Too Sacred To Share?

[mfbukowski]

MF, why do you think you got the whack by a 2'4? Were you seeking Him at that time?

I had been seeking since my early youth when I saw the flaws in what I had been taught in the church I belonged to previously.  By the age of 30, I had spent 20 years seeking, the last 10 studying philosophy in the university trying to find the answer.

 

But I don't know why I got whacked.  Maybe because I was so stubborn I needed it.  I am/was the most skeptical person you have ever met.  Maybe you can see it here on the board- I will argue with anyone about anything.  I wish I wasn't- I am working on it, but the progress is at a glacial pace.

 

I think God just knew that there is no way I would accept it without a whack in the head!

[Tacenda]

I had been seeking since my early youth when I saw the flaws in what I had been taught in the church I belonged to previously. By the age of 30, I had spent 20 years seeking, the last 10 studying philosophy in the university trying to find the answer.

But I don't know why I got whacked. Maybe because I was so stubborn I needed it. I am/was the most skeptical person you have ever met. Maybe you can see it here on the board- I will argue with anyone about anything. I wish I wasn't- I am working on it, but the progress is at a glacial pace.

I think God just knew that there is no way I would accept it without a whack in the head!

Well maybe there is hope for me yet, but it might take some time and more effort. Thanks for sharing that.

[mfbukowski]

 

We need to keep in mind that it is just a goal for human existence based on a new set of social and economic circumstances, hopefully generating a new view and idea of human nature that is different from our current understanding of it within a capitalist system.

That underlined part is exactly precisely the problem with it!

 

It's tearing down what DOES work, without knowing if socialism WILL work, and indeed with much much evidence to the contrary.

 

"Let's burn down the house, so we can live in a tent and hopefully become better people"

 

I just want to state my point as briefly as I can instead of the rambling post above, and now I will shut up about it. 

[mfbukowski]

Well maybe there is hope for me yet, but it might take some time and more effort. Thanks for sharing that.

I am absolutely convinced that the gospel is the best rational way to live the best life.  I don't care or worry about church history, I don't care if Joseph dug for money, if he was a fake, had 49 wives or whatever (I do not believe any of those things- just saying that I would not care if they were true)

 

The lifestyle the church teaches and the values it promulgates are all that is important to me- PLUS I am absolutely convinced that this is where God wants me to be.  I am convinced that if everyone on earth actually followed what the church teaches, this would become a paradise on earth.

 

So in a very real way, Mormonism presented to me a way of life that worked, where I saw communism as totally deficient and contradictory.  All the other stuff doesn't matter one whit.  It's fluff.   Did I care about Marx's personal life?  Why would I ?  All humans are flawed!!  (Joseph included- Monson included)  I saw no importance in even going down that road.   Do I care if the Book of Mormon is historical?  I have a testimony it is, but does it really matter to my soul if it is historical?  Not one iota.  I go by what it teaches as principles of life.

 

Those principles work.  End of story.

[mbh26]

And based on the comments I've heard since, perhaps a really good reason not to share such things isn't because they are too sacred, but because other Church members might think you're weird and crazy

 

Saying I know something very miraculous and supernatural but I can't tell because it's too sacred allows me to testify that miracles happen, perhaps even makes me look special because I received the revelation, but it also protects from scrutiny and criticism of inconsistencies that might show up. 

[mbh26]

I don't care if Joseph dug for money, if he was a fake, had 49 wives or whatever (I do not believe any of those things- just saying that I would not care if they were true)

 

It wouldn't bother you if Joseph was a fake?  How do you know that God wants everyone to be Mormon and not some other religion?  One of the things the Church spends the most money and labor on is converting everyone to Mormonism.  Without those ordinances you're damned according to Mormon doctrine.  So it wouldn't be enough for me to know this is where God wants me to be.  I really don't follow this.  Unless the Church is everything it claims to be, it's guilty of defrauding a lot of people of their time and money. 

[mfbukowski]

Saying I know something very miraculous and supernatural but I can't tell because it's too sacred allows me to testify that miracles happen, perhaps even makes me look special because I received the revelation, but it also protects from scrutiny and criticism of inconsistencies that might show up. 

Show up in your mind, not the testifiers mind.

 

And there is nothing more in these cases.  That's like finding an "inconsistency" in your love for your wife.  THAT is what religion IS- not statements about facts.  In case you hadn't noticed, religion is non-falsifiable, kind of like morality.

 

You cannot prove that "It's wrong to kill babies" by showing evidence or facts.  Either you think it is wrong or you don't.

