Worthy or Unworthy

A few months ago, folks here at Mormon Coffee were discussing LDS temple weddings and the difficulties that can arise when the bride and/or groom come from part-member families. Non-Mormons, as well as Mormons who do not possess temple recommends, are not allowed to enter LDS temples; therefore, they are not allowed to attend the temple weddings of their loved ones.

A Mormon participating in the discussion chided the others:

“Many people here used the word ‘unworthy’ to describe everybody who cannot enter the temple. The implication is that we think we are better than everybody else. And that really isn’t accurate at all. Are the LDS who are not old enough to go to the temple ‘unworthy?’ No.

“And yes- I venture to say that there are a lot of people who live their lives in a manner that they would qualify, if members of the church, to go to the temple.

“For these reasons, I make the point that it is not accurate to us[e] the word ‘worthy’ or ‘unworthy’ to describe everybody who cannot enter the temple.”

I understand that some are not allowed to enter Mormon temples because of being younger than the minimum age requirement. Yet the mild rebuke advanced by this Mormon commenter is really undeserved.

The What We Believe section of the August 2010 issue of the official LDS Ensign Magazine is titled, “Being Worthy to Enter the Temple.” This article is only four paragraphs long, yet uses the words “worthy” or “worthiness” seven times (not including the title):

  • “We must, however, be worthy to enter.”
  • “A temple recommend signifies that we have been found worthy through an interview with a member of our bishopric…”
  • “Temple recommend interviews are opportunities for us to examine our worthiness.”
  • “If our priesthood leaders find that we are worthy to enter the temple,…”
  • “We sign our recommend to confirm our worthiness to enter the temple.”
  • “Our priesthood leaders also sign our recommend as additional witnesses of our worthiness.”
  • “This recommend allows us to enter the temple for the next two years, provided we remain worthy.” (Ensign, 8/2010, p.8)

Whether Mormons “think they are better than everybody else” or not, I cannot say. But I do believe that applying the words “worthy” or “unworthy” in the context of describing someone’s general eligibility regarding entrance to LDS temples is indeed accurate.

It is a common thing here at Mormon Coffee for Mormons to accuse non-Mormons of purposely misrepresenting Mormonism, of not understanding the LDS religion, or of ignoring contemporary official statements. In this case, I fail to see where we have gone wrong. We have merely used the same terms used by LDS leadership in official publications and temple recommend interviews, and those commonly used in Mormon circles.

The reason I bring this up is not in an effort to defend the Christian community here. The reason I bring this up is to demonstrate, with one real-life example, that things are not always as they seem. Here, critics of Mormonism were accused of misrepresenting Mormon doctrine while accurately employing the very words and ideas utilized by the LDS Church itself.

The next time you come across an accusation like this, readers, I challenge you to remember this example and recognize that the accusation may be unwarranted. If Mormons raise objections–and cast aspersions–over simple and verifiable issues like this, it begs the question–what sort of basis is there for the other objections and accusations Mormons frequently bandy about online? Think about it and check it out because, when Mormons tell you that you are reading lies, the information you’re reading just might turn out to be the honest truth.

About Sharon Lindbloom

Sharon surrendered her life to the Lord Jesus Christ in 1979. Deeply passionate about Truth, Sharon loves serving as a full-time volunteer research associate with Mormonism Research Ministry. Sharon and her husband live in Minnesota.

This entry was posted in Mormon Temple, Worthiness and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

132 Responses to Worthy or Unworthy

  1. dltayman says:

    —"No, that isn´t how i feel at all. You are Bible illiterate not because i know more than you, but because your entire interpretation of the Bible is based on the teachings of a false prophet, and on false doctrines made up recently. "—

    And I feel that a great deal of Evangelical interpretations of the Bible are based on revisions of reformations of political councils centuries after Christ. Difference in interpretation does not illiteracy make.

