Nonbeliever's questions about your faith

[Guest Mores]

@Madam_Mim

I've really tried to be patient with your questions because you've been very polite.  But you're showing a pattern in questioning over and over again.  And I'm wondering if you even see it.

You've been basically saying,"I know everything I need to know.  You tell me how your God knows more than I do."  Begin with that attitude and you will always find some reason to ignore God.  If you actually believe you don't know it all, then try finding reasons to believe rather than finding reasons to not believe.

I said that my three items were not meant to be all-inclusive.  But instead of seeing the truth of what I have said, you try to find the exception and the flaws.  If you've actually lived through a hurricane, and known what GOOD came out of it, I think you'd see things differently.  But you're happy in your cozy (and boring) world where natural disasters don't happen -- comfortable in the fact that you know better.  If not, then try to have more empathy for people who have actually been there.

All throughout human history, the idea of light shining in darkness has been a part of our psyche, a part of history and literature.  The tales of heroism that inspire us and future generations are found everywhere.  But your counter-argument is to discount that as unnecessary?  Give some examples.  And I'll show you eventual conclusion of  your argument.  I've had the discussions with dozens of atheists.  I used to actually make them myself when I was an atheist.  Every tragedy has the potential for heroism.  And I would not deny them the opportunity.  But different people will be considered heroes in different situations.

• A baker decides to take his leftover dough and bake some odds and ends to give to a local homeless shelter each night.
• Another baker is trapped in his store  during a hurricane and decides to take hundreds of pounds of flour and bake as many loaves as his power and gas allow him to make.  Then as the flood waters recede, he gives them to first responders and rescue trucks to take to the homeless and displaced.

Yes, both are heroes.  Both did what they could.  But just because the first is a hero, would you refuse the opportunity for the second to be a hero?  What if he simply didn't have the means or opportunity to do the little thing every day like the first baker?  But this catastrophe really brought people together and made the entire community realize we're all one.  It gave him both a motivation and an line of action to become that hero that was within him.

Photographs made it to the news where a guy with a confederate flag took his motorboat and saved the life of an entire black family that were suffering from hypothermia in a deeply flooded area.  The flag didn't matter.  Skin color didn't matter.  All that mattered was that we were all in need.  And we all had a responsibility to help.

But you simply discount that because you know better.  If that's your fall back, you're never going to be ready to hear the Spirit teach you anything. 

If you want to open yourself up to learning, try to see why the general rule is true rather than why an exception would render it untrue.  This is a good practice even in academic learning as well as any truth of life or of God.

Edited May 7, 2019 by Mores

[Jane_Doe]

1 hour ago, Madam_Mim said:

Where I live, we don't have big natural disasters, there are no hurricanes, earthquakes or deadly floods and we're really happy about that!  I think there are enough other ways to help people and show heroism - no deadly catastrophes necessary. 

But again, even though I can't really relate to them, it's interesting to read your answers and they lead me to another question:
What about deadly diseases or miscarriages? Do you believe they have a purpose too? 

God uses EVERYthing to further His purposes.  The things we enjoy, the things that cause us pain, the good, the bad, etc:  they all in some way help us to learn, to grow, and (eventually) find the fullness of joy.  

1 hour ago, Madam_Mim said:

I'm just curious: In this scenario you really wouldn't consider just for a second that it might be the other way around and the Muslim friend got the "right" message and it's actually Allah who thinks that you are in a better spiritual health in your church for now? Or would that thought not even cross your mind? 

I can only work off the best information *I* have.  No better can be done.

1 hour ago, Madam_Mim said:

My "problem" is: Even if I ignore everything I've heard other people say about their belief and just focus on my own experiences and pray about this - if I honestly try to find the truth, I can't just rely on my feelings. I've mentioned this before: Just because we feel something really strongly doesn't mean we're right.  

As some of you already said, I can't expect God to prove himself to us. For me personally, that's ok (although a little more evidence would have been helpful and prevented some wars and deaths) - but then he also shouldn't expect me to follow his rules as long as we can't be certain that he even exists. Why would I do that? That seems completely illogical to me. But anyways... I'm talking too much about myself again. 

