Whistlers, Whittlers and on Being Called an Anti-Mormon – Mormon Exceptionalism from My Perspective

[pogi]

1 hour ago, Navidad said:

Ok ....just to be clear I am not saying that baptism enables me to minister, pray, and bless others. I am saying what I think LDS Christians teach. No LDS baptism - no LDS confirmation - no permanent (as long as faithful) indwelling of the Holy Spirit. I know of no way to be spiritual without the Holy Spirit. Maybe that is where we differ. We can be nice, kind, cheerful, polite, attentive, gentle, helpful, etc. but not spiritual without the presence of the Holy Spirit. Also please read my reply to MN. best to you!

1 hour ago, MiserereNobis said:

I've asked this question of our LDS friends, too. What exactly is the constant companionship of the Holy Spirit as defined by the LDS church? How would my experience of the Holy Spirit change if I were to have it from what I have now?

It's something they have a hard time answering, partly (I think) because they don't want to come across as telling us we're not having the experience of the Holy Spirit that we think we are, or something like that. I can understand the hesitance if that is the case.

There are different schools of thought with Latter-day Saints regarding the Holy Ghost and its constant companionship.  Let me share with you my understanding of our doctrine.

There are several doctrines that we need to distinguish to properly understand Latter-day Saint thought.

1) The light of Christ - aka Holy Spirit, Spirit of the Lord, etc.

2) The Holy Ghost.

3) The gift of the Holy Ghost.

4) The baptism of fire.

The following is my understanding/experience with these doctrines.  Mileage may vary:

First, the light of Christ.  I agree with the part I underlined in your quote Navidad.  However, we may be misunderstanding each other if by "Holy Spirit", you mean "Holy Ghost".  I am thoroughly convinced that around 90% of all spiritual experience in both members and non-members lives can be attributed to the light of Christ.   The light of Christ is not some watered down version of the Holy Ghost.  I would submit that very, very, very few members enjoy the "constant companionship of the Holy Ghost" - they are those who have experienced the "baptism of fire", and have actually "received" the Holy Ghost in it's fullness. 

This is from David A. Bednar of the quorum of the 12 -

Quote

 

These four words—“Receive the Holy Ghost”—are not a passive pronouncement; rather, they constitute a priesthood injunction—an authoritative admonition to act and not simply to be acted upon.

https://www.lds.org/general-conference/2010/10/receive-the-holy-ghost?lang=eng

 

 

I don't believe that most Latter-day Saints enjoy the companionship of the Holy Ghost, or have received it as they are capable of doing any more than most pure hearted nonmembers (Christian or not) who listen and follow the light of Christ.  Many of the roles of the Holy Ghost and light of Christ over-lap.  But I see the light of Christ as the ultimate power and source of revelation.   I see it as God's consciousness that fills the immensity of space and is the source of all power and governance of matter, which allows God omnipotence.  It is the all seeing eye which allows God omniscience and omnipresence, with the ability to commune with us through prayer.  It is the power by which the worlds were created and governed (see D&C 88 and 93).

Can all of the experiences you mentioned be accomplished through the light of Christ.  Absolutely!

The Holy Ghost sanctifies us.  It purifies us from sin.  It testifies of the Father and the Son.  It is a comforter, and finally it offers the baptism of fire that ultimately prepares us for exaltation through cleansing sanctification.  I would suggest that very few experience that in this life.  Mostly, we rely on the light of Christ with occasional experiences with they Holy Ghost.

This is kind of jumbled.  Sorry, don't have a lot of time right now.  May need to clarify more later...

Edited October 12, 2018 by pogi

[The Nehor]

57 minutes ago, MiserereNobis said:

I've asked this question of our LDS friends, too. What exactly is the constant companionship of the Holy Spirit as defined by the LDS church? How would my experience of the Holy Spirit change if I were to have it from what I have now?

It's something they have a hard time answering, partly (I think) because they don't want to come across as telling us we're not having the experience of the Holy Spirit that we think we are, or something like that. I can understand the hesitance if that is the case.

