Religious Epistemology

[Lamanite]

The Book of Mormon and Religious Epistemology (Givens 2001)

I've been thinking a lot about the nature of truth lately. About what it means to "know" something. After reading Givens I had a few thoughts. Anytime "revelation" becomes part of an epistemological method or "model", propositional truth takes on an extremely subjective element. Alma 32 suggests that building upon a foundation of faith, one can achieve a "surety" of "know[ledge]". The subjectivity of Alma's discourse and epistemological methodology requires me to challenge the idea that the Book of Mormon is a proper truth-bearer. In order to absorb Alma's comments into my own understanding of knowledge and truth, I have to redefine some of his language and accept that "belief" not "truth" will be the net result of my acting on Alma's exhortations. I don't have a problem with this as long as I'm honest enough to accept that at this point in my study of truth as it relates to faith based claims, I have abandoned any notion that I am dealing with something that is actually known.

Big UP!

Lamanite

P.S. as always I reserve the right to change my positions at will :-)

[CASteinman]

Alma 32 suggests that building upon a foundation of faith, one can achieve a "surety" of "know[ledge]". The subjectivity of Alma's discourse and epistemological methodology requires me to challenge the idea that the Book of Mormon is a proper truth-bearer. In order to absorb Alma's comments into my own understanding of knowledge and truth, I have to redefine some of his language and accept that "belief" not "truth" will be the net result of my acting on Alma's exhortations. I don't have a problem with this as long as I'm honest enough to accept that at this point in my study of truth as it relates to faith based claims, I have abandoned any notion that I am dealing with something that is actually known.

I believe the foundation that Alma describes -- at least the most fundamental bedrock -- is a "desire to believe". I consider this to be either the same thing or somehow tightly connected with "hope".

I also disagree that "The subjectivity of Alma's discourse and epistemological methodology requires [you] to challenge the idea that the Book of Mormon is a proper truth-bearer." Rather than requiring that of you, this is a personal choice and decision you make. It is not something imposed upon you by Alma or the Book of Mormon.

[Lamanite]

It is not something imposed upon you by Alma or the Book of Mormon.

Bad choice of words on my part.

The desire to believe is definitely part of Alma's discourse, however, he mentions "surety" and knowing more that once. He also said:

"knowledge ^bperfect? Yea, your knowledge is perfect in that thing, and your ^cfaith is dormant; and this because you know" (alma 32 bold added)

Big UP!

Lamanite

edit to add: I also agree that the foundational message in Alma 32 is primarily one of faith and hope and not the acquisition of truth (in the philosophical sense of the word)

Edited July 23, 2012 by Lamanite

[mfbukowski]

This is a wonderful essay with which I agree fully.

The only problem I see with it is perhaps also its greatest strength, and that is the phenomenal job at research and scholarship that Givens has given us.

I just wish it were less well researched and contained more epistemology.

But he does notice that revelation is not designed to have propositional content, which is of course perfectly right. In other words, revelation does not teach us about science.

[Lamanite]

This is a wonderful essay with which I agree fully.

The only problem I see with it is perhaps also its greatest strength, and that is the phenomenal job at research and scholarship that Givens has given us.

I just wish it were less well researched and contained more epistemology.

But he does notice that revelation is not designed to have propositional content, which is of course perfectly right. In other words, revelation does not teach us about science.

Recognizing that revelation does not provide propositional truth, does a Mormon have to seriously consider a relativistic view of truth claims by other religions?

Big UP!

Lamanite

[mfbukowski]

Recognizing that revelation does not provide propositional truth, does a Mormon have to seriously consider a relativistic view of truth claims by other religions?

Big UP!

Lamanite

The view that I would endorse says that religious experience is subjective, not objective. The difference is that many people can simultaneously verify an objective statement, whereas a subjective statement can only be verified by the person stating it.

All of us can verify the boiling point of water, but only I can verify that I have a pain in my toe, or how I feel about abortion, yet all of these might commonly be called "true".

What "truth" is can be complicated, obviously but I think, in a general way a pragmatic view of truth works best, and there is a reason for that.

