Moroni 10:3-5 -- Several Implicit Assumptions

[keith_brian]

After rereading Moroni 10:3-5 with my new perspective on religion (as a non-believer), I realized that there are several implicit assumptions made in taking the "Moroni challenge". For those not familiar with it, here is the text of the promise.

3 Behold, I would exhort you that when ye shall read these things, if it be wisdom in God that ye should read them, that ye would remember how ^amerciful the Lord hath been unto the children of men, from the creation of Adam even down until the time that ye shall receive these things, and ^bponder it in your ^chearts.

4 And when ye shall receive these things, I would exhort you that ye would ^aask God, the Eternal Father, in the name of Christ, if these things are not ^btrue; and if ye shall ask with a ^csincere heart, with ^dreal intent, having ^efaith in Christ, he will ^fmanifest the ^gtruth of it unto you, by the power of the Holy Ghost.

5 And by the power of the Holy Ghost ye may ^aknow the ^btruth of all things.

Assumptions (short list):

1. God(s) exists.

2. Thinking about the scriptures increases the likelihood that said god(s) will answer your prayer

3. Adam was a real person

4. The earth was created by god

5. God(s) are willing to answer human prayers

6. Praying is an effective way to communicate with god(s)

7. God(s) is/are willing to manifest truth to people who pray

8. A sincere heart affects whether you will get an answer

9. Real intent affects whether you will get an answer

10. Jesus Christ was a real person

11.The Holy Ghost is an effective way of communicating with God(s).

12. It will be the god(s) in question answering your prayer and not another god(s).

13. The answer will be confirmation that the BoM is true.

14. God has been good to the children of men.

Also, not explicitly stated in the verses but implied in Mormon culture are the following assumptions:

15. The answer from God comes almost exclusively in the form of "feelings"

16. Another god is unable to answer your prayer (i.e. Lucifer).

There are also other assumptions built into this "promise", but let's start with these. Do we have any outside (e.g. logical) verification that the above assumptions are valid? In other words, how do we know that Mor. 10:3-5 is a valid way to arrive at objective "truth".

[Questing Beast]

Try it and see. That's all the "test" is saying. If it works for you that is the end of the discussion. If you try repeatedly, over a long period, and nothing happens, then the problematic part dominates the discussion.

Religious convictions are all based on feelings. Religion is metaphysical. When dealing with the empirical, it is called science....

[CV75]

Do we have any outside (e.g. logical) verification that the above assumptions are valid? In other words, how do we know that Mor. 10:3-5 is a valid way to arrive at objective "truth".

Who is "we?" People with a new perspective on religion (as non-believers)?

[keith_brian]

Try it and see. That's all the "test" is saying. If it works for you that is the end of the discussion. If you try repeatedly, over a long period, and nothing happens, then the problematic part dominates the discussion.

Religious convictions are all based on feelings. Religion is metaphysical. When dealing with the empirical, it is called science....

But, that's the problem -- the whole idea that the test itself is valid as a way to arrive at objective -- or metaphysical -- truth.

Let me propose another "experiment" for you to try. Suppose that I told you that God existed and that the way to come to know him was to take a bag of dried chicken bones, shake them up, and spread them on the ground. Let's also say that, as a result of this test, God "spoke" to you through the chicken bones and you then came to know things about God. Some would say that it's all good and each person has to find their own path in life. However, I would question why someone would make major life decisions based on the messages found in chicken bones.

Similarly, what evidence do we have that this metaphysical Moroni's promise is a valid way of arriving at truth? How do we know that an answer comes from God and actually reveals to us truth? That's basically the point of my OP.

[zerinus]

But, that's the problem -- the whole idea that the test itself is valid as a way to arrive at objective -- or metaphysical -- truth.

Let me propose another "experiment" for you to try. Suppose that I told you that God existed and that the way to come to know him was to take a bag of dried chicken bones, shake them up, and spread them on the ground. Let's also say that, as a result of this test, God "spoke" to you through the chicken bones and you then came to know things about God. Some would say that it's all good and each person has to find their own path in life. However, I would question why someone would make major life decisions based on the messages found in chicken bones.

