Demonic possession of course is biblical, but what about demonic paranormal activity? With some effort it's not hard to come across testimonies from Christians, and even non-Christians, telling stories of paranormal experiences, such as hearing footsteps, scratches on walls, drawers moving in and out, closets opening and closing, things flying off the shelves or walls, beds shaking, chairs moving, objects falling down, light bulbs exploding, stuff levitating, the temperature in the room suddenly dropping, horrible demonic "smell", hearing audible evil growls, etc. I'm pretty sure many of you have heard of similar experiences. Is there any biblical basis to this? Does the Bible record examples of demonic paranormal activity? Do the Scriptures support the ability of demons to manipulate objects and intervene in the physical world?

The [scientific method](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method) involves developing theories about how reality operates by formulating hypotheses, making predictions, and conducting experiments to determine if the outcomes match the predictions. If the predictions fail, the scientist must revise their initial hypothesis based on the insights gleaned from the experimental results. Eventually, a robust scientific theory will reliably produce accurate predictions across a diverse range of experimental conditions. At the same time, Christianity postulates the existence of a supernatural dimension of reality with entities such as God, demons, angels, cherubim, spirits, souls, and phenomena like miracles, spiritual gifts, heaven, hell, etc. From a Christian perspective, can the supernatural be studied using the scientific method? Specifically, does Christianity propose any theories about the supernatural that generate predictions, and if so, can these predictions be tested through experimentation? In a sense, [parapsychology](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parapsychology) already claims to study the paranormal scientifically. However, [the scientific credibility of parapsychology is heavily contested](https://philosophy.stackexchange.com/q/114014/66156) , and the field does not presuppose a Christian worldview. Instead, I am specifically interested in whether the supernatural dimension of reality, as understood within the Christian worldview, can be subjected to scientific investigation via experimentation and testing. And if not, why not?

> The ***Journal of Parapsychology*** is a biannual peer-reviewed academic journal covering research on psi phenomena, including telepathy, clairvoyance, precognition, and psychokinesis, as well as human consciousness in general and anomalous experiences. > > It was established in April 1937 by Joseph Banks Rhine (Duke University). It is published by the Rhine Research Center and the current editor-in-chief is Sally Ann Drucker (Rhine Research Center). The journal is abstracted and indexed in PsycINFO. It publishes research reports, theoretical discussions, book reviews, and correspondence, as well as the abstracts of papers presented at the Parapsychological Association's annual meeting. > > According to *Anomalistic Psychology* authored by Chris French, et al, it is "widely recognized as the highest quality journal within the field." > > Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Journal_of_Parapsychology See also: [Eight Decades of Psi Research: Highlights in the *Journal of Parapsychology*](https://parapsych.org/uploaded_files/pdfs/00/00/00/00/90/03_alvarado_highlights.pdf) So it appears that parapsychology is considered relevant enough as a field of investigation to warrant its own peer-reviewed reputable journals. Do Christians acknowledge parapsychology as a legitimate field of investigation, and if so, how does parapsychology fit in a Christian worldview? --- For those who might be interested in philosophical perspectives on parapsychology, see [Is parapsychology a science? - Philosophy Stack Exchange](https://philosophy.stackexchange.com/q/114014/66156)

