I'm a confused investigator

[Vort]

I think it's important to be concise in the places where we can be concise.

Did you mean "precise"?

Just being precise...

[Spartan117]

Five people stood trial for it. They were acquitted despite massive amounts of evidence that they were guilty, but they did stand trial. Don't mean to split hairs here, but I think it's important to be concise in the places where we can be concise.

Not splitting hairs, and you are 100% right. In another instance there were 4 men who were indicted but who fled and never stood trial. I did not make myself clear. Apologies.

[beefche]

MODERATOR POST:

Let the moderators worry about trolls or others who have not so good intentions. If one has an issue with a particular post, then report that post.

We are to treat all new people with respect and understanding. We do not assume the worst of people when posting questions.

[Spartan117]

Understood.

[cooling]

The one you specifically responded to with the accusation of anti-mormonism where I was rapid firing questions like that wasn't because I was asking those specific questions. I was just trying to figure out why we didn't have answers to those questions. It was all really the question of what it means to be a prophet and why God hasn't used the prophet to clear up the hazy spots in doctrine. I actually got a good answer to that from another poster (the one with the owl avatar whose name is eluding me and whose post is too far back for me to see while replying).

I'm sure you get plenty of visitors to the board who just want to convert you or tell you you're wrong or whatever. I get being on the defensive. I also know that I'm super ADHD and things that make sense and tie together in a smooth logical train of thought to me can seem like I'm bouncing around in a billion different directions with zero rhyme or reason to a less scattered brain. If you want to answer questions and would prefer them in a less spastic format then I would be happy to make a list. I would love to hear your answers, and if that makes it easier to hear those answers then that's easy enough for me to do. For the record, not that you have to believe me, but I want to make the following clear:

I am NOT anti-mormon or ex-mormon or post-mormon or trolling for fun. If I wanted to discuss ex-mormon ideas I'd go to the ex-mormon website. I'm not twelve years old, so I don't find trolling amusing and wouldn't want to participate in it (nor would I have the time and energy to post this many posts if I didn't really want to learn)

I am genuine in my questions, but since most of my questions don't have definite answers I tend to follow up with more questions. It's how I learn. It drove my teachers nuts, but I was a straight-A student despite the ADHD because I was a pain in the butt with a billion questions.

I have zero ill-will towards the Mormon Church and I especially have none towards actual Mormons. I don't live in a Mormon-heavy location, but the handful of Mormons I know are some of my best friends and some of the nicest people I know.

I appreciate and take in every answer that's given. Even if I feel like it's not exactly an answer, I'm still taking your opinion and adding it to what I already know to hopefully form a new and better answer for myself. That's really my only purpose for being here and asking all these questions. If that's bothering everyone I can go back to researching through books and the internet and stuff. I just liked having the back-and-forth interaction on some of this stuff that nags at me. That is all. I like your religion. I think it's fascinating and I want to understand it better. I sincerely apologize if my attempts to understand have come across as combative though. I'll work on that.

[cooling]

Did you mean "precise"?

Haha. Well played. I stand corrected as well.

[Spartan117]

I'm sure you get plenty of visitors to the board who just want to convert you or tell you you're wrong or whatever. I get being on the defensive. I also know that I'm super ADHD and things that make sense and tie together in a smooth logical train of thought to me can seem like I'm bouncing around in a billion different directions with zero rhyme or reason to a less scattered brain.

I usually am the first one to jump on the frontlines around here. I'm still very new and trying to fix that. I apologize for dismissing your questions without giving you the benefit of the doubt, AND for assuming your intentions.

[cooling]

I usually am the first one to jump on the frontlines around here. I'm still very new and trying to fix that. I apologize for dismissing your questions without giving you the benefit of the doubt, AND for assuming your intentions.

No worries. I fully understand being on the defensive. I'm not even a member of the church and just from investigating I've seen how much anti-Mormon sentiment is out there. I imagine that having that much hate spewed at you about your faith makes you suspicious of newcomers. No harm, no foul. I don't take it personally at all.

[Spartan117]

No worries. I fully understand being on the defensive. I'm not even a member of the church and just from investigating I've seen how much anti-Mormon sentiment is out there. I imagine that having that much hate spewed at you about your faith makes you suspicious of newcomers. No harm, no foul. I don't take it personally at all.

Thank you. I've been put on a leave of absence fom the welcoming party until I complete my recert training. This will definitely effett my GPA

[HiJolly]

I had no idea that Mormon Doctrine was so dismissed by the church. I heard that it was no longer published (the copy I have is super old) and that there are some things in there that had to be changed a few times, but I wasn't aware that it had been basically recalled. That's crazy.

It was never recalled. President McKay did not do it, though he thought about it and discussed it for a time with his counselors.

Okay, so even though he was a prophet and the church accepts official proclamations from the prophets to be doctrine (allowing for continuing revelation, of course) nothing he said before he officially took the role of prophet counts as doctrine? I'm just trying to clarify.

The proclamation has to be from the First Presidency in toto. You didn't read very carefully. The statement explicitly states that no one man declares doctrine. Not even THE prophet.

So do these guys go through any special training or anointing or anything to become the living prophet?

