A Door That Swings Both Ways

[RAD DAD]

1 minute ago, Calm said:

What does that have to do with your following claim?  You are attempting to reason from a specific case (a member with an obsession) to the general rule of repentance.  That is a fallacy. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallacy_of_composition

Handbook:

 

1000s if not millions of young LDS boys or young men have gone to their bishop to confess staring at a really nice set of boobs. Growing up in the church young men are scared to death on purpose so they feel as if they need to confess for the smallest of sins. You actually know that to be the case, even though you won't admit it.

[RAD DAD]

17 minutes ago, Calm said:

I am not going to talk about baptism anymore because it appears you are using that to avoid dealing with something different, repentance.

How bout drinking coffee, is that a big enough sin it should be confessed to the bishop to be fully repented?

Edited May 14, 2023 by RAD DAD

[Calm]

7 minutes ago, RAD DAD said:

1000s if not millions of young LDS boys or young men have gone to their bishop to confess staring at a really nice set of boobs. Growing up in the church young men are scared to death on purpose so they feel as if they need to confess for the smallest of sins. You actually know that to be the case, even though you won't admit it.

Who says I haven’t admitted it?  Now you are just making stuff up to avoid dealing with the Handbook.

That possibly millions of young members have chosen to confess to a priesthood leader as part of their repentance process does not prove confession to priesthood leaders is a required part of all true repentance.

Deal with the Handbook.

 

Edited May 14, 2023 by Calm

[Calm]

2 minutes ago, RAD DAD said:

How bout drinking coffee, is that a big enough sin it should be confessed to the bishop?

Why would a nonmember have to confess to drinking coffee?

Deal with the Handbook.

Quote

Most repentance takes place between an individual, God, and those who have been affected by a person’s sins. However, sometimes a bishop or stake president needs to help Church members in their efforts to repent.

 

Edited May 14, 2023 by Calm

[RAD DAD]

4 minutes ago, Calm said:

Why would a nonmember have to confess to drinking coffee?

Deal with the Handbook.

 

Drinking coffee is a sin for members and non members. We're all gods children 

Edited May 14, 2023 by RAD DAD

[Tacenda]

Just now, RAD DAD said:

Drinking coffee is a sin for members and non members.

Not non members, the WoW is more an obedience deal.

[RAD DAD]

2 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

Not non members, the WoW is more an obedience deal.

Is not drinking coffee a commandment?

[Calm]

3 hours ago, RAD DAD said:

Drinking coffee is a sin for members and non members. We're all gods children 

Off topic, but…

It is not a sin to drink coffee when you have not covenanted not to drink it.

It is not a sin for nonmembers not to wear temple garments as prescribed. 

Quote

A Word of Wisdom, for the benefit of the council of high priests, assembled in Kirtland, and the church, and also the saints in Zion

Not for “all people”.

Now please…

Deal with the Handbook:

Quote

Most repentance takes place between an individual, God, and those who have been affected by a person’s sins. However, sometimes a bishop or stake president needs to help Church members in their efforts to repent.

 

Edited May 14, 2023 by Calm

[Navidad]

46 minutes ago, RAD DAD said:

According to church doctrine it doesn't matter how he sees baptism,  just because he sees baptism differently doesn't mean he gets to live with God in the celestial kingdom, correct? If he wants to live with God, eventually he'll have to accept the gospel and also fully repent, either here or in spirit prison. According to church doctrine, his baptism doesn't get him back to God.

According to my church doctrine my baptism doesn't get me back to God either! 😀 So I guess we are even on that count. I have been faithfully going to an LDS ward for six years now. None of my three bishops have ever suggested that I submit to baptism at their hands. We have never had a conversation about baptism. My Catholic priest neighbor/friend assures me that if I wanted to become Catholic, I would have to be catechized, but not rebaptized. I have baptized probably more than 100 people. I have never thought of a baptism at my hands as being salvific either. Repentance is a whole different manner. My wife and I have voluntarily put ourselves under the spiritual authority of the LDS bishop in the ward. Not once did any of the three ever suggest that she or I confess to or seek repentance from him. I have heard often about going to see the bishop about tithing settlements, but never about confession. I should also add that I do not believe there will be any denominationalism after death either. No Baptists, Catholics, or LDS in eternity. Just individuals who Christ will judge in perfect mercy and righteousness. That will be the only way any of us of any faith will come to the Father.