Given that my [previous question](https://christianity.stackexchange.com/q/101966/61679) was not well-received, I will try again with a different one. To the best of my knowledge, Christians believe in a supernatural realm where God resides, along with angels, cherubim, demons, and other spiritual entities. However, this supernatural realm is hidden from our five senses, which may explain why so many people are more inclined to believe in [naturalism](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naturalism_(philosophy)) . By the way, many such individuals can be found on Philosophy Stack Exchange (I say this from personal experience). For instance, the [argument from divine hiddenness](https://iep.utm.edu/divine-hiddenness-argument-against-gods-existence/) has been gaining popularity in philosophy for good reason since its publication (by the way, *Truth Unites* has published a [response](https://youtu.be/_d-6UhOS0FE) to this argument). We perceive the natural world every day with our physical senses, but the supernatural seems to be concealed. Nonetheless, Christians believe that the supernatural can manifest and has indeed manifested in the past, at least under special circumstances. The resurrection of Jesus is arguably the most notable example of a supernatural manifestation in the natural that has been recorded. However, it is unclear to me if there are other ways for the supernatural realm to interact with the natural world, beyond the resurrection of Jesus (which already happened about 2000 years ago), and whether human beings have any ability to initiate or facilitate such interactions **today**. **What is an overview of Christian beliefs on how humans can interact with the supernatural?** What practices, techniques, or methods are available to facilitate such interactions **TODAY**? --- **Clarifications** > What exactly do you mean by interact? The Bible says that the universe is not only created but upheld by the word of his power. At a very basic level the fact that you exist and continue to exist is an interaction between the supernatural and you. The natural realm operates under regular laws that can be studied through scientific methods, involving observation and experimentation. In contrast, the supernatural realm lies beyond these regular laws and eludes direct scientific investigation, lacking physical principles that can describe it comprehensively (though fields like parapsychology, as seen in the [Journal of Parapsychology](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Journal_of_Parapsychology) , may potentially challenge this notion). Despite its inscrutability to mainstream science, Christians assert that the supernatural realm can exert causal influence on the natural world, producing under certain circumstances perceivable effects, such as miraculous events (e.g., the resurrection of Jesus), spiritual experiences, and so on. **This causal influence of the supernatural over the natural (and vice versa) is what I would call "interaction."** However, if one posits that "everything is supernatural," the distinction between natural and supernatural becomes moot. If that's your view, then perhaps it would be more helpful and practical to distinguish between "usual" and "unusual" instead. The "usual" is studied by science and explained with regular laws (e.g., the laws of Physics), whereas everything else, like resurrections, would be considered unusual occurrences.

Is there a study that gathered accounts of healing under scientific scrutiny? **What is meant by healing?** Healing in this context means a person who had a medically documented sickness was healed in a Christian setting and was declared medically healthy within 48 hours. I like how Ken Graham put it: "The miraculous healing [...] need to be **spontaneous, instantaneous and complete healing**". I also think the criteria laid out at [The miracles of Lourdes](https://www.lourdes-france.org/en/the-miracles-of-lourdes/) also bring it to the point well. Quote: >1. The 1st criterion is that the disease is serious, with an unfavorable prognosis. >2. Secondly, the disease must be known and recorded by medicine. >3. Thirdly, this disease must be organic, lesional, that is to say, there must be objective, biological, radiological criteria, everything that currently exists in medicine; this means that even today we will not recognize cures of pathologies without precise objective criteria, such as psychological, psychiatric, functional, nervous diseases, etc.