The constant companionship is to enjoy the presence of a member of the Godhead. It provides a bulwark against temptation, the ability to discern truth from falsehood, and a power to endure. In addition it provides comfort in distress, revelatory guidance in confusion, and whatever else God wishes to give.

All LDS have the gift but most (including myself) do not enjoy it fully. The Spirit withdraws if it is offended by our actions or our thoughts.

It also manifests differently to different people. I can feel a presence. It is like “cool fire” in my body, like it is coursing through it. I am not always conscious of it due to distraction and I am just used to it and I too regularly scare it away but when I focus on it and have not been misbehaving I can locate it without much trouble. It is a power but I do not control it. Sometimes I even get frustrated with it when I want an answer or a blessing that does not come. Usually it offers comfort which is nice but sometimes annoying because I want more. Other times it manifests as a kind of pure intelligence. A sublime wisdom that gives me advice or commands or insights into problems. These just “smell” of divinity and are sometimes a little thunderous in how they come, especially the rebuking ones. There is more but that is all I feel comfortable sharing.

I also apologize for the feebleness of language in trying to describe it. The English language lacks the words for it so I have to resort to metaphor. Still.....greater men and women then I have also had to use the same kinds of abstractions to try to communicate them. This can lead to two misconceptions. One, that the person describing them is being overwhelmed by spiritual power all the time when that is not true. And second, that the impulses are just normal human sensations that are misinterpreted as or even forced into masquerading as divine communication. The worst part is that both of those errors happen. In the Church O have known people who get a taste of the divine and imagine themselves as great spiritual revelators even as it is clear that revelation has left them and petty people who ascribe every random impulse or thought in their brain the divine stamp of approval, often as a rhetorical tactic to disarm any dispute against them.

Again, that is just my experience. Others would tell different stories. Some probably would not feel comfortable sharing at all.

[pogi]

Scriptures on the light of Christ:

Quote

 

D&C 88 - 

6 He that ascended up on high, as also he descended below all things, in that he comprehended all things, that he might be in all and through all things, the light of truth;

7 Which truth shineth. This is the light of Christ. As also he is in the sun, and the light of the sun, and the power thereof by which it was made.

8 As also he is in the moon, and is the light of the moon, and the power thereof by which it was made;

9 As also the light of the stars, and the power thereof by which they were made;

10 And the earth also, and the power thereof, even the earth upon which you stand.

11 And the light which shineth, which giveth you light, is through him who enlighteneth your eyes, which is the same light that quickeneth your understandings;

12 Which light proceedeth forth from the presence of God to fill the immensity of space—

13 The light which is in all things, which giveth life to all things, which is the law by which all things are governed, even the power of God who sitteth upon his throne, who is in the bosom of eternity, who is in the midst of all things.

49 The light shineth in darkness, and the darkness comprehendeth it not; nevertheless, the day shall come when you shall comprehend even God, being quickened in him and by him.

50 Then shall ye know that ye have seen me, that I am, and that I am the true light that is in you, and that you are in me; otherwise ye could not abound.

66 Behold, that which you hear is as the voice of one crying in the wilderness—in the wilderness, because you cannot see him—my voice, because my voice is Spirit; my Spirit is truth; truth abideth and hath no end; and if it be in you it shall abound.

67 And if your eye be single to my glory, your whole bodies shall be filled with light, and there shall be no darkness in you; and that body which is filled with light comprehendeth all things.

68 Therefore, sanctify yourselves that your minds become single to God, and the days will come that you shall see him; for he will unveil his face unto you, and it shall be in his own time, and in his own way, and according to his own will.

 

Quote

 

D&C 93 - 

1 Verily, thus saith the Lord: It shall come to pass that every soul who forsaketh his sins and cometh unto me, and calleth on my name, and obeyeth my voice, and keepeth my commandments, shall see my face and know that I am;

2 And that I am the true light that lighteth every man that cometh into the world;

28 He that keepeth his commandments receiveth truth and light, until he is glorified in truth and knoweth all things.

 

 

[MiserereNobis]

Thanks @pogi and @The Nehor for your responses. 

