Even though the Rexburg temple is about ready to open to the thousands in a month, this story is just plain awful in our local news. I pray for this.
- Comment
- Reblog
-
Subscribe
Subscribed
Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
Jesus in Idaho Falls 
Umm, why the connection between this story and the Temple?
Did this guy have the position of an ordained high priest?
All I know is what the print article says. Do you believe Mormon High Priests have a propensity to abuse children?
The print article says nothing about the perpetrator’s religion.
If he was LDS (or if he was not), then I am fairly certain your LDS neighbors will stand shoulder to shoulder with you in condemning his acts and sorrowing for the man and his victims. If he was LDS, and especially if he went through the Temple, then he has broken covenants that will redound to his sorrow. And the scriptures are plain that ‘whosoever offends one of these little ones, it is better that a millstone were hung around his neck . . .’
Todd, I’ll be plain. I think sometimes you try to understand the faith of your neighbors, and I admire that. And then sometimes you take potshots at mormon beliefs that are, quite frankly, offensive. Here you take what is sacred to us and juxtapose it with that which is degrading beyond words. Although you do not understand it, the Temple is, for us, a type of Christ. You are figuratively dragging His gift of salvation (our celebration of the same atonement in which you profess to believe) through the mud when you mock it.
You may not understand our belief. You may think it foolish. But if you are making the comparison that I think you are making, then you are committing an act of desecration akin to displaying a crucifix in a bottle of urine. Did you think that was funny or enlightening, too? I hurt when I saw a symbol of my Lord mocked – even though it is not a symbol I venerate.
Todd, this is ridiculous. The BTK killer was an ordained deacon or something in his particular Evangelical creedalist splinter group. What does that say about you personally and about Evangelical creedalists generally? If the answer is nothing, then hopefully you can see that the same applies here.
Mahana and John f., I think I might look at human depravity differently than you. My offense to a holy God was degrading beyond words. My thoughts and actions trampled on Christ’s work on the cross. I mocked him with my rebellious self-will.
This man, Michael Neff and the BTK killer, reveal what the Bible spells out . . . human nature . . . the desperate condition of men. And that earthly positions of religious authority do not make one more spiritual, more sanctified, or more glorified. There has got to be a great exchange of righteousness for the utter hopeless.
I want to know the proper judgment and also the spiritual solution that will be given for this man.
Though I have posted this, I am praying.
Thinking of heart issues . . .
You’re right, you look at it differently than I do.
I see Neff and the BTK Killer as exceptions to the rule, as aberrations among human interactions and relationships. All people are capable of doing what these two people have done but the great majority of them never do or even consider doing those things. Human beings are God’s creations and are noble creatures, fundamentally good in their spirits, and are on earth to learn how to overcome the weaknesses and shortcomings attributable to their mortal bodies. To be sure, overcoming the natural man is a key objective of human life on earth (Mosiah 3:19) and this goal is only ultimately achievable through the grace of Jesus Christ. But Latter-day Saints by and large believe that all people are children of God, created in his image and with the potential to become like him upon inheriting all that He has as joint heirs with Christ so long as they accept the Atonement of Jesus Christ.
Todd,
I agree that we are all lost without Christ, and neither religious office nor religious ordinance, standing by itself, can cover the distance between us and God. Your earlier explanations drew the response they did because you seemed to equate building the Temple with committing grevious sin, or worse, as encouraging abuse. I take your explanation as ruling out that line of thinking.
I see the Temple as standing for hope in the midst of despair. To me it says that even though we are depraved, God loves us and saves us. He even invites us into His house. We cannot enter of our own accord, we may only do so because Christ makes it possible. That we may enter is a testimony to the power of the atonement.
Mahana,
The Rexburg Temple has invited all clergy in the area to come for a tour on December 27. I plan on going to this. I have lived in Mormon country for almost all my life and have never been able to see the inside of an LDS temple.
Dear neighbors have invited my whole family to attend on another evening. We will do this as well.
But Mahana, I got into a discussion yesterday over whether the LDS Church removes all the carpets walked upon in a temple during an open house. I didn’t think they did this. If they do, why?
