CV75 Posted June 30, 2015 Posted June 30, 2015 I have, in recent days, seen some calling out Christians for not living up to Christ's so-called doctrine of inclusion. My question is this: does such a doctrine even exist? I don't think it does. Yes, the Gospel was eventually made available to all, but since when has "wide is the gate and all incompassing is the path" been the motto of Christendom? Christ, after all, did not come to unite but to divide (the wicked from the righteous). Heaven, exaltation, membership and discipleship have always been marked by seemingly impossible demands, including denying oneself of unholy natural tendencies. Christ doesn't seem to concerned about excluding the unrepentant wicked from His kingdom. I am not either.Moronit 7: 12-13, 16 and 2 Nephi 26: 33 speak to a very liberal doctrine of invitation; inclusion would naturlly follow for the receptive. But obviously not for those who would pervert the invitation!
california boy Posted June 30, 2015 Posted June 30, 2015 Why does the church try to home teach even the most inactive member who has no interest in living the commandments if a member does not want his name on the records of the church, will a bishop remove his name if the member is not repenting? how does the parable of the lost sheep fit in with who you think Christ is?There is a saying I have heard repeated. What you think of Christ largely determine what kind of person you are. 3
JLHPROF Posted June 30, 2015 Posted June 30, 2015 (edited) Why does the church try to home teach even the most inactive member who has no interest in living the commandments if a member does not want his name on the records of the church, will a bishop remove his name if the member is not repenting?how does the parable of the lost sheep fit in with who you think Christ is?There is a saying I have heard repeated. What you think of Christ largely determine what kind of person you are. There is a parable of the lost sheep.There is no parable of the lost wolf. The shepherd will go after his sheep (those who have accepted his leadership but wandered) to bring them back to the flock.The shepherd will not go after a wolf (those who actively choose to work against Christ's will) to place them among the flock. We get to decide whether we wish to be sheep or wolves. Edited June 30, 2015 by JLHPROF 1
Kenngo1969 Posted June 30, 2015 Posted June 30, 2015 I posted similar sentiments on another thread, and I think they're relevant here. I had a mission president who said that God loves everyone; God trusts only a few. The first is free, the second is earned. I don't want God to simply be able to love me; I want Him to be able to trust me. "Ken, I love you," is one thing; "Ken, you've been faithful over a few things; I'll make you ruler over many things. Enter into the joy of your Lord" is quite another. 1
Auggybendoggy Posted June 30, 2015 Posted June 30, 2015 Hi everyone! Excited to interact with everyone on the forum. It seems to me that people work with different sets of definitions regarding inclusivism/exclusivism. To some inclusivism is meant to mean salvation, while to other's it's about God's love. The difficulty I see for exclusivists is the doctrine of free will and it's compatibility with exclusivism. What happens to a person who doesn't do what it takes to be saved because they never heard ie. people living in Hawaii at the time of Christ. But the rabbit hole goes deeper than just that, epistomology becomes a big question mark as far as even if they heard, what if they don't have the capacity to understand? As a Universalist (non LDS) I myself am an inclusivist. I've been to convinced of God's unfailing love for all. 1
Mystery Meat Posted June 30, 2015 Author Posted June 30, 2015 God's love is unconditional. God's acceptance is conditioned on repentance and obedience. 3
