Traveler

I find the question of Ghandi most interesting. Ghandi was converted to Jesus and the teachings of Jesus but because he felt that most of Christianity did not represent the teachings he decided not to call his conversion Christianity - instead he called the teachings to which he was converted, "truth". So what does it mean to accept Christ - to call yourself a Christian or to love and live his teachings? The Traveler

Again since there are many ancient oral traditions that make the same claim of origin with Adam and Eve and that also claim to have been proven over time (for example Judaism, Islam and Zoroasterism). How do you validate your interpretation of things over their claims or even the claims of Nestorian Christians – all of which claim to have maintained their traditions and scriptures (exception of Islam who have published their scriptures just slightly longer – but have not modified their versions since their first publication) longer than you have based on Western Christianity? I have seen some of the debates between Dedot (Islam scholar) and Western Christian Scholars and to be honest Islam makes a much more compelling case for validity and consistency of scriptures for the last 1500 years. Also the argument the Pharisees and Scribes used to question the validity of Jesus was the same as yours. I do not say this because I do not understand your argument and your validation – it is my perception that to a hammer everything looks very much like a nail or something similar to a nail. If someone’s arguments are as compelling as yours – do you validate their claim by your standard and expect them to not validate your claim by their standard? The golden Rule you previously spoke of? Has G-d left us with means (spiritual or otherwise) to seek truth – including scientific (physical) truths? The Traveler

Your statement: This concept of not offering "the Way, Truth and Life" is of great interest to me. Many years ago while in college I was taking a Philosophy class when a question was raised. Most everyone at some point thinks they have access to truth that others (especially others that disagree) do not have. The question is, “What is the difference between truth and what is perceived as truth?” Or how do you determine when you know the truth from when you think you know the truth? The logical answer is that when there is more than one that perceive the truth differently there are only two possibilities. Ether all are in error or there is one that perceives correctly and the rest are in error. I know that some argue that because of relativity that there are different perceptions of the same truth but they do not understand that the difference can be logically and accurately accounted for based on the frame of reference. If the difference cannot be accounted for, then there must, in “truth” be a difference. The point I am trying to make – or ask; is how does one validate their access to the way, truth and life when others are just as sure that the first are in error in their perception and that some different way, truth and life is valid? If you use the Bible for validation why would G-d change the method of validation of truth based on pre and post compilation of the Bible? And how is the Bible validated – especially when there are different versions both ancient and modern? Some argue that the difference is negligible – but if you are off by even 1 tenth of one percent on your way to the moon you will miss it completely. That kind of error to arrive at the next closest star would be a joke. How much error can there be in way, truth and life to eternity? The Traveler

I am not trying to take away from anyone but I am attempting to communicate the importance of covenants. See D&D 132:7-12. The Traveler