In fact, in all cases "what works best" is a pretty good definition of truth generally speaking. A moral principle can be said to be true because it "works best for humanity" just as a scientific principle can be said to be true if it works better than the other hypotheses.

Planes fly better with wings than without, aspirin works better for a headache than rat poison. But if you want to kill rats, aspirin probably doesn't work at all.

All of these are objectively verifiable. We can line up 500 rats and everyone can observe how well they live with rat poison in their systems as opposed to aspirin. Everyone can see which works "better".

Note that in each case, we are finding what works better for a specific purpose. Hammers are not very good for taking small nuts off of small bolts.

The test for religious views are what works best to give us what we go to religion to accomplish. Most people turn to religion to seek solace, to give their lives meaning, to find their place in the universe, to decide if God exists, or if one should worship a higher power.

But those answers- what gives one's life meaning and peace for example, cannot be objectively verified. I cannot see what gives YOU peace. That is what testimony is for. That does not mean that statements about what gives one peace cannot be "true"- just that only you can know what beliefs work best for you.

Essentially what we do as Mormons and what happens in Alma 32 is that we ask others to "taste this and see if you like it". As it says in that scripture, if we try it and if we like it, and it becomes "sweet" to us, we will follow that path.

Obviously we know there are many reasons people do not follow up on the path, but it is our belief that though people may find something that works for them, we believe that our path works better than any other if they would just follow it and taste its results.

So I don't know if you call that "relativism' or not. I call it "Pragmatism". I think that the truth is found in what works best for its given purpose.

The bottom line is that we don't go to religion to find out how to send a rocket to the moon- religion is not about science. Religion is subjective and does not have anything to do with what we all together can see and feel. It is an individual thing.

Edited July 24, 2012 by mfbukowski

[mfbukowski]

This is an excellent article that Walker W posted on another thread:

http://www.thepublic...om/2010/03/1174

That's the kind of stuff I think Givens missed. Put this article with that one, and now you've got something!

Edited July 24, 2012 by mfbukowski

[hagoth7]

Recognizing that revelation does not provide propositional truth, does a Mormon have to seriously consider a relativistic view of truth claims by other religions?

Joseph said we had to gather up all their truths or we wouldn't come out true Mormons.

[Lamanite]

So I don't know if you call that "relativism' or not. I call it "Pragmatism". I think that the truth is found in what works best for its given purpose.

The bottom line is that we don't go to religion to find out how to send a rocket to the moon- religion is not about science. Religion is subjective and does not have anything to do with what we all together can see and feel. It is an individual thing.

Well said. And whether I call it relativism or you call it pragmatism, I think I understand what you are saying.

Big UP!

Lamanite

[mfbukowski]

Well said. And whether I call it relativism or you call it pragmatism, I think I understand what you are saying.

Big UP!

Lamanite

I would think relativism would say that all points of view are equal- I don't think that. I really think that there is one way that works better for everyone but not everyone knows it (yet)

I think that's where "every knee shall bow and every tongue confess.... " comes in. Eventually everyone will figure it out.

[Calm]

I would think relativism would say that all points of view are equal- I don't think that. I really think that there is one way that works better for everyone but not everyone knows it (yet)

I think that's where "every knee shall bow and every tongue confess.... " comes in. Eventually everyone will figure it out.

Or it could be that it takes different amounts of time and effort for each individual to reach a point where the one way will work better for them than any other even if it is the best way overall. Some other paths can take one along part of the way, but eventually all must merge so that the essential teachings/experiences that cannot be duplicated elsewhere can be experienced. Edited July 24, 2012 by calmoriah

[djholmess]

Ignore me if my questions aren't specifically on the topic you guys want to talk about.

So if you aren't relativist and you believe that to enter the celestial kingdom you need the first principles of the gospel and temple marriage etc what about the African tribal villager who will never get the opportunity to hear about your gospel and the need for a temple marriage in this life? Does he have any opportunity to enter the celestial kingdom?

