"room For All Levels Of Belief" Sacrament Meeting Talk

[canard78]

I definitely think we as members should do everything we can to make everyone feel welcome. We are all at different stages of faith. However, I think everyone needs to understand that the full blessings of the Gospel of Jesus Christ are available to those who do accept and believe certain things. Attending the temple is a sacred experience. One that I want every one to experience. However, if you do not believe in the restoration of the Gospel, you don't qualify. I still want such a person to come to church with me on Sunday until they have such a testimony. But I don't think that person should be surprised, or angry, or whiney when/if they are deprived of going to the temple (even for a family occasion) because they do not qualify.

I think it is stupid I have to qualify with the above, but I do. Otherwise I think what your bishop and stake president are doing is great!

Thankfully though, you don't get to provide the definition of what a testimony of the restoration means. That's between the individual and The Lord.

If someone goes to the temple with the active intention of deceit and no belief at all in the restoration then it is a mockery and on their head be it. But if someone is able to answer "yes" to the restoration question in good faith, even if they define it differently to you, then I think they are perfectly entitled to go.

[canard78]

We had fast Sunday on April 26th since it was our Ward Conference yesterday (and Stake Conference on the 19th). This is to be the overall theme for every Ward Conference from our SP ("All Are Welcome Here"). I didn't stay for the other meetings, but I've now heard that they were excellent too (I do wish I'd stayed). I'd also love to know how this theme is being discussed in other wards, but according to our Bishop, we're one of the first.

Sounds like you have a fantastic Bishop and SP. I think the future of the church will depend on having more people like that in leadership.

While orthopraxy might remain a common standard for a long time, I anticipate that orthodoxy will not.

[mfbukowski]

If you think that LDS ordinances are the only efficacious ones, that’s fine.  I don’t agree, and I don’t see God as being that limited in nature.  As the Given’s so often like to point out from D&C 49:8, there are “other holy men that ye know not of.”  Now I realize the Joseph also didn’t accept baptismal ordinances from other churches as valid, but that doesn’t mean Joseph always was consistent with applying these principles.  The principle that resonates with me is that God loves all creation and I don’t find a whole lot of value in us trying to judge who has authority and who’s ordinances are valid.  We’re all trying our best!  

Unfortunately no one else has the endowment.  That Thessolonian Theosis Thingy just doesn't do it for me and Amish Apotheosis is just not happening.

[mfbukowski]

The LDS church is in no way catholic in the universal definition. Therefore, you are incorrect.

That would seem a little hard to defend.   And you are not universal in the LDS definition so neener neener

[mfbukowski]

Oh I love how the scriptures define Christ.  I just disagree on how YOU think the scriptures define Christ.

And yes, Mormonism is separate from Judaism and Christianity under your definitions.

 

But you know this.  Why you are trying to make us out as claiming we are the same as other Christian religions I don't know.  We're not.  Don't want to be.  This is why I generally don't argue with "traditional" Christians.  I have no more reason to agree with their beliefs than I do to agree with a Muslim or a Hindu.

yup

[teddyaware]

Sounds like you have a fantastic Bishop and SP. I think the future of the church will depend on having more people like that in leadership.

While orthopraxy might remain a common standard for a long time, I anticipate that orthodoxy will not.

 

The only way way what you "anticipate" could come to pass is if the prophecies in scripture pertaining to the destiny of the Latter-day Saints prove to be false. In other words, what you anticipate is the wholesale apostasy of the LDS Church. But what you hope for will be in vain.

 

While it's true the Lord will allow the wheat (the faithful members) and the tares (the unbelieving members) of the Church to live and grow together within the Church structure until both camps are fully ripe, but the scriptures indicate when that day of full ripening occurs the Lord himself will separate the wheat from the tares and the tares will be cast out of the Church.

 

So I anticipate you are partially correct: There will be a growing number of unbelievers who for their own reasons will remain within the ranks of the Church and the Lord will allow them to exert a counterproductive influence within the Church, and this that the faithful saints might be tested in all things. But the days when the Lord will allow the unbelieving members to expert a spiritually destructive influence are strictly numbered, and after the unbelievers have served their purpose they will finally be "cut off." I imagine when the tares are cut off some of them might try to start their own offshoots of the Church, but those offshoots will dwindle and utterly fail. Here is one of the many prophecies that testify the hopes of those who would rejoice to see the Restored Church go into full state of apostasy will be dashed.

