What if you want the church to be true,

[ave maria]

We are the experts in what we believe.

And what is that, exactly?

Shall we expect that if you are ever post-LDS that you will be effectively mum on the topic, and unauthoritative, from that point forward, that your experience or perspective will be rendered void?

Nonsense.

I see no evidence that you ever had a grasp on Mormonism when you were in it...although I am certainly open to the possibility that you are simply making stuff up on purpose. As for me...if I make a career out of harrassing and misrepresenting a religion that is no longer mine you can just shoot me...my life would obviously have little meaning at that point.

It's hard to take you seriously, juliann, particularly when you're so far off the mark.

[ave maria]

Before anyone thinks ave is simply spreading a skewed version of Mormon beliefs, let me add a personal experience.

Eh....that is not the problem. You recognize the diversity of LDS belief. Ave is spreading the misinformation that Mormonism is her narrow vision and nothing else. There is no doctrine on how many "make it". Everyone is going to have their particular take on it. Only Ave is insisting her take is the way it is. This kind of inflexibility is not admired in our religion (we consider it "contentious" when people argue anything in church) and I find it increasingly interesting how many of those with fundamentalistic worldviews cannot handle Mormonism.

Someone should ring a bell every time juliann uses the word "fundamentalist."

juliann, again you're talking about things that are exclusively your creation, and exist only in your imagination.

[Dale]

Ave Maria I am ex-LDS myself I felt as LDS that I would make it to a lower place of glory. I was confident I was saved from hell. I did doubt I would make it to the Celestial kingdom. Of course I was inactive for most of my adult life. But I heard others who were in good standing express doubts on occasion.

Possibly an faithful temple going wife could make it to the Celestial kingdom. I don't see her husbands faithfullness, or lack thereof effects Gods ability to choose who will make it who will not. Nor does expressing doubts about whether one will or will not make it effect Gods ability to choose you.

LDS don't feel they have an auto-matic place in the Celestial kingdom at the point of belief.

D.& C. 132:21,22 does use the word "few" in regards to who would & who would not get exalted?

D.& C. 132:4,6,27 is read as saved angels being damned. (LDS Bible Dictionary pg. 652) It is understandable while some LDS might have doubts about being exalted or making it to the Celestial kingdom.

I feel myself this wider definition of damnation is based on a misreading of D.&C. 132. I feel there is no valid reason for this doubt.

Here's my commentary.

Vs. 3 The person under commandment was Joseph smith not angels.

Vs.4-The only person under penalty for rejection or not abiding by the covenant from the use of the word "you" was Joseph Smith.

vs.6-Not about angels.

Damnation means going to outer darkness.

vs.27 only applies the possibility of damnation who recieved the law. How can the angels be damned for not keeping a law they never recieved? They were never even offered it. It talks about damnation by being cast out of the kingdom entirely.

vs.22,23 applies Matthew 7:13-14 wording to the gate of exaltation. The other passage used it towards the gate of regular salvation.

The only verse that might say you can be saved but damned if misinterpreted is 132:17 which say's "For these angels did not abide my law; therefore they cannot be enlarged, but remain seperately & singly, without exaltation, in their saved condition, to all eternity; and from henceforth are not gods but are angels of God forever & ever."

Another source for a doubt of exaltation might be D.& C.. 76:72-79. which I feel has been missaplied to inactive Mormons. In order to go to the terrestrial kingdom you must qualify by dying "without law." Be "spirits of men kept in prison." Only recieve a testimony of Jesus for the first time after death.(vs.74) I do not see how the section provokes genuine concerns about saved persons being damned to lesser degree of glory.

To me the only reason LDS might need to fear is if they broke their baptismal comittments.

I doubt Joseph Smith kept the comandments perfectly. But does not the D.&C. 132 document still promise his exaltation?

Does my answer help you any trace the reasons why LDS had doubts? These are some possible answers I would use if them.

-------

I am Community of Christ(RLDS) which is very anti-plural marriage. But I feel giving negative commentary on D.&C. 132 is not a healthy way to discuss the documents meaning.

[juliann]

Someone should ring a bell every time juliann uses the word "fundamentalist."

juliann, again you're talking about things that are exclusively your creation, and exist only in your imagination.

We should all blow party horns if you ever document your imperial decrees about how things just are.

Still avoiding giving that list of names for apostolic succession you base the authority of your beliefs on?

[Confidential Informant]

till avoiding giving that list of names for apostolic succession you base the authority of your beliefs on?

I'd kind of like to see this too. <Asking nicely>

C.I.

