What evidence is there that Russell M. Nelson is a true prophet, seer, and revelator?

[Zathura]

Are the fruits of the Book of Mormon the book or what happens when you apply its teachings?

Both. It invites all to come unto Christ. That in and of itself is a good fruit.

I already addressed the road you're going down, I just don't know if you saw it.

You're saying that if the Book of Mormon is true, and good, because of the good results that came from applying it's teachings, then RMN must also be a prophet if there are good results that came from applying it's teachings.

Again I say, you can apply the teachings of Denver Snuffer, and other modern Christian leaders, and you will have good results. You aren't about to accept those fruits and claim that they are prophets, are you? So why does that work for RMN but not others? Is it just about Math? If you have enough Positives to outnumber the negatives then that person may be deemed a prophet?

This is what I've attempted to communicate to you multiple times. I benefited greatly by studying the words of Denver Snuffer and other Christians, but I do not accept him or them as being called of God for any mighty work by those merits alone, so I would feel dishonest if I were to accept Russell M Nelson by those same merits alone.

Surely you can't blame me for that?

Personally I don't know of another Christian group on the planet that is encouraging people to find ancestors and do proxy work for them in the temple. You have made your case for why you think the temple and authority is not fruit. I disagree based on my own experiences of experimenting on the invitation to attend. I have had experiences as a result that I could never deny, case closed for me, I realize you are still trying to figure it out and sincerely hope you find what you are looking for.

I didn't say the temple and authority is not fruit.

I said that others have announced temples, so logically how could I determine that RMN and only RMN is a prophet based on the fact that he announced temples when others have as well? You HAVE to acknowledge this logic. I would feel dishonest if I said he was a prophet because he announced a temple and I the same sentence said that those others are NOT even though they too announced a temple.

I said that nobody can actually SEE that RMN received priesthood from the Lord, so I don't see that fruit. The priesthood held and exercised by prophets throughout the scripture and by Joseph Smith is fruit because A: It is documented that they received power, and they received power and authority directly from God, and B: their works that they can work through virtue of the priesthood are able to be seen and documented, and are therefore fruit.

RMN does not work any works to be seen(not a criticism, just a fact, and by works I mean works that could ONLY be done by someone with this power and authority. Anybody can travel, anyone can visit, anyone can give talks and make decisions), there are no healing, there are no prophecies, there are none of the typical manifestations seen throughout the scripture, and it is not documented anywhere where he received any such power and authority from God.The only thing that is documented is the date in which he was ordained by other men. They do not affirm or claim it came directly from God. They affirm and claim it came from God, through Joseph Smith, and by virtue of it coming through Joseph Smith they too have what he had.

This is not upheld by scripture. Whatever ordination they received, if they are prophets in the way that Joseph and the other prophets are, then they will have received it the same way.

Let RMN share his experiences openly the way all the other prophets did so that his fruit can be seen, otherwise it's silly for you and others to question why others could possibly not believe or not "know" that he is a prophet.

[cab]

Another genuine question,

Let’s assume president Nelson exhibit all of the fruits which would qualify him in ever sense of the word in your eyes as a prophet, seer, and revelator. What would you change as a result?

As for me I would exclaim, "Now I know that you are a true messenger sent from Father"... Because he would have the appropriate "signs"... And then I would hearken more diligently to his words... Until then I continue to be a bit sceptical (as Adam was sceptical of the mingled precepts of "religion" being presented to him) and continue patiently looking to Father and Christ for greater light and knowledge.

I think you may define yourself as a bit sceptical as in the story of Adam and Eve. There is another way to be sceptical and that is a Doubting Thomas. He did not want to believe that Christ was resurrected from the dead. He also wanted evidence and eye witnesses did not qualify to him. Jesus said into Thomas, Because you have seen me, you believed. Blessed are those who have not seen yet believed". John 20:29 (from memory, may not be a direct quote)
I am not saying you need to be in one camp or the other. In fact you need both camps of waiting for messengers or believing eye witnesses.
There are blessings associated with believing the testimonies of the prophets and apostles. Then on the other hand you can't believe everyone who claims to be a prophet.

Please stop equating men with Christ. Your simply exposing the rampant idolatry we all suffer from.

What I'm "looking for", to use the temple Adam and Eve analogy is men who preach by the power of the Holy Ghost, which gives in the very moment what to say, which has more power to convince the hearts of men than a two edged sword... If you think you've found that in the semiannual prepared teleprompter sermons, then great... I find it lacking.

[cab]

Another genuine question,

Let’s assume president Nelson exhibit all of the fruits which would qualify him in ever sense of the word in your eyes as a prophet, seer, and revelator. What would you change as a result?

As for me I would exclaim, "Now I know that you are a true messenger sent from Father"... Because he would have the appropriate "signs"... And then I would hearken more diligently to his words... Until then I continue to be a bit sceptical (as Adam was sceptical of the mingled precepts of "religion" being presented to him) and continue patiently looking to Father and Christ for greater light and knowledge.

Is there any down side to putting his words to a test (Alma 32) by hearkening diligently to them now, and then discerning what fruits of the Spirit you experience? It would be sweet, bitter, or neutral, all of which should be instructive.

I have, my friend... My entire adult life... I'm 40 something years old and have been all-in LDS... I've always attempted to follow the prophet to the letter....

That's the irony here. The Alma 32 test is what has gotten me to the point I'm at now... Just remember, the seed to be planted isn't whether the Church is true or if RMN Nelson true.... The seed is Jesus Christ....

I've felt to be on a hamster wheel in the church for my whole life... But then about 4 years ago, I decided to evaluate some uncomfortable things a new way and earnestly seek Christ in the process... I told him I would accept truth and follow his Spirit wherever it led... Then the "swelling" of my heart began and I've gone on a journey that I would have previously thought was full of danger.... I've offered some things onto the altar of God that I always assumed were non-negotiable... Yet I've grown closer to the Lord every step....

[Connie561]

The difference between Russell M. Nelson and others who claim they saw Christ is priesthood. The true messengers hold the priesthood. God, Jesus, Peter,James, and John. You can not take the priesthood on because you want it. Hebrews 5:4 is the answer about the difference between the churches.

I already addressed this too.


I am a lifelong member, I served a mission. The typical Mormon talking points are not foreign to me.

It's just unavoidable, these prophets throughout history were not able to work mighty works in the name of the Lord because another man ordained them. They were able to do so because their Faith in Jesus Christ caused the Lord to give them that priesthood by his own voice.

Read the story of Enoch in Moses 6. Notwithstanding his ordination at the hands of another man, it was not until God directly gave him the ability to do anything in the name of the Lord by his own voice.

26 And it came to pass that Enoch journeyed in the land, among the people; and as he journeyed, the aSpirit of God descended out of heaven, and abode upon him.

27 And he heard a avoice from heaven, saying: bEnoch, my son, cprophesy unto this people, and say unto them—Repent, for thus saith the Lord: I am dangry with this people, and my fierce anger is kindled against them; for their hearts have waxed ehard, and their fears are dull of hearing, and their eyes gcannot see afar off;

28 And for these many generations, ever since the day that I created them, have they gone astray, and have adenied me, and have sought their own counsels in the dark; and in their own abominations have they devised murder, and have not kept the commandments, which I gave unto their father, Adam.

29 Wherefore, they have foresworn themselves, and, by their oaths, they have brought upon themselves death; and a ahell I have prepared for them, if they repent not;

30 And this is a decree, which I have sent forth in the beginning of the world, from my own mouth, from the foundation thereof, and by the mouths of my servants, thy fathers, have I decreed it, even as it shall be sent forth in the world, unto the ends thereof.

31 And when Enoch had heard these words, he abowed himself to the earth, before the Lord, and spake before the Lord, saying: bWhy is it that I have found favor in thy sight, and am but a lad, and all the people chate me; for I am dslow of speech; wherefore am I thy servant?

32 And the Lord said unto Enoch: Go forth and do as I have commanded thee, and no man shall pierce thee. Open thy amouth, and it shall be filled, and I will give thee utterance, for all flesh is in my hands, and I will do as seemeth me good.

33 Say unto this people: aChoose ye bthis day, to serve the Lord God who made you.

34 Behold my aSpirit is upon you, wherefore all thy words will I justify; and the bmountains shall flee before you, and the crivers shall turn from their course; and thou shalt abide in me, and I in you; therefore dwalk with me.

Read the story of Adam, how did he receive the priesthood? By the Spirit of God, no man, no messenger was involved.

65 And thus he was baptized, and the Spirit of God descended upon him, and thus he was aborn of the Spirit, and became quickened in the binner man.

66 And he heard a voice out of heaven, saying: Thou art baptized with afire, and with the Holy Ghost. This is the brecord of the Father, and the Son, from henceforth and forever;

67 And thou art after the aorder of him who was without beginning of days or end of years, from all eternity to all eternity.

68 Behold, thou art aone in me, a son of God; and thus may all become my bsons. Amen.

in case you missed what happened:

"67 And thou art after the order of him who was without beginning of days or end of years, from all eternity to all eternity."

You should know that this "order of him who was without beginner of days" etc. Refers to the Priesthood.

Melchizadek
JST GENESIS 14, this one is the most direct teaching on the topic:

27 And thus, having been approved of God, he was ordained an high priest after the order of the covenant which God made with Enoch,

28 It being after the order of the Son of God; which order came, not by man, nor the will of man; neither by father nor mother; neither by beginning of days nor end of years; but of God;

29 And it was delivered unto men by the calling of his own voice, according to his own will, unto as many as believed on his name.

Now, in case you doubt that Enoch properly received the priesthood in the section that I quoted because the Lord doesn't actually reference the priesthood, pay attention the power that he was given, and realize that those exact things are promised to those who receive this priesthood right here in JST Genesis 14 and that this promise was made directly to ENOCH.

30 For God having sworn unto Enoch and unto his seed with an oath by himself; that every one being ordained after this order and calling should have power, by faith, to break mountains, to divide the seas, to dry up waters, to turn them out of their course;

31 To put at defiance the armies of nations, to divide the earth, to break every band, to stand in the presence of God; to do all things according to his will, according to his command, subdue principalities and powers; and this by the will of the Son of God which was from before the foundation of the world.

