All the following quote sections are directly out of the seminary manual. I’m not going to include the direct links as they would not work as the material is behind a username/password.

What follows is some material in the book of Galatians. The opening page of the lesson material contains this quote:

Quote:
Theme: Paul was alarmed when he learned that false teachings were creeping into the lives of his Galatian converts. Many had rejected the teachings of the Atonement and reverted to following the law of Moses. Paul wrote to urge the Saints to return to the higher law of the gospel. He taught that works alone are not sufficient for salvation, but that we must rely on our Savior Jesus Christ. End quote

This is followed in the material by this:
Quote:
Paul was amazed that the Galatian converts were turning away from the living Christ in favor of a dead law. Could they really prefer the bondage of the old law of Moses over the liberty of the new law of Christ? end quote

Then, in the actual text of Galatians are the following versus:

Quote:
6 I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel:
7 Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ.
8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any bother gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.
9 As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed. end quote

So… In my opinion, it is fairly easy to understand this. Paul had done a mission to these people and converted them from Judaism to Christianity. After he left them, many of the people were reverting to the teaching of the Law of Moses as the “other gospel”. At this time, there were clearly 2 gospels (or churches in today’s terms).

Ok. Everything fine so far, right. No controversy.

Quote:
Read this explanation by Elder Boyd K. Packer, a member of the Quorum of the Twelve:

“A few weeks ago I was returning from the East with President [Gordon B.] Hinckley. We conversed with a passenger who said something to the effect that all churches lead to heaven. How often have you heard that—the parallel path to heaven philosophy?

“They claim one church is not really better than another, just different. Eventually the paths will converge. One is, therefore, quite as safe in any church as in any other.

“While this seems to be very generous, it just cannot be true.

“. . . Suppose schools were operated on that philosophy, with each discipline a separate path leading to the same diploma. No matter whether you study or not, pass the tests or not, all would be given the same diploma—the one of their choice.

“Without qualifying, one could choose the diploma of an attorney, an engineer, a medical doctor.

“Surely you would not submit yourself to surgery under the hands of a graduate of that kind of school!”

“But it does not work that way. It cannot work that way—not in education, not in spiritual matters. There are essential ordinances just as there are required courses. There are prescribed standards of worthiness. If we resist them, avoid them, or fail them, we will not enter in with those who complete the course” (in Conference Report, Oct. 1985, 106; or Ensign, Nov. 1985, 82 ).

Testify to your students that there is only one true gospel on the earth that has all the teachings, ordinances, and covenants we need to return to Heavenly Father and live like Him in His kingdom. Tell students that the Apostle Paul understood this doctrine and tried to explain it to the Saints
end quote

I just don’t see at all that Paul understood that there was one true gospel with all the teachings. He was NOT talking about a Christian church with certain teachings, ordinances, and covenants…. he was talking about CHRIST!!! Simple as that.

What I taught was just the Jewish Law vs Christian Law and stopped there. I also taught that whenever a person converts from one background to any other, you can’t just teach them the new way and then leave them alone.

I agree with Ray that this has gone on long enough so I cede you the last word. This whole thread is sounding suspiciously like the troll last year that insisted that white shirts were mandatory for Sunday wear if we were to follow the prophet. As I’ve said before, come judgement we’ll all find out and if you’re right and on your way to Glory and the creation of worlds unnumbered and I’m on my way to a sports bar in the telestial kingdom, you can say I told you so.

Now back to the Holy Ghost and your wanting Him to be in those stale churches. By the way – thanks all of you for the information. I didn’t know a lot of that about Columbus. Especially yours Cowboy. As a result, I have changed my tune. Now I can see why God led him out into the middle of the ocean. I mean like what was there at home (well, maybe it wasn‘t quite that way).

Ray. Columbus (and maybe you, for that matter) might have thought his ‘drive’ for exploration was coming from that thing he called his church. If that’s true both of you should stop thinking that way. In spite of all his hang ups, (his religion being the biggest one) Columbus is the ‘man’ in 1Nephi 13:12. And it was the Holy Ghost who inspired him.

Ray. “It just seems . . . cherry-picked to claim that the Holy Ghost influenced a deeply religious man, but it had nothing to do with his religion.”

