Because the bible tells you so?

[Bathsheba]

Really? all Mormons [claim.. that his god communicates to him directly]

Except for the ones that don't, but then you don't think of them as mormons anymore, right?


Logdog, Mormons believe they are gifted this special companion when they are 8 years old - think of this companion as a Friendly Ghost. Here's how it works, if you are a good little girl or boy, then the Ghost whispers things to you, guides you to chose the right, and, according to Comprehend, the Ghost is the primary source of his morality.

It might be hard to imagine all the conditioning kids have sustained prior to the bestowal of the *gift* unless one has lived it. My daughter has a friend being raised by Jehovah Witness parents. It is unfreaking believable the amount of indoctrination this kid has to digest. By the time kids reach age 8 they have sustained considerable indoctrination, enculturation and mapping. Most kids have the Mormon meme tattooed to their hippocampus by age 5, after that it is just extra mooring hooks for good measure.

My sympathies are with Comprehend, it is difficult to slay this dragon. I don’t doubt that he really believes the stuff he is claiming. To the outsider, not ever having been imprinted the way believers are in those formative years, it is damn near impossible to appreciate the hold it has on a mind.

 

[ChristineES]

This totally off-topic, but what the heck. Why is it so strange to any one that a Christian would follow the Bible's teachings? If we weren't Christians, then we would not follow the Bible's teachings--it is as simple as that.
Any religious person is going to follow the teachings of his or her religion. Buddhists follow the teachings of Siddhartha Gautama about enlightenment. And I could go on with any other religion, whether it has a deity or not. Is that really so strange? No, it is not.

 

[Comprehend]

Doesn't it deal with arguments that are based on abstract premises. Ones that are made independent of sensory experiences?

I'm not, can you explain please?

short explanation:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_priori_and_a_posteriori_(philosophy)


I can't find a good translation of the text online but I have typed out some of the explanation below so you can get an idea of what he is talking about.

Metaphysics of Morals [6:216] :

If, therefore, a system of a priori cognition from concepts alone is called metaphysics, a practical philosophy, which has not nature but freedom of choice for its object, will presuppose and require a metaphysics of morals, that is, it is itself a duty to have such a metaphysics, and every human being also has it within himself, though in general only in an obscure way; for without a priori principles how could he believe that he ahs a giving of universal law within himself?

But just as there must be principles in a metaphysics of nature for applying those highest universal principles of a nature in general to objects of experience, a metaphysics of morals cannot dispense with principles of application, and we shall often have to take as our object the particular nature of human beings, which is cognized only by experience, in order to show in it what can be inferred from universal moral principles. But this will in no way detract from the purity of these principles or cast doubt on their a priori source. - This is to say, in effect, that a metaphysics of morals cannot be based upon anthropology but can still be applied to it.

Would you say that using pure reason, it is possible to arrive at a number of equally "good" but contradictory sets of morals or would there be a single universal *best* (most reasonable) morality?

 

[Comprehend]

Except for the ones that don't, but then you don't think of them as mormons anymore, right?

wrong. (0-1)

Logdog, Mormons believe they are gifted this special companion when they are 8 years old - think of this companion as a Friendly Ghost. Here's how it works, if you are a good little girl or boy, then the Ghost whispers things to you, guides you to chose the right, and, according to Comprehend, the Ghost is the primary source of his morality.

wrong. (0-2)

It might be hard to imagine all the conditioning kids have sustained prior to the bestowal of the *gift* unless one has lived it. My daughter has a friend being raised by Jehovah Witness parents. It is unfreaking believable the amount of indoctrination this kid has to digest. By the time kids reach age 8 they have sustained considerable indoctrination, enculturation and mapping. Most kids have the Mormon meme tattooed to their hippocampus by age 5, after that it is just extra mooring hooks for good measure.

Nice of you to compare us to JW's... we aren't anything like them. (0-3)

My sympathies are with Comprehend, it is difficult to slay this dragon. I don’t doubt that he really believes the stuff he is claiming. To the outsider, not ever having been imprinted the way believers are in those formative years, it is damn near impossible to appreciate the hold it has on a mind.

This is so true. I'm like a manchurian candidate walking around having been brainwashed since childhood just waiting to snap. Sombody please save me! .... :sarcastic

do you have anything constructive, relevant or true to say or did you just wander in here to insult and lie about mormons?

