Eternal Covenants/Baptism at 8 years old

[MustardSeed]

I understand what you are saying in your OP but isn’t anything that we introduce to our kids really our idea of what is best? We can’t avoid all threat of “indoctrination” or kids would have to drive themselves.  
 

I introduced religion, music, sports, social interaction, foods , culture, education etc etc to my kids and at 18 and beyond their path is their choice.  ❤️

[bluebell]

2 minutes ago, meandhim said:

Hi Tacenda, If you do some minor research, you will discover that whenever the word Nakeness is used in the Bible, it is a substitute for another word that is "considered" too adjective to print in the Bible. Such as having **** sex or self-pleasuring. Take some time to look into that. 

Tacenda is referring to the use of nakedness in Genesis. And it’s talking about not being clothed and the Lord clothing them in those verses.

[Tacenda]

2 minutes ago, meandhim said:

Hi Tacenda, If you do some minor research, you will discover that whenever the word Nakeness is used in the Bible, it is a substitute for another word that is "considered" too adjective to print in the Bible. Such as having **** sex or self-pleasuring. Take some time to look into that. 

Now you're just playing ... can't take you serious. What's your favorite scripture?

[MustardSeed]

I’d like to propose we ignore this moving forward.  We decide what happens here, and he keeps manipulating. 
 

back to baptism at 8…? 

[bluebell]

19 minutes ago, meandhim said:

And if you ever want to enter the nudist community, we are here for you as well LOL

It is really only uncomfortable for the first 5 minutes.

But that’s the thing.  Doing something of your own free will is completely different than having something forced upon you.  You’ve taken your lifestyle and forced it upon other people against their wishes.  It’s not just that it’s not aesthetically pleasing to look at that is the problem, it’s also (and more so) that it was done to others without consent in somebody else’s “home” so to speak.

I have watched a few documentaries on nudists and nudism, and I don’t have a problem with it. But every nudist that I’ve ever seen interviewed has always been very respectful of other people. You (and I can’t tell if I am speaking to the man or the woman here) are the first nudist I’ve been exposed to that has behaved in such an unflattering way.  This is why I’m assuming, along with mustard seed, that this is not about nudism. You seem to be exhibitionists and find taking away peoples consent and forcing your naked bodies at them against their will exciting for some reason.

[Tacenda]

4 minutes ago, meandhim said:

Not playing, It only takes a little Bible history study.  AKA, "Don't uncover your nakedness with a family member".  

Sorry, change nakedness, to unclothed body. I don't have a problem with the body, but there is a reason they get clothing on them. First, our bodies excrete different fluids, sorry I had to go there. 

And another thing, by you posting the stupid photos, you subject most people with feelings that aren't good. I don't believe in the devil, but it's along those lines. 

You speak of the Bible, where in the Bible does it ever mention people going naked? And walking around like that? I doubt anywhere. I'd gather that the first human figured out a way to clothe themselves. 

[Tacenda]

6 minutes ago, MustardSeed said:

I’d like to propose we ignore this moving forward.  We decide what happens here, and he keeps manipulating. 
 

back to baptism at 8…? 

Agree, and I think it's a she. 

[Calm]

48 minutes ago, Raingirl said:

Pathetic attention seeking. What a miserable life. 

It is a very odd choice to post here.  It only makes sense to me really as someone thought “I’m bored, why don’t I find some conservative religious types with major hang ups to tease to pass some time?  I’ll find some Mormons as they for sure will go ballistic!”

But why this forum when there must be others bigger out there?  Isn’t this pretty niche?  So someone familiar with the board already?

Quote

This is why I’m assuming, along with mustard seed, that this is not about nudism. You seem to be exhibitionists and find taking away peoples consent and forcing your naked bodies at them against their will exciting for some reason.

I completely agree with this.

Edited January 13, 2024 by Calm

[Calm]

2 minutes ago, meandhim said:

Well Adam and Eve walked around naked for starters. 

Appropriate time and place…they weren’t running into anyone unexpectedly who wasn’t prepared for it for one thing.

Edited January 13, 2024 by Calm

[Calm]

1 hour ago, MustardSeed said:

Hmmm.  Interesting reaction for a newcomer. 

Rather….

[pogi]

43 minutes ago, CV75 said:

According to D&C 130, sociality is an eternal principle, and we cannot have Zion (or a Church of the Firstborn) without a united society of families. Social conditioning in the gospel context is one environmental aspect of spiritual development operating in tandem with the more personal aspects, and as a child matures, he can assess where one begins and the other ends, and where they are functionally integrated. Even Joseph Smith had significant social conditioning from his family (his father was quite the visionary man) both before and after his more personal experiences of First Vision and Moroni’s visit(s) and see where those led! This conditioning, both social and personal, was evident in how he behaved and explained his behavior during his operation at seven years old.

