Asking God to know the truth

[BennyLava]

Hello :), I've heard from members of LDS that to know that one's beliefs are true, or to determine the right path (religiously speaking) to follow, and should "ask God" in their mind and they will receive an answer. To put it short - one knows that Mormonism is true because of personal contact (or personal revelation) with God. However, I would like to discuss whether this is indeed a proper way of knowing which religion is true.

Here are my points and conclusions:

1) there are people in other religions/denominations that are convinced they have spoken with God and thus received a confirmation of their beliefs

2) these claims can't all be true at once (God wouldn't give contradictory information to different people)

therefore

3) personal revelation is not a valid way to determine truth, as I can be convinced of having been spoken to by God and still be wrong

What do you think?

[BenRaines]

If you don't believe that the scriptures give us a way to know truth as you have mentioned through personal revelation how would you go about finding truth?

I think it is James 1:5 in the scriptures that give us our guidance in how to know faith based truths.

Ben Raines

[Palerider]

ask and ye shall recieve...knock and it shall be open....

[BennyLava]

The passages that you have quoted only state the problem that I'm arguing against: personal revelation can't be a valid way of discerning truth, since almost every religion advises to seek personal communication and each of them has believing "personal communicators" and that would mean every religion is true - an impossibility.

Perhaps I should have mentioned that I'm a non-believer - I wish to learn and discuss the faith-based viewpoint.

If you don't believe that the scriptures give us a way to know truth as you have mentioned through personal revelation how would you go about finding truth?

I think it is James 1:5 in the scriptures that give us our guidance in how to know faith based truths.

Ben Raines

Does that mean that belief in scripture is primary to belief in personal revelation? Meaning that I can't hope to just receive an answer from God if I don't already believe in scripture?

That would pose another problem: why should I start believing in this holy book and not any other (Quran, Sutras, Vedas, you name it...)?

And please note that if you proceed now to give me reasons to believe in your particular scripture - such as that the Bible contains prophesies that came true - then this will mean that reason-based arguments have priority over belief in scripture which has priority over personal revelation. At least in my opinion :)

[Wingnut]

I won't engage in the latest question, but one thing that comes to mind about the first question. Something that is not "feeling" or revelation based would be what the Savior recommends in John 7:16-17.

Jesus answered them, and said, My doctrine is not mine, but his that sent me. If any man will do his will, he shall know of the doctrine, whether it be of God, or whether I speak of myself.

[BennyLava]

I won't engage in the latest question, but one thing that comes to mind about the first question. Something that is not "feeling" or revelation based would be what the Savior recommends in John 7:16-17.

So as far as I understand: if I do what the Bible advocates, I will then see that such teachings must have come from God because of their moral value.

There are of course, some good teachings in the Bible that I agree with - the golden rule, be generous, do not be a hypocrite, etc. However, these teachings are not in any way limited to the Bible, nor is the Bible the first religious source to advocate them. This way, we again encouter the problem of multiple claimed revelations in the world: how do we know which one is true, if all of them contain morally sound advice?

You might say that the Bible contains only moral advice, as opposed to other sources containing also obviously immoral advice. However, there are many teachings in it that I don't agree with (and don't "feel" right about advocating them): I don't agree that no marriage can be cancelled (regardless of what trauma the marriage turned out to be), I don't think that everyone should sell all their possessions and give to the poor, since that would just make everyone poor and unable to actually alleviate poverty, I don't agree that I should abandon my care for family and friends just because they are of different religion/viewpoint than me (Luke 9:60), I don't believe that homosexuals deserve hell because they were born with sexual inclinations towards their own gender (if even if it wasn't inborn - so what?), etc., etc.

Moreover, moral teachings such as the golden rule can be arrived at by reason alone: of course it is good to treat other people as you would like to be treated - it enables mutual respect, dissemination of thoughts, and most of all - a stable, non-anarchistic, and therefore happy and prosperous society.