Popular Post Calm Posted June 30, 2015 Popular Post Posted June 30, 2015 What happens to a person who doesn't do what it takes to be saved because they never heard ie. people living in Hawaii at the time of Christ. LDS doctrine covers these types of situation by the doctrine that in the postmortal spirit world, everyone will have the chance to learn the truths of the Gospel and much, much more, have a chance to repent and accept Christ and his Atonement before being judged. The state of those needing to learn the basics of the gospel is described as being in "Spirit Prison" though I prefer to use the term "spirit school" since I don't believe anyone is being punished for ignorance, which the term "prison" implies. It is a restriction though, just as someone is restricted from workng in a hospital as a doctor until they learn how to be a doctor and demonstrate proficiency at it no matter how much they want to help those who are sick. The fulness of God's blessings can only come to us if we understand the purpose of those blessings (and probably other things, I think even those who have heard the Gospel in this life will have a lot to learn...iow, there may not be much difference between some of those in spirit prison and many in paradise. See Gospel Principles manual for very basic treatment: https://www.lds.org/manual/gospel-principles/chapter-41-the-postmortal-spirit-world?lang=eng The Apostle Peter referred to the postmortal spirit world as a prison, which it is for some (see 1 Peter 3:18–20). In the spirit prison are the spirits of those who have not yet received the gospel of Jesus Christ. These spirits have agency and may be enticed by both good and evil. If they accept the gospel and the ordinances performed for them in the temples, they may leave the spirit prison and dwell in paradise.Also in the spirit prison are those who rejected the gospel after it was preached to them either on earth or in the spirit prison. These spirits suffer in a condition known as hell. They have removed themselves from the mercy of Jesus Christ, who said, “Behold, I, God, have suffered these things for all, that they might not suffer if they would repent; but if they would not repent they must suffer even as I; which suffering caused myself, even God, the greatest of all, to tremble because of pain, and to bleed at every pore, and to suffer both body and spirit” (D&C 19:16–18). After suffering for their sins, they will be allowed, through the Atonement of Jesus Christ, to inherit the lowest degree of glory, which is the telestial kingdom. Read the whole text (won't take very long even if you use the online version and read the scriptures linked to) for a great overview/framework for LDS discussions: https://www.lds.org/manual/gospel-principles?lang=eng 5
mfbukowski Posted June 30, 2015 Posted June 30, 2015 I have, in recent days, seen some calling out Christians for not living up to Christ's so-called doctrine of inclusion. My question is this: does such a doctrine even exist? I don't think it does. Yes, the Gospel was eventually made available to all, but since when has "wide is the gate and all incompassing is the path" been the motto of Christendom? Christ, after all, did not come to unite but to divide (the wicked from the righteous). Heaven, exaltation, membership and discipleship have always been marked by seemingly impossible demands, including denying oneself of unholy natural tendencies. Christ doesn't seem to concerned about excluding the unrepentant wicked from His kingdom. I am not either.The only problem is that no one thinks that they are among the "wicked". "The wicked" are usually "every other group but mine" In my case, of course, that happens to be perfectly true. So all you evil "goats"- Hey YOU- get off of my cloud! 3
Teancum Posted June 30, 2015 Posted June 30, 2015 I have, in recent days, seen some calling out Christians for not living up to Christ's so-called doctrine of inclusion. My question is this: does such a doctrine even exist? I don't think it does. Yes, the Gospel was eventually made available to all, but since when has "wide is the gate and all incompassing is the path" been the motto of Christendom? Christ, after all, did not come to unite but to divide (the wicked from the righteous). Heaven, exaltation, membership and discipleship have always been marked by seemingly impossible demands, including denying oneself of unholy natural tendencies. Christ doesn't seem to concerned about excluding the unrepentant wicked from His kingdom. I am not either. You are right. Jesus was quite fine talking about people burning in hell. Course you argue true LDS Christian doctrine does not teach such a thing. But the Jesus of the NT sure did. The NT Jesus also pitted family member against family member and said the wealthy should sell all they have, give it to the poor and follow him. He was quite a shaker up of things. That sell all you have if you are wealthy seems routinely ignored by most of us these days. So hey the EVs are quite fine excluding just about anyone who does not agree with them. The Mormons, sort of the same but with soft gloves on. And Jesus.... your are burnt toast if you don't follow him. 2
