Confident trust in something is really the root of faith.

Do you have confidence Christ died for your sins? Do you have confidence God approves the steps you are taking in life? Do you have confidence in your own intellectualism to figure things out on your own? Do you have confidence the engineers built an unsinkable Titanic?

Faith is based on knowledge, and then takes it further to place confidence in something that helps explain what we do not yet know. And that will motivate us to act down a path until more knowledge is revealed that we can then know. And that is the power of faith, whether that is faith in science, that the scientist will carry out an experiment until the solution is revealed, faith in the harvest in that the farmer will cultivate until he sees a crop, or if that is a religious leader carrying out activities until the solution is revealed.

For that reason, I believe faith is more powerful than intellectualism that limits you to only take action and believe in things you can understand.

This is what I would like to see discussed more. I think we are missing the mark on this issue. My point, in a future post (if given the opportunity) will be to address what spirituality is/isn’t and whether or not my spirituality is as valid as anyone else’s if it has the same effects.

@Ray
Loved your comment. You always have a way!!

Wow-

In my opinion, truth can be seen as you describe it. I don’t see those in a kingdom of glory having regrets. It just wouldn’t be a kingdom of glory if that were the case.

My dad used to say: water seeks it own level. In other words, where our agency takes us is where we will ultimately be most happy. It may take us through hell, but when we come out we will be clean and inherit a kingdom of glory.

And on top of that, time doesn’t exist and we only have a small portion of the knowledge about what lies ahead. Who knows what ultimate truth combined with ultimate love will provide for us.

brjones, I think at this point, we have to make some concessions about the definitions of spirituality. Now, I agreed with you in other posts that the common definition of spirituality and faith make it such that it seems that people clearly can live without it and be just as happy, but then we have common definitions of “intellectualism” and “rationalism” that also don’t seem to fit. For example, I hear so often, “Oh, you’re atheist, you’re not spiritual. You must not be able to see wonder in the world.” And my point is to say, “Whoa, you don’t need spirituality to see wonder in the world. You don’t need to attribute this to God or the supernatural, etc.,”

But I’ve found we don’t get too far here. People are set in their definitions of this dichotomy, so we have to compromise on some terms. For the sake of making people understand we are still humans and not just robots.

Gotta run. Good discussion.

I believe this is a true statement and I’ve seen it happen.

Mormon 9 addresses this thought but it can be offensive if not understood properly.

There are many things of the spirit that I am not ready for. For example, I am not ready to have my calling and election made or receive the second comforter. If I were I would have received them.

So it is with each of us. Some people are far more comfortable with marginal activity in the church. My mother was like that until she was in her 80′s. Then she started to have a change of heart and before she died did all her temple work.

God’s children can’t be pushed or rushed. I they are, then what you’ve said takes place.

What you say makes sense, but you still have an assumption of ultimate truth that basically condescends to everyone else. So, a Buddhist can be spiritual and and atheist can be spiritual, but you make it very clear that these guys are missing the mark on a critical level. They may have truths, but they do not have Ultimate Truth, because for that, there is only one way and one path.

What I am saying is that one path and one way does not fit all, but your line doesn’t allow for that. Someone can find personal truth and work toward self-actualization, but unless it’s the way you have prescribed with Heavenly Father and Jesus Christ, it’s a counterfeit, lower, second place prize

I believe God is the ultimate source of ultimate truth—–

I also believe that there are truths that are not ultimate truths—-

With that concept in mind, then it starts a discussion on the various degrees of glory.

Andrew S. asked: So, I wonder if you think there is a particular way to be “spiritual…”

A Buddhist can be spiritual as can an atheist.

But to be like Heavenly Father and his Son, to be where they are, we need to travel the same path they did in order to experience ultimate truth.

Does this make sense?

I also believe that the seemingly incompatible parts need not be incompatible at all, but perhaps this suggests a redefinition of either one or both terms, and also a redefinition of how the marriage will look for each person.

