“In coming days, it will not be possible to survive spiritually without the guiding, directing, comforting, and constant influence of the Holy Ghost."

[CV75]

2 minutes ago, SouthernMo said:

Ok - you almost had me convinced.  I struggle a little with Alma 32 because of the possible interpretation that if one speak by the Holy Ghost, then others will feel the Holy Ghost. I don’t agree with that.

Ive had personal experience in which I know I don’t always feel the Holy Ghost when I “should.”  If I’m angry, I don’t feel it - even if a speaker or a passage in the scriptures is full of the spirit.

Conversely, if I was speaking to someone and believed I was speaking by the spirit, but my audience didn’t feel the Holy Ghost, what am I to make of that?  Was I the one without the spirit, or was it the audience?

But that is not what any of the Nephi scriptures, or Alma 32, says; it is a clear misinterpretation of the plain text. No one is guaranteed to feel the Holy Ghost just because someone speaks by the Holy Ghost. Nephi is saying the Holy Ghost carries the true word of authorized teachers unto the hearer, and Alma is saying the hearer has some experimenting to do before receiving a spiritual witness.

If your audience doesn't feel the Holy Ghost (and how would you know?) while you know you felt the Holy Ghost, why would you wonder whether you spoke with or by the Holy Ghost, regardless of whether you knew the reaction or the spiritual experience of the audience members or not?

[CV75]

8 minutes ago, SouthernMo said:

I think you’re right. There is not sufficient logical evidence or reason for me to conclude whether or not Christ leads this church.  One has to have faith that it is or is not, then adjust one’s paradigm of how Christ “should” lead the church, and accept whatever happens (good or bad) in the church as the will of the Lord.

Accepting whatever happens as the will of the Lord is not the only option. Agency has the greater role, whether in line or out of line with the Lord's will.

[Navidad]

On 4/14/2019 at 11:27 PM, CMZ said:

So, one gains spiritual strength through disagreeing with the Church?

One gains spiritual strength by hungering and thirsting after righteousness. PS 42: 1 sums it up perfectly: As the hart panteth after the water brooks, so panteth my soul after thee, O God.    A spiritual person is one who pants after more of God. It doesn't matter to what church they belong, which ordinances they have participated in, or what covenants they made or repeat each Sunday. The truly spiritual person hungers and thirsts after more of God wherever and however. 

[Navidad]

On 4/14/2019 at 11:42 PM, rockpond said:

Maybe.  But, there are a lot of truly spiritual people who have not made LDS covenants.

Amen!

[Navidad]

On 4/15/2019 at 4:41 AM, Stargazer said:

For this, I'd nominate a few non-LDS members of this board, such as Navidad, 3DOP and MisereNobis.

Stargazer: I want you to know how much your saying this has ministered to me. Thank you so very much. I have been very down the last three weeks with a bad infection that has impacted me in many ways. I so missed not going to ward on Easter Sunday. My dear wife has been amazing in taking care of me as I have lost 25 pounds in less than three weeks. I have to drive to our little clinic every day to get an injection and it is all discouraging. Your one comment made me smile; I went running into the kitchen to tell my wife. She looked at me like, "What just happened to you?" A kindness just happened to me. Thank you ever so much!

[Navidad]

On 4/21/2019 at 5:02 PM, Wade Englund said:

Perhaps the confusion may be dispelled by understanding that the Church is actually lead by him after whom the Church is named.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

I don't doubt that Christ leads many churches as they seek to bring honor and glory to Him. However, far more important, I think Christ is more in the practice of leading individuals. Christian faith is a "whosoever will" proposition. Even in the biggest church in the world we come to Christ one by one. And in the biggest church in the world spiritual growth is a person by person, moment by moment process. 

[Navidad]

13 hours ago, CV75 said:

How do you conceptualize Christ leading His Church, or, if he doesn't have one, how does He lead His followers in modern times?

I believe Christ has a church for sure. It is the Christian Church - a tree composed of many branches of which Christ is the trunk. How does He lead His followers in modern times? Ever since Pentecost he leads his followers by means of the Holy Spirit. We, his followers are the temples that are indwelt by the Spirit who according to John 16:13 leads us into all truth. That's it! 

[changed]

On 4/9/2019 at 1:18 PM, Navidad said:

The criteria for the Holy Spirit forsaking a Christian are pretty tough. 
 

