MrShorty

A Pentacostal Reads the BoM

Recommended Posts

I thought of @prisonchaplain while listening to Rick Bennet's (Gospel Tangents podcast) interview with Dr. Chris Thomas who recently wrote a book about his experience reading the Book of Mormon as a Pentacostal. I thought prisonchaplain and some of you others may enjoy this. I notice prisonchaplain hasn't been on the forum in a while. All's well, I hope??

https://gospeltangents.com/2021/11/pentecostal-bom-bible-treatment/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, MrShorty said:

I thought of @prisonchaplain while listening to Rick Bennet's (Gospel Tangents podcast) interview with Dr. Chris Thomas who recently wrote a book about his experience reading the Book of Mormon as a Pentacostal. I thought prisonchaplain and some of you others may enjoy this. I notice prisonchaplain hasn't been on the forum in a while. All's well, I hope??

https://gospeltangents.com/2021/11/pentecostal-bom-bible-treatment/

I was thinking of him myself the other day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, MrShorty said:

I thought of @prisonchaplain while listening to Rick Bennet's (Gospel Tangents podcast) interview with Dr. Chris Thomas who recently wrote a book about his experience reading the Book of Mormon as a Pentacostal. I thought prisonchaplain and some of you others may enjoy this. I notice prisonchaplain hasn't been on the forum in a while. All's well, I hope??

I struggle to understand how a Christian can study the Book of Mormon in depth and come away from it without reaching one of two conclusions:

1)  It is the Word of God as is the Bible

2)  It is not the Word of God, but if not, the Bible must not be either

I tend to automatically assume that one who reads the Book of Mormon and doesn't believe it to be true could not have fulfilled Moroni's promise, or they cast out the witness they received.  It is a very direct promise: ". . .he will manifest the truth of it unto you, by the power of the Holy Ghost."  On a separate but related note: If I were to ever leave the Church, the only other option is atheism / agnosticism.  It just seems too obvious to me that other religions are just as (if not more) flawed as detractors claim ours to be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, person0 said:

I struggle to understand how a Christian can study the Book of Mormon in depth and come away from it without reaching one of two conclusions:

1)  It is the Word of God as is the Bible

2)  It is not the Word of God, but if not, the Bible must not be either

I tend to automatically assume that one who reads the Book of Mormon and doesn't believe it to be true could not have fulfilled Moroni's promise, or they cast out the witness they received.  It is a very direct promise: ". . .he will manifest the truth of it unto you, by the power of the Holy Ghost."  On a separate but related note: If I were to ever leave the Church, the only other option is atheism / agnosticism.  It just seems too obvious to me that other religions are just as (if not more) flawed as detractors claim ours to be.

As I read through the link I had much the same impression as you.  When the person said that they were not impressed - I drilled down and discovered that they were not impressed with the Book of Mormon as religious literature produced by a 19th century man named Joseph Smith.  Such a statement is akin to not being impressed by the Bible as literature compiled and reconstructed through the influence of a War Lord King from the Dark Ages. 

You are correct in your assessment in part in considering the Book of Mormon through the modern science of textual criticism and applying the same textual analytics with the Bible.  Even the popular DNA criticism towards the Book of Mormon also disproves the Bible.  Especially the Biblical narrative of mankind springing from the singular parents (Adam and Eve) 6,000 years ago as well as the narrative of a global flood around 5 thousands years ago.

The most astonishing claim of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is that G-d has restored light and truth of his power and plan for the salvation of all mankind in these "last days" for the singular purpose of preparing a covenant people for the return and 1,000 year reign of his Messiah Son.  For those that are not impressed with the Prophet Joseph Smith Jr. - I would challenge that they speak directly to:

          1. That our era is not at all related to the Last-days

          2.  That Joseph Smith did not produce any religious thought of any difference or importance.

           3. That there is a far better Last-day source of religious thoughts to bring mankind back to Christ.

As far as religions go - if it was not for the restoration - I am impressed with the intelligent light and truths taught in some of the adherents of Buddhism and in some cases Islam.  The adherents of "Traditional" Christianity I find "spiritually" as bankrupted as the Pharisees and Sadducees - having a "form" of G-dlyness but denying the power thereof. 

