epistemology of the first vision

[JudoMinja]

cryophil, some of the members on the board are going to end up questioning the validity and sincerity of your questions the same way you are questioning the validity of the Church. I hope that doesn't steer you away from continued participation and searching.

No matter where you search, you are bound to come across others who are going to be questioning you just as much as you are questioning. Everyone wants to be certain of the truth, and we all have limited information with which to ascertain that truth. Some will be more trusting and take you at your word, reserving judgement until you do/say something that will make your purpose clear while others will be more skeptical.

I, at least, have enjoyed reading through your thoughts and answering some of your questions with thoughts of my own, and I'm sure others here have as well. It can be difficult to tell the difference between honest inquirers and those just looking to support a position they already hold when the questions steer into such philosophical and doubt-filled areas. But you can rest assured that there is no need for you to prove yourself honest and members here will continuously engage in discussion with you so long as you make that discussion available.

[Seminarysnoozer]

How can God leave us with such a faulty method to access him?

Because the test we face here is not the exactness in which we follow methodology. It is not a test of intellectual assessment. The test is to separate out how much our hearts are into it.

Everyone on Earth has passed the first estate, we have already passed the intellectual, methodology and assessment part of the exam. Some have passed in a more valiant way than others but we all passed. We already have talked the talk, now we have to walk the walk. Meaning we all have the method and the knowledge to go on to the next step which is a practicum in the setting of having opposing drives. Is the nature of our being such that we follow spiritual drives our self satisfying physical drives? God has the measuring stick on this and we all have different tests we face here, but putting that together He can place us in a gradient level of glory, the lowest of which is even much more higher than any level of intelligence anyone could ever achieve in this world.

I kind of think of the example of a soldier in boot camp who makes an oath to die for his fellow soldiers if needed. Even if all the soldiers, while in boot camp, intellectually agreed to that high ideal of sacrificing their life, if need be, for their fellow soldiers, in the battle field that may be a different story. While in boot camp, they never really had the chance to test out that ideal. Things are a little different on the battle field, there are a lot of emotions that come into play that may sway a person from their original ideal. The real test of integrity is if the person follows through with their original ideal. Here, in this battle field, there are things that sway us away from our original ideal, including the "logical" wiring of our brain. The test is one of integrity to the values we said we had before this life began.

[rameumptom]

True, I did argue with a narrow defition of my version of a loving god. That isn't helpful. The second paragraph gets at the heart of it, in which I stated that by dictating to me that my questions and doubts can be answered by defining God in a certain way is doing the same thing you called me on. I suppose we both did it. And neither of us helps the matter.

I agree that we need a set of congruent principles. And you provided a strawman in saying that science cannot prove anything beyond doubt. It never claimed to. But it still has the power to yield evidence that is equally accessible to all.

Thanks all.

I gave no straw man. Most scientists recognize they cannot show proof. However, most people see scientific discovery as providing complete proof.

That I showed your weakness does not make it my own. I reject your insistence on a methodology to prove things, which you continue to insist upon. You want answers? Well, we provide the answers and evidences we have. Then it is up to you to decide whether they are good enough for you or not.

That is simply how it goes.

We could line up a thousand LDS to share spiritual experiences they've had, and one could say that it was all imagined.

A friend of mine visited the anti-Mormon Sandra Tanner once (years ago) and asked her if archaeologists were to find a 2000 year old sign in Mesoamerica saying 15 miles to Zarahemla, would that be enough evidence for her. She thought for a moment and said, "it would be an item of discussion."

IOW, we offer physical evidences, hundreds in fact at FAIR/MI/etc, and yet there are still people out there that insist there is no evidence whatsoever. We can show them Nahom/NHM, and they insist it was a lucky guess. We show them the 40 ancient names in the Book of Mormon that were not known in Joseph Smith's day, and the statistical improbability of him guessing that many right, and they ignore the data. We show chiasmus, ancient Hebrew and Mayan themes, etc., and still they do not choose to consider any of it. We offer 11 additional witnesses to the Book of Mormon, and they argue about whether Martin Harris actually saw the angel or not, rather than discuss the importance of having 11 witnesses who never denied their testimony of the plates.

The evidences are there. You can do with them as you like. They will not "prove" anything, as one can argue about various issues like KEP, etc., as well.

You asked the questions. I can only answer them in the way I understand things. You ask me about God? I answer you from my knowledge and faith bank. If you disagree, or try to change/invalidate my answer by saying someone else believes differently, it does not change my set of answers. It just means that you will have to decide who has the best set of answers, or if none of them meet your need to know.

That is where faith comes in. You obviously struggle with faith or spiritual answers, and so I do not believe you are ready to receive spiritual answers from anyone, including God.