 

Prove that I love my wife or don't love her.  How do you know I am not faking to get her millions?  (I wish!)

 

We have been over this a billion times at least.  There are no facts that can show that Jesus died for your sins- or didn't.  It cannot be proven nor disproven factually.  Even if you found his bones and could prove it- totally impossible- it would not show that he was not the savior, just that he did not rise.   Good luck in proving something did not happen.

 

We cannot even prove that aliens did not land on the moon yesterday- or in a person's backyard in Phoenix yesterday. 

 

You cannot even prove historically that Jesus was a "great teacher" since most of what he taught was already preached by others in the East for centuries. 

 

History is irrelevant to these kinds of beliefs.

Edited January 7, 2014 by mfbukowski

[mfbukowski]

It wouldn't bother you if Joseph was a fake?  How do you know that God wants everyone to be Mormon and not some other religion?  One of the things the Church spends the most money and labor on is converting everyone to Mormonism.  Without those ordinances you're damned according to Mormon doctrine.  So it wouldn't be enough for me to know this is where God wants me to be.  I really don't follow this.  Unless the Church is everything it claims to be, it's guilty of defrauding a lot of people of their time and money. 

I suggest you take your case to court and prove it to a jury.  After all, juries determine what is factual don't they?

 

And of course I never said that God wants everyone to be a Mormon-  and it's sad you don't know Mormon doctrine better because it does not preach that "Without those ordinances you're damned according to Mormon doctrine "  I know you know Mormon doctrine better than that- you are just stirring the pot.

[mfbukowski]

I had another thought on the communism thing.

 

You know on all these science fiction stories, everyone is afraid of going back in time because they might cause some unforseen consequence that might alter the world forever?  Like maybe they save someone who was supposed to die and then their child becomes another tyrant who causes a nuclear war, and kills off mankind or something like that?

 

But Communists just KNOW that if the can kill capitalism, the world will be a paradise.  It's never worked before, but THIS time......

 

You wanna talk about faith?  That's more than I can muster.  That some collection of bureaucrats will know just the exact formula to turn humanity into god-like beings ?

 

Pardon me while I go off the the DMV to stand in line, to get a dose of reality.  I am sure I will be more god-like when I return.

[EllenMaksoud]

Can someone explain to me the concept of "too sacred to share"; particularly, in the context of giving a testimony?  Just about every FT meeting, someone will get up and say, "Because of spiritual experiences too sacred to share, I KNOW ..."  To me, this is the Mormon equivalent of "Because I said so ..."

 

Where did this idea of "too sacred to share" even come from?  I don't remember any event in scripture being described as "too sacred to share."  In fact, our very own JS shared his experiences in significant detail.  Can you imagine how the sacred grove narrative would have caught on had he said, "I went into that grove and then had an experience that was too sacred to share, but I KNOW that the Church has been restored on earth"?  I can't imagine that there would be 15 Mormons today; nevertheless, 15 MILLION.

 

So when did this "too sacred to share" stuff start?  And why does it continue?  By it's very definition, a testimony is a description of sights, sounds and events.  "I saw two personages ..." "There was a bright light ..." "I heard a voice that said ..."  If you went into a court of law and said, "I KNOW the defendant is guilty because of an experience I had that was too sacred to share," the judge might arrest you for contempt.  She certainly wouldn't allow a jury to even consider what you had to say.

 

In the same light, imagine if a friend tried to convince you to dine at his favorite restaurant and said, "I've had experiences there that were too culinary to share, but I KNOW Applebee's is the true restaurant."  Would you run out and make reservations for your wedding anniversary?  Not if you want to stay married, I imagine.

 

So why do we think that our "too sacred to share" experiences should have any more influence in spreading the Gospel?  And, by the way, from whom are we keeping these experiences secret from?  Can we tell them to our spouses and close friends?  Are we just keeping them secret from those pearl-loving swine?

 

Can someone provide me an explanation, provided it's not too sacred to share?

I've struggled at times with sharing my vision in Kirtland. It was very easy to share about it to Mormons, but not so easy with nons.  Of course when there is doubt about sharing it, then thought of the scripture, Matt 10:32, "Whosoever therefore shall confess me before men, him will I confess also before my Father which is in Heaven".

 

Another aspect of this might also be the explicit Mormon videos on Youtube. I as an unendowed Mormon can get in a lot of trouble if I admit that I have watched any of them. It all gets rather sublime.

