Squaring Church with life

[Ahab]

3 minutes ago, Meadowchik said:

I am being quite specific:

"But I do think there is something inherently less healthy that is more likely in Mormonism, the spiritual answers based on feelings alone.

In "Mormonism" there is an understanding that the Holy Ghost speaks to us with more than mere feelings and that the spiritual answers that come from the Holy Spirit are based on more than feelings alone.

If you had said outside of Mormonism then I may have agreed with you, but you didn't say that.

3 minutes ago, Meadowchik said:

The most perverse is when feelings go beyond merely bridging a gap of the unknown, to actually replacing or taking precedence over the known."

Like when people are motivated to reject the testimony they have received from the Holy Spirit, you mean?

[clarkgoble]

55 minutes ago, Meadowchik said:

Maybe we could communicate more effectively if you tell me how you describe or define "these experiences."

Perhaps it'd be better if I give some hypotheticals.

Hypothetical 1.  Every time I walk towards a particular place I hear a voice saying don't go there. I later find out some people were there robbing and assaulting people. A few months later I am heading towards a place and I hear a voice saying don't go there. I later find out someone was assaulted there the same night I was planning on going there. A few weeks later I hear a voice saying, "go visit Sis. Smith." I act on the prompting and find out she's having some huge trials and needed someone to help her and get groceries for her. In each case I can distinguish the voice from a normal voice. In each case I have the associated belief that this voice is from God. A few weeks later I am driving down the road and I hear a voice say get off the road. Am I justified in believing this is God telling me to take an other route?

Hypothetical 2. A person meets with the missionaries and commits to read the Book of Mormon. That night he dreams about Nephi and other people. The next day he reads 1 Nephi and finds everything in his dream was what he read. The next day the same thing happens. This repeats for a week. He'd never known about the content of the Book of Mormon before. Is he justified in thinking this is God telling him the Book of Mormon is true?

Hypothetical 3. A person has a dream that two people are going to tell him about a message his ancestors have been waiting for and that relates to his origins. He lives in a fairly primitive area in the mountains of a central American country. He speaks spanish but the main language of the village is an indigenous one. The next day two missionaries show up and tell him about the Book of Mormon. One of them is able to speak the language of the village even though almost no one knows it. Is he justified in thinking they are representatives of God and that the Book of Mormon is what the dream fortold for him?

Hypothetical 4. Someone is at stake conference in this central American country. The person from (3) is now a Stake President. This person is inactive and accompanying the person who converted the Stake President. The Stake President who only speaks spanish and his village's language stops in the middle of his talk and begins talking in English, a language he doesn't know, bearing his testimony and talking about how the church is true. Is this person visiting stake conference justified in thinking this is a message to him from God?

[Meadowchik]

44 minutes ago, Ahab said:

In "Mormonism" there is an understanding that the Holy Ghost speaks to us with more than mere feelings and that the spiritual answers that come from the Holy Spirit are based on more than feelings alone.

If you had said outside of Mormonism then I may have agreed with you, but you didn't say that.

Like when people are motivated to reject the testimony they have received from the Holy Spirit, you mean?

In Mormonism, the Spirit is referenced in a variety of ways, taught about in many ways ranging from very simplistically to more complex. In many cases, we are taught that any feeling that encourages belief in the Gospel subject being taught is the Spirit.

[Ahab]

2 minutes ago, Meadowchik said:

In Mormonism, the Spirit is referenced in a variety of ways, taught about in many ways ranging from very simplistically to more complex. In many cases, we are taught that any feeling that encourages belief in the Gospel subject being taught is the Spirit.

And that is true in regard to those feelings, but you are still off the mark when you say or suggest the Holy Spirit speaks to us with feelings alone, or mere feelings.

[Meadowchik]

14 minutes ago, clarkgoble said:

Perhaps it'd be better if I give some hypotheticals.

