posted
When I was 14, I learned to assume that articulate people I met online were all older than me. It's hard to actually take the next [shudder] eleven years into account ...
Posts: 2048 | Registered: Jul 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Justification = being declared righteous and thus able to stand before the throne of God without bursting into flame or equivalent calamity. Sanctification = the process of becoming sanctified, i.e.: holy, without sin, (maybe even unable to sin).
If this is the case, then Paul referring to sanctification (an on-going process) as one event would be confusing. Are we sanctified solely by virtue of the fact that Christ offered the opportunity (vs. 10) or did Christ offer perfection to those already sanctified (vs. 14)?
Posts: 5879 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
The definitions I gave referred to the way the two words were used in theological debate at the time of the reformation, and the way they are used today to distinguish between two ways of veiwing salvation and perfection. I don't think we can assume that the word translated in Hebrews as "sanctification" is necessarily being used the same way. (But, then, I haven't done a word study on the Greek text, so maybe it is.)
I take vs 14 to be an explanation of what “sanctified” means, not a second process. So there isn’t a contradiction (to me). In other words, the writer isn't being contradictory, he's being repetitive.
If it isn't too personal, I'd like to hear some of the ways you feel the Holy Ghost. It probably is, so, I don't really expect anyone to respond but I'll just throw this one out there.
If Christ doesn’t judge us until The Second Coming, how do we get divided into the two states of being before that?
posted
Its a division of our hearts more than a division of space. When we die our actions either endear our "spiritual psychology" toward God or toward Satan -- depending on what direction we were traveling here in mortality. That is why missionary work is possible until the Judgement Day when a physical/spacial split occures.
posted
As for the Holy Ghost, sometimes its just an "oh yea" moment where something that didn't make sense suddenly does. Other times is like the feeling you get when you watch a "heart warming" movie or book, only much more powerful. It becomes very hard to not smile. Finally, there are times when I have a nagging feeling that I should do something that is specific.
However, I admit that I am more intellectual than emotional. Its hard for me to feel the Holy Ghost. But, the Lord seems to have made up for that because many time my answers have come from mental realizations.
Posts: 2460 | Registered: Nov 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
A clarification on the after-life question. So there are two distinct possibilities, and if your on the border line you can waffle back and forth (if you keep getting better and worse)?
Also, I’d like to hear more about the Holy Ghost from others, but what I said above still applies.
posted
Hobbes, do you want just LDS stories? I’ve felt a little odd every time I’ve posted on this thread, since it’s stated purpose is to learn about the LDS religion. I don’t want to come across like I’m trying to derail your search or something.
Posts: 9866 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well I'm interested in hearing any stories at all. I did start this thread off with a bunch of general religious questions (not just LDS), and I have focued on LDS lately. This is because I'm getting to the point where I'll make a choice on believeing in Mormonism or not, but I am still interested in what others have to say. A lot of my questions can only be answered by Mormons (since they're specific to the Mormon doctrine) but if you want to jump in and say something, don't feel odd! I love hearing from everyone about these answers.
posted
Well, I asked the question specifically because you asked for Holy Spirit stories, but after trying to type a few I’ve decided it’s a moot point. They’re too personal, and too weird, to try to communicate by posting. There isn’t a person at Hatrack I wouldn’t be happy to tell these stories to if we could sit down face to face, but there’s just too many ways to misinterpret them to post them on a public forum. Sorry.
I will say, in general, that for me the experience tends to be something that builds over a period of time. I’ll have this nagging feeling that something’s going on, or I’ll start to notice tons of really weird co-incidences, or just feel like my attention is focusing on odd things. This will build and build and eventually break and I’ll come to some major realization and then think, “Ohhhh, so that’s what all that was about.” Usually. A few times it’s been more sudden, and once it was literally like being grabbed by the shoulders and shaken. That was very, very strange, but it definitely got my attention.
Posts: 9866 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
For me feeling the influence of the Holy Ghost has come in many different ways. There have been instances where going about my normal course, like driving home one night after dropping my dh off to play basketball, I've had very strong feelings of danger/warning to not go home, not take that route, not *do* something. I believe these to be warnings. One night I came home after dropping my sister in law off at home and had the strongest feeling to leave and go over to her house. It was just a powerful force seeming to be lodged in my chest. I did not feel peaceful until I left my house and went over to her house. I have no idea why in any of these instances but I do believe they were warnings. Its very easy to spin these into coincidence or believe that they are just results of my anxiety or whatever. I just know that they were warnings from the Holy Spirit.
