LDS beliefs about Jesus Christ?

[Peter_John]

No, it was just a snappy answer after being shocked at your hypocricy. In both the Catholic and LDS churches, men represent the church and make judgements on other members of the church. However, God is the real judge and not these mortal men. There is no fundamental difference between the Catholics and LDS in this area.

There is a fundamental difference. LDS leaders do not have lifetime responsibility for any given role, unless they are Patriarchs or General Authorities (and now there are actually temporary general authorities as well).

CATHOLIC RECONCILIATION
I will apply it to the Sacrament of Reconciliation. In Catholicism, this rests in the hands of the Priest. Neither LDS nor Catholic can partake of the Lord’s Supper while guilty of an unresolved “mortal sin”. Resolving this, a Catholic will go to reconciliation and the Holy Spirit will advise the priest if repentance is sufficient, determine penance (and that, if involving a crime, might involve turning oneself into police). The Priest can never disclose what is said, and cannot use this information for anything else – ever. A Catholic can confess to any priest at any time-- the sacrament knows no heirarchy. I confess to a retired priest who counsels me about traditional Catholicism (he was ordained in 1958) because I feel the need to confess often, and this could burden my busy pastor.

MORMON RECONCILIATION
In Mormonism you talk to your Bishop/Branch President. You can only confess to the appropriate individual authority. If he determines the sin sufficiently serious according to your knowledge, he has to call what used to be called a Church Court, and is now called a disciplinary council. Let’s say you are guilty of adultery (or fornication if single). If you’re married he may tell you that you also have to confess to your wife, or to the husband of the wife with whom you commited the sin.

He will ask if you committed the sin with a member of the church, and you will have to name the person. If the person is from your ward or branch, he will attend to contacting the other person. If from another ward or branch he will contact the appropriate authority and notify them of someone who has seriously sinned and needs to be interviewed.

If you hold the Aaronic Priesthood the court will only be your bishop and his counselors, though if it is a branch in a stake it will involve the Stake President, and if a branch in a mission it will involve the mission president. So, you will ate least have to confess to three people, not counting the clerk taking minutes, or the stake or mission president, and the proceedings of this court will become a permanent part of your membership record – just in case you ever sin again, even if the court decides no further discipline is needed.

If you are an Elder, it has to go before a Stake High Council Court, and you have to confess, in addition to already having confessed to your Bishop, to 13 men and a clerk taking minutes, and the details will again become a part of your permanent membership record. They may choose to do nothing as well.

However in either cae you could be disfellowshipped, which involves a loss of some mebership priveleges, or excommunicated, which renders your baptism invalid. In either a local or High Council court, you need permission from Salt Lake to be rebaptized, and the details of the sin you confessed remain on record with you membership record – even if you never return to the Church. But you want to – so you work on it and years pass.

Perhaps your Bishop/Stake President decides some years later that he thinks you have fully repented. He calls a High Council Court again – or if you’ve moved the Stake President where you live calls a High Council Court again. Again you get to confess to 13 more men, and if one of them does not support your re-baptism, you get to come back and do it all over again in a year, and again, and again – and if one of the men on the board happens to be the father of the woman (or man) you had sex with, it could take years before he accepts it. Then in some cases it still has to go to the First Presidency.

Here is my point: Any number of these men to whom you have confessed these most personal details of the worst thing you’ve ever done could at any time become just another member of the congregation. They are good men, and will never tell anyone what you did, but they know, and the longer it takes, the more men know, and now they are only common members like you.

So, you get rebaptized. You are assured of the Church’s forgiveness, and the Lord’s – what they do not tell you is that your baptismal date is marked as a rebaptism so any clerk who sees your record knows that at sometime in the past you were excommunicated. Also, assume you were young, and you made it back into the Church while young, have been a good memeber and want to serve a mission. Now you have a new Stake President who gets a notice that a General Authority has to interview you because you were excommunicated. He asks what you were excommunicated for, and once again you confess something for which you have been told you were forgiven. Then you interview with the general authority, and he asks – and you confess to something you’ve been forgiven of again. Your garments are tainted forever, despite having done all you were told.

CONCLUSION
That is one difference between LDS priesthood and Catholic Priesthood. I can tell you having experienced both perspectives that the role of Catholic clergy differs from LDS clergy in a way a lifetime Mormon, and even most Protestants can never ubderstand. When our priests and bishops bless the Eucharist it becomes the literal body and blood of Christ, and everything else revolves around that.

 

[SteveVH]

No, this is not true. Again, I cite 1 Corinthians 11:27-“Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord.”. This verse is tied to the Catholic belief in examining one’s conscience before partaking of the Eucharist, and not partaking if they are in a state of mortal sin, which makes them unworthy to partake. Partaking of the Eucharist worthily does not mean that one is not in need of redemption or salvation.

Being “guilty of the body and blood of the Lord” means not recognizing the true presence of Christ in the Eucharist (as Mormons believe), as Paul plainly states. Obviously, if the true presence of the body and blood of the Lord were not there, then one could not be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord. Since Mormons have no authority to concecrate the bread and wine (nor do they even use wine) there is no body and blood of the Lord present anyway so the question is moot as far your beliefs are concerned.

From the Catholic standpoint, however, it follows that if one does, indeed, believe in the true presence of the body and blood of the Lord that one should be free from mortal sin because when one is in mortal sin the soul is supernaturally dead and uninhabitable by Christ. Even when we approach the Eucharist in a state of grace (free from mortal sin), however, we are not worthy. In other words, we do not receive the Eucharist because we are worthy, but rather because we are not worthy and are in need of this heavenly food, the Bread of Life. If we were worthy we would have no need of Christ.

If you state-" If you are not free from sin then you are not keeping the commandments.", then naturally the converse is true, if you are free from sin, then you are keeping the commandments. And we can invert that as well to say that if you are keeping the commandments, you are free from sin.

How does that change anything I said? If you claim to keep the commandments you are saying that you are free from sin either way you cut it. It was you who claimed that the commandments were easy to keep, implying that you do keep them and therefore are free from sin.

