Make not gods of your prophets

[Reluctant Watchman]

The main thing about the OP that will get folks to flinch a little whether they know it or post it or not is—

It could be viewed as being in very poor judgement to use apocryphal books claiming to be written by actual Book of Mormon type/era people as a source text for a morning study with KIDS.

In doing so you are framing the books as equal to the Book of Mormon or New Testament.

That might be fine for adults because there could be good concepts in the books.

But to do it with kids while you are supposed to be laying a solid foundation for them with texts that you can take to the bank like the Book of Mormon and Sermon on the Mount— could be seen as idiotic, negligent, unwise, borderline abusive, and could be thought to likely lead to confusion down the road.

Read the record. You might think differently. I read it first myself. And then read it again. Then we began as a family.

And I should note. I teach my children the exact doctrine of this record: Verify all things, in any record, through the Holy Ghost. This book repeatedly teaches this principle. Samuel, the author I quoted in the OP, states further on that we are not to believe any of his words, nor the words in this record, unless the Holy Ghost adds a witness. What greater lesson can we teach our children?

I approach any and all writings of man in this same way. And yes, I am selective in what I choose to read. I’d much rather read certain parts of the BoM over the Bible, but there are parts of the Bible that are only found there that help reinforce the BoM. I would add the Nemenhah Record as an additional set of writings that add clarity and witness to many truths.

I already read it when it first came out. Which was years ago. I was one of the first non affiliated persons to look at it.

I like everything it says as far as I remember.

But I personally believe that Samuels speech in the actual Book of Mormon was the best speech ever given. The whole point of the Book of Mormon he managed to cram into some stanzas that he could blurt out between dodging arrows. Most pregnant and concise thing I’ve ever read. Took Mormon a full book to basically tell the same story.

I already read the alleged book of Samuel and all the others and many other writings by the guy behind the alleged translation and I like them pretty good.

But I would not teach them to my kids as scripture.

A man can raise his kids how he wants but that’ll be one of the main things he answers to God for.

I expose my kids to all sorts of cool texts from Homer to Hemmingway. But it’s all resting atop a foundation of 100% solid scripture. I would NEVER risk dicking around with someone’s mind as far as that goes especially a young kid.

I’m not telling you not to. I’m telling you that some people, myself included, would not be playing that fast and loose with morning scripture study

I'd ask you to suggest a single doctrine presented that you wouldn't teach your children. I can find a dozen taught in this record with more clarity than the LDS church currently teaches.

[Reluctant Watchman]

Sorry...Nemenhah Record? Never heard of it.

I have plans to write an essay on this record. It is the record of Hagoth (the ship builder) and his descendants for nearly 1600 years. It is essentially the record of the Native American on the North American content, but with groups also traveling across the isles of the sea and all parts of the world. I could give you a far more in-depth analysis, but that the abbreviated version.

It is a "claimed" record. Is it true or false? Up to each individual to decide for himself. I decide it was false. Now, does that mean that 100% of "doctrine" described therein is false? No, as it seems that most all written things have truth contained therein.
And I did not make that decision based upon meeting and visiting with Mr. Cloudpiler. But what he wrote or helped write.
Let me add, a book may be written with the best of intentions, and have many points of "true" doctrine, but that does not make it a true historical record. And that is what I contend, that imo, it is not a true historical record.

Fair enough. I actually think this record is one of the most profound witnesses of the BoM. The historical complexity and interplay between the two records is second to none.

[simpleton]

The book is what I refer to, the book. Was not impressed with the book.

I’m curious if you were not impressed with the narrative, or with the doctrine, or both. I’d be curious to know what you consider “garbage.” I say this, because what I shared in the OP rivals any canon of scripture in clarity on this principle of not elevating church leaders and seeking a witness of the Holy Ghost in all things.

I agree with this, but, I do most definitely think that an allegiance is required by God to our leaders that are approved of Him. "That are approved of Him".
This I have seen throughout the scriptures.
Then along comes mr scratch, and he capitalizes on that and then all hell breaks loose into corruption and destruction.

[hyloglyph]

The main thing about the OP that will get folks to flinch a little whether they know it or post it or not is—

It could be viewed as being in very poor judgement to use apocryphal books claiming to be written by actual Book of Mormon type/era people as a source text for a morning study with KIDS.

