Still Unanswered.

[Cal]

Originally posted by bizabra+Mar 10 2004, 11:20 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (bizabra @ Mar 10 2004, 11:20 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

Originally posted by -Peace@Mar 10 2004, 10:53 PM

<!--QuoteBegin--DisRuptive1@Mar 9 2004, 07:20 PM

Would this also apply to baptisms if the priesthood holder had fornicated or something else?

Would the person still be a normal member?

Fornication is on the books as a 'disfellowship' kind of sin...at the very least...some are absolutely excommunicated.

it depends upon the bishops. If they are disfellowshipped...i don't think they lose their priesthood in the ordinational sense...but i am sure the Lord takes it away..

The Spirit of Christ is to attend the priesthood holder...else he doesn't have it...according to D&C 121.

Is adultery a worse sin than fornication?

Just asking. . . . . . . .

Oh! One more thing! If "the lord takes it away" then how could he not have "lost it"? In other words, if god took it away, he would not have it, and the ordination would not have been performed by THE POWER of god via his priesthood.

As I understand it, THE POWER of the priesthood derives from it being transferred by the laying on of hands along with the proper and exact ritual invocation directly from one man to another. It has apparently been handed down in a direct line, one man to another, from Jesus on. (kinda like a sacred virus or something, heh) It skipped a few human generations when it was revoked for about 1,600 years or so by god took when people were being too wicked (?), and then going right into Joseph Smith from John the Baptists' very own resurrected hands. Correct me if I am wrong.

So, my guess is that all the sacred rituals performed by any priest of any kind during that interim period have no eternal validity, as those claiming such priesthood were decievers and unworthy! Their ordinances are null and void because gods POWER was withdrawn from the earth until John the Baptist HIMSELF gave it back to humans when he transferred it to Smith. Oh, Oliver Cowdery was also ordained right alongside Joe.

I think it logical (and practical) to conclude that THE CHURCH'S position on this (were it to proffer such) would have to be that any ordinances performed by any man holding THE POWER (ie; NOT x'ed or disfellowed) would be legit, regardless of his "worthyness" quotient.

Is adultery as worse sin than fornication? I would answer that by asking, "Is adultery worse than fornication?" (without the sin word) I'm sure God is at least as smart as we are.

[Guest Starsky]

I think it logical (and practical) to conclude that THE CHURCH'S position on this (were it to proffer such) would have to be that any ordinances performed by any man holding THE POWER (ie; NOT x'ed or disfellowed) would be legit, regardless of his "worthyness" quotient. 

Makes sense.

[Guest curvette]

Originally posted by Peace@Mar 10 2004, 10:57 PM

There is only God who can validate or invalidate a baptism....if the person receiving it is worthy, the Lord will more than likely validate it because of their faith.

I agree. Only I believe that the Lord would ALWAYS validate it by the recipient's faith. The Lord's house is a house of order and there can't be any order in the system Porter proposes where the Lord respects the worthiness of the officiator (by also disrespecting his unworthiness), but not the faithfulness of the recipient. I believe the Lord would deal with the Priesthood holder's unworthiness in His own way and time, but not by invalidating the ordinance.

Peace wrote: <<It really would be nice to get the right answer when you push that buzzer...>>

Yeah, and if he's gonna buzz us when we're wrong, he should ding us when we're right!

Biz wrote: << Is adultery a worse sin than fornication?>>

Absolutely. I don't understand why anyone would be excommunicated for fornication. Adultery breaks up families, betrays marriage vows, and makes a way bigger mess than a single person sleeping with another single person. The two things aren't even in the same league.

[Ray]

Has the question regarding what “unworthiness” means already been addressed? There may be some people reading this thread who don’t know what we mean by that.

What does it take to be “worthy” of the priesthood? Can we get a consensus here?

Also, what is it about a blessing that makes it take effect? Is it the “worthiness” of the person who holds the priesthood, or something else?

I say that a person is worthy of the priesthood when they are doing everything they know the Lord expects them to do. This presupposes that that person has already received the priesthood, or the authorization to act for God, and that they know at least something about what the Lord requires from them. Each person has a different level of knowledge, though, with one person knowing something that someone else doesn’t know, but all that is required is that each person do what they know the Lord expects them to do.

