Missionaries and Discernment

[Navidad]

Quick question - in missionary training is there anything that teaches missionaries to evaluate the spiritual condition of people to whom they are ministering? Is it possible for a missionary to spend time with a person and come to the conclusion that they are Christians, love the Lord, and are faithful in their faith, and then decide to move on without a sigh; without needing to "convert" them? Or is it simply a matter that everyone who is not a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints should be and therefore needs to be ministered to until they make the right decision - joining the Church? I am really trying to understand the nature of the LDS acceptance of other Christians as true brothers and sisters in Christ and not in just the sense that one day they were spirit brothers and sisters. Are missionaries taught to discern the spiritual condition of those with whom they come in contact?

[The Nehor]

Why would we do that? Leave them as Perfidious Papists? Healthen Methodists? Apostate Anglicans? Lascivious Lutherans? Pernicious Presbyterians? Belial-Worshipping Baptists? Baleful Born Agains? Aberrant Amish? Never, Sir! Never!

[Navidad]

Wow, I like that reply! I am somewhere between a Belial

-Worhipping Baptist, a Baleful Born Again, an Aberrant Amish, and a dry Mormon!

[Gray]

14 hours ago, Navidad said:

Quick question - in missionary training is there anything that teaches missionaries to evaluate the spiritual condition of people to whom they are ministering? Is it possible for a missionary to spend time with a person and come to the conclusion that they are Christians, love the Lord, and are faithful in their faith, and then decide to move on without a sigh; without needing to "convert" them? Or is it simply a matter that everyone who is not a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints should be and therefore needs to be ministered to until they make the right decision - joining the Church? I am really trying to understand the nature of the LDS acceptance of other Christians as true brothers and sisters in Christ and not in just the sense that one day they were spirit brothers and sisters. Are missionaries taught to discern the spiritual condition of those with whom they come in contact?

I've never seen any instructions for something like that at any level of the church. It's treated like a spiritual gift that you either have or do not have.

Edited August 29, 2018 by Gray

[Hamba Tuhan]

2 hours ago, Navidad said:

Is it possible for a missionary to spend time with a person and come to the conclusion that they are Christians, love the Lord, and are faithful in their faith ...

Yes, absolutely! I've personally had that experience many times, both as a missionary and since.

Quote

... and then decide to move on without a sigh; without needing to "convert" them?

Why would I move on if I have anything to offer them though? I mean, I don't think Andrew doubted the sincere faith of his brother, but he still sought Simon Peter out with the news that he had found the Messiah.

Quote

I am really trying to understand the nature of the LDS acceptance of other Christians as true brothers and sisters in Christ and not in just the sense that one day they were spirit brothers and sisters.

I certainly feel true brotherhood with anyone who has faith in Christ. For me it's like concentric circles. I relate best to people who believe in God (outer circle). I feel a real kinship with fellow Christians (inner circle). I enjoy an intimacy of shared experience with fellow Latter-day Saints (innermost circle).

[Jane_Doe]

3 hours ago, Navidad said:

 spend time with a person and come to the conclusion that they are Christians, love the Lord, and are faithful in their faith, and then decide to move on without a sigh; without needing to "convert" them? 

If a person is an Evangelical with a testimony of Christ, then of course they are Christians and love the Lord and their faith!  Same with Baptists, Catholics, Orthodox, and all other Christians.  We recognize and CELEBRATE the love of Christ every one of these individuals have.  

A LDS person (or missionary specifically) has zero interest in destroying that love of Christ.  Offering to teach that person more of Christ and hopefully draw them closer to Christ is the goal.  And of course that hand is always going to be extended for those that want to take it.   And those that don't want to take it, we shall still pray along side you and celebrate our mutual Savior.  

3 hours ago, Navidad said:

it simply a matter that everyone who is not a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints should be and therefore needs to be ministered to until they make the right decision - joining the Church?

LDS ministering isn't dependent on a person being LDS or not.  We keep ministering and serving those who aren't LDS, and those that are.  

3 hours ago, Navidad said:

 I am really trying to understand the nature of the LDS acceptance of other Christians as true brothers and sisters in Christ and not in just the sense that one day they were spirit brothers and sisters. 

Speaking personally, 2 of the 3 people I most spiritually confide in are not LDS-- one's Evangelical, the other non-denominational.  They are indeed my brothers and sisters.  Do I think that them having more truth and growing closer to Christ would be a good thing-- of course, for all three (including the LDS one), and myself too.  A deeper closeness to God is always something to be celebrated and strive for.

[Navidad]

I appreciate all the answers. It is still confusing to me. Might not their evangelical brother in Christ have something to teach a Saint, to add to their faith? Might not the evangelical be stronger spiritually and be able to help a Saint grow in their faith without even thinking about converting them away from their Mormon Christian faith? I don't understand the assumption that the Saint has something more to teach, to give to the evangelical as an apriori assumption? I believe the bishop of our ward is a very Godly man who can teach me a lot. I love spending time with him as we drive and walk our area looking for historic sites. Certainly I can learn from him. I also believe he would say he has learned from me. Perhaps not; I don't want to speak for him.

But I am certain that I have been of spiritual help to other members of the ward we attend who are struggling with different things in their lives. It would never enter my mind to do so by "converting" them to a different faith, but by offering to them whatever I have learned in my 64 years as a believer. I do not believe my faith group affiliation is better than theirs, just that maybe I can help from my years of walking hand in hand with Christ. It isn't our church or denominational affiliation that makes us spiritual; it is the strength or weakness of our walk with Christ that does that. Isn't that right? I want to ask, aren't there stronger and weaker brothers in every faith?

