Discerning Truth In Spirits And Prophets

[prisonchaplain]

How to know if a proclaimed prophet is or is not who s/he claims to be? Pray? Certainly. Then again, would the seeker need to pray ernestly over every self-proclaimed prophet? During the Seoul '88 Olympics there were 72 such prophets in Korea alone, claiming to be the 2nd coming, etc. Are there disqualifiers?

This goes beyond prophecy. Sometimes there is a spirit about certain groups, or teachings. How to discern a true, false, benign or dangerous spirit? As an example, a small religious group in Korea once tried to recruit me, and I sensed the spirit of devourment. It later turned out they had a communal living arrangement, and many families had literally split up, when part wanted to stay and part wanted to go.

Beyond the obvious call to prayer, are there certain obvious signs that a spirit is false or dangerous, or clearly true and "of God?"

[Blessed]

Beyond the obvious call to prayer, are there certain obvious signs that a spirit is false or dangerous, or clearly true and "of God?"

Well for one if they go against the teachings of Jesus Christ is some thing that would catch my eye. If s/he goes against the commandments or twists them to justify their sick teachings, etc.

Also the Spirit says he will reveal those things that are not of God. The idea of spiritual discernment comes into play as well.

[Kurtless]

Well pray is a big way to know.And facts can support good spiritual feelings.But when it comes down to it its you and the spirit that dwindle upon this decison.But the spirit it hard to sense sometimes ya know?

[Traveler]

I think Jesus said to pray (always) to avoid temptation. It seems to me that false spirits will "tempt" someone rather than inspire them. To be honest it appears to me that prayer is a worthy method of avoiding temptation by unclean spirits. That is we should pray not to be tempted and not pray to be tempted.

I would also add that not all prayers are offered with words or conscious thoughts. Some prayers are offered through the desires of our hearts despite the words we utter.

The Traveler

[Dr T]

Very good question P.C. I'm starting to think that a large part of this comes down to worldview. LDS for example, might pray (as Traveler is saying) and receiving confirmation for "X" or be lead in a certain way while Christians on the other hand may be praying about the same thing and feel they are receiving the opposite yet they both have the worldview/belief that they are praying to the "right God."

[Serg]

That's it, subjective experiences should not alone be enough for one to adopt a worldview, it should consist on much of study and poundering. Although internal(subjective) experience is(and often is enough) to validate one's person belief.

[prisonchaplain]

There's one aspect of my question that may not have been clear enough--because it hasn't arisen yet. When does a proclaimed prophet (self or by others) rise to the level of demanding attention from God's people? Again, there have been and continue to be many proclaimed prophets--many of whom never garner attention beyond their local congregation. As I said in the OP, Korea had 72 running around during its Olympics. Rev. Moon Sun Myong is probably the only one most of us know about. And, even with him, how many of us have prayed, "Is Rev. Moon really a prophet of God. Does he bare to revelation to God for us in these latter days?"

So, for LDS, and even those seriously investigating the COJCLDS, what brought you to the place of believing that Joseph Smith's claims were worthy of seeking discernment about? What would cause me to want to investigate him, and not Rev. Moon for example?

[Serg]

Nothing at all and Everything. Joseph is just one of the many topics on this world of which one can(and should) pay attention and test. Why do i dont pray for "Moon..." ? Because I already know(or at least, think I know) the truthfulness that comes from Smith's work. Now, it makes no difference or sense for me to pray for Moon if I already "know"about Smith, and anyways, their teachings are completely(or even if partly) opposed. As God cannot(logically) contradict Himself, or Smith or anyone else is a prophet of God, thus, It cant be right at the same time that Smith(preaching X) and Moon(preaching Z) would be both prophets and bearers of the SAME message from the SAME God. Of course, this is a brief reaction, for you may very well ask me if then, "particularity"(thus, avoidance of selfcontradiction in God) is what sets appart my wish of prayig for the truthfulness of someone's message, is it then possible for me to accept as a true prophet anyone that resembles Smith's teachings? Would I say that if Mr.W would come up repeating to me the SAME message Smith did(hence, avoiding selfcontradiction in God) i would believe him a prophet of God? Certainly not. The thing here is more complex than that, for truth, although comprehensable(to one) is not easily aprehended(or trnsmitted) by others(to others).

[boyando]

Very good question P.C. I'm starting to think that a large part of this comes down to worldview. LDS for example, might pray (as Traveler is saying) and receiving confirmation for "X" or be lead in a certain way while Christians on the other hand may be praying about the same thing and feel they are receiving the opposite yet they both have the worldview/belief that they are praying to the "right God."

