On Testimony and Intellectual Fulfillment, with Insights from a Rocket Scientist
by Jeff Lindsay
First,
here’s a “Happy Chinese New Year” from Shanghai,
China, a land of surprise and irony. For example, while the peaceful
people of this great nation frequently criticize America for its
abundance of guns, over the next few days enough firepower is going
to be discharged by the “unarmed” citizenry here to
reenact World War II several times over. It’s amazing how much
explosive force a city can withstand without collapsing. If you like
non-stop, full-throttle fireworks, book the next flight to
Shanghai—and pray it isn’t shot out of the sky as it
nears town. We’re about to miss some of the pyrotechnics as we
head to New Zealand for a few days. But I’ll miss China while
there, as I always do these days when I leave. Come visit us in
Shanghai!
In
this post, continuing on the theme of the LDS testimony and how
Mormons come to "know" some things that science can't
confirm, I'll address a common misunderstanding. Mormon "knowledge,"
some say, is based on the whims of the heart. It's entirely
subjective. What the Mormon claims to be knowledge about morality,
for example, it has no basis except feeling. When others seek that
same knowledge by prayer, they may come to completely different
conclusions, so how can Mormon knowledge be trusted? It lacks a
reproducible, trustworthy standard. (If there's a better way to
express this objection, let me know.)
However,
we are not left on our own to the whims of the heart without evidence
or standards. There are four factors to consider here:
On
key issues of morality and doctrine, we have been given standards
to rely on in the form of God's statements in the scriptures and
through modern revelation to living prophets. While these are not
infallible standards and frequently leave room for debate, they
generally provide clear and inspired guidelines for us. Of course,
ideally our conscience and our growing sense of personal morality or
the whisperings of the Spirit in our life agrees with the standards
we are given, but that is a topic for another post someday. For now,
let me state that whether we should feel responsible to heed the
standards and teachings of the Church depends in large part on
whether the Restoration was indeed a divine event, which leads us to
the next point.
We
have a remarkable tool to assist us in both intellectually
and spiritually evaluating the reality of the Restoration in the
form of the Book of Mormon. We are challenged to put this
book to the test and determine if it is a mortal fraud or the word
of God in a process involving mental study, pondering, and prayer to
obtain personal revelation.
Regarding
the divinity of the Book of Mormon, God has not left us without
serious evidence to move us to take it seriously and to help us
overcome objections to it. This evidence includes the remarkable
testimonies of many witnesses, not just to warm feelings but to
encounters with real metal plates and even a real angel and the
voice of God in three cases. There have been many other evidences of
the Book of Mormon since that time, such as specific sites in the
Arabian Peninsula that support details in the Book of Mormon in ways
that Joseph could not have fabricated even if leading scholars had
guided him, and other issues such as the discovery of chiasmus and
other gems in the book itself. I believe these evidences are not
meant to convert and will never be enough to convert, but are
mercifully given to give us strength to continue moving forward.
As
one explores the Gospel, the evidences and intellectual satisfaction
aren’t just from the Book of Mormon (sometimes that comes
last, if at all). There is a remarkably sound and logical
worldview, compatible with a great deal of recent scholarship,
regarding many basic claims of the Church. Scholarship into the
ancient world and early Christianity can support claims of apostasy,
of lost scripture, of ancient covenant making practices and other
practices compatible with LDS teachings and temple worship, etc. The
LDS story of God's ancient pattern of continuing revelation through
authorized prophets and apostles, lost through apostasy, and now
restored, fits well with a knowledge of the Bible and history. The
Restoration brings profound and intellectually satisfying knowledge
about the scope of God's salvation, the work for the dead, the
relationship we all have as children of God, the relationship
between man and God, the purpose of life, the purpose and eternal
nature of families, the destiny of man, and so forth. Subjective?
Yes. These truths resonate with my soul and with my expanding view
of the world and the cosmos as I learn more. It truly is delicious
and intellectually fulfilling. But I can't prove it with a
peer-reviewed publication. You have to be willing to move forward a
step or two on your own to see if anything is there.
Moving
forward (or exercising a little faith and taking a step toward
learning more) is the key, and the mind has to be part of that. Each
human is different and will approach these matters with different
needs, assumptions, and concerns, but there is a common core that can
bring us to share what we dare to call knowledge of some of the
aspects, not all, of our faith. This is usually a lengthy journey,
though, with many factors involved. The journey includes seeing how
the Gospel affects our lives, how prayer works, and how God works in
our lives. It's a combination of experience, of tangible results, and
learning through the Spirit (yes unscientific, subjective, fuzzy
learning from an unseen but masterful Tutor -- the kind that can
transform people into Saints, even if also scientists).
