Scriptural Support of Worthiness Interviews

[CV75]

43 minutes ago, smac97 said:

Okay.  You said "Each individual should determine their own worthiness."

To which I responded: "Then why have 'judges in Israel?'"

What are your thoughts?  What are bishops supposed to "judge?"

Thanks,

-Smac

See Helaman 16:1, D&C 97:15,  3 Nephi 18:28:

“And now, it came to pass that there were many who heard the words of Samuel, the Lamanite, which he spake upon the walls of the city. And as many as believed on his word went forth and sought for Nephi; and when they had come forth and found him they confessed unto him their sins and denied not, desiring that they might be baptized unto the Lord.” Shows the role of those judges who preside over baptisms.

“And inasmuch as my people build a house unto me in the name of the Lord, and do not suffer any unclean thing to come into it, that it be not defiled, my glory shall rest upon it…” Participation in the house of the Lord falls under the purview of those who determine what is clean and unclean (those apostles and prophets referred to in verse 14).

“And now behold, this is the commandment which I give unto you, that ye shall not suffer any one knowingly to partake of my flesh and blood unworthily, when ye shall minister it…” The sacrament falls under the bishop’s purview to determine who is worthy and who not.

[CV75]

51 minutes ago, hope_for_things said:

Honest question, why does there need to be a gatekeeper to judge things for temple attendance?  What is the reasoning behind that.  I'm questioning the assumptions that you're starting with.  

"Judge" means "ruler" or "president" -- the Lord's house of order entails priesthood keys and various offices to preside over all the activities which take place within.

[Tacenda]

2 hours ago, Jeanne said:

Well hey....I always remember this scripture as I was not allowed to partake of the sacrament for awhile...but golly gee...Bishop has been bringing damnation to his soul for how many years???

I think it's terrible to tell someone not to partake of the sacrament. I'm sorry you had to go through that. Now, if I was told not to, I would anyway. It's between the Lord and ourselves. He wants us to take it in rememberance of him. Whichever leader who started this business of not taking it, is wrong.

Edited April 6, 2018 by Tacenda

[Jeanne]

Just now, Tacenda said:

I think it's terrible to tell someone not to partake of the sacrament. I'm sorry you had to go through that. Now, if I was told not to, I would anyway. It's between the Lord and ourselves. He wants us to take it in rememberance of him. Whichever leader who started this business of not taking it, is wrong.

Thank you...it took great courage to go to the Bishop at time..I was trying to get sealed to Shane...but in a small ward..it was total humiliation for one who was trying to make amends.  It is over now..what happens now is that I have made my own promises and covenants to God and the Savior..it is between us. 

[carbon dioxide]

1 hour ago, hope_for_things said:

Honest question, why does there need to be a gatekeeper to judge things for temple attendance?  What is the reasoning behind that.  I'm questioning the assumptions that you're starting with.  

Because God apparently requires it.  The temple is not an open house.  God does things in order.  Back to my original question.

"How do you propose that the Church could determine the worthiness of a member without an interview?" 

You responded "Each individual should determine their own worthiness."

It is important for us to to determine whether we are worthy or not but that is not the question.  My question is what mechanism should the church have to do as much as possible to determine the worthiness of an individual member for the temple or a position or calling in the Church?  Having the individual determine it is not a real mechanism for the church.  What must the Church do.  So far the answer I am getting is "do nothing".  Just let the individual members decide.  Interviews don't stop everyone but it may stop many as they might be more honest with themselves if they are discussing things with someone else.  If we all decide on our own if we are worthy or not, many of us may rationalize or dismiss something as not important when in fact it is important. 

 

 

[smac97]

1 minute ago, Tacenda said:

Quote

Well hey....I always remember this scripture as I was not allowed to partake of the sacrament for awhile...but golly gee...Bishop has been bringing damnation to his soul for how many years???

I think it's terrible to tell someone not to partake of the sacrament. I'm sorry you had to go through that.  Now, if I was told not to, I would anyway. It's between the Lord and ourselves.

How do you reconcile this with 3 Nephi 18?

Quote

28 And now behold, this is the commandment which I give unto you, that ye shall not suffer any one knowingly to partake of my flesh and blood unworthily, when ye shall minister it;
29 For whoso eateth and drinketh my flesh and blood unworthily eateth and drinketh damnation to his soul; therefore if ye know that a man is unworthy to eat and drink of my flesh and blood ye shall forbid him.

Sounds like it's not only"between the Lord and ourselves."