I thank all that have responded to worship. There are many thoughts that I have pondered. It appears to me that my understanding of what constitutes the worship of G-d is quite different than most of the expressions thus far. Please understand that I do not mean to be critical but to add my belief and understanding to what has been discussed. I believe that there are two great pillars that define true worship of G-d and that without these two great pillars, worship is incomplete and of little benefit or value. The first pillar of true worship of G-d is covenant. We learn from scripture that those that worship the true and living G-d are called “The Children of covenant”. Without covenant all the things we may think of as tokens of our relationship with G-d and the worship of him are temporary and an illusion and are not true worship of the living G-d. In the most simple of terms worship without covenant is worthless tokens of false teachings. I am sorry but without covenant your hope is vein. It is by covenant that the Name of G-d is properly taken and used in worship. Taking the name of G-d or referencing G-d without covenant is one of the definitions of using the name of G-d in vein. So that we can better understand our covenant relationship with G-d so that our worship is not vein we are given a most interesting type to learn and develop a covenantal relationship with G-d. The type of worshiping G-d by covenant is marriage. Marriage according to G-d is the type of covenant we must enter into with him before we can participate in real and beneficial worship. Marriage then is a vital part of our covenant with G-d. It has become very popular to claim a personal relationship with G-d but that is not exactly the manner in which G-d deals with his children. The relationship of importance is a covenant relationship with the L-rd – again the example of such a relationship is the marriage covenant relationship. I would ask at this point – How does G-d feel about a marriage that is not a covenant that he recognizes? The term used anciently is adultery. The short version – is that any covenant that is not authorized by G-d will end when one dies. All covenants that are approved by G-d will continue throughout all time and eternity without end. The second pillar of true worship of G-d is love. Jesus taught that there is a connection to loving and serving G-d and loving our neighbor which is all mankind. This idea of loving mankind as a type of worship of G-d was taught by Jesus on many occasions. Thus we know that loving our neighbor is not removed from loving G-d and is part of the covenant true worshipers’ experience. It is not just loving G-d but having G-dly or G-d like love. Again it is vain to claim to worship the true and living G-d and lack G-dly or G-d like love. Even the fallen angles recognize G-d but refuse his love (as well as covenant) and the love of their neighbors thus their worship (recognition of G-d) is worthless and in vein. The symbolism of love has 4 parts: 1.Heart 2.Might 3.Mind 4.Strength. I leave it as an exercise to the reader to break down these symbols and apply them to love. The Traveler

Just a note: History is little more than a point of view. The battle of the Alamo as a hostory lesson is quite different in classes taught in the USA as compared to what is taugh in Mexico. There is still had feelings among many Mexicans that some of the American heros stole land from the Mexicans that owned it and killed anyone that objected or attempted to defend their porperty or their rights - causing the war in the first place. The Traveler

Interesting - did you know that there is not a single ancient document of Biblical scripture that agrees with you? The ancients did not ever complete the spelling reference to G-d as an integral part of their worship. Do you believe we can learn proper and true worship from the Bible? The Traveler

Because of several posters concern about worship, should man become exalted in heaven - I thought I would start a thread about worship. This seems to be a rather broad brush with which many paint but I am not clear what they are attempting to paint. And so this discussion is now open. What are the methods and things which make up worship? If you would please offer your opinions. I would also like to know what elements of your worship you reserve exclusively for G-d. Several years ago I read an article about the ancient worship of Baal and I was quite amazed and finely understood why so many in Israel thought they could worship both G-d and Baal. I see many similar reflections in modern day worship. The other interesting facet of worship concerns the discussion or debate between the Scribes and Pharisees and Jesus. There was something about what the Pharisees and Scribes saw in the manner in which Jesus worship that convinced them that Jesus should be put to death. As we discuss worship it might be interesting to review what the criticism was – but I thought I would reserve this for later. Also if you would indicate why and how something is worshiped. For example: If you list prayer as a method of worship please indicate what about prayer makes it worship opposed to other forms of communication that include the same elements as does prayer. Like praising someone for their good and kind efforts and praising the L-rd in prayer or other verbalizations. Thanks The Traveler

PC: I regret deeply that I have missed the opportunity to met with you personally and spent some time discussing with you some of your views. Communication over the internet is not the best in such circumstances. Perhaps some time I may make an effort to come visit you and take you and your family to dinner – if any of our old family favorites still exist – or perhaps we may select one of your family favorites. I do not doubt but that you are doing an excellent and inspired work. I believe many are doing inspired work to bring goodness and peace. I count among such a devout Hindu, a very dedicated Buddhist priest involved with the Dali Lama, an Islamic scholar with family and ties and friends in war devastated places like Iraq as well as you. All are certain that G-d has called them and directed them to administer spiritual and physical aid. I believe we are all allies in a desperate struggle facing overwhelming darkness and evil. I know that you and I differ in many key and important ideas including that you expect to find sanctuary and relief from the struggle at the most desperate hour, as does my Islamic friend. In contrast I believe a small stone was cut out from the traditional mountain of religious thinking (when the empire of Iron and clay {Roman empire of medieval and pre-modern Europe} was divided into 10 kingdoms) by the hand of G-d and is quietly rolling forth in our day gathering strength according to prophesy. I believe that to preserve family and the sacred institution of marriage (among other things) as ordained by G-d there will come a time where there will remain only one place for faithful to gather in the house hold of Ephraim as restored by the prediction of ancient prophesy and established by modern prophets ordained by actual face to face encounters with angles known from the past and sent to complete what was started anciently. If I still have breath at what appears as the last desperate hour – I hope to be there. As the ancient prophesies unfold, I fully expect that you will continue and not abandon the cause to which you feel inspired. I am quite sure – as I think you also believe – that there is only one kingdom that will inherit and welcome the King when he returns. The Traveler