Dr. T;

What if everyone is praying to the "right God" but not every one is hearing what he is saying? What if we are so tied up in our own worldveiw/belief, that we don't want to hear anything other than our believe?

It just might be handy to have a Prophet to unstop your ears. Just something to think about - allmosthumble

[Dr T]

Hi AMH,

Thank you for your thoughts. I'm thinking that the idea of a prophet "unstopping our ears" IS PART of the worldview that I was talking about.

[Traveler]

I will add a couple more points and perhaps later if I get some time add a story.

Jesus said something rather interesting when he provided the notion that “his sheep hear his voice”. Indicating that both Jesus and his servants are known to the sheep. How is this? As Dr T added - how does this play with the “world view”. How is it that the sheep know the voice of the Shepard? The scriptures make a reference that those with eyes to see will see and those with ears to hear will hear.

In the ancient concept of Kingdoms it was common that when someone was dis-loyal to the king the common punishment was to burn out their eyes and/or ears so that they could no longer hear or see. An example of this punishment was Sampson when his eyes were burned to cause blindness. This was done because Sampson was dis-loyal to those in power at the time. The concept of blindness and dis-loyalty also concerned the Apostles about a man blind from birth. As it turned out the man’s blindness had nothing to do with dis-loyalty to G-d but the Apostles were confused none the less.

So we have a few points to consider in being able to hear the voice of the prophets that are servants of the L-rd:

First: is to become an covenant subject (sheep) of the kingdom of G-d. The LDS view of this covenant is the covenant of Baptism. Note that Jesus pointed out to the Pharisees that those Jews that did not covenant in Baptism through John the Baptist did not hear or understand Jesus’s voice.

Second: Remain loyal through a trial of faith. There is no loyalty with out a trail.

Third: Prayer - both uttered and unexpressed. In other words Ask, Seek and Knock as investment for receiving the L-rd’s voice. The phrase “words from the mouth of G-d” is symbolic of hearing the revelations from a prophet - for a prophet is the mouth of G-d (as Moses was told by G-d).

Not only does man have the words from the mouth of G-d from prophets that will from time to time walk among mankind but we also have the words from the mouth of G-d from prophets that have walked among man through previous generations. We call this the scriptures. I submit that all words spoken from the mouth of G-d through prophets should be considered as sacred scripture.

The Traveler

[prisonchaplain]

Nothing at all and Everything. Joseph is just one of the many topics on this world of which one can(and should) pay attention and test. Why do i dont pray for "Moon..." ? Because I already know(or at least, think I know) the truthfulness that comes from Smith's work. Now, it makes no difference or sense for me to pray for Moon if I already "know"about Smith, and anyways, their teachings are completely(or even if partly) opposed. As God cannot(logically) contradict Himself, or Smith or anyone else is a prophet of God, thus, It cant be right at the same time that Smith(preaching X) and Moon(preaching Z) would be both prophets and bearers of the SAME message from the SAME God. Of course, this is a brief reaction, for you may very well ask me if then, "particularity"(thus, avoidance of selfcontradiction in God) is what sets appart my wish of prayig for the truthfulness of someone's message, is it then possible for me to accept as a true prophet anyone that resembles Smith's teachings? Would I say that if Mr.W would come up repeating to me the SAME message Smith did(hence, avoiding selfcontradiction in God) i would believe him a prophet of God? Certainly not. The thing here is more complex than that, for truth, although comprehensable(to one) is not easily aprehended(or trnsmitted) by others(to others).

Of course the critics of Joseph Smith leveled the same charges against him that are leveled here against Moon--his statements contradict the God I already know, the truths I've already learned, so there is no need to even consider his claims.

Traveler makes good reference to hearing the voice of the Shepherd. Some, of course, would argue that such could be subjective. Yet, to simply rely on what's already revealed would discount any upheaval of the magnitude that Joseph Smith and Rev. Moon proposed.

So...how would a sincere Protestant--perhaps one that already believed something was missing from his/her faith walk--be drawn towards Joseph Smith and away from Rev. Moon (understanding of course, that from the LDS perspective, the sincere Unificationist would end up with the same reward as the sincere Protestant)?