For example, what if a person had a spiritual foundation, but he did not view this as indicative of any god or higher power? This doesn’t mean that he is being hyperrational…but rather, the way he weds spiritual and rational is different than the way others might. So, I wonder if you think there is a particular way to be “spiritual…”

It may require that we have to ultimately look at things that have commonly been looked at in one way in a completely different way. We have specific ideas and biases against Laman and Lemuel, for example, but what if we looked at them in a different way, as Ray does. It’s a possibility, but what if, as Ray suggested:

I have mentioned this elsewhere, but I wonder sometimes if Laman and Lemuel were being honest about the reason for not praying about the meaning of Lehi’s vision when they said, “The Lord maketh no such thing known unto us.”

What if it’s possible that certain concepts simply will not make sense to some…that one size doesn’t fit all (whether spiritually or rationally)? Because every side and every perspective will be able to point to instances where it seemed all the evidences and proofs were right in front of some person, and yet that person could not reconcile with that perspective. We have Laman and Lemuel, but we can think of others, and other religions (and even nonreligions) can think of other ideas.

Thoughtful comments, each one. Ray, thanks for putting my comment in context of the discussion. I was hoping someone would do that. You did it better than I could.

IMO–faith and intellect can increase and grow and bear results.

As human beings, we have a dual nature–we are rational and spiritual (intellectual and faith). And as the title of this post suggest–the two seemingly incompatible parts can marry. I believe that the foundation of our beings needs to be spiritual. When this occurs the rational will produce the best results. At least this is how I see it.

The interplay of Nephi and his brothers Laman and Lemuel are interesting examples to seek to understand. It is an enigma wrapped in a mystery how Laman and Lemuel could lack faith in the face of all they experienced. I can’t wrap my mind around their faithlessness. They saw and heard and angel, witnessed many miracles, heard the voice of God speaking to them, and etc and yet–any repentance they accomplished was short lived.

Note: Regarding prayer and obtaining answers-we can all grow in this process, as well as regress in it. As long as we’re in mortality, we can go either way.

Even a man like Joseph Smith had to work at his faith. Brigham Young said:

Joseph had to pray all the time, exercise faith, live his religion, and magnify his calling, to obtain the manifestations of the Lord, and to keep him steadfast in the faith. Brigham Young , JD 2:267-68

But then, it’s as you alluded. I think that from that position of faith, the consequences should back up the initial faith. So, it seemed reasonable to me. “OK, I have this crazy idea that you’re likely to be skeptical about. Just read this book, and then pray about it, and you should have a confirming experience.” In the beginning, you need that faith to jump out there, but after a while, the faith should be confirmed with the spiritual experience, the burning in the bosom, recognition that the values in the BoM match up with personal values, etc.,

But what if you don’t have this spiritual experience? what if you don’t get the confirming experience? I understand that it is a powerful example to see someone who continues in faith despite not getting confirming experiences, but to me, I think this should not be expected of everyone and can produce negative side effects.

As you said:

In the end, we praise the scientist who keeps tinkering and finally discovers something, but we also tend to ridicule the scientist who refuses to admit he’s wrong about his assumptions and never succeeds in discovering anything. If she fails long enough, her funding will disappear completely, and her life’s work will be considered a waste. When it comes to religion, however, we tend to discourage the very tinkering that might lead to discovering something and praise the person who doggedly believes and does the same thing over and over again without seeing any results

Fwiw, Sundance Kid, that’s not Mormonism to me. That’s creedal Christianity masquerading as Mormonism.

I don’t mean that to be flippant at all, and I understand totally that some members believe that and teach it to others (including their children), but that’s not the vision Joseph articulated, and it’s not the model we have throughout our history.

Faith has also been a hard one for me: yes, I’ve felt the Spirit – without doubt, but I honestly can’t bring myself to use those few, small experiences as reason to utterly change my life to become active in the Church.

Jared’s last example (#51) is another good case study. If Jared has had a track record in his life of praying for things and seeing them occur, especially if he has NOT had a track record of praying for things and NOT seeing them occur, then by this time in his life praying for something and expecting it to happen has moved from the arena of “faith” to “experience-based knowledge”. Iow, he can feel assured or certain that his prayers will result in what they always result in, just like the example of feeling assured that the bridge won’t collapse and the sun will rise. Those aren’t the same as believing in something unseen anymore, since experience has taught that they simply happen that way.

