“for thus it shall be called”: the elders and people of my Church of Jesus Christ of Latter day Saints, scattered abroad in all the world..

December 5, 2018

https://bsd.sos.mo.gov/BusinessEntity/BESearch.aspx?SearchType=0

I am not sure the LDS Church is going to let them get away with this !?!?

My guess is that Mauricio got a commandment from Moroni to have Joseph F. Smith and his associates name their emerging church according to the name given in a prophecy on April 26th 1838. Corporations are critical in setting up institutionalized religions.

In the prophecy it is decreed that in the last days when the gathering to Zion is taking place, those who consecrate and gather to Zion will be called the “Church in Zion” while all of the Saints who remain in a scattered condition will be called the “Church of Jesus Christ of Latter day Saints

Doctrine and Covenants 115:3-4

3 And also unto my faithful servants who are of the high council of my church in Zion, for thus it shall be called, and unto all the elders and people of my Church of Jesus Christ of Latter day Saints, scattered abroad in all the world;

Until Zion is redeemed during the official gathering, all of God’s Saints are to be called the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter day Saints.

Clearly, Mauricio’s new church and movement is struggling to gain traction and begin on the new temple.

Until they are able to establish Zion, they apparently feel that they are designated according to scripture as the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints who are in a scattered condition preparing for Zion.

Good luck with that one 🙂

jfs 1

 

 

.

jfs 2

.

jfs 3

.

jfs 4.png

.

Bobbi Chinnery appears to have replaced Bob Moore as Joseph F. Smith’s confidant, and overseer.

Perhaps she will be called as one of the new apostles or perhaps as a councilor to Joseph in the presidency of the high priesthood.

Joseph has disassociated himself with Bob’s website and is having his right hand gal control his new website. She is now an officer in the corporation.

Although Joseph F Smith has now allowed himself to be ordained a high priest and president of the high priesthood, he is now claiming that previous to his ordination by Mauricio and Mauricio’s ordination by Moroni, there has been no priesthood on the earth for more than 100 years. Everyone will have to be rebaptized and re-ordained.

Once the Utah Saints gathered to the west, Brigham Young also required all of his followers to get rebaptized under his authority as the president of the Church. It is the supreme power play to solidify control.

The opportunity to repair the breach between him and Bob and the Zarahemla Branch emerged briefly, but apparently not to be.

The drama continues..

 

.

.

.

B.M. looks over at Kelvin Henson and says “No” and then looks over at Kelvin Henson. Then Bob looks over at Tyler Crowell and asks him “Would you say he is starting a new church?” and Bob says “No” again as he turns to look back at B.K.

B.K. asks, “Is anyone among the eight or the witnesses starting a new church or asking to organize a new church?”

B.M. looks at Kelvin Henson and looks back at B.K. and says “No”.

B.K. says, “So he has not asked for anything, he’s not asked for a new church

 

 

 


He Received Not of the Fulness at First: When did Jesus Christ BECOME the Son of God?

December 1, 2018

In a recent interview with John Dehlin, LDS bible scholar David Bokovoy pointed out that some Bible passages declare Jesus Christ to have become (or been “begotten”) as the “Son of God” at the time of Mary’s virgin birth, while others claim that he became the Son of God at his Baptism, and yet others claim it took place AFTER his Crucifixion when he was resurrected, or at the time of his ascension.

Bokovoy finds that to be inconsistent.

He is just one more casualty of higher education and intellectualism who claims he loves the gospel and is a believer in the LDS restoration even though he believes that Joseph Smith fabricated the Book of Mormon, the revelations in the D&C, and virtually everything else.

Go figure.

BTW the Church has been paying this fellow to teach the youth of the Church.

Here is an excerpt of some of Bokovoy’s remarks from the interview:

.. the early Christology was that Jesus Christ became the son of god when he was resurrected, that’s when he became the son of god, then if we take that view which is the earliest one we can document historically and compare that with what we see in Mark, which is the earliest new testament gospel, (Mark was written in about 68 CE or so) and in Mark when was Jesus identified as the Son of God? At the baptism… Mark puts the Godship of Jesus Christ at the start of his ministry, God speaks from heaven:

“This is my beloved Son THIS DAY I HAVE BEGOTTEN YOU.”

.. then you get to the next gospels that have been written historically you get to Matthew and Luke and they are the ones that say no no no, jesus was born to a virgin as the Son of God, so Jesus’ divine sonship goes back to his birth.

You can see the way this is evolving, and the last new testament gospel to be written is John

“Before the World Was” (interjected by John Dehlin)

 Exactly.. so you see these things evolve over time and they are just clearly there, you cannot deny them it is just a reality of how Christology developed..”

Listen to 6:45 to 8:55

Again, Bokovoy seems to characterize the supposed multiple declarations of Christ’s Sonship as a delemma. He apparently sees it as proof of doctrinal evolution and how the New Testament supports the notion that Christology evolved and was developed over time with multiple inconsistencies along the way. He ends his synopsis by emphatically declaring that “you cannot deny” the passages he quoted. “it is just a reality of how Christology developed“!

Hmm… so that is how Christiology was developed? by men?

HA!

In my humble opinion, there is no inconsistency or discrepancy at all in the scriptures that have not been corrupted or misinterpreted. The real problem is the uninspired interpretations and interpolations of uninspired commentators.  The New Testament does not represent an evolving doctrine of Chrisiology over time nor does it demonstrate that the doctrine of the Godhood and divine Sonship of Christ was developed over the course of time by men.

Before pondering some of these concepts further, let me point out that Brother Bokovoy misquoted the gospel of Mark, the most important passage to his supposition.

Here is what Bokovoy states as “a fact you cannot deny“:

“Mark puts the Godship of Jesus Christ at the start of his ministry, God speaks from heaven: ‘This is my beloved Son THIS DAY I HAVE BEGOTTEN YOU.’ ”

Wrong!

Actually, that is not what the Gospel of Mark says.

This is what the Gospel of Mark says:

9 And it came to pass in those days, that Jesus came from Nazareth of Galilee, and was baptized of John in Jordan.

10 And straightway coming up out of the water, he saw the heavens opened, and the Spirit like a dove descending upon him:

11 And there came a voice from heaven, saying, Thou art my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.

As you can see, the account does not have the Father declaring “I have begotten you this day“. Rather, the text reads, “in whom I am well pleased“.

The Father simply declares that Christ is the Son of God. It is not saying that Christ had just been begotten as the Son of God.

So why did Bokovoy replace some of the actual content and where did he get the replacement content from?

It turns out that the borrowed content is taken from Psalms 2:7:

Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee.

David Bokovoy is inserting the above snippet from Psalms 2:7 in the Old Testament into Mark’s account of Christ’s baptism in the New Testament.

He doesn’t seem to think that he needs to explain to his audience that he is taking the liberty of inserting text into the passage or why he is inserting text into the passage!

Wow, talk about taking some liberal literary license!

Obviously, Bokovoy believes that the prophecy in Psalms was referring to Christ’s baptism that would take place thousands of years in the future.

A contextual reading of Psalms 2 reveals that the Old Testament passages in question are indeed part of an end times prophecy about an event that is yet in the future.

1 Why do the heathen rage, and the people imagine a vain thing?

2 The kings of the earth set themselves, and the rulers take counsel together, against the Lord, and against his anointed, saying,

3 Let us break their bands asunder, and cast away their cords from us.

4 He that sitteth in the heavens shall laugh: the Lord shall have them in derision.

5 Then shall he speak unto them in his wrath, and vex them in his sore displeasure.

6 Yet have I set my king upon my holy hill of Zion.

7 I will declare the decree: the Lord hath said unto me, Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee.

8 Ask of me, and I shall give thee the heathen for thine inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth for thy possession.

9 Thou shalt break them with a rod of iron; thou shalt dash them in pieces like a potter’s vessel.

As you can see, the prophetic narrative above is speaking about the end times when the heathen are raging and the kings of the earth are conspiring against the Lord’s Davidic servant.

The Lord takes his servant David and sets him upon the holy hill of Zion, anoints him as King, gives him power over all the heathen nations, and makes the decree: “Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee”

Regardless of whether you are interpreting the “David” spoken of in Psalms 2 as the return of the Old Testament David, or a future Davidic Servant, or Christ himself, the event being spoken of is clearly referring to a future end times event, not the baptism of Jesus in the New Testament.

There goes the foundation of David’s construct.

David’s observation that the scriptures possibly declare Christ’s Sonship to have originally taken place during his earthly ministry and that there are arguably multiple events in which his sonship was possibly being declared, is actually a common doctrine among Christian scholars. Here is a quote from an article written by Christian Bible Scholar Don Stewart:

There is a question as to whether Jesus was always the eternal Son of God or that He became the Son of God only when He came to earth. This is technically called the “eternal generation of the Son.”

Some Bible teacher’s believe that Jesus became the Son of God at a certain time in history. There is an Old Testament passage that seems to teach that Jesus became the Son at some point in time.  (Psalm 2:7).

There are four particular times that are suggested: His coming into the world; His baptism; His resurrection; His ascension

According to Stewart, the doctrine of eternal generation of the Son has to do with the belief that Christ first became the Son of God during his earth life. He states that there are four possible times when Christ might have become “begotten” as the Son.

As you can see, Bokovoy seems to have borrowed from and modified a long discussed theme from Christian scholars. It is interesting that Stewart uses Psalm 2:7 to suggest the possibility of Christ being begotten during mortality but he does not have the audacity to authoritatively declare that the prophetic passage was referring to Christ’s baptism like Bokovoy does.

In my opinion, if the Father had made that declaration at the baptism, it would be stated in the passage or at least reinserted as a clarification by Joseph Smith in the Inspired Version of the Bible.

Frankly, the suggestion that Christ was begotten as the Son of God for the first time during his baptism or any time during his earth life is not congruent with scripture. If one visits all of the references provided by Bokovoy and Stewart, it becomes obvious that there is no credible evidence to suggest that Christ was begotten as the Son of God for the first time during his earthly ministry.

Perhaps one of the most revealing passages of scripture that verifies the Godhood and Sonship of Christ in the pre-existence is as follows:

And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was. John 17:5

Clearly Christ was the Son of God who shared in the Father’s glory from before the foundation of the world. His Godship and Sonship should also be evident by virtue of the fact that he created the world(s).

It is true that Christ went through a progression of multiple landmark events that seem to be requisite in having the glory of the Father restored to Him.

Certainly his baptism was a landmark event that seems pivotal.

His suffering and eventual death on the cross were pivotal events. 

His resurrection and his ascension into the presence of the Father were pivotal events.

This progression of Christ going through multiple pivotal events may seem confusing counterintuitive to his proclaimed status of Godhood from the beginning but I would suggest that they are completely consistent with the larger narrative.

One of the many advantages of having the scriptures of the restoration is that they provide additional testimony to the pre-earth divinity of Christ. They provide much needed information about his divine and mystical intercession and condescension. 

The Condescension of God

The CONDESCENSION of Christ was necessary in order to provide a plan of salvation that would meet the criteria of eternal law in redeeming fallen man.

Why did mankind need to go through a fall?

Only an understanding of the pre-existence and what took place in it can provide that answer. The restoration scriptures provide very important information about the pre-existence and yet we have precious few details about the pre-existence or the condescension of Christ.

The Doctrine of Condescension is introduced and made mention in four separate books within the Book of Mormon. 

The scriptures do not provide a long detailed narrative explaining what Christ’s condescension consisted of. It is assumed that the reader knows what condescension means and what Christ’s condescension(s) consisted of:

1 Nephi 11:16,26

16 And he said unto me: Knowest thou the condescension of God?

2 Nephi 9:53

53 And behold how great the covenants of the Lord, and how great his condescensions unto the children of men; and because of his greatness, and his grace and mercy, he has promised unto us that our seed shall not utterly be destroyed, according to the flesh, but that he would preserve them; and in future generations they shall become a righteous branch unto the house of Israel.

