Re: Wolves and Sheep
Posted: March 4th, 2014, 5:03 pm
withdrawn
Your home for discussing politics, the restored gospel of Jesus Christ, and the principles of liberty.
https://ldsfreedomforum.com/
freedomforall wrote:[3 quotes which I put below because the system does not allow 3 quotes inside a quote]
If the CJCOLDS is Christ's church, then it stands to reason that they are one in the same. Christ organized his church in His day, and it was restored for our day. Makes sense to me. In summary...Christ is the church and the church is Christ. It's the people who are imperfect. Just sayin".
1 Corinthians 12:27
27 Now ye are the body of Christ, and members in particular.
Ephesians 4:12
12 For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ:
Let's quote my comment in context. I was responding to this:A Random Phrase wrote:Not really a nerve. I just thought it rather odd that Jesus was left out of the equation and the church was the salvation of souls all by itself.Nan wrote:Sounds like he touched a nerve with you.A Random Phrase wrote:
Interesting. And all this time, I thought our main defense was faith in Jesus Christ. Dang. Guess I'll have to ditch Him and follow an organization (which, by the way, does have the freedom to choose to leave the truth by degrees - else why a need for a restoration in the first place?)
Freedomforall, I appreciate your faith in the church. Scriptures show us, however, that churches - even the Lord's own church or Jehovah's own people - go astray. They fall down. They go awhoring after false gods, often gods they have imagined up unto themselves, not knowing the true God. (To know Him is to meet Him.) They know not the God they should worship.kingbmm wrote:For all of us, our main defense against Satan’s deceptions must be a strong and abiding testimony that the Church is true. All may not be well in Zion (which is what the prophets said would be the case), but the Church is still true. It’s not anemic; it doesn’t need supplements. It’s not true if, and it’s not true but, and it’s not true except. It’s just true! Moreover, the Church is not off course; it’s not going too slow, and it’s not going too fast. Its leaders are not asleep, and they don’t need any uninvited help from the passengers to steer the boat.
Well, if the church(TM) is more important than Jesus Christ, I have no problem leaving these forums behind. I consider my views to be "heretic" according to current paradigms, but not apostate. But if believing in Jesus Christ over men is breaking a rule, feel free to ban me from the forums.freedomforall wrote:Isn't it time to do some house cleaning? There is way too much anti Mormon insinuations, anti church leadership, too much mocking of the church, and too much false and/or misleading doctrine.coachmarc wrote:Just so we're all clear, this website and message board is representative of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints and not a reorganized or fundamentalist splinter group, correct? I've been getting odd vibes ever since I joined.
This church is Christ's church. I believe he will do His own work in saving it and handling bad apples. But we cannot separate the church from the man, period. If we cut down the church we cut down Christ...and that's the way it is. Christ organized it, He'll fix it when the time is right by kicking out any tares. Our duty is to feast upon the word and sustain the leaders Christ has in place. Maybe some people don't want to follow them, maybe the leaders are imperfect...but they're all Christ has to work with at present until He comes to reign. I challenge all scorners, all mockers to go take any one of their places and see if they can do any better. Maybe they would learn something besides animosity and displeasure.A Random Phrase wrote:Well, if the church(TM) is more important than Jesus Christ, I have no problem leaving these forums behind. I consider my views to be "heretic" according to current paradigms, but not apostate. But if believing in Jesus Christ over men is breaking a rule, feel free to ban me from the forums.freedomforall wrote:Isn't it time to do some house cleaning? There is way too much anti Mormon insinuations, anti church leadership, too much mocking of the church, and too much false and/or misleading doctrine.coachmarc wrote:Just so we're all clear, this website and message board is representative of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints and not a reorganized or fundamentalist splinter group, correct? I've been getting odd vibes ever since I joined.
Sounds good so far. It's not up to us to steady the ark, so to speak.freedomforall wrote:This church is Christ's church. I believe he will do His own work in saving it and handling bad apples.
Of which church are you speaking, the LDS church or the Church of the Firstborn?freedomforall wrote:But we cannot separate the church from the man, period. If we cut down the church we cut down Christ...and that's the way it is.
