Seeing Christ / Experiencing the Second Comforter

[MiserereNobis]

16 hours ago, Pyreaux said:

For example, back when Roman Catholic Priests still preformed exorcisms, they resorted to tying down the physical body of the possessed person.

1) Exorcism has not stopped in Catholicism  A few years ago I had a beer with our diocesan exorcist and had some very interesting conversation. 
 

2) There is no rule of tying down the possessed person. 

[MiserereNobis]

49 minutes ago, Pyreaux said:

Though the Catholics may not deny Exorcism, but only the Pope has the keys of the kingdom.

Can you explain what you mean, particularly about the pope?

[Pyreaux]

The Pope claims to have the binding "keys of the kingdom". This is supposed to be the power that opens, shuts, locks, unlocks, seals, unseals, binds, loosens, etc. (hence a key) to bind things like wicked spirits, the holy spirit, and human spirits, etc. This was given to Peter and the other Apostles, and it is the source of their power to bind spirits and preform binding ordinances and create covenant bonds. However, I've been lead to understand that the Catholics believe Peter did not share those keys and that the Pope does not share those keys.

Edited May 21, 2022 by Pyreaux

[MiserereNobis]

24 minutes ago, Pyreaux said:

The Pope claims to have the binding "keys of the kingdom". This is supposed to be the power that opens, shuts, locks, unlocks, seals, unseals, binds, loosens, etc. (hence a key) to bind things like wicked spirits, the holy spirit, and human spirits, etc. This was given to Peter and the other Apostles, and it is the source of their power to bind spirits and preform binding ordinances and create covenant bonds. However, I've been lead to understand that the Catholics believe Peter did not share those keys and that the Pope does not share those keys.

The keys represent spiritual and temporal authority that is held by the pope in the Catholic Church.

[manol]

18 hours ago, Pyreaux said:

... an LDS woman who has faith might find success in exorcising a demon or healing with the laying on of hands.

Not only LDS women, but ANYONE who believes in Christ has these privileges.  Joseph Smith said the following in a speech to the Relief Society, quoting from "Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith", page 224:

"He said the reason of these remarks being made was, that some little foolish things were circulating in the society, against some sisters not doing right in laying hands on the sick. Said that if the people had common sympathies they would rejoice that the sick could be healed...

"President Smith continued the subject, by quoting the commission given to the ancient Apostles in Mark, 16th chapter, 15th, 16th, 17th, 18th verses, 'Go ye into all the world, and preach the Gospel to every creature. He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned. And these signs shall follow them that believe: In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues; they shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.'

"No matter who believeth, these signs, such as healing the sick, casting our devils, etc., should follow all that believe, whether male or female."  [emphasis mine]

 

[Pyreaux]

2 hours ago, MiserereNobis said:

The keys represent spiritual and temporal authority that is held by the pope in the Catholic Church.

I know the keys are interpreted differently but those keys are the powers restored by Joseph Smith. That is the power I'm suggesting other's don't have. As distinguished from the power that all believers have access to.

 

1 hour ago, manol said:

Not only LDS women, but ANYONE who believes in Christ has these privileges.  Joseph Smith said the following in a speech to the Relief Society, quoting from "Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith", page 224:

"He said the reason of these remarks being made was, that some little foolish things were circulating in the society, against some sisters not doing right in laying hands on the sick. Said that if the people had common sympathies they would rejoice that the sick could be healed...

"President Smith continued the subject, by quoting the commission given to the ancient Apostles in Mark, 16th chapter, 15th, 16th, 17th, 18th verses, 'Go ye into all the world, and preach the Gospel to every creature. He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned. And these signs shall follow them that believe: In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues; they shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.'

"No matter who believeth, these signs, such as healing the sick, casting our devils, etc., should follow all that believe, whether male or female."  [emphasis mine]

Oh man, thats a good quote, I need to save this where I can easily find it, I pretty sure I knew this, I just don't like working from off the top of my head. I've been planing to a study the Israelite Queen's/early Christian woman/LDS Woman role in religion in some sort of detail. Before activists try to change the system, we probably need to understand the existing system. During the wedding of the King and Queen in Israel, they were both anointed with the same anointing oil that is only supposed to be used for priests. But the Deuteronomic histories don't seem to want to tell us about the Royal Court's, and thus women's, role in religion.

