Misinterpreting A Spiritual Confirmation

[mfbukowski]

PS- Mormons are materialists.

[BlueDreams]

Have you had a prompting you would be called to a position at church that never came to pass?

I don’t know. I’ve had the thought that I would and then it didn’t happen. But I also knew that the woman who was given a position was going to be before she did. So who knows, I’m notoriously bad at figuring out what will happen with me. Pretty good at figuring it out for others.

Have you ever given a blessing and made promises and felt spiritual confirmation of those promises, but which never came to fruition?

Nope, never gave a blessing . But I’ve trusted the promises that were given to me in blessings. I’ve never had one that hasn’t come to fruition in one way or another. I thought once I did. When I was a teen I was called to be a Laurel’s counselor. I felt it was my job to make us just as close with the new girls as we were with the old. I was wrong…I couldn’t do it. I thought I’d failed. I remember sitting there crying, thinking that I’d failed. Years later I think it was doubly a valuable lesson, on both my limitations and that the Lord’s commands are not necessarily as we see them. I fulfilled my responsibility, I just didn’t recognize it because I’d assumed a different end result.

Have you ever sought after something through prayer, begging and pleading with God, and received a spiritual witness that you would receive that gift or that what you were asking for would occur? Have you ever felt spiritually guided to do something or take a path which ended up not working out? Have you ever felt the Holy Ghost tell you that for sure something would happen that didn't?

Yes, but I largely don’t think they weren’t where I was supposed to go….just that I didn’t understand why I needed to go there in the first place. I had an assumption that if I did this, then a, b, and c must follow. But that’s not necessarily how it works. Whole the Lord’s way is not our way, type of thing. So I’ve come to expect that when I’m prompted to do some or go somewhere I do it and expect only that it’s what I need to do, not necessarily that it’ll get me what I want.

I’ve also messed up my understanding of what is the spirit. That’s more common. I did that just this week. I do what makes sense without consulting. I don’t think it’s necessarily a bad thing. This week's gaffe taught me a needed lesson. And correlated with something earlier that was definitely an answer from God.

With luv,

BD

[Vance]

Have any of you had a spiritual experience, prompting, confirmation, whatever you want to call it, that has led you to believe something that you later came to believe was not true?

No.

This can occur for apostates with a testimony of the church, but I believe it happens regularly for most of us.

Some people (for some reason) can't distinguish between their own "inspiration" and God's inspiration.

I have had what I thought was a fantastic idea. I thought it was wonderful and felt that it was wonderful, (but I never attributed it to coming from God) later a (previously unknown to me) fact came to light which totally exposed it as a bad idea.

I can and have been able to distinguish those incidents from the witness of the Holy Ghost.

[KevinG]

Regarding the prompting I would get a calling and didn't. I was once prompted to prepare to serve as Bishop of our ward. When the call came it wasn't me, but it was a brother I could sustain gladly in that calling. Afterwards in HP group several of us admitted we were prompted and felt we needed to prepare to receive the calling of Bishop. When the call came we were surprised but not upset. Our conclusion was the Lord wanted to test our willingness to prepare for any thing He asked of us.

My wife was asked to take a calling that she was unable to do. When she admitted to the Bishop what her hardship was he smiled and said, "Now I know why I was prompted to give you that call - I needed to know what was going on in your life so I could support you".

We don't always know the reasons behind promptings even if we think we do.

[mfbukowski]

Regarding the prompting I would get a calling and didn't. I was once prompted to prepare to serve as Bishop of our ward. When the call came it wasn't me, but it was a brother I could sustain gladly in that calling. Afterwards in HP group several of us admitted we were prompted and felt we needed to prepare to receive the calling of Bishop. When the call came we were surprised but not upset. Our conclusion was the Lord wanted to test our willingness to prepare for any thing He asked of us.

My wife was asked to take a calling that she was unable to do. When she admitted to the Bishop what her hardship was he smiled and said, "Now I know why I was prompted to give you that call - I needed to know what was going on in your life so I could support you".

We don't always know the reasons behind promptings even if we think we do.

I think God prompts us in order to teach us.

He will set us on a path because it is the way we will learn things we need to learn. We don't always know why things happen or why we are to do what we are to do, but in my life, I have always learned things I absolutely needed to learn by following the spirit.

