Old Soul - LT would have to be dead and a relative in the LDS church would need to submit his records (we only blanket baptise from over a hundred years ago I think.)
LT - while I hope your not ill in any way...any mormons in your family;)
Mormons/LDS
by Evanescence 87 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
-
Qcmbr
-
carla
Nobody brought up the sacred underwear thing. What's the deal with the special underwear one must wear? Or is that only for special occasions?
-
mormon 4 life
THAT THE 1..............THE CHURCH IS TRUE....
-
OldSoul
Qcmbr,
Is there something less salvagable about recently dead people? Are only dead people (more than 100 years dead) and those who choose to be baptized salvagable? I am having trouble understanding how the line of salvation is drawn.
The post I made was really just teasing with LittleToe carried over from another thread, but your reply raised these questions in my mind.
Respectfully,
OldSoul -
LittleToe
Dave:Personally I love talking to people of all faiths, and seeing where there is commonality and where it might augment my ecelectic "pot".
Now the answer you don't expect: Does that happen outside the LDS church? Yes - we know in scripture that there are other prophets and small groups of people who have the same actual authority. Where? Not a clue.
I'ev heard that answer before, but the honest conclusion to it is that you'd still expect an individual to be baptised LDS, regardless of the alleged authority of another party, yes?
Back to the answer you wanted: Do the Born agains have that authority. Doubt it.
Which born agains? You've just contradicted your previous statement. Why do you doubt it?
I was baptised by a Minister, who had authority confered on him by a minister, who had authority confered on him by a minister, who... ad infinitum... back through the reformation, through the Catholic church and ultimately claiming its authority from the original Apostles. And yet you'd question not only my credentials but those of the "water and Spirit" baptised "authority confered" Minister who baptised me, yes?
"you can't expect to wield supreme executive power just 'cause some watery tart threw a sword at you!"
-
OldSoul
LT,
You have some sort of eclectic pot? No wonder I reacted so strangely.
"Look. If I went around sayin' I was Emperor just because some moistened bint lobbed a scimitar at me, they'd put me away!"
-
jillbedford
My 16 year old mother gave me up for adoption, forced choice like we all can relate to.
I was adopted and raised as a Jehovah's Witness.
I spent many years searching for, and found my mother again at age 27. She wanted me to find her and we maintain a relationship now
She joined the Mormon Church.
In the interest of science only, how interesting is it that I was Jehovah's Witness and she was Mormon?
Something to think about isn't it?
-
LittleToe
OldSoul:
Of the augmented kind, no less -
Qcmbr
Hiya.
The reason for the 100 year thing is to do with not offending people I think. We still manage to get up loads of people's noses anyhow (last time I checked the Jews gave us a right roasting.)
Would I expect you to become LDS LT. I'd love you to. Why? because I love it and purely in terms of friendship I'd like people to have what I have. But I think the import of what you are saying is would I exect you to become LDS to get a 'proper' baptism?
Ok you backed me into a corner. Yep. Your minister is probably a brilliant bloke , salt of the earth and may well trace his line of authority to the Catholic church but I don't think they have the authority either anymore(sorry any Catholics!) One thing that I am very sensitive to however, is that arrogantly proclaiming people's sincere actions such as baptism , in whatever form they chose to show it, does me and them an injustice. I want to make a distinction between what I think is desire and purpose and action.
All christian churches (with a few exceptions) have the same core idea - join us or you won't make it. I mention born agains a lot because they (and the JWS and Plymouth Brethren) were the only religious people who cared enough about their beliefs to consistently duke it out with me on the street(and I'm talking about general membership - I met one cracking Catholic who gave us a good razzle). I met lots of people who claimed that I needed to be baptised into their faith to be saved and that my path was straight to overdone toastiness. Fair enough. But what of authority - do the LDS hang onto it as justification for their existence or do they have a case?
I guess what I needed to hear from JWs, ministers, BAs, Catholics etc.. was a real honest appraisal of why they were acting with God's authority and were'nt just great people with a unique bible interpretation. I guess its the sort of feeling I'd have if I was in a large room full of people and several of those present claimed to be policemen but didn't recognise any of the others as policemen and then proceeded to start applying the laws of the land as best they saw fit and disagreeing with each other. I'd want some real legitimate claim to the title AND a good understanding of the law.
Here's a scripture I think that is fairly non contentious but makes good sense to me:
11 And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers;
12 For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ:
13 Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ:
14 That we henceforth be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive;
There was a structure set up to unify the members but since we are now thousands of competing faiths definately not unified something has gone wrong. I think their is an implicit recognition that doctrine can be interpreted differently and people can hold tenaciously to cherished beliefs - doesn't make it right though.
28 ΒΆ Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood.
29 For I know this, that after my departing shall grievous wolves enter in among you, not sparing the flock.
30 Also of your own selves shall men arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them.
Paul recognised that this church at Ephesus would be struggling with some of its own members raising up followers and basically creating a new church. That is also what has happened since, to the church in general. Loads of new churches/ charismatic leaders/ reformers and so on. Did the 'grievious wolves' have authority? - probably not but their disciples would argue they did. Nothing has changed today. Would God honour a baptism performed by one without authority? Take your pick. I'd plump for probably not - I don't see any justification for being blase with any of the commandments - the OT should teach us that at least!
I think its important to check out someone's credentials before we head off into the wilderness for 40 years with them. If God never really talked to them from a burning bush it would be a real bummer and you could look back on many wasted years.
I think about this a lot and us it to critically examine my beliefs - I don't want to eat manna if I can have beer and pizza. -
OldSoul
Qcmbr,
I don't believe anyone who claims religious authority over another human is doing so with Scriptural backing. I believe that I can Scripturally take the pegs out from under anyone on earth who lays claims to authority from God over other humans. Paul specified what the overseers were overseeing. They were to tend, or look after the flock. They did not have AUTHORITY over them, they had RESPONSIBLIITY toward them. After all, these aren't their sheep, are they? IMO, there is a BIG difference between Authority over and Responsibility toward.
Respectfully,
OldSoul