LDS Freedom Forum

AussieOi wrote:from http://www.ldsfreedomforum.com/viewtopi ... ong#p68929

From CHH


So the approach used by Joseph Smith and Brigham and John Taylor when faced with unconstitutional laws was wrong too since all of those same threats applied to them, did they not? Did fighting the government have the chance to affect their families? How about the Romans that refused to deny Christ and were fed to the lions? When is it time to just say no to corrupt government and unconstitutional laws. I refuse to obey laws I feel are unconstitutional. Not some of them, all of them.

All three of my brothers told me that I would end up in jail and have horrible problems if I fought the IRS. All three of them have had more problems than me with the IRS. Have you ever been audited? I never have been. I have had no problems AT ALL with the IRS for 53 years now. Your concerns are unfounded imho.

And strangely you admit that the taxes are unconstitutional. Here is what Joseph Smith said about obeying unconstitutional laws. Are you a fool?

"Shall we be such fools as to be governed by its laws, which are unconstitutional? No!"

If not then why not follow the prophet's counsel? I believe he was right to I did it and God protected me now for 31 years.

How about John Taylor:
"Then do you profess to ignore the laws of the land? No; not unless they are unconstitutional, then I would do it all the time. Whenever the Congress of the United States, for instance, pass[es] a law interfering with my religion, or with my religious rights, I will read a small portion of that instrument called the Constitution of the United States, now almost obsolete, which says—"Congress shall pass no law interfering with religion or the free exercise thereof" [US Const. Amend. I]; and I would say, gentlemen, you may go to Gibraltar with your law, and I will live my religion."

All I have done is to avail myself of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act and the First Amendment, like John Taylor did. Was he wrong? My fruit of 31 years says I was right. The Church has had more IRS problems in the last 31 years than I have had.

Did Taylor not face all of the threats you wrote about. Here is what he himself wrote on the subject.

"They have, however, discovered the difference between a blind submission to the caprices of political demagogues, and obedience to the Constitution, laws, and institutions of the United States; nor can they in the present instance be hood-winked by the cry of "treason." If it be treason to stand up for our Constitutional rights; if it be treason to resist the unconstitutional acts of a vitiated and corrupt administration, who by a mercenary armed force would seek to rob us of the rights of franchise, cut our throats to subserve their own party, and seek to force upon us their corrupt tools, and violently invade the rights of American citizens; if it be treason to maintain inviolate our homes, our firesides, our wives, and our honor, from the corrupting, and withering blight of a debauched soldiery; if it be treason to maintain inviolate the Constitution and institutions of the United States, when nearly all the states are seeking to trample them under their feet—then indeed are we guilty of treason.

end CHH post
-------------------



Like I say- he would rip some of you apart.
Sadly I am 1/100th of a toenail of him in the ability to bring these obvious things to your attention
I don't believe the prophet would ever tell members to hand in their guns.

Trumped by modern revelation. Irrelevant

“Know this, that every soul is free
To choose his life and what he’ll be,
For this eternal truth is given
That God will force no man to heav’n.

“He’ll call, persuade, direct aright,
And bless with wisdom, love, and light
In nameless ways be good and kind,
But never force the human mind.

“Freedom and reason make us men;
Take these away, what are we then?
mere animals, and just as well
The beasts may think of heav’n or hell.”


William Clegg

Aussie, that snippet from CHH was right on.

Trumped by modern revelation. Irrelevant

I guess this is the point when one realizes that nothing more can be said - it won't make any difference.

And now, as to the last neutralizer that the devil uses most effectively— it is simply this: “Don’t do anything in the fight for freedom until the Church sets up its own specific program to save the Constitution.” This brings us right back to the scripture I opened with today— to those slothful servants who will not do anything until the are “compelled in all things.: Maybe the Lord will never set up a specific church program for the purpose of saving the Constitution. Perhaps if he set one up at this time it might split the Church asunder, and perhaps he does not want that to happen yet for not all the wheat and tares are fully ripe.