[Serg]

<div class='quotemain'>

Nothing at all and Everything. Joseph is just one of the many topics on this world of which one can(and should) pay attention and test. Why do i dont pray for "Moon..." ? Because I already know(or at least, think I know) the truthfulness that comes from Smith's work. Now, it makes no difference or sense for me to pray for Moon if I already "know"about Smith, and anyways, their teachings are completely(or even if partly) opposed. As God cannot(logically) contradict Himself, or Smith or anyone else is a prophet of God, thus, It cant be right at the same time that Smith(preaching X) and Moon(preaching Z) would be both prophets and bearers of the SAME message from the SAME God. Of course, this is a brief reaction, for you may very well ask me if then, "particularity"(thus, avoidance of selfcontradiction in God) is what sets appart my wish of prayig for the truthfulness of someone's message, is it then possible for me to accept as a true prophet anyone that resembles Smith's teachings? Would I say that if Mr.W would come up repeating to me the SAME message Smith did(hence, avoiding selfcontradiction in God) i would believe him a prophet of God? Certainly not. The thing here is more complex than that, for truth, although comprehensable(to one) is not easily aprehended(or trnsmitted) by others(to others).

Of course the critics of Joseph Smith leveled the same charges against him that are leveled here against Moon--his statements contradict the God I already know, the truths I've already learned, so there is no need to even consider his claims.

Traveler makes good reference to hearing the voice of the Shepherd. Some, of course, would argue that such could be subjective. Yet, to simply rely on what's already revealed would discount any upheaval of the magnitude that Joseph Smith and Rev. Moon proposed.

So...how would a sincere Protestant--perhaps one that already believed something was missing from his/her faith walk--be drawn towards Joseph Smith and away from Rev. Moon (understanding of course, that from the LDS perspective, the sincere Unificationist would end up with the same reward as the sincere Protestant)?

Yet, to simply rely on what's already revealed would discount any upheaval of the magnitude that Joseph Smith and Rev. Moon proposed.

Well, this happens because you are contrasting Smith's teachings to your biblical teachings. Should a prophet of God(or at least his message) be in accord with the Bible? It depends on what respect. It surely does not mean that he must be a pure resemblance of "scriptural" content, for two things could follow; either any copycat with no call may be taken as a prophet, or we simply have no prophets at all for none of th echristian leaders(including LDS) resemble purely what the primitive Church was. So the literal content of Scripture cannot be a means of basing truth in a prophet COMPLETELY.

Now, you understand Joseph not to adapt to " biblical" standars, that's why you "dont even consider" him, and mostly, why you amaze(or simply wonder) of pentecostals who give him the chance.Well, this may as well say the catholic, that share almost every hermeneutic concepts with protestants, but that also have withinh itself a historical line tracing it to Christ. Now, we may say that this matters not at all, and indeed it matters not at all! Belief is a subjective phenomenon, a mental(i.e.spiritual) state of affairs, and not only a "quest" for truth. So if you give us your argument that the lds belief(Smith's message) is not in accord with Biblical revelation, what you are saying is, that Smith's message is not welcomed or included in the trivial cannon of selected scriptures(by whom?) now called the bible, a bible that went through a very meticulous process of trnsmission which turned into a fight between early christian groups, that the " orthodox" prevailed, that they DID change phrases, concepts, etc...and that now christians treasure as an infalliable revelation. Well, we may also point out, in response to this claim you make, that Christendom is not in accord to HISTORIC christianity which is essentially an equally hard-to-avoid argument. Now, this here is not a debate, just to show you how what draws a person to give a chance to Joseph is not a single aspect of interest but a whole chain.

Influences that make a person(christian) draw to Joseph:

1) such person believes in Jesus Christ already, for he takes the truth of his cultural heritage as a given(and for granted).

2) he might feel confussion, non-conformity, a need of "more",

3) mere curiosity

4) has studied christian history and found it rather unique

5) has studied science and found Smith's understanding of natural phenomenon rare(and full of bull's eyes)

6) has studied philosophy and has definetively recognized Smith's brilliant theology(in accord with modern conceptions, a thing, most ahead of time we may say)

There are too many factors which lead a person to DOUBT his standing, his belief and to open up to another. It is never a matter of one thing that brought you to where you are, but a chain of things.

In fact, "faith", James defines as "belief" in which "there is still the possibility of doubt theoretically". Something interesting he syas, also, in correlation to what you said of Some, of course, would argue that such could be subjective. , James said: "there is a certain class of truths faith is not only licit and pertinent, but essential and indispensible. The truths cannot become true till our faith has made them so", then he proceeds to give an example of a person near a border, that needs to jump in order to go to the other side, he might(according to experience, evidence) consider it an attempt that will not succed, for he has no previous experience to correlate to this particular one, nonetheless, he might still with all proper sense against him give it a chance and believe solely based on his wishful thinking, now, if he believes the first, he will be right, for he will be so anxious and not confident as to truly fall, also, if he believes he can make it, he will probably make it, and yet be right at both situations.