1 minute ago, Tacenda said:

He wants us to take it in rememberance of him. Whichever leader who started this business of not taking it, is wrong.

That leader was . . . Jesus Christ.

Thanks,

-Smac

[Tacenda]

2 minutes ago, Jeanne said:

Thank you...it took great courage to go to the Bishop at time..I was trying to get sealed to Shane...but in a small ward..it was total humiliation for one who was trying to make amends.  It is over now..what happens now is that I have made my own promises and covenants to God and the Savior..it is between us. 

I bet the Lord/God get sick of people interfering.

[Tacenda]

3 minutes ago, smac97 said:

How do you reconcile this with 3 Nephi 18?

Sounds like it's not only"between the Lord and ourselves."

That leader was . . . Jesus Christ.

Thanks,

-Smac

CFR, I read through the scriptures you provided. Very contradictory.

Edited April 6, 2018 by Tacenda

[smac97]

3 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

Quote

How do you reconcile this with 3 Nephi 18?

Sounds like it's not only"between the Lord and ourselves."

That leader was . . . Jesus Christ.

Thanks,

-Smac

CFR

CFR for what?  Are you looking for something other than 3 Nephi 18?

Thanks,

-Smac

Edited April 6, 2018 by smac97

[Jeanne]

2 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

I bet the Lord/God get sick of people interfering.

There was definitely set backs to my own progression and the goals/relationship that I wanted with the Savior because of all that went on in between.  There should be no judge in Israel...just a wonderful friend that guides and directs...and above all supports.

[Tacenda]

4 minutes ago, smac97 said:

CFR what?  Are you looking for something other than 3 Nephi 18?

Thanks,

-Smac

Personally I believe Joseph used a lot of scriptures from the Holy Bible, and put into the BoM. But I think many misunderstand the scripture in the Bible. Here is an interesting article about that. https://escapetoreality.org/2011/04/10/taking-communion-in-an-unworthy-manner/

[smac97]

2 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

Personally I believe Joseph used a lot of scriptures from the Holy Bible, and put into the BoM. But I think many misunderstand the scripture in the Bible. Here is an interesting article about that. https://escapetoreality.org/2011/04/10/taking-communion-in-an-unworthy-manner/

Hmm.  It sounds like your viewpoint is only tenuously tethered to the scriptures.  If there is a conflict arises between your personal opinion and the scriptures, you can simply ignore or dismiss the latter in favor of the former.

I respect your right to hold that view, but I will respectfully disagree with you about it.  The Sacrament is a sacred ordinance, and therefore has some conditions regarding worthiness.  3 Nephi 18 addresses that to some extent, as does Mormon 9:29 ("See that ye are not baptized unworthily; see that ye partake not of the sacrament of Christ unworthily; but see that ye do all things in worthiness, and do it in the name of Jesus Christ, the Son of the living God; and if ye do this, and endure to the end, ye will in nowise be cast out.").  

I think rejection of these scriptures is usually ad hoc.  A person dislikes them or finds them contrary to his/her personal opinion, and so rejects or ignores them.

I think we have a hard enough time with being selectively obedient to the commandments of God.  But to deliberately and emphatically brush off clear scriptural guidance about partaking of sacred ordinances, and to instead publicly declare - as you have done - that you would specifically and knowingly disobey those in authority, is troubling and problematic.  I hope you give this matter some further thought and consideration.

Thanks,

-Smac

[Tacenda]

1 minute ago, smac97 said:

Hmm.  It sounds like your viewpoint is only tenuously tethered to the scriptures.  If there is a conflict arises between your personal opinion and the scriptures, you can simply ignore or dismiss the latter in favor of the former.

I respect your right to hold that view, but I will respectfully disagree with you about it.  The Sacrament is a sacred ordinance, and therefore has some conditions regarding worthiness.  3 Nephi 18 addresses that to some extent, as does Mormon 9:29 ("See that ye are not baptized unworthily; see that ye partake not of the sacrament of Christ unworthily; but see that ye do all things in worthiness, and do it in the name of Jesus Christ, the Son of the living God; and if ye do this, and endure to the end, ye will in nowise be cast out.").  

I think rejection of these scriptures is usually ad hoc.  A person dislikes them or finds them contrary to his/her personal opinion, and so rejects or ignores them.

I think we have a hard enough time with being selectively obedient to the commandments of God.  But to deliberately and emphatically brush off clear scriptural guidance about partaking of sacred ordinances, and to instead publicly declare - as you have done - that you would specifically and knowingly disobey those in authority, is troubling and problematic.  I hope you give this matter some further thought and consideration.

