Questions for Mormons..

[NewSeeker]

Eternity doesn’t begin and it doesn’t end; it has no beginning or end. It is one eternally present “now”. Beginnings and endings belong to time. God is eternally God and so is Christ, who is eternally begotten of God. They dwell beyond time and space, whatever that means. None of us has experienced that so we can’t imagine what that would be like. But one thing it does not mean is that God dwells in a time and space beyond our own time and space, or in a time and space beyond that, ad infinitum. If he did, the word eternal could never be applied to Him. God eternally dwells beyond all spaces and times in an eternal “now” where past and future do not apply.

 

[twopekinguys]

What does 'from all eternity to all eternity" mean? I don’t understand this any more than the bunch of eternities thing.

Wasn’t that a movie with Burt Lancaster from the early 50’s?

Oh wait…that was From Here to Eternity

Sorry, my bad

 

[RebeccaJ]

What does 'from all eternity to all eternity" mean? I don’t understand this any more than the bunch of eternities thing.

zaff, “eternal” is another redefined word. If you were to plot the comparison on a graph, the whole world graphs eternal with an arrow at each end of the line. Mormons have a line with an arrow on one end of the line. ie, their god is eternal beginning from point (x), and we exist somewhere on that line.

 

[PaulDupre]

zaff, “eternal” is another redefined word. If you were to plot the comparison on a graph, the whole world graphs eternal with an arrow at each end of the line. Mormons have a line with an arrow on one end of the line. ie, their god is eternal beginning from point (x), and we exist somewhere on that line.

Sloppy thinking begins with the misuse of words. Mormons misuse the word “eternal” when they really mean “aveternal”. Aveternal means having a beginning but no end.

 

[Charlotte408]

hey…so…just lookin over some more mormon stuff…i was reading about your marriages…and why no one else can enter the temple or attend the marriage…((they have to be endowed)) and its nothing personal…its more like grades…reaching a certain spirituality point…

and i came across this:

The Lord has given his children temples so that they may have a place of refuge from the carnal and sensual world.((me talking: thats why like, dianaiad doesnt discuss certain things i think, because if she brings any negativity with her it might taint her ‘refuge’??)) It is a place where only those who have gained a certain level of spirituality are allowed to enter. If anyone could enter the Temple, the spiritual experiences of the prepared would be hampered by the unprepared. The temple would no longer be a refuge from the outside world.((me talking: <–see)) The Lord has taught us: For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them. (The Holy Bible, Matthew 18:20) The temple is a place where many gather in the name of Jesus to partake of the highest blessings of the gospel.

for some reason partake stuck out to me…idk maybe its because when i think of ‘temples’ i think of ancient temples and rituals and sacrifices etc etc…so…i was wondering what exactly they ‘par-taked’ in??? if they said, ‘rejoiced in his gospel’ or…idk…partake just sounds like their ‘doing’ something…

and theres a part of the marriage, where its between just the woman and the man…NO ONE is allowed to witness…what do they do there?? are they just exchanging vows…and its supposed to be a personal, private covenant between themselves and God? i think its the secrecy, and the not knowing, that creates this stigma…or…i dont know just sends your imagination going…

 

[why_me]

hey…so…just lookin over some more mormon stuff…i was reading about your marriages…and why no one else can enter the temple or attend the marriage…((they have to be endowed)) and its nothing personal…its more like grades…reaching a certain spirituality point…

and i came across this:

The Lord has given his children temples so that they may have a place of refuge from the carnal and sensual world.((me talking: thats why like, dianaiad doesnt discuss certain things i think, because if she brings any negativity with her it might taint her ‘refuge’??)) It is a place where only those who have gained a certain level of spirituality are allowed to enter. If anyone could enter the Temple, the spiritual experiences of the prepared would be hampered by the unprepared. The temple would no longer be a refuge from the outside world.((me talking: <–see)) The Lord has taught us: For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them. (The Holy Bible, Matthew 18:20) The temple is a place where many gather in the name of Jesus to partake of the highest blessings of the gospel.

