A Door That Swings Both Ways

[RAD DAD]

9 hours ago, InCognitus said:

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

A CFR was provided to you. We're discussing that CFR now. 

[RAD DAD]

9 hours ago, manol said:

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. 

I like this, but it's not LDS. We go out of our way to put things between our minds and God. And we do it intentionally so we can prove our worthiness. We're a works based religion,  what you're describing is a non works based religion. But I still like what you said.

Edited May 14, 2023 by RAD DAD

[RAD DAD]

1 hour ago, Meadowchik said:

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.

This is exactly what Oaks is teaching the missionaries. Why? Because according to LDS doctrine, the only path back to where God resides is to accept the eternal gospel,  the gospel LDS members believe is only found in our church. 

 

[RAD DAD]

10 hours ago, Calm said:

Why would a nonmember have to confess to drinking coffee?

Deal with the Handbook.

 

So when I stopped posting last night it was because I was at dinner with a few friends, LDS and non LDS. One of my Non LDS friends made a great point about you asking to concentrate on the LDS handbook. He said to a true Christian, all they need is the Bible, that's their handbook. But you keep pushing the LDS handbook, he wants to know why the Bible isn't enough for you? Would you mind explaining why the Bible isn't sufficient for you to understand what God is teaching? I mean, you are Christian,  correct?

[pogi]

25 minutes ago, RAD DAD said:

So when I stopped posting last night it was because I was at dinner with a few friends, LDS and non LDS. One of my Non LDS friends made a great point about you asking to concentrate on the LDS handbook. He said to a true Christian, all they need is the Bible, that's their handbook. But you keep pushing the LDS handbook, he wants to know why the Bible isn't enough for you? Would you mind explaining why the Bible isn't sufficient for you to understand what God is teaching? I mean, you are Christian,  correct?

Every Christian that I know of relies on extra-biblical creeds to direct belief/practices.  All Christians have formal or informal extra-Biblical guidelines they follow which address and instructs about types of music that can be played at church, how to discipline members, how to collect and handle donations, the role of the pastor/priest in confession or administering other ordinances, proper mode, language, and authority for baptism etc., etc., etc.

The fact that Calm is pointing out is that we do have and use a handbook to direct our practice in these matters.  This officially informs us of our practices in this regard.  You therefore need to address the handbook whether or not you think we should be using it (that is besides the point and just another dodge).  

[RAD DAD]

7 minutes ago, pogi said:

Every Christian that I know of relies on extra-biblical creeds to direct belief/practices.  All Christians have formal or informal extra-Biblical guidelines they follow which address and instructs about types of music that can be played at church, how to discipline members, how to collect and handle donations, the role of the pastor/priest in confession or administering other ordinances, proper mode, language, and authority for baptism etc., etc., etc.

The fact that Calm is pointing out is that we do have and use a handbook to direct our practice in these matters.  This officially informs us of our practices in this regard.  You therefore need to address the handbook whether or not you think we should be using it (that is besides the point and just another dodge).  

We're talking about repentance, not what music we're supposed to play at a dance. Repentance is discussed and defined in the Bible, you know, the Christian handbook.

[Meadowchik]

20 minutes ago, RAD DAD said:

We're talking about repentance, not what music we're supposed to play at a dance. Repentance is discussed and defined in the Bible, you know, the Christian handbook.

I haven't been following so closely so why is the Church Handbook being involved in a doctrinal discussion? The handbook certainly isn't the authority on LDS repentance.

But btw the Bible isn't either. LDS doctrine specifically claims that the Bible does not contain the fullness of the Gospel, it is explicitly not enough.

[Navidad]

7 hours ago, RAD DAD said:

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. 