2 Nephi 4:26

26 O then, if I have seen so great things, if the Lord in his condescension unto the children of men hath avisited men in so much bmercycwhy should my dheart weep and my soul linger in the valley of sorrow, and my flesh waste away, and my strength slacken, because of mine afflictions?

Jacob 4:7

Nevertheless, the Lord God showeth us our aweakness that we may know that it is by his bgrace, and his great condescensions unto the children of men, that we have power to do these things.

What Exactly Does Condescension Mean?

Condescension means to descent from rank and relinquish rights:

Condescension

CONDESCENSION, noun Voluntary descent from rank, dignity or just claims; relinquishment of strict right; submission to inferiors in granting requests or performing acts which strict justice does not require. Hence, courtesy.

Christ’s condescension in putting off the fulness of the Father’s glory in order to come to earth and provide an intercession explains why Christ needed to go through a progression of events beginning with his physical birth, followed by his baptism,  intercessory suffering, crucifixion, resurrection and ascension. All of that was part of the condescension and necessary in having his previous power and glory restored to him.

Both Separate and Apart

The scriptures show that the Father and Son can manifest themselves and act as separate and distinct beings or they can manifest themselves and act as one composite being.

Numerous scriptures can be employed to show both possibilities.

Although many students of the Bible seem to pick one or the other to believe and defend, I believe that both are true. The Father and the Son are separate and distinct when their work requires them to be, yet they are one God dwelling in the same tabernacle when their work does not require them to separate.

One of the differentiating features between the Father and the Son, when they are manifesting themselves separately and acting separately, is that the Son was a created or begotten being while the Father is without beginning or end.

Indeed, the Father is the supreme God over all other gods.

“..shall be revealed in the days of the dispensation of the fulness of times— According to that which was ordained in the midst of the Council of the Eternal God of all other gods before this world was, that should be reserved unto the finishing and the end thereof, when every man shall enter into his eternal presence and into his immortal rest.” (D&C 121:31-32)

The Father is the Eternal God over all other gods. He had no beginning and no end.

The above passage, the Lectures on Faith and many other scriptures expose the false doctrine that is contained in the infamous King Follett Sermon.

Christ also is unique and is the “only begotten of the Father” out of all of the Sons of God. None of the other Sons of God in the divine council were begotten directly by the Father. All other created things were created through the Son.

One way we can validate that Christ had a creation starting point as an organized intelligence and as the only begotten Son of God is that the Son is BEGOTTEN.

The term denotes a beginning point:

Begotten

BEGOT’, BEGOT’TEN, participle passive of get. Procreated; generated.

As you can see, begotten means procreate and generate.

To begat or procreate or produce, or engender or generate presupposes a beginning point.

Procreate

PRO’CREATE, verb transitive [Latin procreo; pro and creo, to create.]

1. To beget; to generate and produce; to engender

Generate

GEN’ERATE, verb transitive [Latin genero. See Gender.]

1. To beget; to procreate; to propagate; to produce a being similar to the parent. Every animal generates his own species.

2. To produce; to cause to be; to bring into life; as great whales which the waters generated.

3. To cause; to produce; to form.

The definitions all become rather interrelated and circular. Suffice it to say that although Christ had always existed as an unorganized intelligence, he had a beginning as an organized intelligence and he became the Son of God in the pre-existence.

The Father refers to the Son as the “word of my power“. He informs us that the Son was created for the sole purpose of creating all other creations.

“..by the word of my power, have I created them, which is mine Only Begotten Son, who is full of grace and truth.

And worlds without number have I created; and I also created them for mine own purpose; and by the Son I created them, which is mine Only Begotten.” Moses 1:32-33

Later in the Book of Moses we are informed that Christ always has been and always will be the ONLY BEGOTTEN by the Father. Section 76 reveals that others have been and will be begotten UNTO the Father. Not only did Christ create all things, he is also the redeemer for all men who will repent:

“I am the Only Begotten of the Father from the beginning and henceforth and forever, that as thou has fallen thou mayest be redeemed , and all mankind, even as many as will ” (Moses 9-10)

Christ’s work as a creator and redeemer required his condescension followed by the restoration to him of the fulness of the Father that he had attained in the pre-existence. Following that restoration of power, he freely laid down his life and took it up again requisite to providing an infinite and eternal atonement for fallen man.

His willingness and choice to lay down his life and temporarily give up his power once again, required him to regain his power and Sonship following his crucifixion.

Hence I see no contradiction where brother Bokovoy does. I see the chronological progression of a mystical set of condescension’s and restorations of power and authority requisite for providing the atonement intercession for fallen man.

I find it all very mystical and mind-blowingly beautiful.

All of this leads me to the next topic I would like to address. It is the assumption that many Mormons make about the earth life and ministry of Christ.

Thanks to a book written by Bruce R. McConkie, many Mormons believe that Christ was Mortal. (The Mortal Messiah)

They believe he had human blood flowing through his veins despite the very clear declaration in the Book of Mormon stating that Christ did not offer up a human sacrifice. 

They assume that Christ evolved from a state of imperfection to a state of perfection and that he was not God from the time he was born into the world.

Frankly, I find it difficult to comprehend a being that is imperfect, yet sinless.

I think one of the problems is that people assume that innocence and perfection are synonymous with having a fulness of power. I do not believe that is true.

Scripture informs us that Christ condescended and  temporarily gave up the fulness of his Fathers power that he had obtained in the pre-existence, yet nowhere is it even implied that his condescension resulted in leaving the grace of the Father or giving up his perfection.

Christ was the Son of God from before the world was created and he was the Son of God from the time he entered his earth life until he ascended to the Father.

The New Testament reminds us that Christ knew of his Sonship from an early age:

48 And when they saw him, they were amazed: and his mother said unto him, Son, why hast thou thus dealt with us? behold, thy father and I have sought thee sorrowing.

49 And he said unto them, How is it that ye sought me? wist ye not that I must be about my Father’s business? (Luke 2:48-49)

One of my favorite passages in the apocrypha has the new born baby Jesus declaring his Sonship to Mary:

“Mary, I am Jesus the Son of God, that word which you brought forth according to the declaration of the angel Gabriel to you, and my Father has sent me for the salvation of the world.”

There are those that believe that Christ started out growing from grace to grace in the sense of growing from imperfection to perfection. However the state of grace does not represent a state of imperfection.

Nevertheless, people who believe that Christ had to become perfect during his earth life usually throw two very compelling scriptures at me to support their belief.

The first comes from Hebrews chapter 5:

8 Though he were a Son, yet learned he obedience by the things which he suffered;

The above passage seems to be saying that Christ grew from a state of disobedience to a state of obedience as a result of the things he suffered.

Of course we have covered this before. The JST reveals that the passage is referring to Melchizedek, not Christ:

*The 7th and 8th verses allude to Melchizedek, and not to Christ.

However the discussion often transitions to the next verse which is clearly referring to Christ, not Melchizedek:

9 And being made perfect, he became the author of eternal salvation unto all them that obey him;

It is important to remember that since that verse is not an extention of the Melchizedek narrative, his “being made perfect” could just as easily have been referring to his creation and begotten sonship in the pre-existence than to some evolution that took place on earth. After all, it was in the pre-existence that he was elected by the Father to be the author of eternal salvation.

The next passage that is often presented to substantiate the notion that Christ went from imperfection to perfection in this earth life is found in section 93:

12 And I, John, saw that he received not of the fulness at the first, but received grace for grace;

13 And he received not of the fulness at first, but continued from grace to grace, until he received a fulness;

14 And thus he was called the Son of God, because he received not of the fulness at the first.

A fulness of what?

Perfection, or power?

Is it possible to have a fulness of perfection without having a fulness of power?

I would suggest that the two terms are not synonymous.

Although it may be true that during Christ’s earthly life he was not restored to the fulness of the Father’s glory at first he continued to grow from grace to grace until he received the fulness.

While the above passages seem to be applicable as a “type”, to his earthly life, it is interesting to note that contextually, John’s vision of Christ had to do with the re-existence.

In Mormonism we are conditioned to highlight and focus on just a few passages and interpret them at face value without considering the full context of what is being said.

Lets back up and read a few verses leading up to those passages for greater context.

Note that beginning in verse six, Christ informs us that John the Baptist had been given a vision of Christ’s evolution in the pre-existence.

In this vision of the pre-existent Christ, John saw the glory of Christ before the world was:

6 And John saw and bore record of the fulness of my glory, and the fulness of John’s record is hereafter to be revealed.

7 And he bore record, saying: I saw his glory, that he was in the beginning, before the world was;

8 Therefore, in the beginning the Word was, for he was the Word, even the messenger of salvation—

9 The light and the Redeemer of the world; the Spirit of truth, who came into the world, because the world was made by him, and in him was the life of men and the light of men.

10 The worlds were made by him; men were made by him; all things were made by him, and through him, and of him.

11 And I, John, bear record that I beheld his glory, as the glory of the Only Begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth, even the Spirit of truth, which came and dwelt in the flesh, and dwelt among us.

Verses 6 through 11 above are referring to Christ’s pre-existence.

He was begotten of the Father in the pre-existence.

He was glorified in the pre-existence.

He created all of the worlds in the pre-existence.

He became the messenger of salvation in the pre-existence!

Why do we assume that the next three verses are not operating in the same context?

Why do we assume they are referring to his earthly ministry instead of the very topic being discussed?

12 And I, John, saw that he received not of the fulness at the first, but received grace for grace;

13 And he received not of the fulness at first, but continued from grace to grace, until he received a fulness;

14 And thus he was called the Son of God, because he received not of the fulness at the first.

I would suggest that John saw that Christ had a beginning point in the pre-existence. Christ went from being an unorganized eternal intelligence to being an organized eternal intelligence. He was begotten by the Father as the Son of God in the pre-existence. Indeed, he was the only begotten directly of the Father.

It is very possible that John was shown in vision that Christ did not enjoy the fulness at first in the pre-existence.

He grew from grace to grace in the pre-existence.

The God of all other gods is a Personage of Glory
who has Always had the Fulness

Verse 14 provides a remarkable differentiation between the Father and Son.

Christ is designated as the “Son of God” because he did not always have the fulness!

The same would be true of the Father if the Father was a created being that did not have the fulness at first upon his creation. But the Father is not a created being. There is no variation in him. There was no God before him. There is no beginning or end to him. He has always been.

If the Father would have had a Father who had begotten him, then he would also be called the Son of God but that is not the case. The Father has always existed as a personage of spirit glory.

Conversely, the Father created or begat Christ as a personage of tabernacle.

That is a major differentiating characteristic between the Father and the Son. The Father was not a personage of tabernacle before he created the Son, nor is he a personage of tabernacle when the Father and Son manifest themselves independently. However, when the Father and Son dwell within each other, it could be said that the Father dwells in the physical tabernacle of the Son.

2 There are two personages who constitute the great, matchless, governing and supreme power over all things—by whom all things were created and made, that are created and made, whether visible or invisible: whether in heaven, on earth, or in the earth, under the earth, or throughout the immensity of space—

They are the Father and the Son: The Father being a personage of spirit, glory and power: possessing all perfection and fulness: The Son, who was in the bosom of the Father, a personage of tabernacle, made, or fashioned like unto man, or being in the form and likeness of man, or, rather, man was formed after his likeness, and in his image;

—he is also the express image and likeness of the personage of the Father: possessing all the fulness of the Father, or, the same fulness with the Father; being begotten of him, and was ordained from before the foundation of the world to be a propitiation for the sins of all those who should believe on his name, and is called the Son because of the flesh..” (Lecture Fifth)

Lectures on Faith reminds us that Christ differs from the Father in that Christ had a beginning point of creation.

Christ was a created being. He was “made“, or “fashioned” ..”in the form and likeness of man..” as well as in “the express image and likeness of the personage of the Father

The Father cloaks himself in the tabernacle of the Son. Conversely, the tabernacle is infused with the spirit of the Father enabling Christ to inherit and manifest the fulness of the nature and character of the Father, enjoying the same mind and will when they are combined.