[Guest]

Benny, the answer to the dilemma is quite simple -

Pray earnestly - with an open heart and a seeking mind - pray for what God wants you to see - not what you want to see. Remebering always that "Let Thy Will Be Done" is the main part of it.

If after such earnest prayer, one finds an answer and it led him to become a Muslim, then there is a purpose to it. If becoming Muslim led him to join an extremist group to strap a bomb to his body, then the fruit of his communication with God is contrary to what God would have him do - one would have to question whether he messed up along the way. But, it is not for us to judge these things. On the contrary, if his becoming Muslim led him to a life of Christ-like charity and love, then that may be the reason why he was led there. But still, it is not for us to judge these things.

As LDS, we claim the privilege of worshiping Almighty God according to the dictates of our own conscience, and allow all men the same privilege, let them worship how, where, or what they may.

Every person has their own personal journey to God. Each journey is different and as long as we all seek for the truth of these things and act according to what God has revealed to us as the truth with all our hearts, minds, and souls, asking for God's will, and not imposing our own, then God will judge us according to our knowledge.

There is truth in other religions - truth does not exist solely within the LDS church. But, the LDS church is where ALL truths are found. That is the answer I received in my own prayer.

[BennyLava]

There is truth in other religions - truth does not exist solely within the LDS church. But, the LDS church is where ALL truths are found. That is the answer I received in my own prayer.

That is the answer every worshipper receives in their religion. This is my point. Again, simply stating that I will know the truth when I pray earnestly doesn't lead anywhere, for reasons I proposed in my first post - in short: people of mutually incompatible religions say they know the whole truth from prayer; all of them can't be right at the same time; therefore, even if I am personally *convinced* of God's answer, I can't really know.

It is honestly great that you are tolerant towards other viewpoints. However, even though there is no hell as such in LDS' beliefs, you do believe there are some - am I right? - eternal degrees of communion with God in the afterlife, with the highest level only accessible to LDS. This means that - if God indeed also replies to people in other religions - he knowingly hides from them some amount of truth vital to achieving that highest level. This would be blatantly unjust and evil.

[Guest]

That is the answer every worshipper receives in their religion. This is my point. Again, simply stating that I will know the truth when I pray earnestly doesn't lead anywhere, for reasons I proposed in my first post - in short: people of mutually incompatible religions say they know the whole truth from prayer; all of them can't be right at the same time; therefore, even if I am personally *convinced* of God's answer, I can't really know.

It is honestly great that you are tolerant towards other viewpoints. However, even though there is no hell as such in LDS' beliefs, you do believe there are some - am I right? - eternal degrees of communion with God in the afterlife, with the highest level only accessible to LDS. This means that - if God indeed also replies to people in other religions - he knowingly hides from them some amount of truth vital to achieving that highest level. This would be blatantly unjust and evil.

Yes, ALL OF THEM CAN BE right at the same time - at that particular moment - if they were truly searching and that was truly the answer they got. Would you say that Ghandi is not right because he is not Christian? I don't.

Personal revelation is what tells you what is right! There is absolute truth in that!

The thing that you need to remember is that God is kind and merciful and he is a just God. People who live in the mountains of Indonesia who will not hear of the name Jesus Christ will not be condemned to hell for not being Christian. It is the same thing as a person who tried their earnest to seek God and found Him in the Catholic church being somehow inferior to somebody who tried their earnest to seek God and found Him in the LDS church.

But, those who did find the truth of the gospel and then has forsaken it - those people could be in spiritual trouble. Nothing absolute, of course, because only God can know their hearts.

But one thing is certain... God will not give you a different answer. You may understand the message differently according to your own conscience and it may lead you to a different path but God does not withhold the answer from those who are truly seeking it.

[Faded]

That is the answer every worshipper receives in their religion. This is my point. Again, simply stating that I will know the truth when I pray earnestly doesn't lead anywhere, for reasons I proposed in my first post - in short: people of mutually incompatible religions say they know the whole truth from prayer; all of them can't be right at the same time; therefore, even if I am personally *convinced* of God's answer, I can't really know.

