King Noah sounds like Brigham Young

For discussing the Church, Gospel of Jesus Christ, Mormonism, etc.
User avatar
cab
captain of 1,000
Posts: 2986
Location: ♫ I am a Mormon! ♫ And... dang it... a Mormon just believes! ♫

Re: King Noah sounds like Brigham Young

Post by cab »

LDS Watchman wrote: November 30th, 2022, 8:14 pm
You also appear to have a complete misunderstanding of the purpose of temple ordinances and the seriousness of keeping the covenants we make with God.
Really? What is the purpose then? The purpose of all things from God is to teach and prepare us to receive the baptism of the Holy Ghost. All those things are the map. After receiving the Holy Ghost then it is the Holy Ghost which tells us all that we should do.
Receiving the baptism of fire isn't some trump card that overrules and supercedes everything else God has said and established, either.
It is the culmination point. It is to fulfill the measure of our creation. When we are born of the Spirit we are born into the kingdom of God and become his children. We then become tabernacles/temples/dwelling places of God. Temples are built to show us what we may become if we submit to God.

This is the doctrine of Jesus Christ. Anything more or less is not of him.

User avatar
Luke
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 10785
Location: England

Re: King Noah sounds like Brigham Young

Post by Luke »

cab wrote: November 30th, 2022, 11:22 pm
LDS Watchman wrote: November 30th, 2022, 8:14 pm
You also appear to have a complete misunderstanding of the purpose of temple ordinances and the seriousness of keeping the covenants we make with God.
Really? What is the purpose then? The purpose of all things from God is to teach and prepare us to receive the baptism of the Holy Ghost. All those things are the map. After receiving the Holy Ghost then it is the Holy Ghost which tells us all that we should do.
Receiving the baptism of fire isn't some trump card that overrules and supercedes everything else God has said and established, either.
It is the culmination point. It is to fulfill the measure of our creation. When we are born of the Spirit we are born into the kingdom of God and become his children. We then become tabernacles/temples/dwelling places of God. Temples are built to show us what we may become if we submit to God.

This is the doctrine of Jesus Christ. Anything more or less is not of him.
You’re both right.

LDS Watchman
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 7390
Contact:

Re: King Noah sounds like Brigham Young

Post by LDS Watchman »

cab wrote: November 30th, 2022, 11:22 pm
LDS Watchman wrote: November 30th, 2022, 8:14 pm
You also appear to have a complete misunderstanding of the purpose of temple ordinances and the seriousness of keeping the covenants we make with God.
Really? What is the purpose then? The purpose of all things from God is to teach and prepare us to receive the baptism of the Holy Ghost. All those things are the map. After receiving the Holy Ghost then it is the Holy Ghost which tells us all that we should do.
Receiving the baptism of fire isn't some trump card that overrules and supersedes everything else God has said and established, either.
It is the culmination point. It is to fulfill the measure of our creation. When we are born of the Spirit we are born into the kingdom of God and become his children. We then become tabernacles/temples/dwelling places of God. Temples are built to show us what we may become if we submit to God.

This is the doctrine of Jesus Christ. Anything more or less is not of him.
Again, this doesn't address the issue at hand at all. The baptism of fire isn't some trump card that supersedes everything else God has said and established. And it isn't the culmination point either. Receiving the gift of the Holy Ghost by the laying on of hands (baptism of fire) is among the FIRST principles and ordinances of the gospel. The ordinances of the temple are to come later. (The doctrine of Christ encompasses a lot more than the steps to receiving the baptism of fire, but that's getting way off topic).

And we're not even talking about the ordinances of the temple as a teaching tool, we're talking about the COVENANTS made in the temple, in this case specifically the solemn covenant not to commit adultery. That covenant is serious and God expects us to keep it. If we break it, then there are serious consequences. And someone who commits adultery, who hasn't been been born of water and the spirit and THEN made this covenant in the temple, isn't held to the same standard.

In the case of the woman taken in adultery, we have no record of her being baptized, having received the gift of the Holy Ghost, or making the covenant with God in his holy house to never commit adultery. So comparing her situation to what Brigham Young was referring to about the seriousness of those who have been baptized, received the gift of the Holy Ghost, and made these solemn covenants in God's holy house is a best an apples to oranges comparison.

But since you insist on making it all about the baptism of fire as a culminating event and downplaying the covenants in the temple, would you not agree that if someone has received the baptism of fire they are held to higher standard before God than someone who hasn't? Surely you would at least agree with this.

User avatar
nightlight
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 8407

Re: King Noah sounds like Brigham Young

Post by nightlight »

LDS Watchman wrote: December 1st, 2022, 6:27 am
cab wrote: November 30th, 2022, 11:22 pm
LDS Watchman wrote: November 30th, 2022, 8:14 pm
You also appear to have a complete misunderstanding of the purpose of temple ordinances and the seriousness of keeping the covenants we make with God.
Really? What is the purpose then? The purpose of all things from God is to teach and prepare us to receive the baptism of the Holy Ghost. All those things are the map. After receiving the Holy Ghost then it is the Holy Ghost which tells us all that we should do.
Receiving the baptism of fire isn't some trump card that overrules and supersedes everything else God has said and established, either.
It is the culmination point. It is to fulfill the measure of our creation. When we are born of the Spirit we are born into the kingdom of God and become his children. We then become tabernacles/temples/dwelling places of God. Temples are built to show us what we may become if we submit to God.

This is the doctrine of Jesus Christ. Anything more or less is not of him.
Again, this doesn't address the issue at hand at all. The baptism of fire isn't some trump card that supersedes everything else God has said and established. And it isn't the culmination point either. Receiving the gift of the Holy Ghost by the laying on of hands (baptism of fire) is among the FIRST principles and ordinances of the gospel. The ordinances of the temple are to come later. (The doctrine of Christ encompasses a lot more than the steps to receiving the baptism of fire, but that's getting way off topic).

And we're not even talking about the ordinances of the temple as a teaching tool, we're talking about the COVENANTS made in the temple, in this case specifically the solemn covenant not to commit adultery. That covenant is serious and God expects us to keep it. If we break it, then there are serious consequences. And someone who commits adultery, who hasn't been been born of water and the spirit and THEN made this covenant in the temple, isn't held to the same standard.

In the case of the woman taken in adultery, we have no record of her being baptized, having received the gift of the Holy Ghost, or making the covenant with God in his holy house to never commit adultery. So comparing her situation to what Brigham Young was referring to about the seriousness of those who have been baptized, received the gift of the Holy Ghost, and made these solemn covenants in God's holy house is a best an apples to oranges comparison.

But since you insist on making it all about the baptism of fire as a culminating event and downplaying the covenants in the temple, would you not agree that if someone has received the baptism of fire they are held to higher standard before God than someone who hasn't? Surely you would at least agree with this.
You mentioned :
"...we're talking about the COVENANTS made in the temple, in this case specifically the solemn covenant not to commit adultery..."

But I don't understand this logic.

Do we not already covenant with God not to do those things when we are Born Again?

“Behold, here are the waters of Mormon. … And now, as ye are desirous to come into the fold of God, and to be called his people, … what have you against being baptized in the name of the Lord, as a witness before him that ye have entered into a covenant with him, that ye will serve him and keep his commandments, that he may pour out his Spirit more abundantly upon you?” (Mosiah 18:8, 10).

