Would the church accept me?

[Origen]

Hello everyone.

A few months ago I was lured out of a fast food restaurant by a pair of LDS who took me to their temple and attempted to convert me. At first I was very skeptical but before long I was impressed with the extent to which LDS doctrine agreed with my own independent conclusions I had drawn since I left my birth religion (Jehovah's Witnesses) and began studying the Bible independently. After this initial meeting, I went to a kind of 'catechism' class where I learned more with some other potential converts. The elder who was teaching us said he couldn't believe that, given my beliefs, I had never been involved with or studied the LDS church. He wanted to convert me on the spot, but I told him I had to wait. He suggested I pray over the matter.

That was about 2 months ago. While I have had mystical experiences before, I am a basically a rationalist at heart and so instead of praying, I have spent the past few weeks learning all I can about LDS history, doctrine, and apologetics. I've read many arguments against the LDS, as well as the counter-arguments made by apologists and am now fairly well convinced that Joseph Smith was what he said he was (more or less) and that the LDS church is about as close to 1st century Christianity as any modern church can get.

Which brings me to my current quandry. While I am ready to join the church and get baptized, I am wondering if I will be accepted. Though I basically agree with most of your doctrines I have always been of a liberal mindset and cannot personally endorse the following:

1. Gay marriage should be banned.

2. Kids and teens should not masturbate.

3. Drinking tea is sinful.

I would like to note for the record that I am not gay, I hardly ever masturbate, and I don't really like tea but, all the same, I cannot participate in making others feel guilty for doing these things for the simple reason that I do not believe them to be sinful. I have no desire to debate the matter here or anywhere else. All I would like to know is if the LDS Church would accept someone with liberal views, but who otherwise agrees with the church's fundamental beliefs.

Edited February 6, 2011 by Origen

[Mahonri]

I also believe that prayer is fundamental for you.

It is the only way we can truly repent and it is essential for us to return to live with Our Heavenly Father.

Once prayer becomes a part of you and you make and keep baptismal covenants, then personal revelation can flow. Then, there won't be anymore questions in your mind about homosexual marriage, masturbation and tea drinking. You will know where the Lord stands and your desire will be to stand with Him.

The Church is open to all who will come unto Christ.

God bless you as you prayerfully enter into sacred holy covenants to follow our Savior.

[Mute]

Hello everyone.

A few months ago I was lured out of a fast food restaurant by a pair of LDS who took me to their temple and attempted to convert me. At first I was very skeptical but before long I was impressed with the extent to which LDS doctrine agreed with my own independent conclusions I had drawn since I left my birth religion (Jehovah's Witnesses) and began studying the Bible independently. After this initial meeting, I went to a kind of 'catechism' class where I learned more with some other potential converts. The elder who was teaching us said he couldn't believe that, given my beliefs, I had never been involved with or studied the LDS church. He wanted to convert me on the spot, but I told him I had to wait. He suggested I pray over the matter.

That was about 2 months ago. While I have had mystical experiences before, I am a basically a rationalist at heart and so instead of praying, I have spent the past few weeks learning all I can about LDS history, doctrine, and apologetics. I've read many arguments against the LDS, as well as the counter-arguments made by apologists and am now fairly well convinced that Joseph Smith was what he said he was (more or less) and that the LDS church is about as close to 1st century Christianity as any modern church can get.

Which brings me to my current quandry. While I am ready to join the church and get baptized, I am wondering if I will be accepted. Though I basically agree with most of your doctrines I have always been of a liberal mindset and cannot personally endorse the following:

1. Gay marriage should be banned.

2. Kids and teens should not masturbate.

3. Drinking tea is sinful.

I would like to note for the record that I am not gay, I hardly ever masturbate, and I don't really like tea but, all the same, I cannot participate in making others feel guilty for doing these things for the simple reason that I do not believe them to be sinful. I have no desire to debate the matter here or anywhere else. All I would like to know is if the LDS Church would accept someone with liberal views, but who otherwise agrees with the church's fundamental beliefs.

