Elder M. Russell Ballard: "To Whom Shall We Go"

[Jeanne]

13 hours ago, california boy said:

I am not quite sure why you are having such a hard time with this concept.  My children are all baptized in the church.  Not all are active.  Those that are, I fully support their involvement in the church.  Like NoFear, the church seems to work well for them and they enjoy being involved.  

For me, as I have explained, the church is definitely not a good place.  I indeed have walked away from the church and never looked back.  And as you can tell from this discussion, I have no use or need for organized religion in general.  I tend to thrive spiritually away from those that claim to speak for God.  i obviously do not believe their claims.  In fact, they have proven to be demonstratively false.

This sounds like where I am at also.  Nice to know that I am not a lone in finding spirituality and Christ outside of religion.  Revelation no longer is in my vocabulary unless it is a confirmation of what I know and feel together about my direction.

[carbon dioxide]

On 10/6/2016 at 10:10 AM, california boy said:

Nevermind.  Continue on.

On second thought, I would like to know.  If you were living in 1800 or 1700 or 1500 or whenever prior to the church being restored.  Would you still claim that joining an organized religion was necessary in order to be a follower of Christ.

Anyone can follow Christ.  I think even the devil can choose to follow Christ.  The question is does Christ know them?  Does Christ recognize different paths to him?  Does Christ recognize things outside official channels?  The D&C says those that did not have an opportunity to hear the gospel while in mortality but would have accepted it had they had opportunity to receive it can inherit celestial glory.  Christ is fair to everyone.  Being part of any organized religion may not be that important.  What is important is for the person to be ready to accept the restored gospel when its presented.  It is at that point they are on the clock when things really matter.

Edited October 10, 2016 by carbon dioxide

[Jeanne]

14 minutes ago, carbon dioxide said:

Anyone can follow Christ.  I think even the devil can choose to follow Christ.  The question is does Christ know them?  Does Christ recognize different paths to him?  Does Christ recognize things outside official channels?  The D&C says those that did not have an opportunity to hear the gospel while in mortality but would have accepted it had they had opportunity to receive it can inherit celestial glory.  Christ is fair to everyone.  Being part of any organized religion may not be that important.  What is important is for the person to be ready to accept the restored gospel when its presented.  It is at that point they are on the clock when things really matter.

Jesus knows me.  My path is no different than yours..trying to be more Christlike and live a life of good.  The difference is those covenants.  That word for me is replaced with a promise.

[JLHPROF]

35 minutes ago, Jeanne said:

Jesus knows me.  My path is no different than yours..trying to be more Christlike and live a life of good.  The difference is those covenants.  That word for me is replaced with a promise.

The difference, as I tried to explain to California Boy, is in what it means to be Christlike.  It has nothing to do with any Church or organized religion.
 

[Jeanne]

2 hours ago, JLHPROF said:

The difference, as I tried to explain to California Boy, is in what it means to be Christlike.  It has nothing to do with any Church or organized religion.
 

You just stated my point.  Thank you. 

[VideoGameJunkie]

I'd be absolutely lost without the church. I've always had it and it's always brought me peace.

[Bobbieaware]

11 hours ago, JLHPROF said:

The difference, as I tried to explain to California Boy, is in what it means to be Christlike.  It has nothing to do with any Church or organized religion.
 

It depends on what one thinks being Christlike is. If being Christlike simply means being a good, kind and compassionate person, then you are correct. But in the Doctrine and Covenants -- aside from encouraging the people to be good, kind and compassionate -- Christ strongly authorizes and endorses his own organized religion (i.e. the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints under his revelatory leadership and the subservient priesthood leadership of authorized  prophets and apostles) and plainly testifies there is no hope of salvation outside of the scope and power of the priesthood of his Restored Church (even the inheritors of the telestial kingdom will eventually need to be taught and receive the Restored Gospel at the hands of officially commissioned missionaries of the Church, either in this world or in the spirit world).

In other words, if being truly Christlike means thinking, believing and a acting as Christ acts, then the fully Christlike person will believe in the absolute necessity of an organized religion set up, empowered and authorized by Christ himself. If the hope for salvation can only come by means of the Lord's own organized religion, how is it Christlike to propagate the false idea that there is no need for the Lord's own organized religion that is set up by him to disseminate his saving power? Christ is the Savior and no one can be saved in any of God's heavenly mansions outside of the umbrella of his organized Church. So in order to be fully Christlike one must endorse Christ's own organized religion. 