Consider
the journey of Arthur Henry King, a majestic human being whose life
radiates a love of Shakespeare and of the greatest literature. Twice
decorated by Queen Elizabeth, this erudite scholar of English
literature was rarely impressed by what humans wrote, but when he
read the testimony of Joseph Smith, he had an interesting
intellectual and possibly spiritual experience as he pondered the
words and the man. That was the beginning of his journey toward
conversion. Read the story of Dr.
Arthur Henry King's reaction to the Joseph Smith History.
Or
returning to the issue of science and testimony, consider the journey
of a real "rocket scientist," an MIT astrophysicist, Dr.
John S. Lewis (Jr.). Dr. Lewis, now Brother Lewis, is Professor
Emeritus of Planetary Sciences and former Co-Director of the Space
Engineering Research Center at the University of Arizona. He was
previously a Professor of Planetary Sciences at the Massachusetts
Institute of Technology (MIT) and Visiting Professor at the
California Institute of Technology (Caltech). Recently, he was a
Visiting Professor at Tsinghua University in Beijing, which is one of
the world's coolest universities IMHO. He has written seventeen
books, including undergraduate and graduate level texts and popular
science books, and has authored over 150 scientific publications. In
scientific lingo, this guy rocks.
Now
read the
story of Dr. John Lewis at Mormon Scholars Testify.
This is a man who grew up using his brain to explore not just science
but also questions of religion. He had come to doubt organized
religion and ministers out for hire, but recognized that the Bible
taught things like anointing and laying on of hands that were
denigrated in modern times as things of the "primitive Church"
no longer applicable today. Here is one excerpt, but please read the
whole things and see his video testimony also:
The
next Sunday afternoon the missionaries arrived. We hustled our
children out of the room lest they be contaminated by these unproved
proselyters. We sat down, Peg with her arms folded and a less than
inviting look on her face, and I threw out a nearly equally cordial
challenge: “I must warn you that we have a very negative view
of organized religion. We are Christians, but we have come to the sad
conclusion that there is no church out there that has any real
authority or power. We fear that the true church was lost in the
century or so after the death of Christ and the Apostles.” Much
to our astonishment, the older missionary smiled back at me and said,
“Have we got news for you!”
The
next few weeks were an intense blizzard of activity. The missionaries
visited us daily, usually staying for dinner. All the questions about
religion that had been haunting us for years, polished by reading,
among many others, the Bible, the Bhagavad Gita, the Koran, the
Egyptian and Tibetan Books of the Dead, the Popol Vuh, the Book of
the Hopi, the Upanishads, the writings and lives of John of the
Cross, Teresa de Avila, Pierre Teilhard de Chardin, and Søren
Kierkegaard, and the inspirational Christian works of C. S. Lewis,
were aired. Usually the missionaries had a ready and satisfactory
answer. Sometimes they confessed ignorance, went to study out the
issue, and returned with answers. Never once did they shoot from the
hip with unsatisfactory answers, as the Holy Spirit testified to us
of their truthfulness. Here at last, in full integrity, was the true
Gospel of Jesus Christ we had found in the Bible, trimmed of the
inventions of uninspired men. All the purity of truth that pervades
and underlies Christian belief was laid out as a seamless, clean,
unblemished cloth. All the sectarian dross was washed away. Paul’s
vision, in I Corinthians, of a single, united Church free of
doctrinal contention alone remained. And the doctrinal foundation of
that true church could only be known with certainty by the testimony
of the Holy Spirit, as prescribed by the Epistle of James. Through
that testimony the strength and integrity of Christian doctrine was
restored to me, based on the firm foundation of the Bible and
building a single coherent, harmonious Church upon that foundation,
free of the divisive doctrinal disputes of the other churches I had
studied. Biblical scholarship, however important, was an artifact of
the intellect, rarely capable of resolving doctrinal disputes. Faith,
by contrast, was the key to salvation; not just belief in anything,
but belief in things not seen which are true –
and the truth could be known spiritually. The intellectual and
legalistic Talmudic and Midrashic pilpul that
engulfed the Old Testament had been illuminated by the New
Testament’s gift of the Holy Spirit, which threw light into the
darkest corners of scriptural commentary. The Holy Spirit was truly a
“guide for the perplexed” with greater authority than
Maimonides.
Like
I said, this scientist rocks. He gets it. He was finding intellectual
and spiritual fulfillment in the bold and clear vision presented by
the Restored Gospel. A lifetime of seeking, pondering, and studying
prepared him to recognize the intellectual strength of our basic
message. I have much to learn yet from him and his approach, and
definitely need to catch up on my reading. He continues, addressing
the issue of science and religion:
As
a professor of Planetary Sciences at MIT, I was on the forefront of
the exploration of the Solar System. Much of my work centered on the
earliest history of the Solar System, essentially on the mechanics of
creation. I was intimately familiar with the evidence, from the
chronology of planetary formation through the geological history of
Earth, the cratering record on the planets, the composition and
evolution of their surfaces and interiors, and the relationships
between ancient small bodies (asteroids and comets) and the planets.