*(this does not mean that these diseases cannot be cured, but according to the criteria of the Church, they will not be recognized as miracles in the current state of affairs).* >4. Fourthly, there must not have been any treatment to which the cure could be attributed.
*(I would be a bit more lenient and say, there should not be a treatment that can work faster than a few weeks)* >5. The 5th criterion concerns the timing of the cure itself: recovery must be sudden, instantaneous, immediate, and without convalescence. >6. Finally, after the cure, there are two additional criteria: it must not simply be a regression of symptoms but a return of all vital functions, and finally, it must not simply be a remission but a cure, i.e. lasting and definitive. **What is meant by scientific scrutiny?** With scientific scrutiny I mean the following: - confirmation bias is accounted for (meaning a trusted party beyond the Christian entity in question has gathered/verified the data or at least can verify the data) - other potential biases are accounted for - the methodology is transparent - the data is complete (but can be anonymized) meaning that every account can be verified by a third party. E.g. X-ray of a broken bone and X-ray of healed broken bone with dates. - Basically, if anyone reads the paper/data, it shouldn't be easy to refute. **Not a replicable experiment/trial** What I do not mean is a replicable experiment, because miracles can only happen when, where, and on who God decides to perform a miracle. Mark 8:11-12 also makes clear that God does not like to be demanded or manipulated into doing miracles: > 11 The Pharisees came and began to argue with him, seeking from him a sign from heaven to test him. 12 And he sighed deeply in his spirit and said, “Why does this generation seek a sign? Truly, I say to you, no sign will be given to this generation.” Also, more scientific reasons why trials don't work here are laid out in a study on the effect of prayer, [Prayer and healing: A medical and scientific perspective on randomized controlled trials](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2802370/) . In essence, the scientific method seeks to find a process/method and control all variables of influence. However, in the case of healing one variable is the whim of God that cannot be controlled. So why the approach I laid out? Well, I don't want to find a Christian method for healing, but want to prove that the phenomenon of healing in Christianity exists. **Why the previous Q&A here, might not answer the question** I've read the answers to this question: https://christianity.stackexchange.com/questions/82583/are-there-or-have-there-been-christian-healing-ministries-that-have-documented-h but my problem is that the sources are somewhat old (I skimmed through and didn't see any account later than 1990.) and I cannot verify if those 70 cases of Lourdes were in fact healed. What I mean is that one cannot deduce from a name, name of ailment, date, and Diocese that healing has occurred. (Referencing the table Ken Graham provided [The Cures at Lourdes which have been recognised as miraculous by the Church ](http://www.miraclehunter.com/marian_apparitions/approved_apparitions/lourdes/downloads/lourdes_cures.pdf)) . What I need is not a name but proof of ailment and proof of the absence of ailment within a reasonable timeframe, proof that the healing occurred in a Christian setting (any denomination is fine), and a date for each. Let me be clear: I am not looking for single testimonies but a statistic that aggregated, verified testimonies, and made each testimony verifiable.

