Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
SouthernMo

If not LDS, then what...

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

SBNA - spiritual but not affiliated is what many are choosing right now.  

17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.

I think Jesus did away with a lot of things, a lot of old laws that were changed, what does everyone think - destroy the law or destroy the prophets - destroy vs. fulfill?  The role of prophets was fulfilled?  Their role in the OT was to prophecy of the coming of Christ - Christ came, and then no more prophecies of when he was going to come were needed...   From prophets, to  the church is built on the light of Christ - our conscience - given to all.  Individual testimony and light to everyone, personal relationships without an organization.  

 

Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-Jona: because flesh and blood hath not revealed it to thee, but my Father who is in heaven....

Personal light and revelation, this is what the new church is built upon.  

Edited by changed

Share this post


Link to post
8 hours ago, SouthernMo said:

Yes - it is a very odd hypothetical situation I am putting forward here. My question I’m trying to ask is that in the absence of (if one believes it) Jesus’ authorized vehicle with the authority and ordinances and truth, is there a faith you think would fit second best?  Or do you have more the belief of John Taylor - “The Kingdom of God or nothing...”?

You’d forgo worship or group worship all together if this COJCOLDS left the earth tomorrow?

To me this is a different question than the OP. If the Church were suddenly "raptured," I would continue studying and living the principles as best I could. This is the spirit of "Come Follow Me" or home-based, Church supported learning and application. I would probably tend to volunteer in charitable organizations (faith-based or secular would not matter) than support another denomination.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, mrmarklin said:

If one wants to be a Christian, the only other plausible option is to be a Catholic. 

How come?

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, mrmarklin said:

If one wants to be a Christian, the only other plausible option is to be a Catholic. 

Greek or Roman? Do Orthodox faiths qualify?

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, mrmarklin said:

If one wants to be a Christian, the only other plausible option is to be a Catholic. 

I think I would be very spiritually uplifted attending mass, but if I still believed what I do now, I don't see how I could ethically get baptized understanding the nature of God the Father and his relationship with the Son and the Spirit fundamentally different than Catholics or Orthodox do.  Therefore I could only observe and not participate in the Mass nor do I think that right since I don't believe the Eucharist is the Real Presence, literally God's body and blood.  As much as I see the Catholic Mass as spiritually and emotionally beautiful and rejuvenating, out of respect for their beliefs I don't see it as right to co-opt it so I could feel a part of a community.

https://www.catholic.com/magazine/online-edition/non-catholics-in-the-communion-line

The same problem would exist for the Orthodox faiths, I wouldn't believe everything they teach So to be baptized would be wrong.

Edited by Calm

Share this post


Link to post
56 minutes ago, SouthernMo said:
3 hours ago, mrmarklin said:

If one wants to be a Christian, the only other plausible option is to be a Catholic. 

How come?

If they are right about receiving their priesthood authority from the Apostle Peter then they are the only ones that can rightfully claim authority from God to lead His kingdom on earth.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
11 hours ago, SouthernMo said:

If for whatever reason there were no COJCOLDS, but you knew what you know today, would you join another faith?  If so which one?  Why?

The LDS church is what one needs to get into the Celestial Kingdom.  You can be pretty much anything else and get into the 2 lower kingdoms.  So with no access to the Celestial Kingdom, it really would not matter what I would be.  I gain nothing by being part of any other religion or being non-religious.   I guess I would just focus my mind on sports, money, and being a nice person.  I could still qualify for the Terrestrial Kingdom. 

Share this post


Link to post
3 minutes ago, carbon dioxide said:

The LDS church is what one needs to get into the Celestial Kingdom.  You can be pretty much anything else and get into the 2 lower kingdoms.  So with no access to the Celestial Kingdom, it really would not matter what I would be.  I gain nothing by being part of any other religion or being non-religious.   I guess I would just focus my mind on sports, money, and being a nice person.  I could still qualify for the Terrestrial Kingdom. 

Interesting... so you see the church and it’s authority and ordinances as all about setting you up for a reward in heaven?  I like to think that this LDS faith and other faiths also help us become better people - which is a reward in and of itself.

