"Believe" vs "Know"

[Backroads]

Yesterday's sacrament meeting revealed a rather strange talk by a soon-to-leave missionary that wound up with follow-up comments by the stake president.

 

The whole topic of this kid's talk was that it wasn't right to use the word "know" in gospel subjects because we don't, in fact, actually know and are pretty much just going on faith.

 

Husband and I personally wanted to smack the kid, but giving him the benefit of the doubt and bad communication/presentation, could he possibly be on to something?

 

Is "know" the wrong sort of word when "believe" is best?

[andypg]

I think both are right depending on where you are in your journey. I don't condemn or judge those who say "Believe" instead of "know." In fact, sometimes that's me. Likewise, it's ok to say "Know" instead of "believe." It depends on where you are on your spiritual journey.

[jerome1232]

I agree with him, but I also think he should shut up about it and not declare it across the pulpit. I believe most people do believe and very few know, but I'm not going to tell them which word they ought to use.

[Backroads]

Granted, my view might be clouded by other comments he made, but he did directly say we should stop using "I know this church is true (or other similar statements)" because it might offend others and, because once again, we don't actually know. 

 

That... I don't agree with.

[The Folk Prophet]

I would ask in return, what harm does it do to use the wording "I know" when you only literally "believe"? From a certain perspective, we know nothing. Everything we experience could be false. We only believe very strongly because of the consistency and power of our experiences. So how is testimony any different?

[The Folk Prophet]

...we should stop using "I know this church is true (or other similar statements)" because it might offend others...

 

Did he say how it would offend others?

[The Folk Prophet]

I agree with him, but I also think he should shut up about it and not declare it across the pulpit. I believe most people do believe and very few know, but I'm not going to tell them which word they ought to use.

 

Who knows and how? If you saw God would you know? Really? What if it was merely the onset of some serious disease and a hallucination?

[andypg]

Granted, my view might be clouded by other comments he made, but he did directly say we should stop using "I know this church is true (or other similar statements)" because it might offend others and, because once again, we don't actually know. 

 

That... I don't agree with.

 

We can know, but for others it may be more complicated. It's ok to just believe. One thing I've noticed in my soon to be nine months as a member of the Church is that there is this tendency to use the word "know" a lot, in testimony meetings, at the end of lessons, missionary lessons. Very rarely do I ever head the word believe. I'm not saying that it's wrong, I'm just stating my observations. Now, what he might mean is that for some, they can't say they "know" but they can say, I believe. As a personal example, in something I really never shared, I can say I know that God exists and I know Jesus Christ is the Son of God and our savior, but honestly, I believe in heaven, I believe in the afterlife. I can't say I know. When I was baptized, I believed the Church to be true. I now know the Church to be true.

 

Using the word know may be off putting to those who don't know (through no fault of their own) or are going through faith struggles. Or those who are cynical can say, "Yeah, right, you 'know.'" Though these are not good reasons to say we can't use "know." But then again, for those who do only believe but don't know, if you are surrounded by people who only say they "know" and not believe, it can make you feel as if something is wrong.

 

We just have to say that it's ok, and just as valid, to get up there on the first Sunday of the month and say "I believe" because for some, that's where they are.

[Suzie]

Granted, my view might be clouded by other comments he made, but he did directly say we should stop using "I know this church is true (or other similar statements)" because it might offend others and, because once again, we don't actually know. 

 

That... I don't agree with.

 

I don't agree with him telling others what they should stop saying. Having said that, I understand what he probably tried to say. A lot of people in Church when sharing their testimonies use the terms "believe" and "know" as the same and they are surely not the same.

[Backroads]

Did he say how it would offend others?

 

Something about today's youth being able to look up other people's stories and other information online that would contradict what someone "knew".

 

Like I said, a strange, strange talk in many of the details.

[The Folk Prophet]

...use the terms "believe" and "know" as the same and they are surely not the same.

 

I disagree...as explained in my prior posts.

[The Folk Prophet]

Something about today's youth being able to look up other people's stories and other information online that would contradict what someone "knew".

 

Like I said, a strange, strange talk in many of the details.

 

Ha ha... so...yeah...this person was going on a mission? Um.....

