The "Only true and living church" vs "The most correct of any church".

[Ironhold]

As I've mentioned before, two of the most hateful, bigoted, and willfully ignorant people I have ever had the misfortune of encountering had doctoral degrees in their chosen fields. 

One was an avowed atheist with a degree in the social sciences. 

The other was a minister with a theological degree. 

Both of them regarded their doctorate as a shield of invulnerability. In their eyes, that they had a doctorate meant that they were all-knowing and all-powerful. In their eyes, anyone who lacked a college degree had no right to speak to them unless it was to kiss their ring or serve them somehow... and even then, no one with anything less than a graduate degree had any right to ask them questions. 

Their incredible arrogance meant that they actually only had a handful of stock arguments and "evidences" for their various positions on different topics, and they kept going right back to them no matter how many times those arguments and "evidences" were debunked; after all, they reasoned, someone who was "below" them was doing it and so how could that person be correct? 

When they were backed into a corner and shown how, in ways they could not deny, they were wrong, they inevitably threw a childish temper tantrum, often involving expletives. After all, they had a doctorate, so how could they be wrong? 

They failed to understand that "evolve or die" is a critical part of academia, and part of that evolution means admitting when one is wrong so that one can fix that flaw.

[Vort]

2 hours ago, Ironhold said:

As I've mentioned before, two of the most hateful, bigoted, and willfully ignorant people I have ever had the misfortune of encountering had doctoral degrees in their chosen fields. 

One was an avowed atheist with a degree in the social sciences. 

The other was a minister with a theological degree. 

So, then, not real degrees. 😋

[mikbone]

3 hours ago, Ironhold said:

Both of them regarded their doctorate as a shield of invulnerability. In their eyes, that they had a doctorate meant that they were all-knowing and all-powerful. In their eyes, anyone who lacked a college degree had no right to speak to them unless it was to kiss their ring or serve them somehow... and even then, no one with anything less than a graduate degree had any right to ask them questions. 

 

[Vort]

On 2/7/2024 at 9:48 AM, zil2 said:

Klaw is on the verge of declaring my typing an abomination

I just realized that the solution to your troubles with you cat is contained within his name: Walk Klaw.

[Vort]

On 2/9/2024 at 7:36 AM, prisonchaplain said:

Yes, many non-LDS (especially us Evangelicals) get caught up in claims of "the only true church." To my ears, "only living church" should be just as provocative.

"...the only true and living Church..."

A rifle that fires true is one that, in the hands of a skilled user, will hit the target it is aimed at.

Living water is water that flows, that moves, that does not stagnate, that is constantly being tumbled and refreshed by its river bed.

The Church's full name is The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. That last part is vital. Not only do we serve in the kingdom of Jesus Christ under the name of Jesus Christ, but we are required, indeed commanded, to be holy. And who is the Holy One of Israel? That would be Jesus Christ. So we are commanded not merely to do some good works, not only to offer ovations and oblations to the Most High God, but in a real sense, to fulfill Jesus' commandment in Matthew 5:48 and become like God (Jesus) by being perfect: Perfectly sanctified by the Holy Spirit.

As I'm sure many of you know, the word Saint comes from the Latin sanctus, meaning holy. The words Sacred, Sacrifice, Sacrilege, and many others arise from this same root, and all have to do with holiness or the desecration thereof. We are to be holy—Saints of the Lord Jesus Christ, achieved through our sanctification by His blood.

I think the name of the Restored Church of Christ and the description given of that holy kingdom is one of the most sacred truths vouchsafed to us as Saints. Let us be quick to sing the praises of Zion and very slow indeed to find fault with it or its anointed leaders. In this, I remind myself as much as anyone else here.

[zil2]

23 minutes ago, Vort said:

I just realized that the solution to your troubles with you cat is contained within his name: Walk Klaw.

I try, but it's too cold for either of us to stay out more than a few minutes, and then he's just frustrated.  Also, when we go outside, he wants to hunt the birdies (which are only here because I got a bird feeder so he'd have birdies to watch), and I won't let him hunt the birdies.  Further, it appears that I scare the birdies away long before he does - I'm reasonably certain he's doing the cat equivalent of rolling his eyes at me: "You're a lousy hunter, Meowmy."