It's my understanding that most Christians have never had an overtly spectacular, extraordinary, supernatural experience themselves, yet they find no problem in holding very specific supernatural beliefs (e.g. the resurrection of Jesus) based on the eyewitness accounts of others (e.g. the apostles, as recorded in the gospels). However, doctrines such Continuationism can find support on the basis of eyewitness accounts as well, [yet Cessationists would object to those as unreliable](https://christianity.stackexchange.com/q/83141/50422) . Latter-day Saints also appeal to the first-hand accounts of 3 & 8 witnesses as supportive evidence for the supernatural origin of the book of Mormon (see [this answer](https://christianity.stackexchange.com/a/83978/50422) for an eloquent presentation of this argument), [yet non-LDS Christians would object to those as unreliable](https://christianity.stackexchange.com/q/84581/50422) as well. When it comes to assessing the reliability of eyewitness accounts as supportive evidence for specific supernatural beliefs, is there anything close to a consensus on how to make these kinds of judgments? Has any denomination or Christian scholar published a set of principles on how to judge the credibility of eyewitness accounts and applied them to concrete cases, such as the apostles (in the case of the resurrection of Jesus) or the eyewitnesses to the golden plates (in the case of Joseph Smith and the book of Mormon)?

My previous understanding of the Catholic Church's teaching was that a human being is of two conjoined natures: physical and spiritual. Also, my previous reasoning was that things like consciousness, the ability to feel and especially free will are impossible in the natural/physical/mathematical world, where all that is possible are non-conscious, non-free, more or less sophisticated mechanisms. Therefore, I would say, free will must have supernatural origins and the claim that a human being has free will implies that there must be a supernaturnatural, spiritual, non-mathematical, non-physical, non-scientific part of the human nature, that cannot be researched nor explained by scientific means. However, now I am being told that what I was thinking and saying were all heresies. I am being told that according to the teaching of the Catholic Church there is no supernatural or spiritual part nor dimension in the human being or human soul. The only fundamental difference between humans and animals, according to the Church, is that God has gifted humans with His grace to a greater extend than animals, and because of this God's favor humans are granted immortality - but otherwise, humans are really simply more intelligent animals and nothng more. Therefore free will, if existent, is absolutely within the scope of science and probably will be fully explained by science. Some people I was talking to were telling me that was I was believing were non-Christian views of Plato, and that I was guilty of believing and spreading the "heresy of Platonic dualism", since the Church has rejected the views of Plato and instead adopted the views of Aristotle, as described above, through St. Thomas. Other people were telling me that while my views were not yet heretical, because these views, since adopted by St. Augustine (who had been inspired by Plato), did have their place in the Church, nevertheless they were unfavorable, since the majority of theologians were instead holding the views of St. Thomas, who had been inspired by Aristotle. The view that free will is a purely natural phenomenon that does not and can not have supernatural origins, since there is no such part nor dimension in the human being is, I have to admit, absolutely counter-intuitive for me and is absolutely opposite to how I used to understand the teaching of the Church. Therefore, could you explain to me, according to the teaching of the Church: 1. Is there no non-natural, non-scientific, non-physical, non-mathematical part or dimension in the human nature? 2. If so, does free will therefore have purely natural origins that are not fundamentally prohibited from being researched and fully explained by science? If I may ask, could you kindly back your answers by appropriate citations of the teaching of the Catholic Church? Disclaimer: Just to keep my conscience clear: This is a summation of views 3 different persons, out of them I know one to have academic background in theology and philosophy and have reasons to suspect one more of such background; these three peoples' views did clash on certain subtleties, however I do not feel competent to state them; finally I am likely to have misunderstood and misinterpreted certain subtleties. The big picture stands, however, for these reasons I cannot 100% say that every word I wrote is an accurate representation of what I was told to be the teaching of the Church.

I already asked a [question](https://christianity.stackexchange.com/q/86488/50422) about whether a standard definition for the word *miracle* exists, but what about the word *supernatural*? Can something be *supernatural* and yet not *miraculous*? Are there nuances in the definitions of these words that make them not interchangeable? Is there a biblical basis for how these terms are usually defined and understood in Christianity?

The Bible records several instances of *Christophanies*, i.e., occasions where Jesus appeared and/or spoke to his disciples after having ascended to heaven. Probably the most well-known example is Paul's encounter with Jesus when he was on his way to Damascus ([Acts 9:3-6](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=acts+9%3A3-6&version=ESV)) , but we also have the conversation between Ananias and the Lord ([Acts 9:10-16](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=acts+9%3A10-16&version=ESV)) and Stephen's vision of Jesus at the right hand of the Father ([Acts 7:54-56](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=acts+7%3A54-56&version=ESV)) . And, of course, how to forget John's powerful encounter with Jesus on Patmos, an event that was recorded in detail in the book of Revelation. Which Christian groups or denominations believe these sorts of encounters with Jesus still happen today?

Inspired by [my previous question on the divine inspiration of the Bible](https://christianity.stackexchange.com/questions/83868/what-are-the-strongest-arguments-for-the-belief-that-the-bible-was-supernaturall) , I would like to ask a similar question on the Book of Mormon: According to Latter-day Saints, what are the strongest apologetic arguments for the divine inspiration of the Book of Mormon? What evidence do we have to be confident that the Book of Mormon was supernaturally inspired by God? *Note: the counterpart question can be found at [What are scholarly objections to the divine inspiration of the Book of Mormon?](https://christianity.stackexchange.com/q/83906/50422)* _____ Related - https://christianity.stackexchange.com/questions/6039/what-is-the-biblical-basis-for-believing-in-the-book-of-mormon - https://christianity.stackexchange.com/q/89274/50422

There was a quickly deleted S.E. post that responded to this question, "is there any way for a rational person to reach the conclusion that Christianity is definitely true?" The post that was deleted was from a responder who brought up the thought that Christianity is a "superstitious" philosophy. What is a general survey of the ways that Christian apologists have responded to the specific argument that Christianity is a "superstitious" philosophy, apart from just ignoring it?

