Why is it that you’re here, MG?

[Gadianton]

There was a lot of chaos before Alma viewed the starry heavens. Didn't happen in the blink of an eye.

I see, so fine-tuning is no longer convincing because prior to God getting involved there was "chaos"?

[Limnor]

Maybe putting it another way… When we talk about the possibility of designed universe and fine tuning, does the recognition that a higher power having possibly designed the universe depend on revelation of that designer? And could that designer be recognized when revealed—would we know what to look for to recognize? What if the revelator reveals something inconsistent? Does that mean the one who is being revealed can only be seen through that revelator’s eyes?

Bundle of questions, but curious about others’ thoughts.

Supposedly, Mormon god knows each of us very well. So before looking at these questions, I'd like to know if he wants to reveal himself to us, and if he is able to do so, in a way that we would recognize, understand, and accept. None of this beating around the bushes, hints, insistence on putting third party "authorities" in charge of the message - just give it to us straight and in an unequivocal way.

It seems that during the War in Heaven, in the "pre-existence", we had full disclosure, and were allowed to make a clearcut binary** decision - Jesus' plan, or Satan's plan - based on an understanding of the choice, the competing options, and the inevitable consequences. But not so now. Yes, I know that the official answer includes the idea that we were sent here with incomplete knowledge and information in order to develop faith, but clearly that is not working for all of us.

[**: Or perhaps not completely binary: although now disavowed, one popular "explanation" of the black exclusion doctrine was that those who were on the fence were to be sent to earth with the disadvantage of being born into a black body. At various times there have been general authorities of the church who have held these views.]

I agree with you—given Mormonism’s own concepts, the current model of revelation falls short.

My concern is that “God” defaults to the Mormon god here, and in that version “hiddenness” is blamed on the person. But that hiddenness could be considered in alternate ways that God might actually be, without the lens of the revelator or institution.

What makes even that thought tricky is “if Joseph faked it, so too could have Paul.”

[huckelberry]

Second bundle of questions…

I’m genuinely curious how people here experienced the “burning bosom” language when they believed. For those who had something they took as confirmation at the time, did that experience fade? Was it reinterpreted later? Was there a realization that the words were rote or was it real to you? Did it become more about loyalty than personal experience?

Feel free to blast away at me if these are too personal of questions, but I’m genuinely curious. When you guys talk to MG, sometimes there seems to be an unstated understanding that something isn’t quite right and I’ve been wondering if that means you know how he is playing because you were once in those shoes.

I'll give it a shot. ...[skip stuff abut MG, ]

If he really felt this way, he could just be content in that knowledge, without reaching out. Many of us grew up with that inbred training, but, thankfully, thought our way out of it. I do think he has also realized, like many here, that those 'burnings in the bosom' feelings are internally generated, and come from being born into and trying to fit in to an established way of life, not from any supernatural power outside himself, but, he cannot leave the comfort of his cocoon.
..............

.

I've mentioned this before, but DrW's thread is still the best source for an explanation that the source of spiritual feelings is simply internal to our brains and not evidence of anything supernatural.

I think Limnor question is interesting, has puzzled me for many years. I do not remember any burning busm confirmation of the Book of Mormon. When sought I experienced only the opposite. I Remember feeling spiritual insight in some church teachings. That of course could be understanding in my mind finding values. Patriarchal blessing seemed a strong almost electric light thing which I held as a reference point for church belief for some time. I tried to build on that with prayer contemplation study but those did not overcome growing doubt, disbelief.
Dr W thread about experiments has some value to my thinking yet I also think it overly reductive. There was some sort of tin hat and electrodes which made people feel all spiritual, whatever that is. That may point to an aspect of laying hands upon the head producing sensations combined with words and ritual context generating a spiritual feeling.

I feel a caution, all my experience is generated by my mental processes. They are all in me and not my cat. Yet it is true that none of my internal experiences have no connection to external influences.they are all interaction. I should therefore be asking what external sources are a part of my spiritual experience, not simply being satisfied that they happen inside of me.

[Limnor]

Second bundle of questions…

I’m genuinely curious how people here experienced the “burning bosom” language when they believed. For those who had something they took as confirmation at the time, did that experience fade? Was it reinterpreted later? Was there a realization that the words were rote or was it real to you? Did it become more about loyalty than personal experience?

Feel free to blast away at me if these are too personal of questions, but I’m genuinely curious. When you guys talk to MG, sometimes there seems to be an unstated understanding that something isn’t quite right and I’ve been wondering if that means you know how he is playing because you were once in those shoes.

I'll give it a shot. Ask yourself, why would a person come to a place for literally decades, a place mostly comprised of people who have left his religion, and repeatedly post passive aggressive insults, bigotry and stereotyping? Regardless of the topic, he eventually works the discussion around to telling those people that they are, as a group, less worthy, less righteous, less 'good' than he is.

If he really felt this way, he could just be content in that knowledge, without reaching out. Many of us grew up with that inbred training, but, thankfully, thought our way out of it. I do think he has also realized, like many here, that those 'burnings in the bosom' feelings are internally generated, and come from being born into and trying to fit in to an established way of life, not from any supernatural power outside himself, but, he cannot leave the comfort of his cocoon.