“Follow me, and do the things which ye have seen me do … with full purpose of heart, acting no hypocrisy and no deception before God, but with real intent, repenting of your sins, witnessing unto the Father that ye are willing to take upon you the name of Christ, by baptism” (2 Nephi 31:12–13).


“Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you” (Matthew 28:19–20).

-----------

LDS Watchman
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 7390
Contact:

Re: King Noah sounds like Brigham Young

Post by LDS Watchman »

nightlight wrote: December 1st, 2022, 7:49 am
LDS Watchman wrote: December 1st, 2022, 6:27 am
cab wrote: November 30th, 2022, 11:22 pm
LDS Watchman wrote: November 30th, 2022, 8:14 pm
You also appear to have a complete misunderstanding of the purpose of temple ordinances and the seriousness of keeping the covenants we make with God.
Really? What is the purpose then? The purpose of all things from God is to teach and prepare us to receive the baptism of the Holy Ghost. All those things are the map. After receiving the Holy Ghost then it is the Holy Ghost which tells us all that we should do.
Receiving the baptism of fire isn't some trump card that overrules and supersedes everything else God has said and established, either.
It is the culmination point. It is to fulfill the measure of our creation. When we are born of the Spirit we are born into the kingdom of God and become his children. We then become tabernacles/temples/dwelling places of God. Temples are built to show us what we may become if we submit to God.

This is the doctrine of Jesus Christ. Anything more or less is not of him.
Again, this doesn't address the issue at hand at all. The baptism of fire isn't some trump card that supersedes everything else God has said and established. And it isn't the culmination point either. Receiving the gift of the Holy Ghost by the laying on of hands (baptism of fire) is among the FIRST principles and ordinances of the gospel. The ordinances of the temple are to come later. (The doctrine of Christ encompasses a lot more than the steps to receiving the baptism of fire, but that's getting way off topic).

And we're not even talking about the ordinances of the temple as a teaching tool, we're talking about the COVENANTS made in the temple, in this case specifically the solemn covenant not to commit adultery. That covenant is serious and God expects us to keep it. If we break it, then there are serious consequences. And someone who commits adultery, who hasn't been been born of water and the spirit and THEN made this covenant in the temple, isn't held to the same standard.

In the case of the woman taken in adultery, we have no record of her being baptized, having received the gift of the Holy Ghost, or making the covenant with God in his holy house to never commit adultery. So comparing her situation to what Brigham Young was referring to about the seriousness of those who have been baptized, received the gift of the Holy Ghost, and made these solemn covenants in God's holy house is a best an apples to oranges comparison.

But since you insist on making it all about the baptism of fire as a culminating event and downplaying the covenants in the temple, would you not agree that if someone has received the baptism of fire they are held to higher standard before God than someone who hasn't? Surely you would at least agree with this.
You mentioned :
"...we're talking about the COVENANTS made in the temple, in this case specifically the solemn covenant not to commit adultery..."

But I don't understand this logic.

Do we not already covenant with God not to do those things when we are Born Again?

“Behold, here are the waters of Mormon. … And now, as ye are desirous to come into the fold of God, and to be called his people, … what have you against being baptized in the name of the Lord, as a witness before him that ye have entered into a covenant with him, that ye will serve him and keep his commandments, that he may pour out his Spirit more abundantly upon you?” (Mosiah 18:8, 10).

“Follow me, and do the things which ye have seen me do … with full purpose of heart, acting no hypocrisy and no deception before God, but with real intent, repenting of your sins, witnessing unto the Father that ye are willing to take upon you the name of Christ, by baptism” (2 Nephi 31:12–13).


“Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you” (Matthew 28:19–20).

-----------
Yes, we made the covenant to keep God's commandments at baptism, which already increases our accountability before God over those who haven't been baptized. But the solemn covenants in the temple take the level of accountability up even further.

User avatar
cab
captain of 1,000
Posts: 2986
Location: ♫ I am a Mormon! ♫ And... dang it... a Mormon just believes! ♫

Re: King Noah sounds like Brigham Young

Post by cab »

LDS Watchman wrote: December 1st, 2022, 6:27 am
cab wrote: November 30th, 2022, 11:22 pm
LDS Watchman wrote: November 30th, 2022, 8:14 pm
You also appear to have a complete misunderstanding of the purpose of temple ordinances and the seriousness of keeping the covenants we make with God.
Really? What is the purpose then? The purpose of all things from God is to teach and prepare us to receive the baptism of the Holy Ghost. All those things are the map. After receiving the Holy Ghost then it is the Holy Ghost which tells us all that we should do.
Receiving the baptism of fire isn't some trump card that overrules and supersedes everything else God has said and established, either.
It is the culmination point. It is to fulfill the measure of our creation. When we are born of the Spirit we are born into the kingdom of God and become his children. We then become tabernacles/temples/dwelling places of God. Temples are built to show us what we may become if we submit to God.

This is the doctrine of Jesus Christ. Anything more or less is not of him.
Again, this doesn't address the issue at hand at all. The baptism of fire isn't some trump card that supersedes everything else God has said and established. And it isn't the culmination point either. Receiving the gift of the Holy Ghost by the laying on of hands (baptism of fire) is among the FIRST principles and ordinances of the gospel. The ordinances of the temple are to come later. (The doctrine of Christ encompasses a lot more than the steps to receiving the baptism of fire, but that's getting way off topic).

And we're not even talking about the ordinances of the temple as a teaching tool, we're talking about the COVENANTS made in the temple, in this case specifically the solemn covenant not to commit adultery. That covenant is serious and God expects us to keep it. If we break it, then there are serious consequences. And someone who commits adultery, who hasn't been been born of water and the spirit and THEN made this covenant in the temple, isn't held to the same standard.

In the case of the woman taken in adultery, we have no record of her being baptized, having received the gift of the Holy Ghost, or making the covenant with God in his holy house to never commit adultery. So comparing her situation to what Brigham Young was referring to about the seriousness of those who have been baptized, received the gift of the Holy Ghost, and made these solemn covenants in God's holy house is a best an apples to oranges comparison.

But since you insist on making it all about the baptism of fire as a culminating event and downplaying the covenants in the temple, would you not agree that if someone has received the baptism of fire they are held to higher standard before God than someone who hasn't? Surely you would at least agree with this.

The issue at hand is that you believe that once having hands laid on your head to receive the Holy Ghost, that you have received the baptism of the Holy Ghost. Or that once you’ve been through the temple for your endowment, that you’ve received the endowment from on high. Or that once you have had hands placed on your head to receive the priesthood, that you actually have priesthood….

You would believe that someone who has “the priesthood” in our church is under the weight of D&C 84:41— 41 “But whoso breaketh this covenant after he hath received it, and altogether turneth therefrom, shall not have forgiveness of sins in this world nor in the world to come.“

You are wrong. A former LDS missionary who leaves the church is not a son of perdition who cannot have forgiveness. They are not under the weight of 84:41 as you likely suppose…. Our merciful God works through preparatory means for this very purpose…

When 8 year olds receive the INJUNCTION to receive the Holy Ghost, they hardly know what they are committing to. When bright eyed 18 year olds go through the temple for the first time, they hardly know what they are “covenanting” to do….

The weight of these covenants comes into place when they are spiritually ratified and sealed by the actual Gift of the Holy Ghost.

