Top 100 Reasons why GBH is smiling...

[Guest]

Mormons are not taught in any formal epistemological sense that they can know the Church is true with absolute certainty. They are taught, properly so I might add, that one can know with a very sure degree of confidence, beyond all reasonable doubt if you will. These are not one in the same. You're just equivocating common expressions with more strict philosophical concepts.

[_Some Schmo]

The Book of Mormon makes a claim. People seek the holy ghost on that claim. The holy ghost bears a powerful witness as to its truthfulness. This has made all the difference. If no spirit feeling was felt, there would be no church as it is today. The church would have fallen long ago.

Again you have used as a proof of the Book of Mormon the Church's survival. But I do not buy this. Many "false" churches have survived and thrived. On what grounds can you make this claim? How can you say that the Church would have not been successful if it were not true? Can you please provide me the arguments that support this claim?

John

Are you sure you want to get on the circular-logic-merry-go-round of "the church is true because of the Book of Mormon" and "the Book of Mormon is true because of the success of the church..."

It gets pretty dizzying on there. It might make you throw up.

[_Tarski]

Just for the record, my position is that certain ordinary things can be known but not in some rarified absolute sense.

Practical ordinary knowledge isn't absolute and neither is scientific knowledge.
The fact that the supernatural isn't part of our everyday experience is the reason why the whole issue of knowledge beomes problematic--The usual practical epitemological rules don't apply--all bets are off. Angels and disappearing gold plates aren't the same the same as disappearing car keys. The latter is a common everyday thing that we have had "public" epistemological practice with.

Amusingly, I once did have a dream where someone annoyed me by asking "how do you know that this isn't a dream?"

[_Tarski]

Mormons are not taught in any formal epistemological sense that they can know the Church is true with absolute certainty. They are taught, properly so I might add, that one can know with a very sure degree of confidence, beyond all reasonable doubt if you will. These are not one in the same. You're just equivocating common expressions with more strict philosophical concepts.

You almost get it.
The problem is with the bolded part; "reasonable".

The things you claim to know just aren't a part of the public universe of ordinary things with which we have had practice (so to speak).
Without that, epistemological practices don't apply.

Everyday usage of the word know is not helpful for these "big" issues. Science exists to help sort these things out empirically.
But when we apply scientific thinking that is exactly when religious stuff falls down.

[_Daniel Peterson]

Just for the record, my position is that certain ordinary things can be know but not in some rarified absolute sense.

You appear to be an epistemological anti-realist in pretty much the same way I am. Which is to say, you're not.

[Guest]

Are you sure you want to get on the circular-logic-merry-go-round of "the church is true because of the Book of Mormon" and "the Book of Mormon is true because of the success of the church..."

It gets pretty dizzying on there. It might make you throw up.

I am stating that the Book of Mormon makes a claim. If a person would pray about the book as the book claims should be done and people received no witness, most would not join. But because people do receive a witness as the book states would happen, people join. Without that witness to the Book of Mormon, the church would have fallen by the wayside long ago. I did not say that the church is true because of the Book of Mormon. The church is true for its members because they received a confirmation to prayer that it is true.

And this is why GBH can smile...because the holy ghost is still testifying in people's lives. Now if countermos wish to negate such a witness to a warm fuzzy and santa clause, well so be it.

[_why me]

The Book of Mormon makes a claim. People seek the holy ghost on that claim. The holy ghost bears a powerful witness as to its truthfulness. This has made all the difference. If no spirit feeling was felt, there would be no church as it is today. The church would have fallen long ago.

Again you have used as a proof of the Book of Mormon the Church's survival. But I do not buy this. Many "false" churches have survived and thrived. On what grounds can you make this claim? How can you say that the Church would have not been successful if it were not true? Can you please provide me the arguments that support this claim?

John

The claim made in the Book of Mormon is very clear. By praying about the truthfulness of the Book of Mormon, the holy ghost will testify that it is true. If the holy ghost did not testify, the church would have fallen like a house of cards long ago. It is rather a bold claim in the Book of Mormon and that has made all the difference in people deciding to join or not to join.

[_Gadianton]

I entirely disagree, I think praying about the Book of Mormon has very little to do with people joining, generally speaking. On or off mission, I don't ever recall a convert expressing a witness to the Book of Mormon as the deciding factor in their decision. More often than not, the Book of Mormon seemed tolerated, the primary interest being in certain doctrines that seemed more common sense than elsewhere, or great member support.

[_why me]

I entirely disagree, I think praying about the Book of Mormon has very little to do with people joining, generally speaking. On or off mission, I don't ever recall a convert expressing a witness to the Book of Mormon as the deciding factor in their decision. More often than not, the Book of Mormon seemed tolerated, the primary interest being in certain doctrines that seemed more common sense than elsewhere, or great member support.

Although I can't judge such conversion, I would predict that these type of members would fall by the wayside quite quickly. The church is not a slacker church and one needs to be committed to the callings and know that the LDS church is true. If not, the person may not be able to devote the time necessary.

[_John Larsen]

I entirely disagree, I think praying about the Book of Mormon has very little to do with people joining, generally speaking. On or off mission, I don't ever recall a convert expressing a witness to the Book of Mormon as the deciding factor in their decision. More often than not, the Book of Mormon seemed tolerated, the primary interest being in certain doctrines that seemed more common sense than elsewhere, or great member support.

Although I can't judge such conversion, I would predict that these type of members would fall by the wayside quite quickly. The church is not a slacker church and one needs to be committed to the callings and know that the LDS church is true. If not, the person may not be able to devote the time necessary.

I cannot think of a single person who joined the Church because of this challenge. Virtually everyone I know was born into the Church and baptized at 8, well before reading the book. The two converts I am related to both joined before reading the book.

This would be an interesting research project: how many actually join because of this promise. I think the number will be very, very small.

John