[mbh26]

And of course I never said that God wants everyone to be a Mormon-

 

I know you never said that, but isn't that a fundamental doctrine of what the Church does right now.  Everyone is invited to be baptized.  If they don't have that done, their progression is stopped until they are baptized for the dead in the Mormon church.  The discussions I taught clearly stated that unless you are baptized in the Mormon church you haven't really accepted Jesus Christ. That's what the Brethren think.  That's what they order you to believe, accept, and support as a member.  So how could you be comfortable in Mormonism and not believe that everyone must be a member or have their progression halted? 

 

Not trying to stir the pot or be disrespectful, just trying to understand how you account for everything in your conclusion.  If it were someone not capable of as much in depth reasoning as yourself, I'd just assume they had put their blinders on. 

 

 

 

Even if you found his bones and could prove it- totally impossible- it would not show that he was not the savior, just that he did not rise.

 

That would be terribly disappointing evidence.  At the very least it would prove the resurrection didn't happen in the way the writers of the gospels claimed it did.  How could He be the Savior if He didn't rise? 

 

I knew a Mormon once who claimed that it didn't matter whether or not Joseph Smith actually saw God and Jesus Christ.  The only thing that mattered was that he thought he did.  Would you agree with that? 

Edited January 7, 2014 by mbh26

[Garden Girl]

The discussions I taught clearly stated that unless you are baptized in the Mormon church you haven't really accepted Jesus Christ. That's what the Brethren think.  That's what they order you to believe, accept, and support as a member.  So how could you be comfortable in Mormonism and not believe that everyone must be a member or have their progression halted? 

 

 

 

 

Hello mbh...

The two statements I underlined are actually incorrect in that IMO you are either misunderstanding or misrepresenting both of these points...

1) I can't beieve the discussions you taught conveyed clearly that the Brethren actually think that unless one is baptized into the "Mormon church" a person hasn't really accepted Jesus Christ... 

2) And let's get something straight... we are not "ordered" to "believe, accept, and support" anything as members... Yes, we do have certain doctrines and theology that are very much a part of our faith, which are presented to all who want to know what we teach... we are free to accept these teachings or not, even as members. 

We have certain ordinances and make certain covenants... but again, no one is "ordered" to accept or believe in these ... We are invited to pray about the teachings of the Church to gain a testimony... And if we want to attend the temple we are interviewed by the bishop/stake presidency in regard to our acceptance of our doctrines... because why attend the temple where we are called upon to make sacred covenants if we don't have a belief in the teachings and covenants we receive in the temple.  Again, we choose what we believe, accept, and support, and participate accordingly.

 

GG

Edited January 7, 2014 by Garden Girl

[teddyaware]

Hello mbh...

The two statements I underlined are actually incorrect in that IMO you are either misunderstanding or misrepresenting both of these points...

1) I can't beieve the discussions you taught conveyed clearly that the Brethren actually think that unless one is baptized into the "Mormon church" a person hasn't really accepted Jesus Christ... 

2) And let's get something straight... we are not "ordered" to "believe, accept, and support" anything as members... Yes, we do have certain doctrines and theology that are very much a part of our faith, which are presented to all who want to know what we teach... we are free to accept these teachings or not, even as members. 

We have certain ordinances and make certain covenants... but again, no one is "ordered" to accept or believe in these ... We are invited to pray about the teachings of the Church to gain a testimony... And if we want to attend the temple we are interviewed by the bishop/stake presidency in regard to our acceptance of our doctrines... because why attend the temple where we are called upon to make sacred covenants if we don't have a belief in the teachings and covenants we receive in the temple.  Again, we choose what we believe, accept, and support, and participate accordingly.

 

GG

D&C 138 is the big game changer on this point. Although D&C 76 reveals the same principle (that the only way to gain entry into any of the kingdoms of glory is through accepting Jesus Christ and His Gospel through the priesthood authority of the Restored Church), it's D&C 138 that leaves no wiggle room. According to what is written therein, only the legitimate Priesthood authority, as found in the Restored Church of Jesus Christ, has the power to administer the necessary ordinances of salvation needed in order for one to enter into even into the lowest kingdom of glory.

 

In this regard, I always challenge LDS-Church members to read D&C 138 with a mind cleared of preconceived notions, because by so doing, if the mind is open, new light and knowledge will burst forth upon the consciousness. Here's an example to what you'll find there (pay particular attention to the portions in bold italic):

30 But behold, from among the righteous, he organized his forces and appointed messengers, clothed with power and authority, and commissioned them to go forth and carry the light of the gospel to them that were in darkness, even to all the spirits of men; and thus was the gospel preached to the dead.