It is the difference between when Jesus gives the injunction to the apostles in John 20:22 22 — “And when he had said this, he breathed on them, and saith unto them, Receive ye the Holy Ghost”… — and when they ACTUALLY receive the Gift in Acts chapter 2…. THAT IS WHEN OLD THINGS PASS AND EVERYTHING BECOMES NEW…. That is when the great power comes along with the great responsibility…. Everything up until that point is preparatory…

LDS Watchman
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 7390
Contact:

Re: King Noah sounds like Brigham Young

Post by LDS Watchman »

cab wrote: December 1st, 2022, 11:27 am
LDS Watchman wrote: December 1st, 2022, 6:27 am
cab wrote: November 30th, 2022, 11:22 pm
LDS Watchman wrote: November 30th, 2022, 8:14 pm
You also appear to have a complete misunderstanding of the purpose of temple ordinances and the seriousness of keeping the covenants we make with God.
Really? What is the purpose then? The purpose of all things from God is to teach and prepare us to receive the baptism of the Holy Ghost. All those things are the map. After receiving the Holy Ghost then it is the Holy Ghost which tells us all that we should do.
Receiving the baptism of fire isn't some trump card that overrules and supersedes everything else God has said and established, either.
It is the culmination point. It is to fulfill the measure of our creation. When we are born of the Spirit we are born into the kingdom of God and become his children. We then become tabernacles/temples/dwelling places of God. Temples are built to show us what we may become if we submit to God.

This is the doctrine of Jesus Christ. Anything more or less is not of him.
Again, this doesn't address the issue at hand at all. The baptism of fire isn't some trump card that supersedes everything else God has said and established. And it isn't the culmination point either. Receiving the gift of the Holy Ghost by the laying on of hands (baptism of fire) is among the FIRST principles and ordinances of the gospel. The ordinances of the temple are to come later. (The doctrine of Christ encompasses a lot more than the steps to receiving the baptism of fire, but that's getting way off topic).

And we're not even talking about the ordinances of the temple as a teaching tool, we're talking about the COVENANTS made in the temple, in this case specifically the solemn covenant not to commit adultery. That covenant is serious and God expects us to keep it. If we break it, then there are serious consequences. And someone who commits adultery, who hasn't been been born of water and the spirit and THEN made this covenant in the temple, isn't held to the same standard.

In the case of the woman taken in adultery, we have no record of her being baptized, having received the gift of the Holy Ghost, or making the covenant with God in his holy house to never commit adultery. So comparing her situation to what Brigham Young was referring to about the seriousness of those who have been baptized, received the gift of the Holy Ghost, and made these solemn covenants in God's holy house is a best an apples to oranges comparison.

But since you insist on making it all about the baptism of fire as a culminating event and downplaying the covenants in the temple, would you not agree that if someone has received the baptism of fire they are held to higher standard before God than someone who hasn't? Surely you would at least agree with this.

The issue at hand is that you believe that once having hands laid on your head to receive the Holy Ghost, that you have received the baptism of the Holy Ghost. Or that once you’ve been through the temple for your endowment, that you’ve received the endowment from on high. Or that once you have had hands placed on your head to receive the priesthood, that you actually have priesthood….

You would believe that someone who has “the priesthood” in our church is under the weight of D&C 84:41— 41 “But whoso breaketh this covenant after he hath received it, and altogether turneth therefrom, shall not have forgiveness of sins in this world nor in the world to come.“

You are wrong. A former LDS missionary who leaves the church is not a son of perdition who cannot have forgiveness. They are not under the weight of 84:41 as you likely suppose…. Our merciful God works through preparatory means for this very purpose…

When 8 year olds receive the INJUNCTION to receive the Holy Ghost, they hardly know what they are committing to. When bright eyed 18 year olds go through the temple for the first time, they hardly know what they are “covenanting” to do….

The weight of these covenants comes into place when they are spiritually ratified and sealed by the actual Gift of the Holy Ghost.

It is the difference between when Jesus gives the injunction to the apostles in John 20:22 22 — “And when he had said this, he breathed on them, and saith unto them, Receive ye the Holy Ghost”… — and when they ACTUALLY receive the Gift in Acts chapter 2…. THAT IS WHEN OLD THINGS PASS AND EVERYTHING BECOMES NEW…. That is when the great power comes along with the great responsibility…. Everything up until that point is preparatory…
You clearly don't understand what I believe nor is this the issue at hand. The issue it hand has to do with the death penalty being required for certain sins under certain circumstances. Which is 100% scriptural.

But since you refuse to acknowledge or address this and won't even answer the question about increased accountability once one has received what you consider to be the pinnacle with the baptism of fire I guess we're done here.

User avatar
cab
captain of 1,000
Posts: 2986
Location: ♫ I am a Mormon! ♫ And... dang it... a Mormon just believes! ♫

Re: King Noah sounds like Brigham Young

Post by cab »

LDS Watchman wrote: December 1st, 2022, 12:30 pm
I guess we're done here.

Copy that. But I think you’re the one not listening. I’ve been exactly where you are. You can’t seem to grasp what me and others are saying.

LDS Watchman
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 7390
Contact:

Re: King Noah sounds like Brigham Young

Post by LDS Watchman »

cab wrote: December 1st, 2022, 4:42 pm
LDS Watchman wrote: December 1st, 2022, 12:30 pm
I guess we're done here.

Copy that. But I think you’re the one not listening. I’ve been exactly where you are. You can’t seem to grasp what me and others are saying.
Not sure how you can accuse me of not listening and being unable to grasp what you and others are saying, when you refuse to actually address the topic being discussed and instead are trying to divert the conversation to your views on the baptism of fire being the pinnacle of the entire gospel.

I mean come on, you flat out refuse to even address the implications of the issue of increased accountability for someone who has obtained what you consider to be the entire purpose of the gospel. But then you turn around and accuse me of not listening and somehow being unable to grasp what you're saying because I haven't "been where you are."

I'm sorry but that doesn't fly.

And while this is completely unrelated to the issue at hand, I think I have a very good grasp of what you are saying and understand where you are coming from. The problem as I see it is that your belief system in regards to priesthood, ordinances, the baptism of fire, etc. simply doesn't square with what the scriptures and teachings of Joseph Smith say as a whole.

For example, Joseph Smith never at any point taught what you are claiming about the priesthood not actually being conferred at the time one is ordained by the laying on of hands, that the purpose of the ordinances of the temple was to lead to the baptism of fire, or that the baptism of fire wasn't received by the laying on of hands following baptism. He taught the exact opposite and so do the scriptures he brought forth.

User avatar
cab
captain of 1,000
Posts: 2986
Location: ♫ I am a Mormon! ♫ And... dang it... a Mormon just believes! ♫

Re: King Noah sounds like Brigham Young

Post by cab »

LDS Watchman wrote: December 1st, 2022, 9:50 pm
cab wrote: December 1st, 2022, 4:42 pm
LDS Watchman wrote: December 1st, 2022, 12:30 pm
I guess we're done here.

Copy that. But I think you’re the one not listening. I’ve been exactly where you are. You can’t seem to grasp what me and others are saying.
Not sure how you can accuse me of not listening and being unable to grasp what you and others are saying, when you refuse to actually address the topic being discussed and instead are trying to divert the conversation to your views on the baptism of fire being the pinnacle of the entire gospel.

I mean come on, you flat out refuse to even address the implications of the issue of increased accountability for someone who has obtained what you consider to be the entire purpose of the gospel. But then you turn around and accuse me of not listening and somehow being unable to grasp what you're saying because I haven't "been where you are."