The Fulness of the Father

The doctrine of the fulness of the Father was revealed in Lectures on Faith as it pertains to Christ and also to all those who become the sons of God by being begotten UNTO the Father ( D&C 76:24)  through Christ’s redemption. Here is an excerpt from Lectures on Faith:

2 There are two personages who constitute the great, matchless, governing and supreme power over all things—by whom all things were created and made, that are created and made, whether visible or invisible: whether in heaven, on earth, or in the earth, under the earth, or throughout the immensity of space—They are the Father and the Son: The Father being a personage of spirit, glory and power: possessing all perfection and fulness: The Son, who was in the bosom of the Father, a personage of tabernacle, made, or fashioned like unto man, or being in the form and likeness of man, or, rather, man was formed after his likeness, and in his image;—he is also the express image and likeness of the personage of the Father: possessing all the fulness of the Father, or, the same fulness with the Father; being begotten of him, and was ordained from before the foundation of the world to be a propitiation for the sins of all those who should believe on his name, and is called the Son because of the flesh—and descended in suffering below that which man can suffer, or, in other words, suffered greater sufferings, and was exposed to more powerful contradictions than any man can be. But notwithstanding all this, he kept the law of God, and remained without sin: Showing thereby that it is in the power of man to keep the law and remain also without sin. And also, that by him a righteous judgment might come upon all flesh, and that all who walk not in the law of God, may justly be condemned by the law, and have no excuse for their sins. And he being the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth, and having overcome, received a fulness of the glory of the Father—possessing the same mind with the Father, which mind is the Holy Spirit, that bears record of the Father and the Son, and these three are one, or in other words, these three constitute the great, matchless, governing and supreme power over all things: by whom all things were created and made, that were created and made: and these three constitute the Godhead, and are one: The Father and the Son possessing the same mind, the same wisdom, glory, power and fulness: Filling all in all—the Son being filled with the fulness of the Mind, glory and power, or, in other words, the Spirit, glory and power of the Father—possessing all knowledge and glory, and the same kingdom: sitting at the right hand of power, in the express image and likeness of the Father—a Mediator for man—being filled with the fulness of the Mind of the Father, or, in other words, the Spirit of the Father: which Spirit is shed forth upon all who believe on his name and keep his commandments: and all those who keep his commandments shall grow up from grace to grace, and become heirs of the heavenly kingdom, and joint heirs with Jesus Christ; possessing the same mind, being transformed into the same image or likeness, even the express image of him who fills all in all: being filled with the fulness of his glory, and become one in him, even as the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are one.

We know from scripture that Christ has the ability to separate out of the Father to bring about the purposes of God. Hence, the Son was able to separate from the Father and condescend and come to earth to do the will of his Father.

Not only does scripture document the Son condescending into his earthly ministry and having a conversation with the Father, he even displays a will that is not necessarily the same as the Fathers which substantiate two separate and distinct wills upon separation.

“Not my will but thine…”

And yet the scriptures document that the Son has the capacity to literally be one with the Father and through the doctrine of the fulness, he IS the Father because the Father dwells within him!

But he has the mystical capacity to separate out as an independent being and member of the Godhead.

John 1:18 informs us that Christ is:

“. . in the bosom of the Father . . “

D&C Section 76:13 also makes reference to :

 . . his Only Begotten Son . . . in the bosom of the Father, even from the beginning.”

D&C Section 93 informs us that the Father and Son literally reside in each other:

 . . I am in the Father, and the Father in me, and the Father and I are one—”

Isn’t that just another way of saying the Son is the Father and the Father is in the Son?

In JST Luke 10:23 Christ declares-

“and no man knoweth that the Son is the Father, and the Father is the Son, but him to whom the Son will reveal it.”

From scripture one could argue that God the Father jointly participated in the suffering of the atonement with the Son prior to the forsaking that enabled the separation of body and spirit

“..I God have suffered these things for all, that they might not suffer if they would repent…” D&C 19:16

On the other hand Christ may have simply been referring to his own Godship.

Mosiah 15:1-4 states that God himself redeems his people-

1 …I would that ye should understand that God himself shall come down among the children of men, and shall redeem his people.
2 And because he dwelleth in flesh he shall be called the Son of God, and having subjected the flesh to the will of the Father, being the Father and the Son—
3 The Father, because he was conceived by the power of God; and the Son, because of the flesh; thus becoming the Father and Son—
4 And they are one God, yea, the very Eternal Father of heaven and of earth.

Bottom-line of the point I want to make is that Christ walked a sinless, perfect life from the time he was born into this world until his mission was complete despite the fact that his intercession may have required multiple condescensions and multiple restorations of keys and authority, ultimately resulting in the restoration of the fulness of His Father’s power and glory that He had enjoyed in the pre-existence. 

https://www.mormonstories.org/podcast/david-bokovoy-applying-higher-criticism-to-mormon-scripture/

A Few Important Updates on the Claims and Vicissitudes of the Brazil Plates Movement

November 26, 2018

The latest news from the Brazil Golden Plates scam is that the translation from the sealed portion is about to come forth for all to read and ponder. This will apparently take place after the witnesses have all had the opportunity to read and study it.

In my opinion, Mauricio Berger’s claims about the Brazil Plates have categorically been proven to be false. Both from empirical evidence with respect to the verified forgeries from the Hoffman manuscript and more importantly, from the blatant inconsistencies of the claims that have been exposed by the word of God.

Nevertheless, there is a remnant of die-hards that still keep the movement alive, and this unfolding drama is instructive and worth monitoring because there is much to be learned from it with regard to how cults are formed and how cult personalities rise to prominence. It shows how Satan deceives the gullible who are not seasoned in the word of God.

Interestingly, the movement seems to be struggling to gain traction among most of the RLDS offshoot branches. The movement has had a similar lack of appeal to mainstream Mormons although there is a very small group of Mormons that have bought what Mauricio is selling. Two of the three movers and shakers of this heretical group are actively promoting this movement. The third person is a prolific author who has made a visit to Missouri and is apparently getting ready to promote the movement as well.

On August 18th of this year a “Solemn Assembly and Conference” was called by Joseph F. Smith. At that conference it was agreed upon that Joseph F. Smith would be ordained as the prophet of the movement at another special conference to be held on September 23rd. Another very important conference was held after that.

Two of the eight witnesses, Bob Moore and Brad Gault failed to make themselves available for either conference. They were conspicuously missing because of scheduling conflicts.

Bob Moore, one of the original masterminds of this spectacle, and Brad Gault, the presiding “high priest” of the Zarahemla Branch (which  initially was the group of people that Joseph had been affiliating with and preaching to), appeared to be having a cold war of sorts with the very dominant and strong handed Joseph.

Among other things, it appears as if the cold war was over the High Priest controversy.

Bob and Brad believe in the calling of High Priest and the restoration of the high priesthood during the ministry of Joseph Smith Jr.. In fact Brad has been ordained to be a High Priest. Conversely, Joseph F. Smith has been preaching for many years that Christ was the last great high priest and that there were not to be any men ordained to that office after that. Joseph believed that Joseph Smith had been deceived about the calling of the high priests at the special conference at the Morley Farm.

Naturally, Joseph F. Smith questions many of the things Joseph was doing in during the early years of his ministry, including the revelations he brought forth.

Joseph apparently believes that Joseph Smith Jr. had been a fallen prophet. Apparently Joseph has been echoing the sentiments made by David Whitmer in his address to believers of the Book of Mormon.

When I personally spoke to Joseph, he informed me that he planned to do away with the calling of High Priest among those that come from the RLDS tradition when he sets his newly formed church in order.

Interestingly, even though Bob Moore has not been very supportive of Joseph F. Smith for several months, he continued to outwardly affirm his belief in the movement.

This is what he said to me in an email when I quizzed him about the High Priest controversy and the apparent cold war he was having with Joseph F. Smith:

“..I remain convinced that the plates in the possession of Mauricio Berger are the same plates that Joseph Smith used in the translation of the Book of Mormon.  From what I understand, the translation of the part that we saw unsealed is nearing completion, both the English and the Portuguese.  

I realize that the testimony Joseph F. Smith and I originally bore implies some significant and direct divine interventions to achieve the promises that we were given and about which we bore testimony.  

The truthfulness of our testimony rests on our Lord fulfilling His promises.  In particular, it requires him to pour out His righteousness as promised in the Book of Mormon:

‘And it came to pass that I beheld that the great mother of abominations did gather together in multitudes upon the face of all the earth, among all the nations of the Gentiles, to fight against the Lamb of God.  And it came to pass that I, Nephi, beheld the power of the Lamb of God, that it descended upon the saints of the church of the Lamb, and upon the covenant people of the Lord, who were scattered upon all the face of the earth; and they were armed with righteousness and with the power of God in great glory’ (1N 3:229-231 RLDS).

Believers in the latter-day work that Joseph Smith, Jr. began are thoroughly divided into various camps to such an extent that unification of understanding, let alone organization, is not possible without this descent of righteousness.  

I still believe and bear the same testimony that I did last October.  Until the descent of righteousness, differences will remain, even when some wish to be unified.

That disunity (as well as distrust caused by the circulation of rumors and gossip) has led to inaccurate and false conclusions.. I truly care about Joseph…

..I was on a mission to assist the church in another country when the “conference” occurred in August.  That was the reason I was not there.  Last Sunday, I fulfilled a commitment that I made in early August to preach.  I would also like to point out that I have attended all the meetings of the eight witnesses, except for when I was out of the country.  I plan to continue doing so.

Bob”

As you can see, Bob is now finally acknowledging that many of the prophetic events that his movement claims to be ushering in cannot proceed until the “power of the Lamb of God” descends “upon the saints of the church of the Lamb, and upon the covenant people of the Lord, who [are] scattered upon all the face of the earth”

I applaud him for this.

This was my reply to Bob expressing my skepticism:

“Bob

I guess I am going to need to ask you to forgive my mistrust also.

How likely is it that you (and Brad) would both find it more important to fulfill speaking assignments and other errands that can easily be changed instead of attending to those two very important conferences of historic and prophetic significance (if the claims of the movement are true)?

I am finding it very hard to believe what you are telling me, however, I will provide your declaration, word for word in my write up if you want me to.

Here is what I believe is really happening. Apparently you still believe in the testimony of Mauricio and in the veracity of the plates. I get that and I don’t doubt your statement of continued belief..

..However the evidence is overwhelming that you and Joseph have had a falling out. It appears to be over the validity of the high priest issue and possibly other things including his role in all of this and his plans for setting the church in order.

Perhaps that is what you were alluding to when you said that differences will continue until the “descent of righteousness” takes place. If it is, and you are simply downplaying the degree of disunity that is taking place, then perhaps what you are saying is accurate and you are simply being a team player and putting on a good game face for the movement.

It is my understanding that the ordination did not take place on the 23 and that Joseph has called a new conference to take place in April in Utah. . Is that incorrect also? I am sure you have been appraised of what went on even though you were conveniently not in attendance.

I also heard that he is going to appoint twelve apostles. Is that also a false rumor?

I appreciate your willingness to respond…  My blog seems to be the one that many people look to for information regarding the movement that you and Joseph have been instrumental in starting.

Watcher”

This was Bob’s reply to my skepticism regarding his inability or unwillingness to change his schedule to be able to attend the conferences that Joseph had called:

“..you apparently believe that my participation in the mission to train the priesthood and other church leaders, as well as visit the branches in one of four nation in which I help direct missionary work, should have been abandoned because of Joseph’s July announcement about an August conference.

 In so doing, you dismiss the preparation of others involved in the mission, including the vacation dates that they obtained, and my commitment to the church leaders there.  

What about the prepayments for renting the training facilities?  Then, you conclude that my participation indicates a rift.  What response can I make to that determination?