 

 4 But behold, in the last days, even now while the Lord is beginning to bring forth the word, and the blade is springing up and is yet tender—

 5 Behold, verily I say unto you, the angels are crying unto the Lord day and night, who are ready and waiting to be sent forth to reap down the fields;

 6 But the Lord saith unto them, pluck not up the tares while the blade is yet tender (for verily your faith is weak), lest you destroy the wheat also.

 7 Therefore, let the wheat and the tares grow together until the harvest is fully ripe; then ye shall first gather out the wheat from among the tares, and after the gathering of the wheat, behold and lo, the tares are bound in bundles, and the field remaineth to be burned. (D&C 86)

Edited May 5, 2015 by teddyaware

[Garden Girl]

I haven't read the entire thread, just the last couple of pages... for me, I'm all for being inclusive and welcoming... and applaud the Church's efforts to reach out... yet I don't want us to try and become so welcoming of diverse views or levels of faith that we weaken the Church or our doctrines... the gospel is the gospel, revealed and restored, and it is here for all those who want or are willing to accept it.  I don't want us to deviate from strong gospel principles just because there are those who may hold a different view or level of faith. 

 

GG

[Mystery Meat]

Thankfully though, you don't get to provide the definition of what a testimony of the restoration means. That's between the individual and The Lord.

If someone goes to the temple with the active intention of deceit and no belief at all in the restoration then it is a mockery and on their head be it. But if someone is able to answer "yes" to the restoration question in good faith, even if they define it differently to you, then I think they are perfectly entitled to go.

 

Thankfully, indeed. It is a job I would not want. However, if I were a Bishop (pray it never comes to that) I would rely on the spirit of discernment.

 

I do disagree that saying "yes" to the restoration question is enough. The Lord's house is a house of order. The path is narrow not wide. Few there will be who find it. So I say with all confidence that there are some limitations to what we can believe and still qualify to go to the temple. You and I may disagree on what those limitations are, but they are there. 

 

Few things will destroy the church faster than adoption of a believe what you will philosophy (or anything remotely close to it). The Church and its leaders have a responsibility to teach correct principals. In order to protect people from making covenants they are not ready to make or keep that may mean withholding temple recommends. 

 

Just because a person does not have a recommend, does not mean they should be excluded from worshiping and fellowshiping with us.

Edited May 5, 2015 by lvjd66

[JLHPROF]

 But if someone is able to answer "yes" to the restoration question in good faith, even if they define it differently to you, then I think they are perfectly entitled to go.

 

I agree with this.  But I don't believe someone can say "Joseph Smith wasn't a prophet but I believe in the restored gospel".

And if someone believes Joseph fell as a prophet at some point then anything "restored" after that point would also be suspect.

 

Separating a testimony of the restored gospel and a testimony of the prophet Joseph Smith is insincere as they are inseparable.

[stemelbow]

I haven't read the entire thread, just the last couple of pages... for me, I'm all for being inclusive and welcoming... and applaud the Church's efforts to reach out... yet I don't want us to try and become so welcoming of diverse views or levels of faith that we weaken the Church or our doctrines... the gospel is the gospel, revealed and restored, and it is here for all those who want or are willing to accept it.  I don't want us to deviate from strong gospel principles just because there are those who may hold a different view or level of faith. 

 

GG

I don't get this fear at all. NOt a little bit, to be honest. Sorry to sound so dismissive, but help me understand.

If the doctrines need tweaking, amending, editing, in order to align our thinking more closely with God's, what's to fear? It might be good for us to be open enough to accept that we need more light and more light may come from outside--afterall God loves all and works with anyone potentially.

[hope_for_things]

Unfortunately no one else has the endowment.  That Thessolonian Theosis Thingy just doesn't do it for me and Amish Apotheosis is just not happening.

 

I appreciate our temple rituals and glean much value from them, but I don’t see it as a strict requirement for salvation.  The endowment has gone through a vast evolution from early Mormonism and I anticipate that it will continue to evolve.