Where did you come across the quotation? Can you reference it? But I can say this: Dianaiad does not bring negativity into her posts because there is no point in doing so. Itis not because of the lds temple. Many mormons can not also enter the temple because they may not be worthy to do so. One must get a temple recommend to enter the temple and this requires a couple of interviews.

Partake means to experience. For mormons the temple is a holy place to be close to Heavenly Father.

People can attend a temple marriage ceremony but one must be a temple recommend holder to do so.

 

[Religio71]

hey…so…just lookin over some more mormon stuff…i was reading about your marriages…and why no one else can enter the temple or attend the marriage…((they have to be endowed)) and its nothing personal…its more like grades…reaching a certain spirituality point…

and i came across this:

The Lord has given his children temples so that they may have a place of refuge from the carnal and sensual world.((me talking: thats why like, dianaiad doesnt discuss certain things i think, because if she brings any negativity with her it might taint her ‘refuge’??)) It is a place where only those who have gained a certain level of spirituality are allowed to enter. If anyone could enter the Temple, the spiritual experiences of the prepared would be hampered by the unprepared. The temple would no longer be a refuge from the outside world.((me talking: <–see)) The Lord has taught us: For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them. (The Holy Bible, Matthew 18:20) The temple is a place where many gather in the name of Jesus to partake of the highest blessings of the gospel.

for some reason partake stuck out to me…idk maybe its because when i think of ‘temples’ i think of ancient temples and rituals and sacrifices etc etc…so…i was wondering what exactly they ‘par-taked’ in??? if they said, ‘rejoiced in his gospel’ or…idk…partake just sounds like their ‘doing’ something…

and theres a part of the marriage, where its between just the woman and the man…NO ONE is allowed to witness…what do they do there?? are they just exchanging vows…and its supposed to be a personal, private covenant between themselves and God? i think its the secrecy, and the not knowing, that creates this stigma…or…i dont know just sends your imagination going…

To clarify: No one can enter a Mormon temple unless they have something called a temple recommend. Basically, you have to be interviewed by LDS Church authorities to determine if you are worthy to have a recommend and receive the ordinances performed in the temples. In the temple, there are various ordinances (ceremonies) performed only there. These are baptism for the dead, the endowment, and sealing. These can also be performed by proxy for the dead.

The one you asked about, marriage, is called “sealing” (children can also be sealed to their parents when family converts and the entire family is sealed together). In the endowment and the sealing ordinances, LDS make covenants, or agreements with God, and it is believed that by honoring and keeping such covenants, they can be blessed. Family can go to witness the sealing ceremony, but they have to hold a temple recommend. So, if you have non-LDS family members (or LDS family members without a recommend), they cannot attend the sealing ceremony. They typically wait outside of the temple, and some couples may exchange rings in a separate ceremony for all to witness.

 

[PaulDupre]

and theres a part of the marriage, where its between just the woman and the man…NO ONE is allowed to witness…what do they do there??

There can be a few witnesses at the sealing (marriage) ceremony. In fact, there must be two. If you don’t bring your own, two of the temple staff will be provided. That’s the way it was when I was sealed to my ex-wife in the temple. We had no family members with temple recommends near enough to attend, so a male and female temple workers witnessed. The sealing ceremony is very brief - no frills and no exchange of rings. You go into a small room with mirrors on all the walls, kneel on opposite sides of a little kneeler, and the presiding temple worker just says something to the effect of (it was 29 years ago so I don’t recall the exact words) “By the power of the Melchizadek priesthood which I hold I seal you together for time and for all eternity.” And that’s it. Then we went home.

 

[ParkerD]

Charlotte408,
Since you asked about temple marriages and have received some answers that are a bit off, I’ll explain by telling about the most recent temple marriages I have attended within the past couple of months.

There were forty or so people present (relatives and friends) in the sealing room (the sealing room can be viewed during a temple open house before one is dedicated, or in pictures of temples). They all sit, and during the ceremony itself the bride and groom kneel facing each other when the sealer asks each of the two if they are willing to be eternally lawfully wedded under a covenant marriage. They receive blessings from the sealer, who has the authority to “bind on earth and in heaven.”

