canard78 Posted May 5, 2015 Posted May 5, 2015 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. And once again I repeat: you don't get to define the implied meaning imbued in the recommend questions. Hard luck.
BookofMormonLuvr Posted May 5, 2015 Posted May 5, 2015 CFR that anyone is adopting the keep your mind and mouth shut attitude you claim.http://www.mormondialogue.org/
canard78 Posted May 5, 2015 Posted May 5, 2015 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. Let's have a quick check shall we: “Do you have faith in and a testimony of God the Eternal Father; His Son, Jesus Christ; and the Holy Ghost?”“Do you have a testimony of the Atonement of Christ and of His role as Savior and Redeemer?”“Do you have a testimony of the Restoration of the gospel in these, the latter days?”“Do you sustain the President of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints as the prophet, seer, and revelator and as the only person on the earth who possesses and is authorized to exercise all priesthood keys? Do you sustain members of the First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles as prophets, seers, and revelators? Do you sustain the other General Authorities and local authorities of the Church?”Official source Umm.... nope... not seeing your questions in the first four at all.
Mystery Meat Posted May 5, 2015 Posted May 5, 2015 And once again I repeat: you don't get to define the implied meaning imbued in the recommend questions. Hard luck. What part of me repeating over and over again that it is only my opinion don't you get? I have already said my opinion is not binding on any one else, including you. Do I believe my opinion is correct, of course. Am I so presumptuous to assume I am smarter than the men leading the Church? Nope, in fact you can read the quote in my signature line to answer how I feel about such people. I will leave that up to them to figure out.
Mystery Meat Posted May 5, 2015 Posted May 5, 2015 (edited) Let's have a quick check shall we: Official source Umm.... nope... not seeing your questions in the first four at all. Seriously, did you ignore the posts where I said this was my opinion or where I said I had no desire to be in a position to make my opinion enforceable? Edited May 5, 2015 by lvjd66
Mystery Meat Posted May 5, 2015 Posted May 5, 2015 http://www.mormondialogue.org/ As I understand board rules, that does not satisfy the CFR. So as I understand it, you either have to retract your statement or support your assertion.
ttribe Posted May 5, 2015 Posted May 5, 2015 As I understand board rules, that does not satisfy the CFR. So as I understand it, you either have to retract your statement or support your assertion.Why are you issuing a CFR on a non-substantive issue that is clearly someone's perception of treatment?
BookofMormonLuvr Posted May 5, 2015 Posted May 5, 2015 As I understand board rules, that does not satisfy the CFR. So as I understand it, you either have to retract your statement or support your assertion.I guess they will have to ban me then, since I refuse to go through scores of posts to identify the wording that implies a "sit down and shut up" attitude towards questioners bold enough to express their viewpoints by some participants here. The posts are here for anyone to see.
Mystery Meat Posted May 5, 2015 Posted May 5, 2015 Why are you issuing a CFR on a non-substantive issue that is clearly someone's perception of treatment? Eye for an eye. I did it more to prove a point. Most of the CFRs I have received on this site are for similar and stupid reasons. It is the worst part about this site.
ttribe Posted May 5, 2015 Posted May 5, 2015 Eye for an eye. I did it more to prove a point. Most of the CFRs I have received on this site are for similar and stupid reasons. It is the worst part about this site.Okay, well at least you are honest about it.
Mystery Meat Posted May 5, 2015 Posted May 5, 2015 Okay, well at least you are honest about it. It is also why I am not going to pursue it further.
JLHPROF Posted May 6, 2015 Posted May 6, 2015 Lots of denominations have a type of priesthood. I guess you’re saying that Mormon priesthood is uniquely Mormon, and Catholic priesthood is uniquely Catholic. Also it sounds like you’re saying Mormon blessings are uniquely Mormon. I’m grateful for any blessings I receive, Mormon or otherwise. No that's not what I'm saying, and you know that."Mormon priesthood" and Mormon ordinances are the ONLY ordinances and authority recognized by God. Others are the works of men. An ordinance performed without "Mormon priesthood" is of no value or authority in the eyes of God. Period.