This is the problem with those who say "you will never get an instruction or revelation contrary to the prophets counsel to the broader church"
Sure, you most realistically wont
but the problem is too many use that as the excuse to NOT do anything, because they say "well, we haven't been instructed"
they tend to do nothing except that which they are compelled to do. they want to be saved by someone else and be able to point and say "its on HIS head- he made me do that"

these are they who make up the "dont tweak the tail of the beast" rubbish- cos they can't fathom that the church doesnt tell them what to do in everythign and they need to be compelled to do something
and then they end up wearing black and coming in the middle of the night for our guns- cos such blind obedience is used by those who oppress others to send these willing obedient slaves out to go and oppress others who don't obey
case in point Amendment 16, the Tax one
Its not even a law but you all obey it. i mean come on, its not even ratified and you ALL know it
yet you still submit to it. Why?
and then you rail on at those who are enlightened enough to opt out?
and why? because you are afraid
afraid you will end up in jail- because the STATE has enough scared fools sucking at the teat of the gadianton system who will come and imprison you for not obeying

Your founders had that dilemma, then one day they knew what they had to do.
if you want to live in the dark, and put the chains on you and padlock yourself up to slavery for the state fine and good

just don't tell others they HAVE to obey laws that are wrong and immoral and against the constitution

i used to detest your slave owning founders. not any more. they took the bravery pill

when were some of you neutralised?

Those who profess to favor freedom, yet deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground. They want rain without thunder and lightening. They want the ocean without the awful roar of its many waters. This struggle may be a moral one; or it may be a physical one; or it may be both moral and physical; but it must be a struggle. Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and it never will."

ngl has no courage to stand against an evil government. Fine we can do without him. What is worse than no courage, is to try and convince others to be like him

NoGreaterLove wrote: Trumped by modern revelation. Irrelevant

you are a very sad individual NGL

“Whosover declareth more or less than this, the same is not of me, but is against me. . .” (D&C 10:68).


I believe that God has endowed men with certain inalienable rights as set forth in the Declaration of Independence and that no legislature and no majority, however great, may morally limit or destroy these; that the sole function of government is to protect life, liberty, and property, and anything more than this is usurpation and oppression.

I believe that the Constitution of the United States was prepared and adopted by men acting under inspiration from Almighty God; that it is a solemn compact between the peoples of the states of this nation that all officers of government are under duty to obey; that the eternal moral laws expressed therein must be adhered to or individual liberty will perish. . . .

I am hereby resolved that under no circumstances shall the freedoms guaranteed by the Bill of Rights be infringed. In particular I am opposed to any attempt on the part of the federal government to deny the people their right to bear arms, to worship, and to pray when and where they choose, or to own and control private property. (Enemy 143-44; also in GFC 299-300; revised in TETB 617; from an address given at the Utah Forum for the American Idea, Salt Lake City, UT, 29 Feb 1968)

NoGreaterLove wrote:

AussieOi wrote:from http://www.ldsfreedomforum.com/viewtopi ... ong#p68929

From CHH


So the approach used by Joseph Smith and Brigham and John Taylor when faced with unconstitutional laws was wrong too since all of those same threats applied to them, did they not? Did fighting the government have the chance to affect their families? How about the Romans that refused to deny Christ and were fed to the lions? When is it time to just say no to corrupt government and unconstitutional laws. I refuse to obey laws I feel are unconstitutional. Not some of them, all of them.

All three of my brothers told me that I would end up in jail and have horrible problems if I fought the IRS. All three of them have had more problems than me with the IRS. Have you ever been audited? I never have been. I have had no problems AT ALL with the IRS for 53 years now. Your concerns are unfounded imho.

And strangely you admit that the taxes are unconstitutional. Here is what Joseph Smith said about obeying unconstitutional laws. Are you a fool?

"Shall we be such fools as to be governed by its laws, which are unconstitutional? No!"

