Make not gods of your prophets

[LDS Watchman]

Why is this singular teaching (which began with Joseph Smith btw) the end all be all for you?

And you didn't answer my question. Do you believe that there is ZERO chance that you have been deceived in your present views? To you there isn't even the tiniest possibility of this?

You will not find a single quote from Joseph where he stated that he “can never lead you astray.” None. Sure, you can find some language where the Lord invited the Saints to heed his counsel, but not in the way it was taught from Brigham on. If you think Joseph would use such language, well, I would heartily disagree with him. The reason I say “singular” is because this precept alone is so contrary to the way of heaven. And yes, there is zero doubt in my mind that I have been deceived. This one of the most damning precepts to be taught by man. It literally breaks the first commandment of having other gods. A true humble servant would never use such definitive language.

I think you're making WAY too much out of this. It's not nearly the problem you are making it out to be.

Just want to clarify. You said, "And yes, there is zero doubt in my mind that I have been deceived."

Are you saying that you know for certain that you have been deceived or that you know for certain that you have not been deceived?

I think you are taking this too lightly. Breaking literally the first commandment is a big deal. 100% contradicting the words of Christ, big deal. (Anti-Christian actually) The epitome of pride, big deal.

I have not been deceived. Zero doubt.

How does believing that God won't let a true prophet lead his people astray violate the 1st commandment? How is that Anti-Christian and the epitome of pride?

The fact that you don't believe that there's even the slightest chance that you could be deceived speaks volumes. Beware of pride friend.

[Reluctant Watchman]

You will not find a single quote from Joseph where he stated that he “can never lead you astray.” None. Sure, you can find some language where the Lord invited the Saints to heed his counsel, but not in the way it was taught from Brigham on. If you think Joseph would use such language, well, I would heartily disagree with him. The reason I say “singular” is because this precept alone is so contrary to the way of heaven. And yes, there is zero doubt in my mind that I have been deceived. This one of the most damning precepts to be taught by man. It literally breaks the first commandment of having other gods. A true humble servant would never use such definitive language.

I think you're making WAY too much out of this. It's not nearly the problem you are making it out to be.

Just want to clarify. You said, "And yes, there is zero doubt in my mind that I have been deceived."

Are you saying that you know for certain that you have been deceived or that you know for certain that you have not been deceived?

I think you are taking this too lightly. Breaking literally the first commandment is a big deal. 100% contradicting the words of Christ, big deal. (Anti-Christian actually) The epitome of pride, big deal.

I have not been deceived. Zero doubt.

How does believing that God won't let a true prophet lead his people astray violate the 1st commandment? How is that Anti-Christian and the epitome of pride?

The fact that you don't believe that there's even the slightest chance that you could be deceived speaks volumes. Beware of pride friend.

I knew you were fishing for something. Study Alma 32, then get back to me about that pride.

[LDS Watchman]

I think you're making WAY too much out of this. It's not nearly the problem you are making it out to be.

Just want to clarify. You said, "And yes, there is zero doubt in my mind that I have been deceived."

Are you saying that you know for certain that you have been deceived or that you know for certain that you have not been deceived?

I think you are taking this too lightly. Breaking literally the first commandment is a big deal. 100% contradicting the words of Christ, big deal. (Anti-Christian actually) The epitome of pride, big deal.

I have not been deceived. Zero doubt.

How does believing that God won't let a true prophet lead his people astray violate the 1st commandment? How is that Anti-Christian and the epitome of pride?

The fact that you don't believe that there's even the slightest chance that you could be deceived speaks volumes. Beware of pride friend.

I knew you were fishing for something. Study Alma 32, then get back to me about that pride.

I wasn't fishing for anything, but I was sincerely hoping for a tiny bit of humility and some acknowledgement on your part that you recognize that there's at least a slight chance that you could be deceived.

But now I'm just dumbfounded that you are lecturing us on how true prophets can be deceived and we can't trust them while simultaneously insisting that you can't possibly be deceived.

SMH

[Reluctant Watchman]

I wasn't fishing for anything, but I was sincerely hoping for a tiny bit of humility and some acknowledgement on your part that you recognize that there's at least a slight chance that you could be deceived.

But now I'm just dumbfounded that you are lecturing us on how true prophets can be deceived and we can't trust them while simultaneously insisting that you can't possibly be deceived.