[Bernard Gui]

On 10/8/2018 at 7:34 PM, Navidad said:

If I may....several of you have tried to make the point that Mormonism is universalist in its approach therefore it is not exclusivistic. I am quoting from the faith of a true universalist faith - the Unitarian Universalist Church. They hold to the following (from their website):

“The Principles are not dogma or doctrine, but rather a guide for those of us who choose to join and participate in Unitarian Universalist religious communities.”

1. 1st Principle: The inherent worth and dignity of every person;
2. 2nd Principle: Justice, equity and compassion in human relations;
3. 3rd Principle: Acceptance of one another and encouragement to spiritual growth in our congregations;
4. 4th Principle: A free and responsible search for truth and meaning;
5. 5th Principle: The right of conscience and the use of the democratic process within our congregations and in society at large;
6. 6th Principle: The goal of world community with peace, liberty, and justice for all;
7. 7th Principle: Respect for the interdependent web of all existence of which we are a part.

I can’t identify anything here that we LDS do not believe.

As for principle 4, what happens when truth and meaning are finally discovered? Or can they be?

[The Nehor]

2 hours ago, Bernard Gui said:

I can’t identify anything here that we LDS do not believe.

As for principle 4, what happens when truth and meaning are finally discovered? Or can they be?

I don't know about that.

5th: I would not call the LDS church democratic. It is (if we are right and we are) literally the kingdom of God. It has a King and said King is not limited by a constitution or a parliament or anything of that sort. Hard to call it democratic and we definitely not democratic in our congregations. I respect and love the law of common consent but it isn't democracy. In every organization in the Church there is one person who makes the final decision. If it is in the Relief Society it is the Relief Society President. If it is in the Ward Council it is the Bishop. Going all the way up to the prophet who reports to the King mentioned above (possibly sometimes through intermediaries....no idea how it works at that level) and there is no real appeal except to the King himself. Member can appeal a decision to the King. As President Packer said in a much maligned talk:

"There is one authorized 'end run' around the bishop, the stake president, the General Authority, and everyone else in our line of authority. That is to our Father in Heaven in prayer. If we do that, we will in most instances solve our own problems."

7th: I have no idea what this principle even means.

[Bernard Gui]

11 hours ago, The Nehor said:

I don't know about that.

5th: I would not call the LDS church democratic. It is (if we are right and we are) literally the kingdom of God. It has a King and said King is not limited by a constitution or a parliament or anything of that sort. Hard to call it democratic and we definitely not democratic in our congregations. I respect and love the law of common consent but it isn't democracy. In every organization in the Church there is one person who makes the final decision. If it is in the Relief Society it is the Relief Society President. If it is in the Ward Council it is the Bishop. Going all the way up to the prophet who reports to the King mentioned above (possibly sometimes through intermediaries....no idea how it works at that level) and there is no real appeal except to the King himself. Member can appeal a decision to the King. As President Packer said in a much maligned talk:

"There is one authorized 'end run' around the bishop, the stake president, the General Authority, and everyone else in our line of authority. That is to our Father in Heaven in prayer. If we do that, we will in most instances solve our own problems."

7th: I have no idea what this principle even means.

5th...I was thinking more of the right of conscience which I interpret as agency. Democratic process in society, yes. In Church...in so far as we give consent and support. Of course we don’t cast votes as such.

7th...God created all things and gave man stewardship over them...as in D&C 59...

Quote

18 Yea, all things which come of the earth, in the season thereof, are made for the benefit and the use of man, both to please the eye and to gladden the heart;
19 Yea, for food and for raiment, for taste and for smell, to strengthen the body and to enliven the soul.
20 And it pleaseth God that he hath given all these things unto man; for unto this end were they made to be used, with judgment, not to excess, neither by extortion.