Bob”

Apparently there is no other person capable of filling Bob’s shoes in the priesthood assignments that he has been given prior to the conferences called by Joseph F. Smith. He seems to feel that these responsibilities are of greater importance than the unfolding of the great work that he claims is taking place.

I have inside sources that have informed me that there has been tension between Bob and Joseph. At first I could not figure out why Bob had distanced himself from Joseph and yet continued to state that all is well and the work was true.

However I believe I have it figured out now.

Some of my inside sources have been telling me that Bob had been emailing Mauricio and discussing the High Priest controversy with him. Apparently Mauricio sided with Bob on the high priesthood controversy and assured Bob that he would deal with Joseph.

Eventually Mauricio sent a revelation to Joseph that he had received from the Lord. The revelation validated the office of high priest!

To Mauricio’s surprise, Joseph rejected the revelation.

But the story gets better.

Joseph flew to Brazil to meet with Mauricio and discuss things.

While discussing the revelation with Mauricio,  Joseph apparently pointed out a few things in the revelation that were not consistent with his understanding of things. The reply of Mauricio is that the revelation had been corrupted and that it originally did not contain the questionable content. This helped Joseph save face regarding his rejection of the revelation. This is what Joseph says about the incident on his website:

“..on August the 3rd Mauricio sent me a revelation and I rejected it. And I got chastised for doing that. But when it came to me the Spirit was not there. And I laid it before the Lord and I said,

‘Lord if this is of you, you give me a confirmation.’

And he would not. The Lord gave me no confirmation. And the people kept mentioning that to me. Some people, not everyone, some people.   So when I got to Brazil, when I had the opportunity, I took that revelation that I had been given in English and I took Mauricio off into a room and Tyler , Bobbi and Kelvin too, came with me. And he begin to read it. And he said,

‘Well, this is true and this, well that’s not true. That’s only half true.’

And he went through the whole thing and showed that it had been corrupted. So I was justified. That’s one for me. Now he has sent another one. It is rewritten and it is around somewhere.

While in Brazil, Mauicio reiterated that the calling of High Priest was valid and that Moroni had ordained Mauricio to that office and had instructed Mauricio to ordain Joseph to that office.

On Joseph’s website, he shares that his initial response was to get up and walk out of the meeting:

..Sam Gould.. has worked with me for 35 years to try to convince me that the high priesthood was of the Lord. I have fought him and I have fought against believing in the high priesthood. And that belief was still strong when I went down there.

I was adamant that no one was going to ordain me to the high priesthood. And that was the directions that was given to Mauricio by the angel. That he ordained Mauricio to the high priesthood and directed him to ordain me to the high priesthood.

So in the service, as I sat in the chair, and they begin to talk about it in Portuguese, and they had a man there that was interpreting into English, but to my poor ears his English was as bad as (my) Portuguese. But at least he was trying.

Then there was Tyler was trying to help and Kelvin. But the thing in my mind was confusion. And God is not the author of confusion. This had me so wound up that in my mind I said, “I’m going to get up and walk out of here.”

In fact, I pulled my feet back and got hold of the chair arms and I was ready to catapult myself out of that meeting. And a voice spoke to me, as loud as any amplifier could make it in my mind. And he said,

“If you leave this service, you will destroy my work.”

I sat back in my chair and I said,

‘Lord, thy will be done, not mine. Whatever you give me, I will operate with the best of my ability to perform the work that you’ve called me to do.’ “

As you can see, Joseph’s first impression was to just get up and walk out of the meeting when he was being told that the office of High Priest was a valid office and that he needed to be ordained a high priest.

One can only imagine the conflict that Joseph F. Smith was experiencing. If he rejected the office of High Priest, he would have to publicly admit that he had been besnookered by Mauricio and his fabricated claims.

How humiliating would that be?

One the other hand, if he accepted Mauricio’s claim that the office of high priest is an authentic office it proves that Joseph F. Smith has not been very inspired and has been a false teacher regarding this very important doctrinal and priesthood issue for much of his adult life!

Joseph was between a rock and a hard spot.

Indeed, even to this day, Joseph must be wondering what other claims of David Whitmer that he has spent much of his life parroting that are also false?

It will be interesting to see if this recent turn of events will mend the breach between Bob and Joseph.

Anyway, there has been much confusion over what is really taking place in this movement because Joseph, Bob and Brad are all very evasive about the obvious contention that has been taking place between them.

Because of the many rumors floating around, I also contacted Tyler Crowell several weeks ago and asked for clarification.

Tyler is one of the eight witnesses. I asked him if he could confirm the rumors about Bob and Brad becoming disaffected from the movement.

This was my email to him

Tyler

It is apparent that there has been a falling out between Joseph F. Smith and the leaders of the Zarahemla Branch. Can you provide any details? Will Bob Moore and Brad Gault be having their names removed as witnesses?

Hope all is going well for you.

This was his reply:

Dear brother,

In spite of my weaknesses and frailties I have been mercifully blessed with the intercession of the Holy Spirit which causes me to greatly rejoice. I hope the same is true for you also.

As yet we who see through a glass darkly use our own human understanding and traditions as a lens to perceive what God sees perfectly in entirety. As you are aware different men have different understandings and interpretations of specific prophetic timelines and events.

But I hope in spite of varying perspectives we all still labor for the same cause. Those who have a witness from the Holy Spirit that this work is of God, such as the eight witnesses, as well as those who wait for confirmation can all labor according to their faith and diligence to bring souls to Jesus.

If you desire to have the intentions of Bob or Brad you will have to ask them. From what I know their testimony stands firm.

As you can see, Tyler’s response seems to suggest that ALL of the witnesses including Bob and Brad are still strong in the emerging movement dispite differing perceptions pertaining to prophetic timelines, events and doctrines. Yet he ultimately refers me to Bob and Brad for their own word on the matter regarding their intentions about their future involvement. Kind of a mixed message.

He then took the opportunity to ask me if I would be willing to post on my blog Mauricio’s responses to my accusations about him:

I am glad you chose to write to me because I would like to ask you if you are willing to allow a reply to be posted to your readers of the accusations you have made?
Since you have spoken in behalf of Mauricio I am sure you would want your readers to have the opportunity to read for themselves his response to your assertions.  
I anxiously await your reply. 

This was my response:

I find it very hard to believe that their silence and absence from the last conference is just a coincidence or apathy towards the work.

Regarding your request, absolutely.

I will post his responses to my assertions. I think all sides of an issue should be able to state their case. I hate to give him publicity, but it is only fair to state his responses.

Obviously I reserve the right to respond to his responses.

I am glad you are doing well.

So, I am going to publish Mauricio’s responses to my accusations at the end of this post. Anyone interested in his replies are welcome to read them.

First I want to share an interesting email I got from an anonymous group of people who claim to live in Missouri that are quite close to this situation and very familiar with the personal life and history of Joseph F. Smith.

Here is what the email says:

“There have been activities in the last nine months that concern several people who are observing the Brazil movement and the sealed portion of the Book of Mormon; concern due to certain actions which have wrought discord instead of the promised unity, corrupting some hearts against others, and undermining the good intentions of others.

We continue to observe a rebellious spirit that seems to emanate from Joseph Fredrick Smith., the great-grandson of Joseph Smith Jr., who was recently acknowledged as prophet by the group in Brazil. These observations brought to mind the character of Joseph Fredrick’s 2ndgreat uncle, William Smith.

There were good reasons that William Smith, brother to the Prophet Joseph Smith Jr., was often chastised by the Lord and at length rejected by the brethren from the office of patriarch after the deaths of his brothers and finally excommunicated.

He allowed himself to be ruled by his passions, pride, and ego. This reflection has come to surface in the minds of several who have been keeping an eye on the claims coming from Brazil and the restructuring of a new search. We have sat back and watched, prayed, considered, attended some meetings, yet tried to do so with our spiritual eyes for it is that vision that keeps us balanced. 

Since it was declared that the gold plates, including the sealed portion, had supposedly been delivered to Mauricio Berger in Brazil, events have been unfolding that show similarities between William Smith and Joseph Fredrick Smith that should give many cause to step back and see things with their spiritual eyes and not be taken by the awe and splendor that their human eyes afford them, for such splendor is wrought through lenses which distort and skew reality. 

Here are just a few notes of interest concerning William:

1)   William felt he was important and should be highly placed.

2)   Contended with those who did not agree with him, at length turning to the people to rally behind him, undermining the leadership.

3)   Felt that he knew more about the direction of the church than those surrounding him, primarily after Joseph’s death, and continually attempted to show the leaders that they were in error.

4)   His pride outweighed his reason. Joseph told him that if he could not learn to control his passion and put it under foot, he would not be welcomed into the kingdom of heaven.

5)   Was not a team player, wanted more authority than he was given.

6)   Resentful, articulate, and abrasive.

7)   1845- After being ordained a patriarch he made public expressions of harmony with the brethren, while in private letters and conversations, he resorted to name calling and accusations.

8)   After Joseph’s death, William bounced from one group to another in an attempt to exert his authority but to no avail.

9)   May 1845, sought the support of the people because he felt his right to lead was being unfairly challenged.

10) Parley P. Pratt objected to sustaining William as an apostle in 1845 because he, “aspires to uproot and undermine the legal presidency of the church that he might occupy the place himself.”

11) George Albert Smith said of William, “he has a pattern of building himself up on the merits of others.”

12) William’s brother, Joseph the Prophet said that William was “a fierce lion who will neglect the more weighty matters until his head is bowed down with sorrow.”

13) The blessing he received while in Missouri speaks of his prideful heart and rebellious spirit.

*This information was taken from the book United by Faith, and the following websites: https://www.lds.org/ensign/1979/09/joseph-smiths-brothers-nauvoo-and-after?lang=eng

William Smith Problematic Patriarch https://www.dialoguejournal.com/wp-content/uploads/sbi/articles/Dialogue_V16N02_13.pdf

One cannot deny that there are many similarities here between William and Joseph Fredrick Smith. Anyone who has been close to the events unfolding in Holden, Blue Springs, and other areas, know of the unrest and division which has been increasing. 

There is another thought which must be taken into consideration as well; where is the family of Joseph F. Smith in the matters at hand? Through the journals and writings of William’s own siblings and those who witnessed his behaviors, we have a good accounting of what he was driven by and that, despite being a good man, he heeded his own passions and ego rather than the more weighty matters of the church and building up the kingdom.

It leads to the question of Joseph Fredrick Smith’s own family. Has anyone thought or wondered where they are? Why are they not rallying behind what he is doing? What are their thoughts? What insights would their reflections offer that we do not see? For the heart of the man who is seen in the home reveals the true nature of that man.”

*end of anonymous email

This is really quite a remarkable email from an anonymous group of people who have been watching the events of this movement very closely.

Having read a little bit of history about William Smith, and also having heard from several informants close to the situation about Joseph F. Smith’s history of jumping around from group to group until his dominant personality burns bridges, I must admit that the comparison is striking.

If my personal beliefs would allow it, I would have to strongly consider the possibility that Joseph F. Smith is the reincarnation of William Smith!

smiths

I found the above email very interesting and the comment about Joseph F. Smith family possibly not supporting his claims of being a prophet or his claims about the authenticity of the Brazil plates.

That really caught my interest.

In regard to that I became aware of a book written by one of Joseph’s daughters which I am currently reading. I am now about half way through it. It is a real eye opener about the life and character of Joseph F. Smith.

Regarding William Smith, one of the most fascinating parts of LDS history that I have found over the years is the little known fact that William Smith was not originally chosen to be a member of the quorum of the Twelve apostles by the witnesses of the book of Mormon who had been given the mandate from the Lord to chose the Twelve.

After the witnesses of the Book of Mormon fulfilled their calling from the Lord to chose Twelve men to be apostles and submitted their decisions to Joseph Smith, they were pressured by Joseph Smith into replacing Phineas Young who had originally been chosen by the witnesses, with Joseph Smith’s brother William Smith!