    "–If someone comes up to me and tell me my interpretation of a passage is wrong, i´ll analyze it, and maybe that will require me to change a belief about it. In mormonism if you attempt to do that you might be risking your neck in the organization. –"

    .You've seen much of my blog. You've seen my responses here. Do you really think I don't honestly and diligently study the Bible? Do you really think I haven't had many assumptions and interpretations change as a result? Why else would I do such an in-depth study of the historical context, original language and cultures surrounding the creation of those texts? Why would I consult biblical literature and scholarship from many not of my own faith, which I allow to influence my understanding? Why else would I write about it, and make diagrams and videos to try and help others understand what many view as a 'fringe' element of scholarship?

    My stake leadership is very well informed of my views, interpretations and understanding. They're well aware of my embracing secular Biblical scholarship. My Bishop loves reading my perspectives on the Blog. And yet I still am allowed to oversee Sunday School in the stake as the High Council representative.

    You've made a ridiculous and unfounded statement.

    You have had some very good and intelligent things to say. This past post contained none of it.

  2. Cont, from above
    Some Mormons will object that unless a statement by an LDS Church leader opens with the statement "Thus saith the Lord", then it can be set aside as the mere opinion of the speaker. However, not everyone would agree with this. In 1980 prominent Mormon leaders gave a speech which contained the following words:

    "SIXTH: The Prophet Does Not Have to Say "Thus Saith the Lord" to Give Us Scripture. Sometimes there are those who haggle over words. They might say the prophet gave us counsel but that we are not obligated to follow it unless he says it is a commandment. But the Lord says of the Prophet, "Thou shalt give heed unto all his words and commandments which he shall give unto you." (D&C 21:4.) And speaking of taking counsel from the Prophet, in D&C 108:1, the Lord states: "Verily thus saith the Lord unto you, my servant Lyman: Your sins are forgiven you, because you have obeyed my voice in coming up hither this morning to receive counsel of him whom I have appointed." Said Brigham Young, "I have never yet preached a sermon and sent it out to the children of men, that they may not call scripture." (JD 13:95.)" (Following the Brethren, Speeches By Mormon Apostles Ezra Taft Benson and Bruce R. McConkie, March 1980. Full speech online at the following link: Following the Brethren).

    Furthermore, the popular, and widely distributed, LDS Church manual Gospel Principles clearly states that the inspired words of the living prophet are supposed to be accepted as scripture by Latter-day Saints. (Gospel Principles, p. 55).

    Another objection that some members of the Mormon Church may bring against the words of past LDS leaders is that it was all in the past and that the Church has moved on since then. But the problem with this view is that the entire existence of the Mormon Church is based on the historical events that it appeared in in the early 19th century. Also, modern officially endorsed Mormon publications such as the books in the series entitled: Teachings of the Presidents of the Church, contain prolific quotes from early Mormon publications. So past LDS leaders are still influencing modern Mormons even though the quotes that are given are given selectively.

    The conclusion of all this is that it is too easy for Mormons to brush aside something uncomfortable that they might hear from a Mormon leader as "just his opinion", but the truth is that the words of these leaders do carry great weight and influence over the rank and file. In addition to this, as the quotations in this brief article demonstrate, there are Mormon leaders who feel that writings and speeches by Mormon leaders are authoritative even though they may not be contained in the Standard Works.

    This article was written by, © Spotlight Ministries, Vincent McCann, 2004
    spotlightministries I was granted permission by Vincent to post this article.

  3. f_melo says:

    "Gen 44:5 Is it not from this that my lord drinks, and by this that he practices divination? You have done evil in doing this.'"

    Wow – i wonder how many revelations that God gave Joseph through that cup have been recorded… IT DOESN´T SAY GOD REVEALED STUFF TO HIM THROUGH A STUPID CUP. LET ALONE THAT WAS THE METHOD GOD REVEALED ANYTHING TO THE PROPHETS.

    Then you complain i call mormons Bible illiterate.

    Imagine Joseph of Egypt putting a cup in a hat, translating ancient stone inscriptions from the tower of Babel – hmmm.. that puts all in perspective.

    That was a practice he learned in Egypt, and the Bible never mentions or teaches that was the way God appointed them to receive revelation. Otherwise, let me dig a stupid stone out of the ground, put in my cap to exclude the light and hope to get a revelation from god so i can start my own church – i need money, dude.