Before the ceremony itself, the sealer asked the parents of each of the two to take a few minutes and give personal counsel about marriage, and there was a sweet feeling when they did that. (Sometimes a sealer will take a few minutes to give some counsel.) He asked them to look in the mirrors that face on opposite walls so that from that vantage point one looks into the many reflections that “symbolize” looking into an eternal future. He asked them if they wanted to exchange rings after the ceremony, which they did.

Some temples have a waiting room for those relatives who may be non-members or otherwise not have a “temple recommend”. After the ceremony, the relatives usually gather outside for pictures, usually with the temple or its gardens as a backdrop.

No words are said that are “secret vows”, but they are certainly “sacred vows” and made as a covenant between the couple themselves and Heavenly Father.

You might liken an LDS temple marriage like being “married under the canopy” in the Jewish faith, except that everyone present is considered to be “under the canopy” and so there must be a way of assuring that those present are living worthy lives by keeping the covenants they have made with the Lord, Jesus. That’s why “temple recommends” are used to allow people to enter the various rooms in the temple itself, after it has been dedicated as the “House of the Lord.”

 

[dianaiad]

hey…so…just lookin over some more mormon stuff…i was reading about your marriages…and why no one else can enter the temple or attend the marriage…((they have to be endowed)) and its nothing personal…its more like grades…reaching a certain spirituality point…

and i came across this:

The Lord has given his children temples so that they may have a place of refuge from the carnal and sensual world.((me talking: thats why like, dianaiad doesnt discuss certain things i think, because if she brings any negativity with her it might taint her ‘refuge’??)) It is a place where only those who have gained a certain level of spirituality are allowed to enter. If anyone could enter the Temple, the spiritual experiences of the prepared would be hampered by the unprepared. The temple would no longer be a refuge from the outside world.((me talking: <–see)) The Lord has taught us: For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them. (The Holy Bible, Matthew 18:20) The temple is a place where many gather in the name of Jesus to partake of the highest blessings of the gospel.

for some reason partake stuck out to me…idk maybe its because when i think of ‘temples’ i think of ancient temples and rituals and sacrifices etc etc…so…i was wondering what exactly they ‘par-taked’ in??? if they said, ‘rejoiced in his gospel’ or…idk…partake just sounds like their ‘doing’ something…

and theres a part of the marriage, where its between just the woman and the man…NO ONE is allowed to witness…what do they do there?? are they just exchanging vows…and its supposed to be a personal, private covenant between themselves and God? i think its the secrecy, and the not knowing, that creates this stigma…or…i dont know just sends your imagination going…

I will describe my wedding.

My fiance’ and I 'partook" of the endowment ceremony; he for the first time, for himself, and me as a proxy for someone who had died. “Partake” of the spirit…that’s like 'partaking" of the Eucharist or communion, or “partaking” of a feast, a feeling or a fellowship, as we ‘partake’ of joy, or sorrow.

After the ceremony that everybody participates in (and as I’ve told you already, you can find the scripts, pictures of the clothing…the whole enchilada…on the internet) the wedding party is invited into a 'sealing room."

I’ve been in one twice on my own hook: once when my parents were sealed together, and since we kids were already here, we joined them, and once for my own wedding. Sealing rooms vary according to the design of the temple they are in. They can be elaborate (we put all the decoration and elaboration in our Temples that we avoid in our regular meeting houses). You can see a few examples here.

It is an absolutely gloriously beautiful place to get married in.

The family and witnesses get the chairs, the officiator stands at one end and the bride and groom kneel, facing each other over the top of the altar, and they are married using very similar language to a ‘normal’ wedding ceremony, except that instead of 'until death do you part," we substitute 'for time and all eternity." At the end of the ceremony, which does not include exchanging rings or even a ‘you may kiss the bride,’ everybody leaves.I will always remember the mirrors, though. They were placed in such a way that the bride and groom see themselves, kneeling together at the altar hand in hand, reflected over and over again as far in the distance as it is possible for mirrors to reflect.