One of the commandments for Latter-day Saints is to always repent, which signifies that we do not believe that keeping the commandments means that one is always free from sin.

This is nonsensical. You are claiming that you keep the commandments but keeping the commandments does not mean you are free from sin. How can one be in sin if they are keeping the commandments?

We know that we fail at some point, and that through the atonement, repentance is possible, following the command of Christ to repent of our sins. Again, Latter-day Saints believe that we are commanded to 'endure to the end", which naturally involves continuous repentance.

And what do you actually do, in concrete terms, to repent? I hear this all the time but is there some common practice within the LDS Church that you follow, or is it just a personal thing?

I am worthy to enter into the temple, however I do not believe that I am sinless, but that I am following Christ’s command to always repent of my sins.

Which means that, while you keep the commandment to repent you have broken another, otherwise you would have no need to repent.

There is no contradiction or dichotomy here. Latter-day Saints do not believe that being worthy means that one does not need redemption or salvation. It is the complete opposite for us.

We believe there is only one Who is worthy and we are reliant on His worthiness in order to obtain salvation.

 

[Jay53]

MORMON RECONCILIATION
In Mormonism you talk to your Bishop/Branch President. You can only confess to the appropriate individual authority. If he determines the sin sufficiently serious according to your knowledge, he has to call what used to be called a Church Court, and is now called a disciplinary council. Let’s say you are guilty of adultery (or fornication if single). If you’re married he may tell you that you also have to confess to your wife, or to the husband of the wife with whom you commited the sin.

He will ask if you committed the sin with a member of the church, and you will have to name the person. If the person is from your ward or branch, he will attend to contacting the other person. If from another ward or branch he will contact the appropriate authority and notify them of someone who has seriously sinned and needs to be interviewed.

If you hold the Aaronic Priesthood the court will only be your bishop and his counselors, though if it is a branch in a stake it will involve the Stake President, and if a branch in a mission it will involve the mission president. So, you will ate least have to confess to three people, not counting the clerk taking minutes, or the stake or mission president, and the proceedings of this court will become a permanent part of your membership record – just in case you ever sin again, even if the court decides no further discipline is needed.

If you are an Elder, it has to go before a Stake High Council Court, and you have to confess, in addition to already having confessed to your Bishop, to 13 men and a clerk taking minutes, and the details will again become a part of your permanent membership record. They may choose to do nothing as well.

However in either cae you could be disfellowshipped, which involves a loss of some mebership priveleges, or excommunicated, which renders your baptism invalid. In either a local or High Council court, you need permission from Salt Lake to be rebaptized, and the details of the sin you confessed remain on record with you membership record – even if you never return to the Church. But you want to – so you work on it and years pass.

Perhaps your Bishop/Stake President decides some years later that he thinks you have fully repented. He calls a High Council Court again – or if you’ve moved the Stake President where you live calls a High Council Court again. Again you get to confess to 13 more men, and if one of them does not support your re-baptism, you get to come back and do it all over again in a year, and again, and again – and if one of the men on the board happens to be the father of the woman (or man) you had sex with, it could take years before he accepts it. Then in some cases it still has to go to the First Presidency.

Here is my point: Any number of these men to whom you have confessed these most personal details of the worst thing you’ve ever done could at any time become just another member of the congregation. They are good men, and will never tell anyone what you did, but they know, and the longer it takes, the more men know, and now they are only common members like you.

So, you get rebaptized. You are assured of the Church’s forgiveness, and the Lord’s – what they do not tell you is that your baptismal date is marked as a rebaptism so any clerk who sees your record knows that at sometime in the past you were excommunicated. Also, assume you were young, and you made it back into the Church while young, have been a good memeber and want to serve a mission. Now you have a new Stake President who gets a notice that a General Authority has to interview you because you were excommunicated. He asks what you were excommunicated for, and once again you confess something for which you have been told you were forgiven. Then you interview with the general authority, and he asks – and you confess to something you’ve been forgiven of again. Your garments are tainted forever, despite having done all you were told.

CONCLUSION
That is one difference between LDS priesthood and Catholic Priesthood. I can tell you having experienced both perspectives that the role of Catholic clergy differs from LDS clergy in a way a lifetime Mormon, and even most Protestants can never ubderstand. When our priests and bishops bless the Eucharist it becomes the literal body and blood of Christ, and everything else revolves around that.

 

[catholic-rcia]

SteveVH,

Being worthy means one is keeping the commandments–simple, straightforward, and not something that needs to be excused by just saying “unworthy servants” and excusing behavior. The commandments were given to be kept and be a blessing to people by keeping them.

Peace to you and all.

Starting reading the post a while ago and this is as far as I could get. So if others have replied the same sorry. I have to write this now.

Parker
(Just one small lie, a little gossip messes this all up Parker)

For thirteen years I have been helping LDS who want to know about Christianity. Parker, I wish I had met you thirteen years ago. I have been wrong for thirteen full years telling them that we can’t follow the Ten Commandments.
Now I know why the LDS do not have the Sacrament of Confession. I have been working side by side with many LDS who do have the worthy temple cards. I had no idea they were so perfect. I guess the imperfections I see are just to throw me off.

No body wants to come off as being that perfect, following all the commandments and such. It would be like if Jesus really did have brothers and sisters. Could you imagine being one of them? How come you can’t be like Him? Your brother would not do that, and so forth. So now I can see why they hide this when they are around me.

Parker what you wrote offends me tremendously. Nothing against you at all. What I am saying is it strikes so deeply. You do not have a clue as to Authentic Christianity with what you wrote. Not even an infants understanding of it.

I do say this in all truth, humility and the love of Christ. You need to dig a whole lot deeper because you are not just missing a little bit of what others here are trying to show you. You’re missing everything. Spiritual blindness is very real. You are the best example I have yet to find. If you only knew how you look to others here when you write this kind of stuff you would stop. Its not Christian reality. I myself am an unworthy servant of Christ. And I know why. I am Christian.

