Advertisement
priest : A person having the authority or power to perform and administer religious rights.
priesthood: the power and authority delegated by God to act in his name for the salvation of his children, including the performance of sacred rights and ordinances, and the performance of miracles.
how is it that a woman cannot qualify?
priesthood: the power and authority delegated by God to act in his name for the salvation of his children, including the performance of sacred rights and ordinances, and the performance of miracles.
how is it that a woman cannot qualify?
Advertisement
Advertisement
-
-
Re: priesthood
Fri, February 23, 2007 - 7:22 AMin the lds church, women do not, and cannot hold the preisthood, unlike 12 year old boys. if all the men wee out of town, the women would be unable to have sacrament, or be able to bless their babies.
of course, unless women are sealed to a man, they cannot enter into the celestial kingdom, oh wait, there is a little bit more,
even if you are sealed, and your husband does not make it to the celestial kingdom, or he decides that he has enough virgin brides already, he can choose to not take his wife into the celestial kingdom.
oh yes, in heaven, women must share their husbands, because in the celestial kingdom, everyone, or a significant amount of the saints, are polygamists
-
-
Re: priesthood
Fri, February 23, 2007 - 12:18 PMReally the best person to ask would be the bishop of your ward. Justin, as good of a man as he is, also has issues with the church. And is only going to give you only the information that seems to support his point of view. My point being there's always more then one side to any issue. -
-
Re: priesthood
Fri, February 23, 2007 - 2:08 PMsilent says:Really the best person to ask would be the bishop of your ward. Justin,
Justin responds:
do you mean the bishop has some sort of training or expertise in handling apostates?
do you have issues with the church?, if you assume that the bishop has issues with the church, does that mean you also have difficulties?
I doubt i will ever talk to a bishop for the rest of my life, unless he asks for help in leaving the lds church.
as i am going to be a father soon, I worry about mormonism and how to handle it with my parents and my child, all i have to do is tell my child the truth about mormonism, and i won't have to worry about them becoming mormon, i don't have to make anything up, I can even document it all.
I can't wait until the day i get my mothers very old copy of the d&c and see for myself how all of these revelations have been changed, and pass it on to my children.
-
-
Re: priesthood
Wed, February 28, 2007 - 8:44 PMWhere do you get these strange ideas from? But then, anyone who belongs to such tribes as "Bay Area BDSM Polyamory," and "Bondage a Go-Go" is certainly not at all serious in his /her search for truth. It appears that you are only here to cause discontent and hatred, so I cannot take you seriously at all. You seem much to caught up in your own selfish pleasure (and pain) to be able to actually share anything worthwhile here. Perhaps I am wrong. I only hope you can somehow give your future child much, much more than you were able to get from your own parents. -
-
Re: priesthood
Thu, March 1, 2007 - 3:53 PMMich asks:Where do you get these strange ideas from?
justin responds:can you be a little more specific?
If you cannot take me seriously, then why are you responding to me?
Why are you judging me, at the very least, trying to discredit my discusion and thoughts by trying to infer that i am not serious about searching for truth?
-
-
-
Re: priesthood
Tue, March 6, 2007 - 8:05 AMIs this is place for talking about the gospel or is just a bunch of LDS Haters who want to criticize?
I've been reading some of the discussions and I'm disappointed.
:( -
-
Re: priesthood
Tue, March 6, 2007 - 1:40 PMI believe it was designed as a place to discuss all things LDS. But very often the haters seem to be the most vocal group. It's a shame, but I think most mainstream LDS just don't have time to debate round and round the same issues. -
-
Re: priesthood
Thu, March 8, 2007 - 11:09 AMThank you, Silent Knight.
I know I'm very busy with school and activities. Couldn't tribe be a wonderful place to fellowship people who don't know anything about the church?
We were challenged to find new people to talk to about the Gospel, and it was my idea to find an internet place to do that since I'm not on a mission and everyone I know in my life is already LDS. -
-
Re: priesthood
Thu, March 8, 2007 - 1:48 PMI imagine fellowshipping online is more difficult then in person. There's often times an emotional disconnect with online chatting. Though actually it might be a nice introduction to the topic being that there is less of a perception of immediate pressure in online conversations.
Not a bad idea
-
-
-
-
-
Re: priesthood
Wed, February 28, 2007 - 8:30 PMTo begin with, a less simplistic definition of Priesthood power is in order. The power of the priesthood is to "bind in heaven what is bound on earth," and to "loose in heaven what is loosed on earth." (paraphrasing from the Doctrine & Covenants.)