[ave maria]

till avoiding giving that list of names for apostolic succession you base the authority of your beliefs on?

I'd kind of like to see this too. <Asking nicely>

C.I.

It's on another thread I started subsequently. Scroll down on the first page to find it.

[rameumptom]

Before anyone thinks ave is simply spreading a skewed version of Mormon beliefs, let me add a personal experience.

Eh....that is not the problem. You recognize the diversity of LDS belief. Ave is spreading the misinformation that Mormonism is her narrow vision and nothing else. There is no doctrine on how many "make it". Everyone is going to have their particular take on it. Only Ave is insisting her take is the way it is. This kind of inflexibility is not admired in our religion (we consider it "contentious" when people argue anything in church) and I find it increasingly interesting how many of those with fundamentalistic worldviews cannot handle Mormonism.

I have to agree with Juliann. There simply is no definitive scripture that states who will/won't make it.

There are abundant scriptures that teach "salvation is free" (2 Nephi 2), and that all will resurrect (Alma 11), and that all will enter into God's presence (2 Nephi 2, Alma 11, Mormon 9). We are taught that all the kingdoms of glory ARE kingdoms of glory. They ARE heaven. To think/believe otherwise is to deny the LDS scriptures. For example, D&C 76 tells us that the Telestial will be "thrust down to hell". When does that occur? In the Spirit Prison, where they will pay for sins they have not repented of. Afterwards, there is no hell, except Outer Darkness. However, in verse 89, we read: "And thus we saw, in the heavenly vision, the glory of the telestial, which surpasses all understanding"

Clearly it IS heaven. I don't see how or why other religions bark at us about our belief that only some LDS will enter into the Celestial Kingdom, when we teach God offers a level of heaven to almost everyone; when those same religions are sending billions to hell for eternity, simply because God did not care enough for them to let them hear about Jesus. There's really an amazing irony, isn't it? Catholics send people at least to Purgatory, where they might escape to heaven; but Protestantism is void of any escape for the non-Christian (and those who do not profess the Protestant line).

Now, it is true that we concentrate on obtaining the Celestial Glory, otherwise why even bother with prophets, temples, priesthood, etc.? We're wanting people to obtain the highest kingdom. And while some may say that very "few" will gain the Celestial Glory - just how much is "few"? Out of the tens of billions that have lived on earth, does one hundred = "few"? 1 million? 1 billion? Surely, even when one considers tens of billions since Adam having lived, 1 billion could be considered "few." So it is all dependent upon the individual and what he/she desires to be the salvific outcome. I've known many people outside the LDS Church (and some within) state they would never want to become a god. Would a just and loving God force it upon a child? I don't think so.

If Protestants are happy with playing economy class harps and singing in business coach choirs all through eternity, would God be doing them a favor by upgrading them to first class seats?

Why would God lead someone away from the LDS Church? Is it possible the person is not willing to accept or be happy in the LDS version of heaven, so God in his ultimate knowledge leads us to what we are ready for, and where we will be most happy? I think so. Why should he give testimonies to people of something that would make them miserable? Instead, allow them to believe something that is nearest the truth they are willing to receive, at least until they are ready to receive more with joy and happiness.

Let's face it. The LDS Church isn't for everyone, even though it welcomes any who will receive it. It is stricter than many churches in its expectations. Some people prefer a Church that is happy to receive 1% donation, rather than the expected 10% plus that is the norm in LDS circles.

We are told that the gifts of the Spirit include gaining one's own testimony, and also believing on the testimonies of others. If a person hasn't gained his/her testimony quickly, there is nothing wrong with relying on the witness of those you trust until yours develops.

I don't begrudge those who leave for other religions. I hope they are happy where they set root. And I know they will be blessed for the amount of truth, light and goodness they establish in their lives. But that doesn't mean they have a fulness or complete truth, just as the LDS do not claim to have all truth. We only claim to have enough to exalt.

[ave maria]

Catholics send people at least to Purgatory, where they might escape to heaven;

Purgatory is most nearly the correlary of the LDS concept of spirit prison/post-mortal spirit world, and should not be mistaken for something else.

[ave maria]

Before anyone thinks ave is simply spreading a skewed version of Mormon beliefs, let me add a personal experience.

Eh....that is not the problem. You recognize the diversity of LDS belief. Ave is spreading the misinformation that Mormonism is her narrow vision and nothing else. There is no doctrine on how many "make it". Everyone is going to have their particular take on it. Only Ave is insisting her take is the way it is. This kind of inflexibility is not admired in our religion (we consider it "contentious" when people argue anything in church) and I find it increasingly interesting how many of those with fundamentalistic worldviews cannot handle Mormonism.