We need to understand that God is the consummate teacher and he may prompt us to do all kinds of things which we may think turn out "wrong" because it is not what we expected. But when you look back on your life, you see that that particular "mistake" led to something else which was for our benefit in the long run.

Indeed that is a central theme of Mormonism- Adam fell that men may be. His "mistake" was for the benefit of everyone who ever lived. You can see that as literally true or as a metaphor for the very point I am making- it really doesn't matter how you see it as long as you get the message.

And regarding callings, I know for a fact that there are often several qualified "candidates" for a calling and one of the criteria a bishop may use, as guided by the spirit, is to pick who needs to learn the position more.

The person who is actually called is not necessarily the "best" person for the job in terms of human perceptions of who is best qualified, but the person who most needs to learn the lessons of the position.

The church is not a human resources department- it is a school- a training ground allowing us to learn what God wants us to learn.

Edited August 23, 2012 by mfbukowski

[mfbukowski]

God doesn't teach us about the world- He teaches us about how to have the proper attitude toward the world.

If you think he teaches us about what is objective, you are wrong.

If he taught us about the world he would be a science teacher, and he just isn't!

If he wanted to teach the ancient Hebrews about science, why didn't they have airplanes?

[mfbukowski]

"You will be healed".

The person dies. But aren't they now "healed"?

[wenglund]

Have any of you had a spiritual experience, prompting, confirmation, whatever you want to call it, that has led you to believe something that you later came to believe was not true?

Yes, particularly in the early stages of my spiritual development.

I think these kinds of spiritual mistakes are an expected part of the growth process, where because of our inexperience wa are bound to make mistakes, and also so that we can learn and grow towards better discern the difference between human generated "feelings" and those coming from God's Spirit.

Indeed, the bigger challenge I have found, at least in my own life, is learning not to read more into a spiritual prompting than was intended. For example, some time ago I was impressed to make the acquaintance of lovely young LDS woman, and at the time I interpreted the prompting to mean that I was going to marry her. Whereas, I discovered over time that God had other less significant and non-eternal reasons in mind for that social connection, and through that process I learned ways to minimize the chances of this kind of mistake.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Edited August 23, 2012 by wenglund

[ERayR]

Of course it would. But doing so wouldn't preclude the possibility of later understanding that original spiritual confirmation in a new and more correct light.

Sounds like maybe the later prompting may be something other than spiritual. Website maybe? I hear some of those can be quite convincing.

[mfbukowski]

Let me be clear. By "attributable to human psychology" I mean, of course, that the origins of all such experiences are internal rather than external. That is to say, the promptings of the Holy Ghost most likely originate within the human mind rather than in some real, external entity called the Holy Ghost.

I think clearly this is overly simplistic by a mile or two. I really think that speaking of the "origins" of experience presupposes that we can get outside of human experience to determine some kind of source which is in fact indeterminable.

For those who believe that God has spoken to them, it is NOT "more likely" that there was some other "origin" and since the case cannot be proven either way, it doesn't make much sense to discuss it.

If two individuals can have similar spiritual testimonies of conflicting truths, (e.g. the Catholic who has received a witness by the Holy Spirit that the Catholic Church is the one true Church, and the Mormon who has received a witness by the Holy Spirit that the Mormon Church is the one true Church), this represents an obstacle for an epsitemology based on spiritual feelings. Without being able to observe an external cause, or to measure the subjective feelings of those involved to know if they are quantitatively or qualitatively similar, then it is impossible to know objectively if one's own spiritual experiences are interpreted correctly or are even legitimate.

I really don't think that the words "epistemology" and "spiritual feelings" even belong in the same sentence. We are talking about two different goals and objectives here- spiritual knowledge does not tell us about the world- it tells us about us and what we need to do with our lives.

The point about misinterpreting spiritual experiences can be reasonably viewed as evidence for a psychological origin rather than an external origin of these feelings. Why did I have this feeling of assurance that I would get the job when in fact I did not get it? We can do some mental gymnastics to reclassify and reinterpret the experience, or we could admit that perhaps it is more likely that the feeling was imaginary.

Only true if one sees spiritual feelings as expressing facts- and that is incorrect.

Yes, apparently. "Psychologically" is a term frequently used to mean "having no real or objective basis; arising in the mind." You are perhaps late to this philosophical discussion which hundreds of years ago swung away from the rationalists, who might have agreed with your statement, in favor of the materialists who demand epistemic reliability based on measurable phenomena.