What are the criteria?

[USU78]

9 minutes ago, changed said:

What are the criteria?

Section 121.

[Wade Englund]

6 hours ago, SouthernMo said:

It does not compute.

You say it’s led by God. It is a faith promoting, god glorifying statement. I really wish it were that easy for me to understand!

My experience the LDS church has been that when great things happen in the church, testimonies are strengthened, and the acts are attributed to the centrality of Christ’s leadership.

However, when things go bad in the church. When a leader misbehaves, or hurts someone, or makes a poor choice, my experience has been that members come to Christ’s defense, and blame those bad things on the agency of the fallible man.

In review: When good happens in the LDS church, it is proof that Jesus leads the church. When bad happens in the church, it is proof that Jesus allows man agency.

It’s hard for me to accept that this church is led by God. Unless that god is a horrible person who takes credit for the victories, but blames the failures on his subordinates.

Help me see that it is god, and only god who leads this church.

Sure, though I don't think in the binary terms you suggest.

Consider Jesus during his mortal ministry. Would you agree that he was the head of the church or kingdom of God on earth? Yet, he also called 12 Apostles to lead and feed his sheep even, and especially after his crucifixion. Right? Did his apostles always fully comprehend his will and implement it with exactitude (the dispute between Peter and Paul over circumcision being a case in point)? Of course the answer is, no. The fact that the apostles didn't always get things exactly right, doesn't mean that Jesus wasn't the head of his church, nor should he be held responsible for the errors of men--assuming they are mistakes. Maybe they weren't mistakes, but simply God leading men at their level, and changing his practices and further evolving his gospel as his chosen disciples continue to develop.

You should be able to comprehend this with your own experience with the Spirit. You say that the Spirit is your truth. Yet, have you always correctly understood the Spirit. Hasn't the Spirit revealed things to you at the level of your understanding at the time, and revealed more and greater things as you developed?

Does it compute yet?

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

 

[Calm]

2 hours ago, Navidad said:

Stargazer: I want you to know how much your saying this has ministered to me. Thank you so very much. I have been very down the last three weeks with a bad infection that has impacted me in many ways. I so missed not going to ward on Easter Sunday. My dear wife has been amazing in taking care of me as I have lost 25 pounds in less than three weeks. I have to drive to our little clinic every day to get an injection and it is all discouraging. Your one comment made me smile; I went running into the kitchen to tell my wife. She looked at me like, "What just happened to you?" A kindness just happened to me. Thank you ever so much!

You have a good heart, Navidad.

[Wade Englund]

2 hours ago, Navidad said:

I don't doubt that Christ leads many churches as they seek to bring honor and glory to Him. However, far more important, I think Christ is more in the practice of leading individuals. Christian faith is a "whosoever will" proposition. Even in the biggest church in the world we come to Christ one by one. And in the biggest church in the world spiritual growth is a person by person, moment by moment process. 

I think that in varying ways and to varying degrees you are correct.

However, ultimately there is one shepherd and one fold, one body of Christ--which suggests that the kingdom is designed to operate on an individual as well as collective basis. For the body of Christ to progress as God wills, the  left and right feet can't work independantly of each other, but must work together as one, else-wise the body may stumble and fall or be split in two or walk in circles.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Edited April 23, 2019 by Wade Englund

[Avatar4321]

3 hours ago, Navidad said:

One gains spiritual strength by hungering and thirsting after righteousness. PS 42: 1 sums it up perfectly: As the hart panteth after the water brooks, so panteth my soul after thee, O God.    A spiritual person is one who pants after more of God. It doesn't matter to what church they belong, which ordinances they have participated in, or what covenants they made or repeat each Sunday. The truly spiritual person hungers and thirsts after more of God wherever and however. 

Which is why those who limit God to only what the Bible says miss so much.

we are to live off every word that proceeds from the mouth of God. woe to him who says we have enough

[SouthernMo]

5 hours ago, Wade Englund said:

Sure, though I don't think in the binary terms you suggest.

