| Re: The remission of Sins does not require baptism [message #2890 is a reply to message #2745] |
Tue, 04 March 2014 23:02   |
Binyamin
Messages: 6
Registered: June 2013
|
Junior Member |
|
|
Seeker, I dont know that I fully understand the necessity of outward ordinances yet. Did everything spoken by the Savior apply to all people? If so It seems that Jules may be correct. I dont take that to be the case though. If i look into other scripture I find that we are not to be compelled in all things.
I have been considering this topic for months now. All outward ordinances are but a shell. The deeper and real ordinance is the one that is reflected upon your soul as your have a baptism by fire. This change that occurs inside of us seems much more valuable to me than the the outward ordinance themselves. Maybe both are necessary?
I disagree with Jules in one area though. I dont know that current LDS Culture teaches to keep sacred things quiet and closed. It seems like most of the times sacred things are worn more as a "badge of honor". "I went to the temple this morning". Or "I was reading my scriptures". Or the church culture places a massive amount of value upon outward ordinances without seeming to value as much the inward. The culture would rather you never have a baptism by fire. You would be left alone if that was the case. Now, if you chose to not be baptized, or not go to the temple to be sealed in 1 year after a civil ceremony, or be ordained to the priesthood at 13 instead of 12, or not go on a mission, or go on a mission late, or only have 1-2 children, or discuss deeper doctrine, etc then the culture of the church would come into play. You would be treated as if you don't have any kind of testimony even though you may have one of the greatest. Or you would be treated as if you somehow aren't as qualified to be a member. Somehow the outward ordinances are much more valuable to the culture. People are defined and loved or reviled based upon these. God of course seems to place much more value upon true conversion. The scriptures support this in numerous accounts throughout. James 2:14-26. Faith without works is a wonderful example. What our hearts are focused upon seems to be what we are judged upon on judgement day. If I only had one choice then I would say that the need for the outward ordinances pales in comparison to the need for the inward. The outward are needed to prepare and assist those living a lower law increase to a higher law. The inward are the result of conscientiously seeking God and finding answers and growing closer to Him.
If you compare the laws to the Priesthood then we have the Aaronic and the Melchizedek laws. The Aaronic was originally created because the people could not live the higher law. An Aaronic Law may be compared to an outward ordinance. This lower law came from God as well. I believe it came directly from Christ in fact. In this case should we still be living a lower law simply because it was commanded for those who couldn't live a higher yet? There may not be a parallel that exists there. I may need to study some more. I would never want to use one instance to blanket justify another. I think there is good learning and growth that is intended in each situation and we simply need to decipher what that good is and listen to the Spirit as it teaches us to hear.
If we are excommunicated do we lose our standing before God? Are we now somehow less of a righteous person based upon an ordinance that was outward from the beginning? Or is it the change inside that defined and defines us into the future? I support the outward ordinances and can see a LOT of good that can come from them. I wouldn't ever want to persuade someone away from these opportunities. I needed them. Or at least I thought that I did. It turned out for the longest time that much of my spiritual blockage was because of the emphasis that I placed upon entities, organizations, ordinances etc without the emphasis on the true change. I don't know that I would have found the path without the lower law.
It may be necessary for initial progression but not for continued foundational support or maintained righteousness and relationship with God.
I suppose that I cant have a stand for or against an outward ordinance. I can seek to educate those that take that as the end-all and teach them that it is only the beginning. It doesn't really seem that anyone was seeking to support and not support Outward Ordinances. The main awareness is the fact that it is the mere beginning.
_Fortunate_
[Updated on: Tue, 04 March 2014 23:06] Report message to a moderator |
|
|
|
Elliaison.org - Forum
Search
Help
Members
Register
Login
Home