 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)

Edited October 10, 2016 by Bobbieaware

[california boy]

4 hours ago, Bobbieaware said:

It depends on what one thinks being Christlike is. If being Christlike simply means being a good, kind and compassionate person, then you are correct. But in the Doctrine and Covenants -- aside from encouraging the people to be good, kind and compassionate -- Christ strongly authorizes and endorses his own organized religion (i.e. the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints under his revelatory leadership and the subservient priesthood leadership of authorized  prophets and apostles) and plainly testifies there is no hope of salvation outside of the scope and power of the priesthood of his Restored Church (even the inheritors of the telestial kingdom will eventually need to be taught and receive the Restored Gospel at the hands of officially commissioned missionaries of the Church, either in this world or in the spirit world).

In other words, if being truly Christlike means thinking, believing and a acting as Christ acts, then the fully Christlike person will believe in the absolute necessity of an organized religion set up, empowered and authorized by Christ himself. If the hope for salvation can only come by means of the Lord's own organized religion, how is it Christlike to propagate the false idea that there is no need for the Lord's own organized religion that is set up by him to disseminate his saving power? Christ is the Savior and no one can be saved in any of God's heavenly mansions outside of the umbrella of his organized Church. So in order to be fully Christlike one must endorse Christ's own organized religion. 

 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)

Of course, to believe this, you would have to believe organized religion was necessary to be on the earth to give you these scriptures you quoted.  The problem is, the church of Christ was no where to be found for 1800 years.  How many millions, no billions of people have lived without the church of Christ in their mortal lives.  How many billions more will live without the church of Christ in their mortal lives.  So while organized religion seems important for their exaltation to Mormonsm  it doesn't seem that important to God.  If one believes in Mormon dogma, then 99.9% of the people who have ever lived were perfectly fine waiting until after they die to receive any necessary ordinances.  It sounds more like a technicality that needs to be taken care of rather than an necessity to becoming like Christ.

[Tacenda]

I've finally got it! I see what the church believes...the church's 1 or 2 percent of the world population, that take out covenants in the temple and become perfect eventually, will become Gods. And that's what it's all about. That's Mormonism. The rest of us that believe in Jesus and don't go to the temple, will still go to heaven and have salvation but not exaltation. I guess this aligns with some older versions of masonry. Like Joseph said, it's a ladder they climb. 

I'm not putting it down, I don't know that it's not true. Look at all the planets out there. Some have said it's all in the Bible, I'm not a scriptorian or even a faithful reader of the Bible. So I don't know for sure. But it's making more sense as I go along. How important to LDS it is to become perfect.

And to non LDS, such as the EV's, believe we're always going to be sinners, it's a matter of faith in Jesus that saves us, not perfection. Although, they believe that they must show that faithfulness by being thankful and wanting to not sin. 

 

[JLHPROF]

11 hours ago, Jeanne said:

You just stated my point.  Thank you.

 

6 hours ago, Bobbieaware said:

It depends on what one thinks being Christlike is.

I don't think my post was very clear.
I was saying the difference of opinion in is our definition of Christlike.  I was not saying that Church/organized religion had nothing to do with being Christlike.  I was saying that being Christlike contains far more than the non-denominational version of Christ portrays.

[Jeanne]

8 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

 

I don't think my post was very clear.
I was saying the difference of opinion in is our definition of Christlike.  I was not saying that Church/organized religion had nothing to do with being Christlike.  I was saying that being Christlike contains far more than the non-denominational version of Christ portrays.

I am sorry.  I really did understand where you were coming from..but at the time, your quote said it all for me.  I have met so many Christlike people outside of church..any church that it colors my thoughts on how I used to think.  I just can't wrap my head around the fact that really good and loving people..honest and full of love can be any kind of outcast because they don't know secret names, signs and passwords. 

[JLHPROF]

8 minutes ago, Jeanne said:

I am sorry.  I really did understand where you were coming from..but at the time, your quote said it all for me.  I have met so many Christlike people outside of church..any church that it colors my thoughts on how I used to think.  I just can't wrap my head around the fact that really good and loving people..honest and full of love can be any kind of outcast because they don't know secret names, signs and passwords.

"Christlike" means those that do as Christ did and in my opinion also do the things he commanded.

I don't believe you can be "Christlike" without those things.  And that based on everything we know about Christ truly being Christlike has to include more than being kind and helping others.