I have to agree with Juliann. There simply is no definitive scripture that states who will/won't make it.

Where juliann is incorrect is in making statements like the following:

"Ave is spreading the misinformation that Mormonism is her narrow vision and nothing else,"

"Only Ave is insisting her take is the way it is,"

and so on.

That is of juliann's creation, and not correct.

Everyone on this message board, not unlike others, presents their view as they believe it to be correct, whether it's juliann's message of diversity, or others' interpretations of LDS belief and practice.

I've personally seen many different interpretations of the same. All, part or none might be found to be compatible with actual LDS belief as interpreted by the current LDS Church leadership, but they are recognized to be coming from individual sources.

Mormonism is a variety of visions. As is Catholicism. As is Protestantism. As are most things.

But it is not so all-over-the-board that anything can be said to be correct, and nothing can be said to be incorrect.

juliann's statements above can be said to be incorrect, however. That is her perception, and not accurate.

[Abulafia]

I have to agree with Juliann. There simply is no definitive scripture that states who will/won't make it.

Rameumpton, everytime, in a gospel doctrine class that this subject came up, I was taught that those who had a chance to accept the gospel and rejected it (as in the LDS worldview of gospel) would be heirs only to a lesser kingdom.

One has to remember that as a child with wonderful, but inactive, non-believing, parents, this always gave me a little discomfort. I could see that on a practical everyday level that there was very little difference between my inactive, terrestial kingdom bound parents, and those who were ardently faithful in the church. The only real difference on an everyday basis, in practical terms, was that the active LDS had ...got baptized, attended church every Sunday, fasted once a month, fulfilled church callings, prayed, and read the scriptures daily. (I am sure there are other things too). However, when it came down to how they really were as people, their characters, it generally made very little difference.

I do not believe for one minute that because my parents happened to be taught about the church, and ended up not believing it (my dad more than my mum) that they are terrestial kingdom bound.

Abulafia

[ave maria]

If Protestants are happy with playing economy class harps and singing in business coach choirs all through eternity, would God be doing them a favor by upgrading them to first class seats?

Now that we've moved on from sports analogies to aviation, I find this one amusing.

rameumpton, I'd respectfully suggest that it isn't that mainstream Christianity doesn't put people in heaven up in First Class, it's that they put everyone in heaven up in First Class.

You either get on the plane, or you don't. But the plane doesn't have cheap seats.

[Bertram]

PHEW!

Does this thread remind anyone of the "ave maria and johnny" show?

The only dissimilarity AND a very important one is that Boniface expresses himself courteously and more intelligently!

Juliann,

Any ideas who might be the "school-marm" to ring the bell?

[redman]

wow. this thread is getting kind of exhausting to read. i was away for a few days and came back to find it pretty derailed, but filled with interesting conversation nonetheless. i just want to comment on a few of the assumptions made about me and my situation in my absence. i'll start with charity -

Mrs. Redman can be a wonderful wife to Redman and give and give and give, and grieve every day that she does not have a husband she can worship with. I am sure she did not expect that there would never be conflicts or problems. But when you marry an active member of the Church in the temple, it has to be a shock when the person turns away from that.

you are one hundred percent correct when you state that my wife may grieve. that is very possible, and as you pointed out, if she truly believes she's losing me for the eternities the grief could be very real and painful. i also agree that it will be a shock to her and this will not be what she expected when she married me. the question is this. do i hide my true feelings for the rest of my life so as not to hurt her feelings?

the thing you have to remember is that i'm not turning away from something i know to be true in order to purposely destroy my soul and hurt my wife. it's quite the opposite, i've found out that it's not true, and i feel that living a lie for the next 50-60 years would be pretty miserable and counterproductive for both of us.

and what's with the phrase that my wife will have to "give and give and give." you make it sound like i'm a selfish jerk and will require all kinds of sacrafice from her while giving nothing in return. i like to believe, and i think my wife would agree, that i also "give and give and give" to her in our relationship. you seem to imply that it would be a lopsided relationship for the rest of our lives, just because my religious views have changed.

Anyway i'll move on to address the torrent of sarcastic personal attacks that Kenngo1969 unleashed on me while i was gone.

Kenngo1969 said:

Soon-to-be-Doctor Redman, you don't tell us what specialty you're considering going into. Since you apparently have a knack for "I operations," perhaps ophthalmology would suit you? I have to do what's going to help me grow, what's going to help me personally to "evolve."

you know nothing about me. i don't say this to brag, but my wife has told me on multiple occasions that i am the most selfless person she has ever met. and for the record, i'm going into the specialty of Internal Medicine (adult general medicine) because i love interacting with people and taking care of the old codgers. nice try.