Other times I've felt an overwhelming sense of peace when pondering a decision, or pondering my life, the gospel, my family.
When I was younger we were driving with my mom, it was my little brother and I in the back seat. It was raining and we were going around a particularly dangerous curve. Suddenly my mom slowed down drastically and began to pull to the side. Immediately following her decision the truck in front of us slammed on its brakes. Had she not already been slowing down she would have slammed into him because of the rain. The dumb driver slammed his brakes to avoid hitting a rabbit. She thanked us for saying "hey look there's a rabbit" because it warned her that the guy would try to stop. Neither one of us had said a word! I have also had an experience with hearing a physical voice. But those experiences are rare I believe.
Explaining how I feel the Holy Spirit is hard to do. Its one of those things I think you know when it happens if that makes any sense. Feel free to email me if you need more. I hope I haven't shared too much.
Posts: 1132 | Registered: A Long Time Ago!
| IP: Logged |
posted
I've felt the spirit in two ways, and perhaps this can show you the difference between having the Gift of the Holy Ghost when you are confirmed and recieving revelation (like is the Book of Mormon a true book?) through it.
The Holy Ghost as it is always with me: it is an emotional steadying post. It is the peace that is in my life. It is what gives me the strength to overcome the despair that on occasion threatens to swallow me up. I know that the despair is not me, who I really am. So I ride out the storm for a while, knowing that I am in God's care and that it will pass.
The Holy Ghost has on occasion whispered to me, given me revelation. It's not huge or anything. You can barely discern it from your own thoughts, but it is different. The peace I spoke about is there, but stronger, a warmth, a joy. The thought makes complete sense. It is logical. It is wonderful. It echoes through your lifetime. It becomes scripture written on your heart.
Posts: 3495 | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged |
I can't put it into words, but for me, the difference between feeling the Spirit and not is like the difference between color television and black and white.
Posts: 26077 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
I asked the missionaries the question about Heaven and Hell (before the Second Coming), but I'd like to hear your guy's responses too. Also, in The Bible there seems to be a lot of mention of Hell as burning and fire and flame, but none of the after-lifes described in The Book of Mormon has fire and falmes, or even anything similar.
On another note, I would like to to e-mail some of you my "plan", because I want to know if it makes any sense. If your willing to look over it, will you e-mail me?
actually, you'll find flames, fire and brimstone mentioned in the Book of Mormon as well. Look at 2 Nephi chapter 9 for example:
quote:O the greatness of the mercy of our God, the Holy One of Israel! For he delivereth his saints from that awful monster the devil, and death, and hell, and that lake of fire and brimstone, which is endless torment.
For the atonement satisfieth the demands of his justice upon all those who have not the law given to them, that they are delivered from that awful monster, death and hell, and the devil, and the lake of fire and brimstone, which is endless torment; and they are restored to that God who gave them breath, which is the Holy One of Israel.
Later on in the Book of Mormon there are less references to flames etc and more references to hell as pain or torment. This could be due to the fact that the idea of hell as a fiery pit (gehenna) was particularly strong for those who lived near Jerusalem (Like Nephi and Jacob in the Book of Mormon) because there was a garbage pit near the city which burned constantly and so the imagery would have been quite vivid for them. Later authors would have been subject to different cultural imagery more specific to the Americas. What strikes me especially are the constant associations of [url=http://scriptures.lds.org/query?words=chain+hell&search.x=0&search.y=0[/url]chains and captivity with the idea of hell in the book of Alma and then in third Nephi "gates of hell" is a common phrase. This difference in emphasis may be cultural as I said or it could be simply due to the fact that the different books were written by different authors who wrote using different phrasology.
At any rate, whatever imagery is used to convey the idea it is clear that the Book of Mormon authors were using metaphor to convey the following idea:
quote: And they that will harden their hearts, to them is given the lesser portion of the word until they know nothing concerning his mysteries; and then they are taken captive by the devil, and led by his will down to destruction. Now this is what is meant by the chains of hell.
Hell is basically a state of suffering brought on by inability/ unwillingness to change. Every human being at some time or another has allowed habit/culture/comfort dictate his or her actions over what they know to be good or right. People who do so frequently find themselves trapped in terribly unhappy situations they can't get out of (think of drug addicts, or spouse abuse or just about any human failing). To escape such a situation requires knowledge of a better way and the faith to act. It is easy to see that this is the case. I think that hell is essentially the same thing- people for one reason or another find themselves unable or unwilling to make the changes which will bring them happiness and so they are stuck in their misery. It is as if they are captives to their own worst natures- they are chained to their bad habits.
