LDS: how do you validate your spiritual testimony?

[dennisknapp]

Your testimony is what proves to you Mormonism is true.

How do you validate your testimony?

I have talked with some Mormons who say it is Scripture (such as the BoM, Bible etc), but does it not become circular if you go to the thing you are attempting to prove to validate that which just proved it to you.

Peace

 

[Brad_Haas]

Just to warn you: this will go nowhere. You are absolutely right, there’s no answer. But if you pursue it here or with LDS friends, it’ll only lead to frustration. Bring it up once, make your point, and move to other topics (there are plenty). It’s unfortunate, but you have to argue with people on their own terms.

 

[amgid]

dennisknapp:

Your testimony is what proves to you Mormonism is true.

How do you validate your testimony?

You do not “validate” the testimony of the Holy Ghost, because the testimony of the Holy Ghost is itself a “validation”. That is the literal definition and meaning of it. You do not validate a validation, otherwise you would be validating validations ad-infinitum, and you would never come to any decision.

amgid

 

[dennisknapp]

amgid:

You do not “validate” the testimony of the Holy Ghost, because the testimony of the Holy Ghost is itself a “validation”. That is the literal definition and meaning of it. You do not validate a validation, otherwise you would be validating validations ad-infinitum, and you would never come to any decision.

amgid

How do you know it is a validation? Is it not from reading the books and believing the theology you are seeking validation of?

You say this testimony is how God does things, it is how He chooses to reveal himself to people. How do you know this? You know this because it is what the BoM says God does, correct?

So, you know of the testimony of the Spirit from your scriptures, and know your scriptures from your testimony, therefore it is circular.

Peace

 

[DeeAnn]

dennisknapp:

How do you know it is a validation? Is it not from reading the books and believing the theology you are seeking validation of?

These things help you find understanding, but it’s the Holy Ghost that confirms what you are reading and believing is actually true.

You say this testimony is how God does things, it is how He chooses to reveal himself to people. How do you know this? You know this because it is what the BoM says God does, correct?

Yes, as well as the Bible.

So, you know of the testimony of the Spirit from your scriptures, and know your scriptures from your testimony, therefore it is circular.

Peace

Yes, I guess it is. Aren’t most religious teachings that way?

DeeAnn

PS Amgid - liked your response.

 

[amgid]

DeeAnn:

PS Amgid - liked your response.

Good to hear from you DeeAnn. Long time no see! Hope you are well. How is your baby? Hope you will stay. There aren’t enough LDS here. I seem to be answering most of the questions.

amgid

 

[DeeAnn]

amgid:

Good to hear from you DeeAnn. Long time no see! Hope you are well. How is your baby? Hope you will stay. There aren’t enough LDS here. I seem to be answering most of the questions.

amgid

I’m doing well, thanks! The “baby” is now 15 months old and into everything. He keeps me on my toes along with his 3 1/2 yr old sister.

I’ll probably just be popping in now and then. Life is a bit crazy these days.

How are you doing? It was good to see a “familiar” face over here.

DeeAnn

 

[Sagefrakrobatik]

dennisknapp:

Your testimony is what proves to you Mormonism is true.

How do you validate your testimony?

I have talked with some Mormons who say it is Scripture (such as the BoM, Bible etc), but does it not become circular if you go to the thing you are attempting to prove to validate that which just proved it to you.

Peace

Well one way of looking at it from a non-mormon, might be that if you were to compare the Old Testmant with the BOM there is a lot of parrallels as far as the verses are concerned. In fact almost every verse seams to have been influenced by The OT and NT, this is also true for the D&C (Doctrine and Covenant).
Also there have supposedly been Native Americans who affirm some of what is said in the BOM.

 

[amgid]

DeeAnn:

I’m doing well, thanks! The “baby” is now 15 months old and into everything. He keeps me on my toes along with his 3 1/2 yr old sister.

That is great to hear. You have got yourself a baby boy and a baby girl. I can’t think of anything nicer!

I’ll probably just be popping in now and then. Life is a bit crazy these days.

Now you don’t want to disappoint our Catholic friends do you?

How are you doing?

I am doing fine, but I am sure not as good as you!

It was good to see a “familiar” face over here.

This must be the face you are referring to:

amgid

 

[dennisknapp]

amgid:

That is great to hear. You have got yourself a baby boy and a baby girl. I can’t think of anything nicer!