Not exactly. Look up "anti-realism" or "postmodernism" and see what century it is from. If you are talking about logical positivism, that is largely a dead world view today.

While it is possible for a person to feel an electrical jolt (or even a spiritual one) while in an altered mental state, the person who feels the jolt from an actual live wire can be assured that his jolt was the real one, for it can be independently verified by concrete objects that detect and measure electricity in a predictable and reproducible way. On the other hand, it is impossible to distinguish between true and false "spirits" without resorting to the entirely subjective means of: tradition (it's always been that way), authority (someone else said so), or persuasion (it seems reasonable to me). Therefore spiritual experiences cannot be relied upon to establish any universal "fact."

Lol

There are many kinds of "jolts".

If you just learned that someone close to you had died suddenly would be be "jolted"? According to you, it would not be a "real" sensation. I think most people would disagree with that.

1) Misinterpreted spiritual experiences as evidence for the subjective origin of such experiences

2) The impossibility of objectively classifying these spiritual experiences as legitimate vs. counterfeit. The Catholic who knows her Church is true by the Holy Ghost has just as much basis as the Mormon who knows his Church is true by the Holy Ghost. Who is misinterpreting and who is not? Who has the true spirit, and who has the false? In other words, "knowing" something does not make it so. Knowing by the spirit is flawed epistemology unless there is some objective way to verify what is "the Spirit."

Spiritual experience is about learning about ourselves not about the world

The spiritual path we choose may very well be the one which will lead us closer to God, at least for now, until we receive further light and knowledge. If I had never been an atheist, I would have never found the church. Was I guided to be an atheist for a season? I don't see why I would NOT say that.

3) The insistence of the spiritually inclined that their spiritually obtained knowledge represents universal truth applicable to all, marching about and reshaping the world in their own image. If it is possible to misinterpret spiritual confirmations, what are the implications for any actions these confirmations influence, especially where outsiders are concerned? What is our responsibility for the interpretation of spiritual experiences, and are we justified in certain actions that may affect others when we walk by faith and not by sight?

I think we are over religous wars, and any action we take is in the realm of convincing others to try the path we have chosen.

And besides what humans DO, is reshape the world in their own image. That is why we refer to God being a Man- Mormonism captures this incredible truth perfectly. God is organizer of reality - and so are we each in our own little ways, mini-gods doing just that. Yes it is a metaphor, but yes it also perfectly describes what we as humans do. God is an Idealized Human.

I said I would get back to you and now I have.

Edited August 24, 2012 by mfbukowski

[Garden Girl]

Regarding the prompting I would get a calling and didn't. I was once prompted to prepare to serve as Bishop of our ward. When the call came it wasn't me, but it was a brother I could sustain gladly in that calling. Afterwards in HP group several of us admitted we were prompted and felt we needed to prepare to receive the calling of Bishop. When the call came we were surprised but not upset. Our conclusion was the Lord wanted to test our willingness to prepare for any thing He asked of us.

We don't always know the reasons behind promptings even if we think we do.

And how do you know the prompting was for that time and place hmmmm? Maybe you were being prompted to prepare and to live your life in such a way that when the Lord does call you that you will be ready... and the same for the other brothers that felt prompted... maybe they should be careful about their lives and be prepared...

GG

[mfbukowski]

I was once prompted to prepare to serve as Bishop of our ward. When the call came it wasn't me, but it was a brother I could sustain gladly in that calling. Afterwards in HP group several of us admitted we were prompted and felt we needed to prepare to receive the calling of Bishop.

I think, as Garden Girl has pointed out, it is probably an excellent idea for any High Priest to prepare to become Bishop, or certainly to prepare for that should it happen.

[Carborendum]

I have not. 99% of the time, my spiritual communications are instructions to do or not do certain things. There are few times where I've received a "confirmation" per se.

[Carborendum]

We've also got to understand the difference between promptings and our assumptions due to those promptings. As an example, I'll use Hollywood.

In the movie "The Scorpion King" the sorceress saw Mattias get shot with an arrow and fall. Her interpretation was "Mattias will die." It turned out that he was shot, fell, and survived.

I once got an impression that something would happen. But my mind was so focused on another problem in my life that I applied the prompting to the problem on my mind. It turns out it had nothing to do with the problem I had in my mind. It had everything to do with how I was going to handle it.