If they replace carpet (and it is not spoiled), I would love to put some in my own house. I really need some good quality carpet to replace much of my old floor surface.
John f,
Michael Neff had been living a horrible life here in Southeastern Idaho. And it does bring up a lot of heart issues. I don’t see the natural man since the fall as “fundamentally good”, as I am studying things currently in Genesis and Isaiah.
And with my parallel studies in John’s Gospel, I don’t see all as wonderful children of God with few exceptions. I equate children of God with those experiencing his celestial light.
Several questions. So would you say that Michael Neff was once a “child of God” and then because of sin he was removed from the family of God? Secondly, did the Father and the Son lose this child? Thirdly, what are the full steps that Michael Neff now needs to do in order to gain worthiness for the highest of celestial glory with the Father?
I think these are crucial questions for families and victims in the town of Rexburg.
“remove the shoes from thy feet, for the ground upon which thou standest is holy ground.”
I think that’s the same sentiment behind the removal of carpeting in the Temple after an open-house. And yes, they do rip out all the carpeting from the temple after public viewings.
When LDS go to the temple, they are allowed to wear their shoes to a certain point, but after that they remove them and wear special slippers or shoes for walking in the rest of the building.
Its a way of maintaining the symbolic purity of the Lord’s house.
I don’t know the answer as to removing Temple carpeting. Never having been involved in planning for a Temple open house or dedication, I can’t speak to the logistics.
I wonder if they donate it to charity? Might be hard to do though…
I worked on the Mt Timpanogos Temple after the open house. They experimented with a plastic covering there to keep the carpet clean during the open house, but it was a disaster: the plastic covering left a sticky residue that attracted dirt, so they had to pull out much of the carpet anyway.
Anyway, the carpet was replaced because it was soiled beyond repair. In some places it was also so trodden that it had already experienced its normal lifetime of wear (i.e. it was completely flattened), and so it would have been replaced even if it had still been clean.
The point is: carpet replacement was a physical facilities decision, not an ecclesiastical one.
BrianJ, the rumor is that Gentiles contaminate it. But I will trust your words in the truth of the last statement.
Yet I must confess the funny feelings I have inside as an outsider. The same feelings I had when putting on plastic coverings when my wife and I visited the “holy Muslim places” in Turkey this spring.
Todd, Neff is still a child of God — I find it surprising that you reject or deny this. God is our Father in Heaven. We are all his children. We all need to accept the Atonement of Jesus Christ to be cleansed of sin and live with God again.
As for steps that Neff needs to take to be saved, Latter-day Saints believe that repentance actually has teeth. This is in contrast, I believe, to Evangelical creedalist views on the matter. To be saved Neff needs to have faith in the Lord Jesus Christ, repent of his sins, be baptized for the remission of sins, and receive the Gift of the Holy Ghost through the laying on of hands (see the New Testament). To repent of such grievous sin will cause much anguish of soul and yet Latter-day Saints believe that Christ’s Atonement is powerful enough to reach even someone this depraved.
Nevertheless, many Latter-day Saints often find the Evangelical creedalist insistence on the fundamental depravity and evil of man to be curious. Why did God create such filthy things in the first place? It is very nice to believe that God loves all of his children. You seem to rule that possibility out with your comment # 10.
More questions . . .
Are only humans, children of God in LDS theology?
And is that all that Michael needs to do for the highest of celestial glory? I am surprised.
Todd, I know you’re hung up on works but even you believe in at least one saving work: accepting the “same substance” Jesus in your heart. If I am not mistaken, you believe that without your act in doing this, the Atonement of Jesus Christ is entirely without effect on you and you will burn in hell forever. In fact, I am unclear (because you seem to have remained intentionally ambiguous on this point in past debates) as to whether you go one step further and believe that God himself — and not you — predetermines (and therefore causes) whether you ever accept the “same substance” Jesus or not and therefore burn in hell forever or not.