If not then why not follow the prophet's counsel? I believe he was right to I did it and God protected me now for 31 years.

How about John Taylor:
"Then do you profess to ignore the laws of the land? No; not unless they are unconstitutional, then I would do it all the time. Whenever the Congress of the United States, for instance, pass[es] a law interfering with my religion, or with my religious rights, I will read a small portion of that instrument called the Constitution of the United States, now almost obsolete, which says—"Congress shall pass no law interfering with religion or the free exercise thereof" [US Const. Amend. I]; and I would say, gentlemen, you may go to Gibraltar with your law, and I will live my religion."

All I have done is to avail myself of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act and the First Amendment, like John Taylor did. Was he wrong? My fruit of 31 years says I was right. The Church has had more IRS problems in the last 31 years than I have had.

Did Taylor not face all of the threats you wrote about. Here is what he himself wrote on the subject.

"They have, however, discovered the difference between a blind submission to the caprices of political demagogues, and obedience to the Constitution, laws, and institutions of the United States; nor can they in the present instance be hood-winked by the cry of "treason." If it be treason to stand up for our Constitutional rights; if it be treason to resist the unconstitutional acts of a vitiated and corrupt administration, who by a mercenary armed force would seek to rob us of the rights of franchise, cut our throats to subserve their own party, and seek to force upon us their corrupt tools, and violently invade the rights of American citizens; if it be treason to maintain inviolate our homes, our firesides, our wives, and our honor, from the corrupting, and withering blight of a debauched soldiery; if it be treason to maintain inviolate the Constitution and institutions of the United States, when nearly all the states are seeking to trample them under their feet—then indeed are we guilty of treason.

end CHH post
-------------------



Like I say- he would rip some of you apart.
Sadly I am 1/100th of a toenail of him in the ability to bring these obvious things to your attention
I don't believe the prophet would ever tell members to hand in their guns.

Trumped by modern revelation. Irrelevant

Makes excellent garden fertilizer I hear. (B.S.)

I can easily now see where the second the Prophet says something that goes against what people "think" is "correct". Many people will leave the Church saying the Prophet is a false Prophet for my personal revelation says different than what he has just said. I see this as the great test that we were warned was coming....

Rosabella wrote:I can easily now see where the second the Prophet says something that goes against what people "think" is "correct". Many people will leave the Church saying the Prophet is a false Prophet for my personal revelation says different than what he has just said. I see this as the great test that we were warned was coming....

Rosa - thanks for the previous post expressing concern for my spiritual welfare. After last night, it means that much more.

To NGL, well you can rest easy in one regard - unlike Sterling Allen I do not claim to know more than the prophet, would NEVER claim the authority to direct anyone other than myself unless that authority was given through proper priesthood channels, and lastly have not even claimed special instruction to exempt myself from any instruction given to the prophet. I have only asserted my God given right to do so - a right that I never intened and never believe I will exercise, however, it IS a condition that I feel is proper to have - and you are free to disagree.

Bella, to your last post - I am not talking about "feelings", warm fuzzies or anything of the sort - I thought I had made this clear, for me to ever make such a drastic move it would require 1) a personal visitation, and 2) my determination, following the pattern given in the temple, that it was a true messenger and not an imposter. If 1 and 2 happen then 3 is me doing as commanded - period. And AGAIN it is something I expect to never happen in my life - I am just enough of a legalistic nitpicker that I have to say "This is the one exception that I can conceive of - and the odds are billions to 1 against - but this is the only condition I must place short of unconditional obedience."

And to clarify, NGL saying that all of the excellent quotes were "trumped by a modern prophet" you give me quotes of Thomas S Monsen that contradicts specifically these quotes - and I will give them due consideration. But you have certainly not provided said quotes and I don;t believe they exist. Prove me wrong show me an IN CONTEXT quote that clearly says otherwise, and you will at the very least have my attention.