Well then let’s start picking cherries because that’s the way it was. For both Columbus and Paul it was the same. There hearts were right but their churches were the kings of bogus.

Ray. You quote me – “you say nobody now can feel the influence and guidance of the Holy Ghost unless it’s prompted as a reaction to the Restored Gospel through “authorized” (Melchizedek Priesthood) representatives.”

If I put the ‘(Melchizedek Priesthood)’ in there, I shouldn’t have. That would seem to tie the ‘representatives’ to mortality. I don’t want to take it that far. I suppose representatives could come in different ways. For that matter maybe Baalim’s mule was a representative.

How much did the Holy Ghost influence that peoples of the dark ages? I don’t know, but the criteria for his influence would have been the same as it is today. How many hearts were there that were right before God? I tend to think there were very few but who knows? In Alma 19, the Lamanitish woman was alone for many years in her conversion (the work of the Holy Ghost). Another person alone in an apostate world.

Kuri – “the Spirit must have worked on Columbus smack dab in the middle of his nearly fanatical Catholic belief and practice.”

Not a problem. But remember, the Spirit worked on Columbus to perform his mission, not his church (and that includes ‘this virgin Mary thing‘).

GBSmith. “What you seem to be doing is taking a specific action or function of the Holy Ghost and generalizing it.”

No. I’m taking a specific action, the comforting action of the Holy Ghost, and applying it to Jesus’ friends and disciples, specifically. Why are you taking that action applying it to the world, generally? D&C 88:3-4 doesn’t do that. Got any scriptures on the ‘generalization theory’?

Cowboy. Yes, His domain is ‘all things, but what is he doing with that domain? Certainly not being a constant companion to all of them. I’m still working on your ‘mark my words’ challenge.

It will take some time to research this, but I seem to recall reading several years ago that Christopher Columbus was shipwrecked, prior to 1492, and among the only survivors – I think during a naval battle of some sort. In any case, according to this source, he washed upon the shore in either Portugal or Italy, but there he claimed to have had a vision of The Virgin Mary. I don’t recall the details, but it seems that the vision gave him assurance of his place before God and then served as the catalyst for his efforts in pursuing his epoch voyage. In any case he remained staunchly catholic his entire life as far as I am aware.

I am also aware that recently there has been a surge of research on Columbus that attempts to de-Christianize him, or make him out as a sinister figure in history. Either way, it doesn’t make a case for limited domain of influence for The Holy Ghost.

For what it is worth I have already said that I agree, TO AN EXTENT, with your comments regarding whether The Holy Ghost would operate in another Church, that would seem to send too many mixed signals to me. But the influence of The Holy Ghost is not limited to just certifying church’s, Moroni rather states that his domain is with “all things”. As for your “Mark my words” remark, it is your challenge to mark them and then make a supportable case.

Columbus was a devout, almost fanatical, Catholic. This is a well-established fact. And the verse in 1 Nephi 13 says that the Spirit wrought upon Columbus, and then he went sailing. It doesn’t say that he went sailing, and then the Spirit wrought upon him. So unless one insists on wresting the text of the Book of Mormon to add something to its plain meaning, the Spirit must have worked on Columbus smack dab in the middle of his nearly fanatical Catholic belief and practice.

Sorry Rich, that’s not what it says. It doesn’t say only, it just says that he, Jesus, is going to send the Comforter that “it may abide in your hearts, even the Holy Spirit of promise:” and then goes on to say it’s the same comforter that was promised to Christ’s disciples as recorded in John. He does go on in verse 4 to say that this Comforter is the promise of eternal life/the celestial kingdom. What you seem to be doing is taking a specific action or function of the Holy Ghost and generalizing it.

I agree that the Holy Spirit isn’t my gift to give but it’s not yours to restrict either.

It also seems you are contradicting yourself with that example (and the cases of the Protestant reformers), when you say nobody now can feel the influence and guidance of the Holy Ghost unless it’s prompted as a reaction to the Restored Gospel through “authorized” (Melchizedek Priesthood) representatives. If that were true, nobody for approximately 1500 years could have been moved upon by the Holy Ghost – including Columbus and the reformers.

