Notable Emails #27 “what makes you so sure JS was not just a charlatan from the beginning?”

December 15, 2015

Email #1

Hi Watcher,

 

So I’m reading Leaving the Saints by Martha Beck and wow is it eye-opening.  It is raising concerns for me regarding the efficacy of anything that came from Joseph Smith.  I’m familiar with the problems of the Book of Mormon, such as DNA evidence, no sheep or horse archeological evidence before the Europeans brought them over in the 15th century.  Now I know a lack of evidence is not in itself incontrovertible evidence, but given the spuriousness of the  POGP origins with the papyri and all, the whole BOM origin seems more tenuous.  I understand from your Solving the Prophet Puzzle that the Book of Abraham helps reveal what the Gospel of Abraham entails, but it also seems to teach a false concept of the nature of God if what Martha asserts is correct.  I guess the bottom line is, what makes you so sure JS was not just a charlatan from the beginning?

 

I remember something Pres Hinckley said in what I believe was a conference address, to paraphrase it was something like either JS was led by God or Satan to do all that he did.  Thinking back on it and knowing all I know now, I wonder if even he (Hinckley) wasn’t sure which one.

 

My Response

I have received lots of questions like yours and I have decided to respond differently than I normally do.

After fielding numerous scientific objections to the restored gospel, and Christianity in general, during the last several decades, and debating various issues and attempting to help doubters with their scientific stumbling blocks I have come to a few shocking conclusions which I will share.

One is that when I provide a doubter with an answer to one of their scientific stumbling blocks, that I have personally found to be an acceptable answer, generally they also find it to be an acceptable answer which fills both of us with hope that they are going to recover from their temporary doubt and regain faith.

However, inevitably they return with one or two more scientific stumbling blocks that need to be answered.

Again, I share the answers that I have found that I find acceptable and usually they do to, which again fills us both with hope that they are going to get back on the path of belief.

Once again they eventually return with other scientific stumbling blocks and the process is then repeated continuously without end because there is no end to the number of scientific stumbling blocks the mortal intellect of the natural man can conjure up.. particularly when you are reading the books and articles and blogs by skeptics and unbelievers that are sharing all of their stumbling blocks. Hence I have concluded that that game is only a waist of time and  effort.

Allow me to share another observation with you in the form of a quasi-allegorical analogy regarding two “paths” or “rabbit holes” that a person can choose to take once they have been introduced to religion in general and the restored gospel specifically. ( I use the term rabbit hole not necessarily in the traditional sense because one of the rabbit holes in this illustration is not evil, it is good, just difficult to stay on)

There are basically two rabbit holes that a person can choose to go down once they choose to leave the innocent mindless state of neutrality and take God seriously enough to begin thinking and searching for the truth and for him.

Before I go further, please note that the rabbit hole one ultimately chooses to go down is a CHOICE which one makes BEFORE they have any serious spiritual knowledge and it is, in my opinion, largely determined by spiritual genetics and the choices they made in the pre-existence.

In other words, I believe the outcome of our probationary existence is largely predetermined or at least strongly affected by what we did and believed and the choices we made in the preexistence.

The one rabbit hole that very few people choose to enter, (or, if entered, very few choose to stay in,)  goes straight to a brilliant light at the end of the tunnel that is found on the other side of this world (keep in mind that Satan is the God of this world and he wants you keep you here in his world and his kingdom. ).

This good rabbit hole that leads to life and salvation is very straight and focused but it is very long and has lots of bumps along the way. It has doors and windows along the sides that enable people who quit looking forward at the light at the end of the tunnel to become distracted and to leave the straight rabbit hole and enter the grand maze of a rabbit hole that Satan’s world has to offer

Satan’s rabbit hole leads to an extensive maze full of smoke and mirrors that keeps the person in a state of hidden darkness. It keeps a person located somewhere inside Satan’s domain continually chasing their tail, even though a false feeling of confidence and security is sometimes felt by those that buy into the religion of intellect and science.

Gods Holy Rabbit Hole

The rabbit hole that leads to the brilliant light of eternal salvation is a very narrow course with a very limited set of instructions. Below I have listed the abbreviated set of instructions that our creator has given us for entering into and staying in straight gate or rabbit hole that leads to light and life:

1- To Do: Read ponder, search, and believe on the words of God until you are visited with the manifestation of the Spirit.

2-  To Do: Keep searching the scriptures and God for greater enlightenment and for the baptism of fire and the Holy Ghost. Live a spirit led life according to the admonitions in the scriptures to the best of your ability.

3-  To Do: Endure to the end by continuing to retain a remission of your sins and by continually revisiting God’s word and continually receiving the manifestations of the spirit.

4- Caution Don’t Do: Don’t accept the learning of men  and the religion of science (science is a religion!) If you do you will be cursed by it.

I realize those instructions sound very simple and yet they really aren’t. It takes a lot of mental energy to ingest God’s word and living a believing life. Once you have entered the good rabbit hole it is difficult to not take your eyes off of the light straight ahead and look out the windows to see what folks in the large and spacious building are saying and thinking and teaching. it is easy to become enticed by the things in the maze and to become convinced that the light up ahead is an illusion or a figment of your imagination.

Here are a few resources for the above abbreviated instruction God has given us to return to him through the rabbit hole of faith and grace-

“behold, whosoever believeth on my words, them will I visit with the manifestation of my Spirit; and they shall be born of me, even of water and of the Spirit—” D&C 5:16

“Thus saith the Lord; Cursed be the man that trusteth in man, and maketh flesh his arm, and whose heart departeth from the Lord.”  Jer 17:5
“Cursed is he that putteth his trust in man, or maketh flesh his arm, or shall hearken unto the precepts of men, save their precepts shall be given by the power of the Holy Ghost.” 2 Nephi 28:31

You will notice that the prerequisites and instructions for learning truth and finding one’s way into the light are quite narrow.

Again, once a person has taken the Lord at his word and entered into the strait gate and received the manifestations of the spirit and been spiritually born again they simply need to endure to the end.

This all may sound very mystical and in fact, it is. The true Christian religion is a mystical religion that is faith based. That does not mean that knowledge is not important. It is extremely important.

There is a profound difference between blind faith without knowledge as opposed to knowledge based faith.

The book of Mormon speaks of what I refer to s “pre-knowledge faithwhich is the beginning point. That kind of a faith is predicated on a desire to believe something even though one cannot see it and does not have a definitive knowledge of it.

The book of Hebrews in the New Testament on the other hand speaks of what I refer to as ‘post-knowledge faith” which is the ultimate power one  is endowed with after showing forth sacrifice and commitment to the Gospel plan. -knowledge based faith is the power that an all knowing God used to create the earth.

Satans Rabbit Hole

Satan’s rabbit hole has a completely contrary set of instructions that are very seductive to the natural man and his carnal mind. The abbreviated set of instructions go something like this-

Put you faith in your logic, intellect and gut feeling and on the logic, intellect and feelings of others who have used science as their measuring yard stick for determining truth, to determine the truth. In other words, use science and the learning of man to judge the accuracy of God’s word and his gospel. In other words, rely heavily in the false light of scientific discovery.

In this scenario it is imperative to use the assumptions provided by learned authors, scholars and scientists to verify the truthfulness of what God says. Although this road often appears to result in a loss of faith and to atheism, in a sense, it really doesn’t. Because putting one’s faith in the arm of flesh and in the conclusions of modern science is actually a religion. It is the religion of the natural man. It is the religion of secularism and the religion of science and of Satan.

The thought of moving forward on faith and not using science and the five mortal senses  as the measuring yardsticks for determining truth is repugnant to the carnal mind.

So in essence, both rabbit holes lead to religious belief. One worships the God of the Bible who made all things in heaven and earth while the other worships the God of science who is Satan, the master of all lies.

One of the remarkable things that the New Testament teaches us is that Satan is the God of this carnal world and that things are not as they appear. This mortal existence is largely an illusion and a deception until one humbles themselves and becomes as a little child and submits themselves to God and becomes a new creature. It is only then that a person can see things as they really are through the spiritual eye of discernment.

Scientific discovery and the philosophies of man are always in a state of flux and are unstable and ever changing. This is why modern science is continually discovering previous scientific conclusions that were wrong and is always attempting to self-correct.

When we get to the judgment bar of Christ it will not be an acceptable excuse to say “ I rejected the concept of an anthropomorphic God who is the creator of all living and created us in his own image, that came to earth to suffer for our sins because the learned John Dehlin told me that if there was a God, it is not the God of the Bible and I was not created in his image.

It will not be an acceptable defense to say “I rejected the historicity of the Book of Mormon because Simon Southerton told me that his DNA research proves differently and that science does not support the restoration narrative”.

It will not be acceptable to say, “ I rejected the validity of the Book of Abraham which ultimately led me to reject the restored Gospel because Martha Beck told me that it teaches a false concept of God”

Since when did John Dehlin, Simon Southerton, Martha Beck and a countless host of other skeptics that are not even in the correct rabbit hole become an expert on the light at the end of the  tunnel?

I realize it is fun and enticing to read books like Martha’s and to view all of the enticing stuff that one can see as one takes their eyes off of the light and looks  out the windows in God’s rabbit hole, but it is a very dangerous thing to do. It is also a very foolish endeavor to pursue prior to becoming proficient in the word of God and receiving the manifestation of God’s spirit.

It is my prayer that you will stay or get back into God’s rabbit hole, whichever you need to do. Then look straight ahead and fill yourself with the word of God that leads to the tree of life. Hang on to the Iron Rod with every ounce of strength you have because we are currently in  a mystical fire and only the elect will be pulled out of this refiners fire:

Doctrine and Covenants 36:6
Save yourselves from this untoward generation, and come forth out of the fire..”

Although I have never seriously considered that Joseph Smith might have been a fraud from the very beginning, I did go through a period of cognitive dissonance, trying to understand why his ministry and actions during the Nauvoo period contradicted his ministry and actions during the Kirtland period. Instead of spending my time researching what everyone else had to say on the topic, I consulted the word of God and that is how I arrived at the information I have provided about the intercessory atonement offering that Joseph and other made in our behalf.

Three Chapters on the Intercessory Atonement Offering

I know Joseph Smith was not a charlatan from the beginning because I have received the promised manifestation of the spirit after reading and believing the word of God that he brought forth.

The reason I made reference to Martha in a previous post was to shock people into the reality that Hugh Nibley is mortal and fallible and may have had some challenges of his own, not to encourage people to read the gospel according to Martha Beck. Martha Beck is not a credible gospel scholar.

His Response

Thanks for the reply.  I really appreciate you taking the time to talk me off the ledge so to speak.  I didnt realize how faithless my email sounded.  I only meant to convey doubt in the mormon faith and not Christianity as a whole. I understand the precepts of man are foolishness to God.  As proof of that i can say i subscribe to the Institute for Creation Research’s monthly periodical.  I’m still in the good rabbit hole!
 .
That said i really enjoyed and was moved by Martha’s book.  She has her father’s wit and intellect but can also convey emotion and stay coherent throughout her prose. The way she describes how she communicates with and experiences God really resonated with me.  I think she understands that God is love.  I’m not sure what she thinks of Christ but it appears organized religion might be her biggest peeve.
 .
She does appear to have become quite secularist in her views, but given her experience with the church, it’s hard not to cut her some slack.  Hers is a tale of caution concerning the evils inherent in a rigidly dogmatic and authoritarian institution.  Without your nuanced understanding of JS and the restoration, it is easy to see how she would have aversion to the whole of it.
 .
This is why I honestly wonder if President Hinckley had maybe a shadow of doubt when he made his either or statement concerning the source of JS inspiration.  It seems to me that making such a declaration admits one can see the other side has a strong argument.  Apparently even the prophet of the Lord must operate on faith.  Which brings me to the predicament i find myself in – can one (or should one) navigate this “middle way” between modern apostate mormonism and unbelief, and stay a member in good standing within the church? .
 .
My Reply
 .
“I only meant to convey doubt in the mormon faith and not Christianity as a whole.”
 .
I understand, however, many people leaving Mormonism that have seriously studied the scriptures Joseph Smith brought forth and believed in them eventually lose faith in the Bible also because God inspired both sets of scriptures. His signature is all over all of them. Hence, if you once believed his word in the Book of Mormon and Doctrine and Covenants and then deny it, the next logical step is to eventually reject the Bible. I am sure there are exceptions for various reasons, but that is often the outcome. This is why it is so important to continuously feed the soul by constant scripture study and not getting distracted by what the skeptics are saying.
.
I understand the precepts of man are foolishness to God.  As proof of that i can say i subscribe to the Institute for Creation Research’s monthly periodical.  I’m still in the good rabbit hole!
 .
It is good that those folks believe in the Biblical creation story however it is disconcerting to me to see creationists feel like they need to justify a literal interpretation of the word of God with science. That is incorrect and it places to much importance on Satan’s religion of science. That is what LDS apologists try to do when defending the faith and that is one of the many reasons why they find themselves being forced to make silly and ridiculous arguments. It is better to simply declare the truth based on scripture and explain to skeptics what God’s ground rules are for determining truth. That way you never leave the good rabbit hole. One has to leave the good rabbit hole in order to use science to defend God’s word. God does not need science to justify his word. He can do that just fine on his own. After this probationary test of our faith is over, God will come out of his hiding place and at that time all of the skeptics will know that his word is true and that the arm of flesh was foolishness.
 .
That said i really enjoyed and was moved by Martha’s book.  She has her father’s wit and intellect but can also convey emotion and stay coherent throughout her prose. The way she describes how she communicates w”ith and experiences God really resonated with me.  I think she understands that God is love.  I’m not sure what she thinks of Christ but it appears organized religion might be her biggest peeve.
She does appear to have become quite secularist in her views, but given her experience with the church, it’s hard not to cut her some slack.  Hers is a tale of caution concerning the evils inherent in a rigidly dogmatic and authoritarian insinstitution.  Without your nuanced understanding of JS and the restoration, it is easy to see how she would have aversion to the whole of it.
 .
Beck is obviously a remarkable individual. You cannot be invited into the Oprah  Winfrey network and get the following endorsement without being a dynamic, magnetic personality with some really good secular wisdom to share with people:
 .
“She’s [Martha Beck] one of the smartest women I know,”- Oprah Winfrey
 .
 While on the topic of Martha, the reason I mentioned in my last post that she is a lesbian, when I pointed out the allegations of abuse that she has made against her father, is because one of the most compelling evidences in favor of her claims is the fact that she is a lesbian. You see,  contrary to popular opinion, homosexuals are NOT born with that emotional affliction nor is it a choice. It is caused by unhealthy relationships and human bonding problems and other things. Most importantly, people can be healed from this affliction. It is often related to abuse or unhealthy relationships that people struggle with early in life,  in their formative years.
 .
The New Testament informs us that some of the converts to the New Testament church had previously had that affliction and had been healed and converted.
 .
People like John Dehlin do great harm to those in the gay community that desperately want to be healed of their homosexuality by claiming that there is no way to be healed and that there is no need to be healed of it. For those that disagree with what I just said, I challenge you to listen to the presentations below with a humble and prayerful heart and see what the spirit tells you.
 .
Part One
 .
 .
Part Two
 .
 .
 A very good Biblical sermon on the topic can be heard on the following link as well.
.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=udT-Ejqwi84
.
This information is very important for our gay brothers and sisters who believe in Christ because there is hope! I am not saying that the healing for those that have had success was easy or quick, it was not. It is a difficult process and one must passionately desire to be healed. Once the fulness returns I believe there will be many miraculous instantaneous healings of every conceivable malady.
.
The Church should be more proactive in reaching out to and providing homosexuals with love and hope. The current policy by the church of withholding the message of the gospel and the preparatory ordinances from the innocent demographic that is now being excluded is pure evil and unjustifiable. It represents the personification of priest craft and unrighteous dominion by those who have been commissioned to testify of the name of Christ:

24 Behold, vengeance cometh speedily upon the inhabitants of the earth, a day of wrath, a day of burning, a day of desolation, of weeping, of mourning, and of lamentation; and as a whirlwind it shall come upon all the face of the earth, saith the Lord.

25 And upon my house shall it begin, and from my house shall it go forth, saith the Lord;

26 First among those among you, saith the Lord, who have professed to know my name and have not known me, and have blasphemed against me in the midst of my house, saith the Lord.