NEPHI
Helaman 10

6 Behold, thou art Nephi, and I am God. Behold, I declare it unto thee in the presence of mine angels, that ye shall have power over this people, and shall smite the earth with famine, and with pestilence, and destruction, according to the wickedness of this people.

7 Behold, I give unto you power, that whatsoever ye shall seal on earth shall be sealed in heaven; and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven; and thus shall ye have power among this people.

By God's voice.

Jesus' Disciples
Matthew 16

Again, by the Lord's own voice, the Lord who happened to be in an earthly tabernacle at that time.

Jesus' Other Disciples in the Americas
3 Nephi 11+

Given the ability to confer the Holy Ghost directly from Jesus. They also receive the Holy Ghost , and yet it wasn't the result of a confirmation or laying on of hands at that moment.

How about this dispensation?
D&C 84:

42 And wo unto all those who come not unto this priesthood which ye have received, which I now confirm upon you who are present this day, by mine own voice out of the heavens; and even I have given the heavenly hosts and mine angels acharge concerning you.

What need is there for God to "confirm" the priesthood upon them if they were already ordained? Because they didn't have it until God confirmed it upon them, regardless of ordination

we could go as deep into this as you want.

Long story short, the picture that is painted by typical LDS talking points just isn't found in the scriptures. The picture that IS found in every single canon book of scripture is the picture where men, regardless of the fact that they received an ordination of another man, even a dispensation head, still had to receive the priesthood directly from God.

If Russell M Nelson is a Prophet in every sense of the word, he will have done exactly what all these men did, and receive what they received in the same way.

You are getting lost in the weeds. Adam and Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdrey are the only ones who need heavenly messengers to be ordained to the priesthood. Everyone else is going to be ordained by a living priesthood holder.

Enoch called people to repentance Russell M.Nelson gave a talk in General Conference called, "We Can Do Better And He Better".

Nephi dealings on earth and Heaven. Russell M. Nelson gave a talk on temples.

I could go on but what is the point. Are you compartmentalizing the gospel topics?

[Connie561]

Another genuine question,

Let’s assume president Nelson exhibit all of the fruits which would qualify him in ever sense of the word in your eyes as a prophet, seer, and revelator. What would you change as a result?

As for me I would exclaim, "Now I know that you are a true messenger sent from Father"... Because he would have the appropriate "signs"... And then I would hearken more diligently to his words... Until then I continue to be a bit sceptical (as Adam was sceptical of the mingled precepts of "religion" being presented to him) and continue patiently looking to Father and Christ for greater light and knowledge.

I think you may define yourself as a bit sceptical as in the story of Adam and Eve. There is another way to be sceptical and that is a Doubting Thomas. He did not want to believe that Christ was resurrected from the dead. He also wanted evidence and eye witnesses did not qualify to him. Jesus said into Thomas, Because you have seen me, you believed. Blessed are those who have not seen yet believed". John 20:29 (from memory, may not be a direct quote)
I am not saying you need to be in one camp or the other. In fact you need both camps of waiting for messengers or believing eye witnesses.
There are blessings associated with believing the testimonies of the prophets and apostles. Then on the other hand you can't believe everyone who claims to be a prophet.

Please stop equating men with Christ. Your simply exposing the rampant idolatry we all suffer from.

What I'm "looking for", to use the temple Adam and Eve analogy is men who preach by the power of the Holy Ghost, which gives in the very moment what to say, which has more power to convince the hearts of men than a two edged sword... If you think you've found that in the semiannual prepared teleprompter sermons, then great... I find it lacking.

Please stop using straw man the straw man argument. I am not exposing anyone to idolatry.

[Connie561]

As for me I would exclaim, "Now I know that you are a true messenger sent from Father"... Because he would have the appropriate "signs"... And then I would hearken more diligently to his words... Until then I continue to be a bit sceptical (as Adam was sceptical of the mingled precepts of "religion" being presented to him) and continue patiently looking to Father and Christ for greater light and knowledge.

I think you may define yourself as a bit sceptical as in the story of Adam and Eve. There is another way to be sceptical and that is a Doubting Thomas. He did not want to believe that Christ was resurrected from the dead. He also wanted evidence and eye witnesses did not qualify to him. Jesus said into Thomas, Because you have seen me, you believed. Blessed are those who have not seen yet believed". John 20:29 (from memory, may not be a direct quote)
I am not saying you need to be in one camp or the other. In fact you need both camps of waiting for messengers or believing eye witnesses.
There are blessings associated with believing the testimonies of the prophets and apostles. Then on the other hand you can't believe everyone who claims to be a prophet.

Please stop equating men with Christ. Your simply exposing the rampant idolatry we all suffer from.

What I'm "looking for", to use the temple Adam and Eve analogy is men who preach by the power of the Holy Ghost, which gives in the very moment what to say, which has more power to convince the hearts of men than a two edged sword... If you think you've found that in the semiannual prepared teleprompter sermons, then great... I find it lacking.

Please stop using the straw man argument. I am not exposing anyone to idolatry.

[cab]

I think you may define yourself as a bit sceptical as in the story of Adam and Eve. There is another way to be sceptical and that is a Doubting Thomas. He did not want to believe that Christ was resurrected from the dead. He also wanted evidence and eye witnesses did not qualify to him. Jesus said into Thomas, Because you have seen me, you believed. Blessed are those who have not seen yet believed". John 20:29 (from memory, may not be a direct quote)
I am not saying you need to be in one camp or the other. In fact you need both camps of waiting for messengers or believing eye witnesses.
There are blessings associated with believing the testimonies of the prophets and apostles. Then on the other hand you can't believe everyone who claims to be a prophet.

Please stop equating men with Christ. Your simply exposing the rampant idolatry we all suffer from.

What I'm "looking for", to use the temple Adam and Eve analogy is men who preach by the power of the Holy Ghost, which gives in the very moment what to say, which has more power to convince the hearts of men than a two edged sword... If you think you've found that in the semiannual prepared teleprompter sermons, then great... I find it lacking.

Please stop using the straw man argument. I am not exposing anyone to idolatry.

Sorry. I just reread your post and actually agree with most.of what you said. I responded too quickly. I apologize.

We certainly are blessed by following true Messengers and must not just assume that every who thinks they are a prophet is indeed a prophet...

As you say, there is a line between scrutinizing and doubting. Those of us who've been members of the church since birth understand that our religion doesn't scrutinize our leaders. We accept that they are sent Messengers and are prophets.

Are we doubting Thomas's if we scrutinize their words? I don't think so. To say so, I feel, is to put them on par with Christ. That's all I meant... It came out very wrong...

[topcat]

I didn't say the temple and authority is not fruit.

I said that others have announced temples, so logically how could I determine that RMN and only RMN is a prophet based on the fact that he announced temples when others have as well? You HAVE to acknowledge this logic. I would feel dishonest if I said he was a prophet because he announced a temple and in the same sentence said that those others are NOT even though they too announced a temple.

-Stahura

To any defender of President Nelson here: can you explain how you would not feel dishonest if you did the same thing?

In the interest of full disclosure, yes I am directly assaulting confirmation bias here.

It is an unfortunate waste of everyone's time that several pages in this thread have been filled with this type of "logic" which Stahura plainly shows is dishonesty.

What "logic"?

The "logic" where certain men are propped up as "prophets" using criteria that can be applied to any Tom, Dick, or Harry of any faith or religion.

I do not accept the premise that confirmation bias is an incurable disorder or disease. The antidote to it is humbling oneself. Stahura lays it out in basic, very rudimentary logic. Can no one here honestly concede, "oh yes, that's right. I was wrong. So I can't use temples as conclusive fruit that RMN is a prophet because others have announced and even built temples that I reject as Prophets."

Or will readers of this thread and others continue to be treated to (I think unwitting) dishonesty in a supposed-defense of their sacred cows?

[Zathura]

The difference between Russell M. Nelson and others who claim they saw Christ is priesthood. The true messengers hold the priesthood. God, Jesus, Peter,James, and John. You can not take the priesthood on because you want it. Hebrews 5:4 is the answer about the difference between the churches.

I already addressed this too.


I am a lifelong member, I served a mission. The typical Mormon talking points are not foreign to me.

It's just unavoidable, these prophets throughout history were not able to work mighty works in the name of the Lord because another man ordained them. They were able to do so because their Faith in Jesus Christ caused the Lord to give them that priesthood by his own voice.

Read the story of Enoch in Moses 6. Notwithstanding his ordination at the hands of another man, it was not until God directly gave him the ability to do anything in the name of the Lord by his own voice.

26 And it came to pass that Enoch journeyed in the land, among the people; and as he journeyed, the aSpirit of God descended out of heaven, and abode upon him.

27 And he heard a avoice from heaven, saying: bEnoch, my son, cprophesy unto this people, and say unto them—Repent, for thus saith the Lord: I am dangry with this people, and my fierce anger is kindled against them; for their hearts have waxed ehard, and their fears are dull of hearing, and their eyes gcannot see afar off;

28 And for these many generations, ever since the day that I created them, have they gone astray, and have adenied me, and have sought their own counsels in the dark; and in their own abominations have they devised murder, and have not kept the commandments, which I gave unto their father, Adam.

29 Wherefore, they have foresworn themselves, and, by their oaths, they have brought upon themselves death; and a ahell I have prepared for them, if they repent not;

30 And this is a decree, which I have sent forth in the beginning of the world, from my own mouth, from the foundation thereof, and by the mouths of my servants, thy fathers, have I decreed it, even as it shall be sent forth in the world, unto the ends thereof.

31 And when Enoch had heard these words, he abowed himself to the earth, before the Lord, and spake before the Lord, saying: bWhy is it that I have found favor in thy sight, and am but a lad, and all the people chate me; for I am dslow of speech; wherefore am I thy servant?

32 And the Lord said unto Enoch: Go forth and do as I have commanded thee, and no man shall pierce thee. Open thy amouth, and it shall be filled, and I will give thee utterance, for all flesh is in my hands, and I will do as seemeth me good.

33 Say unto this people: aChoose ye bthis day, to serve the Lord God who made you.

34 Behold my aSpirit is upon you, wherefore all thy words will I justify; and the bmountains shall flee before you, and the crivers shall turn from their course; and thou shalt abide in me, and I in you; therefore dwalk with me.

Read the story of Adam, how did he receive the priesthood? By the Spirit of God, no man, no messenger was involved.

