I don't think God is one to multiply many words. For that reason, when I read things in the scriptures, I try to understand why they are phrased the way they are. I find it interesting and significant that in many places, we read about "the God of Abraham, and of Isaac, and of Jacob." (1st Nephi 19:10, Mosiah 7:19, Alma 29:11, and many others) Why not just say God? Or perhaps Jesus? There is a reason why it is phrased this way.
We read in John 17:3 that "...this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent." So to have eternal life is to KNOW God. We also read in John 14:23 "Jesus answered and said unto him, If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him." Lest you think that this is somehow meant in a spiritual sense or something that is for the next life, don't forget what Joseph Smith said in D&C 130:3 about this verse - "The appearing of the Father and the Son, in that verse, is a personal appearance; and the idea that the Father and the Son dwell in a man’s heart is an old sectarian notion, and is false."
The concept that is being taught in these verses is that Jesus Christ will appear to men in the flesh, and that such an appearance is what constitutes eternal life. What does this have to do with "the God of Abraham, and of Isaac, and of Jacob?" It is referring to the fact that God appeared to each of these men, individually, and ministered to them individually, and loves each of them. He is a knowable, personal God, and desires to know each one of us.
The whole reason that the Book of Mormon was brought forth was to teach the knowledge of a personal God to mankind, knowledge that was lost but restored by Joseph Smith when God appeared to him.
I pose this question - How can we come to know God if we are not saved by the atonement of Jesus Christ? The obvious answer is that we cannot, for if we have not been cleansed by the power of the atonement, we cannot stand to be in His presence (Alma 12:14).
Since we are individuals and have agency, it is up to us to choose whether we will repent and turn to God and receive His mercy through the atonement. He offers it as a free gift for those who turn to Him with full purpose of heart. This mercy is not offered to a select group or to us as a whole; it is offered to each of us, individually, and if we exercise our agency to come to Him, He will give us knowledge that our sins have been remitted. Such knowledge is communicated to us in a heavenly ordinance called the baptism of fire, which I have previously written about.
Each of us must individually come to Him and be cleansed, and He will acknowledge us individually. He invites ALL men to come to Him, not just some, not as part of a specific group. Coming to Christ does not require you to be part of a specific religious group, ethnic group, race, or sex. He knows you as an individual, and has personally remitted your sins. His atonement was wrought for us as individuals. He didn't just suffer some nebulous agony of mind and body for us as a group. He suffered for each of our sins individually. How else could He know us or succor us in our times of need?
With this in mind, I read with utter incredulity the account of Will Carter, who was excommunicated from the church for teaching false doctrine. His account can be found at his blog, In 200 Words or Less.
If you read the comments on the post I linked to above, Will recounts the following exchange:
One high priest asked "Do you believe that Jesus Christ saves us personally?"
I said "Yes."
"That's false doctrine", he said.
No one in that room spoke up in my defense or refuted his statement.
False doctrine????!!!!!???? To teach that Jesus Christ saves us personally? I cannot understand such a concept and I do not believe it. I KNOW, in the literal, real sense of the word, that Jesus Christ DOES save us personally. He is a knowable, personal God who loves us as individuals, not as a group. I hope that the LDS church never acknowledges such a doctrine. I do not think I could affiliate with an institution that espoused such an idea.
It is sad and discouraging to read such things. To think that men who purport to be the Lord's servants are kicking men out of the church for teaching about Jesus Christ saving them personally is frightening. Thankfully, those who are willing to see falsehoods will be able to overcome such stumbling blocks.
I KNOW that Jesus Christ can and does save us personally. I know this because of my own experience with Him. He lives. I cannot claim certain knowledge of this, but the manifestations of Him in response to my faith are undeniable. I love Him and I know that He loves us beyond our ability to comprehend. I hope that people will not be deceived by those who teach anti-Christ doctrines.
Thursday, June 26, 2014
Wednesday, June 18, 2014
The Baptism of Fire and Confirmation are NOT the Same
A friend started a Facebook thread and mentioned how the concept of baptism of the Spirit has largely been lost in the Church. One commenter disagreed and said that he saw this concept being taught frequently. Another commenter stated that the ordinance of confirmation and the baptism of the spirit, or baptism of fire, were one and the same. Such thinking breaks my heart.
I don't care what the gospel doctrine manual says. The baptism of fire and confirmation are absolutely not the same thing. All ordinances performed by men are types and shadows of things of the spirit. Baptism and the laying on of hands for the gift of the Holy Ghost together are a type and shadow of the baptism of fire. The two may coincide, but more frequently they are distinct and separate, often happening years or even decades apart. I bear testimony of this from my own experience.
