Do we come close to worshipping Joseph Smith?

[LeSellers]

9 minutes ago, Zarahemla said:

Another question. Do we worship the Holy Ghost? He's part of the God head and blasphemy against the Holy Ghost is the unpardonable sin.

Another that deserves its own topic.

Yes, we do, but not in the same way we worship Father (to Whom we pray) or the Son (in Whose name we act). I'm not sure how we manifest it (and that's a problem in my eyes), but He is a full-fledged member of the Godhead.

Lehi

[Awakened]

8 hours ago, LeSellers said:

Another that deserves its own topic.

Yes, we do, but not in the same way we worship Father (to Whom we pray) or the Son (in Whose name we act). I'm not sure how we manifest it (and that's a problem in my eyes), but He is a full-fledged member of the Godhead.

Lehi

I believe we're supposed to invite the Holy Ghost into our lives, follow Jesus Christ and do whatsoever things we do with the father in mind in Christ's name, and worship Heavenly Father.

An even better question is, do we worship Jesus Christ as well or just Heavenly Father? And what exactly does worship mean? Or should mean in the scriptures? This is actually a question I've seriously been thinking about lately.

Edited August 16, 2016 by Awakened

[LeSellers]

7 hours ago, Awakened said:

do we worship Jesus Christ as well or just Heavenly Father?

We're commanded to, at least Christ commanded the Nephites to pray directly to Him. And, if His being our Savior and Redeemer, and Lord  and(future) King aren't reasons sufficient to worship Him, I'm not sure what it would take.

"Worship" means the quality of being worthy. It's a bit ambiguous in that we don't know if we are proclaiming the worshiped Being to be worthy (which we do), or that we are worthy in order to be worshipful (which, if we do it right, we must be).

Lehi

Edited August 16, 2016 by LeSellers

[Guest]

To me, the word "worship" means that we acknowledge one's deific power over us.  The Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost qualify under that definition.  Joseph does not.

[Maureen]

On 8/15/2016 at 3:49 PM, zil said:

And I have also heard that part of it is to ensure we are focused on the right things (worshiping God, feeling the Spirit) and neither distracted by the architecture / decorations, nor accused of idol worship (via statues / paintings / other artwork), nor at risk of it (speaking of putting people on pedestals)....

If this was true, wouldn't this also apply with the Temple. If you're not distracted by all of the above in the Temple why would you be in your chapels?

M.

Edited August 18, 2016 by Maureen

[Just_A_Guy]

1 hour ago, Maureen said:

If this was true, wouldn't this also apply with the Temple. If you're not distracted by all of the above in the Temple why would you be in your chapels?

M.

I don't agree 100% with Zil's assertion--LDS meetinghouses *do* use art in an understated sort of way, and frankly your average LDS meetinghouse would be considered a very nice building by most low-church Protestant standards were it not for the fact that said LDS meetinghouse is virtually identical to dozens--maybe hundreds or thousands--of other such LDS meetinghouses.

That said, temple worship assumes a very different form and entails a different mindset and a different interaction with one's environment.  The endowment is by design an interactive, theatrical experience:  a divine drama in which the worshipper plays a key role.  This turns the temple into a grand stage.  When I go there, I'm not just contemplating Heaven and eternity.  I am in Heaven and eternity.  It's a (for Mormons) unique form of divine communion where props and even costuming don't distract from the experience--they enhance it.

Edited August 18, 2016 by Just_A_Guy

[Anddenex]

On August 15, 2016 at 0:14 PM, Nothing said:

Haven’t we been taught through official channels to see Joseph Smith as a hero and place him on a very high pedestal? John Taylor “the Book of Mormon, and this book of Doctrine and Covenants of the church, cost the best blood of the nineteenth century to bring them forth for the salvation of a ruined world…” (D&C 135:6). The hymn says “Death cannot conquer the hero again.” Following are some quotes about Joseph Smith by presidents of the Church found in Teachings of Presidents of the Church manuals:

We are taught that no one can have a testimony of Christ without having a testimony of Joseph Smith. We are taught that his character was unimpeachable, he was the most exalted of people, his moral character was without fault, he never wronged anyone, he was God-like, and some people considered him to be a superior being. What concerns me the most is how he was likened to the Savior. When speaking of “a lamb slain before the foundation of the world,” only Jesus Christ should be mentioned.

Haven’t we been taught through official channels to see Joseph Smith as a hero and place him on a very high pedestal?

He was a hero. He was the prophet of the restoration who did as God commanded. Why would that be a problem to label him a hero? It isn't. What pedestal are you referring to? We are to place him on the pedestal which God gave him and which he received willingly. Death can't conquer the hero again, true. Why would that be bothersome. Any Mormon should recognize why death cannot conquer him again, he's dead, and through Christ he lives. Not sure the problem.

We are taught that no one can have a testimony of Christ without having a testimony of Joseph Smith.

True. How can you have a testimony of the Master without recognizing his servants. The same would be said for Peter, James, and John, and any servant which held this office. This includes President Thomas S. Monson and all who held it before him. Even the Lord specified, If they reject you don't worry for they rejected me first. The Oath and Covenant of the priesthood specifies this. Receive servants we receive Jesus. Receive Jesus we receive the Father. Reject servants we reject Jesus who called them, and ultimately we reject the Father. How is that a problem?

He was the most exalted of people.

The stretch interpretation of John Taylor's quote isn't helpful, "I thought, why must God’s nobility, the salt of the earth, the most exalted of the human family, and the most perfect types of all excellence, fall victims to the cruel, fiendish hate of incarnate devils?" Notice the statement refers to anyone who walked the path God would have them walk and have paid the price for doing so with their life. This includes all the pioneers who lost their lives during the trek to Utah. This includes Isaiah. This includes all the prophets and apostles who Christ called during his life, and those called after his death in the New Testament as they were killed. "God's nobility," for doing that which God called them to do. This includes innocent children who have fallen victim, life ended, by incarnate devils as well. Not a statement of worship in the least, unless a person wants to stretch what was actually stated.

When speaking of “a lamb slain before the foundation of the world,” only Jesus Christ should be mentioned.

False. The notion of a lamb before the slaughter represents an innocent being slain by wicked men. This can be used for anyone in a position similar to Joseph Smith and Jesus Christ. You imply a personal interpretation and then stamp or draw a line that no one should pass by. Ok, this is your personal choice. 

[Guest MormonGator]

It might help to think of how we treat Smith Jr by looking at how Muslims treat their prophet (again, yes, I get the differences but there are many similarities). 

[Just_A_Guy]

It seems to me that most folks who have passed a tenth-grade English literature class, should be able to reconcile the notion of an extraordinarily great individual who still suffers from a number of human weaknesses.  The tension comes from the fact that certain classes of people are bound and determined to suggest that Smith's flaws were something other than what they actually were.

Joseph Smith was boastful but not selfish; demanding but not predatory; superstitious but not lazy; enigmatic but not fraudulent; open-minded but not an occultist; overly trusting but not ignorant; easily-offended but not vengeful; financially incompetent but not profligate; occasionally earthy but not bawdy or lecherous.  Smith was also tremendously loyal, sympathetic, generous, resourceful, curious, driven, managed to leave his followers believing themselves closer to God than they had been before meeting him and even worked miracles in their eyes, was absolutely committed to the progress of what he believed to be God's work even in the face of enormous personal sacrifice, and ultimately--when Smith had made it across the river into Iowa and was en route to the Rockies, but was begged to return by messengers fearing that his escape would trigger retributive raids against Mormons in Nauvoo--he came back, and surrendered in Carthage knowing that there were better-than-even odds that he was going to his death.  

Smith was not a common person, and IMHO the Church hasn't been wrong to point that out.

[zil]

1 hour ago, Just_A_Guy said:

I don't agree 100% with Zil's assertion--LDS meetinghouses *do* use art in an understated sort of way...

My thought was that the art depicting people doesn't appear in the chapel itself - the center for worship and the ordinance of the sacrament.  Same in the temple (at least, I don't remember artwork depicting deity, or anyone else, in the temple ordinance rooms I've been in).

Agree totally with your post, BTW.

[Guest]

I've been in chapels that have huge paintings on the walls next to the pews. But always older ones. 

[NightSG]

On 8/15/2016 at 4:49 PM, zil said:

Personally, I often lower my head and close my eyes, to concentrate on what I'm hearing

And the soft snoring sound is sort of a meditative mantra, right?