1) Listening to God is different that listening to how *I* feel.  My thoughts/feelings jump around like a hyper-caffeinated jackrabbit.  I'm short sighted, impatient, prone for the dramatic, and downright petty.  God is... for me anyways, His voice is calm.  Driven by the huge picture, patient, and very reflective.  

2) Expriment on His words: go out, live it, and see the results yourself.  

1 hour ago, Madam_Mim said:

Do you take the Adam and Eve story literally or is it viewed as a metaphor? (I've read different opinions about this from catholic authors, that's why I'm asking)

There's actually a full spectrum between 100% literal to 100% metaphorical.  And you'll find LDS folks all over that spectrum, all in 100% good standing.

[estradling75]

In psychology they have what is call the Rorschach test.  (The thing with the inkblots on paper).

In and of itself this test has a limit set of "Truth"  (Paper with Random Ink on it), Yet a psychologist can use it to to gain greater understanding of the patent responding to the test.  Because what a patent sees in it is going to be more about what is going on with them then what the Object Truth is (again ink on paper)

I might see Carebears, @Jane_Doe might see question marks, @Mores might see Norm, @Madam_Mim might see wizards.  We all experience the limited objective truth of the test, but we all come up with something different that we saw.  Does the our differences mean the test is invalid?  Does our differences mean that the objective truth of the test is not True after all? No of course not.  It simply means different people can experience the exact same thing and come away with different meanings.  And that which we come away with tell more about us... then it does about the test or the test giver.

 

[Guest Mores]

1 hour ago, estradling75 said:

In psychology they have what is call the Rorschach test.  (The thing with the inkblots on paper).

In and of itself this test has a limit set of "Truth"  (Paper with Random Ink on it), Yet a psychologist can use it to to gain greater understanding of the patent responding to the test.  Because what a patent sees in it is going to be more about what is going on with them then what the Object Truth is (again ink on paper)

I might see Carebears, @Jane_Doe might see question marks, @Mores might see Norm, @Madam_Mim might see wizards.  We all experience the limited objective truth of the test, but we all come up with something different that we saw.  Does the our differences mean the test is invalid?  Does our differences mean that the objective truth of the test is not True after all? No of course not.  It simply means different people can experience the exact same thing and come away with different meanings.  And that which we come away with tell more about us... then it does about the test or the test giver.

A valid point and analogy to bring up.  I wonder, though, what psychologists would say about me.

I've seen many of these so called tests.  And I usually "instantly" see four or five possibilities equally jumping out at me.  When I hear some other people's ideas, I look again and say,"Oh, yeah, I can see that."  Sometimes, I think,"Uhmm... if you say so.  I guess I can kinda sorta see that (not)."

When I see these multiple possibilities, I am not bothered by it because I'm not under any impetus to determine which is "right" because there is nor "right" or "wrong" with this test.

But when determining truth in life and metaphysics, there is a right.  And there is a wrong.  And it is important for us to figure out which it is.  But it starts with actually seeing all the possibilities to begin with.  We see what is right about each possibility.

The next step is different for each of us.  There is a difference between trying to see what is wrong with each picture (to rule it out) vs. trying to see how each might fit into the big picture.  I think that those who already "know" what is right tend to decide that they must rule out what they don't already accept. This is a closed mind.  This is one who says that they already have the whole picture.  And all that can be done is to replace what they have with something new -- which virtually no one does.

But the open minded person sees how the new interpretation may fit into the empty spaces we all have.  An open minded person realizes that our minds and hearts are not completely filled up.  He realizes that one person's knowledge and experience cannot be the end all and be all of knowing the truths of the universe or of God.  We constantly search for the new and the edifying.  But too many seek for the limiting, the justification to stop learning.

[Madam_Mim]

19 hours ago, unixknight said:

Sure that's occurred to me.  And what if it is?  My response would be the same.  If Allah is the true incarnation of God and He is telling me to join the LDS Church, then I'd better do it, don't you think?  😉

 

Fair enough!

