What do you think of this miraculous experience?

[QuoththeRaven]

The poll is anonymous, but I would be interested to hear comments from those LDS who pick something other than the first option (why do you consider yourself LDS while believing the president to be delusional and/or dishonest?) and those non-LDS who pick their first option (how can the leader of a denomination you believe to be false receive authentic inspiration of this sort?).

I'll bite. I think everyone can receive authentic inspiration of this sort, if that person is willing to be connected to God. And these types of stories happen to people of all faiths and people of no faith. Sometimes the Universe syncs up rather nicely.

[Guest mirancs8]

Sends chills down my spine reading it. It's a good reminder that we should stop sometimes and listen. It's easy to dismiss the promptings.

[annewandering]

It is way to easy and people can die when they do not listen.

I love this story for several reasons. One is that he had the same sort of feelings, I imagine, we all do when we get promptings like that. We would be very embarrassed, sometimes, to do the things we are prompted to do. Yet when we ignore them then......

[Just_A_Guy]

The options in the poll present people with the option to choose that the whole thing was made up. I wasn't accusing the prophet of this -- read it carefully -- the poll is giving people the OPTION of doing so. I was questioning whether it's even a productive conversation to ask everyone to tell the prophet whether what he said was true or not. I said it might jar some people to even be considering it.

Given the sanctity of the prophet, and of established ways of doing things that is oft repeated on this discussion forum, it strikes me as odd that we would have a poll that asks us to judge a Living Prophet as either a truth-teller, a liar, or something in between.

Well, the poll gave six options to the believing Mormon, and only two of those could be construed as imputing any kind of bad faith to President Monson and/or approaching the same caliber of misrepresentation as that perpetrated by Elder Dunn.

I strongly doubt Vort was trying to cast doubt on President Monson per se; rather, I suspect he was trying to get a semi-scientific opinion on how different Church members (or at least, participants on this forum) choose to interpret miraculous accounts related by their leaders.

I agree it could be jarring for some to see questions like this asked openly. But if they don't see it here, they will see it somewhere else. In other discussions you've spoken of a gentleman you home teach who had some serious concerns with the Church; and you seem to have been a great help to him simply by offering a sympathetic ear, allowing him to speak frankly, and providing wise and generally faith-promoting counsel. Would you deny others the same opportunity that you've given your friend?

[Guest mormonmusic]

I don't see this as a frame-up like my home teaching family at all. The analogy seems far-fetched in my view. Even if there was a loose analogy, the purose was to get ideas to help another individual -- not to open the door for potential pot shots at the prophet as a source of entertainment. Plus, we have history of the scanctity of our Prophet, of the divine commission of our church, we sustain him as Prophet, Seer and Revelator. To initiate a conversation where we ask people whether he's an outright liar as a sheer matter of idle enternatiment...well...I'm scratchin' my head.

The logic that the minority of options are an affront to the prophet also doesn't hold a lot of water with me either, they exist, and that's what matters.

But go ahead, vote as you will...I'm not out to derail this man's thread. And I'm comfortable enough to agree to disagree. Or, for you to disagree with my disagreement.

Edited December 21, 2011 by mormonmusic

[Just_A_Guy]

I agree with your agreement that I am free to disagree with your disagreement.

[Vort]

I agree with your agreement that I am free to disagree with your disagreement.

You're both wrong.

[Dravin]

You're both wrong.

What do you know? You can't even please everybody.

[Guest mormonmusic]

I agree with your agreement that I am free to disagree with your disagreement.

I can agree with that.

[Vort]

What do you know? You can't even please everybody.

You're right, but that's wrong of you.

[Vort]

I am surprised, and I admit pleased, to see an overwhelming majority (so far) simply accept the prophet at his word. Guess I expected there to be a bit more doubt. I would be very interested to hear from some non-Latter-day Saints on the issue.

[QuoththeRaven]

You heard from one. :)

[Vort]

You heard from one. :)

Yes, indeed. Sorry. I meant, "Some more."

[unixknight]

(similar to Obone Conobie - pardon spelling - speaking to Luke saying “Trust the force” or “Let the force guide you”)

I tried so hard to let this go... but my inner nerd would not be denied.

