.

13 Which things also we speak, not in the words which man’s wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual.

14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.

John 16:13 Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come.

So, Bowman attempts to limit "all things" and "all truth" to exclude Moroni.

He also claims that his approach is Biblical, yet the Bible is explicit that "truth", "knowledge" and "wisdom" come from the Holy Spirit.

He also claims that prayer isn't helpful in the quest for "truth".

Yet, Jesus taught,

Matt 7:7 ¶ Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you:

8 For every one that asketh receiveth; and he that seeketh findeth; and to him that knocketh it shall be opened.

9 Or what man is there of you, whom if his son ask bread, will he give him a stone?

10 Or if he ask a fish, will he give him a serpent?

11 If ye then, being evil, know how to give good gifts unto your children, how much more shall your Father which is in heaven give good things to them that ask him?

Matt. 21:22 And all things (except "truth"), whatsoever ye shall ask in prayer, believing, ye shall receive.

Bowman would artificially exclude "truth" from these verses to maintain his boundary against Moroni.

Yes, Bowman would have us reject what these verses plainly and clearly teach (and the Holy Spirit verifies) and accept his artificial version that proscribes Moroni.

[altersteve]

I have a question for the non-Mormons here. If you were to actually pray about the Book of Mormon, do you believe God would not answer you? Or do you think He would say no so there's no use asking Him anyway? If you believe the former, then wouldn't that contradict what Jesus taught about the Father giving knowledge to those who seek it, as Vance explained above?

[Ahab]

Yes, Bowman would have us reject what these verses plainly and clearly teach (and the Holy Spirit verifies) and accept his artificial version that proscribes Moroni.

I find it interesting that you are calling what Rob is limiting "Moroni", as if it's just what Moroni said.

It's not, you know.

What Moroni said is scripture, so that means Rob is putting limits on what God has said.

Oh, well. It's not as if Rob is the only one who has ever tried to do that.

[bluebell]

I have a question for the non-Mormons here. If you were to actually pray about the Book of Mormon, do you believe God would not answer you? Or do you think He would say no so there's no use asking Him anyway? If you believe the former, then wouldn't that contradict what Jesus taught about the Father giving knowledge to those who seek it, as Vance explained above?

I'm obviously a mormon, but i've been told by many non-mormons that praying to know if the BOM was true would be the equivalent of praying to know if the devil was evil. Their point seemed to be that with somethings, the answer is so obvious that it's almost blasphemous to ask.

[Mudcat]

I have a question for the non-Mormons here. If you were to actually pray about the Book of Mormon, do you believe God would not answer you?

I think this is plausible. But the caveat would be that if their is no answer, it is more likely not true than true, given that the Holy Spirit leads one to truth. The fact that the Holy Spirit is not leading you to question about the truth claims of the BoM would stand in greater evidence that it is untrue.

Or do you think He would say no so there's no use asking Him anyway?

I don't think so. In 1 John 5:14 it says.

”Now this is the confidence that we have in Him, that if we ask anything according to His will, He hears us”

However I don't think God answers prayers that are not in accordance with His will.

Just as some background. I have read the Standard Works twice and prayed about them all on both occasions. I have since then prayed a few other times about it as well.

My wife and her family are LDS, and to be quite honest, my first run through was a thing they were pressuring me to do. I had just come to the Evangelical faith of my rearing and IMO the push was reactionary on their part. I felt the whole thing was wrong while reading and even more so when praying. I felt like I was betraying my beliefs by even reading it.

Later on down the road.. I had been posting here for a while and had come to some different conclusions about LDS, their faith and so on. Also, I realized that there was predispositional bias when I first read them, so I took it on myself this time to read through them as objectively as I possibly could. I will say, this time was better, I didn't feel negative about the whole thing.. no one was pushing me to do it.. that sort of thing. But to this day I have as of yet to receive any confirmation from the Holy Spirit that any of it is true.

To be clear, I didn't get a no it wasn't true answer either. Just silence on his part.