Now some sort of related pohenomenon happens in a person's conversion to some idea and the propcess of un-conversion from the former. wheter it may be justified in scriptural standards(as protestants seem to feel they are), or on historical-philosophical standards(as mormons think we are), or on traditional standards(as catholics believe they are), or on any other thing, it always lies in the particular interest and openness of a person wether that person believes or not. That is why, you cant prove truth, you only may resemble it, and comprehend it, you cant prove protestantism false, just as you cant prove mormonism true, its a matter of our wills to believe.

regards,

[Traveler]

A short story. About 25 years ago I lived at Brown Point in Washington. A follower of Rev. Moon moved into our area and opened a small convenience story in an attempt to make a living. They made no effort to hide their religious feelings and offered something of religious nature to every one that came to their small store. For some reason several “Christian” ministers became more than concerned with this man and his family and began denigrating both him, his family and his religion from their pulpits in their houses of worship. I will not go into the details because to me the details and the arguments over the details are meaningless - what is meaningful was the results.

The children of the new member of the community were picked on (beaten up) at school. Their oldest child was 7. Because they were picked on by other children there was very little legal recourse. The parents and teachers had to guard the children at school and going to and from school. When the parents picked up their children, parents of other children would taunt them and demand they leave the community. It was quite vile but got worse.

Soon bricks started being thrown through the windows of the home and business of the followers of Rev Moon and demonstrators marched up and down the street in front of the business caring signs accusing all kinds of things including child abuse in the store. All of the things the demonstrators learned from the pulpits of their churches. Because I made a point of going to the store and talking kindly with the owners and buying things, I started receiving threats on my phone and notes at my door of danger to my family.

The sad thing is that the followers of Rev. Moon were forced out of business and finely left the area.

Question - did those ministers, testify of Christ, contending for their faith, against the follower of Rev Moon? You all can make up your own mind. For me: what-ever reward I receive in what-ever next life there is - I would rather spend it with people like the followers of Rev. Moon than the followers of Christ from the various religions at Brown’s Point and Federal Way in the state of Washington. I am glad there are a few true Christians in that area and respond accordingly - but 25 years ago there were but few in that neighborhood.

The Traveler

[miztrniceguy]

LDS for example, might pray (as Traveler is saying) and receiving confirmation for "X" or be lead in a certain way while Christians on the other hand may be praying about the same thing and feel they are receiving the opposite yet they both have the worldview/belief that they are praying to the "right God."

just a reminder that us LDS peoples are Christians, as we believe in Jesus Christ as the resurrected Son of God.

[Dr T]

Miztrniceguy,

I do that to make the distinction between LDS and historical Christian belief (with all of it's beliefs and creeds) which are different. To say that LDS believe exactly as Christians do would be misleading.

Dr. T

[Traveler]

<div class='quotemain'>

LDS for example, might pray (as Traveler is saying) and receiving confirmation for "X" or be lead in a certain way while Christians on the other hand may be praying about the same thing and feel they are receiving the opposite yet they both have the worldview/belief that they are praying to the "right God."

just a reminder that us LDS peoples are Christians, as we believe in Jesus Christ as the resurrected Son of God.

Just a point here from my opinion - saying you believe in something (like Jesus Christ and the resurrection) - I do not believe that saying anything makes someone a Christian any more that sleeping in a garage and saying varumm, varumm putt putt will make someone a Chevy. :)

The Traveler

[Dr T]

I agree Traveler,

Someone I read once said something similar. He was talking about Americans who grow up in a "Christian dominated society" who say "I go to church-I'm a Christian." He said, going to church and saying "I'm a Christian" is no different than going into a garage and saying, "I'm a car."

Dr. T

[prisonchaplain]

Well, this happens because you are contrasting Smith's teachings to your biblical teachings.

Exactly. It is my suggestion that if you would automatically disregard Rev. Moon's revelations--latter day prophecies, if you will--BECAUSE they do not mesh with your LDS teachings, then I might be tempted, using the same logic, to disregard Joseph Smith's revelations, because they do not mesh with my Pentecostal beliefs.

So, if we wrong to automatically disregard that which does not immediately "mesh"--what is it that would rise a particular prophet and message above the claims of so many others?