 

[Bernard Gui]

On 10/11/2018 at 6:20 PM, mfbukowski said:

I think from now on I will abbreviate "Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints as CoJCLDS.

 That is the full name, just abbreviated.

How about this? If we have used the full name in a post or thread should we be able to use approved abbreviations?

Quote

• In the first reference, the full name of the Church is preferred: "The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints."
• When a shortened reference is needed, the terms "the Church" or the "Church of Jesus Christ" are encouraged. The "restored Church of Jesus Christ" is also accurate and encouraged.

I want to call myself a “Restored Christian.”

[Navidad]

On 10/12/2018 at 4:21 PM, pogi said:

There are different schools of thought with Latter-day Saints regarding the Holy Ghost and its constant companionship.  Let me share with you my understanding of our doctrine.

There are several doctrines that we need to distinguish to properly understand Latter-day Saint thought.

1) The light of Christ - aka Holy Spirit, Spirit of the Lord, etc.

2) The Holy Ghost.

3) The gift of the Holy Ghost.

4) The baptism of fire.

The following is my understanding/experience with these doctrines.  Mileage may vary:

First, the light of Christ.  I agree with the part I underlined in your quote Navidad.  However, we may be misunderstanding each other if by "Holy Spirit", you mean "Holy Ghost".  I am thoroughly convinced that around 90% of all spiritual experience in both members and non-members lives can be attributed to the light of Christ.   The light of Christ is not some watered down version of the Holy Ghost.  I would submit that very, very, very few members enjoy the "constant companionship of the Holy Ghost" - they are those who have experienced the "baptism of fire", and have actually "received" the Holy Ghost in it's fullness. 

This is from David A. Bednar of the quorum of the 12 -

 

I don't believe that most Latter-day Saints enjoy the companionship of the Holy Ghost, or have received it as they are capable of doing any more than most pure hearted nonmembers (Christian or not) who listen and follow the light of Christ.  Many of the roles of the Holy Ghost and light of Christ over-lap.  But I see the light of Christ as the ultimate power and source of revelation.   I see it as God's consciousness that fills the immensity of space and is the source of all power and governance of matter, which allows God omnipotence.  It is the all seeing eye which allows God omniscience and omnipresence, with the ability to commune with us through prayer.  It is the power by which the worlds were created and governed (see D&C 88 and 93).

Can all of the experiences you mentioned be accomplished through the light of Christ.  Absolutely!

The Holy Ghost sanctifies us.  It purifies us from sin.  It testifies of the Father and the Son.  It is a comforter, and finally it offers the baptism of fire that ultimately prepares us for exaltation through cleansing sanctification.  I would suggest that very few experience that in this life.  Mostly, we rely on the light of Christ with occasional experiences with they Holy Ghost.

This is kind of jumbled.  Sorry, don't have a lot of time right now.  May need to clarify more later...

Thanks for your post. I am not all that familiar with the doctrine of the Light of Christ - I looked for it and found it in the book The Holy Ghost by McConkie and Millet. It wasn't quite as emphasized therein as you have stated, but that doesn't matter. Now I have something else to learn about. I will ask about tomorrow in the elders quorum. I am interested to see what they say. You always make me think and learn; I so appreciate that.

[Navidad]

On 10/12/2018 at 4:34 PM, The Nehor said:

The constant companionship is to enjoy the presence of a member of the Godhead. It provides a bulwark against temptation, the ability to discern truth from falsehood, and a power to endure. In addition it provides comfort in distress, revelatory guidance in confusion, and whatever else God wishes to give.

All LDS have the gift but most (including myself) do not enjoy it fully. The Spirit withdraws if it is offended by our actions or our thoughts.

It also manifests differently to different people. I can feel a presence. It is like “cool fire” in my body, like it is coursing through it. I am not always conscious of it due to distraction and I am just used to it and I too regularly scare it away but when I focus on it and have not been misbehaving I can locate it without much trouble. It is a power but I do not control it. Sometimes I even get frustrated with it when I want an answer or a blessing that does not come. Usually it offers comfort which is nice but sometimes annoying because I want more. Other times it manifests as a kind of pure intelligence. A sublime wisdom that gives me advice or commands or insights into problems. These just “smell” of divinity and are sometimes a little thunderous in how they come, especially the rebuking ones. There is more but that is all I feel comfortable sharing.

