Things to Come? 2 Nephi 13:16-26--> D&C 112:23-26?

[ZealouslyStriving]

I believe the verses indicated are linked and foreshadow a continuing slouch towards worldliness among Church members that will result in major consequences. Thoughts?

* I want to copy-paste the verses, but this phone and I have a difficult relationship 💔*

[MustardSeed]

31 minutes ago, ZealouslyStriving said:

I believe the verses indicated are linked and foreshadow a continuing slouch towards worldliness among Church members that will result in major consequences. Thoughts?

* I want to copy-paste the verses, but this phone and I have a difficult relationship 💔*

I highly doubt church members are more worldly than the general pop. And other than Vegas i’ve never attended Sunday services and looked around and thought my goodness these people are worldly. So I’m curious why you are posting this? 

Edited February 28, 2024 by MustardSeed

[bluebell]

37 minutes ago, ZealouslyStriving said:

I believe the verses indicated are linked and foreshadow a continuing slouch towards worldliness among Church members that will result in major consequences. Thoughts?

* I want to copy-paste the verses, but this phone and I have a difficult relationship 💔*

Maybe start by defining what you mean by "worldly".

 

[ZealouslyStriving]

2 minutes ago, MustardSeed said:

I highly doubt church members are more worldly than the general pop. And other than Vegas i’ve never attended Sunday services and looked around and thought my goodness these people are worldly. So I’m curious why you are posting us?

I didn't say they were more worldly, but perhaps we are becoming more becoming more worldly?

Verse 26 of D&C 112 says that judgement begins at His house, amongst thos that blaspheme His name in His House.

Is examination of Latter-day prophecy and collective self-reflection off-topic?

[ZealouslyStriving]

Adopting worldly viewpoints, ways of acting, speaking, dressing...

Seems you all think I have some ulterior motive. I'm kind of baffled by the reaction honestly. 

[bluebell]

2 minutes ago, ZealouslyStriving said:

Adopting worldly viewpoints, ways of acting, speaking, dressing...

Seems you all think I have some ulterior motive. I'm kind of baffled by the reaction honestly. 

I asked that question because I'm trying to figure out what you mean so I can better respond.  (We have plenty of people who come on here that pretend to be something they aren't, or pretend to not be the people they are, so some suspicion will happen until people have time to get to know you better.)

Back to the topic, I'm not sure we are following the world more in our "viewpoints and ways of acting, speaking and dressing" now than we were in the 1980s for example.  I'm not sure how we could tell.  We probably are to some degree if we are measuring from one point in history, since that's how atrophy tends to work.  The world is more 'worldly' now than it was in 1980 and I'm sure we've followed that trend.  But does that mean that we are worse than people in the past?  I don't think so.

A 150 years ago it was worldly for women to cut their hair and have bangs.  If we use that 150 year old standard then yes, we're all going to hell in the handbasket.  But, we don't use that standard anymore.  We don't consider having bangs to be a sign of worldliness at all.  Does that mean that we're more worldly because our definition of what it takes to be worldly has changed?  I doubt it.

It would probably need to be measured by degrees rather than actions or beliefs.  As in, compared to what we currently believe to be 'worldly', are we worldly to a greater degree today than they were back in John Taylor's time or SWK's time using the standard they used?  I would doubt it but I really don't know as I don't know how that could be measured.

Do you think we are and how would you measure it?

[juliann]

35 minutes ago, ZealouslyStriving said:

Adopting worldly viewpoints, ways of acting, speaking, dressing...

Seems you all think I have some ulterior motive. I'm kind of baffled by the reaction honestly. 

You need to explain what you mean by worldly. Adopting "worldly" viewpoints, ways of acting, speaking, dressing, has been going on from the beginning. How can anyone not unless they remove themselves from society? Unless you expect something like the Amish who have adopted a particular era to adhere to. Are you advocating we pick a time and only adopt that prevailing culture? Which would you pick? Should we go back to 17th century beliefs and lifestyle? Would only adopting first century practices, dress, speaking, acting be more righteous? 

To begin you need to establish some sort of baseline as a measurement to determine better or worse. 

