Non-Lds, How Do You Know?

[LeSellers]

What if the Muslim was specifically praying that the Qur'an is fully the word of God.

And you miss this point: Muslims don't do that.

Nor does any other group that I know of: Evangelicals do not pray about the truthfulness of the Bible, etc.

Lehi

[diglot]

And you miss this point: Muslims don't do that.

Nor does any other group that I know of: Evangelicals do not pray about the truthfulness of the Bible, etc.

Lehi

I am not missing the point. As I stated, I was talking about a hypothetical Muslim.

Yes, no other group (that I know of) as a whole teaches the practice of praying to God about their religious beliefs. But many people in many religious groups do this. Not debatable. I have talked to people from widely different religious backgrounds who have done this.

Perhaps you could answer my question.... The indisputable fact that people of other religious beliefs have prayed about their specific beliefs unique to their religion, and received confirmation about these beliefs, does that not then require a bit of humility and self-awareness on a Mormon's part that perhaps one can not know for absolute certain as to whether their own religious system is true?

Or would you just be willing to put non-Mormon's testimonies down to simply being: (A) from the devil, or (B) chemical reactions in the brain independent of God.

Edited October 27, 2011 by diglot

[ERayR]

Yes, I have read it multiple times and studied Islam quite a bit.

I think you are kind of missing my point though. What if the Muslim was specifically praying that the Qur'an is fully the word of God. In other words, not praying if it contains some truth, but praying that it contains all the truth and nothing but the truth.

I think you are missing or avoiding my point.

Come now no writings or church or any other organization where man is involved has "all the truth and nothing but the truth". Not possible and if that is what your asking for no wonder you not getting a positive answer.

If you then say that God would still validate to that Muslim that there is some truth in the Qur'an (despite the fact this hypothetical Muslim prayed as to whether the Qur'an is fully truthful), then anyone can just say the same thing about LDS testimonies about the BoM. In other words, even if the BoM is a huge fraud by Joseph Smith, God would still validate it to people since it contains some truth in it (i.e. it contains truthful statements on how to live a righteous life). If that's the case, then an LDS testimony counts for nothing and shouldn't be taken by any LDS as proof that the BoM is true.

See above. Yes you can say or believe what you want but be prepared to accept the consequences.

So while God may be validating your particular religious beliefs for you, you wouldn't go as far to say that God is saying these religious beliefs (e.g. Joseph Smith was a prophet) are objectively true (i.e. true to every person on earth)?

Yes I would. However, every person on earth will have to get their own validation. Mine is of no effect for them.(you)

I wouldn't take any action based on anyone's testimony. I just want you to admit that there is no way of knowing for certain as to whether your testimony validates your particular religious claims as objective truths.

That you think there is "no way of knowing for certain" tells me you have not experienced the witness of the Holy Ghost or at least not recognized that witness. I guess that being the case, for you there is way of knowing for certain but for me there is.

[ERayR]

Or would you just be willing to put non-Mormon's testimonies down to simply being: (A) from the devil, or (B) chemical reactions in the brain independent of God.

NO

[diglot]

I think you are missing or avoiding my point.

Come now no writings or church or any other organization where man is involved has "all the truth and nothing but the truth". Not possible and if that is what your asking for no wonder you not getting a positive answer.

Regardless as to whether I am missing your point, you are definitely missing mine.

If a non-Mormon prays to God about a particular religious belief that is incompatible with Mormonism, and yet receives a testimony from God that this religious belief is true, what do you do with this?

You said that the testimony from God gives you "certain knowledge" about whatever you prayed about.

So the fact that people receive testimony from God regarding religious beliefs that are irreconcilable with one another, doesn't that warrant a little bit of humility, leading one to admit that they can not have certain knowledge that they are correct.

I have heard from Christians who have prayed to God about whether the BoM is true and whether Joseph Smith is a Prophet. They claim to have received confirmation from God that Joseph Smith was not a prophet and that the BoM is not true.