One thing the Lord expects from us, that all people with the priesthood know, is to Repent when we do or don’t do something else the Lord expects from us. If someone repents, determined not to do that thing again, aren’t they then considered worthy? It seems to me that a person who has been given the priesthood is “unworthy” of the priesthood only when they continue to do something against the knowledge they have of what the Lord expects from them.

As to what makes a blessing effective, I believe it is the faith of all persons involved, and it should be realized that a blessing is rarely given by one person alone. A father can bless a member of his own family by himself, but in most other instances we have been told that we should have at least one other person with us when we give a blessing, and I think it is highly unlikely that everybody involved would be unworthy of their priesthood.

Where ordinances are involved, not only are there several persons with the priesthood in attendance, those ordinances are also recorded so that on the day of judgment each of our actions can be verified by what has been recorded. If a person received an ordinance by someone with the authority to perform that ordinance, that ordinance is considered valid because it was done within the boundaries the Lord set, just as a traffic ticket is considered to be valid as long as the person who gave it to you was authorized to act as a policeman. It doesn’t matter if the policeman is unrighteous, as long as he was duly authorized to act as a policeman.

The only question remaining is, how do you know when that policeman is no longer authorized to act as a policeman, or a priest is no longer authorized to act as a priest, and I think only God and the people God communicates with knows that. In the end, everything revolves around Faith, or the assurance that God gives us to know the truth. Without Faith, you can’t know anything.

[Jason]

Gosh, I just have to say one thing. Then I'll butt out.

What makes me saddest about this whole thing is that you're essentially saying that unworthy priests today can still baptise, etc, but the Lord will punish the wicked priesthood holders later.

But what about the humble servant living in the ninth century? That followed Christ, helped their fellow man, and were baptised by a priest serving God.

Ray said: "I say that a person is worthy of the priesthood when they are doing everything they know the Lord expects them to do."

I agree. But at the same time, you say that that individual's ordinances were ignored by a loving God because a Priest of the Ninth Century who was doing what they thought God wanted of them was without authority?

Something to think about....

Love,

Jason

[Guest lt]

I personally think that those who do blessings and temple work and are no longer worthy have to worry about gods judgement. I'm sure the church has there own way of handling things like this, but I would be less worried about my consequences from the church and more worried about what will happen when it was my turn to face the lord.

I would think that fear in its self would help keep people worthy.

[Jenda]

Originally posted by ExMormon-Jason@Mar 11 2004, 10:12 AM

Gosh, I just have to say one thing. Then I'll butt out.

What makes me saddest about this whole thing is that you're essentially saying that unworthy priests today can still baptise, etc, but the Lord will punish the wicked priesthood holders later.

But what about the humble servant living in the ninth century? That followed Christ, helped their fellow man, and were baptised by a priest serving God.

Ray said: "I say that a person is worthy of the priesthood when they are doing everything they know the Lord expects them to do."

I agree. But at the same time, you say that that individual's ordinances were ignored by a loving God because a Priest of the Ninth Century who was doing what they thought God wanted of them was without authority?

Something to think about....

Love,

Jason

My take on this, not being LDS, is that God respects the intent of our heart. IF that person had been alive during a period of time that the church was not in apostacy and would have accepted it, then God blesses that person accordingly. This goes hand in hand with the vision JS had regarding seeing his brother in the Celestial Kingdom.

In Section 76, it states there is a period of time between the resurrection of the just and the final judgment where, I believe, those people who would have accepted the fulness of the gospel in life, or did accept it in the prisonhouse, will be able to receive baptism by those holding authority, thus fulfilling the requirements to enter the Celestial Kingdom.

That is my non-LDS opinion.

[Guest lt]

Gosh, I just have to say one thing. Then I'll butt out.

What makes me saddest about this whole thing is that you're essentially saying that unworthy priests today can still baptise, etc, but the Lord will punish the wicked priesthood holders later.

Like anything we sin in, god cannot make us do right, and if we are pretending to be worthy then like any sin we will be punished at judgement

[Guest Starsky]

Originally posted by LaurelTree@Mar 11 2004, 10:35 AM

Gosh, I just have to say one thing. Then I'll butt out.

What makes me saddest about this whole thing is that you're essentially saying that unworthy priests today can still baptise, etc, but the Lord will punish the wicked priesthood holders later.

Like anything we sin in, god cannot make us do right, and if we are pretending to be worthy then like any sin we will be punished at judgement

There is a scripture in D&C 50 which speaks something of this nature:

7 Behold, verily I say unto you, there are hypocrites among you, who have deceived some, which has given the adversary power; but behold such shall be reclaimed;

8 But the hypocrites shall be detected and shall be cut off, either in life or in death, even as I will; and wo unto them who are cut off from my church, for the same are overcome of the world.