I'm sorry but that doesn't fly.

And while this is completely unrelated to the issue at hand, I think I have a very good grasp of what you are saying and understand where you are coming from. The problem as I see it is that your belief system in regards to priesthood, ordinances, the baptism of fire, etc. simply doesn't square with what the scriptures and teachings of Joseph Smith say as a whole.

For example, Joseph Smith never at any point taught what you are claiming about the priesthood not actually being conferred at the time one is ordained by the laying on of hands, that the purpose of the ordinances of the temple was to lead to the baptism of fire, or that the baptism of fire wasn't received by the laying on of hands following baptism. He taught the exact opposite and so do the scriptures he brought forth.

Oh he taught it. So did Jesus. It IS what they and all sent messengers teach. Few merely understand and most don’t. I didn’t begin to understand until I was 40 years old, despite a lifetime of church service and study.

You can be baptized, have hands laid on your head, and do temple ordinances 1000 times, but if you don’t enter in at the narrow gate and receive the spiritual ordinance of the baptism of fire and of the Holy Ghost, you are like a bag of sand. Without this you are not yet on the strait path, have not yet “entered the terrestrial world”, nor received the name of “the Son” or entered into the Covenant. Narrow is the way and few enter therein.

I am addressing what you are saying, but if you don’t care to try understand this, then I have nothing else to say.

LDS Watchman
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 7390
Contact:

Re: King Noah sounds like Brigham Young

Post by LDS Watchman »

cab wrote: December 2nd, 2022, 7:19 am
LDS Watchman wrote: December 1st, 2022, 9:50 pm
cab wrote: December 1st, 2022, 4:42 pm
LDS Watchman wrote: December 1st, 2022, 12:30 pm
I guess we're done here.

Copy that. But I think you’re the one not listening. I’ve been exactly where you are. You can’t seem to grasp what me and others are saying.
Not sure how you can accuse me of not listening and being unable to grasp what you and others are saying, when you refuse to actually address the topic being discussed and instead are trying to divert the conversation to your views on the baptism of fire being the pinnacle of the entire gospel.

I mean come on, you flat out refuse to even address the implications of the issue of increased accountability for someone who has obtained what you consider to be the entire purpose of the gospel. But then you turn around and accuse me of not listening and somehow being unable to grasp what you're saying because I haven't "been where you are."

I'm sorry but that doesn't fly.

And while this is completely unrelated to the issue at hand, I think I have a very good grasp of what you are saying and understand where you are coming from. The problem as I see it is that your belief system in regards to priesthood, ordinances, the baptism of fire, etc. simply doesn't square with what the scriptures and teachings of Joseph Smith say as a whole.

For example, Joseph Smith never at any point taught what you are claiming about the priesthood not actually being conferred at the time one is ordained by the laying on of hands, that the purpose of the ordinances of the temple was to lead to the baptism of fire, or that the baptism of fire wasn't received by the laying on of hands following baptism. He taught the exact opposite and so do the scriptures he brought forth.

Oh he taught it. So did Jesus. It IS what they and all sent messengers teach. Few merely understand and most don’t. I didn’t begin to understand until I was 40 years old, despite a lifetime of church service and study.

You can be baptized, have hands laid on your head, and do temple ordinances 1000 times, but if you don’t enter in at the narrow gate and receive the spiritual ordinance of the baptism of fire and of the Holy Ghost, you are like a bag of sand. Without this you are not yet on the strait path, have not yet “entered the terrestrial world”, nor received the name of “the Son” or entered into the Covenant. Narrow is the way and few enter therein.

I am addressing what you are saying, but if you don’t care to try understand this, then I have nothing else to say.
Again, I completely understand what you are saying and where you are coming from. You're entitled to your beliefs, but your beliefs are just that, your beliefs. Your beliefs don't equal truth.

Show me where Joseph Smith taught what you are claiming. And please explain why he and the scriptures repeatedly refer to the Gift of the Holy Ghost/baptism of fire being received by the laying on of hands and that this is among the FIRST principles of the gospel.

Now back to the actual topic. I will ask the question one more time.

If someone has received what you believe constitutes the baptism of fire and the pinnacle of the gospel, are they held to a higher level of accountability than someone who hasn't? Yes or no.

If you won't answer this question then there's nothing left to discuss.

User avatar
cab
captain of 1,000
Posts: 2986
Location: ♫ I am a Mormon! ♫ And... dang it... a Mormon just believes! ♫

Re: King Noah sounds like Brigham Young

Post by cab »

LDS Watchman wrote: December 2nd, 2022, 2:13 pm
cab wrote: December 2nd, 2022, 7:19 am
LDS Watchman wrote: December 1st, 2022, 9:50 pm
cab wrote: December 1st, 2022, 4:42 pm


Copy that. But I think you’re the one not listening. I’ve been exactly where you are. You can’t seem to grasp what me and others are saying.
Not sure how you can accuse me of not listening and being unable to grasp what you and others are saying, when you refuse to actually address the topic being discussed and instead are trying to divert the conversation to your views on the baptism of fire being the pinnacle of the entire gospel.

I mean come on, you flat out refuse to even address the implications of the issue of increased accountability for someone who has obtained what you consider to be the entire purpose of the gospel. But then you turn around and accuse me of not listening and somehow being unable to grasp what you're saying because I haven't "been where you are."

I'm sorry but that doesn't fly.

And while this is completely unrelated to the issue at hand, I think I have a very good grasp of what you are saying and understand where you are coming from. The problem as I see it is that your belief system in regards to priesthood, ordinances, the baptism of fire, etc. simply doesn't square with what the scriptures and teachings of Joseph Smith say as a whole.

For example, Joseph Smith never at any point taught what you are claiming about the priesthood not actually being conferred at the time one is ordained by the laying on of hands, that the purpose of the ordinances of the temple was to lead to the baptism of fire, or that the baptism of fire wasn't received by the laying on of hands following baptism. He taught the exact opposite and so do the scriptures he brought forth.

Oh he taught it. So did Jesus. It IS what they and all sent messengers teach. Few merely understand and most don’t. I didn’t begin to understand until I was 40 years old, despite a lifetime of church service and study.

You can be baptized, have hands laid on your head, and do temple ordinances 1000 times, but if you don’t enter in at the narrow gate and receive the spiritual ordinance of the baptism of fire and of the Holy Ghost, you are like a bag of sand. Without this you are not yet on the strait path, have not yet “entered the terrestrial world”, nor received the name of “the Son” or entered into the Covenant. Narrow is the way and few enter therein.

I am addressing what you are saying, but if you don’t care to try understand this, then I have nothing else to say.
Again, I completely understand what you are saying and where you are coming from. You're entitled to your beliefs, but your beliefs are just that, your beliefs. Your beliefs don't equal truth.

Show me where Joseph Smith taught what you are claiming. And please explain why he and the scriptures repeatedly refer to the Gift of the Holy Ghost/baptism of fire being received by the laying on of hands and that this is among the FIRST principles of the gospel.

Now back to the actual topic. I will ask the question one more time.

If someone has received what you believe constitutes the baptism of fire and the pinnacle of the gospel, are they held to a higher level of accountability than someone who hasn't? Yes or no.

If you won't answer this question then there's nothing left to discuss.
Yes. Of course. It’s a silly question. That is why Ananias and Sapphira lost their lives. They attempted to defraud the Holy Ghost after they had received it. But the baptism of fire and of the Holy Ghost is not what happens at confirmation via the laying on of hands. That is merely a priesthood directive to go on and receive the spiritual event.