That is a good question and one I do not know the answer to. I know you can't get a temple recommend if you drink tea or masturbate or at least are not trying to quit them. So I would assume it would be the same for being allowed to be baptized.

[Dravin]

That is a good question and one I do not know the answer to. I know you can't get a temple recommend if you drink tea or masturbate or at least are not trying to quit them. So I would assume it would be the same for being allowed to be baptized.

One of the Baptismal Interview question is the following:

You have been taught that membership in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints includes living gospel standards. What do you understand of the following standards? Are you willing to obey them?

a. The law of chastity, which prohibits any sexual relationship outside the bonds of a legal

marriage between a man and a woman.

b. The law of tithing.

c. The Word of Wisdom.

d. The Sabbath day, including partaking of the sacrament weekly and rendering service to

fellow members.

Gay marriage and masturbation probably wouldn't come up (the first isn't mentioned and what the missionaries teach about and what the interviewer would expect to hear about concerning the Law of Chastity would be their understanding as it pertains to sexual relations with others and possibly pornography)*, but I imagine the unwillingness to accept the Word of Wisdom as binding revelation would come up and cause problems.

* I'm not suggesting one be coy, just that if someone went into the interview the subjects wouldn't necessarily come to light.

Consider the OP hasn't prayed about the matter there is possibly an earlier question preventing baptism:

Do you believe the Church and gospel of Jesus Christ have been restored through the Prophet Joseph Smith? Do you believe that [current Church President] is a prophet of God? What does this mean to you?

Edited February 6, 2011 by Dravin

[Just_A_Guy]

1. Gay marriage should be banned.

There are plenty of Mormons who opposed Prop 8 in California and haven't suffered any official repercussions.

2. Kids and teens should not masturbate.

Like Dravin says, it doesn't come up often; so you may be able to fit in under a sort of "don't ask, don't tell" policy. But the Church's position is what it is, and frankly I'm not sure it's a good idea being baptized if one isn't going to make a sincere effort to conform to the standards of living the Church teaches.

3. Drinking tea is sinful.

You don't have to believe it's sinful per se. You just have to personally be willing to abstain from it as an outward sign of the covenants you make with God through baptism. Sort of like ancient Israel was forbidden from eating pork--not because pigs are evil, but because God wanted to impose some standards that would constantly remind His followers that they were a "peculiar people".

I agree with Mahonri, though, that if you view Mormonism through a solely rationalist lens it isn't going to do you much good. The whole point of Mormonism is to help you to commune with God in a more meaningful way.

Edited February 6, 2011 by Just_A_Guy

[unixknight]

1. Gay marriage should be banned.

2. Kids and teens should not masturbate.

3. Drinking tea is sinful.

I don't have a whole lot to add to the wisdom already presented in this thread* except to say that whenever I hear someone expressing discomfort at the Church's policies/doctrines when they conflict with secular/popular standards is that essentially those people are disappointed that God's Church isn't conforming to the standards of the world. You see it happen in the Scriptures all the time; the common worldly view is one thing and God's people are set apart from it by their beliefs.

If you receive a testimony from the Spirit that the Church is true, then that should be the source for one's moral standards. Would it be easier if the Church said "Ok well a lot of people really believe gay marriage should be allowed so we're just gonna back down on that?" Sure it'd be easier... But that would also be proof positive that the Church isn't truly of God, because Heavenly Father ALONE should guide Church doctrine, and not what fits the populist notions of right and wrong.

Might God someday have the Church open itself to gay marriage? I suppose anything's possible, but as I said, only God can do that. It isn't the job of the Church to conform to the shifting tides of popular morality.

As for masturbation... The way I've explained it to my sons is that indulging in it is like any other physical indulgence... like eating too much, eating or drinking things that are bad for you, etc. They aren't necessarily the kinds of things that are spirit crushing sins or anything, but every time we give in to carnal desires we make it harder to connect spiritually with God and with our fellow brothers and sisters. Would I advise someone to go running to the Bishop to beg for help if he occasionally pleasures himself in the shower? Well no, not necessarily. We are, after all, imperfect humans striving to do our best to be as close to perfection as we can, but we aren't going to get there. It's the effort and the journey that counts. Just do your best. And when you stumble try not to be discouraged. Get back up and recommit yourself. No biggie.