The baptism of fire is not a process. It is a definable event, just like the baptism of water is a definable event. When it happens to you, you know it. You may not know what it is called, but you know that SOMETHING has happened. It is powerful, joyous, wonderful. It is more spiritual and more perfect than anything man can do. It is indescribable in words. No man can administer such a great gift. Men can only offer an invitation or a type and shadow of this blessed event.
Alma the younger describes this event very nicely - Yea, I say unto you, my son, that there could be nothing so exquisite and so bitter as were my pains. Yea, and again I say unto you, my son, that on the other hand, there can be nothing so exquisite and sweet as was my joy. (Alma 36:21)
It is so disheartening to hear members of what is supposed to be the true Church of Jesus Christ not understand this, and when it is taught to them, they don't believe it. I testified to the commenters about my own experience and they completely rejected it. But no matter. I know that what I say is true. The baptism of fire and confirmation are not the same. For those who have not experienced the baptism of fire, I tell you that if I can have it, you can, because you are most certainly more deserving and less sinful than I was.
I testify again of the love of Jesus Christ. He can and will baptize you with fire, and then you will have the fullness of the gift of the Holy Ghost, which will enable you to go on and obtain all the blessings of eternal life, if you follow the pathway marked out in the scriptures. The Lord is willing to take your sins upon His back, and you can know for yourself that your garments are spotless before Him. Please don't be satisfied with a type and shadow. Please, I beg all of you, don't be satisfied with the offerings of men, but instead look to Him and receive what He will give. It is so much greater than you can imagine.
I don't care what the gospel doctrine manual says. The baptism of fire and confirmation are absolutely not the same thing. All ordinances performed by men are types and shadows of things of the spirit. Baptism and the laying on of hands for the gift of the Holy Ghost together are a type and shadow of the baptism of fire. The two may coincide, but more frequently they are distinct and separate, often happening years or even decades apart. I bear testimony of this from my own experience.
The baptism of fire is not a process. It is a definable event, just like the baptism of water is a definable event. When it happens to you, you know it. You may not know what it is called, but you know that SOMETHING has happened. It is powerful, joyous, wonderful. It is more spiritual and more perfect than anything man can do. It is indescribable in words. No man can administer such a great gift. Men can only offer an invitation or a type and shadow of this blessed event.
Alma the younger describes this event very nicely - Yea, I say unto you, my son, that there could be nothing so exquisite and so bitter as were my pains. Yea, and again I say unto you, my son, that on the other hand, there can be nothing so exquisite and sweet as was my joy. (Alma 36:21)
It is so disheartening to hear members of what is supposed to be the true Church of Jesus Christ not understand this, and when it is taught to them, they don't believe it. I testified to the commenters about my own experience and they completely rejected it. But no matter. I know that what I say is true. The baptism of fire and confirmation are not the same. For those who have not experienced the baptism of fire, I tell you that if I can have it, you can, because you are most certainly more deserving and less sinful than I was.
I testify again of the love of Jesus Christ. He can and will baptize you with fire, and then you will have the fullness of the gift of the Holy Ghost, which will enable you to go on and obtain all the blessings of eternal life, if you follow the pathway marked out in the scriptures. The Lord is willing to take your sins upon His back, and you can know for yourself that your garments are spotless before Him. Please don't be satisfied with a type and shadow. Please, I beg all of you, don't be satisfied with the offerings of men, but instead look to Him and receive what He will give. It is so much greater than you can imagine.
Thoughts On Excommunication and Recent Events
I am saddened by the recent spate of completed and pending excommunication of prominent Church members. Perhaps even more discouraging are the Bill Clinton-esque statements put out by the Church. What is going on? Is this really the Church of Jesus Christ?
We have John Dehlin being threatened with excommunication. His crime appears to be publicly stating his skepticism about historical matters and weak faith in Jesus Christ. Despite his misgivings about the Church, Mr. Dehlin has provided the resources for many who struggle with their faith to be able to remain in fellowship.
Kate Kelly is facing excommunication for her role in the Ordain Women movement. I can't say I agree with her agenda. If she had a better understanding of what priesthood really is, she would not have any interest in being ordained to the Church's priesthood. Nevertheless, is it right for the Church to mete out a punishment of eternal damnation for asking the leaders to petition God about the matter? Maybe a polite "No, thanks" would suffice instead.