 

[Bathsheba]

do you have anything constructive, relevant or true to say or did you just wander in here to insult and lie about mormons?

My perspective on my previous post –

Constructive: It is understandable why you believe what you believe.
Relevant: I provided background information on your primary source for morality.
Behavior: I don’t agree that I wandered in here to insult and lie about Mormons.

Did you receive the Holy Ghost as described by the Mormon religion? Do you believe the Holy Ghost plays a role in providing you with your primary source of morality? Do Mormon children before the age of 8 receive religious training? Is it possible that a Mormon child prior to the age of 8 has significantly identified as a Mormon? If so, is that irrelevant (in your opinion)?

In my opinion my comments are relevant, constructive (in terms of considering the ideas at hand) and not based on falsifications.

 

[LogDog]

Would you say that using pure reason, it is possible to arrive at a number of equally "good" but contradictory sets of morals or would there be a single universal *best* (most reasonable) morality?

I think morality is relative to the times and is a moving target. What in the past was considered a perfectly moral position or action would today be considered anything but.



The following questions for you are off-topic so don't feel obligated to answer.

Is it your position that it's ethically appropriate to religiously indoctrinate an eight-year-old child?

How old were you when you "received the holy ghost"?

Does the holy ghost talk to you? If so, what does it say?

How are Bathsheba's representations of your religion incorrect?

 

[Comprehend]

My perspective on my previous post –

Constructive: It is understandable why you believe what you believe.
Relevant: I provided background information on your primary source for morality.
Behavior: I don’t agree that I wandered in here to insult and lie about Mormons.

Did you receive the Holy Ghost as described by the Mormon religion? Do you believe the Holy Ghost plays a role in providing you with your primary source of morality? Do Mormon children before the age of 8 receive religious training? Is it possible that a Mormon child prior to the age of 8 has significantly identified as a Mormon? If so, is that irrelevant (in your opinion)?

In my opinion my comments are relevant, constructive (in terms of considering the ideas at hand) and not based on falsifications.

I was already aware of your opinion. Like I said, you are wrong. I do find it mildly amusing that you have attempted to shade your answers now though.

 

[ChristineES]

Is it your position that it's ethically appropriate to religiously indoctrinate an eight-year-old child?

I think a parent has a right to teach his or her child about any religion or non-religion they choose. It is morally right and a natural thing for a parent to do.

 

[Comprehend]

I think morality is relative to the times and is a moving target. What in the past was considered a perfectly moral position or action would today be considered anything but.

Would you consider each moral position equally valid in its respective time?

The following questions for you are off-topic so don't feel obligated to answer.

Is it your position that it's ethically appropriate to religiously indoctrinate an eight-year-old child?

Educate yes, indoctrinate no.

How old were you when you "received the holy ghost"?

8

Does the holy ghost talk to you? If so, what does it say?

I don't think talk is the best word. I would use "communicate" but yes he does.

He communicates things that are to the benefit of those within my stewardship and in accordance with the gospel. The Holy Ghost also testifies of the truthfulness of gospel principles among a great many other functions.

How are Bathsheba's representations of your religion incorrect?

1. We do not have a Holy Ghost litmus test for whom we consider mormon. She said we "don't think of them as mormon's anymore." That is just plain false and I can't even figure out what group of people she is talking about because as I said before, all mormons believe this as far as I know.

2. She claims the "Friendly ghost" was the primary source of my morality. That would be wrong, God is the primary source of my morality as I have mentioned before.

3. She gives an example of her JW friend as evidence of what Mormons do? That is dishonest, misleading, and a non-sequiter argument. What JW's do has no bearing upon what LDS members do or how we teach our children and we certainly do not brainwash our children. If she would like to make this argument, the least she could do is provide some evidence (anecdotal even) about Mormons...

4. Lastly she again claims that I am the victim of brainwashing with no personal knowledge of me nor offering any evidence that this is even generally the case. Thus her statement amounts to a smear.

 

[LogDog]

Would you consider each moral position equally valid in its respective time?

In the framework of its era, yes. What are you getting at?

Educate yes, indoctrinate no.

In your mind, what's the difference? Do you mean children should be educated on all forms of religion and not just mormonsim?

