Revelation

[BlueHair]

Thomas Paine sums up my thoughts on revelation. Here is a quote from The Age of Reason: "Revelation when applied to religion, means something communicated immediately from God to man.

No one will deny or dispute the power of the Almighty to make such a communication if he pleases. But admitting, for the sake of a case, that something has been revealed to a certain person, and not revealed to any other person, it is revelation to that person only. When he tells it to a second person, a second to a third, a third to a fourth, and so on, it ceases to be a revelation to all those persons. It is revelation to the first person only, and hearsay to every other, and, consequently, they are not obliged to believe it.

It is a contradiction in terms and ideas to call anything a revelation that comes to us at second hand, either verbally or in writing. Revelation is necessarily limited to the first communication. After this, it is only an account of something which that person says was a revelation made to him; and though he may find himself obliged to believe it, it cannot be incumbent on me to believe it in the same manner, for it was not a revelation made to me, and I have only his word for it that it was made to him."

[MikeWaters]

This is why we teach that each person must receive their own revelation.

[woot]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

This is why we teach that each person must receive their own revelation.

I've always liked that position of the church. The problem is that the standard belief is that if you haven't received any such revelation, it's obviously because you haven't tried hard enough or aren't worthy enough yet. This not only discourages people from being honest about a lack of revelation, but it also encourages people to take even the slightest notion or whisper as revelation, when it is probably nothing but the standard passing thought.

[BlueHair]

Shortly before my grandfather passed away he bore his testimony to the extended family. He was an extremely honest man so I have no reason to doubt he truly believed what he claimed to "know". While I am happy that he died happy and content, I don't feel any obligation to feel the same. For most of my life I tried the "fake it till you make it" tactic, but it just didn't take. This is one of the reasons I dislike testimony meeting so much. It seems to me nothing but a way to persuade other members to believe the same way everyone else does. It doesn't make sense to have to repeat the same thing over and over if you truly know something. I've never heard anyone bear testimony of other things they know like: water is wet, the sky is blue, George Bush is the President of the United States. I was always embarrassed as a missionary to take investigators to testimony meeting. It made the church look like a bunch of kooks.

[MikeWaters]

Originally Posted by woot

I've always liked that position of the church. The problem is that the standard belief is that if you haven't received any such revelation, it's obviously because you haven't tried hard enough or aren't worthy enough yet. This not only discourages people from being honest about a lack of revelation, but it also encourages people to take even the slightest notion or whisper as revelation, when it is probably nothing but the standard passing thought.

I know some people (most people perhaps) believe this. But I think there are good, honest people that give Mormonism a fair shake, and it doesn't work for them.

To these, I say, may we be friends in peace, and good luck with the chastity problem.

Just kidding about the last part, couldn't help myself. But seriously, I think some people give it a fair shake and it doesn't work, and that's just the way things go.

[woot]

Originally Posted by BlueHair

Shortly before my grandfather passed away he bore his testimony to the extended family. He was an extremely honest man so I have no reason to doubt he truly believed what he claimed to "know". While I am happy that he died happy and content, I don't feel any obligation to feel the same. For most of my life I tried the "fake it till you make it" tactic, but it just didn't take. This is one of the reasons I dislike testimony meeting so much. It seems to me nothing but a way to persuade other members to believe the same way everyone else does. It doesn't make sense to have to repeat the same thing over and over if you truly know something. I've never heard anyone bear testimony of other things they know like: water is wet, the sky is blue, George Bush is the President of the United States. I was always embarrassed as a missionary to take investigators to testimony meeting. It made the church look like a bunch of kooks.

That's one of the points that is basically impossible to overcome in member v. nonmember discussions. Mormons, more so than the members of any other denomination of which I am aware, are taught that those who "know" are more spiritually mature than those who just "believe," which causes virtually every single mormon to pretend that they absolutely know, at least in public. In any other religion, doubt is a healthy part of faith, and strict adherence to the belief system is a sign of ignorance, not maturity.

[woot]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

I know some people (most people perhaps) believe this. But I think there are good, honest people that give Mormonism a fair shake, and it doesn't work for them.

To these, I say, may we be friends in peace, and good luck with the chastity problem.

Just kidding about the last part, couldn't help myself. But seriously, I think some people give it a fair shake and it doesn't work, and that's just the way things go.

I appreciate that and wish more mormons saw it your way (minus the chastity remark, which I actually did indirectly run into twice when my wife had two different people independently assume I must have had an affair when I left the church).

[Taq Man]

Originally Posted by BlueHair

Shortly before my grandfather passed away he bore his testimony to the extended family. He was an extremely honest man so I have no reason to doubt he truly believed what he claimed to "know". While I am happy that he died happy and content, I don't feel any obligation to feel the same. For most of my life I tried the "fake it till you make it" tactic, but it just didn't take. This is one of the reasons I dislike testimony meeting so much. It seems to me nothing but a way to persuade other members to believe the same way everyone else does. It doesn't make sense to have to repeat the same thing over and over if you truly know something. I've never heard anyone bear testimony of other things they know like: water is wet, the sky is blue, George Bush is the President of the United States. I was always embarrassed as a missionary to take investigators to testimony meeting. It made the church look like a bunch of kooks.

Agree completly. I would add that testimony meetings also create a herd mentality atmosphere (especially the youth conference version) where there is extreme pressure for the individual to conform and get that feeling or something is wrong with them. Not a healthy or legitimate way to gain an unshakeable spiritual experience.