Can you clarify that for me, please?

“I am not confident of the influence of the Holy Ghost in other Churches for the reasons I have stated. But remember that I have no problem with the influence of the Holy Ghost with individuals.”

If a non-member is in a situation, (whether religious or not, as long as it is conducive to the presence of God), to be taught truth by an authorized servant (mortal or otherwise), I don’t have trouble with the Holy Ghost being there. But mark my words, an official gospel teaching experience, will be imminent in that person’s life. Look at the story of priest in Italy who found the Book of Mormon without the cover page in a garbage can. Even though he was a priest in another church, his church had nothing to do with that experience. And yes, I believe in the years he was without the Church, the Holy Ghost was with him a lot and bearing record to him.

The promise in Moroni chapter ten is to those people who are investigating the Lord’s Church and not some other one. In that chapter, verse three ‘after you have read those things’ and than after you have ‘pondered them in your hearts‘, and then after you have asked the Father in the name of Christ, it will be revealed to you by the power of the Holy Ghost.

Cowboy. That experience will not come to the non-member while he is being taught in his church. His church will not teach him to do that. I have even talked to people in other churches who don’t even believe you should listen to feelings. They say that’s how you get deceived (not that that matters). If you’re talking about individuals separated from their churches long enough for an effective, authorized teaching experience to take place (whether from the missionaries or the Holy Ghost himself) and I have no problem with the Holy Ghost in that persons life even though it will not be a constant companionship.

Back to Columbus. He’s a perfect example of what I have been saying – not what you guys have been saying. Ya know, out in the middle of that ocean I don’t suppose he saw many church buildings. I don’t suppose there were many priests, ministers and the like either. And he sure didn’t get the idea from any of them to make that voyage. In principle what happened to Columbus is what needs to happen to every non-member. They need to get out of the environment they’re in and create and environment wherein they can be taught by the power of the Holy Ghost. If Columbus had stayed with his church this world would still be on the back of a turtle.

“I know of no scripture that teaches that people are devoid of the Holy Ghost until the missionaries teach them a discussion, and then it comes one time, witnesses to them, and then leaves.”

Neither do I. I went to the computerized scriptures (which I wouldn’t be without) and clicked on ‘topic search’ on the Holy Ghost. What I got was a tidal wave of scriptures on the Holy Ghost. But they all looked to me to be about the work of the Holy Ghost and his influence inside the Lord’s Church. I have a tendency towards laziness so check them out for yourself. By chance I found one that kind of talked about the work of the Holy Ghost among the gentiles:

“And it came to pass after my father had spoken these words he spake unto my brethren concerning the gospel which should be preached among the Jews, and also concerning the dwindling of the Jews in unbelief. And after they had slain the Messiah, who should come, and after he had been slain he should rise from the dead, and should make himself manifest, by the Holy Ghost, unto the Gentiles.” (1 Ne. 10:11)

‘and after he had been slain he should rise from the dead, and should make himself manifest, by the Holy Ghost, unto the Gentiles’

But look at what that phrase says; Jesus (an authorized teacher) would make himself manifest by the Holy Ghost (essentially create a teaching environment among the gentiles) in which he would bear witness of himself to the gentiles. Once a teaching situation is established, it’s hard telling how much the Holy Ghost will be involved. But once the teaching experience is completed the witness is ended. He is not a constant companion.

The Comforter is sent only to the Lord’s people (Church) (D&C 88: 3-4). Stop trying to share him with other people. He’s not your gift to give.

I agree with you in that I have a hard time reconciling how/why God would drive members towards apostate Christian churchs. I can find scriptures which speak pretty emphatically about the apostate nature of those churchs. I also have found that as far as the scriptures are concerned, the buck stops there. I do not know of any scriptures which support the absolute position you have taken on accessing the Holy Ghost. It sounds to me like a lot of false assumption. I am aware of no scripture that says people are converted to the Church by the Light of Christ, rather Moroni makes it fairly clear that the truth of it will be made known unto you by the power of The Holy Ghost, and by the power of the Holy Ghost you may know the truth of all things. I know of no scripture that teaches that people are devoid of the Holy Ghost until the missionaries teach them a discussion, and then it comes one time, witnesses to them, and then leaves. I do know of scriptures that teach Christopher Columbus was wrought upon by the Spirit, as were the pilgrims. You may argue your distinction between the Holy Ghost and the Light of Christ, but such an argument will be unfounded and unsupportable.

