brotherofJared

Members
  • Posts

    536
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Reputation Activity

  1. Like
    brotherofJared reacted to MarginOfError in Stirring the pot at church   
    This I agree with whole-heartedly.  
    This is a two-edged sword.  I frequently find this forum to be entirely inhospitable to people like myself who do not subscribe to the more orthodox/traditionalist/literalist leanings of the Church membership[1].  And there was a time where my continued participation in the Church in general was at risk because a number of the participants here had me convinced that I was not welcome (unless I changed my ways).
    1. One recent example, 
     
  2. Like
    brotherofJared reacted to askandanswer in Ward Boundary Changes   
    We are into the second week of a major boundary realignment. All four of our city wards had their boundaries realigned but no new wards were created. Everyone has known for more than a year that there was going to be some sort of boundary changes, but nobody knew until it was announced what the changes would be. We had a special stake meeting on Sunday evening three weeks ago when it was announced and the meeting attracted about as many people as what we normally get for stake conference. All four bishops were released and new ones called, the old wards came to an end, and new wards, with new names, were announced. The official reason given for the changes was so that there would be a more even distribution of Priesthood throughout the stake. Most people seem to be pretty happy with the changes. Our Stake President and his second counsellor are particularly happy as they had been serving as both Bishops and members of the Stake Presidency since late June. As yet we have no new Elders Quorum President as we lost our previous president through the boundary changes. I guess the Stake Presidency have done a pretty good job with the changes because I haven't heard any negative comments so far. 
    I'm getting the impression that boundary changes are not announced at random times because I know that within two weeks of each other, there was another major set of boundary changes in another Australian stake far frome here and the neighbouring District became a Stake at about the same time. 
  3. Like
    brotherofJared got a reaction from JohnsonJones in Missionary Work and Baptisms   
    From the institute manual: "the time of the Gentiles have continued from that time until now..." I don't see this as being the the gospel. In the second paragraph, there is this statement: "As President Smith indicated, the times that the major gospel effort would be with gentile nations continued with the Restoration." The preceding statement alluded to Paul and the other Apostles and the great missionary work. There is a gap there. It still belonged to the Gentiles, but it was not the gospel that was being taught nor was it the great missionary work that the apostles had commenced. The apostasy means there was no gospel of Jesus Christ. There was only a Bible and that's all they had.
    When we see that the work continued with the Restoration, we have to consider what we mean by Gentiles. If we take the Jews interpretation of Gentile, it is everyone that is not a Jew. There is little or no effort to accept the possibility that this includes those who were carried into the north countries. If they came back and settled in Jerusalem now, they would not be accepted because they are Gentiles because they are NOT Jews, though they are Israelites. If we see it this way, the work that "continued with the Restoration" is being first brought to Gentiles, even though they are Israelites. 1 Nephi 15:18 reflects this idea, at least to me it does when it says: "Wherefore, our father hath not spoken of our seed alone, but also of all the house of Israel, pointing to the covenant which should be fulfilled in the latter days; which covenant the Lord made with our father Abraham, saying: In thy seed shall all the kindreds of the earth be blessed." This latter clause speaks directly to the 10 Lost or Scattered tribes who, through that scattering infused the blood of Abraham and therefore the promise which was given to Abraham, or that the Gentiles are the scattered tribes, those who hear the word and accept it, which is also part of this revelation.
    Then their are 4 signs which indicate that the time of the Gentiles are fulfilled...
    1. Jews gathered to Jerusalem - check
    2. Social turmoil - check
    3. Gentiles reject the gospel - check (having been separated from the wheat)
    4. Jerusalem no longer trodden down - check 
    What's left is returning the scattered natural branches will be grafted in again. The natural branches are the ten tribes and which includes the Lamanites. The Jews, though the manual says they are part, in that the gospel will be taken, were never scattered, but have always been a people. It is apparent from the rest of the Scriptures, that Christ Himself will appear to them and reveal exactly who He is/was, that these are not included in the grafting and that they are not part of the "major efforts of gospel teaching". Literally, they will be last. Poetically, the Savior brought the gospel to them first, in person. And the first shall be last. The Savior will bring the gospel to them last, in person.
    When I read this, it appeared that you were trying to say that one automatically flows into the other, as though the times of the Gentiles will be fulfilled when the gospel goes back to the Jews. The manual doesn't state that. It can't go to them until the very last part, but the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled.