NoGreaterLove wrote:Trumped by modern revelation. Irrelevant

A specific quote from a prophet regarding obedience to unconstitutional laws would be helpful here...simply stating it as fact with no evidence doesn't help anyone. Thanks!

*edit* I missed OI's post, it looks like he had it covered.

we all know this story, and there's 2 ways to look at it

Remember the story of a man trapped on an island who kept waiting for God to help him?

A man was trapped in his house during a flood. He began praying to God to rescue him. He had a vision in his head of God’s hand reaching down from heaven and lifting him to safety. The water started to rise in his house. His neighbour urged him to leave and offered him a ride to safety. The man yelled back, “I am waiting for God to save me.” The neighbour drove off in his pick-up truck.

The man continued to pray and hold on to his vision. As the water began rising in his house, he had to climb up to the roof. A boat came by with some people heading for safe ground. They yelled at the man to grab a rope they were ready to throw and take him to safety. He told them that he was waiting for God to save him. They shook their heads and moved on.

The man continued to pray, believing with all his heart that he would be saved by God. The flood waters continued to rise. A helicopter flew by and a voice came over a loudspeaker offering to lower a ladder and take him off the roof. The man waved the helicopter away, shouting back that he was waiting for God to save him. The helicopter left. The flooding water came over the roof and caught him up and swept him away. He drowned.

When he reached heaven and asked, “God, why did you not save me? I believed in you with all my heart. Why did you let me drown?” God replied, “I sent you a pick-up truck, a boat and a helicopter and you refused all of them. What else could I possibly do for you?”



1- he probably read once from a prophet that god will always protrect the righteous
2- god was trying to get through to him but he was so shut off from listening to god because he was waiting to be told what to do

Soooooo, when the authorities told those poor hapless people in New Orleans to stay put............

Rosabella wrote:I can easily now see where the second the Prophet says something that goes against what people "think" is "correct". Many people will leave the Church saying the Prophet is a false Prophet for my personal revelation says different than what he has just said. I see this as the great test that we were warned was coming....

why "now" Rosabella

What is it in this thread that has shown you a different light on human nature? I find that disengenous and quite offensive to those presenting a different perspective on obedience. One which quite comfortably supports the thinking of past prophets

why does ignoring unjust and illegal and unconstitutional laws + disobeying the prophet, past, or, future?

who here is saying don't listen to the prophet?

In regards to refusing to serve laws that are wrong- we have this

“Whosover declareth more or less than this, the same is not of me, but is against me. . .” (D&C 10:68).

We have Ezra Taft Benson - aside form being a prophet and president, arguably one of the greatest proponents of freedom from oppressive authority in our time, saying.........I am hereby resolved that under no circumstances shall the freedoms guaranteed by the Bill of Rights be infringed.

in regards to our rights he says .....no legislature and no majority, however great, may morally limit or destroy these

We have Joseph Smith speaking SPECIFICALLY about obeying unconstitutional laws. "Shall we be such fools as to be governed by its laws, which are unconstitutional? No!"

Who are the fools Bella and NGL?

How about John Taylor:
"Then do you profess to ignore the laws of the land? No; not unless they are unconstitutional, then I would do it all the time. Whenever the Congress of the United States, for instance, pass[es] a law interfering with my religion, or with my religious rights, I will read a small portion of that instrument called the Constitution of the United States, now almost obsolete, which says—"Congress shall pass no law interfering with religion or the free exercise thereof" [US Const. Amend. I]; and I would say, gentlemen, you may go to Gibraltar with your law, and I will live my religion."