  4. f_melo says:

    "Mormon Doctrine wasn't written by a prophet or a president. "

    Bruce R. McConkie is just a Billy Bob – nobody that even deserves the least respect.

    He didn´t have a priesthood or anything, you know.

    Also, the Holy Ghost only works if your understanding is revised and approved by the dear leader. Otherwise your Holy Ghost is useless – is just there to keep you believing in whatever they tell you. He is the strongest when you have to believe nonsense – he helps you cope with the cognitive dissonance.

  5. f_melo says:

    the paper – all about spin!

  6. dltayman says:

    Responding to things in the mean-spirited and disrespectful (and often ignorant) manner they've been presented here is not a profitable use of my time. I see no reason to continue my efforts here.

    Keep in mind my purpose here was never to try to proselyte, or convince anyone that I Was Right and You Were Wrong. I began – and remained – to clear up falsehoods and – yes – misrepresentations. I have not gone on the offensive – I recognize this is Your Home, and I tried to respect that. I recognize there are legitimate differences worth discussing between our faiths. And then there's nonsense tactics intended only to mock and ridicule.

    I'm sure my leaving will just be seen as a victory on your end, with me being the Mormon Who
    Couldn't Stand the Heat, and how Truth Prevailed Over the Wicked and Deceived Liar, God Bless His Damned Soul.

    You can believe whatever you wish. I'll let you go back undisturbed to your high-fives, back-slappings, and amen parties. If that's what does it for you.

    You have the links to my blog. A way to contact me by email is also there. Once you've gotten yourself up to date on the facts and the literature that has been produced and are willing to truly discuss it, or if you're interested in discussing specific things in a non-public venue, come and find me. I'll be happy to talk then. As for now, I just don't have time to dredge through the waste here to find the few sincere and thought-out pearls.

    Have fun.

  7. f_melo says:

    "And I feel that a great deal of Evangelical interpretations of the Bible are based on revisions of reformations of political councils centuries after Christ. Difference in interpretation does not illiteracy make."

    Because Joseph told you you can only trust a priesthood inspired interpretation of the Bible, that conveniently only your church possesses – isn´t that exactly what the catholic church claimed during the middle ages?

    btw, those reformers you mentioned never claimed to have any special interpretation power from god – they honestly studied the Bible and understood it what was written in it, in context. That´s why the Holy Ghost inspired the Bible, so that anyone who can read it can also comprehend it, and be saved by Christ. No need for special magic stones.

    "Difference in interpretation does not illiteracy make." Yes it does, specially when your interpretation is biased and you´re taught to not fully trust what is written, because "more light and knowledge have been revealed"

    Just the basic fact it is your doctrine the Bible isn´t trustworthy is enough to disqualify any interpretation you can provide.

    "You've seen much of my blog. You've seen my responses here. Do you really think I don't honestly and diligently study the Bible?"

    You study the Bible through the lenses of mormonism. Those lenses distort the Biblical text and its meaning, no matter how deep you go, your answers will always agree with the "restored gospel".

    "And yet I still am allowed to oversee Sunday School in the stake as the High Council representative."

    Until you pose a threat to the church´s authority, and the truthfulness of its doctrine. Duh.

    "You've made a ridiculous and unfounded statement." No, i didn´t. Have you read the book 1984 by George Orwell? If not, you should because it will open your mind to what your religion really is.

    "You have had some very good and intelligent things to say. This past post contained none of it."

    I suggest you to pray about it – the spirit will reveal the truth to you.

  8. f_melo says:

    "Keep in mind my purpose here was never to try to proselyte, or convince anyone that I Was Right and You Were Wrong."

    Oh, gee, then you are really putting all that effort for what? Clear falsehoods with more falsehoods?

    " I recognize there are legitimate differences worth discussing between our faiths"

    The only difference is that you are a mormon and your doctrine stands on the teachings of Joseph Smith, and you try to convince everyone that is the true christianity. Mormonism isn´t Christianity, and the whole purpose of this blogs is to expose that, because mormon missionaries go around saying they are Christians!!! They also make people believe they are the only true christians, and everyone else is in darkness, and won´t go to live with god in an exalted state!