    This is not correct and we may shift our missionary gaze to the Jews (it's already on the lost tribes), but they will not accept it. The Gentiles have rejected it. The Gentiles, as I have described it here, are the field, in which both the tares and the wheat have been allowed to grow together. Missionary work is the effort to gather the wheat from among the tares. While they grew together, they were not discernable, one from another. As the field matures, we will be able to discern, or I should say, those who are wheat will be able to discern. This process is the harvest, the weekly promised baptism that didn't happen. But that doesn't mean that there aren't any wheat in amongst those tares.
    I apologize to those who are offended when I disagree with our interpretation of scripture and events that we sometimes see in lesson manuals and come over the pulpit. I can't help it. I sometimes feel that we are staring right at the solution to a problem but resist accepting because it's "just not the way we do things around here". If it's wrong, it's wrong. When it comes to the end times, most of us don't have a clue what happens first and what happens second, or in this case, last. Why, then, does it make a difference if someone comes along and says, that piece of the puzzle doesn't go there? Does anyone here know any better? No. Not even the apostles know for sure. God said so Himself.
    There is one thing I have concluded when it comes to the mysteries of God... when it happens, most people just think it was ordinary. It is explainable. It is natural. Only after looking back do we realize what has transpired. Obviously, not everything is going to happen that way. Some things are just going to stand out like a sore thumb, but for the most part, it all fits. No one knew that Christ appeared to Joseph Smith. The earth didn't stop spinning, the Sun was not turned back in the sky. The day started like any other and it ended like any other and that's the way most of these signs will be. For example. There will not literally be blood on the moon. The Sun will not literally darken and the stars will not literally throw themselves down. I, at one time, thought that this meant that the moon was going to crash into the earth, but even this would not describe the event as it is given to us. Sure, the Sun would be darkened, men's hearts would fail them and the stars would be cast down, but the moon would not turn to blood. It might get a little blood on it, but even if it smashed all 5 or 6 billion peoples on the earth, it would not turn to blood.
    When I read these and ponder them, I consider the language, the context, the person telling it, the time it was told and how it could possibly manifest itself. Is it literal or symbolic? This latter one is definitely symbolic. 
    Another one is the anti-Christ and the number 666. After some study, I realized that this symbol of the anti-Christ has been with us for a very long long time. The key is not the number itself, though it is, in the statement, it is the number of man. This passage has nothing to do with some individual who will be born to sit in the temple and decrease the earth. He won't really have horns and He won't breathe fire and brimstone. All this means is that the anti-Christ is man-made. The number 666 actually plays into that explanation quite nicely, but we hold to traditions that are simply false. We believe things that are given us that simply cannot be, like the modern Chrisian view of creation ex nihilo. It just isn't true, it doesn't matter how long and warm and fuzzy the tradition is, it's just not true.
    We might take the gospel to the Jews, but I doubt it. They let is play in their yard, we have more symbology and historical connection with Israel than any other religion. We have a school there and a park and we are a temple building people, but we can't proselyte there. We have also been forbidden from doing work for Jews in our temples. The fact that the Jews will not have accepted Christ until they day He comes, is strong indication that we're not going to focus any effort on teaching the gospel to them.
  4. Like
    brotherofJared got a reaction from Fether in Missionary Work and Baptisms   
    I've given a lot of thought to the goal setting that missionaries get that seem unrealistic and generally fail. Why do our leaders do it and why do their challenges fail? Is it the fault of the missionary or was the leader not truly inspired? This becomes a real problem when general authorities are giving the promises that don't seem to materialize. I have a return missionary friend who served in Japan. He absolutely hated it. He has refused to speak Japanese ever since he got back and hopes to lose that talent. Yesterday would not be soon enough. 
    So, what happened? Why aren't the promises fulfilled?
    One of the things that I think causes the problem is the preconceived notion held in the minds of our young missionaries, often placed there by stories and parents and peer expectations, that the mission is a magical place where we meet God (I'm over doing it on purpose). Then they get out on the mission and find out it's not that at all. It's real life with jerk companions and stupid rules and limitations that seem unlimited. And then that awful word: "work" comes into play. The idea that all a missionary has to do is talk to 20 people a day and they'll get baptisms is simply wrong. 
    While I was out this morning, I contrived that a non-Mormon, liar, dressed in missionary garb, pretending to be a missionary could probably get more baptisms than a real missionary following those same guidelines that were set forth in the goals. Why? Because he'll do anything to get that baptism, lie, bargain, present false and fake stories like those that snopes is constantly shooting down. (btw, I've seen real missionaries do that). Why would that be? While it's hypothetical as I don't believe we could convince anyone to just go get baptisms for us any way they can, the scenario isn't unheard of. Salesmen do it all the time. Missionaries aren't salesmen, though they may feel like they are sometimes. And I know a lot of sales companies that like to use fresh returned missionaries as salesmen.
