Discerning Truth In Spirits And Prophets

[boyando]

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

Dr. T,

I was trying to make light of my choosen screen name and what a burden it puts on others. So it is I who was not very clear.

I don't think that the truth, when it comes to religion, is always self-evident. Many people, just like me, seem to know that Jesus is the Christ and that He rose from the grave. It doesn't make logical scences that a body, being dead for three days would come back to life. Because I believe it, doesn't make it true. There are many on this site that don't believe, and that doesn't make it untrue.

You have asked in the past, how do you know. My advice is don't look for only one way to learn the truth . The truth comes to me, many different ways. Keep searching and you will be rewarded, equal to the effort that you put into your search. Your friend AHM

[Traveler]

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

I do not understand - what did Jesus do to prevent anyone from worshiping? When did he encourage the abuse of children and the destruction of the livelihood of families that prayed to false g-ds but treated others honestly? As near as I can see his criticism was of those that treated others in a vile manner (without love and compassion) - example the good Samaritan.

The Traveler

[Dr T]

Jesus was not a person that would say, "Oh, you chose to worship Baal? Great! As long as it's good for you and you don't hurt anyone in the process then good on you." He always pointed to the Father or to himself (and the Holy Spirit).

Dr. T

[Serg]

First of ALL:

Dr.T, get over it, mormons ought to be considered christians, in fact, technichally speaking, any looney saying he believes in Christ as the alien with green skin to save the earth ought to be considered christian, its a matter of words, get over it.

Next:

<div class='quotemain'>

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?

<span style="color:#FF0000">

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?</span>

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?

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?

1)"using the same logic"

Yes, i concede, and presicely this i mean.

2)"you will--BECAUSE they do not mesh with your LDS teachings,"

Not so my friend. I give a fig(respectfully) as to what this Church as an institution teaches for the sake of teaching it, i have beliefs that are outside the peripherial of this Church, in fact, many that contradict its burocracy, also, i dont agree with a lot of technicalities(manuals, instructions), which are plainly man made. Now, if Moon's teachings were to collide with my lds teachings, it would be colliding against the truths i believe of mormonism(out of all that it teaches). We may most be on the same boat, for nobody should believe every single thing(specially when it makes NO sense). I care for my relationship with Jesus, my intellect, my heart, anything else than that is mere mortality.

3)""Are you suggesting that the Bible is not a very worthy portion of your Standard Works"?

Not at all. In fact, I am one of the few who defend the bible in this Church(to the extent I particularly do), historically speaking, the bible was used by Joseph not as is used by modern day mormons, now, the Book of mormon is a piece of work that in everybody's head is far "better"(complete, perfect, etc...), while in the days of Joseph, the book of mormon was a sidekick. It was used only for the promote of millenial beliefs(for it speaks very much of that). Never did use Joseph the Book of mormon more than the bible, the Book of Mormon was a clarifier, a manual, a commentary(so to speak) for the bible. Now this is not to lessen the book of mormon, but to adapt it's use. In itself is a masterpiece, but this is my point, its is just a masterpiece as the bible. The bible is mostly intact. Of course, i concede(as Joseph did), many things were taken from it(numerous thesis are known), and scripture was corrupted, but nowadays we DO know what and from where it was taken, and it was not "whole"chapters with descriptions similiar to the book of mormon, for crying out loud!

4)Or, are you suggesting that Joseph Smith's teachings do indeed adhere to original Christianity?

Of course, but not in every respect. No actual church has identical characteristics to ancient christianity, and know what? It doesnt have to be that way(in the things that are extrinsic).

5)what drew you to your particular faith?

Well, briefly.

I was raised a catholic, at age 10 i started attending an evangelical Church, I liked it's differences to catholisism but i disliked(deeply) the little sense of order while "the Spirit"manifested it self. I was drawn to my Brian Weiss stage, hat lasted two years, yes, i got to believed briefly in that nonesense lOL, then i began to feel agnostic(as i was developing new questions, intelligent ones, against faith at all), then in the middle of that process I met friends in school(10thgrade) that were mormons, one of them, in a conversation didnt want to tell me about their beliefs, I insisted(for i was curious), then she said "we believe we can be gods". That was the inicial statement that drew me to mormonism. After that, I commenced to study it(lightly, but more than few though), I went through what I call the cultural stage of adherence to a faith, i went through the emotional stage, then through the material stage(the most difficult for me, for that was 8 months ago and I almost abandon mormonism-maybe you remember) and now I am making it through the reflexive stage.

