Jeanne Posted January 20, 2016 Posted January 20, 2016 16 hours ago, Calm said: I am sure it varies from community to community and probably has to do a great deal with whether or not a mother and/or father tells their children 'this is the way we did it'. My mom and dad were married in Las Vegas..no big tadoo..it was Mom's second marriage. When I was nine, we were all sealed in SLC Temple..including my sister and brother from Mom's previous marriage. Basically..it was just playing with barbies..watching TV..that my girlfriends and I would fantasize about weddings..an innocent thing for heavens sakes! I do recall ..because Mom had to work on Sunday..she stood outside Temple gates with a lot of us while my brother was married in the Temple..was she heartbroken??? Of course..but we can blame her if you want.
smac97 Posted January 20, 2016 Posted January 20, 2016 Personally, I like the custom in LDS sealing ceremonies, when possible, of having the mothers of the couple sitting next to them prior to the ordinance, and the fathers acting as witnesses. There was a nice symmetry there. Thanks, -Smac
Popular Post Stargazer Posted January 20, 2016 Popular Post Posted January 20, 2016 On 1/18/2016 at 9:59 AM, salgare said: It's a painful culture where you feel you have to explain why you did not go on a mission. I also noted Nehor in this same thread softly stating his opinion but quickly noting his obedience to the will of the leaders so as not to appear insubordinate. Always in fear of being out of line with the overly authoritative Church who claims to be God's one true church. My God "gives me all the goodies" without asinine requirements with outrageous consequences for the likes of drinking coffee or not sustaining a corrupt organization. Your God seems to be an organization that demands obedience to it above all else. As for complaining about being deemed unworthy, its all in showing just how immoral and unjust your God is (all over a "policy" with no doctrinal backing ... see Nehor's comments upthread). Your God seems to match the characteristics of the God posited in 2 Nephi 28:8 Quote 8 And there shall also be many which shall say: Eat, drink, and be merry; nevertheless, fear God—he will justify in committing a little sin; yea, lie a little, take the advantage of one because of his words, dig a pit for thy neighbor; there is no harm in this; and do all these things, for tomorrow we die; and if it so be that we are guilty, God will beat us with a few stripes, and at last we shall be saved in the kingdom of God. What else does your god teach? That obedience is superfluous? If your god gives you the goodies without requiring anything of you, then he clearly doesn't intend to reward you with much. How can he give you anything at all? Luke 12:48 says, in part: Quote For unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall be much required: and to whom men have committed much, of him they will ask the more. If nothing much is required, then nothing much will be given. You can't have what you're not willing to work for. This makes your god into quite a sight: a puny god indeed. And my God is not an organization. However, my God called a prophet to create an organization in order to promulgate his teachings and doctrine. 5
thesometimesaint Posted January 20, 2016 Posted January 20, 2016 23 minutes ago, Gray said: I've been to several temple weddings, including my own. The only one where I was participating in an ordinance was my own As have I, plus several Church(non-Temple) ones, and "civilian" ones. The Temple ones require a Temple Recommend.
Gray Posted January 20, 2016 Posted January 20, 2016 1 hour ago, thesometimesaint said: As have I, plus several Church(non-Temple) ones, and "civilian" ones. The Temple ones require a Temple Recommend. Yes, that's obvious. But we were talking about participation.
Scott Lloyd Posted January 20, 2016 Posted January 20, 2016 6 hours ago, Jeanne said: My mom and dad were married in Las Vegas..no big tadoo..it was Mom's second marriage. When I was nine, we were all sealed in SLC Temple..including my sister and brother from Mom's previous marriage. Basically..it was just playing with barbies..watching TV..that my girlfriends and I would fantasize about weddings..an innocent thing for heavens sakes! I do recall ..because Mom had to work on Sunday..she stood outside Temple gates with a lot of us while my brother was married in the Temple..was she heartbroken??? Of course..but we can blame her if you want. I don't know your mother's circumstances. But as a point of general clarification, I'm fairly certain that having to work on Sundays is not ordinarily grounds for automatic denial of a temple recommend. I'm quite confident that there are allowances made for extenuating circumstances and that normally, one who is obliged by employment circumstances to work on Sundays can still be eligible for a recommend. Those on this board who are or have been in bishoprics can correct me if I'm wrong. Smac, I do believe you are in that category.
