"I know this church is true"

[UtahDan]

Originally Posted by Indy Coug

Have you ever heard a prayer where someone explictly cites book, chapter and verse?

Many times. Many times. I like it though. Imagine how dry church would be with nothing to talk about on the way home. Not only am I not offended by expressions of ultra-piety, I find them very entertaining.

My wife's grandfather is a champion prayer quoter.

[ERCougar]

Originally Posted by UtahDan

I haven't read the whole thread so forgive me if I retread some ground, but I have thought about this a lot so here goes.

I think the word know as used by most members of the church has a different meaning than it would have in other contexts. For example (and sorry to those who hate lawyer talk and analogies) but if I ever hear the word "know" in testimony or in a deposition I will cross examine to find out what the source of that knowledge is whether it be first hand knowledge, inference, hearsay, assumptions, etc. Often it will come down to a person not having first hand knowledge but is an amalgam of various sources which add up to knowledge in their minds. In the end though, most admit that there are aspects that they don't really know and that they are in fact relying on inference, supposition,speculation and second or third hand hearsay at least in part. First hand knowledge is the coin of the realm, and if you have less than that your testimony in court is at least subject to being questioned.

So when someone in church says they "know", if I am very literal, I can ask whether any of them have first hand knowledge of deity and the answer is that none of them do. I least I don't think so. This knowledge comes mostly from experiences where they felt an emotion and believed it was from God because they have been told that this is what that feeling means and that seemed right to them, or perhaps events unfolded in a way they would not have expected absent divine intervention and they attributed this to God. I think this is how most of us gain a "knowledge."

I was discussing this very thing with a friend who I respect a lot who is a far better scriptorian than and whose priesthood I respect, and he surprised me by saying that what people, in his opinion, really mean when they say that is that they accept the traditions that they have been taught. When they feel a certain way, they have been taught it is from God, and this tradition they accept. I like this formulation a lot and, in my opinion, this is pretty close to what the vast majority of people mean when they use that word.

I used to be much more bothered by the concept of "knowledge" because if taken literally it removes faith from the equation and the plan of salvation as I understand it, is all about exercising faith. About proving whether we will be obedient notwithstanding that we don't know. Perfect knowledge coupled with forced compliance was the adversary's plan. My friend's approach encourages me not to be literal about the words, but to take them as an expression that the person speaking is exercising faith, that is, hoping that certain things are correct or as one has been told they are.

In the course of thinking about all of this, I began to notice that an older gentlemen who is a counselor in my Bishopric and has been a Bishop more than once always expresses his testimony in terms of saying "I believe" rather than "I know." I could be wrong, but I don't get the impression that he is trying to split any hair by doing so, this is just what is natural to him to say.

So where I have landed on this is that I have adopted "I believe" rather than "I know." I don't begrudge anyone saying "know" because I have decided that I think I know what they are trying to say by this, and that it is also the same thing I am trying to say. Having thought it through, I can't really use that word myself because for me it would convey a concept that wouldn't be accurate. So to, I say the same thing, just in a different way. In a way that is more natural to my thought processes.

Now another topic for s separate thread is what it means to say something is "true." This is another word that has a very distinct meaning within the church.

Not much to add to that. Good thoughts--thanks for the input.

[ERCougar]

Originally Posted by RockyBalboa

You know what would be a hoot...moreso than just about any meeting ever....is too see the majority of "intellectuals" here,,,,and them only have a Testimony meeting. Not because I don't think you have any, but purely for the enterainment aspect of trying to hard to think of a way to say what you feel about why you believe, so as to not have others pick it apart.

You have to admit that would be funny as hell to watch.

I mean that's a sitcom of sorts or a scene in a Screenplay just begging to be written.

It could almost been done in a debate style fashion like what we see with the Presidential debates, sans any mediator, save to tell a person it's now their turn.

Tex, Arch, Lingo, ErCougar,,,etc...etc..etc.....Don't tell me this wouldn't be some funny stuff to watch.

And as always, to be followed by a closing prayer from SEIQ.

OK, Rocky...at risk of casting pearls, I'm gonna try to explain myself...

I can appreciate what you're saying. But the reason you find this irrelevant, entertaining, etc is that your experience and thinking has gone along a different line. I don't consider myself an intellectual. I like to think, but when it comes right down to it, I don't like to think about things just for the sake of thinking. I need a translator for half of Arch's posts. So no--I'm not an intellectual.

But the intent of this post was not to nitpick or obfuscate about useless ideas. To me, I've always felt a little alienated from testimony meetings because I can't get up and say I "know" the church is true. So I don't participate. I guess it's helpful to see that not everyone "knows" and that it's ok to get up and just say you believe or have faith that certain elements of the church are true. So, now, I'll at least feel more comfortable participating in my own way, knowing that I'm not wasting everyone else's time, as some might appreciate my thoughts.