I've never understood this board's obsession with the whole tares thing. The thing to watch out for is the wolves. I've seen a few of them, and if they were to participate in a message board such as this, I'm positive they would post similar sentiments to Follow the Prophet. Something to think about.freedomforall wrote:Christ organized it, He'll fix it when the time is right by kicking out any tares.
Certainly, but the really funny thing is sometimes when you feast for a while, it opens your eyes to certain things going on. That's when it gets real tricky...freedomforall wrote:Our duty is to feast upon the word and sustain the leaders Christ has in place.
Fair point there. I wouldn't want those jobs. Being in those kinds of positions invites greater judgment at the end since they influence the decisions of so many people, right or wrong. Charity is important, but it doesn't preclude me from being hesitant to turn over my money to build Babylonian temples. That's what free agency is about, learning to make wise choices and living with the consequences.freedomforall wrote:Maybe some people don't want to follow them, maybe the leaders are imperfect...but they're all Christ has to work with at present until He comes to reign. I challenge all scorners, all mockers to go take any one of their places and see if they can do any better.
John 5:28,29gruden2.0 wrote:Sounds good so far. It's not up to us to steady the ark, so to speak.freedomforall wrote:This church is Christ's church. I believe he will do His own work in saving it and handling bad apples.
Of which church are you speaking, the LDS church or the Church of the Firstborn? Many members of the LDS church are a part of the Church of the Firstborn, otherwise, where are they going to come from based on D&C 76? And since these members mingle with the tares then it stands to reason I'm speaking of the LDS church. Those that do not keep the commandments nor reverence the church and of whom the church is founded in Jerusalem, even Jesus Christ, they are they who will inherit a lesser kingdoms. Do you know of any other church that has saving ordinances for exaltation?freedomforall wrote:But we cannot separate the church from the man, period. If we cut down the church we cut down Christ...and that's the way it is.
When we read the Bible, we see that the Lord chose the Israelites - certain progeny of Abraham - as His people. Those people interpreted that as meaning they had special status and it justified their poor behavior. We see how the Lord views such attitudes as He punishes them. Therefore, we understand that to be the Lord's does not exempt us from punishment - quite the opposite, as we know the Lords chastens those He loves - which is very important to understand in these times.
There are those who say all is well because this is the Lord's church. Then there are those who say this is the Lord's church which is under condemnation, and what follows condemnation that is not resolved? The scriptures show us quite clearly, and THAT is the issue, at least for some of us. We have good reason to tremble. We need to wake up to our awful situation.
I've never understood this board's obsession with the whole tares thing. The thing to watch out for is the wolves. I've seen a few of them, and if they were to participate in a message board such as this, I'm positive they would post similar sentiments to Follow the Prophet. Something to think about. The Lord's sheep are numbered and He knows their names. Wolves and tares are not in that arena.freedomforall wrote:Christ organized it, He'll fix it when the time is right by kicking out any tares.
Certainly, but the really funny thing is sometimes when you feast for a while, it opens your eyes to certain things going on. That's when it gets real tricky... It helps us to discern the tares and the wolves through the Holy Ghost. Remember, by their fruits? It's not that difficult to pick out wolves and tares, based on this: whatsoever is good comes from God, whatsoever is evil comes from the devil. This is a very good method for detection of such. There is no gray area...none, the key word being "whatsoever." Anyone engaged in evil speaking or backbiting or condemning cannot possibly be a part of the Church of the Firstborn. The COFB are people who are the pure in heart, the meek, the humble, the lowly in heart, the Christ-like, the honest, the compassionate...and would not engage in such folly.freedomforall wrote:Our duty is to feast upon the word and sustain the leaders Christ has in place.
Fair point there. I wouldn't want those jobs. Being in those kinds of positions invites greater judgment at the end since they influence the decisions of so many people, right or wrong. Charity is important, but it doesn't preclude me from being hesitant to turn over my money to build Babylonian temples. That's what free agency is about, learning to make wise choices and living with the consequences.freedomforall wrote:Maybe some people don't want to follow them, maybe the leaders are imperfect...but they're all Christ has to work with at present until He comes to reign. I challenge all scorners, all mockers to go take any one of their places and see if they can do any better.
Franktalk wrote:Very interesting conversation. Not to disagree with anyone but I think I will try and live as Jesus lived. Being nice to people and forgiving them of their trespasses. He helped out where He could and talked about a great message that we should love God and each other. He spoke of a Kingdom in which spirits go when they learn to love God and other spirits. That sounds like a great place.