But you’d embrace hedonism in the absence of a post-mortal reward?  So much for a change of heart...

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
6 hours ago, SouthernMo said:

So... Mormonism or nothing?  Join another Christian church?

 

While I am an active, believing Latter Day Saint I wouldn't term it as Mormonism or nothing.  

I think when Christ comes back to reign on Earth "Mormonism" will become a thing of the past and I hope to follow His path. 

 

As I said, my testimony is in Jesus Christ, his ministry, grace, mercy, resurrection, atonement, and salvation.   We are given Commandments, Scripture, Prophets, Priesthood, Ordinances, and Covenants to help bring us to Him and His Father.  The policy, structure, meeting schedule, dealings with members or leadership, relations with political, gender, or government groups etc...they are part of "The Church", which is dispensable, alterable, or changeable.

 

Find me another Faith, Church, or group that can offer saving ordinances and covenants and I will look into it.  I haven't found it so far in my looks into other faiths. 

Outside of that, I think I would be a bit lost.

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
5 hours ago, MiserereNobis said:

I think your take on Mormonism might already qualify 🤪

Good.

Then I am on the perfect Mormon road- creating a world from matter unorganized and following the spirit.

Sort of. ;) 

Honestly.  THAT is what it is to be LDS.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
9 hours ago, mfbukowski said:

I'd start my own.

 

5 hours ago, MiserereNobis said:

I think your take on Mormonism might already qualify 🤪

Not quite. mfbukowski currently and largely submits himself to the authorities that he recognizes. If a major earthly part of that authority were no longer around, there would be no one holding mfbukowski back but God. And I rather think that mfbukowski would believe that God would not be holding him back but rather whole-heartedly behind his particular take.

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, USU78 said:

For the fierce morality and the expansive, world-bettering heart.

And true Monotheism.  The person I know is Logos.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, mrmarklin said:

If one wants to be a Christian, the only other plausible option is to be a Catholic. 

Or Orthodox.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, carbon dioxide said:

The LDS church is what one needs to get into the Celestial Kingdom.  You can be pretty much anything else and get into the 2 lower kingdoms.  So with no access to the Celestial Kingdom, it really would not matter what I would be.  I gain nothing by being part of any other religion or being non-religious.   I guess I would just focus my mind on sports, money, and being a nice person.  I could still qualify for the Terrestrial Kingdom. 

I don´t know if this is said in jest or not.

Is it jest to say ¨with no access to the Celestial Kingdom, it really would not matter what I would be¨?
Is it tongue in cheek that what you ¨gain¨ is really all that motivates you in the reality that you find yourself now?
Is this satire against the LDS Church as ¨what one needs to get into the Celestial Kingdom¨ (as opposed to, you know... Jesus)?

If not in jest, then it´s practical, I guess. God may have another perspective.

On a more serious note: If this were one´s perspective, and more so if the perspective (conscious or not) of many LDS, would it not show some of the issues with organizationalism, authoritarianism, and emphasis of works/rewards? 

Share this post


Link to post
38 minutes ago, Joshua Valentine said:

 

Not quite. mfbukowski currently and largely submits himself to the authorities that he recognizes. If a major earthly part of that authority were no longer around, there would be no one holding mfbukowski back but God. And I rather think that mfbukowski would believe that God would not be holding him back but rather whole-heartedly behind his particular take.

Well thanks I think.  ;)

But I have taken a covenant of obedience and I value that highly.  Nevertheless I do not feel it holds me back at all, but is a source of strength.  At least it gives me a LITTLE humility.  ;)

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
15 hours ago, SouthernMo said:

If for whatever reason there were no COJCOLDS, but you knew what you know today, would you join another faith?  If so which one?  Why?

I do not know exactly what you mean by if "you knew what you know today." I cannot really answer the question fairly because I am so heavily invested in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints that I just do not think I can get past my biases and look at the idea objectively. Right now I consider the church as the most logical of all of the Christian Churches, the Jewish faith, or the Muslim faith using only the Bible and what history I know as the basis for my extrapolations. Beyond that is is impossible for me to do more than guess about what I would do or how I would think.