Neff cannot be saved without the Atonement. The LDS understanding of this is much broader than the Evangelical creedalist counterpart. Christ’s grace is truly powerful in LDS doctrine. It is so powerful that there is one aspect of the Atonement that has effect on everyone no matter how evil or depraved: the Resurrection. This is the unconditional aspect of Christ’s Atonement. Because he suffered and died for our sins and resurrected, all people will be resurrected to stand before God to be judged according to their works, whether those works were good or evil. This is where the conditional aspect of Christ’s Atonement kicks in: for those who have accepted the Atonement and received the necessary ordinances administered by the only authorized priesthood authority, their evil works will have been forgiven and therefore “forgotten” at the Judgment Seat. For those, however, who have actively rejected Christ’s Atonement (i.e. this is not including people who simply never heard of it — another sticking point for Evangelical creedalists, if I am not mistaken — because everyone will have had a chance to actively accept or reject it before standing before the Judgment Seat), they will be subject to judgment on all of their bad works (with the benefit, I personally believe based on my belief in a God who actually loves his children, of as much mercy/taking into account of mitigating circumstances as possible without breaching the demands of justice).
John f. – in regards to your first paragraph.
Yes, the One we are believing in is crucial to our eternal destiny.
Fundamental to salvation. In fact, that is the highest purpose of human salvation . . . to glorify the “One and Only” (NASV).
Someday, when we all stand before the One God of all, God will know who we have given our full faith and allegience to.
Yahweh has taught me this in the scriptures not in creeds. I can’t wrap my mind around the one Yahweh of all; but I simply and joyfully believe.
Todd, what I understand from your comment #19 is that you believe that your salvation depends on you to the same extent that Evangelical creedalists claim that Latter-day Saints believe in “saving themselves”.
Everyone can save themselves by simply confessing the “one substance” Jesus in their hearts, is that right?
Without doing this (accepting the “one substance” Jesus in your heart) you cannot be saved even though Jesus has sacrificed himself for us and the Atonement is available to all.
(Of course Latter-day Saints believe the Atonement is more widely available to all people than Evangelical creedalists, it seems, since LDS doctrine takes into account the fact that billions of people were and are born into circumstances in which they, through no fault or conscious choice of their own, never had or have the opportunity to read the Bible and have the benefit of someone explaining the philosophical abstractions required for transforming what is in the plain language of the Bible into Trinitarian theology.)
In fact, that is the highest purpose of human salvation . . . to glorify the “One and Only” (NASV).
It is wonderful to be a Latter-day Saint and to believe that, in addition to glorifying God in the eternities, those who are saved will be “joint-heirs with Christ” (KJV).
It is exhiliarating and humbling to think that God will allow those who are saved to assist Him in other projects in the eternities. (Being joint heirs with Christ has a very profound meaning for Latter-day Saints who take that at its word. In many senses, it would seem, Latter-day Saints believe the Bible more literally than Evangelical creedalists.)
I can’t wrap my mind around the one Yahweh of all; but I simply and joyfully believe.
It is ironic that someone who speaks of God as incomprehensible (you use the word “mindblowing” recently on a different thread) would be preaching to others that their understanding of the nature of God, which understanding is indeed supported by the Bible even if that understanding differs in some respects from Evangelical creedalist interpretations of the Bible, is wrong. If you can’t wrap your mind around YHWH, then the most you can say is that you think that Latter-day Saints are not interpreting the Bible correctly by failing to read later philosophical conclusions into texts written by people who had never heard of or considered the idea of “homoousios”.
John f., I think God has taught me much since my initial conversion. But if I were to consciously, willfully reject biblical scripture in how God is defined . . . that would be a fundamental heart issue.
Secondly, no one saves themselves. We learn this in John 6. Unless the Father draws, human nature will not respond. Every human.
Thirdly, “joint-heirs with Christ” is in one of my favorite chapters in Scripture. I cling to the message of that chapter. And it is all for God’s glory. The message of that book.
Fourthly, Three in One. Yes. Mindblowing. But I know the Bible teaches there is only one Yahweh.
Sidenote: I am in Elko, Nevada, today and tomorrow for an ordination council. When my pastor friend and I travelled through Twin Falls, Idaho from I.F., we stopped at the new temple construction in Twin. I noticed on the temple (as typically), “THE HOUSE OF THE LORD.”