[ZealouslyStriving]

12 minutes ago, bluebell said:

I asked that question because I'm trying to figure out what you mean so I can better respond.  (We have plenty of people who come on here that pretend to be something they aren't, or pretend to not be the people they are, so some suspicion will happen until people have time to get to know you better.)

Back to the topic, I'm not sure we are following the world more in our "viewpoints and ways of acting, speaking and dressing" now than we were in the 1980s for example.  I'm not sure how we could tell.  We probably are to some degree if we are measuring from one point in history, since that's how atrophy tends to work.  The world is more 'worldly' now than it was in 1980 and I'm sure we've followed that trend.  But does that mean that we are worse than people in the past?  I don't think so.

A 150 years ago it was worldly for women to cut their hair and have bangs.  If we use that 150 year old standard then yes, we're all going to hell in the handbasket.  But, we don't use that standard anymore.  We don't consider having bangs to be a sign of worldliness at all.  Does that mean that we're more worldly because our definition of what it takes to be worldly has changed?  I doubt it.

It would probably need to be measured by degrees rather than actions or beliefs.  As in, compared to what we currently believe to be 'worldly', are we worldly to a greater degree today than they were back in John Taylor's time or SWK's time using the standard they used?  I would doubt it but I really don't know as I don't know how that could be measured.

Do you think we are and how would you measure it?

I know there has been a few times on BYUTv that I have raised an eyebrow. 🤨 I am curious of the experiences of others. I have been out of the loop for quite a while and only started attending a Ward 2 weeks ago. 

Can prophecies of judgement apply to the Church members as a whole and not just individually?

[ZealouslyStriving]

5 minutes ago, juliann said:

You need to explain what you mean by worldly. Adopting "worldly" viewpoints, ways of acting, speaking, dressing, has been going on from the beginning. How can anyone not unless they remove themselves from society? Unless you expect something like the Amish who have adopted a particular era to adhere to. Are you advocating we pick a time and only adopt that prevailing culture? Which would you pick? Should we go back to 17th century beliefs and lifestyle? Would only adopting first century practices, dress, speaking, acting be more righteous? 

To begin you need to establish some sort of baseline as a measurement to determine better or worse. 

When do the standard we are adopting begin to fall outside of scriptural standards? Will sleeveless and briefs garments one day be acceptable, for example? What would be the line?

[bluebell]

1 minute ago, ZealouslyStriving said:

When do the standard we are adopting begin to fall outside of scriptural standards? Will sleeveless and briefs garments one day be acceptable, for example? What would be the line?

They might.  Do any of us feel like we are more worldly because we have two piece garments that don't go down to the ankles and wrists?  That would never have been acceptable in bygone eras of the church, but it's acceptable today.  If change is allowed then we can't point at change alone as an arbiter of increased worldliness.

As for knowing where to draw the line, that would seem to be the job of the prophet.  

[bluebell]

8 minutes ago, ZealouslyStriving said:

Can prophecies of judgement apply to the Church members as a whole and not just individually?

I'm not sure.  

[ZealouslyStriving]

5 minutes ago, bluebell said:

I'm not sure.  

I think this might be our disconnect and why it might be thought that I am secretly on the attack. I believe that if we as members of the Church are not wary, we could be in danger of developing a "all is well in Zion" attitude and think- like the ancient covenant people- that we are secure, trusting in our communal righteousness.

Edited February 28, 2024 by ZealouslyStriving

[ZealouslyStriving]

6 minutes ago, bluebell said:

They might.  Do any of us feel like we are more worldly because we have two piece garments that don't go down to the ankles and wrists?  That would never have been acceptable in bygone eras of the church, but it's acceptable today.  If change is allowed then we can't point at change alone as an arbiter of increased worldliness.

As for knowing where to draw the line, that would seem to be the job of the prophet.  

I agree, but when Elder Bednar needs to give his parabolic (?) talk on the wedding supper - how well are the Saints obeying? Remember D&C 112:26 says judgements (bad ones) will begin at His House.