I am not who I am because of my church affiliation. No saint is spiritually-minded simply because of their church affiliation. Or is that simply not something a Saint considers? Does every Mormon believe he or she has something to add to every non-Mormon? I certainly believe that I can learn from any strong Christian brother or sister. I often think that of five people who have really impacted my life spiritually in a wonderful way; two are Mormon, one was Presbyterian (he has passed away), one was Anglican (he has passed away), and one is Mennonite.  None of the five are special because of their denominational affiliation; all are special because of the closeness of their walk with Christ. They have inspired and ministered to me. No one of them had more to add to my walk than any other, but by their walk with the Lord, they hae each taught me something different.  Guess I have said enough. I really am trying to understand. I trust you all will be patient with me. I am not challenging; I am questioning. It was a year ago yesterday I joined this board. I was active for a while and then got discouraged, so I stepped away. I am trying again. Thanks, Phil

[Storm Rider]

4 minutes ago, Navidad said:

I appreciate all the answers. It is still confusing to me. Might not their evangelical brother in Christ have something to teach a Saint, to add to their faith? Might not the evangelical be stronger spiritually and be able to help a Saint grow in their faith without even thinking about converting them away from their Mormon Christian faith? I don't understand the assumption that the Saint has something more to teach, to give to the evangelical as an apriori assumption? I believe the bishop of our ward is a very Godly man who can teach me a lot. I love spending time with him as we drive and walk our area looking for historic sites. Certainly I can learn from him. I also believe he would say he has learned from me. Perhaps not; I don't want to speak for him.

But I am certain that I have been of spiritual help to other members of the ward we attend who are struggling with different things in their lives. It would never enter my mind to do so by "converting" them to a different faith, but by offering to them whatever I have learned in my 64 years as a believer. I do not believe my faith group affiliation is better than theirs, just that maybe I can help from my years of walking hand in hand with Christ. It isn't our church or denominational affiliation that makes us spiritual; it is the strength or weakness of our walk with Christ that does that. Isn't that right? I want to ask, aren't there stronger and weaker brothers in every faith?

I am not who I am because of my church affiliation. No saint is spiritually-minded simply because of their church affiliation. Or is that simply not something a Saint considers? Does every Mormon believe he or she has something to add to every non-Mormon? I certainly believe that I can learn from any strong Christian brother or sister. I often think that of five people who have really impacted my life spiritually in a wonderful way; two are Mormon, one was Presbyterian (he has passed away), one was Anglican (he has passed away), and one is Mennonite.  None of the five are special because of their denominational affiliation; all are special because of the closeness of their walk with Christ. They have inspired and ministered to me. No one of them had more to add to my walk than any other, but by their walk with the Lord, they hae each taught me something different.  Guess I have said enough. I really am trying to understand. I trust you all will be patient with me. I am not challenging; I am questioning. It was a year ago yesterday I joined this board. I was active for a while and then got discouraged, so I stepped away. I am trying again. Thanks, Phil

There seems to be a lot of confusion here. First, learning from others is a given regardless of their religion or even their church affiliation. Several of the prophets have been very clear that the Restored Gospel does not possess all truth - why would we doubt that?

The Restored Gospel of Jesus Christ is a gospel of Exaltation. The truth and the keys of the priesthood that we do possess enable each and every individual to receive the ordinances of Exaltation. Again, simply because one receives these ordinances does not immediately bestow spiritual grandeur or even faith. What it signifies is that such an individual has chosen to be a seeker of truth and has found the gospel. The path to walk remains in front of them.

Phil, it is good to have you here and I enjoy your comments and questions. All the best, Michael

[Jane_Doe]

9 minutes ago, Navidad said:

Might not their evangelical brother in Christ have something to teach a Saint, to add to their faith?

Of course, I've totally been in that position.  

9 minutes ago, Navidad said:

 Might not the evangelical be stronger spiritually and be able to help a Saint grow in their faith without even thinking about converting them away from their Mormon Christian faith?

Of course to that as well.  I've also been in that position.  '

9 minutes ago, Navidad said:

I don't understand the assumption that the Saint has something more to teach, to give to the evangelical as an apriori assumption? I believe the bishop of our ward is a very Godly man who can teach me a lot. I love spending time with him as we drive and walk our area looking for historic sites. Certainly I can learn from him. I also believe he would say he has learned from me. Perhaps not; I don't want to speak for him.

Phil, you by all means bring the many good things you have to the table and we shall as well.  Let us all share our love of Christ, our perspectives, and be strong disciples for it.  

9 minutes ago, Navidad said:

But I am certain that I have been of spiritual help to other members of the ward we attend who are struggling with different things in their lives. It would never enter my mind to do so by "converting" them to a different faith, but by offering to them whatever I have learned in my 64 years as a believer. I do not believe my faith group affiliation is better than theirs, just that maybe I can help from my years of walking hand in hand with Christ. It isn't our church or denominational affiliation that makes us spiritual; it is the strength or weakness of our walk with Christ that does that. Isn't that right? I want to ask, aren't there stronger and weaker brothers in every faith?

Totally!  

For LDS, merely signing up to be a on paper member of a denomination is... frankly it's missing the boat- big time.  The point is to be stronger disciples of Christ.  And yes, the default LDS position is that the LDS faith is the most true and best natures that-- just like Catholics hold the same position about the Catholic faith, Baptist about Baptist, etc.  But I know that my non-demonaitonal friend has inspired me to be a better disciple of Christ, and I have likewise inspired her.  No denomination change for either of us, but indeed deeper discipleship.  

