What else do I need to consider to be part of the gospel?

[Anonymous]

As some of you probably know, I have been rebuilding my faith and anticipate a return to church in the near term after a 10 year absence. Since I was not religious prior to joining the church, the gospel and the church were one and the same to me, so when I had my crisis of faith both crashed. Part of the struggle of rebuilding for me has been separating the two, that is figuring out what the gospel is and what is church teaching that is not necessarily gospel. So, here’s what I believe so far is gospel:

1. I do believe in the Godhead, there is God the Eternal Father, his son Jesus Christ, and a Holy Ghost and they are separate but one in purpose. (However, their roles and attributes do not necessarily completely align with LDS teachings).

2. I believe God is the creator of the world and each of us are his spirit children, but that we have also always existed and will always exist.

3. I believe Jesus Christ came to earth to redeem mankind through his atoning sacrifice and resurrection, and that men must accept him as their personal Savior in order to enter heaven. Jesus was the only perfect son of God, but all can be perfected through him. I also believe in the Second Coming.

4. I believe we will all face a final judgement.

5. I believe that God teaches his people through prophets, but that the scriptures do not contain all of their teachings or all prophets. Prophets are not perfect and everything they say is not gospel, only some is. I think revelation to prophets is rare.

6. I believe in the Two Great Commandments and that all other commandments fall under one of the two. I believe these commandments are limited to those that are contained in the Old and New Testaments and that men need not be “commanded in all things” but can refer to the Two Great Commandments to verify if something is good and moral. Likewise, people do have some latitude in keeping commandments based on specific circumstances.

I know this list is incomplete, and you will note that specific things that are part of the LDS church, such as the Book of Mormon, are purposely not on this list. What other things do I need to take under consideration to possibly be included in my list of beliefs as gospel?

[Anonymous]

At the most fundamental level, I see “the Gospel” as nothing more than the Book of Mormon description: faith (in the Lord, Jesus Christ), repentance, baptism, the gift of the Holy Ghost and enduring to the end – with divine parental love as the underlying principle on which it all hangs. My signature line adds some clarification to each element that makes it non-specific to any particular religion or denomination.

I see the Gospel in its simplest definition as the “good news” Jesus preached – and that good news is centered on one concept:

Quote:

I am a child of God.

I believe every truly unique doctrine within Mormonism, especially compared with Protestantism, derives from that concept, and I believe the zenith of that teaching of the good news is the Intercessory Prayer in John 17 – that all of us can become one with GOD, the Father (and Mother), and God, the Son, in the same way they are one. For me, everything else is detail – pieces of various puzzles that all attempt to fill the same framework or images on mosaics that we create in order to become a “true and living” replica of God.

I see the good news as the idea that such efforts to become godly replicas are not pointless or in vain – that these mortal caterpillar exteriors we inhabit really will be shed at some point, and we will emerge as the butterflies we were created to be. That requires faith, since, like caterpillars, we don’t get to see the process of metamorphosis that makes us what we aren’t currently (the cocoon process occurring for us after death – theologically phrased as “the spirit world” prior to becoming new, “resurrected” beings), but I believe it is that belief and hope in the unseen (that “faith”) that is the foundation of the gospel Jesus preached – and it is the central “power of godliness” that is mentioned in JSH 1:19 that was denied within the Protestant creeds of Joseph’s time (and still is now).

[Anonymous]

Old-Timer wrote:

At the most fundamental level, I see “the Gospel” as nothing more than the Book of Mormon description: faith (in the Lord, Jesus Christ), repentance, baptism, the gift of the Holy Ghost and enduring to the end – with divine parental love as the underlying principle on which it all hangs. My signature line adds some clarification to each element that makes it non-specific to any particular religion or denomination.

Thanks, Ray. I think I have faith and repentance covered in my statement. The jury is still out on the others. While there must be something to baptism because most Christian churches practice it in some form, I really am not sure on that one yet, although I think it’s likely. Baptism as a symbolic expression of being a follower of Christ and/or as a symbol of being reborn certainly has merit. The gift of the Holy Ghost and endurance are less likely to be part of the core gospel IMO, but are definitely part of church doctrine. I do also believe in divine love, but not in the personal LDS view – it’s more of a “God loved us so he sent his Son” type of general love IMO. I’m really trying to separate church doctrine and teaching from pure gospel, not that I am opposed to church teaching but the two are separate and distinct.