It's spelled Obi-Wan Kenobi.

[Dravin]

I tried so hard to let this go... but my inner nerd would not be denied.

It's spelled Obi-Wan Kenobi.

He was trained by Kwee-Ghan Gin right?

[Soulsearcher]

I am surprised, and I admit pleased, to see an overwhelming majority (so far) simply accept the prophet at his word. Guess I expected there to be a bit more doubt. I would be very interested to hear from some non-Latter-day Saints on the issue.

I'm not sure why you'd expect members to show much in the way of doubt. Even an anonymous poll on line still can be too public for a "good" member to state doubt. Even if no one knows who said it there's always the fear of comments stating how lacking they are if they don't buy it 100% from some others "good" members.

As for the nonlds view point for me, i think it's a nice faith building story. To me that's pretty much as far as it goes. If I'd been there myself and saw some or all of it i'd be impressed, but there are too many faith building stories that have been shown as just stories from all walks of life to get me to believe any of them.

[dahlia]

I believe the story, but more because this kind of thing happens to me all the time than because I think Pres Monson has special powers because he's head of the Church. I can be on the street and then hear a voice that says 'Joe' (whom I haven't seen in years), will be in the building I'm about to enter. I can often tell what the inside of a building will be like before I go inside, or I know who's on the phone when it rings (and I don't have caller ID). My mother is the same way.

One of the strangest things that I've experienced consistently over the years is thinking about my son or husband (when he was alive) and having them call out to me, "Yes? Did you call me?" This usually happens when I'm a bit peeved. : ) I'll be picking up socks and thinking bad thoughts about my son and he'll say, "What did you say?" : ) It's like they hear something, but can't quite get the detail.

[Vort]

As for the nonlds view point for me, i think it's a nice faith building story. To me that's pretty much as far as it goes. If I'd been there myself and saw some or all of it i'd be impressed, but there are too many faith building stories that have been shown as just stories from all walks of life to get me to believe any of them.

This is exactly why I have made the poll and provided the story, in context, with a link. Was Monson lying? Is he just stupid? Did he hallucinate the occurrence?

This is not a "friend of a friend" type hearsay story. This is a first-person account of an experience that, at face value, cannot be explained through "natural" means. So:

• Was Monson telling the truth, or was he lying?

• If he was telling the truth, was he correct, or was he mistaken?

• If he was correct, how do you explain that? Divine revelation? ESP? Ear fairies?

• If he was mistaken, what accounts for the story? Did he hallucinate it? Does he have only a tenuous grasp on reality? Is he certifiably insane?

I chose this story because of its immediacy and unambiguous nature. Either things happened the way Monson said they happened (more or less, allowing for unimportant details that might have been gotten wrong) or they did not. No honest person can really stand on the sidelines and equivocate about this. There is very little wiggle room. I'm curious to know where people come down on the issue.

There is a very great deal of evidence that Monson is an honest and scrupulous man, so those who say he's lying will need to provide other evidence to demonstrate their contention. There is also very great evidence of his intelligence and mental acuity, so those who might want to chalk it up to delusions or senescence also have some evidence to marshall.

But if you allow that he is telling the truth, then you have to explain it somehow. For me and many others, that's easy: He is guided in his leadership role by God, as we all can be. But for those who reject divine revelation (or who reject divine revelation to Mormons), the explanation will have to come from somewhere else: ESP, devilish communications, hidden microphones, or some such.

I understand your skepticism. Nevertheless, the story is right there, in print, boldly put out before the world. I am curious how you (and others) explain it; hence, this poll and thread.

[pam]

For what it's worth. I believe the story.

[Seminarysnoozer]

But for those who reject divine revelation (or who reject divine revelation to Mormons), the explanation will have to come from somewhere else: ESP, devilish communications, hidden microphones, or some such.

I understand your skepticism. Nevertheless, the story is right there, in print, boldly put out before the world. I am curious how you (and others) explain it; hence, this poll and thread.