Redman, I apologize for suggesting that your choices would affect anyone else in any way. I was clearly wrong.

i never said my choices wouldn't affect other people. i know this is a tough choice. i am exquisitely aware of the pain this may cause not just my wife but the rest of our extended families. it sucks.

I am truly sorry, but the very fact that you can say, presumably without choking on your tongue, anything that is prefaced with the phrase,

[Kenngo1969]

Sing it with me now! Any other Billy Joel fans here?

Inteeeeg-rity is such a lonely word!"

I hope your wife and family stick with you, Redman. Except in the very rarest of cases (abuse and the like), I don't think differences in commitment to a Church which teaches that Families Can Be Together Forever ought to cost anyone his or her family. But if your family doesn't stick with you, I hope your "integrity" is a good enough companion when you go home alone at night to your cracker-box apartment, flip on the TV and put another frozen dinner in the microwave...

[docrick]

Redman I'm sorry for you.

If you married your wife in the Temple and made eternal covenants with her and God of course she expects you will honor them.

I refuse to believe, no matter what you or anyone else who has willingly left the Church says, that you never had a spiritual witness that Joseph Smith was a Prophet and that the Book of Mormon is true. I'm pretty sure you have received that witness before or it would have been difficult to make the covenants you have made.

You have had EVERY saving ordinance you were sent to earth to receive. You have a family sealed to you.

I believe when you went through the Temple you felt the spirit it is almost palpable.

You have participated in the oath and covenant of the Priesthood. Please re read section 84. It is not I or anyone else that passes judgement on those that "altogether turn therefrom" the oath and covenant made, it is the Lord Himself.

Your apostacy will not necessarily affect your wife's eternal salvation she could stay with you and be just fine.

Your wife will probably worry about the salvation of her children living with an apostate father. At some point your kids will know you once took upon you covenants and broke them for whatever reason. This may be too much for them to bear and they may turn from the Church. For this reason there is a real possibility your wife will leave you. You will have broke you covenant with her.

If your wife stays with you your marriage can never be the same. Don't think it will get better because the issue of religion to a faithful LDS is IMO too big to overcome in the name of love.

Since I believe you have felt the spirit before and had a witness or you would not have made it through the Temple you need to realize that anything that is contrary to that former witness is not of God but is of the adversary who desires to sift you as wheat.

It's OK to doubt Thomas the Apostle doubted and yet he remained faithful.

You should always hold on to the witness you received in the Temple and prior.

Just friendly advice from a colleague.

[Kenngo1969]

(I)'m going into the specialty of Internal Medicine (adult general medicine) because i love interacting with people and taking care of the old codgers.

Yeah ... That term shows a great deal of respect for your prospective patients, Doc. If you greeted my dad with, "How ya doin' today, old codger?" he'd probably not let the door hit him in the gluteus maximus on the way out ... after flattening you with one punch!

[catholic]

Your wife will probably worry about the salvation of her children living with an apostate father. At some point your kids will know you once took upon you covenants and broke them for whatever reason. This may be too much for them to bear and they may turn from the Church. For this reason there is a real possibility your wife will leave you. You will have broke you covenant with her.

If your wife stays with you your marriage can never be the same. Don't think it will get better because the issue of religion to a faithful LDS is IMO too big to overcome in the name of love.

Don't have time to read all 27 pages of this topic but I must say this statement is downright vile.

How dare you judge another person lifestyle and marriage based on he having doubts in his life?

I love the if your wife stays with you your marriage can never e the same...I am sorry I didn't know that marriage is a threesome?

Where is the moderator when it comes to removing crass comments like this?

[docrick]

Your wife will probably worry about the salvation of her children living with an apostate father. At some point your kids will know you once took upon you covenants and broke them for whatever reason. This may be too much for them to bear and they may turn from the Church. For this reason there is a real possibility your wife will leave you. You will have broke you covenant with her.

If your wife stays with you your marriage can never be the same. Don't think it will get better because the issue of religion to a faithful LDS is IMO too big to overcome in the name of love.

Don't have time to read all 27 pages of this topic but I must say this statement is downright vile.

How dare you judge another person lifestyle and marriage based on he having doubts in his life?

I love the if your wife stays with you your marriage can never e the same...I am sorry I didn't know that marriage is a threesome?

Where is the moderator when it comes to removing crass comments like this?

You obviously haven't been around here much. You also obviously have no idea concerning LDS culture.

