Unless I am convinced by the testimony of the Scriptures or by clear reason (for I do not trust either in the pope or in councils alone, since it is well known that they have often erred and contradicted themselves), I am bound by the Scriptures I have quoted and my conscience is captive to the Word of God. I cannot and will not recant anything, since it is neither safe nor right to go against conscience. May God help me. Here I stand. I can do no other. Amen.
- Martin Luther
Unless I am convinced by clear reason (for I do not trust either in the pope, prophet or in councils alone, since it is well known that they have often erred, given councils of men and contradicted themselves), I am bound by Reason and my conscience is captive to honesty and truth. I cannot and will not recant anything, since it is neither safe nor right to go against conscience. Here I stand. I can do no other.
— Mithryn
And what is “reason”? It is the grammar of a specific philosophy. It is the code-base of a very specific piece of software (the philosophical system). It is a hermeneutic indistinguishable in category from other hermeneutics such as those that emphasize faith. These are various methods toward an end, and not an end in themselves. The end is Truth or, in other words, the software that best serves humankind toward reaching its full civilizational (holy) potential. The software is not supposed to be analyzed using a foreign code-base as criterion (ie: how reasonable is the system, regardless of its observed social result?). The code-base is supposed to be ranked according to its product (the philosophical system and its resultant ability to create civilization).
Remember, Plato held reason not to be the last step out of the cave. That step was reserved for faith. He held that reason continued to produce a degree of shadow.
Anyone who looks for perfect consistency, historical verification, or perfect morality in scripture is missing the point of religion, entirely. The theology is the software. Scripture is the mythological vehicle that delivers the software, and its relative degree of truth or fiction is irrelevant. To illustrate, no Orthodox Rabbi believes the Pentateuch to be a book of historical fact. They know the Old Testament to be a collection of coded allegories that transmit, in part, a theology. Flaws of the authors are not a theological indictment.
If you believe that the social system facilitated by “reason” (aka: atheistic science) is superior, then that is one thing. However, vetting a religion through reason is like trying to vet a race car engine using a manual for a train engine. You simply aren’t using the language of the system itself, and the result will always fall short. You will get a similar result vetting the social result of a society based solely on “reason” using the criteria of a social system built on faith. Either process is a nonsensical endeavor.
A man claiming to “be bound by scripture” fails to grasp history and its progression along the foundational and (largely unfortunate ) evolving track of philosophy and its applied form, theology. Simply, he does not “get” the world, no matter how famous he may be for stirring revolution in the minds of the undereducated masses. Martin Luther may have been inevitable, but his particular understanding of his society was not complete and his later comments in regard to his mistake attest to this.
“However, vetting a religion through reason is like trying to vet a race car engine using a manual for a train engine. ”
Such bullshit. You know why you don’t still believe that the earth is flat and that everything revolves around it? Because we put religion through reason and reason won. They KILLED people for saying the planets were spheres and went around the sun. But religion lost to reason.
Any idea that cannot be tested, is not worth holding.
How do you prove that I love my wife?
I was wavering in my faith. But, I decided to find out by study and prayer. I fasted, and prayed, and prayed and fasted, and nothing came. Then finally I received an answer from heaven above. I know that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints is the only True Church of Jesus Christ on the earth. Since then, I have turned my life to studying, and serving others. I feel the Spirit of the Lord almost every day. Be careful of what side you are on, because if you are wrong, eternity is in the balance, and I testify to you that this is the Church of Jesus Christ.
> Then finally I received an answer from heaven above.
[Citation needed]
How did your answer come? Did you test it? who told you how to interpret this revelation.
I can, with EVIDENCE tell you the LDS church is not true. Can you provide me evidence? Why not?
Mythryn,
Martin Luther believed the scriptures and sought to increase people’s faith.
From what I have read on your site, which admittedly is only a fraction of what you have written, you are nothing like Martin Luther.
I can easily disprove many of your views using the scriptures and clear reason.
However it seems you don’t believe any of God’s word in the scriptures, so I doubt it is possible to reason with you.
I’d be happy to give it a shot though in the hopes of saving your soul before it’s eternally too late.
I am always open for being wrong. My life would be a lot simpler and happier if I were wrong.
I do not believe the Book of Mormon to be a valid, historical document of an ancient people on the Americas. The burden of proof will be upon you for that, before we can use it. I can cite many, many reasons it is not a valid document.
Hi Mithryn,
Sorry I never responded. After you didn’t respond to my initial comment for a couple of weeks I stopped checking back. I thought you had deleted it.
Anyway, I’m glad to hear that you are open to being wrong and that you admit that you’d be happier if you were wrong.
I’m more than willing to defend the Book of Mormon against any and all arguments you bring forth against it.
I don’t know that I can “prove” the Book of Mormon true to you, as that witness must ultimately come from God through the Holy Ghost and not from a man like me.
I am very confident however that I can prove that no one can prove the Book of Mormon false.
There is a ton of evidence that supports it being a true history of an ancient people in the Americas.
The Book of Mormon took place in South America. A man named Del Dowdell has proven this beyond any reasonable doubt in my opinion.
You can check out his work at nephicode.blogspot.com
I’m happy to defend the Book of Mormon on my own, too.
Setting the Book of Mormon aside for a moment, I can also defend the truthfulness of Mormonism using only the Bible.
Do you accept the Bible as scripture?
If so, you might be surprised just how much evidence there is in the Bible to support Mormonism.
If you no longer accept the Bible as scripture, then it will be difficult to reason with you as we won’t have anything to use as a measuring stick for truth.
I would still be willing to give it my best shot, though.
Anyway, if you are truly willing to reason these things out shoot me an email at ldswatchman@gmail.com
It will be easier to correspond via email than in the comment section of this sight.
Hope to hear from you soon.