Quote:
Originally Posted by Tex
So fundamentally you think there's no big difference between the two?
Anyone else?
|
For some reason, I read that second verse and think of John 17. That seems to me that belief is a preliminary step, and that we are expected to eventually come to knowledge.
I think the problem is what we consider "knowledge." If I asked if any of you know when the battle of Cannae took place, you would all respond "Why, 216 BC, of course." But how many of you KNOW that the battle of Cannae took place in 216? None of you saw it; if you had seen it, there are good odds you wouldn't have recognized it, and you CERTAINLY wouldn't have had any means of discerning, amidst the ruckus, that Jesus would be born 216 years later. If, in fact, you knew that the battle of Cannae took place in 216, it is because you have sufficient evidence for so believing-- which, in this case, is little more than what you've read in a few history books.
When I say that I know the Book of Mormon is true, or that Jesus Christ is the son of God, et cetera, it is because I've come across enough evidence to so convince me that it is the case. Others may not accept as persuasive what experiences I've had; so be it.