In the question https://christianity.stackexchange.com/q/12029/50422 , the [accepted answer](https://christianity.stackexchange.com/a/12034/50422) affirms: > But the witness of the Holy Ghost is testimony from God's spirit directly to yours. It's a very personal affair, and it didn't happen to someone else. It happened to you, and you know what you received from the Lord, and no alternate interpretation from some other person who hasn't experienced it can change the reality of that witness. Simply put, it's the only truly trustworthy evidence there is, because it comes directly from the only perfectly trustworthy source there is. > > As to how one is supposed to recognize the answer, this will probably sound like a cop-out, but the best answer is "you'll know it when it happens." The problem is that any description requires a common frame of reference, and the witness of the Holy Ghost is a unique experience that isn't like anything that would be familiar to anyone who doesn't already have experience with it. **It's often described as a strong feeling of peace, and a sensation of warmth, a "burning in your bosom" to use the scriptural language, but it's not the same as physical heat**. But once one has experienced it, they truly know that they have received a testimony from the Lord. Seconding the answer above, [mormonwiki](http://www.mormonwiki.org/Burning_in_the_bosom.html) affirms the following: > One of the foundations of Mormonism is its insistence that a person seek the truth by praying for a private, special revelation from the Holy Spirit > >> "In answer to our prayers, the Holy Ghost will teach us through our feelings and thoughts... Heavenly Father will answer their prayers, typically through feelings of their hearts and thoughts in their minds." (Preach the Gospel, p. 39; this is the "2004 handbook utilized by the Mormon missionaries") > > **What they receive is sometimes called a burning in the bosom as a confirmation of truth**. Mormons frequently appeal to James 1:5 for this, especially given that their founder, Joseph Smith, claimed that this was the verse and method he used for finding the truth. This is often accompanied by the insistence that one suspend judgment of his or her religion (even in the face of its historical and theological problems) **until he or she has read the Book of Mormon and received, by prayer, a special revelation from the Holy Spirit of its truthfulness**. (*) All emphasis mine. **Question**: Do other Christian denominations/groups have an equivalent concept to Mormonism's *burning in the bosom*, or at least acknowledge that similar experiences are legitimate and truly happen from time to time?

[*The Supernatural Occurrences of John Wesley*](http://danielrjennings.org/tsoojw2.pdf) , written by Daniel R. Jennings, claims to be a compilation of John Wesley's supernatural experiences. The book claims to be compiling these stories from Wesley's journal. Is John Wesley's journal available? How authentic is this book by Daniel Jennings?

**Q: According to Protestant New Testament Scholars, can one argue for the inspiration & unity of scripture without using a “theological” claim or method?** Suppose I were to argue for the unity & divine mind behind the creation of scripture… can I argue from prophecy, archeology, geology, topography, language, internal consistency, and all types of connections that the apostles had with each other to show how the Scriptures are the Word of God, without invoking 2 Timothy 3:16? How do I get beyond a theological **claim** to show that on an academic level, the Bible is The Word of God? I ran into this issue recently on a separate Forum, and it makes me wonder.

As far as I'm aware, most Christians have never personally experienced anything "overtly miraculous", that is, no words of knowledge, no prophecy, no miraculous healings, no dreams, no visions, no audible voice from God, no angelic encounters, no demonic encounters, no tongues ([xenoglossy](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xenoglossy)) , no Christophanies, etc. If [continuationism](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cessationism_versus_continuationism) is true, then how do continuationists explain the absence of "overtly miraculous" experiences by the vast majority of Christians? If continuationism is true, then why do most Christians never get to experience this continuation? ___ **Related** - https://christianity.stackexchange.com/q/90141/50422 - https://christianity.stackexchange.com/q/90292/50422 - https://christianity.stackexchange.com/q/86098/50422

