rockpond Posted June 10, 2015 Author Posted June 10, 2015 Insufferable?Nice, Scott. Have you ever listened to one of his podcast interviews?
Okrahomer Posted June 10, 2015 Posted June 10, 2015 Unique in his fervent testimony of the restoration and exceedingly detailed in his explanations (blog posts) of his belief system.It sounds like while you love your Bishop and Stake President, you don't have much confidence in them. 1
Teancum Posted June 10, 2015 Posted June 10, 2015 They dontI missed this. Yes Avatar4321, they do. But your response enforces the arrogance of any religious believer that beleives their supernatural answer is better than another's. And thus you reinforce the fatal flaw of this method for determining truth.
Teancum Posted June 10, 2015 Posted June 10, 2015 I haven't met "many" Evangelicals who make this claim but I recall one who did on a message board long ago. It was clear from her attitude that whatever praying she had done in that regard -- if she had done any at all -- was not with "real intent," as it says in Moroni, but in a prideful effort to put Mormons in their place. God is not going to reveal sacred truth to one with that kind of attitude.But I doubt you have met "many" Evangelicals who make that claim. Those whom I've conversed with generally argue that feelings of the heart are not a reliable determination. They claim they have arrived at their conclusions solely by reading the Bible and reasoning therefrom. They are contemptuous of Mormons for saying that one can seek and receive a witness from the Holy Spirit. It is as though they disbelieve Christ's words when He said the Father would not give a stone to one who asked for bread or a serpent to one who asked for fish. So in addition to lacking real intent, they seem to lack another qualification in Moroni's promise, which is to have faith in Christ, or at least they lack faith in His words that those who ask will receive and that God will manifest the truth unto the seeker by the power of the Holy Ghost.I could care less whether you doubt it or not. I know dozens if not more evangelicals who think their witness is as valid as yours. Yet your answer is they did not have real intent. Well did you have real intent when you asked if their religion was true? Or have you ever bothered?
Teancum Posted June 10, 2015 Posted June 10, 2015 It is sad that you don't understand how well it works.Oh I understand it quite well. I am not sure you do.
Teancum Posted June 10, 2015 Posted June 10, 2015 Again, knowing the process I am sure there was more than one counseling session with both Bishop and SP before the action was taken.Not according to Brother Waterman. One meeting with each. That's it.
Teancum Posted June 10, 2015 Posted June 10, 2015 You mean the one where they told him that they had no interested in excommunicating him? Waterman says he was not told what he needed to repent of. If you have evidence suggesting that Waterman is lying, feel free to present it.Why provide evidence when what they suppose they no fits what they want to believe so well? 1
Teancum Posted June 10, 2015 Posted June 10, 2015 Nice, Scott. Have you ever listened to one of his podcast interviews?My guess....Of course not. Why bother with really listening to someone's position before condemning them out right? 1
Teancum Posted June 10, 2015 Posted June 10, 2015 And by the way, I have listened to three podcasts on Mormon Stories featuring Brother Waterman. And I have read a number of his blogs. I am not surprised at all that he was ex'd and if he is shocked or indignant about it he should not be. He knows what the church is and how it operates. 1
Mystery Meat Posted June 10, 2015 Posted June 10, 2015 (edited) I missed this. Yes Avatar4321, they do. But your response enforces the arrogance of any religious believer that beleives their supernatural answer is better than another's. And thus you reinforce the fatal flaw of this method for determining truth. No they don't. Saying that they do and failing to clarify how they did contradict is a "drive by" posting. At least have the grace to explain your position. Furthermore, we have explained this to you 100 times, if not more. My personal experiences with the Spirit trump anybody else's, at least as far as I am concerned. Every. Single. Time. And twice on Sundays. How am I supposed to know that they aren't lying? Didn't misinterpret? Actually felt the Spirit? I can't. While that also means theirs trump mine, I can't worry about anybody else's spiritual experience (unless they are confirmed to me via, you guessed it, the Spirit). The Spirit, is the ONLY reliable method for determining eternal truth. It is the ONLY way to find God. Without, there is no hope to reason your way to Him. Edited June 10, 2015 by Mystery Meat
rockpond Posted June 10, 2015 Author Posted June 10, 2015 It sounds like while you love your Bishop and Stake President, you don't have much confidence in them.Incorrect -- I have abundant confidence in them but I suspect that neither of them have the time nor inclination to delve into Waterman's blog posts to be able to have a productive discussion with him regarding what they'd like him to change or repent of. And, based on Waterman's account, that was the case with his local leaders as well.