I was also familiar with the literature of “scientific
creationism,” which I found to be appallingly bad, full of
glaring factual blunders and astonishing lapses of logic. I found
their personal interpretations of scripture to be indefensible in the
face of overwhelming evidence. Their mindset seemed to be that
science was the opposite of religion; that their interpretations of
scripture were right and anyone who disagreed with them must be evil,
intent on destroying religion. But the geological record is as much
the work of God as the scriptures are. They together constitute two
independent witnesses, satisfying the Old Testament requirement that
two or more independent witnesses are required to attest to truth.
That the two witnesses, science and scripture, should see different
things is no surprise. After all, your own two eyes see different
scenes; each eye sees things the other does not see, but by combining
the witness of your two eyes you can see in depth, something neither
eye can do alone. To assume that one witness is correct and the other
is lying is to lose all perspective. It is to become half-blind. As
the Jesuit paleontologist Pierre Teilhard de Chardin expressed it,
“Science and religion are two complementary faces of one and
the same underlying reality.”
I
see no conflict between science and religion. I see many conflicts
between the misunderstandings of science and the flawed
interpretation of scripture by men who lack both scientific knowledge
and guidance by the Holy Spirit. I invite any person who desires to
strengthen his understanding and testimony of creation to study both
the scientific and scriptural evidence prayerfully, with the goal of
learning and understanding. Properly understood, this study will
provide you with a rich and deep perspective. Science will tell you
the when and where and how of
creation; the scriptures will tell you who and why.
The
Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, with its long tradition
of free inquiry and of individuals prayerfully testing every point of
doctrine for themselves, is fully compatible with the scientific
method.
Beautifully
stated. Regarding the scientific method, the quest for a personal
testimony is not as remote as you might think.
The Scientific Method and LDS Testimonies
Testimonies
may start off small, fragile, and based upon a small number of
experiences, but for a mature Latter-day Saint, testimony is
typically the sum of many experiences and indeed, experiments, in
which the principles and teachings of the Gospel are put to the test.
There is a combination of the intellectual and the spiritual, the
practical and the mystic, the day-to-day and the occasional rare but
real miracle. There are often doubts and concerns that have been
plumbed and addressed or put on hold. And along the way, there have
been many voices taken into consideration: the voice of witnesses,
the voice of skeptics and critics, the voice of reason, and the voice
of the Spirit. It's a complex process that deals with the most
complex issues humans confront: What is real? What is beyond this
mortal realm? What is my purpose here? Who am I and am I supposed to
live? And finally, who or what, if anything, is God?
To
the surprise of some of our critics, the teachings of the Church do
not focus on blind faith and random emotions, but on experience, even
experimentation, as well as studying, seeking, pondering, and also,
of course, praying. The approach to gaining a testimony is not taught
as a one-time event but a lifelong journey. The Book of Mormon
teaches a testimony-building journey that has some parallels to the
scientific method. It even describes that journey as one of putting
the Gospel to the test and conducting experiments with the word of
God. Here is the relevant passage from Alma 32:
[26]
Now, as I said concerning faith -- that it was not a perfect
knowledge -- even so it is with my words. Ye cannot know of their
surety at first, unto perfection, any more than faith is a perfect
knowledge.
[27]
But behold, if ye will awake and arouse your faculties, even to an
experiment upon my words, and exercise a particle of faith,
yea, even if ye can no more than desire to believe, let this desire
work in you, even until ye believe in a manner that ye can give place
for a portion of my words.
[28]
Now, we will compare the word unto a seed. Now, if ye give place,
that a seed may be planted in your heart, behold, if it be a true
seed, or a good seed, if ye do not cast it out by your unbelief, that
ye will resist the Spirit of the Lord, behold, it will begin to swell
within your breasts; and when you feel these swelling motions, ye
will begin to say within yourselves -- It must needs be that this is
a good seed, or that the word is good, for it beginneth to enlarge my
soul; yea, it beginneth to enlighten my understanding, yea, it
beginneth to be delicious to me.
[29]
Now behold, would not this increase your faith? I say unto you, Yea;
nevertheless it hath not grown up to a perfect knowledge.
[30]
But behold, as the seed swelleth, and sprouteth, and beginneth to
grow, then you must needs say that the seed is good; for behold it
swelleth, and sprouteth, and beginneth to grow. And now behold, will
not this strengthen your faith? Yea, it will strengthen your faith:
for ye will say I know that this is a good seed; for behold it
sprouteth and beginneth to grow.
[31]
And now, behold, are ye sure that this is a good seed? I say unto
you, Yea; for every seed bringeth forth unto its own likeness.
[32]
Therefore, if a seed groweth it is good, but if it groweth not,
behold it is not good, therefore it is cast away.