Quote:

I see the Gospel in its simplest definition as the “good news” Jesus preached – and that good news is centered on one concept:

Quote:

I am a child of God.

I do definitely believe in the “good news” and I suppose that good news to me is the teachings of Christ that we can all be forgiven through his atoning sacrifice and that we will all be resurrected as a result of Christ’s resurrection. I am a child of God in that he is the creator – I am not sure how literal that statement is meant to be, and it may be part of the good news but is not the good news itself.

Quote:

I believe every truly unique doctrine within Mormonism, especially compared with Protestantism, derives from that concept, and I believe the zenith of that teaching of the good news is the Intercessory Prayer in John 17 – that all of us can become one with GOD, the Father (and Mother), and God, the Son, in the same way they are one. For me, everything else is detail – pieces of various puzzles that all attempt to fill the same framework or images on mosaics that we create in order to become a “true and living” replica of God.

This is a little more vague than I need to be at the moment, and again, I am trying to separate Mormonism from the pure gospel. I don’t necessarily disbelieve LDS doctrine, but I need to put it in its place.I do believe the goal of the gospel is for us to return to live with God, and to an extent be like him (in the same way we grow to be like our earthly parents). Clearly, as Hillel pointed out, there is much commentary.

Quote:

I see the good news as the idea that such efforts to become godly replicas are not pointless or in vain – that these mortal caterpillar exteriors we inhabit really will be shed at some point, and we will emerge as the butterflies we were created to be. That requires faith, since, like caterpillars, we don’t get to see the process of metamorphosis that makes us what we aren’t currently (the cocoon process occurring for us after death – theologically phrased as “the spirit world” prior to becoming new, “resurrected” beings), but I believe it is that belief and hope in the unseen (that “faith”) that is the foundation of the gospel Jesus preached – and it is the central “power of godliness” that is mentioned in JSH 1:19 that was denied within the Protestant creeds of Joseph’s time (and still is now).

Again, a bit more vague than what I need to be right now. I do have faith, and I believe faith is necessary for salvation, but I’m not so sure that there are not many teachings of men mingled in with today’s LDS church teachings and doctrines, hence the search for pure gospel.

Thanks for your input – I will ponder what you have said.

[Anonymous]

I believe the Gospel is the good news that Jesus Christ died to pay for our sin and was resurrected the third day. We become his children through faith in him.

To me this is the basic truth of the Gospel. There are ordinances, principles and extras that most Christian churches add to the Gospel. But I think most Christians believe that the good news is salvation through Jesus.

DarkJedi, I am somewhat at the same place as you are in my beliefs. I guess the big question for me is the prophets as part of the Gospel. I absolutely believe there are inspired leaders in the LDS church. But I’ve seen and heard pastors and other Christians who are just as inspiring and just as wise. I’m sure there are non-Christians who are inspired and wise.

To be a part of the Gospel I think we need to have faith in Christ and take our spiritual journey from there. I hope he will let me know if I need to return to the LDS church to be saved. That is the only reason I would go back, if it is really his only true church. I don’t know yet, I’m still praying for an answer.

Ray, I’m wondering what you meant that Protestantism still denies godliness within. Thanks

[Anonymous]

DJ, if you haven’t already, look at my signature line. Changing the exact wording of faith, repentance, baptism, the GoftHG and enduring to the end is instructive for me, since we often miss the real, core meanings when we simply repeat the words in their Mormon context.

[Anonymous]

Old-Timer wrote:

DJ, if you haven’t already, look at my signature line. Changing the exact wording of faith, repentance, baptism, the GoftHG and enduring to the end is instructive for me, since we often miss the real, core meanings when we simply repeat the words in their Mormon context.

My apologies, Ray. Yes, I did read your signature line and I do recognize those things as universal. There are, in fact, truths that I recognize to be universal which are found among various religions and belief systems of the world, and your signature line does sum them up very concisely.

I was actually replying to your post specifically as it relates to the gospel of Jesus Christ which does contain these universal truths and which is the gospel of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. I certainly agree with you that people often (almost always) parrot that which they hear in church without thinking about it and what it really means. I also understand where you’re coming from in changing the exact wording – but I do need to use some exact wording right now, and I really need it to be the gospel in the context of Mormonism in order to be able to sort it out. Admittedly it is a little like trying to get the egg back out of the cake – but I need to do as much as I can for myself at this point.