Hypothetical 1.  Every time I walk towards a particular place I hear a voice saying don't go there. I later find out some people were there robbing and assaulting people. A few months later I am heading towards a place and I hear a voice saying don't go there. I later find out someone was assaulted there the same night I was planning on going there. A few weeks later I hear a voice saying, "go visit Sis. Smith." I act on the prompting and find out she's having some huge trials and needed someone to help her and get groceries for her. In each case I can distinguish the voice from a normal voice. In each case I have the associated belief that this voice is from God. A few weeks later I am driving down the road and I hear a voice say get off the road. Am I justified in believing this is God telling me to take an other route?

Hypothetical 2. A person meets with the missionaries and commits to read the Book of Mormon. That night he dreams about Nephi and other people. The next day he reads 1 Nephi and finds everything in his dream was what he read. The next day the same thing happens. This repeats for a week. He'd never known about the content of the Book of Mormon before. Is he justified in thinking this is God telling him the Book of Mormon is true?

Hypothetical 3. A person has a dream that two people are going to tell him about a message his ancestors have been waiting for and that relates to his origins. He lives in a fairly primitive area in the mountains of a central American country. He speaks spanish but the main language of the village is an indigenous one. The next day two missionaries show up and tell him about the Book of Mormon. One of them is able to speak the language of the village even though almost no one knows it. Is he justified in thinking they are representatives of God and that the Book of Mormon is what the dream fortold for him?

Hypothetical 4. Someone is at stake conference in this central American country. The person from (3) is now a Stake President. This person is inactive and accompanying the person who converted the Stake President. The Stake President who only speaks spanish and his village's language stops in the middle of his talk and begins talking in English, a language he doesn't know, bearing his testimony and talking about how the church is true. Is this person visiting stake conference justified in thinking this is a message to him from God?

There could be a number of conclusions to be drawn from such experiences, not all of which attribute the Spirit's influence.

So, you choose to not provide a definition?

[Meadowchik]

1 minute ago, Ahab said:

And that is true in regard to those feelings, but you are still off the mark when you say or suggest the Holy Spirit speaks to us with feelings alone, or mere feelings.

Whatever the reality of the Holy Ghost, Mormonism teaches that it can be that simple sometimes. Please, Ahab, try to consider that what you believe about the Holy Ghost is not exactly what is always taught in the church. I am talking about Mormonism.

[pogi]

1 hour ago, Meadowchik said:

Huh.

Going with feelings against knowledge is one way to define sin. In other words, prioritising feelings over evidence is something people do frequently. 

Yes, people do prioritize feelings over known consequences (if that is what you are saying), but they don't typically place priority of feelings over knowledge in regards to what they believe to be true.  That is what it sounded like you were saying.  It sounded like you were saying that we believe our feelings before we believe our knowledge.  That is lame! 

 

 

[JLHPROF]

2 minutes ago, Meadowchik said:

Whatever the reality of the Holy Ghost, Mormonism teaches that it can be that simple sometimes. Please, Ahab, try to consider that what you believe about the Holy Ghost is not exactly what is always taught in the church. I am talking about Mormonism.

What is taught in the Church is NOT always the same as what is taught in Mormonism.

In the Church today the emphasis is that the Holy Ghost will give you good feelings.
Joseph Smith taught that the Holy Ghost gives you only pure intelligence/knowledge.

Intellect vs Emotion.  One of the most obvious changes in the Church over its lifespan to date.

[Ahab]

3 minutes ago, Meadowchik said:

Whatever the reality of the Holy Ghost, Mormonism teaches that it can be that simple sometimes. Please, Ahab, try to consider that what you believe about the Holy Ghost is not exactly what is always taught in the church. I am talking about Mormonism.

Yeah I know you are talking about Mormonism, but you are giving an incomplete portrayal of Mormonism and Mormonism's portrayal of the Holy Ghost.

[Calm]

13 minutes ago, pogi said:

Yes, people do prioritize feelings over known consequences (if that is what you are saying), but they don't typically place priority of feelings over knowledge in regards to what they believe to be true.  That is what it sounded like you were saying.  It sounded like you were saying that we believe our feelings before we believe our knowledge.  That is lame! 

Knowledge and feelings about that knowledge are inextricably intertwined in our internal experience except for some dysfunctional individuals who do not process feelings in the same way as most.  We speak as if affect, cognition, and behaviour are separate identities, but they are all different renderings of the same experience (think a painting where we talk about texture, colour, and light, but all three existing together make up the picture and removing any would result in a different experience).