To explain, I have been entertaining a thought, that I will exploit within my mission(as i am a social scientist it will be the best of experiences to do it), with respect to the stages of "conversion" or "adherance" of one person to a faith(philosophy). I dont know, I am sharing it, and I hope that 3 years from now nobody steals it(lol),

Cultural Stage: The subject(person), encounters the object(faith, missionary) and the dealing process begins. This period of time is profoundly distinguished from the rest, for it determines if the other three will follow. Here the subject deals primarily with the object, it attacks it, it circles it, and uses as source his/her background(current belief, faith or philosophy) to do it. The action is centered ON the object, for the subject yet has recognized the possibility of authority in such. For example, here is the typical visit(or visits-a period) when the missionary comes to a house, they are already one of two things:

a) a defined believer(attending a Church or club,etc..) Here the person raises questions to the missionaries based on their cultural knowledge of mormonism, to circle the message, then also use their resources of religious knowledge to attack the object, as in biblical hermeneutics, "bible bashing", philosophical debates, etc..

b )a non-defined believer(agnostic) Here he raises much questions to the missionaries but not to contradict their message, but to make them understand why he is in such position(as wanting a way out but logically finding none).

This stage does not end(or transform it self), until the subject has somehow(the missionaries cal it "proving") trecognized authority(or importance) in the object(message). Here, scriptural and prayer interactions play the key part. many other things may be said of this stage, i have no time now.

The Emotional Stage: The action is centered ON the SUBJECT. The subject starts entertaining the thought of submitting to the object, for it has recognized in it authority. It begins to digest concepts throght the "feelings"channels, here comes the whole phenomenon of subjectivity, and the whole question of conversion. The key concept here is the fact that missionaties stress the issue of "feeling"the presence of teh Spirit, of "feeling"th etruthfulness of the message. In other christians it would be named feeling the new birth, the "voice'of Jehova, the fire opf spirit baptism, the toungues, all that. Here scriptures(or any other study resource) plays no important role at all, for only a matter of sicological NEED in the person matters. Here, concepts as brotherhood are exploited, love, redemption, innocence, "body of Christ", etc...The questions that are raised in this stage involve the utility of the belief, not its procedence. What does this serve me for? Oh, to save you, oh, to make you better, oh, etc...

Here the Subject developes an admiration towards the object, a reverence(as something equal to God), and respect for those who represent it, hence, most investigators in tthis stage are very respectful to missionaries, very helpful, stay quite while they talk, offer food, etc... There is an agape concept that arose and fills all mental need.

The Material Stage: The subject finds itself carrying something precious, now, what happens? well this stage may follow(and often does). The respect and admiration the subject feels towards the object(faith) starts translating itself into duty, a duty to make others respect it(or enjoy it), a duty to proclaim it, for it satisfied my need to pertain to something. Here we develop "doctrinal"skills. Here we have the members of teh community who read the scripture a lot, for the main purpose of arming themselves for the "spiritual(i.e.social)battle" Paul warns. Here the teachers, the local leaders, those who get ahold of books, studies, etc... In grades we may appreciate them as follows:

a) those who plainly(solely) read canon sources

b ) those who also contribute to their knowledge with manuals(both of the faith and of outside)

c) those who become "professionals", apologists, They are the "Nibleys" of their religion/philosophy, and their main justification is(as often heard) the "gratefulness"towards the object. It is called the "material" stage, for the subject focuses its efforts of agape towards the palpable and most material(i.e.universal) things of his religion in relation to others, this is, Scripture, Archeology, Logics, etc...