I am not against the concept that the ancient church was divided - each with important parts but lacking fullness without the others. This is how I see the religions of our era. It may surprise you to know that I believe that there are likely truths in other faith that need to be learned by the LDS. I do not believe that all that is necessary has been restored to the LDS yet but I believe it will be. I believe that the work or "gathering" will and has begun to take place and that at some point those that gather to accept the return of the Christ will not be divided into denominations or religions. I do not think the faithful Jews, Muslims, Hindu, Christians and Buddhist will divide themselves. But as near as I can determine the LDS are the only possibility of the organization of the kingdom that is necessary for the return of the King. The Traveler BTW the only absolute power that I believe exist - is G-d. The others are pretenders and pretending is and always will be corruption - no exceptions.

The ancient Egyptians had very good concepts of time and temporal relationships – it is just that time was not a consideration for defining eternal as we like to define eternal. The interesting thing to me is that eternal things can be identified and recognized in the now. We do not have to consider its past or future to determine its eternal unchanging nature. Also note from Abraham (closely related to ancient Egyptian concepts) that if something is greater, time is not a factor – it is greater – it’s past or future is not a consideration of its greatness. The question given to LDS concerning becoming G-ds and being equal to G-d is a function of modern thinking without understanding of ancient concepts, G-d is always greater especially when we become equal as we understand present equality. I have come to respect the ancient Egyptians – I could post so many reasons why and I could talk for hours about just their concepts of creation – that look foolish until you do the math and then things get really exciting. The Traveler

The ancient Egyptians had a term for eternal that has somewhat different meaning than what we understand today. Today we think of something eternal as associated with time and lasting for all time. The ancient Egyptians word was something like Ignolum (please pardon my spelling). This definition had nothing to do with time and meant that it could not be created, destroyed or changed from its present state – outside of time. So if a chair was eternal you could not chip it, scratch it or dent it or anything else in the now. The now has no effect on something eternal. To the ancient Egyptians “The now” is all that can exist and there is no dislodging “now from the past or the future. Sorry if this concept is difficult but it has often caused me to wonder – because I think this concept is closer to the concept used by the ancients that pasted on to us their scriptures. The Traveler

I like your analogy of a fall and return. May I expand your thought and perhaps add one other. It is quite evident that the church and organization established by Christ did fall and the result was as much or more pagan (of the world) than of what Christ established (created). The “restoration” of man from his fallen state begins with a covenant we call baptism. Through this covenant fallen man becomes reborn and through the restoration of spiritual rebirth man is changed and becomes a new creature of G-d. Does this mean that the new man will not ever sin and need repentance and forgiveness? No – but it does mean that he has put off his old self and become a new (restored) creature under covenant with G-d. Likewise the Christian church fell and became corrupt. The method of G-d was not a reformation but a restoration. It was necessary for the Christian church to be restored as a new church in the same manner that fallen men become a new creature. The restored church must put off (forsake) its old self and become a new church. Just as many do not want to give up some of their old self – even after their baptism; there are many Christians that hold on to their old denomination and paganized traditions. Likewise just as a newly Baptized saint will sin and must be forgiven; the newly restored Church will also error and require correction and change as specified by G-d. The other matter that you have overlooked is the oath and covenant given by G-d in the restoration of his priesthood. The Traveler