[Ray]

I think Jason was asking about someone who believes that he has authority from God to act in God's behalf when in fact he really doesn’t.

To that I respond with:

What makes that someone think he has God’s authority?

How does he think he gained it, and how can he truly know that he has it?

Could he have gained it from someone who simply said he had it?

How would he know whether or not that person had it, and whether it was still valid by the time it trickled down to him?

Someone who has a testimony that the apostle Peter was given the priesthood directly from our Lord may assume that anyone who passed it on from Peter has the authority to give it to others, but is that necessarily true?

If the Lord did not approve of anyone who passed it on from Peter, and wished to restore His church to Earth with new leaders, couldn’t He do it? If He did, how would anyone know it?

Some people think that since the priesthood was once again restored to Joseph Smith, that anyone who received the priesthood from Joseph Smith has the authority to pass it on to others, but is that necessarily true? How can anyone know whether or not the priesthood is still on the Earth? How can anyone know whether or not the Lord recognizes someone who claims to hold the priesthood as one of His duly authorized servants?

Is Gordon Bitner Hinkley truly the Lord’s prophet on this Earth, or is he not? If he is, how can we know it? I say that we can only know that through Faith, and by no other means. Some people truly do not know the answer to that question, but I do, and I say that I know by Faith that Gordon Bitner Hinkley is truly the Lord’s servant, appointed by Him to be the Prophet and President of His church on this Earth. Other people oppose me, and say that my testimony on this matter is untrue, but I will not retract what I have said. Someday, when we’re all standing before God, we will all know whether I was right or whether I was wrong, but I know right now, and I am satisfied.

[Jason]

Ray,

Great post. Those questions may forever remain unanswered outside of a "faith" belief. But you've really nailed it.

Thanks.

Jason

[Cal]

Originally posted by Ray@Mar 11 2004, 01:11 PM

I think Jason was asking about someone who believes that he has authority from God to act in God's behalf when in fact he really doesn’t.

To that I respond with:

What makes that someone think he has God’s authority?

How does he think he gained it, and how can he truly know that he has it?

Could he have gained it from someone who simply said he had it?

How would he know whether or not that person had it, and whether it was still valid by the time it trickled down to him?

Someone who has a testimony that the apostle Peter was given the priesthood directly from our Lord may assume that anyone who passed it on from Peter has the authority to give it to others, but is that necessarily true?

If the Lord did not approve of anyone who passed it on from Peter, and wished to restore His church to Earth with new leaders, couldn’t He do it? If He did, how would anyone know it?

Some people think that since the priesthood was once again restored to Joseph Smith, that anyone who received the priesthood from Joseph Smith has the authority to pass it on to others, but is that necessarily true? How can anyone know whether or not the priesthood is still on the Earth? How can anyone know whether or not the Lord recognizes someone who claims to hold the priesthood as one of His duly authorized servants?

Is Gordon Bitner Hinkley truly the Lord’s prophet on this Earth, or is he not? If he is, how can we know it? I say that we can only know that through Faith, and by no other means. Some people truly do not know the answer to that question, but I do, and I say that I know by Faith that Gordon Bitner Hinkley is truly the Lord’s servant, appointed by Him to be the Prophet and President of His church on this Earth. Other people oppose me, and say that my testimony on this matter is untrue, but I will not retract what I have said. Someday, when we’re all standing before God, we will all know whether I was right or whether I was wrong, but I know right now, and I am satisfied.

If FAITH = Believing without KNOWING, then....

.....Let's see, you KNOW it because you DON'T KNOW it? Interesting logic.

[Guest Starsky]

I have to disagree...that we can know it....and not just by faith.

The fruits are proof...miracles, spiritual insights, profound peace, the feeling of being attended by the Spirit...

[Cal]

Originally posted by Peace@Mar 12 2004, 12:44 AM

I have to disagree...that we can know it....and not just by faith.

The fruits are proof...miracles, spiritual insights, profound peace, the feeling of being attended by the Spirit...

Drugs will do all that too, are they divine?

[Jenda]

Originally posted by Cal+Mar 12 2004, 07:53 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Cal @ Mar 12 2004, 07:53 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--Peace@Mar 12 2004, 12:44 AM

I have to disagree...that we can know it....and not just by faith.