In doing so you are framing the books as equal to the Book of Mormon or New Testament.

That might be fine for adults because there could be good concepts in the books.

But to do it with kids while you are supposed to be laying a solid foundation for them with texts that you can take to the bank like the Book of Mormon and Sermon on the Mount— could be seen as idiotic, negligent, unwise, borderline abusive, and could be thought to likely lead to confusion down the road.

Read the record. You might think differently. I read it first myself. And then read it again. Then we began as a family.

And I should note. I teach my children the exact doctrine of this record: Verify all things, in any record, through the Holy Ghost. This book repeatedly teaches this principle. Samuel, the author I quoted in the OP, states further on that we are not to believe any of his words, nor the words in this record, unless the Holy Ghost adds a witness. What greater lesson can we teach our children?

I approach any and all writings of man in this same way. And yes, I am selective in what I choose to read. I’d much rather read certain parts of the BoM over the Bible, but there are parts of the Bible that are only found there that help reinforce the BoM. I would add the Nemenhah Record as an additional set of writings that add clarity and witness to many truths.

I already read it when it first came out. Which was years ago. I was one of the first non affiliated persons to look at it.

I like everything it says as far as I remember.

But I personally believe that Samuels speech in the actual Book of Mormon was the best speech ever given. The whole point of the Book of Mormon he managed to cram into some stanzas that he could blurt out between dodging arrows. Most pregnant and concise thing I’ve ever read. Took Mormon a full book to basically tell the same story.

I already read the alleged book of Samuel and all the others and many other writings by the guy behind the alleged translation and I like them pretty good.

But I would not teach them to my kids as scripture.

A man can raise his kids how he wants but that’ll be one of the main things he answers to God for.

I expose my kids to all sorts of cool texts from Homer to Hemmingway. But it’s all resting atop a foundation of 100% solid scripture. I would NEVER risk dicking around with someone’s mind as far as that goes especially a young kid.

I’m not telling you not to. I’m telling you that some people, myself included, would not be playing that fast and loose with morning scripture study

I'd ask you to suggest a single doctrine presented that you wouldn't teach your children. I can find a dozen taught in this record with more clarity than the LDS church currently teaches.

Did you comprehend the point of what I wrote?

It was simple and short haha

[Reluctant Watchman]

The book is what I refer to, the book. Was not impressed with the book.

I’m curious if you were not impressed with the narrative, or with the doctrine, or both. I’d be curious to know what you consider “garbage.” I say this, because what I shared in the OP rivals any canon of scripture in clarity on this principle of not elevating church leaders and seeking a witness of the Holy Ghost in all things.

I agree with this, but, I do most definitely think that an allegiance is required by God to our leaders that are approved of Him. "That are approved of Him".
This I have seen throughout the scriptures.
Then along comes mr scratch, and he capitalizes on that and then all hell breaks loose into corruption and destruction.

What "allegiance"? The only allegiance we have is to listen to them when the Holy Ghost confirms their words. The Lord was plain with this doctrine in JST Mark 9 and 2 Nephi 28:31. Can we celebrate and thank God that He does inspire (appoint/anoint) men and women? Most certainly.

[Reluctant Watchman]

Did you comprehend the point of what I wrote?

It was simple and short haha

Yes, I get it. You liked some things, but you'd never teach them to your children. I'm just curious what doctrine was so off that you'd never read any of this record to your children. I can find principles in this record that are presented with far more clarity than the BoM.

[hyloglyph]

Did you comprehend the point of what I wrote?

It was simple and short haha

Yes, I get it. You liked some things, but you'd never teach them to your children. I'm just curious what doctrine was so off that you'd never read any of this record to your children. I can find principles in this record that are presented with far more clarity than the BoM.

Haha wow

No, I guess you don’t get it.

You’re moving too fast bud. Can’t have a conversation with you.

Nothing you just wrote is related to anything I wrote. Classic Internet forum stuff lol

[Reluctant Watchman]

Did you comprehend the point of what I wrote?

It was simple and short haha

Yes, I get it. You liked some things, but you'd never teach them to your children. I'm just curious what doctrine was so off that you'd never read any of this record to your children. I can find principles in this record that are presented with far more clarity than the BoM.

Haha wow

No, I guess you don’t get it.