[mfbukowski]

Let me be clear. By "attributable to human psychology" I mean, of course, that the origins of all such experiences are internal rather than external. That is to say, the promptings of the Holy Ghost most likely originate within the human mind rather than in some real, external entity called the Holy Ghost.

If two individuals can have similar spiritual testimonies of conflicting truths, (e.g. the Catholic who has received a witness by the Holy Spirit that the Catholic Church is the one true Church, and the Mormon who has received a witness by the Holy Spirit that the Mormon Church is the one true Church), this represents an obstacle for an epsitemology based on spiritual feelings. Without being able to observe an external cause, or to measure the subjective feelings of those involved to know if they are quantitatively or qualitatively similar, then it is impossible to know objectively if one's own spiritual experiences are interpreted correctly or are even legitimate.

The point about misinterpreting spiritual experiences can be reasonably viewed as evidence for a psychological origin rather than an external origin of these feelings. Why did I have this feeling of assurance that I would get the job when in fact I did not get it? We can do some mental gymnastics to reclassify and reinterpret the experience, or we could admit that perhaps it is more likely that the feeling was imaginary.

Yes, apparently. "Psychologically" is a term frequently used to mean "having no real or objective basis; arising in the mind." You are perhaps late to this philosophical discussion which hundreds of years ago swung away from the rationalists, who might have agreed with your statement, in favor of the materialists who demand epistemic reliability based on measurable phenomena.

While it is possible for a person to feel an electrical jolt (or even a spiritual one) while in an altered mental state, the person who feels the jolt from an actual live wire can be assured that his jolt was the real one, for it can be independently verified by concrete objects that detect and measure electricity in a predictable and reproducible way. On the other hand, it is impossible to distinguish between true and false "spirits" without resorting to the entirely subjective means of: tradition (it's always been that way), authority (someone else said so), or persuasion (it seems reasonable to me). Therefore spiritual experiences cannot be relied upon to establish any universal "fact."

Indeed, what?

1) Misinterpreted spiritual experiences as evidence for the subjective origin of such experiences

2) The impossibility of objectively classifying these spiritual experiences as legitimate vs. counterfeit. The Catholic who knows her Church is true by the Holy Ghost has just as much basis as the Mormon who knows his Church is true by the Holy Ghost. Who is misinterpreting and who is not? Who has the true spirit, and who has the false? In other words, "knowing" something does not make it so. Knowing by the spirit is flawed epistemology unless there is some objective way to verify what is "the Spirit."

And perhaps this:

3) The insistence of the spiritually inclined that their spiritually obtained knowledge represents universal truth applicable to all, marching about and reshaping the world in their own image. If it is possible to misinterpret spiritual confirmations, what are the implications for any actions these confirmations influence, especially where outsiders are concerned? What is our responsibility for the interpretation of spiritual experiences, and are we justified in certain actions that may affect others when we walk by faith and not by sight?

Still thinking of you.

Here. Read this. Maybe it will help.

Philosophy and the Mirror of Nature

Main article: Philosophy and the Mirror of Nature

In Philosophy and the Mirror of Nature (1979), Rorty argues that the central problems of modern epistemology depend upon a picture of the mind as trying to faithfully represent (or "mirror") a mind-independent, external reality. If we give up this metaphor, then the entire enterprise of foundationalist epistemology is misguided. A foundationalist believes that in order to avoid the regress inherent in claiming that all beliefs are justified by other beliefs, some beliefs must be self-justifying and form the foundations to all knowledge.

There were two senses of "foundationalism" criticized in Philosophy and the Mirror of Nature. In the epistemological sense, Rorty criticized the attempt to justify knowledge claims by tracing them to a set of foundations (e.g., self-evident premises or noninferential sensations); more broadly, he criticized the claim of philosophy to function foundationally within a culture. The former argument draws on Sellars's critique of the idea that there is a "given" in sensory perception, in combination with Quine's critique of the distinction between analytic sentences (sentences which are true solely in virtue of what they mean) and synthetic sentences (sentences made true by the world). Each critique, taken alone, provides a problem for a conception of how philosophy ought to proceed, yet leaves enough of the tradition intact to proceed with its former aspirations. Combined, Rorty claimed, the two critiques are devastating. With no privileged insight into the structure of belief and no privileged realm of truths of meaning, we have, instead, knowledge as those beliefs that pay their way. The only worthwhile description of the actual process of inquiry, Rorty claimed, was a Kuhnian account of the standard phases of the progress of disciplines, oscillating through normal and abnormal periods, between routine problem-solving and intellectual crises.