Hence, hell in my view is not a punishment God inflicts on the wicked but is a state of suffering the wicked inflict on themselves by their own choice.
Posts: 4548 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged |
I joined the Church about 3.5 years ago. If you would like the perspective of someone who grew up with very little religious influence before finding the gospel, please feel free to email me. The address is in my profile.
Posts: 1336 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm going to take everyone up on their offer to look over my plan. Thank-you all for this! The reason I haven't gotten back to all of you is that after getting some feed-back from a couple of people, I'm re-thinking and revising my plan. So don't think I don't appreciate it!
<--*Points up to his un-answered question* What is Sunday dress supposed to be, what is the dress-code? I read a little about it on a website, but what do people normally wear?
Is there any, even vague, reference to the number of intelligence that exist before coming down to this universe?
posted
I don't know if there's really a dress code, per se. I know the standards for guys better than the ones for girls, mostly because Sunday dress for guys is much easier to figure out. Here it is as I understand it: white shirt and tie, slacks, dress shoes, and non-white socks ('cause you can't wear white socks with slacks and dress shoes!). I see lots of guys wearing colored shirts, saggy cargo pants, white socks, and tennis shoes to church. I really don't like it.
[ May 05, 2003, 03:37 PM: Message edited by: Jon Boy ]
Posts: 9945 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:What is Sunday dress supposed to be, what is the dress-code? I read a little about it on a website, but what do people normally wear?
General minimum is nice slacks, button-down shirt (usually white, but younger guys have a variety), leather shoes (from loafers to dress shoes) of some sort, and a tie (optional). Also, a suit is always appropriate. Girls wear a skirt and dress (usually) modestly.
From www.mormon.org: "Those who attend will most likely be wearing their “Sunday best,” which may include suits, sport coats, and ties for the men and dresses or skirts for the women. Children also typically dress up for Sunday."
quote:Is there any, even vague, reference to the number of intelligence that exist before coming down to this universe?
Hmm... not that I know of. There are the references to the third of the host of heaven following Lucifer, but no references to numbers.
Posts: 26077 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
My understanding is that this has never been an actual requirement, but it does seem to be done by most men. My first bishop definitely required it for blessing and passing the Sacrement. I haven't owned a white dress shirt for the past 2 years so I obviously don't wear one. I am in the visible minority.
I quite often wear a light blue dress shirt with my (mainly red) Silver Surfer tie. I always wear at least a shirt and tie with either dress pants or khaki style pants. Probably once a month I wear a suit as I currently own only one suit.
Posts: 1336 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I have always felt that a tie was more than optional. It is rare to see someone without a tie. Dressing our best is a sign of respect, in my opinion. Modesty should be taken into account. Dress slacks, clean button down shirt and tie for the men and nice, modest dresses/skirts and nice shirts for the women. Oh the white sock thing is more of a preference then a requirement. Some of us just don't think the white socks look as nice as dress socks Posts: 1132 | Registered: A Long Time Ago!
| IP: Logged |
posted
*grin* The white sock is more of a sartorial detail. In terms of dressing well, you never wear white socks with dark pants, excepting only blue denim jeans.
Posts: 26077 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
What about someone who grew up where they rarely wore ties, unless they were government or mafia or military. The military ties were clip-ons.
I had to teach my husband how to tie a tie. He'd never done it before. He hates them and wasn't brought up to wear them as a sign of respect. He wears ties at church most of the time, but he occassionally takes advantage if I haven't paid attention Sunday morming.
So what would you think if you saw him on Sunday without a tie?
These things are cultural. They change. Wearing a beard used to be conservative, the cultural norm for a man of honor. It is no longer so. Women used to not cut their hair at all. Then for a time, only the harlots did it. And now it's common and conservative. In fact, I see very few gray haired ladies with long hair.
These things change and I think that it doesn't really matter to God what we wear as long as it is modest and doesn't permanently alter our body (except that pierced ears in women are accepted), and is at the time respectful dress.
Posts: 3495 | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged |
I appreciate your point, but I don't think Wendy was implying that the standard was absolute. I know it is changing, but truthfully, it hasn't changed yet. If you look around most wards I have been in, 90% of the guys are wearing a tie.
And really, these are generalcustoms. Hobbes would probably feel more comfortable dressed nicely, but people hardly spent time in church commenting or even thinking about what other people are wearing.