Thanks,

-Smac

Personal revelation.

[hope_for_things]

1 hour ago, smac97 said:

Okay.  You said "Each individual should determine their own worthiness."

To which I responded: "Then why have 'judges in Israel?'"

What are your thoughts?  What are bishops supposed to "judge?"

Thanks,

-Smac

Too much "judging" in the Mormon and conservative Christian traditions from my vantage point.  I think an honest examination of the purpose of this concept and the values of the gospel would likely lead to a change in practice and hopefully a change in culture as well.  

[hope_for_things]

41 minutes ago, CV75 said:

"Judge" means "ruler" or "president" -- the Lord's house of order entails priesthood keys and various offices to preside over all the activities which take place within.

There a many words in canon that generally are not taken in a literal face value kind of way.  

[Tacenda]

2 minutes ago, hope_for_things said:

Too much "judging" in the Mormon and conservative Christian traditions from my vantage point.  I think an honest examination of the purpose of this concept and the values of the gospel would likely lead to a change in practice and hopefully a change in culture as well.  

 

7 minutes ago, smac97 said:

Hmm.  It sounds like your viewpoint is only tenuously tethered to the scriptures.  If there is a conflict arises between your personal opinion and the scriptures, you can simply ignore or dismiss the latter in favor of the former.

I respect your right to hold that view, but I will respectfully disagree with you about it.  The Sacrament is a sacred ordinance, and therefore has some conditions regarding worthiness.  3 Nephi 18 addresses that to some extent, as does Mormon 9:29 ("See that ye are not baptized unworthily; see that ye partake not of the sacrament of Christ unworthily; but see that ye do all things in worthiness, and do it in the name of Jesus Christ, the Son of the living God; and if ye do this, and endure to the end, ye will in nowise be cast out.").  

I think rejection of these scriptures is usually ad hoc.  A person dislikes them or finds them contrary to his/her personal opinion, and so rejects or ignores them.

I think we have a hard enough time with being selectively obedient to the commandments of God.  But to deliberately and emphatically brush off clear scriptural guidance about partaking of sacred ordinances, and to instead publicly declare - as you have done - that you would specifically and knowingly disobey those in authority, is troubling and problematic.  I hope you give this matter some further thought and consideration.

Thanks,

-Smac

Here is another good article. It mentions that really we are all unworthy. https://bycommonconsent.com/2017/10/29/on-visibly-not-partaking-of-the-sacrament/ I do see that it's not good for someone that takes the sacrament and really thinks it a joke, or mocks it shouldn't take it. But for the rest, they are showing faith by taking it. 

[smac97]

1 minute ago, hope_for_things said:

Quote

Okay.  You said "Each individual should determine their own worthiness."

To which I responded: "Then why have 'judges in Israel?'"

What are your thoughts?  What are bishops supposed to "judge?"

Thanks,

-Smac

Too much "judging" in the Mormon and conservative Christian traditions from my vantage point. 

Quite right.  But then, there are times when there is not enough "judging" in Mormonism, wouldn't you say?  Witness the recent scandal involving Joseph Bishop, which includes a bishop to whom allegations of abuse was reported, but who failed to report those allegations to law enforcement or to the Church.  There are also allegations that Elder Asay knew, but did nothing.  There are also allegations and Elder Wells knew, and did nothing. 

The second biggest grievance in the Joseph Bishop matter (second to the alleged misconduct itself) is that ecclesiastical leaders failed to act when made aware of the allegations.  In other words, a lack of "judging."

1 minute ago, hope_for_things said:

I think an honest examination of the purpose of this concept and the values of the gospel would likely lead to a change in practice and hopefully a change in culture as well.  

Okay.  That is what I am trying to understand.  I'd like to "honestly examine" this with you.  Perhaps we could start with my question: What, in your view, are bishops supposed to "judge?"

Thanks,

-Smac

[smac97]

9 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

Personal revelation.

Personal revelation that conflicts with the scriptures and those in authority.

I've said my piece.  You must do what you think it right.  I hope you grant the same dispensation to others.

Thanks,

-Smac

[Tacenda]

2 minutes ago, smac97 said:

Personal revelation that conflicts with the scriptures and those in authority.

I've said my piece.  You must do what you think it right.  I hope you grant the same dispensation to others.

Thanks,

-Smac

I do Smac, I'm just in this place right now, that I'm very suspcious with mortals right now. Thanks for being patient and not getting too sick of me and still replying.