 

[ParkerD]

Starting reading the post a while ago and this is as far as I could get. So if others have replied the same sorry. I have to write this now.

Parker
(Just one small lie, a little gossip messes this all up Parker)

For thirteen years I have been helping LDS who want to know about Christianity. Parker, I wish I had met you thirteen years ago. I have been wrong for thirteen full years telling them that we can’t follow the Ten Commandments.
Now I know why the LDS do not have the Sacrament of Confession. I have been working side by side with many LDS who do have the worthy temple cards. I had no idea they were so perfect. I guess the imperfections I see are just to throw me off.

No body wants to come off as being that perfect, following all the commandments and such. It would be like if Jesus really did have brothers and sisters. Could you imagine being one of them? How come you can’t be like Him? Your brother would not do that, and so forth. So now I can see why they hide this when they are around me.

Parker what you wrote offends me tremendously. Nothing against you at all. What I am saying is it strikes so deeply. You do not have a clue as to Authentic Christianity with what you wrote. Not even an infants understanding of it.

I do say this in all truth, humility and the love of Christ. You need to dig a whole lot deeper because you are not just missing a little bit of what others here are trying to show you. You’re missing everything. Spiritual blindness is very real. You are the best example I have yet to find. If you only knew how you look to others here when you write this kind of stuff you would stop. Its not Christian reality. I myself am an unworthy servant of Christ. And I know why. I am Christian.

Catholic-RCIA,

OK–that’s all right with me. Since we’re disclosing our thoughts on “worthiness” which includes being able to trust one who is seeking to follow the Ten Commandments, then I suppose I will note that I have come to see things differently than I would have expected about expectations, so that has been a bit of an eye-opener and quite surprising to me in that I simply had thought Catholics lived by the Ten Commandments as a deep conviction to do so.

Way different, definitely.

 

[Telstar]

Continuation to Telstar:

(5) If a person is worthy to enter a temple, then that means they have answered some very basic worthiness questions, each of which can readily be tied to the Bible. It means that they need to be honest in their answers, and that their worthiness ultimately is up to them personally and that their personal repentance may be a part of that if needed. But, again, the questions are basic, and frankly aren’t that “difficult” to live by.

I may not have answered your questions in the way you wished, but I’ve tried to shed some light about them, so best wishes to you and have a good day, sincerely wished.

ParkerD,

Thank you for at least attempting to answer my questions. I appreciate it. As usual, those answers always seem to lead me to ponder many more questions. I have to disagree that those questions of temple “worthiness” are either basic or “aren’t that ‘difficult’ to live by”. I have seen them posted elsewhere (not on this forum), and they are extremely personal and put the person conducting the ‘interview’ in a position of moral judgement of the person seeking the ‘recommend’. They also contain many ‘conditions’ that I find, quite frankly, are completely unrelated to an individual’s ‘state of soul’ that should ever be considered in determining whether or not they are worthy of ‘exaltation/salvation’ (at least IMHO).

One of those that I find to be rather unusual, is the requirement of a person tithing a full 10% of their income to the church. How is that relevant to anyone’s ‘state of soul’ in any way? Does that mean that only those who can afford to do that are ‘worthy’ of salvation/exaltation? Wouldn’t that mean that it would be far easier for a rich man to enter Heaven, contrary to what Jesus said in the Gospels? What about the poor that Jesus loved so much? Are they truly considered to be unworthy of becoming Christlike, according to LDS theology, because they can barely get by on what they have, and can’t afford to give that much? This is one of the main things that stopped me in my tracks when I first read about the requirements for ‘temple recommends’. It made me very sad to think about all of the poor souls that would be considered to be ‘second class citizens’, if that was a real condition for salvation/exaltation.

 

[Telstar]

There is a fundamental difference. LDS leaders do not have lifetime responsibility for any given role, unless they are Patriarchs or General Authorities (and now there are actually temporary general authorities as well).

CATHOLIC RECONCILIATION
I will apply it to the Sacrament of Reconciliation. In Catholicism, this rests in the hands of the Priest. Neither LDS nor Catholic can partake of the Lord’s Supper while guilty of an unresolved “mortal sin”. Resolving this, a Catholic will go to reconciliation and the Holy Spirit will advise the priest if repentance is sufficient, determine penance (and that, if involving a crime, might involve turning oneself into police). The Priest can never disclose what is said, and cannot use this information for anything else – ever. A Catholic can confess to any priest at any time-- the sacrament knows no heirarchy. I confess to a retired priest who counsels me about traditional Catholicism (he was ordained in 1958) because I feel the need to confess often, and this could burden my busy pastor.

MORMON RECONCILIATION
In Mormonism you talk to your Bishop/Branch President. You can only confess to the appropriate individual authority. If he determines the sin sufficiently serious according to your knowledge, he has to call what used to be called a Church Court, and is now called a disciplinary council. Let’s say you are guilty of adultery (or fornication if single). If you’re married he may tell you that you also have to confess to your wife, or to the husband of the wife with whom you commited the sin.

He will ask if you committed the sin with a member of the church, and you will have to name the person. If the person is from your ward or branch, he will attend to contacting the other person. If from another ward or branch he will contact the appropriate authority and notify them of someone who has seriously sinned and needs to be interviewed.

If you hold the Aaronic Priesthood the court will only be your bishop and his counselors, though if it is a branch in a stake it will involve the Stake President, and if a branch in a mission it will involve the mission president. So, you will ate least have to confess to three people, not counting the clerk taking minutes, or the stake or mission president, and the proceedings of this court will become a permanent part of your membership record – just in case you ever sin again, even if the court decides no further discipline is needed.

If you are an Elder, it has to go before a Stake High Council Court, and you have to confess, in addition to already having confessed to your Bishop, to 13 men and a clerk taking minutes, and the details will again become a part of your permanent membership record. They may choose to do nothing as well.