    You use the same techniques to twist information around to make you sound right – as it is plainly seen in your argumentation about Billy Bob, err.. Bruce R. McCOnkie – an apostle of your church that you dismissed it because even though he had the keys of his calling, was worthy and had the spirit of revelation with him, his works weren´t convenient for your church, because they could no longer deny any doctrine that could damage their public image. They changed the original mormon doctrine, and kept publishing it while making sure the members didn´t take it that seriously, and when confronted by non-members they use those deceptive techniques that you dltayman seem to have mastered, of denying everything even to the point of disrespect.

    Efforts like this blog are extremely important to warn people away from mormonism!

    "I'm sure my leaving will just be seen as a victory on your end, with me being the Mormon Who
    Couldn't Stand the Heat, and how Truth Prevailed Over the Wicked and Deceived Liar, God Bless His Damned Soul."

    No, i´m not that ignorant, i know you left because you wanted to – there´s no problem with that – you didn´t sign a contract forcing you to stay. More mormons like you should join the conversation, instead of getting all sad and bitter against it(we know this blog isn´t spirit-friendly, so…)

    "I'll let you go back undisturbed to your high-fives, back-slappings, and amen parties"

    Oh, the hypocrisy – like mormons don´t do that in their forums, give me a break.

    "As for now, I just don't have time to dredge through the waste here to find the few sincere and thought-out pearls."

    Oh, the self-righteousness shows its ugly face again.

    So long, you righteous valiant one!

  9. dltayman said

    "Gen 44:5 Is it not from this that my lord drinks, and by this that he practices divination? You have done evil in doing this.'"

    I hope you understand that if you read the entire story in context, Joseph never really did this, it was a lie so he would not be exposed as their brothers, and part of the story to explain why it was in the bag.

    Does God and did God condone the lying? It's clear from scripture He does not, But as Christians, have we through the years lied? Every one has at some point in time, And before you say it, Yes as a believer in my life I have also, but not in the way you think, (Towards you). Yet again, you either understand Scripture and are lying about it, or you do not understand scripture and that is why your getting so much wrong.

  10. RalphNWatts says:

    fmelo,

    I would have to agree with dltayman about some of the Evs on this site as well as others I have met in person. They come across as 'we are better than you because we are saved and you are going to hell, and we know what we are talking about'. It happens on both sides of the fence. But I have never heard an LDS member at anytime say – I am worthy to have a temple recommend I am better than you.

    As far as knowledge about who holds a temple recommend, yes in correlation meetings things are brought up about temple attendance, but not about who holds a current recommend. The question I have for you is did you at anytime see or handle the actual recommend book and look through it so you could see who had a recommend or not? The only people allowed to do that are the ones I told you earlier – the stake presidency, bishopric and executive secretary. The ward clerk is not allowed access to that book. From my experience no one has taken notes as to who has attended the temple recently or not. I do know that they ask for a show of hands when it comes to our ward's turn for the temple to see how many will go. But just because someone doesn't have their hand up does not mean they lack a temple recommend. Also, just because a couple is not sealed does not mean they do not have a temple recommend. I know of a number of examples of this – they just do not want to get sealed in the temple.

  11. f_melo says:

    "I would have to agree with dltayman about some of the Evs on this site as well as others I have met in person. They come across as 'we are better than you because we are saved and you are going to hell, and we know what we are talking about'"

    Really? What i usually hear from true Christians is "i´m a miserable sinner and Christ saved me". I don´t doubt there are those who don´t understand Christian doctrine, that go around saying they can just sit down and live a sinful life because they´re saved, but that´s different. (not that i can live a sinless life, though – i just meant to sin purposely, to satisfy sinful desires)

    "But I have never heard an LDS member at anytime say – I am worthy to have a temple recommend I am better than you."

    They don´t have to say that, just watch the attitude. They will promptly put down and criticize those who don´t live such as worthy lives as they do.

    "did you at anytime see or handle the actual recommend book and look through it so you could see who had a recommend or not?"

    No, as the book is concerned you´re right. But oftentimes the bishopric would list them in the meetings, "brother * has a temple recommend, sister * needs an interview to get a new one", etc. That´s not such a well kept info. Actually a person´s worthiness is a big thing when Bishops are deciding who are they going to call for important callings in the ward. It´s rare for people not holding a temple recommend to be called to be presidents of anything.

