Another Big Batch Of Temple Ordinance Changes

[Teancum]

5 hours ago, pogi said:

It wasn't wrong if it is intended to be "fluid" and relative.  If your theory were true, that would that would mean the current endowment as revealed by God to President Nelson is incorrect.  I prefer to see the fluidity of it as correct so as to not throw Joseph Smith or multiple more modern prophets under the bus as defilers of the most sacred temple ordinances.  No thanks! 

Maye this is a good indication that they should be tossed under the bus.

[Teancum]

5 hours ago, ttribe said:

You do know that the endowment once contained teachings regarding Adam-God back in Brigham Young's day, right? Aren't those teachings that were later disavowed?

Grug has an entire thread on AGD so I think he does know this. It seems problematic for him.  As it should be.

[Dario_M]

Like me you know...i don't wanna receive the endomend. Never. That is again another ordinance i am totaly not interested in. But the later-day-saints in my ward are not happy with that. Or what do you think about the priesterhood...that is also such an of ordinance i just don't feel like a wanna go through. My bishop has remind me of that for over a month every sunday. Why i whas waiting so long for it and if it whas not better for me that i would do it as soon as posible. BECAUSE i have promissed that when i got baptized. 

My. oh my...my neigbors are so loud here. 😤 Feels like i am living next to a disco. 

Edited February 21, 2023 by Dario_M

[MustardSeed]

51 minutes ago, Dario_M said:

Like me you know...i don't wanna receive the endomend. Never. That is again another ordinance i am totaly not interested in. But the later-day-saints in my ward are not happy with that. Or what do you think about the priesterhood...that is also such an of ordinance i just don't feel like a wanna go through. My bishop has remind me of that for over a month every sunday. Why i whas waiting so long for it and if it whas not better for me that i would do it as soon as posible. BECAUSE i have promissed that when i got baptized. 

My god...my neigbors are so loud here damned. 😤 Feels like i am living next to a disco. 

Would you mind terribly deleting that last paragraph? A polite request, not a demand .  I’m sorry your neighbors are difficult. That’s the worst.  

[Tacenda]

2 hours ago, Dario_M said:

This is not the first time you did this. You have received the endowmend did you not...and you have been a bishop you once told? I suposse that you also have been told not to judge one another or harm anyone in any way...  those are a few commitments. But you don't really seem to be al to serious about those in my opinion i am sorry. Not that i wanna judge you in any way though.

The law of chastity is for me a big drama. I fail in that one. But we are all humans. We make mistakes.

I find that we need to respect the differend ideas from the people here about ordinance changes and other things like covenands. And also how the church have changed and the roll of the wife for her husband and everything. Differend ideas, differend opinions. One may thing that we can have an respectfull conversastion about it. Without attacking each other right? (like you sometimes do) 

I hate to break it to you, but many members believe in righteous judgement. I was listening to this podcast part 1 where they talk about righteous judgement and we're wrong if we think we're not to judge. I think they have different languages to listen to it with. It's part of the Come Follow Me lessons I believe. 

https://followhim.co/new-testament-episodes-1-10/

[bluebell]

Just now, Tacenda said:

I hate to break it to you, but many members believe in righteous judgement. I was listening to this podcast part 1 where they talk about righteous judgement and we're wrong if we think we're not to judge. I think they have different languages to listen to it with. It's part of the Come Follow Me lessons I believe. 

https://followhim.co/new-testament-episodes-1-10/

It’s very true. One of the doctrines of the church is that truth is not relative and that we must be able to judge between truth and error if we want to learn to follow Christ.

 

[ttribe]

1 hour ago, Teancum said:

Grug has an entire thread on AGD so I think he does know this. It seems problematic for him.  As it should be.

My friend, 'problematic' is an understatement, as I'm sure you know.

[Harry T. Clark]

1 hour ago, Teancum said:

Maye this is a good indication that they should be tossed under the bus.

I don't know about anyone else here, but I went through the first time in the 80's when the penalties were still there and it was shocking to say the least.  My first impression was that maybe we are what the critics say, that we are a cult.  Over time, I realized that we aren't.  Even so, evolution is welcomed. 

[Teancum]

26 minutes ago, ttribe said:

My friend, 'problematic' is an understatement, as I'm sure you know.

Well yes indeed.  For Grug and most here though it seems easy for some to come up with a work around.

[bluebell]

6 minutes ago, Teancum said:

Well yes indeed.  For Grug and most here though it seems easy for some to come up with a work around.

That's because it's not problematic for every paradigm of belief in the church (is that the word I want to use?  I could be misappling it).  But for some it is and I think that's valid.  