Those holding the apostolic commission to testify of the name of Christ and profess to know the name of Christ are going to be visited with wrath if they do not fulfill their callings with mercy and justice. Those innocent people between the ages of 8 and 18 that are being exposed to an unnatural , unhealthy, and sinful lifestyle are among those that need help, support, guidance, mentoring and the gospel message the most during the critical early years of their lives.

 .
“can one (or should one) navigate this “middle way” between modern apostate mormonism and unbelief, and stay a member in good standing within the church?”
.
Great question. Each person needs to receive their own personal revelation on how to navigate things at this time. Most importantly, when the Lord and His servants return in the near future and call on all believers to flee from spiritual Babylon, that will be the drop dead date for people to leave the apostate church. Those that remain after that will suffer greatly.

Noteable Emails #26 This and that, this and that, tell us how it is Hugh, we won’t look back!

Noteable Emails #25 “Can I ask you for some help with chapter 27 in 2 Nephi?”

Notable Emails #22 “My prediction is that those who accept the gospel of Bill Reel (non-literal historicity of the Book of Mormon) will ultimately either loose all of their faith…”

Notable Emails #21 ” I don’t believe the current LDS Church has ANY “authority” – especially BECAUSE they preach that the culmination of the Gospel is the Masonic Rituals..”

Notable Emails #19- “Sometime ago I had an extraordinary experience where I was forgiven of some of my sins”

 Notable Emails #18- “I wake up every morning with this intense feeling that we are getting closer”

 Notable Emails #17 “Then shall the offering of Judah and Jerusalem be pleasant unto the LORD, as in the days of old, and as in former years.”

 Notable Emails #16 “the Lord wouldn’t give a young church such responsibility so early”

Notable Emails #15: “It would be so hard to do if we didn’t have the word crunching software available to us to use. Now I can see why so many are deceived. “

 Notable Emails #14 (b) “who was the legal heir and successor of the Prophet Joseph Smith, Jr.?”

 Notable Emails #14 (a) “Baptism for the dead is illogical and pretty much impossible to ever accomplish”

 Notable Emails Part 13 “Gileadi compares the Servant to Hezekiah, in that he answered for the temporal sins of the people and acted as a proxy savior”

 Notable Emails Part 12 “the scriptures will become corrupted and deceive the elect and give Satan power”

 Notable Emails Part 9 “My number one desire right now is to protect my wife and honor her tender feelings about the gospel as she understands it.”

 Notable Emails Part 8 “Who are the Jews and Gentiles?

Notable Emails Part 7 “My eyes have been opened”

Notable Emails Part 6: “Can anyone tell me anything about this blog?… This guy seems to have some new ideas I’ve never heard before using the scriptures to back his views.

Notable Emails Part 5: “the truths that both you and I hold so dear …are things that cannot be taught they can only be revealed.”

Notable Emails- Part 4 “I have now caught the spirit of watching along with you and others.”

Notable Emails- Part 3 “Have you ever read ‘Letter to a CES Director?’” Yes… and it has strengthened my testimony!

Notable Emails- Part 2: “Readers deserve to know if you truly are a heretic or just a faithful divergent thinker”

Notable Emails Part 1- Mormon Missionary: “I too am watching”


It is impossible to be a credible expert on one gospel topic without having a significant knowledge of many other topics

December 5, 2015

Sometime ago I was having an exchange with a high profile LDS apologist in the comments section of an apologetic blog-site. As I recall, he had written something on the topic of polygamy, justifying Section 132 and defending the concepts relating to the need for men to be sealed to multiple wives for eternity during times when God commands it, etc.

I was taking issue with him about the doctrinal legitimacy of Section 132 and the doctrine of celestial polygamy.

After a few exchanges back and forth, I took the time to provide what I thought was a very detailed, exhaustive, and compelling argument showing that the LAW spoken of in section 38, and ultimately given in section 42, represented the law of the Gospel and the law of Zion and it  was never meant to be simply a temporary, lesser law of the Gospel which would eventually be replaced by a higher law of the gospel.

I pointed out that sections 37, 38 & 39 had warned the saints that the law that was eventually given in section 42 needed to be received and lived in order to protect the saints from the enemy in the secret chambers that was already potting the destruction of the newly restored church.

I pointed out numerous things including the fact that since section 42 was the law of the fulness of the gospel, and since the marital law of monogamy was an integral part of the law of the gospel, one could not accept the marital law of celestial polygamy set forth in  section 132 without denying the celestial law of marital monogamy in section 42.

I  pointed out that since God had declared the fulness of the gospel to be in the Book of Mormon prior to 1831, the law of celestial polygamy would have to have been clearly proclaimed in the Book of Mormon, yet the Book of Mormon condemns the practice of Biblical polygamy and NEVER even mentions the law of Celestial polygamy.

I also pointed out that since God declared that the fulness of the gospel had been restored to the gentile church shortly after the restoration of the Melchizedek Priesthood at the Morley Farm in June of 1831, the doctrine of celestial marriage in section 132 would have to have been publicly declared and set forth in a revelation that was accepted by the law of common consent and lived by the saints by the time that God had made that declaration in 1831.

I provided lots of information from history, ancient prophecy and from the revelations that Joseph Smith had brought forth documenting the rejection of the fulness of the gospel by 1834, showing a change in the trajectory of the church after the dispensation of the gospel of Abraham was secretly ushered in in 1836 and pointed out that if polygamy had been restored by God sometime after 1834, it would have had to have been a lesser law of the gospel, not a high law of the gospel. Indeed, it would have to have been a cursing upon the saints for having rejected the fulness of the gospel.

I showed from section 124 that God had warned the saints that anything more or less than what had been published in the Book of Mormon and the revelations that Joseph had received up to that time in 1841 “cometh of evil“.

After attempting to post my response I noticed that my blog comment was not showing up.

Sadly, I had neglected to save what I had taken a long timeto write.

In one sense I was not surprised because the apologists at that particular blog had blocked my comments before. On the other hand, I was a little bit surprised because my previous comments had been accepted and responded to and we had established an ongoing dialogue.

Sometime after my last attempt to post my comment, I noticed a personal email in my email box from the apologist that I had been having that exchange with.

What he told me in the email shocked the hell out of me.

He informed me that he appreciated the exchange that we had been having but that he had decided to block my last comment because the doctrinal, historical and prophecy related topics that I had brought into the discussion were “outside of his area of expertise” and therefore he was not qualified to respond to them.

What!?!?

Outside of his particular area of expertise?

First of all, why shouldn’t my response be posted and viewed by others regardless of whether he felt qualified to respond or not?

Secondly, and more importantly, how can he be an expert on just one doctrine without having an extensive knowledge of virtually every doctrinal, historical and prophetic issue that could possibly be related to the topic he was presenting himself to be an expert on?

I have thought quite a bit about his comment and how impossible it is for anyone to be an “expert” on any gospel or religious historical topic without having an extensive knowledge of many other doctrines and historical topics.

The thought that a lay person could have a desire to become an “expert” on the topic of polygamy by hyper-focusing onhistorical documentation regarding the modern day practice of polygamy without becoming knowledgeable in other related gospel topics, is preposterous.

It is true that a person that collects all of the historical data about who lived polygamy and how they lived polygamy can become proficient in that specific information. However such a person could NEVER be qualified to make a credible interpretation as to whether the doctrinal practice of celestial polygamy was of God.

The Lord has commanded us to search all of the scriptures to become approved of God.

We have been admonished to become approved of God through gospel study. Not just the selective study of one narrow historical issue.

Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth. But shun profane and vain babblings: for they will increase unto more ungodliness. (2 Tim 2: 15-16)

Anyone who is not knowledgeable in the gospel, that has a predetermined bias about a gospel topic, that decides to invest a lot of money to have a controversial religious practice researched simply is not qualified to provide a credible interpretation on whether the practice was inspired of God or not. It is not possible to have a valuable opinion on such a topic without the context that is needed from understanding a lot of other issues.

Without spending years searching the whole word of God, such a person would have little other than vain babbling to offer those who seriously want to determine how such a practice inter-related to the true gospel of Jesus Christ and their personal salvation.

Although a wealthy person can spend his resources to have a researcher document every known historical fact about how polygamy was lived in the church, that does not qualify them to be able to interpret the true spiritual implications behind the documentation that is collected, much less understand the truthfulness behind the doctrine and why various people chose to accept the practice as being a valid part of the fulness of the gospel.

It is disconcerting but par for the course that the institutional church embraces and promotes incompetent individuals as “experts” on various topics of doctrine.

 


Notable Emails #26 This and that, this and that, tell us how it is Hugh, we won’t look back!

December 3, 2015

Email #1
Topic- The Refreshing

Watcher,

In your book on page 81, you have a diagram of the 5 major pillars that support the Mystery of Joseph Smith and solve for the Prophet Puzzle.

As one of the pillars you have Leviticus 16, which treats the topic of the Atonement Statute or Scapegoat Doctrine.

Two of the scriptures you have pointing to that pillar as support are Acts 1:6-7 and John 1:21. I believe the John one should be JST John 1:21-22. Because it’s more in line with the Acts one.

These two scriptures refer to a restoration or a prophet who shall restore all things. Even Isaiah 28, which you use as support for Leviticus 16, has a reference to “refreshing” (see Isaiah 28:12 and Acts 3:19).

Here’s my question and were I’m looking for some clarification:

What am I not seeing or missing when it comes to the Scapegoat Doctrine (Atonement Statute) that has to do with the times of refreshing and restoration?

Thanks!

PS – These online bloggers are really attacking the church and using Denver Snuffer as their measuring rod.

Check out Anonymous Bishop’s latest attack using some Isaiah logic to corner the church’s leaders. Not a bad argument to prove his point.

Regardless of one’s view of Snuffer and his followers, they’re really putting it out there for others to see. I wonder if suddenly next conference we’ll see many talks sprinkled with Isaiah scriptures and commentary. Lol

Here’s the link…

http://anonymousbishop.com/2015/12/02/the-spirit-of-prophecy/

My Response

scapegoat2

That is correct. I did mean JST John 1:21

 Thank you for bringing that to my attention. I am finally working on implementing the changes for the book that the peer review has so generously provided and I am glad you pointed that out to me before the project is a wrap!

The five references that are circled have to do specifically with aspects of Joseph’s role in offering an intercessory atonement for modern Israel while the other references have to do generally with his general role as the Lord’s servant of the last days.

You asked:

“What am I not seeing or missing when it comes to the Scapegoat Doctrine (Atonement Statute) that has to do with the times of refreshing and restoration?”

The term “refreshing” is highly significant. Joseph Smith’s ministry began toward the end of the 1st watch. The fulness had been lost during that watch and the Lord was offering a refreshing by restoring the fulness of the priesthood. Had the saints repented and been obedient to the law of the gospel in section 42 including consecration, they would have experienced the refreshing and would have found their place of rest in Zion.

Refreshing involves restoring but it is more than just restoring. God can restore priesthood but the saints can still collectively reject it and therefore fail to be refreshed, renewed, reborn, made new creatures of the Holy Ghost, etc. Those are all descriptives implied or provided by the Strong’s and Websters.

Refreshing in Isaiah 28

Isaiah 28 was an ancient prophecy from the Old Testament foretelling the fact that the saints of the LDS restoration that would be offered the refreshing at the end of the 1st watch but would collectively fail. They would not hear it:

“..This is the rest wherewith ye may cause the weary to rest; and this is the refreshing: yet they would not hear…”

We are informed that

“.. the word of the LORD was unto them precept upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, and there a little; that they might go, and fall backward, and be broken, and snared, and taken..”

Indeed the saints of the restoration were given the word of the Lord line upon line and precept upon precept and yet they could not live the law that was given to them. They fell backwards. They were snared. They were taken.

Refreshing in Acts 3

Acts 3:9 is not speaking prophetically of the same opportunity for refreshing as Isaiah 28.

It is referring to the successful ushering in of the dispensation of the fulness of times that is about to take place in the 3rd watch.

“..Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, when the times of refreshing shall come from the presence of the Lord;
20 And he shall send Jesus Christ, which before was preached unto you:
21 Whom the heaven must receive until the times of restitution of all things, which God hath spoken by the mouth of all his holy prophets since the world began..”

The above refreshing is referring to a future event. It is not referring to the failed attempt at refreshing that the saints made during Joseph Smith’s ministry.

In Acts 3 Peter was speaking to the wicked Jews who requested and condoned the murder of Christ.

“Then answered all the people, and said, His blood be on us, and on our children.”  

According to the text in the King James Version, they had knowingly and willingly rejected Jesus Christ and demanded his execution. Peter accuses them of delivering up Jesus to Pilate who had been determined to let Jesus go. Peter reminds these murderers that they had denied the Holy One and desired to let a murderer go free instead of Christ. Peter states that he wishes they had done what they had done in ignorance, but he knows that they didn’t.

He therefore commands them to repent but informs them that their sins cannot be blotted out until until the times of refreshing.

 The God of Abraham, and of Isaac, and of Jacob, the God of our fathers, hath glorified his Son Jesus; whom ye delivered up, and denied him in the presence of Pilate, when he was determined to let him go.
14 But ye denied the Holy One and the Just, and desired a murderer to be granted unto you;
15 And killed the Prince of life, whom God hath raised from the dead; whereof we are witnesses.
16 And his name through faith in his name hath made this man strong, whom ye see and know: yea, the faith which is by him hath given him this perfect soundness in the presence of you all.
17 And now, brethren, I wot that through ignorance ye did it, as did also your rulers.
18 But those things, which God before had shewed by the mouth of all his prophets, that Christ should suffer, he hath so fulfilled.

Joseph Smith had this to say about the above passages

Peter preached repentance and baptism for the remission of sins to the Jews who had been led to acts of violence and blood by their leaders; but to the rulers he said, “I wot that through ignorance ye did it, as did also your rulers”

“Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, when the times of refreshing (redemption) shall come from the presence of the Lord, and He shall send Jesus Christ, which before was preached unto you,” &c.

The time of redemption here had reference to the time when Christ should come; then, and not till then, would their sins be blotted out. For Peter, speaking of him says, “David hath not yet ascended into heaven, for his sepulchre is with us to this day.” His remains were then in the tomb.

Now, we read that many bodies of the Saints arose at Christ s resurrection, probably all the Saints, but it seems that David did not. Why? Because he had been a murderer.

If the ministers of religion had a proper understanding of the doctrine of eternal judgment, they would not be found attending the man who forfeited his life to the injured laws of his country, by shedding innocent blood; for such characters cannot be forgiven, until they have paid the last farthing. The prayers of all the ministers in the world can never close the gates of hell against a murderer.

As I have pointed out in previous posts, descendents of those Jews that sat in the seat of Moses at the time of Christ have been reinstated and sit in the seat of Moses today.

Getting back to your question, the “times of refreshing” that will come from the presence of the Lord takes place in the 3rd watch.

One of the great mistakes that alternate bloggers and false prophets are making today is to assume that the fulness that Joseph restored is still on the earth today and that we simply need to get back on track and “preserve the restoration“.

That is a false concept. The fulness of the gospel that was restored through the instrumentality of Joseph Smith cannot be “preserved” because the fulness has been lost. It has been gone for well over four generations!

A new restoration must take place.

In the words of David Whitmer, a second great work will be done, not a preservation of the previous attempt:

Q- When will the temple be built? (referring to Jackson County Temple)
A- Right after the great tribulation is over.

Q- What do you mean by that?
A- A civil war more bloody and cruel than the rebellion. (first civil
war) It will be a smashing up of this nation, about which time the SECOND GREAT WORK has to be done, a work like Joseph did, and the translation of the sealed plates, and peace all over.”

Furthermore, once the fulness is once again restored to the earth, a refreshing, renewal, rebirth, resting place (Zion),  must take place when the restoration takes place or the restoration will all be in vain.

I thought the article you mentioned was well written and made some very important points about how the apostles and prophets of the modern church don’t preach from Isaiah and don’t have the spirit of prophecy and do not show forth the fruits of true prophets.

The reason that virtually any false prophet that makes claims about speaking with God can easily get a bunch of followers, is because the condemned and unconverted “prophets” of the apostate church have set the bar so low and are showing forth so little spiritual fruits that those who are yearning for knowledge and spiritual gifts will accept counterfeits that offer virtually any alternative.

One more thing about the time of the final restoration and refreshing. At that time  the sins that had been put upon the intercessory servants are removed from them and returned upon the heads of latter day Israel. At that time, latter day Israel will be invited to repent or be damned. This will represent a type of RESET which will leave us where we left off at the time the fulness was restored.