SMH

In this thing, I have zero doubt. I have planted God's word, and it has grown unto a perfect knowledge that the "cannot lead astray" doctrine is completely false and of the devil. Of that, I have no doubt. The true doctrine, expressed in both the NT, BoM, and other writings are plain to me. I have zero doubt in that doctrine, that we are to verify all things through the Spirit and that all men can lead you astray. Do I know all things? No. Have I been deceived before? Yes, most certainly. Especially by the LDS church. And I would also agree that I am not perfect. There is much for me to learn.

And guess what LDSW, you don't have to listen to me. You have the agency to discount all of my words. You can cast aside all that I've said, so that you are not deceived.

Alma 32

33 And now, behold, because ye have tried the experiment, and planted the seed, and it swelleth and sprouteth, and beginneth to grow, ye must needs know that the seed is good.

34 And now, behold, is your knowledge perfect? Yea, your knowledge is perfect in that thing, and your faith is dormant; and this because you know, for ye know that the word hath swelled your souls, and ye also know that it hath sprouted up, that your understanding doth begin to be enlightened, and your mind doth begin to expand.

[LDS Watchman]

I wasn't fishing for anything, but I was sincerely hoping for a tiny bit of humility and some acknowledgement on your part that you recognize that there's at least a slight chance that you could be deceived.

But now I'm just dumbfounded that you are lecturing us on how true prophets can be deceived and we can't trust them while simultaneously insisting that you can't possibly be deceived.

SMH

In this thing, I have zero doubt. I have planted God's word, and it has grown unto a perfect knowledge that the "cannot lead astray" doctrine is completely false and of the devil. Of that, I have no doubt. The true doctrine, expressed in both the NT, BoM, and other writings are plain to me. I have zero doubt in that doctrine, that we are to verify all things through the Spirit and that all men can lead you astray. Do I know all things? No. Have I been deceived before? Yes, most certainly. Especially by the LDS church. And I would also agree that I am not perfect. There is much for me to learn.

And guess what LDSW, you don't have to listen to me. You have the agency to discount all of my words. You can cast aside all that I've said, so that you are not deceived.

Alma 32

33 And now, behold, because ye have tried the experiment, and planted the seed, and it swelleth and sprouteth, and beginneth to grow, ye must needs know that the seed is good.

34 And now, behold, is your knowledge perfect? Yea, your knowledge is perfect in that thing, and your faith is dormant; and this because you know, for ye know that the word hath swelled your souls, and ye also know that it hath sprouted up, that your understanding doth begin to be enlightened, and your mind doth begin to expand.

Yeah, I don't think you know what it means to experiment on the word in Alma 32.

How would you even experiment on this? It's not like there's anything you can test. Basically all you could have done is just keep telling yourself that you are right over and over again until you convinced yourself that you can't possibly be wrong.

There's no faith and then action involved. There's no seed to plant.

But I'm sure this belief does feel good to you. Now you just believe and do whatever you want irregardless of what any prophet may have said or written. I'm sure that's a great feeling, but that doesn't mean that you're belief is true and that this feeling is from God.

[abijah]

I think both of you missed the entire point of the OP. A man who says that he cannot lead you astray is making himself a false god.

I think i've had these things brewing in the back of my mind the past couple days, and specifically wanna hone in on just how vastly different peoples' conception of the prophetic role/function was anciently, as opposed to Lds of the modern era.

And ive come to think that, unironically, a big factor w/ this vast conceptual divide is that, likely, ancient peoples simply just weren't dumb enough to believe such a thing, that a mortal man, even a prophet, was incapable of failure. People didn't even think gods were infallible back then lmao let alone prophets. gods rose and fell all the time, just as cities, nations and kings rose and fell all the time (tho the latter were worshipped by some as divine, or at least the embodiment of the deity) the concept of an infallible god was truly unique to Israel, and speaks to how they thought other gods, while real, were also on a fundamentally different category, and fundamentally lower level of divinity as compared w/ the god JHWH, on a qualitative basis. but despite Israel's unique belief in an infallible god, they certainly never thought that of prophets, nor of priests, nor of kings. they had a long history and a well-established scriptural record of all 3 of those failing literally all the time going straight back to the very beginning w/ the garden drama.

