What Exactly Is This Meme Saying?

[CA Steve]

4 hours ago, bluebell said:

We aren't entitled to anything based on membership

Of course we are. it's called the "Gift of the Holy Ghost" and it comes with membership. Now how we utilize it is completely up to us, but we believe it is different than what non members experience, if we didn't there wouldn't be any point in touting it as something different.

 

4 hours ago, bluebell said:

I'm sure it's annoying to them, but our differing beliefs about the gift of the Holy Ghost are not a problem in and of themselves. 

Well you would have to ask the OP since that seems to be exactly his point. We claim to be led by a divine being who is not as available to non-members. 

 

4 hours ago, bluebell said:

And if we do believe they are right, is it a problem if it is easily remedied by making the same choices that they have? 

This sentence makes no sense.

The question is; do LDS experience the HG differently from non LDS? 

If your solution is that non LDS simply have to become LDS to get that blessing, well that is hugely problematic, since the vast majority of humankind never even have that opportunity. 

And quoting McConkie is about as reliable as quoting BY, no one outside of BY has been thrown under the doctrinal bus more than him.

Edited June 30, 2020 by CA Steve

[strappinglad]

2 hours ago, CA Steve said:

since the vast majority of humankind never even have that opportunity. 

If God is no respecter of persons, this too is problematic. What are we missing? The big picture? 

[RevTestament]

14 minutes ago, strappinglad said:

If God is no respecter of persons, this too is problematic. What are we missing? The big picture? 

Yep. We earn our station in this world. Else there is no explanation for the favoritism. The question then becomes how do we become foreordained?

[Hamba Tuhan]

12 hours ago, mfbukowski said:

But whether or not that progression was due to the confirmation ordinance or maturation, I know not.

I wouldn't recommend intentionally engaging in this specific experiment, but one of the women whom I taught as a missionary -- and who was filled with the light of the Spirit the first time we met her! -- came under Church discipline about 14 months after her baptism. I didn't know anything about that when we met up a few months later when I travelled back to my mission. After a few minutes of talking, I thought, What is this? Everything was so different.

'Can you feel it?' she asked. I didn't know what 'it' was, but I nodded. Then she started to weep. 'I've lost access to the Gift of the Holy Ghost'. She then explained what a powerful change had come upon her -- and her relationship with Deity -- when she'd been confirmed (by me, incidentally). She said she thought people raised in the Church didn't really appreciate that and added that she'd sworn never to take it for granted. 'And now I've lost it'.

There was nothing to do but to commiserate and remind her that this was a temporary loss. About a year later, the gift was restored, and she rang to invite me to rejoice with her. I did so again about another year later after she received the blessings of the temple. She had a young son when she was baptised, and he's an adult now with significant mental health issues. Life has been difficult, but she has repeatedly reminded me that it has been less difficult because of the gifts that have been bestowed upon her by authority. I take her as an expert in this area.

I also know what I have experienced each time I have spoken the words, with authority, 'Receive the Holy Ghost'. Every time, I have been reminded of the Saviour's words in Luke 8:46: 'I perceive that virtue is gone out of me'. The word virtue here is, of course, Greek δύναμις, meaning strength or power. Peter and the others seem not to have understood at this point -- they had, of course, not yet received the gift of the Holy Ghost -- but the Lord knew precisely what He was talking about.

As an undergraduate, I was assigned in one of my subjects to read the published debates over authority between Erasmus and Luther, and I understand that Protestants had no choice but to allow themselves to be backed into a corner on this issue, but if one simply looks at the Bible, the need for certain gifts and blessings to be bestowed by authority permeates the narrative from beginning to end and is one of the central themes of the New Testament.

Edited June 30, 2020 by Hamba Tuhan

[mfbukowski]

7 hours ago, CA Steve said:

Of course we are. it's called the "Gift of the Holy Ghost" and it comes with membership. Now how we utilize it is completely up to us, but we believe it is different than what non members experience, if we didn't there wouldn't be any point in touting it as something different.

 

Well you would have to ask the OP since that seems to be exactly his point. We claim to be led by a divine being who is not as available to non-members. 

 

This sentence makes no sense.

The question is; do LDS experience the HG differently from non LDS? 

