How do the Mormons do it?

[Captain_America]

. . . how do Mormons keep together all these disparate, anti-factual aspects of their faith? I mean the notions about American geography, etc., long disproved by archaeology? And the big Race War in History concept?

I’m not knocking Mormons. I just see the potential for a great deal of internal cognitive dissonance, and wonder how it’s all reconciled.

 

[christianley]

. . . how do Mormons keep together all these disparate, anti-factual aspects of their faith? I mean the notions about American geography, etc., long disproved by archaeology? And the big Race War in History concept?

I’m not knocking Mormons. I just see the potential for a great deal of internal cognitive dissonance, and wonder how it’s all reconciled.

The testimony they claim to have received trumps logic for most of the Mormons. They are taught to trust in the revelation they received about the truth of the LDS Church and ignore anything that says otherwise.

 

[ParkerD]

The testimony they claim to have received trumps logic for most of the Mormons. They are taught to trust in the revelation they received about the truth of the LDS Church and ignore anything that says otherwise.

Christianley,

A testimony doesn’t “trump” logic, but it does have the following considerations involved:

1–Is the person being sincere in their prayers to Heavenly Father?

2–Is the person being sincere in desiring to live by truths of the gospel of Jesus Christ, including keeping the commandments, repenting of sins, having faith in Jesus Christ as the Redeemer and Savior of the world and as the Good Shepherd, and earnestly living by the “word of God” found in the holy scriptures, including the Bible as a bedrock foundation of all the scriptures and recognizing that scripture came by revelation to prophets and apostles or by record keeping by those appointed to keep records of the house of Israel?

3–Is the person familiar with how the Holy Spirit bears witness to the soul of the person, as the disciples on the road to Emmaus experienced when Christ taught them about the scriptures that bore record of Him?

Those considerations being in place, including a sufficient knowledge of the Bible to be familiar with the prophecies of Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Jesus Christ, and the Apostle John the Revelator, then there is no need for a feeling that the testimony has “trumped” logic–the truths are consistent with logic, but also consistent with the sifting process about motives and desires and faith that God set in place on this earth and allows to happen in the many ways that sifting process happens.

God is perfect, and His sifting process in His plan of salvation is perfect also–no mistakes.

 

[h2oplyer7]

I have always wondered how they can believe in their own cosmology. I believe Mormons teach that matter and energy in the universe are eternal and will last forever. But the Big Bang and the eventual Big Rip seem to imply otherwise. Since they believe God the Father was merely a man on another planet with another God and the same before that, who was the first God? It could not be an eternal regression because the universe has only been around for so long. And since Mormons believe the soul is made of matter (I think this is true?) what happens to all of our souls when all matter in the universe is eventually torn apart in the Big Rip.

Mormonism cannot explain this. Or if they can I have yet to hear the explanation.

 

[Captain_America]

Well, a major tenet of Christianity is the idea of God’s Creation of It All.

I guess I see archaeologists definitively showing that certain things in our past on the North American continent are not the way the Mormons viewed them.

This would be a little like an archaeologist finding the bones of Jesus----a pretty heavy blow against the idea of the Ascension.

(I think the great majority of people envy the Mormon concern for family; there’s a strong positive. The more dissolute or dissolving are people’s familial lives, the more appealing, at times, is the Mormon family concern.)

 

[rick43235]

. . . how do Mormons keep together all these disparate, anti-factual aspects of their faith?

…[Mormans] are taught to trust in the revelation they received about the truth of the LDS Church and ignore anything that says otherwise.

Every religion makes extraordinary claims. If you want to know how the Mormans do it, just replace the words “Morman” and “LDS” with “Catholic.” See? They do it the same way you do.

 

[SteveVH]

Every religion makes extraordinary claims. If you want to know how the Mormans do it, just replace the words “Morman” and “LDS” with “Catholic.” See? They do it the same way you do.

Please show me the conflicts between Catholic theological and/or doctrinal beliefs and reason. One or two examples would be sufficient.

 

[SteveVH]

(I think the great majority of people envy the Mormon concern for family; there’s a strong positive. The more dissolute or dissolving are people’s familial lives, the more appealing, at times, is the Mormon family concern.)

Well, I don’t think the Mormons have anything on Catholics when it comes to family. We consider it to be the domestic Church and the greatest sign of being made in the image and likeness of God, who is Himself, a family. The great value of the family has been defended by our Church since its inception.

This is opposed to believing that one must have a family (or at least a spouse) in order to gain heaven. The motivations are different. I am not saying that Mormons don’t love their families, it is obvious that they do, but the pressure to have a family is enormous in the Mormon community. God help the poor Mormon girl who cannot find a husband.

 

[tundramom]

Christianley,

A testimony doesn’t “trump” logic, but it does have the following considerations involved:

1–Is the person being sincere in their prayers to Heavenly Father?

2–Is the person being sincere in desiring to live by truths of the gospel of Jesus Christ, including keeping the commandments, repenting of sins, having faith in Jesus Christ as the Redeemer and Savior of the world and as the Good Shepherd, and earnestly living by the “word of God” found in the holy scriptures, including the Bible as a bedrock foundation of all the scriptures and recognizing that scripture came by revelation to prophets and apostles or by record keeping by those appointed to keep records of the house of Israel?

3–Is the person familiar with how the Holy Spirit bears witness to the soul of the person, as the disciples on the road to Emmaus experienced when Christ taught them about the scriptures that bore record of Him?

Those considerations being in place, including a sufficient knowledge of the Bible to be familiar with the prophecies of Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Jesus Christ, and the Apostle John the Revelator, then there is no need for a feeling that the testimony has “trumped” logic–the truths are consistent with logic, but also consistent with the sifting process about motives and desires and faith that God set in place on this earth and allows to happen in the many ways that sifting process happens.

God is perfect, and His sifting process in His plan of salvation is perfect also–no mistakes.

As Parker clearly pointed out… if you can’t believe it, there is simply something wrong with YOU. Were you sincere enough? Were you actually clear on what you prayed about? It all comes down to you. Did you DO enough?

As a former Mormon myself, I can tell you that this is common practice. IF you only believe everything you are told to believe and you still don’t get the burning in the bosom, there is simply something wrong with you.

Steph

 

[SteveVH]

Christianley,

A testimony doesn’t “trump” logic…

Really? I asked you to reconcile the following on another thread but never received a response back. These are “testimonies” received by your founding “prophet”.

Originally Posted by SteveVH

You must believe this:

"I know that God is not a partial God, neither a changeable being; but he is unchangeable from all eternity to all eternity" (Moroni 8:18).

"For do we not read that God is the same yesterday, today and forever, and in him there is no variableness, neither shadow of changing? And now, if ye have imagined up unto yourselves a god who doth vary, and in whom there is shadow of changing, then ye have imagined up unto yourselves a god who is not a God of miracles." (Mormon 9:9-10).

and at the same time this:

"God himself was once as we are now, and is an exalted man, and sits enthroned in yonder heavens! That is the great secret. If the veil were rent today, and the great God who upholds all worlds and all things by his power, was to make himself visible—I say, if you were to see him today, you would see him like a man in form—like yourselves in all the person, image, and very form as a man; for Adam was created in the very fashion, image, and likeness of God, and received instruction from, and walked, talked and conversed with him, as one man talks and communes with another" (King Follett Discourse).

You must, at once, believe in a God that is never changing and at the same time a God who relies upon change in order to progress from a man into God.

Which one of these two contradictory positions do you accept and which one do you reject? It is impossible to believe both at the same time without throwing logic and reason out the window. Now tell me that “testimony” doesn’t trump “logic” in the Mormon world.

 

[paulp1002]

The testimony they claim to have received trumps logic for most of the Mormons. They are taught to trust in the revelation they received about the truth of the LDS Church and ignore anything that says otherwise.

This was one of my biggest struggles, besides the inconsistences in doctrine (my own opinion) during my journey into Mormonism. The questions I had, could never be clearly answered, I was always told that I just needed to pray to know it’s true and that I would feel a burning in the bosom.

Question: “If the BoM is true, then where is the proof of the Nephite and Laminite civilizations, tablets, bones, tools, weapons, grains etc… that where explained in the BoM”

Answer: “You do not need proof, you just have to pray to know it’s true, if you feel a burning bosom, that is God telling you it’s true.”

I personally think that if someone wants to believe that something is true, then subconsciously they will get the answer they want. Bypassing all logic and phyiscal proof.

 

[Lefty0908]

. . . how do Mormons keep together all these disparate, anti-factual aspects of their faith? I mean the notions about American geography, etc., long disproved by archaeology? And the big Race War in History concept?

I’m not knocking Mormons. I just see the potential for a great deal of internal cognitive dissonance, and wonder how it’s all reconciled.

I think for outsiders-looking-in, there is always a tendency to avoid sources and arguments that buttress the truth-claims of the ones being viewed from the outside (in this case, the Mormons). To apply the Captain’s logic in another context, how many times have you Catholics been accused of being “bizarre” for adhereing to beliefs like Transubstantiation and the intercessory activities of Mary and the Saints, which (in the view of some polemicists) have been “proven” to be doctrinally false?

Yet people who I know to be highly intelligent and deeply thoughtful not only embrace these beliefs, but their life’s actions and most deeply-rooted faith is informed by them. So where’s the problem - with them or me?

I vote that the problem is with me. If I can’t reconcile why it is that smart people believe in dumb things, then it’s probably because of my own ignorance and misunderstanding of those things in which they believe. So they’re not dumb things – I’m the dumb thing!

For all of us, the acceptance of truth-claims by which we choose to govern our lives and define our beliefs in God will ultimately be a matter of faith. But if there are also rationally defensible reasons to adhere to those truth-claims, then I think the “cognitive dissonance” to which the Captain refers will be greatly reduced in any body of believers. I certainly see that concept play out in the case of Catholic beliefs. And I do believe that it also holds true in the case of the Latter-day Saints. We’re really not the dupes and troglodytes that some would have you believe.

I don’t know exactly what the Captain means about “anti-factual … notions about American geography … and the Big Race War in History” but I’m assuming he’s referring to the setting of The Book of Mormon (and for the record, “The Big Race War in History” is a phrase I have never come across until just now and I’ll always believe that North Carolina is the fairest in all of American geography).

I certainly can’t be exhaustive here, but a few things are worth pointing out.

Wherever the Captain got his information, it didn’t include anything written by John L. Sorenson. One cannot in fairness be summarily dismissive of BOM claims from a geographical standpoint without addressing the arguments in his 415-page book An Ancient American Setting for The Book of Mormon. Sorenson holds a Ph.D. in anthropology from UCLA and has done extensive on-site work in the Mesoamerican areas for which he proposes BOM locales, so he is not out of his depth in writing on the subject. His other publications include a massive, 900-page bibliography entitled Transoceanic Culture Contacts Between the Old and New Worlds in Pre-Columbian Times: A Comprehensive Annotated Bibliography. These are references to written accounts of people’s contacts with America prior to 1492.

As far as “long disproved archaeology” goes, I’m guessing this has reference to the paucity of archaeological evidence for the BOM as compared with that of the Bible. But again, this issue has been addressed by competent LDS scholarship for a number of years and is really an apple-and-oranges comparison. For said “competent treatment” see this link:

maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/publications/jbms/?vol=2&num=1&id=25

In my opinion, “internal cognitive dissonance” is further reduced if the Latter-day Saints will take into account some of the recent scholarly treatments of, for example, the life of Joseph Smith (Rough Stone Rolling, by Richard Bushman, published by Alfred A. Knopf), and of the Book of Mormon (By the Hand of Mormon, by Terryl Givens, published by Oxford Univeristy Press), to cite just two of the incredibly large number of scholarly works currently published on topics having to do with Mormons and their beliefs.

In Mormon culture, we are continually encouraged to gain as much education as possible. Interestingly, some significant sociological studies indicate that for Mormons, higher levels of education lead to greater religious observance rather than less, as is the case with some other religions.

Finally, given most of what I see written about us, I am of the opinion that many non-Mormons get their information about the Latter-day Saints from Evangelical anti-Mormon websites. These cheese-balls have no interest in being fair, and for quite some time went about their work unchallenged. That is now changing to the point that two Evangelical scholars offered the following:

cephasministry.com/mormon_apologetics_losing_battle.html

I can’t fault the Captain for his conclusions, because I do believe that it is still the concept of most people that Mormons are a bunch of ignoramuses who walk in lock-step and blindly adhere to whatever their lying leaders tell them. Hopefully, that’s changing. But given the number of critics who misrepresent us, it’s a slow process and might take us a few hundred centuries (and I’ll bet that any Catholic can relate to THAT!).

(By the way, Captain America is my second-favorite character behind the Flash. And that’s most likely because my knees are always sore and I therefore envy the Flash terribly).

 

[rick43235]

Please show me the conflicts between Catholic theological and/or doctrinal beliefs and reason. One or two examples would be sufficient.

Well, the first thing that comes to mind are Catholic beliefs regarding the Eucharist. Specifically that the priest, by saying the words of the consecration, can transform bread and wine into the body and blood of Christ. If you were to take two hosts - one consecrated and one not - and subject them to any kind of examination you could come up with, no one would be able to tell the difference. Of course, the Catholic response would be that, while the accidents of bread and wine remain, the consecrated host has actually been transformed into Jesus. From my perspective, this conflicts with reason. At the very least, it is no more unreasonable than Mormon beliefs.

 

[paulp1002]

Well, the first thing that comes to mind are Catholic beliefs regarding the Eucharist. Specifically that the priest, by saying the words of the consecration, can transform bread and wine into the body and blood of Christ. If you were to take two hosts - one consecrated and one not - and subject them to any kind of examination you could come up with, no one would be able to tell the difference. Of course, the Catholic response would be that, while the accidents of bread and wine remain, the consecrated host has actually been transformed into Jesus. From my perspective, this conflicts with reason. At the very least, it is no more unreasonable than Mormon beliefs.

Well there is a slight difference. In Mark (14:22-20) for example Jesus said

22 While they were eating, he took bread, said the blessing, broke it, and gave it to them, and said, “Take it; this is my body.”

23 Then he took a cup, gave thanks, and gave it to them, and they all drank from it.

24 He said to them, “This is my blood of the covenant, which will be shed for many.

This is the basis of the Eucharist. Where in the bible does it say, that we should not drink wine, coffee, or tea etc… It doesn’t. But when you this question the Word of Wisdom, you are told that it was a revelation given to the LDS Prophet by God and you have to pray. One of Jesus’ first miracles was turning water into wine. Where is the biblical reference for Temple Marriage, in order to enter the Celestial Kingdom.

 

[CopticChristian]

I think for outsiders-looking-in, there is always a tendency to avoid sources and arguments that buttress the truth-claims of the ones being viewed from the outside (in this case, the Mormons). To apply the Captain’s logic in another context, how many times have you Catholics been accused of being “bizarre” for adhereing to beliefs like Transubstantiation and the intercessory activities of Mary and the Saints, which (in the view of some polemicists) have been “proven” to be doctrinally false?

Yet people who I know to be highly intelligent and deeply thoughtful not only embrace these beliefs, but their life’s actions and most deeply-rooted faith is informed by them. So where’s the problem - with them or me?

I vote that the problem is with me. If I can’t reconcile why it is that smart people believe in dumb things, then it’s probably because of my own ignorance and misunderstanding of those things in which they believe. So they’re not dumb things – I’m the dumb thing!

For all of us, the acceptance of truth-claims by which we choose to govern our lives and define our beliefs in God will ultimately be a matter of faith. But if there are also rationally defensible reasons to adhere to those truth-claims, then I think the “cognitive dissonance” to which the Captain refers will be greatly reduced in any body of believers. I certainly see that concept play out in the case of Catholic beliefs. And I do believe that it also holds true in the case of the Latter-day Saints. We’re really not the dupes and troglodytes that some would have you believe.

I don’t know exactly what the Captain means about “anti-factual … notions about American geography … and the Big Race War in History” but I’m assuming he’s referring to the setting of The Book of Mormon (and for the record, “The Big Race War in History” is a phrase I have never come across until just now and I’ll always believe that North Carolina is the fairest in all of American geography).

I certainly can’t be exhaustive here, but a few things are worth pointing out.

Wherever the Captain got his information, it didn’t include anything written by John L. Sorenson. One cannot in fairness be summarily dismissive of BOM claims from a geographical standpoint without addressing the arguments in his 415-page book An Ancient American Setting for The Book of Mormon. Sorenson holds a Ph.D. in anthropology from UCLA and has done extensive on-site work in the Mesoamerican areas for which he proposes BOM locales, so he is not out of his depth in writing on the subject. His other publications include a massive, 900-page bibliography entitled Transoceanic Culture Contacts Between the Old and New Worlds in Pre-Columbian Times: A Comprehensive Annotated Bibliography. These are references to written accounts of people’s contacts with America prior to 1492.

As far as “long disproved archaeology” goes, I’m guessing this has reference to the paucity of archaeological evidence for the BOM as compared with that of the Bible. But again, this issue has been addressed by competent LDS scholarship for a number of years and is really an apple-and-oranges comparison. For said “competent treatment” see this link:

maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/publications/jbms/?vol=2&num=1&id=25

In my opinion, “internal cognitive dissonance” is further reduced if the Latter-day Saints will take into account some of the recent scholarly treatments of, for example, the life of Joseph Smith (Rough Stone Rolling, by Richard Bushman, published by Alfred A. Knopf), and of the Book of Mormon (By the Hand of Mormon, by Terryl Givens, published by Oxford Univeristy Press), to cite just two of the incredibly large number of scholarly works currently published on topics having to do with Mormons and their beliefs.

In Mormon culture, we are continually encouraged to gain as much education as possible. Interestingly, some significant sociological studies indicate that for Mormons, higher levels of education lead to greater religious observance rather than less, as is the case with some other religions.

Finally, given most of what I see written about us, I am of the opinion that many non-Mormons get their information about the Latter-day Saints from Evangelical anti-Mormon websites. These cheese-balls have no interest in being fair, and for quite some time went about their work unchallenged. That is now changing to the point that two Evangelical scholars offered the following:

cephasministry.com/mormon_apologetics_losing_battle.html

I can’t fault the Captain for his conclusions, because I do believe that it is still the concept of most people that Mormons are a bunch of ignoramuses who walk in lock-step and blindly adhere to whatever their lying leaders tell them. Hopefully, that’s changing. But given the number of critics who misrepresent us, it’s a slow process and might take us a few hundred centuries (and I’ll bet that any Catholic can relate to THAT!).

(By the way, Captain America is my second-favorite character behind the Flash. And that’s most likely because my knees are always sore and I therefore envy the Flash terribly).

So lefty,

I have read the book of mormon, know of the Pearl of Great Price and D & C. Is this the place I ask you questions about what you believe?