After eliminating foundationalism, Rorty argues that one of the few roles left for a philosopher is to act as an intellectual gadfly, attempting to induce a revolutionary break with previous practice, a role that Rorty was happy to take on himself. Rorty suggests that each generation tries to subject all disciplines to the model that the most successful discipline of the day employs. In Rorty's view, the success of modern science has led academics in philosophy and the humanities to mistakenly imitate scientific methods. Philosophy and the Mirror of Nature popularized and extended ideas of Wilfrid Sellars (the critique of the Myth of the given) and W. V. O. Quine (the critique of the analytic-synthetic distinction) and others who advocate the Wittgensteinian doctrine of "dissolving" rather than solving philosophical problems.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Rorty#Philosophy_and_the_Mirror_of_Nature

The bottom line is that science works fine for those questions it is designed to answer, but on questions about what gives our lives meaning, not so much.

Rorty is actually an atheist, but he still sees ways in which "religion" as a search for meaning in one's life, has a future. He speaks for example of ideals such as curing social ills etc as giving meaning to one's life.

But science still cannot tell us that curing social ills is "good" or a "fact". Science does not give us meaning- it makes things go.

Edited August 25, 2012 by mfbukowski

[KevinG]

And how do you know the prompting was for that time and place hmmmm? Maybe you were being prompted to prepare and to live your life in such a way that when the Lord does call you that you will be ready... and the same for the other brothers that felt prompted... maybe they should be careful about their lives and be prepared...

GG

I am now afraid.

Seriously - it may have been all of the above.

[WorkingOnIt]

We allow the Church to "grow" in understanding. It did things 150 years ago that would get you excommunicated now, and we do things now that might, at very least, seem quaint in 150 years. The Church evolves according to the spiritual understanding of the current leaders, God's will, and whatever other factors may or may not play into what the Church does.

I think this is how individuals process their inspiration from God as well.

[Investigating]

Have any of you had a spiritual experience, prompting, confirmation, whatever you want to call it, that has led you to believe something that you later came to believe was not true? ...This is the way I make sense of it. That time I prayed and asked for a job and had an overwhelming spiritual experience that I interpreted as a promise that God would help me get that job, only I didn't get that job? Looking back at it, I recontextualized that spiritual experience with a different meaning. Maybe the message was "I love you, keep working hard, and I'll make sure everything works out for you in the end, even if you don't get that job."

Do the standard works contain any example of anything like this happening to a prophet (like Abraham, or Moses, or Peter, John, Joseph Smith, or Joseph Smith Jr.)?

[Investigating]

P.S. I know this is an old thread, but I can't start a new thread yet, and the OP is close to the question I would like to ask if I could.

 

Are there any scriptural examples of a genuine prompting from God being temporarily misinterpreted by a prophet?

 

Do we really know that such a thing can happen?

[Investigating]

P.S. Could Abraham have known that God wouldn't really let him kill his son, because He had already promised that his seed (thru Isaac) would be as the sand of the sea?

[mfbukowski]

P.S. Could Abraham have known that God wouldn't really let him kill his son, because He had already promised that his seed (thru Isaac) would be as the sand of the sea?

The rest of the answers on this thread were not sufficient?

[Investigating]

The rest of the answers on this thread were not sufficient?

People friendly to the LDS Church, and people unfriendly to the LDS Church sometimes make things up.

 

I don't know anyone here personally.

 

I don't even know who is a Mormon, who is an investigator, and who is an anti.

 

So, "no," the rest of the answers on this thread (dealing as they do with personal experiences that the posters may or may not have had) were not sufficient.

 

My question was whether anything in the standard works (one of which I already believe to be inspired of God, and three of which I'm investigating--and would have to believe inspired by God if I become a Mormon) supports the view that personal revelations, or Divine promptings can sometimes be misunderstood.

 

I don't recall Noah thinking God told him to climb a mountain to escape the flood, or Peter thinking God told him to go back to fishing (and keep what he knew to himself), or even Joseph Smith Jr. thinking God told him move the Church to Arkanses.