You’re moving too fast bud. Can’t have a conversation with you.

Nothing you just wrote is related to anything I wrote. Classic Internet forum stuff lol

Oh, you don't dickin' around. Gotcha.

[hyloglyph]

Did you comprehend the point of what I wrote?

It was simple and short haha

Yes, I get it. You liked some things, but you'd never teach them to your children. I'm just curious what doctrine was so off that you'd never read any of this record to your children. I can find principles in this record that are presented with far more clarity than the BoM.

Haha wow

No, I guess you don’t get it.

You’re moving too fast bud. Can’t have a conversation with you.

Nothing you just wrote is related to anything I wrote. Classic Internet forum stuff lol

Oh, you don't dick around. Gotcha.

Another swing and a miss!

[nightlight]

Now behold, the councils of the Ammonites were made up of men and women whom the mothers of the
community nominated. Wherefore, whenever a council was to be elected, all the mothers of the
community met together and brought forth the names of those men and women most suited for the
councils. And if the city were great, it was divided into several communities for the purpose of elections.
5) And when the mothers had brought forth the names of those most suitable, all the people voted on those
names and the thirteen who received the most votes were invited to sit as the Council of the Community
for one year. Now, the mothers brought forth the names and from them the people elected their leaders by
vote, each person of the age of agency having one vote. And behold, the councils were made up of men
and women nominated by the mothers of the community.
6) And now, each community council sent one or two of their numbers up to serve, from time to time, in
larger councils, and thus did the People of Ammon choose to govern and regulate their affairs.
7) And behold, the people generally enjoyed peace. But behold, when there did arise contention, the matter
was brought before the community council to be heard of them. And when all sides of the matter had been
heard, the council passed judgment and the matter was ended and the contention was resolved. And thus
great equity was had among the people of Ammon.
8) Behold, this manner of governance served to unite the Ammonites and also to discourage evil men from
gaining power among them. Yea, and it was preferable to them, more so than the system of lesser and
greater judges as was had among the Nephites.
9) For the Nephite judges were all men and were elected by men. Wherefore, the women had no say in any
part of their system of governance.

[Reluctant Watchman]

Another swing and a miss!

I thought you said you didn't like dickin' around. Obviously, you do.

[Reluctant Watchman]

Now behold, the councils of the Ammonites were made up of men and women whom the mothers of the
community nominated. Wherefore, whenever a council was to be elected, all the mothers of the
community met together and brought forth the names of those men and women most suited for the
councils. And if the city were great, it was divided into several communities for the purpose of elections.
5) And when the mothers had brought forth the names of those most suitable, all the people voted on those
names and the thirteen who received the most votes were invited to sit as the Council of the Community
for one year. Now, the mothers brought forth the names and from them the people elected their leaders by
vote, each person of the age of agency having one vote. And behold, the councils were made up of men
and women nominated by the mothers of the community.
6) And now, each community council sent one or two of their numbers up to serve, from time to time, in
larger councils, and thus did the People of Ammon choose to govern and regulate their affairs.
7) And behold, the people generally enjoyed peace. But behold, when there did arise contention, the matter
was brought before the community council to be heard of them. And when all sides of the matter had been
heard, the council passed judgment and the matter was ended and the contention was resolved. And thus
great equity was had among the people of Ammon.
8) Behold, this manner of governance served to unite the Ammonites and also to discourage evil men from
gaining power among them. Yea, and it was preferable to them, more so than the system of lesser and
greater judges as was had among the Nephites.
9) For the Nephite judges were all men and were elected by men. Wherefore, the women had no say in any
part of their system of governance.

The backstory on how/why they formed these councils in such a way is quite interesting. The man who set this up was a Lamanite general who put down his arms at the River Sidon. He spend many years with the Ammonites and recorded their traditions.

[hyloglyph]

Another swing and a miss!

I thought you said you didn't like dickin' around. Obviously, you do.

Haha other people reading this can just scroll back and read what I wrote. You know that right?

You could too!

But instead you behave like a fool. Why? lol

What I wrote was extremely simple and plain.