Interestingly, the revelations in the D&C  that Joseph Smith received, that have passages pertaining to the third watch, will be just as applicable and relevant as they were during the first part of Joseph’s ministry at the end of the first watch.

1828 Websters RENEWING

1. Making new again; repairing; re-establishing; repeating; reviving; renovating.

2. adjective Tending or adapted to renovate.

RENEW’ING, noun The act of making new; renewal.

His Response

Wow! That is deep. Thank you for answering my question. I see the “refreshing” in Isaiah 28 with a whole new set of eyes.

As for the Jews in Peter’s day, I was familiar with their plight and how they won’t be redeemed until after the millennium.

 

How can anyone who really studies this with faith and eyes open to the scriptures not see that an understanding of the 3 watches is a gift from a merciful God and that the LDS foundation movement lost the fullness which caused the 2nd watch to be ushered in?

 

It’s so clear.

 

My father asked me last night where it says that we must be living consecration in order to have the fullness. He wants to know where the others who had the fullness were living it.

 

I told him that I didn’t know, but that D&C 38:32 made it pretty clear that the saints needed to receive the law (consecration) in order to be endowed from on high.

 

He had pointed out that the Colesville saints were the first to live consecration and that was in MO not Kirkland. I mentioned to him that the conference at Morely’s farm was for 2,000 saints including the Colesville branch.

 

It’s hard for me to see someone who knows the scriptures and loves what they teach, but willing to hold on to a fantasy that secretly the LDS church is all that it claims to be. In other words, trying to preserve the restoration.

 

Thanks again I still have two more pillars from the infographic to study tomorrow.

 

I love diving deep.

 

Good night,

Email #2
Topic- Nibley and the Temple Endowment

Hi Watcher-  I’ve been reading a little Nibley lately, specifically an article entitled Unrolling the Scrolls – Forgotten Witnesses, which gives some details as to the contents of the dead sea scrolls and other ancient texts that were discovered post WWII.

It is interesting how the teachings of these texts seem to correlate with the temple ceremony, at least according to Nibley (which I’m sure is the main object of his paper.)  He claims the Ginza text tells how Adam was found in a deep sleep after he was created and was awakened by a helper who began to instruct him and gave him a garment.

It says Adam prays for further light and knowledge and the helper tells him three men will assist you throughout your life.  Nibley says the text describes two great teams of three, the creation team of the Father, Jesus and Adam; and the instruction team of Peter, James and John.

hugh nibley

Nibley claims many of the texts have similar teachings.  One, the Apocalypse of Abraham, he claims to be similar to the book of Abraham.  He says there is much written about ordinances, and that one cannot become a Son of Light without receiving all the ordinances, that Son of Light by definition means those who are perfect in the ordinances.

Nibley claims that whenever you find a very early Christian text, it almost always refers to the secret teachings of the Lord to the Apostles during the forty days.  He says the 50 ancient texts he had available to him had 4 things in common: 1. The Lord taught the apostles really important secrets after the 40 days that are hardly mentioned in the Bible because it was a secret.  2. The Apostles ask the Lord what is going to happen to them and the church?  He answers that it will be on the earth for 2 generations, but will not be handed down, they are to be buried, to be kept secret, not to passed on to the world. 3. Jesus taught the strange doctrines of other worlds and such things that the Christian doctors did not because it didn’t jive with Aristotle.  4. Jesus took them through the temple, taught them temple ordinances.  The person who receives these becomes a son.  Jesus both gives and receives (that is what a son does-becomes a father) the signs and tokens of the God of Truth while demonstrating the same to the Church, all in hope that these things finally some day become reality.

Nibley claims the texts describe prayer circles that were gradually done away with because the fathers of the church didn’t know what to make of them.  The Syriac church kept the rite until the 7th century.  The Pistis Sophia, one of the ancient texts, describes how the Lord orders the apostles and their wives to form a circle while he stands at an altar on one side and they recapitulate all the ordinances.  The Lord then gives a prayer which is recited.  Before forming the circle a hymn is sung.

In the early Syriac church the bishop would take his place at the altar and says “if anyone has any ill feelings against his neighbor let him be reconciled, if any feels himself unworthy, let him withdraw for God is witness of these ordinances , and the Son and the Angels.”

Nibley claims in the ancient text of Bartholomew there is interesting stuff with Mary.  The apostles are having a prayer circle and Mary asks to speak.  She begins by calling upon God with upraised hands, speaking 3 times in an unknown language.  She then goes on to tell how she had a vision in the temple before the birth of Christ, the veil was rent in the temple and she saw an angel who took her by the right hand, after she had been washed and anointed, wiped off, and clothed with the garment, she was hailed by him as a blessed vessel.

The angel took her by the hand again to the altar where there was bread that they ate with some wine, and she saw that the bread and wine had not diminished. (the same as in 3 Nep 20).  At this point the Lord himself appeared and forbade Mary to tell any more, since all the creation, he said, had been completed that day.

Anyway, one can see that this mirrors the temple worship given us by JS and still much existing despite the many changes since.  It’s interesting because JS did not have access to these texts in his day.  Does all this point to inspiration and the existence of valid saving ordinances on the earth today, or perhaps these were lost as well when the Nauvoo temple wasn’t completed?  Or was the church delivered over to satan and masonic rites mingled with “scripture?”

My Reply

There are several issues at play here. One is that we don’t know for sure exactly how much of Brigham’s modified Masonic endowment ceremony was given to him by Joseph and how much was Brigham’s innovations.

Since part of Brigham’s original ceremony  is believed to incorporate the oath of vengeance for the death of Joseph Smith, it is a no-brainer that Joseph had nothing to do with that.

How many other innovations did Brigham Young take the liberty of integrating into the endowment ceremony?

Another issue is that according to Joseph, Satan will tell 9 truths to perpetuation one lie. So, obviously there is some true stuff mingled with nonsense in the temple endowment. The cold hard truth, which I have addressed before, is that the temple endowment is a covenant with Satan. :(

You mention that you have been reading Nibley. Another issue is that many of Nibley’s footnotes are difficult to check since access to the sources is difficult and sometimes requires translation. Many of his  interpretations are so vague and tortured that one has to take his word for the deduction he has made since the parallels cannot be seen by mere humans who show signs of sanity. This is what one person said online which I tend to agree with:

One of the major problems is that Nibley often used foreign language quotes (which he translated to his advantage) and hard to verify sources in his apolgenics.

As much as I appreciate all of the research that Nibley did, he said lots of things that just are not true. Things that he had to have known were not true. Here is another example:

“The gospel as the Mormons know it sprang full grown from the words of Joseph Smith. It has never been worked over or touched up in any way, and is free of revisions and alterations” and further stated that: “Yet of all churches in the world, only this one has not found it necessary to readjust any part of its doctrine in the last hundred years”. (Hugh Nibley, ‘No Ma’am, That’s Not History’)

That quote from Nibley is a bold face lie… period.’

It is unfortunate that Latter day saints are so steeped not only in prophet worship, but also in scholar worship and more particularly Nibley Worship. Nibley has been put on such a supernatural, pious pedestal of enlightenment that he is simply not worthy of. In my opinion, he was not nearly as enlightened as many of the church apologists want you to believe.

Frankly, I no longer hold Nibley in the high esteem I used to before I began to awaken to the awful state that the church is in and the financial conflict of interest that employees of the church such as Nibley are pressured with. I have mentioned a brief exchange I had with Nibley back in the day, in the following series

Black and White Robes part one

Black and White Robes- Part Two

Black and White Robes Final

Again, I personally like Nibley and appreciate the fact that he was trying to defend the LDS restoration and present it in a faith promoting light. The problem is that he was also presenting the apostate church in a faith promoting light by making statements that were simply not true.

Martha Beck, Nibley’s lesbian daughter (whose notoriety came in part from claiming that her father molested her as a child) accuses her father of being a “calculated liar”.

martha beck

While I am not suggesting that I believe all the accusations that Beck levels against her father, I think one needs to be aware of all sides of the story and the fact that not everyone that knows him personally is in awe of him, including his children.

I am of the belief that Nibley is human, biased and fallible and that some of his interpretations about ancient writings are false.

Below are some excerpts from an article about her book ” LEAVING THE SAINTS: HOW I LOST THE MORMONS AND FOUND MY FAITH written by anti-Mormon   (in fairness the other siblings of Martha think she is a wing-nut even though they are less than impressed with their fathers parenting skills )

 

Beck also talks about “the man in tweed,” a “thirty-ish man with a short beard,” who recognized her at a grocery store (p.164). “After politely asking my name, he drew a kind of deep breath you take just before you jump off the high dive and said, ‘Your father is a liar.’” When she asked the man what he meant, he said, “I used to have a job for your dad’s publisher…I was one of the flunkies who checked his footnotes.” “His footnotes. He makes them all up.” “All of them?” she asks. “No, not absolutely all,” the man replies, “But I’d say, conservatively, 90 percent of them.”

 Perhaps this would be a good project for the Neil Maxwell Institute (formerly called the Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies or FARMS). This group of Mormon apologists has become a kind of unofficial protector of the Nibley legacy. In light of such a strong accusation, it would be interesting to see if they would be willing to verify Nibley’s notes with the same enthusiasm they have shown toward their critics.

 When she asks this mystery man why he continued the cover-up, he explained that he needed the job but could not afford being blackballed. “Not just BYU. The Church. And no, I don’t think so, I know so,” he said. 

She relates that on her first day on the job at BYU she witnessed an interesting encounter between the chairman of her department and some fellow professors. “I’m sure you are all aware,” the chairman said, “that the brethren in Salt Lake City are asking BYU faculty to refrain from publishing in any journals that are considered ‘alternate voices.’”

 Beck then explained that “alternative voices” meant publications not approved by the LDS leadership. One of her colleagues remarked, “But that’s ridiculous, Where are we supposed to publish? Nobody takes church journals seriously. I mean I don’t take them seriously. They’ll never let us tell the truth.” Though not mentioned specifically, I assume two of the journals considered off limits were Sunstone, and Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought. Both publications have more of a liberal bent and often print articles that challenge the Mormon status quo. The Sunstone Foundation also sponsors a symposium that freely discusses Mormon history and doctrine. In September 1992, a Salt Lake Tribune article mentioned that some BYU faculty members were disappointed in this directive since it was “one of the few places Mormon-related research can be presented” (“Will BYU Guidelines Bring More Academic Freedom?” 9/19/92, B2).

 The chairman said that he had received several phone calls from church headquarters telling professors to avoid “sensitive research.” On page 81 she listed some of these thorny issues. They included evolution, Mormon history, American archaeology, and feminism.

Again, I am not suggesting that everything Beck claims is true… or even that anything that she says is true. Clearly she is an angry and unbalanced person with an axe to grind, whether real or imagined.

I am simply sharing this information in an effort to show that the splendid royal light that the church shines on Nibley is not the only light that he is seen in by those that know him intimately. If you have been indoctrinated by the church to only read faith promoting stuff put out by the church and to avoid any controversial opinions of others, you are rejecting the counsel of Paul who said to prove all things and hold fast to that which is good.

Financial Conflict of Interest

Perhaps Nibley’s his biggest flaw (which all LDS apologists have), was that he only presents the evidence that supports his point of view (which coincidentally is the same point of view as the institution which signed his paycheck.)

You said, “Nibley claims the texts describe prayer circles that were gradually done away with because the fathers of the church didn’t know what to make of them”

Yes that is one way to spin it.

Another is that the fathers of the church could not find Biblical justification for those religious prayer circle anomalies although there is a significant body of documentation that prayer circles have a long history of use in WICCA and Paganism and therefore the church fathers decided to made a course correction by getting rid of the false traditions that had infiltrated the church.

Nibley’s interpretation and characterization reminds me of the illogical pioneer story about the indian (lamanite) that was about to scalp a Mormon Elder until he saw the masonic emblem in his garment and then spared his life and backed away scampering into the forest out of reverence for the holy man wearing the symbols so apparently familiar to the savage.

The story is often told to validate and vindicate the masonic temple garment yet the logic seems somewhat flawed to me as the Book of Mormon ends with the narrative that the Lamanites were an apostate people with darkened minds and savage rituals. How are we supposed to ascertain from that, that the familiarity with and reverencing of the Masonic symbols by the apostate day Lamanite culture hundreds of years later somehow vindicates the temple garment and the temple ceremony? To me it would imply just the opposite.

The Scrolls Validate the Restoration and the Apostasy

I love studying the dead sea scrolls and I find within them, lots of stuff to validate the LDS restoration movement, as well as the latter day apostasy.

I have written at least one blog related to the scrolls that I can remember

DEAD SEA SCROLLS 28. A FIRM FOUNDATION (AARON A-4Q541) “he will make atonement for all the children of his generation”

Nevertheless, there is a lot of stuff in the scrolls that incriminates the apostate church and the changing of the ordinances and the corrupt temple ordinance. The theme of how God’s people depart from the law and corrupt the ordinances is a recurring theme in the scrolls just like it is in the Old Testament prophecies but Nibley conveniently neglects to note those narratives.

Why?

Is he concerned about casting a dark light on his employer, the institutional church? (yes I am aware that Nibley did make some dark ominous innuendos about questionable practices and the current state of the modern church from time to time, but he always stopped short of telling the cold hard truth, which kept his worshippers fully engaged with the institution. I therefore must view him as an accomplice to the church, rather than as a watchman on the tower)

It is true that the scrolls speak of some similar narratives that are also found in other ancient and apocryphal writings, however your declaration that Joseph was not familiar with lots of ancient apocryphal and esoteric texts that mirror teachings that would later be found in the dead sea scrolls during his Nauvoo years could not be further from the truth.

The fact of the matter is that Joseph Smith had access to a huge library of ancient and esoteric texts during the Nauvoo period and he was up to his eyeballs in Gnosticism and the occult. He was clearly familiar with the Kabbalah.

Lance Owens points out in ” Joseph Smith: America’s Hermetic Prophet” that Alexander Nieber, a Jewish tutor of Joseph Smith had a copy of the Zohar in his library that Joseph Smith undoubtedly borrowed.

Another unusual element entered the matrix of Smith’s creativity around this time. From his associations with ceremonial magic and then Masonry, Smith had almost certainly heard of “Cabala”. But in 1841 a Jew raised in the Polish borderlands of Prussia, educated at the University of Berlin, and familiar with Kabbalah, joined the Mormon church, migrated to Nauvoo, and there became Smith’s frequent companion and tutor in Hebrew.

Documentation has recently come to light suggesting this individual, Alexander Neibaur, not only knew Kabbalah, but probably possessed in Nauvoo a copy of its classic text, the Zohar. Joseph likely became familiar with the Zohar while under the tutelage of Neibaur. Indeed, it appears Smith’s April 7, 1844 public declaration of a plurality of Gods was supported by an exegesis on the first Hebrew words of Genesis (Bereshith bara Elohim) drawn from opening section of the Zohar.7

In part three of Joseph Smith and Kabbalah: The Occult Connection Owens points out that Joseph had access to Alexander Neibaur’s impressive collection of books.

During Joseph’s final years in Nauvoo, however, his connection with Kabbalah becomes more concrete. In the spring of 1841 there apparently arrived in Nauvoo an extraordinary library of Kabbalistic writings belonging to a European Jew and convert to Mormonism who evidently new Kabbalah and its principal written works. This man, Alexander Neibaur, would soon become the prophet’s friend and companion.

In Reed Durhams infamous talk titled “Is there no Help for the Widows Son” he points out that Joseph Smith had in his possession at the time of the martyrdom a book on magic by Francis Barrett which contained an explanation pertaining to the Jupiter Talismon that Joseph had in his possession:

Now, I should like to initiate all of you into what is perhaps the strangest, the most mysterious, occult-like, esoteric, and yet Masonically oriented practice ever adopted by Joseph Smith.

This may also be another fine example of our earlier explained principle of “grabbing on.” All available evidence suggests that Joseph Smith the Prophet possessed a magical Masonic medallion, or talisman, which he worked during his lifetime and which was evidently on his person when he was martyred.

His talisman is in the shape of a silver dollar and is probably made of silver or tin. It is exactly one and nine-sixteenths inches in diameter, and weighs slightly less than one-half ounce.
.