Here is an excerpt from the book “Lost Apostles, Forgotten Members of Mormonism’s Original Quorum of the Twelve Apostles” by Shepard and Marquardt:

“In the behind-the-scenes negotiations, Joseph Smith had rejected on nomination: Phineas Young, Brigham Young’s brother, in favor of Josephs own brother, William. Cowdery wrote to Brigham Young in February 27, 1848:

‘At the time the twelve were chosen in Kirtland, and I may say before, it had been manifested that brother Phineas was entitled to occupy the station as one of that number,; but owing to brother Joseph’s urgent request at the time, Brother David and myself yielded to his wishing and consented for William to be selected contrary to our feelings and judgment and to our deep mortification ever since’

About two decades later in 1854, Phineas spoke to a group of church leaders in Salt Lake City about how his call to the quorum had been cancelled. According to Wilford Woodruff, Phineas Young said that he was the first that was chosen in the organization of the quorum of the Twelve Apostles but brother Joseph said he wished I would let Wm. Smith have that place so I gave way to him. 

It is very telling that Oliver Cowdery and David Whitmer felt deep mortification about being pressured into changing their inspired choice of Phineas Young to that of William Smith.

That is a very interesting historical tidbit that few people know about. Here is another quote from the Book that encapsulates Williams perceived character-

“Historian and educator Paul M. Edwards, second-great-grandson of Joseph Smith, caught the essence of William Smith’s character when he wrote: ‘William B. Smith was a difficult man. Like so many who feel denied power and recognition, he was probably best described as being his own worst enemy, … William had the habit of saying what was on his mind, and as a very active and concerned man, he was often in the midst of controversy'”

The book concludes its remarks about William Smith as follows:

“After Joseph and Hyrum Smth were assassinated, William found he was less able than before to control his acerbic tongue or need to dominate others. Brigham Young did his best to accommodate the volatile apostle but eventually shunted him to the children’s table, so to speak, for which William set about trying to convince the other branches of the Restoration to recognize him as his brother’s rightful heir.

He ended up being excluded from all the churches and engaging in the exchange of insults that were even shriller than his past examples of character assassination. He managed to find peace only in old age when his nephew, Joseph III, was wise enough to keep him at arm’s length.”

 Again, some of the parallels between the very dominate, controversial and sometimes caustic personalities of William Smith and Joseph F. Smith are uncanny. ”

But I digress.

The anonymous group of people who sent me the email brought up a very important observation. Why is it that the family members of Joseph F. Smith who know his character the best, are not rallying around him and supporting his quest to become the prophet to finish the work that Joseph Smith started?

Is it possible that this anonymous group of insiders know something that we should know about the very telling family life of Joseph F. Smith?

When Joseph Smith Jr. was called to be a prophet, his parents and most of his brothers and sisters were very supportive of his claims because they knew the integrity of his soul.

Where do Joseph F. Smith’s children fit into his quest to become prophet?

Those who have decided to sustain Joseph F. Smith as a prophet should do their “due diligence” and make sure they are comfortable with his history.

Here are the responses from Mauricio in regard to the accusations I have made to his claims:

Clarifications by Mauricio A Berger – 05.23.2018 (English)

Throughout my life, many people passed by me, day after day. But only a few of these people are in my memory and I will carry them forever in my heart. Among these people there is one in particular, my friend, Jader.

Recently an acquaintance of social networks has passed me a link: https://onewhoiswatching.files.wordpress.com/2018/04/final-mauricio-blog-10.pdf where the “watcher” of site makes numerous accusations about me, from deceiver and falsifier. This does not really make a difference for me, because I me feel as Joseph Smith Jr. it when he related his story and among his words I highlight some to express what I feel about all of this:

“However, it was nevertheless a fact that I had beheld a vision. I have thought since, that I felt much like Paul, when he made his defense before King Agrippa, and related the account of the vision he had when he saw a light, and heard a voice; but still there were but few who believed him; some said he was dishonest, others said he was mad; and he was ridiculed and reviled. But all this did not destroy the reality of his vision. He had seen a vision, he knew he had, and all the persecution under heaven could not make it otherwise; and though they should persecute him unto death, yet he knew, and would know to his latest breath, that he had both seen a light and heard a voice speaking unto him, and all the world could not make him think or believe otherwise. So it was with me. I had actually seen a light, and in the midst of that light I saw two Personages, and they did in reality speak to me; and though I was hated and persecuted for saying that I had seen a vision, yet it was true; and while they were persecuting me, reviling me, and speaking all manner of evil against me falsely for so saying, I was led to say in my heart: Why persecute me for telling the truth? I have actually seen a vision; and who am I that I can withstand God, or why does the world think to make me deny what I have actually seen? For I had seen a vision; I knew it, and I knew that God knew it, and I could not deny it, neither dared I do it; at least I knew that by so doing I would offend God, and come under condemnation. I had now got my mind satisfied so far as the sectarian world was concerned” — Joseph Smith —History 1:24-26 LDS.

In a similar way I can say that my mind is already satisfied with regard to the sectarian world and their opinions regarding to this work. But there is something to be said about my friend Jader who needs to be recorded here and in the story that will be drawn from that event with the restoration of the gospel.

So I am willing to clarify some things through this message.

But first, I must make a few remarks about the “watcher” accusations about the facts. First, I it has proved to those who seek the truth that such artifacts exist. No man who could have falsified such evidence would be in his right mind to invite eight unknown witnesses to come to his house and test its truth if it were not true. In addition, all eight witnesses are members of some restoration church in the United States, which, of course, would make any charlatan avoid coming to Brazil with the possibility of checking artifacts up close. In fact, most, if not all, wanted only one thing, make sure they were not being deceived. Yet, they all departed with conviction of what they saw when they returned to the United States, with complete certainty of the plates. Doubt, if it existed, did not last in their hearts, not only for the materials that proved to be reliable, but also for the confirmation of the Holy Spirit which he was spilled in all of them here in Brazil.

In its turn, what can I say about the for the accusations highlighted raised by the “watcher”?

By the accusation raised by the “watcher” that I falsified the plates by the Mark Hoffman document, I can say that such an argument only proved even more that the plates in my possession are true.

According to material that the eight witnesses elaborated to understand this coincidence, exist is at least two letters written by Professor Charles Anthon, whose content coincide comes with the description of the last plaque and corroborates with the description of his letters, in which Charles Anthon describes that he saw characters arranged in vertical columns and at the end of the document there was a circle divided into several compartments, adorned with several strange marks. It is logical to assume that Joseph Smith designed this document of Anthon from the last record plate that I showed the eight witnesses. I would not have been able to forge that, since I, like many Latter-day Saints here in Brazil, had no knowledge of this descriptive letter of Anthon, because in short, what is presented to us by the LDS church is that the characters that Martin Harris showed Charles Anthon are those available on the internet, but that second the information I later obtained from the eight witnesses, not match what Professor Anthon mentioned. —https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthon_Transcript.

That is, this argument raised against me proves even more the veracity of the plates, since such descriptive figures are in agreement with the reports of the past. If there were no such last plaque, however close it may seem to Hoffman’s counterfeit, then they would in fact be false. Because Anthon’s description proves that at some point Joseph Smith Jr drew from the gold plates something similar to what is contained in the last plate of the records that the eight witnesses saw.

What do I have to say about the widespread issue of where Mark Hoffman would have copied his paper?

There are some arguments to be considered, especially one that mentions that Mark Hoffman at some point had access to a fragment of the document described in the letters of Charles Anthon, and from then on he forged an entire document to have more monetary value and obtain higher profit from its sale. However, for me the question is simpler than it seems: The Lord our God possesses a real enemy of the invisible and extremely intelligent and powerful world to influence the minds of men, just as he influenced Mark Hoffman to act obscurely among his similar. (Joseph Smith—Históry 1:16 LDS). This enemy, as everyone understands, has lived among humans for thousands of years and has undoubtedly seen Mormon handling the last plate as he may have seen the original Joseph Smith-produced document that Martin Harris took to Charles Anthon. That is the most plausible answer! At the present time and knowing that the sealed part would soon be exposed to the world with the birth of Mauricio Berger, he found in the figure of Mark Hoffman a counterpart to falsify the said document, using in the forger’s thoughts only the original characters that he retained in his remembrance, already with the intention of interrupting the work of the Lord when it began to occur again among the people of the church in the present day.

As for the following question raised by the “watcher” that Joseph Smith Jr. will return to complete the paper, which he says on his website, which has been announcing this idea for years to his readers, and therefore, according to him, I must having copied his idea, when surprised he reads in an email sent by me to a young man from the LDS church stating that Joseph would come back to finish the job. It was then that the so-called “watcher”, perhaps afraid of that I can copy your ideas, tries to manipulate his readers into thinking that I am hiding my personal beliefs from Brother Bob, who according to the “watcher”: Bob not believe in the return of Joseph. Here I confirm again what I said in the e-mail, I know by revelation of Moroni that Joseph will return to finish the job and not because I have read in some place something similar. Yes, he will come, but not in the way the “watcher” testifies, that Joseph will rise again to complete the work, not least because the scriptures do not mention resurrection in the case of that return. But behold, I say unto, that it shall be done in a way no one shall perceive, as it was in the days of Jesus when the Jews also awaited Elijah’s return, but as Jesus taught his disciples, Elijah came in the figure of John Baptist, but no one recognized him. This is so true that in Joseph Smith’s inspired version of the Bible, exactly in the text of Mark 9: 3 mentions that Moses and Elijah were on the mountain of transfiguration, and confirms that this Elijah was indeed John the Baptist. Lastly, if this is the main point of the question, So I say it is a simple fact to understand, because there has been a parallel in the history of the gospel, but still, it is one of the mysteries that the Lord will not make known to ordinary men, but only to his prophets. In this case I regret to inform you that the idea of the “watcher” regarding Joseph’s return is similar to what happened to the Pharisees in the meridian of the times, when they were waiting for Elijah’s return, but they did not realize that Elijah was there among them.

Now, finally, I want to talk about Jader. First of all, I want to reinforce his character by saying that I have not known any man more just, more distinct, and true than the Jader.

In his commentary, Jader mentions that Mauricio has been talking about that he Jader, broke the seer’s stones. First he just came to this comment because someone behind the questions passed the wrong information to him, and because he is very correct in his way, must have thought that I’m spreading lies about he, because he never had access to the stones. On the other hand, whoever passed this distorted information to Jader, lied to him and entangled him in a web of deception. The “Questions and Answers” video is widely available to all interested parties at this link below since the first visit of Joseph and Bob to Brazil, where Bob tells in detail that I, Maurício Artur Berger, broke the seers stones with my own hands. It was only on this occasion on 10/29/2017 that the history of the stones broke was known by the general public. — 10.29.2017 Zarahemla Branch Open Forum – Questions & Answer

On the other, if they asked me, if Jader exerted some influence to break the stones the way I broke them? So the answer is yes! Jader was always a friend who taught me a lot about loving the truth above all things, and made me see situations that sometimes we do not realize its real meaning. In this case, it was Jader, who somehow caught my attention so that I would ascertain the facts in order to see if I was not being deceived by the devil, and with that in mind, and weakened by losing the friendship of my best friend, I acted compulsorily in relation to the feelings that struck me in those days, coming to break the stones, because of the sadness and the doubt he raised in my heart, because of the things that Jader had told me about the lie of satan. The hard words that Jader told me about the lie of Satan, was for the same reason that made Jader move away from me, and I never hid from anyone that I made a mistake with Jader and with God in that regard, when I asked Jader to tell his bishop that he had seen the angel Moroni and the plates, when in fact he had never seen. This point goes into the second charge of the site where Jader responds that I asked him for it, and it was precisely at this point that he came to believe that everything was a lie. I did not see any problem in asking him this because I was quite sure that one day Moroni would show the plates to him personally, because the promise of being one of the three witnesses was his and not Brother Valdeci Machado. Maybe Jader is right when on the site he says that I am arrogant because after my excommunication I felt the desire to show LDS church that they were wrong about me but could not show the plates to Jader, time after he received an email from one of the three men who were on the mountain I requested this him. But for knowing the character of the Jader already predicted that he would move away, however, I asked anyway, for I was sure that as soon as Moroni confirmed everything, he would not be disappointed with me. But he did not allow himself that opportunity.

