Hate the sin, love the sinner--why the disdain for the saying?

[mfbukowski]

7 minutes ago, Calm said:

I admit I have a problem with it because I have never encountered a person who labeled themselves as a fundamentalist, but rather they called themselves evangelicals…but according to you given their beliefs or actions that is not an accurate label. I am used to allowing people to label themselves according to how they want rather than my judgment, so it feels awkward not to on this case. 

Yes yes yes, exactly!!!!!

[kimpearson]

16 hours ago, mfbukowski said:

I agree with you, Navidad is a Mennonite, and apparently thinks differently.

For us, God communicates with us through feelings. For us faith is a HOPE at first of things unseen

Faith is a principle of action

As we act on faith, we feel that testimony feeling again and again, and our faith because certainty 

For other Christians, they believe only in revelation through existing revelation, because they do not have an open canon, their idea of personal revelation is different than ours

We believe our certainty comes directly from God, personally

At least this is my understanding that other Christians believe that revelation only comes from reading scripture and that Feelings are uncertain and not worth trusting 

Where in LDS doctrine, scriptures and prophetic teaching are we taught that faith can become certainty?   The only way I know of by our doctrine is the personal appearance of Jesus Christ such as the brother of Jared.

[James 1 5]

15 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

Yep

Faith is ACTING on a belief, and why would one act without certainty that it was a good cause?

Even acting on say, global warming indicates certainty that it is "real"

We agree on this, and I like it when this happens. 

One of the acts of faith is to simply ACCEPT an idea, as I often do when I have faith from God to help me feel certain that God wants me to accept the idea.  And usually the acceptance of an idea leads to another act after that, and often again and again..

Like how accepting the idea that God inspired Joseph Smith to restore the church of Jesus Christ led me to want to join the Lord's church, and then get baptized, and then receive the gift of the Holy Ghost, and ordination to an office of the priesthood, etc...

[Navidad]

19 minutes ago, James 1 5 said:

If you felt certain about any of your beliefs then I think you would feel as if you were on the right track, that you had a good idea, and if you were also certain that your sense of certainty was given to you by God, rather than your own ego, then you would likely say that certainty was what is also referred to as faith and feel certain that your faith was given to you by God..

There is a huge gap between you and me on this issue. You see certainty as a virtue, something God-given. I see certainty as a form or egoism and self-contentment bordering on a sin. Let me share this quote from Peter Enns with you:

"Preoccupation with correct thinking. That’s the deeper problem. It reduces the life of faith to sentry duty, a 24/7 task of pacing the ramparts and scanning the horizon to fend off incorrect thinking, in ourselves and others, too engrossed to come inside the halls and enjoy the banquet. A faith like that is stressful and tedious to maintain. Moving toward different ways of thinking, even just trying it on for a while to see how it fits, is perceived as a compromise to faith, or as giving up on faith altogether. But nothing could be further from the truth. Aligning faith in God and certainty about what we believe and needing to be right in order to maintain a healthy faith—these do not make for a healthy faith in God. In a nutshell, that is the problem. And that is what I mean by the “sin of certainty.”

The quote comes from "The Sin of Certainty" by Peter Enns. HarperOne, 2016. I highly recommend it!
 

[James 1 5]

3 minutes ago, Navidad said:

There is a huge gap between you and me on this issue. You see certainty as a virtue, something God-given. I see certainty as a form or egoism and self-contentment bordering on a sin. Let me share this quote from Peter Enns with you:

"Preoccupation with correct thinking. That’s the deeper problem. It reduces the life of faith to sentry duty, a 24/7 task of pacing the ramparts and scanning the horizon to fend off incorrect thinking, in ourselves and others, too engrossed to come inside the halls and enjoy the banquet. A faith like that is stressful and tedious to maintain. Moving toward different ways of thinking, even just trying it on for a while to see how it fits, is perceived as a compromise to faith, or as giving up on faith altogether. But nothing could be further from the truth. Aligning faith in God and certainty about what we believe and needing to be right in order to maintain a healthy faith—these do not make for a healthy faith in God. In a nutshell, that is the problem. And that is what I mean by the “sin of certainty.”

The quote comes from "The Sin of Certainty" by Peter Enns. HarperOne, 2016. I highly recommend it!
 

It's a complex issue, and I think the tricky part is knowing or feeling certain that God is helping us (you, me, each of us individually) rather than each of us relying on our own understanding.  We need to know when and if God is helping us. 