Yes, they live their life under a microscope & then have to get really old before they get a chance. Tough gig.

When I read about the beginnings of the religion (like the first 50 years or so) there were prophecies all over the place and revelation all the time. I can't really find any examples of revelation since the blacks in the priesthood thing back in the 70's. Is this because the living prophet no longer speaks directly for God?

It is because none of the prophets have been like Joseph. He was in a class by himself. The others are really good men whom God speaks to once in a while, when it's needed (or sometimes overdue, to be honest). Otherwise they get revelation just like anyone with the Holy Ghost indwelling would.

Someone earlier in the thread mentioned that there was now a process wherein the entire first presidency had to mull over and approve of any revelation before it was made official. Am I misunderstanding what that means? Wouldn't any revelation direct from God to his chosen prophet just be official?

Nope. AND -- for a revelation to be *scripture*, the whole Church has to vote on it. It just kills me that it would basically be a rubber stamp, but that's the reality of it. Only the dissenters would really *think* about it. Oh, OK, and maybe some intellectuals.

Sorry, I know I'm being a pain in the butt. There's just so much that I don't understand.

No worries. Just keep in mind that we are not the Borg. We differ in all kinds of opinions.

As you've seen.

HiJolly

[JudoMinja]

This will definitely effett my GPA

You get a GPA on here?! What's mine!?!

cooling:

You bring up some GREAT points, and ones I have thought about often myself. You are very right that the heart is what really matters.

1 Samuel 16:7 "But the Lord said unto Samuel, Look not on his countenance, or on the height of his stature; because I have refused him: for the Lord seeth not as man seeth; for man looketh on the outward appearance, but the Lord looketh on the heart."

I personally adhere to the LDS church, because I believe that it truly is the Lord's restored church on the earth today. I believe it contains the most truth that can be found anywhere on the earth, be it through religion or science. I believe that the prophet really is called of God and that He will speak through His prophets to give us more revelation when the time comes. I believe that I am required to "make and keep sacred covenants" and that if I do not act on the truth I have found, my opportunity will have been lost. So, I have been baptised by proper Priesthood authority and continue to strive for perfection by enduring to the end.

My journey does not end here. I do not stop in my search for truth, and I go to many sources for my information. Not just the church. I am an avid studyer of science and other religions, and I have especially found much truth in eastern religions and the study of geology and ecology. I have found though, as have you, that I am constantly brought back to LDS teachings. Everything seems to connect and make sense when I put it in the context of LDS doctrine. The more I search, the more I learn, expand, and grow.

There are wonderful people who do wonderful things in many religions, taking many paths. And there are bad apples even here where I have aligned myself. I have seen people with temple recommends who are not very good people. And I have seen people accomplish and teach me amazing things that have never taken part in our sacred ordinances. Where you and I are different lies simply in our origins. I was born into the church and raised with its teachings. I have been studying them for my entire life, though it has only been in recent years that I truly pledged my heart and soul to this church. I feel though, that I have been called to look for truth in all things, and that these teachings help me bind them all together.

You are not ready to make a commitment, and that is okay. You should know in your heart, mind, and soul that this is what the Lord wants of you before making a commitment. I think that many converts end up falling away because they jumped into baptism without really understanding what they were getting into, what they were aligning themselves with. If you can know that this is where you should be, without doubt, then nothing will lead you astray. When you have these questions, you will be able to accept that these are things you just do not yet know or understand and it will eventually be revealed unto you, so long as you seek with a humble and honest heart.

Then again, you may never join this church. Your path may be different. We have at least one poster here who understands much of our faith but follows a different path. There is nothing wrong with that. We all have something different that the Lord would have us accomplish. He has a unique plan for each of us, something of divine design that only YOU can accomplish. If you are feeling driven to study and find the truth in all religions, I think you should continue to do so, and the Lord will direct your path for good.

[HiJolly]

From one ADD to an ADHD (I don't think Hyper happens after 50) ----

JudoMinja-- I get what you're saying completely. I guess I have issues with things where I can read and pray and the answers I get every time are not in accordance with the current official stance of the church. I have searched and searched, both in books and in my soul. None of what I'm writing below is meant to insult anyone's beliefs or argue what's "true" or not. I've asked God about many things, and these are the answers I get back without fail:

I was born & raised in the Church. I am as you are about these things -- clearly some things in the Church are not what they could be. Yes I love the Church and my membership in it has NEVER really separated me from the Truth. There was a time it seemed like it, but that was just my perspective getting in the way. Seeing through a glass, darkly...

1. The WoW should never have been made a requirement of salvation. Coffee and beer are not keystones on which your salvation has ever or will ever be decided. The contents of your heart are far more important than the contents of your stomach.

Agreed, but I think I understand why the leadership did it. I also think that keeping the WoW does not damage my spiritual self, as long as I keep in mind why it's there. So, I keep it as closely as any sane LDS person would. My wife tells me I eat too much meat, and I guess she's right on that.

2. All the temple endowment stuff is for the sake of man. What I do hear from God though is that no man's salvation is affected by having their endowments on an eternal level.