Jader also mentions in this same comment that I already have the translated material completely. In fact, while Jader was at my side, he saw a part of the translation being made from a context that was not in the Book of Mormon that he knows, this context was a translated portion of Lehi’s book. After that, I had to deposit the plates in a hole at the top of the hill, shortly thereafter, I, Jader and Joni, climbed the mountain once more to see if I took the plates from the hole where I had put it, but one a huge stone was laid on top of the site, making it impossible for him to be removed at the time, after which I asked him to trust that the plates would be shown to him by the angel Moroni at the end of the ten years from 2007 to 2017, the year in which Moroni of in fact it showed for the three witnesses. Therefore, I never had all translated material, because I only had the plates again in January 2017, and resumed the translation work only after the eight witnesses came to Brazil earlier this year of 2018.

As I said, Jader is an extremely correct person, and I agree with him to maintain his position in defending his truth, for each one will be judged by what he has. And since many things have become undesirable in my person for him, for I am flawed and imperfect, then I do not see how he can have other position concerning me at this stage in which this story in which he has been involved unfolds. However, I insist that the questions to Jader were questions disguised by someone who made him think I was using his name to make him a bad character. Be that as it may, I believe that if the right questions are asked, he will also speak the truth about them. There is even an email from him dated June 29, 2011 that includes a testimony with his words that say:

I also testify that I know these things are true because I had the privilege exactly on February 4, 2008 to see a group of renowned spirits at the top Acute hill. I want you all to know that I Jader and Brother Mauricio we were ministered and visited on December 25, 2008 also on the Acute Hill by the three Apostles of the Lord, by Simon Peter who holds the keys of the kingdom of his church and together with him James and John. I say this and I tell everyone and I confirm and without shadows of doubt that I speak and believe in what I have seen and know and that all listen and pray to the Lord so that their minds are opened and their hearts are touched. Knowing this I close saying that this is the will of our Savior Jesus Christ to be thus manifested the designs of God and the Holy Spirit, and I do and I leave this Testimony in the name of the Great, Mighty and Redeemer of humanity the Savior Jesus Christ. Amen”.  (Jadar – June 29, 2011)

I do not believe, for a single moment that he allowed himself to be influenced by me at the time he wrote this testimony, because he was always a man of great character to be influenced for someone. Because of this character, I do not believe that in the present time he will let himself be influenced to change his previous testimony. This would be contrary to their high moral standards. I believe that he can say at the present time that they were manifestations of the devil, because, that is what he believes today, that I have been deceived. But I do not think he would say he’s never seen anything.

Finally, to conclude my opinion on the subject posted by the “watcher,” I know that Jader now thinks that the three men who appeared to us at the top of the mountain, whom I supposed at the time to be Peter, James and John are for him only three common men, similar to us, made from of flesh and bones, who coincidentally climbed the mountain that day at a late hour and stayed there no more than fifteen minutes and then left. But if you ask Jader what those men actually did and spoke in those 15 minutes, surely Jader will confirm these words of mine:

1º they asked to pray with us.

2º spoke of his master healing people only with his shadow.

3º they said that they were from Paraiso, which could be a nearby city of the city of Agudo, but also, could be the literal Paradise.

4º They also said that it was the first time they had climbed that mountain, which is impossible in the middle of the bush and the night for someone who does not know the way.

5º Although we saw a light approaching when they arrived, we did not see them light any lantern in the darkness of the night to go away and to go down the mountain.

6º Apart from all this there is there were a storm approaching quickly from the top, there was no escaping it, and I told Jader that we should go down, when one of them said, calm down. If you just believe it, it rains around and the storm does not even touch you. So we spent the night there, and in fact, the storm passed around us with a lot of wind shaking the trees of the mountain, but nothing happened to us.

7º We did not see them drinking water when they arrived among us, or having some canteen or backpack that could contain water so they could hydrate, so little showed signs of fatigue, which was impossible for a man of flesh and bones as we arrive up there on the mountain without feeling exhausted and thirsty for water.

Here is a question: if they were just three ordinary men, do not you think, in the least strange that they go up at night and stay there only 15 minutes after such an intense walk to reach the top and the time they were there, spoke about the subject that led me and Jader to that place, coming to pray with us?

Lastly, it does not matter much to me on which side Jader is at this moment and how much he believes me to be a false prophet, what matters to me is the character of my friend Jader. It matters that their morality remains untouched, though these malefactors try to persuade him with questions elaborated with distorted facts of the current history. Because, I have been told, on at least two occasions, one before Jader departs from me and another afterwards, that he will in future be a key player in this work. Therefore, when I think of my friend Jader raising an accusation against this work, it is like thinking of the story of Paul, who was as whole and zealous as Jader is in defense of the truth. But when God called Paul to embrace his cause, then that zealous man for his traditions bowed to the ground to recognize the truth that was right among those whom he accused of apostasy.

As for the “watcher” and the other sectarians who accuse me of this or that, I mean that I am not angry with them. I have pity before, just as Jesus took pity on those who crucified him because they did not really know what they were doing. Similarly, I, Maurício Berger,  I’ll be praying for those who persecute me and try to disfigure the image of this work, because indeed they do not know what they do. Amen!

Mauricio A Berger – 05.23.2018

 


A Review of What the Book of Mormon Tells us about the Latter day Jews: Part 4

November 15, 2018

In part two of this series we used a keyword search of the word “Jew” in the Book of Mormon to identify, search and parse 1 Nephi 10 and 1 Nephi 13 with regard to the eschatology of the Jews. This search also led us to 2 Nephi 3

In part three of this series we identified additional passages in the Book of Mormon that referred to the eschatology of the Jews. Hence, we parsed 1 Nephi 152 Nephi 92 nephi 10, and 2 nephi 25

In conjunction with these Book of Mormon passages, we also observed passages in the revelations that came through the Prophet Joseph Smith. We also reviewed related historical events of the LDS restoration to correlate and substantiate the fulfillment of the prophecies about the Jews in the Book of Mormon.

By evaluating these Book of Mormon passages in light of the events that took place during Joseph Smith’s ministry, we have begun creating a composite narrative from the various scriptures to prove that the latter day restoration of the Jews to the land of their inheritance has actually already begun and that it is taking place in the New World, not the Old World.

It has been taking place since the Nauvoo era of Joseph Smith’s ministry when LDS missionary were sent across the great waters to take the knowledge of the gospel to the dispersed of Judah and the outcasts of Israel.

Since that time, the dispersed of Judah and the outcasts of Israel began coming across the great waters to America to be restored to the lands of their latter day inheritance in the promised land of America.

This represents the first time, they began to be reclaimed from their scattered condition and united with the condemned restored church of the restoration.

After migrating to Utah the latter day church which was in the process of gathering latter day Jews gave up on the establishment of Zion in Missouri.

They also gave up on the doctrine of the gathering altogether and began establishing “Stakes” all over the world which returned the latter day Jews to a scattered condition among the gentiles.

This is why the scriptures speak of the “second time” that God will once again begin to reclaim his people, the dispersed of Judah, from their scattered condition in the third watch.

10 ¶ And in that day there shall be a root of Jesse, which shall stand for an ensign of the people; to it shall the Gentiles seek: and his rest shall be glorious.

11 And it shall come to pass in that day, that the Lord shall set his hand again the second time to recover the remnant of his people, which shall be left, from Assyria, and from Egypt, and from Pathros, and from Cush, and from Elam, and from Shinar, and from Hamath, and from the islands of the sea.

12 And he shall set up an ensign for the nations, and shall assemble the outcasts of Israel, and gather together the dispersed of Judah from the four corners of the earth.

Clearly, the Lord began to recover the dispersed of Judah during Joseph Smith’s ministry during the second watch AND he will once again recover them and gather them to the land of their inheritance in the latter days.

The land of their inheritance in the latter days is clearly in North America! ( see this blog post for additional documentation that the Jerusalem of last days prophecy is indeed located in North America!)

The commonly accepted belief that the gathering of the Ashkinasi Jews that was orchestrated by the United Nations and financed in part by the Rothchild Family is all just a big smokescreen that will confuse and distract people from the real prophesied events of the latter days that will take place in North America.

The next passage we will consider in this series is found in 3rd Nephi.

Before reviewing it, I want to remind you that versification and punctuation by uninspired editors and church leaders has often bastardized the contextual intent of the scriptures and allowed uninspired interpretations to be taught.

For that reason I am removing the verses and punctuation of the following passage so that it reads in its pure unadulterated form when read and uttered by Joseph the Seer during the translation process:

“And it shall come to pass that I will establish my people, O house of Israel and behold this people [the house of Israel] will I establish in this land unto the fulfilling of the covenant which I made with your father Jacob and it shall be a New Jerusalem and the powers of heaven shall be in the midst of this people; yea, even I will be in the midst of you.” (3 Nephi 20:21-22 bold and underlined and insertions with brackets done by me)

The above passage can be interpreted two different ways.

The common interpretation when viewed in light of the false traditions of our fathers and with the corrupted versification and punctuation is that God will gather all of Israel to different geographical place with the distinction that he will specifically gather the posterity of Lehi the land of America, where Christ was speaking to them in 3rd Nephi while other tribes are gathered to the Old World.

By taking the versification and punctuation out and viewing the passage in context with all of the other scriptures, it is saying that all twelve tribes will be gathered to the new latter day land of Jerusalem.

Please note that when the “n” in “New Jerusalem” is capitalized by uninspired people, it appears to be speaking about the New Jerusalem mentioned in the Book of Revelation, however that is not contextually congruent.

This is because the “New Jerusalem” spoken of in the Book of Revelation (and the book of Ether), is an otherworldly city that comes down from heaven.

Conversely, the “new Jerusalem” spoken of 7 times in the Book of Mormon, is referring to the new establishment of the ancient city of Jerusalem in America, in the latter days.

To further verify the proper interpretation of 3 Nephi 20:21-22 all we need to do is scour 3rd Nephi for additional clarification. Notice the following passages earlier in the chapter

And verily, verily, I say unto you, that when they shall be fulfilled then is the fulfilling of the covenant which the Father hath made unto his people, O house of Israel. And then shall the remnants, which shall be scattered abroad upon the face of the earth, be gathered in from the east and from the west, and from the south and from the north; and they shall be brought to the knowledge of the Lord their God, who hath redeemed them. (3 Nephi 20:12-13)

Pretty clear don’t you think?

All remaining remnants from all of the world are gathered to the same place! ( In America)

Another witness that all of the remnants of Jacob will be gathered together to the same place geographically is found in the 5th chapter:

And as surely as the Lord liveth, will he gather in from the four quarters of the earth all the remnant of the seed of Jacob, who are scattered abroad upon all the face of the earth. (3 Nephi 5:24)

Bingo.

That is game, set, and match.

There is no amount of scripture wresting that can deny what is being said.

The Lord does not gather the Jews to the Old World while gathering other remnants to America. He gathers all remnants of Jacob upon the face of the earth together into the same general location on the same continent. He does not gather the remnants of Judah to the Old World while gathering the remnants of Joseph to the New World.

It is going to be a global gathering of all the remnants of Jacob from all over the world who have not already gathered.

The Book of Mormon is not the only testimony that we have on this topic.

We can go to modern revelation for an additional witness.

If we keyword the words “east” AND “west” AND “south” AND “north” we are led to the astounding prophecy in D&C 42:

62 Thou shalt ask, and it shall be revealed unto you in mine own due time where the new Jerusalem shall be built. And behold, it shall come to pass that my servants shall be sent forth to the east and to the west, to the north and to the south. (D&C 42: 62-63)

As you can see, the gathering of the remnants to the new, latter day Jerusalem will be from the east, west, north and south, duplicating the prophecy in the Book of Mormon. This is obviously speaking of the same topic as the passages in the Book of Mormon.