[nightlight]

Wherefore, Hementah the healer, spoke to Shi-Tugohah privily and beseeched him regarding his daughter,
saying:
9) Do you not see that I have a daughter that is precious to me?
10) And Shi-Tugohah answered him:
11) Yea, Hementah, you will recall that I did look upon your daughter in earlier days with much favor, but
you dissuaded me saying, she is dear to me.
12) Whereupon Hementah continued:
13) Yea, my daughter is a great comfort to me and to this whole people. Behold, have you not heard the
people call her prophetess?

[Reluctant Watchman]

Another swing and a miss!

I thought you said you didn't like dickin' around. Obviously, you do.

Haha other people reading this can just scroll back and read what I wrote. You know that right?

You could too!

But instead you behave like a fool. Why? lol

What I wrote was extremely simple and plain.

I read what you wrote. I get it. You want to keep the purity of doctrine to certain books, and this record isn't one of them. Cool. If I'm not getting the intention of what you said, then just restate it in another way. I don't pretend to read people's minds.

[nightlight]

And the people answered, Nay.
37) Then I say, when you elevate people to be judges and rulers over you, let them be elevated by the voice of
the mothers, and they shall make rulers who shall not make war. For their counsels will ever be the
preserving of the children and not the offering them up because of pride.
38) But Pa-Hementem answered him, saying:
39) Does a woman never become filled with pride then? Nay, Shi-Tugohah, for I have seen how women do
adorn themselves in fine twined linen and costly things.
40) Then Shi-Tugohah also discerned her thoughts, how that she spoke thus to him only so that the people
might think earnestly upon the matter with all seriousness, and he took courage.
41) Yea, you speak rightly, Pa-Hementem. But consider, a mighty man such as myself or Hagoth, might by
his prowess in strength or in arms, win himself to the seat of the judge, by the esteem or the fear had by
men of such feats. But if he had to win to the seat of power by the esteem of the mothers, he would have
to establish to them that his policies would secure the safety of their little ones.
42) Behold, it is true that women may become puffed up in pride, but are not mothers with children, as a
separate class, more generally concerned with the good of the children than are other classes? Or what
mother, when asked to give up her young son to war, is not more inclined than any other women to
ascertain that the cause of the war be a good cause?
43) Yea, I tell you, if you would avoid conflict as a whole people, choose you out to make you laws the wise
and the charitable. But let them be chosen by the mothers. Let those who have the most to lose choose
your rulers. This is the remedy. Then, if the people go down into corruption, it will be because the whole
people have fallen even to the last of them, and not because one strong man has usurped the voice of the
people.
44) And all the people were amazed at the man of war among them. For he did hear the voice of the Lord and
teach peace to them. Yea, all went away very thoughtful after hearing the words of Shi-Tugohah, and
many were amazed.
45) But Pa-Hementem published his words to all the people and condoned them. Wherefore, the people did
believe in his words and did entreat the mothers to meet together on an appointed day to choose Councils
to rule the people of Hagoth.
46) Now, on the appointed day, even Hagoth and Hementah, Cumenihah and Hagmeni, yea, and many other
of the principle men, did stand before the mothers and did appeal to them to choose out those that would
preserve the peace of the land. For they all believed in the words of Shi-Tugohah, and the Spirit witnessed
to them that his words were true.
47) And the mothers did meet and chose out of the people of Hagoth the first of their Councils. And when the
Council met for the first time, they chose Hagoth to preside. And behold, all the people were pleased with
the choice and they all cried amen together.

[nightlight]

This is written by a dude in a late 1900s

Guarantee

[nightlight]

There seems to be a lot of "17) He prays to the Mother" in this book......

[Reluctant Watchman]

This is written by a dude in a late 1900s

Guarantee

Hahaha, sure.

[Reluctant Watchman]

I'm totally fine is this record isn't for y'all. Discount it all you want. But, I would challenge anyone to a discussion on historical framing/context and doctrine. And that doesn't mean we have to agree on everything. I don't agree with some of the interpretations of the translation council. (the footnotes) I think they're flat-out wrong. But in reality, the BoM is a record of a fallen people who repeatedly wash, rinse, and repeated the pride cycle. These people had their problems but were far more righteous than their brethren to the South.

And to bring this back to the OP, can you find anywhere in scripture where that principle is taught in more clarity? I've asked that question three times now without a response.

[hyloglyph]

Another swing and a miss!

I thought you said you didn't like dickin' around. Obviously, you do.

Haha other people reading this can just scroll back and read what I wrote. You know that right?