Posts: 26077 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
The point of a "dress code" for church is to help people to respect the church building (God's house) and to help them get in the proper mind-set to attend a worship service (i.e. people act differently wearing shorts and t-shirts than they do when wearing suits). That being said, what you wear to church is not (should not) be the most important thing about attending church. I have gone to church in areas where people wear jeans and t-shirts, because those are the nicest clothes they have. I have known women who always wore slacks to church because they either did not own any skirts/dresses or because the ones they did they not feel were appropriate (i.e. miniskirts). In my ward, most of the men wear a dress shirt, tie, slacks (or khakis), and conservative shoes. But there are also men who attend wearing jeans and polos. There are women who wear conservative dresses, hose and heels and there are women who wear denim skirts, tshirts and sandals. Basically, how you dress is up to you.
Edit: I get frustrated when people seem to fixate on what people wear to church. Yesterday, a woman became concerned when her elderly, hard-of-hearing mother arrived at church wearing a pant suit and spent several minutes trying to tell her that she needed to make sure that whoever dressed her next time put her in a dress. It made me a little sad.
There are regional and cultural variations related to Sunday dress.
My bishop rarely wears white shirts, and while there are quite a few men who do, there are a lot less men in the Bay Area who wear white shirts than in other places where I've been to church (Utah, Idaho). I didn't wear a white shirt to church until a few months ago when I figured out that it'd be a lot easier to match my ties and pants if I didn't have to worry about the color of my shirt as well. Plus, since I have to wear dress shirts for work (but no tie---except for on the day of commencement), I like wearing a shirt that's different from the ones I wear all week.
Posts: 3423 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
in one of my wards deacons, teachers, and priests weren't asked to bless the sacrament unless they where wearing a white shirt. was this just a tradition that stuck in my area? i hardly care, personally, but iwondered if there was guidance or counsel concerning that specific matter.
i think someone should mail hobbes the Mormon Doctrine book and yet, somehow i don't think that would slow the questions down Posts: 3936 | Registered: Jul 2000
| IP: Logged |
Some people do, some people don't. I'm sure it is the same way in any church. Especially in the alien Idaho and Utah (where I live folks, so I'm not knocking it too hard) there are some who do get hung up about white shirts and a tie.
Anyway, about fasting.
It's an interesting practice, with a lot of levels to it.
The easiest to understand, is that we obviously don't pay for the food we haven't eaten, so we take than money and donate it to the church. It is called a Fast Offering, and it only goes one place: to the welfare and humanitarian program. The welfare system is the best set up I know. When you fall on unfortunate circumstances and find that you need help, you go to your Bishop. If it is job related, he will send you to the employment specialist. You will also get those things you need: food, etc. You will be asked to pay for everything you are able, but what you can't do, the church pays for. Interestingly enough, the checks that get written out are not to the folks in need, but to the utility companies that need to get paid. So, you need to pay the electric bill, the church writes out check to the electric company for the amount needed.
But fasting is more than that. By not eating, you are denying your body to a point, and it is your spirit which is more in control. By itself, it's not a bad thing to do. When combined with prayer, it is a powerful thing. And it helps to have a point, or something specific to pray for. Someone, or even a whole nation in need. Or perhaps, a question Posts: 3495 | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:What is the purpose of fasting? When do you do it (besides the first Sunday of every month)?
Fasting is a means of focusing your thoughts. Fasting involves going without food or drink for a period of time while increasing your focus on spiritual things (prayer, scripture study, etc.). Often people fast at times when they feel a need for special guidance, are stuggling with a particular problem or question, or when they do so with the hopes of helping someone else (such as a family member or friend who has a special need). By fasting, you are focusing on your spiritual needs rather than your physical needs. A typical fast (like that on the first Sunday of every month) skips two meals and lasts about 24 hours - but it is up to each person's discretion. By nature, fasting can be done whenever you feel the need to do so. There is no right or wrong time to fast. Also, not every person can fast (for physical reasons, such as diabetes). Those that can't certainly are not expected (or encouraged) to do so. Also, members are encouraged to set aside the money that would have been spent on the food they did not consume and donate it to the church (known as fast offerings). These funds are then used to help the less fortunate people in their immediate area (ward, stake, etc.) under the direction of the local leaders (like the bishop or stake president).
As a missionary, there were times when I got to see some of the blessings these fast offerings can be to other people. Because the missionaries in the particular area were also the leaders of the congregation, we were involved in helping to meet the needs for food, clothing, etc. of the people in the congregation (through these fast offering funds).
Posts: 5879 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
The Mormon Doctrine book is great to a point, and explains a lot of things. Bruce R. McConkie was a great scriptorian and a wonderful speaker. But there are places where he states his own speculation as doctrine and that gets a little dicey, especially since he was a General Authority.