 

The Traveler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/20/2021 at 5:18 PM, person0 said:

I struggle to understand how a Christian can study the Book of Mormon in depth and come away from it without reaching one of two conclusions:

1)  It is the Word of God as is the Bible

2)  It is not the Word of God, but if not, the Bible must not be either

I tend to automatically assume that one who reads the Book of Mormon and doesn't believe it to be true could not have fulfilled Moroni's promise, or they cast out the witness they received.  It is a very direct promise: ". . .he will manifest the truth of it unto you, by the power of the Holy Ghost."  On a separate but related note: If I were to ever leave the Church, the only other option is atheism / agnosticism.  It just seems too obvious to me that other religions are just as (if not more) flawed as detractors claim ours to be.

 I would say I have studied the Book of Mormon in depth, I also did come follow me all last year (and most of this year on D&C) I've attended LDS church (when I can due to covid). I've lived the Word of Wisdom the entire time, I've prayed with a sincere heart to know if its true.  After almost two years of sincere seeking (and I mean very sincere) I have to conclude that it's not true.  It makes me really sad because I WANT it to be true.

I do still believe the Bible is the word of God though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/21/2021 at 3:10 AM, Traveler said:

 

You are correct in your assessment in part in considering the Book of Mormon through the modern science of textual criticism and applying the same textual analytics with the Bible.  Even the popular DNA criticism towards the Book of Mormon also disproves the Bible.  Especially the Biblical narrative of mankind springing from the singular parents (Adam and Eve) 6,000 years ago as well as the narrative of a global flood around 5 thousands years ago.

The Traveler

The 6000 year thing is largely due to an Irish Anglican Archbishop called James Ussher in the 1600s, a bible was even published with his 'supposed' dates on the top of pages in the bible, they were taken out around 1900.  Most Christian Denominations don't believe the world is only 6000 years old.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, marge said:

I would say I have studied the Book of Mormon in depth, I also did come follow me all last year (and most of this year on D&C) I've attended LDS church (when I can due to covid). I've lived the Word of Wisdom the entire time, I've prayed with a sincere heart to know if its true.  After almost two years of sincere seeking (and I mean very sincere) I have to conclude that it's not true.  It makes me really sad because I WANT it to be true.

I mean no disrespect, but I know the Book of Mormon is true by the power of the Holy Ghost.  It cannot be true for some and not true for others.  If you believe you have not received an answer, there is either something missing from your methodology, or from the way you seek, interpret, or accept answers from God.  If you truly want to know it is true, and are willing to act upon a personal witness and confirmation, as a community, we would love to help you dissect and enhance your process of seeking and finding, so that you may not only receive, but also recognize the witness God has prepared for you.

Edited by person0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@person0 It seems a bit presumptuous  (coupled with some hubris, IMO) to assume that your testimony MUST transfer to others or they have obviously done something wrong. I, too, have a testimony of the Book of Mormon from the Holy Ghost, but I'm not entirely certain I agree that my testimony means that ALL others are expected to receive the same testimony.

In some ways, I think some of this "all or nothing" thinking is part of why many people leave the Church. They come to look at some of the difficult, contested issues, decide that the Church's position on that issue is not true and, because they believe it is all or nothing as we have been taught, their entire house of cards crashes. I don't fully understand how it all works, but I find myself shying away from some of this all or nothing absolutism that characterized my older faith.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, MrShorty said:

. . . to assume that your testimony MUST transfer to others. . .

I haven't done that.

26 minutes ago, MrShorty said:

. . . I'm not entirely certain I agree that my testimony means that ALL others are expected to receive the same testimony.

It is neither you nor I, but God's promise, as declared by Moroni, that establishes that everyone will receive a testimony of the Book of Mormon by the power of the Holy Ghost, if they properly adhere to the requirements of the promise as it pertains to their individual situation, assuming they 'do not cast it out by [their] unbelief'.

35 minutes ago, MrShorty said:

In some ways, I think some of this "all or nothing" thinking is part of why many people leave the Church. They come to look at some of the difficult, contested issues, decide that the Church's position on that issue is not true and, because they believe it is all or nothing as we have been taught, their entire house of cards crashes. I don't fully understand how it all works, but I find myself shying away from some of this all or nothing absolutism that characterized my older faith.