If your solution is that non LDS simply have to become LDS to get that blessing, well that is hugely problematic, since the vast majority of humankind never even have that opportunity. 

And quoting McConkie is about as reliable as quoting BY, no one outside of BY has been thrown under the doctrinal bus more than him.

The problem is of course no one can be both LDS and non LDS at the same time. That's what would be required for one to be able to compare the Holy Ghost as a member to the Holy Ghost as a non-member.   Obviously that's not possible.

And then besides that all you would have is one person's conception of it all. Obviously the question is unanswerable.

As I said earlier the difference may just be about maturation. But I have honestly felt the change.

But on the other hand my lightning flashes of spiritual experience were 40 years ago. 

Speaking about this empirically doesn't make sense.

It may be the case, but it certainly doesn't sound very welcoming to tell someone that their spiritual experiences are now not as good as our spiritual experiences.

Perhaps the present phraseology needs to be tweaked, but I must admit I do understand it a lot better now

Edited June 30, 2020 by mfbukowski

[mfbukowski]

4 hours ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

I also know what I have experienced each time I have spoken the words, with authority, 'Receive the Holy Ghost'. Every time, I have been reminded of the Saviour's words in Luke 8:46: 'I perceive that virtue is gone out of me'. The word virtue here is, of course, Greek δύναμις, meaning strength or power. Peter and the others seem not to have understood at this point, but the Lord knew precisely what He was talking about.

I know exactly what you are talking about, and I often have a sense of absolute certainty when giving a blessing, that it will come to pass, even when I have started the blessing with a confused mind full of doubt and uncertainty.

It is not possible that that certainty could come, in a few seconds, from a confused and doubtful mind.

The words spoken are not mine.

When I heard those words during my confirmation it was as if someone had flipped a switch- like a warm shower filling my body with peace and infinite love.

But none of that could be to my credit or blame because it did not come from me.

Of that I am certain.

There is and was an intelligence outside of me doing it, and I was a passive and surprised recipient.

[CA Steve]

5 hours ago, mfbukowski said:

The problem is of course no one can be both LDS and non LDS at the same time. That's what would be required for one to be able to compare the Holy Ghost as a member to the Holy Ghost as a non-member.   Obviously that's not possible.

Well then there is a problem here with President Nelson's quote, one that I think the OP is trying to illustrate/ask. If there is no outside discernible difference between a member and a non members as to their spiritual survival in the coming days, (whatever that means?) of what use is the "Gift of the Holy Ghost"? Clearly non-members will claim, as members do, that they are spiritually surviving, so what does the quote even mean and how is one to see it in the lives of anyone besides themselves?

 

Edited June 30, 2020 by CA Steve

[stemelbow]

It seems to me he's most often speaking specifically of members of the Church.  If he's telling members and members only, they'll die spiritually if they aren't seeking the Holy Ghost all the time, then I'm not sure he's saying much about anyone else.  The Church has a pretty confused message on this though.  It teaches anyone can have the constant influence of the Holy Ghost, although using the word constant for someone who hasn't received the proper ordinance is problematic.  My guess is, since the Church somewhat and sometimes preaches it, many non members will survive spiritually so it must be that they had the constant companionship without the ordinance.  The Church does seem consistent in saying, though, that anyone can die spiritually and that death can happen when someone's living here in mortality.  

My new question is, can someone be spiritually alive while not believing in God at all?  I've been introduced to a number of people who claim an atheistic philosophy but embrace their spiritual side...and they maintain no one needs mythical or religion belief to tap into that side.  

[bluebell]

14 hours ago, CA Steve said:

Of course we are. it's called the "Gift of the Holy Ghost" and it comes with membership. Now how we utilize it is completely up to us, but we believe it is different than what non members experience, if we didn't there wouldn't be any point in touting it as something different.

 

The gift is given after baptism, but whether or not we have access to the blessings of it depends on our actions and choices.  There are many members of the church who do not have the constant companionship of the Holy Ghost.

Quote

Well you would have to ask the OP since that seems to be exactly his point. We claim to be led by a divine being who is not as available to non-members. 