There are event horizons beyond which we cannot see or gather any information. Just as scientist cannot see beyond the horizon of what is referred to as the “Big Bang” we mortal humans are limited to see beyond what is translated from the Old Testament as “The Beginning”. I would, however, speculate about one possible small aspect of things. In Genesis when first speaking of a beginning and creation the reference to divine contribution is plural, implying the contribution of many. Perhaps the beginning of mortal man was a united (one – “ehad”) effort of many working together to initiate a process that had been planned and worked toward for eons to accomplish what we think of as a beginning of all things. Perhaps there is real reason that G-d has such great love and willing to sacrifice for others – perhaps G-d is G-d because of them. I do not suggest this because I know something unknown to everyone else. I only suggest this because I enjoy logic and this to me seems logical. The Traveler

Thank you for your response. In many ways I agree with what you are trying to say. However, as much as I love and respect the brethren and sisters that serve in what are known as the high profile callings, the reality is that one calling is ether greater or it is not. In truth we are told that there are callings greater than other callings – you almost touched on it. To teach the gospel of Christ is the greatest calling. Often the brethren utilize their “high” office to teach the gospel of Christ but even the calling of home teacher has that same responsibility to teach of Christ – as do heads of families. Just as the widow’s mite is greater than the offering of the wealthy – I do believe the response of a young man or young woman to quorum or class secretary is worthy of the L-rd’s concern and attention. The plan of G-d has never been about serving in high profile callings as it has been about serving G-d and man with love, compassion and sacrifice from what-ever one’s station. I stand in awe for all that serve in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, especially those that do so without reorganization or praise except by the L-rd and the angles of heaven. To all of you that serve I give my sincere thanks. The Traveler

If I was a betting person - I would bet that just as the Adam - G-d theory is quoted out of context without any reference to any thing else in the entire volumns of the "Journal of Discourses", that we will soon see quotes removed from their context of this great work as well. The Traveler

I like this idea - I am sure that anyone that really believes that the Atonement of Christ is infinite is not affected by either by their own sins (which are repented of) but they are not affected by the sins of any and all others (including and especially of those that are not repented of). The Traveler

Misshalfway: Please do not think that I do not respect you, I value your opinion - you are so correct - I do not understand and there must be something about my thinking but I do not seem to be able to get at the heart of it. Perhaps you or someone could explain one simple principle to me. How can anyone be one with G-d and not be connected in any way what-so-ever to the worship of him? I believe that if we are indeed "one" with G-d, as we are commanded, we are directly connected to him in every way to every aspect associated (even remotely) to him - without any reservation what-so-ever and that we will gladly proclaim our acceptance of every aspect – regardless of the views and criticisms of the world. If we are not a part of his worship then we know for sure that we are not really one with him. It does appear to me that there are many that do not desire or in reality seek to be one with G-d. And this, my friends - I do not understand from anyone that calls themselves Christian or a believer in the ancient G-d of Abraham proclaimed to us in scripture and by prophets. The Traveler