Garden Girl Posted May 6, 2015 Posted May 6, 2015 And again, the principle was true BEFORE Joseph got a hold of it.This attitude being adopted by yourself and several members here scares the heck out of me. Basically, you are advocating just keeping your mouths, and minds closed, and only pondering deeper things if given permission by the man with the "button"- and if anyone dares to, they are off the mark and not true Saints.That is not any type of Mormonism Joseph would recognize. The Saints took great delight in pondering the mysteries of eternity, and proffering their ideas. BoML...Why should the fact that I happily and faithfully follow our leaders, and sustain them as prophets, seers and revelators "scare the heck" out of you? I have a strong testimony of the Church, its leaders, and its doctrinal points. I also have an active brain and intellect... and love pondering deep doctrine and concepts (no permission required)... I have my views, by far the majority of which fall within the LDS doctrinal view... but I also differ from past prophets in some instances, i.e., age of earth, length of creation, a form of evolution, etc etc.. And I'm as true a Saint as there is...And the thought of the eternities is breathtaking... particularly as I approach my life's waning years... my heart beats just a little faster as I ponder the wonder of what awaits me...So you don't have to be scared for me... not in the least.. GG 4
Mystery Meat Posted May 6, 2015 Posted May 6, 2015 BoML...Why should the fact that I happily and faithfully follow our leaders, and sustain them as prophets, seers and revelators "scare the heck" out of you? I have a strong testimony of the Church, its leaders, and its doctrinal points. I also have an active brain and intellect... and love pondering deep doctrine and concepts (no permission required)... I have my views, by far the majority of which fall within the LDS doctrinal view... but I also differ from past prophets in some instances, i.e., age of earth, length of creation, a form of evolution, etc etc.. And I'm as true a Saint as there is...And the thought of the eternities is breathtaking... particularly as I approach my life's waning years... my heart beats just a little faster as I ponder the wonder of what awaits me...So you don't have to be scared for me... not in the least.. GG Well said.
mfbukowski Posted May 6, 2015 Posted May 6, 2015 I agree with this too, but it sounds like we approach it differently. The temple does work for me, and I find a lot of beauty and value to it, I just don't like it when our culture tries to compare our temple experiences to other religions in an effort to say, mine is better than yours, or mine has God’s blessing and yours is something less important and less blessed by God. I appreciate your comments, thanks for responding to my inquiry. oOf course, I never said that.
mfbukowski Posted May 6, 2015 Posted May 6, 2015 (edited) Let's have a quick check shall we:Official sourceUmm.... nope... not seeing your questions in the first four at all.The wording on your quote is right, the other is not Edited May 6, 2015 by mfbukowski
canard78 Posted May 6, 2015 Posted May 6, 2015 Seriously, did you ignore the posts where I said this was my opinion or where I said I had no desire to be in a position to make my opinion enforceable?I'm on a different time zone to the rest of you so am usually 8-hours behind the conversation which often means there are up to 10 new pages of content by the time I've logged back in. I either reply to posts as I catch up or have to read right to the end of the thread and then go back to the posts I wanted to reply to. I tend to just reply as I work through which is why people sometimes respond to one of my comments with a "the conversation has moved on."Regardless of that, I know it's your personal opinion and interpretation of the questions. That was exactly my point. You're adding meaning to the questions. If you only hold yourself to that added meaning then it's fine. My problem is that you seemed to feel that other people should also apply your meaning to their answers. If I were to say that "yes" I have a testimony of the restoration but the meaning I gave to that word and answer was polar opposites to your meaning, is that a problem for you? Are you comfortable with an individual defining what a testimony of the restoration means to them.
