"Worthiness"...

[Ma'ake]

Here's something I've never understood:

When I grew up in the church there was a huge emphasis on being worthy... worthy to be baptized, receive the gift of the holy ghost, worthy to hold the priesthood, worthy to get & keep your testimony, etc.

So though time we know some prophets have been... well, "characters", certainly not what we today would categorize as "worthy".

Once a leader, (obstensively) chosen by God, does the worthiness requirement become secondary? If a patriach is not worthy, does he still tap into the spirit to accomplish his job? Likewise for prophets, apostles, etc?

When a litmus test is whether or not a member has used coffee or tea, while (some) leaders above them are (sometimes) misbehaving on a whole different scale... it seems to me this worthiness requirement might be mostly a way to keep the flock in shape, on the straight & narrow, with there being a separate standard applied to leadership, or at least a mysterious, sketchy explanation of how their lack of worthiness doesn't diminish their roles (which require the spirit) as leaders.

Thoughts?

[Zulu451]

Originally Posted by Ma'ake

Here's something I've never understood:

When I grew up in the church there was a huge emphasis on being worthy... worthy to be baptized, receive the gift of the holy ghost, worthy to hold the priesthood, worthy to get & keep your testimony, etc.

So though time we know some prophets have been... well, "characters", certainly not what we today would categorize as "worthy".

Once a leader, (obstensively) chosen by God, does the worthiness requirement become secondary? If a patriach is not worthy, does he still tap into the spirit to accomplish his job? Likewise for prophets, apostles, etc?

When a litmus test is whether or not a member has used coffee or tea, while (some) leaders above them are (sometimes) misbehaving on a whole different scale... it seems to me this worthiness requirement might be mostly a way to keep the flock in shape, on the straight & narrow, with there being a separate standard applied to leadership, or at least a mysterious, sketchy explanation of how their lack of worthiness doesn't diminish their roles (which require the spirit) as leaders.

Thoughts?

First of all, the New Testament clearly states that the Spirit of the Lord cannot dwell in unholy temples. Now does that mean that the Spirit cannot act upon someone who is out doing whatever to fullfill his will? How do imperfect people who are always committing sin and hence unclean become worthy for the companionship of the Holy Spirit at all? I don't know exactly. This is a concept that I think many Mormons struggle with, where do I stand in relationship to the Lord? Growing up I would want to check the boxes... Word of Wisdom (check)... Chastity (most unfortunately.. check).. and I think that we can get too hung up on checking boxes to determine our own personal worthiness.

What really turned the corner for me and has frankly changed my whole outlook on thing was while reading Mosiah 3:19. This is the famous verse which states that the "natural man is an enemy to God". Here is the verse:

"19 For the natural man is an enemy to God, and has been from the fall of Adam, and will be, forever and ever, unless he yields to the enticings of the Holy Spirit, and putteth off the natural man and becometh a saint through the atonement of Christ the Lord, and becometh as a child, submissive, meek, humble, patient, full of love, willing to submit to all things which the Lord seeth fit to inflict upon him, even as a child doth submit to his father. "

I spent so much time focusing on the list in the latter part of the verse that I didn't focus on the most important part, "yielding to the enticings of the Holy Spirit" which is what it takes to "put off the natural man" and allowing myself to be made "a saint" or sanctified, or clean (worthy) by and through the atonement of Jesus Christ. If you do this then you will become as a child,.... and the rest of the stuff will fall into place.

So in response to your question, how I try to gauge my "worthiness" is where do I stand in relation to the Savior? Am I comming unto Christ in my life (which I see as a continual process). Am I yielding to the enticings of the Holy Spirit and if I am, then I will be made worthy, NOT by my own doings or of my own accord but through the atonement of Christ.

I don't worry about what other people leaders or not are doing. I alone am responsible for my relationship with Jesus Christ, not anyone else. The church is merely a vehicle to facilitate this process, a vehicle full of imperfect people, just like myself, who are struggling in their own rights with overcomming their own "natural man".

[jay santos]

No such thing as human worthiness. There is only one who is worthy. We inherit his worthiness.

[Tex]

Originally Posted by Adam

The "worthiness" requirement doctrine is a false doctrine and one of the most pernicious.

Just to clear up the confusing mess that Adam has made, "worthy" != "without sin."

[jay santos]

Originally Posted by Tex

Just to clear up the confusing mess that Adam has made, "worthy" != "without sin."

What do you think it means?

[BYU71]

Originally Posted by Tex

Just to clear up the confusing mess that Adam has made, "worthy" != "without sin."

That doesn't clear up a thing.

It would clear it up if you tell us what worthy does mean.

[Tex]

Didn't we just have this discussion by proxy? When we talked about how to answer temple worthiness questions?

[jay santos]

Originally Posted by BYU71

That doesn't clear up a thing.

It would clear it up if you tell us what worthy does mean.

Tex has defined it before as commiting his favorite sins = ok. commiting sins he doesn't struggle with = not ok.

[BYU71]

Originally Posted by Tex

Didn't we just have this discussion by proxy? When we talked about how to answer temple worthiness questions?

I wouldn't want to answer the question if I were you either.

[Tex]

Originally Posted by jay santos

Tex has defined it before as commiting his favorite sins = ok. commiting sins he doesn't struggle with = not ok.

Stop lying, santos. It makes you unworthy.

Originally Posted by BYU71

I wouldn't want to answer the question if I were you either.

Yes, you're just licking your chops, aren't ya!