65 And thus he was baptized, and the Spirit of God descended upon him, and thus he was aborn of the Spirit, and became quickened in the binner man.

66 And he heard a voice out of heaven, saying: Thou art baptized with afire, and with the Holy Ghost. This is the brecord of the Father, and the Son, from henceforth and forever;

67 And thou art after the aorder of him who was without beginning of days or end of years, from all eternity to all eternity.

68 Behold, thou art aone in me, a son of God; and thus may all become my bsons. Amen.

in case you missed what happened:

"67 And thou art after the order of him who was without beginning of days or end of years, from all eternity to all eternity."

You should know that this "order of him who was without beginner of days" etc. Refers to the Priesthood.

Melchizadek
JST GENESIS 14, this one is the most direct teaching on the topic:

27 And thus, having been approved of God, he was ordained an high priest after the order of the covenant which God made with Enoch,

28 It being after the order of the Son of God; which order came, not by man, nor the will of man; neither by father nor mother; neither by beginning of days nor end of years; but of God;

29 And it was delivered unto men by the calling of his own voice, according to his own will, unto as many as believed on his name.

Now, in case you doubt that Enoch properly received the priesthood in the section that I quoted because the Lord doesn't actually reference the priesthood, pay attention the power that he was given, and realize that those exact things are promised to those who receive this priesthood right here in JST Genesis 14 and that this promise was made directly to ENOCH.

30 For God having sworn unto Enoch and unto his seed with an oath by himself; that every one being ordained after this order and calling should have power, by faith, to break mountains, to divide the seas, to dry up waters, to turn them out of their course;

31 To put at defiance the armies of nations, to divide the earth, to break every band, to stand in the presence of God; to do all things according to his will, according to his command, subdue principalities and powers; and this by the will of the Son of God which was from before the foundation of the world.

NEPHI
Helaman 10

6 Behold, thou art Nephi, and I am God. Behold, I declare it unto thee in the presence of mine angels, that ye shall have power over this people, and shall smite the earth with famine, and with pestilence, and destruction, according to the wickedness of this people.

7 Behold, I give unto you power, that whatsoever ye shall seal on earth shall be sealed in heaven; and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven; and thus shall ye have power among this people.

By God's voice.

Jesus' Disciples
Matthew 16

Again, by the Lord's own voice, the Lord who happened to be in an earthly tabernacle at that time.

Jesus' Other Disciples in the Americas
3 Nephi 11+

Given the ability to confer the Holy Ghost directly from Jesus. They also receive the Holy Ghost , and yet it wasn't the result of a confirmation or laying on of hands at that moment.

How about this dispensation?
D&C 84:

42 And wo unto all those who come not unto this priesthood which ye have received, which I now confirm upon you who are present this day, by mine own voice out of the heavens; and even I have given the heavenly hosts and mine angels acharge concerning you.

What need is there for God to "confirm" the priesthood upon them if they were already ordained? Because they didn't have it until God confirmed it upon them, regardless of ordination

we could go as deep into this as you want.

Long story short, the picture that is painted by typical LDS talking points just isn't found in the scriptures. The picture that IS found in every single canon book of scripture is the picture where men, regardless of the fact that they received an ordination of another man, even a dispensation head, still had to receive the priesthood directly from God.

If Russell M Nelson is a Prophet in every sense of the word, he will have done exactly what all these men did, and receive what they received in the same way.

You are getting lost in the weeds. Adam and Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdrey are the only ones who need heavenly messengers to be ordained to the priesthood. Everyone else is going to be ordained by a living priesthood holder.

Enoch called people to repentance Russell M.Nelson gave a talk in General Conference called, "We Can Do Better And He Better".

Nephi dealings on earth and Heaven. Russell M. Nelson gave a talk on temples.

I could go on but what is the point. Are you compartmentalizing the gospel topics?

I just believe what the scriptures say, you're just recycling the same talking points that can't be found in scripture.

Talk to me when the scriptures support what you have to say, like how I just quoted scripture after scripture to support every single thing I've said. It's inconvenient, so you ignore them, and you have no response to any of them, no explanation, no rebuttal. That's your problem, not mine.

Lemme know when you've got something that actually comes from scripture rather than your own philosophy mixed with various church teachings that cherry pick and quote random verses out of context .

[topcat]

Please stop equating men with Christ. Your simply exposing the rampant idolatry we all suffer from.

What I'm "looking for", to use the temple Adam and Eve analogy is men who preach by the power of the Holy Ghost, which gives in the very moment what to say, which has more power to convince the hearts of men than a two edged sword... If you think you've found that in the semiannual prepared teleprompter sermons, then great... I find it lacking.

Please stop using the straw man argument. I am not exposing anyone to idolatry.

Sorry. I just reread your post and actually agree with most.of what you said. I responded too quickly. I apologize.

We certainly are blessed by following true Messengers and must not just assume that every who thinks they are a prophet is indeed a prophet...

As you say, there is a line between scrutinizing and doubting. Those of us who've been members of the church since birth understand that our religion doesn't scrutinize our leaders. We accept that they are sent Messengers and are prophets.

Are we doubting Thomas's if we scrutinize their words? I don't think so. To say so, I feel, is to put them on par with Christ. That's all I meant... It came out very wrong...

It's hard for mainstream members of the Church to argue with other fellow members of the church who are woke. Is that the correct way to use the term?

It's a basic question, again to bust through the confirmation bias, but I ask it to Connie and other mainstream-thinking members:

Do you ever scrutinize your leaders or what they say? Asked another way, have you ever debated their statements as being right, or wrong, or truth or falsehood? Do you think they might actually be leading you astray? Or do you avoid that line of thinking like the plague because that might be construed as "evil speaking of the Lord's anointed"? In short, you fear man more than you fear God.

This was the earlier reference to idolatry which went over your head. If you have never considered scrutiny of their messages, then you are by definition an idolator.

You consider what they say to be sacrosanct. You put them on the same level as God, because, after all, whether by mine own voice or by the voice of my servants it is the same, right?

But you have never stopped to ask yourself, is this man really the Lord's true, authorized servant?

You haven't asked yourself that because of tradition.

But God has commanded you to ask yourself that question, and yet you avoid it.

PS:

I just watched The Matrix last night again. Truly a monumentally important movie of our time. Morpheus is seeking all of us. Morpheus is a metaphor for God. He comes to us, or wants to come to us, bearing the red pill. As Neo showed, it's not easy to "come unto" Morpheus (you may have to walk on a skyscraper ledge, or be harassed and opposed at every turn by the men in black suits who wish for you to remain in captivity), but when you do, then you will be faced with a choice, the blue pill (you choose to remain in your apathetic, slumbering state inside the matrix, which is defined as an empire of lies, which you would expect since we live in Babylon), or the red pill. It's a scary proposition to choose the red pill because you are opposing the pull of tradition. But if you do, and you humble yourself before God, He will take you down the rabbit hole and show you wonders.

[cab]

Please stop using the straw man argument. I am not exposing anyone to idolatry.

Sorry. I just reread your post and actually agree with most.of what you said. I responded too quickly. I apologize.

We certainly are blessed by following true Messengers and must not just assume that every who thinks they are a prophet is indeed a prophet...

As you say, there is a line between scrutinizing and doubting. Those of us who've been members of the church since birth understand that our religion doesn't scrutinize our leaders. We accept that they are sent Messengers and are prophets.

Are we doubting Thomas's if we scrutinize their words? I don't think so. To say so, I feel, is to put them on par with Christ. That's all I meant... It came out very wrong...

It's hard for mainstream members of the Church to argue with other fellow members of the church who are woke. Is that the correct way to use the term?

It's a basic question, again to bust through the confirmation bias, but I ask it to Connie and other mainstream-thinking members:

Do you ever scrutinize your leaders or what they say? Asked another way, have you ever debated their statements as being right, or wrong, or truth or falsehood? Do you think they might actually be leading you astray? Or do you avoid that line of thinking like the plague because that might be construed as "evil speaking of the Lord's anointed"? In short, you fear man more than you fear God.

This was the earlier reference to idolatry which went over your head. If you have never considered scrutiny of their messages, then you are by definition an idolator.

You consider what they say to be sacrosanct. You put them on the same level as God, because, after all, whether by mine own voice or by the voice of my servants it is the same, right?

But you have never stopped to ask yourself, is this man really the Lord's true, authorized servant?

You haven't asked yourself that because of tradition.

But God has commanded you to ask yourself that question, and yet you avoid it.

PS:

I just watched The Matrix last night again. Truly a monumentally important movie of our time. Morpheus is seeking all of us. Morpheus is a metaphor for God. He comes to us, or wants to come to us, bearing the red pill. As Neo showed, it's not easy to "come unto" Morpheus (you may have to walk on a skyscraper ledge, or be harassed and opposed at every turn by the men in black suits who wish for you to remain in captivity), but when you do, then you will be faced with a choice, the blue pill (you choose to remain in your apathetic, slumbering state inside the matrix, which is defined as an empire of lies, which you would expect since we live in Babylon), or the red pill. It's a scary proposition to choose the red pill because you are opposing the pull of tradition. But if you do, and you humble yourself before God, He will take you down the rabbit hole and show you wonders.

Yep good stuff topcat... Now please watch the 2nd and 3rd Matrix movies, and please provide an interpretation... Cause those made my head explode

[Connie561]

Please stop using the straw man argument. I am not exposing anyone to idolatry.

Sorry. I just reread your post and actually agree with most.of what you said. I responded too quickly. I apologize.

We certainly are blessed by following true Messengers and must not just assume that every who thinks they are a prophet is indeed a prophet...

As you say, there is a line between scrutinizing and doubting. Those of us who've been members of the church since birth understand that our religion doesn't scrutinize our leaders. We accept that they are sent Messengers and are prophets.

Are we doubting Thomas's if we scrutinize their words? I don't think so. To say so, I feel, is to put them on par with Christ. That's all I meant... It came out very wrong...

It's hard for mainstream members of the Church to argue with other fellow members of the church who are woke. Is that the correct way to use the term?

It's a basic question, again to bust through the confirmation bias, but I ask it to Connie and other mainstream-thinking members:

Do you ever scrutinize your leaders or what they say? Asked another way, have you ever debated their statements as being right, or wrong, or truth or falsehood? Do you think they might actually be leading you astray? Or do you avoid that line of thinking like the plague because that might be construed as "evil speaking of the Lord's anointed"? In short, you fear man more than you fear God.