I unironically think that TBM "prophet-culture" Lds are just uniquely naïve, uniquely hoodwinked with a false (heretical) self-constructed tradition, one which happens to fly in the face of all scriptural precedent, which is filled to the brim of mortal protagonists (prophets, priests & patriarchs included) who fail to measure up (Christ being the ultimate exception), as well as no precedent whatsoever for any mortal peoplegroup/institution who never go astray and become corrupted/destroyed over time (Christ's kingdom the ultimate exception).

But the proper solution to these false traditions and heretical customs in the Church is not to make up fake scripture calling it out.

[cab]

So… you aren’t going to answer my question either?

when real scripture criticises false prophets and the people who follow them it never frames it this way. because this reeks of something written by someone specifically with a modern mormon paradigm in mind, with all the feminist post-enlightenment pseudo-egalitarian tenets taken as pre-supposed.

I have a little "ring true" bell in my mind if something seems true or not w/ this stuff, and smell test = not passed, personally.

Absolutely nailed it. It’s clearly written with Modern Mormonism in mind (along with a smattering of feminist elements). Exactly what I was thinking but couldn’t quite phrase so eloquently.

It’s almost like there’s too much clarity. Scriptures are never written in the manner this is written in.

It’s my concern with this record. It’s intriguing to me and I don’t reject it outright, but it’s so “on the nose” that I deeply question it.

[cab]

You will not find a single quote from Joseph where he stated that he “can never lead you astray.” None. Sure, you can find some language where the Lord invited the Saints to heed his counsel, but not in the way it was taught from Brigham on. If you think Joseph would use such language, well, I would heartily disagree with him. The reason I say “singular” is because this precept alone is so contrary to the way of heaven. And yes, there is zero doubt in my mind that I have been deceived. This one of the most damning precepts to be taught by man. It literally breaks the first commandment of having other gods. A true humble servant would never use such definitive language.

I think you're making WAY too much out of this. It's not nearly the problem you are making it out to be.

Just want to clarify. You said, "And yes, there is zero doubt in my mind that I have been deceived."

Are you saying that you know for certain that you have been deceived or that you know for certain that you have not been deceived?

I think you are taking this too lightly. Breaking literally the first commandment is a big deal. 100% contradicting the words of Christ, big deal. (Anti-Christian actually) The epitome of pride, big deal.

I have not been deceived. Zero doubt.

How does believing that God won't let a true prophet lead his people astray violate the 1st commandment? How is that Anti-Christian and the epitome of pride?

The fact that you don't believe that there's even the slightest chance that you could be deceived speaks volumes. Beware of pride friend.

He believes the answer he’s received is knowledge, experiential first hand knowledge. It’s the same type of knowledge people seem to express each Sunday when they say they “know the church is true”.

Are all those makes such statements of knowledge guilty of pride? I would imagine most of them would say they are sure they aren’t deceived in that thing they have expressed knowledge of….

A very paradoxical situation indeed.

[cab]

For anyone interested in where Samuel continued w/ his writings and prophesied of our day. His words could not be more accurate to our current situation in the LDS org:

58) Behold, I say unto you who shall receive these things and ponder them, you shall live in a time when men do seek to elevate the Prophets unto that status wherein they may speak no error nor act in any mean thing. This is a great pitfall to the righteous.

59) For, such men shall make regulations that begin to deny the right of every Covenant Child of the Peacemaker to seek the confirmation of the Holy Ghost. (The "sustaining" doctrine to enter baptism and the temple is but one example. The handbook also includes language, aka "regulations", that your revelation cannot contradict that of a church leader, and if you publicly oppose them, you are labeled an apostate.)

60) Yea, in your day, if a man hears the words of some Prophet and, seeking the confirmation of the Holy Ghost, fails to receive it, but receives instead a witness that the utterance is false or misguided, behold, he shall be brought up before the counsels and he shall be persecuted for having received such a witness. And they shall scourge him bitterly with their words and shall even cast him out from among them. (These words hit close to home for me. I was released from my calling as the senior high councilor for not wearing a mask and would have had my temple recommend revoked. I was subsequently called to repentance by my stake president for questioning the "safe and effective" claims by the church presidency. He would excommunicate me today if we sat down for a chat.)

61) Look you to your own day! For speedy destruction of all that you hold dear shall surely come to
pass. For, of such pride generally were the Nephites in the land Southward, and they did persecute and even put to death they who believed the signs of the coming of the Peacemaker.
——
66) But I would not have you believe our words. Nay, believe not the words written in this book if the
Holy Ghost does not confirm them unto you.