31 And the chosen messengers went forth to declare the acceptable day of the Lord and proclaim liberty to the captives who were bound, even unto all who would repent of their sins and receive the gospel. (DC 138)

And further,

32 Thus was the gospel preached to those who had died in their sins, without a knowledge of the truth, or in transgression, having rejected the prophets.

33 These were taught faith in God, repentance from sin, vicarious baptism for the remission of sins, the gift of the Holy Ghost by the laying on of hands, (D&C 138)

And further,

57 I beheld that the faithful elders of this dispensation, when they depart from mortal life, continue their labors in the preaching of the gospel of repentance and redemption, through the sacrifice of the Only Begotten Son of God, among those who are in darkness and under the bondage of sin in the great world of the spirits of the dead.

58 The dead who repent will be redeemed, through obedience to the ordinances of the house of God,

59 And after they have paid the penalty of their transgressions, and are washed clean, shall receive a reward according to their works, for they are heirs of salvation.(D&C 138)

 

The fact that all men must eventually accept the Gospel of Christ, at the hands of those who hold the true priesthood authority of God, is a glorious doctrine and there is nothing at all wrong with it. The only thing that could be construed as "wrong" about it, by some, is that people who are now bitterly ant-Mormon are going to have to humble themselves and receive salvation by means of the living priesthood authority of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. For now, this may seem to many to be a very grievous and bitter pill to swallow, but I suspect by the time the opportunity comes, the Gospel message and priesthood authority of the Latter-day Saints will be received with much joy and gladness. 

Edited January 7, 2014 by teddyaware

[mbh26]

1) I can't beieve the discussions you taught conveyed clearly that the Brethren actually think that unless one is baptized into the "Mormon church" a person hasn't really accepted Jesus Christ... 

 

I wish I could find those manuals.  Anyone have any idea where I could find the discussions we once had to present word for word during the 90s?  We had to memorize them.  I wish I remembered things I memorize now as well as I can still remember the discussions.  The second discussion during my time from 1995-1997 states, "Help the investigators understand that only by being baptized in the LDS church have they truly accepted Jesus Christ."  I don't see why this is so controversial.  You're actually saying you don't believe that's what the manual said? 

 

If there is life after death and it turns out that Mormonism wasn't the only Church with the authority to act in God's name, I'm going to be very angry and find myself screaming to God for justice, probably in vain.  I get the impression that this wouldn't bother mfbukowski.  It seems like he would say, it was still a good thing even if it wasn't true.  Perhaps I'll have to be able to say this to if I really want to be cured, but right now I can't see how one could not feel cheated if that's how the truth plays out. 

Edited January 7, 2014 by mbh26

[Calm]

 

Pardon me while I go off the the DMV to stand in line, to get a dose of reality.  I am sure I will be more god-like when I return.

Driving around in something quite capable of giving life or death is godlike enough for me today.

[Calm]

I know you never said that, but isn't that a fundamental doctrine of what the Church does right now.  Everyone is invited to be baptized.  If they don't have that done, their progression is stopped until they are baptized for the dead in the Mormon church. 

This never made sense to me since Judgment hasn't occurred yet where we are divided into kingdoms. Won't we all waiting together to move on to the next stage of eternity?

[Calm]

 

The fact that all men must eventually accept the Gospel of Christ, at the hands of those who hold the true priesthood authority of God, is a glorious doctrine and there is nothing at all wrong with it.

Are you saying all will have to be baptised or that all will be taught the Gospel, realize it is true and that Christ is their Lord even if they refuse to accept him through the Atonement as well?

[teddyaware]

Are you saying all will have to be baptised or that all will be taught the Gospel, realize it is true and that Christ is their Lord even if they refuse to accept him through the Atonement as well?

Hi Cal,

Rather than spelling the whole thing out plainly myself, carefully read, study and ponder D&C 138 for yourself. But before you do so, be sure to temporarily put aside all your previous ideas and conceptions of how you think the Gospel is preached to the dead. I repeat, in order to get the most out of this exercise, you must temporarily put aside and suspend what you think you know about the subject of salvation for the dead and then very slowly and carefully, phrase by phrase, read and absorb each verse of D&C 138 on its own merits, without stopping to cross reference or worry about what you're reading conflicting with what you think you already know.