sethpayne Posted June 30, 2015 Posted June 30, 2015 So hey the EVs are quite fine excluding just about anyone who does not agree with them. The Mormons, sort of the same but with soft gloves on. And Jesus.... your are burnt toast if you don't follow him. I think many of these harsher statements by Jesus were likely added by later redactors and compilers. Not necessarily the dividing father/mother/son etc... as that pertained directly to the building of the Kingdom of Heaven. But all that hell talk, to me at least, doesn't really work well textually within the greater context of Jesus' teachings. But, of course, this is just a guess on my part. No real evidence -- one way or the other -- to say for sure. 1
Meadowchik Posted June 30, 2015 Posted June 30, 2015 We are commanded to love one another. This is not equivalent to Church standing or membership, however. It's easy to seek identity in a Church hierarchy and then to try to apply that system to everyone else.But, we really don't know how far someone has come based on exteriors. But we must love each other.To me it is something our culture must learn to progress further: how to fully encircle and love others independent of measures of their worthiness. 1
Gray Posted June 30, 2015 Posted June 30, 2015 I think many of these harsher statements by Jesus were likely added by later redactors and compilers. Not necessarily the dividing father/mother/son etc... as that pertained directly to the building of the Kingdom of Heaven. But all that hell talk, to me at least, doesn't really work well textually within the greater context of Jesus' teachings. But, of course, this is just a guess on my part. No real evidence -- one way or the other -- to say for sure. Anything from John is unlikely to have come from Jesus the man. But, I find John to be full of beautiful passages just the same.
mfbukowski Posted July 1, 2015 Posted July 1, 2015 That dude is one ugly dude.I remember looking at the album covers as they came out, and I couldn't believe that every member of the band was...... less than handsome. It really struck me as- well, odd.http://albumcovergallery.blogspot.com/2011/03/rolling-stones-complete-studio-album.html
Auggybendoggy Posted July 1, 2015 Posted July 1, 2015 LDS doctrine covers these types of situation by the doctrine that in the postmortal spirit world, everyone will have the chance to learn the truths of the Gospel and much, much more, have a chance to repent and accept Christ and his Atonement before being judged. The state of those needing to learn the basics of the gospel is described as being in "Spirit Prison" though I prefer to use the term "spirit school" since I don't believe anyone is being punished for ignorance, which the term "prison" implies. It is a restriction though, just as someone is restricted from workng in a hospital as a doctor until they learn how to be a doctor and demonstrate proficiency at it no matter how much they want to help those who are sick. The fulness of God's blessings can only come to us if we understand the purpose of those blessings (and probably other things, I think even those who have heard the Gospel in this life will have a lot to learn...iow, there may not be much difference between some of those in spirit prison and many in paradise. Calmoriah, thanks for that info. Yes I see that Mormon theology handles it quite differently. Protestant theology is quite different because in their paradigm once someone dies, that's it, they're no going back. So inclusivism become more enticing to the Arminian (free will). To the Calvinist it doesn't since God has determined via election who will be saved and who will not.