Tea... well I've heard a lot of different points of view on that. Some abstain from tea altogether, some drink only herbal tea, some see certain types of tea as okay and some not. I am not an authority on the matter but since you're not really into tea that much I guess it's not that much of an issue for you. Basically when it comes to the Word of Wisdom and things like coffee and tea I don't know why they're forbidden to us, but in the 1830s and 1840s they didn't know why tobacco was forbidden either. (In fact, the medical community at that time believed that things like tobacco, opium and cocaine were of medical benefit!) It wasn't until years later that more was known. In the meantime, faith kept them away from those things. For now, who knows what tomorrow might bring when it comes to coffee and tea?

I wish you the best in your decision. At the end of the day, prayer really is the best way to find the truth because only God can provide information to you in an unbiased, unfiltered way. None of us can do that. The media can't do that. Books can't do that.

But if you want to know simply "will the Church accept you?" the simplest answer is "yes."

*Sorry for the long post... Maybe I had more to add than I thought...

Edited February 6, 2011 by unixknight

[Backroads]

A few months ago I was lured out of a fast food restaurant by a pair of LDS who took me to their temple and attempted to convert me.

Are you sure they took you to the temple? I have trouble believing this.

At first I was very skeptical but before long I was impressed with the extent to which LDS doctrine agreed with my own independent conclusions I had drawn since I left my birth religion (Jehovah's Witnesses) and began studying the Bible independently. After this initial meeting, I went to a kind of 'catechism' class where I learned more with some other potential converts. The elder who was teaching us said he couldn't believe that, given my beliefs, I had never been involved with or studied the LDS church. He wanted to convert me on the spot, but I told him I had to wait. He suggested I pray over the matter.

It's nice to find organized religion that matches your personal views. I'm personally not surprised you haven't run into the LDS stuff before, but hey. As for trying to convert you on the spot, some elders are zealous. I'm a little surprised they took you to a class like that as far as I know missionaries don't really do that. Then again, I'm really not too familiar with what missionaries do, so... yeah.

A few months ago I was lured out of a fast food restaurant by a pair of LDS who took me to their temple and attempted to convert me.

That was about 2 months ago. While I have had mystical experiences before, I am a basically a rationalist at heart and so instead of praying, I have spent the past few weeks learning all I can about LDS history, doctrine, and apologetics. I've read many arguments against the LDS, as well as the counter-arguments made by apologists and am now fairly well convinced that Joseph Smith was what he said he was (more or less) and that the LDS church is about as close to 1st century Christianity as any modern church can get.

Excellent things to study, though I really think if you're sincerely interested in joining the church you better have a spiritual connection.

A few months ago I was lured out of a fast food restaurant by a pair of LDS who took me to their temple and attempted to convert me.

Which brings me to my current quandry. While I am ready to join the church and get baptized, I am wondering if I will be accepted. Though I basically agree with most of your doctrines I have always been of a liberal mindset and cannot personally endorse the following:

1. Gay marriage should be banned.

2. Kids and teens should not masturbate.

3. Drinking tea is sinful.

I'm actually a supporter of gay marriage myself, or at least some sort of other legal union. Plenty of Mormons feel the same way. My only thing is that I don't think the government should be allowed to tell churches who they must and must not marry.

Masturbation... I don't know if I feel it should be lauded as a thing they should do, but I've never seen it as a sin akin to other sexual sins.

Tea... really, it's more of a commandment thing than a total sin. I love the idea of tea. Honestly, the only thing drinking it does is give you an issue when the Word of Wisdom stuff comes up at a temple recommend interview.

I would like to note for the record that I am not gay, I hardly ever masturbate, and I don't really like tea but, all the same, I cannot participate in making others feel guilty for doing these things for the simple reason that I do not believe them to be sinful. I have no desire to debate the matter here or anywhere else. All I would like to know is if the LDS Church would accept someone with liberal views, but who otherwise agrees with the church's fundamental beliefs.