Please understand I mean no disrespect.

[Anonymous]

Haven wrote:

I believe the Gospel is the good news that Jesus Christ died to pay for our sin and was resurrected the third day. We become his children through faith in him.

To me this is the basic truth of the Gospel. There are ordinances, principles and extras that most Christian churches add to the Gospel. But I think most Christians believe that the good news is salvation through Jesus.

DarkJedi, I am somewhat at the same place as you are in my beliefs. I guess the big question for me is the prophets as part of the Gospel. I absolutely believe there are inspired leaders in the LDS church. But I’ve seen and heard pastors and other Christians who are just as inspiring and just as wise. I’m sure there are non-Christians who are inspired and wise.

To be a part of the Gospel I think we need to have faith in Christ and take our spiritual journey from there. I hope he will let me know if I need to return to the LDS church to be saved. That is the only reason I would go back, if it is really his only true church. I don’t know yet, I’m still praying for an answer.

Ray, I’m wondering what you meant that Protestantism still denies godliness within. Thanks

Yes, Haven, it would appear that you and I are in similar places. Part of me says the gospel of Jesus Christ is all I need, but I need to understand exactly what that is before I know that for sure. There’s another part that does make me wonder if indeed the LDS church is the only path. If baptism is necessary, are LDS baptisms the only valid ones? What about the temple? Is the priesthood some actual power or is it just authority or agency, and is that which we hold actually from God? Those questions all have to wait until I know the answer to my other questions relating to the gospel itself.

[Anonymous]

I currently have a very narrow definition of “The Gospel”–as has been already said, I believe the Gospel is the “good news” of the Atonement, plus the “doctrine of Christ” (faith, repentance, baptism, HG, enduring to the end). I don’t like the broad usage of the term used by many in the Church to encompass every teaching and practice of the current Church. This is mainly because so many of these teachings and practices work for some people, but not all, and they are fleeting and fallible. I believe that I can trust in the more narrow definition of “Gospel”, and build my foundation on it. That’s my 2 cents.

[Anonymous]

DarkJedi, you said that the roles and attributes of the Godhead don’t completely align with LDS teachings. What do you mean by that? I always thought they did.

[Anonymous]

Is it possible to be a Christian in the sense of simply trying to follow the teachings of Christ? Do I have to subscribe to the supernatural element (resurrection, atonement, etc?)

Can I just say that I believe that Christ was a great teacher who taught that we should love and serve one another? Can I follow Jesus the way others follow Buddha?

[Anonymous]

Absolutely. Lots of people feel that way. It certainly isn’t Mormon orthodoxy, but the meaning can be almost identical, if you see lots of things as purely symbolic.

[Anonymous]

turinturambar wrote:

I currently have a very narrow definition of “The Gospel”–as has been already said, I believe the Gospel is the “good news” of the Atonement, plus the “doctrine of Christ” (faith, repentance, baptism, HG, enduring to the end). I don’t like the broad usage of the term used by many in the Church to encompass every teaching and practice of the current Church. This is mainly because so many of these teachings and practices work for some people, but not all, and they are fleeting and fallible. I believe that I can trust in the more narrow definition of “Gospel”, and build my foundation on it. That’s my 2 cents.

I’m guessing my definition may in some ways be narrower than yours. I’m looking into this “doctrine of Christ” you mention – I haven’t ever heard it called that. Doctrine and the gospel are different in my view (doctrine being more associated with a church), and whether you call it doctrine or not I’m not really sure the GotHG and endurance are part of the gospel in my view. I know I asked and I am considering them because I asked, but at this point I’m not sure they are not doctrine or simply part of what I consider universal truth, in which case the GotHG is too specific. I do appreciate your two cents, thank you.

[Anonymous]

TheDoctor13 wrote:

Is it possible to be a Christian in the sense of simply trying to follow the teachings of Christ? Do I have to subscribe to the supernatural element (resurrection, atonement, etc?)

Can I just say that I believe that Christ was a great teacher who taught that we should love and serve one another? Can I follow Jesus the way others follow Buddha?