I think our claim is more that the Holy Ghost is available in different ways depending on whether or not someone has entered a covenant relationship with Christ and received the blessings that are offered through that covenant and is keeping that covenant.  That doesn't seem unreasonable or problematic to me.

Quote

The question is; do LDS experience the HG differently from non LDS?

If your solution is that non LDS simply have to become LDS to get that blessing, well that is hugely problematic, since the vast majority of humankind never even have that opportunity. 

I was addressing your statement that our beliefs are problematic.  What's problematic about God requiring covenanting with Him through His authorized servants in order to receive certain blessings?  In our doctrine, every human will have that opportunity eventually.

Quote

And quoting McConkie is about as reliable as quoting BY, no one outside of BY has been thrown under the doctrinal bus more than him.

Elder McConkie was not infallible, but that doesn't mean that his words and teachings aren't reliable.  Do we have any reason to doubt the quote?  Does it disagree with our current teachings or the teaching of other apostles and prophets?  

[Stargazer]

7 hours ago, mfbukowski said:

The problem is of course no one can be both LDS and non LDS at the same time. That's what would be required for one to be able to compare the Holy Ghost as a member to the Holy Ghost as a non-member.   Obviously that's not possible.

And then besides that all you would have is one person's conception of it all. Obviously the question is unanswerable.

As I said earlier the difference may just be about maturation. But I have honestly felt the change.

But on the other hand my lightning flashes of spiritual experience were 40 years ago. 

Speaking about this empirically doesn't make sense.

It may be the case, but it certainly doesn't sound very welcoming to tell someone that their spiritual experiences are now not as good as our spiritual experiences.

Perhaps the present phraseology needs to be tweaked, but I must admit I do understand it a lot better now

I'm not seeing the problem.

If I go through all the time, trouble and expense of gaining a doctorate in astrophysics, is it somehow unwelcoming that someone who didn't go through all that effort is not qualified to take up the post of Chair of the Department of Astronomy at U.C. Berkeley, while I might be so qualified?  True, I could pursue individual study and acquire a significant amount of knowledge in respect of astrophysics. But would I know as much about astrophysics as someone who had done the requisite formal study?  Highly unlikely.  I most specifically would never, ever, be considered for any position that required a graduate degree. But I could write plenty of well-researched and well-received articles for publication in many magazines intended for the general public, and I could even write a book about the subject that would benefit Everyman. But that would be it.

When the Lord told the Apostles to hang about in Jerusalem and wait for the Holy Ghost to fall upon them, He wasn't just blowing smoke at them. There was something real, and something highly valuable, that was intended for them that was not intended for those who were not qualified.  The unqualified certainly received some spillover, but the full effects? No, because the full and extended effects were reserved for those who qualified for them by taking the appropriate action.  By "spillover" I mean that which was received by the non-members who had an experience at Pentecost and who asked Peter "What shall we do?"  He told them exactly what they had to do - repent and be baptized.  If they had chosen to ignore his challenge, what would have happened to them?  They might have gone on feeling that something had happened, but they would have failed to advance to a greater state of comfort, that of the full presence of the Holy Ghost.

I was enlivened in the Spirit before I joined the Church, and that was what led me to it. And I was comforted by the Spirit along that path. But the greater connection with the Spirit only came after I received confirmation and then subsequently (a few months later) actually received the Holy Ghost.  

I am convinced that had I not followed through past my "enlivening" by being baptized and confirmed, I would have lost much of what I had been blessed with to that point.  

Now, as for those who haven't heard of the Church, or haven't investigated, or have investigated but have decided not to join, all of the above is NOT saying that the Holy Ghost isn't still guiding them. The Light of Christ (which I interpret as a degree of the Holy Ghost) is in all humans -- it cannot be lost entirely, after all, even though some disregard it so thoroughly that they can hardly hear a thing.  But the constant companionship of the Holy Ghost is another matter entirely, even if the Light of Christ continues to shine for those who have not received that further promise.

[stemelbow]

55 minutes ago, bluebell said:

 There are many members of the church who do not have the constant companionship of the Holy Ghost.

Which members are they?  I'm curious if you're so certain there are such members, if you know which ones they are.  Or perhaps, if you are saying, you're guessing there are "many" members, emphasis on many, what might give you reason to think there are many?  The leaders?  Or your intuition?  