19 hours ago, unixknight said:

Are my feelings right or wrong?  All I can do is trust my experience.  It's the only tool each of us has in common.  I know I'm not prone to hallucinations.  I don't have flights of fantasy.  I haven't ever had a similar experience about anything else.  I know the voice of my Father in Heaven.  I'm not going to make myself doubt it just for the sake of calling myself an enlightened skeptic

Haha ok. Maybe I would feel the same way if I had the same experience that you (and others here) had. Still, a little more obvious hints for god's existence, and not just communicating with people in a way that can't be witnessed by others would be really helpful. Not just for unbelievers - but also or especially for believers, since they wouldn't get ridiculed or judged for their beliefs AND they wouldn't have to deal with people like me anymore. 

 

18 hours ago, Mores said:

I said that my three items were not meant to be all-inclusive.  But instead of seeing the truth of what I have said, you try to find the exception and the flaws.  If you've actually lived through a hurricane, and known what GOOD came out of it, I think you'd see things differently.  But you're happy in your cozy (and boring) world where natural disasters don't happen -- comfortable in the fact that you know better.  If not, then try to have more empathy for people who have actually been there.

You're just grumpy because God apparently loves us more over here  😎😉 (couldn't resist)
No sorry - I didn't mean to come off like I think I'm right and everyone else is wrong. I'm not denying that it's amazing what some people do to help and support others. I just didn't find the thought that therefor tragedies are somehow a good thing very convincing. But it's perfectly fine if we just leave it at that - you've really been very patient so far.

[unixknight]

1 hour ago, Madam_Mim said:

Haha ok. Maybe I would feel the same way if I had the same experience that you (and others here) had. Still, a little more obvious hints for god's existence, and not just communicating with people in a way that can't be witnessed by others would be really helpful. Not just for unbelievers - but also or especially for believers, since they wouldn't get ridiculed or judged for their beliefs AND they wouldn't have to deal with people like me anymore. 

I've thought about why God doesn't make Himself more  obvious, and I think the answer, at least in part, is this:

The central feature of the Gospel is Faith.  Without faith, we have nothing.  So why is faith so critical?

Well, Every single thing Jesus taught, especially in terms of how we interact with one another, is to be selfless.  To put others first.  To put God first.  To put aside our own greed, lust, narcissism, whatever.  Anything that we might prioritize over loving others (including God) is to be pushed aside.  This is what Christian spirituality is.  It encompasses self denial, fasting, abstaining from things... Name it.

What is faith, but the ultimate expression of putting aside our self for a higher purpose?  If God were to make His presence more obvious, then believing in Him would be a no-brainer.  It wouldn't require faith to believe in Him and follow Him.  Knowing God existed would become a given and nobody in their right mind would choose an atheist view if they knew, for a fact, that there as a God in Heaven. 

But what then?  How could one demonstrate faith and a philosophy of selflessness?  It's been said that honor is what you have when you do the right thing even when nobody is watching.  Well, if every single person knew they were being watched all of the time, how would anyone, even God, judge us?  By His existence being nigh impossible to prove empirically, only those who exercise faith in Him, and live like He knows what we do, are showing a desire to live to a higher, more selfless path.

Who would you trust more to take your daughter out on a date?  Eddie Haskell, who's the very paragon of a polite, friendly and clean cut young man (as long as he knows there are adults watching him) or Wally Cleaver, whose behavior changes relatively little when mom and dad leave the room?

 

 

[Madam_Mim]

@unixknight I think I get what you're saying and again: Thanks for sharing your view.

Some believers do claim they "know" that god exists or that the church is true. Do you think that's still different from people actually knowing (if god demonstrated his existence) he exists and therefore behaving a certain way (as you mentioned)? I'm not criticising in any way, I'm just wondering what the difference is. Because I assume you too think that god watches everything you do?

 

 

[Madam_Mim]

For someone who doesn't even believe in an afterlife, I'm probably thinking about heaven too much but I have a few more things on my mind.

Of course this is all just speculative but what does the church teach or - if there are no official teachings about it - what do you think about heaven:

- Do you have free will? So could you sin and would there be consequences for sinning? 

- What do you think will you be doing in heaven? I know that's such a stupid question, but when I'm picturing heaven I'm wondering for example if you have books there and where you would get them from. And are you living in houses (and who's building them)? I don't expect you to give me definite answers - I'm just curious how you picture it. 