It is honestly great that you are tolerant towards other viewpoints. However, even though there is no hell as such in LDS' beliefs, you do believe there are some - am I right? - eternal degrees of communion with God in the afterlife, with the highest level only accessible to LDS. This means that - if God indeed also replies to people in other religions - he knowingly hides from them some amount of truth vital to achieving that highest level. This would be blatantly unjust and evil.

Christianity in general believes that God revealed his word and will to humankind, but that ultimately, such revelation ceased. They will tell you that the Bible contains everything (or will lead you to everything) that you need to know.

The Church of Jesus Christ differs from that position. We believe that not only did God reveal himself to mankind anciently, but we believe that he continues to do so. So I suppose the best way to understand it is that we view things as a good bit more continuous. God will yet reveal many things, and we don't know them all today. We believe that God has revealed many important and lost truths to us. The information we have been given completes what was already known -- just as a college education does not contradict everything you learned in K thru 12.

Everyone who dies without the knowledge of the full Gospel will have an opportunity to accept or reject it in the next life. This is why we perform baptisms for the dead and other similar ordinances in our temples. It will be up to the deceased person to decide whether or not to accept those ordinances performed in their behalf.

[john doe]

What are YOU searching for, Benny? Do you think you will find it by degrading the spiritual experiences of others?

[BennyLava]

What are YOU searching for, Benny? Do you think you will find it by degrading the spiritual experiences of others?

I do not seek to go around and degrade people's beliefs. My rejection of them - or rather the part of them they gotten to by prayer - comes from the fact that I think knowing truth by personal revelation is a logically incongruent method. Meaning that I can't honestly start seeking God this way unless I am proven that my reasoning is wrong - by discussing with believers. Without civil discussion one can't hope to get outside one's "bubble".

So people who do not belive because they haven't had contact with religion are not punished - fine. But what about those that had? Surely you agree that pairs of statements such as: God is immarterial / God has a body - good deeds are what matters most / faith is what matters most - love thy enemies / punish the infidels - there is hell / there is no hell - are mutually exclusive, meaning only one of each pair can be true (if any). These are statements supposedly revealed by God to adherents of different religions. But if they are, then even the words of God do not lead to knowing truth, and cannot be regarded as pinnacle of moral guidance - how can they, if we don't know which one of us has actually got it right?

You might say there is no absolute truth in this world. But what is God for, then? Just to straighten things up after we die? How can I start believing if I am unable to receive reliable moral guidance from religion?

Edited February 9, 2010 by BennyLava

[pam]

I do not seek to go around and degrade people's beliefs. My rejection of them - or rather the part of them they gotten to by prayer - comes from the fact that I think knowing truth by personal revelation is a logically incongruent method. Meaning that I can't honestly start seeking God this way unless I am proven that my reasoning is wrong - by discussing with believers. Without civil discussion one can't hope to get outside one's "bubble".

There can be no discussion when one side is absolutely convinced that personal revelation is a "logically incongruent method." There is no one here that can prove to you that you are wrong. Personal revelation is real to those that have received it. Unless you seek with honest intent to know..you won't ever receive this either.

There is just no way to prove it. I agree with John Doe that you are degrading those that have received these personal revelations for the reason that they don't fit your "logical" explanation.

[Guest]

I do not seek to go around and degrade people's beliefs. My rejection of them - or rather the part of them they gotten to by prayer - comes from the fact that I think knowing truth by personal revelation is a logically incongruent method. Meaning that I can't honestly start seeking God this way unless I am proven that my reasoning is wrong - by discussing with believers. Without civil discussion one can't hope to get outside one's "bubble".

So people who do not belive because they haven't had contact with religion are not punished - fine. But what about those that had? Surely you agree that pairs of statements such as: God is immarterial / God has a body - good deeds are what matters most / faith is what matters most - love thy enemies / punish the infidels - there is hell / there is no hell - are mutually exclusive, meaning only one of each pair can be true (if any). These are statements supposedly revealed by God to adherents of different religions. But if they are, then even the words of God do not lead to knowing truth, and cannot be regarded as pinnacle of moral guidance - how can they, if we don't know which one of us has actually got it right?