Oh wait...I think you have me on ignore.  But...I leave it in case anyone else wants to answer.  

[bluebell]

7 minutes ago, Stargazer said:

Now, as for those who haven't heard of the Church, or haven't investigated, or have investigated but have decided not to join, all of the above is NOT saying that the Holy Ghost isn't still guiding them. The Light of Christ (which I interpret as a degree of the Holy Ghost) is in all humans -- it cannot be lost entirely, after all, even though some disregard it so thoroughly that they can hardly hear a thing.  But the constant companionship of the Holy Ghost is another matter entirely, even if the Light of Christ continues to shine for those who have not received that further promise.

I always thought that the Light of Christ was the Holy Ghost too until I looked up Light of Christ in the bible dictionary and found this--

Quote

"The light of Christ should not be confused with the personage of the Holy Ghost, for the light of Christ is not a personage at all. Its influence is preliminary to and preparatory to one’s receiving the Holy Ghost. The light of Christ will lead the honest soul who “hearkeneth to the voice” to find the true gospel and the true Church and thereby receive the Holy Ghost."

 

[mfbukowski]

2 hours ago, CA Steve said:

Well then there is a problem here with President Nelson's quote, one that I think the OP is trying to illustrate/ask. If there is no outside discernible difference between a member and a non members as to their spiritual survival in the coming days, (whatever that means?) of what use is the "Gift of the Holy Ghost"? Clearly non-members will claim, as members do, that they are spiritually surviving, so what does the quote even mean and how is one to see it in the lives of anyone besides themselves?

 

Well that is where I was coming from at the beginning of the thread.

It is, I think now, what actually happens to a member as she matures in the gospel, yet stating it as a Doctrine only alienates people who are non-members.  I don't know what function the Doctrine plays in the presentation of the Paradigm of our understanding of the gospel.

One might say that of Temple ordinances to, as our friend Navidad has shown many times. But in my opinion those are entirely different because they give us actual further symbolic knowledge about the gospel. They carry with them content which expands our knowledge.

I am not talking how about the spiritual advantages of ordinances. I am simply talking about the way they present the Paradigm of the Gospel.

[Stargazer]

29 minutes ago, bluebell said:

40 minutes ago, Stargazer said:

Now, as for those who haven't heard of the Church, or haven't investigated, or have investigated but have decided not to join, all of the above is NOT saying that the Holy Ghost isn't still guiding them. The Light of Christ (which I interpret as a degree of the Holy Ghost) is in all humans -- it cannot be lost entirely, after all, even though some disregard it so thoroughly that they can hardly hear a thing.  But the constant companionship of the Holy Ghost is another matter entirely, even if the Light of Christ continues to shine for those who have not received that further promise.

I always thought that the Light of Christ was the Holy Ghost too until I looked up Light of Christ in the bible dictionary and found this--

Quote

"The light of Christ should not be confused with the personage of the Holy Ghost, for the light of Christ is not a personage at all. Its influence is preliminary to and preparatory to one’s receiving the Holy Ghost. The light of Christ will lead the honest soul who “hearkeneth to the voice” to find the true gospel and the true Church and thereby receive the Holy Ghost."

I don't disagree, but I am not sure that the LoC and the HG are necessarily of different kind; just of different degree. Or the LoC is a subset of the HG. Or close cousins.

Perhaps one could take the nomenclature system used by biologists as an analogy, they are of the same genus, but different species?  Whatever, but I think there's wiggle room in there.

"Lead kindly light"!

[Navidad]

Good morning all from sunny and beautiful Chihuahua. I appreciate all the replies to my original post. A few points of clarification. Some folks in their replies have really hit the nail on the head regarding the intent of my question.

My friend who lives on an "isle of the sea" will always answer my questions with his own about the late second temple Jews and their response to early Christianity. God changed things up and they (the Jews) resisted, didn't they? He will always compare that example to the Latter-day Saints and the non-Latter Day Saint Christians. We (the latter) are simply rejecting God's new plan - perhaps a new covenant, unique and different from the new covenant of Christ of the first century. I will most likely continue rejecting that as an appropriate allegory for the struggle between LDS and non-LDS Christians. It does make me think however and I thank him for his persistence!