 

I’m pretty new to this board, but I have read through a few of your posts and found very thoughtful discussions taking place.  Would you care to elaborate on what you find unique about the Mormon endowment that is qualitatively superior to other religious practices?  

[strappinglad]

It really isn't a long step from believing that Joseph or Brigham or Thomas were just good men doing what they thought was God's will ,to believing that Christ was just a good man doing what He thought was God's will, to believing that God is just the manifestation of wishful thinking in humankind .That's why a lot of exmos become atheistic. They skip right out of any Christian tradition or any theistic or deistic thinking and throw it all under the bus.

Where does the scripture " If ye are not one , ye are not Mine " enter into the equation ?

[SeekingUnderstanding]

Where does the scripture " If ye are not one , ye are not Mine " enter into the equation ?

 

Right next to Joseph Smith saying he despises the idea of creeds and trying people because they err in doctrine. It's a convoluted mess to wade through.  

[Mystery Meat]

Right next to Joseph Smith saying he despises the idea of creeds and trying people because they err in doctrine. It's a convoluted mess to wade through.  

 

I do not see the conflict OR any conflict between the prophet's statement and requiring certain belief thresholds for qualifying to enter the temple.

[SeekingUnderstanding]

I do not see the conflict OR any conflict between the prophet's statement and requiring certain belief thresholds for qualifying to enter the temple.

I didn't see strappling lad as referencing the temple recommend, but you are right there is no conflict. That's what is interesting about them. The first three temple recommend questions ask broadly about your testimony of the Godhead, the atonement, and the restoration. The rest merely ask about how you live your life. I'd say the temple recommend questions are as far away from creeds as you could get.

[Mystery Meat]

I didn't see strappling lad as referencing the temple recommend, but you are right there is no conflict. That's what is interesting about them. The first three temple recommend questions ask broadly about your testimony of the Godhead, the atonement, and the restoration. The rest merely ask about how you live your life. I'd say the temple recommend questions are as far away from creeds as you could get.

 

Let me be clear: I think you could make the temple recommend much more specific, such as: Do you believe Joseph Smith is the prophet of the restoration and that through him Jesus Christ restored the power, authority and keys of the priesthood? Do you believe that the church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is the only place where such priesthood power, authority and keys are found on the earth today? Do you sustain President _______________ as a literal prophet, seer and revelator, appointed and called directly by God and accept that he is the only person on earth today who holds and is authorized by God to exercise all of those keys?

 

I don't see any conflict between what Joseph Smith said and any theoretical temple recommend questions such as the above.

Edited May 5, 2015 by lvjd66

[SeekingUnderstanding]

Let me be clear: I think you could make the temple recommend much more specific, such as: Do you believe Joseph Smith is the prophet of the restoration and that through him Jesus Christ restored the power, authority and keys of the priesthood? Do you believe that the church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is the only place where such priesthood power, authority and keys are found on the earth today? Do you sustain President _______________ as a literal prophet, seer and revelator, appointed and called directly by God and accept that he is the only person on earth today who holds and is authorized by God to exercise all of those keys?

 

I don't see any conflict between what Joseph Smith said and any theoretical temple recommend questions such as the above.

I wonder why the church doesn't indeed do just such a thing. Would you further support a question on whether the individuals believe in any deadly heresy's like Adam God, blood atonement,  evolution, a figurative fall, same sex marriage etc? How specific is too specific? 

 

Edited to add: The additional questions you ask still do not raise to the level of creeds in my opinion and would not pose any problems in meshing the two statements. I guess I just wonder at what point you stop. The brethren seem to draw the line at questions 1-3 and that is fine with me.

Edited May 5, 2015 by SeekingUnderstanding

[Mystery Meat]

I wonder why the church doesn't indeed do just such a thing. Would you further support a question on whether the individuals believe in any deadly heresy's like Adam God, blood atonement,  evolution, a figurative fall, same sex marriage etc? How specific is too specific? 

 

That is an eye of the beholder question. My opinion is that those are all peripheral issues. What does not lie outside of the periphery are:

 

1. Testimony of God the Eternal Father and our divine destiny to become like Him.

2. Testimony of Jesus Christ as the only begotten of the Father, His atonement and resurrection, faith in Him as the only means of returning to our Father's presence and a commitment to live by His teachings as contained in Holy Scripture and given by living prophets, seers and revelators.