[beefche]

Yesterday's sacrament meeting revealed a rather strange talk by a soon-to-leave missionary that wound up with follow-up comments by the stake president.

 

 

 

 

What did the stake president say?

[Backroads]

What did the stake president say?

 

A lot in the same vein as what Andy said above, using a lot of scripture to back up his thoughts.  He also emphasized the journey of faith and the importance of growing our faith.  Then he wished the kid success in his own journey of faith (to be fair, this kid has only recently returned from atheism.)

[estradling75]

Joseph Smith saw a vision of God the Father, and Jesus Christ.  This was clearly a profound and spiritual event for him.  When he told others about it he was derided and told it was impossible.  There was no way he could prove such an event...  But his response was that he knew it and that he knew that god knew that he knew it.

 

Do people sometimes overstate what they believe and hope for as knowledge?  Sure.  But at the same time it is very possible for people to have such a profound spiritual witness that it is correct for them to say, "I know"

 

For those of us looking from the outside we simply can not tell the difference barring a spiritual confirmation of their word

[Bini]

It's not a mystery to me where he's coming from. I get it. "Know" and "believe" are different words with differing meanings, despite, the common misuse with interchanging them.

Saying that though, I also understand where people are coming from when they use both words interchangeably. For instance, I know God loves me just as I know my husband loves me. Can I "prove" it? Not really, other than I can FEEL his unconditional love through his actions, which gives me a sense of "knowing" it's something real and not just wishful thinking. The same could be said about God. I can't prove He's real but I have felt His grace, blessings, and warmth - I might say I "know" His presence is very real.

[The Folk Prophet]

Alma's seed analogy helps with this. Knowing is a relative thing that leads to a series of "therefore" clauses of understanding. See bolded by me:

 

28 Now, we will compare the word unto a seed. Now, if ye give place, that a seed may be planted in your heart, behold, if it be a true seed, or a good seed, if ye do not cast it out by your unbelief, that ye will resist the Spirit of the Lord, behold, it will begin to swell within your breasts; and when you feel these swelling motions, ye will begin to say within yourselves—It must needs be that this is a good seed, or that the word is good, for it beginneth to enlarge my soul; yea, it beginneth to enlighten my understanding, yea, it beginneth to be delicious to me.

 

 29 Now behold, would not this increase your faith? I say unto you, Yea; nevertheless it hath not grown up to a perfect knowledge.

 

 30 But behold, as the seed swelleth, and sprouteth, and beginneth to grow, then you must needs say that the seed is good; for behold it swelleth, and sprouteth, and beginneth to grow. And now, behold, will not this strengthen your faith? Yea, it will strengthen your faith: for ye will say I know that this is a good seed; for behold it sprouteth and beginneth to grow.

 

 31 And now, behold, are ye sure that this is a good seed? I say unto you, Yea; for every seed bringeth forth unto its own likeness.

 

 32 Therefore, if a seed groweth it is good, but if it groweth not, behold it is not good, therefore it is cast away.

 

 33 And now, behold, because ye have tried the experiment, and planted the seed, and it swelleth and sprouteth, and beginneth to grow, ye must needs know that the seed is good.

 

 34 And now, behold, is your knowledge perfect? Yea, your knowledge is perfect in that thing, and your faith is dormant; and this because you know, for ye know that the word hath swelled your souls, and ye also know that it hath sprouted up, that your understanding doth begin to be enlightened, and your mind doth begin to expand.

___

 

Does that mean that you know everything? No. But you do know, and saying so is appropriate. In other words, I have experimented upon the seed of the gospel and I have felt it sprout, therefore I know that it is a good thing and therefore I know that it is right and good and true. Is my knowledge absolute? Of course not. But in certain aspects it is, and therefore I can say I know.

[classylady]

As a new missionary in the LTM (Language Training Mission, now the MTC), I was learning the discussions and came to where we testify to the investigator: "I testify to you in the name of Jesus Christ that Joseph Smith saw Jesus Christ and God the Father".  I had to stop and think, could I actually testify in the name of Christ to the truthfulness of the Joseph Smith vision and other aspects of the Gospel?  This was serious.  I couldn't just spout off the words if I didn't actually know if they were true.  To me, testifying in the name of Jesus Christ meant more than just belief.  It meant, I needed to know!  And, I needed more than just the faith and belief that I had.  Had I in the past had a strong spiritual witness of the truthfulness of what I was about to teach investigators?  And, I couldn't think of any.  At the time I was relying on belief and faith.