8

Were you given the opportunity to learn about all other forms of religion and the opportunity to decide for yourself that mormonism was the best fit for you? Do you feel that a child of eight years has the faculties to make an informed decision about worldviews?

I don't think talk is the best word. I would use "communicate" but yes he does.

He communicates things that are to the benefit of those within my stewardship and in accordance with the gospel. The Holy Ghost also testifies of the truthfulness of gospel principles among a great many other functions.

Are the "communications" from the holy ghost consistent? Does everyone in your stewardship hear what you hear? How did you come to accept that the voice (I'll call it a voice for lack of a better word) you are hearing is that of the holy ghost? Have you ever considered that the voice isn't that of a supernatural source?

3. She gives an example of her JW friend as evidence of what Mormons do? That is dishonest, misleading, and a non-sequiter argument. What JW's do has no bearing upon what LDS members do or how we teach our children and we certainly do not brainwash our children. If she would like to make this argument, the least she could do is provide some evidence (anecdotal even) about Mormons...

Does this mean children in your faith are educated on all religious options and that they have chosen to become mormon through their own free will? Do you honestly feel that an eight-year-old has the wherewithal to make a truly informed decision on such matters?

4. Lastly she again claims that I am the victim of brainwashing with no personal knowledge of me nor offering any evidence that this is even generally the case. Thus her statement amounts to a smear.

Are your parents mormon?

 

[Bathsheba]

How are Bathsheba's representations of your religion incorrect?

LogDog, thanks for asking the question. I find the discussion invigorating.

"We do not have a Holy Ghost litmus test for whom we consider mormon. She said we "don't think of them as mormon's anymore." That is just plain false and I can't even figure out what group of people she is talking about because as I said before, all mormons believe this as far as I know."

If the friendly ghost tells a mormon that the church is true, Book of Mormon is true, Joseph Smith was a prophet, Spencer is the current prophet, etc. they stand up in church or knock on doors and tell people that god told them these things were true. If a mormon can’t say that god told them these things, at a minimum that can’t knock on doors. If they stood up in church and said, I don’t believe that the church is true, the book of mormon is fake, Smith was a fake, and Spencer is just a dude they would be excommunicated. Mormons would conclude that an unfriendly ghost (Satan) deceived them and Mormons would speculate that they either wanted to break the commandments or were offended by somebody at church (generally speaking). If the friendly ghost isn’t giving a mormon the required witness, that mormon generally gets branded as anti-mormon. Then hyperbole starts to fly – attacks, lies, and insults … oh my!

"She claims the "Friendly ghost" was the primary source of my morality. That would be wrong, God is the primary source of my morality as I have mentioned before. "

I get the point Comprehend is making. According to Mormons, God, Jesus and the Holy Ghost are united in purpose; supposedly they are all on the same page. Mormons are told that they will be given the gift of the Holy Ghost to reveal truth (among other things). One of the truths that presumably the HG is supposed to reveal is that the Bible is the word of god. So it makes sense to me when Comprehend claims that God is the primary source of his morality. God partners up with the HG, they tag team Comprehend by “communicating” with him and the truth is revealed. Mormons are told to ask God if their scriptures are the word of god. God tells them that the Mormon scriptures are the word of god and thus the bible becomes a secondary source of morality for Comprehend. It isn’t at all clear when the HG became a full partner so I’m not going to split hairs with Comprehend, God it is.

"She gives an example of her JW friend as evidence of what Mormons do? That is dishonest, misleading, and a non-sequiter argument. What JW's do has no bearing upon what LDS members do or how we teach our children and we certainly do not brainwash our children. If she would like to make this argument, the least she could do is provide some evidence (anecdotal even) about Mormons... "

I disagree that I was giving evidence of what Mormons do by referencing the JWs. I trust the careful reader will not draw erroneous conclusions when mentioning the indoctrination of the JWs. The language used is deliberately loose and Comprehends reaction to it tellingly hypersensitive IMHO. To the outsider, “way of life” religious communities do appear to be excessive in terms of the vigor with which these communities immerse the little ones. Granted, this perspective is usually only shared by outsiders. Any evidence, even anecdotal is not going to be appreciated by Comprehend, he cannot comprehend the outsiders view.