I also apologize for the feebleness of language in trying to describe it. The English language lacks the words for it so I have to resort to metaphor. Still.....greater men and women then I have also had to use the same kinds of abstractions to try to communicate them. This can lead to two misconceptions. One, that the person describing them is being overwhelmed by spiritual power all the time when that is not true. And second, that the impulses are just normal human sensations that are misinterpreted as or even forced into masquerading as divine communication. The worst part is that both of those errors happen. In the Church O have known people who get a taste of the divine and imagine themselves as great spiritual revelators even as it is clear that revelation has left them and petty people who ascribe every random impulse or thought in their brain the divine stamp of approval, often as a rhetorical tactic to disarm any dispute against them.

Again, that is just my experience. Others would tell different stories. Some probably would not feel comfortable sharing at all.

The more you share, the more we learn. I appreciate your post.

[Navidad]

On 10/12/2018 at 7:11 PM, Bernard Gui said:

I can’t identify anything here that we LDS do not believe.

As for principle 4, what happens when truth and meaning are finally discovered? Or can they be?

This is from their website; their belief statement about God: Unitarian Universalists have many ways of naming what is sacred. Some believe in a God; some don’t believe in a God. Some believe in a sacred force at work in the world, and call it “love,” “mystery,” “source of all” or “spirit of life.” We are thousands of individuals of all ages, each influenced by our cultures and life experiences to understand “the ground of our being” in our own way. Unitarian Universalists are agnostic, theist, atheist, and everything in between. 

We join together not because we have a shared concept of the divine. Rather we gather knowing that life is richer in community than when we go it alone. We gather to know and be known, to comfort and be comforted, to celebrate the mystery that binds us, each to all.

We welcome you in the fullness of your beliefs. Join us in exploring life’s deepest questions in a spiritually diverse, supportive, and challenging community. We are excited to meet you where you are, and see how we can all learn and grow together.

[pogi]

18 hours ago, Navidad said:

Thanks for your post. I am not all that familiar with the doctrine of the Light of Christ - I looked for it and found it in the book The Holy Ghost by McConkie and Millet. It wasn't quite as emphasized therein as you have stated, but that doesn't matter. Now I have something else to learn about. I will ask about tomorrow in the elders quorum. I am interested to see what they say. You always make me think and learn; I so appreciate that.

The light of Christ doesn't receive enough emphasis, as far as I am concerned.  Most members seem to attribute just about all spiritual experience, ennobling power, enlightenment, and persevering influence to the Holy Ghost.  That simply is not the case however.  Many see it as preparatory to receiving the gift of the Holy Ghost (which it is), but they are wrong to think that the Holy Ghost replaces the light of Christ after baptism.  It doesn't. 

Read D&C sections 88 and 93 for the BEST source of doctrine on the subject.  Along with Alma 19:6, Alma 26:3, Alma 28:14, Moroni 7:12-19, John 1:4, John 8:12, and D&C 20:27.

From my experience, I don't see most Latter-day Saints as any more spiritual or righteous than non-members (Christian or not).  I see the light of Christ in the writings and teachings of the Bennedictine monks that I have studied, in the writings of the early mystics, and even in Buddhist and Hindu writings. I see Christ's light and influence in all good people throughout the world.  I think Latter-day Saints are uniquely qualified through ordinance and covenant to receive a further endowment via "receiving" the Holy Ghost, but I think the fullness of that blessing will not be realized for most in this life-time.  That level of experience through sanctification and enlightenment is something we work towards, but few ever find in this life.  Lucky for us, Christ conquered death, and the work will continue beyond the vail. 