Similarly, what evidence do we have that this metaphysical Moroni's promise is a valid way of arriving at truth? How do we know that an answer comes from God and actually reveals to us truth? That's basically the point of my OP.

If you have doubts about Moroni's test you don't apply it. It is not meant for people like you.

[Arkholt]

But, that's the problem -- the whole idea that the test itself is valid as a way to arrive at objective -- or metaphysical -- truth.

Let me propose another "experiment" for you to try. Suppose that I told you that God existed and that the way to come to know him was to take a bag of dried chicken bones, shake them up, and spread them on the ground. Let's also say that, as a result of this test, God "spoke" to you through the chicken bones and you then came to know things about God. Some would say that it's all good and each person has to find their own path in life. However, I would question why someone would make major life decisions based on the messages found in chicken bones.

But in this instance, would it not be wise to have the results of at least one test of it to show you whether it works or not? What's wrong with Moroni saying "I testify that if you pray to God, you'll get an answer. Don't take my word for it, try it yourself."

Similarly, what evidence do we have that this metaphysical Moroni's promise is a valid way of arriving at truth? How do we know that an answer comes from God and actually reveals to us truth? That's basically the point of my OP.

Right. The answer is "Do the test and find out." That's where your evidence comes from. If it doesn't work, you can remain non-believing. If it does work, you may need to change your mind.

[keith_brian]

If you have doubts about Moroni's test you don't apply it. It is not meant for people like you.

Hence the idea that you have to believe ... in order to believe. Interestingly, this contradicts other ways of acquiring knowledge where doubt forms an integral part of the interrogative process.

[keith_brian]

But in this instance, would it not be wise to have the results of at least one test of it to show you whether it works or not? What's wrong with Moroni saying "I testify that if you pray to God, you'll get an answer. Don't take my word for it, try it yourself."

Right. The answer is "Do the test and find out." That's where your evidence comes from. If it doesn't work, you can remain non-believing. If it does work, you may need to change your mind.

For some reason, I think people keep missing the point of my OP. My question is not whether people can take the Moroni 10:3-5 challenge and arrive at an answer in one form or another. Some people have taken the challenge, and some people have concluded certain things based off that challenge. My question is more with the method of arriving at knowledge itself.

In order for us to take the Moroni challenge, we make a number of assumption, some of which are listed in the OP. Do we have any justification for these assumptions, other than they implied justification that they must be true if the challenge works?

[zerinus]

Hence the idea that you have to believe ... in order to believe. Interestingly, this contradicts other ways of acquiring knowledge where doubt forms an integral part of the interrogative process.

The starting point of religion is faith, not doubt.

[Calm]

15. The answer from God comes almost exclusively in the form of "feelings"

Nope, your assumption, not one that is built into the text and not one that I've experienced in my life.

[Calm]

Hence the idea that you have to believe ... in order to believe. Interestingly, this contradicts other ways of acquiring knowledge where doubt forms an integral part of the interrogative process.

Don't really see that...in all searches for knowledge there is an assumption/belief that there is a way to get an answer out there.

Moroni's test includes the possibility that one's answer will be silence, which would indicate that what was tested failed.

Edited September 18, 2011 by calmoriah

[mfbukowski]

But, that's the problem -- the whole idea that the test itself is valid as a way to arrive at objective -- or metaphysical -- truth.

Where did you ever hear that metaphysical truth was objective????

It is not.

Incidentally I am not interested in this topic- I am simply correcting your terminology.

We have discussed this ad infinitum on this forum before- and as far as I am concerned there is no point in entering into another discussion with someone who thinks metaphysics is "objective".

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/metaphysics/

Edited September 18, 2011 by mfbukowski

[KevinG]

Also, not explicitly stated in the verses but implied in Mormon culture are the following assumptions:

15. The answer from God comes almost exclusively in the form of "feelings"

Wrong. While a feeling can be involved the Holy Spirit answers in multiple powerful ways. The following verses from Dcotrine and Covenants section 46 are instructional.

7 But ye are commanded in all things to ask of God, who giveth liberally; and that which the Spirit testifies unto you even so I would that ye should do in all holiness of heart, walking uprightly before me, considering the end of your salvation, doing all things with prayer and thanksgiving, that ye may not be seduced by evil spirits, or doctrines of devils, or the commandments of men; for some are of men, and others of devils.