 

I have read about him receiving a "revelation" that concerned sending some latter day saints to Toronto to sell the copyright to the book of Mormon, and a subsequent revelation an enemy of the LDS Church said he received after they came back and reported that things hadn't gone as they expected, but I believe the original "revelation" (recorded in Doctrine and Covenants, though I haven't read it in a while, and can't recall where it is) was conditional, and I consider the testimony of an enemy of the Church unreliable.

 

If there's nothing in the Bible to support the idea that a genuine prompting from God can be misunderstood (or misinterpreted) by the recipient, is there anything else in latter day church history (besides this Toronto thing) to suggest that such a thing is possible?

[Investigating]

This caught my attention.

 

Verily, I say unto you: A commandment I give unto mine handmaid, Emma Smith, your wife, whom I have given unto you, that she stay herself and partake not of that which I commanded you to offer unto her; for I did it, saith the Lord, to prove you all, as I did Abraham, and that I might require an offering at your hand, by covenant and sacrifice.

 

D&C 132:51

 

It sounds like God is here saying that he commanded Joseph to offer Emma something that He never really intended to allow her (or am I misreading this?)

 

Does any body know what is being spoken of here?

 

[Investigating]

Would God ever do anything like this?

 

God Works in Strange and Mysterious Ways!
Posted on January 7, 2014    by wsforchrist
Recently a friend asked me to expound on what I meant when I wrote my post Oh! Those Golden God Moments! http://wsforchrist.com/?s=Golden+God
An example came about this past weekend.
Here in Wisconsin it was to become bitterly cold on Monday, with daily high temperatures down to about 17 degrees below zero, and wind chill temperatures of 45 degrees below zero (Fahrenheit).  I work many late evenings, and I tend to be a procrastinator on some of the mundane things of life.
Friday evening as I was working late, I felt a strong urging to go out and purchase a lottery ticket.  This has never happened before.  I have never craved or felt that inner dog that I sometimes associate with God’s urging to go out and purchase a lottery ticket.  Was this it?  Was this the big one?  Was God going to make me rich?  As I worked, I caught myself dreaming a little about how I would spend all that money.
After I left work I headed straight for the supermarket, where I could hardly wait to purchase not one, but two Mega Millions lottery tickets.  The second one, of course, just in case the first one failed me.
While I was there, I stocked up on the essentials I would need to get me through the cold spell.  I purchased milk and bread, or course.  Chicken was only $1.79 a pound, so I loaded up.  I bought some snacks, and even the ingredients for a new recipe I wanted to try.  I left the store with a cartful of groceries.
Well, I got home just before the 10 o’clock news.  I waited, with great anticipation to confirm that I indeed had the lucky numbers.  Well, nothing.  I didn’t match even one number.  Bummer!  I felt momentarily let down and disappointed.
But here it is Tuesday, and the cold snap is almost over.  Had I not stocked up on groceries, I might have found myself scrounging around the house for an egg and a piece of crusty bread.  Instead I found myself living like a queen and cooking some great meals.
Yes, God got me to go and stock up on food, but shamefully, it took the lure of becoming an instant millionaire to get me into that supermarket.  God certainly does work in strange and mysterious ways.  Have faith.  I did!
W.S.

http://wsforchrist.com/2014/01/07/god-works-in-strange-and-mysterious-ways/

[mfbukowski]

It is my belief that God teaches us personally what we must learn, and what he teaches each of us may not apply to others.  I can imagine the scenario in post 49 happening to any one of us.

 

Sometimes people also get confused that God would tell someone to join another church- could that be correct?   I think clearly it could.  He does what we need to move closer to Christ.

 

If you are a drunk on skid row, and the only church available is the Salvation Army, I am sure that God could tell you to join that church to get you off the booze and get farther down the road to Christ.   If you are into tradition and the belief that truth must be ancient to be believable, perhaps he will call you to Catholicism.

 

And so it goes.  But the cool thing about our church is that we actually believe these things are possible AND that our progression continues after we die.  So perhaps on the other side (after death) these same people could have the gospel as we know it be preached to them and this time the time would be right for them to see the truth of it.

 

I believe that eventually "all roads lead to ...... Salt Lake"  and that this is "the" true gospel of God but there may be other valid ways of getting here if we need another path because of our personalities and individual experiences.

 

So post 39 is I think an example of how God guides us even if we miss the fact that we are being guided at the time, or understand his purposes.

 

And section 132 is about polygamy.  Others here are more expert than I am on that subject.  It doesn't bother me at all so I haven't studied it much.   Good luck on your studies!