A Door That Swings Both Ways

[Kenngo1969]

@RAD DAD

Trollin', trollin', trollin'!  Keep up that there trollin'!  Raw-hiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiide!  

[Rain]

On 5/13/2023 at 5:02 PM, RAD DAD said:

Let's say a non member wants to get baptized and when he goes in to the bishops office and has his interview, the bishop ask if he's ever committed sin.

Most bishops will know that a non member 9 or older shouldn't be coming to him for a baptismal interview.  That is not part of the process.  The person should be seen by a district leader or zone leader not a bishop.

No one is ever going to ask him if he has sinned in a baptismal interview.  It is a given that everyone sins.

If a person under 8 comes in to the bishop for a baptismal interview (under 8 would be covered by the bishop) then bishops don't ask about sin because children are not accountable for sin.

On 5/13/2023 at 5:02 PM, RAD DAD said:

The guy says, yeah, but don't worry, bishop, I have fully repented of those sins and a feel I have been fully forgiven! God has let me know this to be true! Is the bishop going to say, GREAT!!

Assuming this is not a baptismal interview because bishops don't do them for over age 8 then most bishops will say that and be happy for you.  

On 5/13/2023 at 5:02 PM, RAD DAD said:

Let's not discuss repentance anymore since you feel like you have been forgiven, or is it more likely the bishop will say, sir, you need to tell me what you're talking about so I can be the judge of that.

 

 

12 hours ago, RAD DAD said:

It's not fault you are unable to comprehend what an apostle of God is trying to teach in the talk I provided as a CFR. I think Dallin Oaks would be very disappointed in you for not accepting him as my CFR. Let me explain this to you again even though you probably won't be able to accept it.

The talk is titled TEACHING REPENTANCE AND BAPTIZING CONVERTS.

I think it might not be good to keep making appeals to the title.  In most cases people will think of converts as already being baptized so it would be odd to be baptizing them again.  

Since that is a problem with the title it is entirely possible the title doesn't cover all the info that the talk covers.

12 hours ago, RAD DAD said:

Why are missionaries taught to teach non members about repentance? Well he tells uou why around the 13 to 14 minute mark when he says no one else can do this, other churches can not do it, good Christian living can not do it. What he's trying to explain to the missionaries is true repentance and a true baptism, repentance and baptism that God  will accept because the two were overseen and performed by a priesthood holder. If a nonmember has the ability to repent without going through a common judge of Israel, then why can't a nonmember enter the celestial kingdom on a baptism that was performed by a Baptist minister or catholic priest? 

If a non member wants to move from spirit prison to spirit paradise, do they repent and accept the baptism performed for them in the temple? Why do they have to repent in spirit prison? 

Why don't you answer my question?

You've had lots of questions.  What is your overall question and do you really want an answer to it or is it a starting point for a discussion? 

12 hours ago, RAD DAD said:

If I go out next weekend and get drunk, have sex with two hookers, run over a bunch of cats on purpose while driving home drunk, can I go to a Baptist minister and repent instead of my bishop and God will accept that I'm fully repentant when the repentance process is over? 

And since repentance and baptism go hand in hand, does God accept a Baptist baptism as being sufficient to enter the celestial kingdom?

 

 

Edited May 15, 2023 by Rain

[RAD DAD]

5 hours ago, Rain said:

You've had lots of questions.  What is your overall question and do you really want an answer to it or is it a starting point for a discussion? 

The problem I'm having with what incognito and Calm are trying to say about repentance is, they think according to doctrine, a non member can fully repent on their own without confessing to a common judge of Israel. So what I think they're trying to convey to everyone here, especially the non members is that non members can go directly to God an repent, or, they can go to their ecclesiastical leader  and repent to him and that will good enough for God. IM SAYING THAT’S NOT WHAT OUR CHURCH TEACHES. 