(At some point not that long after I got him, I realized that his name was "walk" backwards - that wasn't intentional.  I have found a new way to keep him entertained - I'm teaching him to do "high fives" and "fist bumps" - though he doesn't make a fist, just pats my fist with his paw.)

[ZealoulyStriving]

I came in late to the conversation,but here goes:

The basic takeaways I've been getting from the Church on these controversial issues are:

*Be kind to everybody

*Witness where/to whom you feel comfortable

*Worry about your own temple worthiness and let the leaders worry about others

ZealouslyStriving (Mosiah 27:35)

 

Edited February 26 by ZealoulyStriving
Grammar

[LDSGator]

13 minutes ago, ZealoulyStriving said:

I came in late to the conversation,but here goes:

The basic takeaways I've been getting from the Church on these controversial issues are:

*Be kind to everybody

*Witness where/to whom you feel comfortable

*Worry about your own temple worthiness and let the leaders worry about others

ZealouslyStriving (Mosiah 27:35)

 

Welcome to the forums. 
 

Excellent summary 

[Traveler]

I will add what I have come to believe to this thread – for what it is worth.  I believe that the logic for one true and living church is no different from the logic used for the doctrine that there is only one true and living G-d.

There are, in my mind, many misconceptions both in attempts to explain what is true and living as there is in understanding what is and what divergent thinkers say on the subject.  Here is my effort.  If there is a true a living G-d – that being is the supreme Suzerain of law and order, especially the law and order of the kingdom over which that being resides.  Note that the term “Kingdom” is not my term, but the term used in scripture to describe that which G-d defines as his standard for his realm.

 I understand that we are flawed beings and therefore have flawed understanding of things.  Especially things pertaining to G-d and his kingdom.  It is my understanding that because we are flawed beings what happens between birth and death of any individual is not sufficient to understand or prepare for that which is eternal.  This is a primary reason why I understand the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and temple work and worship to be the only true and living church on the earth.  It is the only church doing work to redeem the dead and seal on earth that which will be sealed in Heaven.  It is also the only church I have encountered that has a good grasp on why there must be a pre-earth life existence as there needs to be post-earth live existence to prepare for eternity (though some come somewhat close).

There is one other principle in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints that I believe demonstrates why it is the only true and living expression of the true and living G-d on this earth and realm of fallen beings but that is another discussion that ties into this principle that I have already presented.  Such that if one is doubtful of what has been described thus far – there is no logic to continue.

 

The Traveler

[prisonchaplain]

Those who succeed in walking in holiness and offer lives and voices that praise Jesus--all while being cautious about finding fault--such folk are likely to bring many along on their coat tails. 

[Traveler]

On 2/27/2024 at 2:00 PM, prisonchaplain said:

Those who succeed in walking in holiness and offer lives and voices that praise Jesus--all while being cautious about finding fault--such folk are likely to bring many along on their coat tails. 

I understand that many are striving to do good things and I do not want to criticize any efforts, but the truth is that the only true and living coat tails capable of bringing soles (even their own) into heaven are those of Jesus Christ. 

 

The Traveler

[prisonchaplain]

3 hours ago, Traveler said:

I understand that many are striving to do good things and I do not want to criticize any efforts, but the truth is that the only true and living coat tails capable of bringing soles (even their own) into heaven are those of Jesus Christ. 

 

The Traveler

Amen. "Every member a missionary." Every disciple a representative of his/her Master. If a lost soul is to encounter Jesus it will often be through us. 

[prisonchaplain]

On 2/11/2024 at 7:47 PM, mikbone said:

I don't necessarily argue with this. However, I remember the saying, "The favorite doesn't always win but it's still the best bet." Those who give themselves over to the discipline of formal study have a higher chance of exhibiting intelligence than those who won't. 

[CommanderSouth]

On 2/9/2024 at 12:47 PM, The Folk Prophet said:

What matters? The attempt? Or success?

Obviously, for our own sake, it matters that we try our best. But the idea that our failure or success in how we interact with others, despite our best efforts, determine their salvation is not correct. 

God does His work. We do our best. 

