U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 1.5 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Jump to a detailed profile or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Business Search - 14 Million verified businesses
Search for:  near: 
 
Old 01-22-2010, 11:09 AM
 
Location: Utah
2,331 posts, read 1,910,932 times
Reputation: 221
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hueffenhardt View Post
...Regarding Mormon garments, Mormon Church leaders have taught: "The promise of protection and blessings is conditioned upon worthiness and faithfulness in keeping the covenant. Members of the Church wear the garment as a reminder of the sacred covenants they have made with the Lord and also as a protection against temptation and evil. How it is worn is an outward expression of an inward commitment to follow the Savior." - Letter of the First Presidency, 10 October 1988

The following is from...
I'm sorry you lost your faith Hueff, it happens.

Your link is to an anti-Mormon website complete with the usual order forms for anti-Mormon literature and a link to donate to their "ministry" to 'save' the poor deluded 14,000,000 Mormons, and possibly to profit financially from the lucrative anti-Mormon publishing industry.

The topic you were addressing is the curiousity or concern some people apparently have with the reason why Mormons who have served in an LDS temple wear special undergarments and the purpose for wearing those garments. There is a tendency to make fun of Mormons who think the garments will protect them from physical danger. (And there may be some who do, though I don't think that is a common belief.)

But that belief among some is in the realm of folklore and is not doctrinal. The official statement you quoted pointed out correctly that the real purpose of wearing the garment is to help protect the wearer against "tempation" and "evil".

No mention is made of physical injuries, though in my opinion having faith in almost anything can on occasion be helpful.

 
Old 01-22-2010, 11:57 AM
 
Location: Somewhere out there
128 posts, read 144,370 times
Reputation: 115
Default question....

Quote:
Originally Posted by justamere10 View Post
I'm sorry you lost your faith Hueff, it happens.

Your link is to an anti-Mormon website complete with the usual order forms for anti-Mormon literature and a link to donate to their "ministry" to 'save' the poor deluded 14,000,000 Mormons, and possibly to profit financially from the lucrative anti-Mormon publishing industry.

The topic you were addressing is the curiousity or concern some people apparently have with the reason why Mormons who have served in an LDS temple wear special undergarments and the purpose for wearing those garments. There is a tendency to make fun of Mormons who think the garments will protect them from physical danger. (And there may be some who do, though I don't think that is a common belief.)

But that belief among some is in the realm of folklore and is not doctrinal. The official statement you quoted pointed out correctly that the real purpose of wearing the garment is to help protect the wearer against "tempation" and "evil".

No mention is made of physical injuries, though in my opinion having faith in almost anything can on occasion be helpful.

?? So are you saying you have faith in your undergarments that they will protect you from physical harm? My husband was a convert to the LDS belief system, and he told me the story of Mr. Marriott. So, I think that the belief of protection from physical harm - while it may not be doctrinal - is still a wide-spread belief among those who wear the undergarments.

I do have a couple of questions about being 'sealed' in the temple.
My husband and his ex were sealed. While he was struggling with his faith, he was very nervous about the fact that if he lost his temple recommend and, therefore, could not participate in the temple work, it would have some bearing on his children in the afterlife. Could you please explain to me what, or why he would have thought that way?

He is a stroke survivor, so he gets easily frustrated when he cannot explain himself fully, hence the reason I'm here, to ask other people. Plus, since he was a convert, he does not fully understand all of the beliefs and the 'why' behind all of them.
 
Old 01-22-2010, 12:29 PM
 
Location: Salt Lake City
13,733 posts, read 9,164,014 times
Reputation: 4509
Quote:
Originally Posted by kingbulldog View Post
My cousin does. She thinks it will keep her safe from harm. Not spiritual harm, I'm talking accidents.
I know people who feel that way. Seriously, if wearing temple garments were a guarantee that we'd never have a serious accident, you wouldn't see Mormons killed in the military, in plane crashes, earthquakes or anything else. It's unfortunate that this kind of mindset exists, but common sense should tell you that it just doesn't work that way.
 
Old 01-22-2010, 12:40 PM
 
Location: Salt Lake City
13,733 posts, read 9,164,014 times
Reputation: 4509
Quote:
Originally Posted by kingbulldog View Post
Why are you failing to mention that if a mormon doesn't pay full tithe at the tithing settlement at the end of the year, they cannot get a temple recommend and are banned from the temple until they pay in full?
That's a little misleading. I'm not sure if you meant it to be or not. Here are a few points that should clarify what the rules really are:

1. Yes, paying a full tithing is a requirement for a temple recommend. Any practicing Latter-day Saint who wants to go to the temple is very much aware of that, and would be unlikely to even request a temple recommend if he was not paying a full tithing.