This was the earlier reference to idolatry which went over your head. If you have never considered scrutiny of their messages, then you are by definition an idolator.

You consider what they say to be sacrosanct. You put them on the same level as God, because, after all, whether by mine own voice or by the voice of my servants it is the same, right?

But you have never stopped to ask yourself, is this man really the Lord's true, authorized servant?

You haven't asked yourself that because of tradition.

But God has commanded you to ask yourself that question, and yet you avoid it.

PS:

I just watched The Matrix last night again. Truly a monumentally important movie of our time. Morpheus is seeking all of us. Morpheus is a metaphor for God. He comes to us, or wants to come to us, bearing the red pill. As Neo showed, it's not easy to "come unto" Morpheus (you may have to walk on a skyscraper ledge, or be harassed and opposed at every turn by the men in black suits who wish for you to remain in captivity), but when you do, then you will be faced with a choice, the blue pill (you choose to remain in your apathetic, slumbering state inside the matrix, which is defined as an empire of lies, which you would expect since we live in Babylon), or the red pill. It's a scary proposition to choose the red pill because you are opposing the pull of tradition. But if you do, and you humble yourself before God, He will take you down the rabbit hole and show you wonders.

I have been called a few names before such as a practicing mormon or bad Mormon (Because I was eating chicken) an they thought I was breaking the word of wisdom. Now I am called a mainstream Mormon aka an idol worshiper. Prophets are mortals they are not God. I have a solid basic foundational knowledge of the gospel. Have I ever heard something that I heard from the prophet that I questioned, the answer is yes. I do not have confirmation bias. Someone calling me an idol worshipper did not go over my head.

[ChooseTruth]

Please stop using the straw man argument. I am not exposing anyone to idolatry.

Sorry. I just reread your post and actually agree with most.of what you said. I responded too quickly. I apologize.

We certainly are blessed by following true Messengers and must not just assume that every who thinks they are a prophet is indeed a prophet...

As you say, there is a line between scrutinizing and doubting. Those of us who've been members of the church since birth understand that our religion doesn't scrutinize our leaders. We accept that they are sent Messengers and are prophets.

Are we doubting Thomas's if we scrutinize their words? I don't think so. To say so, I feel, is to put them on par with Christ. That's all I meant... It came out very wrong...

It's hard for mainstream members of the Church to argue with other fellow members of the church who are woke. Is that the correct way to use the term?

It's a basic question, again to bust through the confirmation bias, but I ask it to Connie and other mainstream-thinking members:

Do you ever scrutinize your leaders or what they say? Asked another way, have you ever debated their statements as being right, or wrong, or truth or falsehood? Do you think they might actually be leading you astray? Or do you avoid that line of thinking like the plague because that might be construed as "evil speaking of the Lord's anointed"? In short, you fear man more than you fear God.

This was the earlier reference to idolatry which went over your head. If you have never considered scrutiny of their messages, then you are by definition an idolator.

You consider what they say to be sacrosanct. You put them on the same level as God, because, after all, whether by mine own voice or by the voice of my servants it is the same, right?

But you have never stopped to ask yourself, is this man really the Lord's true, authorized servant?

You haven't asked yourself that because of tradition.

But God has commanded you to ask yourself that question, and yet you avoid it.

PS:

I just watched The Matrix last night again. Truly a monumentally important movie of our time. Morpheus is seeking all of us. Morpheus is a metaphor for God. He comes to us, or wants to come to us, bearing the red pill. As Neo showed, it's not easy to "come unto" Morpheus (you may have to walk on a skyscraper ledge, or be harassed and opposed at every turn by the men in black suits who wish for you to remain in captivity), but when you do, then you will be faced with a choice, the blue pill (you choose to remain in your apathetic, slumbering state inside the matrix, which is defined as an empire of lies, which you would expect since we live in Babylon), or the red pill. It's a scary proposition to choose the red pill because you are opposing the pull of tradition. But if you do, and you humble yourself before God, He will take you down the rabbit hole and show you wonders.

This is a truly painful process for most people and it is often thrust upon them rather than being of their own choosing. It requires you to cast aside so much of what you’ve been taught and believed much of your life.

In my case, I personally knew people on the GA/mission president/temple president level that opened my eyes to it. I was directly told by more than one of them exactly how and how much they are compensated and given additional insight into expenditures on that level. It seemed inconsistent with what we’ve been taught by the church on these matters and led me to re-examine everything. It turned into a snowball of more inconsistencies. Add to that the use of unrighteousness dominion I’ve witnessed in spades and it led to a faith crisis for me.

I’ve been able to strengthen my testimony of the truths surrounding the gospel of Christ. I’ve been empowered to reject much that the church does that isn’t part of the gospel as well. You end up with a stronger testimony and closer to Christ because you’ve removed the middle man, but it’s difficult because once you see what’s happened with the church, you can’t unsee it.

[topcat]

Sorry. I just reread your post and actually agree with most.of what you said. I responded too quickly. I apologize.

We certainly are blessed by following true Messengers and must not just assume that every who thinks they are a prophet is indeed a prophet...

As you say, there is a line between scrutinizing and doubting. Those of us who've been members of the church since birth understand that our religion doesn't scrutinize our leaders. We accept that they are sent Messengers and are prophets.

Are we doubting Thomas's if we scrutinize their words? I don't think so. To say so, I feel, is to put them on par with Christ. That's all I meant... It came out very wrong...

It's hard for mainstream members of the Church to argue with other fellow members of the church who are woke. Is that the correct way to use the term?

It's a basic question, again to bust through the confirmation bias, but I ask it to Connie and other mainstream-thinking members:

Do you ever scrutinize your leaders or what they say? Asked another way, have you ever debated their statements as being right, or wrong, or truth or falsehood? Do you think they might actually be leading you astray? Or do you avoid that line of thinking like the plague because that might be construed as "evil speaking of the Lord's anointed"? In short, you fear man more than you fear God.

This was the earlier reference to idolatry which went over your head. If you have never considered scrutiny of their messages, then you are by definition an idolator.

You consider what they say to be sacrosanct. You put them on the same level as God, because, after all, whether by mine own voice or by the voice of my servants it is the same, right?

But you have never stopped to ask yourself, is this man really the Lord's true, authorized servant?

You haven't asked yourself that because of tradition.

But God has commanded you to ask yourself that question, and yet you avoid it.

PS:

I just watched The Matrix last night again. Truly a monumentally important movie of our time. Morpheus is seeking all of us. Morpheus is a metaphor for God. He comes to us, or wants to come to us, bearing the red pill. As Neo showed, it's not easy to "come unto" Morpheus (you may have to walk on a skyscraper ledge, or be harassed and opposed at every turn by the men in black suits who wish for you to remain in captivity), but when you do, then you will be faced with a choice, the blue pill (you choose to remain in your apathetic, slumbering state inside the matrix, which is defined as an empire of lies, which you would expect since we live in Babylon), or the red pill. It's a scary proposition to choose the red pill because you are opposing the pull of tradition. But if you do, and you humble yourself before God, He will take you down the rabbit hole and show you wonders.

I have been called a few names before such as a practicing mormon or bad Mormon (Because I was eating chicken) an they thought I was breaking the word of wisdom. Now I am called a mainstream Mormon aka an idol worshiper. Prophets are mortals they are not God. I have a solid basic foundational knowledge of the gospel. Have I ever heard something that I heard from the prophet that I questioned, the answer is yes. I do not have confirmation bias. Someone calling me an idol worshipper did not go over my head.

Care to share what doctrines taught by "prophets" you have questioned?

[topcat]

Sorry. I just reread your post and actually agree with most.of what you said. I responded too quickly. I apologize.

We certainly are blessed by following true Messengers and must not just assume that every who thinks they are a prophet is indeed a prophet...

As you say, there is a line between scrutinizing and doubting. Those of us who've been members of the church since birth understand that our religion doesn't scrutinize our leaders. We accept that they are sent Messengers and are prophets.

Are we doubting Thomas's if we scrutinize their words? I don't think so. To say so, I feel, is to put them on par with Christ. That's all I meant... It came out very wrong...

It's hard for mainstream members of the Church to argue with other fellow members of the church who are woke. Is that the correct way to use the term?

It's a basic question, again to bust through the confirmation bias, but I ask it to Connie and other mainstream-thinking members:

Do you ever scrutinize your leaders or what they say? Asked another way, have you ever debated their statements as being right, or wrong, or truth or falsehood? Do you think they might actually be leading you astray? Or do you avoid that line of thinking like the plague because that might be construed as "evil speaking of the Lord's anointed"? In short, you fear man more than you fear God.

This was the earlier reference to idolatry which went over your head. If you have never considered scrutiny of their messages, then you are by definition an idolator.

You consider what they say to be sacrosanct. You put them on the same level as God, because, after all, whether by mine own voice or by the voice of my servants it is the same, right?

But you have never stopped to ask yourself, is this man really the Lord's true, authorized servant?

You haven't asked yourself that because of tradition.

But God has commanded you to ask yourself that question, and yet you avoid it.

PS:

I just watched The Matrix last night again. Truly a monumentally important movie of our time. Morpheus is seeking all of us. Morpheus is a metaphor for God. He comes to us, or wants to come to us, bearing the red pill. As Neo showed, it's not easy to "come unto" Morpheus (you may have to walk on a skyscraper ledge, or be harassed and opposed at every turn by the men in black suits who wish for you to remain in captivity), but when you do, then you will be faced with a choice, the blue pill (you choose to remain in your apathetic, slumbering state inside the matrix, which is defined as an empire of lies, which you would expect since we live in Babylon), or the red pill. It's a scary proposition to choose the red pill because you are opposing the pull of tradition. But if you do, and you humble yourself before God, He will take you down the rabbit hole and show you wonders.

This is a truly painful process for most people and it is often thrust upon them rather than being of their own choosing. It requires you to cast aside so much of what you’ve been taught and believed much of your life.

In my case, I personally knew people on the GA/mission president/temple president level that opened my eyes to it. I was directly told by more than one of them exactly how and how much they are compensated and given additional insight into expenditures on that level. It seemed inconsistent with what we’ve been taught by the church on these matters and led me to re-examine everything. It turned into a snowball of more inconsistencies. Add to that the use of unrighteousness dominion I’ve witnessed in spades and it led to a faith crisis for me.