Clearly, during the Nauvoo years when the heavens had closed, Joseph was devouring lots of books with, and influenced by, ancient texts and apocryphal and mystical interpretations..
.

This is why it is so critical to understand the prophetic narrative behind the secret history of Mormonism so that all of this amazing stuff can be sorted out in the proper context. Joseph Smith was not unfamilar with lots of ancient texts and esoteric writings that had similar narratives as would later be found in the Dead Sea Scrolls.
.

That is one of the things that differentiates the Nauvoo period from the early Kirtland period.
.

In the revelatory period during the early Kirtland years Joseph was not a well read Biblical scholar and he was receiving revelations that he did not even fully comprehend. He was young, naive, innocent and revelatory. That is why Sidney Rigdon, one of the most competent Biblical scholars of the day, was given the divine mandate to “prove the words that Joseph utters through the words of the holy prophets.” (Section 35)’
.

This is why it was primarily Sidney that did the public expounding of the scriptures Joseph was bringing forth to both the saints as well as conducting the debates with critics of the restoration during the Kirtland era..
.

In Nauvoo, after the heavens began closing and Sidney had become silent, it appears as if Joseph began reading apocryphal ancient texts and esoteric books and doing the public expounding. Historians have shown that components of the King Follett Discourse and other discourses that he gave can be found in some of the esoteric and kabbalistic books that Joseph was reading at the time.
.

 It is important to realize that Joseph was the Lord’s servant who was ordained to deliver God’s people over to Satan.
.

What better way was there to do it than to replace the simple ordinances of the fulness of the gospel which had been rejected, containing the baptism of fire and the Holy Ghost, with the idolatry, pomp and circumstance of an esoteric-occult-masonic temple ritual ?
.

One I might add, that contractually places the saints under the power of Satan if they do not obey the letter of the law as contained in the four standard works!
.

 One of the things that we learn in conjunction with the Biblical profile of Joseph Smith as an intercessor that takes the sins of the people upon himself and then acts them out, is that he was a type of Solomon and David.
.

Both David and Solomon fell into sin after having achieved great spiritual heights and favor in the sight of God.
.

In the case of Solomon who was one of the most inspired and wise prophet/kings to ever walk upon the face of the earth, he fell into idolatry as a result of his polygamy. He had multiple pagan wives that influenced him to begin worshipping pagan gods.
.

The Biblical profile and prophetic narrative of Joseph Smith testifies that like David and Solomon, Joseph achieved great enlightenment early in his prophetic reign, during the revelatory sweetspot from 1830 to 1834, yet in the later part of his ministry, he transgressed because of latter day Israels refusal to repent and reform.
.

It is altogether possible that David and Solmon offered up similar intercessory offering in behalf of their peoples which may have led to their fall. This may be the reason why David continued to be spoken of highly by the Lord even after his death despite having committed grievous sins before God.
.

As pointed out in previous posts, the Lord covered Joseph Smith’s eyes because of the sins of the people he had restored the gospel to. He then delivered apostate latter day Israel over to Satan.
.

I am now going to share an email that I shared with another subscriber over a year ago which is related to this topic

.

[Snippet from an email I responded to over a year ago regarding my official rejection of the Temple Endowment]

 

Email #3
The Topic of the Temple Endowment 

…Also, have you read the book “Experiencing the Mighty Change” by Hal Wilcox and Randal Klimt?  That book is all about the Baptism of Fire and the Holy Ghost and how it is a noticeable event and not simply an intellectual experience. As I remember that book it seems that there indeed should be some powerful manifestations that accompany being Born Again.

So your belief is that no one is having that experience in our day?

I guess all we can do is search the scriptures, pray, return to God and just wait for the next phase?

Can I ask a person question: I assume when you discovered the falsehood of the masonic endowment that you stopped wearing your garments?

Even though I’m a convert, almost all of my adult experience has been as an “active” member. Its kind of hard to break out of the box completely.

My Response

We live in a time of hidden darkness where we get all sorts of spiritual impressions, some true and some false. I do think there is a preliminary spiritual rebirth that is always available to repentant people regardless of whether the fulness of on the earth or not, but I don’t believe people are currently receiving the full spiritual rebirth and they definitely are not receiving their calling and election which is always followed (never preceded by) the second comforter !

I have provided countless scriptures in previous posts to demonstrate that God has turned his face from the saints and withheld the gift of greater faith and the greater spiritual blessings for a little season. The evidence from God’s word as well as the lack of fruits in our current world is overwhelming. One must be in a state of deep slumber to deny this.

Regarding deception… please see the following post about discernment and deception

https://onewhoiswatching.wordpress.com/2009/02/28/%E2%80%9Ci-will-tell-you-in-your-mind-and-in-your-heart%E2%80%9D/

According to countless passages, the full baptism of fire and the Holy Ghost is not available during this little season of chastisement. I have personally had an ineffable experience which I believe is a lessor version of the full spiritual rebirth that will return when the fulness returns, however, nobody can receive the full baptism of fire and the Holy Ghost until the appointed time when the fulness returns according to how I interpret the scriptures. If those blessings were available now, there would be no need for the return of the servants in the third watch and the restoration of the fulness THOSE ARE THE FRUITS OF THE FULNESS.

YES, nobody doeth good except those that are ready to receive the fulness when it returns.

Regarding the Temple Endowment: Let me share a personal experience that I once had.

Back in about 1991-ish I was part of a little study group that had been studying the scriptures very deeply for many years together.

During our study we had arrived at the devastating conclusion that all was not well in Zion and that the leaders of the latter day church were not speaking directly to God.

We began to see the discrepancy between the teachings of Brigham Young and the teachings of Joseph Smith, etc.

It also occurred to us, after studying some of the information that has been and will be covered in this current series, regarding the temple, that the temple endowment was not the true endowment promised in the scriptures.

We had concluded that it was not only inspired by Masonic influences, but that it was inspired by the Devil to put the apostate latter day saints under a curse of spiritual bondage. We had reason to believe that the covenants made in that endowment along with the declaration of “Satan” in the endowment that all those that don’t live up to EVERY commandment in the Bible and Book of Mormon, would be put under the power of Satan.

We realized that even though the Lord had temporarily released the saints from having to live the laws of Zion for a little season (Section 105) the temple covenant was placing the saints that followed Brigham Young under that obligation and requirement AGAIN, even though it was impossible to keep all of the commandments in the Book of Mormon and Bible.

In other words, the temple places us under the gospel of works and the harsh demands of Justice, not under the law of Grace offered through the fulness of the gospel and the spiritual rebirth.

Since it is impossible to keep all of the commandments, the net result of thetemple endowment for EVERYONE that is endowed, is to be put under the power of Satan.

How wonderful!!!

NOT!

Having realized that we had all been duped into a covenant with death and hell, as Isaiah refers to it, we pondered for several weeks how insidious it is, that people are initiated into this dastardly covenant without knowing what they are getting into since the contents of the endowment is not openly spoken about.

It is true the people are given the opportunity to back out during the introduction of the endowment, but there is no reason to back out at that time since one does not know what the contractual agreements are that they are about to enter into.

As the evil ceremony progresses, one is under huge social pressure and shock at what is going on and does not want to stand up in front of the whole congregation and make a spectacle of themselves.

The whole thing is done in blindness and darkness. Typological to how a mysterious hand comes through the veil to lead the unsuspecting initiate through the veil without showing a face until the initiate gets to the other side and can see that it is the devil that has deceived them and pulled them through the veil into his kingdom, and is laughing at how stupid the initiate is to have put their trust in the arm of flesh.

The poor initiate doesn’t know what “gifts” they are about to receive via signs, tokens, handshakes, etc.

They don’t realize that they are exchanging the gifts of the spirit for the gifts of signs and tokens and handshakes, etc.

On with the story-

The night before our next little study group meeting, one of our friends that was part of the study group was reading in the Book of Mormon and he read about how the Lord allows people to break a covenant that they are tricked into making. ( I don’t remember the reference)

As we were gathered around the picnic table waiting for this person to show up so that we could begin our gospel study, he finally showed up and did something that caught us quite by surprise.

He jumped up on the picnic table and yelled out “My new name is Abraham”!

We all sat there stunned and in shock.

At first we did not understand what he was doing and what he was hoping to accomplish.

We quizzed him a little and he explained that he had read about how the Lord allows people to honorably break false covenants that they are tricked into making. He had determined that by revealing his new name, he was breaking the covenant with death and hell!

He then shouted out the same thing again.

At that point the spirit fell upon me and I stood up and shouted “My new name is Elijah” (that was the new name I had been given in the Temple)

After I divulged my new name, Mrs Watcher stood up and revealed her new name. The others in the little group all did the same thing, followed by a great deal of rejoicing.

We all felt a huge feeling of relief and renewal. I personally feel that my level of personal revelation opened up exponentially because of what I did.

I suspect that critics would say that some of the unusual interpretations of the scriptures that have come to me since that awakening must be of the Devil. I feel quite the opposite. Indeed virtually all of the false prophets that arise are inspired by the Masonic temple covenant just as the false prophets of the church are. One of the easiest ways to spot a false prophet is their allegiance to Brigham Young’s Masonic temple covenant.

[Editorial Notes: If you are a subscriber to this blog that is freaked out by this event in my life and feel that I have been seriously deceived, I highly encourage you to unsubscribe from this blog and never return.]

The truth is sharper than a two edged sword.

After that I removed my garments and purchased some boxer shorts. I felt a huge relief although I confess I felt a little awkward for several months, having worn garments for many years.

I am sharing this experience because you asked about garments, etc.

I am not suggesting that anyone else do what we did.

If you leave the church before you have sufficient knowledge, the folks in the large and spacious building will destroy you.

I still feel that I have not fully repented of all of the sins of the Gentiles. I don’t even think I know what all of the sins of the Gentiles are.

I just know that for me, I needed to break the covenant I made with Satan in order to progress and to take the personal revelation I got to the highest possible level.

Shortly after that experience I wrote an article titled “Brighams Gift”, referring to the fact that the temple endowment is the gift that Brigham Young gave to the saints.. which I think the book of Mormon refers to as the “evil gift” which replaces the true gift of the Holy Ghost.

Perhaps one day I will scan and send that article to you..

Anyway, that is my story and I am sticking to it! LOL

For years I felt humiliated in dressing rooms when I would be next to someone changing that was wearing garments. For a long time it was hard to feel judged as a “lukewarm” sub-par spiritual weakling. Now I rejoice that I don’t have to mess with the garments.

I look at those who wear garments and I feel sorry for them and hope that some day they will be able to stop the idolatry and take off their filthy garments and return to the simple gospel of Christ as documented in the scriptures.

Again, I am not suggesting people need to do what our little study group did. I am just sharing my experience that led up to taking my garments off. We each have our own path and need to follow the spirit the best we can.

 

Email #4

Topic- The Nefarious Acts of Secret Combinations

What is the “great secret” referred to in these scriptures? Do you know what is meant by “that great secret?”

My Response

The primary “great secret” being referred to is that one can “get gain” by murdering other people.
.

Those familiar with the dastardly acts of the current and last few administrations are aware that countless US citizens have been dispatched and “suicided” in order to maintain and enhance the power base of the secret cabal that runs this country and the world. The times we live in are typological to the times when secret combinations were murdering people in the Book of Mormon.
.

There are rumors that this great secret is alive and well within the modern church which has been infiltrated by the same secret society as the government has been. Some people believe that Presidents of the church have died prematurely do to the acts of secret combinations. As sensational as these claims appear, it would make sense from the prophetic perspective of the scriptures.
.

There is also another great secret revealed in that chapter:
.

“For, from the days of Cain, there was a secret combination, and their works were in the dark, and they knew every man his brother.”
.

That passage is referring to a nefarious homosexual act in which one male initiate places his DNA into the “tailpipe” of another initiate for purposes of binding the brothers of an esoteric secret Satanic order to each other and other members of the order in a way that supposedly increases the spiritual energy, power and bond.
.

It is a well know fact that females carry the DNA of every man they have ever had sex with for their entire lives and it creates mental and spiritual confusion within them if they have not repented.. which is one of many reasons why girls should not be promiscuous and should treat their bodies has holy temples..
.

The same is true when men plant DNA into each other. They continue to carry that “signature” indefinitely. It is believed that this despicable act has been going on within the higher realms of WICCA and Satanism and Masonry and the highest orders of the illuminati for eons.
.
It takes place in high places in government and religion and virtually all aspects of society.

 

I have reason to believe that in recent times, men in high places within the apostate church are also involved in this ungodly act as well. When the book of Mormon prophesies that the secret combination would be among the saints, it is not just referring to their federal government, it is referring to the actual leadership of the saints.

.
This is one of many reasons that the God of Israel is about to emerge from his hiding place and vex this evil nation in the very near future.

.

God will not be mocked indefinitely. 

.

.

Most recent noteable email

Notable Emails #24 “I recently awoke or at least have begun to awaken. Since August I’m no longer blindly following the brethren and traditions of the church.”

Notable Emails #22 “My prediction is that those who accept the gospel of Bill Reel (non-literal historicity of the Book of Mormon) will ultimately either loose all of their faith…”

Notable Emails #21 ” I don’t believe the current LDS Church has ANY “authority” – especially BECAUSE they preach that the culmination of the Gospel is the Masonic Rituals..”

Notable Emails #19- “Sometime ago I had an extraordinary experience where I was forgiven of some of my sins”

 Notable Emails #18- “I wake up every morning with this intense feeling that we are getting closer”

 Notable Emails #17 “Then shall the offering of Judah and Jerusalem be pleasant unto the LORD, as in the days of old, and as in former years.”

 Notable Emails #16 “the Lord wouldn’t give a young church such responsibility so early”

Notable Emails #15: “It would be so hard to do if we didn’t have the word crunching software available to us to use. Now I can see why so many are deceived. “

 Notable Emails #14 (b) “who was the legal heir and successor of the Prophet Joseph Smith, Jr.?”

 Notable Emails #14 (a) “Baptism for the dead is illogical and pretty much impossible to ever accomplish”

 Notable Emails Part 13 “Gileadi compares the Servant to Hezekiah, in that he answered for the temporal sins of the people and acted as a proxy savior”

 Notable Emails Part 12 “the scriptures will become corrupted and deceive the elect and give Satan power”

 Notable Emails Part 9 “My number one desire right now is to protect my wife and honor her tender feelings about the gospel as she understands it.”

 Notable Emails Part 8 “Who are the Jews and Gentiles?

Notable Emails Part 7 “My eyes have been opened”

Notable Emails Part 6: “Can anyone tell me anything about this blog?… This guy seems to have some new ideas I’ve never heard before using the scriptures to back his views.

Notable Emails Part 5: “the truths that both you and I hold so dear …are things that cannot be taught they can only be revealed.”

Notable Emails- Part 4 “I have now caught the spirit of watching along with you and others.”

Notable Emails- Part 3 “Have you ever read ‘Letter to a CES Director?’” Yes… and it has strengthened my testimony!

Notable Emails- Part 2: “Readers deserve to know if you truly are a heretic or just a faithful divergent thinker”

Notable Emails Part 1- Mormon Missionary: “I too am watching”


Notable Emails #25 “Can I ask you for some help with chapter 27 in 2 Nephi?”

November 28, 2015
Email #1

Can I ask you for some help with chapter 27 in 2 Nephi?  This whole chapter screams 3rd watch to me until I get to  vs. 21 & 22, ” Then shalt thou seal up the book again, and hide it up unto me, that I may preserve the words which thou hast not read, until I shall see fit in mine own wisdom to reveal all things unto the children of men,”

this sounds more like the 2nd watch.

I went back to read the chapter again to see if there was a clear break when the lord is speaking about 3rd vs the 2nd watch, but I couldn’t find one. When I went back I found that vs 9 – 14 sounded like they could fit with Jospeh in the 1800’s , however vs. 15-19 didn’t seem to fit the 1800 events of the Book of Mormon.

So I’ve read again and again, but ‘m just not seeing it? If this chapter is all 3rd watch how does vs 21 -22 make sense, why would the book be sealed up AGAIN? If some of the chapter is 3rd and some 2nd I could see that, but I don’t see definitive lines drawn?

Thoughts? 

Thanks

My Reply

Great catch and great question.

I wrote a detailed post on this years ago but I cannot find where the post is LOL. I wish I would have developed some kind of catalogue by topic.

