Originally Posted By vbdad55 < but when I try and explain why I don't believe, it's automatically seen as an attack because it's hard not to explain without being critical of sacred texts, beliefs, and practices.M< not by most of us.....you are free to not believe and I do not see that as any kind of attack whatsoever on what i do believe in. However there are those here who tell sus what idiots we are, how foolish we are, how we can;t possibly be right etc.... THOSE are attacks. If you choose not to believe ecdc - that is your right in my book..I feel no urge to run over and try and convert you. Do I think I am right in my belief and that you are missing something - sure, because of the fact I do believe. I also believe that God oversees all people, not just those who stand up and say they believe. Most of the attacks here come from those trying desparately to prove their non belief is the one truth ( not you in this area) - while maybe, just maybe questioning if they are right or not. As for how can one religion be right and all others wrong. As told here, scripture etc. was written by humans ( and before it was written it was passed down verbally) -- so could there be some nuance errors from that - you betcha. Many religions are very close in their beliefs, one or 2 key items separating...could it be from misinterpretations - of course. I believe in the Catholic faith - is it possible that the Greek Orthodox church has it exactly right and we don't - sure it is possible. The basic core belief is the same so I would never tell any religious person they were wrong and I was right....everyone has to follow their own path. and before the comparisons to radical Islam etc. come flying out -- anything can be taken to an extreme and perverted to fit a cause - true Islam does not preach what a few radical leaders would like some to believe it does.
Originally Posted By utahjosh Well, I have lots of answers about history, doctrine, authority, organization, when where etc... But it all boils down to WHY I choose to believe what I believe. And one of the key ways I choose to believe is found in the Book or Mormon. Near the end of the book, the last Prophet who wrote therin wrote the following passage to the reader: "Now I, Moroni, write somewhat as seemeth me good... and I seal up these records... Behold, I would exhort you that...when ye shall receive these things, I would exhort you that ye would ask God, the Eternal Father, in the name of Christ, if these things are not true; and if ye shall ask with a sincere heart, with real intent, having eaith in Christ, he will manifest the truth of it unto you, by the power of the Holy Ghost. And by the power of the Holy Ghost ye may know the truth of all things." I have read the Bible (I think all of it by now), I have read the Book of Mormon, I have read the testimonies of other Prophets, and I thought it sounded pretty good. Plus, it all makes logical sense to me, as well. So I prayed and asked God to tell me if it is true, and He has "manifested the truth of it" to me, by the power of the Holy Ghost. I've felt it is true. I have felt as if God himself just burned into my soul the truth of these things. I can't explain it. I can't "Prove" it, but I can't deny what I have felt - I just know that it's true.
Originally Posted By ecdc >>You are asking great questions, jonvn. It would take some time, but I have answers for every single one of them.<< But I think the point is, utahjosh, that the answers are rarely unique or satisfactory to an outsider. Instead, like all religions, the answers are formulated by insiders to comfort themselves and to "make it all fit." Insiders don't recognize the mental gymnastics they're playing like outsiders do. I say this as someone who's been on both sides, as a true believer, return missionary Mormon, and now as an Agnostic. In other words, all religions have answers. What troubles me is the certainty so many people have. It ought to be ok, especially with religion, to say "I don't know if it's true, but I believe it's true, I hope it's true, and I'm choosing to live my life like it's true." But instead, everyone has to *know* that it's this way. Whether it's the patented Mormon answers I know I can expect whenever truth claims are challenged, or the absurd explanations for Biblical claims on apologist websites (go find out how the flood really could have happened!), it gets silly how far people will go to insist that their way is right and that they just *know* that it's this way. Belief, faith, and hope often aren't good enough, and that's a real shame. I don't think it's a coincidence that the most certain of religions are also often the most intolerant, at least in the western world. I suspect it's an attempt to cover up the deep-seated insecurity people feel when they have to insist that something is a certain way, despite having little evidence for it.