Danzo Posted January 21, 2016 Posted January 21, 2016 7 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said: I don't know your mother's circumstances. But as a point of general clarification, I'm fairly certain that having to work on Sundays is not ordinarily grounds for automatic denial of a temple recommend. I'm quite confident that there are allowances made for extenuating circumstances and that normally, one who is obliged by employment circumstances to work on Sundays can still be eligible for a recommend. Those on this board who are or have been in bishoprics can correct me if I'm wrong. Smac, I do believe you are in that category. I had a bishop once that often worked on sundays, at least once a month sometime more. Pretty sure he had a temple recommend
Hamba Tuhan Posted January 21, 2016 Posted January 21, 2016 6 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said: I'm fairly certain that having to work on Sundays is not ordinarily grounds for automatic denial of a temple recommend. Correct. Our current elders quorum president is a cop who works about 50% of Sundays, and our current Relief Society president is a doctor who works some Sundays. During my sister's master's course, she was rostered to work in the hospital every single Sunday for two years straight but always had a current temple recommend.
Scott Lloyd Posted January 21, 2016 Posted January 21, 2016 My thanks to Danzo and Hamba Tuhan. Your answers confirmed what I had understood to be the case.
Jeanne Posted January 21, 2016 Posted January 21, 2016 9 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said: My thanks to Danzo and Hamba Tuhan. Your answers confirmed what I had understood to be the case. My mother, though she did not smoke or drink, worked in a bar owned by her brother. It was his family's business. Mom helped out. The bishop took a stance on that. But she had to work..she helped provide for then little things needed at home.
salgare Posted January 21, 2016 Posted January 21, 2016 7 hours ago, Stargazer said: Your God seems to match the characteristics of the God posited in 2 Nephi 28:8 Where in the world did you get that from.? "What else does your god teach? That obedience is superfluous? If your god gives you the goodies without requiring anything of you, then he clearly doesn't intend to reward you with much. How can he give you anything at all? Luke 12:48 says, in part:" Tho shall love the Lord thy God with all your mind might and strength, second love thy neighbor. The 10 commandments are always good as well, with #5 being very pertinent to the OP (Honor your father and your mother.) "If nothing much is required, then nothing much will be given. You can't have what you're not willing to work for. This makes your god into quite a sight: a puny god indeed." Yes your god is a brute of a slave master for sure. Mine, by his own admission is puny: "8Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest. 29Take my yoke upon you, and learn of me; for I am meek and lowly in heart: and ye shall find rest unto your souls. 30For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light." "And my God is not an organization. However, my God called a prophet to create an organization in order to promulgate his teachings and doctrine." Too bad that it started that way and then those prophets turned to mammon. It's a crying shame really.
Popular Post Stargazer Posted January 21, 2016 Popular Post Posted January 21, 2016 32 minutes ago, salgare said: Where in the world did you get that from.? "What else does your god teach? That obedience is superfluous? If your god gives you the goodies without requiring anything of you, then he clearly doesn't intend to reward you with much. How can he give you anything at all? Luke 12:48 says, in part:" Tho shall love the Lord thy God with all your mind might and strength, second love thy neighbor. The 10 commandments are always good as well, with #5 being very pertinent to the OP (Honor your father and your mother.) "If nothing much is required, then nothing much will be given. You can't have what you're not willing to work for. This makes your god into quite a sight: a puny god indeed." Yes your god is a brute of a slave master for sure. Mine, by his own admission is puny: "8Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest. 29Take my yoke upon you, and learn of me; for I am meek and lowly in heart: and ye shall find rest unto your souls. 30For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light." "And my God is not an organization. However, my God called a prophet to create an organization in order to promulgate his teachings and doctrine." Too bad that it started that way and then those prophets turned to mammon. It's a crying shame really. You imagine to yourself that the yoke is easy and the burden light because you don't have to obey anything? The yoke is easy and the burden light because the Atonement of Christ removes the burden of the wages of sin from those who repent of their sins and keep His commandments. You claim that the Church is corrupt, and that the Prophet is all into mammon. So what Church, if any, do you identify as being the true Church of Jesus Christ? Or is there one? Or many? I'm interested to hear about it. Or is it perhaps the Church of Salgare? 6
Paloma Posted January 21, 2016 Posted January 21, 2016 (edited) On 19/01/2016 at 5:14 PM, Russell C McGregor said: But don't you see? The whole concept of "walking down the aisle" is entirely a function of the arrangement of the seats. What happens when the seats aren't arranged in two equal blocks with an aisle between, leading from the door to the altar? Does that cause the whole wedding to collapse? It just so happens that the seats aren't arranged in that way in the Temple, and the ordinance is free of all that sumptuous parading. So even if non-members were invited in, there still wouldn't be anything for them to do. How incredibly disrespectful of non-Mormon marriage ceremonies! Yes, I know that this is essentially an in-house discussion among LDS folk. And my intention was to simply observe (although as an interested observer, who has had many conversations on this subject with close LDS friends.) I tend to not get offended very easily, but found I couldn't silently abide the ignorant and belittling words of mockery above. (Sorry for all this dead space ... tried to eliminate it through editing, but was unsuccessful.) Edited January 21, 2016 by Paloma
Zakuska Posted January 21, 2016 Posted January 21, 2016 I know... temporary temple recommends for nonmember attendies. We already do that for small children or kids going for BFTD.