What do you do with their testimonies? Just simply sweep them aside as anti-Mormons? Put it down to the devil?

Edited October 27, 2011 by diglot

[diglot]

NO

But what if they prayed to God about whether Joseph Smith was a prophet? And God gave them a testimony that he was not a prophet? What then?

Edited October 27, 2011 by diglot

[KevinG]

But what if they prayed to God about whether Joseph Smith was a prophet? And God gave them a testimony that he was not a prophet? What then?

I always encourage people to act according to the light and knolwedge they have been given. If their conclusions are different than mine then they will be judged according to that which God has given them, as will I.

Of course I always encourage them to keep searching too. More than one person has waited for God's time and many have fallen away from the search for truth because they did not have patience to wait for the answers in God's time.

I am not one of those who subscribes to the theory that people are usually deluded or satancally influenced if they don't receive answers right away. In fact I think that is an unrighteous judgement to make about someone.

[KevinG]

But what if they prayed to God about whether Joseph Smith was a prophet? And God gave them a testimony that he was not a prophet? What then?

Oh... and my smart alek answer to that question is "God doesn't want them to be a Mormon".

[ERayR]

Regardless as to whether I am missing your point, you are definitely missing mine.

If a non-Mormon prays to God about a particular religious belief that is incompatible with Mormonism, and yet receives a testimony from God that this religious belief is true, what do you do with this?

You said that the testimony from God gives you "certain knowledge" about whatever you prayed about.

So the fact that people receive testimony from God regarding religious beliefs that are irreconcilable with one another, doesn't that warrant a little bit of humility, leading one to admit that they can not have certain knowledge that they are correct.

I have heard from Christians who have prayed to God about whether the BoM is true and whether Joseph Smith is a Prophet. They claim to have received confirmation from God that Joseph Smith was not a prophet and that the BoM is not true.

What do you do with their testimonies? Just simply sweep them aside as anti-Mormons? Put it down to the devil?

No I do nothing with it. I don't know why they are not receiving the same confirmation I am. I am responsible for me. You have to become comfortable enough with who you are to not worry about what someone else thinks your life should be.

[KevinG]

Steve,

You wrote:

As an evangelical, I'm happy to answer your question(s).

An answer that you might accept as "straight" is made difficult or problematic by the fact that "how do you know" questions can be taken in several ways. You might be asking "what chain of events led you to accept this idea as true," or you might be asking "what reason or reasons do you find personally convincing at the present time that this idea is true," or "what is the actual ground or foundation on which this truth rests," or possibly something else. Most people assume that "how do you know" questions are straightforward and unproblematic; they are not. Epistemology is a complex matter.

C. S. Lewis once wrote, "I believe in Christianity as I believe that the sun has risen, not only because I see it, but because by it I see everything else" ("Is Theology Poetry?" in The Weight of Glory: And Other Addresses [New York: HarperCollins, 1980], 140). We not only have evidence that shows that God exists, that the Bible is the word of God, etc., but it is also the case that for us the truth of Christianity illuminates everything we see.

It is one thing to know, or believe, that God exists; it is another thing to have faith in God, to trust in him. Many people are convinced that God exists but he plays no significant role in the way they live. It turns out that in a sense my answer to all three questions can be rolled into one, though some clarifications and distinctions will have to be made.

A short answer to your question is that I know that God exists because he has revealed himself. God reveals himself in his creation, in my conscience, in Christ, and in Scripture. I am daily confronted anew with the evidence of nature that an infinite or transcendent, yet personal, Being is responsible for the world in which I live. I am also daily confronted anew with the fact that I am a creature accountable to a moral standard not of human invention, a standard against which I fall short. These two realities, one external to me and one internal to me, appear to me utterly convincing proof that God exists. Apart from God's revelation in Christ and in Scripture, though, I would not know much about this God or anything about how to relate to him. God's revelation in Christ is known to me in and through his revelation in Scripture (the Bible), so that for me these two are inseparable (even though distinguishable). This dual revelation of God, both personal (in Christ) and propositional (in Scripture), reveals God in a way that is concrete and life-changing in a way that the general revelation in creation and conscience does not.