The scriptures that do refer to the laying on of hands are almost exclusively limited to the D&C. That is because the early church (and us too!) were subject to a preparatory gospel, meaning they were in preparation for receiving the event spoken of extensively in the New Testament and the Book of Mormon.

And I am done derailing this thread with you Matthias. If I had any hope that you honestly believed what you were saying then I would continue. But I happen to know for a fact that you don’t. I understand your experiment here, but I don’t care to participate in it. I’ve already devoted countless hours to that fruitless endeavor and I have far more valuable things going on in my life than to participate in your little religion deconstruction exercise.

LDS Watchman
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 7390
Contact:

Re: King Noah sounds like Brigham Young

Post by LDS Watchman »

cab wrote: December 2nd, 2022, 3:39 pm
LDS Watchman wrote: December 2nd, 2022, 2:13 pm
cab wrote: December 2nd, 2022, 7:19 am
LDS Watchman wrote: December 1st, 2022, 9:50 pm

Not sure how you can accuse me of not listening and being unable to grasp what you and others are saying, when you refuse to actually address the topic being discussed and instead are trying to divert the conversation to your views on the baptism of fire being the pinnacle of the entire gospel.

I mean come on, you flat out refuse to even address the implications of the issue of increased accountability for someone who has obtained what you consider to be the entire purpose of the gospel. But then you turn around and accuse me of not listening and somehow being unable to grasp what you're saying because I haven't "been where you are."

I'm sorry but that doesn't fly.

And while this is completely unrelated to the issue at hand, I think I have a very good grasp of what you are saying and understand where you are coming from. The problem as I see it is that your belief system in regards to priesthood, ordinances, the baptism of fire, etc. simply doesn't square with what the scriptures and teachings of Joseph Smith say as a whole.

For example, Joseph Smith never at any point taught what you are claiming about the priesthood not actually being conferred at the time one is ordained by the laying on of hands, that the purpose of the ordinances of the temple was to lead to the baptism of fire, or that the baptism of fire wasn't received by the laying on of hands following baptism. He taught the exact opposite and so do the scriptures he brought forth.

Oh he taught it. So did Jesus. It IS what they and all sent messengers teach. Few merely understand and most don’t. I didn’t begin to understand until I was 40 years old, despite a lifetime of church service and study.

You can be baptized, have hands laid on your head, and do temple ordinances 1000 times, but if you don’t enter in at the narrow gate and receive the spiritual ordinance of the baptism of fire and of the Holy Ghost, you are like a bag of sand. Without this you are not yet on the strait path, have not yet “entered the terrestrial world”, nor received the name of “the Son” or entered into the Covenant. Narrow is the way and few enter therein.

I am addressing what you are saying, but if you don’t care to try understand this, then I have nothing else to say.
Again, I completely understand what you are saying and where you are coming from. You're entitled to your beliefs, but your beliefs are just that, your beliefs. Your beliefs don't equal truth.

Show me where Joseph Smith taught what you are claiming. And please explain why he and the scriptures repeatedly refer to the Gift of the Holy Ghost/baptism of fire being received by the laying on of hands and that this is among the FIRST principles of the gospel.

Now back to the actual topic. I will ask the question one more time.

If someone has received what you believe constitutes the baptism of fire and the pinnacle of the gospel, are they held to a higher level of accountability than someone who hasn't? Yes or no.

If you won't answer this question then there's nothing left to discuss.
Yes. Of course. It’s a silly question. That is why Ananias and Sapphira lost their lives. They attempted to defraud the Holy Ghost after they had received it. But the baptism of fire and of the Holy Ghost is not what happens at confirmation via the laying on of hands. That is merely a priesthood directive to go on and receive the spiritual event.

The scriptures that do refer to the laying on of hands are almost exclusively limited to the D&C. That is because the early church (and us too!) were subject to a preparatory gospel, meaning they were in preparation for receiving the event spoken of extensively in the New Testament and the Book of Mormon.

And I am done derailing this thread with you Matthias. If I had any hope that you honestly believed what you were saying then I would continue. But I happen to know for a fact that you don’t. I understand your experiment here, but I don’t care to participate in it. I’ve already devoted countless hours to that fruitless endeavor and I have far more valuable things going on in my life than to participate in your little religion deconstruction exercise.
Thanks for finally answering the question.

I'll send you a PM so we can discuss your accusation that I don't actually believe what I'm saying.

Resorting to false accusations like this is really uncalled for. But I'll give you the courtesy of allowing you to explain yourself in private.

User avatar
cab
captain of 1,000
Posts: 2986
Location: ♫ I am a Mormon! ♫ And... dang it... a Mormon just believes! ♫

Re: King Noah sounds like Brigham Young

Post by cab »

LDS Watchman wrote: December 2nd, 2022, 4:40 pm
cab wrote: December 2nd, 2022, 3:39 pm
LDS Watchman wrote: December 2nd, 2022, 2:13 pm
cab wrote: December 2nd, 2022, 7:19 am


Oh he taught it. So did Jesus. It IS what they and all sent messengers teach. Few merely understand and most don’t. I didn’t begin to understand until I was 40 years old, despite a lifetime of church service and study.

You can be baptized, have hands laid on your head, and do temple ordinances 1000 times, but if you don’t enter in at the narrow gate and receive the spiritual ordinance of the baptism of fire and of the Holy Ghost, you are like a bag of sand. Without this you are not yet on the strait path, have not yet “entered the terrestrial world”, nor received the name of “the Son” or entered into the Covenant. Narrow is the way and few enter therein.

I am addressing what you are saying, but if you don’t care to try understand this, then I have nothing else to say.
Again, I completely understand what you are saying and where you are coming from. You're entitled to your beliefs, but your beliefs are just that, your beliefs. Your beliefs don't equal truth.

Show me where Joseph Smith taught what you are claiming. And please explain why he and the scriptures repeatedly refer to the Gift of the Holy Ghost/baptism of fire being received by the laying on of hands and that this is among the FIRST principles of the gospel.

Now back to the actual topic. I will ask the question one more time.

If someone has received what you believe constitutes the baptism of fire and the pinnacle of the gospel, are they held to a higher level of accountability than someone who hasn't? Yes or no.

If you won't answer this question then there's nothing left to discuss.
Yes. Of course. It’s a silly question. That is why Ananias and Sapphira lost their lives. They attempted to defraud the Holy Ghost after they had received it. But the baptism of fire and of the Holy Ghost is not what happens at confirmation via the laying on of hands. That is merely a priesthood directive to go on and receive the spiritual event.

The scriptures that do refer to the laying on of hands are almost exclusively limited to the D&C. That is because the early church (and us too!) were subject to a preparatory gospel, meaning they were in preparation for receiving the event spoken of extensively in the New Testament and the Book of Mormon.

And I am done derailing this thread with you Matthias. If I had any hope that you honestly believed what you were saying then I would continue. But I happen to know for a fact that you don’t. I understand your experiment here, but I don’t care to participate in it. I’ve already devoted countless hours to that fruitless endeavor and I have far more valuable things going on in my life than to participate in your little religion deconstruction exercise.
Thanks for finally answering the question.

I'll send you a PM so we can discuss your accusation that I don't actually believe what I'm saying.

