Falling Away

[KevinG]

'on here' maybe, but F&T meetings   say differently.  "I know this is the true church (most correct church) (the Lord's church)".      That's not exactly saying, 'hey we could be right or others could be right.'

But, I do think we worship the same God. 

 

I know the church is true... A simplified brief statement that declares the truthfulness of our claims was not designed to be picked apart on a discussion boards.  It was designed simply to be a declaration of faith.

 

As a convert I am always open to the possibility of greater truth.  So far in my searching and living the gospel I have continued to find it among the Saints.

 

I would not expect my 2 minutes of expressing my common experience to fellow Saints at fast and testimony meeting to stand up to a thorough theological examination by several doctors of religion.  It was never intended to be.

[KevinG]

No, the heart is deceitful above all things.  

 

Why would God ask you to trust in feelings from something he's already labeled as "deceitful above all things?"

 

If I'm an apostate, it's because I chose to believe what God's word plainly says.

 

Go your way in peace.  May you find what you seek.  Sincerely.

 

I myself have made exactly "0" occasions to return to the Methodists and correct their faith claims or method of worship.  In fact I still respect my Methodist family and the wonderful things they have taught me about faith, love, charity, and obedience.

 

I am puzzled as to why some feel "falling away" must require a vocal disavowal and arguing of what they used to believe?

Edited November 12, 2015 by KevinG

[mfbukowski]

In the infamous words of Col. Sherman T. Potter: "Horse Hockey"

Truth is ONLY what is plainly written in the Word of God. Nowhere in the Bible does God equate a feeling in the heart with a test of truth.

That's why Mononi's promise is so self defeating; how are unsuspecting investigators to determine if Mornoni's promise is truth? Was there a test of truth to determine if that test of truth is true? Hogwash.

God's Word is His test of truth.

What then is the basis for your belief in the legends in the Bible?

How could you possibly know it is the "word of God"? How. Display evidence for the atonement.

The word of whom? How do you know there is a God?

Edited November 12, 2015 by mfbukowski

[ERayR]

No, the heart is deceitful above all things.  

 

Why would God ask you to trust in feelings from something he's already labeled as "deceitful above all things?"

 

If I'm an apostate, it's because I chose to believe what God's word plainly says.

 

Plainly said to who.  I don't recognize your interpretation.  My mileage is much different than yours seems to be.

[ERayR]

What then is the basis for your belief in the legends in the Bible?

How could you possibly know it is the "word of God"? How. Display evidence for the atonement.

The word of whom? How do you know there is a God?

 

All very good questions that point out a disconnect between his words and actions.

[Ahab]

No, the heart is deceitful above all things.

Why would God ask you to trust in feelings from something he's already labeled as "deceitful above all things?"

If I'm an apostate, it's because I chose to believe what God's word plainly says.

The words you believe are scripture with all of your heart and mind can be misinterpreted and misunderstood in so many thousands of ways that you need something other than scriptures to tell you whether or not they really are scriptures and, if they really are scripture, how you should correctly understand and interpret what they mean.

So who do you trust to tell you those words really are scriptures and to tell you how you should correctly interpret/understand what they mean?

There are only 3 people I trust to tell me the truth about everything and anything anyone else tells me must be vetted by them personally to me.

[mfbukowski]

All very good questions that point out a disconnect between his words and actions.

Yes that is the problem.

 

And then we can get to how we know that child molestation is wrong etc.  The bottom line is that we all have built into us a compass which tells us these things and we must follow or be condemned by God and society.

 

Atheists are moral- why??  Because they too have a conscience and a portion of the spirit.  It is not necessary to believe in God even to be guided by our feelings/spirit.

 

It's really all we have.  Morality cannot be deduced from evidence or science.

[SmileyMcGee]

The words you believe are scripture with all of your heart and mind can be misinterpreted and misunderstood in so many thousands of ways that you need something other than scriptures to tell you whether or not they really are scriptures and, if they really are scripture, how you should correctly understand and interpret what they mean.

So who do you trust to tell you those words really are scriptures and to tell you how you should correctly interpret/understand what they mean?

There are only 3 people I trust to tell me the truth about everything and anything anyone else tells me must be vetted by them personally to me.

You do realize that your "vetting process" is no better than his (or her), right? I.e., you are still exposed to extreme bias. But take comfort in the idea that everyone else is in the same predicament.

[SmileyMcGee]

Yes that is the problem.