[Calm]

1 hour ago, ZealouslyStriving said:

I believe the verses indicated are linked and foreshadow a continuing slouch towards worldliness among Church members that will result in major consequences. Thoughts?

* I want to copy-paste the verses, but this phone and I have a difficult relationship 💔*

Quote

16 Moreover, the Lord saith: Because the daughters of Zion are haughty, and walk with stretched-forth necks and wanton eyes, walking and mincing as they go, and making a tinkling with their feet—

17 Therefore the Lord will smite with a scab the crown of the head of the daughters of Zion, and the Lord will discovertheir secret parts.

18 In that day the Lord will take away the bravery of their tinkling ornaments, and cauls, and round tires like the moon;

19 The chains and the bracelets, and the mufflers;

20 The bonnets, and the ornaments of the legs, and the headbands, and the tablets, and the ear-rings;

21 The rings, and nose jewels;

22 The changeable suits of apparel, and the mantles, and the wimples, and the crisping-pins;

23 The glasses, and the fine linen, and hoods, and the veils.

24 And it shall come to pass, instead of sweet smell there shall be stink; and instead of a girdle, a rent; and instead of well set hair, baldness; and instead of a stomacher, a girding of sackcloth; burning instead of beauty.

25 Thy men shall fall by the sword and thy mighty in the war.

26 And her gates shall lament and mourn; and she shall be desolate, and shall sit upon the ground.

 

Quote

23 Verily, verily, I say unto you, darkness covereth the earth, and gross darkness the minds of the people, and all flesh has become corrupt before my face.

24 Behold, vengeance cometh speedily upon the inhabitants of the earth, a day of wrath, a day of burning, a day of desolation, of weeping, of mourning, and of lamentation; and as a whirlwind it shall come upon all the face of the earth, saith the Lord.

25 And upon my house shall it begin, and from my house shall it go forth, saith the Lord;

26 First among those among you, saith the Lord, who have professed to know my name and have not known me, and have blasphemed against me in the midst of my house, saith the Lord.

The NIV for Isaiah 3

Quote

16 The Lord says,
    “The women of Zion are haughty,
walking along with outstretched necks,
    flirting with their eyes,
strutting along with swaying hips,
    with ornaments jingling on their ankles.
17 Therefore the Lord will bring sores on the heads of the women of Zion;
    the Lord will make their scalps bald.”

18 In that day the Lord will snatch away their finery: the bangles and headbands and crescent necklaces, 19 the earrings and bracelets and veils, 20 the headdressesand anklets and sashes, the perfume bottles and charms, 21 the signet rings and nose rings, 22 the fine robes and the capes and cloaks, the purses 23 and mirrors, and the linen garments and tiaras and shawls.

24 Instead of fragrance there will be a stench;
    instead of a sash, a rope;
instead of well-dressed hair, baldness;
    instead of fine clothing, sackcloth;
    instead of beauty, branding.
25 Your men will fall by the sword,
    your warriors in battle.
26 The gates of Zion will lament and mourn;
    destitute, she will sit on the ground.

 

[ZealouslyStriving]

Sidebar:

Speaking of the NIV- I recall something on BYU where the speaker was going to use a modern translation and he referenced the GH to, I guess, assure everyone it was OK. Did the Church give some recent advice on modern Bible translations?

[Calm]

1 hour ago, ZealouslyStriving said:

Adopting worldly viewpoints, ways of acting, speaking, dressing...

Seems you all think I have some ulterior motive. I'm kind of baffled by the reaction honestly. 

You choosing a verse that focuses on women’s apparel as signs of end times is just a bit odd, imo, rather than selfishness, neglect of the poor, materialism, willingness to go to war, rejection of God, etc.

[Calm]

4 minutes ago, ZealouslyStriving said:

Sidebar:

Speaking of the NIV- I recall something on BYU where the speaker was going to use a modern translation and he referenced the GH to, I guess, assure everyone it was OK. Did the Church give some recent advice on modern Bible translations?

“Referenced the GH”?

My memory is General authorities have been using modern translations of the Bible in conference on occasion for a number of years.  And I believe Elder Utchdorf mentioned using one as a study bible in one of his talks, but I can’t find it.