However in either cae you could be disfellowshipped, which involves a loss of some mebership priveleges, or excommunicated, which renders your baptism invalid. In either a local or High Council court, you need permission from Salt Lake to be rebaptized, and the details of the sin you confessed remain on record with you membership record – even if you never return to the Church. But you want to – so you work on it and years pass.

Perhaps your Bishop/Stake President decides some years later that he thinks you have fully repented. He calls a High Council Court again – or if you’ve moved the Stake President where you live calls a High Council Court again. Again you get to confess to 13 more men, and if one of them does not support your re-baptism, you get to come back and do it all over again in a year, and again, and again – and if one of the men on the board happens to be the father of the woman (or man) you had sex with, it could take years before he accepts it. Then in some cases it still has to go to the First Presidency.

Here is my point: Any number of these men to whom you have confessed these most personal details of the worst thing you’ve ever done could at any time become just another member of the congregation. They are good men, and will never tell anyone what you did, but they know, and the longer it takes, the more men know, and now they are only common members like you.

So, you get rebaptized. You are assured of the Church’s forgiveness, and the Lord’s – what they do not tell you is that your baptismal date is marked as a rebaptism so any clerk who sees your record knows that at sometime in the past you were excommunicated. Also, assume you were young, and you made it back into the Church while young, have been a good memeber and want to serve a mission. Now you have a new Stake President who gets a notice that a General Authority has to interview you because you were excommunicated. He asks what you were excommunicated for, and once again you confess something for which you have been told you were forgiven. Then you interview with the general authority, and he asks – and you confess to something you’ve been forgiven of again. Your garments are tainted forever, despite having done all you were told.

CONCLUSION
That is one difference between LDS priesthood and Catholic Priesthood. I can tell you having experienced both perspectives that the role of Catholic clergy differs from LDS clergy in a way a lifetime Mormon, and even most Protestants can never ubderstand. When our priests and bishops bless the Eucharist it becomes the literal body and blood of Christ, and everything else revolves around that.

I’ll see that and raise it a few :bigyikes: :bigyikes: :bigyikes: :bigyikes: !!!

 

[ParkerD]

ParkerD,

Thank you for at least attempting to answer my questions. I appreciate it. As usual, those answers always seem to lead me to ponder many more questions. I have to disagree that those questions of temple “worthiness” are either basic or “aren’t that ‘difficult’ to live by”. I have seen them posted elsewhere (not on this forum), and they are extremely personal and put the person conducting the ‘interview’ in a position of moral judgement of the person seeking the ‘recommend’. They also contain many ‘conditions’ that I find, quite frankly, are completely unrelated to an individual’s ‘state of soul’ that should ever be considered in determining whether or not they are worthy of ‘exaltation/salvation’ (at least IMHO).

One of those that I find to be rather unusual, is the requirement of a person tithing a full 10% of their income to the church. How is that relevant to anyone’s ‘state of soul’ in any way? Does that mean that only those who can afford to do that are ‘worthy’ of salvation/exaltation? Wouldn’t that mean that it would be far easier for a rich man to enter Heaven, contrary to what Jesus said in the Gospels? What about the poor that Jesus loved so much? Are they truly considered to be unworthy of becoming Christlike, according to LDS theology, because they can barely get by on what they have, and can’t afford to give that much? This is one of the main things that stopped me in my tracks when I first read about the requirements for ‘temple recommends’. It made me very sad to think about all of the poor souls that would be considered to be ‘second class citizens’, if that was a real condition for salvation/exaltation.

Hi, Telstar,

I understand your concern. It appears there is somewhat of an unfamiliarity with, or at least a “that was part of the Old Law” view of tithing and the blessings promised in Malachi 3. Latter-day Saints have experienced those blessings by offering tithes and offerings such as also described in Isaiah 58, so the “poor” gain those same blessings and if they are struggling with basic needs then the application of the blessings promised in Isaiah 58 are in full effect for them.

Many Latter-day Saints in third world nations or in up-and-coming growing economies are on the leading edge of growing their nation, including economically and educationally, and they do that through living by the commandments including the law of tithing and gaining the blessings promised in Malachi 3 for themselves and their families. There are examples by the thousands, so they are not idle tales and Latter-day Saints don’t feel “forced” to offer tithing, they feel “blessed” to offer tithing because those promises are sure.

Wishing peace to all. I am a lover of Isaiah 58 and its promised blessings, which are also sure promises.

 

[CEM5]

CEM5,

I really don’t have much time. First, Hagar was called in the Bible “wife” of Abraham, and I realize it was for the purpose of begetting a child since Sarah was childless–but she was described as “wife”.

The idea that Abraham “gave his wife” as you noted, is incorrect. He did say she was his “cousin” (same word in their language as “sister”, and a truth in that she was his cousin), and did it because otherwise there would have been the temptation to have him killed so they could marry her if they knew he was her husband at the outset–in other words, he wanted time to establish a relationship with them before they would just have him killed upon seeing her for the first time.

But that doesn’t mean Abraham was treating Sarah in the way you described of having her given “for the pleasure of another”. There is not the slightest indication that she had a relationship outside of her marriage, nor that Abraham planned that she would or even thought that she would. He was going to be a stranger where they were going, and needed time to be allowed to become known by the people and the Pharaoh, but the evidence is that he planned to disclose that she was indeed his wife after he had had the chance to become known by them.

A wish of peace to you.

Hi Parker,

The Bible does not describe Hagar as the wife of Abraham. She is described as the handmaid of Sarah. When Sarah gave her handmaid (the slave Hagar) to Abraham, the Bible describes the sexual union as

Genesis 16
1 Now Sarai, the wife of Abram, had brought forth no children: but having a handmaid, an Egyptian, named Agar, 2 She said to her husband: Behold, the Lord hath restrained me from bearing: go in unto my handmaid, it may be I may have children of her at least. And when he agreed to her request, 3 She took Agar the Egyptian her handmaid, ten years after they first dwelt in the land of Chanaan, and gave her to her husband to wife. 4 And he went in to her.