Viewed in this way, my answer to all three of your questions is that the "how" of my knowing these things is divine revelation. God reveals himself to me in all four of the ways just mentioned; that is how I know that God exists. God reveals himself in Christ as Savior and by the Holy Spirit convicts me (through my conscience) of my sin and therefore of my need of salvation, and that same Holy Spirit has made known to me (through Scripture) that Christ is the answer to that need and has instilled trust or confidence in Christ as meeting that need for me personally; that is how I know that Jesus Christ is my personal Savior. Since it is through Scripture that I come to know God in this way and to know that Jesus Christ is my Savior, the one who reconciles me to God, in practical terms this is how I know that Scripture is the word of God. That is, the Bible is God revealing himself in words; ultimately, then, I know that the Bible is God's word because it is, because in it I recognize God speaking, and specifically God speaking about Christ as my Savior.

This knowledge of God, Christ, and Scripture is not separate from or pitted against the factual evidence. God makes himself known in the physical world as Creator; the scientific facts testify to this reality. God revealed Christ to be his divine Son through his teaching, miracles, and especially his resurrection from the dead; the historical facts testify to and corroborate these things to be true. God reveals himself in the words of Scripture; the teaching of Jesus Christ about the nature of Scripture, the evidences of fulfilled prophecies, and various factual evidences provide different sorts of attestations to and corroborative evidence for the inspiration of the Bible as the word of God. I never pit facts or evidences against revelation because for me all facts are revelatory. God reveals himself in every scientific measurement, in every historical event, in every text, in every experience. God is the light by which all facts are properly known, and in turn all facts properly understood testify to God, to his Son, and to his written Word. As fallible and fallen creatures, people often misinterpret God's revelations, but that's our fault, not his.

Very nice Rob. You have done a good job of explaining what is sometimes hard to put into words. That conviction of conscience is what the LDS refer to as the Light of Christ. As much as I debate with you on doctrinal points I appreciate your love for the Savior.

[diglot]

No I do nothing with it. I don't know why they are not receiving the same confirmation I am. I am responsible for me. You have to become comfortable enough with who you are to not worry about what someone else thinks your life should be.

Thank you for answering my question. I see where you are coming from now.

Edited October 27, 2011 by diglot

[KevinG]

No I do nothing with it. I don't know why they are not receiving the same confirmation I am. I am responsible for me. You have to become comfortable enough with who you are to not worry about what someone else thinks your life should be.

Even within the Latter-day Saints we are not commissioned to receive personal revelations for others unless they are under our direct care as an ecclesiastical leader, parent or sometimes teacher. Even then the revelations we receive are for giving comfort and counsel. For example if we receive a revelation that we should not partake of broccoli, that does not extend to preaching it over the pulpit. However, if the Prophet receives a revelation that we should not partake of broccoli then we as a church membership have the right to verification of that general counsel from the Holy Spirit. Too often people (Saints and others alike) get too prideful about their own knowledge and judge others unrighteously because they are at different stage of their journey back to God.

Ultimately to know Christ, to know truth, it is an individual conversation between a person and God. We may benefit from "borrowed light" or the testimony of others, but to be on a sure foundation we must receive that personal witness for ourselves.

[altersteve]

Ultimately to know Christ, to know truth, it is an individual conversation between a person and God. We may benefit from "borrowed light" or the testimony of others, but to be on a sure foundation we must receive that personal witness for ourselves.

What he said.

[cinepro]

If you don't know for certain, then do you accept the possibility that you could be wrong? And why wouldn't it be faith if you knew it? I see no difference, for example, between having faith that God exists and knowing that He exists; they're not mutually exclusive, at least. So since Latter-day Saints claim to know for certain that Jesus Christ lives, do you not believe that we truly have faith in Him?

Not accepting the possibility that you might be wrong isn't the same as "knowing".