The OP is suggesting that our bedside imperfections are key to other's damnation. 

Sorry for revisiting this after a few months.  But I want to EMPHATICALLY state I am NOT saying "bedside imperfections are key to other's damnation".  I am saying we need to learn to speak when God has spoken, and be silent when he has been silent.  I guess text just doesn't carry enough context.

We don't need to look beyond what he has given us, but also we need to stand firm in what he has.  I feel bad that I made this sound otherwise.  I'm simply saying that we need to be careful in driving those away when going to far.

But, it has to be said (as you and others have), we need to make sure we go far enough, else we do ourselves and others a disservice.

I'm happy to leave it at that.

Edited April 26 by CommanderSouth
Finality :D

[The Folk Prophet]

25 minutes ago, CommanderSouth said:

Sorry for revisiting this after a few months.  But I want to EMPHATICALLY state I am NOT saying "bedside imperfections are key to other's damnation".  I am saying we need to learn to speak when God has spoken, and be silent when he has been silent.  I guess text just doesn't carry enough context.

We don't need to look beyond what he has given us, but also we need to stand firm in what he has.  I feel bad that I made this sound otherwise.  I'm simply saying that we need to be careful in driving those away when going to far.

But, it has to be said (as you and others have), we need to make sure we go far enough, else we do ourselves and others a disservice.

I'm happy to leave it at that.

I guess what I can't help but think is.... we always look at these sorts of things as if our job is to make it as easy as possible for others to return to God. To remove all obstacles. To lay out the red carpet, etc., etc.

Obviously there is some correctness to this idea.

And yet...

Life is meant to be a trial.

And how do we know that we aren't meant to be a trial for someone else? I mean....maybe God put someone in our path because He knew we'd rub them the wrong way in everything we say and do and they're being tested to see if they'll stay true to Him despite that?

That doesn't mean we ought to go about being jerks to people on purpose with the idea that we're testing them. (Everything being relative. Because He has asked us to speak truth boldly and warned us that we will offend, and he that is ashamed because of the offense of the world is not worthy, etc., etc.)

I just worry about second-guessing that because of OUR wisdom in what's offensive and what isn't.

The simple matter-of-fact is that Christ offended. Constantly. Every where He went. He offended, and offended, and offended. They put Him to death for it. And we've been asked to take up the cross and follow Him. We should expect that doing so will EXTREMELY offend others.

I've learned, sadly, that speaking the truth offends. And it offends badly and often. If we speak the truth, we will offend.

I get what you're saying. I have, myself, often made changes in my communication methods to try and better align with what I believe God would have me do and say. But we also need to be careful to not hide away, fail to speak what is true and right, etc., because we fear offending others. There's obviously a balance there to be struck. And maybe some strike it easier than others. I struggle with it.

[Carborendum]

From personal experience, helping others is not only hard work, it is sometimes self-defeating.  I've tended to focus my energies on trying to remove "clutter".  We try to make things clearer by removing some of the confusing mess that life tends to throw at us.  When things are clear, they can see truth.

Then I notice two paths people tend to take:

• People don't notice that the clutter is gone.  They've lived with it for so long, they don't even know how to behave without the clutter.  So, they keep doing what they have always done because they had to deal with clutter.  They've come to expect it, then embrace it.
• Some people are able to see clearly because the clutter has been removed.  They make changes and begin to experience peace and happiness for a time.  But eventually the clutter returns because... that's life.  And they go back to their old habits because they've never learned to deal with the clutter in the first place.

So, ideally, we'd find some way to show or explain to people what all the clutter is doing and how to deal with it.  Sometimes we need to clear the clutter because that is the only way they can see clearly.  But once they are able to see clearly, they need to see clearly despite the clutter.

How to do that?  I wish I knew.

Edited April 26 by Carborendum

[mikbone]

30 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

Then I notice two paths people tend to take:

What about hoarders and spartans?

Show me your home screen and I’ll know what category you are in.

[Carborendum]

3 minutes ago, mikbone said:

What about hoarders and spartans?

Show me your home screen and I’ll know what category you are in.

I'm a Spartan.  No contest. 

Ironic.