Interestingly, by linking those two passages and others together one can provide one of the most compelling arguments that it is North America and more specifically, Kirtland Ohio and the gathering places of the LDS restoration movement, where the ancient Nephites were located and where the global gathering of the remnants of Israel will take place in the future.

Regarding the latter day gathering of Israel, even some of the modern general authorities have made supporting declarations about America being the promised land for all of Israel.

Bruce R. McConkie made the following observation:

“The first important part of the restoration of Israel began with the conversion and gathering of many from the tribe of Joseph… Then Joseph will gather the other tribes”’ (Bruce R. McConkie, A New Witness for the Articles of Faith [1985], 529).

 Of course, Brother McConkie was basically paraphrasing the prophecy in Ether :

6 And that a new Jerusalem should be built up upon this land, unto the remnant of the seed of Joseph, for which things there has been a type.

What is the “type” that is being referred to?

It is the Old Testament account of how Joseph was sold into slavery by his brothers.

This took him from the land where he and his father and brothers and all of the family of Israel were living to a foreign land.

This enabled him to get established in the new land and provide a place of refuge for the other tribes of Israel to eventually come to!

That is the TYPE that is being referred to.

That is exactly what has happened in the latter days.

The remnants of Joseph first came to America beginning with the pilgrims. Descendants of those remnants of Joseph began gathering into the church during the Kirtland era of the restoration.

Following that, the dispersed of Judah and the other outcasts of Israel followed the remnants of Joseph to America!

Again, that is the type that is being referred to in Ether 13:6.

Elder McConkie’s observation that the other tribes would follow after the remnants of Joseph to America was also no doubt making reference to D&C 133 which informs us that after the Ephraimite Gentiles return and restore the fulness, in due time, other tribes come “unto the children of Ephraim … and be crowned with glory, even in Zion, by the hands of the servants of the Lord, even [by] the children of Ephraim” (D&C 133:30, 32).

All of these prophecies are essentially an extension and clarification of an ancient prophecy in the Old Testament which is further clarified in the JST.

In this prophecy we the latter-day descendants of Joseph diligently go about the work of gathering scattered Israel or “pushing them together.”

The patriarch Jacob prophesied of this marvelous work as he gave a blessing to Joseph’s two sons: “For thou shalt be a light unto my people, to deliver them in the days of their captivity, from bondage; and to bring salvation unto them, when they are altogether bowed down under sin” (JST, Gen. 48:11, Bible appendix).

Again we reference the Book of Mormon which notes that the first temporal salvation that Joseph of Egypt brought to the other tribes who were all gathered together in the same land, was a type of the temporal and spiritual salvation that the latter day Joseph would bring to the other tribes of Israel who again, will be gathered to the same land.

As you can see, there is a “new Jerusalem” mentioned in 3rd Nephi, that is built up upon the earth and reestablished in the last days which is separate and distinct from the “New Jerusalem” that comes down from heaven.

We are informed in scripture that the term “New Jerusalem” is synonymous with the term “Zion”. Modern revelation informs us that the new Jerusalem (Zion) from below will eventually be cleansed and caught up to meet the New Jerusalem (Zion) from above in the air:

The Lord hath redeemed his people; And Satan is bound and time is no longer. The Lord hath gathered all things in one. The Lord hath brought down Zion from above. The Lord hath brought up Zion from beneath. (D&C 84:100)

One of the reasons it is helpful to identify who the real latter day Jews are is so that we can better understand the events of prophecy that are taking place around us.

In third Nephi the Savior explains that all of the major events spoken of by Isaiah pertaining to Israel have a dual fulfillment. They take place historically prior to the appearance of Christ in the meridian of time AND similar events will take place again after the meridian of time.

 

1 And now, behold, I say unto you, that ye ought to search these things. Yea, a commandment I give unto you that ye search these things diligently; for great are the words of Isaiah.

2 For surely he spake as touching all things concerning my people which are of the house of Israel; therefore it must needs be that he must speak also to the Gentiles.

3 And all things that he spake have been and shall be, even according to the words which he spake.

Although Christ was speaking specifically of the prophecies of Isaiah, it is understood by many prophecy scholars that this concept of history repeating itself, is true of all of the events mentioned by all of the Old Testament prophets.

All of the major historical events spoken of by Jeremiah and Ezekiel and other Old Testament prophets have a dual fulfillment.

With that in mind, and with the understanding that the latter day church of Jesus Christ of Latter day Saints represents latter day Israel including remnants of Judah, I want to share a speculation of mine regarding a curious passage in Jeremiah 11.

 “..the Lord said unto me, Proclaim all these words in the cities of Judah, and in the streets of Jerusalem, saying, Hear ye the words of this covenant, and do them.

7 For I earnestly protested unto your fathers in the day that I brought them up out of the land of Egypt, even unto this day, rising early and protesting, saying, Obey my voice.

8 Yet they obeyed not, nor inclined their ear, but walked every one in the imagination of their evil heart: therefore I will bring upon them all the words of this covenant, which I commanded them to do; but they did them not.

9 And the Lord said unto me, A conspiracy is found among the men of Judah, and among the inhabitants of Jerusalem.

10 They are aturned back to the iniquities of their forefathers, which refused to hear my words; and they went after other gods to serve them: the house of Israel and the house of Judah have broken my covenant which I made with their fathers.

11 ¶ Therefore thus saith the Lord, Behold, I will bring evil upon them, which they shall not be able to escape; and though they shall bcry unto me, I will not hearken unto them.

12 Then shall the cities of Judah and inhabitants of Jerusalem go, and cry unto the gods unto whom they offer incense: but they shall not save them at all in the time of their trouble.

The historical event mentioned above speaks of consequences upon ancient Judah for breaking the law.

We have previously documented the fact that the latter day saints have rejected the fulness of the gospel and broken the law that was received through the prophet Joseph Smith.

I would submit to you that contextually, the phrase “men of Judah” in the above passage has reference to the leading brethren, or leaders of the tribe and kingdom of Judah.

These leaders were involved in a conspiracy.

What is a conspiracy?

CONSPIRACY, noun [Latin See Conspire.]

1. A combination of men for an evil purpose; an agreement between two or more persons, to commit some crime in concert; particularly, a combination to commit treason, or excite sedition or insurrection against the government of a state; a plot; as a conspiracy against the life of a king; a conspiracy against the government.

As you can see, a conspiracy is an agreement between multiple people to intentionally commit a crime. Often the crime consists of committing treason against a government.

If in fact the major historical events that took place among Judah in the Old Testament are repeated in the latter days, and if in fact the “men of Judah” represent the leaders of the modern latter day church, then we must ask ourselves this question-

Has there been a conspiracy among the leaders of the church to commit treason against the government of God and his restored church?

After studying the history of the church for 30 years, if someone were to ask me what such a conspiracy might be, I would probably suggest that it has to do with the intentional suppression and altering of the true history of the church combined with the intentional altering and suppression of the true meaning of the related narratives contained in the revelations that Joseph Smith brought forth.

Many bloggers and writers have documented the fact that Brigham Young and his brethren, and those that followed after him in leadership positions,  have intentionally deleted and altered many historical events in the official history of the church as well as suppressing true doctrines and introducing heresies into the church.

Does this not represent a crime and treason against the restored church of God and his government?

However, there may be more to this conspiracy.

Several weeks ago I blogged about a person who sent a letter to his bishop and Stake President informing them that he was not going to sustain President Nelson as the President of the Church because the scriptural procedure provided in scripture for this event was not followed.

Clearly, appointing someone in secret to lead the church without following the protocol of common consent as laid out in scripture represents a conspiracy by the leaders of the church in my opinion.

That blog post resulted in a remarkable email that I received from someone.

The email absolutely blew my mind.

The email was from someone that I had never heard of.

Apparently, my post went viral and was brought to the attention of a person who has spent many years researching another related conspiracy that has taking place within the church.

It has to do with how the sacred funds from tithes and offerings has been controlled and spent. It has to do with how the latter day men of Judah have intentionally used  legal fictions and a lack of transparency to transfer the control and use of these sacred funds contrary to the will of the Lord.

The fellow that sent me the email is seeking to sue the LDS church for the financial fraud that they have perpetuated upon the latter day saints.

His research is documented and very compelling.

In an affidavit that he has just filed he makes the following allegations:

I am 62 years old. I am a lifelong member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints or LDS Church and its affiliated Trust. My parents, grandparents and most of my great grandparents were lifelong members of the LDS Church and affiliated Trust.

Under oath I attest and confirm to the best of my knowledge as factual and true
the following..

..Over my life time I have found that the LDS Church has changed, it has become
quite different than it was in my youth, especially the main leadership.

Through much study, it has become clear to me that the leadership has set up an ongoing process of taking my church from me and all the members via setting up their own church/corporation for themselves and not telling the members what they’ve done, and then using their church/corporation to re-brand everything from my LDS Church to their own church/corp.

In 1950, the implementation of a lengthy plan to steal the tithes and offerings
from the Trust of the LDS Church was put into place. In fact, a separate church
was created in order to make a top down church as opposed to a bottom up
church.

This allowed the separate and false church to disregard common
consent, to make decisions without the members knowledge and to create
subordinate organizations that are illegal.

This document shows the time line evidence of this false church’s creation, including an overt admission of guilt of one of the leaders…”

In a future post I will summarize his research and you can decide for yourself if you find his research to be compelling.

Keep watching and remember the words of Jeremiah-

9 And the Lord said unto me, A conspiracy is found among the men of Judah, and among the inhabitants of Jerusalem.

 


“I am writing you to inform you that tomorrow during ..Ward conference, I will be opposing the ordination of Russell Nelson to the office of president of the church”

October 3, 2018

Fellow Earth Travelers.

I will be out of town for an extended period of time and will not be blogging unless something extremely important comes up.

So this is the last time you will be hearing from me for a while.

Since I am of the belief that the condemned church was eventually rejected as a church with their dead, there has not been much reason for me to continually monitor and scrutinize how closely they follow the commandments of God in running the modern church.

Nevertheless, there are those that feel that the church is just under condemnation and on probation and that if the members and leaders repent, they can self correct and get right with God. Others realize that church has been rejected but still has an obligation to follow the protocol in scriptures since they are claiming to be the true church.

For those two groups of people, it is of paramount importance to continually monitor the church to see if they are conforming to the protocol of church governance as set forth in the scriptures.

Recently a friend of mine informed me that he had refused to sustain Elder Nelson as the President of the Church because the leaders of the church violated numerous requirements as set forth by the Lord.

He actually contacted his Stake President in advance to let him know that he was going to oppose the ordination. As a courtesy, he provided him with a rather detailed listing of violations.

I found his research quite remarkable and I think you will as well.

Enjoy.

 

To the XXXXX Stake Presidency and the XXXXXXX Ward Bishopric,

I am writing you to inform you that tomorrow during the XXXXX Ward conference, I will be opposing the ordination of Russell Nelson to the office of president of the church. You are likely used to holding these votes without opposition and might not notice a lone hand raised in the large congregation. I don’t want to make a scene, nor draw attention to myself, when I do this. I want you to be aware of this so that you can be watching for it and make note of it, and avoid saying something like “the voting has been unanimous” when it has not.

Rather than waiting until after the vote to find out why I oppose it, I’ll take the time now to explain my opposition to you. It’s based on the scriptures.

Doctrine and Covenants Section 20 was presented to the church in 1830 as the “Articles and Covenants of the Church”. As you are aware, it contains the rules on how things are to be done in the Church of Christ. Verse 65 says:

No person is to be ordained to any office in this church, where there is a regularly organized branch of the same, without the vote of that church;

There is no exception clause to this commandment. No person is excluded, and no office is excluded. Every person, every office, must have a vote of the church BEFORE ordination.