Edited April 18, 2017 by Calm

[clarkgoble]

31 minutes ago, Meadowchik said:

There could be a number of conclusions to be drawn from such experiences, not all of which attribute the Spirit's influence.

So, you choose to not provide a definition?

I don't think definitions are helpful when dealing with a diverse phenomena. Definitions are primarily useful when dealing with things that can be delineated by a few simple characteristics. Outside of that they tend to be more misleading than helpful. That's why I think examples are far more helpful. (Even when people argue about definitions they almost always use hypothetical examples to try and figure out the definitions)

In any case, my point was just that I think in each of those cases the person would be justified in believing they were revelation even if others might not. Likewise I don't think any of the examples could easily be considered subjective in any strong sense. Of course they're all subjective in that they were experiences that happened to a particular person. But in the last two the experiences were shared ones in some sense.

[Daniel2]

On ‎4‎/‎17‎/‎2017 at 5:16 PM, Mystery Meat said:

I think it is perfectly possible to believe that the Spirit may/could prompt someone to leave the Church, once one considers the ultimate purpose of the Church. The Church is the only organization that can prepare people for a Celestial life. There are any number of organizations that can help people live a Terrestial or Telestial life in this life and/or the next. Not everyone is going to be happy in the Celestial Kingdom and God is not going to force anyone to be there. I have to imagine that many of the people who are not happy in the Church won't be happy in the Celestial Kingdom (as many of the Doctrines (such as SSM) will trouble people in the next life as well).

As the other kingdoms are degrees of glory, there absolutely is a spiritual life for people aiming to get there (whether knowingly or unknowingly). This was not meant to be a backhanded post, but from my position (where the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is the Lord's Church and His Kingdom of God on earth, not just for me but for everybody) then there would have to be a reason for the Lord to basically tell people to not strive to return to His presence. Continued unhappiness and struggle to find peace with the Lord and how he does things seems like a pretty merciful and good reason.

I actually really appreciate this post, Mystery Meat, despite the fact that I don't share LDS beliefs anymore.  I wish the church would cater more to allowing people to tailor their attendance and participation to that vision of a spectrum of heavenly placement, instead of the "Celestial Kingdom or BUST!" approach, though I can postulate about understanding why they don't. 

And sometimes, I wish the zealous missionaries who keep leaving invites taped on my DH's and my door to fellowshipping activities might take a similar stance... lol.  But I can and do appreciate the love and concern behind such gestures, despite the minor annoyance in having to keep throwing them away.  (In reality, I think the choir director may be behind the ongoing attempts to bring us back to the church, since whenever my husband and I choose to participate in the Christmas choir, she's tickled pink that two additional men who can carry a tune practically double the men's sections of the choir... ha).

Edited April 19, 2017 by Daniel2

[RevTestament]

1 hour ago, Meadowchik said:

In Mormonism, the Spirit is referenced in a variety of ways, taught about in many ways ranging from very simplistically to more complex. In many cases, we are taught that any feeling that encourages belief in the Gospel subject being taught is the Spirit.

Well, I have had the Spirit manifest itself in a variety of ways - immediately upon waking with a word or scripture on my mind has happened. However, usually when I pray, I am looking for a very specific feeling - it's almost like a shiver up my spine - it's like a welling up inside. If I don't get that feeling, I don't usually consider my prayer to be answered. However, I have had a variety of other occurrences.

[Meadowchik]

7 hours ago, pogi said:

Yes, people do prioritize feelings over known consequences (if that is what you are saying), but they don't typically place priority of feelings over knowledge in regards to what they believe to be true.  That is what it sounded like you were saying.  It sounded like you were saying that we believe our feelings before we believe our knowledge.  That is lame! 

 

 

I mean that, too. It happens. Example:

"Bob's a good guy, he'd never do that. I don't believe you experienced that. Case closed."

[Meadowchik]

8 hours ago, clarkgoble said:

Perhaps it'd be better if I give some hypotheticals.

