better answer? please? =)

[sister_in_faith]

I was confronted by someone a few days ago who knows that I am LDS, and attend the temple... They challenged me by saying, "Show me in the Bible where it says you have to wear those things?" referring to garments. I answered by showing them the verse on Adam and Eve and the coats of skins. They were not impressed and I would like to give them a more detailed answer without talking about sacred things, ya know?

Anyone else have a 'better' answer for me?

[skippy740]

Show me in the Bible where priests need to wear collars?

I wouldn't bother talking about the temple with someone who wants to argue with you. Start with The Book of Mormon. If it's true, then we can build upon that. If it's not (playing devil's advocate here), then why does my underwear matter to you?

[Mute]

#

Lev. 6: 27

27 Whatsoever shall touch the flesh thereof shall be holy: and when there is sprinkled of the blood thereof upon any garment, thou shalt wash that whereon it was sprinkled in the holy place.

#

Lev. 16: 4, 23-24, 32

4 He shall put on the holy linen coat, and he shall have the linen breeches upon his flesh, and shall be girded with a linen girdle, and with the linen mitre shall he be attired: these are holy garments; therefore shall he wash his flesh in water, and so put them on.

• • •

23 And Aaron shall come into the tabernacle of the congregation, and shall put off the linen garments, which he put on when he went into the holy place, and shall leave them there:

24 And he shall wash his flesh with water in the holy place, and put on his garments, and come forth, and offer his burnt offering, and the burnt offering of the people, and make an atonement for himself, and for the people.

• • •

32 And the priest, whom he shall anoint, and whom he shall consecrate to minister in the priest’s office in his father’s stead, shall make the atonement, and shall put on the linen clothes, even the holy garments:

#

Ex. 28: 2, 4

2 And thou shalt make holy garments for Aaron thy brother for glory and for beauty.

• • •

4 And these are the garments which they shall make; a breastplate, and an ephod, and a robe, and a broidered coat, a mitre, and a girdle: and they shall make holy garments for Aaron thy brother, and his sons, that he may minister unto me in the priest’s office.

#

Ex. 29: 29

29 ¶ And the holy garments of Aaron shall be his sons’ after him, to be anointed therein, and to be consecrated in them.

#

Ex. 31: 10

10 And the cloths of service, and the holy garments for Aaron the priest, and the garments of his sons, to minister in the priest’s office,

#

Ex. 35: 19, 21

19 The cloths of service, to do service in the holy place, the holy garments for Aaron the priest, and the garments of his sons, to minister in the priest’s office.

• • •

21 And they came, every one whose heart stirred him up, and every one whom his spirit made willing, and they brought the Lord’s offering to the work of the tabernacle of the congregation, and for all his service, and for the holy garments.

#

Ex. 39: 1, 41

1 And of the blue, and purple, and scarlet, they made cloths of service, to do service in the holy place, and made the holy garments for Aaron; as the Lord commanded Moses.

• • •

41 The cloths of service to do service in the holy place, and the holy garments for Aaron the priest, and his sons’ garments, to minister in the priest’s office.

EXODUS

CHAPTER 40

9 And thou shalt take the anointing oil, and anoint the tabernacle, and all that is therein, and shalt hallow it, and all the vessels thereof: and it shall be holy.

10 And thou shalt anoint the altar of the burnt offering, and all his vessels, and sanctify the altar: and it shall be an altar most holy.

11 And thou shalt anoint the laver and his foot, and sanctify it.

12 And thou shalt bring Aaron and his sons unto the door of the tabernacle of the congregation, and wash them with water.

13 And thou shalt put upon Aaron the holy garments, and anoint him, and sanctify him; that he may minister unto me in the priest’s office.

14 And thou shalt bring his sons, and clothe them with coats:

15 And thou shalt anoint them, as thou didst anoint their father, that they may minister unto me in the priest’s office: for their anointing shall surely be an everlasting priesthood throughout their generations.

16 Thus did Moses: according to all that the Lord commanded him, so did he.

#

Ezek. 42: 14

14 When the priests enter therein, then shall they not go out of the holy place into the utter court, but there they shall lay their garments wherein they minister; for they are holy; and shall put on other garments, and shall approach to those things which are for the people.

#

Ezek. 44: 19

19 And when they go forth into the utter court, even into the utter court to the people, they shall put off their garments wherein they ministered, and lay them in the holy chambers, and they shall put on other garments; and they shall not sanctify the people with their garments.

#

Hag. 2: 12

12 If one bear holy flesh in the skirt of his garment, and with his skirt do touch bread, or pottage, or wine, or oil, or any meat, shall it be holy? And the priests answered and said, No.