    I don't really know the answer, but I believe the difference is where the foundation from which the person works is located. If it's grounded in an unreal expectation, disappointment and discouragement sets in. Thus the unethically motivated missionary who is out to get baptisms at any cost has a more realistic and centered foundation and will not be discouraged so easily. If one way doesn't work then try another. One could even convince themselves that it's right and good to "process" baptisms this way, especially when success is measured by baptisms.
    I believe the idea behind establishing goals with a promise isn't that the goal makes the promise come true. Each individual is different and will approach the goal differently. Some may decide that to ignore the goal observation, don't count the tic marks, don't make tick marks, and reports success because he feels it was successful, but instead establishes a new set of goals for himself, ones that make sense to his line of thinking. These will ask God, not how to get 20 visits a day, but how to get a baptism each week. The answers will vary. It isn't going to be "talk to 20 people a day" for everyone. The idea here, again, is where is the foundation that the missionary works from...
    There is no way that an apostle or a mission president can relay all this information into a lecture that will affect every missionary the same way. If a leader were to say, "find your own way to obtaining a baptism a week", mayhem would result. However, if they were to say, talk to as many people as you can and you'll get baptisms, well, that is true, isn't it? Eventually, we'll find someone we can baptize if we talk to people. We don't even know that the person is interested. In fact, sometimes the person is resistant, refusing, fighting, condemning and then when challenged they say, yes. I want to be baptized. Weirdest thing ever. I've never been able to explain it. How do we make that happen? Well, we talk to people. So, we set goals and we fail. It's frustrating and it appears that our leaders are just wrong.
    ---
    I'm having difficulty getting from here to there. I know where I want to be, but there appears to be no bridge to get there. Sorry for the meandering, but like missionaries who labor under a sense of failure because they aren't getting the promises, there is a bridge from here to there and it is difficult to find it. I think, sometimes, two years isn't enough time. But there is a way. I know where I want to be in this monolog and I know I can personally get there. I've been there many many times. It has never been via my own efforts but has actually occurred most often when I let go and quit trying to control my environment. We actually aren't in control, we just think we are.
    As I said in my previous post, faith worked miracles for Joseph Smith who seemed to attract converts like a magnet does iron. We don't control a lot of what happens in our life. Today, we might wake up and find ourselves jobless. Our car may or may not start for no apparent reason. We may find we or someone we are close to has cancer and will not live through it. We live on a rock hurling through space and somehow, we think we're in charge. The fact is, we can only learn to live in harmony with whatever happens. We didn't put this rock here, at least, not that we can remember, and yet here we are. How we get from talking to 20 people a day to getting a baptism every week is not far different from how we got here.
    Faith is the bridge. It is unseen and uncertain, but we can only find it if we walk to the edge of the light we now have (talk to people) and then there, at the edge, we can obtain more light (a baptism every week), even if there is none to be had (or not a baptism every week). In my mind, the challenged to talk to people every day is a challenge to finding that bridge (we can't get to the bridge if we don't try).
  5. Like
    brotherofJared reacted to Suzie in 12 yr old testimony drama   
    Well, in the video a Church leader after she was told to sit down, got up and mentioned that we are all children of God, etc which is fine but the damage was already done.
  6. Like
    brotherofJared got a reaction from pam in Second Coming / Sign of the rainbow?   
    I have no idea how I ended up on that thread. After seeing that 37 States allow same-sex marriages, that's when I checked the date.
    Thanks
  7. Like
    brotherofJared reacted to Suzie in 12 yr old testimony drama   
    I am not sure how I feel about the whole thing. The Bishop (or whomever talked to the girl) looked annoyed.
    People say that censuring her was the right thing to do because her speech had nothing to do with a testimony.
    However, let's admit it. Testimony meetings come straight from the twilight zone, no kidding.The following are just some things I heard during testimony meetings in all my years as a member of the Church:
    1. A member saying that missionaries offered him money to have sex with him.
    2. A 10 minute testimony about why we should avoid shopping at Walmart.
    3. The evils of sugar.
    4. If you talk bad about Trump, then you are talking bad about the Lord's anointed.
     
  8. Like
    brotherofJared got a reaction from MrShorty in 12 yr old testimony drama   
    I disagree. That is censure and while we have the right to do so, I think it would have been better too address it directly. It confused the girl and established negative environment and hurtful environment. We will be dealing with that for a long time.