Well, it *can* be influenced by the endowment, since so much of the eternities is affected by our mortal sojourn and our attitudes developed here. And the endowment, given to a faithful and trusting LDS member, works a wonder in the mind & heart.

These ceremonies, much like the ceremonies in any religion, are a tool to help you reach the deep spiritual level where you can learn to dedicate yourself to your salvation and listen for the voice of God when he speaks. You can be endowed and life-time full-tithe payer and sealed to your wife and follow the law of chastity and the WoW and never miss a Sunday at church, but if you're mean, selfish, and make those around you unhappy then you're less qualified to exaltation than an agnostic who spreads joy and happiness. Once again, the contents of your heart are what matters.

I hear you but!! Think of the promises that **happen** for the faithful. Joseph said that happiness is the design & object of our existence. Nephi said that we are here to have JOY. These are actuated and delivered as we obey the Gospel law, only one component of the temple ceremony. There is a LOT more.

It's one thing to intellectually understand what's going on. It's profoundly life changing to actually live it.

3. There are many paths to God. We all have "One True Path" but it's not the same path for everyone. You are all happy in the Mormon church because it is your path. It's the way that you better yourself and find spiritual fulfillment and learn to be righteous and find your way back to the kingdom of God. You have found a clearly laid out path from point A to point B and you want to share that knowledge with everyone you know.

Very good summation.

What I hear from God when I pray about this though is that just because we're all trying to get to point B doesn't mean we all start at point A. We are all different people and if we listen then God will lead us to the path that will bring us home to him. I've asked him to show me my path and I've been told on no uncertain circumstances that my path is one of exploration and learning and sharing and growing. Settling down in a religion, no matter how good the church was, would cause a sort of spiritual stagnation in me.

Now you're starting to sound like Joseph Campbell, may he rest in glory. Too much of a maverick to settle for one system of faith. Love the guy, he was awesome. Hero-Thousand-Faces-Joseph-Campbell

My path is not a common one, but it's not any more right or more wrong than anyone elses.

And only you can know that, unless God tells me for some odd reason...

I can't follow a single doctrine because when I stop exploring and seeking truth with an open heart then my spiritual growth will stop. Saying I'm a member of any specific religion and that I believe in the doctrine completely means that I can't truly explore other faiths with an open mind and an open heart.

I will disagree with you there. This is not a religion of the 'book', nor do we have any creed (though many members act like we do). A quote from Joseph Smith:

"WE SHOULD GATHER ALL THE GOOD AND TRUE PRINCIPLES IN THE WORLD AND TREASURE THEM UP, OR WE SHALL NOT COME OUT TRUE MORMONS." (TPJS, p. 316.)

He (Joseph) also said:

"If I revealed all that has been made known to me, scarcely a man on this stand would stay with me." and "Brethren, if I were to tell you all I know of the kingdom of God, I do know that you would rise up and kill me."

The balance between these two ideas makes for a very interesting life!

4. There's something in the LDS faith that I need

to learn in order to grow. I've studied numerous faiths but I find myself

drawn to the Mormon teachings over and over again, like I'm not done with

them yet and I need to learn more. If I seem frustrated when I inquire here

it's because I sometimes get frustrated because I feel like there's all this

knowledge here that I can't quite nail down yet. There's more to it, but in

the interest of not writing a novel I'll stick with those four. Basically, I

know that I need to keep studying the Book of Mormon and all the various

histories of the church, and finding stories of faith and testimony.

Something really important to my spiritual growth is here amongst the

members of this church. I'm just trying to quiet my mind enough to hear

what that is.

Very good.

I'm willing to talk with you for a very long time, I think.

HiJolly

Edited September 7, 2011 by HiJolly

[NoGreaterLove]

Okay... Well the first one that I'm having a rough time with is the whole teaching about men becoming gods. I have a copy of Gospel Principles from the '70s and in it there are numerous references to how we will become gods and have our own spirit children in the CK. From what I read I believed that the church taught that our entire reason for leaving the CK in the first place was so that we could progress to the next stage of development, which was godhood. We couldn't achieve that growth without testing ourselves first on earth. It's all pretty plainly laid out in the older literature from the church, but I feel like the past twenty years have seen a lot of waffling on the controversial issues, and I find it a little sad. When I first read the story of the pre-existence and the ultimate goal of returning and being exalted as gods I thought it was really interesting and unique. But now when I try and ask about it I get told that we can become like gods but not actual gods. That doesn't make any sense to me. The way I understood it when I read about it was that we would still answer to our Heavenly Father, as he would still be our creator, but we would be gods responsible for making our own creations once we became exalted. So if that teaching changed, why did it change? I feel like it used to be official doctrine, but now it's just speculation. What changed that? And if doctrine can become speculation, then how do we know what doctrine is actually doctrine?

Using the King James Version of the bible, I will post a few things that will help you to understand what God's plan is for us.

I am sure you are familiar with Johns visions he recorded in Revelation. I will start there.

Rev 1

5*And from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, and the first begotten of the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth. Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood,

*6*And hath made us kings and priests unto God and his Father; to him be glory and dominion for ever and ever. Amen.

This establishes that we can become kings and priests unto two people, Christ and our heavenly Father, two listed entities.

