Unchanging Ordinances Or Was Moses Baptized By Immersion?

[mercyngrace]

I've been preparing to teach on "laws and ordinances" per the Come Follow Me program outline.

In my preparation, one of the suggested references was to a talk which cited Joseph Smith as saying, "Ordinances instituted in the heavens before the foundation of the world, in the priesthood, for the salvation of men, are not to be altered or changed. All must be saved on the same principles."

Question: Can outward ordinances change and still be valid?

Question: Are ordinances actually salvific, in other words, can the ordinance bring salvation and can the lack of an ordinance prevent salvation?

Question: If ordinances are required, which ordinances? Will Nephi have to go through the modern temple ceremony? Will Moses need to be baptized by immersion? (Presuming obviously, that the lack of record indicates a lack of performance.)

Question: If the ordinances and performances of the Mosaic law were recognized to be "dead" but still taught to Nephite children to prevent their downfall/disillusion upon the elimination of that law, should we also teach our children that our present ordinances and performances are also types and shadows so that they are prepared for a day when these ordinances are also "done away"? Or are modern LDS versions the only acceptable and accurate ordinances as instituted in the heavens before the foundation of the world?

These are meant to be thoughtful, not critical questions and as such, I'm not looking for apologetic responses. I am looking for a way to facilitate the discussion in my class such that we move toward seeing symbols as such and valuing them as such without diminishing the importance of symbolic acts or conversely elevating them to the point that they are confused (over valued) with the principle to which they point.

Hope that makes sense.

Edited July 7, 2013 by mercyngrace

[mfbukowski]

For me, the ordinance is constituted by the covenants made, not the formalities. If we lived on a planet with very little water (think of the "Dune" stories), some other ceremony would have to replace baptism.

I have suggested before that baptism in some respects, is not unlike choosing sides for some game.

"If you want to be on my side, step over this line" - (Or sign the roster, raise your right hand, put on a uniform etc etc.)

The commitment is what counts, not the action, all the action is is a token of the commitment. Clearly actions change- the endowment is adjusted all the time, the most recent changes allowing one to remain seated where before standing was required.

"The Ordinance" is an outward appearance connected to a covenant. The covenant is what does not change.

Cle

[Robert F. Smith]

Even though Moses and the Children of Israel went through the Red Sea dryshod, in I Cor 10:1-2, Paul states that they were baptized symbolically or spiritually. The ordinances must be performed, but that can be done in variety of ways, and even by proxy.

Bukowski is correct about covenant being the focus, the endowment being very figurative and symbolic. Changes have indeed taken place, but only in outward appearance. God judges by the heart.

As with the Roman Catholic change from Latin to vernacular Mass, so the veneer of LDS esoterica has sometimes been changed. I always use the example of a particular Hebrew phrase used in LDS temples -- now the English translation is used instead. Back in Kirtland, Ohio, all the Brethren went to Hebrew school. It is understandable that changes would be made.

[Brian 2.0]

For me, the ordinance is constituted by the covenants made, not the formalities. If we lived on a planet with very little water (think of the "Dune" stories), some other ceremony would have to replace baptism.

I have suggested before that baptism in some respects, is not unlike choosing sides for some game.

"If you want to be on my side, step over this line" - (Or sign the roster, raise your right hand, put on a uniform etc etc.)

The commitment is what counts, not the action, all the action is is a token of the commitment. Clearly actions change- the endowment is adjusted all the time, the most recent changes allowing one to remain seated where before standing was required.

"The Ordinance" is an outward appearance connected to a covenant. The covenant is what does not change.

Cle

I like this idea... but how does it affect proxy work? If it's the commitment and covenant that is important, can't that be done in a spirit form in the spirit world. Why is the proxy work needed.

I would think this has something to do with the concept that they your need a body to do the ordinance. I know you can't baptize a spirit by immersion, which is why we do it, but that indicates to me that the "action," the outward ordinance "counts" as well.

[mfbukowski]

I like this idea... but how does it affect proxy work? If it's the commitment and covenant that is important, can't that be done in a spirit form in the spirit world. Why is the proxy work needed.

I would think this has something to do with the concept that they your need a body to do the ordinance. I know you can't baptize a spirit by immersion, which is why we do it, but that indicates to me that the "action," the outward ordinance "counts" as well.