Originally Posted By utahjosh I know others will say something similar about why they belive what they believe. And they are free to do that. It doesn't conflict with what I believe. I think the Holy Ghost will always testify of Truth, even in other churches. If i'm in a protestant meeting, and somone says "Jesus died for me, and I love Him," I can feel the spirit confirm to me that it is true. But when I really get down to studying doctrines and scriptures and try my faith to the extremes, and questions my beliefs over and over again, I am confident in my faith.
Originally Posted By utahjosh I disagree with much of what you said, edcd, that in "..all religions, the answers are formulated by insiders to comfort themselves and to "make it all fit." That may be true in most cases - but if one church really IS the one directed by God, then it's not just comfort features, it's the truth. I know that's a big "if." But you choose not to accept that one might be right. But you can believe it, just as I can believe what I've said.
Originally Posted By utahjosh "the answers are rarely unique or satisfactory to an outsider." edcd, if he wants to ask, I'll answer. Nobody said anything about believing them or being satified by them. He asked, and I answered.
Originally Posted By ecdc >>If you choose not to believe ecdc - that is your right in my book..I feel no urge to run over and try and convert you. Do I think I am right in my belief and that you are missing something - sure, because of the fact I do believe. I also believe that God oversees all people, not just those who stand up and say they believe.<< I understand, vbdad. But the problem is, often times people are challenged in why they don't believe. I know when people find out my interest in religion, they ask why I'm not a believer. Ironically, it's those that *do* believe that should be challenged - they're the ones insisting something that can't be demonstrated or proven is real. But instead in our culture, it's the non-believers who are often treated as if they're deficient for their unbelief. So when asked why I don't believe, I might point out flaws in the Bible, or flaws in theology, or explain why I logically don't think religion works. That is immediately seen as an attack, because it's so difficult to simply say "I don't believe" and have it be good enough. It's certainly something I run into fairly often here in Salt Lake, in a community of Mormons. Everyone is so certain in their own faith, that they think if you tell them why you don't believe, they'll easily be able to convince you or explain it to you. What really happens is that I'll explain why the Book of Mormon can't really be a literal history and was most likely a nineteenth-century creation, and share parts of the Mormon past that illuminate why I don't believe. I rarely do this anymore, because it upsets people, and that's genuinely not my intention. They aren't expecting to have their faith challenged; quite the opposite, they think they'll be the ones convincing you. Instead, they hear something that troubles them and they typically don't respond well. It's understandable, and it's why I try and avoid the discussion when I can. I'm sure it's different in other parts of the country, but here you'd be surprised how willingly people question you about your religious beliefs, once they get to know you a bit.
Originally Posted By ecdc >>That may be true in most cases - but if one church really IS the one directed by God, then it's not just comfort features, it's the truth.<< And of course, if all religion is man-made and there is no one church directed by God, then it's just answers to comfort believers - like it is in every other faith. Part of it is just the odds and numbers What's more likely - that a church is like every other church out there and engages in the same kind of circular logic and reasoning that all other churches do, and de-emphasizes the parts of their past that do not support their divinity and emphasize the parts that do, inventing new myths along the way to prop up the faith? Or is it more likely that it really is the one church that just happens to be God's church, that it's all the others that are wrong but this one just manages to get it right? And why is it that nearly everyone who insists that their religion really is the right one just happened to be born into that same religion?
Originally Posted By Inspector 57 <<Inspector, I've already said it. I believe that the church I belong to is the only church on earth set up by God, with the authority given by God. All others do not have that. Anything else you'd like to hear?>> Yes, but not from you, utahjosh. I really appreciate your honest, level, personal comments on this thread. Thank you. You've made your position clear, and I respect that. What I'd really like to "hear" from each organized religion that professes to have a lock on heaven is a simple logical acknowledgement from them that everyone else is wrong. Instead, we get from them smarmy acceptance of "wrong" religions under some code of Organized Religion "professional courtesty." And we get that group's joint attacks on non-believers. It's the churches/synagogues/mosques, the media, and individual members of our culture who are guilty of promoting this ridiculous argument: "It's not so important WHAT you believe. It's important that you believe." Gag me. That makes absolutely no sense.