Edited October 14, 2018 by pogi

[Navidad]

1 hour ago, pogi said:

The light of Christ doesn't receive enough emphasis, as far as I am concerned.  Most members seem to attribute just about all spiritual experience, ennobling power, enlightenment, and persevering influence to the Holy Ghost.  That simply is not the case however.  Many see it as preparatory to receiving the gift of the Holy Ghost (which it is), but they are wrong to think that the Holy Ghost replaces the light of Christ after baptism.  It doesn't. 

Read D&C sections 88 and 93 for the BEST source of doctrine on the subject.  Along with Alma 19:6, Alma 26:3, Alma 28:14, Moroni 7:12-19, John 1:4, John 8:12, and D&C 20:27.

From my experience, I don't see most Latter-day Saints as any more spiritual or righteous than non-members (Christian or not).  I see the light of Christ in the writings and teachings of the Bennedictine monks that I have studied, in the writings of the early mystics, and even in Buddhist and Hindu writings. I see Christ's light and influence in all good people throughout the world.  I think Latter-day Saints are uniquely qualified through ordinance and covenant to receive a further endowment via "receiving" the Holy Ghost, but I think the fullness of that blessing will not be realized for most in this life-time.  That level of experience through sanctification and enlightenment is something we work towards, but few ever find in this life.  Lucky for us, Christ conquered death, and the work will continue beyond the vail. 

Well said. I brought up the Light of Christ today in Elders Quorum. It was my dream meeting because it had no agenda. Whatever we wanted to talk about. They basically agreed that the Light of Christ is the source of humankind's conscience - the knowledge of right and wrong. That is about as far as it went. They were much more engaged about the involvement of the Holy Ghost

[RevTestament]

21 hours ago, Navidad said:

Well said. I brought up the Light of Christ today in Elders Quorum. It was my dream meeting because it had no agenda. Whatever we wanted to talk about. They basically agreed that the Light of Christ is the source of humankind's conscience - the knowledge of right and wrong. That is about as far as it went. They were much more engaged about the involvement of the Holy Ghost

I don't believe in the light of Christ as any other being or aspect of a being. I believe in it as the light that was brought into the world over the course of its 6000 years of temporal history by the teaching of His truths. It is found in the temples, scriptural references, etc. For instance Gen 3:22 teaches that Adam and Eve had become as YHWH Elohim or "us." I believe that is because they had followed the same path Christ had taken to receive the inheritance of being YHWH Elohim - a "heretical" belief I am sure - but scriptural anyway.

[pogi]

3 hours ago, RevTestament said:

I don't believe in the light of Christ as any other being or aspect of a being. I believe in it as the light that was brought into the world over the course of its 6000 years of temporal history by the teaching of His truths. It is found in the temples, scriptural references, etc. For instance Gen 3:22 teaches that Adam and Eve had become as YHWH Elohim or "us." I believe that is because they had followed the same path Christ had taken to receive the inheritance of being YHWH Elohim - a "heretical" belief I am sure - but scriptural anyway.

The light of Christ is so, so much more than the teaching of God's truths.

http://emp.byui.edu/satterfieldb/quotes/Light of Christ.htm

Navidad, I found this link to be a great resource of the scriptures and teaching on the subject.  I think you will find it enlightening - pun intended. 

[MiserereNobis]

On 10/15/2018 at 1:02 PM, RevTestament said:

over the course of its 6000 years of temporal history

Just checking: you believe the Earth is 6000 years old?

[Navidad]

On 10/15/2018 at 4:44 PM, pogi said:

The light of Christ is so, so much more than the teaching of God's truths.

http://emp.byui.edu/satterfieldb/quotes/Light of Christ.htm

Navidad, I found this link to be a great resource of the scriptures and teaching on the subject.  I think you will find it enlightening - pun intended. 

Thanks. I will print out and read the article tomorrow. I hope to be delighted! 😎

[RevTestament]

1 hour ago, MiserereNobis said:

Just checking: you believe the Earth is 6000 years old?

No. It's 6000 years of temporal history correspond to the first six seals. Before God introduced His law, there was no temporal history.