And it is not an issue of being outcast.  It is an issue of obedience to laws.  That is why sinless Christ was baptized - to fulfill all righteousness.
Good, loving people, honest and full of love, still have laws that they need to follow.  Even if we disagree on what those laws may be.
You cannot be a Doctor and practice medicine without completing medical school.  You cannot drive a car legally without a license, no matter how good a driver you are. 

And you cannot be a Christian without following Christ.
 

Edited October 10, 2016 by JLHPROF

[Nofear]

2 hours ago, california boy said:

 [Baptism] sounds more like a technicality that needs to be taken care of rather than a necessity to becoming like Christ.

Eventually all of us must inhabit one kingdom or another. Unlike mortality where our birth defines which kingdom we belong to and to which laws we are subject, the Kingdom of Heaven I believe is different. To be citizens we must willingly submit. Like a contract we must "sign" our commitment and submission. Though baptism is more than this, one component of the baptismal ordinance is the "signature". By getting baptized we willingly take upon ourselves the name of Christ and state publicly that we will follow his laws.

Why can't we just give a verbal contract? For something as big as naturalizing citizenship to the Kingdom of God a verbal commitment isn't enough. It must be public and witnessed and lived. Getting baptized followed by unrepentant behaviors inconsistent with that public declaration is a way to null and void the contract.

Why must a physical body be baptized? Baptism has functions beyond just its contractual nature. The answer would involve a discussion that I don't fully understand nor would it probably be appropriate to a mixed audience of believers and unbelievers. Suffice it to say that baptism is one of the mysteries (doctrines not fully revealed to public human knowledge).

So, can one say baptism is a technicality? Sure, technically that would be correct. But we Mormons have clearly sided with Christ's teaching to Nicodemus that baptism is also a necessity... that is, baptism is a necessary technicality.

[JLHPROF]

2 hours ago, california boy said:

 It sounds more like a technicality that needs to be taken care of rather than an necessity to becoming like Christ.

Kind of like naturalization paperwork is a technicality for an immigrant to become a US Citizen.

But a necessary one.
And baptism is a necessary ordinance to enter God's kingdom.

Edited October 10, 2016 by JLHPROF

[ksfisher]

6 hours ago, california boy said:

Of course, to believe this, you would have to believe organized religion was necessary to be on the earth to give you these scriptures you quoted.  The problem is, the church of Christ was no where to be found for 1800 years.  How many millions, no billions of people have lived without the church of Christ in their mortal lives.  How many billions more will live without the church of Christ in their mortal lives.  So while organized religion seems important for their exaltation to Mormonsm  it doesn't seem that important to God.  If one believes in Mormon dogma, then 99.9% of the people who have ever lived were perfectly fine waiting until after they die to receive any necessary ordinances.  It sounds more like a technicality that needs to be taken care of rather than an necessity to becoming like Christ.

I've posted elsewhere, I don't recall if it was on this thread or another, that I find it significant that Christ, at the beginning of his mortal ministry, sought out John the Baptist and was himself baptized.  Also, a central tenet of Christ's teaching to the Nephites in 3 Nephi was that the Nephites should repent and be baptized. 

Edited October 10, 2016 by ksfisher

[Scott Lloyd]

11 hours ago, Bobbieaware said:

It depends on what one thinks being Christlike is. If being Christlike simply means being a good, kind and compassionate person, then you are correct. But in the Doctrine and Covenants -- aside from encouraging the people to be good, kind and compassionate -- Christ strongly authorizes and endorses his own organized religion (i.e. the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints under his revelatory leadership and the subservient priesthood leadership of authorized  prophets and apostles) and plainly testifies there is no hope of salvation outside of the scope and power of the priesthood of his Restored Church (even the inheritors of the telestial kingdom will eventually need to be taught and receive the Restored Gospel at the hands of officially commissioned missionaries of the Church, either in this world or in the spirit world).

In other words, if being truly Christlike means thinking, believing and a acting as Christ acts, then the fully Christlike person will believe in the absolute necessity of an organized religion set up, empowered and authorized by Christ himself. If the hope for salvation can only come by means of the Lord's own organized religion, how is it Christlike to propagate the false idea that there is no need for the Lord's own organized religion that is set up by him to disseminate his saving power? Christ is the Savior and no one can be saved in any of God's heavenly mansions outside of the umbrella of his organized Church. So in order to be fully Christlike one must endorse Christ's own organized religion. 

 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)

Good post -- except that I would have used the word subordinate in place of your "subservient." That is, "the subordinate [not subservient] priesthood leadership of authorized prophets and apostles."