3. Testimony of Joseph Smith as the Prophet of the Restoration and head of this Dispensation. That he held/holds all priesthood keys, power and authority. He was literally called of God and that his authority came from heaven, not of man.

4. Testimony in the truthfulness of the Book of Mormon and a testimony that it is the word of God.

5. Testimony that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is the only true and living church (Jesus's words, not mine) on the face of planet earth and the only Church with all of rights, ordinances, priesthoods, keys and doctrines that will enable a man/woman to receive a Celestial Glory.

6. Testimony that President ______________, is the ONLY person on earth today who holds and is authorized by GOD Himself to use all of the keys of the Priesthood. A testimony that the members of the 1st Presidency and Quorum of the 12 are called directly of God, and not man, and that each of them is a prophet, seer and revealator. 

[Gray]

That is an eye of the beholder question. My opinion is that those are all peripheral issues. What does not lie outside of the periphery are:

 

1. Testimony of God the Eternal Father and our divine destiny to become like Him.

2. Testimony of Jesus Christ as the only begotten of the Father, His atonement and resurrection, faith in Him as the only means of returning to our Father's presence and a commitment to live by His teachings as contained in Holy Scripture and given by living prophets, seers and revelators.

3. Testimony of Joseph Smith as the Prophet of the Restoration and head of this Dispensation. That he held/holds all priesthood keys, power and authority. He was literally called of God and that his authority came from heaven, not of man.

4. Testimony in the truthfulness of the Book of Mormon and a testimony that it is the word of God.

5. Testimony that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is the only true and living church (Jesus's words, not mine) on the face of planet earth and the only Church with all of rights, ordinances, priesthoods, keys and doctrines that will enable a man/woman to receive a Celestial Glory.

6. Testimony that President ______________, is the ONLY person on earth today who holds and is authorized by GOD Himself to use all of the keys of the Priesthood. A testimony that the members of the 1st Presidency and Quorum of the 12 are called directly of God, and not man, and that each of them is a prophet, seer and revealator. 

 

Number four isn't in the temple recommend interview, and many of the details of your other points aren't there either

[ALarson]

Number four isn't in the temple recommend interview, and many of the details of your other points aren't there either

Number three isn't in the temple recommend interview either, IIRC.

[Mystery Meat]

Number four isn't in the temple recommend interview, and many of the details of your other points aren't there either

 

I never said they were. I offered as my opinion that they could be without conflicting with Joseph Smith's statement on creeds.

 

I also offer it as my opinion (and MINE only, therefore not binding on anyone) that many of the points I covered above are implied in the questions as they stand now.

[ALarson]

I never said they were. I offered as my opinion that they could be without conflicting with Joseph Smith's statement on creeds.

 

I also offer it as my opinion (and MINE only, therefore not binding on anyone) that many of the points I covered above are implied in the questions as they stand now.

Sorry if I piled on.  I have to say, lvjd66, that your posts are always thoughtful and respectful.  I appreciate that and I get what you're saying above.  Everyone is offering opinions here and you are, of course, entitled to yours and I respect that (and enjoy reading your opinions too).  

[Senator]

I never said they were. I offered as my opinion that they could be without conflicting with Joseph Smith's statement on creeds.

 

I also offer it as my opinion (and MINE only, therefore not binding on anyone) that many of the points I covered above are implied in the questions as they stand now.

 

I find it interesting that the first three (if my numbering is correct ) uses the word "testimony". Come #4 it changes to the word "sustain" in regards to the presiding leadership of the church.

 

Do you feel that a "do you have a testimony of" is implied in Q4?

Edited May 5, 2015 by Senator

[Duncan]

I sometimes wonder why they don't ask questions in the TR thing about like when was the last time you forgave someone? When was the last time you helped someone who couldn't do anything for in return? stuff like that

[Senator]

I sometimes wonder why they don't ask questions in the TR thing about like when was the last time you forgave someone? When was the last time you helped someone who couldn't do anything for in return? stuff like that

 

Those are covered by that ever so nebulous last question.

Edited May 5, 2015 by Senator