9 minutes ago, Navidad said:

I am not who I am because of my church affiliation. No saint is spiritually-minded simply because of their church affiliation. 

Of course :).  

9 minutes ago, Navidad said:

 Does every Mormon believe he or she has something to add to every non-Mormon? 

Every disciple of Christ has something to add to another.  Even if that person teaching is just a child, sharing that pure and simple testimony. 

9 minutes ago, Navidad said:

all are special because of the closeness of their walk with Christ. They have inspired and ministered to me. No one of them had more to add to my walk than any other, but by their walk with the Lord, they hae each taught me something different.  

Yahoo!!!

9 minutes ago, Navidad said:

Guess I have said enough. I really am trying to understand. I trust you all will be patient with me. I am not challenging; I am questioning. It was a year ago yesterday I joined this board. I was active for a while and then got discouraged, so I stepped away. I am trying again. Thanks, Phil

I am happy to help and share perspective always, either on the public board or via PM .

[Hamba Tuhan]

38 minutes ago, Navidad said:

Might not their evangelical brother in Christ have something to teach a Saint, to add to their faith?

Absolutely! Like Jane, I've been in that very position.

It's not about who knows more or is stronger. But if the Restoration really occurred, and if prophets of the Living Christ are once again on earth, then that is worth sharing regardless of little else I know or how weak I am. Does that make any sense?

[CV75]

15 hours ago, Navidad said:

Quick question - in missionary training is there anything that teaches missionaries to evaluate the spiritual condition of people to whom they are ministering? Is it possible for a missionary to spend time with a person and come to the conclusion that they are Christians, love the Lord, and are faithful in their faith, and then decide to move on without a sigh; without needing to "convert" them? Or is it simply a matter that everyone who is not a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints should be and therefore needs to be ministered to until they make the right decision - joining the Church? I am really trying to understand the nature of the LDS acceptance of other Christians as true brothers and sisters in Christ and not in just the sense that one day they were spirit brothers and sisters. Are missionaries taught to discern the spiritual condition of those with whom they come in contact?

No, but that doesn't prevent the Holy Spirit from giving them discernment to give those with whom they have contact what they need and / or are prepared to receive.

[The Nehor]

I forgot the Ebola-infected Evangelicals. No slight was intended by this omission.

Edited August 29, 2018 by The Nehor

[Navidad]

16 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

I forgot the Ebola-infected Evangelicals. No slight was intended by this omission.

Oh my, now you sound like the Talmage book on the Apostasy! 😃

[Navidad]

I appreciate all the answers to my question except those of Nehor. BTW, wasn't Nehor a pretty bad guy in the BOM? Now I understand! 😄 

Perhaps it would help me if I ask my questions in a more specific and direct manner. I started this thread so I wouldn't be hijacking any other thread and so that folks who have no interest in it, simply don't have to engage. I don't want to overwhelm anyone with my questions, so I decided to limit them to six which are important to me as I try and understand LDS doctrine, practice, and culture. I include culture because of my particular faith background where culture often gets confused with doctrine and practice. I think my questions are non-offensive. Your answers might not be, but I want the truth and I can handle it! I just ordered Millet's book on the Holy Spirit. I hope that will answer other questions I have.  Well, here we go:

1. Does the LDS use of the term “the gospel” refer only to the specific system of Mormon beliefs? Does the “gospel of Jesus Christ” refer only to the system of Mormon beliefs? Or the term “Jesus Christ and his gospel” – does that refer only to a Mormon system of belief? When folks refer to the “the gospel” in sacrament meeting are they referring to the gospel – the good news – the atonement and the gift of God of Romans 6: 23 or a specific LDS doctrine of the good news that is valid or relevant to Latter-day Saints? I ask this because I have always thought of "the gospel" as a Christian belief, not tied to one group's definition. I think that isn't the case for Saints, but I am not sure.

2. The Encyclopedia of Mormonism on page 649 says “In a figurative sense, the Holy Spirit dwells in the hearts of the righteous Saints of all dispensations.” Are these “Saints” – note the capital S -  only Mormons? Do Mormons believe the indwelling of the Holy Spirit is “figurative” and not “literal . . . even for Saints?”

3. Joseph Smith seemed to imply that all Non-Mormon baptisms are like baptizing a “bag of sand” and not “a man.” See quote on p. 649 and the following text of the above encyclopedia. Is that still the perspective of current day Latter-day Saints?

4. As a non-Mormon Christian elder do I hold any authority or keys? Were all the baptisms (only by immersion of those beyond the age of accountability) I have performed in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit fraudulent, or if that is too strong a word - of no avail – rejected by God because I am a non-Mormon Christian ordained minister?

5 Page 649 and 650 of the Encyclopedia state “the whole system of salvation centers on the process of sanctification.” As a non-Mormon Christian can I commit my life to an ever-increasing sanctification and desire to practice holiness and not be involved in a fruitless pursuit?

6. I have been told by Mormons that, as a non-Mormon Christian my spiritual condition is considered by “The Church” to be the same as a Muslim, a Buddhist, a Hindu, or an animist. Is that true?

I am attaching to this post a copy of the Sacrament talk I gave in our ward a couple of months ago. The roof did not cave in, nor did the presiding elder shut down the service. I offer this to you all so that you might understand me better as I ask my questions.