Others will simply repeat church dogma word-for-word. Their solution is quite simple. The Church says it - I believe it - that settles it! That makes the grappling with the whats and hows of religious faith quite simple. This is the truth of my church; it is therefore my truth; it is therefore thee truth. Why do you keep asking questions?

I guess I keep asking questions because, in my devotions I keep running into wonderful scriptures such as that found in Acts 10. The whole chapter deals with my questions about LDS teachings. In an earlier reply, someone has already mentioned it. In Acts 10 Peter had a vision. As a Jew since birth, his faith had taught that things were either clean or unclean. They taught it. He believed it. That settled it. Sound familiar? Well God gave him a vision to teach him a new way! In that new way he had to learn that God is no respecter of persons. Those who He declares clean are clean. What he declares clean is clean. What He declares cleansed is no longer common. It is indeed cleansed. Whether rich or poor, Jew or Gentile, circumcised or not, baptized or not (a number of NT examples of this). In verse 34 we find that God is no respecter (prosopolemptes) of persons. The Greek word for respecter of persons is interesting. It is a hapaxlogomene - a Greek word only used once in the entire New Testament. It comes from two Greek words - prosopon - face and lambano - to take. It literally is best defined as one who shows  partiality to someone because of their face - rank, position, etc. God doesn't do that. He declares someone holy, righteous, unrighteous, etc. and that is what the person is!

A similar but slightly different word is found in Ro 2:11; Eph 6:9; Col 3:25; and James 2:1 - this word is prosopolempsia - it also refers to partiality - but this time its meaning is more specific in the concept of judging - declaring someone innocent or guilty without taking into consideration the person's wealth, position, stature, or connections. This is obviously used more than once in the New Testament and is perhaps more suited for our purpose. No affiliation or position voids what God says about someone. I have been taught by my LDS friends that no LDS revelation or scripture properly understood negates what the Bible has to say when it is properly translated or interpreted. God declares a person to be what that person is. His judgment is always fair and accurate. This gets at the heart of someone has already mentioned; it is what is inside that counts. We can see righteousness, holiness, the attributes of God in a person's lived life, or not. One's church affiliation has nothing to do with what is on the inside. For every testimony of a member of the LDS church who has grown and matured in his relationship with God (spirituality) since joining the LDS church, there is a  testimony of the same thing in a person who has joined a Pentecostal church, the Catholic church, a Nazarene, or Baptist church. Lighting strikes of the soul are not unique to any one Christian group.

I also believe that God is ultimately in charge. He grants the power and presence of the Holy Spirit (Ghost) to whom he wills. That is His prerogative. I firmly believe that He has agency to do as He wills. This even extends to those who have never heard regardless of their affiliation. It is what is inside that counts.

I think it would be very helpful for my LDS friends to understand that today, these are the issues that non-LDS Christians are asking. The old debates about Joseph Smith, the BOM, plural marriage, are lessening in significance to the non-LDS Christian. Their questions now relate to whether or not LDS Christians believe that Christians are fully Christian?  Why are LDS Christians so arrogant in their belief about their own unique and special relationship to a God who is not a respecter of persons?

Are these not the questions I first brought when I came to this forum three years ago? Don't you remember? Am I not still asking them in one form or another? These are more important than the issues, questions, and challenges of the early and mid- twentieth centuries. Sometimes I respectfully think my LDS friends are stuck back there. Can LDS Christians believe that a non-member has the constant presence of the Holy Ghost based on what they see, sense and on what God says about belief and faith in the New Testament? "Thy faith hath made thee whole" is a fascinating verse. It is found in Luke 17. Christ has just healed (made physically whole) ten lepers. One returns to thank him and glorify God. Only one. This one was a Samaritan!!!!  An "unclean" one! Christ declares him whole. He is the only one of the ten who returned and whom Christ declared whole. This wholeness is a spiritual, not a physical wholeness. If Christ can declare a Samaritan leper spiritually whole on the spot; so He can a Mennonite child. God has agency!

That is the point of my post. I would love to join the LDS church to worship and to fellowship. But, I can't join to be made any more whole than I already am, because like the Samaritan leper who had faith and glorified God; so do I and have I. This is the great dilemma of the Christian who wants to join the LDS church. The LDS church cannot make a whole person (as declared by God who is impartial) more whole. It can teach, it can minister to, but it can't fundamentally change a person who has already been fundamentally changed by the grace of God in concert with the person's own faith. I hope this helps you all understand my post.

[Ahab]

3 hours ago, CA Steve said:

Well then there is a problem here with President Nelson's quote, one that I think the OP is trying to illustrate/ask. If there is no outside discernible difference between a member and a non members as to their spiritual survival in the coming days, (whatever that means?) of what use is the "Gift of the Holy Ghost"? Clearly non-members will claim, as members do, that they are spiritually surviving, so what does the quote even mean and how is one to see it in the lives of anyone besides themselves?

 

President Nelson's point, I think, was that anyone who doesn't have or doesn't seek the guiding, directing, comforting, and constant influence of the Holy Ghost will not be able to survive spiritually.

So it seems to me that President Nelson believes that if someone is to survive spiritually, it is essential to have the guiding, directing, comforting, and constant influence of the Holy Ghost.

Such a thought, after reflecting on what President Nelson said, might lead someone to ponder the question:  What/Who is the Holy Ghost? And how can I know how to be open to receiving his spiritual influence in my own life?

I don't think such questions are for others to argue about.  Whether or not someone thinks someone else is open to the influence of the Holy Ghost doesn't determine whether or not the Holy Ghost can influence that person.

[bluebell]

7 minutes ago, Navidad said:

That is the point of my post. I would love to join the LDS church to worship and to fellowship. But, I can't join to be made any more whole than I already am, because like the Samaritan leper who had faith and glorified God; so do I and have I. This is the great dilemma of the Christian who wants to join the LDS church. The LDS church cannot make a whole person (as declared by God who is impartial) more whole. It can teach, it can minister to, but it can't fundamentally change a person who has already been fundamentally changed by the grace of God in concert with the person's own faith. I hope this helps you all understand my post.

I do see your point and I believe that is very very reasonable.  The issue is, that I believe that our position, the position of the church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, is also very very reasonable.  Both of us have reasonable beliefs, they just don't agree.  If it isn't fair to ask you to believe something different is it fair to ask that of us?

[Stargazer]

1 hour ago, stemelbow said:

Which members are they?  I'm curious if you're so certain there are such members, if you know which ones they are.  Or perhaps, if you are saying, you're guessing there are "many" members, emphasis on many, what might give you reason to think there are many?  The leaders?  Or your intuition?  

Oh wait...I think you have me on ignore.  But...I leave it in case anyone else wants to answer.  

Oh, fine. Let me bite.

The canonical (as it were) category of members who are not in communication with the Holy Ghost would seem to include those who have tossed the commandments down the rat hole and are living lives of such character that most people who know about the expectations held for members of the Church would be surprised to find out they were members of it.

I'm not going to go out on a limb and present specific examples of those who don't have the constant companionship of the Holy Ghost (who am I to judge?), but the concept seems to be real that there are some such folks:

"We can, if we live worthy of it, have the blessing of the Spirit to be with us, not only now and then ... but always" (emphasis added) says President Eyring (Oct 2015 GC: The Holy Ghost as Your Companion).

That's a big if, is it not?

President Eyring seems to believe that at least some members of the Church do not currently experience the Holy Ghost as a constant companion. I feel I can trust his insight into this.

You may disagree.  If so, what do you believe about it?

 

 

Edited June 30, 2020 by Stargazer

[Ahab]

10 minutes ago, Navidad said:

I would love to join the LDS church to worship and to fellowship. But, I can't join to be made any more whole than I already am, because like the Samaritan leper who had faith and glorified God; so do I and have I. This is the great dilemma of the Christian who wants to join the LDS church. The LDS church cannot make a whole person (as declared by God who is impartial) more whole. It can teach, it can minister to, but it can't fundamentally change a person who has already been fundamentally changed by the grace of God in concert with the person's own faith. I hope this helps you all understand my post.

Some of your beliefs are of your own making, from your own reasoning, or from what you have accepted from others who taught those beliefs to you, and actually are not true.  You believe those beliefs are true, though, despite what others try to teach you as they try to teach you what is actually true, so still you go on believing your false ideas while believing that what you believe is really the truth.

Now take those same comments which I just now directed at you and apply them to anyone else on this planet.  Say, for example, that I am wrong in some of my own beliefs while I believe that what I believe is true.

Perhaps now you can see why every one of us needs the guiding, directing, comforting, and constant influence of the Holy Ghost to be able to survive spiritually.

Oh, and as I have told you before, someone can be a true Christian while not being a member of the one and only true church of Jesus Christ. One is more a matter of intent while the other is a matter of receiving the proper ordinances from someone who has the proper authority in the true church of Jesus Christ.

[Navidad]

On 6/29/2020 at 10:48 AM, mfbukowski said:

We have a Doctrine about the gift of the Holy Ghost which supposedly allows us further access to the Holy Ghost than other people have, as a "constant companion" after we are confirmed.

I have found that terminology to be very vague, and frankly somewhat unreasonable.

As one who has come through the conversion process I do feel closer to the spirit now than I ever have in my life but I think it is not because I was baptized and confirmed. I think it's because I have just drawn closer to God as I mature.

I couldn't agree more with you on this. No ordinance has ever made me more spiritual or more like Christ. I remember going to watch an eight-year-old be baptized and confirmed in our ward. After all was said and done, his mom gave him a big hug. She was obviously very proud. His first question to her was "Where are the cookies?" They were hidden behind the piano at that time. I thought that was a wonderful reply from a wonderful eight-year-old. So many of us in whatever church are still asking, "Where are the cookies?"
 

On 6/29/2020 at 10:48 AM, mfbukowski said:

On the other hand though the claim is not that one receives less of the Holy Ghost by not being a member but that one would receive more of the Holy Ghost after one becomes a member.

I know you find this "exclusivity" teaching of the Church, as the church with more truth than any other,  as very objectionable.  But please don't let it color every statement so that you see things that are not there.

Very few of the general authorities are converts, so very frankly I think the tendency is to think that feeling the Holy Ghost is unique for members, because they have never felt the Holy Ghost as a non-member.

I always enjoy reading your replies. I exhibit more of the constant presence of the Holy Ghost in my life as I mature in Him. Just attending the ward positively impacts that. I have learned many things, as I have in the different churches we have previously attended. Actually in my OP, I was asking if you all think President Nelson was suggesting in his talk that only LDS Christians will spiritually survive the coming stress?

Regardless, you are mostly right. I do find the exclusivity of the LDS church very sad and also objectionable. There is no question in my mind that most folks on this forum see me as less than because I am not a member of the LDS church. That is very clear to me. I just have decided not to react to that like I would have a year or so ago. I may indeed be less spiritual than many of you, but it certainly is not because I have not experienced LDS baptism or confirmation.

I think your last sentence is accurate for most LDS Christians who grew up in the church. They have never experienced life as a non-LDS Christian. Of if they did, it may have been a negative experience, just like it is for some of those who leave the LDS church. I do my best to emulate Christ by not making assumptions about people's faith and spirituality solely by their church affiliation. I think many of the folks on this forum do just that.
 

[Navidad]

22 hours ago, Ahab said:

What this meme is saying, exactly, is that in the coming days it will not be possible to survive spiritually without the guiding, directing, comforting, and constant influence of the Holy Ghost.

That is what this meme is saying, exactly.

Sounds to me like the influence of the Holy Ghost is something that is important for everyone to have if they want to survive spiritually.

Certainly the influence of the Holy Ghost is something that is important for everyone to have if they want to survive spiritually. No question about that!

[Navidad]

20 hours ago, CA Steve said:

At any rate, I am sure you can understand how the notion that members are entitled to a superior form of the HG based on membership might be a bit off putting for a non believer. The notion that God might communicate better with a worthy member over a similar behaving nonmember is  problematic to say the least.

Amen!

[Ahab]

5 minutes ago, Navidad said:

Certainly the influence of the Holy Ghost is something that is important for everyone to have if they want to survive spiritually. No question about that!

Yes, and now that you have that idea firmly in your own mind, consider what President Nelson said again in the context of days that are yet to come.  