Rev 5

10*And hast made us unto our God kings and priests: and we shall reign on the earth.

*11*And I beheld, and I heard the voice of many angels round about the throne and the beasts and the elders: and the number of them was ten thousand times ten thousand, and thousands of thousands;

*12*Saying with a loud voice, Worthy is the Lamb that was slain to receive power, and riches, and wisdom, and strength, and honour, and glory, and blessing.

We (those who become priests and kings) will reign with Christ on earth.

Rev 6

*11*And white robes were given unto every one of them; and it was said unto them, that they should rest yet for a little season, until their fellowservants also and their brethren, that should be killed as they were, should be fulfilled.

Those who have been washed in the blood of Christ and are pure are given white robes. This happened in the fifth seal or at the same time Christ was resurrected.

Rev 7:

9*After this I beheld, and, lo, a great multitude, which no man could number, of all nations, and kindreds, and people, and tongues, stood before the throne, and before the Lamb, clothed with white robes, and palms in their hands;

14*And I said unto him, Sir, thou knowest. And he said to me, These are they which came out of great tribulation, and have washed their robes, and made them white in the blood of the Lamb.

*15*Therefore are they before the throne of God, and serve him day and night in his temple: and he that sitteth on the throne shall dwell among them.

This is talking about those who have been washed clean. It tells us they will be among Christ during the Millennium when he reigns on earth.

Rev 20

4*And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.

*5*But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection.

*6*Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years.

Once again John establishes the fact that those who are purified by Christ and who have taken part in the first resurrection are priests of God and Christ, two different entities. They reign with them on earth. Remember, they have thrones.

Rev 21

2*And I John saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband.

*3*And I heard a great voice out of heaven saying, Behold, the tabernacle of God is with men, and he will dwell with them, and they shall be his people, and God himself shall be with them, and be their God.

7*He that overcometh shall inherit all things; and I will be his God, and he shall be my son.

23*And the city had no need of the sun, neither of the moon, to shine in it: for the glory of God did lighten it, and the Lamb is the light thereof.

*24*And the nations of them which are saved shall walk in the light of it: and the kings of the earth do bring their glory and honour into it.

These kings have glory. They live in the New Jerusalem. This is describing the highest degree of Heaven, where Christ dwells. It is telling us who is there, that they have glory and have inherited all that Christ has. ALL that Christ has.

Rev 22

3*And there shall be no more curse: but the throne of God and of the Lamb shall be in it; and his servants shall serve him:

*4*And they shall see his face; and his name shall be in their foreheads.

What is the importance of having Christ's name in one's forehead?

Other prophets teach us of these principles.

Proverbs 3:5

35 The wise shall inherit glory: but shame shall be the promotion of fools.

1 Samuel 2

*7*The Lord maketh poor, and maketh rich: he bringeth low, and lifteth up.

*8*He raiseth up the poor out of the dust, and lifteth up the beggar from the dunghill, to set them among princes, and to make them inherit the throne of glory: for the pillars of the earth are the Lord’s, and he hath set the world upon them.

*9*He will keep the feet of his saints, and the wicked shall be silent in darkness; for by strength shall no man prevail.

We inherit glory, Christ's glory. To inherit means to gain access to something that is owned by someone else.

There are many instances in the Holy Bible that teach these doctrines. I have only posted a few, but if you look for them, you will find them. A resurrected saint is referred to many times in the scriptures as a king or priest.

Hope this helps.

If you would like we can also take a look at the Greek or Hebrew translations of the King James Version and go over changes that show the original script did allow for a plurality of gods but were changed by the Church of England.

[NoGreaterLove]

Okay... Well the first one that I'm having a rough time with is the whole teaching about men becoming gods. I have a copy of Gospel Principles from the '70s and in it there are numerous references to how we will become gods and have our own spirit children in the CK. From what I read I believed that the church taught that our entire reason for leaving the CK in the first place was so that we could progress to the next stage of development, which was godhood. We couldn't achieve that growth without testing ourselves first on earth. It's all pretty plainly laid out in the older literature from the church, but I feel like the past twenty years have seen a lot of waffling on the controversial issues, and I find it a little sad. When I first read the story of the pre-existence and the ultimate goal of returning and being exalted as gods I thought it was really interesting and unique. But now when I try and ask about it I get told that we can become like gods but not actual gods. That doesn't make any sense to me. The way I understood it when I read about it was that we would still answer to our Heavenly Father, as he would still be our creator, but we would be gods responsible for making our own creations once we became exalted. So if that teaching changed, why did it change? I feel like it used to be official doctrine, but now it's just speculation. What changed that? And if doctrine can become speculation, then how do we know what doctrine is actually doctrine?

Using the King James Version of the bible, I will post a few things that will help you to understand what God's plan is for us.

I am sure you are familiar with Johns visions he recorded in Revelation. I will start there.

Rev 1

5*And from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, and the first begotten of the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth. Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood,

*6*And hath made us kings and priests unto God and his Father; to him be glory and dominion for ever and ever. Amen.

This establishes that we can become kings and priests unto two people, Christ and our heavenly Father, two listed entities.