And then we can get to how we know that child molestation is wrong etc. The bottom line is that we all have built into us a compass which tells us these things and we must follow or be condemned by God and society.

Atheists are moral- why?? Because they too have a conscience and a portion of the spirit. It is not necessary to believe in God even to be guided by our feelings/spirit.

It's really all we have. Morality cannot be deduced from evidence or science.

Are you attributing morality to God? If so, I would love to hear you reasoning for that. If not, feel free to ignore, or ignore regardless... Edited November 12, 2015 by SmileyMcGee

[mfbukowski]

You do realize that your "vetting process" is no better than his (or her), right? I.e., you are still exposed to extreme bias. But take comfort in the idea that everyone else is in the same predicament.

But think about it.

 

If we are all "exposed to extreme bias" then even saying so becomes irrelevant.  It is like adding zeroes to both sides of an equation- it is useless informaiton which cancels itself out.

 

It is perhaps instructive to understand the principle but actually irrelevant in argument.  That is why "confirmation bias" becomes irrelevant in religious discussion- we all have it whether we are atheists or fundamentalists.  In a subjective discussion about how an individual feels about a matter, there is no standard to judge anything.

 

"I like x" is not anything to be debated.  No one can be right or wrong for liking x.  No one can be right or wrong for feeling this church is true or that church is true., their feelings may or not be consistent with their objectives or the benefits they get from that belief, but there is no basis for argumentation about it.

 

I have no problem saying that I know this church is true because of my feelings and testimony, and I know others will disagree.

 

What they do not understand is that there is no basis there for comparison which we both share, so the claim itself is hollow.  Yes what is "true" for me may not be "true" for you but that is because the word "true" has no shared meaning or understanding between us.  The problem is what the word "true" could possibly mean in this context, without a shared basis for comparison.  It's not like we can go out and compare it with the truth-o-meter to see who is right- there is no shared "reality" in this context with which we can compare our claims

 

So yes, all we have are the feelings of our heart and soul to use to make these decisions.  That's all anyone has, and we had better get used to it.  That means we have to give up Creedal dualism which differentiates between a world of Platonic (pagan) Idealism  and the world of observation which is all "illusion".

 

Truth is what we experience, and yes we experience these matters differently.  There is really not anything more we can say about it literally- since language itself implies shared experience.

 

We are not sharing experience whenever we use the word "II".  When we say "I know the church is true" it is not saying anything which can be communicated to another any more than "I like vanilla" communicates anything but our preferences to anyone else.

 

But that does not mean that "I like vanilla" is false.  It just means that we have no way to share your experience of vanilla and mine. There is no shared observation which we can use to compare my appreciation of vanilla or my understanding of the church.

[Mars]

i once told a fellow software developer that the reason for my pause in my question was that i was trying to come up with the best combination of words that would cause to fire the exact same set of neurons in his head as i had in mine when i pictured the question, so that he would know perfectly what i was getting at.

 

he burst into laughter and said that was impossible.  but his tone softened and patience for my lack of understanding increased.

Edited November 12, 2015 by Mars

[FormerLDS]

The words you believe are scripture with all of your heart and mind can be misinterpreted and misunderstood in so many thousands of ways that you need something other than scriptures to tell you whether or not they really are scriptures and, if they really are scripture, how you should correctly understand and interpret what they mean.

So who do you trust to tell you those words really are scriptures and to tell you how you should correctly interpret/understand what they mean?

There are only 3 people I trust to tell me the truth about everything and anything anyone else tells me must be vetted by them personally to me.

 

Regardless what you might think the ultimate source would be, why would "God" use what he has already declared as "deceitful above all things" as part of the test for truth?

 

I mean really people.  

 

Read Isaiah 44:20 and just let it sink in:

 

"He feedeth on ashes: a deceived heart hath turned him aside, that he cannot deliver his soul, nor say, Is there not a lie in my right hand?"

[mfbukowski]

Are you attributing morality to God? If so, I would love to hear you reasoning for that. If not, feel free to ignore, or ignore regardless...

God represents our ideal of moral values.

 

Yes he exists, yes he is an exalted Human.  That is the key to the church and to any humanistic view of God.

 

Morality has survival value in a peaceful society of humans.  The best expression of these values are found in the Golden Rule.  We all want to be treated fairly, as others want to be treated.  It is simply a fact of life, perfectly demonstrable scientifically if we want to, that people prefer to be left alone and leave others alone to live their lives in peace and freedom in a family relationship.