[Calm]

Yes, that is why we do proxy temple work.

http://www.lds.org/s...istory?lang=eng

http://www.lds.org/church/temples/why-we-build-temples?lang=eng

http://www.lds.org/manual/gospel-principles/chapter-40-temple-work-and-family-history?lang=eng

The Apostle Peter referred to the postmortal spirit world as a prison, which it is for some (see 1 Peter 3:18–20). In the spirit prison are the spirits of those who have not yet received the gospel of Jesus Christ. These spirits have agency and may be enticed by both good and evil. If they accept the gospel and the ordinances performed for them in the temples, they may leave the spirit prison and dwell in paradise.

http://www.lds.org/manual/gospel-principles/chapter-41-the-postmortal-spirit-world?lang=eng Edited July 24, 2012 by calmoriah

[djholmess]

Proxy temple marriages as well? I understand the proxy baptisms etc to allow someone into the lower kingdoms but can someone who never heard the gospel, never had a temple marriage get into the celestial kingdom and be exalted as God is?

[Calm]

Yep. I added more links.

Everyone ever born will have the same opportunity to accept the Atonement and the gift of exaltation.

Baptism is only necessary for the Celestial Kingdom.

51 They are they who received the testimony of Jesus, and believed on his name and were baptized after the manner of his burial, being buried in the water in his name, and this according to the commandment which he has given—

http://www.lds.org/s...-53?lang=eng#50

Much of this work will be done during the Millennium: http://www.lds.org/manual/gospel-principles/chapter-45-the-millennium?lang=eng

Edited July 24, 2012 by calmoriah

[djholmess]

So let's say this Africian villager was a male who died having never married who would he be sealed too? Does he have any say in the matter?

[Calm]

I assume he will have a say. If not, it will be God who chooses for him which would be if he was choosing himself so it would be the same as if he had a say. This work will likely be done in the Millennium when communication between the living and the dead will likely be much more open.

From the link I gave above:

There will be two great works for members of the Church during the Millennium: temple work and missionary work. Temple work involves the ordinances that are necessary for exaltation. These include baptism, the laying on of hands for the gift of the Holy Ghost, and the temple ordinances—the endowment, temple marriage, and the sealing together of family units.

Many people have died without receiving these ordinances. People on the earth must perform these ordinances for them. This work is now being done in the temples of the Lord. There is too much work to finish before the Millennium begins, so it will be completed during that time. Resurrected beings will help us correct the mistakes we have made in doing research concerning our dead ancestors. They will also help us find the information we need to complete our records. (See Joseph Fielding Smith, Doctrines of Salvation, comp. Bruce R. McConkie, 3 vols. [1954–56], 2:167, 251–52.)

The other great work during the Millennium will be missionary work. The gospel will be taught with great power to all people. Eventually there will be no need to teach others the first principles of the gospel because “they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the Lord” (Jeremiah 31:34).

[djholmess]

So I presume that therefore proxy baptisms/marriages etc will be done for every single person to ever live so that all have the opportunity to enter the Celestial Kingdom?

[mfbukowski]

So I presume that therefore proxy baptisms/marriages etc will be done for every single person to ever live so that all have the opportunity to enter the Celestial Kingdom?

Yes, that is the belief.

We believe that the dead progress in knowledge on the other side. So your hypothetical person might be progressing and have gotten to the point where he wants his ordinances to be done for him, but cannot tell us that he is ready, and let's assume there are no records of his birth existent on the earth anymore.

The belief is that he could come forward during the Millenium and perhaps appear to someone as a spirit and tell them his name and that he wanted his work to be done, so that could happen.

All will have an opportunity for exaltation.

There is a mistaken belief out there that we believe that "you have to be Mormon to go to heaven (or the Celestial Kingdom)." Not so! All will have the opportunity and in fact if there are any who do not want their ordinances done, they will still have a telestial glory, which in my opinion is what most people think of as "heaven"- a place of peace and joy without pain and perfect happiness.

Joseph said that if people could see even the telestial kingdom they might commit suicide just to get there. (Which is where they would go if they committed suicide....)

[djholmess]

So then hypothetically speaking lets say I understand the message and I'm not sure if it is true or not. Also lets say I love some particular sin - lets go with promiscuity. I know that to join your church and seek after the celestial kingdom in this life I would have to give it up. What incentive is there for me to stop sinning in this life when I can enjoy my sin now and wait to the Millennium (or sooner) for someone to go through the temple practices for me on my behalf? And if it turns out you are wrong about the afterlife then I will still have enjoyed my sin in this life.

[CV75]

So then hypothetically speaking lets say I understand the message and I'm not sure if it is true or not. Also lets say I love some particular sin - lets go with promiscuity. I know that to join your church and seek after the celestial kingdom in this life I would have to give it up. What incentive is there for me to stop sinning in this life when I can enjoy my sin now and wait to the Millennium (or sooner) for someone to go through the temple practices for me on my behalf? And if it turns out you are wrong about the afterlife then I will still have enjoyed my sin in this life.

The incentive is in the choice of responding how Christ would respond to a message of faith, hope and charity vs. the way you describe. Christ would not enjoy sin at all, much less premeditatedly enjoy it until a postponed repentance. The reason for this has to do with the relationships between choice, agency, faith, power and existence (in summary from D&C 93, the more agency we exercise well, the more of it we have, and the more abundant an existence we enjoy--the epitome of the subjectivity of truth). But to begin with, any particle of a desire to believe will move someone toward Christ and to behave like Him, if ever so gradually. The incentive is provided by Christ’s invitation (by any number of means that He reaches out to us) if we are willing to receive it.

[mfbukowski]

So then hypothetically speaking lets say I understand the message and I'm not sure if it is true or not. Also lets say I love some particular sin - lets go with promiscuity. I know that to join your church and seek after the celestial kingdom in this life I would have to give it up. What incentive is there for me to stop sinning in this life when I can enjoy my sin now and wait to the Millennium (or sooner) for someone to go through the temple practices for me on my behalf? And if it turns out you are wrong about the afterlife then I will still have enjoyed my sin in this life.

The temple ordinances are not magical incantations that somehow magically make dead people do things in the after life. This is not voodoo it is the gospel of Jesus Christ.

If you have an honest chance here to accept the gospel, and you know in your heart it is true and you decide to go on being promiscuous, do you think God does not know that??

He does. On the other hand if you hear about the gospel and think it is an interesting idea, are not really sure that promiscuity is a sin and are not really sure the church is true etc and then you die, everything is up for grabs.

Remember it is God who is doing the judging here. He is your Father and knows every thought of your mind and heart. You aren't going to fool him because somebody does some mumbo jumbo in the temple.

But if you desire to obey him and follow him, he will give you every chance to do so. The temple is about obedience, it is not about magic. He has given us ordinances to make promises to him- as a concrete step to follow him

"If you want to obey me, do this.... If you want to promise me this, then do that...." THAT is what the temple is really about. It is about taking further steps and covenants (promises) that say that you want to get closer to God and do all that he wants you to do.

If you truly understand and believe all that, and don't act accordingly, then it's on you and you will be judged accordingly.

[mfbukowski]

And sin is not "enjoyable" once you understand it. There are much better pleasures available when you are constantly in the spirit. Those who have felt that would not give it up for any earthly pleasure.

[Lamanite]

I would think relativism would say that all points of view are equal- I don't think that. I really think that there is one way that works better for everyone but not everyone knows it (yet)

I think that's where "every knee shall bow and every tongue confess.... " comes in. Eventually everyone will figure it out.

Dealing with religious "points of view" is not dealing with truth. We only have a very subjective guess as to the value of the point(s) of view and a number of different perceptions and perspectives.

The assertion that "one way" works better is a subjective statement of belief and experience, however, it doesn't come close to being identified as an absolute truth.

I like what your saying but I think you've drifted out of the realm of propositional truth.

Big UP!

Lamanite

[Lamanite]

Or it could be that it takes different amounts of time and effort for each individual to reach a point where the one way will work better for them than any other even if it is the best way overall. Some other paths can take one along part of the way, but eventually all must merge so that the essential teachings/experiences that cannot be duplicated elsewhere can be experienced.

I like this idea. It's a very sensitive and inclusive approach to the Gospel. Feels good.

Can't say that it is true, but it is most definitely a wonderful belief.

Big UP!

Lamanite