You could too!

But instead you behave like a fool. Why? lol

What I wrote was extremely simple and plain.

I read what you wrote. I get it. You want to keep the purity of doctrine to certain books, and this record isn't one of them. Cool. If I'm not getting the intention of what you said, then just restate it in another way. I don't pretend to read people's minds.

I’m not pretending to read folks minds.

You seem to be pretending to read peoples posts lol.

Not really possible to have anything good happen if you just keep posting past everyone.

You still keep posting at me about doctrine. Why?

I have known people that don’t do good with reading and comprehending. A lot of people in your demographic are like that actually.

How much plainer can I be? You keep misunderstanding. At this point, I assume it is intentional.

Other folks reading along might not have your same hang ups though. And then they just assume that the OP of the thread is a dope because you can’t grasp a simple little thing, that thing being: what you present to your kids as scripture had better damn sure be scripture or you are screwing yourself and messing with your kids heads.

This is basicass stuff lil fella. You could have just acknowledged that at the beginning. But you didn’t.

[Reluctant Watchman]

I thought you said you didn't like dickin' around. Obviously, you do.

Haha other people reading this can just scroll back and read what I wrote. You know that right?

You could too!

But instead you behave like a fool. Why? lol

What I wrote was extremely simple and plain.

I read what you wrote. I get it. You want to keep the purity of doctrine to certain books, and this record isn't one of them. Cool. If I'm not getting the intention of what you said, then just restate it in another way. I don't pretend to read people's minds.

I’m not pretending to read folks minds.

You seem to be pretending to read peoples posts lol.

Not really possible to have anything good happen if you just keep posting past everyone.

You still keep posting at me about doctrine. Why?

I have known people that don’t do good with reading and comprehending. A lot of people in your demographic are like that actually.

How much plainer can I be? You keep misunderstanding. At this point, I assume it is intentional.

Other folks reading along might not have your same hang ups though. And then they just assume that the OP of the thread is a dope because you can’t grasp a simple little thing, that thing being: what you present to your kids as scripture had better damn sure be scripture or you are screwing yourself and messing with your kids heads.

This is basicass stuff lil fella. You could have just acknowledged that at the beginning. But you didn’t.

Yes, I'm damn sure that my kids are learning far more doctrinal clarity than they'll ever learn in the LDS church.

[hyloglyph]

Haha other people reading this can just scroll back and read what I wrote. You know that right?

You could too!

But instead you behave like a fool. Why? lol

What I wrote was extremely simple and plain.

I read what you wrote. I get it. You want to keep the purity of doctrine to certain books, and this record isn't one of them. Cool. If I'm not getting the intention of what you said, then just restate it in another way. I don't pretend to read people's minds.

I’m not pretending to read folks minds.

You seem to be pretending to read peoples posts lol.

Not really possible to have anything good happen if you just keep posting past everyone.

You still keep posting at me about doctrine. Why?

I have known people that don’t do good with reading and comprehending. A lot of people in your demographic are like that actually.

How much plainer can I be? You keep misunderstanding. At this point, I assume it is intentional.

Other folks reading along might not have your same hang ups though. And then they just assume that the OP of the thread is a dope because you can’t grasp a simple little thing, that thing being: what you present to your kids as scripture had better damn sure be scripture or you are screwing yourself and messing with your kids heads.

This is basicass stuff lil fella. You could have just acknowledged that at the beginning. But you didn’t.

Yes, I'm damn sure that my kids are learning far more doctrinal clarity than they'll ever learn in the LDS church.

Another swing and a miss!

They are gonna start calling you “Reliable Missman”

None of your responses ever connect with anything I have wrote lol.

You miss every time. Reliably!

Folks are wondering probably. Why all the sidestepping?

You have turned your own thread into a case study on the psychology of trying to save face lol.

It’s not an uninteresting topic!

[Reluctant Watchman]

I have words to describe you as well. I'll just move along.

[hyloglyph]

I have words to describe you as well. I'll just move along.

Whatever words you may have aren’t worth a damn thing if:

1. They aren’t related to anything having to do with me (which I’m sure they aren’t since you are the Reliable Missman)

And

2. You don’t even have the wherewithal to write or speak them, which apparently you don’t.

Therefore,

You are just another instance of people typing stuff but not engaging