Originally Posted By jonvn "And one of the key ways I choose to believe is found in the Book or Mormon. " "I thought it sounded pretty good" So what you are telling me is that you believe simply because you read something that sounded pretty good? What caused you to read the book of Mormon in the first place? Are your parents Mormon? Can't anyone just write a book that says such things? And that it'd just be as acceptable? In fact, isn't something like The DaVinci code just as acceptable as "scripture?" Why not? "So I prayed and asked God to tell me if it is true, and He has "manifested the truth of it" to me, by the power of the Holy Ghost." What I don't understand, then, is how the Holy Ghost can tell you one thing, and tell someone else something completely different. Which person is not telling the truth? Both you and a Catholic can not both be telling me that the Holy Spirit has told them to do different things. What you are doing is telling me what you believe. Not why. Nor why your Holy Spirit is telling you something different than the Holy Spirit of a Pentecost, or that of those who are moved to speak in tongues. You tell me the Holy Spirit did this to you, they tell me the same things. How is it different? "I know others will say something similar about why they belive what they believe. And they are free to do that. It doesn't conflict with what I believe." It sounds like it directly conflicts with what you believe. If, for example, people think your church is heretical because of the ideas it promots, then I would think that's a direct conflict. For example, the Mormon concept of the trinity being three separate and distinct beings is completely different than the traditional belief that the Trinity are three facets of one being. That's a very substantial difference. "I think the Holy Ghost will always testify of Truth, even in other churches." Except it seems to be telling people contradictory things. I have had Catholics on here tell me the story of how they are convinced their church is correct because the Holy Spirit has told them so. One is wrong. And if one of you is wrong, which one, and why? If it is not the Holy Spirit telling them this, then who is it? "But when I really get down to studying doctrines and scriptures and try my faith to the extremes, and questions my beliefs over and over again, I am confident in my faith." The problem is that it doesn't make any sense. How can you be confident in your faith when other people say the exact same things yet believe something completely different? You see, it's just not reasonable to conclude that because one of your books says "trust me" that it is correct. Diet books say the same thing. That doesn't make them right, either. So, again, why would you believe any of this? Again, your parents are Mormon? If so, wouldn't you think that the real reason you believe these things is because you were taught to from an early age? Now, for Mormons, this is not always true, since the aggressively go out to convert. But I'd like to know if you, Josh, had Mormon parents. That's what makes sense to me as to why people are in a religion. They were taught it as children, and that's the end of it. "It's not so important WHAT you believe. It's important that you believe." Believe in what, though?