Females, as a separate entity apart from males, have no more ability to hold or exercise priesthood authority than males do in becoming pregnant and bearing children. To ask the question why women do not "qualify" for priesthood office only shows a profound lack of understanding regarding the earthly and eternal roles of the male and female aspects of Man. Exercising priesthood authority is not something a woman could do by herself any more so than a man could become pregnant by himself and bear his own child. The Apostle Peter clearly taught that neither the man nor the woman is complete without the other. It's like the relationship of hydrogen and oxygen to water. Water simply cannot exist without *both* gases being present, according to the necessary pre-conditions that will result in the formation of the liquid H2O. Male and female, as separate beings, can never become whole (i.e. "holy") apart from each other, and cannot, as discreet identities, perform the function of the other no more so that hydrogen can assume the properties of oxygen.
Together they are Man. The child of the man is every bit as much a reflection of him as it is her, even though she is the one who did almost all of the obvious work. So it is with priesthood authority; it is just a much a reflection of the righteousness of the female even though it appears that the male does all the work. Each sex, as a discreet entity, is called upon to sacrifice in their own manner, according to their own natural constitutions.
The ability to bodily form and create a living being within oneself is the most obviously awesome power I can think of. Nothing truly compares to it. Woman is the "mother of all life." What more awesome power would any being want?
Should I, as a male, petition Congress and church officials because I am somehow slighted in sharing this awesome privilege? Would any woman trade such power for the privilege of breaking and blessing bread, or baptizing, or laying on hand to bless the sick? Whatever for? -
-
Re: priesthood
Wed, February 28, 2007 - 8:36 PMso can women get into the celestial kingdom without being married? -
-
Re: priesthood > Celestial Kingdom for those who want it
Wed, February 28, 2007 - 8:56 PMAre you truly worried about this?
Any daughter or son of God who is able to live the full measure of truth that they have been given during this life will be able to attain the Celestial Kingdom. It's really pretty simple. There is no rocket science or secret handshakes to all this.
Attaining the Celestial Kingdom is not like getting admitted into some prestigious club or disco joint. No celebrity status is required ... or desired.
Who do you hang out with in this life? That's pretty much who'll you'll be hangin' with in the next. Water seeks its' own level; so do human beings. You end up going -- we *all* end up going -- precisely where we *really want* to go. -
-
Re: priesthood > Celestial Kingdom for those who want it
Wed, February 28, 2007 - 9:19 PM<we *all* end up going - precisely where we *really want* to go>
i like that idea.
so is the celestial kingdom a place or a state of mind?
I have to belive that there are many different ideas of what we(all righteous people) *really want* heaven/the celestial kingdom to be.
Mine is full of sex, drugs and rock n roll and lots of liesure time. I don't know that yours is. So are there multiple heavens/celestial kingdoms? It would seem that there have to be if we're all( all righteous people) going there -
-
Re: priesthood > Celestial Kingdom > Kingdom(s) ?
Wed, February 28, 2007 - 10:23 PMMultiple kingdons? Well, D&C *does* mention that "there is no kingdom where there is no space, and there is no space where there is no kingdom ..." Like string theory, I suppose, which contemplates anywhere from 11 to innumerable universes ... ;D
<sigh> Jamie, you are less than half as clever as you seem to think you are. I was well aware that your main interest was to bait and trap me in semantics before I composed the first word of my replies to this thread. I also pondered that if you were really having so much fun in the other tribes you belong to, you wouldn't be wasting any time here at all. Therefor, I reasoned, there might be a child in you still (as there in is me) that, despite himself, has a secret wish that during one of your visits here to unleash a little sarcasm, mockery and mayhem you might actually find a gem or two worth some serious contemplation.
You are spot-on correct in this - each child of the Creator has his or her agency to define themselves however they wish, and call it whatever they want to call it. You get to claim it, you get to name it, and you get to live with your own creation, just as God is even now living with His own creation (you and I, amongst everything else).
Life truly is a state of mind. "Even as a man thinketh," Jesus taught, "so is he."
As for celestial kingdoms, tell you what ... you go where you think you'll experience the most joy. I'll go where I think I'll experience the most joy. Fair enough? You can call wherever you end up anything you wish to call it. If such a place is your "celestial kingdom," fine. I'm happy for you. Do what you want - you've been practicing that for some time now, it seems, and you should be getting pretty good at it by now.