Edited February 28, 2024 by Calm

[Calm]

Also in the tips for studying the Bible, they say use the experts when needed and that imo would cover some of the modern translations…

Quote

8

Look up what you don’t understand

Chances are that as you study the Bible, you’ll come across terms that are confusing or that you simply don’t understand. Don’t hesitate to search the meaning of a particular word or phrase, or even a whole parable. The internet is home to millions of other people studying the Bible and many experts who can help your study

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/comeuntochrist/believe/bible/bible-study-tips

[ZealouslyStriving]

11 minutes ago, Calm said:

You choosing a verse that focuses on women’s apparel as signs of end times is just a bit odd, imo, rather than selfishness, neglect of the poor, materialism, willingness to go to war, rejection of God, etc.

I don't believe the significance has anything to do with women's apparel, but is about God's people following the trends of the world, and the Saints suffering economic loss, lack of prosperity as a result. My sidenote from a year ago. I'm not a neanderthal 😤:

 

Edited February 29, 2024 by ZealouslyStriving

[Calm]

Elder Holland quoted the NRSV here (devotional, not conference, but it just happened to be the first thing I grabbed off a search of “NRSV” on LDS.org)

Quote

And Jeremiah writes: 

“For surely I know the plans I have for you, says the Lord, plans for your welfare and not for harm, to give you a future with hope. 

“Then when you call upon me and … pray to me, I will hear you.”19

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/broadcasts/worldwide-devotional-for-young-adults/2023/01/14holland?lang=eng#p21

[ZealouslyStriving]

8 minutes ago, ZealouslyStriving said:

I don't believe the significance has anything to do with women's apparel, but is about God's people following the trends of the world, and the Saints suffering economic loss, lack of prosperity as a result. My sidenote from a year ago. I'm not a neanderthal 😤:

 

[ZealouslyStriving]

The "daughters of Judah" were the cities and villages of the land. Could not the "daughters of Zion" be Stakes and Wards?

[juliann]

50 minutes ago, ZealouslyStriving said:

When do the standard we are adopting begin to fall outside of scriptural standards? Will sleeveless and briefs garments one day be acceptable, for example? What would be the line?

What are scriptural standards? And what century do those standards reflect? This is your thread, you need to establish that line. What is it?

 

45 minutes ago, ZealouslyStriving said:

I think this might be our disconnect and why it might be thought that I am secretly on the attack. I believe that if we as members of the Church are not wary, we could be in danger of developing a "all is well in Zion" attitude and think- like the ancient covenant people- that we are secure, trusting in our communal righteousness.

What would be the problem with sleeveless garments?? Do you know these same things were said when we went to two piece? I was there. So should the standard of righteousness be one piece? Or should we go back to the original long sleeve/leg version? What do you think about the ecological disaster washing all of this fabric without machines is for undeveloped countries? Would it be worldly to account for that by reducing the fabric? 

[ZealouslyStriving]

4 minutes ago, juliann said:

What are scriptural standards? And what century do those standards reflect? This is your thread, you need to establish that line. What is it?

 

What would be the problem with sleeveless garments?? Do you know these same things were said when we went to two piece? I was there. So should the standard of righteousness be one piece? Or should we go back to the original long sleeve/leg version? What do you think about the ecological disaster washing all of this fabric without machines is for undeveloped countries? Would it be worldly to account for that by reducing the fabric? 

The garment example kinda stinks 🦨 my bad. My point is if there is no standard where we can say " Here, and no further!" - we are danger of being the guy so open minded his brain falls out.🤕 

P.S. I wouldn't mind the long sleeve option personally 🥵

Edited February 29, 2024 by ZealouslyStriving

[juliann]

5 minutes ago, ZealouslyStriving said:

The "daughters of Judah" were the cities and villages of the land. Could not the "daughters of Zion" be Stakes and Wards?

No. The Bible is talking about current things relevant to them. That is very well established in Biblical scholarship.  Do you really think our prophets consider perfume bottles and bangles to be such a problem for LDS women that they should be made bald as punishment? And all the men killed? Really?