The fruits are proof...miracles, spiritual insights, profound peace, the feeling of being attended by the Spirit...

Drugs will do all that too, are they divine?

Why always take a smart-alecky approach, Cal?

Drugs might make you feel that way for a while, but they are man-induced feelings, they go away, and in order to get the feeling back you have to go get another fix. And after a while, it gets to be addicting. And expensive. And to pay for it, you have to start stealing and maybe even hurting people to get the money you need for your next fix.

Which of those fruits are good?

[Guest Starsky]

I have to disagree...that we can know it....and not just by faith.

The fruits are proof...miracles, spiritual insights, profound peace, the feeling of being attended by the Spirit...

Drugs will do all that too, are they divine?

No they aren't...they are Satan's counterfeit.

That is a very good point you made....people can have devine revelation, or they can have phoney, drug induced revelation.

The one from the Lord frees you and enhances your permenant senses with intelligence....the other binds you down into captivity and darkness....and you lose intelligence.

I know a few past druggies...and they are almost like they are a tad mentally challenged...They speak real slow, and this one my husband works with has to be on meds permenantly because of it.

So....just say NO to drugs...and yes to Jesus

[Guest curvette]

Originally posted by Cal@Mar 12 2004, 07:53 AM

Drugs will do all that too, are they divine?

Well, technically yes. All things were created spiritually before they were created physically...

[Winnie G]

Oh Oh I can answer this!

When I was baptized in to the church, the young man who baptized me later on that evening wile kissing me good night grabbed a handful if you get my drift.

He later apologized from a payphone and then stopped seeing me using the excuse I was the cause of his wondering hand. (Right) It hurt and upset me greatly. I stopped going to church, I did not drive and was lost as to what to do to get there.

My bishop showed up one Sunday and invited me to his home for dinner with his family.

We took a walk after dinner and he asked me what happened? I told him and he told me that even though the priesthood holder was not worthy the angels in heaven witnessed my baptism, making it a true covenant.

[Faerie]

Things like this don't bother me, nor do I think about them. I worry about my OWN worthiness and figure God will sort the rest out.

[AFDaw]

Originally posted by Cal@Mar 11 2004, 07:28 PM

If FAITH = Believing without KNOWING, then....

.....Let's see, you KNOW it because you DON'T KNOW it?  Interesting logic.

Faith = Belief in things not seen, or belief in things without physical proof

It's not "Believing without KNOWING"

[Guest bizabra]

Originally posted by ExMormon-Jason@Mar 11 2004, 10:12 AM

Gosh, I just have to say one thing.  Then I'll butt out. 

What makes me saddest about this whole thing is that you're essentially saying that unworthy priests today can still baptise, etc, but the Lord will punish the wicked priesthood holders later.   

But what about the humble servant living in the ninth century?  That followed Christ, helped their fellow man, and were baptised by a priest serving God. 

Ray said: "I say that a person is worthy of the priesthood when they are doing everything they know the Lord expects them to do." 

I agree.  But at the same time, you say that that individual's ordinances were ignored by a loving God because a Priest of the Ninth Century who was doing what they thought God wanted of them was without authority?

Something to think about....

Love,

Jason

Yeah, especially when it seems that it is the FAITH of the RECIPIENT that really seems to matter.

Given that, why wouldn't a blessing given by ANYONE with a sincere heart to someone possessing faith in the ordinance/ritual be "valid" and thus, able to tap into THE POWER of god? Why the need for the priesthood particularly anway? Eh?

[Guest bizabra]

Originally posted by LaurelTree@Mar 11 2004, 10:14 AM

I personally think that those who do blessings and temple work and are no longer worthy have to worry about gods judgement. I'm sure the church has there own way of handling things like this, but I would be less worried about my consequences from the church and more worried about what will happen when it was my turn to face the lord.

I would think that fear in its self would help keep people worthy.

Just being a good person for it's own sake isn't reward enough, huh. I guess the ability to live an ethical life is dependent upon "fear" and retribution and shame.

really.

[Guest Starsky]

Originally posted by bizabra+Mar 12 2004, 11:37 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (bizabra @ Mar 12 2004, 11:37 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--ExMormon-Jason@Mar 11 2004, 10:12 AM

Gosh, I just have to say one thing.  Then I'll butt out. 