"Lastly she again claims that I am the victim of brainwashing with no personal knowledge of me nor offering any evidence that this is even generally the case. Thus her statement amounts to a smear."

Every child is influenced by their parent’s worldview. Even if a parent is passive in the rearing of their child, that child will in part form their worldview based on the beliefs of the parent, even some of the unconscious ones. What I am considering is the extent to which a parent imparts their worldview to their child. I am suggesting that the Mormons are very very active in passing on their worldview to their children. I have also indicated that I think the JWs are extremely active in passing on their worldview to their children. This isn’t a surprise to anyone. It is natural for parents to want to teach their children their morals, their beliefs, their way of life. I want to be free to teach my children my beliefs. Clearly, it isn’t just the religionist that has a stake in influencing their child’s belief map.

Brainwashing is a term with a lot of baggage and is probably not useful in this discussion. I prefer to use the following terms: indoctrination, enculturation and mapping. I can appreciate why Comprehend derived “brainwashing” from the terms I used, but I in fact did not say that he had been brainwashed. And thus – NO SMEAR! I just heard the Umpire from youth holler in my head - “SAFE” – just like he did when I slid into home and scored the winning run.

Earlier Comprehend said he found my shades amusing; this should really tickle his fancy.

 

[quadrophenic_9]

LogDog, thanks for asking the question. I find the discussion invigorating.

"We do not have a Holy Ghost litmus test for whom we consider mormon. She said we "don't think of them as mormon's anymore." That is just plain false and I can't even figure out what group of people she is talking about because as I said before, all mormons believe this as far as I know."

If the friendly ghost tells a mormon that the church is true, Book of Mormon is true, Joseph Smith was a prophet, Spencer is the current prophet, etc. they stand up in church or knock on doors and tell people that god told them these things were true. If a mormon can’t say that god told them these things, at a minimum that can’t knock on doors. If they stood up in church and said, I don’t believe that the church is true, the book of mormon is fake, Smith was a fake, and Spencer is just a dude they would be excommunicated. Mormons would conclude that an unfriendly ghost (Satan) deceived them and Mormons would speculate that they either wanted to break the commandments or were offended by somebody at church (generally speaking). If the friendly ghost isn’t giving a mormon the required witness, that mormon generally gets branded as anti-mormon. Then hyperbole starts to fly – attacks, lies, and insults … oh my!

"She claims the "Friendly ghost" was the primary source of my morality. That would be wrong, God is the primary source of my morality as I have mentioned before. "

I get the point Comprehend is making. According to Mormons, God, Jesus and the Holy Ghost are united in purpose; supposedly they are all on the same page. Mormons are told that they will be given the gift of the Holy Ghost to reveal truth (among other things). One of the truths that presumably the HG is supposed to reveal is that the Bible is the word of god. So it makes sense to me when Comprehend claims that God is the primary source of his morality. God partners up with the HG, they tag team Comprehend by “communicating” with him and the truth is revealed. Mormons are told to ask God if their scriptures are the word of god. God tells them that the Mormon scriptures are the word of god and thus the bible becomes a secondary source of morality for Comprehend. It isn’t at all clear when the HG became a full partner so I’m not going to split hairs with Comprehend, God it is.

"She gives an example of her JW friend as evidence of what Mormons do? That is dishonest, misleading, and a non-sequiter argument. What JW's do has no bearing upon what LDS members do or how we teach our children and we certainly do not brainwash our children. If she would like to make this argument, the least she could do is provide some evidence (anecdotal even) about Mormons... "

I disagree that I was giving evidence of what Mormons do by referencing the JWs. I trust the careful reader will not draw erroneous conclusions when mentioning the indoctrination of the JWs. The language used is deliberately loose and Comprehends reaction to it tellingly hypersensitive IMHO. To the outsider, “way of life” religious communities do appear to be excessive in terms of the vigor with which these communities immerse the little ones. Granted, this perspective is usually only shared by outsiders. Any evidence, even anecdotal is not going to be appreciated by Comprehend, he cannot comprehend the outsiders view.

"Lastly she again claims that I am the victim of brainwashing with no personal knowledge of me nor offering any evidence that this is even generally the case. Thus her statement amounts to a smear."