Okrahomer Posted June 10, 2015 Posted June 10, 2015 Incorrect -- I have abundant confidence in them but I suspect that neither of them have the time nor inclination to delve into Waterman's blog posts to be able to have a productive discussion with him regarding what they'd like him to change or repent of. And, based on Waterman's account, that was the case with his local leaders as well.You have abundant confidence in them, and yet apparently not enough confidence to trust them to do the work necessary to communicate clearly with a "unique" member of the Ward/Stake who is in danger of Church discipline. That sounds like equivocation to me, but probably you see it differently--healthy skepticism perhaps. It does seem unfortunate though that your benefit of doubt--the one that chooses to believe Rock Waterman's version of events--does not extend to your own Priesthood leaders first.Thank you for taking time to answer my questions. I hope I wasn't too much of a nuisance. I hope nothing but the best for you. I hope nothing but the best for Rock Waterman. And I hope nothing but the best for all Priesthood leaders across the globe, who have the difficult task of governing the Church to the best of their imperfect abilities. I am so grateful for the hard work they do to communicate clearly with unique people like me. 1
Teancum Posted June 10, 2015 Posted June 10, 2015 (edited) No they don't. Saying that they do and failing to clarify how they did contradict is a "drive by" posting. At least have the grace to explain your position.Furthermore, we have explained this to you 100 times, if not more. My personal experiences with the Spirit trump anybody else's, at least as far as I am concerned. Every. Single. Time. And twice on Sundays. How am I supposed to know that they aren't lying? Didn't misinterpret? Actually felt the Spirit? I can't. While that also means theirs trump mine, I can't worry about anybody else's spiritual experience (unless they are confirmed to me via, you guessed it, the Spirit).The Spirit, is the ONLY reliable method for determining eternal truth. It is the ONLY way to find God. Without, there is no hope to reason your way to Him.I understand you have explained it. And I understand and even understood it before. And I understand at least currently for you yours trumps everything.I bring it up again on this thread because a beleiving Mormon essentially said Waterman's testimony he claims is false because it differed from his and from what the church leaders say a testimony is. Thus I challange this once again.And yes I had a testimony just like yours I am sure regarding the LDS church. When I found other good honest people also claimed spiritual witnesses, revelations or answers to pray that was differen than mine that I started asking about the validity of such experiences. Why would a God of truth give so many different answers to so many people? What it seems you do not understand, as well as others here is this simple fact demonstrates that this method for finding the truth is not reliable. Your continued instance or refusal to even explore this idea is an obstruction to reasoned dialogue.And who decided reason and critical thinking is NOT a way to find truth and or God? Edited June 10, 2015 by Teancum
rockpond Posted June 10, 2015 Author Posted June 10, 2015 You have abundant confidence in them, and yet apparently not enough confidence to trust them to do the work necessary to communicate clearly with a "unique" member of the Ward/Stake who is in danger of Church discipline. That sounds like equivocation to me, but probably you see it differently--healthy skepticism perhaps. It does seem unfortunate though that your benefit of doubt--the one that chooses to believe Rock Waterman's version of events--does not extend to your own Priesthood leaders first.Thank you for taking time to answer my questions. I hope I wasn't too much of a nuisance. I hope nothing but the best for you. I hope nothing but the best for Rock Waterman. And I hope nothing but the best for all Priesthood leaders across the globe, who have the difficult task of governing the Church to the best of their imperfect abilities. I am so grateful for the hard work they do to communicate clearly with unique people like me.I'm sorry -- I apparently didn't explain that well. My "throw them for a loop" comment wasn't me saying that my leaders couldn't communicate clearly with a Waterman type member. It was just a recognition of the difficulty and challenge he poses to any leader. It was meant as an expression of understanding for Waterman's leaders, not a conviction of my own.