Glenn

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, Joshua Valentine said:

On a more serious note: If this were one´s perspective, and more so if the perspective (conscious or not) of many LDS, would it not show some of the issues with organizationalism, authoritarianism, and emphasis of works/rewards? 

No, in fact it makes an abomination of LDS doctrine

The whole point of temple worship is to allow those who did not progress here to do so, with more information at their disposal.

Waking up alive after dying has got to be a great motivation for repentance  ;)

 

 

Edited by mfbukowski
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
11 hours ago, The Mean Farmer said:

 

While I am an active, believing Latter Day Saint I wouldn't term it as Mormonism or nothing.  

I think when Christ comes back to reign on Earth "Mormonism" will become a thing of the past and I hope to follow His path. 

 

As I said, my testimony is in Jesus Christ, his ministry, grace, mercy, resurrection, atonement, and salvation.   We are given Commandments, Scripture, Prophets, Priesthood, Ordinances, and Covenants to help bring us to Him and His Father.  The policy, structure, meeting schedule, dealings with members or leadership, relations with political, gender, or government groups etc...they are part of "The Church", which is dispensable, alterable, or changeable.

 

Find me another Faith, Church, or group that can offer saving ordinances and covenants and I will look into it.  I haven't found it so far in my looks into other faiths. 

Outside of that, I think I would be a bit lost.

 

 

Other faiths believe Jesus is all that is needed. Why do you need saving ordinances and covenants? That sounds like works. But I'll get backlash, come and get me...for saying it. 

And a bit about being a bit lost, that's my journey. Now I can't rely on the church, now I'm going to have to be like other people in the Christian faith and get my own faith. Relying on the church put me in this spot, when you disbelieve in the LDS church than you doubt the rest, God/Jesus and have to figure it out on your own. You have to adult it. You can no longer be handheld through.

To answer the OP, I'm leary of many churches. Some of them are far worse than LDS, so I am thinking being on my own to search is better for now. 

Edited by Tacenda

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Tacenda said:

Other faiths believe Jesus is all that is needed. Why do you need saving ordinances and covenants? That sounds like works. But I'll get backlash, come and get me...for saying it. 

It is just a very narrow, and frankly misleading way to believe. What about all the rest of the scriptures besides a few sentences by Paul? Even Paul repeatedly warns against sin. He also mentions doing the work of the Lord:

1 Corinthians 3:13

13 Every man’s work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire; and the fire shall try every man’s work of what sort it is.

14 If any man’s work abide which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward.

1 Corinthians 15:58

58 Therefore, my beloved brethren, be ye steadfast, unmoveable, always abounding in the work of the Lord, forasmuch as ye know that your labour is not in vain in the Lord.

2 Corinthians 9:8

8 And God is able to make all grace abound toward you; that ye, always having all sufficiency in all things, may abound to every good work:

What Paul is trying to say is that we aren't saved because of our works. We are saved from sin through the grace of Christ based on our repentance. But he also certainly recognized that Yeshua calls us to work for him, even as he did.

Ephesians 2:10 For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them.

So what happens if we don't do the good works Christ has called us to do? Can we be rewarded for them? Is being saved from punishment in Hell really the same as being rewarded? If not, a lot of "Pauline Christians" may find themselves very disappointed and feel very mislead.... just sayin....

Share this post


Link to post
4 minutes ago, RevTestament said:

It is just a very narrow, and frankly misleading way to believe. What about all the rest of the scriptures besides a few sentences by Paul? Even Paul repeatedly warns against sin. He also mentions doing the work of the Lord:

1 Corinthians 3:13

13 Every man’s work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire; and the fire shall try every man’s work of what sort it is.

14 If any man’s work abide which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward.

1 Corinthians 15:58

58 Therefore, my beloved brethren, be ye steadfast, unmoveable, always abounding in the work of the Lord, forasmuch as ye know that your labour is not in vain in the Lord.

2 Corinthians 9:8

8 And God is able to make all grace abound toward you; that ye, always having all sufficiency in all things, may abound to every good work:

What Paul is trying to say is that we aren't saved because of our works. We are saved from sin through the grace of Christ based on our repentance. But he also certainly recognized that Yeshua calls us to work for him, even as he did.