And Parker, Abraham was married to Sarah, making her his wife, and when he feared for his life, he lied and called her his sister so as not to be killed. By lying he allowed his wife to be taken to pleasure another man.

I have provided you with the Scriptures that clearly show Abraham lying and letting his wife be given to another man.

I hope you will take the time to read the Scripture I have provided.

Gen 12
11 When he was about to enter Egypt, he said to his wife Sarai, "I know well that you are a woman beautiful in appearance; 12 and when the Egyptians see you, they will say, “This is his wife’; then they will kill me, but they will let you live. 13 Say you are my sister, so that it may go well with me because of you, and that my life may be spared on your account.” 14 When Abram entered Egypt the Egyptians saw that the woman was very beautiful. 15 When the officials of Pharaoh saw her, they praised her to Pharaoh. And the woman was taken into Pharaoh’s house. 16 And for her sake he dealt well with Abram; and he had sheep, oxen, male donkeys, male and female slaves, female donkeys, and camels. 17 But the Lord afflicted Pharaoh and his house with great plagues because of Sarai, Abram’s wife. 18 So Pharaoh called Abram, and said, "What is this you have done to me? Why did you not tell me that she was your wife? 19 Why did you say, “She is my sister,’ so that I took her for my wife? Now then, here is your wife, take her, and be gone.” 20 And Pharaoh gave his men orders concerning him; and they set him on the way, with his wife and all that he had.

The others you can look up later.

blessings to you,
CEM

I

 

[ParkerD]

Hi Parker,

The Bible does not describe Hagar as the wife of Abraham. She is described as the handmaid of Sarah. When Sarah gave her handmaid (the slave Hagar) to Abraham, the Bible describes the sexual union as

Genesis 16
1 Now Sarai, the wife of Abram, had brought forth no children: but having a handmaid, an Egyptian, named Agar, 2 She said to her husband: Behold, the Lord hath restrained me from bearing: go in unto my handmaid, it may be I may have children of her at least. And when he agreed to her request, 3 She took Agar the Egyptian her handmaid, ten years after they first dwelt in the land of Chanaan, and gave her to her husband to wife. 4 And he went in to her.

And Parker, Abraham was married to Sarah, making her his wife, and when he feared for his life, he lied and called her his sister so as not to be killed. By lying he allowed his wife to be taken to pleasure another man.

I have provided you with the Scriptures that clearly show Abraham lying and letting his wife be given to another man.

I hope you will take the time to read the Scripture I have provided.

Gen 12
11 When he was about to enter Egypt, he said to his wife Sarai, "I know well that you are a woman beautiful in appearance; 12 and when the Egyptians see you, they will say, “This is his wife’; then they will kill me, but they will let you live. 13 Say you are my sister, so that it may go well with me because of you, and that my life may be spared on your account.” 14 When Abram entered Egypt the Egyptians saw that the woman was very beautiful. 15 When the officials of Pharaoh saw her, they praised her to Pharaoh. And the woman was taken into Pharaoh’s house. 16 And for her sake he dealt well with Abram; and he had sheep, oxen, male donkeys, male and female slaves, female donkeys, and camels. 17 But the Lord afflicted Pharaoh and his house with great plagues because of Sarai, Abram’s wife. 18 So Pharaoh called Abram, and said, "What is this you have done to me? Why did you not tell me that she was your wife? 19 Why did you say, “She is my sister,’ so that I took her for my wife? Now then, here is your wife, take her, and be gone.” 20 And Pharaoh gave his men orders concerning him; and they set him on the way, with his wife and all that he had.

The others you can look up later.

blessings to you,
CEM

I

CEM,

I am familiar with the use of the word “handmaid”, but also with the words “to wife” as even your version used.

Genesis 12:19 has a much different meaning in the KJV, so no wonder you had the impression that the Pharaoh had actually married Sarah. He hadn’t done so, as is evidenced in the KJV translation. But he had planned to do so, and yes Abraham had taken advantage of the use of the word “cousin” since Sarah was his cousin–but I think he had good reason to do so to protect his own life and be able to be the husband to Sarah also.

But we would never see that account even remotely the same way, and it’s OK with me.

Wishing peace.

 

[CEM5]

Hi again Parker - I should proof read before hitting submit:blush:

This is what I should have written:

And Parker, Abraham was married to Sarah, making her his wife, and when he feared for his life, he lied and called her his sister so as not to be killed. By lying he allowed his wife to be taken for the pleasure another man. (She is described as beautiful and you can be sure she wasn’t taken to scrub his floors! )

I have provided you with the Scriptures that clearly show Abraham lying (by not telling them they were husband and wife) and letting his wife be given to another man.

blessings to you,
CEM

 

[catholic-rcia]

Catholic-RCIA,

OK–that’s all right with me. Since we’re disclosing our thoughts on “worthiness” which includes being able to trust one who is seeking to follow the Ten Commandments, then I suppose I will note that I have come to see things differently than I would have expected about expectations, so that has been a bit of an eye-opener and quite surprising to me in that I simply had thought Catholics lived by the Ten Commandments as a deep conviction to do so.

Way different, definitely.

Yes, lets look at those differences…

So let us confidently approach the Throne of Grace to receive mercy and to find grace for timely help. Hebrews 4:16

“Those who are well do not need a physician, but the sick do. I did not come to call the righteous but sinners.” Mark 2:17b

I will say this Parker
As a devout Catholic who is very much in love with Jesus, I have a very, very deep conviction to follow the Ten Commandments. If I had cancer I would also have a deep conviction to be healed from it. If my wife had cancer I would have a very deep conviction for her to be healed from it. Thus my relationship with you can be seen for what it truly is.

Jesus knows me, He knows my sins. He knows that I know how it separates me from His Father. This is why I walk with Him daily. Day to day He makes me a better person because of my reliance on Him. The more I let Him into my life, the smaller I become. It is my wish to become smaller and smaller until there is no trace of me left.