Edited August 24, 2011 by Mudcat

[bluebell]

I think this is plausible. But the caveat would be that if their is no answer, it is more likely not true than true, given that the Holy Spirit leads one to truth. The fact that the Holy Spirit is not leading you to question about the truth claims of the BoM would stand in greater evidence that it is untrue.

That's actually a really interesting idea that i had never heard of before in this context.

How does it mesh with non-Christians who are not lead to learn more about Christianity when being given the chance? (I'm thinking of some experiences i had on my mission, one with a Jewish man specifically). If the Holy Spirit is not leading them to question the truth claims of Christianity, should they see their lack of desire or 'pull' towards that religion as evidence in favor of their non-Christian religion?

I'm guessing of course that you wouldn't think it was evidence in support of it, but i'm interested in understanding your thoughts on the idea as it pertains to non-Christians.

[KevinG]

I'm obviously a mormon, but i've been told by many non-mormons that praying to know if the BOM was true would be the equivalent of praying to know if the devil was evil. Their point seemed to be that with somethings, the answer is so obvious that it's almost blasphemous to ask.

Sadly there is a lot of poison dumped in that particular well.

The fact that someone would trust tradition or the word of a preacher while doubting the ability of God to guide them towards the truth and away from error is a curious paradox to me.

Edited August 24, 2011 by DaddyG

[Mudcat]

I'm obviously a mormon,.

And all this time I thought you were a Seventh Day Adventist!!!!

lol.. just kidding.

but i've been told by many non-mormons that praying to know if the BOM was true would be the equivalent of praying to know if the devil was evil. Their point seemed to be that with somethings, the answer is so obvious that it's almost blasphemous to ask

I don't think there alone on their point. I read Mormon Enigma once, thought it was a fair historic overview.. good footnotes and so forth. I asked my wife to read it. I didn't think it an unfair request given I had read a bit at her and her family's request. IIRC the corner of page 3 is still her marker and it's been a few years.

I am not certain, but I was thinking the CoJCoLDS had issued some statements via "Ensign" or something like that to avoid specific literature.

I'm just saying there are two sides to that coin Bluebell.

Kindest Regards,

Mudcat

[Hughes]

I have a question for the non-Mormons here. If you were to actually pray about the Book of Mormon, do you believe God would not answer you? Or do you think He would say no so there's no use asking Him anyway? If you believe the former, then wouldn't that contradict what Jesus taught about the Father giving knowledge to those who seek it, as Vance explained above?

Of course. And the answer was no.

[wenglund]

This is very much relevant! We are arguing about what distinguishes one experience (the evangelical witness) from another (the LDS testimony). Well, many people think that they are actually very similar experiences- with a source in human psychology and not divine origin.

Don't forget that you have also born solemn witness of your faith in Scientism, having yourself even nowdays experienced the sacred, though lab-replicable, feelings of listening to classical music and when contemplating the stars. For you, Beethoven and Betelgeuse are true, and we should respect such beliefs.

I find your popcorn analogy as rather short-sighted. Unless you are claiming that popcorn is of divine nature, with no way to verify its existence in our world save through each of our own personal smells and stories about it, then it really isn't an accurate comparison at all.

I am quite sure you missed the point of the popcorn analogy. So let me be of some help. The point is, just because a sensation can be artificially produced in a lab doesn't mean that the sensation can't also be produced by something real outside the lab. It can--as in the case of popcorn. And, since it can, it isn't reasonable, except perhaps within the religion of Scientism, to conclude that lab-replicable sensations necessarily means the sensations are solely a creation of the mind. Does that help?

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[Vance]

I have a question for the non-Mormons here. If you were to actually pray about the Book of Mormon, do you believe God would not answer you?

Of course. And the answer was no.

A bit confusing.

[bluebell]

And all this time I thought you were a Seventh Day Adventist!!!!

lol.. just kidding.

I don't think there alone on their point. I read Mormon Enigma once, thought it was a fair historic overview.. good footnotes and so forth. I asked my wife to read it. I didn't think it an unfair request given I had read a bit at her and her family's request. IIRC the corner of page 3 is still her marker and it's been a few years.