Anyway, I was able to find a graphic I created for the blog post. I am going to include that graphic in this response while I keep trying to find my old blog post.
The bottom line is that portions of the plates are brought forth three separate times. first in the 2nd watch, then again at the first of the third watch to provide a test and a great polarization between the believing and the unbelieving when the Marvelous Work begins, and finally after the righteous repent later on in the third watch.
This is such a great topic that I will probably do another post on it one way or another.
Let me know if the graphic provides an ah ha or if it just muddies the waters and needs more explanation
gp
Follow up from me
I found one of the articles having to do with it
http://threewatches.blogspot.com/2010/04/vapors-of-smoke-in-foreign-lands.html
Her Reply
THANK YOU SO MUCH!! It’s funny how even when I think I’m reading my scriptures without any preconceived notions I still find myself at times holding onto old teachings.  It is such a clear and simple chapter. I knew from the start it was speaking about the 3rd watch, so lesson learned, read and believe!!!! Thank you for sending me the blog post and the diagram. 
Email #2
Watcher! 

Isn’t there a third option (to the two preserved in the blog post): the intercessory atonement? Or have I misunderstood the concept? 

[with reference to Are You Calling Joseph Smith a Liar?]

My Response
I am not sure I understand your question. Can you elaborate?
His Reply
Sure!

Adrian, the man behind “To the remnant” is of the opinion that Joseph never practiced polygamy, but that subsequent leaders have ascribed that behavior to him in order to justify their own sins. He also seems to imply that anyone that believes that Joseph was a polygamist and deceitful about it should expect today’s leaders to be the same.

But, as I’ve read your blogs and about Joseph’s intercessory atonement, it seems possible that he took upon him the sins of his people, and therefore engaged in the practice of polygamy. This could mean that Joseph did practice polygamy, lied about it but wasn’t a liar in God’s mind since he did it because of the offering he gave the Lord.
If i need to elaborate more, please let me know!
My Response

I agree with Adrian in that Joseph Smith, the man, was not a liar. It was not in his nature to lie.

My contention is that by 1832, Joseph became sanctified through the oath and covenant of the priesthood and had his name enrolled in the book of the names of the sanctified. Then, as a holy man, the Lord used him and others to provide an acceptable offering that included an intercessory atonement offering in behalf of latter day Israel who had, collectively as a church, rejected the fulness.
Because of this intercession, the sins of Israel were placed upon the intercessors. Hence Joseph Smith was outwardly acting out the sins of latter day Israel as a part of his calling, not because was inherently an evil man or a liar. . This same thing happened with Moses. Moses offered himself as an atonement offering for Israel and then he sinned before the Lord and was prevented from entering the promised land.
If Biblical polygamy or Celestial polygamy were part of the fulness of the gospel, they would have had to have been taught and practiced in the church during the 3 1/2 years during which the fulness was on the earth. The Lord would have provided a public revelation on it and it would have been clearly spelled out.
The reason Adrian and others have a hang up about this is because they don’t accept my interpretation of the prophecies relating to the atonement statute in Leviticus 16 and 2 Samuel 7. They apparently don’t believe that Joseph provided an intercessory atonement offering for latter day Israel.
If I did not accept those prophecies as relating to Joseph Smith, I would have to agree with Adrian and others because I do not believe it was Joseph’s nature to lie or commit any serious sins.
I would appreciate it if Adrian would take the time to debunk what I have written about that topic.
I appreciate and admire Adrian’s loyalty to the character of Joseph Smith
His Reply

  I see!

So there is a third option (as it oftentimes seems to be), that is: Joseph could’ve practiced it and not been a liar (if I understood you correctly)!
Thanks!
[further clarification not sent in an email]
I think I may be partly responsible for some of the confusion on this topic because of my poor ability to explain the prophecies relating to Joseph Smith. When not specifically speaking about the Biblical prophecies referring to Joseph Smith, I have possibly been guilty of implying at times that Joseph Smith was a fallen prophet, without providing the prophetic narrative about why he fell and explaining that the sins he was committing were not his own but were the sins of the people he was providing an intercession for.
Email #3
Watcher,
I tired to post your last blog response on the anonymous polygamy essay over at Adrian Larsen’s blog. 
Your post was perfect for the deception he’s involved in. However, I’ve been blocked. 
:(
My Response
Wow that is really low budget that he is not willing to allow other views and opinions…. sad
Email #4

Thank you for getting back with me so quickly….

One more question that I’d like you’re thoughts on. In your opinion is Denver Snuffer a false prophet through and through, or could he have a message from Christ himself as he claims, that being that rebaptism is required for those who will be part of the true zion? I ask this because I wouldn’t have recently awakened to the knowledge that the current LDS church is in apostasy without the help of a good friend who is a follower of Denver Snuffer. He is convinced that Snuffer is a true messenger from Christ. I have investigated Denver Snuffer’s claims by reading his first lecture, nearly all of his blog, PTHG, and his lecture on Polygamy. I find that he teaches a lot of truth, but in my opinion also some false doctrine. I don’t believe that a true messenger would teach any false doctrine. Rather I think a false prophet would offer a great deal of truth, but would mix in key false doctrine to deceive even the very elect. 

I have read through your rebuttal of PTHG and it was very informative. I actually took detailed notes on what was put forth in the book as I was reading it and noticed some key false doctrines, such as his bogus definition of how one progresses from belief to faith to knowledge (knowledge only coming from a visit by an angel or Christ himself). He defends that position from the Book of Mormon, but upon reading the passages he sites in defense of that idea it doesn’t hold water. Of course one can receive knowledge without a heavenly visitation. Also in German the words faith and belief are the same word Glaube. 

I’m a torn between my concerns about Denver Snuffer’s teachings and my fear of damning myself by rejecting a true messenger of the Lord. I guess for me the jury is still out on Denver Snuffer. I would greatly appreciate your thoughts on the matter.

My Reply

I have decided to not provide my response to this fellow at this time and I have asked him to not forward my reply to anyone. However, this is his response to my reply

His Response

Thanks for taking the time to break all that down about Denver Snuffer. Those where pretty much my thoughts about him, but I guess I was trying to leave the door open that he might be a true messenger just in case. Funny you should mention what you did about observing what kind of spirit is leading my friend. I have noticed that there is something off about him, especially when you look into his eyes. I had the impression he was being deceived about Denver a couple of days after I initially started to really wake up. I guess a part of me was desperate to latch on to a new true prophet and I hoped that inspite of my impression that Denver was that man. It certainly would be nice and much easier if he was. Your email just confirmed what I already new in my heart, but couldn’t quite bring myself to completely admit, and that is that Denver Snuffer is a false prophet. Now I can put him and his claims behind me and move forward. The Holy Ghost has confirmed that this is right. I will keep our conversation between us (accept for perhaps showing your email to my wife one day when she’s ready. Thanks for all your help.

Email #5
Watcher,

I am going to purchase your book for my husband for Christmas and was wondering if the only edition available is the first? I found the link and password to purchase it but just wanted to confirm that is was the only one available before I purchase it. Please let me know.

Thank you

My Reply

I am so sorry the new edition is not done. I have had a real mental block and have had several distractions and don’t know when I will get it done. It is possible that it will be done in a few weeks but I cannot promise. If you decide to purchase the existing one now, send me a screen print of your receipt and I will mail you the updated one free of charge when it becomes available.

Thanks
[This offer is good for all subscribers of this blog]

Notable Emails #24 “I recently awoke or at least have begun to awaken. Since August I’m no longer blindly following the brethren and traditions of the church.”

Notable Emails #22 “My prediction is that those who accept the gospel of Bill Reel (non-literal historicity of the Book of Mormon) will ultimately either loose all of their faith…”

Notable Emails #21 ” I don’t believe the current LDS Church has ANY “authority” – especially BECAUSE they preach that the culmination of the Gospel is the Masonic Rituals..”

Notable Emails #19- “Sometime ago I had an extraordinary experience where I was forgiven of some of my sins”

Notable Emails #18- “I wake up every morning with this intense feeling that we are getting closer”

Notable Emails #17 “Then shall the offering of Judah and Jerusalem be pleasant unto the LORD, as in the days of old, and as in former years.”

Notable Emails #16 “the Lord wouldn’t give a young church such responsibility so early”

Notable Emails #15: “It would be so hard to do if we didn’t have the word crunching software available to us to use. Now I can see why so many are deceived. “

Notable Emails #14 (b) “who was the legal heir and successor of the Prophet Joseph Smith, Jr.?”

Notable Emails #14 (a) “Baptism for the dead is illogical and pretty much impossible to ever accomplish”

Notable Emails Part 13 “Gileadi compares the Servant to Hezekiah, in that he answered for the temporal sins of the people and acted as a proxy savior”

Notable Emails Part 12 “the scriptures will become corrupted and deceive the elect and give Satan power”

Notable Emails Part 9 “My number one desire right now is to protect my wife and honor her tender feelings about the gospel as she understands it.”

 

Notable Emails Part 8 “Who are the Jews and Gentiles?

Notable Emails Part 7 “My eyes have been opened”

Notable Emails Part 6: “Can anyone tell me anything about this blog?… This guy seems to have some new ideas I’ve never heard before using the scriptures to back his views.

Notable Emails Part 5: “the truths that both you and I hold so dear …are things that cannot be taught they can only be revealed.”

Notable Emails- Part 4 “I have now caught the spirit of watching along with you and others.”

Notable Emails- Part 3 “Have you ever read ‘Letter to a CES Director?’” Yes… and it has strengthened my testimony!

Notable Emails- Part 2: “Readers deserve to know if you truly are a heretic or just a faithful divergent thinker”

Notable Emails Part 1- Mormon Missionary: “I too am watching”


Notable Emails #24 “I recently awoke or at least have begun to awaken. Since August I’m no longer blindly following the brethren and traditions of the church.”

November 23, 2015

 

Email #1

Watcher,

In the Lecture 7, last verse in the Lectures on Faith it states “for God must change otherwise faith will prevail with him. And he who possesses it will, through it, obtain all necessary knowledge and wisdom, until he shall know God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, whom He has sent — whom to know is eternal life. Amen.”

What does it mean “for God must change”? Previous lectures teach that God is perfect and unchanging. I’m havin a hard time wrapping my head around this one. 

I read online where it means that God changes his reward or blessings for those that don’t have faith, but that doesn’t make sense since it would be the same unchanged God who withholds the blessing because faith wasn’t present. 

This lecture was eye opening to the awful state we’re in — no blessings or very few as a people because of the lack of faith. 

Thanks!

Response

 

The language is very confusing for sure. It is somewhat typical of the way Rigdon and others of that day communicated, almost a quasi shorthand or abbreviated form of communication.

The topic being  focused on is the principle of faith being an essential character trait of God and on the necessity for us to obtain faith in order to know God. The unchangeable character of God has already been addressed in a previous lecture.

 In light of the previous chapters that tell categorically that God does not change, I think what the awkward sentence means is that “unless God were to change, faith will prevail with him”.
Here is a reconstruction of the sentence clarifying what I think Rigdon meant
“for God must change [in order for faith to not prevail with Him] otherwise [if God is an unchanging God]  faith will prevail with him. And he who possesses it will, through it, obtain all necessary knowledge and wisdom, until he shall know God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, whom He has sent — whom to know is eternal life. Amen.”
That’s the best translation I can do without the Urim and Thummim

Email #2

Hello Watcher!

Could you send me the link to the site that shows the changes between the Book of Commandments and D&C?

Thanks!

Response

There are numerous webpages that address this. Virtually all of them are done by anti-Mormons. It is unfortunate that the LDS church does not provide an accurate and faith promoting explanation for the changes on line along with all of the changes.

The one I have used in my posts and video presentation is the one done by 2think.org which I like because it is color coded and allows you to copy and paste

This particular page link that I am providing is for BofC chapter 4/D&C 5

You can use the arrows at the bottom of each page to scroll forward or backward to different sections or simply change the Boc # in the url.
For a more in depth understanding behind the changes there is a really good six volume work by Woodford that  goes into much greater detail and provides historical context for each revelation. It is called the “The Historical Development of the Doctrine and Covenants” It is a must read for anyone wanting to have a better understanding of the history of the church and the changes made in the Doctrine and Covenants
The following posts relate to this topic and provide a detailed explanation of why the changes were made
Enjoy

Email #3

[Look at the following thesis] Looks like another nail in the coffin for section 132.

 

Reply

Where is the rest of the document? Do you have it? I would like to review it for any historical data that it might provide.

The supposition that Orson Hyde or, more probably Brigham Young wrote it makes a lot of sense. I am of the opinion that Brigham Young oversaw the project but I suspect that he had some help. I think it may have been a group project and that some snippets from other unpublished revelations were used as well. The general narrative feels quite disjointed and does not flow well in my opinion.

Regarding the lady that did the research, I was struck by the number of illogical and erroneous historical assumptions contained in her thesis.

Just off the top of my head, here are some that jumped out at me.

She attributes the writing of section 76 to Joseph Smith when it is a known fact that Rigdon wrote it

She attributes “The Seer” to Orson Hyde when it is well known that Orson Pratt wrote it.

By falsely attributing the authorship of those writings she corrupts and invalidates some of her analysis and research and destroys her own credibility as a competent historical researcher on this topic.

She initially considers Oliver Cowdery and Hyrum Smith as a top suspects. Both are illogical and absurd.

Oliver had left the church many years previous to the time in question. and he was violently opposed to the doctrine of polygamy and had charged Joseph with indiscretion relating to the Alger affair.

Hyrum was a late adapter of the principle who had been on a crusade against the principle well into the time that it was being received by many.

Had she been familiar with the general history of the church she would not have spent time and energy focusing on those two historical players.

Using the Journal of Discourses to analyse the language style of Brigham Young seems questionable to me as the discourses were hastily written by scribes who at worst used short hand and at best were reducing long complex sentence structures into shorter narratives often using their own vocabularies to reconstruct succinct thoughts. Simply look at the side by side comparisons of the Nauvoo Discourses by Joseph Smith from the various journals to see a huge difference between what various note takers are hearing from the speaker not only in style but uses of words.

She does not seem to be able to differentiate inspired  “word of wisdom” revelations in the D&C that were clearly written in the style of mortal authors  from “thus sayeth the Lord” first person narratives in the D&C and she attributes the writing style of the “thus sayeth the Lord” revelations to Joseph Smith instead of to the Lord.

Overall, her knowledge of history is very lacking. I think she was way out of her depth in studying and researching this topic.  This lady is largely ignorant about much of church history. She makes egregious historical mistakes repeatedly.

She could have only gotten away with submitting such a mistake ridden thesis at a university where the committee is completely unfamiliar with LDS church history.

Nevertheless, her analysis did uncover some interesting things. I loved how she observed how section 132 uses certain phrases in an inconsistent way that they had been used in previous revelations. One great observation she made was that

“When Joseph [the Lord] used “as touching,” [in other revelations] it meant “agreed.” As used in Section 132, “as touching” meant “in relation to.” This is a very significant observation.  I had pointed several other changes in the use of established scriptural terms in my

Analysis of Section 132

The bottom line for me is that if a person treasures up the word of God and searches the scriptures and the history of the church under the influence of the spirit, they will find that content, context and consistency in the prophetic narrative is what demonstrates the fallacy of section 132 not the research of an RLDS secular linguistics expert who has an ax to grind with the principle of polygamy.

Thanks for sending the document, it was an interesting read.

His reply

That [portion of the thesis] is all I came across.

I don’t know what her agenda or reasoning was in doing this paper but I found it interesting and some of it pretty compelling. I skimmed through parts of it.
It isn’t definitive but it does add to the case against 132.

I do think she made a pretty good case for this not being written through JS either by revelation(whether she thinks he received any) or on his own, since it was so different from other things he wrote(revealed) and that it was so similar to stuff BY wrote or said. I believe BY wrote it and have thought that for a long time. King Brigham, imho was the driver behind polygamy from the start. It was his thing and he wanted to get as many people doing it as he could to justify his own desires.

No way God would reveal His crowning doctrine in such a convoluted, illogical and dubious manner supported by no other scripture in recorded history.
There is no credible second let alone third witness of it anywhere.

The fact that she has an axe to grind against polygamy isn’t necessarily a negative. Because, even if BY was the one who wrote it(her conclusion) and that was proven somehow, LDS corp wouldn’t back off from it since he was a prophet, right? They would just change the narrative.

The SLC suits have way to much invested in 132 and getting rid of it means the whole eternal marriage procreation scam would be in jeopardy.