My comments were spot on with no guile. Go and read the entire thread and you will really get an eyeful.

You need to get a clue before opening your mouth and inserting foot.

[Sput]

Your wife will probably worry about the salvation of her children living with an apostate father. At some point your kids will know you once took upon you covenants and broke them for whatever reason. This may be too much for them to bear and they may turn from the Church. For this reason there is a real possibility your wife will leave you. You will have broke you covenant with her.

If your wife stays with you your marriage can never be the same. Don't think it will get better because the issue of religion to a faithful LDS is IMO too big to overcome in the name of love.

Don't have time to read all 27 pages of this topic but I must say this statement is downright vile.

How dare you judge another person lifestyle and marriage based on he having doubts in his life?

I love the if your wife stays with you your marriage can never e the same...I am sorry I didn't know that marriage is a threesome?

Where is the moderator when it comes to removing crass comments like this?

It has been clearly studied that couples of varing faiths have more contention then of same faith families. I dont think this is a judgment but a consequence of a desicion. Redman is faced with a tough desicion i do not doubt he is a child of god but if i were married to him in the temple I would expect him to stay true to the covenants made to me and our heavenly father. Yes he would have to sacrifice his happiness for that of his families. And doesnt that kinda boil down what the meaning of life is. Sacrifice and love?

I once knew a man that when he asked for his wife hand in marriage she replied that if they got married she would expect him to be active in the church even if he didnt believe in it. And keep to the covenants he made in the temple to her and heavenly father. So even when he had doubts he kept true to this and accepted his callings and has stayed active and in turn streangthened his testimony. Good Luck Redman.

[catholic]

You obviously haven't been around here much. You also obviously have no idea concerning LDS culture.

Not yet...but trying to keep a neutral and open mind to it...comments on how his marriage will be destroyed during a tough time is not very Christian like in my book.

[docrick]

You obviously haven't been around here much. You also obviously have no idea concerning LDS culture.

Not yet...but trying to keep a neutral and open mind to it...comments on how his marriage will be destroyed during a tough time is not very Christian like in my book.

Your feelings are understandable but since you know nothing of our culture don't judge.

As I said my comments are spot on.

I've known Catholics who have joined the LDS church and have been "disowned" by their families for it.

The breaking of Temple covenants we believe has eternal consequences, it truly would be difficult for a spouse to remain in marriage with an openly apostate person.

That is the truth.

[Sput]

You obviously haven't been around here much. You also obviously have no idea concerning LDS culture.

Not yet...but trying to keep a neutral and open mind to it...comments on how his marriage will be destroyed during a tough time is not very Christian like in my book.

Your feelings are understandable but since you know nothing of our culture don't judge.

As I said my comments are spot on.

I've known Catholics who have joined the LDS church and have been "disowned" by their families for it.

The breaking of Temple covenants we believe has eternal consequences, it truly would be difficult for a spouse to remain in marriage with an openly apostate person.

That is the truth.

I wouldnt expect my wife to deal with it...That would be so hard and unfair to her.

[catholic]

I've known Catholics who have joined the LDS church and have been "disowned" by their families for it.

Not going off topic but I have heard there is two-sides to this coin so to be fair and neutral the Catholic family may have a valid point...but that is for another time...

[docrick]

I've known Catholics who have joined the LDS church and have been "disowned" by their families for it.

Not going off topic but I have heard there is two-sides to this coin so to be fair and neutral the Catholic family may have a valid point...but that is for another time...

Oh I agree they have a point of view that their daughter is lost due to their faith that the RCC is the Lord's Church.

My point is that you seemed preturbed that I would presume to opine that a spouse of an apostate would possibly "disown" (divorce) their wayward spouse.

That is not only possible but IMO probable

[Kenngo1969]

You obviously haven't been around here much. You also obviously have no idea concerning LDS culture.

Not yet...but trying to keep a neutral and open mind to it...comments on how his marriage will be destroyed during a tough time is not very Christian like in my book.

Your feelings are understandable but since you know nothing of our culture don't judge.

As I said my comments are spot on.

I've known Catholics who have joined the LDS church and have been "disowned" by their families for it.

The breaking of Temple covenants we believe has eternal consequences, it truly would be difficult for a spouse to remain in marriage with an openly apostate person.

That is the truth.

I wouldnt expect my wife to deal with it...That would be so hard and unfair to her.

But Sput, don't you understand?!! Your wife and family are mere "window dressing" ... They exist to cater to your whims and to adjust to your sudden paradigm shifts! And if your wife should fail to adjust ... Well, that's just tough cookies! You have to be true to yourself ... to do what's best for you, after all!