I believe this is unrelated.  The Book of Mormon being true has nothing to do with whether or not some other Church policy, teaching, or statement is true.  If one disagree's, they are free to take it up with God and Moroni, who also promised, "God shall show unto you, that that which I have written is true."

It is not my intent to be hard.  I desire that all understand that they will come to know the Book of Mormon is true by the power of the Holy Ghost when they follow the prescribed way to obtain a witness as it pertains to their circumstances.  Otherwise, God would be a respecter of persons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, marge said:

The 6000 year thing is largely due to an Irish Anglican Archbishop called James Ussher in the 1600s, a bible was even published with his 'supposed' dates on the top of pages in the bible, they were taken out around 1900.  Most Christian Denominations don't believe the world is only 6000 years old.  

I am grateful for your responses on this thread.  I would, if you would respond inquire into your reasoning concerning the Book of Mormon and the Bible - especially concerning your above comments.  Please note that I was not talking about the age of the world but rather that the first of the species of man in the person of Adam and Eve existed some 6,000 years ago along with the biblical narrative of a global flood (know of as the flood of Noah) took place some 5,000 years ago.

My specific point about DNA and DNA diversion today - if such cannot be allowed since the initial migration of civilized modern man (according to the Book of Mormon) was somewhere around 3,000 BC or not long following the flood.   This means the if the DNA diversity is inconsistent with Book of Mormon claims - it is even more so with Biblical claims.   Even if the flood epoch is mitigated and we make calculations based of the Biblical claims of Adam being the first of the modern human species about 6,000 years ago. 

There is another issue in this type of discussion concerning modern archology and the traditional classification of what is prehistoric.  In essence that the historian Homer marks the change from pre-historic to historic in classical literature around 750 BC.  This identifies pre-literature as symbolic and fantastic whereas historical literature is historically accurate - thus the label of historic verses pre-historic.

My question is do you believe that the Bible is the very word of G-d and that Adam lived as the first of mankind 6,000 years ago (also that Adam's life span approached almost 1,000 years) and that there was a global flood about 5,000 years ago and that all land creatures (including humans) that survived the  flood of Noah - did so on the Ark of Noah with the dimensions as specified in our modern versions of the Bible?  In other words are the Biblical claims from ancient texts - symbolic and fantastic or are they historical?  THANKS

 

The Traveler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Traveler said:

I am grateful for your responses on this thread.  I would, if you would respond inquire into your reasoning concerning the Book of Mormon and the Bible - especially concerning your above comments.  Please note that I was not talking about the age of the world but rather that the first of the species of man in the person of Adam and Eve existed some 6,000 years ago along with the biblical narrative of a global flood (know of as the flood of Noah) took place some 5,000 years ago.

The Traveler

The 6000 year age of the earth and the belief that man existed for 6000 years is tied together in the same flawed calculations, along with the flood.

I'll read and respond to the rest of your post later on today :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, person0 said:

I mean no disrespect, but I know the Book of Mormon is true by the power of the Holy Ghost.  It cannot be true for some and not true for others.  If you believe you have not received an answer, there is either something missing from your methodology, or from the way you seek, interpret, or accept answers from God.  If you truly want to know it is true, and are willing to act upon a personal witness and confirmation, as a community, we would love to help you dissect and enhance your process of seeking and finding, so that you may not only receive, but also recognize the witness God has prepared for you.

I mean no disrespect either but I find this response extremely close minded. To assume that because I didn't get the same answer as you did that my answer is wrong, my methodology for finding my answer is wrong, or that I don't understand, recognise or refuse to accept the 'right' answer from God, or that I wasn't willing enough is well, too be honest, insulting and comes across as quite arrogant.  