Then we have Rock Waterman, who has publicly blogged about his doctrinal disagreements. I find it sadly amusing that Joseph Smith reveled in the fact that Mormonism has no creeds which a man must believe or be asked out the church, and yet here we are with a man who disagrees with the post-Joseph creeds established by the church, and now he is being asked out of it.
And who could forget the condemnation the Church has heaped upon itself, casting out Denver Snuffer, whose offense consisted of publishing historical facts that lead to very uncomfortable conclusions about our doctrine and the Church's standing before God?
Worst of all, we have a Church which bills itself as the only true and living Church on the earth, using legal techniques suited for Bill Clinton, finessing the wording of their public statements to effectively tell the truth while at the same time lying through its teeth. Yes, I said that. The level of misdirection and obfuscation of the Church's statement that higher-ups have no involvement in these excommunication is an abomination. I think I would ask this question of the church - Are you honest in your dealings with your fellow men?
The fear and anger that the Church and its leaders display is born of the master of fear and anger himself. It is wrong. Our God is a God of truth, a God of light, a God of honesty, of integrity. Evil, sin, and cockroaches love darkness. When the light of truth is shined, those things scatter. They cannot remain in the presence of the light. A church of God should do work in the light.
I have also been ashamed of my fellow Latter-day Saints, who have gleefully supported their leaders in this move to cast out their brothers and sisters. Our church teaches that men must have the Church's priesthood and receive all the "temple blessings" in order to obtain eternal life. If this is so, excommunication is the spiritual equivalent of eternal damnation. If you excommunicate someone, you damn them to hell for eternity, according to our doctrine. Well, with what judgment ye mete, it shall be measured to you again. You who call for the ouster of those who differ one iota from the infallible popes, er, prophets, er, leaders who cannot lead us astray, I urge you to reconsider your position.
Yesterday I listened to an interview with a Church PR representative. It was quite amusing. She carefully stated that the Church leaders do not direct the actions of local leaders in disciplinary matters, but would not categorically state that they have no influence. She called it "training" and "technical assistance." She also stated that discipline is always meant to be a way to love someone and help them in their repentance, that it is not a punishment. I'm sorry, but the cases with which I am familiar do not support such an assertion.
My, my, my. Things are certainly a mess. Fortunately, the Rock of our salvation is immovable in His love, in His gospel. We can repent and come to Him. He forgives. He offers eternal life through His grace. No institution or man can offer such blessings to us. No keys held by men give us these things. I love my Savior and I am so grateful for all He has given me. I testify of His love. Amen.
We have John Dehlin being threatened with excommunication. His crime appears to be publicly stating his skepticism about historical matters and weak faith in Jesus Christ. Despite his misgivings about the Church, Mr. Dehlin has provided the resources for many who struggle with their faith to be able to remain in fellowship.
Kate Kelly is facing excommunication for her role in the Ordain Women movement. I can't say I agree with her agenda. If she had a better understanding of what priesthood really is, she would not have any interest in being ordained to the Church's priesthood. Nevertheless, is it right for the Church to mete out a punishment of eternal damnation for asking the leaders to petition God about the matter? Maybe a polite "No, thanks" would suffice instead.
Then we have Rock Waterman, who has publicly blogged about his doctrinal disagreements. I find it sadly amusing that Joseph Smith reveled in the fact that Mormonism has no creeds which a man must believe or be asked out the church, and yet here we are with a man who disagrees with the post-Joseph creeds established by the church, and now he is being asked out of it.
And who could forget the condemnation the Church has heaped upon itself, casting out Denver Snuffer, whose offense consisted of publishing historical facts that lead to very uncomfortable conclusions about our doctrine and the Church's standing before God?
Worst of all, we have a Church which bills itself as the only true and living Church on the earth, using legal techniques suited for Bill Clinton, finessing the wording of their public statements to effectively tell the truth while at the same time lying through its teeth. Yes, I said that. The level of misdirection and obfuscation of the Church's statement that higher-ups have no involvement in these excommunication is an abomination. I think I would ask this question of the church - Are you honest in your dealings with your fellow men?
The fear and anger that the Church and its leaders display is born of the master of fear and anger himself. It is wrong. Our God is a God of truth, a God of light, a God of honesty, of integrity. Evil, sin, and cockroaches love darkness. When the light of truth is shined, those things scatter. They cannot remain in the presence of the light. A church of God should do work in the light.