That memory gives me some comfort, since I could only keep him here for twenty years.

I’m not certain what you were expecting, but…that’s about it. It is a lovely memory for me. We exchanged rings, and the kiss, later.

Now, m’dear, exactly what were you expecting?

 

[why_me]

youtube.com/watch?v=7B8SCsMshe4

By linking here one can see actual mormons celebrating a wedding outside the Washington Temple.

And here is a montage of mormon weddings. Everyone looks so human…it is quite amazing really after hearing what mormons are and how their church is a cult and satanic on this forum from certain posters. Catholic brothers and sisters, mormons are human beings and most are good people who love god and family.

May all the people in these videos remain happy and peaceful.

youtube.com/watch?v=l5_X9Rl0lcA&feature=related

 

[Religio71]

The temple ordinances are not as sinister as some make them out to be. There were certain parts that were omitted in the recent forms of the endowment, oaths related to physical harm if one revealed temple secrets, however I don’t think that many understand how they were meant to be interpreted. Thus it was better that they were eliminated.

My real interest in the temple ordinances, specifically the endowment, are the similarities to freemasonry. Now, the endowment has a Christian overtone to it, and is focused on the “plan of salvation”, and in that way, it is not similar to freemasonry. It is the various “signs and tokens” (as well as symbols on the garment) that are learned that have many similarities. I won’t discuss what those are, as diana said, one can freely find them available on the internet. But for me, it relates to the origins of freemasonry, whether there are origins of it in the temple of Solomon, and whether the argument that both the endowment and freemasonry rites have a common source, in that freemasonry was a corruption of those Solomon temple rites. I find it fascinating to study. I visited the Freemasonry “temple” in DC a couple months ago, and found it interesting.

 

[dianaiad]

The temple ordinances are not as sinister as some make them out to be. There were certain parts that were omitted in the recent forms of the endowment, oaths related to physical harm if one revealed temple secrets, however I don’t think that many understand how they were meant to be interpreted. Thus it was better that they were eliminated.

My real interest in the temple ordinances, specifically the endowment, are the similarities to freemasonry. Now, the endowment has a Christian overtone to it, and is focused on the “plan of salvation”, and in that way, it is not similar to freemasonry. It is the various “signs and tokens” (as well as symbols on the garment) that are learned that have many similarities. I won’t discuss what those are, as diana said, one can freely find them available on the internet. But for me, it relates to the origins of freemasonry, whether there are origins of it in the temple of Solomon, and whether the argument that both the endowment and freemasonry rites have a common source, in that freemasonry was a corruption of those Solomon temple rites. I find it fascinating to study. I visited the Freemasonry “temple” in DC a couple months ago, and found it interesting.

I have never been bothered by any relationship the Temple script may have to freemasonry; doesn’t bother me a bit.

I am amused, though, that it isn’t the Masons that object to that (even though they refused to allow any Utah Mormon to join for a very long time); it is those who dislike us both that object to it.

and dang, how frustrating for those who want to find something deliciously salacious in the Temple ordinances…not an orgy to be seen. Shoot, we don’t even kiss each other in the wedding ceremonies.

Ah, well…life is full of these little disappointments.

 

[why_me]

I have never been bothered by any relationship the Temple script may have to freemasonry; doesn’t bother me a bit.

I am amused, though, that it isn’t the Masons that object to that (even though they refused to allow any Utah Mormon to join for a very long time); it is those who dislike us both that object to it.

and dang, how frustrating for those who want to find something deliciously salacious in the Temple ordinances…not an orgy to be seen. Shoot, we don’t even kiss each other in the wedding ceremonies.

Ah, well…life is full of these little disappointments.