I think- stressing the word think- because I certainly don't know, nor do I make any claim to knowledge on this subject- that one of the main reasons we do proxy work is to turn our hearts to "the fathers" and see all of humanity as one family.

As I get older I think more and more about the endless progression of those who are not yet here on this side of the veil and then the progression of generations as children grow, then become parents then the older generation passes to the other side.

I was talking recently to a brother who was telling me about being at a family gathering with lots of kids running around, and one repeatedly calling "Grandpa! Grandpa! come here and see this!". When the brother turned to see which child was speaking he was dumfounded to find that the child was not calling him, but his own SON.

The child was his great-grandchild, and "grampa" was his son.

One thinks of the phrase "the blood and sins of this generation" as well as the triumphs and wonders of technology, all products of "this generation" meaning those alive on the earth at this time. Yet we will all pass, and pass on our thoughts and ideas, what we have learned and how we have behaved to others who are younger who in turn will do the same for their children and grandchildren.

This must seem like endless repetition to God who has seen thousands of generations learn the things of this world, pass them on, and then return to dust in an endless parade of humanity, here for a few years then moving on, all learnin g the same lessons and making the same mistakes again and again.

In fact, in some small way, I think doing work for the dead by repeating rituals we have done for ourselves helps us see this very vividly. We are all in this together- they have done things for us we could not do for ourselves, and now we are doing for them what they cannot do for themselves. They taught us all we know and have accumulated - we are the recipients of all the wisdom of the past generations of humanity. They have taught us what works and what does not work, they have been both good examples and bad examples, they have given us their cultures and it is up to us to carry them on. Music, art, literature, science, philosophy, languages- all we are and all we know comes from them.

Watching the generations pass must almost seem like a ritual. You know what will happen before it does because you have seen it so many times before, promises made, promises kept, promises broken, lives broken contrasting with lives of joy and peace.

Each wave rises in the distance, approaches shore, then breaks on the sand to be seen no more- yet there is always another wave on the horizon, full with the potential for both joy and misery.

I don't doubt that proxy work helps others in ways I do not fully comprehend, but certainly I know it helps me feel brotherhood with those who have gone before, and even if it had no effect whatsoever on those who have passed on, it would be worth every second of my time spent to learn those lessons and feel that fellowship. And I am sure that that lesson itself can only be fully comprehended in this life which is so short and finite.

We have all eternity to comprehend the big picture, but only now to fully know what life is. If we don't learn it now, we never will.

[Thinking]

The commitment is what counts, not the action, all the action is is a token of the commitment. Clearly actions change- the endowment is adjusted all the time, the most recent changes allowing one to remain seated where before standing was required.

If the commitment is really what counts, then proxy work makes no sense. The belief in a physical resurrection also renders proxy work unnecessary.

[Brian 2.0]

The belief in a physical resurrection also renders proxy work unnecessary.

How?

[mfbukowski]

If the commitment is really what counts, then proxy work makes no sense. The belief in a physical resurrection also renders proxy work unnecessary.

A blanket assertion without an argument why you think what you think.

Not too convincing especially if proxy work is as much for us as it is for them. And even in the spirit, they also need to learn about us and why we would do work for them.

No, not convincing at all.

Edited July 7, 2013 by mfbukowski

[volgadon]

Martin Buber on signs:

It is a symbolization, a sensory presentation of a manifested truth, a perceptible reality which, no matter whether it is more or less "wondrous," always reminds people once again of that truth. In the same sense, after Moses says (Exod. 3:11): "Who am I that I should go to Pharaoh and that I should lead the children of Israel out of Egypt?" YHVH provides the assurance "Indeed I shall be present with you," and He promises Moses a "sign" which at first seems strange to us: that the people would come to this same mountain, where they would engage in the service of their God; and this is what must serve Moses as a sign that it is this same God who has sent him. We have to understand this as meaning: what is now only existent in words will then take on real existence. Then Moses will experience the mission of this God as an expression of His being; not as a spiritual mission, as now, but as a reality apparent to the senses.

-Martin Buber, "On the Bible," p. 53.

[mfbukowski]

You can only learn to surf while you are actually ON the wave, and waves don't last too long, especially when you only get one per lifetime.

Learning to surf by proxy isn't easy, but it's possible.

[Rivers]

How?