Before D&C 138 was added to the canon, I knew that if it ever was added it would be a game changer for the Church; reason being that it goes well beyond D&C 76 in specific detail as how the program of preaching the Gospel to the dead is carried out and what obligations and performances are required of the dead before they can be redeemed and receive salvation in one of the Father's many mansions of glory.

Recently we've been talking about what constitutes the "meat" of the Gospel. Well, if one can read, digest and thoroughly comprehend what's written in D&C 138, that person will have feasted on a platter of rich, satisfying and spiritually nutritious Gospel "meat." Enough said. The bottom line is that I don't think it would be right for me to spell things, only to deprive you of the joy that will come if you can figure it out for yourself...

Edited January 7, 2014 by teddyaware

[mfbukowski]

Driving around in something quite capable of giving life or death is godlike enough for me today.

Wow that is seriously quite an insight!

 

Compared to chipping flint for the next arrowhead, since we lost the last one in the deer that got away, we are indeed godlike even today.

[mfbukowski]

This never made sense to me since Judgment hasn't occurred yet where we are divided into kingdoms. Won't we all waiting together to move on to the next stage of eternity?

Such are the dangers of thinking we actually know what we are talking about.

[Tacenda]

Wow that is seriously quite an insight!

Compared to chipping flint for the next arrowhead, since we lost the last one in the deer that got away, we are indeed godlike even today.

Yep, that's why I get panic attacks on the freeway now. Knowing I can take someone's life in an instance, and it sucks!

Edited January 7, 2014 by Tacenda

[Calm]

Hi Cal,

Rather than spelling the whole thing out plainly myself, carefully read, study and ponder D&C 138 for yourself..

what makes you think that I haven't?

It speaks of the dead who repent...what of those who do not in your view...or do you believe all must repent in the end?

[Calm]

Yep, that's why I get panic attacks on the feeeway now. Knowing I can take someone's life in an instance, and it sucks!

Not to add to your anxiety I hope, but to encourage people not to relax at the wrong time.....

"All driving can be dangerous. Fatalities have been recorded as slow as 12 miles per hour on non-belted occupants. Most crashes occur at speeds less than 40 miles per hour. As for the length of your trip making a difference – 75% of traffic accidents occur within 2.5 miles of your home."

http://wellness.missouri.edu/DriveSafe/facts.html

This happened to a little girl when we lived in Kansas. Everyone else walked away without a scratch or even whiplash because they were belted in. She was standing up in the middle of the car and was thrown when they were hit by another car...I think the total speed was under 30 miles an hour. They were just driving home from the local supermarket. People relax in familiar territory, thinking the trip is over with too soon or hasn't quite started....

Edited January 7, 2014 by calmoriah

[teddyaware]

what makes you think that I haven't?

It speaks of the dead who repent...what of those who do not in your view...or do you believe all must repent in the end?

The only ones who won't ultimately come unto God and repent are the sons of perdition. All the rest will repent and be redeemed in the due time of the Lord, to come forth and receive an inheritance in one of God's many mansions of glory.

 

"110 And heard the voice of the Lord saying: These all shall bow the knee, and every tongue shall confess to him who sits upon the throne forever and ever;

111 For they shall be judged according to their works, and every man shall receive according to his ownworks, his own dominion, in the mansions which are prepared;" D&C 76)

[Garden Girl]

Hello mbh and Teddy

 

You both have missed my point... mbh, you spoke of the Brethren thinking that a person has not really accepted Jesus Christ unless they are baptized into the Mormon Church... I stand by my view that this is incorrect (manual or no manual).... there are people of other faiths who have indeed accepted Jesus Christ as their Savior and Redeemer just as faithfully as we LDS, sometimes even more so when I think of some of the LDS I know...  when one of these people hears and accepts the gospel as we believe it to be, restored, and they are then baptized into the Church by someone with priesthood authority, that adds to their faith and understanding, and opens them to new light and understanding and the saving ordinances of Christ's restored church...  I firmly believe in the necessity of priesthood authority and the truthfulness and fulness of the gospel ... but I'm not so arrogant as to ever suggest that individuals of other faiths have not really accepted Jesus Christ.  And for those who didn't have the opportunity in this life hear the restored gospel, will be taught and given that opportunity beyond the veil.  And they will have agency... even there... to accept or not...

 

And that brings me to the statement that we are ordered to believe, etc... We put our doctrines and teachings forward... stating clearly that this is what we believe is necessary to progress and become exalted in God's Kingdom... persons are then able to choose to accept these things or not... but they are never ordered to do so... they make a choice based on their agency.  The Lord will judge how fully they understood...

 

GG