Mystery Meat Posted May 6, 2015 Posted May 6, 2015 I'm on a different time zone to the rest of you so am usually 8-hours behind the conversation which often means there are up to 10 new pages of content by the time I've logged back in. I either reply to posts as I catch up or have to read right to the end of the thread and then go back to the posts I wanted to reply to. I tend to just reply as I work through which is why people sometimes respond to one of my comments with a "the conversation has moved on."Regardless of that, I know it's your personal opinion and interpretation of the questions. That was exactly my point. You're adding meaning to the questions. If you only hold yourself to that added meaning then it's fine. My problem is that you seemed to feel that other people should also apply your meaning to their answers.If I were to say that "yes" I have a testimony of the restoration but the meaning I gave to that word and answer was polar opposites to your meaning, is that a problem for you? Are you comfortable with an individual defining what a testimony of the restoration means to them. Right now I am fine with such an interpretation as the question as it is currently framed invites a variety of interpretations. I, however, think it is the wrong interpretation. But I am not seeking to change how the questions are asked or desiring the authority to do so. But, if I had some of the views expressed by folks on this board I would not feel honest answering the temple recommend questions in the affirmative.
hope_for_things Posted May 6, 2015 Posted May 6, 2015 No that's not what I'm saying, and you know that."Mormon priesthood" and Mormon ordinances are the ONLY ordinances and authority recognized by God. Others are the works of men. An ordinance performed without "Mormon priesthood" is of no value or authority in the eyes of God. Period. Period, so let it be written, so let it be done. Feels good to be on the winning team, and that all those other sorry saps aren’t!
mfbukowski Posted May 6, 2015 Posted May 6, 2015 Period, so let it be written, so let it be done. Feels good to be on the winning team, and that all those other sorry saps aren’t!What is the purpose of sacraments or ordinances?
Mystery Meat Posted May 6, 2015 Posted May 6, 2015 (edited) Again we really have become a society and generation of wussies. Do I believe Mormon doctrine, practices, beliefs, ordinances, rights, covenants, etc. are better than other religions' practices, beliefs, ordinances, rights, covenants, etc.? You are darn right I do. If I didn't I wouldn't be a member of the LDS faith. Somewhere along the way making such a state became arrogant or even audacious. There is nothing arrogant about it. While I don't believe Mormonology has a monopoly on truth or the influence of the Holy Spirit, I do believe the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has a monopoly on God's sacred authority. There are good people every where who are trying their best. There is even value in other religious practices and beliefs. Yet, making a strong claim for the veracity of priesthood authority is somehow now arrogant or conceited. Are we that fragile as a society that such a claim is going to hurt someone's feelings? I went to school with a lot Catholics, Jews and Evangelicals. They think what we do in the Church lacks efficacy. Why should that hurt my feelings? That is their right to maintain such a belief. And these same people are some of my best friends. I am attending one of their weddings in a few days. Yet when we, as members of the "ONLY TRUE AND LIVING CHURCH", make a bold claim we are given statements such as: Feels good to be on the winning team, and that all those other sorry saps aren’t! (tell that to the Lord) OR The temple does work for me, and I find a lot of beauty and value to it, I just don't like it when our culture tries to compare our temple experiences to other religions in an effort to say, mine is better than yours, or mine has God’s blessing and yours is something less important and less blessed by God. Guess what, ours is better than the rest. Wanna know why its better? Because its not ours. Its God's. That is our message. That is why we have missionaries. It is better because it has real, lasting and eternal significance. It is better because it comes directly from God, not man, and He has directly commanded it. In short ours is better, because it is true. That does not mean that people who aren't LDS are terrible people. That does not mean they are stupid or should be pitied. Shoot, I will even say it doesn't mean other folks won't qualify for the Celestial Kingdom (but they will have to receive and accept these very same ordinances that are better than what they have now if they want to dwell with God). But if declaring truth as it has been revealed by God hurts people's feelings, well then I suppose we are in the good company of men (and women) who have hurt many feelings throughout the history of man by declaring God's Holy and Revealed word. /sidetrackrant Edited May 6, 2015 by lvjd66 3