People could get the ordinances done when they have resurrected bodies.

I have always found it interesting that these ordinances are so important that people still need them after their dead.

[mfbukowski]

Martin Buber on signs:

It is a symbolization, a sensory presentation of a manifested truth, a perceptible reality which, no matter whether it is more or less "wondrous," always reminds people once again of that truth. In the same sense, after Moses says (Exod. 3:11): "Who am I that I should go to Pharaoh and that I should lead the children of Israel out of Egypt?" YHVH provides the assurance "Indeed I shall be present with you," and He promises Moses a "sign" which at first seems strange to us: that the people would come to this same mountain, where they would engage in the service of their God; and this is what must serve Moses as a sign that it is this same God who has sent him. We have to understand this as meaning: what is now only existent in words will then take on real existence. Then Moses will experience the mission of this God as an expression of His being; not as a spiritual mission, as now, but as a reality apparent to the senses.

-Martin Buber, "On the Bible," p. 53.

Thanks.

[mfbukowski]

People could get the ordinances done when they have resurrected bodies.

I have always found it interesting that these ordinances are so important that people still need them after their dead.

But the crucial lesson to learn is the value of life.

Besides, doctrinally, what body you are resurrected with is dependent on having these ordinances BEFORE one is resurrected. What is it? 1 Cor 15 something. Too late to look it up.

Celestial terrestrial bodies- remember that?

[mfbukowski]

Celestial terrestrial bodies- remember that?

1 Cor

15:35

35But some man will say, How are the dead raised up? and with what body do they come? 36Thou fool, that which thou sowest is not quickened, except it die: 37And that which thou sowest, thou sowest not that body that shall be, but bare grain, it may chance of wheat, or of some other grain: 38But God giveth it a body as it hath pleased him, and to every seed his own body. 39All flesh is not the same flesh: but there is one kind of flesh of men, another flesh of beasts, another of fishes, and another of birds. 40There are also celestial bodies, and bodies terrestrial: but the glory of the celestial is one, and the glory of the terrestrial is another. 41There is one glory of the sun, and another glory of the moon, and another glory of the stars: for one star differeth from another star in glory.

You get the body according to what glory you receive- no ordinances, no celestial body.

[volgadon]

Mormonism does not recognise a dichotomy between body and spirit. Together they are the soul. Spirit and element, inseparably connected, receiveth a fullness of joy. That is a big clue as to why physical ordinances are essential. They point towards the truth that spirit and matter unite into one.

[Darren10]

I imagine Moses was baptized. By modern-day revelation we know that Adam was baptized:

64 And it came to pass, when the Lord had spoken with Adam, our father, that Adam cried unto the Lord, and he was caught away by the Spirit of the Lord, and was carried down into the water, and was laid under the water, and was brought forth out of the water.

65 And thus he was baptized, and the Spirit of God descended upon him, and thus he was born of the Spirit, and became quickened in the inner man.

66 And he heard a voice out of heaven, saying: Thou art baptized with fire, and with the Holy Ghost. This is the record of the Father, and the Son, from henceforth and forever;

67 And thou art after the order of him who was without beginning of days or end of years, from all eternity to all eternity.

68 Behold, thou art one in me, a son of God; and thus may all become my sons. Amen.

We also know from the same chapter a purpose of baptism and the salvific affects of it as well as from the spririt and the atonement 9which all harmoniously play together):

59 That by reason of transgression cometh the fall, which fall bringeth death, and inasmuch as ye were born into the world by water, and blood, and the spirit, which I have made, and so became of dust a living soul, even so ye must be born again into the kingdom of heaven, of water, and of the Spirit, and be cleansed by blood, even the blood of mine Only Begotten; that ye might be sanctified from all sin, and enjoy the words of eternal life in this world, and eternal life in the world to come, even immortal glory;

60 For by the water ye keep the commandment; by the Spirit ye are justified, and by the blood ye are sanctified;

Moses Chapter 6

[Darren10]

Mormonism does not recognise a dichotomy between body and spirit. Together they are the soul. Spirit and element, inseparably connected, receiveth a fullness of joy. That is a big clue as to why physical ordinances are essential. They point towards the truth that spirit and matter unite into one.

I like that insight, Volgadon.

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

I've been preparing to teach on "laws and ordinances" per the Come Follow Me program outline.