The Reflexive Stage: The subject finds it self, often, after arming itself with so much prodigal fighting(knowledge) resources, overwhelmed. He also, starts developing another apreciation of the agape towards its object. No longer does he(think) he needs to defend the cause for the sake of defending it, but understanding the very nature of the object is a "more sublime" target to show respect and gratefulness. No longer does the subject divert itself by going into dichotomies concerning doctrinal accuracy, or statements in Scripture, while blacks were cursed or not, or Abraham had three wives, or if they found Noah's ark so the world will believe the faith. He finds rather important(and more fruitful) to grasp the "whys" of the "hows". I no longer want to now how the black were cursed or not, or wether christological tendencies after Lewis have evolved(for the better), i want to know why is there at all a concept of curse and blacks, and a concept of christology. Here, as in ethical studies, the subject finds its ultimate bonding with the object, by elucidating the philosophical principles behind the social/cultural/religious/doctrinal/emotional ones. It tries to reach for the last concept of the chain. It deals primarily with epistemology, ontology, psicology, and all the contemplation diciplines, that reffer(or study) trascendental concepts.

Here , some certain characters will develope:

a) the rooted theist(remained a believer for he understood the final purposes and principles of his/her religion and found them far more appeling-as to truthfulness test-than all doctyrinal studies he had)

b ) the rooted agnostic(became agnostic after not-according to him-undesrtading the fundamental truthfulness of the propositions he entertained. This is no mere agnostic, looking for a miracle answer, this one expects not one single possible answer. Also the cathegory of atheist is contained here.

Now PC, the question you ask me, centers it self within the Cultural Stage, for it pretends to deal with the "why would i ever give a chance to Smith".

regards.

[Traveler]

Jesus was not a person that would say, "Oh, you chose to worship Baal? Great! As long as it's good for you and you don't hurt anyone in the process then good on you." He always pointed to the Father or to himself (and the Holy Spirit).

Dr. T

Very interesting post Dr T. But I must ask - Do you know who Baal was? Do you know by what means Baal was worshiped in ancient Israel (what was considered worship)? It is interesting that many in ancient Israel thought they could "worship" Baal and the G-d of Israel as well. Do you know why? Perhaps if you understood these things you would understand not just the problem of ancient Israel but how Baal is being manifested and worshiped among us today?

The Traveler

[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.

When I looked into the GO 'N JOY near Federal Way I found no evidence of any workers forced to volunteer or work extra long hours or anyone starving. The store was owned and in the name of the family and they were the primary workers at the store. I found no effort to pull vulnerable young people away from their families or to try to get children druggs. When I asked those accusing such things they could not provide names. I checked with the state of Washington and no formal charges were ever filed by anyone in association with the accusations against the Moonies. If anything was ever proven in court I would like to know of it. There was a lot of stuff passed out making claims about Moonies but I could not verify any of it.

It is my opinion that Rev Moon is a bit of a nut case - but I have found nut cases even within my own LDS faith as well as many other places.

The Traveler

[Dr T]

Hey Traveler,

You can substitute any god into my example. Baal was a god that was worshiped. Look in Kings when the prophet was challenged to have his God vs. Baal to start the fire as an example. My point was that Jesus was not about, "Go ahead and worship who you please."

Dr. T

[Blessed]

I have been following this thread. There seems to be some confusion about semantics.

GB stated this from the article of faith:

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 said that Jesus wouldn't done this in his day unless it pointed to Him, God or the Holy Spirit.

I see that article staying true to how Jesus would do. He did not stop the lady from washing his feet with her hair and tears. That was her form of worship and repentance.

Now when it gets in the case of worshipping any other than God alone, Jesus was adimant that it be God alone or Himself. He reminded some that God was a jealous God. But I don't think that means that the articles of faith applies ot this.

It is how, when and where, not whom that we should be debating over.

[Dr T]

That makes sense Blessed. The cleaning his feet with her hair or pouring on perfume etc. is not my point. As you said, "Jesus was concerned about WHO was worshiped. The object of worship must be the God of Abraham, Issac and Jacob (in his book) not Allah, etc.

Dr. T

[pushka]

I don't pretend to know much, if anything about the Islamic religion, but I thought that they considered Allah and the Christian God to be one and the same...Christianity, Judaism and Muslim/Islamic religions all have their origins with Abraham.

Please can somebody help me out if I'm mistaken here! Thanks in advance.

[Dr T]

Hey Push,

They are monotheist but not the same as Christianity. They don't see Jesus as God. Christianity split from the Jewish faith.

[boyando]

I don't pretend to know much, if anything about the Islamic religion, but I thought that they considered Allah and the Christian God to be one and the same...Christianity, Judaism and Muslim/Islamic religions all have their origins with Abraham.

Please can somebody help me out if I'm mistaken here! Thanks in advance.