I understand that social conditioning is unavoidable, and even important especially at that age.   It is not social conditioning in and of itself that I have a problem with, it is the social conditioning of an 8 year old to enter a covenant that they can’t understand and where there are no take-backs.   Eternal covenants are like the Hotel California, you can check in, but you can never leave.  Seems like it is only ethical that an individual at least has some capacity of understanding that level of commitment.  My child sure doesn’t.

[Calm]

15 minutes ago, pogi said:

I understand that social conditioning is unavoidable, and even important especially at that age.   It is not social conditioning in and of itself that I have a problem with, it is the social conditioning of an 8 year old to enter a covenant that they can’t understand and where there are no take-backs.   Eternal covenants are like the Hotel California, you can check in, but you can never leave.  Seems like it is only ethical that an individual at least has some capacity of understanding that level of commitment.  My child sure doesn’t.

But really, we probably made our full covenant—the one we made knowing it required an all in commitment— back before this all started when we agreed to back God’s plan for coming to earth.  And we weren’t 8 then.

Baptism as a covenant is probably just a rehearsal or reflection, reminder of the covenant we took that started us on this path.  It has no more bigger implications for the individual than that one surely.

Edited January 13, 2024 by Calm

[pogi]

47 minutes ago, MustardSeed said:

I understand what you are saying in your OP but isn’t anything that we introduce to our kids really our idea of what is best? We can’t avoid all threat of “indoctrination” or kids would have to drive themselves.  
 

I introduced religion, music, sports, social interaction, foods , culture, education etc etc to my kids and at 18 and beyond their path is their choice.  ❤️

Yes indeed. Social conditioning is unavoidable and can be used in good ways.  But not when its purpose is to get an immature child to enter an eternally binding contract that he can’t understand and which is associated with eternal and terrifying consequences for violation of said contract, even after becoming an adult and realizing that there are other options out there he was never privy to.

Can they truly consent to a contract and commitment that they can’t even comprehend and where no alternative options are even offered?

The difference is that none of those things have eternally binding covenants associated with them (with the exception of some religions).   

[bluebell]

11 minutes ago, pogi said:

Yes indeed. Social conditioning is unavoidable and can be used in good ways.  But not when its purpose is to get an immature child to enter an eternally binding contract that he can’t understand and which is associated with eternal and terrifying consequences for violation of said contract, even after becoming an adult and realizing that there are other options out there he was never privy to.

Can they truly consent to a contract and commitment that they can’t even comprehend and where no alternative options are even offered?

The difference is that none of those things have eternally binding covenants associated with them (with the exception of some religions).   

What are the eternal and terrifying consequences for violation of the covenant? 

[pogi]

5 minutes ago, Calm said:

But really, we probably made our full covenant—the one we made knowing it required an all in commitment— back before this all started when we agreed to back God’s plan for coming to earth.  And we weren’t 8 then.

Baptism as a covenant is probably just a rehearsal or reflection, reminder of the covenant we took that started us on this path.  It has no more bigger implications for the individual than that one surely.

That’s an interesting way to look at it.  I am not aware of any revelatory doctrine on the idea of a pre mortal covenant we all entered. 

Either way, baptism would be a new covenant associated with different blessings and consequences for violation.  It is unwise to enter any covenant or contract without first understanding the conditions, especially ones that are eternally binding.   Because of that, it feels almost unethical to place a child in a position to enter such a contract without the capacity to understand the conditions and consequences.  Especially when they don’t even realize they have other options.

[Tacenda]

2 minutes ago, pogi said:

That’s an interesting way to look at it.  I am not aware of any revelatory doctrine on the idea of a pre mortal covenant we all entered. 

Either way, baptism would be a new covenant associated with different blessings and consequences for violation.  It is unwise to enter any covenant or contract without first understanding the conditions, especially ones that are eternally binding.   Because of that, it feels almost unethical to place a child in a position to enter such a contract without the capacity to understand the conditions and consequences.  Especially when they don’t even realize they have other options.

Maybe I've been way to nonchalant about baptism. I never took it to this extent, but do see why you would be worried of the harm that could happen in a child's mind. 

[Calm]

6 minutes ago, pogi said:

am not aware of any revelatory doctrine on the idea of a pre mortal covenant we all entered. 

They have substituted Covenant Path for Plan of Salvation.  Seems logical that is the second started preearth life, so did the first if they are pretty used interchangeably.