- And has the idea of eternity ever been scary or uncomfortable to you? You have no chance to ever end your existence in heaven, do you? That's one thing I really like about mortality - knowing that I can end my life anytime I want is extremely comforting to me. Not that I'm suicidal or anything, it's just nice to know that we have this option. 
 

 

 

[unixknight]

3 minutes ago, Madam_Mim said:

@unixknight I think I get what you're saying and again: Thanks for sharing your view.

Some believers do claim they "know" that god exists or that the church is true. Do you think that's still different from people actually knowing (if god demonstrated his existence) he exists and therefore behaving a certain way (as you mentioned)? I'm not criticising in any way, I'm just wondering what the difference is. Because I assume you too think that god watches everything you do?

I do think it's a little different, if I understand your question... but in effect both types of  knowledge are the same  In the former example you mention, there can be room for doubt to creep in under certain circumstances.  People struggle with their faith all the time even if they have had a testimony.  Not everybody experiences this, but many do.  I think that has a lot to do with human psychology though.  I mean, I know for certain that my car is parked outside on the top level of the parking garage, because I can look out the window near my cubicle and see it.  But the longer I go without looking, the easier it might be for me to experience doubt that it's still there.  It doesn't mean I wasn't absolutely certain when I last looked.  I mean, I *saw* my car was there.  Maybe I took a picture of it.  The evidence was about as absolute as it gets.  But, if 2 hours from now I've been away from the window, am I still absolutely certain?  There's a chance it's gone, isn't there?  Doesn't mean it really is gone or that I didn't see it before.  The human mind is a paranoid thing, and no absolute certainty exists for long without re-checking.

This is why I pray for stronger faith and testimony from time to time.

Does God watch everything I do?  Well, I don't know if I'd phrase it that way.  I believe He does *know* what I do, and He knows what's in my heart, but I don't imagine He's sitting in a chair somewhere looking at the life of unixknight every moment.

1 minute ago, Madam_Mim said:

- Do you have free will? So could you sin and would there be consequences for sinning? 

Yes.  We have free will otherwise it would be impossible to sin.  To sin is to choose to disobey God's will.  By definition, that must mean we have that free will to make the choice.

And yes.  "The wages of sin is death."  That's metaphorical, and it refers to the absence of eternal life in the light of God.  We all sin, but through the Atonement of Jesus Christ, we can be forgiven and those sins washed away entirely.

1 minute ago, Madam_Mim said:

- What do you think will you be doing in heaven? I know that's such a stupid question, but when I'm picturing heaven I'm wondering for example if you have books there and where you would get them from. And are you living in houses (and who's building them)? I don't expect you to give me definite answers - I'm just curious how you picture it. 

Personally I believe it's not possible to imagine the Celestial Kingdom based on any image or experience from my mortal life, but I do believe I will continue to grow, to learn and to experience things we can't even dream of.

1 minute ago, Madam_Mim said:

- And has the idea of eternity ever been scary or uncomfortable to you? You have no chance to ever end your existence in heaven, do you? That's one thing I really like about mortality - knowing that I can end my life anytime I want is extremely comforting to me. Not that I'm suicidal or anything, it's just nice to know that we have this option. 

I don't imagine eternity as simply being an infinite timeline in a 3 dimensional universe.  I think eternity means not only time but space and dimension.  What is awesome to think about isn't an infinite number of years, but whole new dimensions our mortal brains can't comprehend.  I also don't believe that we'll be stagnant in that state.  We will always have change, growth, new experiences and new things to see and do.  Stagnation would be pretty scary, but I don't see it as being plausible.

[Madam_Mim]

@unixknight Just giving a "thumbs up" without any kind of reply might seem like I didn't really care about your explanations, so just to make that clear: I simply have nothing to add to that ☺️It was definitely an interesting read. 

I guess that's all for now. Thanks everyone for your comments and patience! 

[unixknight]

16 hours ago, Madam_Mim said:

@unixknight Just giving a "thumbs up" without any kind of reply might seem like I didn't really care about your explanations, so just to make that clear: I simply have nothing to add to that ☺️It was definitely an interesting read. 

I guess that's all for now. Thanks everyone for your comments and patience! 

Haha thanks for the note then.  Glad to help!