I think it's reasonable to think he knows how important it is to be open to the influence of the Holy Ghost every day, but maybe something or someone is coming in coming days to warrant his additional warning? Maybe?

[Navidad]

20 hours ago, bluebell said:

MFB described the difference between feeling the Holy Ghost before and after baptism as "the most powerful individual experiences I have ever had with the Holy Spirit came before and during my conversion process.  Now those great lightning flashes of spiritual experience have abated and I feel a constant calm sense that God is with me."  Isn't that how Elder McKonkie described the difference?  Flashes of lightening verses the constancy of the sun in daytime?

We aren't entitled to anything based on membership of course, but I do get what you are saying. I'm sure it's annoying to them, but our differing beliefs about the gift of the Holy Ghost are not a problem in and of themselves. 

It's pretty human to get annoyed when someone believes they have a right to something good that we don't have a right to because we haven't made the same choices (or believe the same things) as they have/do.  Is it really a problem though, if we don't believe that they are right?  And if we do believe they are right, is it a problem if it is easily remedied by making the same choices that they have? 

 

 

 

I am not completely sure I understand what you are saying. However, I would simply suggest that perhaps my issue isn't wanting what you have if I don't see what you have making any more difference in your life than what I have makes in mine! I am not jealous or envious in other words.

If I saw that the body of Mormons I have met in my life lived a different and fuller Christian life than I do by their actions, demeanor, faith, piety, etc. than I know is available to me, of course I would want that and might make different choices. However, that is not the case. The folks I have met at conferences, on this forum and in our ward over the years span the same spectrum of piety and Godliness as those I have met in any other Christian group with which I have affiliated. Granted, all of those are fairly conservative and pietistic groups. Neither my wife or I have noticed any greater degree to spirituality due to the unique one of a kind priesthood or presence of the Holy Ghost. We have looked long and hard for the "more" that is the mantra of the Saints that they will offer us when we join.

[Navidad]

14 hours ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

I wouldn't recommend intentionally engaging in this specific experiment, but one of the women whom I taught as a missionary -- and who was filled with the light of the Spirit the first time we met her! -- came under Church discipline about 14 months after her baptism. I didn't know anything about that when we met up a few months later when I travelled back to my mission. After a few minutes of talking, I thought, What is this? Everything was so different.

'Can you feel it?' she asked. I didn't know what 'it' was, but I nodded. Then she started to weep. 'I've lost access to the Gift of the Holy Ghost'. She then explained what a powerful change had come upon her -- and her relationship with Deity -- when she'd been confirmed (by me, incidentally). She said she thought people raised in the Church didn't really appreciate that and added that she'd sworn never to take it for granted. 'And now I've lost it'.

There was nothing to do but to commiserate and remind her that this was a temporary loss. About a year later, the gift was restored, and she rang to invite me to rejoice with her. I did so again about another year later after she received the blessings of the temple. She had a young son when she was baptised, and he's an adult now with significant mental health issues. Life has been difficult, but she has repeatedly reminded me that it has been less difficult because of the gifts that have been bestowed upon her by authority. I take her as an expert in this area.

I also know what I have experienced each time I have spoken the words, with authority, 'Receive the Holy Ghost'. Every time, I have been reminded of the Saviour's words in Luke 8:46: 'I perceive that virtue is gone out of me'. The word virtue here is, of course, Greek δύναμις, meaning strength or power. Peter and the others seem not to have understood at this point -- they had, of course, not yet received the gift of the Holy Ghost -- but the Lord knew precisely what He was talking about.

As an undergraduate, I was assigned in one of my subjects to read the published debates over authority between Erasmus and Luther, and I understand that Protestants had no choice but to allow themselves to be backed into a corner on this issue, but if one simply looks at the Bible, the need for certain gifts and blessings to be bestowed by authority permeates the narrative from beginning to end and is one of the central themes of the New Testament.

Great post. There is nothing in it that I haven't experienced firsthand and that I disagree with! I only think you paint "Protestants" with much too broad a brush in your last paragraph. If you only studied Erasmus and Luther, you missed out on most of the Protestant tradition, especially as the Pentecostal movement has grown.