LDS beliefs about Jesus Christ?

[Peter_John]

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

A temple recommend can be revoked at any time during the year. If you commit an offence rendering you not temple worhty, seek reconciliation and tell your appropriate LDS authority, you lose your recommend. If you get caught doing something , you lose your recommend. If in titihing settlement you do not pay a full titihe, I do not know itf that voids a recommend immediately.

 

[Peter_John]

One omission I must correct: The record of the proceedings of the Church disciplinary councils does not go around with your membership record to local congregations. The details stay in a central repository in Salt Lake. The local records just indicate thet there have been prior issues.

 

[zaffiroborant]

One omission I must correct: The record of the proceedings of the Church disciplinary councils does not go around with your membership record to local congregations. The details stay in a central repository in Salt Lake. The local records just indicate thet there have been prior issues.

Do local leaders have access to the records of the proceedings?

 

[Jay53]

One omission I must correct: The record of the proceedings of the Church disciplinary councils does not go around with your membership record to local congregations. The details stay in a central repository in Salt Lake. The local records just indicate thet there have been prior issues.

Still…
That is HORRIBLE!!! (And it makes me thankful and grateful for the blessings of being Catholic!! )

 

[SteveVH]

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”.

Who is misunderstanding the word “worthy”? Is this kind of like misunderstanding “one God”, “eternal”, “original sin”, “atonement”, “omnipotence”, etc., etc., etc…? I realize this may be a little flippant, Parker, but it gets to be very tedious when people think it is fine and dandy to lend their own definition to words used commonly in the English language to suit their own cause.

 

[Tony888]

A temple recommend can be revoked at any time during the year. If you commit an offence rendering you not temple worhty, seek reconciliation and tell your appropriate LDS authority, you lose your recommend. If you get caught doing something , you lose your recommend. If in titihing settlement you do not pay a full titihe, I do not know itf that voids a recommend immediately.

Peter, getting a temple recommend relies on the integrity of the person - I review my condition and respond to the questions.

In a similar fashion, aren’t ther certain conditions where a Catholic should not partake of communion until they are again worthy?

 

[RebeccaJ]

:banghead:

 

[Telstar]

:banghead:

That seems to be the general feeling of anyone that tries to discuss theology with Mormons, whether they are Catholic or of any other traditional Christian faith.

Mormons have their own dictionary that defines common terms in their own ‘special way’, that they fully understand. But to the rest of us that see those same words as defined in a standard dictionary, it’s all gibberish. Unfortunately, their dictionary is unavailable to ‘outsiders’ because those words are ‘too sacred to share with unbelievers’.

 

[Tony888]

That seems to be the general feeling of anyone that tries to discuss theology with Mormons, whether they are Catholic or of any other traditional Christian faith.

Mormons have their own dictionary that defines common terms in their own ‘special way’, that they fully understand. But to the rest of us that see those same words as defined in a standard dictionary, it’s all gibberish. Unfortunately, their dictionary is unavailable to ‘outsiders’ because those words are ‘too sacred to share with unbelievers’.

LOL, you mean like the dictionary definition of Christian?
I love watching how so many Christian denomnination create their custom definition that excludes all they don’t like. Were you aware that a signficant number of Protestants don’t believe members of the RCC are Christian?

 

[Stephen168]

:banghead:

When the previous two pages would have answered his question before he asked it; I would have to agree.

 

[catholic-rcia]

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

I would agree, sounding more reasonable.

Parker, You mentioned Huntsville. This is one of my favorite places on earth. I go up there every year with 10 others and we spend the weekend there. We each have a small room for reflection and sleep. We all go to confession up there. The Priest are very special. The guest master quit his job on wall street many years ago to get out of that world. He chose the Holy Trinity to spend the rest of his life. His name is Michael. He cooks us breakfast, lunch and dinner while we are there. If you came up with us, spent time there you would be a different person when you left. A few years back we were all in the Holy Trinity Library. Every one I was with was looking at the books and or reading them. I don’t read much but wanted to look normal so I went over and picked one out, sat down and began to read it. Out of a thousand books I chose this one was about Michael. His story as a wall street investor. I had no Idea it was about are guest master until the end when it said he left that life behind to go to the Holy Trinity in Huntsville. I walked back to the kitchen and asked him. “Is this about you” He just smiled and said yes, but I don’t want to remember that life. We left it at that. I love that guy along with the other Monks I have come to know. Parker there is so much spirituality in that place. I remember a confession a few years ago when Father Charles said. “Your sins have been absolved, go in the peace of Christ and tell the next sinner to come in.”
When I walked out there was no one left so I went to find one. I found my friend Juan in the library and asked if he had been to confession. He said “no” I told him “Father wanted me to get you”

At the end of the day Juan said he was not ready to go but gave me a hug and said thank you for what I had done for him by getting him there. I said “I have nothing to do with it.” Father asked me to find a sinner and you were the first one I found.
.