Now you don’t want to disappoint our Catholic friends do you?

I am doing fine, but I am sure not as good as you!

This must be the face you are referring to:

amgid

Couldn’t this be done through private messaging?

Any response to the topic at hand, amgid?

Peace

 

[amgid]

dennisknapp:

Couldn’t this be done through private messaging?

Yes, it could; but are you so meanspirited that you begrudge me a little lighthearted banter with a dear friend you has just joined the boards?

Any response to the topic at hand, amgid?

Definitely not!

amgid

 

[dennisknapp]

amgid:

Yes, it could; but are you so meanspirited that you begrudge me a little lighthearted banter with a dear friend you has just joined the boards?

Definitely not!

amgid

When have I been meanspirited? Have you read any of the comments you posted against me? Where they not meanspirited? I have been trying to dialog with you about inconstantancies in Mormon beliefs. If that is meanspirited, I am sorry.

Peace

 

[dennisknapp]

DeeAnn:

These things help you find understanding, but it’s the Holy Ghost that confirms what you are reading and believing is actually true.

Yes, as well as the Bible.

Yes, I guess it is. Aren’t most religious teachings that way?

DeeAnn

PS Amgid - liked your response.

So, you agree that this process is circular? If this is the case it is also invalid, for circular arguments are invalid arguments.

Here is a link with some good examples to help you out:

nizkor.org/features/fallacies/begging-the-question.html

Peace

 

[DeeAnn]

dennisknapp:

So, you agree that this process is circular? If this is the case it is also invalid, for circular arguments are invalid arguments.

Here is a link with some good examples to help you out:

nizkor.org/features/fallacies/begging-the-question.html

Peace

Sure, I’ll agree that the process is circular. That doesn’t mean that the issues are invalid. After all, I can’t “argue” a testimony. That’s why I believe, not because of some “logical argument” that you might be able to make.

 

[dennisknapp]

DeeAnn:

Sure, I’ll agree that the process is circular. That doesn’t mean that the issues are invalid. After all, I can’t “argue” a testimony. That’s why I believe, not because of some “logical argument” that you might be able to make.

The issue here is if this is a valid way to establish your testimony. If the process is circular then I would say, no. The reason for this is that it is irrational. Why would God require something of us that is irrational? BTW, faith is rational.

Peace

 

[Casen]

How does a Catholic know that Jesus really walked the earth, performed mighty miracles and resurrected on the third day?

There is scant archeological evidence that Jesus even existed and absolutely no scientific evidence to “prove” that he was who we said he was and did indeed perform miracles. If you’re unwilling to accept the Holy Spirit as a validation of spiritual truths then how do you KNOW anything spiritual? Also, where does FAITH come in?

I continue to be surprised by Catholics on these forums that reject the Holy Spirit as a revealer of truth, as stated in the scriptures but would prefer to rely on science… as if science can prove spiritual truths. I find this baffling. Perhaps someone here can help me and other non-Catholics understand your perspective on revealed spiritual truths?

 

[Brad_Haas]

Hi Casen,

Understand that Catholics don’t reject inner spiritual witness as a validation of the truth. If I didn’t have any such thing in my faith life, I think something would be very wrong. The difference is that for us, it’s part of an entire package of how we know truth - any truth. It’s on level with reason, history, philosophy, personal witness, and so on. Not above all of them. If you’re interested, I wrote a related article a while ago. That discussion has continued, and I ought to update my article with the additional insights that have come from it, but it was a good start, I thought.

 

[Phaedrus]

Casen,

A while back on this forum I made the following observation that I believe illustrates our approach to faith and reinforces what Brad wrote. When I first approached the Catholic Church, I had a lot of baggage to overcome. I had been taught as a child that the Catholic Church was the “Whore of Babylon”, and that the pope was likely the antichrist. Then I met a man named Sheldon Vanauken whose faith I did not doubt and who was in the process of becoming a Catholic. This forced me to reexamine my beliefs about the Church of Rome. I began studying Catholic Beliefs and attending mass, and reading LOTS of books (Chesterton, Knox, Newman, Kreeft). One by one my concerns, misconceptions, and fears were answered. I never intended to become a Catholic, but at some point I realized that I could not go back to being a Protestant without rejecting a Church I had come to love. At that point I had exhausted all the intellectual means open to me, and was convinced that the Catholic Church COULD be the one, true Church. But I also knew that absolute certainty was not possible in matters of faith. I had to make a leap of faith when I joined the Church.
Now what seems odd for us Catholics is that Mormons seem to START with the leap of faith, and then seek rationalizations for the leap. That just seems backward, and an invitation to be misled. How many times in history has someone come along claiming to embody divine authority and convinced gullible people that they only needed to believe in them, and that reason was not required. Jim Jones is a perfect example. If some of those poor souls had looked at Jones’ message rationally perhaps they could have seen how improbable his claims were.
We are not saying that the personal witness of the Holy Spirit is not valid, but that any subjective (i.e. personal) experience MUST be squared with reason because there are other powers in this world that have access to our minds and hearts. God gave us minds for a reason.

Under the Mercy,
Phaedrus

 

[DeeAnn]

Phaedrus:

Casen,

A while back on this forum I made the following observation that I believe illustrates our approach to faith and reinforces what Brad wrote. When I first approached the Catholic Church, I had a lot of baggage to overcome. I had been taught as a child that the Catholic Church was the “Whore of Babylon”, and that the pope was likely the antichrist. Then I met a man named Sheldon Vanauken whose faith I did not doubt and who was in the process of becoming a Catholic. This forced me to reexamine my beliefs about the Church of Rome. I began studying Catholic Beliefs and attending mass, and reading LOTS of books (Chesterton, Knox, Newman, Kreeft). One by one my concerns, misconceptions, and fears were answered. I never intended to become a Catholic, but at some point I realized that I could not go back to being a Protestant without rejecting a Church I had come to love. At that point I had exhausted all the intellectual means open to me, and was convinced that the Catholic Church COULD be the one, true Church. But I also knew that absolute certainty was not possible in matters of faith. I had to make a leap of faith when I joined the Church.
Now what seems odd for us Catholics is that Mormons seem to START with the leap of faith, and then seek rationalizations for the leap. That just seems backward, and an invitation to be misled. How many times in history has someone come along claiming to embody divine authority and convinced gullible people that they only needed to believe in them, and that reason was not required. Jim Jones is a perfect example. If some of those poor souls had looked at Jones’ message rationally perhaps they could have seen how improbable his claims were.
We are not saying that the personal witness of the Holy Spirit is not valid, but that any subjective (i.e. personal) experience MUST be squared with reason because there are other powers in this world that have access to our minds and hearts. God gave us minds for a reason.

Under the Mercy,
Phaedrus

Phaedrus, I don’t think any LDS would tell you not to study before praying for confirmation of the truth. It’s kind of a prerequisite.

DeeAnn

 

[DeeAnn]

dennisknapp:

The issue here is if this is a valid way to establish your testimony. If the process is circular then I would say, no. The reason for this is that it is irrational. Why would God require something of us that is irrational? BTW, faith is rational.

Peace

Dennis,
What would you consider a “valid” way to establish one’s testimony? Is it the way you established yours? Or are there other ways?

Here’s the way mine was established.

I was born to LDS. They taught me the gospel and set a good example for me and my 5 siblings. I read the Bible and the Book of Mormon. I asked questions and studied things out in my mind. I doubted and overcame my doubts. I prayed for confirmation of the things that I had studied and received answers. I struggled with difficult issues, willing to leave it all if it were not true. I live the principles taught by the LDS church and their truthfulness have been validated. I have read Joseph Smith’s revelations and have found them to be inspired. I have read about Joseph Smith’s life and found him to be an imperfect man whom God used to perform a mighty work. I continue to read and learn and search out answers to questions I may have. I continue to feed my testimony through regular scripture study, prayer, etc…

Is that valid enough or is there something I’m missing?

I also have to point out, however, that there ARE people who are Catholic and also who are LDS who’s testimony is gained in other ways. Some of them have the faith just to believe those who teach. Who’s to say that theirs is the wrong way? I believe that the ultimate teacher is the Holy Ghost. And I believe that to build one’s foundation on rock and not sand, that we need to have a direct relationship with God through prayer, be open to the Holy Spirit and study God’s word. We can’t just “sit by” and expect our faith to remain strong.

DeeAnn