Those are some scripture verses that talk about garments. Bottom line is, why do you need something from the Bible only to back up what you say? Many lds beliefs are only in the doctrine and covenants, pearl of great price and Book of Mormon and not in the Bible. Does that mean you shouldn't believe in them because a belief may not also be included in the Bible? That's up to you. You believe they're just as much scripture as the Bible, so why do you need anymore reason than that? That's just my two cents.

[jerome1232]

We believe in modern day revelation, why does the answer have to reside in The Holy Bible? I would simply say I made a covenant with God to wear them.

[Vort]

Anyone else have a 'better' answer for me?

Yes. A better answer is, "I do not discuss my underwear with anyone but my husband."

[Guest]

Tell me where in the Bible they endorse Fruit of the Looms and Victoria's Secret?

[NeuroTypical]

The most appropriate snarky answer I have, is "Oh, it's all over the Old Testament. But it's ok - don't feel bad - Mormons are pretty much the only Christians left who actually still read it."

[Dravin]

Yes. A better answer is, "I do not discuss my underwear with anyone but my husband."

A next best answer is, "Uh, why?"

I always find it perplexing the challenge to prove all of our beliefs out of the Bible, we have never claimed all of our beliefs are found in the Bible. It's like asking an Evangelical to show were it is okay to eat pork in the Old Testament. Why would you limit yourself to a portion of what you believe to be revelation?

This is of course speaking of the tendency of others to try to limit me to their domain (and less this specific case). I'm under no such restriction.

Edited October 5, 2011 by Dravin

[Guest mormonmusic]

When people would use the "where does it say that in the Bible" myopic argument, I usually defend myself and wait until they make their own assertions. Then I say "Where does it say THAT in the Bible!!!!". 1/2 of what they claim is their own opinion anyway and they can't cough up a scripture.

I'd also consider reframing the argument as one about the valid reasons for scripture outside the Bible. Second Nephi has good reasons for it. After you agree to disagree on that one, there should be fewer of these pushy demands for proof as the person will know you don't believe everything has to be in the Bible to be valid.

[SteveVH]

When people would use the "where does it say that in the Bible" myopic argument, I usually defend myself and wait until they make their own assertions. Then I say "Where does it say THAT in the Bible!!!!". 1/2 of what they claim is their own opinion anyway and they can't cough up a scripture.

I'd also consider reframing the argument as one about the valid reasons for scripture outside the Bible. Second Nephi has good reasons for it. After you agree to disagree on that one, there should be fewer of these pushy demands for proof as the person will know you don't believe everything has to be in the Bible to be valid.

I am Catholic and I've never understood what the hoopla was about. We wear scapulars and crosses and various medals under our clothing. Because I belong to the Secular Francisan Order, I even wear a thin rope around my waist (under my clothing) with three knots in it which represent the Trinity to remind me always of the promises I have made to God. It bothers me when I see people wearing things as jewelry that I consider sacred. I've never understood why "Mormon underwear" is a secretive thing, but I certainly respect the fact that it is sacred to you. My answer to this person would simply be "what does it matter to you"?

[SteveVH]

I was confronted by someone a few days ago who knows that I am LDS, and attend the temple... They challenged me by saying, "Show me in the Bible where it says you have to wear those things?" referring to garments. I answered by showing them the verse on Adam and Eve and the coats of skins. They were not impressed and I would like to give them a more detailed answer without talking about sacred things, ya know?

Anyone else have a 'better' answer for me?

I am Catholic and I've never understood what the hoopla was about. We wear scapulars and crosses and various medals under our clothing. Because I belong to the Secular Francisan Order, I even wear a thin rope around my waist (under my clothing) with three knots in it which represent the Trinity to remind me always of the promises I have made to God. It bothers me when I see people wearing things as jewelry that I consider sacred. I've never understood why "Mormon underwear" is a secretive thing, but I certainly respect the fact that it is sacred to you and that you have your reasons. My answer to this person would simply be "what does it matter to you"?

[estradling75]

I am Catholic and I've never understood what the hoopla was about. We wear scapulars and crosses and various medals under our clothing. Because I belong to the Secular Francisan Order, I even wear a thin rope around my waist (under my clothing) with three knots in it which represent the Trinity to remind me always of the promises I have made to God. It bothers me when I see people wearing things as jewelry that I consider sacred. I've never understood why "Mormon underwear" is a secretive thing, but I certainly respect the fact that it is sacred to you and that you have your reasons. My answer to this person would simply be "what does it matter to you"?

Please note they are not 'secret' they are sacred. When some one considers something sacred and/or personal they are not going share them with people that might mock them.

For example I doubt you would have shared your personal clothing choices if you thought we would mock you for them. Chances are you saw what this thread was about and felt that people here would understand your choices even if we didn't agree with the details. That any question you might get would be less about attacking what you consider sacred and more about understanding them.

We are the same way. Unfortunately to the people outside our our belief systems sacred and secret look alot like and secret is by far the more sinister of the two.

[SteveVH]

Please note they are not 'secret' they are sacred. When some one considers something sacred and/or personal they are not going share them with people that might mock them.

For example I doubt you would have shared your personal clothing choices if you thought we would mock you for them. Chances are you saw what this thread was about and felt that people here would understand your choices even if we didn't agree with the details. That any question you might get would be less about attacking what you consider sacred and more about understanding them.

We are the same way. Unfortunately to the people outside our our belief systems sacred and secret look alot like and secret is by far the more sinister of the two.

Well, I have no problem at all, and in fact, would invite inquiries into why I wear what I do. When I said "secret" I may very well be under a wrong impression. I thought it had to do with your Temple rites which are not shared with the outside world. Thanks for the correction.

[Vort]

Well, I have no problem at all, and in fact, would invite inquiries into why I wear what I do. When I said "secret" I may very well be under a wrong impression. I thought it had to do with your Temple rites which are not shared with the outside world. Thanks for the correction.

Many outside the Church, and even some within it, accuse Church members of duplicity in saying "sacred, not secret" regarding these things. (Not you, Stephen, but many others.) Let me give an illustration to distinguish the difference. For the record, I think I read this illustration on this very list. In any case, it was recent, within the last few months, that I read it.

Consider two people alone in a car, no telephones, no bugging devices, no surveillance cameras, nothing like that. Let us suppose that both these people are privy to a secret. Is there anything wrong with them discussing that secret in their car? No one else can hear. They're golden.

Now let us suppose that the two are privy to sacred things, things which are not supposed to be discussed outside a certain place (e.g. the temple). Can these two people, say a husband and wife, then discuss the specifics of these sacred things in their car in private? No, of course not. To do so would be to violate the sanctity of such things. Even if it's just the two of you alone, and you are both "in on" the topic, you do not discuss sacred things outside the appropriate setting.

Now, not all sacred things require this level of confidence. Sex, for example, is about as sacred as anything, yet it can be openly discussed (in private) between spouses. LDS doctrines are sacred, and many are sensitive in nature, yet they can usually be discussed even with non-members, as long as their sacred nature is respected. Not all sacred things are forbidden to be discussed outside the temple; I would suggest that most do not fall under that category.

But it is obvious to see that, for example, if God reveals such-and-such a principle to you, then you are under solemn obligation to keep that revelation to yourself and not to share it, or only to share it with those about whom the Spirit reveals to you that you can share it. This is why we rarely or never discuss sacred manifestations and visitations and such openly: It is not that they don't occur, it is that we hold them sacred.

As for our underwear, simple good taste and social decency dictates that others not mock or harass you about such things. When they do, that is (as the lawyers would say) prima facie evidence that you should not talk with them about it. But to the honest and sincere inquirer, it is an easy matter to explain that they are a symbol of covenants we make in the temple, and thus a sign of our devotion to God. That is a sufficient answer to any honest and fair-minded person. On the rare occasion that someone has a legitimate need to know more, e.g. the non-member spouse of an endowed member, we can explain more to that person as far as is appropriate.

[bluedreams]

I'd probably tell him if it really matters if he understood what the garment means for someone LDS? I'd listen to whatever the answer is (no, or probably something wrong....just general likelihood). Than i'd tell him that I wear it as a reminder of Christ and my relationship to him. I tell him that they remind me of the gifts of the spirit and how I am to follow His example and seek after the Spirit in each moment that I'm alive. It was a reminder that I am not mine but the Lord's first. I'd then note that this theme is an entirely biblical concept and that just about any verse in the bible eventually talks about the garments to me because they are all describing the sacred covenant and relationship between humanity and God.

At best, I'd hope for him to build a better respect for what the garment represent for LDS. I don't see the point in proving its right cuz he'll never see it. But he can come to better understand my view and love for something. I'd look for him to have respect for that

with luv,

BD

[prisonchaplain]

Show me in the Bible where priests need to wear collars?

Sorry...couldn't resist: Why Clergy Should Wear Clericals

I wouldn't bother talking about the temple with someone who wants to argue with you. Start with The Book of Mormon. If it's true, then we can build upon that. If it's not (playing devil's advocate here), then why does my underwear matter to you?

Depends on the spirit the challenge is being offered in. For example, if someone were to respectfully as a Jewish person why he wears tzi tzi (very smilar to sacred garments), he would have an answer about what the strings on it represent, etc. So, if it's a simple explanation that the person wants, I would think there is one--even if it's something like, "They remind me that I am coverd by the Spirit of God."

If it's an argument they are sporting for, I agree that it is ludicrous to argue with anyone about why I wear what I wear. Perhaps the best answer is, "It didn't do our former President of USA any good to talk about his undergarments--I think I'll learn from him!"

