The Fo-Mo Chronicles: Thoughts on hearing from a "General Authority"

I thought the following comment from The Fo-Mo Chronicles: Thoughts on hearing from a "General Authority" was an excellent description of the difference between the Christian concept of the Holy Spirit and the Mormon role of the Holy Ghost as represented in a recent talk by a general authority:

"[The talk contained] [n]ot a hint of the Biblical doctrine of being born again through the regenerating work of the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit is relegated to a baptismal gift, given after baptism to be a helper so we know which works we need to perform and which sins we need to repent of so we can clean ourselves."

Creating other worlds?

I apologize that I have long since lost the link to the original blog post and comment (I think it was Mormon Coffee. Here is a comment that I made in response:

HankSaint said: "show me where in our Meetinghouses, General Conferences, Sunday School Classes, Standard Works, where we teach any of these principles [creating our own worlds as Gods]"

I agree that critics of the Church may sensationalize these doctrines, but as a life-long member of the Church, I and others have discussed the veracity of each of these doctrines one or more times in our Meetinghouses.

For example, I don't know how many times in Elders Quorum or High Priest Group we have joked about how things would be different on the world(s) we create. Heck (oops my Utah upbringing showing), I remember that Camilla Kimball (wife of the late prophet Spencer W. Kimball) once commented about her fear of snakes and that on her world there would be none.

I don't know how many times I have sung in our Meetinghouses the hymn "O My Father" which says it is only logical that we have a Heavenly Mother.

etc, etc.

Again, the tone of the critics can be over the top but it might be explained by their shock at doctrines that are so contrary to Biblical teachings.

I hope I can always give "an answer to every man...with meekness and fear" (1 Peter 3:15) but to deny that these doctrines are not part of the fabric of Mormonism is wrong. Some of them may be a thread; others may be whole cloth.

Should the LDS Church keep records of past disciplinary councils?

This is my comment to a blog post on Mormon Matters about whether the LDS Church should keep a record of past disciplinary councils for its members in light of the idea that God forgives and forgets.

I agree with Latter-day Guy that the practical reasons for keeping this information in certain cases are compelling, especially to limit the church's liability and to protect possible future victims.

However, from a spiritual, doctrinal perspective...

Why would we expect the institution to forgive and forget when that is not what the D&C teaches that God will do?

The statement in D&C 58:42 applies to those who have forsaken (never repeated) those sins. For those who are repeat offenders, it all comes back to haunt them:

"And now, verily I say unto you, I, the Lord, will not lay any sin to your charge; go your ways and sin no more; but unto that soul who sinneth shall the former sins return, saith the Lord your God." (D&C 82:7)

So, I am not surprised that the Church does not expunge these records because it doesn't believe God will either. Since we are natural man and are doomed to repeat them, let's keep them on file as evidence, if needed.

After becoming an evangelical Christian after more than 4 decades in the LDS Church, this doctrine--in hindsight--is a most devastating and depressing condition and is counter to the Grace of Jesus Christ (Jeremiah 31:34; Isaiah 43:25; Ephesians 2:8-10 to quote a few).

We will never be perfect here on earth. But rather than count that against us, God has imputed His righteousness to His believers through the once-and-for-all sacrifice of Jesus Christ (Romans 3:24-28). By faith we are justified and thus freed to do good works without fear that if we stumble our works were all for naught.

Bottom line: Faith save us and gets us to heaven. Works determine our rewards in heaven. A lack of perfect works does not disqualify us.

I know this is nothing new to those who frequent the bloggernacle but even an EV feels compelled to bear testimony once in a while.

Do you have to be Mormon to get into heaven?

I posted a response to a comment on the blog Mormon Matters about the topic Does the LDS Church claim to be “an exclusive conduit to God”?

Matthew Chapman said:

"Just a quick point of perspective. The vast majority of vicarious work will not be performed by “Mormons” - it will occur during the millenium, at which time “The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints” must technically cease to exist as an organization. After all, by that time the “Latter Days” will be over and done with."

Growing up in the church I was never taught the church as an organization would go away during the millennium but that Christ would rule his kingdom/church personally on the earth.