Consider Jesus during his mortal ministry. Would you agree that he was the head of the church or kingdom of God on earth? Yet, he also called 12 Apostles to lead and feed his sheep even, and especially after his crucifixion. Right? Did his apostles always fully comprehend his will and implement it with exactitude (the dispute between Peter and Paul over circumcision being a case in point)? Of course the answer is, no. The fact that the apostles didn't always get things exactly right, doesn't mean that Jesus wasn't the head of his church, nor should he be held responsible for the errors of men--assuming they are mistakes. Maybe they weren't mistakes, but simply God leading men at their level, and changing his practices and further evolving his gospel as his chosen disciples continue to develop.

You should be able to comprehend this with your own experience with the Spirit. You say that the Spirit is your truth. Yet, have you always correctly understood the Spirit. Hasn't the Spirit revealed things to you at the level of your understanding at the time, and revealed more and greater things as you developed?

Does it compute yet?

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

 

I see what you’re saying.

But, I’m still not convinced that Jesus leads the church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints any more or less than any other organization that is trying to follow him. 

[CV75]

10 hours ago, Navidad said:

I believe Christ has a church for sure. It is the Christian Church - a tree composed of many branches of which Christ is the trunk. How does He lead His followers in modern times? Ever since Pentecost he leads his followers by means of the Holy Spirit. We, his followers are the temples that are indwelt by the Spirit who according to John 16:13 leads us into all truth. That's it! 

Yes, according to the Book of Mormon, that is one of the ways Christ has a church ("the church of the Lamb of God"). It also mentions "the church of the Lamb, who were the saints of God" and "the saints of the church of the Lamb" which some might construe as the same church but could also be read as a subset, the restored Church. But also according to the Book of Mormon, He also has a church organization as I've been describing in the posts above.

[SouthernMo]

3 minutes ago, CV75 said:

Yes, according to the Book of Mormon, that is one of the ways Christ has a church ("the church of the Lamb of God"). It also mentions "the church of the Lamb, who were the saints of God" and "the saints of the church of the Lamb" which some might construe as the same church but could also be read as a subset, the restored Church. But also according to the Book of Mormon, He also has a church organization as I've been describing in the posts above.

I apologize for interjecting, but you’re using a production of a church (Book of Mormon) that claims it is the only church Christ leads to prove a point that Christ has only one organized church.  Do you see how that wouldn’t be convincing?

It’s like me using a book I wrote that states that I’m the king of Mexico to prove that I’m the king of Mexico.

Edited April 23, 2019 by SouthernMo

[CV75]

2 hours ago, SouthernMo said:

I see what you’re saying.

But, I’m still not convinced that Jesus leads the church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints any more or less than any other organization that is trying to follow him. 

It depends on what you mean by "lead" -- I do not take it to be an absolute term. He leads everyone in the world to follow their conscience, and He also leads through His properly authorized, ordained servants so that all God's children might receive His saving ordinances and order.

[SouthernMo]

1 minute ago, CV75 said:

It depends on what you mean by "lead" -- I do not take it to be an absolute term. He leads everyone in the world to follow their conscience, and He also leads through His properly authorized, ordained servants so that all God's children might receive His saving ordinances and order.

Ok - so could we say that Christ leads the Catholic Church because the Pope and Cardinals and Bishops and Priests around the world are following their consciences?

Authority may be viewed as a separate matter from leadership (in your view)?

[CV75]

1 minute ago, SouthernMo said:

I apologize for interjecting, but you’re using a production of a church that claims it is the only church Christ leads to prove a point that Christ has only one organized church.  Do you see how that wouldn’t be convincing?

I'm not trying to convince, only inviting to consider a perspective that I believe will be confirmed by the Holy Ghost. And again, it depends on what you mean by "lead" -- when I hear our general authorities teach about how and what Christ leads,  I do not take it to be an absolute term. He leads everyone in the world to follow their conscience irrespective of their sectarianism or secularism, and He also leads through His properly authorized, ordained servants so that all God's children might receive His saving ordinances and enter His order. "Convincing" by the Holy Ghost is a function of faith as well as of hearing the word, knowledge and logic being ancillary components to that process.

[CV75]

5 minutes ago, SouthernMo said:

Ok - so could we say that Christ leads the Catholic Church because the Pope and Cardinals and Bishops and Priests around the world are following their consciences?

Authority may be viewed as a separate matter from leadership (in your view)?

In a way, yes; the semantics work that way (to both questions).