So I guess I am issuing you a friendly challenge Rich, don’t just say it, support your conclusion with scripture.

I was also surprised to hear that I was quoting GAs. Do I do that? I always thought that I seemed to end up disagreeing with them – probably too much for comfort. Oh well, whatever. Boy this has been a thread and a half.

I just don’t see the people that I know doing good as committed Christians being tools of satan.

Thank you, GB. That is precisely the interpretation I took from a couple of comments (especially bsmith’s), and that is precisely my feeling, as well. I simply believe we don’t need to paint someone else with an extreme brush when there are more benign and charitable views that do not deny our ultimate doctrines in any way.

It just seems to me that the denial of the Holy Spirit and God’s hand in other churches and religions is carrying a narrow interpretation of scripture to an extreme that I find very disturbing and sad. It reminds me of the people that stand on street corners and shout a people attending conference telling them that they’re wrong, satanically inspired and hell bound. Except it us doing the shouting and the rest of the world just ignores us and goes on it’s way trying to do good in the best way they see to do. I’m sorry Rich, but regardless of how many GAs you quote, I just don’t see the world that way. I just don’t see the people that I know doing good as committed Christians being tools of satan. I think God is influencing them by the Holy Ghost to do good and serve him and not some made up substitute, “the Light of Christ”.

Two points. First, I have no problem seeing that’s just what Satan is doing. Second, section 76 describes the reason why those ‘good and well intentioned people’ will end up in the Terrestrial Kingdom – deception. That used to bother me. They were fooled. They didn’t know. It seemed like a pretty harsh statement. The thing I didn’t see is that those people in that Kingdom were given the chance to understand at one time or another. When the missionaries taught them they were given the unique chance to experience the witness of the Holy Ghost and they rejected it. And when that experience came it would certainly not have been in the context (the presence) of another church.

Cowboy. That would have made God the deceiver. Those people would have associated that experience with the other church. If the Holy Ghost witnesses truths taught when a minister in another church is teaching them, they will conclude that that church is the Lord’s Church. That’s why I say the witness of the Holy Ghost will only come from the Lord’s Church. The Light of Christ will be the non-members guide in the matters of truth.

Ray. “A wicked Mormon has better access to the Holy Ghost than a dedicated, sincere Christian somewhere else.” This quote restates something I said earlier that you, apparently want clarified.

A wicked Mormon has the Gift of the Holy Ghost even though he may have to do some serious repenting to access it. The non-member doesn’t have it at all. If the wicked Mormon sincerely repents, he has the constant companionship of the Holy Ghost. The non-member, regardless of his righteousness will never have that. Who do you think has the advantage? Of the wicked Mormon, it can be said what Paul of the Jew: “What advantage then hath the Jew? or what profit is there of circumcision? Much every way: chiefly, because that unto them were committed the oracles of God.” (Rom. 3:1-2) The wicked Mormon also inherits the greater condemnation (D&C 82:3). As for Mother Teresa and your good Protestant neighbor, if they never change their ways they will also never have that companionship. They will live out there lives never having been cleansed of their sins, will go into the spirit world where an immediate judgment will be made. Did they have a chance to receive the gospel, if yes, what was the outcome? And were their works in their lives celestial or sub-celestial? If they did not have a chance to receive the gospel and their works in mortality were celestial, I believe they go into Paradise, even though no ordinance work has been done for them. They are taught the gospel, they accept it, and are sent on missions into spirit prison. If you have a problem with that, write a post on it and I will certainly comment. As for Gary Gilmore, well Ray, you work on that one and see what you can come up with.

Cowboy. “…the exclusive claim that Mormons have on The Holy Ghost is not in the influence or powers of revelation…”. Yes it is. I don’t feel comfortable Brother Clawson’s statement. I have an idea that very, very many members of the Church, including me, have never really experienced the witness of the Holy Ghost. Very many of us have not yet been reborn. Very many of us live our lives much like the non-member in one way. The Light of Christ is our guide – not the Holy Ghost near as much as He should because of our actions. We’ve all talked ourselves into the false notion that conversion is a life long process even though in the scriptures it is likened unto the birth process or called rebirth. Any birth of a baby taking a life time to accomplish would kill both the mother and the child. Somebody write a post on conversion. I will certainly comment.