Okrahomer Posted June 10, 2015 Posted June 10, 2015 I'm sorry -- I apparently didn't explain that well. My "throw them for a loop" comment wasn't me saying that my leaders couldn't communicate clearly with a Waterman type member. It was just a recognition of the difficulty and challenge he poses to any leader. It was meant as an expression of understanding for Waterman's leaders, not a conviction of my own. Thanks for the clarification. You probably explained it well enough--I just didn't read you properly. Apologies for that. 1
Mystery Meat Posted June 10, 2015 Posted June 10, 2015 (edited) I understand you have explained it. And I understand and even understood it before. And I understand at least currently for you yours trumps everything.I bring it up again on this thread because a beleiving Mormon essentially said Waterman's testimony he claims is false because it differed from his and from what the church leaders say a testimony is.Thus I challange this once again.And yes I had a testimony just like yours I am sure regarding the LDS church. When I found other good honest people also claimed spiritual witnesses, revelations or answers to pray that was differen than mine that I started asking about the validity of such experiences. Why would a God of truth give so many different answers to so many people? What it seems you do not understand, as well as others here is this simple fact demonstrates that this method for finding the truth is not reliable. Your continued instance or refusal to even explore this idea is an obstruction to reasoned dialogue.And who decided reason and critical thinking is NOT a way to find truth and or God? IMO, God decided that, but that's neither here nor there. I also used to have a testimony like yours, where I did not think I could rely on the Spirit. When I first started reading about the hard issues in Church history and listening to arguments of former members, one of the first things they did was cause me to question my own spiritual experiences by pointing out how other people have had different spiritual experiences (supposedly) than me. I fell for their lie. They were seeking, and still seek to destroy my confidence in the Spirit. And it worked. I became very much a cynic about other's claims of spiritual experiences...and then I started having them and everything changed. A God of truth would never give conflicting answers of truth to different people (one is told that Jesus is the Christ and another is not; one is told Joseph Smith was prophet and the other is not; one is told the Book of Mormon is true while the other is not). We live in a world filled with imperfect people who see through a glass darkly. While I believe there are many good people who have not had the same revelations I have had, people who are doing their best but for one reason or another can't get over their cultural, political, doubtfal and/or prejudiced roadblocks and so they aren't capable of hearing or receiving the Spirit. I know of one such person, who was a raised a staunch evangelical, was taught to loath Mormons and our doctrine, who came to Church with me one time just to see, and who afterwards did not know what to do and was tormented for weeks. The cognitive dissonance was too much and she could/would not accept her experience for what it was. What it seems you do not understand, as well as others here is these simple facts demonstrate that this method for finding truth is perfectly reliable. Your continued instance or refusal to even explore this idea is an obstruction to reasoned dialogue. (See what I did there?) Edited June 10, 2015 by Mystery Meat
Scott Lloyd Posted June 10, 2015 Posted June 10, 2015 Dang. Strange day when I am in lockstep with Smac. I nearly always agree with you both. Yet you imply the two of you are at odds. Am I missing something?
Scott Lloyd Posted June 10, 2015 Posted June 10, 2015 (edited) Insufferable? Nice, Scott. Have you ever listened to one of his podcast interviews?No. Which is why I put a question mark after my response. Quotes I've seen from him summarizing his position strike me as extremely unpalatable. But I grant the possibility he could have a honey-sweet delivery and a persuasive eloquence that would sway even a hardbitten believer like me. Edited June 10, 2015 by Scott Lloyd
rockpond Posted June 10, 2015 Author Posted June 10, 2015 No. Which is why I put a question mark after my response. Quotes I've seen from him summarizing his position strike me as extremely unpalatable. But I grant the possibility he could have a honey-sweet delivery and a persuasive eloquence that would sway even a hardbitten believer like me. Oh yeah... I think his position is definitely unpalatable for you. No doubt. But he is a rather kind-hearted old soul. And you are both "hardbitten believers" so at least you have that in common.