Should a prophet of God(or at least his message) be in accord with the Bible? It depends on what respect. It surely does not mean that he must be a pure resemblance of "scriptural" content, for two things could follow; either any copycat with no call may be taken as a prophet, or we simply have no prophets at all for none of th echristian leaders(including LDS) resemble purely what the primitive Church was. So the literal content of Scripture cannot be a means of basing truth in a prophet COMPLETELY.

Quite simply, any new prophet's message should not CONTRADICT the Bible. You would say, "Well Joseph Smith does not." I am certain that Rev. Moon's followers would tell you that his teachings enhance and enlighten the Bible, rather than contradicting them. So again, why give Joseph Smith the time of day, but not Moon?

Belief is a subjective phenomenon, a mental(i.e.spiritual) state of affairs, and not only a "quest" for truth. So if you give us your argument that the lds belief(Smith's message) is not in accord with Biblical revelation, what you are saying is, that Smith's message is not welcomed or included in the trivial cannon of selected scriptures(by whom?) now called the bible, a bible that went through a very meticulous process of trnsmission which turned into a fight between early christian groups, that the " orthodox" prevailed, that they DID change phrases, concepts, etc...and that now christians treasure as an infalliable revelation. Well, we may also point out, in response to this claim you make, that Christendom is not in accord to HISTORIC christianity which is essentially an equally hard-to-avoid argument. Now, this here is not a debate, just to show you how what draws a person to give a chance to Joseph is not a single aspect of interest but a whole chain.

I'm not quite sure what you are getting at here. Are you suggesting that the Bible is not a very worthy portion of your Standard Works? it is, after all, LDS canon. Or, are you suggesting that Joseph Smith's teachings do indeed adhere to original Christianity? All restoration churches make the claim (again, including Rev. Moon, most likely). So, what would dray my attention TO Joseph Smith, and away from Rev. Moon?

Influences that make a person(christian) draw to Joseph:

1) such person believes in Jesus Christ already, for he takes the truth of his cultural heritage as a given(and for granted). 2) he might feel confussion, non-conformity, a need of "more", 3) mere curiosity 4) has studied christian history and found it rather unique 5) has studied science and found Smith's understanding of natural phenomenon rare(and full of bull's eyes) 6) has studied philosophy and has definetively recognized Smith's brilliant theology(in accord with modern conceptions, a thing, most ahead of time we may say)

This might be the most useful section of the post. I would imagine, however, that Moonies would point to many of the same lines of reasoning, as to what drew them to his pathway.

Now some sort of related pohenomenon happens in a person's conversion to some idea and the propcess of un-conversion from the former. wheter it may be justified in scriptural standards(as protestants seem to feel they are), or on historical-philosophical standards(as mormons think we are), or on traditional standards(as catholics believe they are), or on any other thing, it always lies in the particular interest and openness of a person wether that person believes or not. That is why, you cant prove truth, you only may resemble it, and comprehend it, you cant prove protestantism false, just as you cant prove mormonism true, its a matter of our wills to believe.

regards,

Another interesting paragraph. Perhaps a simpler question would have been, what drew you to your particular faith?

Question - did those ministers, testify of Christ, contending for their faith, against the follower of Rev Moon? You all can make up your own mind. For me: what-ever reward I receive in what-ever next life there is - I would rather spend it with people like the followers of Rev. Moon than the followers of Christ from the various religions at Brown’s Point and Federal Way in the state of Washington. I am glad there are a few true Christians in that area and respond accordingly - but 25 years ago there were but few in that neighborhood.

The Traveler

GO 'N JOY. I remember one of them popping up in the White Center (also W. WA area). That store is run by Moonies. The workers are forced to volunteer, and work long hours, and are starved, etc. ad nauseum. Unificationists were considered the poster child of what a cult was, both doctrinally and theologically. They were accused of mind control, of pulling vulnerable young people away from their families, etc.

Nobody can condone the violence, nor the intimidation and nastiness. Would I boycott a business that was run by a religious organization that I believed to be spiritually, and perhaps socially dangerous? Today, I would hesitate. I've come to find it rather foolish to shop by denominational affiliation. On the other hand, I might be more likely to do business with a bro/sis in the faith, if the option is there.

Traveler, I'm not sure your age, but me thinks you were more Christian than I was 25 years ago (I was afraid to get anywhere close to that store).

Dr. T. brings up a good question. Just what makes someone truly a Christian? Belief? Works? Both? A certain % of each?