I have also been ashamed of my fellow Latter-day Saints, who have gleefully supported their leaders in this move to cast out their brothers and sisters. Our church teaches that men must have the Church's priesthood and receive all the "temple blessings" in order to obtain eternal life. If this is so, excommunication is the spiritual equivalent of eternal damnation. If you excommunicate someone, you damn them to hell for eternity, according to our doctrine. Well, with what judgment ye mete, it shall be measured to you again. You who call for the ouster of those who differ one iota from the infallible popes, er, prophets, er, leaders who cannot lead us astray, I urge you to reconsider your position.
Yesterday I listened to an interview with a Church PR representative. It was quite amusing. She carefully stated that the Church leaders do not direct the actions of local leaders in disciplinary matters, but would not categorically state that they have no influence. She called it "training" and "technical assistance." She also stated that discipline is always meant to be a way to love someone and help them in their repentance, that it is not a punishment. I'm sorry, but the cases with which I am familiar do not support such an assertion.
My, my, my. Things are certainly a mess. Fortunately, the Rock of our salvation is immovable in His love, in His gospel. We can repent and come to Him. He forgives. He offers eternal life through His grace. No institution or man can offer such blessings to us. No keys held by men give us these things. I love my Savior and I am so grateful for all He has given me. I testify of His love. Amen.
Monday, May 19, 2014
One Step At A Time
The walk of discipleship is not always easy. Often, the Lord will only give you a small piece of the puzzle at a time, or only will let you see one step into the dark. I suffer from an acute case of pride because I always want to be right. When it comes to the word of the Lord, I want to make sure that I am doing what God wants me to do, and when I don't know for sure that what I'm doing is right, I have to really push myself to do it.
I recently felt strongly that the Lord wanted me to have an uncomfortable conversation with someone. I felt good about the position I was taking, but there were risks in having the conversation. A couple of days before I had to meet with this person, I got down on my knees and asked the Lord to help me know for certain that I was serving Him, that this conversation was what He wanted me to do.
He responded by showing me a sign to know that I was doing His will. I was grateful for this, but I still didn't know why I was doing it. And the Lord refused to tell me. I had the conversation yesterday, and it did not go as well as I would have liked. But after I had a good night's sleep and pondered the situation for a while, it dawned on me that this unpleasant conversation had indeed led me to my next step, and I could see why the Lord instructed me to do this. This event led to someone's eyes being opened more widely to truth, and gave me an understanding of some things that will be coming in the future. It also caused me to realize some things that I need to do to obtain greater blessings from heaven.
We all walk in this life one step at a time. Sometimes we are given a view of many steps that we will take, or even an end destination. Other times, we barely get a glimpse of the next step. And the hardest ones of all are where we are not certain that the step we are supposed to take is even there. We just trust that it is there.
Our Savior loves us and will help us through these times of trust, if we will just let Him. I write this to remind myself more than anything else. If He will give me an obvious sign just at the moment that I need it, He will give you what you need. Trust Him and only Him. He is the path, the destination, and the transportation.
I recently felt strongly that the Lord wanted me to have an uncomfortable conversation with someone. I felt good about the position I was taking, but there were risks in having the conversation. A couple of days before I had to meet with this person, I got down on my knees and asked the Lord to help me know for certain that I was serving Him, that this conversation was what He wanted me to do.
He responded by showing me a sign to know that I was doing His will. I was grateful for this, but I still didn't know why I was doing it. And the Lord refused to tell me. I had the conversation yesterday, and it did not go as well as I would have liked. But after I had a good night's sleep and pondered the situation for a while, it dawned on me that this unpleasant conversation had indeed led me to my next step, and I could see why the Lord instructed me to do this. This event led to someone's eyes being opened more widely to truth, and gave me an understanding of some things that will be coming in the future. It also caused me to realize some things that I need to do to obtain greater blessings from heaven.
We all walk in this life one step at a time. Sometimes we are given a view of many steps that we will take, or even an end destination. Other times, we barely get a glimpse of the next step. And the hardest ones of all are where we are not certain that the step we are supposed to take is even there. We just trust that it is there.
Our Savior loves us and will help us through these times of trust, if we will just let Him. I write this to remind myself more than anything else. If He will give me an obvious sign just at the moment that I need it, He will give you what you need. Trust Him and only Him. He is the path, the destination, and the transportation.