Gray Posted May 6, 2015 Posted May 6, 2015 (edited) Again we really have become a society and generation of wussies. Do I believe Mormon doctrine, practices, beliefs, ordinances, rights, covenants, etc. are better than other religions' practices, beliefs, ordinances, rights, covenants, etc.? You are darn right I do. If I didn't I wouldn't be a member of the LDS faith. Somewhere along the way making such a state became arrogant or even audacious. There is nothing arrogant about it. While I don't believe Mormonology has a monopoly on truth or the influence of the Holy Spirit, I do believe the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has a monopoly on God's sacred authority. There are good people every where who are trying their best. There is even value in other religious practices and beliefs. Yet, making a strong claim for the veracity of priesthood authority is somehow now arrogant or conceited. Are we that fragile as a society that such a claim is going to hurt someone's feelings? I went to school with a lot Catholics, Jews and Evangelicals. They think what we do in the Church lacks efficacy. Why should that hurt my feelings? That is their right to maintain such a belief. And these same people are some of my best friends. I am attending one of their weddings in a few days. Yet when we, as members of the "ONLY TRUE AND LIVING CHURCH", make a bold claim we are given statements such as: (tell that to the Lord) OR Guess what, ours is better than the rest. Wanna know why its better? Because its not ours. Its God's. That is our message. That is why we have missionaries. It is better because it has real, lasting and eternal significance. It is better because it comes directly from God, not man, and He has directly commanded it. In short ours is better, because it is true. That does not mean that people who aren't LDS are terrible people. That does not mean they are stupid or should be pitied. Shoot, I will even say it doesn't mean other folks won't qualify for the Celestial Kingdom (but they will have to receive and accept these very same ordinances that are better than what they have now if they want to dwell with God). But if declaring truth as it has been revealed by God hurts people's feelings, well then I suppose we are in the good company of men (and women) who have hurt many feelings throughout the history of man by declaring God's Holy and Revealed word. /sidetrackrant I'm not sure why you think religious pluralism is for wussies. It may not appeal to personal pride as much as ecclesiasticism (I hope you'll forgive my taking a little liberty with these terms), but I don't believe it's the way of the wuss. Of course some people say the same thing about Jesus' teachings in the Sermon on the Mount. ETA: In fact in a tradition that emphasizes the importance of its own ecclesiastical superiority, advocating for pluralism is not the path of least resistance, by any means. Edited May 6, 2015 by Gray
Mystery Meat Posted May 6, 2015 Posted May 6, 2015 I'm not sure why you think religious pluralism is for wussies? Matthew 7:14 13 Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat:14 Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.
Gray Posted May 6, 2015 Posted May 6, 2015 (edited) Matthew 7:14 13 Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat:14 Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it. This doesn't directly speak to your comment on "wussies", but I doubt Jesus had a specific religious denomination in mind, but rather a way of living one's life. Consider this passage in Luke 9: John answered and said, "Master, we saw someone casting out demons in Your name; and we tried to prevent him because he does not follow along with us." 50But Jesus said to him, "Do not hinder him; for he who is not against you is for you." Edited May 6, 2015 by Gray
Mystery Meat Posted May 6, 2015 Posted May 6, 2015 This doesn't directly speak to your comment on "wussies", but I doubt Jesus had a specific religious denomination in mind, but rather a way of living one's life. Consider this passage in Luke 9: John answered and said, "Master, we saw someone casting out demons in Your name; and we tried to prevent him because he does not follow along with us." 50But Jesus said to him, "Do not hinder him; for he who is not against you is for you." My reference was not in relation to wussies, but to debunk the whole notion of pluralism as a feel good doctrine of man that has no lasting consequence or divine sanction. The passage in Luke 9 is a great scripture. But it does nothing to support pluralism. We don't know who the man was. But we do know he didn't hold any priesthood keys.
Recommended Posts