Email #4

[editorial note: this was in response to the amazing ice melt in the North Pole youtube that was mentioned in one of my posts]

Watcher,

I read about the Hollow Earth Theory about 10 years ago when I learned of the quote from JS:
“I was then really ‘the bosom friend and companion of the Prophet
Joseph.’ … Sometimes when at my house I asked him questions relating
to the past, present and future; … one of which I will relate: I asked
where the nine and a half tribes of Israel were. ‘Well,’ said he, ‘you
remember the old caldron or potash kettle you used to boil maple sap in
for sugar, don’t you?’ I said yes. ‘Well,’ said he, ‘they are in the
north pole in a concave just the shape of that kettle. And John the
Revelator is with them, preparing them for their return.”– Benjamin Johnson, My Life’s Review, 1947, p. 93
I read scriptures that seemed to support it as well…
Hel 14:21-22
  • 21 Yea, at the time that he shall yield up the ghost there shall be thunderings and lightnings for the space of many hours, and the earth shall shake and tremble; and the rocks which are upon the face of this earth, which are both above the earth and beneath, which ye know at this time are solid, or the more part of it is one solid mass, shall be broken up;
  • 22 Yea, they shall be rent in twain, and shall ever after be found in seams and in cracks, and in broken fragments upon the face of the whole earth, yea, both above the earth and beneath.
  • D&C 88:79, 104
  • 79 Of things both in heaven and in the earth, and under the earth; things which have been, things which are, things which must shortly come to pass; things which are at home, things which are abroad; the wars and the perplexities of the nations, and the judgments which are on the land; and a knowledge also of countries and of kingdoms—
  • 104 And this shall be the sound of his trump, saying to all people, both in heaven and in earth,and that are under the earth—for every ear shall hear it, and every knee shall bow, and every tongue shall confess, while they hear the sound of the trump, saying: Fear God, and give glory to him who sitteth upon the throne, forever and ever; for the hour of his judgment is come.

Response

Yep

This may also apply

“Wherefore, I will that all men shall repent, for all are under sin, except those which I have reserved unto myself, holy men that ye know not of.”

Email [comment in the about section of my blog] # 5

Hello Watcher. I recently awoke or at least have begun to awaken. Since August I’m no longer blindly following the brethren and traditions of the church. I’m still active at church, but I’m very confused. I was raised in the church, served a mission, married in the temple, and have always been active. Though I’ve committed my fair share of sins and am at best an unworthy servant of Christ, I have always tried to do what’s right. I never questioned or wavered in my belief that the church was the Lord’s true church and that the brethren were true prophets and apostles, but now I’m not so sure. Something is off. I recently found your blog and I’m thankful I did. I admit I have been reading your recent posts and have kind of bounced around through different posts of yours and haven’t read through all your blogs in order on your sister blog, but I plan to as I have time. I have a few questions for you and I don’t know how to get a hold of you except for in this comment section.

I have four kids, the oldest is 9 and I baptized him when he was 8 before I woke up. My next child turns 8 in the spring. In your opinion is it ok to baptize her? I’m not sure what priesthood authority, if any, I actually possess. I’m also very concerned about my children and even myself being mislead by corrupted and false doctrine at church, but I don’t know if leaving the church and the support system of fellow believers of Christ. It’s very frustrating.

For the most part I find your blog very enlightening, but I have questions about a few of the things you teach. One question from a recent post of yours is about John the Baptist and Elijah. You say they are the same person, but the JST of John 1 says that they aren’t the same person. It also appears from the D&C that Joseph Smith understood them to be different people since he refers to them by theit seperate names. Any thoughts? I have other questions too, is there a better way to reach you?

My Reply

Praise God that you are no longer blindly following the brethren and the false traditions of the church. As Paul says, you need to prove all things, hold fast to that which is good. Obviously, that includes anything you read on my blog.

You can contact me anytime by email at onewhoiswatching [at] gmail dot com.

Not everyone responds the same way when they begin to wake up and it is a long process. Many people react in anger and make rash decisions. I hope you will take things slowly and not jump to conclusions or make radical life changes without taking it slowly and counting the cost of your actions. Please realize that there is still much to learn and that you don’t want to make major life-changing decisions based on a very small portion of the relevant information that you need in order to make informed decisions.

As a matter of policy I try to never give counsel and tell people what they need to do since we have been commanded not to give counsel ( man should not counsel his fellow man, neither trust in the arm of flesh— D&C 119)

Nevertheless, I do share my opinions regarding what I would do in certain situations and what I have seen others do.

You have asked whether I think it is ok for you to baptise your child. I think the answer to that question probably varies from person to person that begins to wake up and has to do with a multiplicity of things, including your level of doctrinal understanding which, by your own admission is not great.

As I implied at the end of my last blog post, I think we all sin relatively cheaply during this little season of learning and chastisement since we are actually in the dispensation of the gospel of Abraham, NOT the dispensation of the fulness of times (which is erroneously taught in the church.)

Since we do not currently have the fulness of the gospel on the earth, we cannot be held to that level of accountability. I believe our generation of latter day saints have inherited the apostasy from our forefathers and I think God has mercy on us for that reason.

I have stated before that I believe that the authority to promulgate the gospel that was given to the “condemned” and “unconverted” quorum of the Twelve during Joseph ministry is still on the earth today among the current “condemned” and “unconverted” quorum of the Twelve. It is up to each member of the church to determine for themselves how to navigate the waters based on how these men are presenting the preparatory gospel of Christ.

When the fulness is ushered in, in the near future, we will all be held accountable to accept or reject the light at that time.

The process of waking up is a long process for most people. I have been studying the apostasy and trying to wake up for about 30 years now and I continually am learning things I did not understand before and am currently finding areas where the false indoctrinations I have inherited still have a strong hold upon my mind.

I think God will judge your actions according to the intent of your heart. If you prayerfully determine that the best thing for your family is to continue active in the church and to baptize your children, I think the Lord will bless you in that effort as long as you continue to learn and grow in the gospel and continue earnestly trying to wake up and teach the truth to your children. The ultimate goal for all of us to to treasure up the word of God and seek to take the Holy Spirit as our Guide as we WATCH for the return of the first laborers of the last kingdom.

You said:

“For the most part I find your blog very enlightening, but I have questions about a few of the things you teach. One question from a recent post of yours is about John the Baptist and Elijah. You say they are the same person, but the JST of John 1 says that they aren’t the same person. It also appears from the D&C that Joseph Smith understood them to be different people since he refers to them by theit seperate names. Any thoughts?”

Actually, the first chapter of the Gospel of John according to the JST has John the Baptist admitting that he is Elijah the Prophet. It is the KJV that indicates otherwise

Please read the following article very carefully and I think you will see that the evidence is overwhelming that John the Baptist represents the literal transmigration of Elijah the Prophet

The Secret Return of Elijah the Tishbite

I wrote that article to demonstrate that section 110 is a true revelation in response to a false prophet that is trying to sway people into believing that it is a false revelation.

 

Email #6

Watcher,
I’m reading chapter 9 in your book – the casting down of Satan in (JST) Rev. 12. 
I was also read in Moses 4:3. That Lucifer was cast down by the power of God’s Only Begotten. Why was Lucifer cast down by the power of God’s Only Begotten?
D&C 29:36 says that Lucifer rebelled against the Father. Why would the Father have his Son do it?
I know that D&C 76:25 says that Lucifer rebelled against the Son and was cast out of both, he Father and the Son’s, presence. 
Just curious. 
Also, I really liked your last post on baptisms in Zion. I’m going through the Book of Mormon and D&C and re-reading passages in Zion with the thought the idea that Zion is a physical place, not just the nebulous belief that it’s the pure in heartor both north and South American continents. 
This really has opened up my mind to certain realities that need to be present in order for Zion to be redeemed and to return. 
Thanks!

My Response

One of the many insidious reinterpretations of scripture by the modern church is the non-literal interpretation of Zion, reducing it to some non-geographical definition. Yes a Zion society consists of those that are pure in heart and of ONE heart and ONE mind, but it is a very real geographical location. A closely related doctrine that has been watered down by the apostate church is the concept of the gathering. The latter day saints are NOT a gathered people. They are a scattered people. There is still going to be a geographical gathering of Gods elect (see D&C 29)

Your observation about the Father using Christ to cast down Satan is a great observation. We learn from scripture that the Father created the Son in a tabernacle of element for the purpose of creating all other things including the earth we live on. Christ created all things in earth and in heaven. Indeed, if Satan was organized from unorganized matter or intelligence, it was the Son who did it.

The father seems to do all things through the Son. Even in the few instances where scripture credits the father as doing something, it has reference to him doing it through the son. IMO

Email #7

Watcher,
I was reading the Lectures on Faith. And in lecture 6, verse 9 it reads, “And in the last days, before the Lord comes, he is together together his saints who have made a covenant with him by sacrifice.”
What is the covenant that will be made unto the Lord by sacrifice?
Do you know?
Thanks!

 

My Reply

There are several possible interpretations

 The “sacrifice” in that context could be referring to the broken heart and  contrite spirit, or to the building of a temple, or to the law of consecration or all of the above.
 
8  Verily I say unto you, all among them who know their hearts are honest, and are broken, and their spirits contrite, and are willing to observe their covenants by sacrifice—yea, every sacrifice which I, the Lord, shall command—they are accepted of me.
9  For I, the Lord, will cause them to bring forth as a very fruitful tree which is planted in a goodly land, by a pure stream, that yieldeth much precious fruit.
10  Verily I say unto you, that it is my will that a house should be built unto me in the land of Zion, like unto the pattern which I have given you.
11  Yea, let it be built speedily, by the tithing [consecration] of my people.
12  Behold, this is the tithing and the sacrifice which I, the Lord, require at their hands, that there may be a house built unto me for the salvation of Zion—
13  For a place of thanksgiving for all saints, and for a place of instruction for all those who are called to the work of the ministry in all their several callings and offices;
14  That they may be perfected in the understanding of their ministry, in theory, in principle, and in doctrine, in all things pertaining to the kingdom of God on the earth, the keys of which kingdom have been conferred upon you.
15  And inasmuch as my people build a house unto me in the name of the Lord, and do not suffer any unclean thing to come into it, that it be not defiled, my glory shall rest upon it;
16  Yea, and my presence shall be there, for I will come into it, and all the pure in heart that shall come into it shall see God.
I tend to believe it is referring primarily to the law of consecration which is necessary in offering up a broken heart and a contrite spirit and is also necessary in building the temple in Zion. The Lord had previously said
23  Behold, now it is called today until the coming of the Son of Man, [which day ended when the Lord came secretly to the Kirtland Temple] and verily it is a day of sacrifice, and a day for the tithing of my people; for he that is tithed shall not be burned at his coming.
24  For after today cometh the burning—this is speaking after the manner of the Lord—for verily I say, tomorrow all the proud and they that do wickedly shall be as stubble; and I will burn them up, for I am the Lord of Hosts; and I will not spare any that remain in Babylon.
25  Wherefore, if ye believe me, ye will labor while it is called today. [ie, while the fulness of the gospel is on the earth and the law of sacrifice/consecration can be lived]
 
This is one of the many doctrines that differs true latter day saint end times dogma from the protestant end times dogma. Many protestants are looking for the rapture while LDS scripture informs us that the servants must first return and the elect must first be gathered and consecrated “tithed”  and Christ must return to his people in secret before Zion from below can be raptured up to meet zion from above 

His reply

I just had a thought after re-reading
23  Behold, now it is called today until the coming of the Son of Man, and verily it is a day of sacrifice, and a day for the tithing of my people; for he that is tithed shall not be burned at his coming.
24  For after today cometh the burning—this is speaking after the manner of the Lord—for verily I say, tomorrow all the proud and they that do wickedly shall be as stubble; and I will burn them up, for I am the Lord of Hosts; and I will not spare any that remain in Babylon.
25  Wherefore, if ye believe me, ye will labor while it is called today. 
What “today” is he referring to? 2nd watch or 3rd?
How about “tomorrow?”
Could there have been a shadow fulfillment in the 2nd watch as you pointed out, but the literal fulfillment in the 3rd watch?
Especially this part of the verse 24
My Response

The way I read it “today” is the end of the first watch when the saints were given the fulness which they rejected. The window of time to be tithed was limited and it came to an end on sometime between april 3 1836 and September 11 1836 when “tomorrow” began with the gospel of abraham and the opportunity to tithe and sacrifice was taken away with the fulness. The burning takes place sometime after today (first watch)

At the end of the second watch the burning begins

Email #8

Hey Watcher,

 I’m not as well read on the whole polygamy issue as you.
There’s a very good article that attempts to debunk or challenges a lot of the evidence out there that JS practiced polygamy.
He takes them all head on, except OC’s account with Fanny Alger.
Anyway, I wanted to share it with you incase you hadn’t seen it yet.
http://anonymousbishop.com/2015/11/03/joseph-smiths-monogamy/
It’s caused me to think…
In your book and your blog you’ve done a great job documenting the Atonement Statute and how JS is the David Servant and all the prophecies that fall in place with that.
I know that a lot hinges on JS committing iniquity and being chastened by the rod of men. You’ve pinpointed that as the sin of polygamy.
What if that’s not it? Could there be something else that he did, something less severe? Something akin to Moses taking credit for the water.
Just food for thought?
Also, it would’ve had to had happen in Kirtalnd I’m thinking. I know that OC points to JS and Fanny Alger at that time.
Could there be anything else that might’ve caused the prophet to fall?
Thanks for entertaining the thought.

My Response

I enjoyed reading the article. He does a very good job of making a compelling case that Joseph Smith did not practice polygamy, in part, by sprinkling Joseph Smith’s public denials throughout his article. For those that want to believe the testimony of Joseph Smith and protect his reputation there certainly is good reason to view the situation through the lens that he provides. Particularly if you believe that Joseph Smith, as a true prophet of God could not have committed any serious sins.

On the other hand, there is another lens that one can view the topic through. It is such a compelling and powerful historical lens that it toppled the RLDS church and caused them to reject Joseph Smith and the Book of Mormon and the LDS restoration. Indeed, the overwhelmingly compelling research that has come forth regarding Joseph Smith’s polygamy that has come out during the last few decades is so compelling that it caused the RLDS church to rename itself and to  reinvent itself as a protestant church.

What is the basis of this lens? It is that VIRTUALLY EVERY INTIMATE FRIEND OF JOSEPH SMITH, AND EVERY HIGH LEVEL MEMBER OF THE FIRST PRESIDENCY AND THE NAUVOO HIGH COUNCIL AND THE QUORUM OF THE TWELVE APOSTLES AS WELL AS COUNTLESS WOMEN THAT JOSEPH INTRODUCED INTO THE RELIEF SOCIETY, BELIEVED THAT JOSEPH SMITH WAS A POLYGAMIST.

.
joseph smith polygamy
While the anonymous author of the article is attempting to preserve Joseph’s credibility as a true prophet, by claiming that he did not lie about his involvement in polygamy, it seems to be lost on him that the scenario he is painting also destroys the credibility of Joseph Smith’s character and prophetic abilities.

Think about it.

The people that Joseph Smith surrounded himself with as his closest friends and confidents all lied about him and threw him under the bus, claiming he was a polygamist when they knew perfectly well that he wasn’t, according to the theory being presented.

Really?

So much for Joseph’s ability to attract and choose good, loyal people with integrity, as friends.

According to the theory being presented, by revelation Joseph called men like Sidney Rigdon, and William Law into the First Presidency and people like William Marks and Austin Cowles into the Stake Presidency and others into the highest positions positions of authority in the church, that got amazing endorsements from God in section 124, and yet they all apparently lied in unison about Joseph’s involvement in polygamy and unitedly threw him under the bus.

Really?

Does Joseph Smith credibility look any better when we accuse virtually everyone except Joseph Smith of being liars and perjurers?

To the credit of this particular author he does not make the mistake that others have made in trying to blame the problem on a Brigham Young led conspiracy. The fact of the matter is that it was not just Brigham Young and the Utah saints that credited the doctrine of celestial polygamy on Joseph Smith. EVERYONE of the various factions that split from the church in Nauvoo, including those that chose not to follow Brigham Young, saw Joseph Smith as the author of the spiritual wife-celestial polygamy doctrine, not Brigham Young.