[Anijen]

On 4/22/2019 at 1:22 PM, RevTestament said:

Well, this is none of my business Ken, but are you interested in a particular area of law? Do you aim towards serving a certain segment such as disability rights? If so, you could volunteer in that area, and show some rehabilitation that way. I wonder if you have tried being admitted into a bar in another state? Perhaps Nevada is not so picky. Once admitted, that may as a practical matter throw a little weight behind an application in UT for instance. The last option is to apply for admittance into the Federal courts - thus bypassing the state bar. If you are interested in civil rights this might prove a better course anyway. You seem to like writing. Perhaps there is room as an appellate lawyer in the Federal courts.... Lots of room for different talents and interests in the legal system... you certainly seem to have the drive for it. 

Still need a licence to practice in federal courts, both civil cases and criminal cases (which [criminal cases] are only filed by governments; local, state or federal). However, one can practice on reservations without a license, but will have to eventually take and pass a tribal bar exam.

Edited April 24, 2019 by Anijen

[Navidad]

8 hours ago, SouthernMo said:

I apologize for interjecting, but you’re using a production of a church (Book of Mormon) that claims it is the only church Christ leads to prove a point that Christ has only one organized church.  Do you see how that wouldn’t be convincing?

It’s like me using a book I wrote that states that I’m the king of Mexico to prove that I’m the king of Mexico.

Oh my goodness! You are the King of Mexico?! Wow, can I speak with you about some property issues I am having?

Seriously I think your point is very interesting. One of the great logical fallacies in the world is argument where the evidence and the conclusion are the same with no other probative data involved.  I think this happens a lot in religious dialogue. Mennonites believe they hold the definitive position in Christianity on peace, conflict resolution, and conscientious objection. How do they know? Because that is what the Mennonite Church has always taught for almost 500 years. This might be a less than optimal example because there probably is independent data that demonstrates the unique position of Mennonites in the world of religious peace/social justice activity.

I know of no independent data to demonstrate or prove, nor any way to conduct a study that shows the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has the only priesthood authority and the only ordinances approved by God. That is by its very nature a faith statement. Nothing wrong with that - in fact there are advantages, because it is impossible to disprove except with another faith statement. It is a statement that cannot be proved or disproved on its own; it is therefore impossible to draw any conclusions about it outside of the mind (not brain) of the believer or disbeliever. Speaking of Mexico, it is the Virgin of Guadalupe vision paradox. 

Edited April 23, 2019 by Navidad

[CV75]

2 hours ago, Navidad said:

I know of no independent data to demonstrate or prove, nor any way to conduct a study that shows the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has the only priesthood authority and the only ordinances approved by God. That is by its very nature a faith statement. Nothing wrong with that - in fact there are advantages, because it is impossible to disprove except with another faith statement. It is a statement that cannot be proved or disproved on its own; it is therefore impossible to draw any conclusions about it outside of the mind (not brain) of the believer or disbeliever. Speaking of Mexico, it is the Virgin of Guadalupe vision paradox. 

That is the unique thing about the Book or Mormon teachings. It teaches us not to seek to disprove, but to obtain and invite others to obtain the Holy Ghost’s witness of the truth of the spiritual and doctrinal content of the Book of Mormon: Another Testament of Jesus Christ. This principle leads to the comments I was making about Christ’s “church” in all senses of the word found in the book. It teaches us not to undermine another’s faith with a contradicting faith statement, but to actively eschew the spirit of contention which these kinds of statements represent. Hence we say, as I indicated in my comments above, keep all the Lord has led you to (and He certainly has led you), and consider obtaining more through the truth the Lord has led us to. Moroni 10:3-5 is very much dependent on drawing our own conclusions through our own experience, and the Lord often exposes us to opportunities to experience new truths, as these verses promise.

Edited April 23, 2019 by CV75

[Stargazer]

10 hours ago, SouthernMo said:

I apologize for interjecting, but you’re using a production of a church (Book of Mormon) that claims it is the only church Christ leads to prove a point that Christ has only one organized church.  Do you see how that wouldn’t be convincing?

It’s like me using a book I wrote that states that I’m the king of Mexico to prove that I’m the king of Mexico.

You may have to contend with Norton I, Emperor of the United States and Protector of Mexico:

 

[SouthernMo]

2 hours ago, Stargazer said:

You may have to contend with Norton I, Emperor of the United States and Protector of Mexico:

 

I will take what is rightfully mine!