Brother Clawson goes on:
“The baptismal injunction to “receive the Holy Ghost” has no bearing on personal revelatory implications conditioned upon righteousness, but is rather a commandment to walk uprightly and honor the baptismal covenants, so that again, the contingent promises from God for our salvation may be recognized by that sealing power.”

What is this? Am I on a mission to disagree? —– Hey, I know. Let’s convert Brother Clawson’s statement to a ‘Rich’ statement:

“The baptismal injunction to “receive the Holy Ghost” has every bearing on personal revelatory implications conditioned upon righteousness, and is a commandment to walk uprightly and honor the baptismal covenants, so that you will have a clean heart in which He may dwell and be with you constantly, bringing about the contingent promises from God for our salvation in the use of His sealing power.”

Enough said on that.

We have two different conduits going here. The one is, largely the Light of Christ, the other is largely the priesthood and the Holy Ghost. And a point of contention I’m seeing is that some want to extend the influence of the Holy Ghost in with the Light of Christ and I’m saying – ‘No way, if it is with the other churches but, possibly, with individuals in those churches!’. If you say the Light of Christ conduit is associated other churches and individuals, I say yes. If you say the Holy Ghost/ priesthood conduit is associated with the Lord’s church only, I say yes.

KG McB. I don’t know what your reference to Jacob was all about? Jacob lived his life in a one church environment.
I am not confident of the influence of the Holy Ghost in other Churches for the reasons I have stated. But remember that I have no problem with the influence of the Holy Ghost with individuals.
And KG McB, what is all this ‘you felt good about some of the things the minister said’ stuff? Why shouldn’t you have felt good. The Holy Ghost bore record to you. You are a worthy citizen. You have that right. And because of the gift you have and that you live worthily, you cannot be deceived into thinking that the church of that minister is the Lord’s church. The other people in that church could easily be deceived and for that reason received no such witness. They might have liked what they heard by the Light of Christ but that was it.

GBSmith. “Rich and bsmith, it seems from your comments that you’re denying the good done by other churches and religions and that in fact their actions are satanically inspired.”

God didn’t create them so who is their foundation? Yes, they (the individuals in those churches) still have the Light of Christ. The individuals are the membership. The churches are the cornerstones and the foundations. The cornerstones are the adversary (my interpretation of the great and spacious building). The foundations are the authorized positions held by members of those churches who, by the way, have the Light of Christ. How strongly they feel that light will vary from a lot to a little depending on circumstances that might be the same as for all the rest of us. What I have much trouble accepting is that the Holy Ghost would bear witness to a truth taught, even rightly, to the members of those churches by the teachers in those churches. By the same principle that Jesus didn’t want the evil spirits bearing record of His divinity (Mark 1:23-26), Heavenly Father will not have the truth taught by these other churches. And the only way you can teach is by the Holy Ghost. “…if ye receive not the Spirit ye shall not teach.” (D&C 42:13)

The reason everybody does good things in their lives is because of the presence of the Light of Christ. They are influenced to those good things by that light. They will produce good things all their lives but that is not to be confused with the Holy Ghost. We need to have a post on the Holy Ghost – what He does and what He doesn’t do.

GBSmith. “As regards salvation or to use a better term, exaltation, that’s something we’ll just have to wait and see about.” No don’t wait, Understand it now. That’s what the exclusive priesthood/Holy Ghost conduit is all about.

Ray – 124. Nice comment . My biggest sensitivity in this whole thing has been to how the witness of the Holy Ghost was used. At times it was difficult not to get too philosophical. I’m used to scripture, verse kind of talk. And I agree that on some things we may have to agree to disagree.

Cowboy – 125. Bravo! Hip hip hurray!