Resorting to false accusations like this is really uncalled for. But I'll give you the courtesy of allowing you to explain yourself in private.

Don’t bother. I won’t respond. And it’s not false and you know it. Let’s just not talk anymore. It’s a trite game. I don’t have time for it. We have hundreds of replies to one another and other pms and it never goes anywhere.

LDS Watchman
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 7390
Contact:

Re: King Noah sounds like Brigham Young

Post by LDS Watchman »

cab wrote: December 2nd, 2022, 4:56 pm
LDS Watchman wrote: December 2nd, 2022, 4:40 pm
cab wrote: December 2nd, 2022, 3:39 pm
LDS Watchman wrote: December 2nd, 2022, 2:13 pm

Again, I completely understand what you are saying and where you are coming from. You're entitled to your beliefs, but your beliefs are just that, your beliefs. Your beliefs don't equal truth.

Show me where Joseph Smith taught what you are claiming. And please explain why he and the scriptures repeatedly refer to the Gift of the Holy Ghost/baptism of fire being received by the laying on of hands and that this is among the FIRST principles of the gospel.

Now back to the actual topic. I will ask the question one more time.

If someone has received what you believe constitutes the baptism of fire and the pinnacle of the gospel, are they held to a higher level of accountability than someone who hasn't? Yes or no.

If you won't answer this question then there's nothing left to discuss.
Yes. Of course. It’s a silly question. That is why Ananias and Sapphira lost their lives. They attempted to defraud the Holy Ghost after they had received it. But the baptism of fire and of the Holy Ghost is not what happens at confirmation via the laying on of hands. That is merely a priesthood directive to go on and receive the spiritual event.

The scriptures that do refer to the laying on of hands are almost exclusively limited to the D&C. That is because the early church (and us too!) were subject to a preparatory gospel, meaning they were in preparation for receiving the event spoken of extensively in the New Testament and the Book of Mormon.

And I am done derailing this thread with you Matthias. If I had any hope that you honestly believed what you were saying then I would continue. But I happen to know for a fact that you don’t. I understand your experiment here, but I don’t care to participate in it. I’ve already devoted countless hours to that fruitless endeavor and I have far more valuable things going on in my life than to participate in your little religion deconstruction exercise.
Thanks for finally answering the question.

I'll send you a PM so we can discuss your accusation that I don't actually believe what I'm saying.

Resorting to false accusations like this is really uncalled for. But I'll give you the courtesy of allowing you to explain yourself in private.

Don’t bother. I won’t respond. And it’s not false and you know it. Let’s just not talk anymore. I don’t have time for it. We have hundreds of replies to one another and other pms and it never goes anywhere.
It's totally a false accusation. But if you aren't willing to explain yourself, then at least have the integrity to retract it. Otherwise all you're doing is shutting down the conversation and hurling an insult on the way out. And I would hope that you're better than that.

User avatar
Luke
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 10785
Location: England

Re: King Noah sounds like Brigham Young

Post by Luke »

LDS Watchman wrote: December 2nd, 2022, 4:40 pm
cab wrote: December 2nd, 2022, 3:39 pm
LDS Watchman wrote: December 2nd, 2022, 2:13 pm
cab wrote: December 2nd, 2022, 7:19 am


Oh he taught it. So did Jesus. It IS what they and all sent messengers teach. Few merely understand and most don’t. I didn’t begin to understand until I was 40 years old, despite a lifetime of church service and study.

You can be baptized, have hands laid on your head, and do temple ordinances 1000 times, but if you don’t enter in at the narrow gate and receive the spiritual ordinance of the baptism of fire and of the Holy Ghost, you are like a bag of sand. Without this you are not yet on the strait path, have not yet “entered the terrestrial world”, nor received the name of “the Son” or entered into the Covenant. Narrow is the way and few enter therein.

I am addressing what you are saying, but if you don’t care to try understand this, then I have nothing else to say.
Again, I completely understand what you are saying and where you are coming from. You're entitled to your beliefs, but your beliefs are just that, your beliefs. Your beliefs don't equal truth.

Show me where Joseph Smith taught what you are claiming. And please explain why he and the scriptures repeatedly refer to the Gift of the Holy Ghost/baptism of fire being received by the laying on of hands and that this is among the FIRST principles of the gospel.

Now back to the actual topic. I will ask the question one more time.

If someone has received what you believe constitutes the baptism of fire and the pinnacle of the gospel, are they held to a higher level of accountability than someone who hasn't? Yes or no.

If you won't answer this question then there's nothing left to discuss.
Yes. Of course. It’s a silly question. That is why Ananias and Sapphira lost their lives. They attempted to defraud the Holy Ghost after they had received it. But the baptism of fire and of the Holy Ghost is not what happens at confirmation via the laying on of hands. That is merely a priesthood directive to go on and receive the spiritual event.

The scriptures that do refer to the laying on of hands are almost exclusively limited to the D&C. That is because the early church (and us too!) were subject to a preparatory gospel, meaning they were in preparation for receiving the event spoken of extensively in the New Testament and the Book of Mormon.

And I am done derailing this thread with you Matthias. If I had any hope that you honestly believed what you were saying then I would continue. But I happen to know for a fact that you don’t. I understand your experiment here, but I don’t care to participate in it. I’ve already devoted countless hours to that fruitless endeavor and I have far more valuable things going on in my life than to participate in your little religion deconstruction exercise.
Thanks for finally answering the question.

I'll send you a PM so we can discuss your accusation that I don't actually believe what I'm saying.

Resorting to false accusations like this is really uncalled for. But I'll give you the courtesy of allowing you to explain yourself in private.
The point he’s trying to make is that you don’t magically get the Holy Ghost because someone lays their hands on your head and says certain words. That’s just a verifiable fact. For example, Lorenzo Snow’s experience was that he did not receive it at the time of his receiving the ordinance of laying on of hands, but when he went and did the work for himself to fulfill the call to “receive the Holy Ghost”.

LDS Watchman
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 7390
Contact:

Re: King Noah sounds like Brigham Young

Post by LDS Watchman »

Luke wrote: December 2nd, 2022, 6:20 pm
LDS Watchman wrote: December 2nd, 2022, 4:40 pm
cab wrote: December 2nd, 2022, 3:39 pm
LDS Watchman wrote: December 2nd, 2022, 2:13 pm

Again, I completely understand what you are saying and where you are coming from. You're entitled to your beliefs, but your beliefs are just that, your beliefs. Your beliefs don't equal truth.

Show me where Joseph Smith taught what you are claiming. And please explain why he and the scriptures repeatedly refer to the Gift of the Holy Ghost/baptism of fire being received by the laying on of hands and that this is among the FIRST principles of the gospel.

Now back to the actual topic. I will ask the question one more time.

If someone has received what you believe constitutes the baptism of fire and the pinnacle of the gospel, are they held to a higher level of accountability than someone who hasn't? Yes or no.

If you won't answer this question then there's nothing left to discuss.
Yes. Of course. It’s a silly question. That is why Ananias and Sapphira lost their lives. They attempted to defraud the Holy Ghost after they had received it. But the baptism of fire and of the Holy Ghost is not what happens at confirmation via the laying on of hands. That is merely a priesthood directive to go on and receive the spiritual event.

The scriptures that do refer to the laying on of hands are almost exclusively limited to the D&C. That is because the early church (and us too!) were subject to a preparatory gospel, meaning they were in preparation for receiving the event spoken of extensively in the New Testament and the Book of Mormon.