Rev 5

10*And hast made us unto our God kings and priests: and we shall reign on the earth.

*11*And I beheld, and I heard the voice of many angels round about the throne and the beasts and the elders: and the number of them was ten thousand times ten thousand, and thousands of thousands;

*12*Saying with a loud voice, Worthy is the Lamb that was slain to receive power, and riches, and wisdom, and strength, and honour, and glory, and blessing.

We (those who become priests and kings) will reign with Christ on earth.

Rev 6

*11*And white robes were given unto every one of them; and it was said unto them, that they should rest yet for a little season, until their fellowservants also and their brethren, that should be killed as they were, should be fulfilled.

Those who have been washed in the blood of Christ and are pure are given white robes. This happened in the fifth seal or at the same time Christ was resurrected.

Rev 7:

9*After this I beheld, and, lo, a great multitude, which no man could number, of all nations, and kindreds, and people, and tongues, stood before the throne, and before the Lamb, clothed with white robes, and palms in their hands;

14*And I said unto him, Sir, thou knowest. And he said to me, These are they which came out of great tribulation, and have washed their robes, and made them white in the blood of the Lamb.

*15*Therefore are they before the throne of God, and serve him day and night in his temple: and he that sitteth on the throne shall dwell among them.

This is talking about those who have been washed clean. It tells us they will be among Christ during the Millennium when he reigns on earth.

Rev 20

4*And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.

*5*But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection.

*6*Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years.

Once again John establishes the fact that those who are purified by Christ and who have taken part in the first resurrection are priests of God and Christ, two different entities. They reign with them on earth. Remember, they have thrones.

Rev 21

2*And I John saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband.

*3*And I heard a great voice out of heaven saying, Behold, the tabernacle of God is with men, and he will dwell with them, and they shall be his people, and God himself shall be with them, and be their God.

7*He that overcometh shall inherit all things; and I will be his God, and he shall be my son.

23*And the city had no need of the sun, neither of the moon, to shine in it: for the glory of God did lighten it, and the Lamb is the light thereof.

*24*And the nations of them which are saved shall walk in the light of it: and the kings of the earth do bring their glory and honour into it.

These kings have glory. They live in the New Jerusalem. This is describing the highest degree of Heaven, where Christ dwells. It is telling us who is there, that they have glory and have inherited all that Christ has. ALL that Christ has.

Rev 22

3*And there shall be no more curse: but the throne of God and of the Lamb shall be in it; and his servants shall serve him:

*4*And they shall see his face; and his name shall be in their foreheads.

What is the importance of having Christ's name in one's forehead?

Other prophets teach us of these principles.

Proverbs 3:5

35 The wise shall inherit glory: but shame shall be the promotion of fools.

1 Samuel 2

*7*The Lord maketh poor, and maketh rich: he bringeth low, and lifteth up.

*8*He raiseth up the poor out of the dust, and lifteth up the beggar from the dunghill, to set them among princes, and to make them inherit the throne of glory: for the pillars of the earth are the Lord’s, and he hath set the world upon them.

*9*He will keep the feet of his saints, and the wicked shall be silent in darkness; for by strength shall no man prevail.

We inherit glory, Christ's glory. To inherit means to gain access to something that is owned by someone else.

There are many instances in the Holy Bible that teach these doctrines. I have only posted a few, but if you look for them, you will find them. A resurrected saint is referred to many times in the scriptures as a king or priest.

Hope this helps.

If you would like we can also take a look at the Greek or Hebrew translations of the King James Version and go over changes that show the original script did allow for a plurality of gods but were changed by the Church of England.

[cooling]

HiJolly and JudoMinja, thank you both so much. I will respond properly when I'm not occupied with work stuff, but I did want to take the time to let you know how much it means to me to have a nice open dialogue with like-minded (if different-faithed) people. I think the sort of things you both mentioned are a lot of what draws me to the church.

NoGreaterLove, I am totally grateful for the detailed and thorough explanation. Thanks very much. I actually think I understand the principle of men becoming gods pretty well. What confused me was being told it wasn't doctrinal. That was one of my favorite parts of the teachings of the church. One of those things that separated the LDS church from all the other churches in a really interesting and positive way. So I think my confusion is more based around the church's current stance on the teaching rather than the teaching itself, if that makes any sense...?

[NoGreaterLove]

No worries. I fully understand being on the defensive. I'm not even a member of the church and just from investigating I've seen how much anti-Mormon sentiment is out there. I imagine that having that much hate spewed at you about your faith makes you suspicious of newcomers. No harm, no foul. I don't take it personally at all.

Christ and his followers were hated, persecuted, stoned, imprisoned, killed, ridiculed, and they were in the minority. The modern day church that belongs to Christ is no different.

Luke 14:27

27 And whosoever doth not bear his cross, and come after me, cannot be my disciple.

Mark 8:34

34 ¶And when he had called the people unto him with his disciples also, he said unto them, Whosoever will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me.

[JudoMinja]

No problem cooling. You remind me a lot of my bestfriend :), so chatting with you on here is a lot like chatting with her. She is not a member of the church but came to church with me during our high school years. She has come to understand a lot about our faith and believes it is true, but holds back for a number of reasons. Some of it is very similar to your reservations, and we talk about them now and then.