I agree 100% with Pres. Uchtdorf’s message during last April’s General Conference in his talk entitled, “Faith of Our Fathers” – and every other talk that has emphasized how grateful they are to the Protestant reformers who created the atmosphere in which the LDS Church could be restored in America in 1830. There are numerous references to this idea – that the Restoration would have been practically impossible without the Reformation – that the establishment of churches by sincere Christians opened the way for the establishment of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints – that the belief in Christ those churches taught (and which even the Catholic Church taught), and the access to the Bible inspired by those reformers, created, built or deepened the faith of many people who then were and are capable of hearing the Restored Gospel and accepting it. The Reformation made the Restoration possible, and, thus, brought the world closer to God in a real way.

I have never said that any other church can bring someone to the Father (since I’ve said the other Christian churches don’t even teach of Him as we believe Him to be), but our own theology explicitly states that good, sincere people from any religion will qualify AT LEAST for the Terrestrial Kingdom and the presence of the Son. As I said in an earlier comment that you might have missed (since you never responded to it), I personally know of multiple people who were living Telestial Kingdom lives before gaining a basic belief in Jesus as the Savior and Redeemer, turning their lives around and living a Terrestrial Kingdom life. That change, again according to our own doctrine, moved them from a telestial existence to a terrestrial existence – and that is movement toward and to “God” in a very real way, even if it isn’t a full movement to the Father. That is true of ANY religion that keeps someone from wallowing in their full natural man and encourages them to strive to be true to some kind of higher standard.

Again, I’ve never denied the unique Mormon claim to be a separate conduit to the Celestial Kingdom – ever. I’ve never denied the power of the sealing ordinances – for the living or the dead – ever. I attend the temple as often as I can, and my oldest son went with me recently for the first time – in preparation for his mission soon. I’m not denying ANY ultimate claim of the Church or the modern Prophets.

All I have said is that we do NOT teach now that Satan leads all other churches – that all leaders and members of other churches are following Lucifer in what they do – that attending and believing in other faiths will land people in Hell. I read that result in your comments (that all non-Mormons ultimately are followers of Lucifer, since they are affiliated with organizations established by Lucifer), and I believe strongly that every single apostle of our day would disagree with that wording. I believe every one of them would agree that no other church leads its members to the Father, as we understand Him, giving them the opportunity to become like God and gods in their own right – since the other churches don’t even teach that. However, that doesn’t mean those churches don’t help people gain a basic testimony of Jesus – and it doesn’t mean someone who spends his entire life as a member of another church automatically loses any chance to qualify for the Celestial Kingdom. I believe every apostle would agree that many other churches serve a basic human need to keep Christ and “God” in people’s minds and blunt the natural man tendency to reject God completely. I also believe there isn’t one apostle who would say that an unrepentant, sinful Mormon is better off than a repentant, sinning non-Mormon. (If any of that is a misreading of what you or Rich has said, I apologize – seriously. That’s how I read it, but I could be wrong.)

If I take the strictest, most narrow definitions possible, I am left to say that other churches can and often do provide a conduit “toward” God and “toward” the full Gospel of Jesus Christ – and that many people would be unable to accept the fullness without partaking of the “partness” first – that many people will become or remain good, sincere people as a direct result of the good things they learn in other churches, which will prepare them in a very real way for the full vision taught in Mormon theology – or, at the very least, lead them from a telestial existence to a terrestrial existance. I see that as being a conduit to God, even if it isn’t a conduit all the way to God – and I think our modern prophets and apostles would be totally fine with that distinction and what I’ve said in this thread. At least, that’s the message I get when I listen to them and read their words.

Why do we need to walk on eggshells to accommodate other religions when they all pull people away from the restored gospel? WHY? What, in the afterlife, would persuade a devout evangelical to join the mormon church? I have already demonstrated that the LDS church is the ONLY conduit to salvation – again, what is your definition of “conduit”? How, exactly, does devoting one’s life to another church improve your situation in the afterlife…you may as well be an atheist.

If we are going to claim the “ONE true church title” that would mean that all other churches are UNTRUE and WRONG. This really is a black and white issue regardless of the number of “good” people in other faiths – if we really believed they were going to be fine, then why send out missionaries to convert these “good” people to the LDS faith in THIS life?