2. Tithing settlement is not generally the time when one pays his tithing, although many give the bishop one last check at that time. The purpose of tithing settlement is essentially to make sure that all funds a member has contributed have been properly accounted for, to the member's satisfaction as much as to the bishop's. Since tithing can be claimed as charitable giving when a person files his income tax for the year, it's good to know that everybody is on the same page.

3. I've never heard of anyone's temple recommend being confiscated as part of tithing settlement. While it's true that his bishop will ask if the amount paid represents a full tithing, that's not so that an answer of "no" will result in the member having to turn over his recommend. Recommends are good for a period of two years and the temple recommend interview is not the same thing as tithing settlement at all.

4. When you say that a person is "banned from the temple until he pays in full," that implies that he must pay back tithing if he stopped paying for a period of time. This is not the case. A person must typically have paid a full tithing for a period of one year before being issued a recommend, but it's not as if there is a "past amount due" that is being held over a person's head.
 
Old 01-22-2010, 12:55 PM
 
Location: Salt Lake City
13,733 posts, read 9,164,014 times
Reputation: 4509
Quote:
Because some of our faithful do since the rumor about the garments protecting the faithful has been perpetrated by the shishops themselves.
Some of "our faithful"? Who is the "we" here?


Quote:
Because the promised land in the Bible is JERUSALEM. Jews are the chosen ones, remember?
Yes, well we believe in the old Jerusalem and in a new Jerusalem.


Quote:
Please specify which religion you are referring to. I know for a fact that the Greek (and other) Orthodox, Catholics, Episcopalians, Presbyterians, Lutherans, Baptists, Buddhists, Hindus, and Scientology do not.
Sorry, I don't understand your question.


Quote:
And yet it is offensive to the families of other religions who all of a sudden find the name of their loved one on the LDS rolls. We had problems with the jews when the LDS started doing baptisms for victims of the holocaust. And also remember that we baptised a Catholic saint, St. Damian of Hawaii, as well as Obama's mother.
You're pretty antagonistic for a member of the Church. As you are apparently on the membership rolls of the Church yourself, you ought to know that no one who receives the ordinance of baptism by proxy after death is added to the membership rolls of the Church. If that were the case, our membership would be in the hundreds of millions by now.


Quote:
No, but they don't get a temple recommend. Which, if your child is getting married in the temple, THE PARENT, cannot go inside and see their child get married. They must wait in those tiny waiting rooms or wait to take pictures on the steps. Just because they didn't pay full tithe. I went to a wedding where this happened, so don't try and sugarcoat it.
Who was sugarcoating it? I made a statement of fact. How was I supposed to anticipate your response? That's right, non-tithe paying members cannot hold temple recommends. They know that and their children who choose to get married in the temple in spite of the fact that their parents will not be able to attend know that. Nobody finds out when he or she shows up at the doors of the temple on the wedding day, and while young people are encouraged to have a temple marriage, it's ultimately their choice. If they wanted to take the feelings of their inactive parents into account, they could be married civilly and sealed a year later. That's not what the Church leadership would encourage them to do, but it is an option.


Quote:
And yet, Utah has the highest percentage of Prozac abuse in the country. Not to mention the suicides from some molly's who can't take the pressure.
Jeesh! What's eating you, man?


Quote:
This number is inflated and about 45% of members are inactive. Baptisms and attendance are down and have been for a couple of years. The LDS keeps people on their membership rolls until they are 110 years old. Also, this number includes people that have left the church and haven't requested that their names be taken off (to avoid family conflict like I'm doing) as well as the many, MANY inactives in Europe, Latin America and the rest of the USA.
Quote:
The number is somewhere around 3 to 4 million.
This is not an inflated number. It represents the actual number of people who have been baptized into the Church, regardless of whether they are "active" or "inactive." That is the same for any church. No church's membership is based on how many of its adherents actually attend services every Sunday.

Quote:
I know that this board is a MISSIONARY OPPORTUNITY for you, but have the decency to be fully truthful and transparent with your answers regarding the Church of Jesus Christ and Latter Days Saints.
And you have the decency to not accuse me of lying when every word I've said is true. I can't possibly be expected to antipate people's follow-up questions and respond to them before they are asked. And if I were using this board as a missionary opportunity, you'd find that my posts elsewhere on the forum would reflect that. Look through the other active threads. You will find that I don't even mention what religion I am unless it is clearly necessary in order for my answer to make sense.
 