[33]
And now, behold, because ye have tried the experiment, and
planted the seed, and it swelleth and sprouteth, and beginneth to
grow, ye must needs know that the seed is good.
[34]
And now, behold, is your knowledge perfect? Yea, your knowledge is
perfect in that thing, and your faith is dormant; and this because ye
know, for ye know that the word hath swelled your souls, and ye also
know that it hath sprouted up, that your understanding doth begin
to be enlightened, and your mind doth begin to expand.
[35]
O then, is not this real? I say unto you, Yea, because it is light;
and whatsoever is light, is good, because it is discernible,
therefore ye must know that it is good; and now behold, after ye have
tasted this light is your knowledge perfect?
[36]
Behold I say unto you, Nay; neither must ye lay aside your faith, for
ye have only exercised your faith to plant the seed that ye might try
the experiment to know if the seed was good.
[37]
And behold, as the tree beginneth to grow, ye will say: Let us
nourish it with great care, that it may get root, that it may grow
up, and bring forth fruit unto us. And now behold, if ye nourish it
with much care it will get root, and grow up, and bring forth fruit.
[38]
But if ye neglect the tree, and take no thought for its nourishment,
behold it will not get any root; and when the heat of the sun cometh
and scorcheth it, because it hath no root it withers away, and ye
pluck it up and cast it out.
[39]
Now, this is not because the seed was not good, neither is it because
the fruit thereof would not be desirable; but it is because your
ground is barren, and ye will not nourish the tree, therefore ye
cannot have the fruit thereof.
[40]
And thus, if ye will not nourish the word, looking forward with an
eye of faith to the fruit thereof, ye can never pluck of the fruit of
the tree of life.
[41]
But if ye will nourish the word, yea, nourish the tree as it
beginneth to grow, by your faith with great diligence, and with
patience, looking forward to the fruit thereof, it shall take root;
and behold it shall be a tree springing up unto everlasting life.
[42]
And because of your diligence and your faith and your patience with
the word in nourishing it, that it may take root in you, behold, by
and by ye shall pluck the fruit thereof, which is most precious,
which is sweet above all that is sweet, and which is white above all
that is white, yea, and pure above all that is pure; and ye shall
feast upon this fruit even until ye are filled, that ye hunger not,
neither shall ye thirst.
[43]
Then, my brethren, ye shall reap the rewards of your faith, and your
diligence, and patience, and long-suffering, waiting for the tree to
bring forth fruit unto you.
Those
investigating the claims of the Gospel are encouraged to put it to
the test by living it and seeing what the fruits are. Yes, faith must
be exercised first, even a little particle of faith, but the results
of this spiritual exercise will include knowledge and metal
enlightenment, not just fuzzy feelings, and from those fruits one can
see that at least some part of the Gospel makes sense and can be
trusted. But that's just a beginning. It's an ongoing process that
requires faith and diligence, for testimony is delicate and can be
lost. That's also the point of the Lord's parable of the sower and
the seed. The plant that sprouts up can be choked by materialism,
sin, and neglect.
The
path toward gaining a testimony of the divinity of the Book of Mormon
is also not described as waiting for a random feeling, but a journey
of careful study, pondering, and then turning to God to ask if it is
true. Mind and spirit are involved, not random emotion. Discerning
the voice of the Spirit, of course, is the difficult part where there
is not a simple tangible outcome like getting a reading on a
thermometer. So no, it's not a clear-cut scientific process. It's a
journey of changing fallen man into a redeemed saint, and that's a
much bigger and more important thing than even the wonders of science
can achieve. In a way, it's very simple though it takes serious
effort, but in terms of scientific standards, it's hopelessly fuzzy
and subjective. So no, it's not as straightforward as, say, rocket
science. It's too big and too important for that.
Jeff Lindsay has been defending the Church on the Internet since 1994, when he launched his
LDSFAQ website under JeffLindsay.com. He has also long been blogging about LDS matters on
the blog Mormanity (mormanity.blogspot.com). Jeff is a longtime resident of Appleton,
Wisconsin, who recently moved to Shanghai, China, with his wife, Kendra.
He works for an Asian corporation as head of intellectual property. Jeff and Kendra are the parents of 4 boys, 3 married and the the youngest on a mission.
He is a former innovation and IP consultant, a former professor, and former Corporate Patent
Strategist and Senior Research Fellow for a multinational corporation.
Jeff Lindsay, Cheryl Perkins and Mukund Karanjikar are authors of the book Conquering
Innovation Fatigue (John Wiley & Sons, 2009).
Jeff has a Ph.D. in Chemical Engineering from Brigham Young University and is a registered US
patent agent. He has more than 100 granted US patents and is author of numerous publications.
Jeff's hobbies include photography, amateur magic, writing, and Mandarin Chinese.