I am not certain, but I was thinking the CoJCoLDS had issued some statements via "Ensign" or something like that to avoid specific literature.

I'm just saying there are two sides to that coin Bluebell.

Kindest Regards,

Mudcat

My response was not meant to imply that there weren't two sides. I think we all agree that some things ARE so obvious you don't have to ask God. I wouldn't put the BOM (or a book similar to it) in that category, but some people obviously do.

[Rob Bowman]

Ahab,

You wrote:

True, but how do you know God is truly giving you wisdom rather than you just thinking he is.

This question is inescapable for everyone who thinks he knows what God knows. For example, I could ask you, how do you know that God truly gave you the testimony of the Holy Ghost rather than you just thinking that you have it?

You wrote:

Point blank: Where does your knowledge of things that are true come from?

Ultimately, from God, of course. Mediately, it comes from various sources.

You wrote:

In other words, can you determine what is true, without God's help, or do you need God to help you know what is the truth?

If it is not already clear to you that I agree we need God's help to know truth, then probably nothing I say can make that clear to you.

You wrote:

If you can admit that you need God's help... because you realize that without God you could be wrong... then what's all the hubbub about not wanting to admit that you go to God to ask for his help when you want to know the truth about ANYTHING???

I give up.

[Mudcat]

That's actually a really interesting idea that i had never heard of before in this context.

How does it mesh with non-Christians who are not lead to learn more about Christianity when being given the chance? (I'm thinking of some experiences i had on my mission, one with a Jewish man specifically). If the Holy Spirit is not leading them to question the truth claims of Christianity, should they see their lack of desire or 'pull' towards that religion as evidence in favor of their non-Christian religion?

I am assuming given your statement that "If the Holy Spirit is not leading them to question the truth claims of Christianity". That you also mean the that the Holy Spirit takes an active role in not leading some people when you say, "non-Christians who are not lead to learn more about Christianity".

It seems you are suggesting that the Holy Spirit seems to be withholding information about Christ. It is my belief that the Holy Spirit does not deny Christ to anyone, rather we deny him ourselves.

But if, as you seem to be suggesting, propose that the Holy Spirit doesn't really give much of an offering to such a person in the way of spiritual evidence. Then this would seem to take apart the notion that God is not a respecter of persons in short order. Wouldn't you agree?

[KevinG]

Rob, please be patient with my understanding of your terms. I am not trying to misrepresent what you have taught in any way and you have every opportunity to clarify here on this board.

"God also uses our Spirit-illuminated minds as we examine the facts of nature and history in the light of his revelation in Scripture to learn truth that isn't found specifically in the Bible. God uses other people, experiences, our meditation on Scripture, even the criticism of outsiders, to move us toward a fuller and more accurate understanding of his truth. Prayer is our way of submitting ourselves to God in all of these processes."

This sounds very consistent with the LDS doctrines of the gifts of the Spirit. (Particularly verse 18 below)

Doctrine and Covenants 46:13 To some it is given by the ^aHoly Ghost to know that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, and that he was crucified for the sins of the world.

14 To others it is given to ^abelieve on their words, that they also might have eternal life if they continue faithful.

15 And again, to some it is given by the Holy Ghost to know the ^adifferences of administration, as it will be pleasing unto the same Lord, according as the Lord will, suiting his ^bmercies according to the conditions of the children of men.

16 And again, it is given by the Holy Ghost to some to know the diversities of operations, whether they be of God, that the manifestations of the ^aSpirit may be given to every man to profit withal.

17 And again, verily I say unto you, to some is given, by the Spirit of God, the word of ^awisdom.

18 To another is given the word of ^aknowledge, that all may be taught to be wise and to have knowledge.

19 And again, to some it is given to have ^afaith to be healed;

20 And to others it is given to have faith to ^aheal.

21 And again, to some is given the working of ^amiracles;

22 And to others it is given to ^aprophesy;

23 And to others the ^adiscerning of spirits.

24 And again, it is given to some to speak with ^atongues;

25 And to another is given the interpretation of tongues.

26 And all these ^agifts come from God, for the benefit of the ^bchildren of God.

- - -

I note that your use of Spirit in "Spirit illuminated mind" (itself an extra biblical term) is capitalized. Is that an intentional referral to the Holy Ghost? If so what distinguishes the idea of LDS gaining a knowledge of all things through the gifts of the Spirit distinct from the Evangelical idea of receiving knowledge through a Spirit illuminated mind?

Rob - I think my last question to you got buried in the length of the thread...

Thanks in advance for your thoughts.

[bluebell]

But if, as you seem to be suggesting, propose that the Holy Spirit doesn't really give much of an offering to such a person in the way of spiritual evidence. Then this would seem to take apart the notion that God is not a respecter of persons in short order. Wouldn't you agree?

I was just trying to understand how your statement of: "The fact that the Holy Spirit is not leading you to question about the truth claims of the BoM would stand in greater evidence that it is untrue", applied to non-Christians who don't feel led to question the truth claims of Christianity.

I wasn't trying to propose anything, but was wanting you to explain something that it seemed you had proposed.

[mfbukowski]

Thank you—any lesser approach is akin to being force-fed stale toast by a baker who lost his license.

[mfbukowski]

In part it does, but part is still open.

When I asked, "First question has to with what seem to be deductive verifications. If it is revealed to you that the BoM is true, then what can actually be deduced from such a revelation aside from the revelation of it's truth?"

What I meant by that was, If you are given a testimony of the BoM, as you believe you have been given. Then I think it would be a safe assumption you take what is in the BoM as true.

Does such a revelation of its truth lead a person to other deductive sorts of truth? In example, if we assume the BoM is true, then can it be deduced that JS is a prophet, the CoJCoLDS is true, the D&C, PoGP is true and so forth.

What I am wondering in specific, is if revelation by the Holy Spirits confirmation is necessary for all aspects within the CoJCoLDS for something being true or can you actually make safe assumptions on some things deductively.. and if so what do you think some of those assumptions might be?

I almost want to ask the question, when you say you believe it is true, then in what way or how is it true? I am afraid that would bog things down.. because it is tangential. So don't feel compelled to answer, I may start a thread on it at some point though.

Regards,

Mudcat

No problem.

As a Pragmatist I see the statement "I know the church is true" to mean something like "I know the church and all it offers is the best pathway to God".

It means, at least to me, "Yep. I'm I'm buying the whole package." Mormonism is as much a way of life as anything else- it is a whole world view, not a collection of discreet doctrines sewn together. Blake Ostler talks about the "praxis" of Mormonism and I think the is right.

But on the other hand, if you accept the Bible as true, aren't you accepting each individual doctrine the bible teaches? The virgin birth, the fact that Jesus is the savior, the fact that Isaiah was a prophet, the resurrection, the prophecies of the end times etc etc?

How much "deduction" is involved in accepting Biblical doctrine? I see it pretty much as the same kind of thing.

[jo1952]

jo,

I did nothing to "derail" this thread. You made statements and I asked questions about some of them and responded to others.

Since you chose to ignore my questions, I guess we've come to an impasse.

Rob,

You must have missed the part where I told you DaddyG had already answered your questions pretty much the same as I would have. So why is it necessary to repeat what he already said?

This appears to be an excuse to avoid addressing the questions I have now asked you in two different threads. So be it. Silence can speak volumes.

Regards,

jo

[mfbukowski]

Rob,

You must have missed the part where I told you DaddyG had already answered your questions pretty much the same as I would have. So why is it necessary to repeat what he already said?

This appears to be an excuse to avoid addressing the questions I have now asked you in two different threads. So be it. Silence can speak volumes.

Regards,

jo

Now you know what Vance and I and others have been saying for months.

Edited August 24, 2011 by mfbukowski

[jo1952]

I notice that you don't address the issues he raised nor do you clarify or expose his supposed twists. I wonder why.

It is difficult to know exactly what he does believe since, when pressed, he won't answer questions regarding what his beliefs look like to us. Then he turns around and condemns us for misrepresenting what he believes.....

For instance, see my post #248.

jo

Edited August 24, 2011 by jo1952