 

[ParkerD]

…

Who is misunderstanding the word “worthy”? …

Hi, SteveVH,

The Webster Dictionary definition of the word “worthy” fits the LDS use of the word just fine.

 

[CEM5]

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.

Hi Parker,

I was never under the impression that the Pharaoh married Sarah. He used her for his own pleasure, in the way a husband will be with his wife. The Pharaoh had carnal knowledge of Sarah, but did not marry her, thus the wording of “to wife”.

Abraham may have thought it was good reason, but God didn’t, and that is why the second time Abraham did it with another man, God appeared to that man and saved him from God’s punishments because of the man’s innocently believing Sarah an unmarried woman.

We know that later, God gave Moses the commandments and one of them is that we should not commit adultery. It has no addendum saying it’s ok to commit adultery or cause another to commit adultery so long as it saves your life.

peace and God’s blessings to you,

CEM

 

[CEM5]

Peter, getting a temple recommend relies on the integrity of the person - I review my condition and respond to the questions.

In a similar fashion, aren’t ther certain conditions where a Catholic should not partake of communion until they are again worthy?

Hi Tony888,

Not similar, because the Eucharist is the Real Presence of Jesus: Body, Soul, Divinity and Blood of Christ, Jesus, and only when someone is in grave/mortal sin, prior to repentence followed by the Sacrament of Reconciliation (confession and absolving of sins), one cannot partake of Communion.Nonetheless, they are still welcome at Mass - especially so, but they can go up and receive a blessing instead. No one is ever turned away from the Church and Mass. That is the difference.

blessings,
CEM

 

[CEM5]

LOL, you mean like the dictionary definition of Christian?
I love watching how so many Christian denomnination create their custom definition that excludes all they don’t like. Were you aware that a signficant number of Protestants don’t believe members of the RCC are Christian?

Hi Tony888,

yep! Quite aware! However, the RCC – really still officially called as its name has always been: The Church - but a catholic (universal) Church, the one and only Bride of Christ – the Protestants who claim this (that RCC aren’t Christians) is laughable! We are the Church that Christ commanded to baptize all nations in “the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit” (understanding that there is one God:three persons – not three separate gods).

We are the Church whose members were first called ‘christians’. All other churches – congregations really – are offshoots of the Catholic Church.

People can say the RCC is not Christian, however, just saying so doesn’t make it so. Just like anyone can look at a rose and say it’s not a rose and call it by another name, say a pansy, doesn’t change the fact it is still a rose and not a pansy.

blessngs,
CEM

 

[ParkerD]

Hi Parker,

I was never under the impression that the Pharaoh married Sarah. He used her for his own pleasure, in the way a husband will be with his wife. The Pharaoh had carnal knowledge of Sarah, but did not marry her, thus the wording of “to wife”.

Abraham may have thought it was good reason, but God didn’t, and that is why the second time Abraham did it with another man, God appeared to that man and saved him from God’s punishments because of the man’s innocently believing Sarah an unmarried woman.

We know that later, God gave Moses the commandments and one of them is that we should not commit adultery. It has no addendum saying it’s ok to commit adultery or cause another to commit adultery so long as it saves your life.

peace and God’s blessings to you,

CEM

CEM,

There is nothing in the KJV Genesis account given about the Pharaoh’s involvement with Sarah to lead one to believe he had relations with her as you have stated, at all. I am sure the Hebrew would bear that out also. He didn’t. Abraham did not do the thing you have accused him of doing with respect to allowing that to happen to her. Never. Just because some writer has made the implication or changed the translation, doesn’t mean the change was correct.

 

[ParkerD]

…(And it makes me thankful and grateful for the blessings of being Catholic!! )

By the way, Peter John stated several incorrect things in his description. (I would be put off by such a description also, so I would share the )

Also, church disciplinary councils happen for perhaps 2 per thousand members at the stake level, per year, and perhaps 0-1 per 300 members at the ward level per year, as a safe guess average. So that makes about .004, or in other words 0.4% of members experiencing such a mode of having a disciplinary council necessary (purely an estimate from experience of serving on a stake high council and as a bishop, years ago.)