Likewise, I will do pretty much what I want, though it may differ here or there from your idea of a good time (you know - BTDT). We both get to live within the heaven we've created for ourselves, so we both should have no complaints.
The child truly is father of the man (I think Thoreau said that). Both you and I, through our thoughts, beliefs, deeds and actions will end up fathering many children - at least figuratively, and most likely literally as well. Those children will end up truly defining us eternally. You know - the first shall be last, and the last shall be first. What goes around, comes around - heaven or hell or something somewhere in between. You can call it whatever you think sounds good and fitting.
As for you or I being being "righteous" people well, you can put any old shoe in an oven, but that don't mean its a steak. I'll just take one day at a time and hope for the best.
All my best to you, friend! I've got to get some sleep now since I must be awake at 6:00 a.m. tomorrow. Got to take my daughter to work. -
-
Re: priesthood > Celestial Kingdom > Kingdom(s) ?
Thu, March 1, 2007 - 12:33 PMright on!
You obviously have a gift for putting things in prospective. Your comments were very well put.
Thanks -
-
Re: priesthood > Celestial Kingdom > Kingdom(s) ?
Wed, March 7, 2007 - 1:04 AMThank you! You are most kind. I have enjoyed several of your remarks, as well.
-
-
Re: priesthood > Celestial Kingdom > Kingdom(s) ?
Thu, March 1, 2007 - 4:05 PMmich:As for celestial kingdoms, tell you what ... you go where you think you'll experience the most joy. I'll go where I think I'll experience the most joy. Fair enough? You can call wherever you end up anything you wish to call it. If such a place is your "celestial kingdom," fine. I'm happy for you. Do what you want -
Justin Responds:
As an apostate that questions the validity of the mormon faith, and has been ex-communicated, will I go to the celestial kingdom too? and since we are talking, does that mean we will meet in the afterlife?
-
Re: priesthood > Celestial Kingdom > Kingdom(s) ?
Thu, March 8, 2007 - 11:14 AMWow. Do you mind if I print this out and tape it up where I can read it? I really feel like a shoe sometimes and hope I'll grow and strive to become a worthy child of our Heavenly Parents. -
-
Re: priesthood > Celestial Kingdom > Kingdom(s) ?
Thu, March 8, 2007 - 1:49 PMwhy do you feel like a shoe sometimes? -
-
Re: priesthood > Celestial Kingdom > Kingdom(s) ?
Thu, March 8, 2007 - 7:42 PMLike O'Golly said, "As for you or I being being "righteous" people well, you can put any old shoe in an oven, but that don't mean its a steak. I'll just take one day at a time and hope for the best. "
There are times when I feel like I haven't been as worthy as I should be .. . when I've slacked off on daily prayers or after I've watched a movie that I know I shouldn't have. There are times when I feel farther from the Lord than I should. But, when I'm going to church and having FHE and reading the scriptures and praying . . . and then I feel much better, not like an old leather shoe, but instead I feel happy and good about myself.
You know?
Anyways, it was a good comparison. -
-
This is the maximum depth. Additional responses will not be threaded.
Re: priesthood > Celestial Kingdom > Kingdom(s) ?
Fri, March 9, 2007 - 11:46 AMI think we all get that way from time to time. I think those times help us to appreciate the good feelings when we are about the Lords work.
-
-
-
-
-
Re: priesthood > Celestial Kingdom for those who want it
Thu, March 1, 2007 - 3:48 PMJamie said: so is the celestial kingdom a place or a state of mind?
Justin Replies: according to the teachings i was given as a child, the celestial kingdom is a physical place, like Kolob, that only the faithful and worthy members of the mormon church who have gone through the temple (special underwear and secret names and handshakes)can enter.
and unmarried women CANNOT enter, and they cannot have their own planet, unless of course, someone decides to take multiple wives, aka... sloppy seconds. this also leads to an interesting thing, if you are a woman, married in the temple to your husband, and he decides in the afterlife that you are too much of a b***h, he has the "agency" or free choice to not pull you into the celestial kingdom, across the veil.
and please, if someone knows different, please correct me, I am merely going by memory.
-
-
Re: priesthood > Celestial Kingdom for those who want it
Sun, March 4, 2007 - 1:51 PMThe question is, how badly do you want it and how faithful are you willing to be to get it?
Women qualify for all blessings men qualify for. This is not a two tier system.