Every child is influenced by their parent’s worldview. Even if a parent is passive in the rearing of their child, that child will in part form their worldview based on the beliefs of the parent, even some of the unconscious ones. What I am considering is the extent to which a parent imparts their worldview to their child. I am suggesting that the Mormons are very very active in passing on their worldview to their children. I have also indicated that I think the JWs are extremely active in passing on their worldview to their children. This isn’t a surprise to anyone. It is natural for parents to want to teach their children their morals, their beliefs, their way of life. I want to be free to teach my children my beliefs. Clearly, it isn’t just the religionist that has a stake in influencing their child’s belief map.

Brainwashing is a term with a lot of baggage and is probably not useful in this discussion. I prefer to use the following terms: indoctrination, enculturation and mapping. I can appreciate why Comprehend derived “brainwashing” from the terms I used, but I in fact did not say that he had been brainwashed. And thus – NO SMEAR! I just heard the Umpire from youth holler in my head - “SAFE” – just like he did when I slid into home and scored the winning run.

Earlier Comprehend said he found my shades amusing; this should really tickle his fancy.

So this is what you do with your time, tell Mormons they are indoctrinated and wrong? :sarcastic

Wow, doesn't seem like you have much of a life.

 

[Comprehend]

LogDog, thanks for asking the question. I find the discussion invigorating.

too bad I wasn't talking to you eh? :sarcastic

 

[Bathsheba]

too bad I wasn't talking to you eh? :sarcastic

I dig the prickly bad boy thing you got going on, wanna make out or something?

 

[DeepShadow]

If the friendly ghost tells a mormon that the church is true, Book of Mormon is true, Joseph Smith was a prophet, Spencer is the current prophet, etc. they stand up in church or knock on doors and tell people that god told them these things were true. If a mormon can’t say that god told them these things, at a minimum that can’t knock on doors.

As a general rule, this is false. There are plenty of stories of people going on their missions without having a witness of anything. Moreover, at no point are we asked whether the Holy Ghost has told us anything. When we are interviewed, the questions deal with what we believe, not why we believe it.

If they stood up in church and said, I don’t believe that the church is true, the book of mormon is fake, Smith was a fake, and Spencer is just a dude they would be excommunicated.

If they stood up in church and said that...why are they in church? Excommunication would be a formality; the person has put themselves outside the church. The church is defined as people who believe X. If you don't believe X, don't join. If you change your mind, we change your status. Excommunication among Mormons is basically "unbaptism" as opposed to shunning.

Mormons would conclude that an unfriendly ghost (Satan) deceived them and Mormons would speculate that they either wanted to break the commandments or were offended by somebody at church (generally speaking).

I'm sorry if this happened to you, but it's not universal, and saying the entire church is like that is not only unfair, it's silly. You cannot read our minds.

If the friendly ghost isn’t giving a mormon the required witness, that mormon generally gets branded as anti-mormon.

If the person has stood up in church and said Joseph Smith is a fraud, that's one thing. If they fail to testify (which isn't mandatory) that's another. Either way it falls short of the common definition of anti-Mormon:

What is an anti-Mormon? Anyone who disagrees with you?
This is a poorly defined term, but I would say that only the activists who attack the Church in a way intended to generate misunderstanding, fear, and shock are the ones who deserve the epithet of "anti-Mormons." Many such "Mormon bashers" feel that the end justifies the means, and use tactics that are incompatible with the truthful example of Christ.(http://www.jefflindsay.com/LDSFAQ/FQ_antis.shtml)

Then hyperbole starts to fly – attacks, lies, and insults … oh my!

I'm deeply sorry if this happened to you, but extrapolating it to the entire church is unfair...and it's a fallacy of a small sample.

Brainwashing is a term with a lot of baggage and is probably not useful in this discussion. I prefer to use the following terms: indoctrination, enculturation and mapping.

Those are terms I'm familiar with (psych major) but they fail to explain the rapid first-generation growth of the church (i.e. converts). It may not be relevant to the OP, but if 100 people a month insist they got a Holy Ghost witness without any of these three events then it's disingenuous to say non-converts are only a product of those three schemas. Call it hysteria, call it reenculturation, call it whatever you want, but it's going on for all generations at the same time.

 

[Comprehend]

In the framework of its era, yes. What are you getting at?

Just trying to understand where you are coming from to better understand your argument.