You might say there is no absolute truth in this world. But what is God for, then? Just to straighten things up after we die? How can I start believing if I am unable to receive reliable moral guidance from religion?

The bolded phrase there, Benny, is the exact logical reasoning that makes personal revelation the ONLY way to know the truth of such things.

Because, think about it - how would YOU propose you uncover the truth of the matter?

Here, let's start with this simple one: God is spirit / God is corporeal.

How do you logically find the answer? You tell me how you would go about it. What, find people who has died and gone to heaven, then came back to earth, to ask them what they saw?

You can debate that topic from sunrise to sundown until the end of days and you will NEVER know what is true by plain logic or Bible Study. It is not possible. If it was - you wouldn't have 5 gazillion different churches out there.

The ONLY way you can find the truth for yourself is if God himself manifests the truth of it to you. Hence, personal revelation.

But, like you needing to learn how to communicate in Filipino to be able to talk to my mother, you will need to start learning how to recognize revelation. Unfortunately, that's not something anybody on this earth - not even the Prophet or the Pope - can teach you how to do. They can only share their experiences and guide you to position yourself to receive it. The rest is all up to you.

If you don't find talking to God logical, then you are not ready. Go debate the matter elsewhere and maybe you will get so confused by all the contradicting instructions all over the place that you will give up futile debate, drop to your knees in frustration and ask God, "Okay, God, which one is it - are you real or not?"

Then the fun can begin.

Good luck, Benny. The questioning and rebellion is just but part of this journey. Keep searching. You'll figure it out one way or the other.

[Hemidakota]

Hello :), I've heard from members of LDS that to know that one's beliefs are true, or to determine the right path (religiously speaking) to follow, and should "ask God" in their mind and they will receive an answer. To put it short - one knows that Mormonism is true because of personal contact (or personal revelation) with God. However, I would like to discuss whether this is indeed a proper way of knowing which religion is true.

Here are my points and conclusions:

1) there are people in other religions/denominations that are convinced they have spoken with God and thus received a confirmation of their beliefs

2) these claims can't all be true at once (God wouldn't give contradictory information to different people)

therefore

3) personal revelation is not a valid way to determine truth, as I can be convinced of having been spoken to by God and still be wrong

What do you think?

1] How many of those did the Lord visited and told them in person that there religion was His? ZERO! If they did, let him or her compare it to the First Vision or even Paul on the road to Damascus. As we do know, the devil can assert himself as an angel of god but cannot counterfeit the face of the Savior or His presence where one does feel the absolute pure love of GOD. The devil or Lucifer cronies cannot imitate these feelings.

2] They are not true...that is the answer unless it came by the Holy Ghost or the Lord Himself. I can stand and listen to a man when he testifies about his conversion and asked the Holy Ghost to give me a confirmation on whether it is true or not. Devils or man again, cannot counterfeit these feelings or visions. Unless the Holy Ghost or the Savior Himself has made it known to them, others can receive a confirmation of such for themselves.

3. It is the only way to receive the truth. Without it, you will never know or the Lord will not make it known to you. GOD and His beloved Son still walk and talk with HIS children. This had never ended in the past and remains so until this earth finally becomes Celestialized.

There are three actions one must do in order to receive a personal testimony directly from GOD; 1] DESIRE, 2] HOPE/FAITH, and 3] FOLLOW THE WILL OF GOD. Put forth these three things, you will receive a personal and direct revelation on whether or not GOD lives, that Jesus is the Christ, and Joseph Smith was His called prophet in restoring the gospel in these latter days.