Hypothetical 1.  Every time I walk towards a particular place I hear a voice saying don't go there. I later find out some people were there robbing and assaulting people. A few months later I am heading towards a place and I hear a voice saying don't go there. I later find out someone was assaulted there the same night I was planning on going there. A few weeks later I hear a voice saying, "go visit Sis. Smith." I act on the prompting and find out she's having some huge trials and needed someone to help her and get groceries for her. In each case I can distinguish the voice from a normal voice. In each case I have the associated belief that this voice is from God. A few weeks later I am driving down the road and I hear a voice say get off the road. Am I justified in believing this is God telling me to take an other route?

Hypothetical 2. A person meets with the missionaries and commits to read the Book of Mormon. That night he dreams about Nephi and other people. The next day he reads 1 Nephi and finds everything in his dream was what he read. The next day the same thing happens. This repeats for a week. He'd never known about the content of the Book of Mormon before. Is he justified in thinking this is God telling him the Book of Mormon is true?

Hypothetical 3. A person has a dream that two people are going to tell him about a message his ancestors have been waiting for and that relates to his origins. He lives in a fairly primitive area in the mountains of a central American country. He speaks spanish but the main language of the village is an indigenous one. The next day two missionaries show up and tell him about the Book of Mormon. One of them is able to speak the language of the village even though almost no one knows it. Is he justified in thinking they are representatives of God and that the Book of Mormon is what the dream fortold for him?

Hypothetical 4. Someone is at stake conference in this central American country. The person from (3) is now a Stake President. This person is inactive and accompanying the person who converted the Stake President. The Stake President who only speaks spanish and his village's language stops in the middle of his talk and begins talking in English, a language he doesn't know, bearing his testimony and talking about how the church is true. Is this person visiting stake conference justified in thinking this is a message to him from God?

First hypothetical: your wife has cancer and has gone into remission. You drive her to the doctor every six months for a checkup to check for new cancerous growth. The second visit, you hear that voice saying not to go to the visit. You don't go but reschedule. A week later, you both are about to leave and the voice again says not to go. How many times will you obey this? Will you put off the check-ups indefinitely, or will you eventually disobey the voice?

Second hypothetical: why would it be God and not some other influence? If it's supernatural, how does he know it's not a devil influencing him?

Third hypothetical: This man in your story is part of a village co-operative. They have a five year plan, for five years they develop a crop together, sharing in the work. Each year one family gets the lion's share of profits in order to buy something for their home. The first year, his family buys a sewing machine. The man gets baptised and uses the profits from the sewing machine to bring his old grandfather, mother, and sister to church every Sunday.  There he is taught about missionary service and the branch president gives him a blessing that he will leave to serve a a faithful mission for the church within the year. That means he will break his promise with the other families in the village co-op. Should he go?

Fourth. Again, how does he know that power or manifestation or gift came from God? If so, what is the message? Does it mean the church is true? Does it mean God is giving him a sign? Suppose he had a dream ten years ago that he would learn English and become a Catholic priest doing important work in the capitol.  But he has fallen away and even though he has repented, he fears the dream is lost. Is this English speaker God's way of telling him he's still called to the Catholic priesthood?

So we have four problems. They force a person to choose between a manifestation and something else, or to decide what the experience truly means.

First: between the voice and the empirical need to check for cancer.

Second: is the dream God, Satan, or something else?

Third: between a blessing and a promise.

Fourth: between one manifestation and a dream, or does the manifestation support the dream?

[stemelbow]

16 hours ago, The Nehor said:

I didn't unless you communicated your point terribly.

if you say so. 

Nehor: "Your conclusion is based on the false premise that people follow the Spirit."

Then you followed that up by somehow disagreeing with yourself. 

"There is a happy medium between everyone listing to follow the Spirit and no one following the Spirit. "

So you went from people don't follow the Spirit to "I guess some might"

of course the Spirit exists to be followed.  If no one followed (as you claimed) the Spirit's existence would be meaningless. 

Anyway, thanks for your comments. 

[pogi]

7 hours ago, Meadowchik said:

I mean that, too. It happens. Example:

"Bob's a good guy, he'd never do that. I don't believe you experienced that. Case closed."

That is an example of believing our feelings before believing our knowledge?

I don't follow.