    "From my experience no one has taken notes as to who has attended the temple recently or not." – that happened in what would be "my" ward all the time, in elder´s quorum.

    "Also, just because a couple is not sealed does not mean they do not have a temple recommend."

    Yes, but women won´t get recommends for endowments unless they are going to get married in the temple, the exception being sister missionaries or older single/divorced women.

    "they just do not want to get sealed in the temple" – i´ve met a few of those couples, but they usually don´t get married in the temple because they are not keeping the word of wisdom. I´ve never seen though a couple with temple recommends not getting married in the temple for no reason… but i don´t doubt they exist´, i´m not questioning your personal experience.

  12. RalphNWatts says:

    Fmelo,

    You said "women won´t get recommends for endowments unless they are going to get married in the temple, the exception being sister missionaries or older single/divorced women". I thought it was the other way around, that men could not get a recommend unless they were going on a mission or getting married, but women could. At least I know of about half a dozen women who have not been on missions nor are engaged or previously married (ie divorced or widowed), but who hold recommends. I know them because my sister is one and the others are her friends. May be I'm wrong – may be they were previously on a mission or married, but I don't believe they were.

    You commented on my remarks "From my experience no one has taken notes as to who has attended the temple recently or not." – that happened in what would be "my" ward all the time, in elder´s quorum". I don't know why that policy was made in your ward, but I never saw or heard anything like that in the 4 wards I have lived in. I guess different people want to do different things.

    Also, I am saying these things not to contradict you, but to show others that are reading here that its not ‘all the LDS’ that are doing this. That is why I am saying ‘from my experience’. If there are people doing this and if it is wrong then they will ultimately answer to Heavenly Father for it.

  13. I love how you guys find ways to blow things off. You can say all you want that the church issued a statement, thats great, but still people believed this stuff to be true, and by the church allowing the re-publishing they are saying much of it is true. Yet if it is true then why are they stopping the printing of it? They are stopping because they feel it's not true.

    You guys can blow off Bruce as a nobody, but back in his day he was looked upon as someone who knew his stuff and was quoted a lot. I really feel sorry for you guys, you dodge and weave, dont know scripture, cannot or refuse to answer questions, and as I have said before.

    Why is it if the mormon prophet really is a mouth piece for God, and the Only person who can speak for God, and supposedly gets new and fresh revelation from God, How come they have never in the last 200 years of Mormonism have gone to God and asked God to give them clear direction and for a revelation to clear up all these problems.

    I know already you guys will say that God does not clear up all the confusion because it would do no good, Us non LDS would not believe anyway, so why bother, To which I call BS on that idea.

    I call BS, Because First off, you dont know for sure that God would not clear up all the confusion, You assume He would not and by assuming He would not is to make a huge judgment. Then the other thing is, If their are over a million people on the face of the earth that do not believe in the LDS gospel, I would think that at least one single person would believe in the LDS church if God cleared up all the confusion by giving the prophet some fresh revelation to clear up everything.

    But that will never happen because your prophet is a false prophet who does not and cannot hear from God, because He does not know God, It's that simple.

  14. 4fivesolas says:

    Ralph,

    This distancing from Mormon Doctrine is just some of the shifting sands of Mormonism. As Rick pointed out in his quotes above, Mormons have no Westminster Confession or Augsburg Confession – it's purposely kept vague so they won't have to keep denying things. When I first learned of Mormonism I was enthusiastically pointed to Bruce McConkie's book Mormon Doctrine by friends who were completely sold on Mormonism, temple recommend holding worthy Mormons. Now, it is kicked to the side, because the shifting sands of Mormonism have shifted some more and morphed to where it is now a detriment. Best to keep what Mormons really believe from actually being written down anywhere. Plausible deniability – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plausible_deniabilit

  15. Martin_from_Brisbane says:

    f_melo

    Thanks for reading the post.

    Sorry about the bold/not bold thing (I was intending to highlight the 'additions'). I couldn't find away to check it before I posted it and I obviously missed one of the important backslashes about half way through.