And I am done derailing this thread with you Matthias. If I had any hope that you honestly believed what you were saying then I would continue. But I happen to know for a fact that you don’t. I understand your experiment here, but I don’t care to participate in it. I’ve already devoted countless hours to that fruitless endeavor and I have far more valuable things going on in my life than to participate in your little religion deconstruction exercise.
Thanks for finally answering the question.

I'll send you a PM so we can discuss your accusation that I don't actually believe what I'm saying.

Resorting to false accusations like this is really uncalled for. But I'll give you the courtesy of allowing you to explain yourself in private.
The point he’s trying to make is that you don’t magically get the Holy Ghost because someone lays their hands on your head and says certain words. That’s just a verifiable fact. For example, Lorenzo Snow’s experience was that he did not receive it at the time of his receiving the ordinance of laying on of hands, but when he went and did the work for himself to fulfill the call to “receive the Holy Ghost”.
Yes of course one has to actually become truly converted and exercise real faith and true repentance, in addition to being baptized and receiving the laying on of hands by the proper priesthood authority, in order to actually receive the Gift of the Holy Ghost. The laying on of hands alone isn't enough. I never said otherwise.

But that isn't his point. Nor is it even relevant to the issue at hand. Instead of addressing the issue at hand he would rather talk about something else and then insult me to save face when he decided to bow out of the conversation before we actually got to the root of the issue.

Which is too bad because with him finally answering this relevant question we could have actually discussed the issue at hand. He conceded that death was required after one has received the baptism of fire for trying to defraud the Holy Ghost. That's consistent with what Brigham Young was saying, regardless of our differences of opinion on the significance of the baptism of fire and how it is received.

Precepts
captain of 50
Posts: 75

Re: King Noah sounds like Brigham Young

Post by Precepts »

Here is another example from the Book of Mormon:

Ether 10
5 And it came to pass that Riplakish did not do that which was right in the sight of the Lord, for he did have many wives and concubines, and did lay that upon men’s shoulders which was grievous to be borne; yea, he did tax them with heavy taxes; and with the taxes he did build many spacious buildings.
6 And he did erect him an exceedingly beautiful throne; and he did build many prisons, and whoso would not be subject unto taxes he did cast into prison; and whoso was not able to pay taxes he did cast into prison; and he did cause that they should labor continually for their support; and whoso refused to labor he did cause to be put to death.

User avatar
Mindfields
captain of 1,000
Posts: 1869
Location: Utah

Re: King Noah sounds like Brigham Young

Post by Mindfields »

innocentoldguy wrote: October 29th, 2022, 1:31 am
Shawn Henry wrote: October 29th, 2022, 12:08 am
innocentoldguy wrote: October 28th, 2022, 11:40 pm His first plural wife was Fanny Alger.
Wow!!! Did you just throw a prophet of God under the bus!!

Do you honestly think a prophet of God would go behind his wife's back, marry a 14 year old, bang her out in the barn, all before the Lord even gave the church the revelation and before he even had the sealing powers given him in 1836, and all in the same year he canonizes the article on marriage that declares polygamy a crime? Can you say secret works of darkness.

What kind of man of God is that?
Who cares if he banged her? They were married, right? Also, Joseph first received the revelation on plural marriage in 1831, so once again, I don't know what you're talking about, but I guess that's OK because neither do you.
This is morally reprehensible. A grown man having sexual relations with a fourteen year old girl is wrong. Period. The church lies about polygamy to protect themselves and their positions of power. Stop relying on these liars and learn to think for yourself. Polygamy is adultery.

User avatar
ransomme
captain of 1,000
Posts: 4014

Re: King Noah sounds like Brigham Young

Post by ransomme »

cab wrote: November 30th, 2022, 11:22 pm
LDS Watchman wrote: November 30th, 2022, 8:14 pm
You also appear to have a complete misunderstanding of the purpose of temple ordinances and the seriousness of keeping the covenants we make with God.
Really? What is the purpose then? The purpose of all things from God is to teach and prepare us to receive the baptism of the Holy Ghost. All those things are the map. After receiving the Holy Ghost then it is the Holy Ghost which tells us all that we should do.
Receiving the baptism of fire isn't some trump card that overrules and supercedes everything else God has said and established, either.
It is the culmination point. It is to fulfill the measure of our creation. When we are born of the Spirit we are born into the kingdom of God and become his children. We then become tabernacles/temples/dwelling places of God. Temples are built to show us what we may become if we submit to God.

This is the doctrine of Jesus Christ. Anything more or less is not of him.
The baptism of fire helps get you to the door. One still has to endure to the End. The Beginning and the End is Jesus the Messiah.

It is not a trump card but the baptism of fire is a required event, after which one needs to walk in the light and companionship of the Holy Ghost to come to the Lord Jesus.

User avatar
ransomme
captain of 1,000
Posts: 4014

Re: King Noah sounds like Brigham Young

Post by ransomme »

nightlight wrote: December 1st, 2022, 7:49 am
LDS Watchman wrote: December 1st, 2022, 6:27 am
cab wrote: November 30th, 2022, 11:22 pm

Really? What is the purpose then? The purpose of all things from God is to teach and prepare us to receive the baptism of the Holy Ghost. All those things are the map. After receiving the Holy Ghost then it is the Holy Ghost which tells us all that we should do.



It is the culmination point. It is to fulfill the measure of our creation. When we are born of the Spirit we are born into the kingdom of God and become his children. We then become tabernacles/temples/dwelling places of God. Temples are built to show us what we may become if we submit to God.

This is the doctrine of Jesus Christ. Anything more or less is not of him.
Again, this doesn't address the issue at hand at all. The baptism of fire isn't some trump card that supersedes everything else God has said and established. And it isn't the culmination point either. Receiving the gift of the Holy Ghost by the laying on of hands (baptism of fire) is among the FIRST principles and ordinances of the gospel. The ordinances of the temple are to come later. (The doctrine of Christ encompasses a lot more than the steps to receiving the baptism of fire, but that's getting way off topic).

And we're not even talking about the ordinances of the temple as a teaching tool, we're talking about the COVENANTS made in the temple, in this case specifically the solemn covenant not to commit adultery. That covenant is serious and God expects us to keep it. If we break it, then there are serious consequences. And someone who commits adultery, who hasn't been been born of water and the spirit and THEN made this covenant in the temple, isn't held to the same standard.

In the case of the woman taken in adultery, we have no record of her being baptized, having received the gift of the Holy Ghost, or making the covenant with God in his holy house to never commit adultery. So comparing her situation to what Brigham Young was referring to about the seriousness of those who have been baptized, received the gift of the Holy Ghost, and made these solemn covenants in God's holy house is a best an apples to oranges comparison.

But since you insist on making it all about the baptism of fire as a culminating event and downplaying the covenants in the temple, would you not agree that if someone has received the baptism of fire they are held to higher standard before God than someone who hasn't? Surely you would at least agree with this.
You mentioned :
"...we're talking about the COVENANTS made in the temple, in this case specifically the solemn covenant not to commit adultery..."

But I don't understand this logic.

Do we not already covenant with God not to do those things when we are Born Again?

“Behold, here are the waters of Mormon. … And now, as ye are desirous to come into the fold of God, and to be called his people, … what have you against being baptized in the name of the Lord, as a witness before him that ye have entered into a covenant with him, that ye will serve him and keep his commandments, that he may pour out his Spirit more abundantly upon you?” (Mosiah 18:8, 10).