I believe that is when my new life with Him will fully be complete, enough to last through all of eternity. And yes I will know it and I will love Him more than anything else that can possibly be loved. A gift of the kind of love the Father has always had for His Son. The gift from the Son, His love for His Father. This is the kind of progression I know as a Catholic.

But in the mean time. “Jesus I am not worthy to receive you, but only say the word and I shall be healed”

In the mean time “Your sins have been absolved, Go in the peace of Christ”
As Catholics this is freedom for us. This is following the ten commandments. We go out from there, out to the world to let others know about such love, about such Mercy, about Jesus.

Continued…

 

[catholic-rcia]

*I found this post awhile back below and saved it. You should spend a few days studying what a Catholic means when they say they are not worthy. That we are sinners, before you make the same assumptions that many others have made before you and all around you. The depth would take your breath away if you would only open up. You might come to understand why we as Catholics have the Crucifix front and center in our homes, in our churches, around our necks. Not to forget in our hearts. It is to remind us that Jesus loves us as we are. This is where true change in our lives occurs. It’s why He died for us. If we could follow the 10 commandments there would be no need for His death for us. You see we follow Jesus, He is the Ten Commandments. It’s a process of going down and getting back up. It’s a journey to the Eucharistic table, where we find reality, where we are loved, nourished to the point of truth and humility. Jesus is what brings us to confession where we say no to sin not just individually but also as the whole church on earth. Devil hates it! *

*You seem to think we use this as an excuse for bad behavior. We can just go in , confess our sins, then we are forgiven. You know what? Yes, yes and yes. We have been gifted this kind of freedom because of His unending mercy for those that honestly turn to Him, with honest and sincere confessions. Nothing less will work. . *

*But maybe you already know these things, yet still pock and prod. Because I really do not know you I could assume this is the case. But who is leading in the pocking and the prodding? If you were to go to deep your whole world as you have come to learn it by others may fall apart. Best thing that could ever happen in your life. really. Because in order to be risen in Christ you must go down. Tell me who wants to go down? How about we just focus on all the good stuff…the resurrection maybe. Who would want to focus on the death of Jesus? *

Here is that post, just one Catholics thoughts. I would look deep into this and find other comments on unworthiness. What does it mean, how it brings us closer to God. Lots of Catholic writings on this topic. Maybe even the whole Bible.

“Lord I am not worthy to receive you”

“That line in the Liturgy is based on the account in the Holy Gospels of the encounter of Christ with the centurion. His servant was back at his house sick and (presumably dying) and he came and asked Christ to heal him. Christ was willing to heal him but the centurion said “Lord, I am not worthy that you should come under my roof, but only say the word and my servant shall be healed.” Christ praised this man for his faith saying that He had not found faith like this among the children of Israel. It seems that this is a perfect line to precede the reception of Holy Communion since it simultaneously is an act of humility (unworthiness), which is simply true, to deny this is to diminish the Eucharist. It is the total expression of Christ’s love for us, which we can do nothing to merit and which we are incapable of adequately returning. This line proclaims that God has loved us first and that we are in need of His transforming Grace (implied by the reference to being healed) and restorative power, and it is an act of Faith in God’s goodness and His desire and power to fill us with His transforming Love. Certainly God loves us or else we wouldn’t exist, and His love is the grounds of our worth, we are literally nothing apart from God’s Love. We are pretty sinful afterall, filled with ingratitude and presumption. One should utterly humble themselves before recieving this most august Sacrament. The model disposition for this event is the disposition of Our Lady as she receives Her Son.”
Laudate -Dominum

 

[RebeccaJ]

Catholic-RCIA,

OK–that’s all right with me. Since we’re disclosing our thoughts on “worthiness” which includes being able to trust one who is seeking to follow the Ten Commandments, then I suppose I will note that I have come to see things differently than I would have expected about expectations, so that has been a bit of an eye-opener and quite surprising to me in that I simply had thought Catholics lived by the Ten Commandments as a deep conviction to do so.

Way different, definitely.

Too bad this didn’t come up a few weeks ago, our RCIA class just discussed the Law and the Prophets. You could have come to that one night if you wished. The deacon who taught it is very orthodox and is an excellent teacher.

Anyway, the Ten Commandments have been purposely put in order by the Catholic Church. Here is the order:

1. I am the Lord your God: You shall not have strange Gods before me.
2. You shall not take the name of the Lord your God in vain.
3. Remember to keep holy the Lord’s Day.
4. Honor your father and mother.
5. You shall not kill.
6. You shall not commit adultery.
7. You shall not steal.
8. You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.
9. You shall not covet your neighbor’s wife.
10. You shall not covet your neighbor’s goods.

The purpose of this is to bring the ten commandments to light in context of the greatest commandment of all, to love thy neighbor as thyself and Jesus’ commandment to love God with all your heart, might, mind and strength.

As placed in the order above:

1-3 fall under loving God, as we are commanded to do. Loving God being the most important for a Christian, they are listed first.

4 love of parents, which is next in importance to loving God

5-10 loving your neighbor, as thyself (which of course, requires that we love ourselves under these same laws)

These are important for Catholics, no doubt, but we do not follow them as Israel followed them. They were/are followed by Jews because this is what God gave in order to bring them to perfection.

As Christians, we are not perfected by the Law. God has given us a Son, and it is through Him we are made perfect. (“For what the law was powerless to do because it was weakened by the flesh, God did by sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh to be a sin offering.” Romans 8:3 NIV) So we follow the commandments that Jesus has given, and put the ten commandments in the Light of Christ, as Jesus has done for us.

The “thou shalt nots” being turned by Jesus to “blessed be’s”.

And last but not least, Catholics understand the ten commandments as a natural law, that is, one that is written in the hearts of all people.

Hope that helps.

 

[ParkerD]

Too bad this didn’t come up a few weeks ago, our RCIA class just discussed the Law and the Prophets. You could have come to that one night if you wished. The deacon who taught it is very orthodox and is an excellent teacher.