Thanks for your reply. My curiosity-based question is then this - If the temple is the focal point - why is that it has been suggested to me at several different times that only 30% of eligible members of the church have temple recommends? If, as you say it is the fulcrum (my  word) of your faith, why isn't that number up in the 90% range? My second question is this - how does this special authority manifest itself in the lived life of the LDS male priesthood holder? I keep looking for some difference in the life of the Godly Presbyterians, Mennonites, and  Catholics who I know and the LDS priesthood holder - something like a greater manifestation of the Holy Spirit in their lives - a greater commitment to and trust in Christ? I don't see less than - but I sure don't see more than. If the LDS priesthood is such a one-of-a-kind-thing then why isn't their manifestation of spirituality, Christ-likeness, authority, and spiritual power likewise unique? Some kind of a by-their-fruits-you-will-know-them kind of a thing? it seems to me there is a range of spirituality in all of Christianity that is similar, if not identical to that of the LDS priesthood holder. None of that is a criticism - just a comment. It seems the one who claims an only status in all of Christianity- especially the only to be able to pursue sanctification (my term for exaltation) there ought to be some evidence of the same - something for those of us who don't have it to desire, long for, or seek.

My sense again, is that spiritual authority, power, Christ-likeness, fruits, and piety are all individual things, missing and found in individuals, not in institutions. I'll enjoy being with a Godly individual of whichever group any day of the week. It is the panting after the waterbrooks (Ps. 42: 1) that makes the difference, not the immersion in the baptismal font. Take care.

Edited May 14, 2023 by Navidad

[Navidad]

12 hours 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.

I am a bit confused if you are implying that is a good thing, a bad thing, or just "is what is" in the LDS church thing? I can't imagine the type of gospel/Christianity that you describe. I hope your conclusion is that being "scared to death on purpose" is a bad thing - not something that somehow leads to a one-of-a-kind spiritual authority and power.

Edited May 14, 2023 by Navidad

[Navidad]

10 hours ago, Calm said:

(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%). 

I don't want to get this off track, but you are introducing something new to me. Who is "appointed to be a judge" among the worthy priesthood holders? Is this something about the "Church of the Firstborn" or something else? Is there any worthy male priesthood holder, someone currently living in the LDS Mexican colonies who has been appointed by someone (God?) to be a judge over others or is what you are talking about something in the post-mortal life?

[manol]

2 hours ago, RAD DAD said:

I like this

 Thanks!

2 hours ago, RAD DAD said:

... but it's not LDS.

Neither am I, but I used to be.

[Navidad]

1 hour ago, pogi said:

Every Christian that I know of relies on extra-biblical creeds to direct belief/practices.  All Christians have formal or informal extra-Biblical guidelines they follow which address and instructs about types of music that can be played at church, how to discipline members, how to collect and handle donations, the role of the pastor/priest in confession or administering other ordinances, proper mode, language, and authority for baptism etc., etc., etc.

The fact that Calm is pointing out is that we do have and use a handbook to direct our practice in these matters.  This officially informs us of our practices in this regard.  You therefore need to address the handbook whether or not you think we should be using it (that is besides the point and just another dodge).  

I agree with you 100%. My only nit-pick is your use of the word "creeds". I think creeds are different from polity or policy guidelines. Creeds are confessions of what is believed. Policies, polities, handbooks, guidelines, etc. are outlines for lived expectations for those in the group. I can't repeat the Nicene Creed in good faith because I don't believe in one or two things it includes. I certainly agree that "all Christians have formal or informal extra-Biblical guidelines" that are often interpreted differently. That interpretation is necessary, even in these formal or informal extra-Biblical guidelines is evidenced in our lived experience here in the ward. Change a bishop for a few years and our whole-lived-world-in-the-ward is turned upside-down. Worship, fellowship, and ministry are each significantly changed to the degree it isn't even the same place for us to step into anymore. Take care my friend!

Edited May 14, 2023 by Navidad

[Tacenda]

4 hours ago, RAD DAD said:

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. 

 

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!

Yep, that's the truth, hopefully God isn't so exclusive.

[Navidad]

4 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

Yep, that's the truth, hopefully God isn't so exclusive.

Amen!

[MustardSeed]

Sounds like you’ve been bitten by the “this seems so impossible that there’s just no hope.” 
 

I’ve been there.  I get it.  

[Meadowchik]

4 hours ago, RAD DAD said:

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. 

 

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!

This is a fair representation of LDS belief but to be clear, it sure doesn't sound right and good.

[pogi]

2 hours ago, RAD DAD said:

We're talking about repentance, not what music we're supposed to play at a dance. Repentance is discussed and defined in the Bible, you know, the Christian handbook.