Thanks,

Phil

 

Sacrament Talk.docx

[mfbukowski]

20 hours ago, Navidad said:

Quick question - in missionary training is there anything that teaches missionaries to evaluate the spiritual condition of people to whom they are ministering? Is it possible for a missionary to spend time with a person and come to the conclusion that they are Christians, love the Lord, and are faithful in their faith, and then decide to move on without a sigh; without needing to "convert" them? Or is it simply a matter that everyone who is not a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints should be and therefore needs to be ministered to until they make the right decision - joining the Church? I am really trying to understand the nature of the LDS acceptance of other Christians as true brothers and sisters in Christ and not in just the sense that one day they were spirit brothers and sisters. Are missionaries taught to discern the spiritual condition of those with whom they come in contact?

Honestly I do not understand why you are so interested in whether or not we see others as "true brothers in Christ"- when I don't know why that is important or even what that means.

Why is it important to you?

Should I be interested in whether or not YOU see US as "Brothers in Christ?"

It sounds to me a like a doctrinal issue in someone else's church- like being concerned that some denomination baptizes differently than your denomination or something like that.

I mean it might be interesting information to know how every denomination feels about baptism etc, but why is it so important for you whether or not we see others as "Brothers in Christ"?

Sorry I just don't get it.   Good to see you back but it seems a few years ago you were asking the same questions and now you are back again with still the same questions apparently yet unanswered.

Sorry I don't want to be rude- I just don't get it that's all! 

Do you think anything has changed since the last time you were here?   Like then we did not see you that way and now we do?

Evangelicals call us a "cult" and say we worship "another Jesus" and call us all kinds of things and we just kind of let it run off, because we don't care what they think- at least speaking for me!

So why do you care so much what we think?

Just be secure in your beliefs and go where God leads you.  You don't have to worry about what others think of of you.

Sorry I just don't get your concern...   I don't ask the Mennonites what they think of us either.  Judging from your posts- it's not very positive.

 

Edited August 29, 2018 by mfbukowski

[The Nehor]

2 hours ago, Navidad said:

I appreciate all the answers to my question except those of Nehor. BTW, wasn't Nehor a pretty bad guy in the BOM? Now I understand! 😄 

Perhaps it would help me if I ask my questions in a more specific and direct manner. I started this thread so I wouldn't be hijacking any other thread and so that folks who have no interest in it, simply don't have to engage. I don't want to overwhelm anyone with my questions, so I decided to limit them to six which are important to me as I try and understand LDS doctrine, practice, and culture. I include culture because of my particular faith background where culture often gets confused with doctrine and practice. I think my questions are non-offensive. Your answers might not be, but I want the truth and I can handle it! I just ordered Millet's book on the Holy Spirit. I hope that will answer other questions I have.  Well, here we go:

1. Does the LDS use of the term “the gospel” refer only to the specific system of Mormon beliefs? Does the “gospel of Jesus Christ” refer only to the system of Mormon beliefs? Or the term “Jesus Christ and his gospel” – does that refer only to a Mormon system of belief? When folks refer to the “the gospel” in sacrament meeting are they referring to the gospel – the good news – the atonement and the gift of God of Romans 6: 23 or a specific LDS doctrine of the good news that is valid or relevant to Latter-day Saints? I ask this because I have always thought of "the gospel" as a Christian belief, not tied to one group's definition. I think that isn't the case for Saints, but I am not sure.

 

2. The Encyclopedia of Mormonism on page 649 says “In a figurative sense, the Holy Spirit dwells in the hearts of the righteous Saints of all dispensations.” Are these “Saints” – note the capital S -  only Mormons? Do Mormons believe the indwelling of the Holy Spirit is “figurative” and not “literal . . . even for Saints?”

 

3. Joseph Smith seemed to imply that all Non-Mormon baptisms are like baptizing a “bag of sand” and not “a man.” See quote on p. 649 and the following text of the above encyclopedia. Is that still the perspective of current day Latter-day Saints?

 

4. As a non-Mormon Christian elder do I hold any authority or keys? Were all the baptisms (only by immersion of those beyond the age of accountability) I have performed in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit fraudulent, or if that is too strong a word - of no avail – rejected by God because I am a non-Mormon Christian ordained minister?

 

5 Page 649 and 650 of the Encyclopedia state “the whole system of salvation centers on the process of sanctification.” As a non-Mormon Christian can I commit my life to an ever-increasing sanctification and desire to practice holiness and not be involved in a fruitless pursuit?

 

6. I have been told by Mormons that, as a non-Mormon Christian my spiritual condition is considered by “The Church” to be the same as a Muslim, a Buddhist, a Hindu, or an animist. Is that true?

I am attaching to this post a copy of the Sacrament talk I gave in our ward a couple of months ago. The roof did not cave in, nor did the presiding elder shut down the service. I offer this to you all so that you might understand me better as I ask my questions.

 

 

Thanks,

Phil

 

Sacrament Talk.docx

Oh sure, single me out. To your questions:

1. Yes, it is limited to LDS in its fullness. Others have pieces of the gospel which is better then nothing but only the LDS have power to make binding covenants with God.

2. Only the LDS have a right to the continuous presence of the Holy Ghost (based on righteousness and obedience). Others can experience the Holy Ghost and we do not presume to dictate to a member of the Godhead who he wishes to communicate with.

3. The bag of sand quote I know of is about baptizing and not giving the gift of the Holy Ghost afterwards and has nothing to do with other faiths. That might be a different quote though. But yeah, our scriptures have Jesus himself calling baptisms into other faiths without authority “dead works”.

4. Yeah, you have no authority or keys and such ordinances are not binding in heaven. They might serve as a symbol of devotion which might be good in its own way or at least is harmless.

