Thank You For Allowing Me Here

[annewandering]

BIC means born in the covenant. In other words children who are born after their parents marriage is sealed in the temple.

[Deborah]

I apologize, but nothing has been refuted. I have simply stated that I have reviewed the evidence and come to my own opinion. I am sorry if you think that it is wrong to hold onto an opinion that is different from yours.

You can hold any opinion you want but don't pretend it's based on actual evidence when it isn't particularly with the rationale you have given which is pure speculation.

[stevedallas]

Deborah, do not confuse evidence with proof. Yes, the evidence has convinced me, but there is no "proof". My opinion is based on more than speculation, but that evidence does not rise to definitive proof.

[stevedallas]

BIC means born in the covenant. In other words children who are born after their parents marriage is sealed in the temple.

Thank you

[bluebell]

Actually, I was not being sarcastic. I was being sincere.

If you were being sincere, that's great, but that would seem to mean that you made a judgmental remark concerning her motivations for disagreeing you because you sincerely felt that you were qualified to do so.

That's not sarcasm, but it still says something about your personality that's not very flattering. Again, if that's what you are trying to put out there because you honestly believe its' the best way to be and it's honestly who you are, then it is what it is and there's no reason to change it. I think Cal was assuming that those traits aren't who you are and that you would be interested in finding a way to come across differently so she was trying to give you some tips to be able to do that.

I know i'm personally very glad for the people who helped me, long ago, to figure out the best way for me to present myself online while downplaying my worst weaknesses. It's a tricky business posting on line where tone and facial expressions aren't available for people to judge the intent of words. I still mess up way too often, though.

[Deborah]

Deborah, do not confuse evidence with proof. Yes, the evidence has convinced me, but there is no "proof". My opinion is based on more than speculation, but that evidence does not rise to definitive proof.

You have yet to present documented "evidence" except your extrapolation of other things BY said and things that went on in the history. That my friend is not evidence but jumping to conclusions.

[wenglund]

That is my conundrum. I absolutely love GC. I have several LDS apps on my iphone and ipad. I listen to the talks (my favorite is Jeffrey Holland). I have a good feeling in the temple. But yet, despite my prayers and efforts, I cannot bring myself to accept the Book of Mormon. It is frustrating.

A good question to ask yourself may be: Where are you placing the preponderance of your faith for determining whether the Church of Jesus Christ, and the scriptures canonized therein, are of God or not? Are you placing more faith in the arm of flesh (your own research and reasoning about the Church), or more in God (through not only praying to him as mentioned in Moroni 10, but also in living the precepts of the Church to see if they magnify the soul and enable you to become like Christ--as mentioned in Alma 32)?

The process of growth in faith within the restored gospel is designed to produce a spiritual conversion and a spiritual change, rather than an intellectual conversion and intellectual change (though the mind and heart are certainly influenced and enlightened through spiritual conversion and progression). It is the Spirit and the arm of God that affects the former, and the arm of flesh that affects the latter, and not so much vice-versa.

In short, we humans on this discussion board can't really help you with your lack of faith in this instance, except to direct you back to your knees and perhaps provide some room for faith in answering some of your questions (which may only occur if you are striving to understand rather than argue and contend).

If that doesn't suffice for you, then I wish you well on your chosen faith journey.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Edited October 23, 2011 by wenglund

[stevedallas]

A good question to ask yourself may be: Where are you placing the preponderance of your faith for determining whether the Church of Jesus Christ, and the scriptures canonized therein, are of God or not? Are you placing more faith in the arm of flesh (your own research and reasoning about the Church), or more in God (through not only praying to him as mentioned in Moroni 10, but also in living the precepts of the Church to see if they magnify the soul and enable you to become like Christ--as mentioned in Alma 32)?

The process of growth in faith within the restored gospel is designed to produce a spiritual conversion and a spiritual change, rather than an intellectual conversion and intellectual change (though the mind and heart are certainly influenced and enlightened through spiritual conversion and progression). It is the Spirit and the arm of God that affects the former, and the arm of flesh that affects the latter, and not so much vice-versa.

In short, we humans on this discussion board can't really help you with your lack of faith in this instance, except to direct you back to your knees and perhaps provide some room for faith in answering some of your questions (which may only occur if you are striving to understand rather than argue and contend).

If that doesn't suffice for you, then I wish you well on your chosen faith journey.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Wade,

I did not come here to have you all give me a testimony. I did not come here in lieu of prayer and study. I came here because I thought it would be a good place to ask questions and express doubts. In my life, I tend to learn better as I debate an issue. To be able to see others' perspectives is helpful. I did not come here looking for shortcuts. If you wish to help, I appreciate it. If you choose not to, then I can;t say as I blame you- it is not your job to help me.

[Calm]

At the time I actually meant "position" rather than tone but said "tone" out of habit of thought; with most people the issue is tone first, acting like their position is unassailable even while protesting they don't view it that way is secondary usually.

An example of this is how you ignored dealing with any other potential influences on the MMM besides BY.

In my view your tone did deteriorate some when you started jumping to the conclusion that there were those of us who would never be convinced to change our position, basically accusing us of being close-minded, blind followers when you have no knowledge of the level of research we have done in this area before we came to our current conclusion nor do you even know what those conclusions are for the most part.

Edited October 23, 2011 by calmoriah

[stevedallas]

You have yet to present documented "evidence" except your extrapolation of other things BY said and things that went on in the history. That my friend is not evidence but jumping to conclusions.

I can see where you would see it that way. As a former prosecutor AND criminal defense attorney, I look at evidence and proof different than most. I laid it out in an earlier post where I compared it with the OJ trial.

[annewandering]

I can see where you would see it that way. As a former prosecutor AND criminal defense attorney, I look at evidence and proof different than most. I laid it out in an earlier post where I compared it with the OJ trial.

Maybe this is the problem. ^^ You are applying a judicial test to a spiritual problem? Just a thought...

[Stargazer]

I was a convert to the Church back in 1966, at the age of 15. Although the missionaries exhorted me to pray for one, I did not receive a testimony of the Book of Mormon while deliberately seeking it, in fact I don't remember actually praying to get one, either. I may have prayed about the Church, and I certainly felt very comfortable about joining it, and wanted to do so, but as best I can remember I never knelt down and asked "Is the Book of Mormon true?" Or "Is the Church true?" Or at least I never did so before I actually had the testimony.

When I was baptized, I had not at that time taken any specific effort to systematically read the Book of Mormon, let alone ask if it were true. However, I felt strongly that joining this Church was the right thing to do. I expected to get a revelation about it eventually, but I hadn't had one. About two or three months after my baptism, I happened to ask the Lord vaguely for a dramatic spiritual experience (in fact I politely requested a vision), and although I did get an answer, it was more along the line of "You don't have enough faith, yet." I didn't at the time recognize that this in itself was a revelation. In fact, I've never received a "vision." I've never felt the lack, actually.

Much much later, when I came to think about how the project had worked itself out, it seemed to me that my progress into the Church followed more a line-upon-line-precept-upon-precept process than a Paul-on-the-road-to-Damascus one. My testimony of the Book of Mormon (and the Church) seemed to come over time, as I continued in faithfulness in the Church, until a point came where I recognized that I knew without a doubt that the Church was true. Quite a number of little (but important) spiritual witnesses have followed as a portion of my due as I needed them in fulfilling my callings. But I have received nothing for free -- at every step Heavenly Father demanded of me that I step out of my comfort zone before I would get what I needed, but, having done so, it was then available. I remember the great surprise I felt when, in preparation for serving my mission, I finally took matters in hand and read the Book of Mormon from cover to cover for the very first time. I got to the end and according to formula knelt in prayer and asked Father if the Book of Mormon was true. Silence. I prayed longer. Still silence. Then I started getting a little, dare I say, ticked off. Darn it, I was about to go on a mission to a foreign land, and by golly I needed an Answer! So why wasn't I getting one?! When I think it over again, years later, I still find myself shaking my head in bemusement. I didn't need any thunder and lightning telling me the book was true -- because I already knew! It was as if I had been saying to God: "I know the book is true, so please tell me its true! That's an order!" This full-blown testimony of the truthfulness of the Book of Mormon had sneaked up on me over time, growing from an ember to a full-fledged blaze, and I hadn't actually noticed. I remembered that when I read the story of the disciples of Alma and Amulek being thrown into the fire for believing upon their words, while they were forced to watch, I cried. This thing had happened. I knew it had happened. I felt horrible about it. Other experiences while reading the book were as powerful. Yet here I was asking: "Is it true?" The Lord was rolling His eyes at me, I just know it. He probably didn't say to Himself "Well, DUH!" or "What do you think, Sherlock?" but He would have been justified.

There are members of the Church who have received dramatic experiences along their way towards a firm testimony. I've met a few of them. Others have sensed the truth and acted upon it in faith, not requiring of the Lord that he make their way doubtless. That is what it is, after all: FAITH. I'm sure you have read Alma 32, which is one of the most explicit declarations of what it means to live by faith that can be found in any scripture.

May I suggest the following General Conference talks:

• The Spirit of Revelation - David A Bednar
  
• Light - Ted A Brewerton (see especially the story of Archibald Stewart and his family, close to the end)
  
• Prayer and Promptings - Boyd K. Packer
  

There was another General Conference address which I have looked for but cannot find at this moment -- I think it was given by Elder Packer, but I'm not sure -- in which he reported early upon his "career" as a General Authority being given advice about not expecting to see the end from the beginning about everything. He was told that the Lord often times expects us to take a step into the unknown, in faith, before the remainder of our course is revealed, or becomes apparent. This would track closely with the story of Nephi, who, when re-entering Jerusalem alone after attempting twice to get the brass plates, reported that he was led by the spirit, not knowing beforehand the things that he was to do.

Alma 32 makes plain that if we should feel even a glimmer of hope that the Gospel as taught by the missionaries might be true, then one needs to take the next step in faith, and the next in turn, as the spirit makes it clear to us that we're on a right or the right path. In fact, given all the study you've made so far, and the hope which you have expressed that the Church is true, it seems the next most logical step would be to take the leap of faith and be baptized.

Finally, I suggest you read the story of Lorenzo Snow, who eventually became one of the Presidents of the Church. He did not have a full testimony of the Church when he was baptized, but had a hope. His hope was later fulfilled, though his struggle was still not over (and many of us have found in our own lives). Here's a link to a good article about Br. Snow, in the May 1993 Ensign, Lorenzo Snow: Decisions of a Young Man.

[Stargazer]

Deborah, do not confuse evidence with proof. Yes, the evidence has convinced me, but there is no "proof". My opinion is based on more than speculation, but that evidence does not rise to definitive proof.

You're not going to find definitive proof, even of God's existence, until you die, and maybe not even until you stand before Him.

"Definitive proof" in this context I suppose, means the kind of proof that, if presented to a neutral outsider, would cause them to jump right in with you. The only proof you're going to get is the spirit testifying to you, and you alone, that it is true. The kind of proof, as it were, that Paul presented to Felix and Aggrippa about his personal experience on the road to Damascus, which the one said was the result of madness, and the other was only "almost persuaded." How would you like to have a glorious vision that everyone else laughed at?

I'm sure Paul felt quite frustrated at this, yet the ones who heard him testify of Jesus and believed on his words sight unseen (perhaps to gain their own testimony later) were greatly blessed thereby.

I'm as old as Questing Beast, perhaps not as long in the Church, and I don't understand how someone could be in it, swimming in it as it were for so long and still not be certain of it. But I guess I will have to just face up to it: some will be required to be steadfast in faith, regardless of their doubts. And I have no doubt that those who are so steadfast despite the lack of definitive proof will find great reward eventually, perhaps greater joy than I.

[TAO]

Welcome steve dallas, I am glad you are here =).

In any case... I'd like to reaffirm what Stargazer said... 'miraculous experiences' don't just happen... though they do happen occasionally. It take growth to get there though... if God is to give you a 'miraculous' one at all. Actually, oftentimes it is the simplest things that are the most miraculous.

One thing I have found that really helps me, is to focus on those small things. Although God can effect our lives in leaps and bounds, I think he more than often takes little steps to teach us to do the right thing. And he has so much patience... he is so willing to forgive when we make mistakes (and I have made more than enough of those in my life - sometimes even mistakes that verge on the line of willing - and he still forgives me when I truly repent). But I think, like Stargazer said... you may already have a witness... it's just hidden deep inside of you, where you have a hard time seeing it directly. But it's there... you just have to go looking for it =).

Another thing, I had to learn, while gaining a testimony, was to lose my pride. Now of course, there is the regular sort of pride which I think you already know about....but I mean something a bit deeper. Oftentimes, when I was younger (I'm probably still younger than you, I mean when I was young young), I was not only proud of myself... but I was also proud of my methods... that is... of my techniques. I was proud of something else other than myself... and yet, I found it just as deterring to my testimony as my pride in myself. Simply because I would trust this other 'thing' more than the spirit... which caused some problems. I haven't gotten over it completely yet... and I don't know if it effects you or not... but if it does effect you... try to get rid of it... because it really can hurt you. As much as you shouldn't be proud of yourself... it is also important not to be proud of the other things of the world... my weakness was in logic, science, and argument... and yet... I had to overcome... and lose my pride in all of those. Again, I don't know if it effects you... but if it does... please get rid of it... it will make you happier I think.

In any case, I do wish you good luck in finding the witness, my friend... and I apologize if I am totally rambling XD.

Which I do a bit more often than others ;-).

In any case,

Best Wishes,

TAO

[shalamabobbi]

I know I may debate with you, but I want you to know I hold no ill will. I actually LOVE what the LDS Church stands for. Who can watch GC and not be impressed with the LDS Church?

As you might have seen in my few posts, I have problems with the Book of Mormon and Joseph Smith, but not with 99% of the LDS teachings. About 2 years ago, I believed I would get baptized. I was attending Sac Meetings, reading, studying, and praying. I would go to the Temple and sit in the foyer and relish the peace while I studied. I went to do lessons with the missionaries. Two of my best friends, LDS, placed my name in the Temple prayer list. But, no matter how hard I prayed, I could never get an answer that the Book of Mormon is the inspired Word of God.

Please do not take my debates as anti. I am striving to learn. If I offend, let me know so that I might apologize. I do not wish to offend.

In Christ

I have found that the Lord tends to answer my prayers when I am willing to commit to do His will. In your case the next step might be a willingness to commit to baptism if the Lord gives you an answer.

After following this process for a while you will see that we are really already in possession of the answers. We merely need to admit it to ourselves which we are only capable of doing fully when we are willing to commit fully.

[LeSellers]

Others have said this here, but I believe a different vantage point and a reiteration are in order: this is an important issue!

Revelation comes in a myriad of forms. God tailors each revelation to a set of conditions, not least of which are the recipient's need (not necessarily wants), and his ability to understand the message to be delivered. In Moroni's famous promise, he tells us that if we pray with faith in Christ, with real intent, having [studied the question], God will manifest the truth of the matter by the power of the Holy Ghost. And this, I have determined, is absolutely true. The problems are typically two-fold when people feel their prayers are not answered. The first is not always obvious, and it is not that they lack faith in Jesus Christ (although this may be another obstacle). It is the "real intent" part. Mot people ignore this almost completely. As an example of "real intent", we turn to Lamoni's father who, when he prayed his first prayer said, "... and I will give away all my sins to know thee...". He not only said the words, he meant them, so much so that, rather than even defend himself and his people (which is a scary proposition—that's what kings are all about), he buried his sword deep in the earth lest he commit another murder, even by accident, much less by war.

The second issue many people get worked up about is the nature of their revelations. Each one is different, even to the same person. Joseph Smith had a direct manifestation of God in 1820, and another in 1836. He had visitations from angels (too many to list); intense feelings; quiet thoughts unexpected in his mind; open-air, voiced "data down loads"; night-time visions (i.e., dreams); and others like the translation of the Book of Mormon.

We'd all like to have that same kind of First Vision, a Paul-on-the-road-to-Damascus experience. But I am convinced that such an event would kill most of us. Even Joseph, as prepared as he was, found himself lying on his back, completely exhausted that Easter Morning. Paul went blind (as did Alma the Younger, and even worse). They were "chosen vessels", men called and fore-ordained to be ministers of God for their generations, and who had marvelous support during their visions. I know I am not physio-spiritually strong enough to withstand it.

One of the problems with a road-to-Damascus experience is the aftermath: "where much is given, much is required." Paul was brutalized many times for his testimony. Joseph Smith no less. Their lives were wholly dedicated to the work of the Lord in ways that I cannot even begin to picture in my mind, much less feel with my body.Those who want the event of a First Vision are, if they are like me in the least degree, totally unprepared for the consequences of that experience, and those results would be required. I know I am not prepared to give that much, to pay the price attached to such an event.

The two things, "real intent" and "paying the price", are, in reality, the same thing, or different sides of the coin. One we see before the revelation, the other only from the other end of the time line.

Being a fairly lazy guy, one somewhat afraid of the potential consequences (at least as of this point), I prefer the kind of revelation David O. M^cKay related from his childhood. He was praying, the four hundred umpteenth time, for a testimony of the truthfulness of the Book of Mormon. Nothing came until, in the middle of the night he understood. It was not rushing wind, no earthquake, nor thunder or fires from heaven: it was a clear, quiet voice that said, as I recall his words: "You have always known." I, too, have "always known". It is not a matter of debate, and I will not quibble with the Lord over how intense my revelations have been. I know, and that is enough for me.

Others I know have told me they lack a testimony. But, even as they tell the story, their words scream to me, "You have always known!" I strongly suspect this to be your case, as well. Do not overlook a clear, quiet voice telling you, giving you peace, assuring you and comforting you, because if you ignore this revelation, the Lord will not be inclined to expand your horizons. And both He and you will be sadder for the dismissal; He because you are His son, and you because you will not be His son when it really counts a thousand years hence.

Our Primary children sing:

Listen, listen, the Holy Ghost will whisper,

Listen, listen to the still, small voice.

Lehi

Edited October 24, 2011 by LeSellers

[mnn727]

I watch GC and want so badly to believe. I want it to be true. I pray so hard. Why does it elude me? Does it elude you?

It took me about a year to get the kind of answer I was looking for, In looking back I see I was getting answers all along, they just were not answered I recognized at the time.

I finally got the answer I was looking for when I change my prayer from "is it true?" to "I'll do what you want me to do Lord, just let me know what you want me to do"

Edited October 24, 2011 by mnn727