It is easy to sit smugly and say oh i obey the laws even when i disagree with them. but we aren't talking about that

its never that simple. the test is not "we can see they will walk away from the church when the prophet tells them to do something they don't want to do"

yeah- any minute now- its not like, fidelity, word or wisdom, porn, fasting, paying 10% of my pre tax income (we are taxed 50% on income tax alone in australia and then another 15% in other taxes + a 10% GST, yeah, members of the church aren't faced with tough decisions to be an upstanding member every day- but oh yes, any minute now, any minute, the prophet is going to test us. sigh.

i have heard that so many times and apart from being uncharitable and unsanctimoneous, its naive and ignorant

anyway, the test isn't to obey a law you dont like, perhaps its to see which sheep will NOT obey a law that they impose on other people

My friend is a doctor in Melbourne
He struggles with this every day


8: Obligations of registered health practitioner who has conscientious objection

(1) If a woman requests a registered health practitioner to advise on a proposed abortion, or to perform, direct, authorise or supervise an abortion for that woman, and the practitioner has a conscientious objection to abortion, the practitioner must—

(a) inform the woman that the practitioner has a conscientious objection to abortion; and

(b) refer the woman to another registered health practitioner in the same regulated health profession who the practitioner knows does not have a conscientious objection to abortion.

Notes: He's not allowed to provide any alternative materials on pro life
If the child is under 18 he cannot even notify her parents

She/ He HAS to refer onto a doctor he knows will provide the abortion or facilitate

Many doctors, nurses and pharmacists with strong ethical, religious and cultural beliefs against abortion have to consider whether to continue to practise in breach of the law or to discontinue working as health-care professionals in this state

i read here that because they are not obeying the law they are going apostate

i wonder how many nazis feeding gypsies and jews and homosexuals into the gas chambers in WW2 felt compelled to be obedient citizens? Well we know of one don't we.

according to some his was the model behavior to adopt....we believe in obeying our leaders


Attacks on pro-life health professionals are likely to come from two sources.

One is from insurance firms which may deny pro-life doctors access to professional indemnity insurance on the commercial grounds that a doctor's refusal to refer a woman for abortion will increase the likelihood of future legal action.

Another is from medical practice boards, which will be legally obliged to investigate any complaint from an aborting mother against any doctor who refuses to refer her for an abortion.

This has happened twice in Victoria before last year's decriminalisation bill was passed.

The new legislation also puts at risk counsellors who are trying to help women to keep their babies and will not refer them for abortions.


Note: Victoria allows abortion up to 40 weeks. Provided the babies head is not out and it is not breathing independently, it is legally allowed to be terminated.

Any refusal of a doctor to refer a 15yr old girl to an abortionist or a 37wk pregnant adult to a doctor they know will enable or perform an abortion is a criminal act in this state

For him to act otherwise- even to simply say "i don't know anyone I can refer you onto", is both illegal and an act of Totalitarian conscientious (civil) disobedience

but of course this discussion is only about those who download movies off the internet, or don't fill in tax forms and small, stupid, irrelevent things like that, which law "abiders" can wag their fingers at others and say "tsk tsk obey authority you are going to go apostate don't you tell me i can disregard these stupid laws" and so forth

Am I angry? You bet- this is about freedom of our soul.

Rosabella wrote:I can easily now see where the second the Prophet says something that goes against what people "think" is "correct". Many people will leave the Church saying the Prophet is a false Prophet for my personal revelation says different than what he has just said. I see this as the great test that we were warned was coming....

{Shrug}
Fear or faith. LDS will follow the prophet just like they continue to do so now. As a matter of fact, the very people you label here will most likely be leading the charge to follow the prophet. The posters here have not implied or represented that they are sitting around just waiting for the prophet to give them a command they don't like so they can disobey, nice try though.

I agree Squally. I am sorry to say, but as much as you complain, Bella, about people personally attacking you, it appears that you are accusing others of what you yourself are doing, and doing falsely.

Mahonri wrote:I agree Squally. I am sorry to say, but as much as you complain, Bella, about people personally attacking you, it appears that you are accusing others of what you yourself are doing, and doing falsely.

Really so a general statement is a personal attack hmmm...

I have been pondering this very topic for quite a while. I see where many people even people I know are against the Church on prop 8. One of my closest friends from years past is one of the top leaders in the Gay marriage movement. Big heart, but would not agree to follow the Prophet because their personal revelations said no.