ksfisher Posted January 21, 2016 Posted January 21, 2016 23 minutes ago, Zakuska said: I know... temporary temple recommends for nonmember attendies. We already do that for small children or kids going for BFTD. Would their bishop need to interview them to see if they were worthy to enter the temple? Or would worthiness no longer be a prerequisite for entering the House of the Lord?
Gillebre Posted January 21, 2016 Posted January 21, 2016 14 hours ago, salgare said: Where in the world did you get that from.? "What else does your god teach? That obedience is superfluous? If your god gives you the goodies without requiring anything of you, then he clearly doesn't intend to reward you with much. How can he give you anything at all? Luke 12:48 says, in part:" Tho shall love the Lord thy God with all your mind might and strength, second love thy neighbor. The 10 commandments are always good as well, with #5 being very pertinent to the OP (Honor your father and your mother.) "If nothing much is required, then nothing much will be given. You can't have what you're not willing to work for. This makes your god into quite a sight: a puny god indeed." Yes your god is a brute of a slave master for sure. Mine, by his own admission is puny: "8Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest. 29Take my yoke upon you, and learn of me; for I am meek and lowly in heart: and ye shall find rest unto your souls. 30For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light." "And my God is not an organization. However, my God called a prophet to create an organization in order to promulgate his teachings and doctrine." Too bad that it started that way and then those prophets turned to mammon. It's a crying shame really. I took the opportunity to bold something you said which I believe was important. Didn't I communicate the exact same idea when you asked for a reason as to why this policy could exist? To love the Lord thy God with ALL the mind, might, and strength? How can someone claim to love Him if they won't put Him first? "If ye love Me, keep My commandments." So the next question then would be: is getting married in the Temple important in God's plan? Yes or no. If yes then why is it unreasonable for God to expect us to put His priorities before our own? The first great commandment is to love God completely, and Jesus taught that to love Him meant that you needed to obey Him (that you can't love Him and not obey Him). Elder Holland gave a great talk about smooth gods who wouldn't rock the boat, let alone row it. You might find it interesting. I commend it to you: The Cost and Blessings of Discipleship. 3
Zakuska Posted January 21, 2016 Posted January 21, 2016 (edited) 39 minutes ago, ksfisher said: Would their bishop need to interview them to see if they were worthy to enter the temple? Or would worthiness no longer be a prerequisite for entering the House of the Lord? The bishop would still do the interview. Of course the questions would be tailored to a non member who was being given a 30 minute temple tour pass (eg. no testimony of the restoration or sustaining the brethen etc. But still following the WOW, immediately prior to going) would be a great missionary opportunity. We could always create a court of the gentiles were the goings on could be spectated. Edited January 21, 2016 by Zakuska
salgare Posted January 21, 2016 Posted January 21, 2016 (edited) 14 hours ago, Stargazer said: You imagine to yourself that the yoke is easy and the burden light because you don't have to obey anything? The yoke is easy and the burden light because the Atonement of Christ removes the burden of the wages of sin from those who repent of their sins and keep His commandments. You claim that the Church is corrupt, and that the Prophet is all into mammon. So what Church, if any, do you identify as being the true Church of Jesus Christ? Or is there one? Or many? I'm interested to hear about it. Or is it perhaps the Church of Salgare? If I still believed in all of the aspects that I used to I would likely follow Snuffer. i.e. one who testifies that Christ still appears to him and can/will to you also (i.e. calling and election type stuff). But I have no need for a man made organized religion, God and I are good without it. Kind of Snuffer's concept as well. Edited January 21, 2016 by salgare