First of all, I have never heard it taught in Mormonism that we should give precedence to our feelings over what we know to be true. 

I am assuming you are hinting at a case of molestation here. Are you suggesting that this person had knowledge that a child was molested by Bob and chose to protect Bob because they felt good about him?  You realize that is a crime, right?  Do you really think this happens in Mormonism because Mormons are taught to listen to the spirit?  It seems you are on a witch hunt. 

[clarkgoble]

7 hours ago, Meadowchik said:

First hypothetical: your wife has cancer and has gone into remission. You drive her to the doctor every six months for a checkup to check for new cancerous growth. The second visit, you hear that voice saying not to go to the visit. You don't go but reschedule. A week later, you both are about to leave and the voice again says not to go. How many times will you obey this? Will you put off the check-ups indefinitely, or will you eventually disobey the voice?

Second hypothetical: why would it be God and not some other influence? If it's supernatural, how does he know it's not a devil influencing him?

Third hypothetical: This man in your story is part of a village co-operative. They have a five year plan, for five years they develop a crop together, sharing in the work. Each year one family gets the lion's share of profits in order to buy something for their home. The first year, his family buys a sewing machine. The man gets baptised and uses the profits from the sewing machine to bring his old grandfather, mother, and sister to church every Sunday.  There he is taught about missionary service and the branch president gives him a blessing that he will leave to serve a a faithful mission for the church within the year. That means he will break his promise with the other families in the village co-op. Should he go?

Fourth. Again, how does he know that power or manifestation or gift came from God? If so, what is the message? Does it mean the church is true? Does it mean God is giving him a sign? Suppose he had a dream ten years ago that he would learn English and become a Catholic priest doing important work in the capitol.  But he has fallen away and even though he has repented, he fears the dream is lost. Is this English speaker God's way of telling him he's still called to the Catholic priesthood?

So we have four problems. They force a person to choose between a manifestation and something else, or to decide what the experience truly means.

First: between the voice and the empirical need to check for cancer.

Second: is the dream God, Satan, or something else?

Third: between a blessing and a promise.

Fourth: between one manifestation and a dream, or does the manifestation support the dream?

In your first counter hypothetical if the voice doesn't correspond to repeatable patterns then I have strong reasons to distrust it. I think one then has to figure out distinguishing characteristics. So it's the relationship between sign and consequence that matters. That's what we need to analyze.

For the rejoinder to the second hypothetical one would have to do further inquiry to discern the nature of the revelation. I dislike the term supernatural in that it's so caught up in Hume's notion of being contrary to natural law. However it certainly seems a communication not reducible to the person in question. You're right that discovering the nature of the source matters. But again one can then do the correlation with the fruits of ones choices.

For your third counter hypothetical, assuming he is justified in believing the branch president is inspired in that blessing he should go. You don't give enough information to know if that is true. Although the man in this story actually was already the village leader and became the Stake President in the fourth hypothetical.

For the fourth, again one has to do correlations on fruits of the consequences. Although in this particular case (which was a true story) part of the experience was a belief it was from God. Now merely coming away from the experience with that belief is insufficient of course. One has to continue to do inquiry.

My argument would be that inquiry must continue (indefinitely) so there's never an end but we know when our inquiry keeps giving us the same answer. That is we reach a point of stability in our belief.

To your other points, there can be vagueness and a certain degree of indeterminism in our conclusions, although I don't see that as a flaw.

[clarkgoble]

13 minutes ago, pogi said:

First of all, I have never heard it taught in Mormonism that we should give precedence to our feelings over what we know to be true. 

I am assuming you are hinting at a case of molestation here. Are you suggesting that this person had knowledge that a child was molested by Bob and chose to protect Bob because they felt good about him?  You realize that is a crime, right?  Do you really think this happens in Mormonism because Mormons are taught to listen to the spirit?  It seems you are on a witch hunt. 

Yes, people here are conflating knowledge with feeling and intentionally emphasizing the vague nature of a feeling. That's avoiding the real issue.

Now of course there are Mormons who aren't good at identifying the spirit. Some Mormons make bad choices. I can think of members who when in a leadership position let abusers go thinking they are following the right feeling. They are wrong. The fact some people are wrong about spiritual matters seems as irrelevant as finding there are medical doctors who appear in anti-vaccine videos. That doctors make poor judgements says nothing about medicine just as Mormons making poor judgements about spiritual manifestations says nothing about those manifestations. Humans are fallible and many people believe what they want to be true rather than paying attention to the signs of whether it is true.

[Duncan]

Leaders, members can pressure or sometimes manipulate people into doing things in the Church that they ordinarily wouldn't do. I'd rather have someone active who didn't go on a mission, get married, have kids-than someone who felt forced into those and hate the Church or are inactive because of it. Your're taught that leaders represent God so what they say is what God would say and if this leaders say you should do this it's because God wants you to do that. Then however you wake up one day and realize that leaders aren't always inspired and say what God wants them to say, you need a filter in the Church and you decide what you're going to do and if Bishop or President So and Such get bent outta shape about it than let them

[Tacenda]

4 minutes ago, Duncan said:

Leaders, members can pressure or sometimes manipulate people into doing things in the Church that they ordinarily wouldn't do. I'd rather have someone active who didn't go on a mission, get married, have kids-than someone who felt forced into those and hate the Church or are inactive because of it. Your're taught that leaders represent God so what they say is what God would say and if this leaders say you should do this it's because God wants you to do that. Then however you wake up one day and realize that leaders aren't always inspired and say what God wants them to say, you need a filter in the Church and you decide what you're going to do and if Bishop or President So and Such get bent outta shape about it than let them

Thank you, couldn't have said this better! I also think, what about someone's parents that say they feel something about their children and what they should do or don't do. What if their feelings were wrong and that child missed an opportunity. I remember an instance where a mother told her daughter not to go on a trip. This daughter was married and she and her husband were going to go with a group of us on a trip to a cabin and snowmobile. It was a church auxillary presidency that my husband was in. Can't remember what for now. It was so long ago. But maybe something could have happened. Or not. But I can see how a parent or leader can change the course of someone's life in a much bigger way.

[Duncan]

Just now, Tacenda said:

Thank you, couldn't have said this better! I also think, what about someone's parents that say they feel something about their children and what they should do or don't do. What if their feelings were wrong and that child missed an opportunity. I remember an instance where a mother told her daughter not to go on a trip. This daughter was married and she and her husband were going to go with a group of us on a trip to a cabin and snowmobile. It was a church auxillary presidency that my husband was in. Can't remember what for now. It was so long ago. But maybe something could have happened. Or not. But I can see how a parent or leader can change the course of someone's life in a much bigger way.

yeah! some parents are better than others! i've known some dictatorial parents who decide what the kid does and I was not one bit surprised at the eventual backlash. Hopefully though those kinds are few and far between!

[MiserereNobis]

On 4/18/2017 at 8:45 AM, RevTestament said:

I see one modern option is to avoid teaching by singing for the whole service....

Or you can go to a Catholic Latin High Mass where not only is everything sung/chanted, but it's in Latin, so just don't look in the missal (where the translation is) and you won't have a clue what's being said

 

[Meadowchik]

1 hour ago, pogi said:

That is an example of believing our feelings before believing our knowledge?

I don't follow.

First of all, I have never heard it taught in Mormonism that we should give precedence to our feelings over what we know to be true. 

I am assuming you are hinting at a case of molestation here. Are you suggesting that this person had knowledge that a child was molested by Bob and chose to protect Bob because they felt good about him?  You realize that is a crime, right?  Do you really think this happens in Mormonism because Mormons are taught to listen to the spirit?  It seems you are on a witch hunt. 

That could be one example but there can be many other kinds. I am serious about feelings being given priority over facts being prevalent in Mormonism. 

There is a promise given years back that any righteous man and woman can have a successful marriage. There has been counsel that parents prioritize childbearing over having secure financial situations. Those are two major church-wide-taught concepts that I can think of quickly.

[pogi]

31 minutes ago, Meadowchik said:

That could be one example but there can be many other kinds. I am serious about feelings being given priority over facts being prevalent in Mormonism. 

What would MFB say?  "There are no such things as facts, only interpretations."