To me your views are so extreme as to further isolate the LDS Church from what it has been striving so hard to be. Respected and appreciated as a partner in trying to make the world a better place. As regards salvation or to use a better term, exaltation, that’s something we’ll just have to wait and see about. The Savior said disappearingly little about the afterlife preferring that we try and take care of each other in the here and now, a position I can support. To me any person or group that encourages others to do that qualifies as a conduit to God.

Earlier posts included points about work in the spirit world and temple work. Because God’s plan allows for this, then one can argue that the LDS church only has the authority for saving ordinances for salvation, however, other churches bring people closer to God, and whether in this life or the life after, they will have a chance to receive saving ordinances with the correct authority.

Therefore, that opens my mind to the fact that other churches have a lot of good people, and a lot of good things that help people live righteous lives. This does not have to water down the importance of the true church on the earth. For those given more light and knowledge through church membership, more is expected of them. However, being exclusive in thinking all other churches are empty and have no value in bringing people closer to God is narrow minded.

Read post 51 and those around in that range.

Truth was taught. The spirit testified to me that Christ is the source of life and we are to have faith and bring others to Him.

Afterwards, there was a lot of other things in the service that I didn’t care for, but I felt the spirit briefly during that sermon on Mark 2. I’m not suggesting that specific church was true, only that the Spirit testifies of truth, wherever it is taught.

Jacob 4:13 reads:
13 Behold, my brethren, he that prophesieth, let him prophesy to the understanding of men; for the Spirit speaketh the truth and lieth not. Wherefore, it speaketh of things as they really are, and of things as they really will be; wherefore, these things are manifested unto us plainly, for the salvation of our souls. But behold, we are not witnesses alone in these things; for God also spake them unto prophets of old.

In reading President Faust, President Packer, and other General Authorities, I am confident the 3 differences between Light of Christ, Influence of the Holy Ghost, and Gift of the Holy Ghost is the doctrine the church teaches. Only the third is exclusive to the LDS Church, but the other two can be conduits to God.

While I recognize that we all are apt to speculate and at times assert our views, I would not be comfortable taking this license to the extremes you have. I am aware of no scripture or doctrine that supports the total exclusivity of The Holy Ghost, such as what you have taught here. Rutger Clawson, former member of the Twelve, taught that the exclusive claim that Mormons have on The Holy Ghost is not in the influence or powers of revelation, but rather lie in the ratifying power of The Holy Ghost to be sealed upon the righteous as the Holy Spirit of Promise. The baptismal injunction to “recieve the Holy Ghost” has no bearing on personal revelatory implications conditioned upon righteousness, but is rather a commandment to walk uprightly and honor the baptismal covenants, so that again, the contigent promises from God for our salvation may be recognized by that sealing power.

I agree with you, that I do not see God leading other’s into Church’s born of apostasy, but I would be cautious about putting limits on The Holy Ghost. Furthermore, I would be very cautious about setting parameters on qualifying for The Holy Ghost, when such parameters cannot be thoroughly confirmed through scripture.

“are (you) saying moral atheists also “have access to the spirit” that they openly reject?”

*SIGH* I never said they do.

“Mormonism is the ONLY religion that claims the gift of the holy ghost”

*SIGH* I never said it isn’t.

“you are not in line with the teachings of the LDS church.”

*BIGGEST SIGH* All this over what? That I asked for a clarification to make sure I understood what Rich was saying?

Good heavens, bsmith! I’m not arguing that the “Gift of the Holy Ghost” exists anywhere else – and I never have. I quoted Rich directly and asked if my reading of what he meant is accurate. How in the world did you get from that to your comment #116? Seriously, how did you get to me denying the Gift of the Holy Ghost as an exclusively Mormon ordinance?

We are defining “conduit to God” differently – and that’s about it. Andrew discussed definition issues, admitting the answer depends largely on those definitions. That’s the issue, not that you or I or anyone else is “denying the Gift of the Holy Ghost” within Mormonism.

Fine, we are defining “conduit to God” differently. Fine, we disagree about what that phrase means. Fine. You win. You are saying what I’ve been saying consistently throughout the entire thread – that we are disagreeing about how to define a word. I’m wrong when I say it; you’re right when you say it. Fine. I give up.