Here's exactly why I say this! The first principles of the gospel are, Faith in the lord Jesus Christ, REPENTANCE, Baptism and Laying on of the hands for the gift of the Holy Ghost. I was taught that's why Joseph restored the gospel, so people could come to the gospel and be able to have and partake in those principles once more, like they could when the gospel was here on earth when Jesus walked the earth. What I'm putting forth is, we believe people who lived during the time between the death of Jesus and Joseph restoring the gospel didn't have an opportunity to have a true faith in a true gospel because the church/gospel wasn't even on earth, there was no priesthood authority. We believe all churches during that time were littered with half truths of the gospel, not one had a pure truth. Same for repentance, no one during that time had an opportunity to fully repent because there was no priesthood or priesthood leaders here on earth during that time. What's my proof for that besides the talk I provided? Well that's simple, the next principle of the gospel is baptism, and there again, we don't believe anyone living on earth during the 1800 year period the gospel/priesthood was taken from the earth had the ability to be baptized by a man with priesthood authority, that's why we baptize dead people!! The fourth is laying on of hands. That also was part of the restoration  and a principle that was missing during the 1800 year period the gospel was not here on earth. Maybe some religions would lay hands on people during that 1800 year period,  but the men who performed those rituals didn't have priesthood power. 

Incognito and Calm are trying to separate the repentance principle from the other three and I say you can't. They go hand in hand. If people need to be baptized by a man with proper authority, then they need to repent to God and be guided through the process by a man with the proper authority. 

Once more, here's the first principles of the gospel 

1. Faith. But not just any faith, faith in the LDS gospel will get you back to God, not a belief in the Baptist religion or catholicism or etc.

3. Baptism.  Not any baptism,  a LDS baptism will get you back to God, not a Baptist baptism, not a catholic baptism, etc.

4. Laying on of hands for the gift of the holy ghost. Not any laying on of hands, a LDS laying on of hands!! A group of Baptist or a group of catholic men laying their hands on someone after a non mormon baptism won't satisfy the devine decree of God as far as baptism and receiving the gift of the holy ghost.

2. Last but not least, Repentance! I say when Joseph restored the gospel he restored the ability for people to FULLY repent by joining the church and repenting and being guided by a man with proper priesthood authority, and that principle was missing on earth just like the #1 #2 and #4. 

I'm also saying if a non member wants to fully repent, they can go to a LDS bishop to repent, just like if they wanted a priesthood blessing by a group of men with the proper priesthood authority, they could ask the bishop to give them a blessing with consecrated oil and they could have a group of men with priesthood authority bless them.

 

It's very simple. Here's what the third prophet of our church says about how Joseph restored a way for people to truly repent. Is John Taylor wrong?

 

 

 

Edited May 15, 2023 by RAD DAD

[Meadowchik]

2 hours ago, RAD DAD said:

The problem I'm having with what incognito and Calm are trying to say about repentance is, they think according to doctrine, a non member can fully repent on their own without confessing to a common judge of Israel. So what I think they're trying to convey to everyone here, especially the non members is that non members can go directly to God an repent, or, they can go to their ecclesiastical leader  and repent to him and that will good enough for God. IM SAYING THAT’S NOT WHAT OUR CHURCH TEACHES. 

Here's exactly why I say this! The first principles of the gospel are, Faith in the lord Jesus Christ, REPENTANCE, Baptism and Laying on of the hands for the gift of the Holy Ghost. I was taught that's why Joseph restored the gospel, so people could come to the gospel and be able to have and partake in those principles once more, like they could when the gospel was here on earth when Jesus walked the earth. What I'm putting forth is, we believe people who lived during the time between the death of Jesus and Joseph restoring the gospel didn't have an opportunity to have a true faith in a true gospel because the church/gospel wasn't even on earth, there was no priesthood authority. We believe all churches during that time were littered with half truths of the gospel, not one had a pure truth. Same for repentance, no one during that time had an opportunity to fully repent because there was no priesthood or priesthood leaders here on earth during that time. What's my proof for that besides the talk I provided? Well that's simple, the next principle of the gospel is baptism, and there again, we don't believe anyone living on earth during the 1800 year period the gospel/priesthood was taken from the earth had the ability to be baptized by a man with priesthood authority, that's why we baptize dead people!! The fourth is laying on of hands. That also was part of the restoration  and a principle that was missing during the 1800 year period the gospel was not here on earth. Maybe some religions would lay hands on people during that 1800 year period,  but the men who performed those rituals didn't have priesthood power. 