Pushka,

I'm not an expert on the Islamic religion, either. I have heard "experts" on the radio, lately and I find it interesting that they claim Jesus as a Prophet, but not the Messiah.

Just like Judaism, the Islamic faith is still waiting for the Messiah.

One of these experts made the point (and I am not agreeing or denying the point) that all three religions are waiting for the Messiah to come in triumph. All three have different idea's of what will trigger the Messiah coming to earth.

Like I say, I'm not an expert but I believe Islam split for Judaism when Ishmael didn't get the birthright.

Hope this helps - allmosthumble

[pushka]

Hi Allmosthumble, I heard that explanation of the origins of the Islamic religion too...the fact that Ishmael didn't get the birthright.

I just thought that they were all worshipping the same 'God' of the Old Testament, I do realise that they believe that Jesus was only a prophet and not the son of God, but still thought it was the same God?

I think I ought to ask on an islamic site :)

Ooops...scrap that last answer, I've just found a link that explains why Muslims do NOT worship the God of the Bible, and explains the origins of the prophet Mohammad and Allah!

http://contenderministries.org/islam/trueislam.php

'It is commonly taught that Judaism, Christianity and Islam are the three monotheistic world religions, and many times it is implied that all the adherents of these three religions pray to the same God. President Clinton did much to promote this idea, elevating and popularizing Islam in America. This is a very, very serious mistake that must be clearly exposed.'

'The same is NOT TRUE concerning Islam. They are not worshipping the same God as Jews and Christians. Let's look at the clear facts. Mohammad grew up in Mecca in Arabia, belonging to the Quraysh tribe in charge of idol worship at the Kabah shrine, containing the black stone and at least 360 idols. The word for god or idol in Arabic is "ilah." Allah was the name for the main idol worshiped in Mecca. The name was probably originally derived from the two Arabic words "al" and "ilah", meaning "the god" or "the idol."

Allah was also used as THE PERSONAL NAME among the Arabs for the moon god. Its symbol was the crescent moon found on many idols from pre-Islamic Arabia. Every year there was a pilgrimage to Mecca to worship Allah at the black stone. People were taught to turn towards Mecca several times a day. One month every year, beginning and ending with the crescent moon, was dedicated to fasting.'

'To confuse the issue, Mohammad declared that Allah is the god of the Jews and the Christians. Noah, Abraham, Moses and Jesus were all prophets sent by Allah. Since Mohammad's beliefs did not agree with the Scriptures, Mohammad declared that the Jews and the Christians have perverted the Scriptures. Therefore Allah has rejected them and cursed them and has sent Mohammad to replace the Bible with the Koran; and to replace Judaism and Christianity with Islam. It is the duty of Islam to subjugate and destroy the infidels, the Christians and the Jews. Islam is Satan's most powerful and successful plan to destroy true faith in the God of the Bible.'

Thanks for helping to inspire me to check that out Dr. T. and AHM! :)

[Dr T]

I would love to learn what you hear when you ask a member of that religion.

Thanks

[pushka]

Yeah, me too...when I first linked to the site, I didn't realise it was a non-Muslim site...that it was a Christian site giving it's own versions of different forms of religion.

I do belong, or have belonged to a Muslim forum, so perhaps I could raise this question on there and get back to you with the answer. I also have some muslim contacts in my email so will see what info I get.

I am fascinated with this story of the split between the Arab and Jewish nations/religion due to Abraham giving the birthright to his younger son (born of his jewish wife) instead of to his eldest son (born of his non-jewish concubine)...I can see how this would lead to arguments, but wow!!! doesn't somebody think it's about time these family members started talking to each other again and got some mediation classes going!!! lol.

[Dr T]

Would they be the Hatfields or the McCoys?

[prisonchaplain]

I'll not try to match your post, point for point. I do thank you for a thoughtful and revealing post about your own spiritual journey, and the processes you passed through and are continuing in.

Your explanations did bring to the surface an idea of my own. While religion should never be reduced to a numbers game, if we accept the idea of a universal God (or at least a global one), and if we posit that this God desires relationship with his creation, then we would imagine that any truth faith would become substantial and wide spread.

Christianity and Islam are the two religions that seem to qualify. While Hinduism has many adherents, it is a culturally based and non-missionary system of faith.