Originally Posted By tiggertoo I hope nobody minds me sticking my nose into this conversation for a brief moment. But here’s what I have to say. <<What I don't understand, then, is how the Holy Ghost can tell you one thing, and tell someone else something completely different. Which person is not telling the truth?>> It isn’t so much the Holy Ghost tells one person one thing and another person something else. It’s more how one interprets what s/he is being prompted to do. It’s akin to how so many religions are spawned from a single text…the Bible. Who is correct? Who knows. But this leads me to my main point. It isn’t about being right or being wrong. It’s about doing one’s best to attain the answers that will lead one closer to truth…whatever that truth may be. It’s about always keeping one’s mind open to prompting or additional information. It is actually kind of like science in this singular respect, that we must be willing to modify our convictions as we receive more information or positive promptings. Does that mean tomorrow I might wake up with an epiphany about such and such, and my whole belief structure reformed? Of course; and this has in fact happened a couple times in my life. Overall, I think you are asking the wrong types of questions, jonvn; and then expecting answers that you cannot possibly understand. In fact, nobody but the answerer can. That is because he is drawing from a base of “knowledge†that isn’t transferable from person to person. Last night I dreamt about going to Disneyland (always a favorite). How can I prove that to you? I cannot, because it is shared with no one but God. And that is Josh’s answers will never satisfy your desire to know. <<Believe in what, though?>> How about a belief that there is more out there than we can comprehend at this time? That doesn’t have to be strictly religious, metaphysical, or empirical. But if we are doing our best, to find truth, than we shouldn’t have anything to worry about. And that is one reason why I was disturbed somewhat by a comment ecdc made, “be a member of [the Mormon church] or miss out when you die.†I’ve never really got that sense. I was always taught that we must all do our best to find truth and we will be judged by how well we performed given the knowledge we attained. If that meant someone had never been exposed to the Mormon church, never considered joining, or had some doctrinal concerns or other issue that prevented them from attaining a testimony and thus converting, then that is fine. The caveat is that they must have done as well as they could with the knowledge they had, yet never ceased looking for further knowledge. A Bishop once told me that a complacent Mormon is worse off than someone who had never heard of the church yet never stopped seeking for the truth. That is exactly why the church does ordinances by proxy in the Temples as some ordinances must be performed in the flesh. Because people who had not attained the knowledge would be allowed to accept it in the afterlife if they so desired. The point is, according to my understanding of Mormon theology, people don’t have to join the church here on Earth per se to experience the blessings in the afterlife, but they have to always be working to better themselves spiritually, or conscionably.
Originally Posted By jonvn "It’s more how one interprets what s/he is being prompted to do." What is the point of that? Why have it prompt you to do anything, if the prompting is so vague you can go in diametrically opposite directions? "It isn’t about being right or being wrong." I would think that since many religious beliefs consider eternal torment as a punishment for choosing wrong, then being right or wrong is very much what it is about. Otherwise, it seems pointless to believe in any of them as opposed to another. Which would then cause me to ask why then even have them, if it doesn't matter? "I think you are asking the wrong types of questions, jonvn; and then expecting answers that you cannot possibly understand." I think I'm asking questions that make perfect sense, but if the answer to my questions is irrational then no, I won't understand it. Because it is not something that can be understood. It is an irrational and baseless belief then. If there is no reason for someone to believe something, that means it is baseless. "Last night I dreamt about going to Disneyland (always a favorite). How can I prove that to you?" You don't have to prove it to me. You are not trying to convince me of anything that I need to do, or believe in that is a truth for me as it is for you. "How about a belief that there is more out there than we can comprehend at this time?" Of course there are things we don't comprehend. For example, we don't know how gravity actually works. This does not mean you go out and invent things that have no reasoning behind them to explain them. "But if we are doing our best, to find truth" How exactly do you find out the truth in something when there is no way to determine it? "The caveat is that they must have done as well as they could with the knowledge they had" This is a mormon teaching that other churches do not ascribe to. Therefore, how can I know this is the truth of the matter? How can you? I hear what you say you believe, but not why. I don't hear any reasoning as to why I should pick up your beliefs as opposed to any others.
Originally Posted By jonvn I'm sorry if this is offensive, I am trying to not be hostile about this. I just want to hear an explanation of the mindset that goes into these thoughts. I can explain my mindset. I know why I believe the things I do, and why I don't believe the things I don't. It is very simple, and involves very little in the way of discussion. I would like to hear why from other people who believe quite differently. I don't think it is an unfair question.