I'd like to address a couple specifics you brought up, now that I've had time to think through my answers:

First the WoW- While the heart is what really matters, mastery of the body is very important and there are many areas in which we work on this. The WoW is one of them. So is the Law of Chastity, the need to use clean language, and (I think) going to seminary at 6 in the morning .

D&C 88:124 "Cease to be idle; cease to be unclean; cease to find fault one with another; cease to sleep longer than is needful; retire to thy bed early, that ye may not be weary; arise early, that your bodies and your minds may be invigorated."

All these things help us work on the mastery of our bodies which are a "temple" to house our spirits. If you look at it in the context of the Plan of Salvation- part of our purpose in coming here is to receive a body... Why? Because Heavenly Father has a body, and we are striving to become like Him. We cannot be like Him, if we cannot control the urges and desires of the flesh.

Mosiah 3:19 "For the natural man is an enemy to God, and has been from the fall of Adam, and will be, forever and ever, unless he yields to the enticings of the Holy Spirit, and putteth off the natural man and becometh a saint through the atonement of Christ the Lord, and becometh as a child, submissive, meek, humble, patient, full of love, willing to submit to all things which the Lord seeth fit to inflict upon him, even as a child doth submit to his father."

Following the WoW and the LoC are part of temple recommend interviews because they are evidence of our ability to master our bodies. I don't think everyone who gets a recommend necessarily follows the WoW to the letter. I'm sure they all have their weaknesses, especially about the DOs of the WoW. (Exercise, eat fruit in the season thereof, rise early, etc). But we don't have to be perfect in our following of the WoW, we just have to be following at least the basics and striving to do more.

This is also part of why I am attracted to some eastern religions and practices. It is why I study martial arts. Mastery of the body is heavily stressed, and our overall health is affected by all areas- physical, emotional, and spiritual. When we are physically and emotionally healthy and in control, our spirits will feel the effects and be more healthy as well.

As for the temple covenants- I have not yet been through the temple to receive my endowment, but I almost feel like I am ready to do so. So, what I say here isn't from experience going through the sessions. However, I have believe I have recently come to a better understanding of their purpose than I previously had. I've always understood that they are important, that it is a promise between us and God and necessary if we want to return to the highest glory of the celestial kingdom. However, I've not really had a very strong testimony, not really FELT the importance of it. Like you said, I've basicall felt that they were more for our personal benefit and learning than anything else.

I've been getting asked to teach lessons in Relief Society lately while they are trying to call a new teacher (will probably end up being me at this rate ), and I'm going to be teaching the lesson on Temple Work and Family History this week. I've have been studying and thinking and mulling things over for the last couple weeks because I don't feel that I will do a very good job of teaching it if I don't have a good testimony of it. I know everyone needs to have a chance to have their work done, and that is why we do work for the dead, but it's always kinda been for me just "because God said so".

It was actually yesterday though, that things started coming together for me- The final ordinance performed in the temple is the sealing. It links us all together under a promise... What promise is that? Often, when talking about family history work, we talk about the spirit of Elijah. The prophesy about Elijah is mentioned in a few places- Malachi 4:6, Luke 1:17, 3 Nephi 25:6, D&C 27:9, 98:16, and 110:15. But it wasn't until I read THIS account that I noticed something important I'd been missing:

D&C 2:2 - "And he shall plant in the hearts of the children the promises made to the fathers, and the hearts of the children shall turn to their fathers."

It's about the PROMISES made to the fathers... When we first received revelation for the sealing ordinances, our leaders didn't completely understand how it worked. Several people were being sealed "by adoption" to Joseph Smith, to Brigham Young, and others. Later, it was revealed to Wilford Woodruff (the current prophet at that time) that this was an incorrect practice:

"I was adopted to my father and should have had my father sealed to his father, and so on back; and the duty that I want every man who presides over a Temple to see performed from this day henceforth and forever, unless the Lord Almighty commands otherwise, is to let every man be adopted to his father. When a man receives the endowments, adopt him to his father, not to Wilford Woodruff, nor to any other man outside the lineage of his fathers. That is the will of God to his people. … I say let every man be adopted to his father; and then you will do exactly what God said when he declared He would send Elijah the prophet in the last day." (The Deseret Weekly, April 1894)

Why had the practice been confused in the first place? Could it be, perhaps, because these sealings are an important component of ADOPTING us into the house of Abraham? That we are all being sealed and linked together as his lineage under the Abrahamic covenant and the PROMISE made to him? The importance of these ordinances suddenly seems to make more sense. It is about much more than just going through the motions. It is about much more that just doing it because God said to. There is a power in these ordinances- that so long as we hold up our end of the promise, God will be bound to bless us with the blessings of our ancient fathers. Check out this article from the Jan. 1998 Ensign. It talks about the Abrahamic covenant in detail and just what blessings we are being promised.

In undertaking these ordinances and working to perform them for those who died without the chance to do them themselves, we are being sealed up as God's promised people, to receive these wonderful blessings, so long as we keep our hearts in the right place. See, the heart is what is most important yes, but so is the act of making the promise. We make the covenants as an outward commitment to do our part. Just as Christ was baptised even though he had no need to be cleansed of sin, so we need to actually make the commitment. The ordinances have a power to them and must be performed.