The scriptures also declare the importance of common consent. Again, there are no exclusions.

D&C 26:2 And all things shall be done by common consent in the church, by much prayer and faith, for all things you shall receive by faith. Amen.

D&C 28:12 For, behold, these things have not been appointed unto him, neither shall anything be appointed unto any of this church contrary to the church covenants.
13 For all things must be done in order, and by common consent in the church, by the prayer of faith.

Russell Nelson was set apart to the office of president on January 14, 2018. This was done in secret and the church was not notified of this action until January 16, 2018. It was impossible for the church to give its consent to this ordination. Russell Nelson was ordained to the office of president without the vote of this church, without common consent, and it was done contrary to the church covenants. This ordination was not done in order.

Doctrine and Covenants 20:67 goes on to clarify requirements for filling the office of president:

Every president of the high priesthood (or presiding elder), bishop, high councilor, and high priest, is to be ordained by the direction of a high council or general conference.

Russell Nelson was not ordained to the office of president by direction of a general conference – one has not been held since the death of President Monson.

Lest you claim that the Quorum of the Twelve is the high council that can approve this action, I refer you to D&C 124. In verses 127-130 the Lord names the members of the Twelve. Then in verses 131-132, the Lord names twelve different men to the high council. According to the Lord Himself, the high council and the Twelve are two different groups with different authority. Because the high council no longer exists in the church, the only group, according to God’s holy writ, with authority to call a new president is the general conference.

Now you could tell me I’m being nitpicky. Or that modern prophets trump the scriptures. Or that those rules don’t apply anymore. But that isn’t what the Lord has said. In D&C 43:

5 And this shall be a law unto you, that ye receive not the teachings of any that shall come before you as revelations or commandments;
6 And this I give unto you that you may not be deceived, that you may know they are not of me.
7 For verily I say unto you, that he that is ordained of me shall come in at the gate and be ordained as I have told you before, to teach those revelations which you have received and shall receive through him whom I have appointed.

The Lord told us how the president is to be ordained in D&C 20. And He has commanded us to not receive the teaching of anyone who has not followed that process. Russell Nelson did not follow the Lord’s process. His ordination to that office is illegitimate.

In Section 43 the Lord continues:

8 And now, behold, I give unto you a commandment, that when ye are assembled together ye shall instruct and edify each other, that ye may know how to act and direct my church, how to act upon the points of my law and commandments, which I have given.
9 And thus ye shall become instructed in the law of my church, and be sanctified by that which ye have received, and ye shall bind yourselves to act in all holiness before me

The Lord commands us to act upon the points of his law when we act in and direct his church, and we are to bind ourselves to this law. Ignoring his laws on succession is a violation of his commandments. Russell Nelson might be the right person for the job, but he did not obey the Lord’s commandments on how to get that job.

I ask you, have you ever ordained or set apart someone without a vote of the church? I’ve never seen it. And if you did, you would have to hold a vote and then re-do the setting apart or ordination. Just like an improperly performed baptism, you cannot fix it after the fact. It must be redone according to God’s law. Russell Nelson has not acknowledged his violation of the law of God, nor has he indicated he will submit to it.

In Section 42, the Lord unequivocally declares the importance of obeying His law for the church:

59 Thou shalt take the things which thou hast received, which have been given unto thee in my scriptures for a law, to be my law to govern my church;
60 And he that doeth according to these things shall be saved, and he that doeth them not shall be damned if he so continue.

A few other words of our Lord and Savior on the laws of His church:

D&C 42:13 And they shall observe the covenants and church articles to do them, and these shall be their teachings, as they shall be directed by the Spirit.

D&C 58:23 Behold, the laws which ye have received from my hand are the laws of the church, and in this light ye shall hold them forth. Behold, here is wisdom.

D&C 51:2 For it must needs be that they be organized according to my laws; if otherwise, they will be cut off.

For those of you who don’t know, I stopped attending church about eight months ago after seeing how much of the scriptures are ignored in so many areas. It would have been easy for me to stay away from church this weekend. That was my intention. But the Spirit has made it clear that I must stand as a witness to this lawlessness. The word of the Lord has been violated and the Lord requires a witness to bear testimony of it. I don’t want to do it, but I will submit to the will of my God.

I encourage you to study these scriptures and ask the Lord yourselves. We will all stand accountable before God one day for the decisions we make this weekend.

2 Nephi 4:34
O Lord, I have trusted in thee, and I will trust in thee forever.
I will not put my trust in the arm of flesh; for I know that cursed is he that putteth his trust in the arm of flesh. Yea, cursed is he that putteth his trust in man or maketh flesh his arm.

There are only two sides to this argument. One says we can ignore the law of God because we have men we can trust to do the right thing. The other says we must only trust in God and His law and no man is above it.

I have chosen to put my trust in God and in His commandments.

XXXXX XXXXXXXXX


Diminishing Revelation After 1834

October 2, 2018

Years ago I did a youtube series on the secret history of Mormonism .

In it I showed how the revelatory sweet spot of Joseph Smiths Ministry took place in the early Kirtland years leading up to 1834. It was at that time that Joseph Smith received a revelation from the Lord declaring that the whole church including the leaders were under CONDEMNATION and needed to REPENT and REFORM in ALL THINGS.

“Verily,  condemnation resteth upon you, who are appointed to lead my Chu[r]ch,  and to be saviors of men: and also upon the church: And there must needs be a  repentance and a refor[m]ation among you, in all things..” (Account of Meetings, Revelation, and Blessing, 5-6 December 1834 )

After that, revelation to the church through the prophet Joseph Smith greatly diminished and the heavens began to close until valid revelations from the Lord completely came to an end during the Nauvoo years prior to Joseph’s death.

general timeline 2 horizontal

The fellow that writes the Measuring Doctrine Blog has recently posted a remarkable, much more detailed analysis on this topic of diminishing revelation.

It can be found at the link below-

Data mining the Doctrine and Covenants

 

It is a very interesting read.

Enjoy.


“…the evil gift. What do you think it is?”

September 24, 2018

Many years ago, shortly after Noah’s flood, I had a consulting agreement with a company in Happy Valley to act as their Director of Product Development and Director of Sales and Marketing.

During that time we hired a person to be our IT guy.

He and I had lots of talks about the church and the gospel.

I have not seen him for many many years.

Today I got the following email from him:

Hey brother, 

Sorry for not keeping in touch better. I think of you and our conversations often though and frequently think of things I’d like to ask you as I read, but you know how time is. 
I did see something interesting today reading Moroni and Googled it. Low and behold, you had an article about it on your site. It’s Moroni 10:30.  You say you’ll talk about it at some point, but it looks like time got away from you.
It’s about the evil gift. What do you think it is? I know the rest of the bom talks about it generally, but not specifically. And it seems like Moroni kind of hid that little gem in there. It poked out at me like a thorn for some reason. 
Anyway, I hope to hear back and that you’re all well.
This was my response:
My speculation on that goes like this
The “good gift” appears to be the Holy Ghost and the gifts of the spirit that flow from it. As previously addressed in that same chapter. Every “good gift” flows through the “Gift of the Holy Ghost” That is the gift that God bestows upon the elect that puts them on in the strait and narrow gate and seals them up unto eternal life.
Those faithful in obtaining that gift and the gifts that flow through it make an oath publicly before God and their fellow saints at the time of baptism and after being found worthy by God, he then makes an oath to them, promising them that they will be sealed up to eternal life through the power of the Holy Ghost.
It appears to me that the “evil gift” as mentioned briefly and cryptically in the BofM is a counterfeit gift that comes from Satan. It is used to deceive and to essentially replace the true gift.
In the early days of the church, the Lord stressed the need for the saints to receive an “endowment” (gift) from heaven which would enable them to avoid being overcome by the enemy in the secret chamber. I believe that gift was to be administered by the Holy Ghost. Eventually, they were to receive that “endowment” in the Kirtland Temple.
In the strict, scriptural sense, endowment means spiritual gift from heaven. The definition has since morphed to something ritualistic.
Over time, the saints failed to live the law of God and they rejected the fulness. Because of this it appears as if they did not receive the full endowment in Kirtland or if they did, it was suspended for a little season of chastisement.
Because of this, the gifts of the spirit began to diminish among the saints and the spiritual gift or endowment that they were seeking eventually was replaced by a Masonic, ceremonial, letter of the law type of gift which is administered in modern LDS temples. ( a variation of this masonic ritual has been administered in one form or another from ancient times up to our present age)
Shockingly, this modern “endowment” is actually administered in the temple symbolically by Satan himself.  
Sadly, that gift or endowment is largely patterned after the secret oath that Cain entered into with Satan, including the mandate for secrecy and the penalty of death.
The agreement with Satan entered into by unsuspecting initiates, places the endowed members under the law of justice rather then the law of mercy that is inherently a part of the simple gospel of Christ.
During the ceremony, Satan informs the initiates that if they fail to live any law of God and the gospel that is found in the four standard works, they will be under Satans power. This sadistic covenant with death and hell is likely what Isaiah is referring to in the following passage:

14 ¶ Wherefore hear the word of the Lord, ye scornful men, that rule this people which is in Jerusalem.

15 Because ye have said, We have made a covenant with death, and with hell are we at agreement; when the overflowing scourge shall pass through, it shall not come unto us: for we have made lies our refuge, and under falsehood have we hid ourselves:

16 ¶ Therefore thus saith the Lord God, Behold, I lay in Zion for a foundation a stone, a tried stone, a precious corner stone, a sure foundation: he that believeth shall not make haste.

17 Judgment also will I lay to the line, and righteousness to the plummet: and the hail shall sweep away the refuge of lies, and the waters shall overflow the hiding place.

18 ¶ And your covenant with death shall be disannulled, and your agreement with hell shall not stand; when the overflowing scourge shall pass through, then ye shall be trodden down by it.

19 From the time that it goeth forth it shall take you: for morning by morning shall it pass over, by day and by night: and it shall be a vexation only to understand the report.

.

Over the years many offensive parts of the temple ceremony have been taken out however, each time they are taken out, the authorities declare that although the wording and signs and tokens have been altered or deleted, the original meaning remains the same. (which means that even the oath of vengeance is also an integral part of the covenant that people are unwittingly entering into)
I see this modern temple endowment as a literal fulfillment of the warning that God gave to the church at the beginning of the LDS restoration wherein God warned that he would deliver the saints over to Satan if they harden their hearts against his word, (which strictly forbids swearing by their necks and entering into such covenants and in rejecting God’s pure and simple gospel)

Here is what God said in BofC 5:19 before the revelation was revised in 1835.

And thus, if the people of this generation harden not their hearts, I will work a reformation among them, and I will put down all lyings, and deceivings, and priestcrafts, and envyings, and strifes, and idolatries, and sorceries, and all manner of iniquities, and I will establish my church, like unto the church which was taught by my disciples in the days of old.

And now if this generation do harden their hearts against my word, behold I WILL DELIVER THEM UP UNTO SATAN, for he reigneth and hath power at this time, for he hath got great hold upon the hearts of the people of this generation: and not far from the iniquities of Sodom and Gomorrah, do they come at this time: and behold the sword of justice hangeth over their heads, and if they persist in the hardness of their hearts, the time cometh that it must fall upon them.

That is just the opinion of a heretic.
Take it for what it is worth.
BTW I have had several people contact me over the years and tell me that they feel the modern LDS temple endowment is essentially the modern-day version of the Law of Moses that God has placed the condemned and rejected modern church under as a heavy burden, during the little season of chastisement until the appointed time arrives when the fulness will once again be restored to the earth.
I am open to that possibility. It is certainly a cursing.
Great to hear from you hope all is going well
** End of my reply.
Anyway, it was good to hear from an old friend and to remind him what a heretic I am .
Those newer readers wanting to read a series that deals to some degree with this topic to some extent, can read the following
Black and White Robes part 1
Black and White Robes Part 2
Black and White Robes Part 3