I’ve been able to strengthen my testimony of the truths surrounding the gospel of Christ. I’ve been empowered to reject much that the church does that isn’t part of the gospel as well. You end up with a stronger testimony and closer to Christ because you’ve removed the middle man, but it’s difficult because once you see what’s happened with the church, you can’t unsee it.

Will you please share what they make? Always wanted to know. We all SHOULD know, in my view.

If you don't feel comfortable sharing on this public forum, would you please PM me?

Thanks.

[Connie561]

Sorry. I just reread your post and actually agree with most.of what you said. I responded too quickly. I apologize.

We certainly are blessed by following true Messengers and must not just assume that every who thinks they are a prophet is indeed a prophet...

As you say, there is a line between scrutinizing and doubting. Those of us who've been members of the church since birth understand that our religion doesn't scrutinize our leaders. We accept that they are sent Messengers and are prophets.

Are we doubting Thomas's if we scrutinize their words? I don't think so. To say so, I feel, is to put them on par with Christ. That's all I meant... It came out very wrong...

It's hard for mainstream members of the Church to argue with other fellow members of the church who are woke. Is that the correct way to use the term?

It's a basic question, again to bust through the confirmation bias, but I ask it to Connie and other mainstream-thinking members:

Do you ever scrutinize your leaders or what they say? Asked another way, have you ever debated their statements as being right, or wrong, or truth or falsehood? Do you think they might actually be leading you astray? Or do you avoid that line of thinking like the plague because that might be construed as "evil speaking of the Lord's anointed"? In short, you fear man more than you fear God.

This was the earlier reference to idolatry which went over your head. If you have never considered scrutiny of their messages, then you are by definition an idolator.

You consider what they say to be sacrosanct. You put them on the same level as God, because, after all, whether by mine own voice or by the voice of my servants it is the same, right?

But you have never stopped to ask yourself, is this man really the Lord's true, authorized servant?

You haven't asked yourself that because of tradition.

But God has commanded you to ask yourself that question, and yet you avoid it.

PS:

I just watched The Matrix last night again. Truly a monumentally important movie of our time. Morpheus is seeking all of us. Morpheus is a metaphor for God. He comes to us, or wants to come to us, bearing the red pill. As Neo showed, it's not easy to "come unto" Morpheus (you may have to walk on a skyscraper ledge, or be harassed and opposed at every turn by the men in black suits who wish for you to remain in captivity), but when you do, then you will be faced with a choice, the blue pill (you choose to remain in your apathetic, slumbering state inside the matrix, which is defined as an empire of lies, which you would expect since we live in Babylon), or the red pill. It's a scary proposition to choose the red pill because you are opposing the pull of tradition. But if you do, and you humble yourself before God, He will take you down the rabbit hole and show you wonders.

I have been called a few names before such as a practicing mormon or bad Mormon (Because I was eating chicken) an they thought I was breaking the word of wisdom. Now I am called a mainstream Mormon aka an idol worshiper. Prophets are mortals they are not God. I have a solid basic foundational knowledge of the gospel. Have I ever heard something that I heard from the prophet that I questioned, the answer is yes. I do not have confirmation bias. Someone calling me an idol worshipper did not go over my head.

Care to share what doctrines taught by "prophets" you have questioned?

I don't know Topcat. Are you sure you want to hear from an idol worshipper? Someone truly evil who mixed the philosophies of men mingled with scripture according to some on this thread? Then be warned... Read at your own risk!!! Polygamy was one. I was one of those people who read the Book of Mormon and got to Moroni's promise and felt nothing, so for a year or two after that I didn't have a testimony of that book.

[topcat]

It's hard for mainstream members of the Church to argue with other fellow members of the church who are woke. Is that the correct way to use the term?

It's a basic question, again to bust through the confirmation bias, but I ask it to Connie and other mainstream-thinking members:

Do you ever scrutinize your leaders or what they say? Asked another way, have you ever debated their statements as being right, or wrong, or truth or falsehood? Do you think they might actually be leading you astray? Or do you avoid that line of thinking like the plague because that might be construed as "evil speaking of the Lord's anointed"? In short, you fear man more than you fear God.

This was the earlier reference to idolatry which went over your head. If you have never considered scrutiny of their messages, then you are by definition an idolator.

You consider what they say to be sacrosanct. You put them on the same level as God, because, after all, whether by mine own voice or by the voice of my servants it is the same, right?

But you have never stopped to ask yourself, is this man really the Lord's true, authorized servant?

You haven't asked yourself that because of tradition.

But God has commanded you to ask yourself that question, and yet you avoid it.

PS:

I just watched The Matrix last night again. Truly a monumentally important movie of our time. Morpheus is seeking all of us. Morpheus is a metaphor for God. He comes to us, or wants to come to us, bearing the red pill. As Neo showed, it's not easy to "come unto" Morpheus (you may have to walk on a skyscraper ledge, or be harassed and opposed at every turn by the men in black suits who wish for you to remain in captivity), but when you do, then you will be faced with a choice, the blue pill (you choose to remain in your apathetic, slumbering state inside the matrix, which is defined as an empire of lies, which you would expect since we live in Babylon), or the red pill. It's a scary proposition to choose the red pill because you are opposing the pull of tradition. But if you do, and you humble yourself before God, He will take you down the rabbit hole and show you wonders.

I have been called a few names before such as a practicing mormon or bad Mormon (Because I was eating chicken) an they thought I was breaking the word of wisdom. Now I am called a mainstream Mormon aka an idol worshiper. Prophets are mortals they are not God. I have a solid basic foundational knowledge of the gospel. Have I ever heard something that I heard from the prophet that I questioned, the answer is yes. I do not have confirmation bias. Someone calling me an idol worshipper did not go over my head.

Care to share what doctrines taught by "prophets" you have questioned?

I don't know Topcat. Are you sure you want to hear from an idol worshipper? Someone truly evil who mixed the philosophies of men mingled with scripture according to some on this thread? Then be warned... Read at your own risk!!! Polygamy was one. I was one of those people who read the Book of Mormon and got to Moroni's promise and felt nothing, so for a year or two after that I didn't have a testimony of that book.

Lol. I was going to ask that polygamy not be on your list, because the presidents of the church contradict each other on that one.

Seriously, do you have anything of substance? Something doctrinal and not policy like lowering the age for missionaries.

This isn't a "gotcha" question. The lack of a response by you or others is prima facie evidence that the member (possibly you?) doesn't question her/his leader, but wholesale blanket accepts every teaching and doctrinal exposition the leader gives because of the unbelief that the man is God's ordained and appointed true servant.

Stahura has not just rhetorically destroyed that notion, he has destroyed it quoting scriptures which reveal how a man gets to be a true servant/ spokesman for God. If those verses are strange to you, well it's not a surprise because the mainstream Mormon Church (and its correlated curriculum) doesn't teach them. Instead what is taught in the Church is that a man becomes a true prophet if men (fellow buddies you work with in the apostleship) do the laying-on-of-hands ordination and certify by their witness alone that the "ordained" man is a "prophet" or apostle (one sent from God).

As stated, your lack of response is evidence that is nigh impossible to deny or disprove, even with confirmation bias aiding the excuse-creator. It's good to have evidence because it can cause one to reflect introspectively on their unbelief, which might lead to the shedding of the falsehood, and a full-blown turning away from an arm-of-flesh idol and towards God.

[SempiternalHarbinger]

Pretender may have been a little harsh and probably not the right word I was looking for. Regardless, just because millions of good folks sustain President Nelson as a prophet, seer, and revelator doesn't mean he is one. They are simply titles that have been slowly forged into a golden crown only fitting for a king. What happened to by their fruits ye shall know them?

I am also not comparing President Nelson to just Joseph Smith, but all the prophets of old and he fails on all accounts. One of literally a hundred examples... King Benjamin Is one of my favorite leaders who exhibits many incredible qualities/attributes of a great leader (most great leaders have in common). The one that comes to mind is he hated praises of the world. From the records we have he "rejected all praise". But he didn't just he reject praise, but he rightfully taught where all our praise and energy should be placed, God.



So my question is have you ever heard President Nelson deflect any attention, praise, and admiration? Has he ever pointed where all our praise truly belongs? No, in my mind, he clearly loves all the attention. Have you seen him giving out pictures of himself with a big smile? Who does that? Have you seen his reaction to seeing photos of himself? Like a kid in a candy store. The first couple conferences after the passing of President Monson was a complete love feast for the "prophet" and I don't even think Nelson blinked one single time. Hail to the prophet! Everyone is setting him up as a light to the world and I get the sense he is eating it all up buffet style. Not I, not my style.



Can anyone show one a single sermon from RML on Zion? I am told that is not his responsibility. I have heard many talks from RML, but not a single sermon of the likes of Joseph or King Benjamin. Just nice feel good talks.

And I really don't know what your talking about when you say, "that the prophet and apostles are being figuratively placed at the stake in this world of wicked people who are advocates for the devils work." Huh?? President Nelson is a star/celebrity, he has sold out some of the biggest sporting stadiums in this world. He is loved and admired by millions. The hate/negativity he gets is no worse than any celebrity/star/organization gets. I am sure Tom Brady and the Patriots, Lebron James and the Lakers get more hate than President Nelson and the brethren receive. No wonder Satan is compared to a star. But what does it matter when you got millions of followers. All the stars of this world get the same treatment as RMN and all the brethren. And guess what, he is as untouchable and unapproachable as the rest of the stars of this world. We small folks are beneath the stars of this world. President Nelson also doesn't have a care in this world. He is set for life. He could sell everything he owns and give it all to the poor and he still would never have to worry about a roof over his head or food on his plate. He would still live like a king.

I have heard him direct the focus to Christ and I have heard him honor Joseph Smith.

It’s really difficult when people say that he’s a phony or not really anointed in his calling, I wonder if they listen to him when he speaks to the church. I have never heard him praise himself.

When someone comes into the spot light they are criticized more, Nelson is expected to be nearly perfected these days it seems.