One thing I have noticed is that when we speak of the actual life of Christ and what He actually did there is very little contention or disagreement. It is like the message of His life is true and something we should all follow. But when we add to His life and the message He gave us then contention starts.
I don't know why it is that we add to what Jesus tells us. It is my belief that Jesus told us exactly who are the members of His church on the earth.
D and C 10
67 Behold, this is my doctrine—whosoever repenteth and cometh unto me, the same is my church.
68 Whosoever declareth more or less than this, the same is not of me, but is against me; therefore he is not of my church.
69 And now, behold, whosoever is of my church, and endureth of my church to the end, him will I establish upon my rock, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against them.
I think that Jesus is telling us quite the message here. We need to repent of our ways that are not like the ways that Jesus showed us with His life. If we do then He calls us His church. But He adds that anyone who declares more or less than what He just stated is not of Him. And if not of Christ then not of His church. Does anyone besides me see a correlation between the added doctrines of any church and disagreement between men?
Is it time to cast aside all things added to the simple message of Christ? If we do accept the simple message can we hold onto that message and not be shaken? I think we can. I think the simple message of Christ is a rock that we can embrace and not be turned to and fro.
If you wish to add to D and C 10 that is your choice. And you can teach that to others as well. For myself I will be happy with some real simple gospel of Christ.keep the faith wrote: If someone carries your definition of Christs church to its conclusion frank they will determine that there really was no need for a restoration or a Joseph Smith. Most people who profess a belief in Christ throughout all the myriads of church's believe in the principle of repentence. Therefore everyone who did repent of their sins would be part of Christs church. I have to ask though. Why was Joseph told by diety to join none of the church's of his day because they were all wrong? Why wasn't he just told to repent and do nothing else and then he would be numbered among the church of Christ? Why did Joseph need to restore anything if repentence was the only gospel principle that made any difference to The Lord? Me thinks there is more to this scripture that you continually quote than you are willing to see.
All of the other churchs had added to Christ's simple gospel message. They were filled with creeds and beliefs that one needed to agree with...or a person couldn't even be considered a "Christian". The LDS Church has done the same thing; missed the same mark. Joseph restored the true message; but it has been added to just like all others. We can see this just by how it is that D&C 10 came before the other sections with additions. If we had "gotten it"...no others would have been added; there would have been no need. God is true to His own self; He will not interfere with our free agency...and He gives us what we want.keep the faith wrote: If someone carries your definition of Christs church to its conclusion frank they will determine that there really was no need for a restoration or a Joseph Smith. Most people who profess a belief in Christ throughout all the myriads of church's believe in the principle of repentence. Therefore everyone who did repent of their sins would be part of Christs church. I have to ask though. Why was Joseph told by diety to join none of the church's of his day because they were all wrong? Why wasn't he just told to repent and do nothing else and then he would be numbered among the church of Christ? Why did Joseph need to restore anything if repentence was the only gospel principle that made any difference to The Lord? Me thinks there is more to this scripture that you continually quote than you are willing to see.
That scripture is really all you need. That is indeed Christ's church. When you think about it, that's very subversive doctrine you're posting... ;)freedomforall scripture wrote: 67 Behold, this is my doctrine—whosoever repenteth and cometh unto me, the same is my church.
Is this to say you don't read scriptures because they're too long? D&C 76 is vital to the understanding of who gets what. Besides, there are lurkers looking in that just might be interested to learn something that they may not have been aware of. This is not a private forum, kept from the world, correct?gruden2.0 wrote:freedomforall, I see you subscribe to the Jason posting approach of massively long missives that are difficult to read. You might want to consider making more concise points with specific quotes and scriptures to support your points and just linking to full articles for those interested in reading the whole thing.
That scripture is really all you need. That is indeed Christ's church. When you think about it, that's very subversive doctrine you're posting... ;)freedomforall scripture wrote: 67 Behold, this is my doctrine—whosoever repenteth and cometh unto me, the same is my church.