Anyway, the Ten Commandments have been purposely put in order by the Catholic Church. Here is the order:

1. I am the Lord your God: You shall not have strange Gods before me.
2. You shall not take the name of the Lord your God in vain.
3. Remember to keep holy the Lord’s Day.
4. Honor your father and mother.
5. You shall not kill.
6. You shall not commit adultery.
7. You shall not steal.
8. You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.
9. You shall not covet your neighbor’s wife.
10. You shall not covet your neighbor’s goods.

The purpose of this is to bring the ten commandments to light in context of the greatest commandment of all, to love thy neighbor as thyself and Jesus’ commandment to love God with all your heart, might, mind and strength.

As placed in the order above:

1-3 fall under loving God, as we are commanded to do. Loving God being the most important for a Christian, they are listed first.

4 love of parents, which is next in importance to loving God

5-10 loving your neighbor, as thyself (which of course, requires that we love ourselves under these same laws)

These are important for Catholics, no doubt, but we do not follow them as Israel followed them. They were/are followed by Jews because this is what God gave in order to bring them to perfection.

As Christians, we are not perfected by the Law. God has given us a Son, and it is through Him we are made perfect. (“For what the law was powerless to do because it was weakened by the flesh, God did by sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh to be a sin offering.” Romans 8:3 NIV) So we follow the commandments that Jesus has given, and put the ten commandments in the Light of Christ, as Jesus has done for us.

The “thou shalt nots” being turned by Jesus to “blessed be’s”.

And last but not least, Catholics understand the ten commandments as a natural law, that is, one that is written in the hearts of all people.

Hope that helps.

RJ,

Thanks–that does help clarify, and elevates my expectations which had been undermined by some other previous comments. I had thought they were leaving something out, so it seems that indeed they were. Thanks.

 

[Korihor]

Catholic-RCIA,

OK–that’s all right with me. Since we’re disclosing our thoughts on “worthiness” which includes being able to trust one who is seeking to follow the Ten Commandments, then I suppose I will note that I have come to see things differently than I would have expected about expectations, so that has been a bit of an eye-opener and quite surprising to me in that I simply had thought Catholics lived by the Ten Commandments as a deep conviction to do so.

Way different, definitely.

Mormons must be worthy to receive a temple recommend, correct? Must they be worthy to use it? How does that work in practice, as recommends last for a year and I can’t imagine anyone remining sinless and, therefore, worthy, for an entire year. Suppose you leave your interview with recommend in hand. Leaving the parking lot, someone cuts you off and you uncharitably (if unintentionally) scowl and curse. Going home, you’re still in a bad mood and snap at the kids and your wife. Later that night, you’re watching a television program and a scantily clad girl is shown on the screen and, momentarily, you entertain a lustful thought about her. You’re now unworthy of that recommend, not to mention, no longer worthy to exercise your priesthood at home. If you tell me this kind of thing doesn’t happen every single day of everyone’s life, then I have a bridge to sell you. Sure, most people aren’t murderers or adulters, but at multiple points in every single day of your life, you commit minor sins (of omission or commission) against God, your family, and your neigbors. A conscientious Mormon must be constantly on their knees at multiple times during the day to continually repent and re-earn personal worthiness in order to enable use of that annual temple recommend. Or, does personal worthiness only apply during the annual interview, i.e., by obtaining one you’re covered for a multitude of minor sins for a year?

Korihor

 

[catholic-rcia]

Re-cap
Originally Posted by ParkerD

*Quote: *Being worthy means one is keeping the commandments–simple, straightforward, and not something that needs to be excused by just saying “unworthy servants” and excusing behavior. The commandments were given to be kept and be a blessing to people by keeping them.
Quote: I would have expected about expectations, so that has been a bit of an eye-opener and quite surprising to me in that I simply had thought Catholics lived by the Ten Commandments as a deep conviction to do so.

Parker you really are among friends here by the postings I am reading. The first step to holiness is in recognizing your sinful nature. The second step would be recognizing Jesus. If you can do step 2 first its easier to deal with step 1.

Go to the catechism search online and enter the word holiness
scborromeo.org/ccc.htm
Or Sainthood. Read all you can about it. This way you will have tilled the ground a bit more in order to speak about sin and holiness better. With a true and sincere understanding of us Catholics. If you knew more you would not have made the comments you made above. You would see those comments in a new light and want to delete them. Trust me on this.

This would be a good journey for you Parker, to study Christian Holiness. If you have a Catholic Monastery in your area see if you can visit it. See if you can speak to the residents about Holiness, what it takes to become Holy, to become a Saint. You may not find any holy souls there but I bet they could give you some good insight. The biggest problem with becoming a Holy person is to try to become a Holy person. Most likely that would be sin. It really has to come naturally through a relationship with Jesus. The fact is most Holy persons would not see themselves as being a Holy person, to the contrary most likely.

scborromeo.org/ccc.htm…
"If the Church was a body composed of different members, it couldn’t lack the noblest of all; it must have a Heart, and a Heart BURNING WITH LOVE. And I realized that this love alone was the true motive force which enabled the other members of the Church to act; if it ceased to function, the Apostles would forget to preach the gospel, the Martyrs would refuse to shed their blood. LOVE, IN FACT, IS THE VOCATION WHICH INCLUDES ALL OTHERS; IT’S A UNIVERSE OF ITS OWN, COMPRISING ALL TIME AND SPACE - IT’S ETERNAL! 298

827 "Christ, ‘holy, innocent, and undefiled,’ knew nothing of sin, but came only to expiate the sins of the people. The Church, however, clasping sinners to her bosom, at once holy and always in need of purification, follows constantly the path of penance and renewal.“299 All members of the Church, including her ministers, must acknowledge that they are sinners.300 In everyone, the weeds of sin will still be mixed with the good wheat of the Gospel until the end of time.301 Hence the Church gathers sinners already caught up in Christ’s salvation but still on the way to holiness:”

Parker, how many of the Jews who followed the ten Commandments were in need of Jesus?