Kenngo1969 Posted July 1, 2015 Posted July 1, 2015 (edited) I remember looking at the album covers as they came out, and I couldn't believe that every member of the band was...... less than handsome. It really struck me as- well, odd.http://albumcovergallery.blogspot.com/2011/03/rolling-stones-complete-studio-album.htmlYeah ... money makes up for a lotta things, don't it? Too bad I'm ugly and ... poor. Edited July 1, 2015 by Kenngo1969
Duncan Posted July 1, 2015 Posted July 1, 2015 People talk about God's love and I am trying to feel it, but I don't know God loves me I have never heard him say that to me or have felt his love. I have had spiritual experiences but love wasn't one of those things that I found out as a result. I talked about this previously but in Feb. 2003? I think Elder Nelson wrote that article about God's love and I wrote him about it and he answered me, I struggle with this whole concept
JLHPROF Posted July 1, 2015 Posted July 1, 2015 People talk about God's love and I am trying to feel it, but I don't know God loves me I have never heard him say that to me or have felt his love. I have had spiritual experiences but love wasn't one of those things that I found out as a result. I talked about this previously but in Feb. 2003? I think Elder Nelson wrote that article about God's love and I wrote him about it and he answered me, I struggle with this whole concept I agree with this and have faced the same struggle myself.However, I also recognize that just as my wife knows I love her by my actions, not just feelings, I can know God loves me by his actions in my life, not just by feeling loved. If we stop and "count our blessings" it's easier to see God's love. 4
Popular Post filovirus Posted July 1, 2015 Popular Post Posted July 1, 2015 I love seeing bumper stickers saying "God is Love". It is absolutely correct. God has more love than we can imagine. To put it into perspective, I truly believe He loves Hitler, Charles Manson, and other of the vilest sinners as much as he loves me. But what people don't understand is that God is more than just love. He is mercy! He is jealous! He is justice! He is from everlasting to everlasting!He accepts everyone who comes to him with a broken heart and a contrite spirit. His gospel is all inclusive. He accepts all. A few weeks ago we had a cross dresser come into my gospel principles class. We tried our darnedest to help him feel accepted for the few short hours he was with us. I went to his home a few days later. In short he said the Church wasn't for him. I have visited the majority of inactive members in my ward and continue to do so. Many say the Church is not for them. I do regular splits with the missionaries. Many nonmembers are interested but eventually feel the church is not for them.My point: the Church is for everyone. All inclusive. It's people who exclude themselves, be it that they don't like the doctrine and teachings, don't feel comfortable, or have other reasons. Even Jesus, the Son of God, could not convince everyone it was for them. We must respect their agency to be excluded. 5
mfbukowski Posted July 1, 2015 Posted July 1, 2015 Yeah ... money makes up for a lotta things, don't it? Too bad I'm ugly and ... poor. Dang. I agree with half- but not the other half. I'll let you guess which is which.
mfbukowski Posted July 1, 2015 Posted July 1, 2015 People talk about God's love and I am trying to feel it, but I don't know God loves me I have never heard him say that to me or have felt his love. I have had spiritual experiences but love wasn't one of those things that I found out as a result. I talked about this previously but in Feb. 2003? I think Elder Nelson wrote that article about God's love and I wrote him about it and he answered me, I struggle with this whole concept Let me get this straight. You are not sure that God loves you, but an apostle of the Lord answered you personally. You might want to think about why he did that. They don't do that you know. It is against policy because everyone wants a personal letter and there just isn't time in the day to answer them all. But he answered you, but God doesn't love you. I hope he doesn't love me that way too. 2
Duncan Posted July 1, 2015 Posted July 1, 2015 Let me get this straight. You are not sure that God loves you, but an apostle of the Lord answered you personally. You might want to think about why he did that. They don't do that you know. It is against policy because everyone wants a personal letter and there just isn't time in the day to answer them all. But he answered you, but God doesn't love you. I hope he doesn't love me that way too. go home you're drunk
california boy Posted July 1, 2015 Posted July 1, 2015 There is a parable of the lost sheep.There is no parable of the lost wolf.The shepherd will go after his sheep (those who have accepted his leadership but wandered) to bring them back to the flock.The shepherd will not go after a wolf (those who actively choose to work against Christ's will) to place them among the flock.We get to decide whether we wish to be sheep or wolves.Thanks for your answer. I wasn't aware of the change. It used to be that the church home taught any member who would allow a visit even if that member was against some of the churches teachings. So now if a member actively participates In say OW the church will no longer visit them?What does it take for a member to become a wolf and the church to abandon them?
Duncan Posted July 1, 2015 Posted July 1, 2015 Thanks for your answer. I wasn't aware of the change. It used to be that the church home taught any member who would allow a visit even if that member was against some of the churches teachings.So now if a member actively participates In say OW the church will no longer visit them?What does it take for a member to become a wolf and the church to abandon them? we have a hoarder lady in our ward who I think....supports OW, I ain't going in there. I went once and caught a mummified cat disease. OW or no OW, I don't need that!
Recommended Posts