In your mind, what's the difference? Do you mean children should be educated on all forms of religion and not just mormonsim?

Education allows for agency and a choice to be made, indoctrination does not.

I think children's religious education should be about what we believe to be the truth. Their social and civic education should be about all forms of religion. I understand that you do not believe it to be true but that doesn't change whether or not it actually is.

Were you given the opportunity to learn about all other forms of religion and the opportunity to decide for yourself that mormonism was the best fit for you?

Yes. I was not a member for about 10 years. Our church always gives a choice, nobody is forced to be baptized.

Do you feel that a child of eight years has the faculties to make an informed decision about worldviews?

Yes, and if they don't like their choice later they can certainly change their mind.

Are the "communications" from the holy ghost consistent?

yes.

Does everyone in your stewardship hear what you hear?

it isn't a voice nor is it audible. (usually), but yes.

How did you come to accept that the voice (I'll call it a voice for lack of a better word) you are hearing is that of the holy ghost?

intersubjective experience, my own experience and the results of following the direction.

Have you ever considered that the voice isn't that of a supernatural source?

of course.

Does this mean children in your faith are educated on all religious options and that they have chosen to become mormon through their own free will? Do you honestly feel that an eight-year-old has the wherewithal to make a truly informed decision on such matters?

Nope. Could you name a religion or anything else for that matter that does? I certainly don't remember learning about creationism in my biology class and being given a choice on which I thought was better.

Yep.

Are your parents mormon?

That wouldn't have any bearing on whether I was brainwashed.

 

[Comprehend]

I dig the prickly bad boy thing you got going on, wanna make out or something?

I don't really dig the lame smear campaign you have going on. Why don't you go try to kiss a Greyhound bus on the freeway?

 

[Bathsheba]

DeepShadow,

As a general rule, this is false. There are plenty of stories of people going on their missions without having a witness of anything. Moreover, at no point are we asked whether the Holy Ghost has told us anything. When we are interviewed, the questions deal with what we believe, not why we believe it.

I have heard it said that the people that go on the mission not knowing it is true are told to tell people they know it is true until they get their own belief that it is true. Ever heard of that?

It is a good thing that a member doesn’t have to declare that they have received a HG witness to the Mormon beliefs. But you gotta wonder, if some guy received the HG at age 8 and the HG still hasn’t gotten through to him by age 19, I dunno, what’s going on? I think you should probably ask for your money back.

Excommunication among Mormons is basically "unbaptism" as opposed to shunning.

Wow, that is seriously impressive eyes wide shut. The “unbaptism” thing is the party line, sure, the reality is quite different for people.

saying the entire church is like that is not only unfair, it's silly. You cannot read our minds.

I don’t mind backing up on this and rewording my earlier comment. Every instance in which I have known somebody that has been excommunicated, the rumor mill was active and the conclusion was that an unfriendly ghost (Satan) deceived them and they speculated that they either wanted to break the commandments or were offended by somebody at church.

If the person has stood up in church and said Joseph Smith is a fraud, that's one thing. If they fail to testify (which isn't mandatory) that's another. Either way it falls short of the common definition of anti-Mormon.

I agree. I claimed that if they don’t get the HG lowdown they generally get branded anti-Mormon. Upon reflection I can consider many instances where this would not be the case.

extrapolating it to the entire church is unfair...and it's a fallacy of a small sample.

Another valid push-back, you are on a role my good man.


Those are terms I'm familiar with (psych major) but they fail to explain the rapid first-generation growth of the church (i.e. converts). It may not be relevant to the OP, but if 100 people a month insist they got a Holy Ghost witness without any of these three events then it's disingenuous to say non-converts are only a product of those three schemas. Call it hysteria, call it reenculturation, call it whatever you want, but it's going on for all generations at the same time.

I don’t understand what you are saying with this last bit, “but it's going on for all generations at the same time.” Do you mean the hysteria, etc is constant across the generations? (I'm not being snotty)

I am not at all persuaded by the numbers argument.

 

[Bathsheba]

I don't really dig the lame smear campaign you have going on. Why don't you go try to kiss a Greyhound bus on the freeway?

Yes, I get that, I hear the anger.

 

[mcteethinator]

The Qur'an/Bible/Torah/etc strengthens people's morals, it's not like they didn't have any morals beforehand.