[FormerLDS]

"How do you know God exists? How do you know Jesus Christ is your personal Savior? How do you know the Bible is the Word of God? I don't want to hear things like "archaeology," because archaeology doesn't prove anything, and it absolutely can't prove that the Bible is inspired scripture from the mouth of the Lord. I want to know how you know, from the bottom of your hearts, that your Redeemer lives and that the Bible is His Word. For Latter-day Saints, these questions are easy to answer, but it seems to be a complex topic for evangelicals and other non-LDS Christians."

So how do we know?

The same way Latter-day Christians claim to "know" that a confirmational feeling is a valid, reliable test for truth from the "Holy Ghost".

In both cases, we read it and CHOSE to believe it.

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

I am not missing the point. As I stated, I was talking about a hypothetical Muslim.

Yes, no

Hypothetical in most cases are worthless. This is one of those times when talking about a hypothetical is not useful.

[Senator]

Yes, I am fully cognizant of the fact that I could be wrong about my particular religious beliefs.

I think LDS have faith in Christ. I don't think I've ever said anything to the contrary. I am curious as to how you can claim that LDS "know for certain that Jesus is the Christ"? Is this some sort of reference to the "burning in the bosom" test that the missionaries have repeatedly told me about? If so, experiencing some sort of spiritual euphoria after praying and asking God about something isn't really my idea of confirmation. It may be for other people, but I am too much of a skeptic. Apart from receiving a revelation like Paul did on his way to Damascus, I don't know how else I could ever say for certain that I know Jesus was resurrected and is Lord. I am happy with merely believing and hoping that my beliefs about God and Jesus are true.

Diglot,

My I first commend you for what I consider a very respectable post. Especially your last sentence. I'm an active LDS, and must admit that over the last few years I have grown increasingly sensitive to the use (may I say, over use) of the "I KNOW" expression in the Mormon church. It seems as though it has almost become a cultural catch phrase.

There are relatively few things in my mind that I would attach the "I KNOW" certification to; that the church is true, or even that God lives, is not amoung them. However, I do have a belief and certain conviction in those things, and more importantly, a hope that such things are indeed true, just as you stated in your last sentence.

Edited October 27, 2011 by Senator

[diglot]

Hypothetical in most cases are worthless. This is one of those times when talking about a hypothetical is not useful.

Do not bother responding to my posts if you are going to entirely miss and obfuscate the point of my post.

Your reply is as bad as that of the CARMites. And I do not say that lightly. (edit: sorry, that was pretty harsh)

Edited October 27, 2011 by diglot

[altersteve]

Do not bother responding to my posts if you are going to entirely miss and obfuscate the point of my post.

Your reply is as bad as that of the CARMites. And I do not say that lightly. (edit: sorry, that was pretty harsh)

Nobody's missing your point. Our point is that your point is meaningless, since it's based on a completely hypothetical situation that does not happen.

[LeSellers]

Do not bother responding to my posts if you are going to entirely miss and obfuscate the point of my post.

Your reply is as bad as that of the CARMites. And I do not say that lightly.

The problem with your analysis is that Muslims do not pray about the Koran. It would not occur to them to do so. I have met many Muslims (not nearly as many as Dr. P., but a lot, nonetheless), and the very idea would shock them, I believe.

Just the same for Evangelicals. They do not pray about the Bible. It "just is" true. The question it, even to ascertain its veracity, would be tantamount to asking your mother if you are really her child.

Lehi

[diglot]

Nobody's missing your point. Our point is that your point is meaningless, since it's based on a completely hypothetical situation that does not happen.

You are missing my point.

I have stated, it is not debatable that people prayer about religious beliefs that are irreconcilable to the LDS church, yet they receive a testimony from God that such things are false. This is not debatable. At all.

People have prayed about Joseph Smith and received a testimony that he was not a prophet of God. Not debatable.