8 Wherefore, beware lest ye are deceived; and that ye may not be deceived seek ye earnestly the best gifts, always remembering for what they are given;

9 For verily I say unto you, they are given for the benefit of those who love me and keep all my commandments, and him that seeketh so to do; that all may be benefited that seek or that ask of me, that ask and not for a sign that they may consume it upon their lusts.

10 And again, verily I say unto you, I would that ye should always remember, and always retain in your minds what those gifts are, that are given unto the church.

11 For all have not every gift given unto them; for there are many gifts, and to every man is given a gift by the Spirit of God.

12 To some is given one, and to some is given another, that all may be profited thereby.

13 To some it is given by the Holy 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 believe 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 differences of administration, as it will be pleasing unto the same Lord, according as the Lord will, suiting his mercies 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 Spirit 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 wisdom.

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

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

20 And to others it is given to have faith to heal.

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

22 And to others it is given to prophesy;

23 And to others the discerning of spirits.

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

25 And to another is given the interpretation of tongues.

26 And all these gifts come from God, for the benefit of the children of God.

Edited September 18, 2011 by DaddyG

[TAO]

Hence the idea that you have to believe ... in order to believe. Interestingly, this contradicts other ways of acquiring knowledge where doubt forms an integral part of the interrogative process.

I hate to say, but this is how it is with most things really =/.

How do we know logic is correct? Because it is innately logical to us.

Many of our methods couldn't be proved any good if we didn't take them on faith to a degree. We just arbitrarily choose to 'trust' one things, and not another =P.

I guess one could even say that empirical testing is trusted based on... empirical testing =D. It's all cyclical!

Edited September 18, 2011 by TAO

[wenglund]

There is no test that isn't based on a whole system of assumptions (paradigm), and for the test to work logically requires accepting the underlining assumptions. There is no "external" logic (external to a given paradigm) that can verify the validity of the test. The verification of validity is unavoidably paradigm-dependant.

For example, testing the boiling point of water assumes a number of things: the existence of water, heat, and scientists, a system of measuring heat, the acceptable accuracy of those measuring devises, the assumptions that heat is what causes boiling of water, the heat needs to be sufficient to raise the temperature of the water, and on and on. Absent belief in these assumption, the test is meaningless.

Also, Moroni 10 is a subjective test, and thus it is a test of subjective truths.

Furthermore, it should be remembered that Moroni 10 tends to be a starter test, and not an end test. It may start us on our religious epistemic way. Whereas, Alma 32 is designed to verify the validity of Moroni 10 and take us through to epistemic fruition.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Edited September 18, 2011 by wenglund

[altersteve]

The answer from God comes almost exclusively in the form of "feelings"

I just have to point out that this is not true. It's not exclusive, or even "almost" exclusive, at all. An answer from God may come in many forms.

[Fowdy92]

After rereading Moroni 10:3-5 with my new perspective on religion (as a non-believer), I realized that there are several implicit assumptions made in taking the "Moroni challenge". For those not familiar with it, here is the text of the promise.

merciful the Lord hath been unto the children of men, from the creation of Adam even down until the time that ye shall receive these things, and ^bponder it in your ^chearts.

ask God, the Eternal Father, in the name of Christ, if these things are not ^btrue; and if ye shall ask with a ^csincere heart, with ^dreal intent, having ^efaith in Christ, he will ^fmanifest the ^gtruth of it unto you, by the power of the Holy Ghost.

know the ^btruth of all things.

Assumptions (short list):

1. God(s) exists.

2. Thinking about the scriptures increases the likelihood that said god(s) will answer your prayer

3. Adam was a real person

4. The earth was created by god

5. God(s) are willing to answer human prayers

6. Praying is an effective way to communicate with god(s)

7. God(s) is/are willing to manifest truth to people who pray

8. A sincere heart affects whether you will get an answer

9. Real intent affects whether you will get an answer

10. Jesus Christ was a real person

11.The Holy Ghost is an effective way of communicating with God(s).