Old 01-22-2010, 01:02 PM
 
Location: Salt Lake City
13,733 posts, read 9,164,014 times
Reputation: 4509
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hueffenhardt View Post
Earlier in this thread someone used the words "magic underwear" when obviously referring to the garments Mormons receive in the temple. Instead of telling you the truth about them, they got all defensive saying, "Who told you that? I'm pretty sure my underwear is no more magic than yours. And why this fascination with other people's underwear? I can't even imagine what kind of a person would care about the underwear of someone he doesn't even know."

While it is true, Mormons would never use the word "magic" to refer to the garments, he knew what the person was talking about and did not bother to address the real issue. You see, Mormons are uncomfortable talking about things they deem sacred and which they know would sound weird or strange to others. So, he used the questioners' unfortunate word choice as an excuse to get out of talking about what he surely knew was being asked about.
That "he" was me, and I'm not a "he." I answered as I did because of the flippant attitude of the poster. I tend to treat people pretty much the same way they treat me. And if someone comes at me with a disrespectful, sarcastic question, they might as well know upfront that they're not going to get a sincere, courteous response from me. I am pretty much open to dialogue about even the most controversial topics surrounding my faith's history and doctrines. Furthermore, I am much more liberal-minded than the average Mormon and will generally call things as I see them, much to the horror of many of my fellow Church members -- even when my position differs from the position of most everybody else in the Church, including that of the Brethren (read Prop 8). But it still gets down to the fact that I've been participating on forums of this nature for over ten years now, and it's easy for me to tell who has a legitimate question and who just wants to pick a fight. I don't have time to waste on people who fit into the second category.

(By the way, I was glad to read your answer on the other thread where I asked you why you had served a mission. I have no use for missionaries who just go to please their parents.)

Last edited by Katzpur; 01-22-2010 at 01:38 PM..
 
Old 01-22-2010, 01:04 PM
 
Location: Utah
2,331 posts, read 1,910,932 times
Reputation: 221
Quote:
Originally Posted by witty, wise and wicked View Post
?? So are you saying you have faith in your undergarments that they will protect you from physical harm? My husband was a convert to the LDS belief system, and he told me the story of Mr. Marriott. So, I think that the belief of protection from physical harm - while it may not be doctrinal - is still a wide-spread belief among those who wear the undergarments.

I do have a couple of questions about being 'sealed' in the temple. My husband and his ex were sealed. While he was struggling with his faith, he was very nervous about the fact that if he lost his temple recommend and, therefore, could not participate in the temple work, it would have some bearing on his children in the afterlife. Could you please explain to me what, or why he would have thought that way?

He is a stroke survivor, so he gets easily frustrated when he cannot explain himself fully, hence the reason I'm here, to ask other people. Plus, since he was a convert, he does not fully understand all of the beliefs and the 'why' behind all of them.
Thank-you for your serious questions, your post is a great example of the reason why I started this thread. I will respond as best I can, speaking of course only for myself. Other Saints writing in this thread may see it differently.


I personally do not believe that temple garments protect from physical harm, but it's quite possible that some Mormons do. It's certainly not doctrinal. Perhaps for those who do believe that, it's a desire to get some kind of empirical evidence of spiritual things, such as atheists commonly demand?

Latter-day Saints believe that the apostolic sealing power in which things bound on earth are also bound in heaven has been restored. When that power is excercised in holy temples it will bind worthy husbands and wives to each other and their children to them not just for time but for all eternity.

(Perhaps a way to look at this is to think of once having a very good friend who you lost touch with then years later trying to find that friend again, knowing that he or she traveled the world and moved their principle residence often. Should that friend or a loved one die, then when you are dead you have no assurance that you would find him or her in a world of spirits that could be similar to this one except with many more cities perhaps, and much more densely populated. But if you had that priesthood temple sealing, there is in our belief no power in the universe that can keep you apart if you want to be together.)

As I understand it, there are two major factors to consider in the concern you outlined. Blessings from God, in our belief, are subject to our faithfulness. If your husband for example ceased to be worthy by breaking major commandments or covenants with God and remained unrepentant, then his temple sealings for him would not be effective.

The second major consideration is our belief that nobody can be denied a blessing from God that they have earned because of the unrighteousness of another. So, for example, if your husband remained true and faithful to his covenants with God, then he would be entitled to all of the blessings promised regardless of the worthiness or unworthiness of his ex or their children.

As I see it, your husband need not be concerned about his children's blessings being made void by his own unrepentant sinful actions. They will not lose any earned blessing because of him.

It's a bit complicated to explain without a basic understanding of our belief in three heavens or kingdoms of glory, the highest being the Celestial where God and Jesus Christ dwell. Temple sealings are designed to provide worthy people an opportunity to make sacred covenants with God that He is bound to keep if we do our part. Families, in our belief can be forever. (But only those individual members of that family who remain faithful to their part of the covenant will bind God to His promised blessing. Those who break commandments and covenants have no such promise for themselves, so in any family sealed for eternity there may be some empty chairs at the table.)