Friday, May 2, 2014
The Church Is Not The Church
I've said before that one of my all-time favorite quotes is from Rush Limbaugh. He often says "Words mean things." How true this. Many words have certain connotations and evoke images and associations in our minds. For example, when I speak of a "company," you probably imagine Ford, Wal-Mart, General Electric, or some similar corporation. You might also imagine the company you work for. In any event, you most likely think of an institution, because that is the most common way we think of companies in our enlightened, Western culture.
But consider that the word company is also used to describe a group of people. The Merriam-Webster dictionary defines company as "a group of persons or things." It is a correct definition, but probably not what you normally think of when that word is used.
In the world of Mormonism, the CHURCH seems to be central in our lives. For many of us, particularly those of us who live in Utah and have been surrounded by the Church and Church culture for our entire lives, everything we do is probably influenced in one way or another by the Church. Our friends and family relationships are also defined in terms of the Church. Because of our association with the Church, we also have a unique vocabulary. Elder, Brother, Activity Days, Young Men, Young Women, Relief Society, Bishop, President, ward council meeting, ward, stake, GA, Gs (for you oldsters out there), fetch, dang, green jell-o with carrots. All of these words should evoke certain images and associations in your mind.
Well, that presents a problem. There is a tendency to take words that have certain associations and meanings to them, and assume that those same meanings and associations are universal. But consider the idea that the meanings and mental associations from certain words are not static in time or space, or from culture to culture. I dare you to go to England or Australia and ask someone where you can buy a fanny pack.
It should come as no surprise that some words used in Joseph Smith's time carry a different meaning than they do today. For example, the word "interest" meant something different than it does today. (Which might prompt me to do a tithing post some time.) Likewise, the first definition listed in the 1828 dictionary for the word "beetle" is a heavy wooden mallet.
The Book of Mormon is a book about a culture and civilization that is long dead. They descended from Jews, although the second generation had little understanding of the ways of the Jews. There were also elements of Egyptian culture, and certainly the peoples already living on the American continents had their own cultures. I think it is dangerous to assume that all the words we see mean exactly the same thing as they do today.
Well, finally I'm getting around to the subject of this post. Church. Church surrounds us in this modern culture, but I would like to suggest that when you read about the "Church" in the scriptures, that you should STOP thinking about the institution. Like the word company, the word church ought to be viewed as a group of people.
Let's take a look at the scriptures that help us understand this:
D&C 10:67 "Behold, this is my doctrine—whosoever repenteth and cometh unto me, the same is my church."
Moroni 4:2 "And they did kneel down with the church, and pray to the Father in the name of Christ..."
1st Nephi 14:10 "And he said unto me: Behold there are save two churches only; the one is the church of the Lamb of God, and the other is the church of the devil; wherefore, whoso belongeth not to the church of the Lamb of God belongeth to that great church, which is the mother of abominations; and she is the whore of all the earth."
Clearly these are all examples of the word "church" being used to describe a group of people rather than an institution. I would submit that EVERY SINGLE INSTANCE of the word "church" in the Book of Mormon should be viewed this way. What an astounding difference it makes. It personalizes the commandments of the Savior. It personalizes the love of the Father, the Son, and the various prophets in the Book of Mormon for the children of men.
God does not love institutions. God loves people. God loves YOU. I bring this up because we as Mormons have this unfortunate tendency to define our relationship with God in terms of our relationship with the Church. To echo the words of Dieter Uchtdorf, I urge you to "Stop it." Your relationship with the Lord is independent of the Church. The Lord's relationships with every man, woman, and child is independent of the Church.
Taking this stand can help us to have empathy and compassion for those who do not belong to our Church, or those who have left for one reason or another. For some, the Church becomes a source of pride. How often do we think we "the chosen people?"
This concept can also help us to unwittingly put the Church or its leaders between us and God. You must have your own relationship with Jesus Christ in order to be saved. Your relationship with the Church is not your relationship with God. The fact that you have participated in ritual ordinances in the "true Church" does not get you any closer to Him who is your King.
Next time you go to "Church", consider that you are participating in fellowship with people, not receiving blessings from an impersonal institution. Consider that you are gathering with your fellow men to build them up, to encourage them in their journeys to gain salvation, to help them. You need not be part of a "Church" to do that, but you do need serve in the church.
But consider that the word company is also used to describe a group of people. The Merriam-Webster dictionary defines company as "a group of persons or things." It is a correct definition, but probably not what you normally think of when that word is used.