Russell C McGregor Posted January 21, 2016 Posted January 21, 2016 11 hours ago, Paloma said: How incredibly disrespectful of non-Mormon marriage ceremonies! What was? Pointing out that you can only walk down the aisle if the seats are arranged so that there is one, or that walking down the aisle isn't essential to the wedding? 11 hours ago, Paloma said: I tend to not get offended very easily, but found I couldn't silently abide the ignorant and belittling words of mockery above. What was ignorant, what was belittled, and where was the mockery? 11 hours ago, Paloma said: (Sorry for all this dead space ... tried to eliminate it through editing, but was unsuccessful.) I managed to eliminate it. 1
Russell C McGregor Posted January 21, 2016 Posted January 21, 2016 3 hours ago, Zakuska said: I know... temporary temple recommends for nonmember attendies. We already do that for small children or kids going for BFTD. An excellent suggestion for all those who hold that the Temple has no sanctity. 2
Zakuska Posted January 21, 2016 Posted January 21, 2016 11 minutes ago, Russell C McGregor said: An excellent suggestion for all those who hold that the Temple has no sanctity. Or for those who tried to stone Paul for taking filthy Greeks into the temple. What was it Christ said to Peter? " Call not unclean that which I have cleansed." Isn't Christ's blood strong enough and god gracious enough to show a little love russel?
Russell C McGregor Posted January 21, 2016 Posted January 21, 2016 2 minutes ago, Zakuska said: Or for those who tried to stone Paul for taking filthy Greeks into the temple. What was it Christ said to Peter? " Call not unclean that which I have cleansed." Isn't Christ's blood strong enough and god gracious enough to show a little love russel? Ah, wresting the scriptures again. The point you miss about the accusation that Paul had taken a gentile into the Temple was that it was false. It was a trumped-up charge. Anyone who wants to enter the Temple in these latter days needs to come in by the front door, which is baptism. 2
Zakuska Posted January 21, 2016 Posted January 21, 2016 (edited) 23 minutes ago, Russell C McGregor said: Ah, wresting the scriptures again. The point you miss about the accusation that Paul had taken a gentile into the Temple was that it was false. It was a trumped-up charge. Anyone who wants to enter the Temple in these latter days needs to come in by the front door, which is baptism. Children who are being sealed enter the temple all the time without baptism. Even Satan himself is in the temple. He presented himself in God's temple in Job. Edited January 21, 2016 by Zakuska
Scott Lloyd Posted January 21, 2016 Posted January 21, 2016 (edited) 27 minutes ago, Russell C McGregor said: What was? Pointing out that you can only walk down the aisle if the seats are arranged so that there is one, or that walking down the aisle isn't essential to the wedding? What was ignorant, what was belittled, and where was the mockery? I wonder if there's indeed something sacrosanct about walking down the aisle. At non-LDS weddings I've attended, this and other traditional trappings have pretty much been used or dispensed with at will (many people, it seems, even custom-compose their own wedding vows these days). If, in practice, the traditions are that non-essential, I wonder what is so offensive about pointing out that fact. Edited January 21, 2016 by Scott Lloyd 2
thesometimesaint Posted January 21, 2016 Posted January 21, 2016 2 hours ago, salgare said: If I still believed in all of the aspects that I used to I would likely follow Snuffer. i.e. one who testifies that Christ still appears to him and can/will to you also (i.e. calling and election type stuff). But I have no need for a man made organized religion, God and I are good without it. Kind of Snuffer's concept as well. This is one more place you run into trouble. Jesus organized a religion while he was on earth. SEE https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Ephesians+4%3A11-16&version=KJV 2
Recommended Posts