You honestly sound either bitter or bitter and jealous. Sure you can say your not but I’m not buying it. The only time I hear people point out how someone has it made, they are jealous. He has the mantle of president of a worldwide church, you bet he has tons of “cares” in this world and carries a great responsibility. Would you trade with him if it meant you would have your temporal needs met without worry?

I would love your list of a hundred examples that Nelson fails on.

Lol, jealous... nah. From where I sit and my upbringing, there is nothing to be jealous of. I am more of the fisherman type. I could care less about his fame, money, houses, education, degrees ( robes of the false priesthood), accolades, his administrative and management skills. None of it appease me. But good for him and all his worldly success. Really! As for myself, I love my simplistic life. I sure don't need anyone telling me everyday me how great and amazing I am. I have always loathed praise and the honors of men.

I also never said he praises himself, I said he has never once has rejected the praises of the world and he sure seems to love it all. Complete opposite of King Benjamin, a true leader who rejected all praise. It was just one of many examples of how President Nelson falls short of being a leader. I will however not question his management/administration skills, they are superb!!

Well if Nelson was a King...
but he’s not.

Basically your saying he’s not like you and not like King Benjamin? So what.
The only thing that concerns me is your statement of “robes of the false priesthood”.

Okay...so what is your purpose here?

MMbelieve, fwiw, I never called President Nelson a king. I was talking about a golden crown being forged and molded upon titles and accolades that is only fitting for a King. And yet, I still give President Nelson his props. Good for him and all he has accomplished.

"Basically your saying he’s not like you and not like King Benjamin? So what."

Again, that's not what i said. If President Nelson is in fact a prophet, seer, and revelator, we should be able to hold him to the same litmus test as ALL the prophets of old. Right? Why can't we do that? Take your pick? Nephi, Moroni, Daniel, Ezekiel, Joel, Peter, John the Revelator, Joseph Smith? What's the problem? Take your pick individually or collectively and President Nelson fails on every single point. President Nelson has more in common with rich executives types than the prophets of old.

The only thing that concerns me is your statement of “robes of the false priesthood”.

Leaders to Managers: The Fatal Shift by Hugh Nibley (The Black Robes of the False Priesthood)

https://speeches.byu.edu/talks/hugh-nib ... -managers/

Pay attention, all the patterns are there in comparison with our modern day LDS church.... (demise of FARMS, the correlation department are a few of many examples)

That was the classical education which Christianity embraced at the urging of the great St. Augustine. He had learned by hard experience that you can’t trust revelation because you can’t control it—the Spirit bloweth where it listeth, and what the Church needed was something more available and reliable than that, something, he says, commodior et multitudini tutior—“handier and more reliable for the public”—than revelation or even reason, and that is exactly what the rhetorical education had to offer.

Correlation and manuals over inspiration, revelation, and the Holy Word of God. This is exactly what church scholars and apologist have to offer us today, not the truth but rhetorical gibberish. Thus we have extensive correlation. The more correlation the less revelation needed. This is a difference between an inspired leader and a business manager. Got to love our manuals. We read more from manuals and quote modern leaders more than the actual scriptures. IS there any interest in ending the condemnation for treating lightly the things we have received? Instead of revelation from God via the spirit and his apostles, the brethren have discovered something more “handier and more reliable for the public” -than revelation or even reason, and that is exactly what the rhetorical education had [has] to offer." That's us.

This is exactly what the church is now offering us ... the church essays don't answers the real question, it avoids them like a plague. They raise more questions than answers. It only answers those who are easily persuaded by flattery words and none of it builds a foundation in stone. The essays have destroyed testimonies which were NOT written by prophets but apologist and historians. The only way to combat falsehoods is with truth!!! It's the only way. The church is not concerned at the moment for the truth. Like Elder Holland says, he has never studied ancient Egyptian. It's no wonder the Egyptian Book of Abraham is a sealed book to him and the rest of the brethren. You can add LDS historians and apologist. But this is not so with real prophets. The brethren tells us we can trust our experts/apologists and we should listen. NO thank-you. ALl that did for me is cause unbelief. I have had too many good friends leave the church over the Abraham's Egyptian writings via the church Essays. Too bad none of the brethren have a clue to Abraham's Egyptian writings. It's a sealed book as much as John's revelations or Isaiah's writings. But I can guarantee that all the prophets of old understood Abraham's writings. In truth, If one doesn't understand Abraham's writings I see no way one could proclaim themselves to be a Seer or Revelator considering how many prophets of old taped into that knowledge. Nephi understood history and the language of the prophets, thus the reason the tapped into both Isaiah's and John the Revelators writings.

Back to Nibley and the robes of the false priesthood...

At the beginning of this century scholars were strenuously debating the momentous transition from Geist to Amt, from Spirit to office, from inspiration to ceremony in the leadership of the Early Church, when the inspired leader was replaced by the typical city bishop, an appointed and elected official—ambitious, jealous, calculating, power-seeking, authoritarian; an able politician and a master of public relations—St. Augustine’s trained rhetorician. At the same time the charismatic gifts, the spiritual gifts, not to be trusted, were replaced by rites and ceremonies that could be timed and controlled, all following the Roman imperial model, as Alfoeldi has shown, including the caps and gowns.

And down through the centuries the robes have never failed to keep the public at a respectful distance, inspire a decent awe for the professions, and impart an air of solemnity and mystery that has been as good as money in the bank. The four faculties of Theology, Philosophy, Medicine, and Law have been the perennial seedbeds not only of professional wisdom, but of the quackery and venality so generously exposed to public view by Plato, Rabelais, Molière, Swift, Gibbon, A. E. Housman, H. L. Mencken, and others. The Spirit has been exchanged for office and inspired leadership for ambitious management.

This is us and the environment in today's church!! One of many examples, here is one from Elder Ballard that validates my thoughts and what Nibley expounds on. Here Elder Ballard tells us we can trust the good, faithful, temple recommend holder, the historians, the doctors, the scholars of the church for answers. ANSWERS that they our modern living prophets of today have not been able to answer. My mind was blown when I first heard this talk. Since when do apostles of the Lord delegate their responsibilities (Seers and Revelators) to historians, apologist, the learned and educated of this world for answers?? Seers and Revelators are the greatest and most accurate historians to ever walk this earth. Not only that, it's a commandment of Our Lord to seek these things out and as far as I can tell from Joseph Smith on backwards, ALL of the prophets of old followed this commandment. Joseph gave us the template yet none of the current apostles follow this pattern/commandment and thus the reason Elder Holland has never studied ancient text/writings. I guess following the commandments has no bearing on true prophets, seers, and revelators. This is utterly false.

“Master the content of the Gospel Topics essays.” -Elder Ballard

"... Gone are the days when a student asked an honest question and a teacher responded, ‘Don’t worry about it!’ Gone are the days when a student raised a sincere concern and a teacher bore his or her testimony as a response intended to avoid the issue. Gone are the days when students were protected from people who attacked the Church.” -Elder Ballard

What do folks here think Elder Ballard means?? How are we going to protect the students from detractors of the church? Hint: “Master the content of the Gospel Topics essays” (-Elder Ballard), via the robes of the false priesthood. Not the book of Mormon, the most correct book on earth, but essays writing by the arm of flesh.

Let me warn you not to pass along faith promoting or unsubstantiated rumors or outdated understandings and explanations of our doctrines or practices from the past…Consult the works of recognized, thoughtful and faithful LDS scholars to ensure you do not teach things that are untrue, out of date, or odd and quirky…We give medical inoculations [Vaccinations, lol] to our precious missionaries before sending them into the mission field so they will be protected against diseases that can harm or even kill them…In a similar fashion, please, before you send them into the world, inoculate your students by providing faithful, thoughtful and accurate interpretation of gospel doctrine, the scriptures, our history and those topics that are sometimes misunderstood.

If we have truth, [it] cannot be harmed by investigation. If we have not truth, it ought to be harmed." J. Reuben Clark,

"Do not listen to those who have not been ordained and/or set apart to their Church calling and are not acknowledged by common consent of the members of the Church. Be aware of organizations, groups, or individuals claiming secret answers to doctrinal questions that they say today’s apostles and prophets do not have or understand"

Of course they (prophets, seers, and revelators) don't understand, they have openly admitted it...

"I worry sometimes that Church members expect too much from Church leaders and teachers, expecting them to be experts in subjects well beyond their duties and responsibilities. The Lord called the apostles and prophets to invite others to come unto Christ, not to obtain degrees in ancient history, biblical studies, and other fields that may be useful in answering all the questions we may have." Elder Ballard

Elder Ballard is right about one thing, we do expect too much from them. Problem is, it is NOT beyond their duties. How else are we suppose to understand prophecy and ancient history save the spirit? It may not be listed in the job description but it is a fruit/characteristic/attribute of a Seer and Revelator of the Lord. Besides, God has commanded us to seek out understanding of theses things so who better to gain better enlightenment (along with the HG) then those we believe to be prophets, seers, and revelators of the Lord? . "and all this for the salvation of Zion."

D&C 93:53 ... "And, verily I say unto you, that it is my will that you should hasten to translate my scriptures, and to obtain a knowledge of history, and of countries, and of kingdoms, of laws of God and man, and all this for the salvation of Zion. Amen."

It's impossible to be a Seer or Revelator without having an understanding of the history of our world/solar system. It's IMPOSSIBLE.

D&C 88:76–80 ... And I give unto you a commandment that you shall teach one another the doctrine of the kingdom. Teach ye diligently and my grace shall attend you, that you may be instructed more perfectly in theory, in principle, in doctrine, in the law of the gospel, in all things that pertain unto the kingdom of God, that are expedient for you to understand; 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—

WHAT IS A SEER? It is settled in my mind that Seers are by far the most knowledgeable men to ever walk this earth when it comes to an understanding the history of the earth.

Mosiah 8:15-17 And the king said that a seer is greater than a prophet. And Ammon said that a seer is a revelator and a prophet also; and a gift which is greater can no man have, except he should possess the power of God, which no man can; yet a man may have great power given him from God. But a seer can know of things which are past, and also of things which are to come, and by them shall all things be revealed, or, rather, shall secret things be made manifest, and hidden things shall come to light, and things which are not known shall be made known by them, and also things shall be made known by them which otherwise could not be known.

By having a correct understanding of the past, only then can see and prophecy of the future.

D&C 93:24,25: And truth is knowledge of things as they are, and as they were, and as they are to come; And whatsoever is more or less than this is the spirit of that wicked one who was a liar from the beginning.

This is the very reason why Avraham Gileadi labeled one of his books on Isaiah's, "The End From the Beginning." Isaiah tells us about the end by describing what happened in the beginning in the very same way John the revelator does. Isaiah, Nephi, Ezekiel, Daniel, Moroni, and Joseph Smith to name a few who all understood the past, and drew on past historical events to describe our future. But our Seers and revelators today tell us they are not experts so go to the revisionist and apologist for the answers as long as they are active members of the church. You can't make this stuff up. Yet we eat it up buffet style.

"The Prophecy of Isaiah, encoded by literary devices, reveals a vision of the end of the world and brings to light parts of Hebrew religion that were lost. The Book of Isaiah shows that the end is foretold by events that occurred in the beginning, the future mirroring the past." -Avraham Gileadi

"Showing how Isaiah predicts the end from the beginning by prophesying new versions of ancient events. Uncovering an implicit sequence or chronology of end-time events that becomes apparent when linking together new versions of ancient events, domino fashion, throughout the text. Determining that the end of the world is contained in Israel's past, in a repetition of ancient events within it's own sequence called the "Day of Jehovah." -Avraham Gileadi

"As Isaiah informs us, God, "foretells the end from the beginning, from ancient times things yet not done." (Isa. 46:10) That may seem an obvious statement, coming from a prophet. But we already know it doesn't just mean that God predicts the future in plain terms. God's revelation is multi-dimensional. He also foretells the end by orchestrating history itself, so that what happened in the beginning will happen again at the end. The "end" - that is, the end of the world-is thus foretold "from the beginning" in Israel's own history."

"This linking together of past events to create a sequence of end-time events tell us what Isaiah means by the "Day of Jehovah." That day consists of a cycle of new events patterned after the old that comprehends the past and the future in one. Isaiah's domino structure interconnects and accounts for all parts of the Book of Isaiah. It outlines a single end-time scenario. Indeed, once set in motion, the entire sequence of new events unfolds in rapid succession like a domino effect." -Avraham Gileadi

As it is with Isaiah, so it is with all the prophets of old. The exception being modern day prophets. The reasons we are so dismissive of Isaiah's writings is because he condemns Israel of the last days proceeding the 2nd coming, he doesn't glorify us as LDS tradition and modern leaders do.

[LDS Watchman]

I have heard him direct the focus to Christ and I have heard him honor Joseph Smith.

It’s really difficult when people say that he’s a phony or not really anointed in his calling, I wonder if they listen to him when he speaks to the church. I have never heard him praise himself.

When someone comes into the spot light they are criticized more, Nelson is expected to be nearly perfected these days it seems.

You honestly sound either bitter or bitter and jealous. Sure you can say your not but I’m not buying it. The only time I hear people point out how someone has it made, they are jealous. He has the mantle of president of a worldwide church, you bet he has tons of “cares” in this world and carries a great responsibility. Would you trade with him if it meant you would have your temporal needs met without worry?

I would love your list of a hundred examples that Nelson fails on.

Lol, jealous... nah. From where I sit and my upbringing, there is nothing to be jealous of. I am more of the fisherman type. I could care less about his fame, money, houses, education, degrees ( robes of the false priesthood), accolades, his administrative and management skills. None of it appease me. But good for him and all his worldly success. Really! As for myself, I love my simplistic life. I sure don't need anyone telling me everyday me how great and amazing I am. I have always loathed praise and the honors of men.

I also never said he praises himself, I said he has never once has rejected the praises of the world and he sure seems to love it all. Complete opposite of King Benjamin, a true leader who rejected all praise. It was just one of many examples of how President Nelson falls short of being a leader. I will however not question his management/administration skills, they are superb!!

Well if Nelson was a King...
but he’s not.

Basically your saying he’s not like you and not like King Benjamin? So what.
The only thing that concerns me is your statement of “robes of the false priesthood”.

Okay...so what is your purpose here?

MMbelieve, fwiw, I never called President Nelson a king. I was talking about a golden crown being forged and molded upon titles and accolades that is only fitting for a King. And yet, I still give President Nelson his props. Good for him and all he has accomplished.

"Basically your saying he’s not like you and not like King Benjamin? So what."

Again, that's not what i said. If President Nelson is in fact a prophet, seer, and revelator, we should be able to hold him to the same litmus test as ALL the prophets of old. Right? Why can't we do that? Take your pick? Nephi, Moroni, Daniel, Ezekiel, Joel, Peter, John the Revelator, Joseph Smith? What's the problem? Take your pick individually or collectively and President Nelson fails on every single point. President Nelson has more in common with rich executives types than the prophets of old.

The only thing that concerns me is your statement of “robes of the false priesthood”.

Leaders to Managers: The Fatal Shift by Hugh Nibley (The Black Robes of the False Priesthood)

https://speeches.byu.edu/talks/hugh-nib ... -managers/

Pay attention, all the patterns are there in comparison with our modern day LDS church.... (demise of FARMS, the correlation department are a few of many examples)

That was the classical education which Christianity embraced at the urging of the great St. Augustine. He had learned by hard experience that you can’t trust revelation because you can’t control it—the Spirit bloweth where it listeth, and what the Church needed was something more available and reliable than that, something, he says, commodior et multitudini tutior—“handier and more reliable for the public”—than revelation or even reason, and that is exactly what the rhetorical education had to offer.

Correlation and manuals over inspiration, revelation, and the Holy Word of God. This is exactly what church scholars and apologist have to offer us today, not the truth but rhetorical gibberish. Thus we have extensive correlation. The more correlation the less revelation needed. This is a difference between an inspired leader and a business manager. Got to love our manuals. We read more from manuals and quote modern leaders more than the actual scriptures. IS there any interest in ending the condemnation for treating lightly the things we have received? Instead of revelation from God via the spirit and his apostles, the brethren have discovered something more “handier and more reliable for the public” -than revelation or even reason, and that is exactly what the rhetorical education had [has] to offer." That's us.

This is exactly what the church is now offering us ... the church essays don't answers the real question, it avoids them like a plague. They raise more questions than answers. It only answers those who are easily persuaded by flattery words and none of it builds a foundation in stone. The essays have destroyed testimonies which were NOT written by prophets but apologist and historians. The only way to combat falsehoods is with truth!!! It's the only way. The church is not concerned at the moment for the truth. Like Elder Holland says, he has never studied ancient Egyptian. It's no wonder the Egyptian Book of Abraham is a sealed book to him and the rest of the brethren. You can add LDS historians and apologist. But this is not so with real prophets. The brethren tells us we can trust our experts/apologists and we should listen. NO thank-you. ALl that did for me is cause unbelief. I have had too many good friends leave the church over the Abraham's Egyptian writings via the church Essays. Too bad none of the brethren have a clue to Abraham's Egyptian writings. It's a sealed book as much as John's revelations or Isaiah's writings. But I can guarantee that all the prophets of old understood Abraham's writings. In truth, If one doesn't understand Abraham's writings I see no way one could proclaim themselves to be a Seer or Revelator considering how many prophets of old taped into that knowledge. Nephi understood history and the language of the prophets, thus the reason the tapped into both Isaiah's and John the Revelators writings.

Back to Nibley and the robes of the false priesthood...

At the beginning of this century scholars were strenuously debating the momentous transition from Geist to Amt, from Spirit to office, from inspiration to ceremony in the leadership of the Early Church, when the inspired leader was replaced by the typical city bishop, an appointed and elected official—ambitious, jealous, calculating, power-seeking, authoritarian; an able politician and a master of public relations—St. Augustine’s trained rhetorician. At the same time the charismatic gifts, the spiritual gifts, not to be trusted, were replaced by rites and ceremonies that could be timed and controlled, all following the Roman imperial model, as Alfoeldi has shown, including the caps and gowns.

And down through the centuries the robes have never failed to keep the public at a respectful distance, inspire a decent awe for the professions, and impart an air of solemnity and mystery that has been as good as money in the bank. The four faculties of Theology, Philosophy, Medicine, and Law have been the perennial seedbeds not only of professional wisdom, but of the quackery and venality so generously exposed to public view by Plato, Rabelais, Molière, Swift, Gibbon, A. E. Housman, H. L. Mencken, and others. The Spirit has been exchanged for office and inspired leadership for ambitious management.

This is us and the environment in today's church!! One of many examples, here is one from Elder Ballard that validates my thoughts and what Nibley expounds on. Here Elder Ballard tells us we can trust the good, faithful, temple recommend holder, the historians, the doctors, the scholars of the church for answers. ANSWERS that they our modern living prophets of today have not been able to answer. My mind was blown when I first heard this talk. Since when do apostles of the Lord delegate their responsibilities (Seers and Revelators) to historians, apologist, the learned and educated of this world for answers?? Seers and Revelators are the greatest and most accurate historians to ever walk this earth. Not only that, it's a commandment of Our Lord to seek these things out and as far as I can tell from Joseph Smith on backwards, ALL of the prophets of old followed this commandment. Joseph gave us the template yet none of the current apostles follow this pattern/commandment and thus the reason Elder Holland has never studied ancient text/writings. I guess following the commandments has no bearing on true prophets, seers, and revelators. This is utterly false.

“Master the content of the Gospel Topics essays.” -Elder Ballard

"... Gone are the days when a student asked an honest question and a teacher responded, ‘Don’t worry about it!’ Gone are the days when a student raised a sincere concern and a teacher bore his or her testimony as a response intended to avoid the issue. Gone are the days when students were protected from people who attacked the Church.” -Elder Ballard

What do folks here think Elder Ballard means?? How are we going to protect the students from detractors of the church? Hint: “Master the content of the Gospel Topics essays” (-Elder Ballard), via the robes of the false priesthood. Not the book of Mormon, the most correct book on earth, but essays writing by the arm of flesh.

Let me warn you not to pass along faith promoting or unsubstantiated rumors or outdated understandings and explanations of our doctrines or practices from the past…Consult the works of recognized, thoughtful and faithful LDS scholars to ensure you do not teach things that are untrue, out of date, or odd and quirky…We give medical inoculations [Vaccinations, lol] to our precious missionaries before sending them into the mission field so they will be protected against diseases that can harm or even kill them…In a similar fashion, please, before you send them into the world, inoculate your students by providing faithful, thoughtful and accurate interpretation of gospel doctrine, the scriptures, our history and those topics that are sometimes misunderstood.