Within Christianity, Catholicism remains dominant. In my own view, there is still much to treasure within that faith system.

The fastest growing international movements with Christianity are Mormonism and the Assemblies of God. I believe there is another contender, but don't recall which one, off-hand (maybe Jehovah's Witnesses).

COJCLDS went from a handful to 12 million in just under 200 years.

AoG went from a few thousand in 1914 to over 50 million today.

Jehovah's Witnesses started in the late 1800s and now # around 6 million if I'm not mistaken.

Unificationists (Moonies) grew for a season, but tapered off.

ERGO:

One reason to consider Smith's claims over Moon's is that his message and followers have managed to sustain themselves and develop a consistent and rigorous rate of growth.

Likewise for pentecostalism (some estimate as many as 500 million adherents to the broad pentecostal/charismatic movement).

Likewise for Islam. & Ironically, Islam will likely grow in AMERICA, in part due to the tensions of 9/11 and the war on terror.

My point? Reason can indeed narrow our field of consideration in relation to religious truth. Then, having ears that hear, a heart that receives, what the Spirit is saying to creation should lead the sincere seeker to a true worship of the living God. That is a point that the Old Testament, the New Testament, the Qur'an and the BoM all agree on.

[BenRaines]

Welcome back PC.

Ben Raines

[prisonchaplain]

Ooops...scrap that last answer, I've just found a link that explains why Muslims do NOT worship the God of the Bible, and explains the origins of the prophet Mohammad and Allah!

http://contenderministries.org/islam/trueislam.php

Go with your first answer, Pushka. Just as our LDS friends here implore not to go to anti-Mormon sites to learn about Mormonism, it probably would not due to refer to a fundamentalist Christian website to learn about Islam.

Jack Chick (of Chick Tract fame) wrote a tract about Islam and the moon god. This guy makes Walter Martin look like an apologist for FAIR/FARMS, btw. So, I'm leary of any site that postulates that Muslims worship the moon god, when 99% of Muslims would tell you that isn't so. "Well, they don't know what their religion teaches, so I'll educate them." Sounds familiar, eh?

Islam, Christianity, Judaism, and yes, COJCLDS all worship the same God. IMHO are discussions are over understanding the nature of this God, and of the proper approach to worshiping Him.

[pushka]

Hi Prisonchaplain...thanks for confirming my first belief about the Islamic/Muslim religion, that they and the Judeo/Christians all believe in the same God, but that they use the name Allah which is the Arabic name for God.

I was going to post a link to the following website, but don't know why I didn't...perhaps I didn't feel it stated it clearly enough, but it seems an interesting site to explore:

http://www3.sympatico.ca/shabir.ally/new_page_4.htm

[boyando]

Welcome back PC,

[Serg]

Thanks PC, I agree.

[Ray]

...again, why give Joseph Smith the time of day, but not Moon?

Three thoughts came to me from this question:

My first thought:

I would read all the books from Reverend Moon if he claimed to be speaking for God, as God's prophet. I don't know much about him... did he claim to be? If he just shared his own thoughts... without claiming it 's revelation... then I really wouldn't care what he thought.

My second thought:

Once I know God's true prophets, or what God says through prophets, I'm not interested in learning what the opposition says. That would be like hearing God and then asking His adversaries what they think about what God has said.

My third thought:

If I now learn Reverend Moon claimed to write revelations... actually claiming to be speaking for God... I would read what he wrote and compare that to what I know. If it's from God, then I'll see harmony... because I know how to know when God speaks through other people... like I know God has shared truth with me.

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

I think a Christian is someone who is following Christ... not those who only think or say they are, and since Christ knows who is or who was His disciple(s), we can all know if we ask and He tells us.

[prisonchaplain]

Ray, here's a link that offers a short description of Moon's ministry, and his claim to be a messenger from God. I'll let you read, pray, and discern for yourself. Feel free to share what you discover.

http://www.unification.org/ucbooks/RTL1/TL1-00.htm

As for your belief that we can know whether or not another individual is a true follower of Christ, that can be true, but not always. There is some New Testament Scriptural warnings against trying to pluck out all the weeds, because too often good grain will be torn out as well. Better to leave it until harvest time, when the separating will be easier, the indentification process very obvious.

[pushka]

Welcome Back Ray!! I hope you're well rested :)