Finally, regarding this:

So I think my confusion is more based around the church's current stance on the teaching rather than the teaching itself, if that makes any sense...?

There are many things that have been "revealed" and then pulled back because we, as a people, were not ready for them. Another Ensign excerpt, this one from 1979 does a much better job of explaining this than I could.

On this topic at least- of man becoming gods, I think this is a correct teaching that just is not heavily stressed right now. You do not have to believe this to consider yourself a "Mormon", but many Mormons do believe it including a great number of our leaders. We do not consider it "doctrine" in that it is not one of our basic tenets, one of our core beliefs. There is some leeway in how people see and interpret it. I am sure, that when we are ready for it, it will be revealed in full clarity.

[DKM88]

You guys have to realize something. When you start saying things like "this was revealed from God, but we weren't ready, so it was retracted" or "we don't know why, but the Lord guided it all", it's going to sound kind of funny.

What if you asked a JW about blood transfusions and they gave their explanation of why they are evil. You'd probably say they were idiotic. They will claim it's God's will that we get rid of all blood transfusions and that they "know" this is what God wants and it's true. You would say they were a freaking looney toon for saying that. Others outside the Church may say the same about your responses to things that seem a bit "out there."

What's wrong with saying, "Hey, I know Brigham Young was racist. It wasn't God's will that Blacks didn't receive the priesthood because Joseph Smith ordained blacks to the priesthood. There was even a black seventy in his day. Brigham Young was simply an American with typical racial views. Luckily, it's changed now."

What's wrong with saying, "Yes, women are second class citizens in Mormondom. It's really a throw-back to the 1800's, but it's steadily changing. Slowly but surely."

What's wrong with saying, "Yeah, the Church has always taught that men become Gods. GBH said in an interview that he 'didn't know' if we taught that or not. But it's always been taught, at least in a round about way. It may be strange, but the whole idea of eternal progression is core to our doctrine."

What's wrong with saying, "Polygamy was a disaster. Polyandry was even worse. It's a major black spot for the Church. It was a mistake made by men that probably became a bit overzealous in their leadership roles. It's been discontinued, so there aren't any issues with it anymore."

The problem is we consider the Church to be perfect. The Church is run by men. They make executive decisions all the time that aren't right. So who do you blame? I guess we could just say that the Lord's will was done and we just don't understand it. But I think that's a bit of a cop out.

[Matthew0059]

What's wrong with saying...

DKM, maybe that isn't the most helpful thing to say in this situation. Edited September 9, 2011 by Matthew0059
More diplomatic

[pam]

You guys have to realize something. When you start saying things like "this was revealed from God, but we weren't ready, so it was retracted" or "we don't know why, but the Lord guided it all", it's going to sound kind of funny.

What if you asked a JW about blood transfusions and they gave their explanation of why they are evil. You'd probably say they were idiotic. They will claim it's God's will that we get rid of all blood transfusions and that they "know" this is what God wants and it's true. You would say they were a freaking looney toon for saying that. Others outside the Church may say the same about your responses to things that seem a bit "out there."

What's wrong with saying, "Hey, I know Brigham Young was racist. It wasn't God's will that Blacks didn't receive the priesthood because Joseph Smith ordained blacks to the priesthood. There was even a black seventy in his day. Brigham Young was simply an American with typical racial views. Luckily, it's changed now."

What's wrong with saying, "Yes, women are second class citizens in Mormondom. It's really a throw-back to the 1800's, but it's steadily changing. Slowly but surely."

What's wrong with saying, "Yeah, the Church has always taught that men become Gods. GBH said in an interview that he 'didn't know' if we taught that or not. But it's always been taught, at least in a round about way. It may be strange, but the whole idea of eternal progression is core to our doctrine."

What's wrong with saying, "Polygamy was a disaster. Polyandry was even worse. It's a major black spot for the Church. It was a mistake made by men that probably became a bit overzealous in their leadership roles. It's been discontinued, so there aren't any issues with it anymore."

The problem is we consider the Church to be perfect. The Church is run by men. They make executive decisions all the time that aren't right. So who do you blame? I guess we could just say that the Lord's will was done and we just don't understand it. But I think that's a bit of a cop out.

What's wrong with saying them? Because some of your comments simply aren't true.

[DKM88]

What's wrong with saying them? Because some of your comments simply aren't true.

According to you? According to the Journal of Discourses? You see, you have to break out of the shell. It's ok to believe that people screw up royally in the Church. It's alot better than saying God did it and we're just too stupid to get it.

[DKM88]

DKM, maybe that isn't the most helpful thing to say in this situation.

Well, in my humble opinion, it's a lot better than hiding the truth in hopes people get baptized, only to go inactive because they feel lied to when they find out the darker history.

[Vort]

You guys have to realize something. When you start saying things like "this was revealed from God, but we weren't ready, so it was retracted" or "we don't know why, but the Lord guided it all", it's going to sound kind of funny.

Like burning bushes, angels with gold plates, casting out demons, and a lynched man suddenly springing back to life don't "sound kind of funny."