Fair enough on the debating. I don't think I have anything I can really debate with you on those three things.

There's actually a good number of liberals in the LDS church. There's a stereotype of church members that certainly applies in many cases, but I think that by dropping expectations of how members think and act you'll be pleasantly surprised at the variety within the church.

[Traveler]

Hello everyone.

A few months ago I was lured out of a fast food restaurant by a pair of LDS who took me to their temple and attempted to convert me. At first I was very skeptical but before long I was impressed with the extent to which LDS doctrine agreed with my own independent conclusions I had drawn since I left my birth religion (Jehovah's Witnesses) and began studying the Bible independently. After this initial meeting, I went to a kind of 'catechism' class where I learned more with some other potential converts. The elder who was teaching us said he couldn't believe that, given my beliefs, I had never been involved with or studied the LDS church. He wanted to convert me on the spot, but I told him I had to wait. He suggested I pray over the matter.

That was about 2 months ago. While I have had mystical experiences before, I am a basically a rationalist at heart and so instead of praying, I have spent the past few weeks learning all I can about LDS history, doctrine, and apologetics. I've read many arguments against the LDS, as well as the counter-arguments made by apologists and am now fairly well convinced that Joseph Smith was what he said he was (more or less) and that the LDS church is about as close to 1st century Christianity as any modern church can get.

Which brings me to my current quandry. While I am ready to join the church and get baptized, I am wondering if I will be accepted. Though I basically agree with most of your doctrines I have always been of a liberal mindset and cannot personally endorse the following:

1. Gay marriage should be banned.

2. Kids and teens should not masturbate.

3. Drinking tea is sinful.

I would like to note for the record that I am not gay, I hardly ever masturbate, and I don't really like tea but, all the same, I cannot participate in making others feel guilty for doing these things for the simple reason that I do not believe them to be sinful. I have no desire to debate the matter here or anywhere else. All I would like to know is if the LDS Church would accept someone with liberal views, but who otherwise agrees with the church's fundamental beliefs.

I will respond to your objecion #1. First off you have the objection backwards. Gay marriage is not a long standing tradition that the LDS are trying to force a change. What we are talking about is an attempt to replace how many thousands years of tradition and family with a new priority under the force of law.

I personal do not object what any person does in private. But if private things are to be made public with an expectation that society support and encourage behavior then I believe there should be some discussion about what benefit will be granted to society.

The benefit of current marriage tradition is to garentee a next generation. However, I see no benefit to society in gay marriage. In fact when I have asked the question from supporters of gay marriage - rather than provide a benefit I am threatened and accused of all manner of things. But not even a hint of a honest benefit to society.

If you have a pressing need that is currently missing in society because of marriage based around children and biological families I would gladly hear your opinion. But if you have been convinced that seeking personal pleasures is the answer to solving human proplems - I simply will thank you for your opinion and wish you all the "luck" possible with such a attitude.

The Traveler

[unixknight]

I personal do not object what any person does in private. But if private things are to be made public with an expectation that society support and encourage behavior then I believe there should be some discussion about what benefit will be granted to society.

This is important. Not to get into an anti-gay marriage rant here, but one of the big points raised by supporters of gay marriage when it first hit the media bigtime is the assertion that "Noting will change about society, just gay people will have equal marriage status."

The truth is there are a lot of changes. In Washington DC and in Boston Catholic adoption agencies, long partnered with city governments to place children in loving homes, are having to close down rather than be forced by the Government to place children in gay couples' homes in violation of their beliefs. Or what about the professional photographer in Arizona who was sued - successfully - for refusing to photograph a lesbian wedding. She wasn't the only wedding photographer in town and yet she was targeted and financially destroyed for daring to adhere to her beliefs.

Or what about Sweden, where a politician is trying to have preachers who don't perform gay marriages banned from performing weddings at all?

How about the public school in Massachusetts that started introducing teaching materials into the classroom normalizing gay couples to children, not only refusing to inform parents of this but ignoring their objections when the truth came out?

