Comments on: Ask a Mormon

By: Rusty Lindquist

Rusty Lindquist — Tue, 13 Oct 2009 18:43:28 +0000

Addison – I’m so glad you miss me. I’ve had an amazing summer, not necessarily amazing in the way you’d expect either. I am working my way back, just recovering from surgery right now, so going a bit slowly. But I’ll start posting again this week! I’ve got so much to tell you.

Sherry – When the Lord established the Law of moses, was it sacred? Certainly. When he came to the earth and fulfilled the law of Moses, and ushered in a new, higher law, uniquely tailored now to the changing (more spiritually evolved) needs of the world, did that mean that the law of Moses was therefore no longer sacred? Nope, just no longer necessary. God’s kingdom is one that progresses “line upon line, precept upon precept”. Such progression doesn’t diminish the value of what preceded it.

As for the sacred nature of the temple ceremony, and therefore the need to not “cast your pearls before swine”, this kind of gatekeeping is not new. The same protection was given to the sacred ceremonies conducted in the temples of the Old Testament.

Thanks for commenting.

By: Sherry Sugar

Sherry Sugar — Sat, 10 Oct 2009 00:40:22 +0000

If the Mormon temple ceremony is so sacred that it’s secret, then why have there been so many changes and deletions throughout the history of it? Did the changed and removed portions just cease to be sacred? Did God change His mind and give them a non-sacred status? And, since those changed or removed parts have been rendered no longer sacred, they must no longer be secret, and Mormons should be free to discuss them between themselves and anyone else.

By: Addison

Addison — Thu, 08 Oct 2009 21:26:17 +0000

Hey Rusty,

I hope your still posting, there hasnt been anything done recently, and I miss your posts.

By: ryan

ryan — Tue, 09 Jun 2009 20:50:33 +0000

PP,

I personally would prefer warm cookies and milk for our sacrament service, but maybe my eye isn’t exactly “single to the glory of God” yet.

By: ryan

ryan — Tue, 09 Jun 2009 20:44:50 +0000

Meghan,

The official name of the church is “The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints.” That’s a mouthful to say–”I’m a memeber of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints” every time. Back in the days of Joseph Smith, the followers were called “Mormons” by opposers of the church. This obviously came from “The Book of Mormon.” The term, “Mormon,” had a negative connotation to it for over a hundred years so members would go by their official name. It was too long so they called themselves, “Latter-Day Saints.” and this now has been shortened to LDS.

Few of us take offense at the term, “Mormon,” anymore, so you may refer to us as that. A more politically correct term would be “LDS”, “Latter-Day Saint”, or if you feel up to it, “a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints.”

It might help to realize that by calling ourselves LDS we are not meaning that we have all acheived sainthood. I have some neighbors . . .

Thanks for the post.

ryan

By: Meghan

Meghan — Sun, 07 Jun 2009 07:36:53 +0000

This website often refers to “Mormons”, which is often what I hear in common parlance amongst non-Mormons, but lately, I’ve only been hearing Mormons referring to themselves, or describing themselves, as LDS. As a Catholic, I believe that only the Pope has the right to name saints, so I would prefer not to refer to Mormons as “saints”, even latter day saints. However, I have Mormon acquaintances and I don’t want to call them something that may be offensive or is generally unpreferred.

Why are people sometimes called Mormons and sometimes called LDS? Is it cool for me to refer to them as Mormons or is that kind of passe? Thanks for your help! I feel a little embarrassed to ask my friends about this.

By: ditchu

ditchu — Tue, 05 May 2009 19:35:18 +0000

When water is avalible it usually is cheeper than any fruit juice. Thus I see the only reason to use Grap juice is to substitute for wine but keeping the look.
Thus if there is a decision to be made between water and grape juice then the choice for grape juice would be more vain, looking at appearances.

However as a student of Floklore, I do see some reasoning to use something that looks like blood as a reminder that it is a substitute for the blood of Christ.

God bless you all,
-D

By: Bob Loblaw

Bob Loblaw — Tue, 16 Dec 2008 03:06:52 +0000

It is important to note that we can use grape juice. Water is used generally, but I have partaken of the sacrament when grape juice is used – as approved by an LDS bishop for a youth conference. The scripture Margaret quoted above said: “that it mattereth not what ye shall eat or what ye shall drink when ye partake of the sacrament, if it so be that ye do it with an eye single to my glory…”

By: ponderingpastor

ponderingpastor — Tue, 16 Dec 2008 02:02:11 +0000

Some Christians use grape juice today for the same reason.

By: Rusty Lindquist

Rusty Lindquist — Sat, 13 Dec 2008 09:27:51 +0000

It’s a great question. When you take the context Margaret provides, and supplement that with the revelation given to Joseph about what we call the “Word of Wisdom”, which essentially entails instructions on how to care for our bodies, which are temples, and includes the counsel to avoid substances like tobacco and alcohol (much like Daniel in the Bible), then it makes more sense why now we simply use water. It’s clean, pure, and healthy.