Avatar4321 Posted June 11, 2015 Posted June 11, 2015 I understand you have explained it. And I understand and even understood it before. And I understand at least currently for you yours trumps everything.I bring it up again on this thread because a beleiving Mormon essentially said Waterman's testimony he claims is false because it differed from his and from what the church leaders say a testimony is. Thus I challange this once again.And yes I had a testimony just like yours I am sure regarding the LDS church. When I found other good honest people also claimed spiritual witnesses, revelations or answers to pray that was differen than mine that I started asking about the validity of such experiences. Why would a God of truth give so many different answers to so many people? What it seems you do not understand, as well as others here is this simple fact demonstrates that this method for finding the truth is not reliable. Your continued instance or refusal to even explore this idea is an obstruction to reasoned dialogue.And who decided reason and critical thinking is NOT a way to find truth and or God?Actually I've yet to see anyone show that he has a testimony. In fact, I was fairly surprised because earlier in the thread we were being told he has not been claiming revelation and a testimony is revelation.
Teancum Posted June 11, 2015 Posted June 11, 2015 Actually I've yet to see anyone show that he has a testimony. In fact, I was fairly surprised because earlier in the thread we were being told he has not been claiming revelation and a testimony is revelation.Go read his blog and listen to the interviews on the MS podcasts. It is there to see in plain sight.
Avatar4321 Posted June 11, 2015 Posted June 11, 2015 If he has a testimony of joseph smith, why ignore his counsel?
Teancum Posted June 11, 2015 Posted June 11, 2015 IMO, God decided that, but that's neither here nor there. I also used to have a testimony like yours, where I did not think I could rely on the Spirit. When I first started reading about the hard issues in Church history and listening to arguments of former members, one of the first things they did was cause me to question my own spiritual experiences by pointing out how other people have had different spiritual experiences (supposedly) than me. I fell for their lie. They were seeking, and still seek to destroy my confidence in the Spirit. And it worked. I became very much a cynic about other's claims of spiritual experiences...and then I started having them and everything changed. A God of truth would never give conflicting answers of truth to different people (one is told that Jesus is the Christ and another is not; one is told Joseph Smith was prophet and the other is not; one is told the Book of Mormon is true while the other is not). We live in a world filled with imperfect people who see through a glass darkly. While I believe there are many good people who have not had the same revelations I have had, people who are doing their best but for one reason or another can't get over their cultural, political, doubtfal and/or prejudiced roadblocks and so they aren't capable of hearing or receiving the Spirit. I know of one such person, who was a raised a staunch evangelical, was taught to loath Mormons and our doctrine, who came to Church with me one time just to see, and who afterwards did not know what to do and was tormented for weeks. The cognitive dissonance was too much and she could/would not accept her experience for what it was. What it seems you do not understand, as well as others here is these simple facts demonstrate that this method for finding truth is perfectly reliable. Your continued instance or refusal to even explore this idea is an obstruction to reasoned dialogue. (See what I did there?)It is not a lie that good honest believers claim a witness of something they claim is true that differs from yours and they believe it sincerely. So you must think they are all liars or deceived since you state God does not give conflicting answers or witnesses. And I agree. The other clear conclusion is God is not giving any of them thus the unreliability of this method to determine truth.Let me ask you something. Would you fly in an airplane that was built by someone who claimed to get the plans for the plane by a witness of the spirit?
Calm Posted June 11, 2015 Posted June 11, 2015 http://puremormonism.blogspot.com/2013/07/my-testimony-of-church.html
Okrahomer Posted June 11, 2015 Posted June 11, 2015 Would you fly in an airplane that was built by someone who claimed to get the plans for the plane by a witness of the spirit?I think it was Nephi who got the plans to build a vessel via the Spirit; and Laman and Lemuel were not keen to sail in it either. Just sayin'... 4
Recommended Posts