[Scott Lloyd]

3 hours ago, ksfisher said:

I've posted elsewhere, I don't recall if it was on this thread or another, that I find it significant that Christ, at the beginning of his mortal ministry, sought out John the Baptist and was himself baptized.  Also, a central tenant of Christ's teaching to the Nephites in 3 Nephi was that the Nephites should repent and be baptized. 

Good post. Except that I would have said tenet, not tenant. 

A tenant is an inhabitant of a rented dwelling. A tenet is a principle or belief.

[Scott Lloyd]

3 hours ago, JLHPROF said:

Kind of like naturalization paperwork is a technicality for an immigrant to become a US Citizen.

But a necessary one.
And baptism is a necessary ordinance to enter God's kingdom.

I liken it to signing a contract. Actually putting ink to paper with my own hand. A symbolic gesture, but the contract is not in force unless or until I do that.

 

[ksfisher]

17 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

 

 

12 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

Good post. Except that I would have said tenet, not tenant. 

A tenant is an inhabitant of a rented dwelling. A tenet is a principle or belief.

Over reliance on auto correct comes back to haunt me.

[Scott Lloyd]

54 minutes ago, ksfisher said:

 

Over reliance on auto correct comes back to haunt me.

I can relate.

 

[california boy]

5 hours ago, ksfisher said:

I've posted elsewhere, I don't recall if it was on this thread or another, that I find it significant that Christ, at the beginning of his mortal ministry, sought out John the Baptist and was himself baptized.  Also, a central tenet of Christ's teaching to the Nephites in 3 Nephi was that the Nephites should repent and be baptized. 

Maybe you could shed some light on this.  What church was Christ baptized into when he sought out John?  Since it wasn't the church Christ purported to establish, were people saved by being baptized in the Jewish church?  

[JLHPROF]

9 minutes ago, california boy said:

Maybe you could shed some light on this.  What church was Christ baptized into when he sought out John?  Since it wasn't the church Christ purported to establish, were people saved by being baptized in the Jewish church?

We've been over this.
Baptism isn't into a Church.  Not even today.  That would be confirmation.

[california boy]

2 hours ago, JLHPROF said:

We've been over this.
Baptism isn't into a Church.  Not even today.  That would be confirmation.

I am reading from Mormon.org

Quote

We are baptized by someone who has God’s priesthood authority for the remission of sins. (Acts 2:38, Acts 22:16). We are also baptized to become members of the Church of Jesus Christ, and to enter the kingdom of God (John 3:5).

I personally always thought it was an essential part of joining the church.  Could you site something that says baptism isn't into a church as you claim?  It would certainly clear up this issue that you have brought up.

[Nofear]

Most Mormons I know believe that Christ's baptism wasn't technically necessary because 1) he was sinless and 2) it is his kingdom.
Nonetheless, he did so as an example for all of us and not because of necessity.

Baptism by water as John did was good for people but, in my opinion, probably mostly a symbolic gesture of efforts to change their lives. Those whom John baptized and later joined the Church were rebaptized (see Acts 19:1-7). See also the Bible Dictionary's entry: Confirmation.

And to bring this line of discussion back to the original question, "To whom shall we go?" our answer is that the Church is Christ's and departure from it distances us from Christ.

As I understand it the counter from california boy, Tacenda, and Jeane and like-minded individuals is basically 1) joining Christ's Church is optional if one wants and 2) for some, they argue, joining his Church actually distances them from Christ. It seems to me also, that the two points are emotionally tied. They argue point 1) after the fact after experiencing 2). But, perhaps, the same could be said for me as well. Perhaps I argue that joining the Church is necessary because I have found the Church integral to my discipleship of Christ.

From such a perspective the question of whether or not baptism is necessary just becomes a proxy for whether or not membership in the Church brings that individual closer to Christ. For my part, it is difficult for me to understand how the Church distances one from Christ. I can easily see how imperfections in its members can become stumbling blocks for others but I recognize the failings of men as just that, the failings of men. Those failings don't change the truthfulness of the Gospel.
 
 

[Calm]

12 hours ago, Tacenda said:

I've finally got it! I see what the church believes...the church's 1 or 2 percent of the world population, that take out covenants in the temple and become perfect eventually, will become Gods. And that's what it's all about. That's Mormonism. The rest of us that believe in Jesus and don't go to the temple, will still go to heaven and have salvation but not exaltation.

 

When all of earth's population will have the same opportunity to take out covenants in the temple, why would you assume it will only be 1  or 2% and only those who are Mormons (meanings members of the current, but very limited version of the Kingdom of God in mortality)?