In the world of Mormonism, the CHURCH seems to be central in our lives. For many of us, particularly those of us who live in Utah and have been surrounded by the Church and Church culture for our entire lives, everything we do is probably influenced in one way or another by the Church. Our friends and family relationships are also defined in terms of the Church. Because of our association with the Church, we also have a unique vocabulary. Elder, Brother, Activity Days, Young Men, Young Women, Relief Society, Bishop, President, ward council meeting, ward, stake, GA, Gs (for you oldsters out there), fetch, dang, green jell-o with carrots. All of these words should evoke certain images and associations in your mind.
Well, that presents a problem. There is a tendency to take words that have certain associations and meanings to them, and assume that those same meanings and associations are universal. But consider the idea that the meanings and mental associations from certain words are not static in time or space, or from culture to culture. I dare you to go to England or Australia and ask someone where you can buy a fanny pack.
It should come as no surprise that some words used in Joseph Smith's time carry a different meaning than they do today. For example, the word "interest" meant something different than it does today. (Which might prompt me to do a tithing post some time.) Likewise, the first definition listed in the 1828 dictionary for the word "beetle" is a heavy wooden mallet.
The Book of Mormon is a book about a culture and civilization that is long dead. They descended from Jews, although the second generation had little understanding of the ways of the Jews. There were also elements of Egyptian culture, and certainly the peoples already living on the American continents had their own cultures. I think it is dangerous to assume that all the words we see mean exactly the same thing as they do today.
Well, finally I'm getting around to the subject of this post. Church. Church surrounds us in this modern culture, but I would like to suggest that when you read about the "Church" in the scriptures, that you should STOP thinking about the institution. Like the word company, the word church ought to be viewed as a group of people.
Let's take a look at the scriptures that help us understand this:
D&C 10:67 "Behold, this is my doctrine—whosoever repenteth and cometh unto me, the same is my church."
Moroni 4:2 "And they did kneel down with the church, and pray to the Father in the name of Christ..."
1st Nephi 14:10 "And he said unto me: Behold there are save two churches only; the one is the church of the Lamb of God, and the other is the church of the devil; wherefore, whoso belongeth not to the church of the Lamb of God belongeth to that great church, which is the mother of abominations; and she is the whore of all the earth."
Clearly these are all examples of the word "church" being used to describe a group of people rather than an institution. I would submit that EVERY SINGLE INSTANCE of the word "church" in the Book of Mormon should be viewed this way. What an astounding difference it makes. It personalizes the commandments of the Savior. It personalizes the love of the Father, the Son, and the various prophets in the Book of Mormon for the children of men.
God does not love institutions. God loves people. God loves YOU. I bring this up because we as Mormons have this unfortunate tendency to define our relationship with God in terms of our relationship with the Church. To echo the words of Dieter Uchtdorf, I urge you to "Stop it." Your relationship with the Lord is independent of the Church. The Lord's relationships with every man, woman, and child is independent of the Church.
Taking this stand can help us to have empathy and compassion for those who do not belong to our Church, or those who have left for one reason or another. For some, the Church becomes a source of pride. How often do we think we "the chosen people?"
This concept can also help us to unwittingly put the Church or its leaders between us and God. You must have your own relationship with Jesus Christ in order to be saved. Your relationship with the Church is not your relationship with God. The fact that you have participated in ritual ordinances in the "true Church" does not get you any closer to Him who is your King.
Next time you go to "Church", consider that you are participating in fellowship with people, not receiving blessings from an impersonal institution. Consider that you are gathering with your fellow men to build them up, to encourage them in their journeys to gain salvation, to help them. You need not be part of a "Church" to do that, but you do need serve in the church.
Thursday, May 1, 2014
The Holy Ghost Is Not Better Than God
Denver Snuffer has said before (paraphrasing) that belief is associated with the Holy Ghost, faith is associated with angels, and knowledge is associated with God Himself. I have pondered a lot about what this means, and today I had a bit of an epiphany while responding to a comment on a discussion forum.
There is a commonly believed idea that a testimony that comes from the Holy Ghost is superior to testimony that comes from angels or from the Lord Himself. This idea is FALSE! Do not believe it. If you content yourself with the Holy Ghost without seeking the presence and testimony of God Himself, you damn yourself.
This idea goes at least as far back as Joseph Fielding Smith. It is not surprising to me that he made the following comment:
“When a man has the manifestation from the Holy Ghost, it leaves an indelible impression on his soul, one that is not easily erased. It is Spirit speaking to spirit, and it comes with convincing force. A manifestation of an angel, or even of the Son of God himself, would impress the eye and mind, and eventually become dimmed, but the impressions of the Holy Ghost sink deeper into the soul and are more difficult to erase” (Answers to Gospel Questions, comp. Joseph Fielding Smith Jr., 5 vols. [1957–66], 2:151).