 

I got down on my knees and prayed for a strong spiritual witness.  I explained to Father in Heaven that if I was going to testify in the name of Christ to His investigators, that I needed more than belief and faith.  I needed to know.  It took more than one prayer.  It took a lot of tears and humility on my part.  But, I got my spiritual witness.  To this day I cannot deny that witness.  And, I was able to go out into the mission field with more than faith and belief.  I was able to go out in the field with knowledge.  I was able to testify in the name of Jesus Christ of the truthfulness of the Gospel, and of the truthfulness of Joseph Smith's vision.

 

For those who have never received a spiritual witness from the Holy Ghost, they may never understand how one can say "I know".  But, if you have received that witness, then you understand and it's undeniable.

[Palerider]

I am not worked up with either phrase.....you either do or you don't. If the Book of Mormon is true and Joseph Smith was a prophet it all falls into place. You can either believe it or you might know it. All I want to know is regardless of which phrase you use....I want to know how you found out.

[Quin]

4 loosely related thoughts:

The older I get, the less I know.

Someday, said M2B will be sitting listening to another boyo, feeling the same way your were listening to him.

Can't change the world, and always going to offend someone.

Sounds like his heart is in the right place. His head will catch up.

Q

[Dravin]

As far as the distinction goes, while I can understand making the distinction if one wants to discuss things in philosophical, theological, or technical contexts, using know to mean "something I really strongly believe to be the case" is accepted English usage of the word. So, even given his premise that nobody knows things in a gospel context, in the sense he means, he's objecting to standard English usage, just because it's the second definition provided by Merriam-Webster ( http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/know ) doesn't make it incorrect.

 

Generally when you find people arguing over if someone can claim they know something spiritual you've got someone who is arguing a connotative definition with you, and connotative definitions are highly experience, context, and culture dependent.

[MarginOfError]

I usually say that I 'believe' things.  That's a personal and deliberate choice.  There's a two-part explanation for my choice.

 

First, I tend to think of 'know' as a word that suggests demonstrable, objective knowledge.  The example I usually employ is that most people don't know that x * 0= 0.  They think they know it, but they really only believe it.  People often object and say that they know it, but when asked to prove it, they are at a total loss and reply "It just is."  That isn't knowledge.  That's a very strong faith put into practice.  And there's nothing wrong with that.  Most people simply don't need to know that x*0 = 0.  The belief is sufficient.

 

The second reason I avoid using 'know' is that I disliked the way so many youth in my area were coached to bear testimony.  We were told to always use the phrase "I know" and never to use "I believe" because "I believe" implied doubt.  I have spoken to others in my generation who were raised in other parts of the country and were taught the same thing.  I object to the idea that "belief" is a sign of weakness, and so I am careful to state that I "believe" things are true because I want people to hear it more often.  I want to eliminate that connotation that a mere belief is bad.

 

But I think this young man when a bit too far in saying that we shouldn't say we know things that we can't prove.  As Dravin pointed out, "know" has connotations beyond objectively verifiable truth.  It makes a lot more sense to try and understand people's intent than to criticize their choice of words.

[mordorbund]

I had a mission companion get called out on his use of saying "I know" in his testimony. I took it as a learning experience and dropped the phrase. I don't replace it with anything else. I don't use the phrase when describing other truths I've learned or experienced:

 

 I know I had a mission companion get called out on his use of saying "I know" in his testimony. I know I took it as a learning experience and dropped the phrase. I know I don't replace it with anything else. I know I don't use the phrase when describing other truths I've learned or experienced:

I know x*0 = 0; I know if you drop a ball it will accelerate at 9.81 m/s^2. I know earning a slap across the jaw smarts, and I know it's not smart.

 

I just state it as fact like other facts: Joseph Smith saw God the Father and Jesus Christ. This is the only living and true church. God loves you and Jesus lives!