Ephesians 2:10 For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them.

So what happens if we don't do the good works Christ has called us to do? Can we be rewarded for them? Is being saved from punishment in Hell really the same as being rewarded? If not, a lot of "Pauline Christians" may find themselves very disappointed and feel very mislead.... just sayin....

I really never said "no works", did I? I understand there are works, and I believe the works are those that come from believing Jesus is Lord and then acting on it. Not just I believe and therefore I get to sin no matter what. Where in the Bible does it mention the works like in the temple though? Or having to acquire a TR? Only in the D&C right, whoops, maybe that scripture that is obsure to me that says baptisms for the dead, now does that mean no baptisms or baptisms, it isn't clear to me.

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, Tacenda said:

I really never said "no works", did I? I understand there are works, and I believe the works are those that come from believing Jesus is Lord and then acting on it. Not just I believe and therefore I get to sin no matter what. Where in the Bible does it mention the works like in the temple though? 

Isaiah 61:

7  For your shame ye shall have double; and for confusion they shall rejoice in their portion: therefore in their land they shall possess the double: everlasting joy shall be unto them.

8 For I the Lord love judgment, I hate robbery for burnt offering; and I will direct their work in truth, and I will make an everlasting covenant with them.

Now, was Jerusalem the land of the Gentiles? Is that where God would give the Gentiles the double? Or where He made an everlasting covenant with them? Wasn't His new covenant made with Israelites in their land? To spread elsewhere? That doesn't sound like the everlasting covenant made with the Gentiles in "their land." "Pauline Christians" seem content in being saved from hell, but will they be made a pillar in the temple? It seems to me maybe they don't understand all there is to understand.... I do not condemn them for that, but I am inclined to show them a more complete interpretation.
 

Quote

Or having to acquire a TR? Only in the D&C right, whoops, maybe that scripture that is obsure to me that says baptisms for the dead, now does that mean no baptisms or baptisms, it isn't clear to me.

Yeshua seems pretty clear about baptizing all that would come. Making baptism some kind of invalid work is off putting to me, because it just ignores scripture. Covenants are not a work. They are a promise. If people won't enter them, then they can't receive the blessings of Isaiah 61. I am more than happy to help my ancestors who did not have access to all the truth, or help those who died having never heard of Yeshua. If they want to make those promises too, I am all about helping them do it. I see no evil in that... only good.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
36 minutes ago, RevTestament said:

It is just a very narrow, and frankly misleading way to believe. What about all the rest of the scriptures besides a few sentences by Paul? Even Paul repeatedly warns against sin. He also mentions doing the work of the Lord:

No offense intended, but it seems you are the one making it ¨very narrow, and frankly misleading way to believe¨ RevTestament. As Tacenda already replied, no one said no works at all - she was talking about salvation by works. You seem to be broadening this to no works at all - which is a strawman - I don´t know of any Christian (at least those serious enough to make a statement about it) that does not believe in good works and doing the will of the Lord. Maybe you misunderstood Tacenda?  But then it still sounds like you think some Christians actually believe this? Or maybe you think those verses in fact have to do with salvation, but your own commentary seems to indicate otherwise. Please clarify if you think we are misunderstanding you - not to divert the thread, just to clear up this little bit here and then we can proceed with the OP.

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
38 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

Only in the D&C right, whoops, maybe that scripture that is obscure to me that says baptisms for the dead, now does that mean no baptisms or baptisms, it isn't clear to me.

In the research for the paper by the late scholar John Tvedtnes on early temple rituals, (Early Christian and Jewish Rituals Related to Temple Practices... fairlds.org/pubs/conf/1999TveJ.html), he cited that he had found 15... 15... references to the practice of baptism for the dead in the various Christian texts, and several Mandean and Jewish texts.  We have clung to the one reference from the Bible (1 Cor 15:29) when Tvedtnes included 15 in his article "Baptism for the Dead in Early Christianity," scheduled for publication later in 1999 in another FARMS temples volume.

GG

Edited by Garden Girl

Share this post


Link to post

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...