Mg has subtly admitted multiple times that he is comfortable staying in because his family is in. How else do you push down that realization that you are wrong to believe your 'in-group' is the only special and important group than by repeatedly attacking the 'out-group'? And he has a very unique situation here. Shades allows his bigotry and stereotyping under the guise of free speech. There is literally no other online community he could visit and attack the way he attacks the community here, because other communities value free speech AND community. Shades sees his attacks as part of the entertainment, so, mentalgymnast comes here, the only place that will allow his repeated and offensive stereotyping and bigotry. Not even Mormon-related subreddits allow this any more, as requirements of civility are paramount.

I've mentioned this before, but DrW's thread is still the best source for an explanation that the source of spiritual feelings is simply internal to our brains and not evidence of anything supernatural.

Thanks again, Marcus. I really appreciate you taking the time to answer thoughtfully. Honestly, I feel like I learn more from responses like yours than I ever could from going back and forth with MG. And I think your assessment about attacking the “out-group” has merit.

If you’re open to a follow-up, I’m curious about the transition—how did you come to a realization that the feeling was internally generated and not “from god?” Did the feeling fade, or was it gradual?

[Marcus]

...Dr W thread about experiments has some value to my thinking yet I also think it overly reductive. There was some sort of tin hat and electrodes which made people feel all spiritual, whatever that is...

I will have to strongly disagree wth this summarization of DwW's presentation. I particularly do not recall any "tin hat and electrodes" portion of his discussion.

...Yet it is true that none of my internal experiences have no connection to external influences.they are all interaction. I should therefore be asking what external sources are a part of my spiritual experience, not simply being satisfied that they happen inside of me...

I don't understand at all why you conclude "I should therefore be asking what external sources are a part..." Could you expound more on how you concluded that?

[Limnor]

Patriarchal blessing seemed a strong almost electric light thing which I held as a reference point for church belief for some time. I tried to build on that with prayer contemplation study but those did not overcome growing doubt, disbelief.

What exactly are those, anyway? Patriarchal blessings I mean. Has anyone here “given” one?

[Limnor]

I don't understand at all why you conclude "I should therefore be asking what external sources are a part..." Could you expound more on how you concluded that?

You are very sharp—I’m interested to understand this better as well.

[malkie]

Supposedly, Mormon god knows each of us very well. So before looking at these questions, I'd like to know if he wants to reveal himself to us, and if he is able to do so, in a way that we would recognize, understand, and accept. None of this beating around the bushes, hints, insistence on putting third party "authorities" in charge of the message - just give it to us straight and in an unequivocal way.

It seems that during the War in Heaven, in the "pre-existence", we had full disclosure, and were allowed to make a clearcut binary** decision - Jesus' plan, or Satan's plan - based on an understanding of the choice, the competing options, and the inevitable consequences. But not so now. Yes, I know that the official answer includes the idea that we were sent here with incomplete knowledge and information in order to develop faith, but clearly that is not working for all of us.

[**: Or perhaps not completely binary: although now disavowed, one popular "explanation" of the black exclusion doctrine was that those who were on the fence were to be sent to earth with the disadvantage of being born into a black body. At various times there have been general authorities of the church who have held these views.]

I agree with you—given Mormonism’s own concepts, the current model of revelation falls short.

My concern is that “God” defaults to the Mormon god here, and in that version “hiddenness” is blamed on the person. But that hiddenness could be considered in alternate ways that God might actually be, without the lens of the revelator or institution.

What makes even that thought tricky is “if Joseph faked it, so too could have Paul.”

As an active member I had always assumed that god wanted to communicate with his children, and for some reason not known to ordinary people had decided on the model of revelation to selected authorities who would then pass on the message. But the more I thought about this model, the less appealing it seemed, especially when it was clear that in Mormonism the authorities fell back on a "speaking as a man" (SAAM) excuse when things didn't work out. They could not, however, tell in real time, or (prophetically) beforehand, when they were in SAAM mode - it was always a post hoc rationalization, usually applied to the words of dead prophets.

But, in spite of what scriptures and apologists tell us, I think we must consider the possibility that god either doesn't want to communicate with us, or is somehow unable to do so. Hence my occasional statement to the effect that Mormon god is a piss-poor communicator.

I look at this issue in a similar way to the issue of temple work: if such a tiny percentage of the world gets the benefit during mortality, and the millennial work will dwarf it in comparison, why not have us humans concentrate our efforts during mortality - which we know exists - on the real and present needs that we can see. In effect, let the dead take care of the dead, during the glorious 1000 years, which may or may not happen - we have no way of knowing.

Sorry, my friend - this is my usual bit of a jumble that may or may not be answering your question.

[malkie]

Patriarchal blessing seemed a strong almost electric light thing which I held as a reference point for church belief for some time. I tried to build on that with prayer contemplation study but those did not overcome growing doubt, disbelief.

What exactly are those, anyway? Patriarchal blessings I mean. Has anyone here “given” one?

I've never given one, though I was told by a Stake Patriarch that I should give my children theirs, and not delegate it to him or his successor. However, they (or I!) all became inactive before what I considered to be an appropriate age.

[Limnor]

What exactly are those, anyway? Patriarchal blessings I mean. Has anyone here “given” one?

I've never given one, though I was told by a Stake Patriarch that I should give my children theirs, and not delegate it to him or his successor. However, they (or I!) all became inactive before what I considered to be an appropriate age.

Very interesting—this isn’t a thing in the faith I grew up in (however scant), so it’s another fascination to me and actually helps explain parts of the draw of “lived Mormonism.”