Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Analytics

Can A Rich Man Enter the Kingdom of God?

   47 votes

  1. 1. Can A Rich Man Enter the Kingdom of God?

    • Quite easily, wealth is a sign of favor with God
      0
    • Just as easily as anybody else
      17
    • Yes, but it is somewhat difficult
      15
    • Impossible, but with God all things are possible
      4
    • Impossible, unless they trust in God and leave all for His sake
      11

Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

180 posts in this topic

According to Robert Millet, "Jesus said what he meant and meant what he said when he taught that it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of heaven. There is no metaphor intended. No softening of this hard saying by linguistic or cultural traditions is justifiable. The Savior said what he said. "Who then can be saved?" the apostles asked. "With men that trust in riches, it is impossible; but not impossible with men who trust in God and leave all for my sake, for with such all things are possible" (JST, Mark 10:22-26; compare JST, Matt. 19:26;JST Luke 18:27)."

The apostles found this doctrine quite difficult to accept. Do you guys accept it? Just curious.

0

Share this post


Link to post

According to Robert Millet, "Jesus said what he meant and meant what he said when he taught that it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of heaven. There is no metaphor intended. No softening of this hard saying by linguistic or cultural traditions is justifiable. The Savior said what he said. "Who then can be saved?" the apostles asked. "With men that trust in riches, it is impossible; but not impossible with men who trust in God and leave all for my sake, for with such all things are possible" (JST, Mark 10:22-26; compare JST, Matt. 19:26;JST Luke 18:27)."

The apostles found this doctrine quite difficult to accept. Do you guys accept it? Just curious.

With men that trust in riches, it is impossible;

Being rich, and having a your heart set on the things of the world is not the same thing. You can be poor and still pine for things of the world. I would not equate being rich, with trusting in riches.

Edited by ELF1024
0

Share this post


Link to post

Trusting in riches is not the same as being materially wealthy. It is equally easy for everyone, regardless of material wealth alone, to enter the kingdom of God. Trusting in eternal life, and having eternal life (or a hope in Christ) is what makes one rich in this regard.

0

Share this post


Link to post

We, all of us, must unburden ourselves of the trappings of mortality. If the heart is right, the unburdening is not onerous. If the heart is not right, hoooboy.

1

Share this post


Link to post

I think it all depends on a person's attitude, not his wealth. Wealth can create a huge stumbling block of pride, yet it can also be a tremendous resource for helping others. I voted for the last option, except that I'd change the wording to "unless they trust in God and (be willing to) leave all for His sake".

Edited by Brenda
0

Share this post


Link to post

Oh no! Not another thread on wealth vs. poverty!!

Bob Millet is of course correct. A rich person cannot enter into heaven, only a consecrated man or woman who has given everything the Lord has blessed them with to the building of his kingdom can enter therein. At least that is what the NT teaches from start to finish.

Edited by David Bokovoy
0

Share this post


Link to post

Oh no! Not another thread on wealth vs. poverty!!

Bob Millet is of course correct. A rich person cannot enter into heaven, only a consecrated man or woman who has given everything the Lord has blessed them with to the building of his kingdom can enter therein. At least that is what the NT teaches from start to finish.

HAS given everything, or WOULD give everything if called upon to do so?

0

Share this post


Link to post

HAS given everything, or WOULD give everything if called upon to do so?

For Latter-day Saints, the Law of Consecration is absolutely in full force and has never been revoked. The United Order is not in effect, but the LofC is very much a part of God's expectations for the righteous. So the answer is has given everything. A camel could never fit through the eye of a needle.

CamelNeedle-250x300.jpg

0

Share this post


Link to post

For Latter-day Saints, the Law of Consecration is absolutely in full force and has never been revoked. The United Order is not in effect, but the LofC is very much a part of God's expectations for the righteous. So the answer is has given everything. A camel could never fit through the eye of a needle.

CamelNeedle-250x300.jpg

You just condemned an awful lot of people to non-CK status, since the LofC is not being practiced.

I challenge you to go this Sunday to the Bishop and deed over everything you own, allowing him to only give back what you need.

0

Share this post


Link to post

HAS given everything, or WOULD give everything if called upon to do so?

Has covenentally deeded it back to the Lord, acknowledging that nothing of substance is truly his own, and all his time, talents, and substance must be being used to further the Lord's will and purposes, and not merely his own personal desires.

0

Share this post


Link to post

You just condemned an awful lot of people to non-CK status, since the LofC is not being practiced.

I challenge you to go this Sunday to the Bishop and deed over everything you own, allowing him to only give back what you need.

That would be living the United Order which is not in effect. Now, the way I use my stewardship, i.e. the wealth that God has given me to use, is between me and the Lord. Btw, the gate myth that you referenced in relationship to this story in a pervious thread was debunked in the Ensign. Here is the reference:

Ensign on the Camel/Gate Myth

0

Share this post


Link to post

You just condemned an awful lot of people to non-CK status, since the LofC is not being practiced.