Some of the factions even practiced polygamy to some degree, but it was not because of the influence of Brigham Young. Lyman Wight eventually had a stint with celestial polygamy but he certainly did not learn the practice from Brigham Young who he personally despised. James Strang integrated polygamy into his new order but his motivation had nothing to do with Brigham Young who he very possibly never even met.

And what about the women who all put their own reputations at risk while supposedly lying about Joseph Smith? Are we  to believe that all of these noble women lied about Joseph Smith, knowing that such a lie could put their eternal relationship with God at jeopardy?

Really?

There’s a very good article that attempts to debunk or challenges a lot of the evidence out there that JS practiced polygamy. He takes them all head on, except OC’s account with Fanny Alger.”

I really don’t think that Oliver Cowdery’s testimony is the only damning piece of historical evidence that is missing from the essay. There is a lot of evidence that is missing. One of the most compelling and powerful missing evidences is the testimony of William Marks. Marks was not mentioned once in the article that I am aware of.

Marks was considered by most to be one of the  most honest men of personal integrity in Nauvoo. Apparently the Lord was impressed Marks. He made Marks the President of the Church in Far West and Nauvoo. Here is the testimony that Marks actually published in 1853 in the Zions Harbinger and Baneemy’s Organ:.

When the doctrine of polygamy was introduced into the church as a principle of exaltation, I took a decided stand against it; which stand rendered me quite unpopular with many of the leading ones of the church…

Joseph, however, became convinced before his death that he had done wrong; for about three weeks before his death, I met him one morning in the street, and he said to me, “Brother Marks… We are a ruined people.” I asked, how so? He said: “This doctrine of polygamy, or Spiritual-wife system, that has been taught and practiced among us, will prove our destruction and overthrow.

I have been deceived,” said he, “in reference to its practice; it is wrong; it is a curse to mankind, and we shall have to leave the United States soon, unless it can be put down and its practice stopped in the church. 

Now,’ said he,’ Brother Marks, you have not received this doctrine, and how glad I am.  I want you to go into the high council and I will have charges preferred against all who practice this doctrine, and I want you to try them by the laws of the church, and cut them off, if they will not repent and cease the practice of this doctrine.”

As an interesting aside to this response, you might find the following exchange between me and one of the top LDS apologists (and his wife) about the principle of polygamy. At the 52:32 point of the youtube, I ask Brian Hales “are you open to the possibility that Joseph Smith could have been a true prophet but that he was not justified in everything that he did regarding polygamy”?

The responses from him and his wife are entertaining if not enlightening. When I bring up the above testimony by Marks about Joseph Smith admitting that he had been deceived, Brian Hales incoherently deflects the question by associating the topic with the “Joseph Smith Fought Polygamy” series by Richard and Pamela Price which of course rejects the premise that Joseph was deceived by postulating that he never practiced it. I fail to see the logic in associating William Mark’s accusation of Joseph Smith’s polygamy with the Price’s contention that he never practiced it!

Ultimately, Hales claims that the testimony by Marks is “not credible” and “highly improbably”, although he does not explain why they would not be credible. He then follows up with another incoherent declaration that William Marks statement “fit the RLDS needs at the time” which makes absolutely no sense at all because the declarations of the Emma Smith and her sons, denied Joseph’s involvement in the practice polygamy. The official stance of the RLDS church when it was formed was that Joseph did not practice polygamy. Therefore, Hales statement that Marks reminiscence that Joseph confessed to his involvement and was deceived “fit the RLDS needs at the time” seems somewhat illogical to me. (Perhaps he is referring to some of the other key players in the RLDS organization like Marks, who did believe that Joseph was the originator of the principle despite the official storyline of the church.

The Nauvoo High Council Minutes

Another perhaps even more compelling evidence that was conspicuously left out of the anonymous essay has to do with the minutes of the Nauvoo High Council and the Nauvoo City High Council which documents that fact that Hyrum presented a revelation on polygamy to both councils, stating that his brother Joseph Smith had received the revelation and that the members of the High Council would be damned if they did not accept it.

Sadly, the anonymous author of the paper deceitfully only provides the “damage control” statements of Hyrum Smith that were made AFTER the high council rejected the revelation. But he neglects to provide the whole story and the testimony from multiple sources of what was really said to the High Council. Here is what the anonymous author has to say using selected quotes from the a book by John Dinger:

“At the time William Law made his accusations in the Expositor regarding this alleged revelation, Joseph and Hyrum did not deny the existence of a revelation but flatly denied that it permitted plural wives.

In the City Council minutes of June 8, 1844 Joseph and Hyrum give us a glimpse into the revelation according to them: “[Hyrum] referred to the revelation [he] read to the [Nauvoo Stake] High council — that it was in answer to a question concerning things which transpired in former days & had no reference to the present time

​— that W[illia]m Law[,] when sick[,] [confessed and] said ^he had been guilty of adultery &^ he was not fit to live or die, had sinned against his own soul….[The mayor said]…They make [it] a criminality of for a man to have a wife on the earth while he has one in heaven —

according to the keys of the holy priesthood, and [the mayor] read the statement of W[illia]m Law in the Expositor, where the truth of God was transformed into a lie​. [He] read [the] statements of Austin Cowles — & said he had never had any private conversation with Austin Cowles on these subjects, that he preached on the stand from the bible showing the order in ancient days[,] having nothing to do with the present time.​..

C[ouncillor] H[yrum] Smith — spoke to show the falsehood of Austin Cowles in relation to the revelation referred to — that it referred to former days [and] not the present time​as stated by Cowles. [The] Mayor said he had never preached the revelation in private as he had in public — had not taught it to the highest anointed in the Church ^in private^ which many confirmed.

[The mayor said][,] on enquiring [of God regarding] the passage in [the Bible that in] the resurrection they neither marry &c[:] I received for [an] answer, Men in this life must be married in view of Eternity, [and that] was the [full] amount of the [content of the] revelation, otherwise [in the resurrection] they must remain as angels only in heaven, and [the mayor] spoke at considerable length in explanation of the[se] principles[.] 56 I”

It is shocking that the author would only provide part of the evidence provided from John Dingers book “The Nauvoo City and High Council Minutes“. Did he really think that nobody has the book?

Prior to Hyrum Smith’s above mentioned attempt to backpedal and try to deny having presented the doctrine of polygamy as a contemporary doctrine that needed to be accepted and lived, he had apparently made quite a different declaration according to multiple testimonies contained within the book.

According to documentation within the book, on one occasion Councilman Dunbar Wilson “made inquiry in relation to the subject of plurality of wives as there were rumors respecting it, and he was satisfied there was something in those remarks and he wanted to know what it was.”

At this time, Hyrum Smith, who was probably relieved to just get the secret practice out in the open, read the revelation on polygamy to the High Council.

After reading it, he made the following declaration: “Now, you that believe this revelation and go forth and obey the same shall be saved, and you that reject it shall be damned

That hardly sounds like Hyrum was simply informing the high council about an ancient principle that did not need to be lived anymore.

Much more evidence is provided in the book by multiple witnesses that contradict the later attempt by Hyrum Smith to do damage control. It is truly unfortunate that the anonymous author of the article would mischaracterize Hyrums statements to the High Council by only relating a small part of the evidence that supports his own contentions.

I will not go into further problems with the anonymous essay on polygamy because it does not matter to me if people choose to believe that Joseph never lived polygamy. For those who have a serious interest in this topic, I will refer you to the following link where I address a few more issues and also suggest that those interested in this topic consider purchasing the book by Dinger.

William Law- Offering a Reformation and Bringing about the “Chastisement” of God Upon the Fallen Servant- Final

What was the Great Sin the Joseph Committed?

You asked me a question that several others have asked me over the years. Is there a different sin beside polygamy that Joseph Smith might have committed that could have fulfilled the atonement statute- 2nd Samuel 7 prophecy?

“In your book and your blog you’ve done a great job documenting the Atonement Statute and how JS is the David Servant and all the prophecies that fall in place with that.
I know that a lot hinges on JS committing iniquity and being chastened by the rod of men. You’ve pinpointed that as the sin of polygamy.
What if that’s not it? Could there be something else that he did, something less severe? Something akin to Moses taking credit for the water.”
 .
Absolutely. There are other possibilities. I have pointed out before that Joseph taught some heresies about the nature of God in the King Follett Sermon. This is a possibility. The anonymous author unwittingly presents another possible sin that Joseph committed in his theory that Joseph was introducing a spiritual sealing doctrine where Joseph and others were having men and women sealed to themselves. That doctrine is just as vacant in the scriptures as the celestial polygamy doctrine is and just a damnable.
 .
The bottom line in my opinion is that one cannot determine Joseph’s involvement in celestial polygamy solely based on an intellectual assessment of historical documentation. I believe that all of the historical documentation needs to be viewed through the eyes of prophecy.
 .
That is why I personally believe that Joseph sinned and that is why I believe the primary sin had to do with celestial polygamy. I believe that ancient prophecies identify Joseph as the one who initially brought forth the “law of truth” and “did turn many way from iniquity“. However they also identify him  as the one who “departed out of the way” and “caused many to stumble at the law” by dealing “treacherously” against the “wife of [his] youth“. Because of this, the Lord made his servant Joseph Smith “contemptible and base before all the people” (See Malachi chapter 2)
 .
Of course the full storyline and prophetic narrative has to do with the fact that Joseph Smith made an intercessory atonement offering in behalf of apostate latter day Israel that placed their sins on his head and caused him to act them out,  just as Moses made in intercessory atonement offering in behalf of ancient israel. If you are not familiar with the true Biblical profile of Joseph Smith, you can read the three chapters in my new book that discuss this topic using the link below.:
.
Three Chapters on the Intercessory Atonement Offering
 .
.

Notable Emails #23 “Woe to the rebellious children, saith the Lord, that take counsel, but not of me; and that cover with a covering, but not of my Spirit, that they may add sin to sin”: The LDS Temple Garment

Notable Emails #22 “My prediction is that those who accept the gospel of Bill Reel (non-literal historicity of the Book of Mormon) will ultimately either loose all of their faith…”

Notable Emails #21 ” I don’t believe the current LDS Church has ANY “authority” – especially BECAUSE they preach that the culmination of the Gospel is the Masonic Rituals..”

Notable Emails #19- “Sometime ago I had an extraordinary experience where I was forgiven of some of my sins”

Notable Emails #18- “I wake up every morning with this intense feeling that we are getting closer”

Notable Emails #17 “Then shall the offering of Judah and Jerusalem be pleasant unto the LORD, as in the days of old, and as in former years.”

Notable Emails #16 “the Lord wouldn’t give a young church such responsibility so early”

Notable Emails #15: “It would be so hard to do if we didn’t have the word crunching software available to us to use. Now I can see why so many are deceived. “

Notable Emails #14 (b) “who was the legal heir and successor of the Prophet Joseph Smith, Jr.?”

Notable Emails #14 (a) “Baptism for the dead is illogical and pretty much impossible to ever accomplish”

Notable Emails Part 13 “Gileadi compares the Servant to Hezekiah, in that he answered for the temporal sins of the people and acted as a proxy savior”

Notable Emails Part 12 “the scriptures will become corrupted and deceive the elect and give Satan power”

Notable Emails Part 9 “My number one desire right now is to protect my wife and honor her tender feelings about the gospel as she understands it.”

 

Notable Emails Part 8 “Who are the Jews and Gentiles?

Notable Emails Part 7 “My eyes have been opened”

Notable Emails Part 6: “Can anyone tell me anything about this blog?… This guy seems to have some new ideas I’ve never heard before using the scriptures to back his views.

Notable Emails Part 5: “the truths that both you and I hold so dear …are things that cannot be taught they can only be revealed.”

Notable Emails- Part 4 “I have now caught the spirit of watching along with you and others.”

Notable Emails- Part 3 “Have you ever read ‘Letter to a CES Director?’” Yes… and it has strengthened my testimony!

Notable Emails- Part 2: “Readers deserve to know if you truly are a heretic or just a faithful divergent thinker”

Notable Emails Part 1- Mormon Missionary: “I too am watching”


Have eight year old children fully reached the years of accountability?

November 21, 2015

 

In Section 68 of the Doctrine and Covenants the Lord commands parents to baptise their children when they are eight years old.

Is there anything about that which seems illogical to you? If not, perhaps you have never known an eight year old.

Why do Mormons Baptise Eight Year Olds?

In an article written by  in the Deseret News Kristine shared the  following question from a friend of her daughter that wondered why she was having her child baptized at the tender age of eight:

“A friend of my daughter recently said she could not understand why Mormons baptize children at such a young age, 8 years old. This got me thinking.We know from the scriptures the necessity of baptism by immersion and that Christ set the example for all to follow. We do not baptize infants or little children because, as taught in section 29 of the Doctrine and Covenants, “little children are redeemed” through Christ and “cannot sin, for power is not given unto Satan to tempt little children until they begin to become accountable before me.”But why do we baptize at the young and tender age of 8?”

bap1

I believe the question is a valid one.

I am of the opinion that virtually every eight year old that I have known, including myself, when I was eight, is much more accurately characterized as a “little child” than as an adult. I certainly have to question whether they have reached the full “years of accountability”. I would agree that some children are more sober minded and mature than others and some probably BEGIN to understand right and wrong at that age but I don’t think most children at that age understand the gospel or the atonement. (one the other hand, do any of us?)

It also seems a little strange that the decision is being made by the parents rather than the little child of eight years of age. where does agency come into this equation? Should the decision to be baptised be initiated by the one being baptized?

Furthermore, I believe the scriptures are congruent with the above suppositions.

The motivation of these Latter day Saint little children who are getting baptized at the age of eight, solely based on the fact that they have turned eight, seems to be in making their parents proud or getting a party or getting a fun baptismal present, etc.

bap2

Notice the following snippet from Moroni 8 which speaks of the concept of accountability:

10 Behold I say unto you that this thing shall ye teach—repentance and baptism unto those who are accountable and capable of committing sin; yea, teach parents that they must repent and be baptized, and humble themselves as their little children, and they shall all be saved with their little children.

The ability to be accountable in the above passage seems to be referring to parents, not their “little children”. Indeed, parents are to become like their “little children”, through the baptismal covenant, innocent and unable to commit sin.

Section 18 informs the witnesses to the Book of Mormon and the quorum of apostles that they were to choose, that they are to preach repentance unto the world, to those men, women, and “children” that have arrived at the “years of accountability”. From that we are informed that “children” do reach the years of accountability, but I am still having a hard time believing that eight is the magic number.

And you must preach unto the world, saying: You must repent and be baptized, in the name of Jesus Christ;
42 For all men must repent and be baptized, and not only men, but women, and children who have arrived at the years of accountability.
43 And now, after that you have received this, you must keep my commandments in all things;

In comparing the above passage in the Book of Mormon to the above passage in the D&C we note that the Book of Mormon is stating that parents are to become like their “little Children” through the process of baptism because their “little children” are not capable of sin. Yet the D&C is stating that both both men and women AND “children” are to be baptized.

Is there a contradiction between the two passages?

Not necessarily.

One passage is referring to “little children” who have not reached the years of accountability while the other is referring to “children” that have reached the years of accountability.

What is the defining and distinguishing differentiation between “children” that are accountable and “little children” who are not accountable?

The question is, at what point in time does a “little child” who is innocent, become a “child” that is accountable because they are fully capable of sinning and repenting?

What Makes a Child Accountable for their sins?

How do we know what the measuring yardstick is for determining if a child of any age can be accountable for their sins?

One parameter is given in section 29 which informs us that the child must be knowledgeable

46 But behold, I say unto you, that little children are redeemed from the foundation of the world through mine Only Begotten;
47 Wherefore, they cannot sin, for power is not given unto Satan to tempt little children, until they begin to become accountable before me;
48 For it is given unto them even as I will, according to mine own pleasure, that great things may be required at the hand of their fathers.
49 And, again, I say unto you, that whoso having knowledge, have I not commanded to repent?

From that we are informed that one must have knowledge in order to repent. How many eight year olds do you know that are truly knowledgeable about the atonement and the gospel of Jesus Christ?

In my opinion, most adult members of the modern corporate church are not very knowledgeable about the gospel of Christ. How can their eight year old children be knowledgeable?

In section 20 we are informed that a person has not arrived at the years of accountability unless they are “capable of repentance

How many eight year olds do you know that are truly capable of knowledgeable sincere repentance?