People have prayed about specific religious systems and asked if they are the true religion of God. They have received confirmation that their religious systems is the truth (not partial truth, but the truth). Again, this is not debatable.

[altersteve]

You are missing my point.

I have stated, it is not debatable that people prayer about religious beliefs that are irreconcilable to the LDS church, yet they receive a testimony from God that such things are false. This is not debatable. At all.

People have prayed about Joseph Smith and received a testimony that he was not a prophet of God. Not debatable.

People have prayed about specific religious systems and asked if they are the true religion of God. They have received confirmation that their religious systems is the truth (not partial truth, but the truth). Again, this is not debatable.

Yes, I knew this was your main point, and I'm not saying that it is debatable. But I was talking about your claim that a Muslim could pray about the Qur'an. Muslims don't do this. It doesn't matter if it's hypothetical. Such a hypothetical statement is worthless if it doesn't actually happen. And none of this changes, or is evidence against, the fact that The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is the only true and living church on this earth.

[diglot]

The problem with your analysis is that Muslims do not pray about the Koran. It would not occur to them to do so. I have met many Muslims (not nearly as many as Dr. P., but a lot, nonetheless), and the very idea would shock them, I believe.

Just the same for Evangelicals. They do not pray about the Bible. It "just is" true. The question it, even to ascertain its veracity, would be tantamount to asking your mother if you are really her child.

Lehi

That is why I said a hypothetical Muslim in a hypothetical situation. I will using it to illustrate a point which is still perfectly valid. Stop avoiding it.

You are all completely missing the point which I have to repeatedly restate.

People have prayed about specific religious beliefs that are unique to their religion and irreconcilable with the LDS religious system. They receive testimony from God that their religious belief is true. This isn't debatable in the slightest.

I originally bought this point up because someone claimed that these testimonies they receive gives them certain knowledge that the LDS Church is true. My question was, other people receive testimonies that are irreconcilable with the LDS Church being true (e.g. Joseph Smith was not a prophet) and they have been given a testimony and confirmation from God about this. My point was that knowledge of this should make one perhaps exercise a bit of humility that they do not know for certain that their religious system is true. If you disagree with that, fine. But do not try and pretend that people do not receive testimonies from God that are irreconcilable with your own testimonies and the LDS Church.

Edited October 27, 2011 by diglot

[diglot]

Yes, I knew this was your main point, and I'm not saying that it is debatable. But I was talking about your claim that a Muslim could pray about the Qur'an. Muslims don't do this. It doesn't matter if it's hypothetical. Such a hypothetical statement is worthless if it doesn't actually happen. And none of this changes, or is evidence against, the fact that The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is the only true and living church on this earth.

As a whole, no, Muslims do not do this. As a whole, no, evangelicals do not do this. As a whole, no, Catholics do not do this.

But people from most religious streams (including Muslims) certainly do say that they have received personal revelation from God that their own religious system is true, to the exclusion of all others. As a student who studies a bit of comparative religion, I have heard and read many of these experiences.

While the LDS Church may be the only religious system that teaches its practitioners to engage in prayer to God concerning such things, it is not even remotely unique to the LDS Church. Individual people from all religious streams claim to have had unique revelation or testimonies or whatever you want to call them. And their testimonies are many times irreconcilable with that experienced by Mormons.

Does this prove the LDS Church is not true. No. But your testimonies certainly don't prove the LDS Church is true. I think it does prove that many people like to just stick their head in the sand and pretend that it doesn't matter if people are getting confirmations from God that contradict their own, because hey, you know your testimony is the real and full truth, right? So its irrelevant if God tells them Joseph Smith wasn't a prophet of God.

Edited October 27, 2011 by diglot

[LeSellers]

That is why I said a hypothetical Muslim in a hypothetical situation.

You are all completely missing the point which I have to repeatedly restate.

I am not missing your point. A hypothetical, to be useful, must be possible. Yours is not. There is no imaginable universe in which a Muslim would pray about the Koran. It will not happen.

Lehi

Edited October 27, 2011 by LeSellers