In another thread I was warned against speculation but here, are you inviting people to speculate? I am confused. Or does that standard only apply to LDS?

Their explanations can only, at best, be speculation.

[Vort]

In another thread I was warned against speculation but here, are you inviting people to speculate? I am confused. Or does that standard only apply to LDS?

Their explanations can only, at best, be speculation.

I guess I am confused at your confusion. I never condemned speculation per se. Rather, I pointed out that some elements of our beliefs and worship are so sensitive that reckless speculation about them is almost sure to cause some harm without bringing any benefit.

In this case, I am asking for people to choose whether they believe the testimony of a demonstrably honest man. If they do, how do they explain the occurrence? And if they do not, how do they explain the testimony?

If you are really just so confused by the distinction I'm drawing that you can't figure it out at all, then I suppose the safe thing to do is avoid answering. This thread was meant as a discussion of perception and belief, not a lightning rod of contention. I chose an unambiguous example so people could either say "yes" or "no", rather than "well, you see, maybe he really meant thus-and-such, and you're being overly literal," etc.

[Seminarysnoozer]

I guess I am confused at your confusion. I never condemned speculation per se. Rather, I pointed out that some elements of our beliefs and worship are so sensitive that reckless speculation about them is almost sure to cause some harm without bringing any benefit.

In this case, I am asking for people to choose whether they believe the testimony of a demonstrably honest man. If they do, how do they explain the occurrence? And if they do not, how do they explain the testimony?

If you are really just so confused by the distinction I'm drawing that you can't figure it out at all, then I suppose the safe thing to do is avoid answering. This thread was meant as a discussion of perception and belief, not a lightning rod of contention. I chose an unambiguous example so people could either say "yes" or "no", rather than "well, you see, maybe he really meant thus-and-such, and you're being overly literal," etc.

Well, I guess "reckless speculation" is a matter of opinion and that is very difficult to see where that line is.

You specifically asked people to explain why they might believe it is something other than divine revelation. I think it is a good discussion, don't get me wrong. I just don't see how one avenue of speculation is "reckless" where another is not. Whether it is a "lightening rod of contention" has nothing to do with intentions, as you pointed out to me earlier. It only has to do with the potential for pointing out differences in beliefs I suppose, but the only way to know that is to put it out there and see what happens. In other words, if a person responds with saying that it is the devil communicating or ESP, would you then call it a "reckless speculation"? You invited those kinds of responses. The thing is, you said that I shouldn't even put it out there in the first place. I also believed that my discussion was one of "perception and belief", so that is not a very good qualifying or disqualifying criteria. One of your criteria was to suggest if it goes against mainstream or common LDS belief than it could be speculation, well, we can see by the results of the poll what is mainstream, so inviting anything other than that is inviting speculation, by that definition.

[Suzie]

Really I have no reason NOT to believe in the story.

[Dove]

It's sad that the poll is leading some of us to be contentious over points that almost seem to be over splitting hairs. It's kind of silly. Is it really worth contending over the wording, or response to the wording?!

That being said, I have no problem accepting Pres, Monsons' story at face value as true...

While this story is quite an obvious showing of a miracle, ( a lot of people were at the meeting this happened at) I believe God will not hesitate to show His hand through miracles to those who sincerely seek Him....Obviously, subtly, and however He deems them to come, for our learning and strengthening of faith in Him.

There have been times in my life when miracles like this happened frequently, with no explanation other than intervention from the spiritual side. I believe even the adversary can produce miracles, in the right circumstance, to mislead us if we are open to it. There's a vast spiritual universe right here around us that most (myself included) have only skiffed the surface in understanding. Of course Pres Monson, being the prophet, would have Godly miracles occur in his life regularly. I'm grateful he felt to share this one.

[Blackmarch]

The poll is anonymous, but I would be interested to hear comments from those LDS who pick something other than the first option (why do you consider yourself LDS while believing the president to be delusional and/or dishonest?) and those non-LDS who pick their first option (how can the leader of a denomination you believe to be false receive authentic inspiration of this sort?).

Id say the spirit was involved. How so i still dont really know the details of.

No option for this really in the poll.