Edited May 14, 2023 by Navidad

[Navidad]

6 minutes ago, Calm said:

Off topic, but…

Not for “all people”.

Just to chime in. . . . My wife and I had the entire bishopric of our ward visiting us a couple of weeks ago. We talked and had good time talking about our respective Word of Wisdoms. You see, my faith group has quite a list of no-no's as well. It just happens that coffee isn't on our list, but dancing is. Hot tea isn't, but playing cards is. For my faith premarital sex is a no-no because it leads to dancing! I hope your friend Rad Dad doesn't think he has any shot at all at the Celestial Kingdom if he hasn't repented of dancing! 😀

[InCognitus]

1 hour ago, RAD DAD said:

I provided an apostle of God giving a talk on repentance and in his talk he said point blank that only a man who holds the priesthood can perform certain ordinances and functions that will be acceptable to God, that included baptism. 

I'm starting to think you're unable to understand what dalin oaks was trying to convey to the missionaries he was talking to. Again, the first word in the title of the talk is REPENTANCE! Your cfr is an apostle of God, boom!

Mike, again, you haven't answered the CFR.   Maybe Nemesis has your IP address this time.

[Navidad]

6 hours ago, RAD DAD said:

So you believe a non priesthood holder, let's say a Baptist preacher or a catholic priesthood has the power or keys to be a common judge and sit in judgement of transgressors? Doesn't that ho against everything we are taught in church?

I am a Baptist preacher and I would agree that no Baptist preacher anywhere on earth has the power or keys to be a common judge and sit in judgement of transgressors. I have never met a Baptist preacher who ever did that either. Baptist preachers only sit in judgement of other Baptist preachers!

[manol]

51 minutes ago, RAD DAD said:

What if we let go of all our grievances...

Yes!  (I know I re-interpreted your post with my edit; that was intentional.)

I believe that forgiveness is universally applicable.  And when we forgive, it is a gift we give to ourselves, because we unburden ourselves of needless darkened thoughts which obscure our awareness of God and his love.  Imo when we no longer place anything between our minds and God, we return to our natural state, which is love. 

[mfbukowski]

8 hours ago, Meadowchik said:

If you've paid attention to my own reconstruction and restatement of personal epistemology, you'd know it's more than that.

Did I do that?

I think I was using the universal personal "you", meaning "everyone" instead of the more particular "you" meaning "Meadowchik".

As in "If ONE (you) believes that xyz is the case, then ONE (you) will find out that..."

Sorry

Edited May 14, 2023 by mfbukowski

[Meadowchik]

29 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

Did I do that?

I think I was using the universal personal "you", meaning "everyone" instead of the more particular "you" meaning "Meadowchik".

As in "If ONE (you) believes that xyz is the case, then ONE (you) will find out that..."

Sorry

If you are wrong about me then you might be wrong about everybody. 

 

[Calm]

My daughter was kind enough to transcribe the relevant section from Pres. (then Elder, I believe) Oaks’ talk. 

Did not double check to make sure she got it exactly right as it all made sense.  My punctuation btw, save the periods.

Quote

To be admitted to his presence we must be more than clean, we must also be changed from a morally weak person who has sinned into a strong person with the strength to resist sin and the spiritual stature to dwell in the presence of God. That is what it means to be saved. You will understand from what I’ve just said why it is so important for missionaries to teach repentance. In our day the lord has commanded missionaries to say nothing but repentance unto this generation. The lord explained further: “Verily, verily I say unto you those who believe not on your words and are not baptized in water in my name for the remission of their sins that they may receive the Holy Ghost shall be damned and shall not come into my father’s kingdom where my father and I am.”

We do not preach and teach in order to bring people into the church or to increase our membership.  We do not find and teach just to persuade to live better lives. We honor and appreciate the many ministers and others involved in efforts that make bad men good and good men better. That is important but we offer something more. From modern revelation we know that children of God can qualify for a significant heaven or degree of glory without the ordinances of his church.  As missionaries called by him and preaching the fullness of his doctrine, we are concerned with something more than a lesser kingdom of glory. The fundamental purpose of our missionary work is to teach the word of God that men and women cannot be saved in the highest degree of glory the celestial kingdom without faith in the atoning sacrifice of Jesus Christ.

Further we teach that the only way to lay claim to the ultimate merits of his atonement is to follow his commands. Repent and be baptized and receive the gift of the Holy Ghost and the ordinances of the temple and endure to the end. Those who do so can be exalted in the celestial kingdom instead of being damned in a lesser status or kingdom. No one else can do this. Other churches cannot do it. Good christian living cannot do it. Good faith, good desires, and good reasoning cannot do it. Only a man or woman teaching the fullness of the gospel with priesthood authority can teach this and only a man exercising the priesthood of God can administer a baptism that will satisfy the divine decree except a man be born of water and of the spirit he cannot enter the kingdom of God.

You missionaries who are on the front line in this great effort need to remember that the baptism we seek is the baptism that follows sincere repentance. The baptism that is part of a conscious change and coming unto christ with the deliberate decision to come into the fold of god and to be called his people. In the eighteenth chapter of Mosiah Alma concludes his teaching about the burdens we covenant to bear by characterizing baptism as a witness before him:  “ye have entered into a covenant with him that ye will serve him and keep his commandments that he may pour out his spirit more abundantly upon you”.

The bold clearly shows he is talking about exaltation, something much more than just the process of repentance.

The italic and underlined part clearly shows nonmembers must be capable of true repentance in his view or how would bad men become good and good men become better?  How would any nonmember qualify for a kingdom of glory where no unclean thing can enter (and unrepentant is surely unclean)?

On a side note, I really wish we didn’t use “damned” to mean any separation from God instead of just total separation from God. 
 

——

Thank you for sharing that talk, Rad Dad, as it supports the doctrine that “[m]ost repentance takes place between an individual, God, and those who have been affected by a person’s sins” and thus true repentance does not inherently require confession to an LDS priesthood holder (though it may be necessary in some situations).

Since that reference supports a different position than you claimed, the CFR still stands to show that true repentance is not possible save for confessing to a worthy priesthood holder (and that is wrong too, because confessing when necessary to any worthy priesthood holder isn’t enough; it needs to be one who is appointed to be a judge, which percentage wise of all worthy priesthood holders is quite small, maybe even less than 1%). 
 

Original claim of Rad Dad so as not to be distracted by his constant shifting of topic:

”There's only one way to truly and fully repent on this earth and that's to sit down in front of a worthy priesthood holder so to  repent, and those priesthood holders are only found within our church.”

Edited May 14, 2023 by Calm

[bluebell]

3 hours ago, RAD DAD said:

Drinking coffee is a sin for members and non members. We're all gods children 

It’s not a sin for nonmembers. It wasn’t a sin for members either before the WOW (and before it was interpreted/applied as it is now).

[bluebell]

6 hours ago, RAD DAD said:

Here's a few screenshots explaining who belongs to the church of the first born. Not even some members of our faith will be members. Are you telling me you think non members can be members if the church of the first born without joining our church?

 

Yep. Nothing in those contradicts what I said.

[Tacenda]

Wow, Chad and Lori Daybell are calling themselves members of the church of the First Born. I didn't know anything about this before, that it's related to the Celestial Kingdom.

Edited May 14, 2023 by Tacenda

[Meadowchik]

6 hours ago, Calm said:

My daughter was kind enough to transcribe the relevant section from Pres. (then Elder, I believe) Oaks’ talk. 

Did not double check to make sure she got it exactly right as it all made sense.  My punctuation btw, save the periods.

The bold clearly shows he is talking about exaltation, something much more than just the process of repentance.

The italic and underlined part clearly shows nonmembers must be capable of true repentance in his view or how would bad men become good and good men become better?  How would any nonmember qualify for a kingdom of glory where no unclean thing can enter (and unrepentant is surely unclean)?

On a side note, I really wish we didn’t use “damned” to mean any separation from God instead of just total separation from God. 
 

——

Thank you for sharing that talk, Rad Dad, as it supports the doctrine that “[m]ost repentance takes place between an individual, God, and those who have been affected by a person’s sins” and thus true repentance does not inherently require confession to an LDS priesthood holder (though it may be necessary in some situations).

Since that reference supports a different position than you claimed, the CFR still stands to show that true repentance is not possible save for confessing to a worthy priesthood holder (and that is wrong too, because confessing when necessary to any worthy priesthood holder isn’t enough; it needs to be one who is appointed to be a judge, which percentage wise of all worthy priesthood holders is quite small, maybe even less than 1%). 
 

Original claim of Rad Dad so as not to be distracted by his constant shifting of topic:

”There's only one way to truly and fully repent on this earth and that's to sit down in front of a worthy priesthood holder so to  repent, and those priesthood holders are only found within our church.”

I would reword that to say:

”Accordingvto the LDS gospel there's only one way to truly and fully repent and therefore continue progressing eternally and that is through the ordinances of the gospel including baptism by those in authority who are priesthood holders only found within our church."

Repentance is a turning to God. The whole point is to return to the Father, and build on an inheritance held for our eternal progression. Everything else results in a stopping of progression, which is regardless of quality of the stasis, a form of damnation.

[RAD DAD]

8 hours ago, Navidad said:

According to my church doctrine my baptism doesn't get me back to God either! 😀 So I guess we are even on that count. I have been faithfully going to an LDS ward for six years now. None of my three bishops have ever suggested that I submit to baptism at their hands.

Going to a LDS ward building and sitting through sacrament meeting isn’t mormonism, it isn't the gospel, it isn't what we strive for. The temple and the temple alone is how we get back to God. Everything in our faith revolves around the temple. A ward building is a gathering place that's all. You feel special for attending sacrament meeting. My brother in law has been attending sacrament meeting and Sunday school for over 40 years and he's a Presbyterian. 

 

8 hours ago, Navidad said:

My wife and I have voluntarily put ourselves under the spiritual authority of the LDS bishop in the ward. Not once did any of the three ever suggest that she or I confess to or seek repentance from him

Again, you're not playing in the game yet! You're sitting in the stands watching the game being played. You're a fan, congratulations, but if you ever want to start playing ball you'll have to do everything I'm talking about to become a member. If you and your wife want to be in the presence of God someday you'll have to repent to the proper authority and get baptized by the proper authority. We LDS believe 100% that the only church in the world that has priesthood authority is our church! That will hold true when you die. So if you want to see God one day, according to our doctrine, you will have to accept the gospel preached by our church and repent, either here or in spirit prison, or you will end up in a kingdom God does not reside in. You could sit in LDS sacrament meetings for 60 years and that won't help you a lick if you're trying to get back to God. We're not concerned about salvation like the rest of Christianity, our goal is exaltation!

Edited May 14, 2023 by RAD DAD

[RAD DAD]

8 hours ago, Navidad said:

I am a Baptist preacher and I would agree that no Baptist preacher anywhere on earth has the power or keys to be a common judge and sit in judgement of transgressors. I have never met a Baptist preacher who ever did that either. Baptist preachers only sit in judgement of other Baptist preachers

In my experience most Christian denominations think going directly to God and confessing sin, is perfectly acceptable. 

But what everyone here is dancing around accept for me for some reason, because they all know what I'm saying is true, is that today, 1000s of young men, and I'm only speaking for the men and boys, will go to their bishop and confess of sins that are serious and also NOT SERIOUS! Why? Because they have been taught that sin, all sin, serious and not serious, is because the devil or one of his angels was able to convince them to commit sin. That young boy might feel guilty for months, maybe even years, because he feels the only way he can get rid of that sin is to tell his BISHOP, not God, what happened. 

So now take that young boy, let's say he's 13, Calm wants you to believe because there's a handbook, that 13 year old boy understands the difference between little sins and big serious sins, that's not how it happens in real life. And what is serious sin?? Guess what! That depends on who your bishop is, everyone knows exactly what I'm talking about. LDS call it Bishop roulette.  

So what is a non serious sin? Is stealing a pack of gum a serious sin? Does that need to be confessed to the bishop? What about smoking one cigarette at a party, is that serious sin? Does the bishop need to be told about that? What about visiting Pornhub once a week, does a 13 year old boy need to confess to the bishop for visiting Pornhub only once a week? What if he masturbates while visiting Pornhub, is that like really serious, so serious he needs to repent to his bishop immediately? You see, my point is, knowing when to confess to the bishop isn't as easy as Calm is trying so desperately to make it out to be, she's trying to make repenting to the bishop a black or white issue but it's not. It depends on the individual and how they feel and it is highly dependent on your bishop and how strict he is when it comes to sin. Most young men in our church are scared to death of Satan and his angels! Young men are taught that if we die and we haven't confessed of the sins we have committed, our spiritual well being is at risk! Back in my day bishops would tell parents to baptize their 7 year old as close to their 8th year as they can because as soon as that child turns eight, Satan will be set free to start tempting that child and if the child dies before being baptized, his spiritual well being is at risk. Let me say that again! Baptize your child as soon as you can incase they are in a car wreck or something, because if they die with sin and unbaptized, their spiritual well being is at risk! Many bishops used that to convince parents to baptize their child as soon as possible. 

 

[RAD DAD]

6 hours ago, bluebell said:

Yep. Nothing in those contradicts what I said.

To me, you were trying to make it sound as if other Christian religions are part of the church of the firstborn. 

[RAD DAD]

6 hours ago, bluebell said:

It’s not a sin for nonmembers. It wasn’t a sin for members either before the WOW (and before it was interpreted/applied as it is now).

We are all gods children. If drinking coffee is a sin, if it's breaking a commandment, then it's a sin for all of God's children, not just LDS children of God. 

[RAD DAD]

8 hours ago, Calm said:

My daughter was kind enough to transcribe the relevant section from Pres. (then Elder, I believe) Oaks’ talk. 

Did not double check to make sure she got it exactly right as it all made sense.  My punctuation btw, save the periods.

The bold clearly shows he is talking about exaltation, something much more than just the process of repentance.

The italic and underlined part clearly shows nonmembers must be capable of true repentance in his view or how would bad men become good and good men become better?  How would any nonmember qualify for a kingdom of glory where no unclean thing can enter (and unrepentant is surely unclean)?

On a side note, I really wish we didn’t use “damned” to mean any separation from God instead of just total separation from God. 
 

——

Thank you for sharing that talk, Rad Dad, as it supports the doctrine that “[m]ost repentance takes place between an individual, God, and those who have been affected by a person’s sins” and thus true repentance does not inherently require confession to an LDS priesthood holder (though it may be necessary in some situations).

Since that reference supports a different position than you claimed, the CFR still stands to show that true repentance is not possible save for confessing to a worthy priesthood holder (and that is wrong too, because confessing when necessary to any worthy priesthood holder isn’t enough; it needs to be one who is appointed to be a judge, which percentage wise of all worthy priesthood holders is quite small, maybe even less than 1%). 
 

Original claim of Rad Dad so as not to be distracted by his constant shifting of topic:

”There's only one way to truly and fully repent on this earth and that's to sit down in front of a worthy priesthood holder so to  repent, and those priesthood holders are only found within our church.”

No! He is clearly talking about repentance and he's there to tell the missionaries that are listening to him that they should be teaching repentance to non members! 

The first paragraph your daughter transcribed proves my point.  What does he say. Must atleast be clean, which is talking about repentance. He then explains a unrepentant person is weak, a person who has gone through the repentant process is strong. Then he tells the missionaries how important it is to teach REPENTANCE, not exaltation. Then he doubles down and say it in a different way in the very next sentence. He says, "in our day the lord has COMMANDED missionaries to SAY NOTHING but REPENTANCE unto this generation. And as I said yesterday, baptism and repentance go hand in hand. He says, Verily verily I say unto those who believe not on your words and are not baptized in water in my name for the remission of their  sins that they may receive the holy ghost shall be damned and shall not come into my father's kingdom. Where my father and I am.

You proved my point for me, Calm! Thank you! Again! The title of the talk is TEACHING REPENTANCE AND BAPTIZING CONVERTS. The talk isn't about exaltation.

Edited May 14, 2023 by RAD DAD