Let me know

 

[mwok]

Well, the first thing that comes to mind are Catholic beliefs regarding the Eucharist. Specifically that the priest, by saying the words of the consecration, can transform bread and wine into the body and blood of Christ. If you were to take two hosts - one consecrated and one not - and subject them to any kind of examination you could come up with, no one would be able to tell the difference. Of course, the Catholic response would be that, while the accidents of bread and wine remain, the consecrated host has actually been transformed into Jesus. From my perspective, this conflicts with reason. At the very least, it is no more unreasonable than Mormon beliefs.

This is supposing that we use natural means of examination. The Eucharist is supernatural, as with all things spiritual. Just because we don’t have the physical senses to perceive things doesn’t mean they are/aren’t. What I have an issue with as far as mormon ideas is that we can become Gods. The created can’t become the Creator. They don’t claim that the egg will become a chicken, they claim the egg will become THE chicken that laid it.

 

[CopticChristian]

Well, the first thing that comes to mind are Catholic beliefs regarding the Eucharist. Specifically that the priest, by saying the words of the consecration, can transform bread and wine into the body and blood of Christ. If you were to take two hosts - one consecrated and one not - and subject them to any kind of examination you could come up with, no one would be able to tell the difference. Of course, the Catholic response would be that, while the accidents of bread and wine remain, the consecrated host has actually been transformed into Jesus. From my perspective, this conflicts with reason. At the very least, it is no more unreasonable than Mormon beliefs.

Sometimes Christianity is not reasonable. Look at those guys thumping bibles trying to convince people that these are the very words of God. Do you believe that?

Reason is a marveolus thing and with reason you can reason that God exists and you can reason that God does not exist. Reason gives us two different perspectives. Now what do we do?

 

[CopticChristian]

Every religion makes extraordinary claims. If you want to know how the Mormans do it, just replace the words “Morman” and “LDS” with “Catholic.” See? They do it the same way you do.

Catholics claim that Jesus was the God/man and that Satan is a fallen angel. That is extraordinary.

John A. Widtsoe’s work Evidences and Reconciliations, Pg.209, it is learned that Lucifer strove to gain the birthright of his Elder Brother, Jesus the Christ and became Satan, the enemy of God.

"The story of Lucifer is the most terrible example of such apostasy. Lucifer, son of the morning, through diligent search for truth and the use of it, had become one of the foremost in the assembly of those invited to undertake the experiences of earth. But, in that Great Council, his personal ambition and love of power overcame him. He pitted his own plan and will against the purposes of God. He strove to gain the birthright of his Elder Brother, Jesus the Christ. When his proposition was rejected, he forsook all that he had gained, would not repent of his sin, defied truth, and of necessity lost his place among the followers of God. He was no longer Lucifer, bearer of truth, who walked in light, but Satan, teacher of untruth, who slunk in darkness. He became the enemy of God and of all who try to walk according to the Lord’s commandments. One-third of the spirits present in that vast assembly supported Satan and became enemies of the truth that they had formerly cherished. With him these rebellious spirits lost their fellowship with the valiant sons of God. What is more, they lost the privilege of obtaining bodies of flesh and blood, without which they cannot gain full power over the forces of the universe. In the face of that defeat, and that curse, they have sought from Adam to the present time to corrupt mankind and defeat the Lord’s purposes

."

In this context these extraordinary claims could not be exchanged Catholic for Mormon as the beliefs are different are they not?

 

[zaffiroborant]

Interestingly, some significant sociological studies indicate that for Mormons, higher levels of education lead to greater religious observance rather than less, as is the case with some other religions. .

In light of the fact that BYU requires religious observance of it’s student, and that all people who work for or attend BYU must observe Mormon religious practices, I wonder how many of these Mormons with greater religious observance attended BYU for their initial higher education. And how much of an influence the rules at BYU had, after all the consequences of non-participation or even something as trivial as having a cup of coffee or a beer are steep and they become even greater as you go through school. Who wants to go looking for another college with a record of breaking an “honor code”?

 

[Holly3278]

Unfortunately some people are ignorant of things like North American geography and history and then are fooled by the Mormons who are constantly proclaiming their false doctrine.