I knew Sterling Allen same thing.

I could go on and on. The more the Church comes out against things the more it might just be our pet hobbie or idea. Something we hold dear to us. I have posted this many time on this site. That we need to be prepared that one of the things we hold as "truth" might be one of the things the Church takes a stand against at some point. For reasons we may not understand at that time. They may ask of us to do or not to do something that we feel is not inline with past Prophets or scriptures. That is what I am talking about. We all need to be prepared and have a testimony that the Prophet will never lead this Church astray. I am saying I can see know how even within very strong members we can be swayed to disagree with a Prophet because our personal revelations trump the Prophet. That is a very dangerous path and an path I have seen in the past , present and fear to see it far more in the future.

This is a really good read, and relevant to this discussion: Be Not Deceived

BrianM wrote:This is a really good read, and relevant to this discussion: Be Not Deceived

Great talk!

When I talk about being careful about personal revelation. I do not mean were are not to receive it or use it just that we need to be very very careful that it comes from God. One of the best ways is to compare it to counsels of the Prophets.

This is a quote warning us to be careful and how to tell which side it comes from. It shows that this was a huge problem in the Church before and it still is now.

I deal with people that have had false revelation or manifestation that have lead them out of the Church and into the new age all the time. That is why this for me is so important to understand.

http://lds.org/ldsorg/v/index.jsp?hideN ... footnote19


The gift of discerning of spirits allows the faithful to distinguish between the influence of good and evil spirits.

In the early days of the restored Church, members of the Church, as well as members of other religious groups, sometimes acted upon influences from evil or false spirits, believing they were under the influence of the Holy Ghost. The Prophet Joseph Smith taught: “Recent occurrences that have transpired amongst us render it an imperative duty devolving upon me to say something in relation to the spirits by which men are actuated.

“It is evident from the Apostles’ writings [in the New Testament], that many false spirits existed in their day, and had ‘gone forth into the world,’ and that it needed intelligence which God alone could impart to detect false spirits, and to prove what spirits were of God [see 1 John 4:1–4]. The world in general have been grossly ignorant in regard to this one thing, and why should they be otherwise—‘for no man knows the things of God, but by the Spirit of God.’ [See 1 Corinthians 2:11.] …

“There always did, in every age, seem to be a lack of intelligence pertaining to this subject. Spirits of all kinds have been manifested, in every age, and almost amongst all people. … All have their spirits, all have a supernatural agency, and all contend that their spirits are of God. Who shall solve the mystery? ‘Try the spirits,’ says John [1 John 4:1], but who is to do it? The learned, the eloquent, the philosopher, the sage, the divine—all are ignorant. … Who can drag into daylight and develop the hidden mysteries of the false spirits that so frequently are made manifest among the Latter-day Saints? We answer that no man can do this without the Priesthood, and having a knowledge of the laws by which spirits are governed; for as ‘no man knows the things of God, but by the Spirit of God,’ so no man knows the spirit of the devil, and his power and influence, but by possessing intelligence which is more than human, and having unfolded through the medium of the Priesthood the mysterious operations of his devices. …

“A man must have the discerning of spirits before he can drag into daylight this hellish influence and unfold it unto the world in all its soul-destroying, diabolical, and horrid colors; for nothing is a greater injury to the children of men than to be under the influence of a false spirit when they think they have the Spirit of God. Thousands have felt the influence of its terrible power and baneful effects. …

“As we have noticed before, the great difficulty lies in the ignorance of the nature of spirits, of the laws by which they are governed, and the signs by which they may be known; if it requires the Spirit of God to know the things of God; and the spirit of the devil can only be unmasked through that medium, then it follows as a natural consequence that unless some person or persons have a communication, or revelation from God, unfolding to them the operation of the spirit, they must eternally remain ignorant of these principles; for I contend that if one man cannot understand these things but by the Spirit of God, ten thousand men cannot; it is alike out of the reach of the wisdom of the learned, the tongue of the eloquent, the power of the mighty. And we shall at last have to come to this conclusion, whatever we may think of revelation, that without it we can neither know nor understand anything of God, or the devil; and however unwilling the world may be to acknowledge this principle, it is evident from the multifarious creeds and notions concerning this matter that they understand nothing of this principle, and it is equally as plain that without a divine communication they must remain in ignorance. …