"Trust in the Lord with all thine heart; and lean not unto thine own understanding. In all thy ways acknowledge him, and he shall direct thy paths" - Proverbs 3:5-6

Best wishes.  

[kimpearson]

35 minutes ago, James 1 5 said:

That is your opinion, kim, and you are entitled to it even though I believe it is wrong.  We can know things are true even if we have never seen them with our natural 5 senses.  I know atoms exist even though I have never seen one with my natural eyes.  And knowledge is not limited to only one definition of the word.  Many people often use the word knowledge to refer to what they are aware of and accept as truth.  Like how I know my wife doesn't like seafood.  You know what I mean?.

 

Have you ever read D&C 1?  How do you think most other churches feel about what Jesus said there?

Actually there is a ton of proof that atoms exist and you have been taught some of that so not a good example.  Please explain how you have certainty in your beliefs.  Strong feelings, yes.  A feeling of sureness in your heart, yes.  A feeling of it just makes sense to you, yes.  Members had that same certainty about polygamy, blacks and the priesthood, the necessity to gather to Zion, the american Indians were Lamanites and temple garments had to go to your ankles and wrists.  Brigham Young was certain of the Adam/god theory.  Bruce R McConkie was certain the Catholic church was the whore of the earth.

D&C 1 condemns no churches just individuals.

Edited January 26, 2022 by kimpearson

[mfbukowski]

18 minutes ago, James 1 5 said:

We agree on this, and I like it when this happens. 

One of the acts of faith is to simply ACCEPT an idea, as I often do when I have faith from God to help me feel certain that God wants me to accept the idea.  And usually the acceptance of an idea leads to another act after that, and often again and again..

Like how accepting the idea that God inspired Joseph Smith to restore the church of Jesus Christ led me to want to join the Lord's church, and then get baptized, and then receive the gift of the Holy Ghost, and ordination to an office of the priesthood, etc...

Yep! It's the stone rolling downhill...!

[mfbukowski]

21 minutes ago, Navidad said:

There is a huge gap between you and me on this issue. You see certainty as a virtue, something God-given. I see certainty as a form or egoism and self-contentment bordering on a sin. Let me share this quote from Peter Enns with you:

"Preoccupation with correct thinking. That’s the deeper problem. It reduces the life of faith to sentry duty, a 24/7 task of pacing the ramparts and scanning the horizon to fend off incorrect thinking, in ourselves and others, too engrossed to come inside the halls and enjoy the banquet. A faith like that is stressful and tedious to maintain. Moving toward different ways of thinking, even just trying it on for a while to see how it fits, is perceived as a compromise to faith, or as giving up on faith altogether. But nothing could be further from the truth. Aligning faith in God and certainty about what we believe and needing to be right in order to maintain a healthy faith—these do not make for a healthy faith in God. In a nutshell, that is the problem. And that is what I mean by the “sin of certainty.”

The quote comes from "The Sin of Certainty" by Peter Enns. HarperOne, 2016. I highly recommend it!
 

Commitment to a cause does not entail blind acceptance.

It cannot be a sin to be devoted to God's cause when God himself confirms it.

One issue is being on the right boat and the other is making sure the boat is still on the right course, so we must check in with God on a daily basis.

But whatever the answer, then full speed ahead!!

I think the problem is doubt with what God confirms

I am the most skeptical of God's children, but in tribute to Meatloaf," I can't do that"!!

Joseph knew, and I can and do know too, and God knows I know.

Nothing else is a live option 

Edited January 26, 2022 by mfbukowski

[James 1 5]

2 minutes ago, kimpearson said:

Actually there is a ton of proof that atoms exist and you have been taught some of that so not a good example.  Please explain how you have certainty in your beliefs.  Strong feelings, yes.  A feeling of sureness in your heart, yes.  A feeling of it just makes sense to you, yes.  Members had that same certainty about polygamy, blacks and the priesthood, the necessity to gather to Zion, the american Indians were Lamanites and temple garments had to go to your ankles and wrists.  Brigham Young was certain of the Adam/god theory.  Bruce R McConkie was certain the Catholic church was the whore of the earth.

Are you proposing that we try to make sure that we are never certain about anything?  Except maybe only what we can sense with our 5 natural senses?  Yes I have been taught some things about atoms, and about many other things, but still there are a lot of things that I have never seen with my natural eyes, including atoms, and I still feel certain that those things exist.  So what are you proposing as the means we can use to correctly know about things that really exist?  And remember, I have never seen an atom with my natural eyes, even though I have heard from a lot of people about what atoms are and how they can be used, says those who have told me.