It would seem that the author had a different understanding of who and what the Holy Ghost is than I do. How can he say that the witness of the Holy Ghost is greater than having Jesus Himself appear unless he has experienced these things and can judge between them? It saddens me that this doctrine is taught in our gospel "doctrine" classes. Oh, how the Lord must weep at this. This idea causes people to stop at a witness of the Holy Ghost rather than pressing forward to stand in the presence of the Son. In essence, by following this belief you deny the fullness of the gospel.
This goes back to the comments on my last post about belief, faith, and knowledge. If the Holy Ghost tells you that Jesus lives, you have belief. You believe that Jesus lives, but you have no proof. If an angel testifies that Jesus lives, you have faith. You have acted in such a manner that a being who has been in the presence of Jesus has testified of it to you. You have an eyewitness testimony, which is greater than mere belief. If Christ testifies that He lives, you have knowledge, you have proof that He lives because you have seen Him.
Which is better to you? For me, I will choose knowledge over faith or belief. You cannot honestly say that it is better to know Christ from a distance (by the Holy Ghost) than it is to know Him in person. Knowing Christ is the very definition of eternal life. Until you KNOW Him, you do not have knowledge and you do not have eternal life.
There is a commonly believed idea that a testimony that comes from the Holy Ghost is superior to testimony that comes from angels or from the Lord Himself. This idea is FALSE! Do not believe it. If you content yourself with the Holy Ghost without seeking the presence and testimony of God Himself, you damn yourself.
This idea goes at least as far back as Joseph Fielding Smith. It is not surprising to me that he made the following comment:
“When a man has the manifestation from the Holy Ghost, it leaves an indelible impression on his soul, one that is not easily erased. It is Spirit speaking to spirit, and it comes with convincing force. A manifestation of an angel, or even of the Son of God himself, would impress the eye and mind, and eventually become dimmed, but the impressions of the Holy Ghost sink deeper into the soul and are more difficult to erase” (Answers to Gospel Questions, comp. Joseph Fielding Smith Jr., 5 vols. [1957–66], 2:151).
It would seem that the author had a different understanding of who and what the Holy Ghost is than I do. How can he say that the witness of the Holy Ghost is greater than having Jesus Himself appear unless he has experienced these things and can judge between them? It saddens me that this doctrine is taught in our gospel "doctrine" classes. Oh, how the Lord must weep at this. This idea causes people to stop at a witness of the Holy Ghost rather than pressing forward to stand in the presence of the Son. In essence, by following this belief you deny the fullness of the gospel.
This goes back to the comments on my last post about belief, faith, and knowledge. If the Holy Ghost tells you that Jesus lives, you have belief. You believe that Jesus lives, but you have no proof. If an angel testifies that Jesus lives, you have faith. You have acted in such a manner that a being who has been in the presence of Jesus has testified of it to you. You have an eyewitness testimony, which is greater than mere belief. If Christ testifies that He lives, you have knowledge, you have proof that He lives because you have seen Him.
Which is better to you? For me, I will choose knowledge over faith or belief. You cannot honestly say that it is better to know Christ from a distance (by the Holy Ghost) than it is to know Him in person. Knowing Christ is the very definition of eternal life. Until you KNOW Him, you do not have knowledge and you do not have eternal life.
Monday, April 28, 2014
Belief, Faith, And Knowledge Are Different
As Mormons, we tend to equate belief, faith, and knowledge as being largely the same. Then when we read the scriptures, we see these words and then apply them to text with the same meanings as we ascribe to them from our church meetings. I "know" that.... Anymore, these words are like fingernails on a chalkboard. These words need to be understood and used properly.
Belief
I believe a lot of things. I believe that government is corrupt. I believe that the justice system in this country is an oxymoron. I believe that TWA Flight 800, September 11th, and the JFK assassination were NOT government conspiracies. I believe many other things. But belief is passive. You can sit back and read about stuff and form an opinion, but until you do something it is just belief. I daresay that even Satan believes that Jesus Christ lives. But it doesn't matter because Satan does do anything constructive with that belief.
