"If You Had Experienced It, You'd Believe Too" Nonsense

Mormons say that once you experience the Spirit testify to you that something is true, it is pretty hard to convince yourself that you did not feel the Spirit. I felt what I used to call the Spirit many times, I now feel forced by the evidence to have to think differently about those powerful experiences. I now believe that those experiences are produced entirely by the biological brain.



When I was nine, I had an experience that I interpreted as being visited by an angel. I no longer interpret it that way. When I was 14 years old, my mother passed away. On the day of my marriage in the temple, I believed I felt her presence there. I now believe that that experience was entirely produced by my brain.



Experiences are always vulnerable to reinterpretation when we adopt a new perspective. So, the argument that "if you had only experienced what I have experienced, then you'd believe" does not have any validity for me.

Comments

Anonymous said…
And shows that such experiences don't have an unmistakable message. They are just experiences which we interpret each in our own way. That's why the Sin against the Holy Ghost business makes no sense to me. If we can misinterpret the messages that God allegedly sends to us, how can we be held accountable if God doesn't get his point across properly?
Thu Jan 31, 10:16:00 AM PST
fallingaway said…
People are able to convince themselves to think a certain way or to believe something is what it is not because they want to make themselves believe it (that was a confusing sentence...sorry). But what I'm saying is that I understand what you mean. It would be convenient for me to say that I was 'prompted' to drive home a certain way and therefore missed getting into a bad accident because the spirit told me. Or maybe it was just because I felt like going home a different way. Of course, the first explanation sounds much better in fast and testimony meeting... anyway, I could tell the story either way depending on what I was feeling at the time, or who I was talking to. Meanings change, too, and feelings change.
Thu Feb 21, 09:16:00 PM PST
Anonymous said…
Belief first is the requirement. Then, once you "believe", you simply apply each and every circumstance to God's presence, influence, and communication in your life.

Two people can experience something similar and come to 2 very different conclusions.

It sounds to me as if you accept that "spiritual experiences" (awe, elevation, etc...) happen, you just debate the cause of them. I believe most believers don't dispute that there is a physical reaction that occurs in some way. They just assign causation differently.

Ultimately, the argument expressed in the title is simply a non sequitur.
Sat Mar 01, 09:57:00 PM PST
Anonymous said…
Actually, I should have said "origin" for cause/causation. Well, I think you know what I mean.

As always, a good post.
Sat Mar 01, 10:00:00 PM PST
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Why I left the LDS Church

[Last edited 1/28/10] I was a very deeply spiritual person and easily moved to tears when thinking of the Savior and the sacrifices I believed he made for me and the rich blessings he bestowed upon me. I was born in the covenant to convert parents who were very active in the Church and true believers. I had a strong testimony of Joseph Smith and the restoration even before turning eight for I had recognized the joy of the Spirit and the love for mankind I felt when reading the Book of Mormon. And after turning eight, I had an experience which I considered to be a visitation of an angel. When I was 14, my mother passed away. I felt very much alone and learned through that experience to lean on the Lord even more. I decided that I would do what was right because it was the path to happiness, not to please my dad or because of fear of punishment. I felt particularly close to Heavenly Father over the next few years, having had countless experiences of answered prayers, premonitions that w...
Read more

My Patriarchal Blessing

First an intro: Sister Mary Lisa recently posted parts of her patriarchal blessing on her blog. I have decided to do the same. I used to believe in this document so much. I believed that God was personally telling me how much he loved me and how highly he thought of me and what he had in store for me and the mission he sent me to earth to accomplish. I even made my PB into Section 139 of my Doctrine and Covenants and divided it into verses and inserted cross references to other scriptures. It really is beautiful and inspiring and I think patriarchal blessings in general are good for raising people's self-esteem. But, that good does not make up for what I believe to be the misdirection it gives believers. Believers make very important life decisions based on this blessing, which would be great if it actually came from God, but since in all likelihood it is nothing more than the words of an old man inspired by nothing more than his own thoughts and experiences, it can be quite danger...
Read more

Spalding's "Manuscript Found" vs "Manuscript Story"

I don't claim to know who or how the BoM was written. But, there is one point of confusion about the Spalding-Rigdon theory that has been exacerbated by most who have written on the subject, both anti and apologist alike. It is very important that anyone looking into this topic understand what I am about to tell you as most everything that has been written on the Spalding-Rigdon theory focuses on the wrong book. I am borrowing generously from websites for which I will provide links to below. The following is from: http://www.mormoninformation.com/srtheory.htm The "Spalding-Rigdon theory" was first given wide publicity in 1834 with the publication of the book Mormonism Unvailed. In it, the author followed up on indications previously published in Ohio-based newspapers that a man named Solomon Spalding was the real (and unwitting) originator of the Book of Mormon. To make an extremely long story very, very short, the theory goes that Solomon Spalding authored a work called...
Read more