    I've played that scenario in my head a number of times, but no one can be prepared for every situation and always do the right thing. 
    I'm my mind it goes like this: get the attention of the speaker first ask them to sit down and explain the purpose of the meeting and that the course of there talk is not acceptable. All while the mic is on. If the person objects, then turn the mic off. 
    The "love all of God's children" speech that followed was a fail. It feel on dead ears because the actions spoke louder.
    My 2¢.
  9. Like
    brotherofJared reacted to JohnsonJones in Sanders vs Vought = Postmodernism vs Truth   
    Responding more to the earlier posts (haven't read all the posts after...)
    In regards to who one worships...I think many are too judgemental in who they feel is Christian/Saved/etc, and instead of leaving it up to the Lord who is the true and real judge, decide for themselves who is or is not to be saved.
    I like C.S Lewis's ideas from the Chronicles of Narnia where Aslan saves one who didn't necessarily believe in Aslan, but did believe in a greater being and as such, what he did in fealty to that, was in likewise fealty to Aslan.
    A prime example of this...
    When we say Donald Trump is the President of the United States of America...is he really the president?
    Do you have to know what he looks like to acknowledge he is president of the United States?  Is it mandatory?
    Do you have to understand what his motivations are to recognize him as President of the United States?  If you do not, does that mean you cannot or do not recognize him as President?
    Do you have to have a deep personal relationship with him to say he is president of the United States?
    If we, as a nation, recognize (whether you voted for him or agree with him or not) that currently, Donald Trump is the President of the United States of America in his current office at this time, how much greater is the reach and power of the Lord for those who believe in him?
    In that light, I do feel one could be Muslim and still worship the Lord.  We cannot know the intentions of their heart, but the Lord does.
    Even the Muslims (those who bother to even read or adhere to it) have a cautionary verse in their Koran which warns them to be wary of attacking or persecuting the Jew or Christian, for it is possible that they worship Allah.  It is impossible for the good Muslim to know, and hence, great care should be taken in regards to those who are part of those religions.
    In that light, I take the idea that we should not judge, perhaps, to strongly, but I feel much as C.S. Lewis that many we might not feel are Christians or worship the Lord will turn out to be worshipping the Lord.
    Of course, I also fee that it may be that many we do not think are Christians will turn out to be Christian, and many of those we feel are saved, might not be.  It is not for us to decide...but the Lord.
    Thus, in the case of the woman with the hijab...I might have had a more liberal approach than the college did, and acknowledge that while some of the Muslims may worship the same Lord, they do not acknowledge Christ nor his divine role and atonement that was necessary for us all.
  10. Like
    brotherofJared reacted to Traveler in The Great Plan of Salvation vs Principles & Doctrine   
    Have you ever sinned and not repented?  or is there even a single sin for which you have not repented?  If I were to say what you have said - I would fear more for myself than anyone else.
    Perhaps I should ask questions more directly? - do you qualify yourself as someone exempt from or worthy of condemnation?  Do you realize that the title of Satan is accuser and that the similar title given to Christ is advocate?  Which are you?
    Or as Jesus said - let him who is without sin cast the first stone.  - Which could bring us to Nephi - but that I believe is a very different subject.
    In case you or anyone else is wondering - I obviously have a problem with those that think they know anybody worthy of condemnation or think they should be the voce of condemnation.  But not enough to say they will not be forgiven because I believe there will be forgiveness.  I believe we should teach repentance and forgiveness - not because of fear for anything that comes from not repenting or not forgiving but for what is possible and inevitable because of repentance and forgiveness - and forgiving at least enough to believe that whoever we forgive will be forgiven.  What is the point to forgive and remain thinking - forgiveness is not possible?
     
    The Traveler
  11. Like
    brotherofJared got a reaction from Sunday21 in Blessings of Being LDS   
    I like how you see the best in others. (just an observation).
  12. Like
    brotherofJared got a reaction from seashmore in Blessings of Being LDS   
    Often times, those elect don't know they are elect and are not known as such. Consider the 7000 reserved who would not bend the knee to Baal. They were not known nor, do I think that they knew themselves to be elect. All they saw was that they would not bend the knee to Baal. Of these, I wonder how many suffered in life, barely able to sustain themselves, much less their family? Of these, how many were burdened with sin and cried day and night to be relieved of the monkey on their back? We only know of one. The other 7000 we do not know. Not their names, their station, their gender or their age and yet. These are the elect that early church compared themselves too.