    Sincerely, though, this is the kind of butchery I see Mormonism doing to the thing it claims to believe as the 'Word of God' and that, to me, is plain wrong.

    Why have confidence in the 'blood of Jesus' when what you actually need is a Temple Recommend?

  16. khippor says:

    I did choose. And I must say that even though you are well versed in your "fire and brimstone", what are you doing to improve this world? What are you doing to help those in need? Besides being able to quote whatever and shake your fist at the world, what can you honestly say that you are doing to help? Are you tell those people who are "engaged in homosexual activity" that they are are horrible, when they might be feeding the poor, caring for those in need and helping those less fortunate?

    Can you consider the possibility that instead of chastizing people for their beliefs and hurting those by calling them sinners, that you could actualy do some good for others and for yourself? Try loving those people. Just try it , without calling brimstone down on their head.
    Make the Choice.

  17. khippor says:

    Oh jeeze. How much symbolism must be slung around before things get out of hand?

  18. khippor said

    Are you tell those people who are "engaged in homosexual activity" that they are are horrible, when they might be feeding the poor, caring for those in need and helping those less fortunate?

    You cannot change the Bible and Gods word. God loves the sinner but hates the sin, These people's lifestyle God hates, He loves and died for the people, But even if they feed the poor, that means nothing. It is not feeding the poor that gets you into heaven.

    Jesus says in the Bible, Many will say to Him in the day of judgment, LORD, LORD, Did we not feed the poor, did we not cast out demons in your name, did we not do miracles in your name? And he will reply with, Depart from me your workers of evil, for I never knew you.

    These people did things in the name of God, but they were not and will not be saved from the good works they do. So people feed the poor, it's better that they are feed the word of God and they are saved from eternal death, then to be fat and happy but then die and go to hell.

  19. khippor says:

    Hmmmm. That's a veiwpoint….one viewpoint…..and I'm not Christian. I believe that the afterlife will be exactly what you deserve. I also believe that our Creator is a lot bigger than our small minds can comprehend, and to make decisions and cast judgement in his name is one of the worst things a human can do. Something along the lines of Hitler….oh, wait, that's what Hitler did! Right!

    So don't chastise me because of my beliefs. My afterlife will be exactly what it should be, and it will not concern you or your beliefs. You will get what you deserve, good or bad.

    "All the churches will know that I am He who searches the minds and hearts; and I will give to each one of you according to your deeds." (Revelation 2:23)

  20. It's like this, You cannot say, I do not believe in God, Therefore He does not exist, any more than you can say, If I jump off this 100 story building I will fly like superman.

    He exists whether we like it or not and believe it or not.

    As to getting what you deserve, your correct about that, but see it's like this. We all can get what we deserve, Eternal damnation, or we can get what we dont deserve, Grace that allows us to be in Heaven with Jesus.

    That is our choice to make.

    Now when you said this,

    I also believe that our Creator is a lot bigger than our small minds can comprehend, and to make decisions and cast judgement in his name is one of the worst things a human can do

    You said you research things so you can talk about them, this shows you do not do that and are lying. If you read the Bible, God is the one that says homosexuals are wrong and that life style will result in death. I did not say that. If it is Gods word and us believers simply repeat what God said to us, then were not making things up, were saying what we were told. So if you dont agree with the word of God, or do not like it, then take it up with the creator who said these things that you do not like or agree with.

  21. khippor says:

    Rick-

    First and foremost, I do believe in a God. Just because I am not Christian does not mean I am unable to believe in God. You seem to be implying that I do not believe in God at all, which is far from true.

    Also, why do you state that we deserve "eternal damnation" and that we dont deserve heaven? Im not sure what you are trying to say.

    Another note: I never said anything about researching and reading the bible. There are plenty of ways to research and not pick up the bible EVER. And yes, I have read the bible. And yes, you are being a drone and repeating the bible because your preacher told you to. Hooray for you. You can memorize.

    Its very interesting that you would also suggest that I take it up with my Creator. I think thats a fantastic idea….but rest assured I will not be quibbling about who said what.