Here is a pretty good happy go lucky explanation of the similarities.

en.fairmormon.org/Temple_endowment_and_Freemasonry

There is also a great podcast from John Dehlin’s podcasts with Greg Kearney, a freemason and a mormon:

mormonstories.org/?p=14

 

[PRmerger]

And when truth is used to mock, bash, blame, harm and hurt, it is not really love either. Bu to give truth with love shows respect and dignity to those who we are in dialogue with. I have never heard any pope say that we need to hurt others with truth.

Here is a case in point from your link:

1. The Church’s Pastors, in communion with the Successor of Peter, are close to the faithful in this effort; they guide and accompany them by their authoritative teaching, finding ever new ways of speaking with love and mercy not only to believers but to all people of good will. The Second Vatican Council remains an extraordinary witness of this attitude on the part of the Church which, as an “expert in humanity”,5 places herself at the service of every individual and of the whole world.

How often have I said that we need to post with love and mercy? Quite often. And how often have I spoken about humanity on this forum? Quite often when I address the catholic posters about their bashing.

And who is following the understanding of what is in blue? And show where catholics have responded with love and mercy on the mormon threads? Very few and inbetween.

Do you think you post with love and mercy? Can you truly say that every post you’ve sent was done in love and mercy?

Just wondering.

I don’t even know really to whom you’ve been alluding in all this discussion about rude posting…

 

[why_me]

Do you think you post with love and mercy? Can you truly say that every post you’ve sent was done in love and mercy?

Just wondering.

I don’t even know really to whom you’ve been alluding in all this discussion about rude posting…

Probably not. But mormons in general have been called on the mormon threads: dishonet, liars, satanic, false and cultists, And all this is said as a generalization of what mormons are. I see no love or mercy in such posts. I have reacted to these type of generalizations without mercy at times but I do have some love which is why I keep dwelling on love, mercy and confession. I will not name names but they are usually very vocal on these threads but occupy no more than a small handful of people. .

Besides I have forsaken my mormon and catholic identity on these threads and list my self as happy go lucky. I feel relieved since I received nothing but a monster bash for listing myself mormon and catholic. And trust me, that bash had no love nor no mercy.

 

[PRmerger]

Probably not. But mormons in general have been called on the mormon threads: dishonet, liars, satanic, false and cultists, And all this is said as a generalization of what mormons are. I see no love or mercy in such posts. I have reacted to these type of generalizations without mercy at times but I do have some love which is why I keep dwelling on love, mercy and confession. I will not name names but they are usually very vocal on these threads but occupy no more than a small handful of people. .

Besides I have forsaken my mormon and catholic identity on these threads and list my self as happy go lucky. I feel relieved since I received nothing but a monster bash for listing myself mormon and catholic. And trust me, that bash had no love nor no mercy.

Oh, ok! I understand the monster bash part. As a Catholic who questions I seem to get bashed for simply asking the question, “Why does the Church ______? I don’t understand…” I like to remind people that this is the Catholic ANSWERS forum, so it’s ok to ask QUESTIONS so we can get the ANSWERS.

 

[why_me]

Oh, ok! I understand the monster bash part. As a Catholic who questions I seem to get bashed for simply asking the question, “Why does the Church ______? I don’t understand…” I like to remind people that this is the Catholic ANSWERS forum, so it’s ok to ask QUESTIONS so we can get the ANSWERS.

Here is how it works: a catholic usually or a protestant starts a mormon thread, usually it is negative about the mormon church. Mormons come to the thread to defend their faith. Then, catholics rally around the flag and bash the mormon faith under the pretext of ‘defending’ catholicism on the thread. All in the name of catholic apologetics.

I just don’t get it.

 

[twopekinguys]

Here is how it works: a catholic usually or a protestant starts a mormon thread, usually it is negative about the mormon church. Mormons come to the thread to defend their faith. Then, catholics rally around the flag and bash the mormon faith under the pretext of ‘defending’ catholicism on the thread. All in the name of catholic apologetics.

I just don’t get it.

 

[why_me]

See who starts the mormon threads and tell me that I am wrong. But now I am a happy go lucky person who belongs to the happy go lucky faith. I feel much better now. :bounce: