Why are ordinances required?

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
User avatar
Seven
Savior (resurrected)
Posts: 998
Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2007 1:52 pm

Why are ordinances required?

Post by Seven »

(Going with the New Testament and LDS doctrine that baptism is required of all, even of Jesus)

I understand the symbolism and benefits of performing ordinances. Making covenants with God helps to keep us on the right path and teaches us God's ways. What I would like your opinions of, is WHY ordinances like baptism, and temple ordinances are REQUIRED for every person that has ever lived. This has never made sense to me. I think the LDS teaching and doctrine of baptism for the dead is beautiful and in line with a loving Heavenly Father who offers salvation for all his children. I think it's a wonderful way for us to connect with our ancestors and renew our own covenants.
But .....WHY is the physical act of having a proxy baptism/sealing etc. so necessary to salvation in the Celestial Kingdom?
I appreciate your thoughts on this. : )
"Happiness is the object and design of our existence...
That which is wrong under one circumstance, may be, and often is, right under another." Joseph Smith

User avatar
Sethbag
God
Posts: 6855
Joined: Thu Feb 22, 2007 4:52 am

Post by Sethbag »

You already know the answer. If you don't know the secret passwords and handshakes, the angels won't let you in to the Celestial Kingdom. Duh.

User avatar
truth dancer
High Goddess of Atlantis
Posts: 4792
Joined: Tue Oct 24, 2006 6:40 am

Post by truth dancer »

Hi Seven...

Let me ask you a question... :-)

Do you think it is really a requirement for someone to get into heaven (CKHL)? Do you really think God demanded such a thing from human beings? Do you really think that regardless of how beautiful, holy, and honorable one lives her life she will not make it into heaven if a body hasn't been immersed in water with a few special words? Do you really think God, the very creator of the Universe would have such a requirement? Do you see any need whatsoever for people who have died, who want to be with God and who believe in the church (assuming the LDS version of the afterlife is the correct one), and who have lived holy lives, to have a body on the earth make covenants that they can not even remotely abide by (think of the four covenants one makes in the temple) in heaven? Could you really imagine a father, who has several children, who have lived great lives and who believe in goodness and virtue and holiness, KEEP THEM FROM blessings because they didn't know the right handshake or the correct secret word?

Ok.. that was more than one question... LOL!

~dancer~
"The search for reality is the most dangerous of all undertakings for it destroys the world in which you live." Nisargadatta Maharaj

User avatar
Seven
Savior (resurrected)
Posts: 998
Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2007 1:52 pm

Post by Seven »

[
quote="truth dancer"]Hi Seven...

Let me ask you a question... :-)

Do you think it is really a requirement for someone to get into heaven (CKHL)?


Hi Truth Dancer,
If it is not a requirement, then why was the earth baptised and why did Jesus have to be baptised? I don't think it is required to be in paradise when we die, but it is at some point to be in the CK.

Do you really think God demanded such a thing from human beings?


I have accepted that it is commanded of all because of my belief in Christ.

Do you really think that regardless of how beautiful, holy, and honorable one lives her life she will not make it into heaven if a body hasn't been immersed in water with a few special words?


No, but all will be given that ordinance by those doing temple work in their name.

Do you really think God, the very creator of the Universe would have such a requirement? Do you see any need whatsoever for people who have died, who want to be with God and who believe in the church (assuming the LDS version of the afterlife is the correct one), and who have lived holy lives, to have a body on the earth make covenants that they can not even remotely abide by (think of the four covenants one makes in the temple) in heaven? Could you really imagine a father, who has several children, who have lived great lives and who believe in goodness and virtue and holiness, KEEP THEM FROM blessings because they didn't know the right handshake or the correct secret word?


I agree with everything you have stated but I have to make sense of why Jesus was baptised and the commandment to follow his example. I understand the earthly blessings and symbolism, but not the reason for every deceased person to have it performed.

I am not saying I agree with God's ways or understand them, but there must be a reason it is essential & He commands it of all.

God doesn't keep his children from their blessings for not entering baptism or learning the temple ordinances. They are all given the chance through temple work done in proxy. This is one LDS doctrine that makes God much more loving than other Christian faiths.
"Happiness is the object and design of our existence...
That which is wrong under one circumstance, may be, and often is, right under another." Joseph Smith

User avatar
truth dancer
High Goddess of Atlantis
Posts: 4792
Joined: Tue Oct 24, 2006 6:40 am

Post by truth dancer »

Hi Seven...

I'm respectfullly suggesting that God is not the author of the rituals, ceremonies, and ordinance that have been engaged in my human beings. IMO, this whole thing sounds much more like a rule and teaching created by a few men then the God of the entire universe.

Perhaps it all doesn't make much sense to you because it is not something God instigated?

You are going with the assumtion that everything the leaders of the church say is correct therefore there must be some reason.

Others go more with the idea of questioning the very human men who came up with the various rituals and passwords, since these same leaders have been wrong over and over again.

In terms of the baptism of the earth... My understanding of the church leaders and teachings is that this was a very old opinion of some leaders but not in any way church doctrine or even official teaching (I could be wrong about this). I think few, if any, leaders would suggest such a thing today. I'm quite certain few (if any) leaders believe the Noachian flood was a fact.

If one looks at the early days of the original Christian church and the origin of various rituals and ceremonies I think the LDS rituals and teachings are not so easily embraced as God directed. If one looks at the Masonic rituals one often has a more difficult time believing the LDS temple ceremony has anything whatsoever to do with passing angels in heaven or something that had divine origins.

As you know, the temple ceremony and rituals, signs, penalties, etc. etc. have dramatically altered over the years... this fact gives some reason for pause.

If you are trying to figure out why God requires various rituals, ordinances, and ceremonies, you may just have to come up with an idea that is comfortable to you. I think any guess is as good as any other.

Usually what I hear from believers is something like... we don't know the mind of God, it is not our place to question, God's ways are not man's ways, it doesn't matter so long as we believe, etc. etc. etc.

Best of luck ... :-)

~dancer~
"The search for reality is the most dangerous of all undertakings for it destroys the world in which you live." Nisargadatta Maharaj

User avatar
Trinity
2nd Counselor
Posts: 426
Joined: Fri Feb 09, 2007 6:36 am

Post by Trinity »

I totally totally agree with TD. Ordinances almost feel anti-God to me. If God loves his children, and God requires certainly earthly ordinances to be performed in order to return to his presence, God would make those ordinances available to all his children. He doesn't.

I would also suggest that ordinances are more to do about binding a person to the organization. In the case of LDS temple work, even moreso because of the monetary stipulations.
"I think one of the great mysteries of the gospel is that anyone still believes it." Sethbag, MADB, Feb 22 2008

User avatar
Sethbag
God
Posts: 6855
Joined: Thu Feb 22, 2007 4:52 am

Post by Sethbag »

Seven, when was the earth baptised?

User avatar
moksha
God
Posts: 22055
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 2:42 pm

Post by moksha »

Sethbag wrote:...when was the earth baptised?

July 27, 1907 2:40 pm at the Glendale Second Ward.
Cry Heaven and let loose the Penguins of Peace

User avatar
Runtu
God
Posts: 16721
Joined: Sat Nov 04, 2006 11:06 pm

Post by Runtu »

moksha wrote:
Sethbag wrote:...when was the earth baptised?

July 27, 1907 2:40 pm at the Glendale Second Ward.


I just spit my coke out. Too funny. I've always thought the idea of The Flood as a baptism was more than a bit hokey.
Runtu's Rincón

If you just talk, I find that your mouth comes out with stuff. -- Karl Pilkington

User avatar
Sethbag
God
Posts: 6855
Joined: Thu Feb 22, 2007 4:52 am

Post by Sethbag »

Not only is the Flood = Earth's Baptism hokey on the grounds that a global, worldwide flood didn't happen, but wouldn't Noah's Ark bobbing along on top of the water count as a toe sticking up out of the water, so God would have to do it again, and this time get it right?

User avatar
asbestosman
God
Posts: 6215
Joined: Tue Nov 07, 2006 4:32 pm

Post by asbestosman »

Sethbag wrote:Not only is the Flood = Earth's Baptism hokey on the grounds that a global, worldwide flood didn't happen, but wouldn't Noah's Ark bobbing along on top of the water count as a toe sticking up out of the water, so God would have to do it again, and this time get it right?


I'm still waiting for the earth to take out her endowments and get sealed to . . . uhhh, Kolob?
That's General Leo. He could be my friend if he weren't my enemy.
eritis sicut dii
I support NCMO

User avatar
Bond...James Bond
He-Who-Has-Not-Sinned (Recently)
Posts: 4627
Joined: Mon Nov 06, 2006 10:49 pm

Post by Bond...James Bond »

moksha wrote:
Sethbag wrote:...when was the earth baptised?

July 27, 1907 2:40 pm at the Glendale Second Ward.