Women receive instruction and make covenants in the temple. They are not asked to do any less than their male counterparts. A faithful latter day saint woman is in fact just as eligible as a faithful lds man. Opportunities for entrance into the presence of the Lord are defined and determined by man (or woman's) ability, desire and willingness to honor the covenants made with the Him in the temple (yes names, garments etc), marital status aside.
I should point out that it is my understanding that an unmarried woman has more of a chance of attaining celestial glory than an unmarried man. She may be invited by another p/h holder to cross the veil if she is not called by one who is her own; he, on the other hand, is kind of stuck.
-
Re: priesthood > Celestial Kingdom for those who want it
Wed, March 7, 2007 - 1:50 AM<< Justin Replies: ... (special underwear and secret names and handshakes) can enter ... "sloppy seconds" ... too much of a b***h ... to not pull you into the celestial kingdom. >>
You complained earlier that I didn't take your comments seriously, and this is why. Your disdain of everything I believe in fairly reeks from your comments. I can't help but reason that you are not interested in receiving answers so much as you are in debating and defaming anything associated with the gospel of the Church of Jesus Christ. You seem to delight in mocking the beliefs of those who joined this forum for genuine fellowship, using descriptive language that you well know is quite offensive.
Your language and attitude frankly betray your claim to be "seeking truth."
Nevertheless, not being familiar with your personal history, I suppose I may be in error in so judging your motives.
All questions are capable of answers -- if you really want an answer and not just fodder to continue a debate with someone. It has been my personal experience that cynicism gets you pretty much nowhere with the Lord. If you want honest answers, you have to ask in an honest manner; the Lord, that is, not me -- because ultimately He is the only source we all have. My posts here are nothing more than educated opinions I have arrived at after asking all these same questions you're asking and more.
I'll respond to your comments in a separate post to this thread.
-
Re: priesthood > Celestial Kingdom for those who want it
Wed, March 7, 2007 - 3:00 AMJustin Responds:
< As an apostate that questions the validity of the mormon faith, and has been ex-communicated, will I go to the celestial kingdom too? and since we are talking, does that mean we will meet in the afterlife? >
You will go precisely where you wish to go. If you wish to attain the Celestial Kingdom, then you'll become a celestial being through the decisions and actions you take during this life. The agency is *yours* alone - not someone else's.
Think of it in the same terms you would if you wanted to go party and get stoned. In order to "party" with certain friends, you are expected to socialize and behave in such a manner that is acceptable to the group you have elected to be with. Your speech patterns, verbiage, body language, dress, and etceteras you will modify and adapt to the social group you have chosen to be with. In addition, if you want to get high, it is necessary you partake of your intoxicant of choice; a ritual that if you refuse, you won't be able to experience the desired effect.
You do all these things not because someone forced you to, but because it was what you *desired,* and you simply conformed your behaviour to attain the desired affect. Likewise, nobody on earth or in heaven will force you to the Celestial realms, nor will they by force or fraud keep you from such a glory.
When a friend invites you to a party, he is describing a place and social group you can go and participate with as long as you conform your behavior to the expectations and ability of the group and place they are going to party at. If you show up for a kegger dressed in a suit or evening gown expecting to discuss Mozart and classical music, you are not going to get very far; i.e. you are not very "worthy" of attendance, are you? You can't fly airplanes in the sea, and you can't play football very well on a basketball court.
Likewise, when the Lord invites you to live a celestial glory, it is because he thinks you are capable of being a celestial being. HE NEVER WOULD HAVE EXTENDED THE INVITATION if he didn't think you were able to attend -- no more so than your friend would ever have invited you to a party if he thought you would show up and be a bore. At this "party" there are social norms you will either feel comfortable with or uncomfortable with just as you would at any earthly gathering; in addition you will be required to "partake" of such rituals as baptism in order to fully appreciate the desired effect /affect.
You were excommunicated because you, in effect, replied to such an "invitation," through your actions and behaviour, that you were not interested in "attending" a celestial "party." But that *doesn't* mean you shan't be asked again; it is totally and completely up to you.
You decide. If you don't want to live the life of a celestial being, than you won't be at all happy in the Celestial Kingdom, and that should be good news to you. If you don't like hanging out with well-meaning Mormons in this life, you won't like hanging out with them any more in the next.
Shall we meet there? you asked. Hard to say. We met here, didn't we? At least "virtually," and we belong to quite different social structures and live many hundreds of miles apart.