I challenge you to go this Sunday to the Bishop and deed over everything you own, allowing him to only give back what you need.

That's the United Order. We deed our substance to the Lord's Storehouse when we Covenant to live the Law. The Bishop has the right to make a withdraw, such as, "Sister so-and-so, who is having terrible financial struggles, needs to visit his spouse who works in another state. I know you have accumulated $x00 in frequent flier miles. Will you use them to bring this family together?" - I know Bishops who have done that. It is their right to make that request to individuals who have covenanted to live the Law of Consecration.

"The Lord's storehouse includes the time, talents, skills, compassion, consecrated material, and financial means of faithful Church members. These resources are available to the bishop in assisting those in need" (Thomas S. Monson,

Edited by nackhadlow
0

Share this post


Link to post

David B.

Perhaps you would feel more comfortable in the Church of Jesus Christ (Alpheus Cutler)? Part of their requirements for membership are gathering to Independence and Consecrating all they own...

http://web.archive.o....cutlerite.org/

**Also, they are the only other Restoration church (besides some polygamist groups) to do the Nauvoo Era Endowment .

Edited by BookofMormonLuvr
0

Share this post


Link to post

That would be living the United Order which is not in effect. Now, the way I use my stewardship, i.e. the wealth that God has given me to use, is between me and the Lord. Btw, the gate myth that you referenced in relationship to this story in a pervious thread was debunked in the Ensign. Here is the reference:

Ensign on the Camel/Gate Myth

I don't believe I referenced anything to "the gate myth". You must be confusing me with someone else.

0

Share this post


Link to post

David B.

Perhaps you would feel more comfortable in the Church of Jesus Christ (Alpheus Cutler)? Part of their requirements for membership are gathering to Independence and Consecrating all they own...

http://web.archive.org/web/20040921162545/http://www.cutlerite.org/

**They are the only other Restoration church (besides some polygamist groups) to do the Nauvoo Era Endowment .

I'm quite pleased trying to live up to my temple covenants as a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

Thanks.

0

Share this post


Link to post

I'm quite pleased trying to live up to my temple covenants as a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

Thanks.

So when the rubber meets the road, you aren't up to the challenge? wink.gif

0

Share this post


Link to post

I don't believe I referenced anything to "the gate myth". You must be confusing me with someone else.

You're right, I'm sorry. It was Deborah.

0

Share this post


Link to post

So when the rubber meets the road, you aren't up to the challenge? wink.gif

There is certainly room for quite a bit of improvement in my life, even though I feel I'm doing a pretty good job. I've never claimed to be perfect and certainly do not expect perfection from those around me. Fortunately, I do not believe that perfection is a requisite for eternal life.

0

Share this post


Link to post

According to Robert Millet, "Jesus said what he meant and meant what he said when he taught that it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of heaven. There is no metaphor intended. No softening of this hard saying by linguistic or cultural traditions is justifiable. The Savior said what he said. "Who then can be saved?" the apostles asked. "With men that trust in riches, it is impossible; but not impossible with men who trust in God and leave all for my sake, for with such all things are possible" (JST, Mark 10:22-26; compare JST, Matt. 19:26;JST Luke 18:27)."

The apostles found this doctrine quite difficult to accept. Do you guys accept it? Just curious.

the monetarliy rich are only going to see this thru the eyes of personal justification; the poor do truely get it. :P

0

Share this post


Link to post

the monetarliy rich are only going to see this thru the eyes of personal justification; the poor do truely get it. :P

This is a classic Liberal fallacy- placing poor people in some sort of moral authority because they are poor.

0

Share this post


Link to post

This is a classic Liberal fallacy- placing poor people in some sort of moral authority because they are poor.

You can count Jesus among the "liberal and fallacious" then.

Luke 6:20

20

Edited by semlogo
0

Share this post


Link to post

HAS given everything, or WOULD give everything if called upon to do so?

Hello. In another thread you asked me for an example of Meldrum maligning other scholars. I provided a few examples and anticipate your response soon, as you've had time to read and comment on other threads. Thanks!

0

Share this post


Link to post

You can count Jesus among the "liberal and fallacious" then.

Luke 6:20

20

0

Share this post


Link to post
Life On a Plate:

Hello. In another thread >you asked</a> me for an example of Meldrum maligning other scholars. I provided a few examples and anticipate your response soon, as you've had time to read and comment on other threads. Thanks!

Are you stalking me into other threads? ph34r.gif

I think you all need to develop thicker skins- That is my response.dirol.gif

Edit: From all your guy's talk I thought maybe he had condemned Meso-American leaning scholars to the lower rungs of Outer Darkness.

Edited by BookofMormonLuvr
0

Share this post


Link to post

Consider a man who has both charity and riches (as "riches" are defined by the worldly) and then suppose the rich man comes to realize there are many people who are poor in the world (as "poor" is defined by the worldly).

What do you think the rich man would need to do to not only enter the kingdom of heaven, but to also stay there?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.