5. There are limits to sanctification without the ordinances of the gospel. All faiths and people of no faith can cultivate goodness but only through Priesthood power and ordinances is godliness manifest. So it is not fruitless to seek purity but it requires more to achieve the end for which you are created.

6. I dislike this generalization. There is no ranking of faiths in terms of member righteousness or purity. The LDS faith is the one truth faith and that means that living it fully has the greatest rewards. It also contains weaklings less spiritually developed then those of other faiths and, in my experience, also contains the worst of the worst among our membership and former members. In LDS doctrine, to fall to the bottom and become like the devil you have to be affiliated with our faith (or it’s equivalent in other dispensations) at some point as well.

I found part of your sacrament talk offensive. You begin a paragraph with “In conclusion” and you are only a little over halfway through the talk. Lying is wrong......particularly when done in Church.  

[Jane_Doe]

Happy to answer/help.

3 hours ago, Navidad said:

1. Does the LDS use of the term “the gospel” refer only to the specific system of Mormon beliefs? Does the “gospel of Jesus Christ” refer only to the system of Mormon beliefs? Or the term “Jesus Christ and his gospel” – does that refer only to a Mormon system of belief? When folks refer to the “the gospel” in sacrament meeting are they referring to the gospel – the good news – the atonement and the gift of God of Romans 6: 23 or a specific LDS doctrine of the good news that is valid or relevant to Latter-day Saints? I ask this because I have always thought of "the gospel" as a Christian belief, not tied to one group's definition. I think that isn't the case for Saints, but I am not sure.

"The Gospel" = The Good News.  The amazing news of Christ's birth, death, resurrection, and that all mankind may be saved.  Other Christian churches do indeed preach the Gospel and many good things-- yes the Romans 6:23.  They do also (from the LDS perspective) get something wrong, are missing somethings, and aren't His Church, you will sometimes hear an LDS person refer to LDS beliefs as "the fullness of the Gospel".  

3 hours ago, Navidad said:

2. The Encyclopedia of Mormonism on page 649 says “In a figurative sense, the Holy Spirit dwells in the hearts of the righteous Saints of all dispensations.” Are these “Saints” – note the capital S -  only Mormons? Do Mormons believe the indwelling of the Holy Spirit is “figurative” and not “literal . . . even for Saints?”

Short answer: The Holy Spirit / Holy Ghost is the third member of the Godhead.  He is a 100% divine person, just like Christ and the Father.  He testifies of Truth to ALL men.  After a person is baptized by a person holding Christ's Priesthood, they have the are confirmed a member of His Church and receive the Gift of the Holy Ghost by the laying on of hands -- which is the constant companionship of the HS.  

Longer answer: https://www.lds.org/manual/gospel-principles/chapter-21-the-gift-of-the-holy-ghost?lang=eng

3 hours ago, Navidad said:

3. Joseph Smith seemed to imply that all Non-Mormon baptisms are like baptizing a “bag of sand” and not “a man.” See quote on p. 649 and the following text of the above encyclopedia. Is that still the perspective of current day Latter-day Saints?

My husband is an Evangelical, and his baptism was/is one of the most important moments of both of lives.  Why?  Because it's when he decided to cast off his old destructive self, and become the great man I fell in love with.  It's a great commitment / change in his heart.  It's a hugely important moment, because that's when he made that decision.

Now that being said, the man who baptized him did not have authority from God to do so-- because that man did not hold Christ's Priesthood, the Priesthood which is only found in Christ's Church, which is the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.   That authority is of critical importance for a valid baptism, and my husband's EV baptism lacks that authority, hence he's lack a valid baptism in LDS eyes (simply due to the authority of the baptizer, not due to his lack of conviction, or the importance of his decision).

3 hours ago, Navidad said:

4. As a non-Mormon Christian elder do I hold any authority or keys?

None at all.  You love Christ and devote yourself to Him, but you have not been validly ordained. 

3 hours ago, Navidad said:

Were all the baptisms (only by immersion of those beyond the age of accountability) I have performed in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit fraudulent, or if that is too strong a word - of no avail – rejected by God because I am a non-Mormon Christian ordained minister?

See the above example of my husband and his baptism.  You lack authority to baptize (cause you are not an ordained Priest), but the baptizee's commitment and love of God is still a super important thing.

I hope this does not offend you too badly.  Authority is a big deal for LDS-- just like I am not a valid Eucharist blesser for a Catholic church, or a valid preacher for your church.  This is not to downplay my love of God (or anyone else's), but also not ingoring the imporance of authority.

(Will answer more later)

Edited August 29, 2018 by Jane_Doe

[Navidad]

22 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

Honestly I do not understand why you are so interested in whether or not we see others as "true brothers in Christ"- when I don't know why that is important or even what that means.

Why is it important to you?

Should I be interested in whether or not YOU see US as "Brothers in Christ?"

It sounds to me a like a doctrinal issue in someone else's church- like being concerned that some denomination baptizes differently than your denomination or something like that.

I mean it might be interesting information to know how every denomination feels about baptism etc, but why is it so important for you whether or not we see others as "Brothers in Christ"?

Sorry I just don't get it.   Good to see you back but it seems a few years ago you were asking the same questions and now you are back again with still the same questions apparently yet unanswered.

Sorry I don't want to be rude- I just don't get it that's all! 

Do you think anything has changed since the last time you were here?   Like then we did not see you that way and now we do?

Evangelicals call us a "cult" and say we worship "another Jesus" and call us all kinds of things and we just kind of let it run off, because we don't care what they think- at least speaking for me!