What makes me saddest about this whole thing is that you're essentially saying that unworthy priests today can still baptise, etc, but the Lord will punish the wicked priesthood holders later.   

But what about the humble servant living in the ninth century?  That followed Christ, helped their fellow man, and were baptised by a priest serving God. 

Ray said: "I say that a person is worthy of the priesthood when they are doing everything they know the Lord expects them to do." 

I agree.  But at the same time, you say that that individual's ordinances were ignored by a loving God because a Priest of the Ninth Century who was doing what they thought God wanted of them was without authority?

Something to think about....

Love,

Jason

Yeah, especially when it seems that it is the FAITH of the RECIPIENT that really seems to matter.

Given that, why wouldn't a blessing given by ANYONE with a sincere heart to someone possessing faith in the ordinance/ritual be "valid" and thus, able to tap into THE POWER of god? Why the need for the priesthood particularly anway? Eh?

I think that this was explained once to me....

It's a matter of being a part of an order...so that not just anyone is running around performing ordinances without record or authorization.

The one thing these unworthy men have is the 'authorization' from the organization. Also, if they are only temporarily unworthy...they can receive the authority back from God at His will.

The foundation of the priesthood is faith... the power of the priesthood is charity/pure love of Christ...and the authority of the priesthood is the order.

[Cal]

Originally posted by Jenda@Mar 12 2004, 09:08 AM

I have to disagree...that we can know it....and not just by faith.

The fruits are proof...miracles, spiritual insights, profound peace, the feeling of being attended by the Spirit...

Drugs will do all that too, are they divine?

Why always take a smart-alecky approach, Cal?

Drugs might make you feel that way for a while, but they are man-induced feelings, they go away, and in order to get the feeling back you have to go get another fix. And after a while, it gets to be addicting. And expensive. And to pay for it, you have to start stealing and maybe even hurting people to get the money you need for your next fix.

Which of those fruits are good?

Jenda--give me a break! I wasn't advocating the use of drugs! My point is that just because you have those feelings doesn't mean they come from outside your own head---your brain is capable of "feeling" all kinds of things( which is the point of the drug reference) and you don't need to assume they come from anywhere besides your own head. It is well understood by neuro-science that the human brain has a bevy of neuro-transmitterst that are responsible for the feelings and emotions that we get. By stimulating various parts of the brain a neurologist can cause you to have the same kinds of feelings that people describe as religious epiphanies.

My point: Feelings, BY THEMSELVES, without some basis in external evidence, are not a good barometer of whether you have found the truth. Truth always requires a REALITY check. IOW, "feelings" generated truth is not reliable in the face of external evidence to the contrary.

A good feeling about what is otherwise rational and reasonable is iceing on the cake, but is not the cake itself.

I think that Snow's approach (though we often disagree on some things) is a reasonable one---though he respects the feelings he has about mormonism, when reality conflicts with some of the things that a lot of other mormons just take at face value (insisting on a literal interpretation of all of Genesis, or the whitewashed mormon history that most of us got in SS and Seminary classes) he is willing to question and revise. (Pardon me, Snow, for speaking for you--if I am off base, or misrepresent what you believe.)

My only point in refering to Snow was to point out that many people in the church consider themselves good mormons without relying TOTALLY on "feelings"--feelings can mislead and can be interpreted as the HG, when they are really just wishful thinking (I'm not saying the there is no influence of a HG, just that it is not always clear when one is feeling the HG and when one is hallucinating)---the only good check on this is by answering the question---does this feeling comport with what I see in front of me in the real world? I seriously doubt that a just God would punish one for using the brain he has given us. Even JS said that we are not to be commanded in all things---which says to me that JS recognized that we need to be using our own brain, faculties and talents to make decisions about what is true and correct about the world we live in.

[Guest Starsky]

Okay..Cal here is my sermon on 'feelings/emotions vs. true spiritual manifestations

When one has emotions/feelings during a spiritual talk, or experience....and not the spiritual confirmation...you will be lifted for just a short time....

Then when things get tough or cloudy, or unspiritual, you will drop down emotionally and feel bad, disappointed...even angry at God.

That is because emotions/feelings are subjective....when they feel good, you feel good...

However, when you have a confirmation from the Spirit....you are given strength....enduring strength....strength even in hard times, unspiritual times, or even confusing times. Spiritual confirmation gives you 'steadfastness' even in trials...

There is a major difference between 'feelings/emotions and actual Spiritual confirmations.