If we have truth, [it] cannot be harmed by investigation. If we have not truth, it ought to be harmed." J. Reuben Clark,

"Do not listen to those who have not been ordained and/or set apart to their Church calling and are not acknowledged by common consent of the members of the Church. Be aware of organizations, groups, or individuals claiming secret answers to doctrinal questions that they say today’s apostles and prophets do not have or understand"

Of course they (prophets, seers, and revelators) don't understand, they have openly admitted it...

"I worry sometimes that Church members expect too much from Church leaders and teachers, expecting them to be experts in subjects well beyond their duties and responsibilities. The Lord called the apostles and prophets to invite others to come unto Christ, not to obtain degrees in ancient history, biblical studies, and other fields that may be useful in answering all the questions we may have." Elder Ballard

Elder Ballard is right about one thing, we do expect too much from them. Problem is, it is NOT beyond their duties. How else are we suppose to understand prophecy and ancient history save the spirit? It may not be listed in the job description but it is a fruit/characteristic/attribute of a Seer and Revelator of the Lord. Besides, God has commanded us to seek out understanding of theses things so who better to gain better enlightenment (along with the HG) then those we believe to be prophets, seers, and revelators of the Lord? . "and all this for the salvation of Zion."

D&C 93:53 ... "And, verily I say unto you, that it is my will that you should hasten to translate my scriptures, and to obtain a knowledge of history, and of countries, and of kingdoms, of laws of God and man, and all this for the salvation of Zion. Amen."

It's impossible to be a Seer or Revelator without having an understanding of the history of our world/solar system. It's IMPOSSIBLE.

D&C 88:76–80 ... And I give unto you a commandment that you shall teach one another the doctrine of the kingdom. Teach ye diligently and my grace shall attend you, that you may be instructed more perfectly in theory, in principle, in doctrine, in the law of the gospel, in all things that pertain unto the kingdom of God, that are expedient for you to understand; 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—

WHAT IS A SEER? It is settled in my mind that Seers are by far the most knowledgeable men to ever walk this earth when it comes to an understanding the history of the earth.

Mosiah 8:15-17 And the king said that a seer is greater than a prophet. And Ammon said that a seer is a revelator and a prophet also; and a gift which is greater can no man have, except he should possess the power of God, which no man can; yet a man may have great power given him from God. But a seer can know of things which are past, and also of things which are to come, and by them shall all things be revealed, or, rather, shall secret things be made manifest, and hidden things shall come to light, and things which are not known shall be made known by them, and also things shall be made known by them which otherwise could not be known.

By having a correct understanding of the past, only then can see and prophecy of the future.

D&C 93:24,25: And truth is knowledge of things as they are, and as they were, and as they are to come; And whatsoever is more or less than this is the spirit of that wicked one who was a liar from the beginning.

This is the very reason why Avraham Gileadi labeled one of his books on Isaiah's, "The End From the Beginning." Isaiah tells us about the end by describing what happened in the beginning in the very same way John the revelator does. Isaiah, Nephi, Ezekiel, Daniel, Moroni, and Joseph Smith to name a few who all understood the past, and drew on past historical events to describe our future. But our Seers and revelators today tell us they are not experts so go to the revisionist and apologist for the answers as long as they are active members of the church. You can't make this stuff up. Yet we eat it up buffet style.

"The Prophecy of Isaiah, encoded by literary devices, reveals a vision of the end of the world and brings to light parts of Hebrew religion that were lost. The Book of Isaiah shows that the end is foretold by events that occurred in the beginning, the future mirroring the past." -Avraham Gileadi

"Showing how Isaiah predicts the end from the beginning by prophesying new versions of ancient events. Uncovering an implicit sequence or chronology of end-time events that becomes apparent when linking together new versions of ancient events, domino fashion, throughout the text. Determining that the end of the world is contained in Israel's past, in a repetition of ancient events within it's own sequence called the "Day of Jehovah." -Avraham Gileadi

"As Isaiah informs us, God, "foretells the end from the beginning, from ancient times things yet not done." (Isa. 46:10) That may seem an obvious statement, coming from a prophet. But we already know it doesn't just mean that God predicts the future in plain terms. God's revelation is multi-dimensional. He also foretells the end by orchestrating history itself, so that what happened in the beginning will happen again at the end. The "end" - that is, the end of the world-is thus foretold "from the beginning" in Israel's own history."

"This linking together of past events to create a sequence of end-time events tell us what Isaiah means by the "Day of Jehovah." That day consists of a cycle of new events patterned after the old that comprehends the past and the future in one. Isaiah's domino structure interconnects and accounts for all parts of the Book of Isaiah. It outlines a single end-time scenario. Indeed, once set in motion, the entire sequence of new events unfolds in rapid succession like a domino effect." -Avraham Gileadi

As it is with Isaiah, so it is with all the prophets of old. The exception being modern day prophets. The reasons we are so dismissive of Isaiah's writings is because he condemns Israel of the last days proceeding the 2nd coming, he doesn't glorify us as LDS tradition and modern leaders do.

Very well said. I don't know how anyone can challenge what you said.

President Nelson and the rest of the brethren have been found wanting.

This is as clear as the sun at noon day.

[righteousrepublic]

Tares are growing in number every day, and when they are ripe God will send his wrath upon them.

[righteousrepublic]

The meek shall inherit the earth Matt 5:5

[righteousrepublic]

Beware of Pride

Pride and the Priesthood...Dieter Uchtdorf

[LDS Watchman]

Tares are growing in number every day, and when they are ripe God will send his wrath upon them.

Since you brought up the parable of the wheat and the tares, let's talk about it, since it appears that you don't understand it.

The interpretation of this parable was not given by the Savior in the New Testament, but it was given in D&C 86.

1 Verily, thus saith the Lord unto you my servants, concerning the parable of the wheat and of the tares:
2 Behold, verily I say, the field was the world, and the apostles were the sowers of the seed;
3 And after they have fallen asleep the great persecutor of the church, the apostate, the whore, even Babylon, that maketh all nations to drink of her cup, in whose hearts the enemy, even Satan, sitteth to reign—behold he soweth the tares; wherefore, the tares choke the wheat and drive the church into the wilderness.

Notice how there is a blend of past tense, present tense, and future tense in these four verses.

This tells us that we are dealing with a dual prophecy and that there is a last days application for us.

The first fulfillment of this parable was when the ancient Church fell into apostasy following the deaths of the ancient apostles.

However, this is not what the Savior was telling Joseph Smith about. The Savior was talking about the restored Church, not the ancient Church.

Verses 2-3 are blending past, present, and future tense, as I mentioned.

Notice how the Savior says that after the apostles "HAVE fallen asleep" then the apostasy would set in, as the devil "SOWETH the tares", and eventually "the tares CHOKE the wheat and DRIVE the church into the wilderness."

Notice how the verbiage is all future tense and not past tense about the apostles falling asleep, Satan sowing the tares, and the tares driving the Church into the wilderness (apostasy).

The original apostles called by God in the restored Church, would fall asleep. Then the tares would be planted, and eventually they would choke out the wheat and drive the Church into apostasy.

There are two possibilities for what the Savior meant by the apostles falling asleep.

1) The Savior is talking about the original twelve apostles dying and then the apostasy slowly setting in.

2) The Savior is talking about the apostles letting their guard done, compromising with Babylon, and therefore spiritually falling asleep.

3) A blend of options 1 and 2

Either way the apostles were going to fall asleep (and they have) and the church was going to be overrun by the wicked and driven into apostasy (which it has).

Verse 4 seals the deal with the Savior specifically telling us that he is talking about the last days.

4 But behold, in the last days, even now while the Lord is beginning to bring forth the word, and the blade is springing up and is yet tender—
5 Behold, verily I say unto you, the angels are crying unto the Lord day and night, who are ready and waiting to be sent forth to reap down the fields;
6 But the Lord saith unto them, pluck not up the tares while the blade is yet tender (for verily your faith is weak), lest you destroy the wheat also.
7 Therefore, let the wheat and the tares grow together until the harvest is fully ripe; then ye shall first gather out the wheat from among the tares, and after the gathering of the wheat, behold and lo, the tares are bound in bundles, and the field remaineth to be burned.

The Lord says that his angels have been ready since at least Joseph's Smith's time to destroy the wicked and purify the earth for Christ's return.

Specifically the angels are ready to come down and destroy the wicked in the now apostate Church.

But the Lord tells them to hold off for a while. Even though the tares have taken over the Church and have driven it into apostasy, there is still wheat in the Church that needs to be allowed to continue to grow.

Then when the time is right, the wheat (righteous church members and perhaps other righteous people) will be gathered out to the barn (New Jerusalem). Then once they are gone, the tares (wicked church members and the rest of the wicked) will be bundled up (brought into captivity) and then burned (destroyed).

So if you think those of us who keep pointing out the apostasy in the Church are the tares, and that we will soon be destroyed, so the rest of the membership can build up Zion, you've got it mixed up.

The righteous (who are in the minority) will be gathered out of the Church, and then the apostate Church and those members who remain blindly following the leaders and drinking the "all is well in Zion" kool aid will be taken captive and destroyed like apostate Israel of old, just as Isaiah, Ezekiel, Jeremiah, and others prophesied.

[righteousrepublic]

Since you brought up the parable of the wheat and the tares, let's talk about it, since it appears that you don't understand it.

I didn't get passed the first sentence because of your arrogance, judging attitude and pride in yourself. Do you really expect me to take insults and give you credibility? Sorry, that's not how it works. If you decide to settle down and fly right, then we can talk.

Matt 13:38
The field is the world; the good seed are the children of the kingdom; but the tares are the children of the wicked one.

So don't tell me I don't understand it.

[BruceRGilbert]

Matthias wrote: ↑
Sun Dec 22, 2019 12:13 am
Since you brought up the parable of the wheat and the tares, let's talk about it, since it appears that you don't understand it.

I didn't get passed the first sentence because

. . . offense was taken. I don't think it was intended. There is merit in what Matthias has pointed out and, certainly, I would apologize to you for that, but it was needful to bring out some truths not generally understood by many. I learned something, for which I am grateful.