I poured my heart and soul into this religion for two years, and wanted nothing more than for it to be true.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Traveler said:

 

My question is do you believe that the Bible is the very word of G-d and that Adam lived as the first of mankind 6,000 years ago (also that Adam's life span approached almost 1,000 years) and that there was a global flood about 5,000 years ago and that all land creatures (including humans) that survived the  flood of Noah - did so on the Ark of Noah with the dimensions as specified in our modern versions of the Bible?  In other words are the Biblical claims from ancient texts - symbolic and fantastic or are they historical?  THANKS

 

The Traveler

I don't believe in the dates proposed by James Ussher at all (as most christian denominations don't) so I don't believe man only existed or the flood was only 5000 years ago.  If you look at ancient history every culture has a flood story, the epic of gilgamesh for example is basically the same story as noah, except its 1000s of years older than the Genesis account.  I believe there was a great flood in ancient history, the date of it, I don't think anyone knows.  Perhaps there were several of differing degrees.  

Your question seems to be asking me if I am a bible literalist (6000 years, timing of the flood etc) I am not, but that doesn't mean the bible is not the word of God.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, Traveler said:

 

also that Adam's life span approached almost 1,000 years) and that there was a global flood about 5,000 years ago and that all land creatures (including humans) that survived the  flood of Noah - did so on the Ark of Noah with the dimensions as specified in our modern versions of the Bible?  In other words are the Biblical claims from ancient texts - symbolic and fantastic or are they historical?  THANKS

 

The Traveler

With regards to the lifespan of early biblical figures, God for some reason decided that living that long was a bad move so he cut it down to 120 years (I find it super interesting that the maximum lifespan for humans is 120 - I think there was one person who lived until 122)  A lot of Genesis is focussed on Genetics, kill the giants, wipe out this city etc etc. Maybe that's why there was a flood in the first place, to wipe out the bad genetics? (Genesis 6:4 for example produced abominable offspring in the eyes of God). I don't know but I'll be sure to ask when I get to heaven 😂

I think people wrote down with sincerity what they saw, what was passed down by verbal knowledge for probably 1000s of years, and what they felt guided by God to record.  I think it's better to compare it to a child looking at something they can't possibly understand and trying to explain it.  A child's description of seeing a rocket ship take off would be a lot different to yours or my version of the same story.  

I think the bible is a record of people trying their best to explain something they don't (and can't) truely understand with Gods guidance.  That doesn't make it not the word of God.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, marge said:

I poured my heart and soul into this religion for two years, and wanted nothing more than for it to be true.  

It is true.  Neither your nor my wants have any bearing on it.  It simply is.  Don't get me wrong, I understand your perspective.  What you perceive as arrogance is confidence in God and the witness of His Spirit.  My relationship with my Heavenly Father and my Savior, Jesus Christ, and the manifestations of God's power in my life, both temporal and spiritual have led me to this knowledge time and time again.  I know you can come to this knowledge, too.

I don't know the circumstances surrounding your efforts to seek an answer, so I can only judge based on God's promise that I know for myself to be true.  If you are interested and willing to hear it, I will gladly share my experience with the fulfillment of that promise in the hopes that it may help you.  Would you like me to share my witness and would you be willing to hear the Spirit witness to your Spirit that my experience and testimony is true?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, MrShorty said:

@person0 It seems a bit presumptuous  (coupled with some hubris, IMO) to assume that your testimony MUST transfer to others or they have obviously done something wrong. I, too, have a testimony of the Book of Mormon from the Holy Ghost, but I'm not entirely certain I agree that my testimony means that ALL others are expected to receive the same testimony.

In some ways, I think some of this "all or nothing" thinking is part of why many people leave the Church. They come to look at some of the difficult, contested issues, decide that the Church's position on that issue is not true and, because they believe it is all or nothing as we have been taught, their entire house of cards crashes. I don't fully understand how it all works, but I find myself shying away from some of this all or nothing absolutism that characterized my older faith.

I would agree with you if the promise we are discussing were to be coming from "man" and not from God. Within the promise provided the Lord provides conditions and stipulations to receiving a witness from him:

Conditions:

1) Remember how merciful the Lord has been to his children

2) Ponder these things in your heart

Stipulations: Ask with

1) Sincere heart

2) Real intent

3) Faith in Christ

Promise:

* You will receive a manifestation from the Holy Ghost that these things are true.

If a person has fulfilled all of the above and has received no witness then this would make God a liar, and we know God is a God of truth and cannot lie. As such, the default then falls back upon us, and always will fall upon us. It will never fall upon God.