 

Why do we agree about that? Because it is a requirement for civilization.  Human babies are born helpless and need care for what- 12 to 15 years at least?  The age of puberty itself tells us that.

 

We cannot reproduce before the "fall from innocence".  We are all Adam and Eve in the garden until them.  After that we wander looking for truth and find it in our own families.  We want to raise them in peace and so band together into cultures all of which demand "morality".

 

For the LDS, God is one of us, raised to being the Ideal Human with Ideal Human values.  You can believe that literally- as I do- and see Him as a real Being, or you can see that as an ideal created by humans.  I have reasons for believing it literally, because I know I have felt Him "speaking" to my spirit and telling me these things are true, but I cannot express that to you in language.

 

So yes, God is moral becaue He is our Ideal of moral behavior.

 

Who would possibly believe in an immoral god??  The fact that God is moral is self-evident in our definition of God as the Ideal Human.

 

And if you believe in the King Folette Discourse you may believe that God is one of an infinite string of Gods, of Fathers of Sons going back into infinite eternities- far beyond our comprehension.

 

That's why I am LDS intellectually.   It just makes sense.

[FormerLDS]

What then is the basis for your belief in the legends in the Bible?

How could you possibly know it is the "word of God"? How. Display evidence for the atonement.

The word of whom? How do you know there is a God?

 

How does one "know" Moroni's promise is actually God's test for truth? 

 

You hear and choose to believe.  That simple.  No spooky confirmational feelings.  

[mfbukowski]

i once told a fellow software developer that the reason for my pause in my question was that i was trying to come up with the best combination of words that would cause to fire the exact same set of neurons in his head as i had in mine when i pictured the question, so that he would know perfectly what i was getting at.

 

he burst into laughter and said that was impossible.  but his tone softened and patience for my lack of understanding increased.

Perfect!

That is it exactly- except it presumes that neurons are themselves "conscious".  We do not experience neurons firing and the experience itself is what we are trhing to communicate.  His same neurons may not cause the same shade of "blue".

 

But that gets it about as close as one can get- at least for a programmer!!

 

Engineers!! 

[FormerLDS]

Go your way in peace.  May you find what you seek.  Sincerely.

 

I myself have made exactly "0" occasions to return to the Methodists and correct their faith claims or method of worship.  In fact I still respect my Methodist family and the wonderful things they have taught me about faith, love, charity, and obedience.

 

I am puzzled as to why some feel "falling away" must require a vocal disavowal and arguing of what they used to believe?

 

Kevin it bothers me to think there are those out there who simply cannot accept the fact there are those who make the logical, sincere decision to leave the CJCLDS based upon scripture alone.  I didn't fall into corruption, read "anti" literature, hang around the bad crowd, etc.  

 

The plain reading of the Bible DOES NOT support LDS theology.  Period.  if that makes me an "apostate" then I'm ok siding with what Jesus Christ plainly says in His word.  

[mfbukowski]

How does one "know" Moroni's promise is actually God's test for truth? 

 

You hear and choose to believe.  That simple.  No spooky confirmational feelings.  

God has no "test for truth"- God IS. 

 

Truth is a linguistic concept.   Only sentences are true- not things.

 

God confirms his desires for us through the feelings of our hearts.  You cannot know that Christ died for YOU except by feelings in your heart.  How else do you know that?

 

Biblical historicity proves nothing.  You could have a "true" video of the crucifixion and all it would show is a bloody scene of a man being crucified.   You could go back in a time machine and see it for yourself and still not know that that bloody mess in front of you took away your sins.

 

Either you know it or you don't because either God reveals it to you or He doesn't.

 

Moroni is just a re-statement of James 1:5.  God will give you wisdom.  That's biblical.  If youi belive the bible you believe Moroni

Edited November 12, 2015 by mfbukowski

[mfbukowski]

Kevin it bothers me to think there are those out there who simply cannot accept the fact there are those who make the logical, sincere decision to leave the CJCLDS based upon scripture alone.  I didn't fall into corruption, read "anti" literature, hang around the bad crowd, etc.  

 

The plain reading of the Bible DOES NOT support LDS theology.  Period.  if that makes me an "apostate" then I'm ok siding with what Jesus Christ plainly says in His word.  

I personally don't care about who's interpretation of what scripture agrees or disagrees with some other imperfect interpretation of someone else's scripture.