ROTFCMLUL! Jesus moksha. Will you put a "Warning: cough up a lung laughing probability" warning on your posts? Man that is funny.
"Whatever appears to be against the Book of Mormon is going to be overturned at some time in the future. So we can be pretty open minded."-charity 3/7/07

User avatar
Who Knows
God
Posts: 2455
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 12:09 pm

Post by Who Knows »

Bond...James Bond wrote:...ROTFCMLUL!


? I've never seen that one before. Rolling on the floor cause my leg's under lettuce?
WK: "Joseph Smith asserted that the Book of Mormon peoples were the original inhabitants of the americas"
Will Schryver: "No, he didn’t." 3/19/08
Still waiting for Will to back this up...

User avatar
Jason Bourne
God
Posts: 9207
Joined: Sun Oct 29, 2006 2:00 pm

Post by Jason Bourne »

moksha wrote:
Sethbag wrote:...when was the earth baptised?

July 27, 1907 2:40 pm at the Glendale Second Ward.


Teeeeheeheheheeee

User avatar
Jason Bourne
God
Posts: 9207
Joined: Sun Oct 29, 2006 2:00 pm

Post by Jason Bourne »

Sethbag wrote:Not only is the Flood = Earth's Baptism hokey on the grounds that a global, worldwide flood didn't happen, but wouldn't Noah's Ark bobbing along on top of the water count as a toe sticking up out of the water, so God would have to do it again, and this time get it right?


This is kind of funny too. But I guess since the ark was not part of the earth it would not be considered it toe. Fingernail maybe?

User avatar
asbestosman
God
Posts: 6215
Joined: Tue Nov 07, 2006 4:32 pm

Post by asbestosman »

Jason Bourne wrote:
Sethbag wrote:Not only is the Flood = Earth's Baptism hokey on the grounds that a global, worldwide flood didn't happen, but wouldn't Noah's Ark bobbing along on top of the water count as a toe sticking up out of the water, so God would have to do it again, and this time get it right?


This is kind of funny too. But I guess since the ark was not part of the earth it would not be considered it toe. Fingernail maybe?


More like the dry clothes you change back into after the ordinance is done.

Now if Noah happened to have his anchor out and reaching between the bottom of the ocean and his ark, that would be a different matter.
That's General Leo. He could be my friend if he weren't my enemy.
eritis sicut dii
I support NCMO

User avatar
Bond...James Bond
He-Who-Has-Not-Sinned (Recently)
Posts: 4627
Joined: Mon Nov 06, 2006 10:49 pm

Post by Bond...James Bond »

Who Knows wrote:
Bond...James Bond wrote:...ROTFCMLUL!


? I've never seen that one before. Rolling on the floor cause my leg's under lettuce?


Sorry. I guess I shouldn't make up things. That's "rolling on the floor coughing my lungs up laughing". Too graphic?
"Whatever appears to be against the Book of Mormon is going to be overturned at some time in the future. So we can be pretty open minded."-charity 3/7/07

User avatar
Who Knows
God
Posts: 2455
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 12:09 pm

Post by Who Knows »

Bond...James Bond wrote:"rolling on the floor coughing my lungs up laughing"


Ah, yes, that makes much more sense.

ROTFLSHISMCO.

There, try that.
WK: "Joseph Smith asserted that the Book of Mormon peoples were the original inhabitants of the americas"
Will Schryver: "No, he didn’t." 3/19/08
Still waiting for Will to back this up...

User avatar
Bond...James Bond
He-Who-Has-Not-Sinned (Recently)
Posts: 4627
Joined: Mon Nov 06, 2006 10:49 pm

Post by Bond...James Bond »

Who Knows wrote:
ROTFLSHISMCO.


Rolling on the floor loudly s***ing hellfire into some macaroni (&) cheese omelettes?

No clue.
"Whatever appears to be against the Book of Mormon is going to be overturned at some time in the future. So we can be pretty open minded."-charity 3/7/07

User avatar
Who Knows
God
Posts: 2455
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 12:09 pm

Post by Who Knows »

Bond...James Bond wrote:
Who Knows wrote:
ROTFLSHISMCO.


Rolling on the floor loudly s***ing hellfire into some macaroni (&) cheese omelettes?

No clue.


Haha, yeah, that's it exactly!
WK: "Joseph Smith asserted that the Book of Mormon peoples were the original inhabitants of the americas"
Will Schryver: "No, he didn’t." 3/19/08
Still waiting for Will to back this up...

User avatar
silentkid
Crack whore trainee
Posts: 1606
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 11:50 am

Post by silentkid »

Circular Reasoning 101:

Ordinances are required to test our faith. We show our faith by being obedient. Obedience requires performing ordinances. Or something like that.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Chadillac, Google [Bot], huckelberry, moksha and 19 guests