In these cases, if a person remains without "witness" which we know wouldn't be true if they followed the given conditions and stipulations, they will one day (if at judgement) see every witness God gave by the power of the Holy Ghost by which they were past feeling. Otherwise once again, God would be a liar.

This goes back to Christ living among the Jews. Why were there some who received witness that he was the Son of God, the prophesied Messiah, and why were those there who did not receive the same witness? God's fault, or does the responsibility and accountability fall upon us? Is God unable to provide according to his promises? No. Then the default is always at us -- individual accountability and responsibility.

This isn't arrogant, nor does it have any hubris, because we recognize God is a God of truth and cannot lie and it is his promise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Anddenex said:

I would agree with you if the promise we are discussing were to be coming from "man" and not from God. Within the promise provided the Lord provides conditions and stipulations to receiving a witness from him:

Conditions:

1) Remember how merciful the Lord has been to his children

2) Ponder these things in your heart

Stipulations: Ask with

1) Sincere heart

2) Real intent

3) Faith in Christ

Promise:

* You will receive a manifestation from the Holy Ghost that these things are true.

If a person has fulfilled all of the above and has received no witness then this would make God a liar, and we know God is a God of truth and cannot lie. As such, the default then falls back upon us, and always will fall upon us. It will never fall upon God.

In these cases, if a person remains without "witness" which we know wouldn't be true if they followed the given conditions and stipulations, they will one day (if at judgement) see every witness God gave by the power of the Holy Ghost by which they were past feeling. Otherwise once again, God would be a liar.

This goes back to Christ living among the Jews. Why were there some who received witness that he was the Son of God, the prophesied Messiah, and why were those there who did not receive the same witness? God's fault, or does the responsibility and accountability fall upon us? Is God unable to provide according to his promises? No. Then the default is always at us -- individual accountability and responsibility.

This isn't arrogant, nor does it have any hubris, because we recognize God is a God of truth and cannot lie and it is his promise.

In matters like this... we tend to forget that the Lord will keep all his promises... in his time...  That last bit is kind of important.  For example if we are talking to a faithful and true member who desires the blessing of being sealed... we have no problem believing that it will happen, but the timing might not be for a while or even in mortality, but the Lord will work it out and keep all his promises.

Yet when we hear someone who is not getting a testimony of the Book of Mormon... we assume they are doing something wrong.. and while that is a good thing to check... We also have to acknowledge that the Lord is in control, and it will happen on his schedule, in his timing.  While we might not understand the delay we do need to accept that it is for a wise purpose.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, estradling75 said:

In matters like this... we tend to forget that the Lord will keep all his promises... in his time...  That last bit is kind of important.  For example if we are talking to a faithful and true member who desires the blessing of being sealed... we have no problem believing that it will happen, but the timing might not be for a while or even in mortality, but the Lord will work it out and keep all his promises.

Yet when we hear someone who is not getting a testimony of the Book of Mormon... we assume they are doing something wrong.. and while that is a good thing to check... We also have to acknowledge that the Lord is in control, and it will happen on his schedule, in his timing.  While we might not understand the delay we do need to accept that it is for a wise purpose.

Right, which means the witness will come, especially if they meet the requirements. The responsibility falls upon us, not God. God is always ready to give witness.

EDIT: And you are making an assumption that it is just the Book of Mormon. You will notice from my comment I also addressed those who received witness that Christ was the Son of God while he was upon the earth and those who didn't. Did the people who didn't receive witness while Christ walked the earth and spoke, is it not their fault? Yes, it is. The sole responsibility is ours. If a person sincerely, with real intent, and faith in God followed Christ or heard Christ speak for two years and still did not receive witness of his divinity -- yes I would not need to assume anything it is clearly manifest. The same for the Book of Mormon. What Father would withhold witness from any of his children if they are meeting the requirements -- none, especially if they are perfect.

If we don't receive witness, as in such a direct statement from the Lord, then yes, it is easy to see we are doing something wrong on our end not to receive a witness.

