Pretty convenient that I left this tab open, cause I always have something to say. This morning, I was thinking about William McClelan from the early days of the church, and how much his stories effect my perspectives. How so? Well, I was referring to the time he had questions that he never wrote down, but asked for a revelation from Joseph Smith and every question was answered perfectly to his curious mind. It was said that most early saints were skeptically curious, and in his very own words William said that in every reasonable way, he knew that joseph truly was a prophet of God. And this morning, it reminded me of a similar time I asked a thing seriously doubting the security of popularly accepted "secure channels". I decided that if things were actually as I had been taught, no unclean thing or nefarious purpose could exist in the temple, which was a point of differentiation from the rest of the world. but, I had been warned by a well-meaning person once that I ought not trust someone just because they have a temple recommend, my own father had explained to me that it is not the stake presidency's job to determine a person's acceptability to the Lord, but be more of a mirror to the person to let them see if they find themselves worthy I used to believe they had some supernatural power to discern things, and maybe they do (I am not convinced that they do not), but a person may claim to be worthy but not be... let it be said that the reason temples are sacred (not secret) is because there are things that need to be ready for like taking a class spoken in a language that you know nothing of, a prerequisite is given of having a recommend to enter the temple. If someone entered unprepared, it would profit them nothing, and may even be a thing that condemns them, so, like dad said, the individual must determine if they are ready.
Ok, huge side-track. The point I intended to make was that I decided if I truly wanted a secure channel to Heavenly Father, then I ought to go to the temple, then I could know that my answer was true. It was answered in a way perfect for me to understand, and yet seem commonplace to everyone else. But, anyhow, this morning, I really started to think bout who I trusted and who I didn't and in particular how secure prayers are. I had not thought of that previously.
Further, William McClellan ended up leaving the church even though he KNEW with all his thinking, satisfactorily, that Joseph Smith was a prophet. It seems then he knew that the church he established was true, etc. etc. I realized that simply knowing mentally is not enough. I have come at this conclusion many ways. It is extremely important. Knowing by intelligence is good, Knowing by emotions and feelings is good, too, but both are absolutely required.
An institute instructor shared a story about something a seminary teacher told him when my teacher walked in on his classroom preparation...The preparing seminary teacher was planning his lesson on the three types of testimony. And I understand the least what the third actually is, but I likely understand it without realizing it yet. It was referred to as a testimony of the hand. It is a way to know something is true by doing it (like the law of tithing).
No comments:
Post a Comment