“A man must have the discerning of spirits, as we before stated, to understand these things, and how is he to obtain this gift if there are no gifts of the Spirit? And how can these gifts be obtained without revelation? ‘Christ ascended into heaven, and gave gifts to men; and He gave some Apostles, and some Prophets, and some Evangelists, and some Pastors and Teachers’ [see Ephesians 4:8, 11]. And how were Apostles, Prophets, Pastors, Teachers and Evangelists chosen? By prophecy (revelation) and by laying on of hands:—by a divine communication, and a divinely appointed ordinance—through the medium of the Priesthood, organized according to the order of God, by divine appointment. The Apostles in ancient times held the keys of this Priesthood—of the mysteries of the kingdom of God, and consequently were enabled to unlock and unravel all things pertaining to the government of the Church, the welfare of society, the future destiny of men, and the agency, power and influence of spirits; for they could control them at pleasure, bid them depart in the name of Jesus, and detect their mischievous and mysterious operations when trying to palm themselves upon the Church in a religious garb, and militate against the interest of the Church and spread of truth. …

“… Our Savior, the Apostles, and even the members of the Church were endowed with this gift, for, says Paul, ‘To one is given the gift of tongues, to another the interpretation of tongues, to another the working of miracles, to another prophecy, to another the discerning of spirits.’ [See 1 Corinthians 12:10.] All these proceeded from the same Spirit of God, and were the gifts of God. … No man nor set of men without the regularly constituted authorities, the Priesthood and discerning of spirits, can tell true from false spirits.”18

“Lying spirits are going forth in the earth. There will be great manifestations of spirits, both false and true. … Every spirit, or vision, or singing, is not of God. … The gift of discerning spirits will be given to the Presiding Elder. Pray for him that he may have this gift.”19

For those that PM me or posted on this thread their concerns and hopes that my site might be restored. I am happy to say that the company that hosts my website was able to restore it from their backup. I feel I have to give thanks to the Lord and His answering our prayers last night and today that the data was not lost forever. Thank all of you for you sweet support. You know who you are

Back to the topic of submitting to secular authority-
Bella, it was illegal for Parker Jensen's parents to take him in order to avoid "medication". The state accused them of kidnapping him at the time. Were they wrong to go against the state (law)? It was certainly illegal. Should they have just bent over and obeyed the law and Chemo their son to death or were they justified in going against the general counsel of the church in keeping the laws of the land?
Generally speaking, I agree with keeping the laws of the land. I file taxes, register my car, pay property tax etc. etc. even though I don't agree with them, but there are exceptions justified by the spirit, no?
Thou shalt not kill. Nephi killed Laban. An exception??

This thread is like the soap opera of the forum. I want to pull myself away from it, but I keep coming back to see what else has been said.

Bella, I am happy to hear your website was recovered.

BrianM wrote:This is a really good read, and relevant to this discussion: Be Not Deceived

Thanks so much for posting this Brian. Very inspiring words.

Good Grief!!!

Can a 'spell of confusion' be so effective that a Spiritual Black Hole goes unseen?

Let me see...hmm...yes!...yes, that's it!...

I see a single darkling entity drawing everything into its orbit...wandering star, to whom is reserved the blackness of darkness for ever


Break this spell before it's everlastingly too late!!!

Brian, the talk "Be not Decieved" is wonderful and fully addresses from what I can see, every issue brought up on this particuliarly exciting thread. Wonderful, wonderful talk. Thanks for sharing it!



Folks, tune in tomorrow for another exciting page of posts to find out who actually read the talk.........