By opposing these things, the LDS Church (as well as the Catholic Church and other Christian denominations) are not trying to subjugate homosexuals or control them. They're essentially protecting themselves and their members from forced changes by a society that is trying to take the moral highground and override the freedom of religion. Personally, I don't care who people spend their nights with, but I refuse to take society's word for it over the Church, which I have a testimony of.

Edited February 6, 2011 by unixknight

[pam]

Are you sure they took you to the temple? I have trouble believing this.

Many non lds don't understand the difference between meetinghouses and temples. I've heard many refer to meetinghouses as temples.

[unixknight]

Many non lds don't understand the difference between meetinghouses and temples. I've heard many refer to meetinghouses as temples.

Or maybe a temple visitor's center?

[O2BNSD]

Many non lds don't understand the difference between meetinghouses and temples. I've heard many refer to meetinghouses as temples.

It's possible the OP was taken to the Visitor's Center at a Temple. That is a wonderful place to introduce someone to the Church & the filmstrips are so informative.

[Backroads]

Thanks, everyone. I had the weirdest mental image in my head and I needed some clarification.

[pam]

It's possible the OP was taken to the Visitor's Center at a Temple. That is a wonderful place to introduce someone to the Church & the filmstrips are so informative.

Very true but I'm more inclined to think a meetinghouse.

[Origen]

Thank you, everyone, for your replies.

Just to clear up a few things:

I am not in support of forcing any religion or sect to bless gay marriage. My endorsement of it is simply in secular terms. I believe the government should extend whatever legal benefits it gives to commited heterosexual couples to homosexual couples as well. Now whether God approves of homosexual marriage is a completely seperate issue that the various churches in this country will have to decide for themselves. It seems clear to me that God intended the sexes to mingle, but since some people (probably less than 1% of the population) seem utterly incapable of feeling anything for the opposite sex, I would rather see these people in commited relationships and raising families, than engaging in promiscuous sex and spreading diseases.

On masturbation: I basically share Dr. Wilhelm Reich's opinion on the matter which is that the practice is normal and healthy for children and adolescents and only becomes a problem for adults who use it as a substitute for entering into a relationship with someone and starting a family. Yes, it is selfish, but so is scratching an itch or eating a cake. It's always better to share pleasurable things with another, but being alone is no vice so long as you aren't depriving another person. Since an adult would be depriving another person, it is probably not a good idea for them.

I don't really care about the tea or coffee issue. I don't drink either, I just think it would be silly to transform my personal preference into moral superiority. Of course, high amounts of caffiene are unhealthy but then it's really just an issue of moderation, not abstinence. I suspect Just_a_Guy probably has the right idea here: it's just a way to distinguish LDS from non LDS, keeping them mindful of who they are.

Yes, hard as it is to believe these two young men did take me into the temple. Maybe they wanted to impress me. It worked. I was very impressed by the warm vibes within. Even though we were the only ones there I could already sense that the people who use that temple are like an extended family. I may be a rationalist, but simple intellectual agreement alone could never motivate me to join a church. I think the most remarkable thing about the Mormons is not their unorthodox beliefs, but their positive emotions and agape.

Finally, I well aware of how much a personal relationship with God through prayer is emphasized in your religion and in fact that is one of the things that attracted me. As a Jehovah's Witness, when I told an elder that I could talk to God in prayer, he responded that I must either be deluded or decieved by Satan. He insisted that God would never condescend to communicate with a nobody like me. To put it mildly, I was shocked by his reaction. By then I had already read books by people like Saint John of the Cross, Madam Guyon, and many others. These people weren't insane and some of them were saints. None of them seemed to think it was odd to feel God's presence during prayer or even to occassionally recieve a personal revelation from him. Looking back on it, I believe he was simply afraid that if anyone could pray to God and recieve an answer, the entire edifice of organized religion would come tumbling down. Who needs the equivalent of a pope or church president when the all-knowing one is on line #1?

To be honest, that's actually the view I took for a very long time. I saw organized religion as a scam designed to milk money from people by convincing them that God was too busy to speak to them directly and delegated his authority to special humans. But then I relaized it could be very lonely being spiritual in a world of atheists and nihilists. There are actually very few SECULAR humanists in this era. Most people who have any sense of honor or decency at all are also religious to some degree. I just didn't want to be taken for a sucker either, so I avoided the issue until those two missionaries invited me to their temple.

