User talk:65.208.108.89

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Nice one.

Dude you're smoking dope. Read :"why we believe" by Michael Shermer. Or Maybe "How we know what isn't so." Your coincidences add to up wishful thinking. If you want the truth, as you claim you need to want it more than you want the church to be true. You may be surprised. I sure was. You cannot find the truth if you already think you’re right. Before you start your search for truth you need to ask yourself a few questions. 1: What would make the church false? (For me it was basically that the church isn’t what it claims it is.) 2. If Joseph Smith lied, would I want to know? 3: If Joseph Smith lied, how would I know? It’s not easy after you find the truth, but it is worth it. unsigned by User:65.208.108.89

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although its not specifically named in the Word of Wisdom, I don't smoke Dope.
Incidentally, Shermer's book is called "Why People Believe Weird Things, How We Believe" and if I recall, there is a series of them, no (at least two or three if I remember correctly)? And Thomas Gilovich is a decent author, but that topic is not of great interest to me. Well. Hmmm. Don't quite know what to say. I don't think that convinces me that my own wishful thinking leads to my belief system (which is what I assume your point was by those particular sources).
Incidentally, have you read "A Short History of Nearly Everything, " by Bill Bryson [1]? Its also a pretty good one that actually brings in science. It helps readers understand how theories such as big bang and evolution are created, how man evolved from an amoeba to a mammal, and more. Very good book written from the standpoint of a scientist. I keep it in my entertainment center. I also like Journal of Discources and am currently in Volume 3 of history of the church again (and of course my daily scripture study). Any others you recommend? I'm always looking for a good book, but it may have to wait until after I'm done with Volume 6. ;^)
My guess is that I have thoroughly studied every issue you have with Mormonism and The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. I very much doubt you have any "new" information to shed light on. The difference is that I have spent time with the primary documents - reading primary sources whether in libraries or in the Church Historical Office and Church Archives. I've cut through the speculative conclusions of many historians when there are places that no conclusions are to be made. I doubt you have taken the same effort, but instead, you like many others probably rely on the work of others (secondary or tertiary sources). Some church critics have called it "blind obedience" when church members rely on others for information to determine what they believe and how they act, so then why do you do it as well? Of course I could be wrong. But I doubt it from reading your note to me. Most arguments don't seperate, for example, the cultural beliefs with the church doctrines. You probably still think the plan of salvation chart shown to you by some sunday school teacher reflects church doctrine. Or that the standard works say that a deacon's responsibility is to pass the sacrament. But those are topics for other discussion. But yes, I have asked myself those questions, and I have found some answers. Others I do expect any answers on.
Let me clarify something about your comment: "You cannot find the truth if you already think you’re right." I have studied the church from every angle I could/can. I know there are many things that I don't know for sure - even about the church - and that most members assume they know something about a particular doctrine when in fact nothing has been taught on the matter. When you have experienced what I have, you cannot doubt the church's truthfulness. I know the church is true - and not just saying that as many missionaries do because of a good warm feeling. However, I do rely on my testimony from the Holy Ghost. Personal revelation is a very, very real thing to me. As Brigham Young said "to know, one must experience" - which you apparently have not. You can still find out - it takes great effort, but it is your choice.
I have no hard feelings for you and find it interesting that you have spent time and effort on me - someone of no consequence. I normally would not be of sufficient importance to attract your attention, aside from my belief in the Mormonism. It is simply amazing that you've taken time out of your day to let me know you disagree with my belief. Thank-you for the compliment.
There are more answers to your questions than you realize in primary documents. Try cutting past the cultural teachings and folklore of Mormonism (as you know, Mormonism is full of it) and study the primary sources. Yes it may be dry to read page after page of misspellings in journals, newspapers and letters. I believe reading primary sources will help. Of course, you can rely on the "testimony" of others, as you seem to be doing. But, again, I call that "blind obedience." -Visorstuff 21:54, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

I noticed this on Visorstuff's talk page and thought I would copy it to yours in case you didn't see it on his page. Unfortunately my response below will probably not be as good as his.

I have to say that while I have not been able to go through primary sources as comprehensively as Visorstuff, I have asked myself those questions, but for me they were:

  1. What is truth?
  2. Can we come to know truth?
  3. How can I determine if something is true?
  4. Am I willing to do/be/change to bring my life in line with what I discover?

I am really big on assumptions. For example an assumption of nearly all physics, including the big bank theory, string theory, etc. is that there is Time Symmetry and Space Symmetry. I.e. that the things we observe here on earth now will be the same wherever in the universe they are observed, and in whatever time they are observed. This is, in my opinion, a huge assumption that is one that we have very little choice but to make. However, it is an assumption that is never discussed as to the impact it may have on the results of the conclusions we are drawing.

I think the same is true of many things that I read in the anti-Mormon literature - they ask me to question and challenge the conventional wisdom of the culture in which I was raised; however, those that have introduced them to me, and those that have written them (when I have had the chance to talk with them) take umbrage when I question and challenge their conclusion and ask for information about the veracity of their sources - and shrug my questions off with a comment to the effect that I am still too wrapped up in what I was taught to see the "truth." Thus I am in 100% agreement with Visorstuff, that often those that accuse me of blind obedience are willing, themselves, to be blindly obedient, when they get the answers they want. Trödel 01:12, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Hi, the recent edit you made to Paul Rice has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thanks – Gurch 15:06, 28 November 2007 (UTC)