[Gwen]

personal revelation is just that, it's personal. why is it so hard to believe that god could have told me to be lds and another to go to another church?

one must always keep the question and the answer in mind. if you ask, "is this the path i should be on right now?" that's not the same as, "is this your (god's) church?". asking "is this a good church?" and "does this church contain your saving ordinances?" isn't the same question. asking "is the bible true?" isn't the same as asking "is this church true?" if someone asks about the bible and gets the revelation that it is holy scripture they may indeed think that means the church that first exposed them to the bible and the path to ask that question to be true. and if it brings them that step closer to god then that is wonderful.

everyone is learning one step at a time. god directs each person one step at a time. there will be many steps before reaching exaltation. those steps may include many churches. does that mean god didn't direct them? we are all at different places; some of us insist on taking a longer path than others. god's only goal is to bring us back to him. he will do that as he sees fit. the only way you will understand revelation as part of that process is after you have experienced it.

[Hemidakota]

Personal revelation is the same method employed by the Godhead as the First Vision was given to Joseph....it was personal. :)

[walkersd]

I have thought those same things too in my life about receiving an answer from God. I wondered how so many different people in different religions could receive revelation that their particular church is true. For me, the way I was able to find out was to read the Book of Mormon and to go to the source and ask God if what I am learning is true. I'm not one to follow something blindly, I question things, just like you. I put things to the test. For example, if there is a certain doctrine I'm not sure about, I apply it to my life and test it out. It will either work or it won't. I have always found that the doctrine helps me be closer to God. I couple my experiments with asking God himself about what I should do. I suggest you experiment as well. Apply something in your life that the church teaches and see if it brings you closer to God. And of course, pray about it and ask God.

[Burst2Flame]

3) personal revelation is not a valid way to determine truth, as I can be convinced of having been spoken to by God and still be wrong

What do you think?

Personal revelation is where truth is founded from. Spiritual knowledge must be attained by spiritual means. It's impossible to gain a lasting testimony soley based on logical facts, or even seeing miracles. However these things may inspire one to one day obtain a spiritual knowledge that God lives and He has a plan for all of us.

No other source can be used to start your journey for truth. If you were to just start your journey by seeking the bible how would you really know the bible is the word of God without asking God if it is? Spiritual knowledge cannot be attained through physical means, nor are physical proofs always constant (ie. the world being flat etc.). Only God's truth is constant. Prayer is a tool He has given us to speak with Him. He loves us more than any of us will ever know. So who better to ask than an all knowing Father (that loves us and wants us to succeed) for spiritual truths?

[sjdean]

Come back Benny. As a Christian myself, I understand exactly where you're coming from. Revelation is inconsistent. Or at least, some people have a harder time communicating to God. I think God communicates in different ways to different people. Certainly he never answered my question as to whether the Book of Mormon was true or false. But I felt many other things happening, like, a spiritual awakening, unexplained things, I felt protection.

You may just not be ready. And hey, it's Ok. It'll come at the right time for you, when you're ready. That's my personal opinion. And maybe the quakers are right, maybe there's more than one way to God, especially if we think that the only thing that is required is faith and love (from a CofE perspective), perhaps there are many different styles of worship and you need to find the right one that fits with your beliefs.

That would be my advice to any newcomer to faith. Have a think about what you think religion is about. It should be imprinted on people from an early age I believe. My main beliefs about religion is freewill.

After meeting the Mormon missionaries who gave me the first inkling of faith, I spent the next 10 years looking at the different religions and wondering what I thought faith was about. Ultimately I wanted a God that didn't restrict me, he had to give me freewill to make mistakes so I was responsible for my actions, I wanted a God that wouldn't stop me from doing things - he gave us all this beauty in the world, why would he not want us to share in everything? And I put together a short list, and went to the first church that I thought didn't stand for anything and could never see myself going to and was over the moon for a week. I knew that was right for me. I got baptised and confirmed.

So you need to ask whether you believe in God. Then whether you believe in Jesus. Then what you think the nature of God is - or rather, what do you want God to be. Explore the religions. Explore your inner self. Make a shortlist of worship places, and try a few. You'll know.