    Is there any reason for me to continue to discuss this with you, or should I consider it banging my head against a brick wall?

  22. Sorry to tell you this but, I'm not a drone becasue My preacher told me to say something. Try reading the Bible, you claim you did/do, I doubt it because if you did these are things you would now.

    1. The Bible/Jesus/God tell us/Me to share the Gospel with everyone, Not a preacher.

    2. You said, I dont want to quibble over who said what. Well I hate to tell you but God said we will BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE for teaching False things.

    3. God said, If we teach things and misrepresent Him we will be held accountable

    4. The Bible tells us we are all sinners who deserve death, that is why Jesus Died for us.

    5. Jesus said if we are not with Him we are against him. Jesus also said, that not everyone is a Child of God. Only those who call upon Jesus, the rest are as Jesus said, Children of the Devil.

    These are only a few things that you seem to not understand, yet the Bible teaches this, not me.

  23. khippor says:

    Rick, I don't think you are hearing me. I am not Christian. I don't have to believe the Bible. I can read it, understand it, and study it, but not actually believe it.
    You are imposing your beliefs on me, and saying that I am damned unless I listen to you. Super kind of you, I must say.

    Now try to tell me that I'm a horrible person WITHOUT USING ANYTHING THE BIBLE SAYS. You can't, can you? Because without the bible, you are just a human with a soul and the free will to choose right from wrong. And you might choose to tell me that I'm still going to hell, because that is your choice. God gave us free will to make choices.

    Make a choice, and realize that I'm human, I have beliefs, and I have made a choice with my GOD GIVEN FREE WILL.

    Oh, and remember: The Bible isn't the only divinely inspired writing out there.

    “There is no fire like hatred, no rushing river like craving, and no snare like illusion.” The Buddha verse 251, The Dhammapada

    The forces of Nature do all work, but due to delusion of ignorance, or ego, people assume themselves to be the doer and incur karmic bondage.
    -Karmic verse

    ”This is an admonition:
    Whosoever will, let him
    Take a (straight) Path
    To His Lord” 76:29
    -The Qur'an

  24. wyomingwilly says:

    dltayman, you seem to be very knowlegable of your faith, and you offered responses
    to many questions asked of you. Though some of your responses only tended to raise
    more questions , nevertheless your participation here was appreciated.

    ww

  25. Mary Young says:

    Rick,
    This is in reguards to your replies to Khippor.

    It looks like all we can do now (maybe not) is pray for her.She won't like me saying that (if she reads this),and will likely come back at me for it,too,that's ok).I was encouraged by your posts.I was beginning to wonder about this site,it being Christian,and no one calling her on this.And even seeing where some had given her thumbs-up! You have given me faith that perhaps there are others on here too who care about this very serious Bible issue.Morality matters to God,and it should matter to us too.Again,you restored my faith in this site, to a degree,anyway.Maybe I will see replies from others,also.I sure do hope so.It would make me feel so much better,if I did.

  26. Ok, first you said all homosexuals are really nice people, then you made a reference to Hitler.

    So let me ask you this? If the homosexuals are the kind loving people you claim they are, then how come they are forcing people to tolerate them under penalty of law? What I mean is, The homosexuals claim tolerance, yet they do not tolerate anyone, Christians, Atheists, or anyone that says their life style is wrong. They are using the law to force me to "tolerate" them, how exactly is that loving? what was that about Hitler again?

    Now as to can I say apart from the Bible your evil? Well let me put it this way, I was talking with an atheist and said that according to the bible people are evil. He claimed we are all generally good people. So this is what I said to Him and have not heard back.

    Have you heard of the Stanford prison experiment? You can read all about it here, http://www.prisonexp.org

    Lets see, a bunch of "Good" people went down hill and so evil so fast that the 12 day experiment lasted 6 days, and even people playing prison Guard. who you would think are good people went bad fast.

    According to your blog you have kids. Why is it you have to teach your kids to tell the truth? you never taught them to lie, but I know they have lied. I know because I have 3 kids myself, You catch them doing something and they will still tell you they did not do it.

    can you honestly tell me your so perfect you have never lied to your husband? You mean you have never stolen a thing in your life? you mean you have never gotten angry and wished someone dead? You might not be on the level of Hitler, but your also not perfect, so are you evil? I would say yes.