12. It will be the god(s) in question answering your prayer and not another god(s).

13. The answer will be confirmation that the BoM is true.

14. God has been good to the children of men.

Also, not explicitly stated in the verses but implied in Mormon culture are the following assumptions:

15. The answer from God comes almost exclusively in the form of "feelings"

16. Another god is unable to answer your prayer (i.e. Lucifer).

There are also other assumptions built into this "promise", but let's start with these. Do we have any outside (e.g. logical) verification that the above assumptions are valid? In other words, how do we know that Mor. 10:3-5 is a valid way to arrive at objective "truth".

Yes these assumptions are valid,

Because you are to ask in faith. Thus you test the water first to see if it is the desired temperature which you seek it to be!

[wenglund]

Without going into a detailed discussion (because this new user name is likely to get blocked too and I don't want to put in the effort), let me just ask this. If someone came to you and told you that you dead grandmother had contacted him from the grave, what kind of proof would you need of his claims? What kind of proof would you need if he claimed she said she wanted you to invest 10,000$ in his business?

The levels of evidence you would likely demand are much higher than the levels of evidence available through Mor. 10:3-5, even if I accept the method at face value.

No, not really. What more evidence would I need to determine if my deceased grandmother appeared to him and said what the someone said she did, than for me to ask my deceased grandmother if she did appear and said what the someone said she did.

Granted, before I actually invest the 10 grand I would need further assurance, which is where Alma 32 comes in. As previously intimated, Moroni 10 tends to provide initial evidence to get one's faith jump-started. It would be analogous to giving reason for an investor to consider and look deeper into investing in the someone's company. Alma 32 takes evidential things from there. It would be analogous to a person investing a small portion of the 10 grand to see if it provided the kinds of returns as claimed.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[Calm]

Without going into a detailed discussion (because this new user name is likely to get blocked too and I don't want to put in the effort)

There is a chance you've up your temp suspension...I'm assuming....into a long term banning with this comeback. If I were you, I'd read the guidelines before posting again.

[Ares]

Keith is gone and so is his sock puppet. It is always a good idea to review the board guidelines.

[Maidservant]

Assumptions (short list):

1. God(s) exists.

2. Thinking about the scriptures increases the likelihood that said god(s) will answer your prayer

3. Adam was a real person

4. The earth was created by god

5. God(s) are willing to answer human prayers

6. Praying is an effective way to communicate with god(s)

7. God(s) is/are willing to manifest truth to people who pray

8. A sincere heart affects whether you will get an answer

9. Real intent affects whether you will get an answer

10. Jesus Christ was a real person

11.The Holy Ghost is an effective way of communicating with God(s).

12. It will be the god(s) in question answering your prayer and not another god(s).

13. The answer will be confirmation that the BoM is true.

14. God has been good to the children of men.

Also, not explicitly stated in the verses but implied in Mormon culture are the following assumptions:

15. The answer from God comes almost exclusively in the form of "feelings"

16. Another god is unable to answer your prayer (i.e. Lucifer).

There are also other assumptions built into this "promise", but let's start with these. Do we have any outside (e.g. logical) verification that the above assumptions are valid? In other words, how do we know that Mor. 10:3-5 is a valid way to arrive at objective "truth".

Ahhhh, yes . . . the quest of a lifetime. You've got a good head start now that you realize what the questions and challenges are for any seeker.

However, I would question why someone would make major life decisions based on the messages found in chicken bones.

Why? How another person makes their decisions is none of your business. We are each responsible for our beliefs and the course we take in life. Moroni 10:3-5 is an invitation that respects that reality.

[Robert F. Smith]

No, not really. What more evidence would I need to determine if my deceased grandmother appeared to him and said what the someone said she did, than for me to ask my deceased grandmother if she did appear and said what the someone said she did.

Granted, before I actually invest the 10 grand I would need further assurance, which is where Alma 32 comes in. As previously intimated, Moroni 10 tends to provide initial evidence to get one's faith jump-started. It would be analogous to giving reason for an investor to consider and look deeper into investing in the someone's company. Alma 32 takes evidential things from there. It would be analogous to a person investing a small portion of the 10 grand to see if it provided the kinds of returns as claimed.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Too bad that Keith didn't commit himself to sincerety. Then we could have recommended he try James 1:5, which proved to be so helpful to young Joseph.

The epistemological question he posed is a worthwhile and productive one. Too bad he didn't confront it head on.