 

[ParkerD]

Re-cap
Originally Posted by ParkerD

Quote: Being worthy means one is keeping the commandments–simple, straightforward, and not something that needs to be excused by just saying “unworthy servants” and excusing behavior. The commandments were given to be kept and be a blessing to people by keeping them.
Quote: I would have expected about expectations, so that has been a bit of an eye-opener and quite surprising to me in that I simply had thought Catholics lived by the Ten Commandments as a deep conviction to do so.

Parker you really are among friends here by the postings I am reading. The first step to holiness is in recognizing your sinful nature. The second step would be recognizing Jesus. If you can do step 2 first its easier to deal with step 1.

Go to the catechism search online and enter the word holiness
scborromeo.org/ccc.htm
Or Sainthood. Read all you can about it. This way you will have tilled the ground a bit more in order to speak about sin and holiness better. With a true and sincere understanding of us Catholics. If you knew more you would not have made the comments you made above. You would see those comments in a new light and want to delete them. Trust me on this.

This would be a good journey for you Parker, to study Christian Holiness. If you have a Catholic Monastery in your area see if you can visit it. See if you can speak to the residents about Holiness, what it takes to become Holy, to become a Saint. You may not find any holy souls there but I bet they could give you some good insight. The biggest problem with becoming a Holy person is to try to become a Holy person. Most likely that would be sin. It really has to come naturally through a relationship with Jesus. The fact is most Holy persons would not see themselves as being a Holy person, to the contrary most likely.

scborromeo.org/ccc.htm…
"If the Church was a body composed of different members, it couldn’t lack the noblest of all; it must have a Heart, and a Heart BURNING WITH LOVE. And I realized that this love alone was the true motive force which enabled the other members of the Church to act; if it ceased to function, the Apostles would forget to preach the gospel, the Martyrs would refuse to shed their blood. LOVE, IN FACT, IS THE VOCATION WHICH INCLUDES ALL OTHERS; IT’S A UNIVERSE OF ITS OWN, COMPRISING ALL TIME AND SPACE - IT’S ETERNAL! 298

827 "Christ, ‘holy, innocent, and undefiled,’ knew nothing of sin, but came only to expiate the sins of the people. The Church, however, clasping sinners to her bosom, at once holy and always in need of purification, follows constantly the path of penance and renewal.“299 All members of the Church, including her ministers, must acknowledge that they are sinners.300 In everyone, the weeds of sin will still be mixed with the good wheat of the Gospel until the end of time.301 Hence the Church gathers sinners already caught up in Christ’s salvation but still on the way to holiness:”

Parker, how many of the Jews who followed the ten Commandments were in need of Jesus?

Catholic-RCIA,

I’ve been to the monastery in Huntsville (family wanted to stop by as a learning experience), I’ve seen those who have committed themselves to that order, and I differ as to what I see reflected in their eyes versus what you evidently see reflected in their eyes. So to each their own. It’s OK with me that there are different choices about religions and about expectations and the outcomes from those expectations.

Answer to your added question is all of them, of course, in more ways than I observe that either they realize or others seem to realize.

 

[ParkerD]

Mormons must be worthy to receive a temple recommend, correct? Must they be worthy to use it? How does that work in practice, as recommends last for a year and I can’t imagine anyone remining sinless and, therefore, worthy, for an entire year. Suppose you leave your interview with recommend in hand. Leaving the parking lot, someone cuts you off and you uncharitably (if unintentionally) scowl. Going home, you’re still in a bad mood and are short with the kids and your wife. Later that night, you’re watching a television program without pure thoughts. You’re now unworthy of that recommend, not to mention, no longer worthy to exercise your priesthood at home. If you tell me this kind of thing doesn’t happen every single day of everyone’s life, then I have a bridge to sell you. Sure, most people aren’t murderers or adulters, but at multiple points in every single day of your life, you commit minor sins (of omission or commission) against God, your family, and your neighbors. A conscientious Mormon must be constantly on their knees at multiple times during the day to continually repent and re-earn personal worthiness in order to enable use of that annual temple recommend. Or, does personal worthiness only apply during the annual interview, i.e., by obtaining one you’re covered for a multitude of minor sins for a year?

Korihor

The annual interview doesn’t ask if you’re perfect, of course. The word “worthy” in the context of those questions does not mean “perfect” nor does it mean the person will not be repenting each day of their life. It means that they will be repenting, changing, growing, making mistakes but really sincerely trying and improving in terms of following the Two Great Commandments. Those questions set a standard for actions that show a person’s sincerity of heart and sincerity of covenant keeping. They don’t set a standard that says the person no longer needs repentance, of course.

But we might as well drop the conversation, it would seem to me from the tone of most of your comments. (This one was more sincere, but still the tone was there.)
I just thought others might learn since your questions here were indeed some that others might also be thinking about, given the misunderstanding about the word “worthy”.

A wish of peace to you.

 

[Korihor]

The annual interview doesn’t ask if you’re perfect, of course. The word “worthy” in the context of those questions does not mean “perfect” nor does it mean the person will not be repenting each day of their life. It means that they will be repenting, changing, growing, making mistakes but really sincerely trying and improving in terms of following the Two Great Commandments. Those questions set a standard for actions that show a person’s sincerity of heart and sincerity of covenant keeping. They don’t set a standard that says the person no longer needs repentance, of course.

But we might as well drop the conversation, it would seem to me from the tone of most of your comments. (This one was more sincere, but still the tone was there.)
I just thought others might learn since your questions here were indeed some that others might also be thinking about, given the misunderstanding about the word “worthy”.

A wish of peace to you.

Ok, so “worthy” doesn’t mean ‘keeping the commandments’ after all, as you cannot make the choice to keep all of them all of the time for the rest of your life and actually do it, right? It only means ‘doing your best’ to keep them, i.e. “repenting, changing, growing, making mistakes but really sincerely trying and improving in terms of following the Two Great Commandments.” ‘Keeping the commandments’ is thus a worthy goal, but is impossible for humans without external aid. You’re beginning to sound Catholic.

Korihor