Michael Ash - Shaken Faith Syndrome

[Guest]

Sorry Jo,
but the only argument I am forwarding is that many members confuse an emotional reaction with the HG instead of understanding that by the teachings of Joseph Smith the HG acts by providing primarily intelligence, not warm fuzzies. You are the one deflecting with a straw man.

I neither said nor inferred anything about the state of the petitioner, only addressing the nature of the response as taught by the prophet.

The quotes and sections of d&c I provided pose a response to Themis's questions, providing reference to what the church teaches regarding discerning the HG.

[_emilysmith]

What happens when you seek with a sincere heart and are given personal revelation that another church is true? Have you ever heard of the True Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints? It is different than the group that followed Brigham Young.

Community of Christ (RLDS)
Strangites
Rigdonites
Whitmerites
Williamites
Church of the Lamb of God
The Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints

These are all churches where people are using the same exact methodology as you describe, but they are all receiving different answers.

How do you know if they are right or wrong? They are all following their prophets' teachings.

[_SteelHead]

Jo,
since you say we must ask in faith.....

Lets say there is a practitioner of Confucianism in China receiving the first discussion from the missionaries and wanting to know the truth. The investigator has no background of, nor any comprehension of Christ, or Christianity, but has an honest heart.

In what must his faith be based to get true guidance from the Holy Ghost?

Faith in the HG presupposes the answer.

Faith in Christ presupposes the answer.

Faith in receiving an answer from the HG presupposes the answer.

Circular logic much?

Definition:
presuppose -
require or involve necessarily as an antecedent condition.

[_Corpsegrinder]

Jo wrote:

Where is it written that man should walk in proof (i.e., evidence)?

The logical corollary to your question would be this: Where is it written that man should act in contravention of proof (i,e,, evidence)?

Is that what you’re arguing? That we should act in contravention of all observable evidence?

Jo wrote:

The person who builds his faith upon evidence is building upon a slippery slope.

But the radical changes that have occurred in the core doctrines of Mormonism show us that the Holy Ghost is, in fact, the slipperiest slope of all.

[_Themis]

I do not refer to truth as the winner of the most hands vote.

You refer to it as absolute reality which is something you cannot know for sure. I am fine with using it that way, since truth being about the accuracy of a proposition is about reality.

The "truth" we think we see with our physical senses can deceive us.

We are limited with our physical senses, but it is way better then people who think they are getting truth from how they interpret their spiritual senses. The physical is not perfect, but it is all you got. Even the spiritual expereince is physical in nature, even if you might not use the five senses for the whole expereince.

Watch how science creates theories, which over time, become "truth" until the day someone makes a discovery which shows the theory had a glitch in it. At that point "truth" changes according to the new physical discovery. What has just happened is what was once a theory, left the realm of theory, became truth, was discovered incorrect, and was relagated back to theory which has now been adjusted and modified to account for the new data.

Learning some science would have a very positive impact on you. Science does not make the claims of truth that you do, even though it is in a better position to do so. Science is about a methodology or approach to the universe around us. Scientists understand that we are limited and that any theory or understanding could be wring and in need of change if new evidence becomes available. Scientists usually understand that new data may come forth changing our understanding. This is a humble position that many like yourself do not make. You state certain things as some absolute reality or truth based on unreliable experiences in which you state certainties you cannot know.

by the way, the LDS are not the only ones to teach a world wide flood.

I am well aware that it is not the only one. Where did I say otherwise.

So do not present this as some type of Themis truth presented to support your agenda.

I have never stated as truth in the way you are using the word, but it is ironic that you accuse me of the verey thing you are doing.

If I can see through that, certainly other readers can see through it as well. You and I will have better discussions if you stick with presenting your theories AS theories and NOT as truth.

LOL How can you accuse me of something I haven't done, and something you have done and do not seem willing to follow your own advice. Even if I wanted to use the word truth like you, why do you get to use it and not I?

I noticed you remained silent when I was able to show you that your claim about the Book of Mormon had been buried while Jesus lived was not logical. Why not recognize that your claim was made in error? You would gain a great deal of trust and respect from me.

I think you are confusing me with someone else, although I may not have read everything everyone said, could you provide your source for this claim. While Jesus is supposed to live their was no Book of Mormon or shall we say gold plates. Those were to have been prepared by Mormon and Moroni almost 400 years later. Can you admit your mistakes? :)

I KNOW I don't have everything figured out. And I readily claim that I am blind to whatever I do not know yet. This is not a character weakness; it is the position of a student who is continuing to learn because I have not closed my mind to any possibilities.

Based on your posts I would say you are very closed minded any any ideas or possibilities that do not fit what you already believe. Your posts about physical evidence is a good demonstration of a closed mind.

You will show me peer-reviewed articles which support the concluson that there was no world wide flood. I will provide scientific studies performed by legitimate scientists who could not get their studies peer-reviewed. Why? Because money speaks louder than truth. So, the the non peer-reviewed articles which DO support a world wide flood are laughed at. Is it necessary to point out that the peer-review is not all it is cracked up to be?

This is simply not true, but I can understand why someone who is so ignorant about science and how it works might think so. by the way their are no peer reviewed articles dealing directly with the claim of a Global flood. What we have is a mountain of peer reviewed articles and evidence about the nature of our universe which conflict with any idea of a global flood ~4200 years ago. You would need to educate yourself about things like Geology, biology, physics, chemistry, etc to understand just how silly it is. This is why so many LDS if not most today no longer believe in a global flood even though they maintain belief the church is true. Same goes for a young earth.

Are you one of the believers who would rather worship at the alter of science and feel justified in re-writing scripture when something you think supports a conflicting world-view of scripture rears its man-inspired head? Why would you think that God would want you to do this?

Science is really just a good methodology for looking at the world around us and gaining knowledge that is more likely to accurate then any other method. Particularly compared to the spiritual which is all over the place. Just look around the world to see. Now do you consider Scientology scripture to be man-made or of God?

As I see it, man has been able to turn scripture into a stumbling block. They are willing to torture scripture until they can make it say what man wants it to say.

But your interpretations of the Bible, Book of Mormon, etc are correct right? :)

They claim to do this because they have found physical evidence which supports them. Doesn't this put you into unenviable position of placing your faith in physical evidence rather than keeping your faith founded in the spiritual realm from which the Holy Ghost confirms and witnesses spiritual truth to you?

Considering the physical evidence has a better track record then one should not ignore it just becuase they don't like what it is saying. The church make a number of claims that can be tested through physical evidence. It just that many don't like what it is saying about those claims being inaccurate.

Themis, I am not taking your spiritual journey for you. YOU are. I cannot take it for you. You must walk it personally with God.

What would you like to hear me say???

I haven't asked you to. I have only tried to get you to back up your claim that the church teaches better then any other how to discern and recognize the HG. After all these pages you still are avoiding this. While I think their is no Holy Ghost, and that the spiritual experience is primarily internal, something I think the Body is more then capable of producing. In many cases our desire for it can bring about eh experience in which most of us already have a interpretation ready. For those in different religions a different interpretation is formed based on what they have been taught and want to believe.

Here some help for you though about what the church teaches.

D&C 9:8 Burning of the bossom

http://LDS.org/manual/aaronic-priesthood-manual-3/lesson-17-the-holy-ghost?lang=eng&query=discern+holy+ghost
“[His influence] quickens all the intellectual faculties, increases, enlarges, expands and purifies all the natural passions and affections; and adapts them, by the gift of wisdom, to their lawful use. It inspires, develops, cultivates and matures all the fine-toned sympathies, joys, tastes, kindred feelings and affections of our nature. It inspires virtue, kindness, goodness, tenderness, gentleness and charity. It develops beauty of person, form and features. It tends to health, vigor, animation and social feeling. It invigorates all the faculties of the physical and intellectual man. It strengthens, and gives tone to the nerves. In short, it is, as it were, marrow to the bone, joy to the heart, light to the eyes, music to the ears, and life to the whole being”

http://LDS.org/ensign/1996/02/discerning-answers-to-our-prayers?lang=eng&query=discern
http://LDS.org/ensign/2006/08/the-gift-of-the-holy-ghost-what-every-member-should-know?lang=eng&query=feeling+holy+ghost
Impressions, still small voice, assurance, fire, promptings, enlighten, Investigators may say: “It looks right and feels right. I still don’t know about it. It just feels good.”

There is plenty more, but I wonder if you avioded this becuase it becomes more clearer that these expereinces are common among all people religious or not, and that the body is fully capable of producing the expereince. The problems is how do you test if your interpretation is true. This is why the physical is very important here. by the way you rely on the physical like everyone else in most areas of life.

By encouraging us to study scripture and first asking for the assistance of the Holy Ghost, the Church IS teaching us the answer to this question. The message is woven throughout the New Testament. I am not going to give you a discourse on the entire New Testament. If you are sincerely seeking, then YOU will put the time in and personally seek.

Actually you didn't show what I asked, but I showed what the church does teach on the matter. :)

Apparently you think I do. Maybe we just don't know each other well enough yet.

Apparently I am right since you did misread what I said as being angry.

I'm glad you don't hate the Church. But you must admit that those who already are suffering from shakey faith can be very much influenced by such negative remarks.

I made no negative remarks. I only stated what I think is more accurate. It does not matter the state of ones faith. If they have weak faith in something not true, then it is good for them to hear and ponder why their beliefs may be incorrect.

You have the advantage of having had many more years of activity in the Church than some. Your remarks can be devastating to someone on shakey ground, and this should be taken into considerating lest you, even unintentially, cause a person to falter.

So. If something is not true then faltering is probably the best for them. I don't actually talk to others about religious beliefs unless they want to.

For then, whose side are you working on?

I believe I have matured beyond the black and white thinking of being on a particular side. I am interested in what is true. If one wants to be in Scientology or LDS I am fine with it, but I don't see any reason to say why I think it is wrong if they want to discuss it.

Sigh...I have not avoided anything. When a person first hears the Gospel message, the Light of Christ - if it has not been dulled too much by personal choices or experiences up to that point, will draw them to either the spoken or the written Gospel. The desire I speak about is the one wherein the person hearing the messages WANTS to believe the message about Christ. So their desire is to believe it, then leads to practically the same thing; a conscious exercising of faith in that desire and/or belief in Christ.

but can you show that the church teaches this. The church does teach that the LOC gives one knowledge of good and evil. I think this is wrong, but it is what the church teaches.

For most people, what happens is that they feel good, or they feel comfort, or peace. Some feel greater emotions. Each is different. It will most likely not be until later that they will come to learn that the positive reaction they felt when they exercised their faith, was their first experiencing of a witness of Christ by the Holy Ghost.

This might be the first real description you give for how you think one can discern the HG. I agree that emotions and feelings are considered to be the HG communicating by the church. I think it is just created by the body.

This then, needs to be built upon by further experiences. They will not necessarily involve witnessing of Christ. Thus we constantly seek sincerely for the guidance of the Holy Ghost is everything we do; especially in studying scripture. Until we are experiencing the Holy Ghost, we will not be able to learn to discern Him.

My question was always about how one can discern the HG after supposedly receiving it. As I have shown the church does give what they think the expereince is like. I took a long time to get unbiased enough to recognize that the expereince is not very reliable for reason already given, so when I finely looked at the physical evdience it did not take long to realize that the church is not what it claims to be.

[_Themis]

Man can be led astray by his own vain imaginations, whereas the Holy Ghost cannot lead man astray.

And this is why so many good people like yourself can delude themselves into thinking their own vain imaginations are not coming from themselves but some invisible being. Funny how some think they are the special ones who have the right interpretation, and how they dismiss the physical that they depend on and is reliable in all the others ways accept the ones they don't like. Some of us tend to be more consistent with the physical, even though I do think the spiritual is important I understand that certain interpretations are really not knowable in the way many religious people think it is.

[_jo1952]

Sorry Jo,
but the only argument I am forwarding is that many members confuse an emotional reaction with the HG instead of understanding that by the teachings of Joseph Smith the HG acts by providing primarily intelligence, not warm fuzzies. You are the one deflecting with a straw man.

I neither said nor inferred anything about the state of the petitioner, only addressing the nature of the response as taught by the prophet.

The quotes and sections of d&c I provided pose a response to Themis's questions, providing reference to what the church teaches regarding discerning the HG.

Sorry SteelHead,

But Joseph Smith, in explaining the mechanics of receiving pure intelligence, does not describe what this feels like to the physical self as it is taking place. When our spirit receives pure intelligence our physical body is made aware of this --- our mind and body do not remain static when our spiritual self is enlarged. In fact, when our physical body becomes "aware" of spirit self residing in it, our physical self is profoundly effected by the beginning of our spiritual awakening and rebirth which is required as taught by Jesus. So, man is left with trying to describe what is happening to them, and the only ones who will understand what they are trying to do are those individuals who have also experienced the Holy Ghost. This is all understood only on a spiritual level - but the physical self, though still attached to the world, will from that point on, be effected by anything the spiritual self experiences. In order to allow the receiving of pure intelligence to continue, the physical self must be subdued by the spiritual self - which entails a new level of understanding about how it is the choices we make physically can either stiffle our spirit, or allow our spiritual awakening/rebirth to continue to its completion. Hence, we need to be sincerely seeking and humbly asking Father for the Holy Ghost's guidance and direction; which prepares our spirit for further revelation of Truth a.k.a. the receiving of pure intelligence.

Trying to discount the efforts of a man to describe physically something which is happening to his spirit is an indication to me that the person attempting to discount those efforts has either not yet experienced the Holy Ghost, or has not yet learned to discern what is going on. I have found that this usually happens because a person is so attached to the world, that they are not yet in-tuned with their spiritual self.

Love,

jo

[_jo1952]

What happens when you seek with a sincere heart and are given personal revelation that another church is true? Have you ever heard of the True Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints? It is different than the group that followed Brigham Young.

Community of Christ (RLDS)
Strangites
Rigdonites
Whitmerites
Williamites
Church of the Lamb of God
The Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints

These are all churches where people are using the same exact methodology as you describe, but they are all receiving different answers.

How do you know if they are right or wrong? They are all following their prophets' teachings.

Depending upon what a person is ready to receive, that is the portion of Truth which will be revealed to them. In God's eyes, there is only Truth; His Truth is always, well, True. Spiritually, therefore, there is no "right" or "wrong"; there is only Truth. Since Truth can be found everywhere, and since each of us is at our own point in our personal journey, it is not surprising that we can find some part(s) of Truth no matter where we are. If a person is thinking about joining the church of Emily Smith, then it is reasonable to assume they will have been taught at least the basics of Emily Smith's beliefs. Most likely, Truth can be found within those beliefs, even if every element of those beliefs is not true. So, a person praying about those beliefs, should there be any Truth in them, will receive the answer that, "yes, there is Truth to be found there". In order to seek more specific Truth, the prayers need to be more specific. As a person grows in spiritual understanding, their seeking and their prayers become more and more refined. To some this may appear that people are receiving a different answer than others are. I believe this to be a misinterpretation of what is actually happening. I also believe that there may come a point in a person's life that an individaul may even change the choice of which religious institution they want to go to; because their spirit will thirst for more and more Truth. It will be natural for them to try to find others who are comparably at the same place in their journey as they are in order to continue to receive the edification and continual progression which they desire.

Do I think a person can, therefore, "outgrow" (so to speak) their current choice of religious institution? Yes.

I also believe, that for the most part, many are content to remain in whatever religious institution they currently are a part of merely because so many people never take the time to really study out what their beliefs look like. Therefore, they have no incentive or motivation to change what they are comfortable with.

Love,

jo

[_jo1952]

Jo,
since you say we must ask in faith.....

Lets say there is a practitioner of Confucianism in China receiving the first discussion from the missionaries and wanting to know the truth. The investigator has no background of, nor any comprehension of Christ, or Christianity, but has an honest heart.

In what must his faith be based to get true guidance from the Holy Ghost?

Faith in the HG presupposes the answer.

Faith in Christ presupposes the answer.

Faith in receiving an answer from the HG presupposes the answer.

Circular logic much?

Definition:
presuppose -
require or involve necessarily as an antecedent condition.

SteelHead,

You have forgotten that all of us are born with the Light of Christ in us. This has the potential to change and/or effect everything you just wrote. Worldview, upbringing, personal experiences, personal CHOICES, all effect how brightly the Light of Christ shines within us; which, in turn, effects our reaction to hearing the Gospel message, should we have the opportunity to hear it, in this life.

Love,

jo

[_emilysmith]

Where does the "Light of Christ" reside, exactly?