That obviously won't be you. So be it.

[Clark Addison]

I have no problem with people who say they "know" things in testimonies, but to me it is pretty clear that at times there is some groupthink going on. I appreciate people who think honestly about their testimonies and how they will bear them (I'm not saying that this is rare). For example, I knew a guy a few years ago who said in Priesthood that he had never received a witness of resurrection, or really, and continuation of life after death. He had received one of the divinity of Christ, the prophetic mission of Joseph Smith, the Book of Mormon, GBH as a prophet, etc., but never resurrection. His testimony for this was based on deduction.

After this, I noticed that whever he bore his testimony, he would say something like, "I know that Jesus is our Lord, I know that Joseph Smith was a prophet, I believe that I will live with my loved ones for eternity".

I thought it was a small point, but neat that he had analyzed his testimony and was not ashamed to say where he stood on various parts of it.

Just for information's sake, this guy was not an "intellectual". He was in his 50s, very conservative, reminded me of a general authority in a lot of ways.

[Snowcat]

I'm not trying to post a Grapevine, but a few years ago we had a brother in the ward stand and tell us the Savior's physical characteristics from his personal experience (height, build, hair). I would rather he had stood and said "I know the church is true".

[RockyBalboa]

Originally Posted by ERCougar

OK, Rocky...at risk of casting pearls, I'm gonna try to explain myself...

I can appreciate what you're saying. But the reason you find this irrelevant, entertaining, etc is that your experience and thinking has gone along a different line. I don't consider myself an intellectual. I like to think, but when it comes right down to it, I don't like to think about things just for the sake of thinking. I need a translator for half of Arch's posts. So no--I'm not an intellectual.

But the intent of this post was not to nitpick or obfuscate about useless ideas. To me, I've always felt a little alienated from testimony meetings because I can't get up and say I "know" the church is true. So I don't participate. I guess it's helpful to see that not everyone "knows" and that it's ok to get up and just say you believe or have faith that certain elements of the church are true. So, now, I'll at least feel more comfortable participating in my own way, knowing that I'm not wasting everyone else's time, as some might appreciate my thoughts.

That obviously won't be you. So be it.

I'll certainly never accuse you of being overly dramatic and straining at gnats.

Nit picking while claiming the result of emotional damage has become a sport. I think what you're explaining is simply nothing more than just a pet peeve and we all have em'.

While I agree that testimony meetings can be laborious to sit through, I submit to you that if you're ever feeling alienated....come to a 31+ Singles Ward Testimony meeting.

You will feel like you should've been charged admission afterwards due to the entertainment value.

Anyone who doubts this is free to join me on any of those days.

[Indy Coug]

Originally Posted by Snowcat

I'm not trying to post a Grapevine, but a few years ago we had a brother in the ward stand and tell us the Savior's physical characteristics from his personal experience (height, build, hair). I would rather he had stood and said "I know the church is true".

So does He have an appropriate BMI?

[Snowcat]

Originally Posted by Indy Coug

So does He have an appropriate BMI?

He's ripped.

[K-dog]

As a teenager in the Church, this "I know this Church is true" nonsense bothered me. As a result, I stood up in a Youth Conference testimony and gave my personal statements of various beliefs. For example:

I believe the Book of Mormon to be of ancient origin.
I hope and have faith in a God who loves us.
I have faith that Jesus Christ lived and that the attonement he was the focal point of has the power to save us.
I think the priesthood is the power to act for God.

As a result of this testimony, I was innundated with well meaning idiots (primarily adult leaders) who tried to squeeze me into the "I know the Church is true box." I've refused to use the "I know" formula ever since. One of those well meaning idiots even approached my parents to tell them how problematic my lack of testimony was. Ironically, he was excommunicated a few years later for having sex with prostitutes and getting caught in a raid that made the papers.

[K-dog]

Originally Posted by RockyBalboa

I'll certainly never accuse you of being overly dramatic and straining at gnats.

Nit picking while claiming the result of emotional damage has become a sport. I think what you're explaining is simply nothing more than just a pet peeve and we all have em'.

While I agree that testimony meetings can be laborious to sit through, I submit to you that if you're ever feeling alienated....come to a 31+ Singles Ward Testimony meeting.

You will feel like you should've been charged admission afterwards due to the entertainment value.

Anyone who doubts this is free to join me on any of those days.

Try the 45+ singles ward in the Avenues. When it ended I was crying in the fetal position.