[Anddenex]

On my mission, an anti presented the same question (he was Christian himself).  He asked the question, "Why do you suggest to say "I know" when you actually act in faith, a hope?"  We explained ourselves, and he rebuttled.  I thought it interesting when his rebuttles ended, knowing he was Christian, when confronted with his own beliefs as we stated, "We know Joseph Smith is a prophet as we know Jesus is the Christ."  He didn't have much to say after this, because he himself would not consider his "belief" a mere whim, a mere hope, but knowledge that there is an afterlife.

 

I went through period where I felt similar to Mordorbund, and my testimony would be simple statements of fact.  God lives.  He is our father....

 

As of now, I would disagree with the young man, because the purpose of the Holy Ghost is supply us with knowledge, truth.  Once revealed by the Holy Ghost, we have been given knowlege, not just a mere belief.  Through experience we are provided other witnesses to clarify and increase what we have already received.

 

I now use both simple statements of facts along with "I know."  Otherwise, how are we to interpret Moroni 10: 3-5, "by the power of the Holy Ghost ye may KNOW the truth of all things"?

 

We are informed that a sure witness from the Holy Ghost is more powerful (maybe not correct word) than a visit from the Savior himself, or a visit from an angel.

 

I know, not believe, that prayers are answered.  As to why some are answered and some are not...still learning, but I do know prayers are answered.

 

I don't blame the young missionary because he was speaking from his knowledge, and I would agree from his knowledge, he is possibly only in a "believing" stage in his life. 

[mordorbund]

By the way, there's a great story of President Kimball helping his missionary son come to terms with "know" vs "believe".

 

 

In 1947 Elder Spencer W. Kimball received a letter from his son Andrew, who was serving a full-time mission. Andrew wrote: “I told one fellow … that I knew of the truthfulness of what I told him, and said that the Holy Ghost had borne witness of it to me. … When I thought about it later I was a little concerned that I should do such a thing.” Because of his concern he said, “I’ve carefully avoided bearing my testimony to anyone beyond the point of saying ‘I feel, I believe, etc.’”

 

Elder Kimball wrote back to his son. “I think I know exactly how you felt,” he said, “for I went through the same experience in my mission. I wanted to be very honest with myself and with the program and with the Lord. For a time I couched my words carefully to try to build up others without actually committing myself to a positive, unequivocal statement that I knew. I felt a little hesitant about it, too, for when I was in tune and doing my duty I felt the Spirit. I really wanted to say that which I really felt, that I knew, but I was reticent. When I approached a positive declaration, it frightened me and yet when I was wholly in tune and spiritually inspired, I wanted to testify. I thought I was being honest, very honest, but then I decided that I was fooling myself. …

 

“Undoubtedly, the day you testified to your investigator that you KNEW it was true, the Lord was trying so hard to reveal this truth to you through the power of the Holy Ghost. While you were in the Spirit and in tune and defending the holy program, you felt it deeply, but after you were ‘out of the Spirit’ and began to reason with yourself and check yourself and question yourself, you wanted to back out. …

 

“I have no question in my mind of your testimony. I am sure that you (like I did) have countless golden threads of testimony all through your being only waiting for the hand of the Master Weaver to assemble and weave them into a tapestry of exquisite and perfect design. Now my son, take my advice and QUENCH NOT THE SPIRIT, but whenever the Spirit whispers, follow its holy promptings. Keep in tune spiritually and listen for the promptings and when you are impressed speak out boldly your impressions. The Lord will magnify your testimony and touch hearts. I hope that you will know that there is no criticism herein, but only attempted helpfulness. …

 

“I cannot close my epistle to you without bearing you my testimony. I know that it is true—that Jesus is the Creator and Redeemer; that the Gospel taught by us and our 3,000 missionaries is restored and revealed through the real Prophet, Joseph Smith, and is of God, and I have consecrated the balance of my life to ‘preaching the kingdom.’ I [have borne] my testimony boldly … and I reaffirm it again and again. I am sure your testimony is the same except perhaps your golden threads need only to be woven into a complete tapestry which will quickly be accomplished in your missionary work as you turn your heart loose and let it rule your mind.

 

“May God help you to weave into a beautiful pattern the golden threads of your experience and inspiration and may you with always increasing power continue … to live and teach the everlasting truth.”

 

 

The entire chapter is worth a good read (and a better ponder).