Incognito and Calm are trying to separate the repentance principle from the other three and I say you can't. They go hand in hand. If people need to be baptized by a man with proper authority, then they need to repent to God and be guided through the process by a man with the proper authority. 

Once more, here's the first principles of the gospel 

1. Faith. But not just any faith, faith in the LDS gospel will get you back to God, not a belief in the Baptist religion or catholicism or etc.

3. Baptism.  Not any baptism,  a LDS baptism will get you back to God, not a Baptist baptism, not a catholic baptism, etc.

4. Laying on of hands for the gift of the holy ghost. Not any laying on of hands, a LDS laying on of hands!! A group of Baptist or a group of catholic men laying their hands on someone after a non mormon baptism won't satisfy the devine decree of God as far as baptism and receiving the gift of the holy ghost.

2. Last but not least, Repentance! I say when Joseph restored the gospel he restored the ability for people to FULLY repent by joining the church and repenting and being guided by a man with proper priesthood authority, and that principle was missing on earth just like the #1 #2 and #4. 

I'm also saying if a non member wants to fully repent, they can go to a LDS bishop to repent, just like if they wanted a priesthood blessing by a group of men with the proper priesthood authority, they could ask the bishop to give them a blessing with consecrated oil and they could have a group of men with priesthood authority bless them.

 

It's very simple. Here's what the third prophet of our church says about how Joseph restored a way for people to truly repent. Is John Taylor wrong?

 

 

 

Yes, I agree on the whole. Today a nonmember might convert to enter into the covenant path of baptism et al, or after death in the Spirit World they may choose to accept the Gospel and the saving ordinances of baptism, et al. 

They can be valiant today, and that might include being sorry and trying to be better and repair wrongs, but if the Gospel ordinances are meaningful they make full repentence possible when it otherwise is not. Without those ordinances, no one (save those who don't need repentence) is ready to meet God. This is what the Plan of Salvation teaches, it is the path back to the Father or in other words the path of full repentence.

That said, I would say that also according to the gospel were accountable for what we know including what we know through the Light of Christ. And we will be blessed when we need it. *Just not--all else being equal--blessed to the extent of fully taking upon the name of Christ through those who are in authority. And that's a very big *

[RAD DAD]

23 minutes ago, Meadowchik said:

That said, I would say that also according to the gospel were accountable for what we know including what we know through the Light of Christ. And we will be blessed when we need it. *Just not--all else being equal--blessed to the extent of fully taking upon the name of Christ through those who are in authority. And that's a very big

I agree.

 

On a personal note, what upsets me about what incognitos and Calm are trying to misrepresent about repentance is, I think they're trying to misrepresent what the church truly teaches about the first principles of the gospel so we Mormons look more inclusive. To say "all can repent" "all can be forgiven" without coming to the true gospel doesn't make sense when taking LDS Doctrine into account. 

Look at this. It says to repent fully is to accept the gospel of Jesus Christ, not Christianity, the gospel of christ which LDS believe to be the restored gospel. 

 

 

 

Edited May 15, 2023 by RAD DAD

[RAD DAD]

38 minutes ago, Meadowchik said:

Yes, I agree on the whole. Today a nonmember might convert to enter into the covenant path of baptism et al, or after death in the Spirit World they may choose to accept the Gospel and the saving ordinances of baptism, et al. 

They can be valiant today, and that might include being sorry and trying to be better and repair wrongs, but if the Gospel ordinances are meaningful they make full repentence possible when it otherwise is not. Without those ordinances, no one (save those who don't need repentence) is ready to meet God. This is what the Plan of Salvation teaches, it is the path back to the Father or in other words the path of full repentence.

That said, I would say that also according to the gospel were accountable for what we know including what we know through the Light of Christ. And we will be blessed when we need it. *Just not--all else being equal--blessed to the extent of fully taking upon the name of Christ through those who are in authority. And that's a very big *

Here's another example of the church  teaching that the repentance process was distorted because the priesthood was taken from earth. And that's what I'm trying to get people to understand. If we believe Christianity was corrupted for over 1700 years, how do we know a nonmember is repenting the correct way? Confessing sin is just one part of the repentance process, there's many more! Calm and incognitos are forgetting about all the other parts about the repentance process. 

