What is a Temple Recommend?

[Katzpur]

Why, Katz? Seems to me that of someone has repented and knows that God has washed them clean of their sin, they can honestly, from the heart, answer in the affirmative that they are morally clean when the bishop asks that question. Why should further confession to the church and "consequences" imposed by the church be necessary?

Sorry for my delay in answering, Snowbear, but it looks like you got some good explanations from everyone else.

About all I can add to what has already been said is that people do occasionally tend to be even harder on themselves than God is. Sometimes, confessing one's sins to an ecclesiastical leader can lift a weight off a person's shoulders. It would be great if people could always be confident that God had forgiven them, but to have another trusted, respected human being there for them during the repentence process can be helpful. To hear the valued opinion of a Church leader can reassure them that God has put the transgression behind Him, may help the person let go of the past and move forward. When a person is struggling under the weight of guilt, he is not always able to see the situation as clearly as someone who can look at it more objectively.

James 5:16 says, "Confess your faults one to another, and pray one for another, that ye may be healed." I think that this is what we are doing when we confess serious sins to our bishops.

I'll just leave you with one final thought. According to the Doctrine and Covenants 58:42, "Behold, he who has repented of his sins, the same is forgiven, and I, the Lord remember them no more." To me, this is an incredible promise. The Bible may say something similar, but I wasn't able to find it there. I just love the idea that God will not only forgive me of my sins. He will actually forget them. I think that's so important for us to understand.

 

[Snowbear]

....The Bible may say something similar...

It does

I just love the idea that God will not only forgive me of my sins. He will actually forget them. I think that's so important for us to understand.

Yup. This we agree on.
Which is why your doctrine on the matter puzzles me so ....

 

[Katzpur]

It does

Would you mind telling me where? I'd like it for future reference, since I rarely quote from any of the non-biblical LDS scriptures if I can find a similar passage in the Bible.

Yup. This we agree on.

Which is why your doctrine on the matter puzzles me so ....

Now I'm puzzled... This is our doctrine. I'm not sure what part of it you find confusing. God requires us to repent of our sins. Sometimes this requires confession of one's sins. Once the repentence process is complete, God will forgive literally any sin except blasphemy against the Holy Ghost. And when He forgives, He forgets. I think it's a remarkably straightforward teaching.

 

[evearael]

except blasphemy against the Holy Ghost

What qualifies as blaspheming against the Holy Ghost? (Sorry, I'm off topic...)

 

[Katzpur]

What qualifies as blaspheming against the Holy Ghost? (Sorry, I'm off topic...)

This is a question that I've seen debated among Christians of all denominations. The LDS perspective on the subject is that blasphemy against the Holy Ghost involves denying that Jesus Christ is the Son of God and the Savior of the world once a person has received a perfect knowledge of that fact. 99.9999% of all Christians would have to admit that, to one extent or another, they accept the divinity and saving power of Jesus Christ on faith. Jesus has not personally appeared to them stating who He was. Consequently, they are not even candidates for a sin of this severity. Someone who could have potentially blasphemed against the Holy Ghost was the Apostle Peter. He knew, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that Jesus Christ was who He proclaimed He was. Had He denied that fact, he would have blasphemed against the Holy Ghost, the Holy Ghost being the sole means by which anyone comes to know the absolute truth of spiritual things. (Peter did, of course, deny that he knew or was friends with Jesus. But that is not the same thing as denying who He was.) Since we believe that this is the only unforgivable sin, we believe that only a tiny fraction of people who have ever lived will ever be guilty of committing it. Hence, the rest will ultimately accept Christ and will end up in heaven.

 

[Snowbear]

Would you mind telling me where?

Hebrews 10:12 But this Man, after He had offered one sacrifice for sins forever, sat down on the right of God,
13 from then on expecting until His enemies are made His footstool.
14 For by one offering He has perfected forever those who are sanctified.
15 The Holy Spirit also is a witness to us; for after He had said before,
16 "This is the covenant that I will make with them after those days, says the Lord; I will put My Laws into their hearts, and in their minds I will write them,"
17 also He adds, "their sins and their iniquities I will remember no more."
18 Now where remission of these is, there is no more offering for sin.

Isa 43:25 I, I am He who blots out your sins for My own sake, and will not remember your sins.

Isa 65:16 He who blesses himself in the earth shall bless himself in the God of truth. And he who swears in the earth will swear by the God of truth; because the former troubles are forgotten, and because they are hidden from My eyes.

Now I'm puzzled... This is our doctrine. I'm not sure what part of it you find confusing.

I'm talking about the part where even when a person has been forgiven by God (as I noted earlier as well - this means completely washed clean of the sin), s/he still needs approval from a man to be considered worthy enough to be allowed into a temple.

 

[SoyLeche]

I'm talking about the part where even when a person has been forgiven by God (as I noted earlier as well - this means completely washed clean of the sin), s/he still needs approval from a man to be considered worthy enough to be allowed into a temple.

God's not at the door to the Temple to give the yes or no to the question. The church has been given the responsibility to make sure that someone who is not worthy doesn't enter - for their own benefit and for the benefit of others. The system in place isn't perfect, but it's the best us imperfect humans can accomplish.

 

[Katzpur]

Snowbear, thanks for the scripture citations. I'm going to make a note of them.

SoyLeche, thank you for your explanation. It was far better than mine.

 

[DeepShadow]

I'm talking about the part where even when a person has been forgiven by God (as I noted earlier as well - this means completely washed clean of the sin), s/he still needs approval from a man to be considered worthy enough to be allowed into a temple.

As I tried to say in my earlier post, you're comparing apples and oranges. The bishop's approval for a temple recommend has nothing to do with God's forgiveness!If a bishop were to conclude an interview by telling me that God forgave me, I would burst out laughing.

To really understand the purpose of a bishop's interview, you have to understand a little of what goes on inside a temple. Temple worship is done in metaphor, and people need to be living a certain lifestyle in order to "get" the metaphors. A bishop's interview is to discover whether people are living this lifestyle. That's it.

Sound odd? Consider: I didn't truly understand the song "Sixteen Tons" until I learned about the American West and the cruelty of the railroad companies, who scaled their pay and their store prices so as to keep workers perpetually in their debt. This was why the 'wage slaves' would sing out mournfully, "I owe my soul to the company store!" Like many songs and poems written for a particular time period, "Sixteen Tons" requires a foundation of knowledge to create a sensible context.

Likewise, the temple ceremonies require a foundation of knowledge, but they are a participatory metaphor. In order to understand them, one need to first have participated (or be participating in) the foundation metaphors--baptism, confirmation, tithing, godly living, etc. This is the purpose of a bishop's interview.

 

[Snowbear]

Thanks for taking the time to explain this for me, Soy.... I might actually start understanding this some day

Soooo... what you're saying is (I think???) that being allowed into the temple really has nothing to do with BEING sin free (forgiven), but more a matter of convincing the bishop that you are living the approved lifestyle and paying the tithe, thus being worthy to participate in the worship services? Am I 'getting' it yet?

 

[SoyLeche]

Thanks for taking the time to explain this for me, Soy.... I might actually start understanding this some day

Soooo... what you're saying is (I think???) that being allowed into the temple really has nothing to do with BEING sin free (forgiven), but more a matter of convincing the bishop that you are living the approved lifestyle and paying the tithe, thus being worthy to participate in the worship services? Am I 'getting' it yet?

I think you're getting there. You've got to remember that the Bishop is hard to trick when he is in tune with the Spirit though