**Note**: this question is scoped to *Cessationists* (see [Cessationism vs. Continuationism - Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cessationism_versus_continuationism)) . Suppose that a fellow Christian tells a Cessationist that God spoke to them, or that they were attacked by demons, or that they witnessed a miracle, or that they had a dream or vision from God, etc. What would the average Cessationist do? - Would they believe them? - Would they be skeptical? - Would they think they are crazy, deluded or lying? - Would they request hard scientific evidence? - Would they dismiss their testimony entirely? What if many Christians from different parts of the world are reporting similar experiences? Would they (Cessationists) think they are all deluded, deceived or lying? **In short, how do Cessationists respond when a fellow Christian shares a world-view-challenging testimony?** ___ **Appendix 1 - Books with testimonies** I'm listing several books below with lots of testimonies from fellow Christians to illustrate what I'm talking about: - Miracles: The Credibility of the New Testament Accounts, by Craig Keener (https://www.amazon.com/Miracles-Credibility-New-Testament-Accounts/dp/0801039525) - Miracles Today: The Supernatural Work of God in the Modern World, by Craig Keener (https://www.amazon.com/Miracles-Today-Supernatural-Modern-World-ebook/dp/B08MXZVXLW) - The Case for Miracles: A Journalist Investigates Evidence for the Supernatural, by Lee Strobel (https://www.amazon.com/Case-Miracles-Journalist-Investigates-Supernatural/dp/0310259185) - Why I Am Still Surprised by the Power of the Spirit: Discovering How God Speaks and Heals Today, by Jack Deere (https://www.amazon.com/Why-Still-Surprised-Power-Spirit/dp/031010811X) - The Grave Robber: How Jesus Can Make Your Impossible Possible, by Mark Batterson (https://www.amazon.com/Grave-Robber-Jesus-Impossible-Possible/dp/0801015987) - Demonic Foes: My Twenty-Five Years as a Psychiatrist Investigating Possessions, Diabolic Attacks, and the Paranormal, by Richard Gallagher (https://www.amazon.com/Demonic-Foes-Twenty-Five-Psychiatrist-Investigating/dp/0062876481/) - They Shall Expel Demons: What You Need to Know about Demons - Your Invisible Enemies, by Derek Prince (https://www.amazon.com/They-Shall-Expel-Demons-Invisible/dp/0800792602/) **Appendix 2 - Types of Cessationism** Answers to this question would probably benefit from splitting the analysis into the four major types of Cessationism: > - **Full cessationists** believe that all miracles have ceased, along with any miraculous gifts. > - **Classical cessationists** assert that the miraculous gifts such as prophecy, healing, and speaking in tongues ceased with the apostles. > However, they do believe that God occasionally works in supernatural > ways today. > - **Consistent cessationists** believe that not only were the miraculous gifts only for the establishment of the first-century > church, but the need for apostles and prophets also ceased. > - **Concentric cessationists** believe that the miraculous gifts have indeed ceased in the mainstream church and evangelized areas, but may > appear in unreached areas as an aid to spreading the Gospel. Daniel B. > Wallace describes himself as a concentric cessationist and describes > the other cessationist viewpoints as "linear". > > ([source](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cessationism_versus_continuationism#Types_of_cessationism))

According to believers in modern miracles, what is the biblical basis for expecting modern miraculous / supernatural interventions by God? Are there any passages in Scripture that can justify one's expecting miracles to continue to happen after the apostolic age? **Note 1**: I'm not necessarily talking about sign gifts. Belief in sign gifts does not follow (necessarily) from belief in miracles. There are many Cessationists who believe in miracles but lack a belief in the continuation of the sign gifts. **Note 2**: By 'miracle' I mean the definition suggested by the ['miracles'](https://christianity.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/miracles) tag: *Actions of God not explained by normal laws of physics, chemistry, biology, or the natural sciences*. If you disagree with this definition and have the sufficient privileges, feel free to [edit the tag info](https://christianity.stackexchange.com/edit-tag-wiki/175) for 'miracles'. ___ To bring some balance to the force, here is the link to the opposite view: https://christianity.stackexchange.com/q/90089/50422