[smac97]

3 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

Here is another good article. It mentions that really we are all unworthy. https://bycommonconsent.com/2017/10/29/on-visibly-not-partaking-of-the-sacrament/ I do see that it's not good for someone that takes the sacrament and really thinks it a joke, or mocks it shouldn't take it. But for the rest, they are showing faith by taking it. 

What about people who are in the midst of some great sin, and unrepentantly so?  A man in the midst of adulterous affair?  A woman who has been coercing her infirm grandmother into signing over money and property?  A former missionary who, prior to serving his mission, got a girl pregnant and then pressured her into getting an abortion?

Do you approve of these people doing what you propose for yourself?  Taking the Sacrament, even when instructed not to by the bishop?

Thanks,

-Smac

[hope_for_things]

31 minutes ago, carbon dioxide said:

Because God apparently requires it.  The temple is not an open house.  God does things in order. 

More assumptions.  Does God require it, or do you require it? 

31 minutes ago, carbon dioxide said:

"How do you propose that the Church could determine the worthiness of a member without an interview?" 

You responded "Each individual should determine their own worthiness."

It is important for us to to determine whether we are worthy or not but that is not the question.  My question is what mechanism should the church have to do as much as possible to determine the worthiness of an individual member for the temple or a position or calling in the Church?  Having the individual determine it is not a real mechanism for the church.  What must the Church do.  So far the answer I am getting is "do nothing".  Just let the individual members decide.  Interviews don't stop everyone but it may stop many as they might be more honest with themselves if they are discussing things with someone else.  If we all decide on our own if we are worthy or not, many of us may rationalize or dismiss something as not important when in fact it is important. 

It seems to me that different methods could be used to fit different situations.  Calling someone to a position of responsibility requires a different level of scrutiny than allowing someone to attend a place of worship.  Think of this from a business perspective, would you apply the same level of decision making in hiring a CFO as you would with determining what kinds of customers you would offer credit to at your store?  Different situations.  

In today's LDS interview practice individuals largely determine their own worthiness.  The interviews are functionally just a routine that doesn't provide any significant level of ecclesiastical judgment.  And considering that there is a lot of baggage around the concept of worthiness and how it is typically wielded in our culture, I see a lot of practical value in significant revision of the current structure.  

[Jeanne]

5 minutes ago, smac97 said:

What about people who are in the midst of some great sin, and unrepentantly so?  A man in the midst of adulterous affair?  A woman who has been coercing her infirm grandmother into signing over money and property?  A former missionary who, prior to serving his mission, got a girl pregnant and then pressured her into getting an abortion?

Do you approve of these people doing what you propose for yourself?  Taking the Sacrament, even when instructed not to by the bishop?

Thanks,

-Smac

It is neither yours or Tacenda's call...it is between these people and God..and they understand the perils of their sins in your religion as taught..so let them drink damnation to their souls..it is still...not your call.  Unless it has to do with the laws of the land..it is not your call.

Edited April 6, 2018 by Jeanne

[Tacenda]

Just now, smac97 said:

What about people who are in the midst of some great sin, and unrepentantly so?  A man in the midst of adulterous affair?  A woman who has been coercing her infirm grandmother into signing over money and property?  A former missionary who, prior to serving his mission, got a girl pregnant and then pressured her into getting an abortion?

Do you approve of these people doing what you propose for yourself?  Taking the Sacrament, even when instructed not to by the bishop?

Thanks,

-Smac

To me, I believe it can be especially needed for people that have sinned. As Elder Uchtdorf has mentioned, everyone sins differently. I believe the Sacrament is about the Atonement. The guy pressuring someone to get an abortion, and isn't after forgiveness may be a different story, many variables I guess. I'm just feeling for those that need the sacrament in their lives I guess.

[CV75]

14 minutes ago, hope_for_things said:

There a many words in canon that generally are not taken in a literal face value kind of way.  

Yes there are no there aren't LOL

[hope_for_things]

11 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

 

Here is another good article. It mentions that really we are all unworthy. https://bycommonconsent.com/2017/10/29/on-visibly-not-partaking-of-the-sacrament/ I do see that it's not good for someone that takes the sacrament and really thinks it a joke, or mocks it shouldn't take it. But for the rest, they are showing faith by taking it. 

I understand the author's discomfort with the public nature of non-participation in the sacrament, and I agree with that problem.  But I disagree that we are all unworthy and I find that characterization of our inherent position with respect to God antithetical a core principle of the nature of us as humans and the universe that we are a part of.  

I personally like to think that we are all worthy, that there is inherent good, and life within everyone.