Edited by Anddenex

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, person0 said:

It is true.  Neither your nor my wants have any bearing on it.  It simply is.  Don't get me wrong, I understand your perspective.  What you perceive as arrogance is confidence in God and the witness of His Spirit.  My relationship with my Heavenly Father and my Savior, Jesus Christ, and the manifestations of God's power in my life, both temporal and spiritual have led me to this knowledge time and time again.  I know you can come to this knowledge, too.

I don't know the circumstances surrounding your efforts to seek an answer, so I can only judge based on God's promise that I know for myself to be true.  If you are interested and willing to hear it, I will gladly share my experience with the fulfillment of that promise in the hopes that it may help you.  Would you like me to share my witness and would you be willing to hear the Spirit witness to your Spirit that my experience and testimony is true?

You seem completely unwilling to hear mine, and are in fact dismissing my experience as wrong and claiming yours is right, yet both of us got our answers from the same source.  I also have great confidence in God and the guidance he gives me.

I was a very sincere investigator of this church, I devoted two years of my life to it, and my answer was no, its not true.  Does that mean I don't see value in the church, of course not.  Does that mean I call all those who believe it to be true wrong or misinformed, and that only my answer is the correct one? Of course not, that would be arrogant, rude and narrow minded.

I do find it extremely off-putting when I hear members basically say 'I'm right, you're wrong, you must have missed something, you weren't sincere enough, you did something wrong'. You can say 'I know it's true' all day long, it doesn't make it so for everyone.

Perhaps my view will change in time, perhaps yours will.  But I wouldn't ever call someone else's beliefs wrong because they decided after two years of investigation not to join my chosen religion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Anddenex said:

Right, which means the witness will come, especially if they meet the requirements. The responsibility falls upon us, not God. God is always ready to give witness.

As a general rule I agree...   But there are too many examples in the scripture where even the prophets themselves ask why the Lord is not responding (Take Joseph Smith and Liberty Jail for example) and there are many teaching in the church how blessing do not always instantly follow obedience.  (Nor punishment instantly following disobedience).  Thus expecting instant answers, once we have done our part is not something we should expect, but often do.

Many times in my own life I have had to take that leap of faith, and step out into the darkness with nothing but faith, hoping that the Lord will light the path once I am committed to it.  Once I've done that... then the many of promised answers have came, but some I still wait for... knowing that they will come.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, estradling75 said:

As a general rule I agree...   But there are too many examples in the scripture where even the prophets themselves ask why the Lord is not responding (Take Joseph Smith and Liberty Jail for example) and there are many teaching in the church how blessing do not always instantly follow obedience.  (Nor punishment instantly following disobedience).  Thus expecting instant answers, once we have done our part is not something we should expect, but often do.

Many times in my own life I have had to take that leap of faith, and step out into the darkness with nothing but faith, hoping that the Lord will light the path once I am committed to it.  Once I've done that... then the many of promised answers have came, but some I still wait for... knowing that they will come.

 

This is where I believe we are looking at two different concepts. The one you are mentioning is simply seeking and asking questions according to our circumstance. The other is an actual witness from God pertaining to a specific promise.

You can see from Marge's response that her answer received from God, "no, its not true." This is in direct opposition against what God said he would do. They both can't be right. It would be similar to someone teaching someone about Christ (let's say someone who grew up Hindu -- with no Bible background and is not a Christian). That person then saying they devoted their lives to learning about Christ, reading the Bible, and then coming away with the following, "God spoke to me and told me Christ is not his son." Did this person do something wrong? I think we probably would both come to the same conclusion.

And your last statement is exactly what I am referring to. Once you "committed", done your part, the answer or witness came. I agree whole heartily with the concept of waiting. Sometimes we need to learn line-upon-line before God can bring further witness.

But in this sense, we are talking about God saying I will give witness by the Holy Ghost that these things are true, and the individual saying God said the opposite. God isn't a liar, and that would make God a liar to say something opposite of what he said he would do.

I think we are both on the same page though; however, my mission experience taught me that I never met one person who met the requirements not receive witness.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Anddenex said:

I would agree with you if the promise we are discussing were to be coming from "man" and not from God. Within the promise provided the Lord provides conditions and stipulations to receiving a witness from him:

Conditions:

1) Remember how merciful the Lord has been to his children

2) Ponder these things in your heart

Stipulations: Ask with

1) Sincere heart

2) Real intent

3) Faith in Christ

Promise:

* You will receive a manifestation from the Holy Ghost that these things are true.