[JLHPROF]

11 minutes ago, bluebell said:

That's because it's not problematic for every paradigm of belief in the church (is that the word I want to use?  I could be misappling it).  But for some it is and I think that's valid.  

The only valid consideration is whether the Lord revealed them to Joseph as a requirement for temple prayer.  If that is actually the case then we no longer have that knowledge or the blessing available.  If it's not the case then every part of the ordinance is suspect.

[MustardSeed]

I don’t believe that every action and every word of the temple ceremony is or ever was dictated word for word from God.  So changes don’t bother me. I know some see it differently. 

[Tacenda]

27 minutes ago, MustardSeed said:

I don’t believe that every action and every word of the temple ceremony is or ever was dictated word for word from God.  So changes don’t bother me. I know some see it differently. 

Well, before finding out masonry was what Joseph used to put in place the temple instruction I probably thought it came from God. This article goes into it. https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/history/topics/masonry?lang=eng

Edited February 21, 2023 by Tacenda

[manol]

1 hour ago, Tacenda said:

I hate to break it to you, but many members believe in righteous judgement.

At the risk of over-simplifying, imo there are only two thought systems, though each may take many different forms. One always results in darkness and condemnation, and the other always results in light and love.

In one thought system, “judgment” is synonymous with condemnation, and condemnation is deemed to always be the proper response to any form of guilt. Since all are guilty of something, ultimately all are condemned, according to this thought system.

In the other thought system, “judgment” is synonymous with discernment, and discernment is how we differentiate that which is of God from that which is not (see Moroni 7:15-18). Light and love and forgiveness are of God.

Therefore, imo any interpretation of “righteous judgement” which calls on us to be a source of condemnation is incorrect.  And imo any interpretation of "righteous judgment" which calls on us to be a source of light and love and forgiveness is correct. 

[bluebell]

56 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

The only valid consideration is whether the Lord revealed them to Joseph as a requirement for temple prayer.  If that is actually the case then we no longer have that knowledge or the blessing available.  If it's not the case then every part of the ordinance is suspect.

I can see why some might believe that, but to me the only consideration is if the Lord has been involved in and approved of every iteration of the temple endowment.  They don’t all have to be exactly the same for them all to be valid.

I think that baptism is a perfect example of that. 

[Grug the Neanderthal]

19 minutes ago, bluebell said:

to me the only consideration is if the Lord has been involved in and approved of every iteration of the temple endowment.

This is the most critical consideration for sure. But assuming that the Lord approved of every change (which I think is highly questionable), this still doesn’t mean the changes are positive.

Truth has been taken away and symbolism has been lost. And I think it’s clearly because the general membership was uncomfortable with the truths and symbolism that were taken away. I see that as a negative, whether God approved it or not (but it’s obviously a lot better if he did.)

Edited February 21, 2023 by Grug the Neanderthal

[bluebell]

8 minutes ago, Grug the Neanderthal said:

This is the most critical consideration for sure. But assuming that the Lord approved of every change (which I think is highly questionable), this still doesn’t mean the changes are positive.

 

If the Lord approved then they cannot harm us.  To me, that is all that matters.

Quote

Truth has been taken away and symbolism has been lost. And I think it’s clearly because the general membership was uncomfortable with the truths and symbolism that were taken away. I see that as a negative, whether God approved it or not (but it’s obviously a lot better if he did.)

I know you do.  Myself and many others don't. 

We are lucky in that our perspective does not limit our enjoyment or access to the blessings of the temple while I recognize that your perspective likely makes anything to do with the temple, including attending, less of a blessing for you and those who agree with you. 

That is a trial in many ways and I'm willing to mourn with you and others who mourn perceived losses.  But I can't pretend that I've lost anything.

[Calm]

4 hours ago, Dario_M said:

Feels like i am living next to a disco. 

Can you get a decent pair of noise canceling headphones?  I am looking into them as my hearing sensitivity seems to be going up and I am not too comfortable when all the family is together, but of course I want to be there with my grandkids, son and his wife.  Always a bit nervous about buying something a bit more expensive, lol.  Thank goodness for consumer reports and other online reviews….(if anyone has suggestions, PM me please…)

I don’t know how I would manage if my neighbours were like yours.

Edited February 21, 2023 by Calm

[Grug the Neanderthal]

8 minutes ago, bluebell said:

I'm willing to mourn with you and others who mourn perceived losses.  But I can't pretend that I've lost anything.

I appreciate the sentiments, but will also add that you may have lost a great deal and just don’t realize it yet. 

[Calm]

1 hour ago, MustardSeed said:

I don’t believe that every action and every word of the temple ceremony is or ever was dictated word for word from God.  So changes don’t bother me. I know some see it differently. 