[Calm]

Quote

SWK:

We made vows, solemn vows, in the heavens before we came to this mortal life. . . .

“We have made covenants. We made them before we accepted our position here on the earth.

“Now we made this commitment, ‘. . . all things whatsoever the Lord our God shall command us.’ We committed ourselves to our Heavenly Father, that if He would send us to the earth and give us bodies and give to us the priceless opportunities that earth life afforded, we would keep our lives clean and would marry in the holy temple and would rear a family and teach them righteousness. This was a solemn oath, a solemn promise. He promised us an eventful mortal life with untold privileges and providing we qualified in the way of righteousness, we would receive eternal life and happiness and progress. There is no other way to receive these rewards.” (“Be Ye Therefore Perfect,” Address given at the University of Utah Institute Devotional, 10 Jan. 1975, p. 2.; cited in New Testament Institute manual The Life and Teachings of Jesus and His Apostles, Chapter 31.)

 

Quote

DBH:

Most of us have wondered about what occurred in the premortal world and how it relates to our existence here. We should be acquainted with the truth that knowledge of the premortal life was restored that we might fulfill our responsibilities as children of God.

 

The Lord has revealed that a grand council was held in that pre-earth world where we exercised our agency regarding the plans presented. The major proposition in the accepted plan of salvation provided for an earth life where each person could work out his eternal salvation.

 

John A. Widtsoe provides insight to an earth-life responsibility made in that premortal world which is of great importance. He highlights a contractual agreement we made concerning the eternal welfare of all of the sons and daughters of the Eternal Father:

 

“In our preexistent state, in the day of the great council, we made a[n] … agreement with the Almighty. The Lord proposed a plan. … We accepted it. Since the plan is intended for all men, we became parties to the salvation of every person under that plan. We agreed, right then and there, to be not only saviors for ourselves but … saviors for the whole human family. We went into a partnership with the Lord. The working out of the plan became then not merely the Father’s work, and the Savior’s work, but also our work. The least of us, the humblest, is in partnership with the Almighty in achieving the purpose of the eternal plan of salvation.”  (Ensign, November 1990, p.59)

This one is rather interesting…how would it be fair to hold us to details when we can’t remember them?  Perhaps our spirit does and that drives us without our mental awareness…or perhaps God is more concerned with the whole result and not the timing of the fulfillment of each commitment/ covenant…

Quote

Elder Orson Hyde said of our life in the premortal world, “We understood things better there than we do in this lower world.” Elder Hyde also surmised as to the agreements we made there as follows: “It is not impossible that we signed the articles thereof with our own hands,–which articles may be retained in the archives above, to be presented to us when we rise from the dead, and be judged out of our own mouths, according to that which is written in the books.” Just because we have forgotten, said Elder Hyde, “our forgetfulness cannot alter the facts” (Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses 7:314–15). Brothers and sisters, the degree of detail involved in the covenants and promises we participated in at that time may be a much more highly customized thing than many of us surmise…. (BYU Devotional, October 10, 1978)

 

https://askgramps.org/covenants-made-premortal-life/

Edited January 13, 2024 by Calm

[Calm]

https://rsc.byu.edu/vol-3-no-3-2002/two-covenants
 

Quote

The first covenant, as announced in the premortal existence, is the covenant of perfect obedience. His children would be brought into mortality and would be proved to see if they would do all things whatsoever the Lord their God would command them to do (see Abraham 3:22–25). This covenant is fulfilled only by our living a perfect mortal life, by not deviating from the path of perfect obedience one iota, no matter what the opposition or the consequences. This demonstration of perfect obedience is no idle or pointless exercise. It is a demonstration of the ability to do what exalted beings all do: to lead an absolutely disciplined existence of action in accordance with the principles of righteousness and order in the priesthood chain of command in the process of blessing others. This is the eternal path: blessing others here and now as preparation for an eternity of blessing them there and then, in a way that is selfless and holy. One deviation from the path, however minor, would show that that person cannot be trusted. And because he or she cannot be trusted, he or she cannot be given the blessings of exaltation. To be trusted is more important than to be loved. All of God’s children are loved by Him, but only a few can He trust completely.

Quote

The second covenant, companion to the covenant of perfect obedience, is the covenant of perfect repentance (see Moses 6:56–57). The word perfect means “complete.” Perfect obedience can be demonstrated only by persons of already perfect character. But all of God’s children, of any character, can choose to comply with the second covenant of perfect repentance by repenting until they have perfect character. Then, when they have perfect character, they can comply with the first covenant and demonstrate perfect obedience. This second covenant of perfect repentance is usually referred to as the new and everlasting covenant. It is “new” because it comes after the first covenant. It is “everlasting” because it is made possible only through the life, mission, and Atonement of Jesus Christ, one of His names being “Everlasting.”