Personally, I'm not worried about "sounding funny." If I were, I wouldn't be religious.

What if you asked a JW about blood transfusions and they gave their explanation of why they are evil. You'd probably say they were idiotic.

Doubtful. Most here understand that the beliefs of others don't coincide at all points with our own, and are happy to live and let live without flinging accusations of idiocy.

They will claim it's God's will that we get rid of all blood transfusions and that they "know" this is what God wants and it's true. You would say they were a freaking looney toon for saying that. Others outside the Church may say the same about your responses to things that seem a bit "out there."

Your point is not well taken on many counts, the most obvious of which is this: We claim revelation from heaven directly to our souls when we say we "know" this or that. Other religious folks base their "knowledge" on their interpretation, or exegesis, or gloss, of scripture, which is a much different thing.

What's wrong with saying, "Hey, I know Brigham Young was racist. It wasn't God's will that Blacks didn't receive the priesthood because Joseph Smith ordained blacks to the priesthood. There was even a black seventy in his day. Brigham Young was simply an American with typical racial views. Luckily, it's changed now."

Maybe because we don't believe that?

How would you know that the Priesthood ban was not God's will? Where do you get the authority to make that determination? Those who held the keys of the kingdom apparently thought it was divinely inspired and commanded. Who are you that your opinion in the matter carries any weight whatsoever?

What's wrong with saying, "Yes, women are second class citizens in Mormondom. It's really a throw-back to the 1800's, but it's steadily changing. Slowly but surely."

Maybe because it's false? Women are not and never have been "second-class citizens" in the kingdom of God. This is a lie, pure and simple.

What's wrong with saying, "Yeah, the Church has always taught that men become Gods. GBH said in an interview that he 'didn't know' if we taught that or not. But it's always been taught, at least in a round about way. It may be strange, but the whole idea of eternal progression is core to our doctrine."

Because that gravely and dishonestly misrepresents the entire issue.

What's wrong with saying, "Polygamy was a disaster. Polyandry was even worse. It's a major black spot for the Church. It was a mistake made by men that probably became a bit overzealous in their leadership roles. It's been discontinued, so there aren't any issues with it anymore."

On what do you base this judgment? How do you know God's views on the matter?

The problem is we consider the Church to be perfect. The Church is run by men. They make executive decisions all the time that aren't right. So who do you blame? I guess we could just say that the Lord's will was done and we just don't understand it. But I think that's a bit of a cop out.

No. The problem is that some people just can't discipline themselves to let the anointed leaders of the Church run it according to inspiration. They are forever steadying the ark. Those are the people I blame.

[pam]

What's wrong with saying, "Yes, women are second class citizens in Mormondom. It's really a throw-back to the 1800's, but it's steadily changing. Slowly but surely."

Well I take offense at this one. Why should I EVER say this? I'm a woman and not once in my almost 55 years of being a member of this church have I ever felt I was a second class citizen. Yes men are the leaders in the church. And that is because of the Priesthood they hold. But women play just an equally important part in the church.

So I would NEVER tell someone that yes..women are second class citizens in the world of Mormondom.

[DKM88]

Like burning bushes, angels with gold plates, casting out demons, and a lynched man suddenly springing back to life don't "sound kind of funny."

Personally, I'm not worried about "sounding funny." If I were, I wouldn't be religious.

Doubtful. Most here understand that the beliefs of others don't coincide at all points with our own, and are happy to live and let live without flinging accusations of idiocy.

Your point is not well taken on many counts, the most obvious of which is this: We claim revelation from heaven directly to our souls when we say we "know" this or that. Other religious folks base their "knowledge" on their interpretation, or exegesis, or gloss, of scripture, which is a much different thing.

Maybe because we don't believe that?

How would you know that the Priesthood ban was not God's will? Where do you get the authority to make that determination? Those who held the keys of the kingdom apparently thought it was divinely inspired and commanded. Who are you that your opinion in the matter carries any weight whatsoever?

Maybe because it's false? Women are not and never have been "second-class citizens" in the kingdom of God. This is a lie, pure and simple.

Because that gravely and dishonestly misrepresents the entire issue.

On what do you base this judgment? How do you know God's views on the matter?

No. The problem is that some people just can't discipline themselves to let the anointed leaders of the Church run it according to inspiration. They are forever steadying the ark. Those are the people I blame.

1. I concede your point that most things in religion sound "funny."

2. Do you have any proof that Brigham Young wasn't racist? It's ok that he was! I'm perfectly fine with that. What American wasn't racist at that time?! Is it that hard to believe? Joseph Smith ordained Blacks to the priesthood. Why did God all of the sudden change his mind when Joseph died?! More than likely, Brigham was racist. But I'm cool with that.

3. I believe it was Richard G. Scott that said women won't be "third-class" citizens in heaven. The fact is, in our current world of equality, women are second class. The only way to get around it is to redefine equality. We aren't in the 1800's anymore. Oh, and polygamy...need I say more?

Many of your arguments hearken to the 'pay, pray, and obey' mindset of many members today. Be open! Be truthful! It's a wonderful thing, I promise you.