So why do you care so much what we think?

Just be secure in your beliefs and go where God leads you.  You don't have to worry about what others think of of you.

Sorry I just don't get your concern...   I don't ask the Mennonites what they think of us either.  Judging from your posts- it's not very positive.

 

It really is ok with me if you don't get my concern. After all it is my concern and not yours. I own it. And if it makes any difference, yes I consider Mormons my true brothers in Christ - and to answer  you question, that is one thing that has changed since last time I was here. So perhaps it is better if you posit that "some fundamentalists call us a cult" - I certainly don't and I am aware of no evangelicals who call Mormons a cult. Fundamentalists yes, but please remember Evangelicalism was founded to counter both the fundamentalists and the mainstream liberals. My questions reflect no doctrinal issues in any denomination of which I am aware. They represent questions that are important to me. I didn't ask about pre-existence or exaltation - I asked about those things that are important to me. When I am called Brother Phil by all the folks in the ward, I would like to know what that means. Brother in Christ as a fellow believer is very different from Brother in Christ as a fellow pre-mortal spirit. Perhaps you see no distinction in that, but I do and it is very important to me. Notice too please that I haven't asked anything related to church membership, joining the church, etc. That isn't important to me. What my fellow LDS brothers believe about my relationship to Christ is very important to me. It is the bedrock for fellowship. All churches have standards for membership; only the LDS as far as I know carry those same standards to qualifying for entrance to salvation and eternity. For example, there probably are some groups who may require a non-member to be re-baptized to join their denomination; I know of no evangelicals who would require you to be re-baptized to qualify you for your eternal destiny. Latter-day Saints are the only Christian group I know of who require rebaptism for salvation and "eternal life."  And yes, my questions are as yet unanswered. I even started faithfully attending a ward ten months ago but have not gotten answers to my questions. Hence I have returned here. I know I don't have to worry about what others think. But when you start loving a people, you do then care what they think of you; that is part of what makes a relationhip (fellowship).  Oh, and I have never in my entire 70 years ever heard another Mennonite discuss Latter-day Saints. My guess in knowing my faith group as well as I do, is that the vast majority would consider you Christian brothers and sisters in Christ, just as I do. Since you are "judging from my posts," I apologize if any of my posts from this week have been "not very positive." I did not think they were such, but I may have a blind spot.  Phil

[Navidad]

52 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

Oh sure, single me out. To your questions:

1. Yes, it is limited to LDS in its fullness. Others have pieces of the gospel which is better then nothing but only the LDS have power to make binding covenants with God.

2. Only the LDS have a right to the continuous presence of the Holy Ghost (based on righteousness and obedience). Others can experience the Holy Ghost and we do not presume to dictate to a member of the Godhead who he wishes to communicate with.

3. The bag of sand quote I know of is about baptizing and not giving the gift of the Holy Ghost afterwards and has nothing to do with other faiths. That might be a different quote though. But yeah, our scriptures have Jesus himself calling baptisms into other faiths without authority “dead works”.

4. Yeah, you have no authority or keys and such ordinances are not binding in heaven. They might serve as a symbol of devotion which might be good in its own way or at least is harmless.

5. There are limits to sanctification without the ordinances of the gospel. All faiths and people of no faith can cultivate goodness but only through Priesthood power and ordinances is godliness manifest. So it is not fruitless to seek purity but it requires more to achieve the end for which you are created.

6. I dislike this generalization. There is no ranking of faiths in terms of member righteousness or purity. The LDS faith is the one truth faith and that means that living it fully has the greatest rewards. It also contains weaklings less spiritually developed then those of other faiths and, in my experience, also contains the worst of the worst among our membership and former members. In LDS doctrine, to fall to the bottom and become like the devil you have to be affiliated with our faith (or it’s equivalent in other dispensations) at some point as well.

I found part of your sacrament talk offensive. You begin a paragraph with “In conclusion” and you are only a little over halfway through the talk. Lying is wrong......particularly when done in Church.  

Thanks. I appreciate your answers. They are direct and provide me direction.  I appreciate your sense of humor and candid responses. I am saddened, but that isn't your fault. best, Phil

[mfbukowski]

31 minutes ago, Navidad said:

It really is ok with me if you don't get my concern. After all it is my concern and not yours. I own it. And if it makes any difference, yes I consider Mormons my true brothers in Christ - and to answer  you question, that is one thing that has changed since last time I was here. So perhaps it is better if you posit that "some fundamentalists call us a cult" - I certainly don't and I am aware of no evangelicals who call Mormons a cult. Fundamentalists yes, but please remember Evangelicalism was founded to counter both the fundamentalists and the mainstream liberals. My questions reflect no doctrinal issues in any denomination of which I am aware. They represent questions that are important to me. I didn't ask about pre-existence or exaltation - I asked about those things that are important to me. When I am called Brother Phil by all the folks in the ward, I would like to know what that means. Brother in Christ as a fellow believer is very different from Brother in Christ as a fellow pre-mortal spirit. Perhaps you see no distinction in that, but I do and it is very important to me. Notice too please that I haven't asked anything related to church membership, joining the church, etc. That isn't important to me. What my fellow LDS brothers believe about my relationship to Christ is very important to me. It is the bedrock for fellowship. All churches have standards for membership; only the LDS as far as I know carry those same standards to qualifying for entrance to salvation and eternity. For example, there probably are some groups who may require a non-member to be re-baptized to join their denomination; I know of no evangelicals who would require you to be re-baptized to qualify you for your eternal destiny. Latter-day Saints are the only Christian group I know of who require rebaptism for salvation and "eternal life."  And yes, my questions are as yet unanswered. I even started faithfully attending a ward ten months ago but have not gotten answers to my questions. Hence I have returned here. I know I don't have to worry about what others think. But when you start loving a people, you do then care what they think of you; that is part of what makes a relationhip (fellowship).  Oh, and I have never in my entire 70 years ever heard another Mennonite discuss Latter-day Saints. My guess in knowing my faith group as well as I do, is that the vast majority would consider you Christian brothers and sisters in Christ, just as I do. Since you are "judging from my posts," I apologize if any of my posts from this week have been "not very positive." I did not think they were such, but I may have a blind spot.  Phil