"Brigham Young taught that there will be nonmembers of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints living on earth as well as members. There will be two great works for members of the Church during the Millennium: temple work and missionary work" (Gospel Principles, Unit Nine: The Second Coming of Jesus Christ, 44: The Millennium, 282)

Why do Mormons bristle when Evangelicals say that LDS believe that you have to be baptized a Mormon to get into heaven? The prayer for the proxy confirmation following vicarious baptism specifically confirms the dead as members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

Mary as Partner in Salvation

Here is a comment I posted on Mormon Coffee about a comment on the post Joseph Smith as a Passport into God’s Presence

falcon said:

"This concept of Joseph Smith punching the ticket to heaven would be right up there with something as absurd as Catholics teaching that Mary the mother of Jesus having to give the OK to get into heaven…….which they don’t teach BTW"

Actually, one of the messages to come out of the miracles at Fatima and Lourdes is that Mary is a partner in salvation.  In a French publication that I picked up as an LDS missionary in France the statement is made:

"Elle (Marie) est aussi la co-rédemptrice, la co-salvatrice."

Mary is considered the co-redeemer and co-savior by those who revere these apparitions.

I was researching this because while teaching the First Vision I was often challenged whether other "visions" in history--such as Fatima and Lourdes--were authentic.  As a young and ignorant missionary (most of us were dumb and not necessarily deceptive), I could only say that it depended on what was revealed in the event.  If it conflicted with scripture, then it was not of God.  Only now, do I see the irony as it relates to Joseph Smith.

Getting on With My Life

Here is another comment that I posted on mormon matters about the post "Every exmember a missionary."

Jen said:

"It is hard for me to understand why a person who has left the church feels a need to keep hanging on to it by talking about it and spending time debating all the issues. It seems a better use of time and life to just drop what isn’t working and to find what does and then live life."

For me, there are two reasons:  My friends and family who still remain in the church whom I love deeply AND because truth matters.

I know that many Mormons sincerely seek to heed the admonition to come to Christ (2 Nephi 25:26) including my own children who are still LDS. However, Mormonism--by its own definition--teaches a different Christ than the traditional church (JSH 1:19). That distinctiveness was reiterated by President Hinckley in 1998 (click for Church News article).

The Bible teaches that a correct knowledge of the nature of God is paramount to salvation (John 17:3) and Joseph Smith agrees: "It is the first principle of the gospel to know for a certainty the character of God" (History of the Church, 6:305).

I hope that I am never guilty of criticizing LDS people for their sincerity nor the experiences which lead them to their faith. But I must put everything to the test (1 Jn 4;1; 1 Thes 5:21) for the sake of my own salvation and preach the true gospel for the salvation of others (Romans 10:10).

For me, that is "getting on with my life."

Every exmember a missionary?

Here is a comment that I posted on mormon matters about the post "Every exmember a missionary."

Andrew S. said:

But I am still put in this strange position…where I become the liaison for the church and for the LDS doctrine. And then I realize that because I am viewed as a somewhat reputable source despite my warnings otherwise, even as an exmember, I still am a missionary of sorts.

I can relate to this.  I have had the opportunity many times to share my story of leaving the LDS church after becoming a born-again Christian.  But when my audience hears that I was a member for 47 years, they change the subject from my story of finding God's grace to a question-and-answer session about Mormon doctrine.

For example, I was a guest on the radio program Truth Talk Live not long after my conversion.  In the first segment, I shared my testimony of Grace.  But for the rest of the hour the callers wanted to know about Mormonism, so I fielded questions just as you have been talking about.  I was honest and fair and corrected a few misconceptions about the church.  (The host thought that people paid to have vicarious temple work done for their ancestors much like the Catholic indulgence.")

Some of them were quite pointed and one guy even wanted to talk Adam-God theory.  I summarized the questioning by saying this:  There is enough in the basic, canonical Mormon Doctrine to engage LDS and those who are investigating the church.  We don't have to resort to "fringe" doctrines to show that the LDS Church is not "the only true and living church upon the face of the whole earth" (D&C 1:30)

For example President Hinckley's statement that the LDS church does not worship the same Jesus as traditional Christianity is fertile ground for discussions about God's true nature.

I find it vital to continue to keep my pulse on the church's doctrinal positions through their publications because I know that I will be asked about them by people who know I used to be a member and they can trust that I will give them a straight answer.