There is also the possibility that God uses multiple avenues to teach the same knowledge, so just because one way is removed, it doesn’t mean access to that necessary knowledge is lost.  Like having multiple cookbooks teaching how to barbecue…maybe if one cookbook is misplaced or thrown away, you lose those specific recipes, but if what you are interested is learning the skill of barbecuing, you still have other ways to learn it and once learn, you can then use your knowledge to create desired tastes.

[Calm]

59 minutes ago, manol said:

At the risk of over-simplifying, imo there are only two thought systems, though each may take many different forms. One always results in darkness and condemnation, and the other always results in light and love.

In one thought system, “judgment” is synonymous with condemnation, and condemnation is deemed to always be the proper response to any form of guilt. Since all are guilty of something, ultimately all are condemned, according to this thought system.

In the other thought system, “judgment” is synonymous with discernment, and discernment is how we differentiate that which is of God from that which is not (see Moroni 7:15-18). Light and love and forgiveness are of God.

Therefore, imo any interpretation of “righteous judgement” which calls on us to be a source of condemnation is incorrect.  And imo any interpretation of "righteous judgment" which calls on us to be a source of light and love and forgiveness is correct. 

Question for clarification, not a challenge…how would you see appropriate judgement of seriously abusive behaviour by a parent, as in vicious, sick criminal abuse?  Could it be appropriate in some cases to both condemn and forgive?

Edited February 21, 2023 by Calm

[Tacenda]

59 minutes ago, manol said:

At the risk of over-simplifying, imo there are only two thought systems, though each may take many different forms. One always results in darkness and condemnation, and the other always results in light and love.

In one thought system, “judgment” is synonymous with condemnation, and condemnation is deemed to always be the proper response to any form of guilt. Since all are guilty of something, ultimately all are condemned, according to this thought system.

In the other thought system, “judgment” is synonymous with discernment, and discernment is how we differentiate that which is of God from that which is not (see Moroni 7:15-18). Light and love and forgiveness are of God.

Therefore, imo any interpretation of “righteous judgement” which calls on us to be a source of condemnation is incorrect.  And imo any interpretation of "righteous judgment" which calls on us to be a source of light and love and forgiveness is correct. 

I agree, the podcast I shared made it sound a lot lighter or on the lighter side. Such as judging on who would be the best person to babysit your children, etc. So I guess we all judge if put in that context. 

[bluebell]

5 minutes ago, Grug the Neanderthal said:

I appreciate the sentiments, but will also add that you may have lost a great deal and just don’t realize it yet. 

I know you believe that, and while I find it incredibly sad, I get it and I'm sorry.

But there isn't anything you can say to lead me to that place where you are.  The  upside to my perspective is that I don't believe it's possible for me to lose blessings because of something the prophets have done in good faith, believing they are doing God's will.  I get that you believe that you can lose blessings through no fault of your own, but that is nonsense to me.

So even if you are ultimately correct, my belief system is such that Christ does not "ding" me (or anyone) for following His prophets who are sincerely and actively trying to follow Him. 

My faith is in Christ's ability to run His church and manage His prophets despite their weaknesses.  My faith in being blessed doesn't depend on the prophet's level of fallibility. So I don't have to gauge my access to temple blessings or power based on the level of imperfection of someone else.

I have access to them all, even with an infallible prophet.  

[pogi]

4 hours ago, Grug the Neanderthal said:

become more and more enlightened in creating their own truths relative to their current societal norms. 

In my opinion if your views were correct there would be no point to the restoration, no point to having scriptures, prophets, or ordinances, since none of it actually teaches the truth of things as they actually are, were, and will be. 

No, it’s evident you really don’t understand.  I would not agree with any of this.

[manol]

30 minutes ago, Calm said:

Question for clarification, not a challenge…how would you see appropriate judgement of seriously abusive behaviour by a parent, as in vicious, sick criminal abuse?  Could it be appropriate in some cases to both condemn and forgive?

Being prudent and protecting the innocent (even if that means incarcerating someone for life because that's the only way) are not the same thing as holding that person in condemnation. 

One reason not to hold another in condemnation is that there is a price tag attached:  We have to lower our spiritual state in order the feel negativity towards another.  It doesn't matter how justified we are - we cannot hold another in darkness without lowering ourselves into darkness too.  No matter how justified, we cannot hate without lowering our energy into the state of "hate". 

So imo we do what is prudent and protective (and healing wherever possible), and sometimes that means removing a person from our lives (temporarily or permanently), but we would be wise to do so without going into hatred and condemnation because that carries a price tag and offers us nothing of value in return.