OK thanks

I don't want to derail the thread for a side note but many "Christian" groups do not accept Mormon baptism as "valid"- the Catholics being one and certain Baptists at least another.  No need to talk about it- just google membership requirements of your favorite group to find out.

http://www.cbcac.org/church-membership/

https://www.catholic.com/qa/why-doesnt-the-catholic-church-accept-mormon-baptism

https://www.dosp.org/chancellor/wp-content/uploads/sites/9/3.-Valid-and-Invalid-Baptisms.pdf

https://www.versebyverseministry.org/bible-answers/does-a-mormon-baptism-qualify-as-a-christian-baptism

https://C***.org/is-mormon-baptism-valid

Note that some do not accept Mennonite baptisms either! 

 

Edited August 29, 2018 by mfbukowski

[Navidad]

Hi Amigo - Your Baptist church website speaks only to membership, not salvation. And it is a fundamentalist independent Baptist church so it is fundamentalist, not evangelical. It speaks only for itself. It has no denominational affiliation; it exists as one isolated church doing its own thing. Ditto for the Verse by verse church - not part of any denomination. CARM is totally independent, not part of any denomination and are clearly not evangelical - they are fundamentalist. I can't speak for the Catholics. Even the fundamentalist sites you listed are not relating baptism to salvation or eternal life. I know of no fundamentalists who do that. Catholics used to prior to Vatican II, but now at least they have an approved list; of course it appears you are out and we are suspect! Ha!

Again, it seems to me that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is the only denomination I know of that requires rebaptism for salvation and eternal life. I went to Baptist graduate school and seminary and I can assure you that no Baptist relates baptism to salvation or eternal life. 

Phil

[Jane_Doe]

1 hour ago, Navidad said:

Again, it seems to me that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is the only denomination I know of that requires rebaptism for salvation and eternal life. 

Comparing LDS views to Baptist here doesn't really work, because LDS have very different view of post-death events is different than other Christian branches---

Your basic Christian generic view of post-death events is: a person dies, your life test is turned in that second, and you're given a passed/fail grade-- either they are 'damned' and go to Hell to be tortured for eternity, or 'saved' to go live with God for eternity and joy around all happy.  (This is the uber-generalized uber-simplified uber-quick version).

For LDS, a person who dies first receives a preliminary judgement (as opposed to the final judgement which I'll talk about in a minute).  Those who received Christ go to a temporary place known as Spirit Paradise, and those that did not accept Him go to a temporary place known as Spirit Prison.  Those souls in Spirit Prison still have the opportunity to accept Christ and be freed -- that way even those people whom never heard of Christ during their mortal life still have the opportunity to hear and accept His message.  These people also have the opportunity to accept a baptism done in their behalf-- to choose to honor that commitment.  These people can fully come unto Christ, even if they never did during their mortal life.

Now, come Christ's return and all of those events, there is the Final Judgement.  As the name implies, all people receive their final judgement.  At this point, 99.99999% of people receive happiness beyond their wildest dream and at least some measure of God's presence.  Yes, even a horrible adulterous unrepentant sinner whom never ever accepted Christ gets to spend eternity beyond happy with some measure of God's presence (we call this the Telestial Kingdom).  Now, that sinner's joy and presence is beyond our mortal comprehension, but completely pales to the happiness experienced by those whom accept Christ even to the least degree (Terestial Kingdom) or fully (Celestial Kingdom).  More info: https://www.lds.org/topics/kingdoms-of-glory?lang=eng

 

Now, on to talking about you: a person who has accept Christ to the least degree is already at least Terestial Kingdom-- hanging out for eternity beyond beyond beyond happy, spending days with the Holy Spirit and Christ, glory and measure beyond comprehension.  So no, an LDS person doesn't remotely think that a Mennonite is going to spend eternity burning in Hell-- such a picture doesn't remotely remotely cross the LDS mind.  

Edited August 29, 2018 by Jane_Doe

[Jane_Doe]

(Finishing these questions)

5 hours ago, Navidad said:

5  As a non-Mormon Christian can I commit my life to an ever-increasing sanctification and desire to practice holiness and not be involved in a fruitless pursuit?

Totally!  Closeness to Christ is always a great and desirable thing. 

5 hours ago, Navidad said:

6. I have been told by Mormons that, as a non-Mormon Christian my spiritual condition is considered by “The Church” to be the same as a Muslim, a Buddhist, a Hindu, or an animist. Is that true?

No.  You have a testimony of Christ, that He is the Son of God and your Savior.  That is something a animist or other on your list lacks. 

It is true that the LDS Church does not consider you having a valid baptism.  But there is more to being a disciple of Christ than having a valid baptism.

5 hours ago, Navidad said:

I am attaching to this post a copy of the Sacrament talk I gave in our ward a couple of months ago. The roof did not cave in, nor did the presiding elder shut down the service. I offer this to you all so that you might understand me better as I ask my questions.