  13. Like
    brotherofJared got a reaction from Fether in Blessings of Being LDS   
    Often times, those elect don't know they are elect and are not known as such. Consider the 7000 reserved who would not bend the knee to Baal. They were not known nor, do I think that they knew themselves to be elect. All they saw was that they would not bend the knee to Baal. Of these, I wonder how many suffered in life, barely able to sustain themselves, much less their family? Of these, how many were burdened with sin and cried day and night to be relieved of the monkey on their back? We only know of one. The other 7000 we do not know. Not their names, their station, their gender or their age and yet. These are the elect that early church compared themselves too.
  14. Like
    brotherofJared got a reaction from SilentOne in The Great Plan of Salvation vs Principles & Doctrine   
    I wasn't trying to understand the lyric. I know where the phrase comes from. I believe that at some place and time, in the eternities, that we will know where Gods began to be. If we are ever to be like the Father, having all knowledge, then we would know this, unless you think God doesn't know where Gods began to be. I believe also, that in my present state, IF I could Hie to Kolob, which I can't because I am mortal and finite, even IF I could, I could not find out where God's began to be, BECAUSE I am mortal and finite. But some day, I shall know. at least, I hope I will be in a place where I can know if I so choose.
  15. Like
    brotherofJared reacted to SilentOne in The War in Heaven   
    Very true.
  16. Like
    brotherofJared got a reaction from Just_A_Guy in The Great Plan of Salvation vs Principles & Doctrine   
    I believe this world is an example of the telestial worlds in the hereafter. However, living in this world, coupled with immortality, it seems that most of those "sins" will be rendered inoperative. Eternity has a way of sapping all the fun out of some sins. But, I don't know what God suffered that caused him to tremble, but I suspect that that suffering will be enough that when released into a telestial glory, that which caused them to suffer will be enough to leave the sin well enough alone. I'll leave the where, when, and how those things will be accomplished to God.
    Your last statement seems to allude to a sense that ceasing from sin is the same as repentance and therefore, by default, they take some of Christ's atonement and thus justify their graduation to a telestial glory? I'm not sure what you were trying to say.
    My position is rejecting Christ's atonement for themselves is not grounds for outer darkness and that anything other than the Celestial Kingdom is damnation. Further, I believe people will choose another weight of glory simply because they don't want to live the kind of life that God lives.
  17. Like
  18. Like
    brotherofJared got a reaction from The Folk Prophet in The War in Heaven   
    I realize this is arbitrary and your opinion, but establishing norms from anyone's personal perspective is never going to establish norm. Bell curves assume we have all the data, we don't. If we did, the percentage would actually be established based on the distribution of the data over the bell and the fact that we are using a bell curve means that the norm is established by what is popular, most frequent. That normal is what most be people do.
    That is not how we, in the church determine what normal is because, on a bell curve, normal is the absolute most minimum edge of the upper side of the grade. It is normal to abstain from coffee, tea and tobacco. It is normal to reserve sexual relations only between an man and a woman who have been legally and lawfully wedded, it is normal to be honest in our dealings with our fellow man, it is normal to pay an honest tithe with an actual measurement, a rule, that we can use as a guide as to what that means. On a bell curve, Mormons are not normal.
  19. Like
    brotherofJared reacted to zil in The Great Plan of Salvation vs Principles & Doctrine   
    Nope, that just does not help at all.  (I am refraining mightily from wisecracks about this guy's name.)
  20. Like
    brotherofJared got a reaction from Traveler in The Great Plan of Salvation vs Principles & Doctrine   
    Interesting position to take. What is true then?
    I can agree that we teach a lot of things in ignorance, but that doesn't mean it's not true. We may not know how to put the pieces together, but that doesn't mean that the pieces do go together. In the example you quoted, it referenced scripture. Was the scripture just not true? or was the ideas that were taught based on that scripture not true? Based on one your responses, it appears that you have no problem with spirit prison or that people are kept from paradise by their own choice so that probably isn't the issue. Perhaps it's the idea of hell as being a temporary condition for them that is not true. Perhaps after rejecting the truth and staying in prision, they ought to be made sons of Perdition or placed in permanent hell?
    But I do agree with you, we do teach a lot of things that we don't know how it works. We say we are the God's children and it seems that some people think this means a 9 month pregancy and 50 billion personal births. The idea is ludicrous. That doesn't mean that we're not God's children. It just means that we don't know what makes us God's children. When we explain how things are done when we don't know, it is very likely that we will get the "how" of how things are done, wrong.