[Traveler]

Since this thread has been brought back up – I thought to add some more of my thoughts about the one and only true and “LIVING” church.  In my mind the importance of the one and only true and living church is equivalent to or saying that there is only one true and living path or way.  In a previous post of mine on this thread I used the metaphor of Kingdom that is often used in scripture in reference to the society of G-d.  Obviously, there are many kingdoms that we encounter in mortality – we could also say governments or the structure of laws by which societies on earth are governed.  Just as there is only one true and living G-d, there is only one true and living church structured with G-d’s laws (not man’s or man’s interpretations) and ordinances and commandments.

Since there were no comments about divine kingdoms or governments my assumption was that this concept was not understood or considered of upmost importance.  This leads me to believe somewhat that few are capable or interested in discussing the structure of laws by which G-d governs his Kingdom (which his Church is part).  The one example I used in a previous thread pointed directly to the law given to Peter that would allow him to seal here on earth (perform functions) within the church on earth that were valid in Heaven or after we die.  Of course, baptism is an example of such a function.   As I said previously, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is the only organization I know of on earth that claim and/or attempt to insure all have opportunity to be baptized on earth and have that sacred law sealed in heaven.  Many “churches”, rather than deal with such necessity as baptism claim that it is not all that necessary, despite the fact that Jesus himself, of necessity, was baptized. 

I would now point out that the scriptures bring to bear a second witness that there is a true and living Church in the giving witness of the “Path” or “Way” of G-d to salvation.  The post that started this thread seemed to indicate (as I understood it) that there is no such thing as the only one true and living path or way – only a best path or way available at the time.  I find no such witness in scripture.  Rather I find comments like straight, and narrow is the way or path – implying only one path leads to salvation.  Jesus said that he is the way.  I understand that to mean that He is the Christ, and that Christ (Messiah) is the only means or path of salvation and exaltation and that he is not a Christ or Messiah of confusion but of clarity and exactness for all his disciples and followers.  There is no other true and living path.  If one is not convinced, they are on the one and only true and living path it can only be because they do not know the one and only true and living G-d nor His Son (Jesus Christ).  It is not possible to know G-d without knowing His Son – the Son of G-d – Jesus Christ (the Messiah) and the one and only way that they have provided.

There is a caveat that needs to be understood.  Though the path is currently available to some in this life – it is not complete or completed in this life.  One of the simple truths that was lost from scripture that was restored in the Book of Mormon is that there is of necessity a “time” between death and the resurrection to complete the way or path.  There are spiritual echoes of this in the ancient scripture of Genesis that references the way or path to the “Tree of Life”.  The Book of Mormon provides more concerning this path in what is known as “Lehi’s Dream” of the path and the “Tree of Life”. 

It is true that other churches (religions) have access to truths.  It is possible that there are individuals in other religions and churches that know and better understand certain truths than some (even many) of the Latter-day Saints.  Their understandings and efforts to appreciate and honor the truth they have received or discovered will be of their benefit when they leave this life and await the resurrection.  Likewise, there will be many things individual Latter-day Saints will think they understand that will have to be adjusted for when they leave this life and await the resurrection.

I do not believe we (LDS) have to convince anybody of anything in this life.  Our job is to testify of Christ and teach the doctrine of Christ – particularly the doctrine of Christ that was lost and restored for us now in the Book of Mormon.   There are great advantages in this life and the next to know and follow the path holding on to rod of iron (way), being aware of the fulness of the Gospel of Christ (or doctrine of Christ) that is in the Book of Mormon and take advantage of the Laws, Ordinances and Covenants of the only true and living Church of Christ.

 

The Traveler

[prisonchaplain]

18 hours ago, Traveler said:

I do not believe we (LDS) have to convince anybody of anything in this life.  

The Traveler

This approach, often referred to as the 'soft sell,' is not about convincing or converting. It's about representing our Savior. True conversion is not in our hands. It is the Holy Spirit that convicts of sin and reveals the path to salvation. This is why some may ridicule the call to pray for a 'burning in the bosom,' but I refuse to do so. The witness of the Holy Spirit is the only true catalyst for conversion.