It was him that gave me something of a crisis of faith when something he stated didn't fit my own studies. I had to learn then that not everything that passed the lips of the General Authorities, or came from their pen, was Gospel Truth.
Posts: 3495 | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged |
In my experience, one thing that people who physically are unable to fast do is to eat foods that only meet their needs. Foods that are bland, without taste. For instance, they would have plain toast. This way, they can still sacrifice something without harming themselves.
Posts: 3495 | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Heavens, it's not that some people obsess about what other people wear that surprises me. I've certainly seen that. It's that I've never heard of making a distinction between white and colored shirts for men. Is this a regional thing, or am I just oblivious to men's fashions? Is white more formal?
Posts: 9866 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
While some bishops are very strict about how the young men dress, I spent years preparing and blessing the sacrament in a black suit, with a black shirt and various brightly-colored ties. It was part of how I liked to present myself at the time, and I'm glad I was allowed to.
If I were a leader, and I saw a kid dressing in a way that seemed disrespectful, trying to change the way he dressed would be my absolute lowest priority. If the kid is otherwise on the up-and-up, then most likely, I'm being too picky. If he has real problems, on the other hand, I think we should help those, rather than correcting the superficial.
quote:Is there any, even vague, reference to the number of intelligence that exist before coming down to this universe?
I get the impression that there was an infinite number, and that there still is. We believe that this Earth is not God's first project, nor is it His last. He'll need an endless sea of intelligences to draw from to keep this cycle going.
But no, there is no direct reference to the number.
Posts: 2048 | Registered: Jul 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Heavens, it's not that some people obsess about what other people wear that surprises me. I've certainly seen that. It's that I've never heard of making a distinction between white and colored shirts for men. Is this a regional thing, or am I just oblivious to men's fashions? Is white more formal?
This is a small cultural nuance of the mormon church I think. For whatever reason (probably because missionaries are required to wear white shirts as part of their dress code) there is a general perception in many areas that white shirts are more conservative. Some folks get rather adamant about it at times. The fact of the matter is that there is a good deal of what I call cultural doctrine in the church (as I am sure that there is in any human organization). The cultural doctrine consists of the unwritten norms of behavior which have absolutely no bearing on actual doctrine but which are nonetheless often followed. Folk doctrines vary by region, but here are a few that I've seen:
Only take the sacrament with your right hand. Wear only white shirts to church. There must be at least three jello salads at any given social event.
Posts: 4548 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Jacare - but you forgot the most important - Mormon Standard Time (MST) - everyone has to show up late (5-30 mins.) to everything.... Posts: 5879 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I've always been under the impression that the leaders of the Church have said that men should wear white shirts. Perhaps it's just one of those myths. But it's the way I was raised, and I never questioned it. I have always worn a white shirt to church, and I imagine I always will. But now I'm wondering if there's any truth to the white shirt thing. I hate to think that I'm being critical of people for no reason. Even if there is a reason, I need to stop caring so much about what other people are wearing.
[ May 06, 2003, 11:06 AM: Message edited by: Jon Boy ]
Posts: 9945 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Interesting, the only person who wears a tie at our church on Sunday is the pastor. Even the elders of our church normally only wear khakis and a polo shirt or something similar.
I've many pants many times to a Sunday service, though normally I do wear a casual cotton dress.
Not that I'm saying either thing is right or wrong, just that it's kind of neat to see how people view these type of things differently. Maybe it's a regional thing as well, considering that down here if you wore a suit and tie every Sunday in the summer you'd roast.
And I just wanted to say, even though we've moved past the topic, that I have some very personal stories about the Holy Spirit and it's effect on me personally that I'll be happy to share, if anyone wants to email me. Like dkw, it's not something I want to put out in a public forum where it could be misinterpreted, but I'll be happy to talk about it as best as I can.
Posts: 14428 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Actually I'm so worried about getting my kids in line, if my own clothes match and did I get all of breakfast off my baby's face (and consequently my shirt) that I pay very little attention to what other people are wearing. I don't judge someone for not wearing a tie. I was trying to explain what the majority of U.S. members wear. I assume Hobbes lives in the U.S. In other countries the dress code is different. I didn't mean to cause any hurt feelings or contention on this. Just wanted Hobbes to get a good idea of what to expect. I know I hate not knowing what to wear and wearing something out of place. That feeling is awful, for me anyway.
Instead of Gospel Doctrine (which does contain a lot of personal opinion) we ought to send Hobbes the Gospel Principles manual.
Posts: 1132 | Registered: A Long Time Ago!
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
I want to know your plan.
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