(see John 10:33) I do not understand why you believe being worshiped is evil and undesirable. If you do not want to seek after something; that is fine with me but you have provided no reason at all for your objection. You have said that you know of no commandment to seek the things of G-d. Paul said to him that knoweth to do good and do it not to him it is sin. I see two possibilities – one: you do not believe that it is good for G-d to be worshiped. (from his point of view) Or two: You have a different understanding of worship than what I understand. I understand worship to be recognition of G-d for his love, mercy and justice and all his acts of love, mercy and justice as well as respect for the covenants I have with him and his position (as king of heaven) in providing the covenant to the citizens of heaven. As a priesthood holder I am commanded to stand as proxy for G-d in the offering of covenants. This I consider my roll as proxy as part of my worship of him. There is honor and respect for offices of the priesthood that I understand I must accept; not because of who I am as much as it is the title and office to which I have been called and appointed. You may see worship in the eternities as something of privilege and means to be “better” and “greater” than others. I see any such thing as a calling of responsibility and service. He who is greatest is the “servant” of all. In general it is my impression that few understand or desire to understand the great responsibility in the covenant that G-d holds. I honor him – I love him and in every way I seek to be like him – no exceptions. I also love him such that I sorrow that anyone should think evil or bad of anything associated with G-d and his desire to share all with those that covenant with him. But if you do not want to be a part of something of G-d – I will not force it upon you nor will I take anything unto myself. I will not limit what G-d can do or his ability to pass on to who he will; anything or any honor. I have not said that it must be but I will not say that it cannot be or should not be. If G-d does or does not command the worship of all g-ds or G-ds of heaven I will accept whatever he commands – without exception. The Traveler

Seeking something that G-d is or does or something he seeks is good. If G-d does something I define that as good. Many may seek to be worshiped but not for the same reason or purpose that G-d does. I do not know all things but I trust and believe in G-d. I do not believe he is a do as I say - not as I do - kind of G-d. I trust him, his methods and all he asks, all that he allows and all that he does. If it is really a part of him - I am comfortable with being a part of him and I seek it - no exceptions - none. You can seek what you will but for me - I seek the goodness of G-d - whatever that is. The Traveler

Just so I am clear - is to be worshiped a evil attribute of G-d and therefore we should not seek such a thing? Should we not seek after all that is good and righteous? For me - everything about G-d is good and should be sought - no exceptions - regardless of any spin by any man or anyone for that matter. The Traveler

The restoration is very much a part of the Last Days. We are in the process of preparing for the second coming of Christ. If you are not personally prepared – I suggest that you make every effort to do so without delay. If you expect and itemized schedule of things from which you will prepare – I think you are making a mistake. The Traveler

Like Prison Chaplin, I am not concerned about taking honors upon myself. I am concerned with the good that we can do for others. Having experienced parenthood I realize that young children will worship their parents through emulation, especially if their parents are goodly as mine were. Acting like or trying to be like, is in my mind the highest form of worship. Perhaps there are misunderstandings of what constitutes worship. For example, we may think of prayer as a form of worship. However, prayer is the only form of communicating with G-d that we can initiate – Would we not want our children to initiate communications with us as parents, asking us for help, directions in their lives, for things they need and thanking us for what we have done for them? As for the concept of “As man is G-d once was and as G-d is man may become.” Jesus is the only example of G-d that man has. It is through Christ (the mediator) that we learn anything and all things about G-d. So let us review the above statement: As man is G-d once was. => As man is Jesus Christ once lived. As we suffer and die so did Christ suffer and die. As G-d is man may become. => As Jesus Christ was raised from the dead and glorified to ascend to heaven to sit on the right hand of G-d the Father so can man be resurrected from the dead and glorified to ascend to heaven to sit at the right hand of G-d. Let me assure you that we should seek after every good thing and that everything about G-d is good. There is not one thing about G-d that is evil and should not be sought. And yet there are some that would tempt us to not seek after all that is good. G-d the Father and his Son, Jesus Christ are indeed the example of all that is good and we should seek in every way to be like them. This is the doctrine as I understand it and I do not know why anyone would pervert such a beautiful concept of shun such a doctrine. For me it is very simple – if something is a true nature and attribute of G-d it is good and we should seek to obtain that goodness – no exceptions – none. This is not uncomfortable to me – it is good news beyond anything that I have ever known and something I am the most comfortable with beyond anything that I have ever heard. I also believe that G-d will not force even his greatest and most valuable goodness on anyone – we will all live in eternity with whatever goodness we are comfortable. The Traveler

Are you sure he was not talking about Satan? The Traveler

Many people have varied ideas about what G-d is. What about your belief of G-d makes you uncomfortable to emulate? The Traveler