Otoh, if someone else has not had that kind of track record with prayer, continuing to pray despite not having seen evidence that it has a direct effect on objective outcomes is an act of “pure faith”. I have mentioned this elsewhere, but I wonder sometimes if Laman and Lemuel were being honest about the reason for not praying about the meaning of Lehi’s vision when they said, “The Lord maketh no such thing known unto us.” We could debate the “why” ’til the cows come home, but I wonder if they had prayed previously without feeling they had received any answers and simply given up seeking those answers – if they had “lost faith” because they had not received evidence in the past.

Fwiw, I admire greatly those who can “endure to the end” in faith without gaining some degree of experience-based knowledge – and I understand why many who don’t see any evidence as a result of their faithful struggles give up. We tell scientists all the time that if their experiments don’t result in what they envision to change the parameters of the experiment and try again – yet we sometimes tell religionists that if their “experiments” don’t result in what they envision to just try harder without changing anything objective about their experiment.

In the end, we praise the scientist who keeps tinkering and finally discovers something, but we also tend to ridicule the scientist who refuses to admit he’s wrong about his assumptions and never succeeds in discovering anything. If she fails long enough, her funding will disappear completely, and her life’s work will be considered a waste. When it comes to religion, however, we tend to discourage the very tinkering that might lead to discovering something and praise the person who doggedly believes and does the same thing over and over again without seeing any results. To me, that’s no longer faith in the unseen; that’s ignoring the seen and failing to truly “experiment upon the word” until something is discovered. To me, the challenge is to combine intelligent experimentation (that might need to be tweaked and altered and expanded) with faith that it will result in a meaningful discovery at some point in the future – recognizing that our individual experiments might need to be slightly different than someone else’s.

My wife and I like to watch a friday night movie (thanks to net flix) when we can. We were in the middle of a movie when someone we love called. We stopped the movie and listened to a wonderful loved one explain in detail a problem. This is a long standing problem. We gave encouragement and before we started the movie we knelt in prayer and asked for a blessing to be given in behalf of this person. It was a earnest prayer because of the love we have for this individual. I felt tender after the prayer and felt the Lord was near.

About a half hour later we had another call. This time we were told, “thanks for praying for me.” I said, I’m not sure what you mean? He said, “after talking with you I had an experience where I saw my challenge in a unique way,I knew it was from the Lord. I also learned that the reason I received this blessings was due to your prayer in my behalf.”

For a few minutes we wept and talked about the kindness of the Lord. I asked him if he had written this experience down in detail so that as the days go by he wouldn’t forget what he learned. He agreed to do so.

I hope our loved one will use this experience to overcome the challenge he is faced with. I’ve talked with him since and learned he is still in a war with his weaknesses. It may take months or even years to win this war, but we won and important battle that friday night and he was also fortified for future battles.

I am not relating this experience to draw attention to anything other than the fact the Lord hears our prayers. Sometimes we get to see the results of our prayers in behalf of others, but most of the time we don’t. We pray for others having faith that what is taught in Alma 34 is true.

27 Yea, and when you do not cry unto the Lord, let your hearts be full, drawn out in prayer unto him continually for your welfare, and also for the welfare of those who are around you.

Alma 34:27

“Where to start? I would have thought at least a few saints would know the difference between faith and belief, or faith and esoteric B.S.”

Whether we do or not, this is not a part of the discussion as I see it. Just as the “lectures on Faith” attempted to discuss faith in a more tangible way, that is what I think we are trying to do here.

We all know the scriptures of which you speak, but we’ve attempted to go a bit beyond the simple statement ” Faith is a gift from God.” It seems in your post, that’s all it is and end of discussion.

I am not disagreeing with you but we’re looking at it in a bit more detail.

I don’t know whether I understand your comment enough to agree with it or disagree.