In my preparation, one of the suggested references was to a talk which cited Joseph Smith as saying, "Ordinances instituted in the heavens before the foundation of the world, in the priesthood, for the salvation of men, are not to be altered or changed. All must be saved on the same principles."

Question: Can outward ordinances change and still be valid?

Question: Are ordinances actually salvific, in other words, can the ordinance bring salvation and can the lack of an ordinance prevent salvation?

Question: If ordinances are required, which ordinances? Will Nephi have to go through the modern temple ceremony? Will Moses need to be baptized by immersion? (Presuming obviously, that the lack of record indicates a lack of performance.)

Question: If the ordinances and performances of the Mosaic law were recognized to be "dead" but still taught to Nephite children to prevent their downfall/disillusion upon the elimination of that law, should we also teach our children that our present ordinances and performances are also types and shadows so that they are prepared for a day when these ordinances are also "done away"? Or are modern LDS versions the only acceptable and accurate ordinances as instituted in the heavens before the foundation of the world?

These are meant to be thoughtful, not critical questions and as such, I'm not looking for apologetic responses. I am looking for a way to facilitate the discussion in my class such that we move toward seeing symbols as such and valuing them as such without diminishing the importance of symbolic acts or conversely elevating them to the point that they are confused (over valued) with the principle to which they point.

Hope that makes sense.

From institute I remember reading all of Israel was baptized while passing under the Red (or Reed) sea, and thus delivered from Egypt (bondage unto salvation).

[canard78]

I've been preparing to teach on "laws and ordinances" per the Come Follow Me program outline.

In my preparation, one of the suggested references was to a talk which cited Joseph Smith as saying, "Ordinances instituted in the heavens before the foundation of the world, in the priesthood, for the salvation of men, are not to be altered or changed. All must be saved on the same principles."

Question: Can outward ordinances change and still be valid?

Yes. The baptismal prayer in Mosiah 18 is different to the one used today. The liquid used in sacrament has changed. The temple endowment has had several changes over the years. They all remain valid.

Question: Are ordinances actually salvific, in other words, can the ordinance bring salvation and can the lack of an ordinance prevent salvation?

No. But the lack of behaviour needed to keep the covenant can prevent salvation. Matt 25, parable of the Goats and Sheep, describes the righteous, those who will have eternal life. The simple description is of people who fulfilled the mandate "inasmuch as ye have served/cared for/visited/comforted the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.

All of the covenants are a promise to serve God by serving others. In this service we develop charity and become more Christlike. He is not offering us the option to walk the 4 or 5 gates carrying some "celestial hall-pass" (to quote Givens²).

If you look at all of the key ordinances, they are promises to serve God by serving other people.

Baptism

Sacrament

Priesthood

Endowment

Marriage

God is not interested in the ordinance, he is interested in the commitment being kept after making it through the ordinance.

Question: If ordinances are required, which ordinances? Will Nephi have to go through the modern temple ceremony? Will Moses need to be baptized by immersion? (Presuming obviously, that the lack of record indicates a lack of performance.)

Suggest you look at this thread which suggests a temple like experience happened to the people of 3 Nephi. I would imagine the actual ceremony that attended the teaching experience was different to what you would have today in a modern temple. But then your experience today would be different to someone going through the Nauvoo temple in the 1800s. Or the Salt Lake Temple in the late 1800s.

The manner of the ordinance is not important. The commitments and keeping them are.

So no, if Moses has made a commitment to 'mourn with those that mourn and stand in comfort with those stand in need of comfort' through some other outward expression of an inner conviction then I don't believe he will need to be re-baptised by proxy by a Mormon temple worker.

Question: If the ordinances and performances of the Mosaic law were recognized to be "dead" but still taught to Nephite children to prevent their downfall/disillusion upon the elimination of that law, should we also teach our children that our present ordinances and performances are also types and shadows so that they are prepared for a day when these ordinances are also "done away"? Or are modern LDS versions the only acceptable and accurate ordinances as instituted in the heavens before the foundation of the world?

Very interesting question. I'm not sure the people in the day of Moses thought much about them being 'types and shadows?' Were they taught that at the time? Even if they were, they were the ordinances they lived and died with. They were the applied process to make a covenant with God.