Originally Posted By ecdc Tiggertoo, I certainly welcome your perspective - good comments! My only response would be that your reading is the most positive approach to the theology. Like all religions, you'll find Mormons who have a fairly progressive outlook like you outlined, but others who are dogmatic and closed. But what my point was is that despite a more tolerant and open approach, when pressed, most Mormons are going to say that everyone on earth has to accept the gospel of Jesus, which is synonymous in their minds with modern-day Mormonism. It's why Mormons practice baptism by proxy for the dead - because everyone must be baptized "the right way" in their mind. Sure, if you lived in China in 200 BC and never heard of Jesus, then in Mormon theology, you'll be taught in the afterlife about Jesus and the gospel and you *have* to accept it and your proxy baptism to go to the highest Mormon heaven. In other words, no matter how good you are on earth, you ultimately have to accept Mormonism either now or in "spirit prison" - a kind of Mormon purgatory. I know you probably know all that, I just wanted to clarify what I meant
Originally Posted By utahjosh ecdc, you are really stretching to make the LDS doctrine of heaven the same as all others. It's NOT the same. 3 kingdoms of GLORY...not one heaven and one hell. We believe in a God that will give everyone an equal chance, that loves each child endlessly, that is not out to punish. Yes, ultimately we do say that in order to reach the highest degree of heaven, you must follow Christ in the way we believe, but it doesn not mean Hell, misery, or condemnation.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan You have family members who say they love you. You take them at their word, and you see evidence of that love in how they treat you. But part of the deal is that to love and be love requires some faith and trust that the other person is telling the truth and means it when they say they love you. You can't be with a person 24/7 so during those times you are apart, you have faith that they will still love you and act accordingly. In a religious context, that same concept applies. Christians believe that Jesus Christ came to earth and made that promise. They accept his sacrifice as proof of His love. The faith that it requires on the Christian's part is that they must put their trust in someone who is not here to profess his love in the same way as someone who is mortal would. This seems a bizarre concept to someone who isn't inclined to take such things on faith alone. That's why I don't know that anyone can really answer the question in a way that will satisfy you, jonvn. Most religions require placing trust in a higher power that may or may not exist. Not everyone can go for that. But millions of others have been able to. Many others are somewhere in between not believing at all and wanting to believe but skeptical. Why do you love your child? Is it purely biological? Do you see things in your child that perhaps others might not? Why do you love your child more than some random child on the street? Why do have the urge to protect your own child so strongly? It goes beyond biological "duty". Love is a very difficult concept to explain to someone who hasn't experienced it. Likewise, a religious calling is just as mysterious and complex. From the outside looking in, we might look at two people in love and come up with all sorts of reasons "why" they are together -- "They don't REALLY love each other, he was desperate and so was she and they settled." and so forth. But we don't know for sure what these two expereince internally, if it is really love or a type of love we ourselves don't experience or even want. Similarly, from the outside looking in , religious people can be seen as inventing something just to make them feel better. But there's no way to know what is in that person's heart, what they have experienced.
Originally Posted By ecdc Jonvn, I think your questions ultimately have no answers. Those questions are a big part of why I no longer believe. I looked for answers for a long time and never found them because they aren't out there. In my observation, there's two kinds of religious people in regards to the questions you ask. The first makes peace with the lack of answers and chooses to believe anyway. The second formulates the kind of answers I've been referring to, that help convince the faithful of the correctness of their beliefs but that are rather transparent and unsatisfying to outsiders. I suppose there's also a third group that simply never even ponders the dilemmas that seem so natural to you or I - why is my religion right and others wrong, why is mine any different than Greek or Egyptian mythology, why is it that the religion of my parents is so conveniently the right one, etc., etc.
Originally Posted By ecdc Josh, I've never said Mormons believe in a heaven and a hell. In fact I've been quite clear of what the case really is. But Mormons do believe in a three-tiered heaven and of necessity, the highest is better than the lowest. And to be a part of the highest, you've got to become Mormon, either now or in the afterlife.
Originally Posted By utahjosh You have been pretty clear and correct about the doctrine, ecdc. What I took expection with was your conclusion that the LDS doctrine of heaven/rewards/etc was just about the same as most religions.
Originally Posted By utahjosh And Kar2oonMan, I totally agree with your post #96. That is just what I was thinking about the other day. You can't "prove" that someone loves you. Love is a feeling.