When I was an enlisted soldier in the Army, I had a friend who was an officer. I was an enlisted physical therapy aid with the rank of private first class, and he was a registered physical therapist with the rank of lieutenant. We were both about the same age - he was only four or five years older than I. The biggest difference between us was that he had graduated college with a six-year degree, and I had dropped out of college. We both joined the Army, and wound up being assigned to Darnall Army Hospital, Fort Hood, Texas.
I saw him everyday at the workplace in the hospital clinic we both worked at. He even invited me to his home one day for supper, since he was married and lived in the officers' housing area, and I was single living in the barracks. But there were events, places, and things he could do or go to that I could not. I could not attend functions at the officers club, or qualify for an officer's billet. I could not perform certain therapy treatments due to to my lack of education and training. I was limited in my scope of abilities based on my own accomplishments prior to joining the military and arriving at Fort Hood. That *didn't* mean I wasn't busy doing work that was both rewarding and necessary.
I think it is highly probable that this same sociality that differentiates the celestial kingdom and the "lower" kingdoms is very similar to the same sociality that differentiates enlisted soldiers from officers in the Army.
When I got off active duty, I joined the National Guard and enrolled in ROTC. In four years I was commissioned a lieutenant in the U.S. Army. I attained the rank of captain before my Gulf War disabilities obliged me to leave the Guard. My point here is that I *chose* to do the things that would allow me to advance to the next "kingdom" (if you will) in the structure of the United States military. I rose from the rank of sergeant in the non-commissioned officer corps (I had been promoted during the interim) to the rank of captain in the medical service corps.
In the same manner, you could change your course as well. The choice is yours. Choose that which gives you the most joy and sense of well-being. It is no one's place to decide that but yourself.
So why are you here?
I will address the male /female thing in the next post to this thread tomorrow. Too late now.
-
-
-
-
-
Re: priesthood
Thu, March 1, 2007 - 4:01 PMmich: It's like the relationship of hydrogen and oxygen to water. Water simply cannot exist without *both* gases being present, according to the necessary pre-conditions that will result in the formation of the liquid H2O. Male and female, as separate beings, can never become whole (i.e. "holy") apart from each other, and cannot, as discreet identities, perform the function of the other no more so that hydrogen can assume the properties of oxygen.
Justin Responds: so, from this metaphor, it would be impossible for a man to hold the preisthood without the woman to "im-preisthood" him?
Mich: The Apostle Peter clearly taught that neither the man nor the woman is complete without the other.
Justin asks: can you please tell me where in peter this is located? and have any of the modern, polygamist or non-polygamist prophets taught this either?
-
-
Re: priesthood
Tue, March 20, 2007 - 4:21 PMA women was given the right, and privlig to breed, to give life. As a second prize, men got the priesthood.
So when a man can have a baby, women can hold the prieshood. But women it seems want both? -
-
Re: priesthood
Sat, April 28, 2007 - 9:30 PMWhy would a woman with the infinite responsibilities women have to do these days, want something as responsible and demanding as the Priesthood.
As it was stated above, and reiterated to me (by a man) women are sacred. They are the only gender who can bring forth life (until the scientists can achieve more positive results..then who knows.. ) Women are born sacred... most women have just forgotten that..
Children can be looked upon by either gender as a tremendous blessing or a chore.. If looked children are looked upon by the mother as a blessing.. why then would she seek to add to her responsiblities by taking away from her children and taking on the role of the father of her children? If looked upon as a burden or added chore.. why then would a woman want the added labor of performing the priesthood responsibilites to add to her already burdened list of chores..
Either way.. I can see no reason why a woman would want the added responsibilities of having the Priesthood.. Men are away from home often enough trying to fulfill the responsibilities of this great wonder.. and those men who are communicative to their wives help them understand what is necessary to render the Priesthood. It is a great responsibility, a great honor to have and hold.. not all men understand what it actually means to hold something this sacred..
Like in all things.. we have become numb over the years as to what is sacred.. what is a miracle.. what is to have meaning and what is trivial.. Birth even today, is still a miracle.. to have someone love you.. is a miracle.. To hold someones love.. Love is sacred.. Trust and honor are sacred.. but they are all taken for granted..
We are each saturated with so much violence and inundated with media, tv, radio and numerous other sources of things that mock that which should be sacred, that ppl in general tend to block out or desensitise what used to be sacred in the times when the Priesthood was first passed down..
-