I'm not sure we should teach our children that they may pass (though I do know people who were very shocked when the temple ceremony changed in 1990 or 2005. Their reaction was to say that if it had to be changed it must have been wrong before. If it was wrong before then it was always wrong.

But the point of these ceremonies are symbols of the commitments we are making and then the fulfilling of those commitments, not the acts in the ordinances themselves.

These are meant to be thoughtful, not critical questions and as such, I'm not looking for apologetic responses. I am looking for a way to facilitate the discussion in my class such that we move toward seeing symbols as such and valuing them as such without diminishing the importance of symbolic acts or conversely elevating them to the point that they are confused (over valued) with the principle to which they point.

Hope that makes sense.

It does. Look forward to further conversation on the topic.

[Glenn101]

I do not know of the specific salvic properties of the ordinances. All I really know is that we were commanded to participate in certain ordinances in order to gain access or have the door unlocked for us to enable access to different levels or areas of the Kingdom of God. It's maybe like taking the citizenship oath. The oath itself does not make one a citizen. It is the seal of authority by a designated U.S. official that actually confirms the deed. But the oath is required.

The main thing for us, in my opinion, is that the ordinance we have are revealed to us through revelation, and they are necessary, on the ultimate level, to "fulfill all righteousness."

The wording on some ordinances may have been changed a bit, but the actual ordinances, as far as I know, have remained the same. I don't want to get into the temple stuff here.

Glenn

[CV75]

I am looking for a way to facilitate the discussion in my class such that we move toward seeing symbols as such and valuing them as such without diminishing the importance of symbolic acts or conversely elevating them to the point that they are confused (over valued) with the principle to which they point.

You seem to have assessed your class' needs and determined that the members need to "move toward seeing symbols as such and valuing them as such." So I think a question like, "What are symbols / what is their value?" might be a good place to start. Using baptism as an example, perhaps you can lead with your own thoughts or testimony about the importance of its symbolism, the principles entauled, and the act itself and invite others to share theirs.

Bouncing off the other ideas dscussed in this thread:

I think that another reason for the ordinances needing to be done in this world, whether for the living or for the dead, and regardless of whether their format may change from time to time, has to do with the key role of mortal servants of God being part and parcel of the doctrine of Christ with regards to the fulness of the Gospel in this world. While they are given keys to seal on both sides of the veil, they can only perform their service on this side of the veil, in a physical world. And as far as changes in the format, they are the only ones that can do that in this world, and it is by their record, or the books they are commissioned to keep in this world, we will be judged.

In 3 Nephi 11 (12:1), Christ commissions twelve disciples to carry out these ordinances which are of His doctrine (repentance, becoming as a little child, baptism by water and by fire, receive the witness, the record, the inheritance of the kingdom of God, and the oneness). This is what comprises the fulness--the essential elements as well as the actual fulfillment--of the Gospel as laid out in 3 Nephi 27 (that Jesus came into the world to do the will of His Father, because His Father sent Him, and that Jesus and His servants will judge the children of God according to their adherence to His doctrine, which includes the works or the ordinances).

So yes, the outward ordinances can be changed by proper authority and still be valid.

Yes, the ordinances are actually salvific and can bring salvation (or the lack thereof prevent salvation) according to the person’s willingness to receive them.

I believe all the ordinances that we have in the dispensation of the fulness of times are required. Nephi and Moses would be happy to submit if they haven’t received them, but I think there are many ways they could have received them already, despite our lack of access to a record.

I would say that the modern LDS versions of the ordinances are bona fide versions of those ordinances that were instituted in the heavens before the foundation of the world and are acceptable and accurate. Since these ordinances only have to be performed once, they are immediately done away, but the covenants and their benefits for the faithful endure forever. In line with AoF 9 there may yet be other ordinances yet to be set forth on this side of the veil.

[mercyngrace]

All -

Thanks for the comments! The lesson went fine.

A few specific responses:

CV75, I took my cue about how to present symbolism from 2 Ne 25:23-27 and Mosiah 13:27-31. The BOM being a template for our day, I felt it wise to acknowledge that we can, if we aren't careful either become so enamored of outward ordinances that we miss the inward principle (Jews failing to recognize Christ as an admittedly oversimplified example) or we can take outward ordinances so lightly that we forget the truths they point to.