Is the LORD on the temple, referring to the Father or the Son?
Secondly, no one saves themselves. We learn this in John 6. Unless the Father draws, human nature will not respond. Every human.
Todd, unless you accept Jesus in your heart, you aren’t saved. Are you saying you do not believe this? If you believe this, then it means that you actually believe that you are in control of whether you are saved or not.
Of course I realize that you don’t believe that you save yourself — and Latter-day Saints don’t believe it either. Both you and Latter-day Saints believe that there is only one name under heaven and earth by which people can be saved: Jesus Christ.
However, if you start preaching against ordinances that Latter-day Saints perform as instructed in the Bible and use them as a basis to argue that Latter-day Saints believe they can save themselves, then you would do well to consider that your own view is not much different because unless you accept Jesus, you aren’t going to be saved even though the Atonement is a reality.
As to your explanation that Heavenly Father draws, it doesn’t really help you out here — in fact it almost hurts your position because of how close it puts you to the repugnant and fundamentally un-biblical doctrines of Calvinism and predetermination. At best, your argument gets you nowhere because even with the Father drawing, you still have to choose to respond. At worst, your argument means that people don’t have a choice in whether to accept God or not — that God predetermined (and therefore caused) before anyone was ever born who would accept Jesus and who would not thereby being damned in hell. This means that if there is a single soul in hell, it is God’s fault — God chose to send them there before they were ever even born and he decided they would not accept Jesus in their hearts. If you respond that people are still free to choose to accept God or not then you are back in the same problem of holding the keys to your own salvation — not that you save yourself by your own power but that you have to unlock that door yourself by accepting Jesus.
But I know the Bible teaches there is only one Yahweh.
Sure, Latter-day Saints believe this too. There is only one YHWH. Now there’s just the issue of El.
John f., I think we differ on how sufficient is the one work in John 6:29 from the lips of Jesus for our ultimate glorification.
And my particular belief about Jesus’ words in John 6 to this crowd does put me in the camp of what you call “the repugnant and fundamentally un-biblical doctrines of Calvinism.” But then again, I reject your logical extensions that it is God’s fault people are in hell. (And remember, I believe that Christ died for all.)
And concerning your last statement:
Sure, Latter-day Saints believe this too. There is only one YHWH. Now there’s just the issue of El.
So let me get this straight from your perspective. Correct me if I am wrong. You believe that LDS go into the House of the LORD (Yahweh, your Jesus) but that while in this house, you pray to El (Your Heavenly Father).
How do the Hebrew Scriptures separate the one and only Yahweh from the most high El?
And my particular belief about Jesus’ words in John 6 to this crowd does put me in the camp of what you call “the repugnant and fundamentally un-biblical doctrines of Calvinism.” But then again, I reject your logical extensions that it is God’s fault people are in hell. (And remember, I believe that Christ died for all.)
Todd, this simply can’t be. You believe that God chose all who will accept the “one substance” Jesus in their hearts before they were ever born. You believe that all who do not confess the “one substance” Jesus in their hearts burn in hell forever. This means that they were created for the purpose of eternal torture and none other. Your God is entirely at fault that a single soul is in hell because he did not choose them from before they were born to accept the “one substance” Jesus in their hearts. This is not really a logical extension but rather a plain observation. If it is a logical extension, then it is at most a simple syllogism but not a controversial one given your own premises, unless you are claiming that God predestined everyone to accept the “one substance” Jesus in their hearts. If this is your position then it raises at least two fundamental problems:
1. If God predestined everyone to accept the “one substance” Jesus in their heart, then why don’t they all (by the way this requires other leaps from the biblical truth such as the rejection of the need for priesthood authority and ordinances to effect this acceptance, but let’s stick with this basic problem of predestination).
2. If God did not predestine everyone to accept the “one substance” Jesus in their heart, then why not? What did some people do before they were born to merit God not predestinating them to do this and then creating them anyway, only to live lives of misery and then proceed to eternal torture in fire and brimstone when they die? Why did God create billions of creatures only to torment them?