Faith
In the gospel of Jesus Christ, it is critical to move our belief to faith. This requires action WITHOUT KNOWLEDGE. Belief that Christ can forgive sins is useless unless you do something. You move to faith when you act on your belief. When you forsake your sins and repent in sackcloth and ashes, when you implore the Savior of the world to forgive you, you have moved to faith. When you serve your fellow men, do good to the poor, when you heed the promptings of the Holy Spirit, you are acting in faith.
Knowledge
You move to knowledge when you experience the end results of faith. When your sins are forgiven, then you know that Jesus Christ forgives sins. You also know that it is possible for sins to be forgiven. You know because you have experienced it.
For a testimony to mean anything, you must have attained to knowledge. Otherwise you are speaking in vain. When you testify that Jesus Christ lives and have not beheld Him, you are taking His name in vain. When you say that you know God answers prayers, you need to testify why that is. Otherwise your testimony is meaningless.
It is important to have faith and knowledge in things that are worthwhile. I have knowledge that Mythbusters is a great TV show. I knowledge that Boston cream pie is the most delicious substance known to mankind. This knowledge is not saving (except maybe my appetite). Likewise, knowledge that "Thomas S. Monson is a prophet of God" or "this church is true" will not save you either. I submit that such knowledge is vain. The church cannot save your soul. Thomas Monson cannot save your soul. I think it is a waste of time to bear testimony of these things.
Finally, I encourage you to pay attention to the testimonies of those to whom you look for salvation. Do the apostles and prophets of the church bear testimony of Jesus Christ? Is their witness one of true knowledge or true faith? Or is it just belief? You will have to decide. When your bishop bears testimony that the church is true and Jesus is the Christ, is this a true testimony based on experience? You will have to decide.
What you might find is that the only thing testimonies are good for is pointing to Christ and giving you hope that you can obtain something. No work of any man can save your soul. I encourage you to gain your own testimony, one that is based on KNOWLEDGE. It is knowledge that saves. And what knowledge saves more than the knowledge that you are saved? Go out and ask God to give you that knowledge. You will know it when you obtain it.
Belief
I believe a lot of things. I believe that government is corrupt. I believe that the justice system in this country is an oxymoron. I believe that TWA Flight 800, September 11th, and the JFK assassination were NOT government conspiracies. I believe many other things. But belief is passive. You can sit back and read about stuff and form an opinion, but until you do something it is just belief. I daresay that even Satan believes that Jesus Christ lives. But it doesn't matter because Satan does do anything constructive with that belief.
Faith
In the gospel of Jesus Christ, it is critical to move our belief to faith. This requires action WITHOUT KNOWLEDGE. Belief that Christ can forgive sins is useless unless you do something. You move to faith when you act on your belief. When you forsake your sins and repent in sackcloth and ashes, when you implore the Savior of the world to forgive you, you have moved to faith. When you serve your fellow men, do good to the poor, when you heed the promptings of the Holy Spirit, you are acting in faith.
Knowledge
You move to knowledge when you experience the end results of faith. When your sins are forgiven, then you know that Jesus Christ forgives sins. You also know that it is possible for sins to be forgiven. You know because you have experienced it.
For a testimony to mean anything, you must have attained to knowledge. Otherwise you are speaking in vain. When you testify that Jesus Christ lives and have not beheld Him, you are taking His name in vain. When you say that you know God answers prayers, you need to testify why that is. Otherwise your testimony is meaningless.
It is important to have faith and knowledge in things that are worthwhile. I have knowledge that Mythbusters is a great TV show. I knowledge that Boston cream pie is the most delicious substance known to mankind. This knowledge is not saving (except maybe my appetite). Likewise, knowledge that "Thomas S. Monson is a prophet of God" or "this church is true" will not save you either. I submit that such knowledge is vain. The church cannot save your soul. Thomas Monson cannot save your soul. I think it is a waste of time to bear testimony of these things.
Finally, I encourage you to pay attention to the testimonies of those to whom you look for salvation. Do the apostles and prophets of the church bear testimony of Jesus Christ? Is their witness one of true knowledge or true faith? Or is it just belief? You will have to decide. When your bishop bears testimony that the church is true and Jesus is the Christ, is this a true testimony based on experience? You will have to decide.
What you might find is that the only thing testimonies are good for is pointing to Christ and giving you hope that you can obtain something. No work of any man can save your soul. I encourage you to gain your own testimony, one that is based on KNOWLEDGE. It is knowledge that saves. And what knowledge saves more than the knowledge that you are saved? Go out and ask God to give you that knowledge. You will know it when you obtain it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)