The problem with Moroni's challenge

[Guest]

-

[Guest]

Stem, what you state is the same as what I said you said.
You use trial and error to see what's right, and only then do you ascribe the 'successful' promptings to the Holy Ghost. That's not how it's supposed to work. The Holy Ghost is supposed to manifest the truth of all things, instead it's trial and error that does it for you.
You must be able to see that.

You didn't state the same. You mischaracterized as only trial and error, sans the Holy Ghost. I say, surely there are things that arise in the brain and feeling and promptings had by all that aren't from the Holy Ghost. It takes quite the effort sometimes to recognize whether its from the Holy Ghost or not. That is how its supposed to work, as far as I'm concerned. No one ever said tere wouldn't be confusion and misunderstanding in it all. No one ever said that all feelings are via the Holy Ghost. You seem mistaken.

Wait, are you saying ideas that come from you would never work? That doesn't seem right. If the ideas work out, how does that demonstrate that the HG communicated with you?

Assume for a moment that there is no God. Now if you follow the same method you're using now, won't some of your ideas work out and some not? Just the same as what's happening now, right?

[_stemelbow]

Are you open to the possibility that these impressions, thoughts, ideas and voices could be self generated?

Thanks,

Hasa Diga Eebowai

'course

[_stemelbow]

Maybe not for Abraham in being told to kill, but in the case of Nephi and Laban it was through the same process that you describe, a voice and while Joseph Smith's experience undoubtedly wasn't by the same promptings since he claimed to have been visited by an Angel with a flaming sword the experiences and decisions of the women he polyandrously married were similar to the experiences you describe.

Choice of clothing, payment of ten percent, alcohol consumption, opinions on gender and equality and the way they raise their children seem to be big issues within a person's life to name a few. Given the context of those who have set the example are you saying that you would only go so far in following and trusting your experiences that you recognize as the spirit?

Thanks,

Hasa Diga Eebowai

I doubt I would go so far at all. but that doesn't mean a whole lot. We're talking about a hypothetical here. I don't know.

[_stemelbow]

Wait, are you saying ideas that come from you would never work?

No.

That doesn't seem right. If the ideas work out, how does that demonstrate that the HG communicated with you?

Through further experience and effort mostly.

Assume for a moment that there is no God. Now if you follow the same method you're using now, won't some of your ideas work out and some not? Just the same as what's happening now, right?

Yes, assuming their is no God, I would have to conclude that the idea that the Spirit of God teaches me, is really just me learning through other means--or assuming things.

[_Themis]

Man, you guys are so dogmatic about other people's perspective and experiences. That's too bad if you ask me.

Seriously? I kinda thought your use of the word was being dogmatic. I only explained, I thought fairly well, that people use the word quite loosely. Now how about addressing the real problem with Moroni's promise which is confirmation bias on what you think works as well as reliability. Not to mention defining how the HG is supposed to communicate.

[_Buffalo]

Wait, are you saying ideas that come from you would never work?

No.

That doesn't seem right. If the ideas work out, how does that demonstrate that the HG communicated with you?

Through further experience and effort mostly.

Assume for a moment that there is no God. Now if you follow the same method you're using now, won't some of your ideas work out and some not? Just the same as what's happening now, right?

Yes, assuming their is no God, I would have to conclude that the idea that the Spirit of God teaches me, is really just me learning through other means--or assuming things.

I gotta say Stem, I appreciate your frankness. You really, really, REALLY want to believe.

[_Lost Mystic]

First off, in order to do the challenge, you have to place trust and confidence in the Book of Mormon.

not true, incorrect assumption.

The challenge comes from the book itself, and has a specific set of instructions, and promises an answer. If the reader takes the challenge as described, they already demonstrate an element of trust in the book, or they wouldn't be wasting their time.

Second, and because of this, Mormons will claim you didn't do it correctly if you received a different answer.

not true. i never have. if you do it "correctly" you will always receive a correct answer, that correctness is not for another to determine, as per a correct application of Moroni's challenge.

See what I mean???

This sets up the person who already starts believing for whatever reason...which is a placebo effect.

nonsense. the only belief that is "set up" is that an answer will be received, there is no guarantee what that answer will be nor that it will even be received in a manner "believed".

The reader is instructed to alter their mental status for the "answer" to come.

Trust is needed immediately, so those who pray for an answer with a "sincere heart" and "contrite spirit" are already expecting the outcome in the affirmative.

contradictory statement. one may "desire" an outcome, but certainly not expect it. And if your heart is sincere and spirit contrite, then you are not "expecting" at all. your reasoning is flawed.

If someone trusts the book enough to accept the challenge and follow it's instructions, they most likely expect an answer, otherwise they wouldn't be asking. If the trust the instructions enough to follow them, they most likely trust in the promise that's included.

If you have to trust in the question first, there is no validity to the answer.

a more absurd proposition this post doth not have.

I worded it poorly. If someone wants an answer bad enough, they will ignore other reasoning to get the answer. If the reader trusts the passage enough to follow it's instructions, which also inform them that a knowledge will come to them outside of the normal means, supernaturally even, any answer they receive is not as valid as conclusions they have drawn before based upon reason and evidences.

[_Corpsegrinder]

Subgenius wrote:

Here is one possible reason...people are not perfect.
You take your reference out of context and you fail to recognize the deliberate phrasing of your own quote.
It clearly states that you "may know" it does not read "shall know".

“May know” meaning the procedure is unreliable and inconsistent--right.

And it’s not my “own quote”; it’s Joseph Smith’s quote from his fictional best seller, The Mormonecronomicon. (You know…written in blood, bound in human flesh, incredibly hard to pronounce, another testament of Jesus Christ.)

wow! Speculation…

Yes, the “I think” at the beginning of that particular sentence is a reliable indicator of speculation. Way to go, Captain Obvious.

…and anecdotal evidence....

On the contrary, what we have here is a statistical sample consisting of two MST testimonies--Dan’s and John’s--in which references to Moroni’s Challenge occur at a frequency of zero. This, my fine feathered friend, constitutes statistical evidence.

…you are correct!

At last, progress. You are learning, young padawan.

why would there be a need to specifically mention Moroni?

Because the title of this thread is “The Problem with Moroni’s Challenge.” Duh.

Are you suggesting that a true testimony of the Book of Mormon is gained by means other than just simply reading it with the honest determination of knowing whether it is "true" or not?

Again, the title of this thread is “The Problem with Moroni’s Challenge.” The overall truthfulness of the Book of Mormon, although related, is a different subject.

Stemelbow wrote:

Perhaps not foolproof is the idea I was going with. Sure.

Not foolproof? Then I guess Subgenius is SOL…

[_Corpsegrinder]

In Dan’s interview on Mormon Stories, he made a remark to the effect that folk magic, as practiced in Joseph’s day, is indistinguishable from traditional religion.

Do his remarks constitute an implicit admission that Moroni's Challenge is simply another form of divination? With all the weaknesses thereof?