Essentially the opposite of this question: https://christianity.stackexchange.com/q/87159/50422 Some Christians believe that miracles ceased after the apostolic age -- or at least that miracles from God did, since many believe that counterfeit miracles from Satan have continued. What is the biblical basis for NOT expecting Godly miracles after the apostolic age? **Note 1**: By 'miracle' I mean the definition suggested by the ['miracles'](https://christianity.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/miracles) tag: *Actions of God not explained by normal laws of physics, chemistry, biology, or the natural sciences*. If you disagree with this definition and have the sufficient privileges, feel free to [edit the tag info](https://christianity.stackexchange.com/edit-tag-wiki/175) for 'miracles'. **Note 2**: Notice that I'm not talking about sign gifts. Belief in sign gifts does not follow (necessarily) from belief in miracles. There are many Cessationists who believe in miracles but lack a belief in the continuation of the sign gifts (e.g. see https://christianity.stackexchange.com/q/10020/50422) ____ Related: - https://christianity.stackexchange.com/q/10041/50422 - https://christianity.stackexchange.com/q/86488/50422

I've already asked my fair share of questions on the paranormal, but so far I have mainly received answers from the Catholic viewpoint. Therefore, this time I want to limit the scope of this question to the **Protestant perspective**. **According to Protestants, are there genuine cases of paranormal activity in modern times?** If so, is there agreement among Protestants as to the causes? Are genuine cases of paranormal activity caused by God, angels, demons, the disembodied spirits of the dead, people endowed with psychic abilities or something else? ___________ Related questions: - https://christianity.stackexchange.com/q/89056/50422 - https://christianity.stackexchange.com/q/87240/50422 - https://christianity.stackexchange.com/q/80515/50422 - https://christianity.stackexchange.com/q/82874/50422 - https://christianity.stackexchange.com/q/84082/50422 - https://christianity.stackexchange.com/q/80419/50422 - https://christianity.stackexchange.com/q/44557/50422 - https://christianity.stackexchange.com/q/53105/50422

[Moroni 10:3-7](https://abn.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/scriptures/bofm/moro/10?lang=eng) : > 3 Behold, I would exhort you that when ye shall read these things, if it be wisdom in God that ye should > read them, that ye would remember how merciful the Lord hath been > unto the children of men, from the creation of Adam even down until > the time that ye shall receive these things, and ponder it in your > hearts. > > 4 And when ye shall receive these things, **I would exhort you that ye** > **would ask God, the Eternal Father, in the name of Christ, if these** > **things are not true; and if ye shall ask with a sincere heart, with** > **real intent, having faith in Christ, he will manifest the truth of it** > **unto you, by the power of the Holy Ghost**. > > 5 **And by the power of the Holy Ghost ye may know the truth of all** > **things**. > > 6 And whatsoever thing is good is just and true; wherefore, nothing > that is good denieth the Christ, but acknowledgeth that he is. > > 7 **And ye may know that he is, by the power of the Holy Ghost**; > wherefore I would exhort you that ye deny not the power of God; for he > worketh by power, according to the faith of the children of men, the > same today and tomorrow, and forever. Has any Latter-day Saint published **a very detailed description** of the day when they undertook Moroni 10:3-7's challenge and, as a result, had an extraordinary experience from the Holy Spirit that confirmed to them the authenticity of the Book of Mormon? *Note: when I say published, I mean published in any format (book, magazine, website/blog, YouTube video, podcast, etc). By very detailed, I mean ideally a decent amount of paragraphs just to describe the experience itself. And by extraordinary, I mean any kind of experience that cannot be easily explained away as a mere psychological phenomenon.*