Another obvious parameter would seem to be that they need to be able to meet the requirements given in the divine baptismal protocol given by the Lord. We need to ask ourselves the simple question, does an eight year old child have the mental, emotional and spiritual maturity and capacity to fulfill the requirements of the baptismal protocol.

Section 20 gives the following protocol for baptism in to the Church of Christ:

And again, by way of commandment to the church concerning the manner of baptism—All those who humble themselves before God, and desire to be baptized, and come forth with broken hearts and contrite spirits, and witness before the church that they have truly repented of all their sins, and are willing to take upon them the name of Jesus Christ, having a determination to serve him to the end, and truly manifest by their works that they have received of the Spirit of Christ unto the remission of their sins, shall be received by baptism into his church.

Ok..

How many eight year olds do you know, that are capable of making a sincere and accurate public confession before the church that they have a broken heart and a contrite spirit and have truly repented of all their sins and have a determination to serve Christ to the end and have received the spirit of Christ unto the remission of their sins?

Be honest about this. After all, this is the Watcher you are dealing with not your local Bishop. You can be totally honest with me. I won’t withhold your temple recommend if you tell how you honestly feel about some of the practices in the church that don’t make sense an  don’t appear to square with the foundational doctrines of the gospel.

If you grew up in the church, I would submit that as sincere as you may have been when you were baptised at the age of eight, you were pretty much clueless about the gospel and you probably would not have even understood the above requirements outlined in section 20 let alone been able to meet them .

(In previous posts we have covered the fact that the modern church neglects to follow the above protocol. They do not have those being baptized enter into the above baptismal oath by making a public declaration before the church. They have perverted the ordinance.)

The simple fact of the matter is that most, if not all eight year old children that I am aware of are incapable of meeting the baptismal requirements listed in section 20 which is why the the saints were probably not baptizing their eight year olds until section 68 was given some 2 1/2 years after the church was restored and section 20 was given.

So what am I saying?

Am I suggesting that section 68, which appears to be the ONLY scripture commanding parents to categorically baptize their children at the age of eight, is a false revelation?

No.

I am simply suggesting that section 68 was not a church wide commandment. It was being given exclusively to a designated special interest group that would be living in special circumstances.

Take a close look at the passage in question:

25 And again, inasmuch as parents have children in Zion, or in any of her stakes which are organized, that teach them not to understand the doctrine of repentance, faith in Christ the Son of the living God, and of baptism and the gift of the Holy Ghost by the laying on of the hands, when eight years old, the sin be upon the heads of the parents.
26 For this shall be a law unto the inhabitants of Zion, or in any of her stakes which are organized.
27 And their children shall be baptized for the remission of their sins when eight years old, and receive the laying on of the hands.
28 And they shall also teach their children to pray, and to walk uprightly before the Lord.

Notice that the commandment to baptize children at the age of eight is only directed to a limited demographic, not to the whole church.

More on that later.

In the above passages the parents are commanded to teach their children about repentance. There is nothing about the children being required to testify before the church that they have repented or to follow the baptismal protocol given in section 20.

Clearly the protocol for child baptism is different in section 68 than the protocol for adults in section 20.

According to section 68 it appears that following the commandment to teach their children about repentance, parents are to categorically baptize their little children solely based on them arriving at the age of age of eight.

Again, there is nothing about the little eight years olds needing to fulfill the requirements mentioned in section 20.

Indeed, the eight year olds are just being taught about repentance and how to pray and walk uprightly before the Lord at the time they are being baptized because they would not have understood prior to that time.

An adult already needs to have knowledge and know how to walk uprightly before the Lord BEFORE they can repent and make the declarations listed in section 20.

Is that commandment to baptize little children at the age of eight in section 68 a true commandment or does it conflict with the protocol in section 20?

Does it make sense to categorically baptize children little eight year olds unto repentance  without them having to fulfill the requirement given in section 20?

Do you see a dilemma here?

Using the Prophetic Narrative to Demystify the dilemma

In a previous post I showed how an understanding of the prophetic narrative behind the 15 year ministry of Joseph Smith can provide answers to difficult doctrinal and historical dilemmas. It was demonstrated how the true narrative answers many difficult questions, such as why the witnesses of the book of Mormon waited nearly five years before obeying the commandment of the Lord to call the quorum of the Twelve and clarification regarding questions about priesthood.

general timeline 2 horizontal

In this post we will once again use the proper historical context contained in the prophetic narrative of Joseph Smith’s ministry to solve this doctrinal dilemma pertaining to baptising innocent eight year olds.

Only those living in Zion are to be baptized at the age of Eight!

As briefly mentioned earlier, section 68 was directed exclusively towards parents with children LIVING IN ZION OR IN AN ORGANIZED STAKE OF ZION!!!!

In other words, if you were a member of the church who was a parent with a child who was eight years years that was living outside of the designated gathering places of Zion at the time this revelation was given, (such as Jackson County or Kirtland), the commandment DID NOT APPLY TO YOU!

Ponder that little tidbit for a second and then ponder this-

Once the saints rejected the fulness of the gospel and were eventually rejected as a church with their dead in Nauvoo THERE HAVE BEEN NO PROPERLY ORGANIZED STAKES OF ZION FROM THAT TIME TO THE PRESENT.

This means that the commandment in section 68 to baptize eight year olds does not apply to anyone living today.

Notice that the protocol in section 20 was given to the Church of Christ in 1830 BEFORE the Melchizedek Priesthood and the Church of God was on the earth and BEFORE stakes of Zion were being established. Conversely, the commandment in section 68 was given to the Church of God, living in Zion and organized stakes of Zion, in 1831, shortly after the Melchizedek Priesthood had been restored at the Morley Farm. Once the Church was rejected with their dead and the saints once again had to flee from Nauvoo, no organized stakes existed after the saints fled from Nauvoo.

Incredible.

Without a contextual understanding of the prophetic narrative behind the LDS restoration, the following passages in section 20 and 68 would seem somewhat incongruent.

comparison

It is apparent that the commandment in section 68 for parents to categorically baptize their children is only referring to those of the church of God who are living in a Zion setting where little children are sheltered from the worldly. It is not for those of the church of Christ who are not being led by the higher priesthood and are not living in a sheltered Zion society. It appears as if children living in Zion will grow up without sin unto salvation and therefore can be baptized at age eight without having to meet the requirements set forth in section 20.

Based on the directives provided in scripture regarding children, accountability and baptismal requirements, I think it is safe to say that the Lord has not commanded parents to baptise their little eight year olds when they are not living in an organized stake of Zion and particularly when we are living during a time of full blown apostasy.

Having shown in previous posts that the modern corporate latter day church has changed the laws, perverted virtually every doctrine and broken the everlasting covenant, it makes perfect sense that they are involved in the erroneous practice of baptising little children at the age of eight even though there is no directive from the Lord to do so. Indeed we live in the prophesied of era when the Lords people can no longer endure sound doctrine.

Fortunately, we do not live when the fulness of the gospel is on the earth. We live during the dispensation of the gospel of Abraham and therefore, there is probably no-harm-no-foul. But when the fulness is ushered in, a great spiritual awakening must take place and we must begin to understand the scriptures and obey them.

 

[Editorial Note: Since writing this blog, one of my readers has brought it to my attention that the JST also says children become accountable at the age of eight. I think that having a second scriptural witness to the doctrine that accountability begins at the age of eight his significant.

I am not sure if the passage sheds more light on the issue of baptizing children other than to acknowledge that accountability takes place at eight. It may well be that being born to parents that are believers and under the baptismal covenant makes a huge difference regarding this doctrine.

It is still baffling to me that young children that cannot spiritually qualify to meet the requirements laid out in section 20 should be baptized, however, if it is a preparatory baptism, it makes sense to me.

Of course, the baptism being offered in modern day Mormonism can only be preparatory anyway.

Ultimately, whether or not it makes sense to me is secondary and frankly quite insignificant if the Lord has truly commanded it, and  if there are two independent scriptural sources that verify that the child becomes accountable at eight, then I accept that as fact.

11 And I will establish a covenant of circumcision with thee, and it shall be my covenant between me and thee, and thy seed after thee, in their generations; that thou mayest know forever that children are not accountable before me until they are eight years old.  ]


Miscellaneous Musings #18 Catholic Theologian Accepts Joseph Smith as a Prophet

November 19, 2015

Boy is he in for a surprise! 

Elder Jeffery R Holland declared in February of this year that the Church is immune to error and will not fall into apostasy.

“Ours is that fail-safe, inexorable, indestructible dispensation of the fulness of the gospel… Unlike every other era before us, this dispensation will not experience an institutional apostasy; it will not see a loss of priesthood keys; it will not suffer a cessation of revelation from the voice of Almighty God. Individuals will apostatize, they may turn a deaf ear to heaven, but never again will this dispensation collectively do so. What a secure thought that is! What a day in which to live! What a way to cut through fear or faintheartedness”

I have no problem accepting Joseph Smith as a Prophet
An evening with margaret Barker and Stephen Webb 

When was the last time you heard a high profile Catholic theologian state that Joseph Smith was a prophet and that he brought important information to the earth?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rTYDE0SoM5E

Paris

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L7GAbVhjTSw

Humility & Sweetness Soundly Defeats Arrogance

I am not a huge fan of extreme fighting, particularly female extreme fighting, I think it is wrong.

I must admit however, that I found the shocking victory of Holly Holm over Ronda Rousey extremely inspiring. I love it when the overwhelming underdog wins a decisive victory.

Warning for Violence

A Female Smackdown on Feminism

Obamacare

Think You Are Going to Skate by With a Cheap Obamacare Penalty in 2016? Think Again! Penalty Shock Fine Just Released

[link to apnews.myway.com

Folks. The 2014 $75 penalty was just another Obama ruse to get his horrific ‘health care’ law in place. The purpose is to collapse the health care system and get our citizens to BEG for single payer, Bernie Sanders style health care.

That is when your taxes go up to 75-80% of your income. You can take the pennies you have left over from your paycheck and spend any way your little heart desires.

2016 penalty for those who are not enrolled in Obamacare is a minimum of $695 dollars or 2.5% of your gross income, which ever is higher.

For a family of four who has two working parents and a combined gross income of $100,000 will pay $2500 per year for the privilege of NOT having Obamacare insurance.

With $5000-10,000 per year of up front payments (deductibles) before your coverage even kicks in…when will single payer insurance start in America?

2017? 2018? or 2019? We can’t go on much longer than this as the fines and penalties will continue to skyrocket every year until people are all tapped out.

Congratulations Barack. You won again. You beat Congress and the Supreme Court on the way to national tyranny.

 

Logs Logs

Has anyone been keeping a log of Log’s logs? on other people’s blogs?

On one particular post, I counted 23 out of the 66 comments which is roughly 38.8%

Whose blog is this?

Is there no limit to how many logs a person can lay on another person’s blog?

I disabled the comments section on my blog to prevent two things from happening. One was to stop the paid LDS shills from trying to do damage control, the other was to prevent people from hi-jacking the thread. The comment section of two of the most popular LDS blogs have been ruined by a guy that is so incredibly divisive and critical of others and yet he plays the victim every time anyone calls him on it.

 Invasion by Immigration

Large scale mass migrations become invasions and this actually appears to be a hijrah as he describes it. This is NOT going to end well. It appears the policies of the liberal socialist leaders in Europe and the US do not want to keep these lands from being overrun. Why???

I couldn’t figure out why other Arab countries (Saudi Arabia, UAE, Oman, etc.) weren’t taking in refugees, so I started  digging.

Hijrah is jihad by emigration.

It means moving to a new land in order to bring Islam there and is considered in Islam to be a holy and revered action:

“And whoever emigrates for the cause of Allah will find on the earth many locations and abundance, and whoever leaves
his home as an emigrant to Allah and His Messenger and then death overtakes him, his reward has already become incumbent upon Allah.” (4:100)

Anyone Familiar with “The Watcher”

“To me, it seems that he sees the same basic problems with the corporate church that we all do, but he takes it in a whole different direction. From a “fruits” point of view, when I read his stuff I don’t get nearly the same enlightenment or sense of understanding my own place in the grand scheme of things. I’m wondering, though, if this is just a result of my own lifelong conditioning for heartsell. From a scriptural viewpoint he certainly has a new perspective on things. While I can see where he gets to conclusions, I think that he sees many things that the verses he cites just don’t support He tends to wrest the scriptures quite a bit, in my opinion..”

Do I wrest the scriptures? Or is it that you have been so brainwashed by the corporate church, and void of the true spirit of revelation that you don’t know how to accept the literal interpretation of the scriptures?

Peer Reviewing the Interpreter

http://interpreterpeerreviews.blogspot.com/2015/08/the-treason-of-geographers-part-1.html

The Smoking Gun of Book of Mormon Geography

http://www.firmlds.org/feature.php?id=38

Finding the Temple Endowment “Disturbing”

What went through your mind the first time you went through the temple endowment? Many people have been shocked at their first experience.

Marlin K Jensen: “ I think my little daughter was quite worthy, but she was so disturbed, I’ll say..”

Sustaining the Brethren

“I think I understand from this article that binding doctrinal announcements are those sanctioned by the First Presidency in unison. If so, when and where did Presidents Sidney Rigdon and William Law line up in support and implementation of Celestial Marriage in its fullness as presented in Section 132?”

Sadly

I believe that the concept of “progressive revelation” originally had to do with “continuous revelation” and the belief that the Lord’s church enjoys continuing revelations that remain consistent with previous revelations, and that all new revelations are congruent and harmonious with the past revelations, generally providing additional details and clarifications to past revelations.

Sadly, I think that for many Saints, the term “Progressive revelation” has come to mean “Revisionist Revelation”, or the belief that past doctrines that were presented by a past First Presidency as being true, can legitimately be overturned and revised by the current First Presidency.

Was Jesus Married?

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/markdroberts/series/was-jesus-married-a-careful-look-at-the-real-evidence/?ref_widget=popular&ref_blog=anxiousbench&ref_post=apples-and-oranges

Suffer the Little Children.. and the Gays?

The latest policy controversy is so frustrating that it makes those of us that resigned many years ago so angry that we want to join again to have the privilege of resigning again. Nevertheless, there are two issues that have been messed together. One has to do with stifling the agency of innocent people from making their own decisions. The other has to do with the successful attempt by a special interest group in making their lifestyle generally accepted which, according to Chuck Missler, is a sign of the times.

http://seventhsola.blogspot.com/2008/06/chuck-missler-on-gay-issue.html

Here is a recent comment from someone who is responding to a gay person

“I have never been able to swallow this implicit contention that your sexual abnormality is any different or more privileged than my daughter’s congenital birth defects. Do we have to create entirely new categories of humanity and tell her there isn’t actually anything wrong (as she struggles to walk…seeing every minute that other can without effort) in order for her to lead a psychologically healthy life?

She isn’t going to get to do a lot of things she would like to in life. How are you any better than her? Why do we have to change the Plan for you and not for her? There are plenty of physically disabled folks who will never get to have sex or have children in this life.

Why are you so much better than them? Why is it supposed to be such an impossible burden for gays to live a celibate life when so many others, disabled and not, manage to pull it off however hard it may be? You aren’t God’s special little revelation, you’re just one more human with divine potential and human challenges.”

 

Miscellaneous Musings #17 “For it was the woman that sinned not the man”

Miscellaneous Musings #16 The Link between Prophet Worship and Breaking the LAW of the Gospel

Miscellaneous Musings #15 “Dedicating yourself to truth and dedicating yourself to God are the exact same thing”

Miscellaneous Musings #14 The Collateral Damage of the LDS Historical Essays on Polygamy Transcend the Mormon Church

Miscellaneous Musings #13 Peter was a High Priest

Miscellaneous Musings #12 Are the Nauvoo Discourses True?

Miscellaneous Musings #11 Six Year Anniversary of OneWhoIsWatching

Miscellaneous Musings #10 Ferguson is Close to the “Center Place”

Miscellaneous Musings #9 The Mystery of the Shemitah

Miscellaneous Musings #8 Sunstone Symposium 2014

Miscellaneous Musings # 7 The Kinderhook Plates were Authentic

Miscellaneous Musings # 6 Jeremy Runnells

Miscellaneous Musings # 5 Phineas Young

Miscellaneous Musings #4

Miscellaneous Musings #3 Kingdom of the Jews (3/7/2014)

Miscellaneous Musings #2 (2/28/2014)

Miscellaneous Musings #1 (2/11/2014)


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 170 other followers