Please don't hesitate to further question my response, or to ask other questions about LDS beliefs. I wish you and your husband and family the very very best.

www.mormon.org
 
Old 01-22-2010, 02:16 PM
 
133 posts, read 176,923 times
Reputation: 73
Quote:
And yet nearly 14 million people in the world
You do know that there are almost 7 BILLION people in the world right??? lol 14 million is quite minuet in the big scheme of things...
 
Old 01-22-2010, 02:23 PM
 
Location: Utah
2,331 posts, read 1,910,932 times
Reputation: 221
Quote:
Originally Posted by ShanesG View Post
You do know that there are almost 7 BILLION people in the world right??? lol 14 million is quite minuet in the big scheme of things...
Certainly. The point is to contrast the belief of millions of people all over the world with an individual's or some "ministry's" or other non-Mormon group's uninformed opinion regarding LDS beliefs.
 
Old 01-22-2010, 03:32 PM
 
Location: Somewhere out there
128 posts, read 144,370 times
Reputation: 115
Quote:
Originally Posted by justamere10 View Post
Thank-you for your serious questions, your post is a great example of the reason why I started this thread. I will respond as best I can, speaking of course only for myself. Other Saints writing in this thread may see it differently.


Latter-day Saints believe that the apostolic sealing power in which things bound on earth are also bound in heaven has been restored. When that power is excercised in holy temples it will bind worthy husbands and wives to each other and their children to them not just for time but for all eternity.

(Perhaps a way to look at this is to think of once having a very good friend who you lost touch with then years later trying to find that friend again, knowing that he or she traveled the world and moved their principle residence often. Should that friend or a loved one die, then when you are dead you have no assurance that you would find him or her in a world of spirits that could be similar to this one except with many more cities perhaps, and much more densely populated. But if you had that priesthood temple sealing, there is in our belief no power in the universe that can keep you apart if you want to be together.)

So, according to your belief, if one does not have that priesthood, then you cannot be together, no matter what?

As I understand it, there are two major factors to consider in the concern you outlined. Blessings from God, in our belief, are subject to our faithfulness. If your husband for example ceased to be worthy by breaking major commandments or covenants with God and remained unrepentant, then his temple sealings for him would not be effective.
In his defense, he has done nothing 'unworthy' and has NEVER been unrepentant.

The second major consideration is our belief that nobody can be denied a blessing from God that they have earned because of the unrighteousness of another. So, for example, if your husband remained true and faithful to his covenants with God, then he would be entitled to all of the blessings promised regardless of the worthiness or unworthiness of his ex or their children.

Salvation and blessings are given, not earned.

As I see it, your husband need not be concerned about his children's blessings being made void by his own unrepentant sinful actions. They will not lose any earned blessing because of him.

Why did you choose that wording..unrepentant sinful actions? Are you judging the actions or character of my husband?

It's a bit complicated to explain without a basic understanding of our belief in three heavens or kingdoms of glory, the highest being the Celestial where God and Jesus Christ dwell. Temple sealings are designed to provide worthy people an opportunity to make sacred covenants with God that He is bound to keep if we do our part. Families, in our belief can be forever. (But only those individual members of that family who remain faithful to their part of the covenant will bind God to His promised blessing. Those who break commandments and covenants have no such promise for themselves, so in any family sealed for eternity there may be some empty chairs at the table.)

I just cannot wrap my head around any faith that makes it's members think that they will not get a blessing if they break a commandment. I have yet to meet anyone on the face of this earth who, in one way or another, has never sinned. Does your faith not believe that people like Mother Teresa, any of the Popes, Ghandi, etc. have the full right to be at the feet of the Allmigty? Thoses types of people righfully belong there more than any other type of person on this earth!

Please don't hesitate to further question my response, or to ask other questions about LDS beliefs. I wish you and your husband and family the very very best.
And just so you know, he was not worried about his children because of his 'sinful actions'. He was trying to explain to me the reasoning behind the sealing, and what that means or doesn't mean for his children. He has decided to change his faith system (as in change churches), because faith is not earned, it has been given to all of us unconditionally, you just have to have faith in the first place. And from what I understand and know from conversations that I've had with a few LDS members, that is just too simple of an answer. There has to be some type of 'condition' in your belief system in order to receive blessings and an exaulted place in Heaven. Hence your reason behind the 'tree levels' of Heaven. And no, I'm not trying to attack or anything, I am more than willing to have a healthy debate.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Closed Thread

Over $79,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:51 PM.

2005-2014, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25 - Top