Confusing the spirit with familiarity

[Moliere]

Lately I've been pondering the idea of the spirit. This has actually been on my mind for the past couple months but recent postings have brought it to the forefront.

It all started with an innocent question from one of my kids. We were all eating dinner as a family and right after the prayer my little girl asked me if there was a Heavenly Mother. She's a thinker and so this didn't catch me off guard. I began to explain to her that we do believe in a Heavenly Mother and then talked about eternal families and such.

I will admit that it felt odd to talk about Heavenly Mother and for a stretch I felt that sort of sick feeling like I was talking about something I shouldn't. I've often been told that we don't talk about her out of reverence for her so due to my orthodox upbringing I felt somewhat uneasy discussing it. In fact, I'd say that the feeling I got could have easily been mistaken for the spirit leaving.

I've had many experiences during testimony meeting where someone starts going off on some weird tangent or doctrine and I begin to feel uneasy only to be brought back to "the spirit" after the discussion comes back to familiar territory.

I don't want to discount spiritual experiences as I have had many and they definitely were not because something was just familiar to me. But I do often wonder if we as members truly understand what it feels like to feel the spirit and instead oftentimes mistake it for a feeling of familiarity with teachings we've been taught since we were babies.

I'm sure I didn't explain my thoughts on this too clearly so hopefully the premise makes a little sense. Thoughts?

[statman]

But I do often wonder if we as members truly understand what it feels like to feel the spirit and instead oftentimes mistake it for a feeling of familiarity with teachings we've been taught since we were babies.

Familiarity, emotion, warm and fuzzy topics, all can kinda feel like the Spirit is supposed to feel. It often takes experience/discernment/wisdom to tell the difference. I'd say that one of the first best guesses about figuring it out is to ask yourself if it makes sense that I'd feel the Spirit right now. If not, it's probably something else.

To me, really learning to identify the Spirit was one of the most important parts of my mission. That and being able to feel promptings about what to do/say/etc - something beyond just the 'burning in the bosom' that testifies of truth. Post-mission, those promptings are a lot harder to have - for me anyway.

[SoonerCoug]

The way I decide if I'm feeling the spirit or not is to ask other people if they are feeling the spirit at a moment that seems appropriate. If they say yes, then I can say that I'm feeling it too. The other thing I like to do sometimes is tell people that they are driving the spirit away. This serves multiple purposes. For example, it lets people know how in tune I am while simultaneously calling them out if they are doing something that irritates me.

[Moliere]

Familiarity, emotion, warm and fuzzy topics, all can kinda feel like the Spirit is supposed to feel. It often takes experience/discernment/wisdom to tell the difference. I'd say that one of the first best guesses about figuring it out is to ask yourself if it makes sense that I'd feel the Spirit right now. If not, it's probably something else.

To me, really learning to identify the Spirit was one of the most important parts of my mission. That and being able to feel promptings about what to do/say/etc - something beyond just the 'burning in the bosom' that testifies of truth. Post-mission, those promptings are a lot harder to have - for me anyway.

I left emotion for a reason since I think that one is a lot more complicated. I don't doubt that someone can feel the spirit when being thankful and feeling loved, but obviously the spirit is difficult to discern with the emotional feelings that one is having at the same time. As much as I don't like sappy testimonies, I don't doubt that some of the feelings we have when hearing them come from teh spirit.

I guess where I was going was along the lines of this post:

http://www.cougaruteforum.com/showpost.php?p=441309&postcount=40

We have been conditioned to see and expect certain things within the comfortable confines of the church. We all know the JS story and have seen the church approved pictures. Now, picture the sequence of pictures that are being suggested in that post and I can assure you that people would be upset not only because it's not familiar, but I bet many people would claim that they didn't feel the spirit with the last picture. Which is ironic given that it is a true depiction of the translation process, however because we are not familiar with it, it makes us uncomfortable.

Now if you were to show that picture to a SS class made up of CUF members, you would not get the same reaction as your typical SS class. In fact, I don't think it would impact the way I was feeling during the previous 4 pictures that were shown.

[ERCougar]

This is a topic I've thought a lot about and wish i had something other than my phone to post on. In short, i think confusing losing the spirit with leaving ones comfort zone us a really common mistake.

[Jacob]

I'd say that one of the first best guesses about figuring it out is to ask yourself if it makes sense that I'd feel the Spirit right now. If not, it's probably something else.

That seems circular.

1) I'm feeling something right now. Is it the spirit?
2) Is this an occasion when I'd normally feel the spirit?
3) Hearken back to time when I felt something. Was it the spirit?
4) repeat

[Sleeping in EQ]

That seems circular.

1) I'm feeling something right now. Is it the spirit?
2) Is this an occasion when I'd normally feel the spirit?
3) Hearken back to time when I felt something. Was it the spirit?
4) repeat

Exactly. It's a recipe for the familiar.

[Mrs. Funk]

I think confusing discomfort with the Spirit is fairly common occurrence, and one that can make it fairly difficult to have honest discussion about stickier subjects (like peepstones, Heavenly Mother, treasure-seeking and polygamy and polyandry in the early church). These subjects can be unsettling and upsetting, especially as they can come totally by surprise after a lifetime of spoon-fed correlation.

In a larger sense, I believe many members of the church assume that anything that makes them feel uncomfortable is an impression from the Spirit. I've seen this most recently lately in my book club. One woman in particular refuses to even consider reading books with difficult subjects, like rape and war. I don't think that one should glorify violence, but to outright avoid any "icky" subjects is an extreme solution. This individual has been pulling the "the Spirit" card to avoid any books that might make her squeamish. The latest suggestion of mine rejected by the group is The Invisible Man by Ralph Ellison. Parts of the books are extremely violent, particularly the battle royale. Some literature and materials SHOULD evoke a visceral reaction. Simply being unpleasant doesn't mean that something shouldn't be read.

I think the context of the feelings can make a difference. Discussion with the intent to destroy faith, like I experienced with an anti-Mormon group Campus Crusade for Christ, never felt very good. It wasn't exactly kind to say I was going to hell for believing in the wrong Jesus. I felt pretty awful. I think it was a combination of feeling attacked personally and having the basic contours of my faith attacked. I'm not certain it was the Spirit, though.

I am concerned for people whose faith can't handle any scrutiny or the discussion of difficult things. Life and religion aren't simple, and the pursuit of truth can lead to the discovery of uncomfortable things.

[DrumNFeather]

I am concerned for people whose faith can't handle any scrutiny or the discussion of difficult things. Life and religion aren't simple, and the pursuit of truth can lead to the discovery of uncomfortable things.

I think you have to look at it from their perspective. If we're speaking about a particular group of "faithfuls" I think we have to conceed on some level that they are not currently engaged in a pursuit of truth. They feel (right or wrong depending on what side of the isle you sit on) that they have truth so the pursuit of it isn't as much their aim as it is strengthening their faith and testimony in the truth they've come to accept and believe.

This is obviously not the case for everyone, and personally, I don't think there is anything wrong with it, but when someone has made a decision that they are going to believe this or that and there is nothing that will sway them in any other direction...even if the information provider actually thinks what he or she is presenting will in fact strengthen their faith.

These kind of people, that i suspect run more in the book club circles of the church than, say, the CUF circles (no value judgement there either) are not going to have their faith strengthened anymore by scientists finding evidence that the Book of Mormon is true, than they are to have their testimonies weakened by the idea that Joseph Smith used a stone and a hat to translate the Book of Mormon.