 

[CEM5]

CEM,

There is nothing in the KJV Genesis account given about the Pharaoh’s involvement with Sarah to lead one to believe he had relations with her as you have stated, at all. I am sure the Hebrew would bear that out also. He didn’t. Abraham did not do the thing you have accused him of doing with respect to allowing that to happen to her. Never. Just because some writer has made the implication or changed the translation, doesn’t mean the change was correct.

Hi Parker,

The KJV is an altered Bible rife with error and mistranlations. This is fact.

But regardless, here is the KJV of that passage:

Gen 12
12 Therefore it shall come to pass, when the Egyptians shall see thee, that they shall say , This is his wife: and they will kill me, but they will save thee alive . 13Say , I pray thee, thou art my sister: that it may be well with me for thy sake; and my soul shall live because of thee.14 And it came to pass, that, when Abram was come into Egypt, the Egyptians beheld the woman that she was very fair.15 The princes also of Pharaoh saw her, and commended her before Pharaoh: ***and the woman was taken into Pharaoh’s house.16 And he entreated Abram well for her sake: and he had sheep, and oxen, and he asses, and menservants, and maidservants, and she asses, and camels.17 And the LORD plagued Pharaoh and his house with great plagues because of Sarai Abram’s wife.18 And Pharaoh calledAbram, and said , What is this that thou hast done unto me? why didst thou not tell me that she was thy wife?19 Why saidst thou , She is my sister? so I might have taken her to me to wife: ***now therefore behold thy wife, take her, and go thy way

There is the phrase “to wife” in regard Pharaoh and his relationship with Sarah. She spent months in his household, was given gifts, and as a beautiful woman, it wasn’t to srub his floors and that is why God caused plagues "because of Sarai (Sarah) Abram’s wife – see, she was already married but given by Abraham (Abram) via a lie, to Pharaoh.

blessings,
CEM

 

[ParkerD]

Hi Parker,

The KJV is an altered Bible rife with error and mistranlations. This is fact.

But regardless, here is the KJV of that passage:

Gen 12
12 Therefore it shall come to pass, when the Egyptians shall see thee, that they shall say , This is his wife: and they will kill me, but they will save thee alive . 13Say , I pray thee, thou art my sister: that it may be well with me for thy sake; and my soul shall live because of thee.14 And it came to pass, that, when Abram was come into Egypt, the Egyptians beheld the woman that she was very fair.15 The princes also of Pharaoh saw her, and commended her before Pharaoh: ***and the woman was taken into Pharaoh’s house.16 And he entreated Abram well for her sake: and he had sheep, and oxen, and he asses, and menservants, and maidservants, and she asses, and camels.17 And the LORD plagued Pharaoh and his house with great plagues because of Sarai Abram’s wife.18 And Pharaoh calledAbram, and said , What is this that thou hast done unto me? why didst thou not tell me that she was thy wife?19 Why saidst thou , She is my sister? so I might have taken her to me to wife: ***now therefore behold thy wife, take her, and go thy way

There is the phrase “to wife” in regard Pharaoh and his relationship with Sarah. She spent months in his household, was given gifts, and as a beautiful woman, it wasn’t to srub his floors and that is why God caused plagues "because of Sarai (Sarah) Abram’s wife – see, she was already married but given by Abraham (Abram) via a lie, to Pharaoh.

blessings,
CEM

CEM,

The words are “so I might have taken her to me to wife”. Those words mean that he had laid the plan to marry her, not that he had married her. The plagues were to give him a warning so that he wouldn’t carry out his plan to marry her.

You might study about the Pharaoh, and learn that he wasn’t in the practice of committing adultery, nor does that passage imply that he did nor that he was in that practice in his life.

See also Genesis 20:2-7 and find the same kind of implication if the words “took Sarah” were used by someone in an implication that could be construed but is shown to not be correct by what happens in verses 3-7.

 

[Jay53]

By the way, Peter John stated several incorrect things in his description. (I would be put off by such a description also, so I would share the )

Also, church disciplinary councils happen for perhaps 2 per thousand members at the stake level, per year, and perhaps 0-1 per 300 members at the ward level per year, as a safe guess average. So that makes about .004, or in other words 0.4% of members experiencing such a mode of having a disciplinary council necessary (purely an estimate from experience of serving on a stake high council and as a bishop, years ago.)

It would be helpful if you could point out what was incorrect in his post.

(And you already know how I feel about the Sacrament of Reconciliation and the fact that I believe Mormons do not have a valid priesthood and thus do not have the God-given authority to act *in persona Christi *in absolving sins - which is why they don’t. God has protected and preserved His Sacrament only in His Church. )

Hope you have a wonderful night!