Sadly, what you are doing is something we commonly see anti-Mormons do. They ask a question. When answered, they reject the answer because it does not fit their world view of things. Then they claim we have no evidence to offer.

You have put yourself into a never ending circle, because you refuse to allow others to offer answers you do not want to hear.

The best answer for you is this: take your scriptures into the woods. Stay there for a week in a secluded place. Fast for most of the time you are out there. Spend all your time pondering, praying, and arguing these things over with God. He has your "proof". Seek your own spiritual answer from God, as you will not receive it from us. I have found that a 3 day fast usually prepares me for answers, especially ones I normally would not want to receive. To be that hungry humbles a person to the point of being ready to truly listen.

Then listen.

[rameumptom]

All I am trying to do is clarify this so that I can really truly understand what is the means to know truth. What you don't like is that I dare question the assumption that the spirit is the truth meter. Unfortunately, that doesn't bear out with the evidence I've seen the world over and that I have experienced personally.

I wish it were. Truly I do. I wish there was a clear cut answer to this without the subjectivity that the method is plagued with. But there doesn't appear to be a clear answer and that troubles me. How can God leave us with such a faulty method to access him?

I have not asked you to repent. I've asked you to have an open mind to the answers you receive.

Given that we are physical humans, the spiritual answers we receive can come through physical means, yes. But for many of us, we've received answers in such a powerful way that the physical body's chemical reactions cannot explain them away.

I think I previously mentioned of a man I knew, who questioned the gospel as you do. Interestingly, he was miserable. He noted how peaceful and happy he was back when he believed and had a testimony, but was now miserable as he struggled to find a scientific answer to spiritual questions. I couldn't help but ask him why he would give up the peace/happiness for misery. Was that not an answer? Sadly, he never responded to me.

I do not pretend that the LDS Church has all the answers. It does not. I believe it has a subset of answers that can bring us greater joy and happiness. If it does bring a person such peace of mind, then why insist on being miserable instead? That is counter-intuitive.

I believe God gives to all mankind the amount of truth they are ready for (again, see Alma 29:8). I believe God provides a near universal salvation through Jesus Christ, which will save Christians, Muslims, Jews, Buddhists, Hindus, and even most atheists. That the LDS Church's teachings include that all will receive a fair opportunity to hear and embrace the fullness of the gospel shows that God IS impartial. It is a logical fallacy to say that the LDS God is a partial God because he sends prophets to some and not others, or that he gives the First Vision to Joseph Smith and not others.

That God reveals himself to each person in His own way, and according to the needs of the individual, makes Him impartial. BTW, I am sure there are many people who have seen the face of God, but they do not share the experience because it is too sacred for them to share.

Personally, I have never seen God face to face in mortality. However, the spiritual experiences I've had are significant enough to me to be sufficient for my testimony and faith. That the Holy Ghost has burned deeply into my soul many times, leaving an indelible belief, is enough witness for me to testify of God and Jesus Christ. That such experiences fill me with peace, joy, happiness, and hope for an eternal future, tell me that this is good evidence. That thoughts have filled my mind with wisdom, understanding and knowledge beyond my own ability is another witness that these things are true.

I have spent decades studying the gospel in-depth. I discuss deep topics with LDS and other scholars frequently online, and have done so for over 20 years (back when only universities and military had Internet). I've studied the physical evidences for and against the Book of Mormon, etc. I've given seminars at LDS-related symposium. I blog about the scriptures, and have done so for 2 1/2 years now, using the Dead Sea Scrolls, other ancient documents, concepts from various LDS and non-LDS theologians, and my own ideas on these topics. I've discussed Mormonism as a modern form of Gnosticism with some of the top scholars in the subject. I've come to see the great complexity within the Book of Mormon as few members truly could ever understand, written by a young man with a third grade education! I've studied topics that Joseph Smith taught, unknown in his day, but now are being discussed by the top scholars as new materials come forth to reteach us what the ancients believed. And there is so much more. IOW, I've studied these things a lot over 30 years.

That said, none of this evidence compares to my spiritual experiences. Most of my spiritual experiences are not giant events, but often just the quiet whisperings of the Spirit, bringing me peace, joy and confidence in these things. It has revealed some amazing things to me in regards to religion, and beyond.

So, the challenge isn't for us to try and convince you. With your scientific standards that just is not ever going to happen. You need to do your own homework. You need to accept the spiritual toolbox that God offers, and then use it properly. You need to abandon your preconceived notions and beliefs, and allow your mind to be a clean slate. You need to allow God to answer you in HIS way, whether it is a First Vision, or the still small voice, or somewhere in between. You need to accept His method of answering: with peace, joy, and hope.