Edited May 21, 2022 by Pyreaux

[MiserereNobis]

1 hour ago, Pyreaux said:

I know the keys are interpreted differently but those keys are the powers restored by Joseph Smith. That is the power I'm suggesting other's don't have. As distinguished from the power that all believers have access to.

Yes, a very important point of similarity between our two churches is that we both believe these keys are necessary and authentic. Of course, we believe we have them, and you believe you have them.

[Navidad]

On 5/20/2022 at 4:44 PM, Pyreaux said:

Many non-Mormon priests are apostate, but if earnest and living righteously, will have their efforts blessed accordingly, by the power of their faith, but the true power of the LDS Priest lays in keys to the power of binding, these are the bonds of the oath of the Everlasting Covenant. For example, back when Roman Catholic Priests still preformed exorcisms, they resorted to tying down the physical body of the possessed person. Even though we see when Christ exorcised devils, he didn’t bind the person, rather He was binding devilish spirits by power and authority that had been given to him and by the swearing of the oath. Christ had the Melchizedek Priest’s sealing or binding power the Pharisee’s Aaronic Priests didn’t possess. The bonds are covenant priesthood bonds, one must spiritually bind the devilish spirit first before attempting to take its possessions away, the physical body. Do I know an LDS priest whose used their power to exorcise a demon? I do, his name was Papaloa Ete. But the least flashy but most important powers they possess is the keys to the seals of baptism, binding of the holy spirit, the marriage sealing, etc which is seen on a regular basis.

LDS women are inducted into the priesthood. They are baptized, anointed, endowed and married, which is the "highest order of the priesthood", and though she might not be called to serve in the same manner as a man, an LDS woman who has faith might find success in exorcising a demon or healing with the laying on of hands. I recall one of the famous pioneer story of a woman who laid hands on her collapsed ox and healed it. I want to say her name was "Snow"... maybe...

Can you share what you mean by "many non-Mormon priests are apostate?" I find that a pretty audacious claim, but perhaps I am not understanding what you mean by the use of the word apostate? I was hoping to get your thoughts on the day-to-day manifestation of the gifts (meekness temperance, kindness, love, faithfulness)  of the Holy Spirit, especially by LDS Christians who are so uniquely blessed with a gift that no one outside of the LDS church dare claim. I would dare say that certainly not all, but many, if not most non-LDS Christians who I know are equally bound by the Everlasting Covenants made between them and Christ, especially those related to eternal life. That has certainly been my experience as I have worshiped and fellowshipped with various Christian groups over my adult life.  Not sure what any of this has to do with exorcisms? They certainly are not day to day manifestations.

I have great respect for a person of any church or denomination who manifests his or her gifts, whatever they may be on a day-to-day basis. That is the essence of living the Christian life with power, authority, and a host of other gifts. I have seen an equal sense of being bound by commitments and covenants in Christians of a wide variety of Christian groups. At 73 years of age, I think I would have to conclude that no church group I know of can lay a unique claim to the unique manifestation of specific gifts or Christlikeness in its members. 

[manol]

1 hour ago, Navidad said:

... I would have to conclude that no church group I know of can lay a unique claim to the unique manifestation of specific gifts or Christlikeness in its members. 

My road has no doubt been different from yours, but has led me to the same conclusion. 

 

[mfbukowski]

2 hours ago, Navidad said:

At 73 years of age, I think I would have to conclude that no church group I know of can lay a unique claim to the unique manifestation of specific gifts or Christlikeness in its members. 

Of course because a "unique manifestation" would be subjective by definition with  no possible way to compare "unique manifestations".

 

[Meadowchik]

On 3/28/2022 at 11:55 PM, pogi said:

My brother in-law, who left the church, was hiking up little cottonwood canyon around 4 years ago with his family (wife and 2 young girls - all still active).  They ran into President Nelson hiking (In his 90's mind you!) with a younger man they thought was a body guard.   President Nelson stopped them and commented on what a beautiful family they were and asked if he could take their picture.    I have seen the pictures with him to verify the encounter.  My B-I-L actually had the nerve to ask him directly if he has ever seen Christ.  He answered, "no, we are not witnesses to Him in that way."  My active S-I-L verified the story. 

This testimony by Elder Oaks further verifies the account. 

Good on your BIL for having the nerve. It's a valid question.

[Meadowchik]

On 3/30/2022 at 12:08 PM, Fether said:

Just seeing where you stand in that bit. 
 

Well here is what I believe:

- Man can see Christ. I feel like there are enough scriptures and quotes saying this for it to be true.

- If BH Roberts coined the phrase “2nd comforter” to mean “a comforter after the HG who is Christ” then I have no problem using it in the same fashion. Again, I only see one source if the phrase of “second comforter” so I don’t quite understand where the conflict is here. No one seems to be disputing this aside from a few who suggest John 14:16 is a reference to the second comforter (which I mentioned I don’t believe it is). 

I think that ultimately, it is personal belief that shapes us most.

My process around spiritual experiences has become more careful over time.

I think there is a difference between being near to God and having  a perceived manifestation one might attribute to God. Obviously it's more important to actually be nearer God than to think oneself is.

This becomes more complex if we're relying on *someone else's* belief that God has manifested to them. I consider this and I ask if if God really would want the person representing the God experience to others.

Over time I feel like religion is over often used as a superficial currency, one through which God/Truth/Love doesn't require to move or transform people's lives.

Perhaps the real divine experience is more like A More Wayfaring Man of Grief, or the quote from Victor Hugo, "To love another person is to see the face of God."

[Navidad]

9 hours ago, mfbukowski said:

Of course because a "unique manifestation" would be subjective by definition with  no possible way to compare "unique manifestations".

 

I mean the use of "unique" to refer to one of a kind or one of only a very few. That might not be so hard to define or as subjective. If for example, I claimed to be unique because I have one of only three households in my village with internet, that would be a claim to uniqueness fairly easy to prove or disprove, would it not?

If I claimed to have the prettiest house in the village, that would be what you are talking about (I think) - highly subjective.  BTW, my house is not one of three in the village with internet, and it is not the prettiest house in the village. So in either case, my claim of uniqueness would be personally gratifying, but demonstrably untrue. Therefore I am making neither.

If I claimed to have a power that no one else has, as was done in this thread:

Quote

That is the power I'm suggesting other's don't have. As distinguished from the power that all believers have access to.

That is claiming a unique manifestation (that only a member of the LDS church with the priesthood can bind a demon or the Holy Spirit) - one that, given the appropriate circumstances can be readily proven false. I have no idea what purporting to "binding the Holy Spirit" means? Gotta check that one out. Maybe you can help me with that one. A priesthood holder in the LDS church can "bind" God? The more I read comments on this forum, the "confuseder" I get! Ha! 🙃

[Navidad]

6 hours ago, Meadowchik said:

I think that ultimately, it is personal belief that shapes us most.

My process around spiritual experiences has become more careful over time.

I think there is a difference between being near to God and having  a perceived manifestation one might attribute to God. Obviously it's more important to actually be nearer God than to think oneself is.

This becomes more complex if we're relying on *someone else's* belief that God has manifested to them. I consider this and I ask if if God really would want the person representing the God experience to others.

Over time I feel like religion is over often used as a superficial currency, one through which God/Truth/Love doesn't require to move or transform people's lives.

Perhaps the real divine experience is more like A More Wayfaring Man of Grief, or the quote from Victor Hugo, "To love another person is to see the face of God."

Wow . . . I didn't go to the ward this morning because I am still suffering from my concussion. However Meadowchik, this comment of yours just took me to church! Thanks so much. Very powerful insights. Thanks so much. I love "Les Miserables" and your last quote from the book/movie is so profound! Thanks again.

Edited May 22, 2022 by Navidad

[Meadowchik]

31 minutes ago, Navidad said:

Wow . . . I didn't go to the ward this morning because I am still suffering from my concussion. However Meadowchik, this comment of yours just took me to church! Thanks so much. Very powerful insights. Thanks so much. I love "Les Miserables" and your last quote from the book/movie is so profound! Thanks again.

I'm sorry about your concussion, that's serious business! I hope you can rest and heal in comfort.

[manol]

9 hours ago, Meadowchik said:

I think there is a difference between being near to God and having a perceived manifestation one might attribute to God.

Agreed.  For most of my life my belief system - my testimony - was based on a personal treasury of "spiritual experiences".  And I made (seemingly logical to me) extrapolations from those experiences which over time proved to be unjustified.  To use a simple example, a deep and mutually enriching spiritual conversation does not necessarily extrapolate to "she's supposed to be my wife."

9 hours ago, Meadowchik said:

Obviously it's more important to actually be nearer God than to think oneself is.

My old barometer used to be "the checklist".   And every comparison between myself and "the checklist" was discouraging at best. 

Now my barometer is more like this:  There is a spectrum of spiritual state(s), perhaps roughly analogous to the electromagnetic spectrum, ranging from very low to very high.  At the low end of the spectrum are such things as rage, shame, despair, resentment, guilt, hatred, grievance, jealousy, discouragement, bitterness... we humans spend a LOT of time at this low end of the spectrum so we have lots of language for describing the many different nuances of darkness.  At the other end of the spectrum, or at least much further up the spectrum, we find things like love, peace, reconciliation... energies that could be described as "light".  And it has become my experience that we can consciously choose to shift up (or down!) the spectrum by deliberate intention. 

9 hours ago, Meadowchik said:

Over time I feel like religion is over often used as a superficial currency, one through which God/Truth/Love doesn't require to move or transform people's lives.

VERY WELL PUT!!  This is BRILLIANT. 

The First and Second great commandments are about love, not about the outer-form "checklist".  "The Kingdom of God is within you."  "Ye are the temple of God, and the Spirit of God dwells within you."

9 hours ago, Meadowchik said:

Perhaps the real divine experience is more like A More Wayfaring Man of Grief, or the quote from Victor Hugo, "To love another person is to see the face of God."

YES!!  "Inasmuch as ye have done it unto the least of these my brothers, ye have done it unto me."

Notice the relationship between the First and Second great commandments:

"Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself."   Victor Hugo was right.

Personally, I don't think it's so much about who is right and who is wrong.  I think it's more about how we see (and therefore how we treat) one another.  If we see the face of God in another, whether or not we and they agree on this or that issue pales in significance. 

[Pyreaux]

19 hours ago, Navidad said:

Can you share what you mean by "many non-Mormon priests are apostate?" I find that a pretty audacious claim, but perhaps I am not understanding what you mean by the use of the word apostate? I was hoping to get your thoughts on the day-to-day manifestation of the gifts (meekness temperance, kindness, love, faithfulness)  of the Holy Spirit, especially by LDS Christians who are so uniquely blessed with a gift that no one outside of the LDS church dare claim. I would dare say that certainly not all, but many, if not most non-LDS Christians who I know are equally bound by the Everlasting Covenants made between them and Christ, especially those related to eternal life. That has certainly been my experience as I have worshiped and fellowshipped with various Christian groups over my adult life.  Not sure what any of this has to do with exorcisms? They certainly are not day to day manifestations.

I have great respect for a person of any church or denomination who manifests his or her gifts, whatever they may be on a day-to-day basis. That is the essence of living the Christian life with power, authority, and a host of other gifts. I have seen an equal sense of being bound by commitments and covenants in Christians of a wide variety of Christian groups. At 73 years of age, I think I would have to conclude that no church group I know of can lay a unique claim to the unique manifestation of specific gifts or Christlikeness in its members. 

They are a part of a system that went into Apostasy. Spiritual gifts are innate to everyone regardless of belief system even apostate and even heretic groups, for example I believe even witches have received spiritual gifts from God, real inborn spiritual gifts. Such gifts are often most effective when they used by believers in God and especially if they are a priest. Priests tend to pickup gifts they didn't innately have at birth when they became reborn priests.

So the priests of Egypt could copy Moses the Priest by creating a snake, but Moses was superior, his snake ate their snake. It wasn't until Saul became a Priest-King that the spirit fell on him and he became a prophet when he wasn't as a simple believer before becoming a born again king (1 Samuel 10:6; 19:24). The Seven Sons of Sceva, the Jewish High Priest, attempted to exorcise a demon in the name of Christ, but didn't have any priesthood power/authority that the devil recognized to force him to obey, so the devils beat these non-royal priests up (Acts 19:13-14). On the other hand, that is not to say its impossible for a non-royal priest to exorcise a demon (Mark 9:40). It was simply not an inherent ability in all believer, it was not common or manifest in Jewish Priests, nor John the Baptist who was not able to heal or exorcise (John 10:41), being an Aaronic Priest by his descent from Aaron, and not a Royal Priest like Christ. Because those were specific gifts of King-Priests that Christ had to restore and distributed to the Apostles and the Seventy. This entitled them to have power to exorcise in a manner that they and other people are normally not entitled to, but that is not to say with enough faith that an average person can't do so. Nor that a priest with insufficient faith may find failure to do so. The Priesthood gives the bears recognized authority to command such things.

When it come to something completely unique, a believer cannot use the keys of sealing to perform in ordinances without the LDS priesthood. Simon the Sorcerer as a believer could not give people the Gift of the Holy Ghost, that is unique to the royal priesthood. The gift can only be given after proper and authorized baptism and is conferred by the laying on of hands of those with Priesthood authority to do so (Acts 8:12-25). Unless an uncommon miracle happens like when Cornelius spontaneously received the Holy Ghost (Acts 10) in which case, it wasn't by authority of a non-priest that he received the Holy Ghost, it was God himself.

7 hours ago, Navidad said:

I mean the use of "unique" to refer to one of a kind or one of only a very few. That might not be so hard to define or as subjective. If for example, I claimed to be unique because I have one of only three households in my village with internet, that would be a claim to uniqueness fairly easy to prove or disprove, would it not?

If I claimed to have the prettiest house in the village, that would be what you are talking about (I think) - highly subjective.  BTW, my house is not one of three in the village with internet, and it is not the prettiest house in the village. So in either case, my claim of uniqueness would be personally gratifying, but demonstrably untrue. Therefore I am making neither.

If I claimed to have a power that no one else has, as was done in this thread:

That is claiming a unique manifestation (that only a member of the LDS church with the priesthood can bind a demon or the Holy Spirit) - one that, given the appropriate circumstances can be readily proven false. I have no idea what purporting to "binding the Holy Spirit" means? Gotta check that one out. Maybe you can help me with that one. A priesthood holder in the LDS church can "bind" God? The more I read comments on this forum, the "confuseder" I get! Ha! 🙃

The unique power LDS have is what I'm calling the keys of "Sealing" or "Binding". All may live in a way that is inviting to the Holy Spirit, but that is not the same as having the Gift of the Holy Ghost, which is to have it bound or "Sealed" to you (Ephesians 1:13; 4:30; 2 Corinthians 1:22) by the binding power of the unique royal priesthood keys. Another way of thinking of it, its not unlike a marriage bond, the Spirit has to be bestowed and given like a bride from God, in what Solomon describes as a marriage with it (Wisdom of Solomon 8:2), similarly to how a husband and wife becomes "one", by being pressed upon each other with a seal, "set me as a seal upon your heart" (Song of Solomon 8:6). LDS marriage is also a bond or seal unique to the royal priesthood.

However, Latter-day Saints believe that all worthy men and women, through righteous living will in inherit eternal life in the Celestial Kingdom, simply that those who are sealed by the power of the LDS priesthood have certain unique blessings, universally obtainable, but not universally obtained.

Edited May 22, 2022 by Pyreaux

[rodheadlee]

On 5/21/2022 at 8:59 PM, Navidad said:

Can you share what you mean by "many non-Mormon priests are apostate?" I find that a pretty audacious claim, but perhaps I am not understanding what you mean by the use of the word apostate? I was hoping to get your thoughts on the day-to-day manifestation of the gifts (meekness temperance, kindness, love, faithfulness)  of the Holy Spirit, especially by LDS Christians who are so uniquely blessed with a gift that no one outside of the LDS church dare claim. I would dare say that certainly not all, but many, if not most non-LDS Christians who I know are equally bound by the Everlasting Covenants made between them and Christ, especially those related to eternal life. That has certainly been my experience as I have worshiped and fellowshipped with various Christian groups over my adult life.  Not sure what any of this has to do with exorcisms? They certainly are not day to day manifestations.

I have great respect for a person of any church or denomination who manifests his or her gifts, whatever they may be on a day-to-day basis. That is the essence of living the Christian life with power, authority, and a host of other gifts. I have seen an equal sense of being bound by commitments and covenants in Christians of a wide variety of Christian groups. At 73 years of age, I think I would have to conclude that no church group I know of can lay a unique claim to the unique manifestation of specific gifts or Christlikeness in its members. 

The bottom line is The LDS Church is HIS Church. He started it. His hands are all over it.  He invited you to partake of His Church. Everything else is a distraction.

[Meadowchik]

33 minutes ago, rodheadlee said:

The bottom line is The LDS Church is HIS Church. He started it. His hands are all over it.  He invited you to partake of His Church. Everything else is a distraction.

I believe that you believe this. But I'm pretty sure that you saying it and believing it doesn't make it true.