[CV75]

4 hours ago, RAD DAD said:

The problem I'm having with what incognito and Calm are trying to say about repentance is, they think according to doctrine, a non member can fully repent on their own without confessing to a common judge of Israel. So what I think they're trying to convey to everyone here, especially the non members is that non members can go directly to God an repent, or, they can go to their ecclesiastical leader  and repent to him and that will good enough for God. IM SAYING THAT’S NOT WHAT OUR CHURCH TEACHES. 

Here's exactly why I say this! The first principles of the gospel are, Faith in the lord Jesus Christ, REPENTANCE, Baptism and Laying on of the hands for the gift of the Holy Ghost. I was taught that's why Joseph restored the gospel, so people could come to the gospel and be able to have and partake in those principles once more, like they could when the gospel was here on earth when Jesus walked the earth. What I'm putting forth is, we believe people who lived during the time between the death of Jesus and Joseph restoring the gospel didn't have an opportunity to have a true faith in a true gospel because the church/gospel wasn't even on earth, there was no priesthood authority. We believe all churches during that time were littered with half truths of the gospel, not one had a pure truth. Same for repentance, no one during that time had an opportunity to fully repent because there was no priesthood or priesthood leaders here on earth during that time. What's my proof for that besides the talk I provided? Well that's simple, the next principle of the gospel is baptism, and there again, we don't believe anyone living on earth during the 1800 year period the gospel/priesthood was taken from the earth had the ability to be baptized by a man with priesthood authority, that's why we baptize dead people!! The fourth is laying on of hands. That also was part of the restoration  and a principle that was missing during the 1800 year period the gospel was not here on earth. Maybe some religions would lay hands on people during that 1800 year period,  but the men who performed those rituals didn't have priesthood power. 

Incognito and Calm are trying to separate the repentance principle from the other three and I say you can't. They go hand in hand. If people need to be baptized by a man with proper authority, then they need to repent to God and be guided through the process by a man with the proper authority. 

Once more, here's the first principles of the gospel 

1. Faith. But not just any faith, faith in the LDS gospel will get you back to God, not a belief in the Baptist religion or catholicism or etc.

3. Baptism.  Not any baptism,  a LDS baptism will get you back to God, not a Baptist baptism, not a catholic baptism, etc.

4. Laying on of hands for the gift of the holy ghost. Not any laying on of hands, a LDS laying on of hands!! A group of Baptist or a group of catholic men laying their hands on someone after a non mormon baptism won't satisfy the devine decree of God as far as baptism and receiving the gift of the holy ghost.

2. Last but not least, Repentance! I say when Joseph restored the gospel he restored the ability for people to FULLY repent by joining the church and repenting and being guided by a man with proper priesthood authority, and that principle was missing on earth just like the #1 #2 and #4. 

I'm also saying if a non member wants to fully repent, they can go to a LDS bishop to repent, just like if they wanted a priesthood blessing by a group of men with the proper priesthood authority, they could ask the bishop to give them a blessing with consecrated oil and they could have a group of men with priesthood authority bless them.

 

It's very simple. Here's what the third prophet of our church says about how Joseph restored a way for people to truly repent. Is John Taylor wrong?

 

 

 

Anyone can repent of a bad behavior; that is one thing, a secular or ecumenical interpretation. The Church invites people to repent in an entirely different and specific way, by getting and staying on the covenant path as we teach it. This takes nothing away from the secular or ecumenical interpretations, just offers more.

Edited May 15, 2023 by CV75

[Rain]

1 hour ago, RAD DAD said:

I agree.

 

On a personal note, what upsets me about what incognitos and Calm are trying to misrepresent about repentance is, I think they're trying to misrepresent what the church truly teaches about the first principles of the gospel so we Mormons look more inclusive. To say "all can repent" "all can be forgiven" without coming to the true gospel doesn't make sense when taking LDS Doctrine into account. 

Look at this. It says to repent fully is to accept the gospel of Jesus Christ, not Christianity, the gospel of christ which LDS believe to be the restored gospel. 

 

 

 

 

You are irritated because you feel they are looking at your CFR references and ignoring what is said in them and you feel that makes them dishonest about the church's doctrines. I can see why this might be frustrating to you.

I'm asking about your overall reason for starting the thread  - the swinging doors idea. What is your overall question and do you want an answer to it or is it just a starting point for a discussion? 

[RAD DAD]

Just now, Rain said:

You are irritated because you feel they are looking at your CFR references and ignoring what is said in them and you feel that makes them dishonest about the church's doctrines. I can see why this might be frustrating to you.

I'm asking about your overall reason for starting the thread  - the swinging doors idea. What is your overall question and do you want an answer to it or is it just a starting point for a discussion? 

Yes, this thread wasn't about repentance originally 😅. The swinging door idea isn't doctrinal. I started the thread as a point for discussion. I believe if there's a God and a Satan, then they're working with one another to test us while here on earth. 

[Tacenda]

16 minutes ago, RAD DAD said:

Yes, this thread wasn't about repentance originally 😅. The swinging door idea isn't doctrinal. I started the thread as a point for discussion. I believe if there's a God and a Satan, then they're working with one another to test us while here on earth. 

I bet you feel gaslit slightly. 

I think that this may or may not help, the church believes that everyone has salvation in Jesus Christ. But the church offers exaltation not just salvation. So could that be the missing link to why Calm and InCognitus are saying what they are?

Edited May 15, 2023 by Tacenda

[RAD DAD]

35 minutes ago, CV75 said:

Anyone can repent of a bad behavior; that is one thing, a secular or ecumenical interpretation. The Church invites people to repent in an entirely different and specific way, by getting and staying on the covenant path as we teach it. This takes nothing away from the secular or ecumenical interpretations, just offers more

I agree, but what you're explaining also pertains to baptism. Anyone can get baptized, but if they want to have a legitimate baptism that's done with priesthood authority, they'll have to be baptized into the church. According to church doctrine, no other baptism is sufficient to get you on to the covenant path, is that a true statement according to our doctrine?

What I'm saying is, the same holds true for repentance. Of course anyone can repent, just like anyone can get baptized, but true repentance leads to the acceptance of the everlasting gospel. 

Would I be correct in saying if a Baptist man who had an ongoing affair with his wife's best friend then started to feel extremely guilty so he starts the repentance process on his own without a priesthood leader overseeing the process, is going about repenting in the wrong way? Yes he's repenting, but it doesn't really matter because it isn't being carried out the correct way. The correct way would be having a common judge of Israel over see the repentance process then tell the guy when he's fully done with the repentance process. Repentance has to go through the correct channels, just like baptism. So in my opinion, church doctrine teaches that the Baptist man will have an opportunity to repent for his sin of cheating in spirit prison by having the repentance process overseen by a worthy priesthood holder, that's if he doesn't join the church first before he dies. Would that be correct?

Edited May 15, 2023 by RAD DAD

[Rain]

15 minutes ago, RAD DAD said:

Yes, this thread wasn't about repentance originally 😅.

Yes. Things get off track sometimes.  That can be a good or a bad thing.

I think they are feeling frustrated because they think the quote isn't saying exactly what you feel it says.

15 minutes ago, RAD DAD said:

The swinging door idea isn't doctrinal. I started the thread as a point for discussion. I believe if there's a God and a Satan, then they're working with one another to test us while here on earth. 

Thank you.

[RAD DAD]

9 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

So could that be the missing link to why Calm and InCognitus are saying what they are

They're correct that anyone can repent, just like anyone can get baptized. Also, anyone can take the sacrament in any church that offers the sacrament. Also, anyone can wear sacred garments of a different religion. Also, anyone can follow health code/word of wisdom of a different religion, and so on, I'm sure you're understanding what I'm trying to convey.

 

But none of that matters! We don't accept a baptism from another religion including a Christian baptism. What would happen if a worthy LDS member walked into the temple dressed up in the garments of a catholic priest and not wearing their sacred LDS temple garments, would they be allowed in? What if a worthy member went into a bishop interview an when asked if they obey the word of wisdom they say they obey the health code the seventh day Adventist abide by, which means they can drink coffee, what would the bishop say? We all know the answers to the questions I put forth. 

Where Calm and incognitos are wrong in my opinion is God doesn't accept the repentance process a nonmember puts themselves through. And even though they went through the physical steps of repenting, it doesn't matter. They'll have to fully repent in Spirit Prison to be cleansed. In my opinion that's church doctrine. If God doesn't accept a Christian baptism as legitimate, I don't think he accepts repentance outside the church as legitimate. 

And just to throw this out there! Nothing is stopping a nonmember from going to a LDS bishop to start the repentance process. 

[Tacenda]

4 minutes ago, RAD DAD said:

They're correct that anyone can repent, just like anyone can get baptized. Also, anyone can take the sacrament in any church that offers the sacrament. Also, anyone can wear sacred garments of a different religion. Also, anyone can follow health code/word of wisdom of a different religion, and so on, I'm sure you're understanding what I'm trying to convey.

 

But none of that matters! We don't accept a baptism from another religion including a Christian baptism. What would happen if a worthy LDS member walked into the temple dressed up in the garments of a catholic priest and not wearing their sacred LDS temple garments, would they be allowed in? What if a worthy member went into a bishop interview an when asked if they obey the word of wisdom they say they obey the health code the seventh day Adventist abide by, which means they can drink coffee, what would the bishop say? We all know the answers to the questions I put forth. 

Where Calm and incognitos are wrong in my opinion is God doesn't accept the repentance process a nonmember puts themselves through. And even though they went through the physical steps of repenting, it doesn't matter. They'll have to fully repent in Spirit Prison to be cleansed. In my opinion that's church doctrine. If God doesn't accept a Christian baptism as legitimate, I don't think he accepts repentance outside the church as legitimate. 

And just to throw this out there! Nothing is stopping a nonmember from going to a LDS bishop to start the repentance process. 

No, to the last sentence. Wouldn't you need to be a member to even get an appointment with the LDS bishop? No one can walk off the street and go in to the bishop and get repentance, the most they could do is start the process of becoming a member. 

So Rad Dad, of which I'm sure you are, what is the deal, what is it that you really want to figure out or get to the bottom of. I think some have asked what it is you want, and what's your background (me asking that). I'm a member but inactive and had a faith crisis many years ago and can't hop off the fence.  This board saved me from doing that and doing worse maybe. 

[RAD DAD]

17 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

No one can walk off the street and go in to the bishop and get repentance, the most they could do is start the process of becoming a member.

Why not? Isn't everyone a child of god?

[MustardSeed]

14 minutes ago, RAD DAD said:

Why not? Isn't everyone a child of god?

Anyone can meet with the bishop. 

[Tacenda]

27 minutes ago, RAD DAD said:

Why not? Isn't everyone a child of god?

Come on...

 

[RAD DAD]

13 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

Come on...

 

Come on what?? I'm serious. You don't think a non member can get an appointment with the bishop?

[Tacenda]

26 minutes ago, RAD DAD said:

Come on what?? I'm serious. You don't think a non member can get an appointment with the bishop?

How long have you been a member?

[Tacenda]

Just now, Tacenda said:

How long have you been a member?

But of course a non member could get an appointment, but not to go through a repentance process, unless I'm terribly mistaken.

[bluebell]

1 minute ago, Tacenda said:

But of course a non member could get an appointment, but not to go through a repentance process, unless I'm terribly mistaken.

The repentance process as the church teaches it requires baptism, so you are right.  If someone came to a bishop and wanted to repent then the bishop would see to it that they were taught the gospel (as we believe it) and could do so.

But the church also teaches that people are only accountable for the light and knowledge they have and that the Atonement of Christ and His grace covers us for any knowledge we lack.  A Lutheran who sincerely believes in his religion and has faith in Christ can repent of and be forgiven of his sins outside of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints through Christ's Atonement because he or she is operating according to the truth they have (just as we operate according to the truth we have in our church--all of us are always growing spiritually and we are never held to a spiritual standard we aren't capable of yet regardless of what church we are a member of--because of the Atonement of Christ).

Eventually, perhaps after death, that person would be given the chance to learn more truth and to accept baptism and confirmation (and temple covenants) through authorized means, completing those requirements for forgiveness and exaltation. 

But that does not mean that they were not capable of repenting and being forgiven during their earth life as a sincere Lutheran (or any other religion).  When we know more, more is required of us, but that does not mean that we are not blessed by God when we knew less.

All of this is possible because of the Atonement of Christ and His grace, which is sufficient for all who have true faith in Him and seek to follow Him to the best of their ability and according to their knowledge.

[RAD DAD]

10 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

But of course a non member could get an appointment, but not to go through a repentance process, unless I'm terribly mistaken.

Thanks for answering. But why can't a member go through the repentance process with a LDS Bishop? 

And I'm being serious, is the gospel just for members of the church? I know bishops who have counseled non members on their death bed. Bishops give priesthood blessings to non members. 

I don't see a bishop turning away a child of God when the person is willing to start the repentance process. 

[bluebell]

Just now, RAD DAD said:

Thanks for answering. But why can't a member go through the repentance process with a LDS Bishop? 

And I'm being serious, is the gospel just for members of the church? I know bishops who have counseled non members on their death bed. Bishops give priesthood blessings to non members. 

I don't see a bishop turning away a child of God when the person is willing to start the repentance process. 

The repentance process as the church teaches it requires baptism.  If someone came to a bishop and wanted to repent then the bishop would joyfully see to it that they were taught the gospel (as we believe it).

But the church also teaches that people are only accountable for the light and knowledge they have and that the Atonement of Christ and His grace covers us for any knowledge we lack.  A Lutheran who sincerely believes in his religion and has faith in Christ can repent of and be forgiven of his sins outside of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints through Christ's Atonement because he or she is operating according to the truth they have (just as we operate according to the truth we have in our church--all of us are always growing spiritually and we are never held to a spiritual standard we aren't capable of yet regardless of what church we are a member of--because of the Atonement of Christ).

Eventually, perhaps after death, that person would be given the chance to learn more truth and to accept baptism and confirmation (and temple covenants) through authorized means, completing those requirements for forgiveness and exaltation. 

But that does not mean that they were not capable of repenting and being forgiven during their earth life as a sincere Lutheran (or any other religion).  When we know more, more is required of us, but that does not mean that we are not blessed by God when we knew less.

All of this is possible because of the Atonement of Christ and His grace, which is sufficient for all who have true faith in Him and seek to follow Him to the best of their ability and according to their knowledge.

[RAD DAD]

15 minutes ago, bluebell said:

Eventually, perhaps after death, that person would be given the chance to learn more truth and to accept baptism and confirmation (and temple covenants) through authorized means, completing those requirements for forgiveness and exaltation

You forgot to mention repentance, they would have to repent after death before they accepted baptism and conformation. 

15 minutes ago, bluebell said:

But that does not mean that they were not capable of repenting

They could repent, but it wouldn't hold up in God's eye's. They would have yo repent in spirit prison under the proper authority. 

 

15 minutes ago, bluebell said:

The repentance process as the church teaches it requires baptism, so you are right.  If someone came to a bishop and wanted to repent then the bishop would see to it that they were taught the gospel (as we believe it) and could do so

 Wait a minute , if the repentance process requires baptism, how does a non member repent?

 

Also, anyone can go to a LDS bishop for repentance,  we're all children of God.

Edited May 15, 2023 by RAD DAD

[bluebell]

4 minutes ago, RAD DAD said:

You forgot to mention repentance, they would have to repent after death before they accepted baptism and conformation. 

They could repent, but it wouldn't hold up in God's eye's. They would have yo repent in spirit prison under the proper authority. 

 

 Wait a minute , if the repentance process requires baptism, how does a non member repent?

 

Also, anyone can go to a LDS bishop for repentance,  we're all children of God.

I've explained our doctrine and answered these questions.  You are of course free to believe that our doctrine is wrong.  But I've expressed what we believe and what we teach so while you can believe that we are wrong, it's not accurate to state we don't believe what we do.

You can decide what you believe, but you can't decide what we believe.