 

[pogi]

29 minutes ago, bluebell said:

What are the eternal and terrifying consequences for violation of the covenant? 

Are you sure you want to know?  “I guarantee, you won’t go to sleep”.  

You can watch the whole thing but the part about covenant breakers starts at 3:41

 

 

Edited January 13, 2024 by pogi

[Calm]

Quote

25 And we will prove them herewith, to see if they will do all things whatsoever the Lord their God shall command them;

26 And they who keep their first estate shall be added upon; and they who keep not their first estate shall not have glory in the same kingdom with those who keep their first estate; and they who keep their second estate shall have glory added upon their heads for ever and ever.

If baptism is a command as we believe, then it seems it was part of our first covenant we made with God when we agreed to come to earth when he presented his plan. (Abraham 3). His purpose for us was to prove we would be obedient.  If we agreed to come, aren’t we agreeing to be obedient in all things?  How could we lose our second estate if we hadn’t promised/covenanted  to do certain things when it was given to us?

Why would we agree to the impossible?  Because it’s not impossible if it’s understood correctly, imo…and for me that means breaking the covenants can only happen when we understand them and that will only happen after death, when we learn the rest of the story…imo of course.

It is the only way it makes sense to me if I believe, as I do, God is not only just and merciful, but the best teacher ever…and what teacher expects a student to learn everything they need to know when they may not even know they are in class?

Edited January 13, 2024 by Calm

[bluebell]

3 minutes ago, pogi said:

Are you sure you want to know?  “You won’t be able to sleep tonight”.

You can watch the whole thing but the part about covenant breakers starts at 3:41

 

 

He's talking about temple covenants as well here though, not just about baptismal covenants.  And you didn't actually answer my question (neither did Elder Bednar, because he's talking about something different than making a covenant when you are 8 but never being fully converted to the gospel afterwards).

[pogi]

33 minutes ago, bluebell said:

He's talking about temple covenants as well here though, not just about baptismal covenants.  And you didn't actually answer my question (neither did Elder Bednar, because he's talking about something different than making a covenant when you are 8 but never being fully converted to the gospel afterwards).

I was showing you the culture of fear associated with covenants.  It is impactful.  I can share more from the scriptures he directs us to, but not tonight - I want to sleep 😁He is right though, the scriptures are replete with examples.   

Perhaps any who have left the church can share their personal experiences associated with fears of violating covenants?  I felt the fear viscerally even thinking about it.  It is deeply engrained in our culture.

He was specifically addressing baptism covenants in this talk and only mentioned the temple as not being a choice after baptism.  We have to go to the temple in order to fulfill baptismal covenants, he said.  So it is all one giant web.  No escape.  There is only one way you can go, and that direction to the temple is eternally binding upon 8 year olds once they “make that decision” to be baptized.  They are essentially covenanting to go to the temple.  At 8!  They have no real choice after that.

Edited January 13, 2024 by pogi

[mfbukowski]

1 hour ago, pogi said:

That’s an interesting way to look at it.  I am not aware of any revelatory doctrine on the idea of a pre mortal covenant we all entered. 

Either way, baptism would be a new covenant associated with different blessings and consequences for violation.  It is unwise to enter any covenant or contract without first understanding the conditions, especially ones that are eternally binding.   Because of that, it feels almost unethical to place a child in a position to enter such a contract without the capacity to understand the conditions and consequences.  Especially when they don’t even realize they have other options.

Just postulate in your paradigm that spirits coming to earth already know what they're getting into, and have the ability to choose their path

After all, they by definition rejected Satan's plan already, or would not be on earth 

I think that would cover it 

It's an eternal being accepting what he/she ready accepted a jillion years ago

 

Edited January 13, 2024 by mfbukowski

[Calm]

1 hour ago, pogi said:

It is deeply engrained in our culture.

I would love to see research on this as it is quite different from my own experience…not saying I don’t believe you, but it comes across to me as more linked to the way an individual reacts as opposed to engrained in our culture, so I am now curious whether your description is widely accepted by a majority of Saints (which is what I would define as needed to be experienced by for anything “deeply engrained”) or it is more uncommon than you perceive it to be.

I think Elder Bednar’s reaction is similar to yours, but his seemed unusual to me as well.  But maybe my perception is off.

Edited January 13, 2024 by Calm