I don't think your current prophet in infallible (no prophet is in my opinion) but I also understand that having a central authority is necessary in order to keep the church together. As a counter-example look at the Anglican Communion: they DON'T have a central authority (except for the Queen, who doesn't care) and look what's happened to them! So even if I don't necessarily agree with everything your current prophet says, I will respect his authority enough to pipe down and not raise total hell.

I think all religious institutions have their flaws and are vulnerable to corruption and exploitation. But if I am going to join one of them I figure, hell, it may as well be the LDS.

Edited February 6, 2011 by Origen

[Backroads]

Thanks for your thoughts. I always enjoy seeing spiritual views.

I'm still a little bewildered on the temple thing, though I suppose they could have taken you into a waiting room or perhaps the opening foyer. See, it's rather impossible to take you any further if you did not have a temple recommend.

[Just_A_Guy]

Or, depending on the location, an open house for a newly constructed temple.

[Backroads]

Or, depending on the location, an open house for a newly constructed temple.

In that case why would they be the only ones there?

[prospectmom]

Backroads why are you so fixated on that one part??? There was so much said and your still stuck on that

[LocalFarms]

On masturbation: I basically share Dr. Wilhelm Reich's opinion on the matter which is that the practice is normal and healthy for children and adolescents and only becomes a problem for adults who use it as a substitute for entering into a relationship with someone and starting a family. Yes, it is selfish, but so is scratching an itch or eating a cake. It's always better to share pleasurable things with another, but being alone is no vice so long as you aren't depriving another person. Since an adult would be depriving another person, it is probably not a good idea for them.

We only do as adults the things we learned were correct as children. Thusly, if we were taught as children that masturbation is apropriate, we will continue in the practice as adults, to the detriment of our love lives, prospective spouses, and children who have yet to be born.

[bytebear]

Backroads why are you so fixated on that one part??? There was so much said and your still stuck on that

It is a little odd, and I suspect he went to a chapel and not a temple, so I think it's fair to have it clarified. Missionaries do not teach at temples, but they do at chapels.

Did the building look like this?

Google Image Result for http://farm1.static.flickr.com/24/52302238_17d27478f6.jpg

or this?

Google Image Result for http://es.mormonwiki.com/wiki/images/0/09/Sacramento_lds_mormon_temple.jpg

At any rate, I think the issues have been addressed fairly well, and it really becomes a matter of you committing to covenant through Baptism to follow the Gospel of Jesus Christ (as defined by the LDS Church)?

[Origen]

I'm still a little bewildered on the temple thing, though I suppose they could have taken you into a waiting room or perhaps the opening foyer. See, it's rather impossible to take you any further if you did not have a temple recommend.

Well, it had pews and it was very large. Isn't that what a temple is? It looked like the 1st picture you linked to.

We only do as adults the things we learned were correct as children. Thusly, if we were taught as children that masturbation is apropriate, we will continue in the practice as adults, to the detriment of our love lives, prospective spouses, and children who have yet to be born.

Well, you do have a point there. It's just hard for me to imagine someone choosing masturbation over having sex with someone they love and are attracted to. Though I suppose it can happen. Isn't that why pornography is such a problem for some couples? I really don't understand... though I guess I don't have to understand in order to acknowledge that it exists. I did know a man who viewed pornography even though he had a very attractive wife. I never understood why...

[Backroads]

Backroads why are you so fixated on that one part??? There was so much said and your still stuck on that

Because it strikes me as a little odd that missionaries would teach in a temple, even an open house. I think he was confused and wound up in a chapel if it was the first picture... which is a meeting house that would have a chapel.

Edited February 7, 2011 by Backroads

[bytebear]

Well, it had pews and it was very large. Isn't that what a temple is? It looked like the 1st picture you linked to.

Nope, that was a chapel. It is where we do our weekly Sunday services.

[prospectmom]

In Jesus time wern't Chapels and Temples the same thing??