“Follow me, and do the things which ye have seen me do … with full purpose of heart, acting no hypocrisy and no deception before God, but with real intent, repenting of your sins, witnessing unto the Father that ye are willing to take upon you the name of Christ, by baptism” (2 Nephi 31:12–13).


“Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you” (Matthew 28:19–20).

-----------
I think so. Remember the temple was intended to provide instruction, so that we could be endowed with power, meaning the Spirit of God which is what authorizes our authority (aka power). We are supposed to be washed (cleansed by fire) so that our bodies may be the Temple of the Spirit.

That's why when the Spirit is offended and withdraws there is the end of one's priesthood, aka authority, and of course the gifts of the Spirit.

The Church has clearly changed the ordinances (added to them at the very least) and also changed the Doctrine of the Christ. Which as I recall is described as being evil

User avatar
SJR3t2
captain of 1,000
Posts: 2619
Contact:

Re: King Noah sounds like Brigham Young

Post by SJR3t2 »

ransomme wrote: March 22nd, 2023, 5:02 am
cab wrote: November 30th, 2022, 11:22 pm
LDS Watchman wrote: November 30th, 2022, 8:14 pm
You also appear to have a complete misunderstanding of the purpose of temple ordinances and the seriousness of keeping the covenants we make with God.
Really? What is the purpose then? The purpose of all things from God is to teach and prepare us to receive the baptism of the Holy Ghost. All those things are the map. After receiving the Holy Ghost then it is the Holy Ghost which tells us all that we should do.
Receiving the baptism of fire isn't some trump card that overrules and supercedes everything else God has said and established, either.
It is the culmination point. It is to fulfill the measure of our creation. When we are born of the Spirit we are born into the kingdom of God and become his children. We then become tabernacles/temples/dwelling places of God. Temples are built to show us what we may become if we submit to God.

This is the doctrine of Jesus Christ. Anything more or less is not of him.
The baptism of fire helps get you to the door. One still has to endure to the End. The Beginning and the End is Jesus the Messiah.

It is not a trump card but the baptism of fire is a required event, after which one needs to walk in the light and companionship of the Holy Ghost to come to the Lord Jesus.
You may enjoy this summary of the baptisms I did.

As I see it every part of the Doctrine of Christ [the Messiah] is connected to His law / Torah.
A Repenting and returning to the law / Torah.
-B Baptism of water is a witness of covenant already made to keep all of His law / Torah.
-B Baptism of fire is a witness you have been judged and found with a broken heart and a contrite spirit and you are then cleansed of your past sins and have been justified by the law / Torah because of Yeshua’s merits.
A Baptism of the Holy Spirit is sanctification by the law / Torah and have it written on your heart and you seek to sin no more and have the express image of Yeshua in your countenance.
Sometimes the Doctrine of Christ [the Messiah] includes enduring to the end which is keeping the commandments to the end of your life even when the world will judge you negatively for doing so. Other times it will include speaking with the tongue of angels which is simply preaching and teaching the law / Torah and calling people to repentance which is telling them to return to YHWH’s law / Torah.
https://seekingyhwh.org/2022/10/05/all- ... o-chiasmi/

simpleton
captain of 1,000
Posts: 3074

Re: King Noah sounds like Brigham Young

Post by simpleton »

Precepts wrote: October 23rd, 2022, 10:57 pm I was reading Mosiah 11 for my personal study today. I couldn’t help but see the similarities between the wicked King Noah and Brigham Young

Noah Wives and Concubines
BY Polygamy

Noah 1/5 tax
BY enforces 1/10 tithing even among poor

Noah elegant buildings
BY lion house

Noah wine bibber
BY distillery

Noah delight in bloodshed
BY blood atonement
I was reading the above and couldn't help but notice the similarity with you and others of like, and this crowd:

When the chief priests therefore and officers saw him, they cried out, saying, Crucify him, crucify him. Pilate saith unto them, Take ye him, and crucify him: for I find no fault in him. The Jews answered him, We have a law, and by our law he ought to die, because he made himself the Son of God.

User avatar
ransomme
captain of 1,000
Posts: 4014

Re: King Noah sounds like Brigham Young

Post by ransomme »

simpleton wrote: March 22nd, 2023, 9:22 am
Precepts wrote: October 23rd, 2022, 10:57 pm I was reading Mosiah 11 for my personal study today. I couldn’t help but see the similarities between the wicked King Noah and Brigham Young

Noah Wives and Concubines
BY Polygamy

Noah 1/5 tax
BY enforces 1/10 tithing even among poor

Noah elegant buildings
BY lion house

Noah wine bibber
BY distillery

Noah delight in bloodshed
BY blood atonement
I was reading the above and couldn't help but notice the similarity with you and others of like, and this crowd:

When the chief priests therefore and officers saw him, they cried out, saying, Crucify him, crucify him. Pilate saith unto them, Take ye him, and crucify him: for I find no fault in him. The Jews answered him, We have a law, and by our law he ought to die, because he made himself the Son of God.
I don't get your response. Was he trying to kill B.Young? I haven't heard anyone call for B.Young's death, granted he is already dead but I think you get the idea.

User avatar
ransomme
captain of 1,000
Posts: 4014

Re: King Noah sounds like Brigham Young

Post by ransomme »

SJR3t2 wrote: March 22nd, 2023, 8:48 am
ransomme wrote: March 22nd, 2023, 5:02 am
cab wrote: November 30th, 2022, 11:22 pm

Really? What is the purpose then? The purpose of all things from God is to teach and prepare us to receive the baptism of the Holy Ghost. All those things are the map. After receiving the Holy Ghost then it is the Holy Ghost which tells us all that we should do.



It is the culmination point. It is to fulfill the measure of our creation. When we are born of the Spirit we are born into the kingdom of God and become his children. We then become tabernacles/temples/dwelling places of God. Temples are built to show us what we may become if we submit to God.

This is the doctrine of Jesus Christ. Anything more or less is not of him.
The baptism of fire helps get you to the door. One still has to endure to the End. The Beginning and the End is Jesus the Messiah.

It is not a trump card but the baptism of fire is a required event, after which one needs to walk in the light and companionship of the Holy Ghost to come to the Lord Jesus.
You may enjoy this summary of the baptisms I did.

As I see it every part of the Doctrine of Christ [the Messiah] is connected to His law / Torah.
A Repenting and returning to the law / Torah.
-B Baptism of water is a witness of covenant already made to keep all of His law / Torah.
-B Baptism of fire is a witness you have been judged and found with a broken heart and a contrite spirit and you are then cleansed of your past sins and have been justified by the law / Torah because of Yeshua’s merits.
A Baptism of the Holy Spirit is sanctification by the law / Torah and have it written on your heart and you seek to sin no more and have the express image of Yeshua in your countenance.
Sometimes the Doctrine of Christ [the Messiah] includes enduring to the end which is keeping the commandments to the end of your life even when the world will judge you negatively for doing so. Other times it will include speaking with the tongue of angels which is simply preaching and teaching the law / Torah and calling people to repentance which is telling them to return to YHWH’s law / Torah.
https://seekingyhwh.org/2022/10/05/all- ... o-chiasmi/
Thanks. I did enjoy our discussion on Torah, and it is super fascinating. I agree that it is an essential concept in the Gospel that is still valid.

Post Reply