[LDSGator]

1 hour ago, prisonchaplain said:

True conversion is not in our hands

Very true. 
 

From the human side, trying to get others to convert or even listen to you is challenging. If you come across too strong, you’ll be looked at as a pious jerk. If you come across too soft, you won’t be viewed as someone dedicated to your cause. Believers have to walk a fine line. 

[Traveler]

2 hours ago, prisonchaplain said:

This approach, often referred to as the 'soft sell,' is not about convincing or converting. It's about representing our Savior. True conversion is not in our hands. It is the Holy Spirit that convicts of sin and reveals the path to salvation. This is why some may ridicule the call to pray for a 'burning in the bosom,' but I refuse to do so. The witness of the Holy Spirit is the only true catalyst for conversion.

Thank you for your input and response.   The point I intend to make is that there is no sell (hard or soft).  The duty of each individual is first to stand up for what they believe to be true.  There are two parts to this.  The first part of standing up for truth is to speak honestly (and completely) to what it is we believe and understand to be true and to be clear and precise as we can.  The second part is to stand as an example of that truth.  Another way to think of standing as an example of Christ is taking upon us His name.  We do not teach of Christ unless we are that example of what it is that we teach of Christ.

Christ is the mediator that assists in our reconciliation to G-d.  However, it is the choice of each person to seek a truth and then once a truth is found it is up to each individual to choose to invest and apply that truth.  This is the only “way” designated by Christ.  I believe a good example concerns Jesus and a rich young man.  Jesus spoke clearly and directly but that rich young man chose to dedicate his choice towards riches rather than Christ.   As much as Jesus loved him – the choice was left to that person.  The same happens with the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit will not convert anyone against their will.  And I do not believe a choice can be made without a clear explanation and example.

The amazing thing about the Doctrine of Christ and his example is that it is the way (path) not just to what many call salvation (forgiveness) it is the means (path or way) to freedom.  Truly it is that G-d is liberated and free – it is impossible to be free unless or intel we become like him.  Obviously, some do not want or intend to become like G-d.  Also obviously, I am not yet free (nor yet like or one with G-d) because I am yet a slave of death – but I believe that Christ has established a way to arise free – including free from death and that is done (in part) by submitting one’s self to be buried in baptism by one with authority to seal on earth that which will be sealed in heaven.

 

The Traveler

[Traveler]

On this subject of one true and living church – I would add some thoughts concerning what I believe is the “Doctrine of Christ”.  The reason is because this is one of the reasons that many “Christians” claim that we worship a different Jesus.  I do not intend to represent any other concept other than my own as a covenant Latter-day Saint.  Our good friend @prisonchaplain can, if he wishes, speak to other concepts that define Jesus differently.  Before I begin, I would explain that for each point of doctrine of Christ there is an opposing doctrine that in scripture is called “anti Christ”.  This means that, especially in the Last-days there will be a strong movement to oppose or present anti to Christ and his doctrine.

The first point is that I believe and present as the doctrine of Christ is that Jesus the Christ is the only begotten Son of G-d.  There are three operative words, only, begotten and Son.  The doctrine of Christ as I understand indicates that Jesus is unique in that his Father (both spiritually and physically) is the same.  Scripture tells us that all mankind has a Father of spirits and Jesus taught that when we pray, we should address our Father (father of our spirit) in Heaven.  More on this later.

The second point I will address of the Doctrine of Christ is that mankind (both male and female) were created physically in the image and likeness of G-d.  That the two genders of humanity are the same as the genders of G-d and are either male and female.  There are two important doctrines that follow tightly coupled (inseparable) to this doctrine.  The first is the ancient Hebrew term “ehad”, that define the one true G-d.  Always in scripture there is no reference to the one G-d that does not use the term “ehad”.  The only other oneness defined in scripture that I am aware of is in the marriage of a man and a woman are one “ehad”.  Logic would indicate that where there are clearly defined genders of man and woman – that if there is a Father that has begotten a Son that a Mother must also exist and be involved.  I would add that there should be no confusion here that gender (male and female) are an integral part of the doctrine of Christ  and what the anti-Christ doctrine is concerning gender.

The third point of the Doctrine of Christ concerns that in every way mankind was created and commanded to be like G-d.  In the Gospel of John chapter 17, Jesus speaks directly (in prayer to G-d the Father) that mankind is to be one with G-d just as (exactly and in every way the same as) Jesus is one with the Father.  Scripture tells us that man is not without the woman neither is the woman without the man – I believe indicates that marriage is necessary to be one with G-d.  And for that marriage to be valid that someone with authority to seal on earth that which is sealed in heaven needs to seal a marriage before G-d.  It is through such binding and sealed marriage that G-d becomes a father of “begotten” children.

The fourth point of the Doctrine of Christ is the condescension of G-d to be born of a woman and able to suffer death to redeem mankind from sin.  Such a condescension was necessary because other wise Christ could not suffer because of sin nor die.  Without condescension the suffering and death of Christ would be a deceptive ruse and a pretending to suffer and die.  Only through the suffering and death of Christ can the sins of mankind be mitigated.  I could speak more to this, but I will end this point here.

The fifth and final point of the Doctrine of Christ to be included in this particular post is that in order to become one with G-d the Father one must enter by the path or way (which is the word of G-d or the Doctrine of the Christ).  That if one does not believe in and take upon them the name of Christ (his doctrine) that they will be damned – meaning that becoming one with G-d the Father and His Son will be incomplete or lacking perfection.  The first step is and covenant of submission through baptism by emersion – indicating complete submission to the doctrine.  That this baptism must be performed by one like unto John the Baptist that has authority to baptize on earth a baptism that is sealed in heaven.  Those that have died without such a baptism will receive via proxy on earth by covenant Saints of G-d committed to the doctrines of Christ and stand as proxy for the L-rd.  Scripture prophesies of such Saints – “how beautiful upon the mountain (in the temples of G-d) are the feet of him the bringeth good tidings.

The Book of Mormon tells us that many precious truths have been removed from the Bible – That all things testify of G-d and His Son (the doctrines of Christ).  That the restoration of the doctrines of Christ are the fulness of the Gospel.  The promise of G-d is that those that seek, knock and ask for the truth shall receive that knowledge of the one and only true doctrines of Christ from G-d the Father through the power of the Holy Ghost.  And that through the Holy Ghost one can know the truth of all things – that all things testify of Christ.

 

The Traveler

[prisonchaplain]

 

@Traveler: Our good friend @prisonchaplain can, if he wishes, speak to other concepts that define Jesus differently. 

 

Answer:  OK. The traditional Christian teaching about Jesus is that He is God the Son, co-eternal, co-equal with the Father (and the Spirit). There is a perception that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints teaches that Jesus is completely separate from the Father (and so is perhaps in some sense less). Further, the teaching that some men may become gods is perceived as detracting from God's eternal role over us. 

Edited Tuesday at 07:27 PM by prisonchaplain

[Traveler]

4 hours ago, prisonchaplain said:

 

@Traveler: Our good friend @prisonchaplain can, if he wishes, speak to other concepts that define Jesus differently. 

 

Answer:  OK. The traditional Christian teaching about Jesus is that He is God the Son, co-eternal, co-equal with the Father (and the Spirit). There is a perception that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints teaches that Jesus is completely separate from the Father (and so is perhaps in some sense less). Further, the teaching that some men may become gods is perceived as detracting from God's eternal role over us. 

Thank you for your response.  I appreciate your always kind attitude.  You are correct that LDS believe that within the doctrine of Christ is the notion that the intended purpose of man is to become a G-d; for both men and women - in the image and likeness of G-d the Father  (Mother???) - Anything less we see as a limit of perfection – or the more common term -- Damnation.  I do not intend to argue these points unless someone desires to understand the why and our (my) logic and interpretation of sacred scripture.  These are points I do not see being rectified through discussion anytime soon and something we all ought to be aware.  There are many points upon which we agree that I believe we can stand together concerning.  I have no problem that much of Christianity is sure that we LDS worship a different Jesus.  Since these are the last days – though for a long time I doubted I would live long enough to experience – Never-the-less, it just may be possible that the L-rd himself will resolve all remaining discrepancies in the not-so-distant future.

 

Thanks

 

The Traveler