 

I go by what God tells me is right and wrong.  That's all any of us have- the rest is just talk

[mfbukowski]

Kevin it bothers me to think there are those out there who simply cannot accept the fact there are those who make the logical, sincere decision to leave the CJCLDS based upon scripture alone.  I didn't fall into corruption, read "anti" literature, hang around the bad crowd, etc.  

 

The plain reading of the Bible DOES NOT support LDS theology.  Period.  if that makes me an "apostate" then I'm ok siding with what Jesus Christ plainly says in His word.  

So again- why in heaven's name would anyone accept the Bible blindly as you have ??

 

It makes no sense!!

[KevinG]

Kevin it bothers me to think there are those out there who simply cannot accept the fact there are those who make the logical, sincere decision to leave the CJCLDS based upon scripture alone.  

 

Well they certainly didn't do it based on a feeling in their heart now did they?

 

I don't judge others faith claims to be true or false.  Would that some ex Mormons would offer me the same courtesy.  

[mfbukowski]

Sorry no more time for this.

We have been over it a thousand times. Search for threads on biblical historicity.

[Russell C McGregor]

How does one "know" Moroni's promise is actually God's test for truth? 

 

You hear and choose to believe.  That simple.  No spooky confirmational feelings.  

 

Why pretend to ask a question if you're just going to provide the answer yourself?

 

So here's a real question for you: How does one "know" that the Bible is the sole yardstick against which truth is to be tested?

[Mars]

God has no "test for truth"- God IS. 

 

Truth is a linguistic concept.   Only sentences are true- not things.

 

God confirms his desires for us through the feelings of our hearts.  You cannot know that Christ died for YOU except by feelings in your heart.  How else do you know that?

 

Biblical historicity proves nothing.  You could have a "true" video of the crucifixion and all it would show is a bloody scene of a man being crucified.   You could go back in a time machine and see it for yourself and still not know that that bloody mess in front of you took away your sins.

 

Either you know it or you don't because either God reveals it to you or He doesn't.

 

Moroni is just a re-statement of James 1:5.  God will give you wisdom.  That's biblical.  If youi belive the bible you believe Moroni

 

i've read and been told by many a-Evangelical Christian that wisdom doesn't mean spiritual knowledge.  it meant -- oh, i may as well just quote the guy who traded emails with me:

 

"Wisdom (Grk. sophia) is not knowledge (Grk. Gnosis). It's not doctrinal facts or information. Instead, wisdom is the ability to properly apply knowledge. Godlly wisdom, for instance, is the ability to see the world through God's eyes, and similarly discern good from evil. To act wisely. Solomon's work are not full of doctrinal facts, but wisdom."

 

Ergo, I'm guessing, James 1:5 is incorrect exegesis for support of the notion that God will tell you in your heart and in your mind that the Book of Mormon is true.

[Mars]

it felt like splitting hairs.  i eventually gave up.

 

if i had a dollar for every time i tried to get an Evangelical Christian to see that they do with the Bible what they accuse me of incorrectly doing with the Book of Mormon, i wouldn't have any more student loans.

 

not that I think the Evangelical Christian is off his rocker or anything.  if you accept that Jesus really was who the Bible said He was, it necessarily comes from something other than the Bible.  it comes from God.  just own it.  and give me space to do the same with the Book of Mormon.

 

or not. 

[FormerLDS]

God has no "test for truth"- God IS. 

 

Truth is a linguistic concept.   Only sentences are true- not things.

 

God confirms his desires for us through the feelings of our hearts.  You cannot know that Christ died for YOU except by feelings in your heart.  How else do you know that?

 

Biblical historicity proves nothing.  You could have a "true" video of the crucifixion and all it would show is a bloody scene of a man being crucified.   You could go back in a time machine and see it for yourself and still not know that that bloody mess in front of you took away your sins.

 

Either you know it or you don't because either God reveals it to you or He doesn't.

 

Moroni is just a re-statement of James 1:5.  God will give you wisdom.  That's biblical.  If youi belive the bible you believe Moroni

 

Here's how I know Christ died for ME:

 

"8 But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us." Romans 5:8

 

Where in James 1:5 do you get anything even close to Moroni's promise?

 

"5 If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all men liberally, and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him."

 

Furthermore, and perhaps even more troubling, how does one KNOW Moroni's promise is truth?  [i.e. prior to believing it]