Yes you can, Doc. You can certainly believe whatever you like. I am a believer in the 11th AoF (We claim the privilege of worshiping Almighty God according to the dictates of our own conscience, and allow all men the same privilege, let them worship how, where, or what they may) and I believe it applies to members and nonmembers alike. That certainly might shake some members’ trees, but it does say all men. In my crisis, I was once at a point where I did believe that which you state. I had gone to the extreme of perhaps believing there was no God, hence no Christ. When I came to the conclusion that there is indeed a God, I could also consider whether there was a Jesus and what his role might have been. For a time I took the Muslim view of Jesus as a prophet/teacher. However, I now do believe in the resurrection and atonement, and I do believe they are part of the gospel of Jesus Christ.

I’m not ignoring you IloveChrist77, I just don’t have time to answer you at the moment.

[Anonymous]

I don’t believe in the temple ordinances as the basis for salvation in the church anymore. The first principles and ordinance are important, but only to the extent to encourage good character and service to mankind in general. I think the temple ceremonies have meaning to people who buy into them, but I don’t have a strong belief that the ordinances themselves are necessary for salvation, even when coupled with righteous living.

There is too much reference to the organizational church in them as you get to the temple — requiring you to participate in church ordinances eventually that are egocentric to the church (pledging that eventually, you will give all you possess to the church, for example — not to worthy causes, but specificially, the to THE CHURCH).

Also If you progress in the church, you eventually end up being asked to make covenants to make huge sacrifices of your time and talent FOR THE CHURCH. This leads to the cultural belief that if you aren’t serving in the church, you are doing something wrong. I don’t believe that is what God intended. Service to mankind is what matters, not only to the institutional church. And I think these covenants create room for abuse by church leaders both locally and at the head of the church. This is evidenced by church leaders who revoke TR’s over home teaching or not attending your home ward (I have seen both), or leaders like BKP who write The Unwritten Order of things which essentially removes individual agency regarding serving in callings with personal regard for your circumstances…It is also evidenced by the belief that because we are indebted to God for all things (King Benjamin’s discourse), priesthood leaders do not need to provide servant leadership or even appreciation to the members who serve diligently.

Nor do I believe that ordinances or policies that attach immediate punishments for non-compliance are consistent with our own scriptures. As D&C 121 indicates, the priesthood should not exert compulsion on the souls of men. As soon as they do the heavens withdraw themselves and Amen to the priesthood authority of that man. Instead, persuasion and other Christlike virtues must be exerted to help people participate WILLINGLY. Only then will the ‘kingdom “flow unto you without compulsory means”. This means, to me, that any commitment or TR question that means you are not entitled to immediate privileges unless you comply, is inconsistent with DC 121.

As DC 121 says, “the kingdom of God flows until you with or without compulsory means” has a specific meaning to me. It means that leaders get their home teaching report without forcing people, people attend the Ward in which they live because they choose to, they clean the chapel because they accept an invitation, not because they are assigned. And people pay tithing voluntarily — not because of fear of church -imposed immediate consequences. Consequences such as being forbidden to go to the temple to see their children’s wedding or perform a Melchizedek Priesthood ordinance also represent immediate consequences that I don’t agree with.

Last of all, I believe the church violates the principle that the key to the 99 is the 1. They implement it the other way around. If someone sticks out as unorthodox, the culture knocks them down or ostracizes them in certain ways. And it can happen fast — nullifying 30 years of being a good solider in one foul swoop. In our church, the key to the 99 is the 99. The one is to be knocked down and placed on the fringe as soon as they are lost. But the irony is that if if you are TOTALLY lost, they are more likely to invest effort into you in a one-shot visit, but if you are active and struggling, they tend to ostracize.

So, strip away some of these items, and you are left with the gospel.

For me, it’s righteous living and development of your personal character, and strength of the transmission of these character qualities to your family that matters. To the extent that the partial rendition of Christ’s life and teachings in the Bible, the Book of Mormon, and current scripture and talks do that, I’m all for it. Unfortunately, going to church involves a heavy filtration process and nullification of much of what our children hear at churchl that is extraneous to the pure gospel.

[Anonymous]

When I hear “Gospel” what comes to my mind is the sermon on the mount, and any “truth” that can be properly demonstrated or verified.

[Author]

Posts