Is this divided according to what Signey Rigdon saw or Joseph Smith saw. Since Signey Rigdon was excommunicated I wonder if what he saw was removed? Or do you know what Signey Rigdon saw was correct? If so please tell me what it was that Signey did not see correctly that got him excommunicated from the church. Or was Signey a foreshaddow of the future, telling us that righteous people would be thrown out of the church? Or do you wish to tell me that what Signey saw was correct until the day he was thrown out and only after that he was not to be trusted? Which of course leads to the question. what did he do that was so wrong?freedomforall wrote: The above long post is D&C 76 at near full length so it can be divided for understanding purposes.
Keep talking. You're telling the story...eh, if there is one, that is.Franktalk wrote:Is this divided according to what Signey Rigdon saw or Joseph Smith saw. Since Signey Rigdon was excommunicated I wonder if what he saw was removed? Or do you know what Signey Rigdon saw was correct? If so please tell me what it was that Signey did not see correctly that got him excommunicated from the church. Or was Signey a foreshaddow of the future, telling us that righteous people would be thrown out of the church? Or do you wish to tell me that what Signey saw was correct until the day he was thrown out and only after that he was not to be trusted? Which of course leads to the question. what did he do that was so wrong?freedomforall wrote: The above long post is D&C 76 at near full length so it can be divided for understanding purposes.
Dude, she quoted exactly what she was referencing from OI's post. There wasn't a lot of mystery or guessing work.MrScience wrote:kLeejae
When I read your post I was not sure where it was coming from as it had nothing to do with the previous posts.
Actually you told a story. You just don't consider it a story.freedomforall wrote: Keep talking. You're telling the story...eh, if there is one, that is.
That may be true, but mine is NOT listed under fiction. You know, a lot of fantasy perceived as reality, ending up as form of sensationalism?Franktalk wrote:Actually you told a story. You just don't consider it a story.freedomforall wrote: Keep talking. You're telling the story...eh, if there is one, that is.
I value the scriptures very highly. That is why I am very careful about what I consider scripture. I am also very careful in placing the words in context. I am also very careful in trying to discover the intended purpose of the words.freedomforall wrote: At least I stick with scripture...scripture you think is not worth the paper it is written on based on some of your replies, that is. :ymsigh:
Then take all your scriptures and throw them outside to rot...because they were written by the arm of flesh. So why read them? If you're going to learn from them, then you must accept more recent scripture as well called the Book of Mormon and D&C for starters.Franktalk wrote:I value the scriptures very highly. That is why I am very careful about what I consider scripture. I am also very careful in placing the words in context. I am also very careful in trying to discover the intended purpose of the words. Discover? Try asking God, through the Holy Ghost. This is the accepted pecking order of things, and cuts out any self interpretations.freedomforall wrote: At least I stick with scripture...scripture you think is not worth the paper it is written on based on some of your replies, that is. :ymsigh:
It is clear that some words of the prophets are intended to give the people at that time support for the idols in their heart. I try and sort these out since I do not wish false doctrine to enter into my doctrinal view. I also do not follow the arm of the flesh when it comes to doctrine or revelation. I could of course drop all of my study and instead take on the scriptural views of someone else and trust the arm of the flesh in all things, but I have decided that path is not for me.
I have a great deal of respect for the scriptures. But I will study what is before me to see if it is from God or man. And of course you are free to do what you feel is best.freedomforall wrote: Then take all your scriptures and throw them outside to rot...because they were written by the arm of flesh. So why read them? If you're going to learn from them, then you must accept more recent scripture as well called the Book of Mormon and D&C for starters.
The notion that you'll not pay heed to the arm of flesh, yet quote from them...is one huge oxymoron. Can't have it both ways.
Franktalk,Franktalk wrote:I value the scriptures very highly. That is why I am very careful about what I consider scripture. I am also very careful in placing the words in context. I am also very careful in trying to discover the intended purpose of the words.freedomforall wrote: At least I stick with scripture...scripture you think is not worth the paper it is written on based on some of your replies, that is. :ymsigh:
It is clear that some words of the prophets are intended to give the people at that time support for the idols in their heart. I try and sort these out since I do not wish false doctrine to enter into my doctrinal view. I also do not follow the arm of the flesh when it comes to doctrine or revelation. I could of course drop all of my study and instead take on the scriptural views of someone else and trust the arm of the flesh in all things, but I have decided that path is not for me.