My intent was to help the class members see that the ordinances have the specific purpose (among others) of directing our minds and hearts toward God and His higher law, the celestial law or law of Christ. We talked about the importance of remembering and the briefly touched on the danger of hardening our hearts (see the 2 Ne, reference) when there are changes in practices, policies, and even ordinances.

We discussed what the words "law" and "ordinance" mean - prescribed code of conduct and enactment - and how ordinances and laws both help us to get to know God's nature and character.

We discussed D&C 84 where is says that the powers of godliness are made manifest in the ordinances of the priesthood and we talked about what the word "manifest" means - to make clear and obvious to the mind or eye, to reveal to the senses - and how when we participate in ordinances, we can come to know God, which is life eternal (John 17:3).

We discussed the sacrament, as an example, and talked about the Last Supper and what happened there, including the washing of feet and the call to discipleship or to "have part of [Jesus]" through this act of communion and through the acts of service we perform for one another.

All in all, it went well.

I've got some service to perform myself at the moment but when I get back, sometime late this evening, I'll explain why I felt inspired to go in the direction that I did and I'll respond to some of the other comments.

[Thinking]

How?

I was taught that a body is necessary to complete the ordinance of baptism. If that is true, a person who accepts Jesus Christ as the savior could be baptized after the resurrection.

[emarkp]

I was taught that a body is necessary to complete the ordinance of baptism.

And last I heard it's supposed to be a body of flesh and blood, i.e. a mortal body.

[Palerider]

name='mercyngrace' timestamp='1373217027' post='1209276692']

All -

Thanks for the comments! The lesson went fine.

A few specific responses:

CV75, I took my cue about how to present symbolism from 2 Ne 25:23-27 and Mosiah 13:27-31. The BOM being a template for our day, I felt it wise to acknowledge that we can, if we aren't careful either become so enamored of outward ordinances that we miss the inward principle (Jews failing to recognize Christ as an admittedly oversimplified example) or we can take outward ordinances so lightly that we forget the truths they point to.

My intent was to help the class members see that the ordinances have the specific purpose (among others) of directing our minds and hearts toward God and His higher law, the celestial law or law of Christ. We talked about the importance of remembering and the briefly touched on the danger of hardening our hearts (see the 2 Ne, reference) when there are changes in practices, policies, and even ordinances.

We discussed what the words "law" and "ordinance" mean - prescribed code of conduct and enactment - and how ordinances and laws both help us to get to know God's nature and character.

We discussed D&C 84 where is says that the powers of godliness are made manifest in the ordinances of the priesthood and we talked about what the word "manifest" means - to make clear and obvious to the mind or eye, to reveal to the senses - and how when we participate in ordinances, we can come to know God, which is life eternal (John 17:3).

We discussed the sacrament, as an example, and talked about the Last Supper and what happened there, including the washing of feet and the call to discipleship or to "have part of [Jesus]" through this act of communion and through the acts of service we perform for one another.

All in all, it went well.

I've got some service to perform myself at the moment but when I get back, sometime late this evening, I'll explain why I felt inspired to go in the direction that I did and I'll respond to some of the other comments.

It seems to me that the Savior placed the ordinances in their proper perspective in Matthew 12:7:

"But if ye had known what this meaneth, I will have mercy, and not sacrifice, ye would not have condemned the guiltless."

The Weymouth translation renders it somewhat plainer:

"And if you knew what this means, 'It is mercy I desire, not sacrifice', you would not have condemned those who are without guilt."

Gill's exposition has this commentary:

"Our Lord taxes the Pharisees both with ignorance of the Scriptures, in which they pretended to be very knowing, and took upon them to be the interpreters of; and with inhumanity, for condemning innocent persons, the apostles, for rubbing a few ears of corn, for the refreshment of nature; which they would never have done, had they understood the word, and will of God; who prefers acts of humanity, compassion, and mercy, to the observance of rites and ceremonies; or had they the common affections of human nature, and those bowels of compassion which one man ought to show to another."

Obviously the "ordinances" are given to point us towards God, but I believe in God's eyes, it is the life we lead that is of import while the ordinances per se almost become meaningless.

I think Joseph over-reaches when he writes that the power of Godliness is manifested in the ordinances and begins to merit the same chastizement received by the Pharisees for their reliance on the outward trappings of the law.