  21. Like
    brotherofJared got a reaction from zil in Hello Mormons and everybody   
    LOL. I'm not that brother. U can call me BoJ
  22. Like
    brotherofJared got a reaction from zil in Hello Mormons and everybody   
    I didn't take it that way (I did, but chose to ignore it). It's all fixed up now. I wasn't even sure it was coherent as I was typing between bus stops and bus rides. 
  23. Like
    brotherofJared got a reaction from zil in Hello Mormons and everybody   
    Typing on my cell phone.
  24. Like
    brotherofJared got a reaction from Sunday21 in Can everyone become God?   
    God is always just. Being fair is a relative term. Of course He is fair, but it may not seem to be from our perspective. But no one can not deny that He is just. 
    I have also read posts, not here, where critics claim that only Mormons can obtain the highest levels of the Celestial Kingdom which, if one considers that our baptisms for the dead make people Mormons, then we can't escape that accusation. However, baptism is not to a church. It is simply a saving ordinance that everyone must have in order to enter the Celestial Kingdom.
    You mention advancing through the degrees of the highest levels of the Celestial Kingdom and there is simply no way to advance into marriage if a person never married in life. Everyone will have the opportunity to advance before the judgment, but once judgment is passed there will be no more opportunity for advancement. There will be plenty of opportunities to advance for those who didn't squander the opportunities in life. That's the way I understand your statement in "a)". My personal belief that all married couples will have their work done for them and the wife they married. But the many people who never got the chance to marry, both men and women (which, I believe the biggest cause is that they just didn't live to a marrying age), will enjoy a courtship and be able to find a mate in the spirit world. This has been ongoing since the first man and woman died without marriage. During the millennium, when the Savior reigns personally on the earth, these who wish to marry will be able to be sealed by proxy just as those who died are already. We, the living, in those days, will learn directly from them what they desire and those marriages will be performed so they also may obtain the highest degrees of glory. Of course, these are my personal views. I can think of no other reason for a millennium. It's not a reward for the few good people left on the earth at his second coming. It an absolute necessity to handle the natural and normal shortcomings of life in mortality.
    In "b)", you stated that those living in the millennium will have "another opportunity", which I think is not correct. There are no second chances. However, that being said, no mortal being is capable of determining if the person had a "first chance" (unless moved upon by the Holy Ghost, but I wouldn't want to be that person if that responsibility ever were to rest on my shoulders). 
    I don't think we can see these opportunities given to those through temple ordinances after death as second chances for anyone. If they refused to avail themselves of it the first time around, what's to say that they will not refuse the second time. Most refuse because they don't want to live a life patterned after a Celestial order. One of the greatest problems in human nature is the justification we give ourselves that what we are doing is our God given right. And, oddly, that is a true statement. Like the marshmallow experiment, many people are not willing to put off a right that they have NOW for more rights later. They cannot see beyond the marshmallow they have. I believe that if they had to chance, truly had the chance in life to obtained these blessings, they will pass it up when they are offered them again. We rise from the grave with the same spirit that went down into the grave. If we are filthy when we die, we will come out of the grave filthy still.
    I explained this concept to a friend who told me of his own experience of attempting to swim across a lake to the other side, like the swimming the English Channel. He started with good intentions but halfway there, he just couldn't make it and had his friends haul him out of the water into their boat. He felt that the boat represented Christ. I told him, in this life, it does represent Christ, but in the next, Christ will not carry us to the other side of the lake in a boat. In the next life, our families, through promises made in the temple, sealed families can reach through the eternities and find and retrieve those who lived below their capabilities. However, there, there will be no boat. The journey for them must be made alone with encouragement, but there will be no boat, no rescue. Then, somewhere in the middle, they realize that they chose not to get married and didn't want the priesthood and so when the fatigue and pain and sorrow, that they must suffer themselves, hits. They will suddenly see the fruitlessness of such a pursuit. It's not impossible, but it is very painful and most will just give up thinking it not worth the pain and sorrow.
    My take on your question is that as long as a person is following Christ, he is qualified for the Celestial Kingdom. It does not matter if they are modern Christian, Mormon, Hindu or Muslim, all are qualified because all are children of God. Of these, the good ones, the ones that do right, are often kept from learning of Christ and the ordinances by ignorance or the craftiness of man. However, once they learn and I think good people will grasp this concept right away, they will accept this gift with great joy. The saving ordinances are easy to accomplish. Living a Christ-centered life takes a lifetime.