You’re still dodging.  The fact is that this is our official guidelines and practice - like it or not.   You can argue that it is wrong, but you can’t argue that we don’t actually follow the handbook as a general rule (which you seemed to be arguing).  Now you are changing the argument…again

[CV75]

2 hours ago, RAD DAD said:

We're talking about repentance, not what music we're supposed to play at a dance. Repentance is discussed and defined in the Bible, you know, the Christian handbook.

Too many pages have gone by since I last checked in here: what is your question? Does it have something to do with communication that takes place within the dynamic between good and evil?

[bluebell]

4 hours ago, RAD DAD said:

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. 

Sometimes something is only breaking a commandment under certain circumstances though.  Think of the commandments surrounding sex.  By your argument I could say "if having sex is a sin, if it's breaking a commandment, then it's a sin for all of God's children". But that's not true or accurate.

Having sex is only a sin based on the circumstances surrounding it.  There are times when having sex is a sin and times when having sex is very much not a sin but is even encouraged and taught as good and beautiful.

The commandments surrounding the WoW are similar.  It's not either always a sin or always ok.  It's based on covenants.  

[bluebell]

4 hours ago, RAD DAD said:

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

Yes, other Christians are/can be, based on their knowledge and understanding in this life.  In the next they would then readily accept the remaining covenants and continue to be a true follower of Christ who is valiant in their testimony just as they were in life.

 

[Calm]

2 hours ago, Navidad said:

I don't want to get this off track, but you are introducing something new to me. Who is "appointed to be a judge" among the worthy priesthood holders? Is this something about the "Church of the Firstborn" or something else? Is there any worthy male priesthood holder, someone currently living in the LDS Mexican colonies who has been appointed by someone (God?) to be a judge over others or is what you are talking about something in the post-mortal life?

It is nothing complicated, bishops and stake presidents (and I assume branch presidents) have been called as part of their role to be judges.  A few others because of their type of stewardship are also deemed judges.

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/manual/doctrine-and-covenants-student-manual/enrichment-i-judges-in-israel-watching-over-the-church?lang=eng

Quote

With reference to Church disciplinary councils, Elder Kimball wrote: “The bishop in his ordination to that office is made a ‘judge in Israel’ to those of his own ward, but to none who are not so placed under his jurisdiction. The stake president, by his setting apart, is made a judge over the people of the stake over which he is to preside. Likewise, a branch president and mission president have somewhat similar responsibilities. The General Authorities, of course, have general jurisdiction, and have the duty to make judgments in certain instances.” (Miracle of Forgiveness, pp. 267–68.)

Quote

The Doctrine and Covenants indicates that to sit as a judge among the Lord’s people is one of the foremost responsibilities of a bishop (see D&C 58:17–18; 64:40; 107:68, 72, 74–75). Others besides bishops are given this responsibility within the bounds of their stewardships (see D&C 46:27; Kimball, Miracle of Forgiveness, p. 327).

God is the judge over all, and He rules and directs those He has chosen to sit “upon the judgment seat” (D&C 58:20).

 

Edited May 14, 2023 by Calm

[Calm]

10 hours ago, Tacenda said:

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.

This is nothing new.  Like much else, Daybell is likely borrowing his ideas from apostates before him.  His only creativity imo came from incorporating D&D terminology (or probably his idea of what such would be) into his twisted fantasy (light and dark scales, death percentages, zombies, trustworthiness scale, etc).  But this is a man who was claiming Harry Potter spells were real.

It seems somewhat common for apostate groups to identify this way.  My guess is because it gives them justification to abandon the Church’s structure and assume they have higher authority. 

[Calm]

7 hours ago, Meadowchik said:

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.

That would depend on what you mean by “fully repent”.  Rad Dad has still not provided a definition.  I don’t believe anyone has agreed what type, what level of repentance this discussion is meant to be focused on, but I may have missed it.

If we are talking about the process of repenting for an action, I don’t believe that is restricted to only those who are in the Latter-day Saint faith or the version of The Church of Jesus Christ that was on the earth while they were alive or will exist for us after death.  It is nonsense, imo, to believe the billions who were never baptized before death or able to converse with a priesthood holder could not fully repent of being a thief or adulterer, could not have a change of heart, mind, and soul to a better nature simply because they weren’t baptized.

If one is talking about the process of sanctification, preparation for exaltation, then of course our doctrine is baptism and other ordinances must be part of that process.

Edited May 14, 2023 by Calm

[Calm]

6 hours ago, RAD DAD said:

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.  

You are completely misrepresenting my argument.  You need to stop telling people what I am saying because you haven’t gotten it correct once.

I have never disagreed that young men frequently confess to bishops.  I am not, however, talking about perception of what a particular person or even millions of people think they should be doing, or even what millions should do.  I am not talking specifics, but the general rule of repentance.  You keep jumping from specific cases (young men confessing what they believe are sexual sins) to general (everyone who has ever sinned and needs to repent).

You claimed “the only way” for every last case of repentance, big and small, whenever it occurred to repent was to confess to a priesthood holder. The handbook disagrees with you.  Deal with the Handbook and stop trying to make it about something I never said.  If the Handbook is wrong in how it summarizes our doctrine***, then pull up scriptures that teach the principle correctly…a scripture that says the only way to truly and fully repent of any sin is to confess it to a priesthood holder and not scriptures dealing with the full process of progressing to exaltation.

At this point, it is hard to see this as anything but intentional misrepresentation, whether because you refuse to consider your filter for understanding is askew and misleading you or because you intentionally want to twist church teachings for some reason, so I won’t be responding to any of your posts in this thread unless you change your avoidance tactics and actually deal with what I and then the Handbook says.

The only reason I have engaged in this discussion to this extent is to hopefully ensure nonmembers are not confused by your misrepresentations of church teachings.  I hope by now it is clear to them and anyone else that you do not accurately represent what the Church teaches in this nor what others say and so no one should assume your paraphrases or commentary is an accurate representation of anything but your own beliefs.  Any concern anyone has from something you claim about anyone besides yourselves should be double-checked by going to the original source.  While I always encourage that as a good proactive, for you it is a necessity.

Back to the original dispute…

Your claim below is contrary to actual church teachings as evidenced 

Quote

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

by the Handbook section below.

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.

***The Handbook is not just a listing of policies.  It includes principles of the Gospel, not as a source of doctrine, but like other manuals it teaches doctrine found in scripture and revelation given to our prophets.

Quote

These instructions can invite revelation if they are used to provide an understanding of principles, policies, and procedures to apply while seeking the guidance of the Spirit.

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/general-handbook/0-introductory-overview?lang=eng#title_number8

Edited May 14, 2023 by Calm

[Navidad]

40 minutes ago, Calm said:

It is nothing complicated, bishops and stake presidents (and I assume branch presidents) have been called as part of their role to be judges.  A few others because of their type of stewardship are also deemed judges.

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/manual/doctrine-and-covenants-student-manual/enrichment-i-judges-in-israel-watching-over-the-church?lang=eng

 

Wow! Thanks for pointing me to that article. I don't think I have ever read it before. I am so glad I am not a judge over anyone. I don't see how a local bishop can even begin to take that burden on himself, especially if he has some cognizance of his own shortcomings. I am trying to think of a place in the New Testament that suggests that there are positions such as judges in the New Testament church. Well, this is something else new to me that I will have to reflect on. I must admit to a bias in reading the article. Too many references to President Kimball in it, the man who wrote that I committed blasphemy every time I baptized someone. Anyway, thanks again for pointing me to the article. It fills in a gap in my understanding. I wonder what the term "attend" means in this - Unless an apostate sect is involved, a disciplinary council should not be convened for a member who attends another church. There seems to be no judgment for inactivity. I find that interesting. Certainly our stake patriarch and my old bishop attended Mennonite services in the area. I attend lots of different churches as I travel speaking. I assume in this context the word attends implies leaves the LDS church to go to another, not attends a Presbyterian church for a wedding or Sunday morning service when visiting Aunt Suzy, the lone Presbyterian heretic in the family! When I was made a ministerial priest in two other Christian groups, I don't ever remember the concept of judgment coming up in the conversation or charge to me by the elders. Interesting stuff! Thanks and best wishes.