Again, I recommend you set aside a week, go into the wilderness. Fast. Pray. Study. Ponder. Open your heart and mind to God. Stay as long as it takes, even as Enos did, until you receive the answer.

And if one week isn't long enough, then prepare to spend several weekends doing the same thing. Pride is a tough thing to overcome. So is unbelief. But determination to search until you find the answer, regardless of what that answer is, is exactly what any good scientist would do.

[Timpman]

Thank you for your judgement. And with that kind of judgement, I am betting that you would also tell me that the spiritual experiences that pagans, wiccans, polytheists, islamists and many other have which communicates to them that Mormonism is utterly false and their beliefs are completely truth, that you would tell me they too need to repent and pray in your prescribed form. Because none of their experiences are as valid as yours, I'm sure you believe.

I made no judgement. We all have things to repent of every day. That's all I meant.

[Traveler]

Given the First Vision (if true) is a critical event--Hinckley stated that it was where it all rested upon--If I could get the same standard of evidence for the first vision that I have for any critical science theory (evolution, gravity, QM, DNA) then I would be ecstatic!

Your approach and thinking - I find interesting – but extraordinarily inconsistent. As an engineer and scientist I wonder how it is that you find more exactness of explanation in current scientific theories of gravity and quantum mechanics. One of the best explanations of gravity and quantum mechanics interestingly is “string theory” which is considered a “viable possibility” despite the fact that there is absolutely no evidence to support any claim what-so-ever. There is in essence more evidence that Joseph Smith’s first vision has more “useable consistent theoretical knowledge” (logical consistency) than string theory, gravity or quantum mechanics.

The Traveler

[Timpman]

Cryophil: - Does the Holy Ghost testify and point as truthful doctrines which contradict Mormonism? For example, polytheism & paganism?

Yes.

I posit that a "burning in the bosom" when practicing Chakra meditation does NOT contradict Mormonism. Does the burning indicate at all that Hinduism is the true religion? I would say the people are not having a revelation saying "Jesus is not the Son of God. Joseph Smith was not a prophet. The Book of Mormon is false." Same with Muslims. They can receive a burning, but it's not telling them anything contradictory to the true faith.

During my mission in the US Mid-West. I met people of many faiths and I asked many them if they had prayed to know which church is true. Very very few (maybe 1 or 2) really had. I think a super-majority of people do not earnestly seek the true.

The LDS Church is quite different. Mormons bear witness that this is the one true church. Millions have received a burning AND A SPECIFIC MESSAGE.

Edited May 15, 2012 by Timpman
Somehow a sentence got cut off!

[rameumptom]

James Faulconer wrote an excellent philosophical article regarding reason and faith - one cannot have reason without faith and vice versa. He establishes that real faith is based upon evidence, but rationality also depends upon a faith. One develops a chain of rationales for/against an idea. However, at each link, one can always ask "why/why not?" In doing so, one could potentially create an infinite chain.

However, we always end the chain with some external thing. For Levinas, that external reason is God. For Heidegger, who did not believe in creatio ex nihilo, it was the world that could reveal itself. For LDS, we can accept that both God and the world can reveal themselves as the external concepts, understanding that even the world has God above it.

As Traveler noted, many LDS beliefs have more evidence than do some popularly accepted scientific theories. Why do many believe in string theory? Because reason leads us towards it, and we bridge the gap with faith.

As I've noted, there are two trees: Knowledge and Life. One is reason or logic, the other is faith that is based on evidence. To reject faith is to reject reason, because most things require faith in something external, in order to end the chain of reasoning. For cryophil, he is lost in a never-ending chain of reasons, because he will not allow faith in the Other to end his search.

I suggest a good reading of Faulconer's article: Revelation, Reason, and Faith: Essays in Honor of Truman G. Madsen - Room to Talk: Reason's Need for Faith

[Timpman]

I posit that a "burning in the bosom" when practicing Chakra meditation does NOT contradict Mormonism. Does the burning indicate at all that Hinduism is the true religion? I would say the people are not having a revelation saying "Jesus is not the Son of God. Joseph Smith was not a prophet. The Book of Mormon is false." Same with Muslims. They can receive a burning, but it's not telling them anything contradictory to the true faith.

During my mission in the US Mid-West. I met people of many faiths and I asked many them if they had prayed to know which church is true. Very very few (maybe 1 or 2) really had. I think a super-majority of people do not earnestly seek the true.

The LDS Church is quite different. Mormons bear witness that this is the one true church. Millions have received a burning AND A SPECIFIC MESSAGE.

I would really like a response to this, cryophil.