[Vort]

Sorry...couldn't resist: Why Clergy Should Wear Clericals

While I don't agree with all the author's biases, I think he makes some valuable points.

[prisonchaplain]

He does have some strong views that I find...well...too strong. But yes, he makes some strong points. As FYI, we don't wear clericals in my church--I do so at the jail as a means of having new inmates quickly identify me as the chaplain.

[SteveVH]

He does have some strong views that I find...well...too strong. But yes, he makes some strong points. As FYI, we don't wear clericals in my church--I do so at the jail as a means of having new inmates quickly identify me as the chaplain.

I think it is a good idea to wear clericals for this reason. It is a sign of God's presence in the world. I was traveling with a good friend of mine who is a Catholic priest. It was amazing to see the reaction of people in the airport. We went to our gate and there was a group of young people who were using some pretty fowl language, that is until they saw the priest. There behavior improved immediately. lol.

[SteveVH]

Many outside the Church, and even some within it, accuse Church members of duplicity in saying "sacred, not secret" regarding these things. (Not you, Stephen, but many others.) Let me give an illustration to distinguish the difference. For the record, I think I read this illustration on this very list. In any case, it was recent, within the last few months, that I read it.

Consider two people alone in a car, no telephones, no bugging devices, no surveillance cameras, nothing like that. Let us suppose that both these people are privy to a secret. Is there anything wrong with them discussing that secret in their car? No one else can hear. They're golden.

Now let us suppose that the two are privy to sacred things, things which are not supposed to be discussed outside a certain place (e.g. the temple). Can these two people, say a husband and wife, then discuss the specifics of these sacred things in their car in private? No, of course not. To do so would be to violate the sanctity of such things. Even if it's just the two of you alone, and you are both "in on" the topic, you do not discuss sacred things outside the appropriate setting.

Now, not all sacred things require this level of confidence. Sex, for example, is about as sacred as anything, yet it can be openly discussed (in private) between spouses. LDS doctrines are sacred, and many are sensitive in nature, yet they can usually be discussed even with non-members, as long as their sacred nature is respected. Not all sacred things are forbidden to be discussed outside the temple; I would suggest that most do not fall under that category.

But it is obvious to see that, for example, if God reveals such-and-such a principle to you, then you are under solemn obligation to keep that revelation to yourself and not to share it, or only to share it with those about whom the Spirit reveals to you that you can share it. This is why we rarely or never discuss sacred manifestations and visitations and such openly: It is not that they don't occur, it is that we hold them sacred.

As for our underwear, simple good taste and social decency dictates that others not mock or harass you about such things. When they do, that is (as the lawyers would say) prima facie evidence that you should not talk with them about it. But to the honest and sincere inquirer, it is an easy matter to explain that they are a symbol of covenants we make in the temple, and thus a sign of our devotion to God. That is a sufficient answer to any honest and fair-minded person. On the rare occasion that someone has a legitimate need to know more, e.g. the non-member spouse of an endowed member, we can explain more to that person as far as is appropriate.

Thanks Vort. I have absolutley no problem with the Mormon position on this. I appreciate you taking the time to explain it to me.

[beefche]

I think it is a good idea to wear clericals for this reason. It is a sign of God's presence in the world. I was traveling with a good friend of mine who is a Catholic priest. It was amazing to see the reaction of people in the airport. We went to our gate and there was a group of young people who were using some pretty fowl language, that is until they saw the priest. There behavior improved immediately. lol.

I know it's just a typo, but this struck me as funny. "You big chicken!" "You like eating crow, dude?" "Shhh!!!! There's a priest here! Watch the bird language!"

[SteveVH]

I know it's just a typo, but this struck me as funny. "You big chicken!" "You like eating crow, dude?" "Shhh!!!! There's a priest here! Watch the bird language!"

Now that is funny! Even if I could edit it at this point I don't think I would.

[spamlds]

The very question is intended to bait you into a fruitless argument. Ask your friend to show you in the Bible where any first century Christian had a Bible to go by. The Bible is the product of the Christian Church. The Lord did not reveal a Bible and then the Church grew from it. The Lord called apostles, prophets, seventies, evangelists, pastors, and teachers, elders, deacons, bishops, etc. and gave them authority and revelation. The Church was founded upon apostles and prophets with Jesus Christ as the chief cornerstone.

The people who ask questions like this are not Christians--they are "Biblicans." They attribute qualities of divinity like inerrancy to an inanimate book and deny utterance to the living God. It is a form of idolatry. They supplanted a living God with an inanimate object and they give it veneration.

Don't worry about proving anything to anyone from the Bible. After 2000 years, there are over 1000 Christian denominations and sects who can't agree what the Bible means. It is not common ground. It is the source of contention and confusion. The Book of Mormon is the means God has given to fix the situation. If they reject it, don't sweat it. It's their choice. Life's all about making that choice.