  27. Let me add to that, why are we making more prisons if we are all so good? why are we simply allowing rapists and child molesters to go free knowing they will do it again? why is it if I kill or seriously hurt someone for breaking into my house, even though they have a record as long as my arm, I will go to jail longer than them and I will be in more trouble. Have you seen the movie law abiding citizen?

  28. khippor says:

    I really dont think you even know where you are going with this. You have gotten so lost in your own "logic" that I have decided to step out if this, and let you continue to rage in your own froth.

    No, I do not have children. I dont lie to my husband, and I believe in the good in people. The honest to God, deep-in-your-heart good.

    God help your children. Thy will need a lot of help, being raised by someone who believes so much in the evil in people.

    Dont bother writing back. I will be opting out of this conversation.

  29. Let me say this even though you do not want to reply.
    I must have mis-read your blog, I thought you had kids.

    As to the rest of it, typical, you cannot reply to me, it's not that you dont want to. The Homosexuals are taking people to court and making them by force to believe in what they do, other wise it's a hate crime. Hows that loving and tolerant?

    I bet you did not even look into the Stanford prison experiment. People lie, and the crime is going sky high. do you not listen to politics? Kids lie naturally, we must teach them to tell the truth and be good. It's not a matter of I dont make sense, it's people cannot handle the truth and reply with honest answers.

  30. I dont believe you for a minute. You can say we are mean spirited, have you seen how LDS treat nonLDS over on websites like Fair-lds? Thats brutal, I was their for a couple of years with almost 700 posts, I know how rough they can be.

    You tried to answer question, yea right. You never did answer my questions of what the temples were for or anything like that. You never explained why the prophets never get revelation from God clearing up the contradictions. I said their were changes to the BoM, you said I was wrong, I showed you J.F.S stated their were none and it's all lies. Yet you never replied to that, and you accused me of being ignorant. Why was it so hard to reply to what your prophet said.

    You claim BY taught a lot of things that were his mere opinion, yet Ralph quotes him, did you or Ralph ever answer F_melo's question as to, was what BY said Inspired or his opinion? Nope, never happened. Are we/me rejoicing and doing high fives your leaving? Please, dont flatter yourself. I would rather you stay and hear the truth and also show to everyone seeking to be a mormon how you guys dodge honest questions and show how you cannot reply to questions posed from the Bible.

    You guys never answered the questions about why the Bible and the pearl teach God is the only God, then later in the pearl it says, God sat in the counsel of the Gods and created the heavens. It's questions like those that you guys dodge.

  31. wyomingwilly says:

    It seems that some Mormons are still trying to find ways to excuse this
    teaching of B.Y. On the hand there are those who are finally admitting
    that he taught just what non-LDS have been saying about this for
    years. Admiting that it was his own opinion, and not the position of
    the Church as a whole, is not new news. The fact that a prophet of
    the One true God could teach and thus influence many of his people
    to embrace an improper spiritual position to a supposed other God
    (Adam) is a clear case of said prophet failing in his avowed role
    as the teacher who will only advance correct doctrine.

  32. wyomingwilly says:

    cont.
    The fact that B.Y. could'nt convince all LDS to embrace this "revealed"
    doctrine of his, and as result chose back down somewhat on the
    way he would then emphasize it is , has been documented before.
    This is normal behavior for any leader trying to preserve unity. He
    chose to wait until the Saints were more ready to digest this belief.
    Especially noteworthy for all LDS today is how recent past Mormon
    Authorities and apologists have sought to excuse the seriousness
    of the doctrine by resorting to saying that perhaps it was'nt really
    recorded accurately or that what non-LDS have said B.Y.'s refering
    to Adam being the Being who begat Jesus' spirit and body was not
    what BY actually said. Yet these alibi's are now being seen as
    only failed attempts to rescue B.Y. Lastly, the rational of using
    the phrase, " I reckon " by B.Y. to downplay the seriousness of his
    teaching is strange since he also used it to describe other doctrines
    held to be true.

Leave a Reply