[Navidad]

23 minutes ago, Calm said:

I admit I have a problem with it because I have never encountered a person who labeled themselves as a fundamentalist, but rather they called themselves evangelicals…but according to you given their beliefs or actions that is not an accurate label. I am used to allowing people to label themselves according to how they want rather than my judgment, so it feels awkward not to on this case. 

Fair enough. Let me allow a Fundamentalist website to speak for itself. Take a look at:  https://www.ifca.org/page/what-we-believe

It is a large (probably the largest) group of Fundamentalists who have allied together since the 1940s and 1950s. Please read their lengthy and detailed "What we Believe" section. Please take note of their comments about Evangelicals, Evangelicalism, etc. towards the end of their belief statement. If you are going to join their group - the largest group of Fundamentalists in the country, it is both "requisite" and "essential" that you subscribe, not to the Scripture, but to their exact and explicit interpretation of the Scripture as outlined in this document. If you can't agree with all of their statements, you can't join.

As a contrast and in honor of Mark and his SOCAL roots I randomly picked the website from an historically Evangelical College therein - Westmont College. I offer you the "about" page from their website: https://www.westmont.edu/about  

Under the Spiritual Life section - they identify as being in the "Worldwide Protestant Evangelical" tradition. Please note their statement of faith or rather its lack of existence.

Another SOCAL university in the Evangelical tradition, this time with a Wesleyan Holiness history I offer you Azusa Pacific University. It clearly identifies as Evangelical on this page: https://www.apu.edu/about/believe/ 
From that page you can link to a number of pages that state their mission, faith, including a Evangelical Commitment statement. This is the most important page for our purposes.  Is there no difference in wording and tone between the IFCA International page and these two Evangelical pages? If you live somewhere else in the country, I would be happy to direct you to a local Evangelical institution's page. If you would like to see some more Fundamentalist group pages, I can provide those as well. Thanks everyone and take care.

[Navidad]

1 hour ago, mfbukowski said:

Yes I see that one group is " better" than another, and that for me LDS is the best.

But doesn't that contradict your view that no Christian groups are superior to another?

Why are you Evangelical rather than Fundamentalist? Is one better than the other or not?

Of course your views are "superior" imo to critics, but you maintain that all Christians are equal?

I will never understand you on this I think 

I see Christian groups as being different from each other. I am not comfortable with saying one is "better" than the other, especially in the eyes of God. I have my own personal preferences. I wouldn't say my preferences are better than anyone else's. I would suggest they are different. I just posted websites of various institutions for you all to see. I prefer those of the Evangelical institutions and I think they stand out in contrast to those of the IFCA. Given my preference I would join the former and not the latter. 

I am an Evangelical in my beliefs. That is why I am an Evangelical. I am not a Fundamentalist in my beliefs. That is why I am not a Fundamentalist. What you are asking is like asking me why I am not Lutheran. Because I am not Lutheran in my beliefs. My beliefs however, are no better than those of the Lutheran. They are different from, not better than. Why am I not a member of the LDS church after four+ years of attendance? No other reason other than I do not have the beliefs necessary to be baptized in the LDS church, nor to receive a temple recommend. That is why I don't join. The correct beliefs to join are not mine. That is it in a nutshell.

I do maintain that all Christians are equal before God in their Christianity. He knows lots of things we don't. I do not think He judges us on trying to figure out as best as we can those things that He has not revealed to us. I can't describe what it is like behind the veil of death. I could however do my best to write a poem about it. It might be a beautiful poem, but it might be completely wrong. I honor your trying to understand me. I just don't see things in terms of certainty, being better, or onlyism.

[Navidad]

50 minutes ago, James 1 5 said:

It's a complex issue, and I think the tricky part is knowing or feeling certain that God is helping us (you, me, each of us individually) rather than each of us relying on our own understanding.  We need to know when and if God is helping us. 

"Trust in the Lord with all thine heart; and lean not unto thine own understanding. In all thy ways acknowledge him, and he shall direct thy paths" - Proverbs 3:5-6

Best wishes.  

I am a huge fan of Prov 3: 5-6 because it is all about trust - not certainty. When we lean on our own understanding of things, we become certain. When we acknowledge him, we acknowledge He is in control and He will direct us. We trust and faith that. Amen!

[James 1 5]

1 minute ago, Navidad said:

I am a huge fan of Prov 3: 5-6 because it is all about trust - not certainty. When we lean on our own understanding of things, we become certain. When we acknowledge him, we acknowledge He is in control and He will direct us. We trust and faith that. Amen!

Do you ever feel certain that God is leading you as you trust in him with all your heart while you do not lean on your own understanding?  I do. If you don't I would wonder why not.

[The Nehor]

4 minutes ago, Navidad said:

I am a huge fan of Prov 3: 5-6 because it is all about trust - not certainty. When we lean on our own understanding of things, we become certain. When we acknowledge him, we acknowledge He is in control and He will direct us. We trust and faith that. Amen!

Odd. I dislike that passage for exactly the same reasons.

[JLHPROF]

2 hours ago, kimpearson said:

The logic that members of the Church use to say we are not putting anyone down and the arrogance that we have stating our exclusiveness as if it is a fact rather than a belief.  Every time someone says "I know the Church is true" they are not stating a fact.  They don't know unless God Himself appeared to them and told them this.  They are stating a feeling of strong belief based on personal experiences that can't be proven.  We need to acknowledge that it is our belief not knowledge.

If you don't accept personal revelation from God as proof of fact or knowledge then I would agree with you.
Of course if that's the case I wouldn't expect God to condescend to reveal anything to you in the future.  Seems a bit ungrateful, considering it as unfactual.

Quote

Please cite where Christ offended a religion.  Religious leaders because of their wickedness in not following their own religion yes.   Righteous religious leaders were never offended.   Did he offend the religion of the Samaritans, no.  The Romans, no.  The Greeks, no.  Jesus never even testified of a religious organization being true.  Jesus was a jew and was a member of that religion until His death.  Jesus's testimony was of God the Father, Himself and the Holy Ghost and He authorized certain individuals to act in His name.  I am solely speaking of New Testament times.  In the Book of Mormon during Christ's appearance, all other religions had ceased to exist so He organized His Church but still never offended any other religions.

Christ blanket insulted Jews and Pharisees repeatedly throughout the New Testament.  In some cases it was due to wickedness or hypocrisy.  But not every time.
He insulted their beliefs in the law of Moses.  He insulted their belief in the Abrahamic covenant.  He insulted their disbelief in him.

You could argue that these were due to their unworthiness.  But either way, he made their beliefs out to be invalid.
Serpents, broods of vipers, blind men, full of extortion and rapacity, thieves, dogs, etc.
Do you believe that EVERY Jew and Pharisee in Christ's day merited these insults for their beliefs?  Was every one of them disingenuous and hypocritical?

Matthew 16:11 How is it that ye do not understand that I spake it not to you concerning bread, that ye should beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees?
12Then understood they how that he bade them not beware of the leaven of bread, but of the doctrine of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees.

He's literally warning the Apostles to beware of the doctrinal beliefs of the Pharisees and Sadducees.  Not their wickedness, but their religion.

2 hours ago, kimpearson said:

Do you not understand your own church doctrine?  Why would we ever look down on or judge another religion as being less than when your own doctrine teaches that every true believer in Jesus Christ will receive all the ordinances necessary for exaltation.  We also believe that everyone that truely had no idea who Jesus Christ was will also have that same blessing if their heart would have accepted Jesus if given the full opportunity in this life.  The temple takes care of ordinances for everyone.  You have no right under your own religion to infer that someone who wasn't baptized with the proper authorization or didn't enter into eternal marriage in this life will not receive all the heavenly blessings.  Last I checked we were doing temple work for everyone with no exception.

I understand just fine.  Of course I believe that those of other Christian faiths will receive every opportunity to accept and receive the gospel and ordinances.  Where have I ever implied otherwise?

Quote

In my opinion, the best we members of the LDS Church can say is that we have access to priesthood authority in this life that everyone else will have at a later date.  Navidad is completely right that he can stand confidently before Jesus Christ and receive all of Christ's blessings without formally joining the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints if his heart and life are aligned with Jesus Christ.   

True.  And then when that happens he will receive baptism and confirmation into the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints.
I don't think he'd appreciate the distinction you are making.

Edited January 26, 2022 by JLHPROF

[california boy]

3 hours ago, mfbukowski said:

The benefits as I see them is promoting a POV with which you agree, and learning from others with similar inclinations

And an organization can get more done to spread a POV than just a bunch of believers hanging out congratulating themselves on how right the are.  Example: LDS missionaries 

For that matter, why have Gay Pride etc organizations? Promoting common beliefs, offering comfort in a tough world

Very similar rationale as I see it.

You get more done with organizations, that's why they are formed!

I didn't mean to imply that organizations are not useful.  I was more pointing out that less people feel the need to be a part of such organizations.  Organized religion does not have a lock on having a relationship with God.  Many people seem to be choosing to have a more direct relationship and find little value in the organizations.   Some, of course, still like to be a part of a bigger organization.  But it is the group that is leaving organized religion that is significantly out pacing those that wish to stay.

[Olmec Donald]

1 hour ago, mfbukowski said:

Commitment to a cause does not entail blind acceptance.

It cannot be a sin to be devoted to God's cause when God himself confirms it.

One issue is being on the right boat and the other is making sure the boat is still on the right course, so we must check in with God on a daily basis.

But whatever the answer, then full speed ahead!!

I think the problem is doubt with what God confirms

I am the most skeptical of God's children, but in tribute to Meatloaf," I can't do that"!!

Joseph knew, and I can and do know too, and God knows I know.

Nothing else is a live option 

Upvote for the Meatloaf reference.

The boat thing is good too.  

[Navidad]

1 hour ago, James 1 5 said:

Do you ever feel certain that God is leading you as you trust in him with all your heart while you do not lean on your own understanding?  I do. If you don't I would wonder why not.

I think I should re-emphasize that I don't value certainty nor certain feelings. When I seek God' leading I do so with humility, trust, lack of confidence in myself to adequately hear and understand a sovereign God. I know my own human ability to project, to twist things to my favor or advantage or preconceived preference. You obviously have much more confidence in your own ability to "rightly divide the word of truth" than I have in mine. I grew up in a world of certainty in non-LDS fundamentalism. Since then much has changed, and things thought certain to happen did not. If you are over 70 and grew up in Mormonism, you can say the exact same thing. I have confidence in God; I lack certainty in my ability to rightly discern Him, his counsel and leading through the Holy Spirit. That gives me a certain degree of uncertainty (got that?). I don't always understand what my wife of 52 years is trying to say to me. I don't always understand what I am thinking and feeling. I certainly (ha!) don't feel certain about what the Holy Spirit is telling me. I sail forth in the direction I think He is guiding me, but am at my best when I do so in fear and trepidation that I may be wrong. I find peace and comfort in that - I don't have to lean on my own understanding. I trust I am rightly dividing God's direction, but never with abject certainty - not with my wife, self, or God!

[Olmec Donald]

1 hour ago, Navidad said:

I certainly (ha!) don't feel certain about what the Holy Spirit is telling me. I sail forth in the direction I think He is guiding me, but am at my best when I do so in fear and trepidation that I may be wrong. I find peace and comfort in that - I don't have to lean on my own understanding. I trust I am rightly dividing God's direction, but never with abject certainty - not with my wife, self, or God!

I don't think there's anything wrong with uncertainty, doing our best even if it's not perfect, and making course-corrections along the way.

I think @rodheadleeis a sailor.  Does he lock the tiller in place according to the compass and then go below and take a nap?  No, he keeps a hand on the tiller and an eye on the compass and makes as many course-corrections as he needs to.  

Edited January 27, 2022 by Olmec Donald

[James 1 5]

25 minutes ago, Navidad said:

I think I should re-emphasize that I don't value certainty nor certain feelings. When I seek God' leading I do so with humility, trust, lack of confidence in myself to adequately hear and understand a sovereign God. I know my own human ability to project, to twist things to my favor or advantage or preconceived preference. You obviously have much more confidence in your own ability to "rightly divide the word of truth" than I have in mine. I grew up in a world of certainty in non-LDS fundamentalism. Since then much has changed, and things thought certain to happen did not. If you are over 70 and grew up in Mormonism, you can say the exact same thing. I have confidence in God; I lack certainty in my ability to rightly discern Him, his counsel and leading through the Holy Spirit. That gives me a certain degree of uncertainty (got that?). I don't always understand what my wife of 52 years is trying to say to me. I don't always understand what I am thinking and feeling. I certainly (ha!) don't feel certain about what the Holy Spirit is telling me. I sail forth in the direction I think He is guiding me, but am at my best when I do so in fear and trepidation that I may be wrong. I find peace and comfort in that - I don't have to lean on my own understanding. I trust I am rightly dividing God's direction, but never with abject certainty - not with my wife, self, or God!

You are NEVER certain with your wife, or with God?  And never have been?  Somehow I doubt that is true. 

I agree with needing to be humble, and careful, and I know mistakes can occur, but there are some things I am absolutely certain about which God, and my wife, have taught me.  Surely you can think of some things you are certain about too.

For me it isn't all or nothing.  I learn line upon line, precept upon precept.

[kimpearson]

3 hours ago, James 1 5 said:

Are you proposing that we try to make sure that we are never certain about anything?  Except maybe only what we can sense with our 5 natural senses?  Yes I have been taught some things about atoms, and about many other things, but still there are a lot of things that I have never seen with my natural eyes, including atoms, and I still feel certain that those things exist.  So what are you proposing as the means we can use to correctly know about things that really exist?  And remember, I have never seen an atom with my natural eyes, even though I have heard from a lot of people about what atoms are and how they can be used, says those who have told me.

 

2 hours ago, JLHPROF said:

If you don't accept personal revelation from God as proof of fact or knowledge then I would agree with you.
Of course if that's the case I wouldn't expect God to condescend to reveal anything to you in the future.  Seems a bit ungrateful, considering it as unfactual.

Please read Alma 32 and verse 21 and verses 33 to 43 in particular.  My take on this lesson about faith. 

Verse 21 defines faith:   And now as I said concerning faith—faith is not to have a perfect knowledge of things; therefore if ye have faith ye hope for things which are not seen, which are true.

You plant the seeds and have faith it will grow.  The seed grows and brings forth good fruit.  You can be certain that the fruit you planted brought forth a good feeling.  That is the only certainty you can feel. 

Alma then gives a warning in verse 36: Behold I say unto you, Nay; neither must ye lay aside your faith, for ye have only exercised your faith to plant the seed that ye might try the experiment to know if the seed was good.

Now you must walk forward in faith until you partake of the tree of life and then your faith will turn to certainty.  Partaking of the tree of life is to receive eternal life. It can happen in this life with a personal visit from the second comforter and have your calling and election made sure.  Now if you two have had your calling and election made sure by the second comforter then you can proclaim certainty.  Otherwise all your claims are based on faith which is not a perfect knowledge or certainty.

Remember this warning from Moroni 10: 

20 Wherefore, there must be faith; and if there must be faith there must also be hope; and if there must be hope there must also be charity.

21 And except ye have charity ye can in nowise be saved in the kingdom of God; neither can ye be saved in the kingdom of God if ye have not faith; neither can ye if ye have no hope.

Faith, hope, charity.  You both are expressing your faith and hope.  I have no idea if you have charity.  Certainty is not a gift of the Holy Ghost named in any of the scriptures I know of.

In my experience feelings of certainty breeds pride, a feeling of being more righteous than others, a feeling superiority, a dismissive attitude towards the beliefs of other and most dangerous, rigid thinking that cannot withstand a blow to some part of that supposed certainty.  I have met far to many inactive and former members who were certain of their beliefs until they discovered one of their beliefs was wrong.  Then the whole structure crumbled.

I have felt God's revelation in my life.  I am certain of that experience.  Most of my questions to God have gone unanswered, I am certain of that.  I am certain there is so much about God's plan I will never understand in this life.  I will never tell anyone I am certain they are wrong but I will tell them I think they are wrong.  Since I am not perfect, please just take my thoughts and comments as my opinion.

[James 1 5]

58 minutes ago, kimpearson said:

 

Please read Alma 32 and verse 21 and verses 33 to 43 in particular.  My take on this lesson about faith. 

Verse 21 defines faith:   And now as I said concerning faith—faith is not to have a perfect knowledge of things; therefore if ye have faith ye hope for things which are not seen, which are true.

You plant the seeds and have faith it will grow.  The seed grows and brings forth good fruit.  You can be certain that the fruit you planted brought forth a good feeling.  That is the only certainty you can feel. 

Alma then gives a warning in verse 36: Behold I say unto you, Nay; neither must ye lay aside your faith, for ye have only exercised your faith to plant the seed that ye might try the experiment to know if the seed was good.

Now you must walk forward in faith until you partake of the tree of life and then your faith will turn to certainty.  Partaking of the tree of life is to receive eternal life. It can happen in this life with a personal visit from the second comforter and have your calling and election made sure.  Now if you two have had your calling and election made sure by the second comforter then you can proclaim certainty.  Otherwise all your claims are based on faith which is not a perfect knowledge or certainty.

Remember this warning from Moroni 10: 

20 Wherefore, there must be faith; and if there must be faith there must also be hope; and if there must be hope there must also be charity.

21 And except ye have charity ye can in nowise be saved in the kingdom of God; neither can ye be saved in the kingdom of God if ye have not faith; neither can ye if ye have no hope.

Faith, hope, charity.  You both are expressing your faith and hope.  I have no idea if you have charity.  Certainty is not a gift of the Holy Ghost named in any of the scriptures I know of.

In my experience feelings of certainty breeds pride, a feeling of being more righteous than others, a feeling superiority, a dismissive attitude towards the beliefs of other and most dangerous, rigid thinking that cannot withstand a blow to some part of that supposed certainty.  I have met far to many inactive and former members who were certain of their beliefs until they discovered one of their beliefs was wrong.  Then the whole structure crumbled.

I have felt God's revelation in my life.  I am certain of that experience.  Most of my questions to God have gone unanswered, I am certain of that.  I am certain there is so much about God's plan I will never understand in this life.  I will never tell anyone I am certain they are wrong but I will tell them I think they are wrong.  Since I am not perfect, please just take my thoughts and comments as my opinion.

I think we all take someone's thoughts and comments as their own opinion until we feel certain that God has inspired someone to think and say what they have said.  And your opinion could be as good on this issue as God's opinion, if we can correctly call what he thinks and says and knows as his opinion.

And you made my point for me or agreed with my point when you said you are certain you have felt God's revelation in your life.  I have been saying the same thing.  I am certain God has revealed his thoughts to me in my own life.  Of course we could both be lying.  Or only one of us could be. And I am only certain about some things, not everything.  There are many many issues I am still pondering and as yet am not certain about what I should think regarding those issues. I think we are all on this mission of discovery.  Eventually we will supposedly know everything about everything or we will no longer be interested in learning more than we know at a particular point.  

Edited January 27, 2022 by James 1 5

[Hamba Tuhan]

The invitation to act on faith and, thereby, to arrive at sure knowledge is one of the sweetest of God's gifts. In my opinion, a desire to deny disciples such certainty is borderline diabolical.

Edited January 27, 2022 by Hamba Tuhan

[James 1 5]

45 minutes ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

The invitation to act on faith and, thereby, to arrive at sure knowledge is one of the sweetest of God's gifts. In my opinion, a desire to deny disciples such certainty is borderline diabolical.

Here here.  I think Satan would be in favor of all of us not being certain about anything, especially about anything pertaining to the gospel.  Or good and evil, if we are not certain we can tell the difference.

[Olmec Donald]

17 hours ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

The invitation to act on faith and, thereby, to arrive at sure knowledge is one of the sweetest of God's gifts. In my opinion, a desire to deny disciples such certainty is borderline diabolical.

16 hours ago, James 1 5 said:

I think Satan would be in favor of all of us not being certain about anything, especially about anything pertaining to the gospel.  Or good and evil, if we are not certain we can tell the difference.

I'm not saying sure knowledge doesn't happen, but imo it's probably not a good idea to carve things you "know" into stone, such that they become creeds - that is, fixed and immutable formal beliefs.  Creeds are the thing that Joseph was told were an abomination.  Creeds set limits beyond which God is not allowed to act or institute changes.  An example would be the creed that revelation ceased with the completion of the last book in the New Testament.  It was probably well-meaning and intended to elevate the New Testament writings to a place of honor, and was a logical explanation for what had actually happened, but it also effectively banned new revelation for many centuries.  Imo as long as God "has yet to reveal many great and important things pertaining to the Kingdom of God", it's probably a good idea to make sure today's certainty doesn't become tomorrow's creed.  

Note also that Joseph Smith never established a creed, though if anyone was ever in a position to do so, he certainly was.  When he wrote down thirteen statements of the fundamental doctrines of the Church, he wrote them as twelve "we believe" statements and one "we claim" statement, rather than as thirteen statements of certitude.

Joseph Smith said that "One of the grand fundamental principles of Mormonism is to receive truth, let it come from whence it may."  Imo THAT paradigm was one of his great innovations, and it's pretty much the opposite of creedalism.  

 

Edited January 27, 2022 by Olmec Donald