Sacrament Talk.docx

This is awesome!  Thank you for sharing!!

[Avatar4321]

“If I esteem mankind to be in error, shall I bear them down? No. I will lift them up, and in their own way too, if I cannot persuade them my way is better; and I will not seek to compel any man to believe as I do, only by the force of reasoning, for truth will cut its own way.” - Joseph Smith Jr

[mapman]

8 hours ago, Navidad said:

I appreciate all the answers to my question except those of Nehor. BTW, wasn't Nehor a pretty bad guy in the BOM? Now I understand! 😄 

Perhaps it would help me if I ask my questions in a more specific and direct manner. I started this thread so I wouldn't be hijacking any other thread and so that folks who have no interest in it, simply don't have to engage. I don't want to overwhelm anyone with my questions, so I decided to limit them to six which are important to me as I try and understand LDS doctrine, practice, and culture. I include culture because of my particular faith background where culture often gets confused with doctrine and practice. I think my questions are non-offensive. Your answers might not be, but I want the truth and I can handle it! I just ordered Millet's book on the Holy Spirit. I hope that will answer other questions I have.  Well, here we go:

1. Does the LDS use of the term “the gospel” refer only to the specific system of Mormon beliefs? Does the “gospel of Jesus Christ” refer only to the system of Mormon beliefs? Or the term “Jesus Christ and his gospel” – does that refer only to a Mormon system of belief? When folks refer to the “the gospel” in sacrament meeting are they referring to the gospel – the good news – the atonement and the gift of God of Romans 6: 23 or a specific LDS doctrine of the good news that is valid or relevant to Latter-day Saints? I ask this because I have always thought of "the gospel" as a Christian belief, not tied to one group's definition. I think that isn't the case for Saints, but I am not sure.

2. The Encyclopedia of Mormonism on page 649 says “In a figurative sense, the Holy Spirit dwells in the hearts of the righteous Saints of all dispensations.” Are these “Saints” – note the capital S -  only Mormons? Do Mormons believe the indwelling of the Holy Spirit is “figurative” and not “literal . . . even for Saints?”

3. Joseph Smith seemed to imply that all Non-Mormon baptisms are like baptizing a “bag of sand” and not “a man.” See quote on p. 649 and the following text of the above encyclopedia. Is that still the perspective of current day Latter-day Saints?

4. As a non-Mormon Christian elder do I hold any authority or keys? Were all the baptisms (only by immersion of those beyond the age of accountability) I have performed in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit fraudulent, or if that is too strong a word - of no avail – rejected by God because I am a non-Mormon Christian ordained minister?

5 Page 649 and 650 of the Encyclopedia state “the whole system of salvation centers on the process of sanctification.” As a non-Mormon Christian can I commit my life to an ever-increasing sanctification and desire to practice holiness and not be involved in a fruitless pursuit?

6. I have been told by Mormons that, as a non-Mormon Christian my spiritual condition is considered by “The Church” to be the same as a Muslim, a Buddhist, a Hindu, or an animist. Is that true?

I am attaching to this post a copy of the Sacrament talk I gave in our ward a couple of months ago. The roof did not cave in, nor did the presiding elder shut down the service. I offer this to you all so that you might understand me better as I ask my questions.

Thanks,

Phil

Sacrament Talk.docx

I'll take a shot at answering your questions. I think for most of them there aren't any clear official teachings. Latter-day Saint theology can get kind of fuzzy in places and when it comes to other religions you can find both very positive and very negative statements by past Latter-day Saint leaders.

1. In the Book of Mormon Christ defines the "fullness of the Gospel" as: that we can achieve salvation through the Atonement as we (1) have faith in Jesus Christ, (2) repent, (3) are baptized by a person with authority from Christ, and (4) receive the Gift of the Holy Ghost from someone with authority from Christ. After that you have to endure to the end. What the Gospel means for Latter-day Saints is found in 3 Nephi 11 and 2 Nephi 32, as well as Articles of Faith 3 and 4. Sometimes Mormons will use it to more generally refer to teachings of the Church, but that I think is a mistaken or at least confusing usage.

2. "Saints" refers to Latter-day Saints (Mormons) or to "former-day" Saints, a.k.a. the early Christians, the faithful Israelites, and others that had the priesthood of God in past dispensations. I've never seen the distinction between literal and figurative dwelling of the Spirit talked about before, so I'm not really sure what they're talking about. The difference of experiencing the Spirit between Latter-day Saints and everyone else is a difference of degree not kind.

3. Probably some feel that way and others don't. You won't find any leaders saying something like that for the past century I don't think. Personally, I think that non-Mormon Christian baptisms are probably all a positive thing for people, or at least harmless.

4. You might have some kind of authority, but the official Latter-day Saint view would be that you do not have authority beyond this mortal life.

5. Absolutely. We believe that you take with you whatever progress you make here in this life into the next. The various levels of heaven are filled with good people who sought righteousness of all sorts of religions. According to some interpretations, people will be able to progress upwards in the afterlife even if you didn't try to sanctify yourself in this life.

6. There's no way that this is an official teaching. There is no official teaching ranking the value of different religions. My personal opinion would be that Christians have the great blessing of knowing about Christ and his teachings, and that certainly counts for something. I sense that you might not like the idea of being compared to Muslims or Hindus or pagans, but most every religion has much goodness and truth in them as well and no doubt their devout followers will be rewarded in heaven for their faith and good works.

Edited August 30, 2018 by mapman