If a person has fulfilled all of the above and has received no witness then this would make God a liar, and we know God is a God of truth and cannot lie. As such, the default then falls back upon us, and always will fall upon us. It will never fall upon God.

In these cases, if a person remains without "witness" which we know wouldn't be true if they followed the given conditions and stipulations, they will one day (if at judgement) see every witness God gave by the power of the Holy Ghost by which they were past feeling. Otherwise once again, God would be a liar.

This goes back to Christ living among the Jews. Why were there some who received witness that he was the Son of God, the prophesied Messiah, and why were those there who did not receive the same witness? God's fault, or does the responsibility and accountability fall upon us? Is God unable to provide according to his promises? No. Then the default is always at us -- individual accountability and responsibility.

This isn't arrogant, nor does it have any hubris, because we recognize God is a God of truth and cannot lie and it is his promise.

I followed all these conditions as well as embracing the church and its teachings, read the book of mormon everyday, followed the WoW, FHE, regular church attendance, gospel principles lessons, Come follow me, read the pearl of great price, prayed a lot.  I really tried and I was very sincere, I wanted it to be true, I was actually really upset when I finally accepted I was being told 'No'.  I did everything right.  

Please don't take my no answer as insincerity or lack of faith, or lack of dedication.  It was none of those things at all.  I was told no, just as you were told yes.  That doesn't make either of us bad people, or either of us wrong or right.

I still have great respect for the LDS church, its members and its focus on family.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, estradling75 said:

We also have to acknowledge that the Lord is in control, and it will happen on his schedule, in his timing.  While we might not understand the delay we do need to accept that it is for a wise purpose.

I think it would be inconsistent with the teachings of the Book of Mormon as a whole for God to wait until after someone's death to witness to them that the Book of Mormon is true and that it is His word, through His prophets and messengers, IF they are reading it and seeking that answer in this life.

5 minutes ago, marge said:

. . . or either of us wrong or right.

Oh but it does.  Either the Book of Mormon is what we claim it to be (a genuine and true historical and scriptural record of God's dealings with some of the ancient inhabitants of the Americas), or it isn't.  There is no in between.

I am curious, do you claim that you received a specific witness that the Book of Mormon is not true, or simply that you never received a witness that it is?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, person0 said:

Oh but it does.  Either the Book of Mormon is what we claim it to be (a genuine and true historical and scriptural record of God's dealings with some of the ancient inhabitants of theAmericas), or it isn't.  There is no in between.

I am curious, do you claim that you received a specific witness that the Book of Mormon is not true, or simply that you never received a witness that it is?

My witness was that the book of mormon is not true, that the LDS church is a good organisation of well meaning people but unfortunately it was built upon a book that was not the word of God.

I received the same witness numerous times over a period of 18 months, I ignored it for a long time because I wanted to join the LDS church.  I was heartbroken. I wanted an eternal family and I thought the LDS church was the only way to achieve that.  

I have found a lot comfort in realising that eternal christian marriage was first taught by Emanual Swedenborg in the early 1700s.  Also there are a lot of much older pagan religions that believe in eternal marriage as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Anddenex said:

 

You can see from Marge's response that her answer received from God, "no, its not true." This is in direct opposition against what God said he would do. They both can't be right. It would be similar to someone teaching someone about Christ (let's say someone who grew up Hindu -- with no Bible background and is not a Christian). That person then saying they devoted their lives to learning about Christ, reading the Bible, and then coming away with the following, "God spoke to me and told me Christ is not his son." Did this person do something wrong? I think we probably would both come to the same conclusion.

You see I would not discount the Hindu's experience as misinformed, or assume they did something wrong.  What makes your spiritual experiences any greater than theirs?  What makes the Hindu or the Buddhist or the Jew wrong? Why is it so hard to accept their experience as genuine? Or that you might be wrong? Only one third of the world is Christian, and Christianity only spread as far as it did at the tip of a sword.  

I don't think we can ever know for certain that we are right in our belief system.

Socrates once said ' I am the wisest man alive, for I know one thing, and that is I know nothing' 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now