[Latter Days Guy]

A short story. About 25 years ago I lived at Brown Point in Washington. A follower of Rev. Moon moved into our area and opened a small convenience story in an attempt to make a living. They made no effort to hide their religious feelings and offered something of religious nature to every one that came to their small store. For some reason several “Christian” ministers became more than concerned with this man and his family and began denigrating both him, his family and his religion from their pulpits in their houses of worship. I will not go into the details because to me the details and the arguments over the details are meaningless - what is meaningful was the results.

The children of the new member of the community were picked on (beaten up) at school. Their oldest child was 7. Because they were picked on by other children there was very little legal recourse. The parents and teachers had to guard the children at school and going to and from school. When the parents picked up their children, parents of other children would taunt them and demand they leave the community. It was quite vile but got worse.

Soon bricks started being thrown through the windows of the home and business of the followers of Rev Moon and demonstrators marched up and down the street in front of the business caring signs accusing all kinds of things including child abuse in the store. All of the things the demonstrators learned from the pulpits of their churches. Because I made a point of going to the store and talking kindly with the owners and buying things, I started receiving threats on my phone and notes at my door of danger to my family.

The sad thing is that the followers of Rev. Moon were forced out of business and finely left the area.

Question - did those ministers, testify of Christ, contending for their faith, against the follower of Rev Moon? You all can make up your own mind. For me: what-ever reward I receive in what-ever next life there is - I would rather spend it with people like the followers of Rev. Moon than the followers of Christ from the various religions at Brown’s Point and Federal Way in the state of Washington. I am glad there are a few true Christians in that area and respond accordingly - but 25 years ago there were but few in that neighborhood.

The Traveler

I agree, they did not show much of the spirit of Christ with their dealings with this family. I only wish that people would allow others to worship their own way as the articles of faith teach.

[Dr T]

Jesus did not allow people to "worship their own way" if that means to worship another god.

[Latter Days Guy]

Jesus did not allow people to "worship their own way" if that means to worship another god.

I was refering to the 11th article of faith of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints.

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.

[Dr T]

I understand that GB. My point was that it is not consistent with how Jesus functioned while on Earth.

[boyando]

Hi AMH,

Thank you for your thoughts. I'm thinking that the idea of a prophet "unstopping our ears" IS PART of the worldview that I was talking about.

Hi Dr. T,

Next time I choose a screen name it will be nice and short, so no one has to abbreviate, LOL.

I will be the first to agree with you that our own worldview can obscure the truth. My question was not do you think that our Prophet is giving his world view, but would it be nice to have a Prophet. My worldview stopped me from adding the thought, a Prophet who gets truth from the sources of all truth, because from my worldview, that is redundant.

As I have just proven, I am not a perfect man. There for it is easy to find examples in my own life of how a persons worldview can hide the truth.

As you are aware, my Church encourages its member to do genealogy. I, like so many others, every time I heard a talk in Church on the subject, felt the need to find my roots. It has always been difficult to find family history on my fathers side of the family, because of the last name, Smith. The job of finding my ancestor's was made even harder by my worldview or the thoughts and feeling that I had when I started the task.

The information that I started with came from my mother, who is very good at doing genealogy. My worldview was that mothers are not wrong and so she would not give me wrong information. She had only passed on the information that she had collected from a very few members of the bloodline that I was seeking. The information that I had, had some truth to it, but not the whole truth.

Another worldview that was stopping me from finding the truth when it came to who I came from, was the chance that I might be related to the Prophet Joseph Smith. I wanted this to be, so I waisted a lot of time, trying to prove a connection, rather than just trying to work from my father back.

I have not yet got any solid evidence of who I came from. But setting aside these, "my worldviews" has helped me to come a lot closer to the truth of who I came from.

Truth is not debatable. It is what it is. Our worldview's will always be debatable, because they are our views.

Your Friend - allmosthumble

[Dr T]

Almosthumble,

I apologize if calling you AMH is offensive to you. If it is, I will no longer use that abbreviation. I agree with you that truth is truth regardless if we believe it or not. Logic for example, with the law of noncontradition, is a self evident fact. My issue would be that if we have a false worldview (holding to the notion that it is based in fact) and come to the conclusion that it is without question-self evident, while it is in fact, false does not make it true. The issue is that we hold these "truths" in our worldview to be true/self-evident in the face of evidence against our beliefs (as they are not consistent and not REALLY able to stand up to critical analysis). No matter how much we want it to be true, not matter how much we claim it to be true, that does not in itself make it true. I'm sorry if I'm not being clear or redundant, I'll try harder next time.

Dr. T