67) Yea, though my people do call me Prophet, and they do revere me and follow my counsels, I would not have them do it but that they be moved upon by the Holy Ghost to do so.

68) Wherefore, you also may call me Prophet, and my words may touch your souls. Nevertheless, make not of me a lesser god, but seek the confirmation of the Holy Ghost in all things.

I believe there is more truth in these “verses” than any talk from the most recent General Conference (except maybe one - Elder Johnson from the Seventy gave a good one)…

For me, however, the jury is still out on this record. I’ve read quite a bit (my parents often send me long passages and I read them intently). Much of what has been shared with me is suspiciously “on the nose” and seems to be written from a contemporary LDS perspective…. But I don’t reject it out of hand… I feel there is danger in doing so…

Could it be ancient and prophetic manuscript handed down for generations (as claimed)? Maybe. Could it be written by an inspired modern man but channeled/revealed as a historical document? Maybe. Is it a fraudulent document written by a malcontent seeking to build a new church? Maybe…

My big question is where this record came from…. I often my mom specific questions about the actual provenance of the record and she can never give me any source materials or straight answers as to where the record came from, who translated it, or lead me to any actual documented history of this people who have supposedly passed down these records for generations…. I’d love to learn more about the verifiable historicity of it - but until then it’s on my shelf at an arms distance (as are many other things).

[Reluctant Watchman]

For anyone interested in where Samuel continued w/ his writings and prophesied of our day. His words could not be more accurate to our current situation in the LDS org:

58) Behold, I say unto you who shall receive these things and ponder them, you shall live in a time when men do seek to elevate the Prophets unto that status wherein they may speak no error nor act in any mean thing. This is a great pitfall to the righteous.

59) For, such men shall make regulations that begin to deny the right of every Covenant Child of the Peacemaker to seek the confirmation of the Holy Ghost. (The "sustaining" doctrine to enter baptism and the temple is but one example. The handbook also includes language, aka "regulations", that your revelation cannot contradict that of a church leader, and if you publicly oppose them, you are labeled an apostate.)

60) Yea, in your day, if a man hears the words of some Prophet and, seeking the confirmation of the Holy Ghost, fails to receive it, but receives instead a witness that the utterance is false or misguided, behold, he shall be brought up before the counsels and he shall be persecuted for having received such a witness. And they shall scourge him bitterly with their words and shall even cast him out from among them. (These words hit close to home for me. I was released from my calling as the senior high councilor for not wearing a mask and would have had my temple recommend revoked. I was subsequently called to repentance by my stake president for questioning the "safe and effective" claims by the church presidency. He would excommunicate me today if we sat down for a chat.)

61) Look you to your own day! For speedy destruction of all that you hold dear shall surely come to
pass. For, of such pride generally were the Nephites in the land Southward, and they did persecute and even put to death they who believed the signs of the coming of the Peacemaker.
——
66) But I would not have you believe our words. Nay, believe not the words written in this book if the
Holy Ghost does not confirm them unto you.

67) Yea, though my people do call me Prophet, and they do revere me and follow my counsels, I would not have them do it but that they be moved upon by the Holy Ghost to do so.

68) Wherefore, you also may call me Prophet, and my words may touch your souls. Nevertheless, make not of me a lesser god, but seek the confirmation of the Holy Ghost in all things.

I believe there is more truth in these “verses” than any talk from the most recent General Conference (except maybe one - Elder Johnson from the Seventy gave a good one)…

For me, however, the jury is still out on this record. I’ve read quite a bit (my parents often send me long passages and I read them intently). Much of what has been shared with me is suspiciously “on the nose” and seems to be written from a contemporary LDS perspective…. But I don’t reject it out of hand… I feel there is danger in doing so…

Could it be ancient and prophetic manuscript handed down for generations (as claimed)? Maybe. Could it be written by an inspired modern man but channeled/revealed as a historical document? Maybe. Is it a fraudulent document written by a malcontent seeking to build a new church? Maybe…

My big question is where this record came from…. I often my mom specific questions about the actual provenance of the record and she can never give me any source materials or straight answers as to where the record came from, who translated it, or lead me to any actual documented history of this people who have supposedly passed down these records for generations…. I’d love to learn more about the verifiable historicity of it - but until then it’s on my shelf at an arms distance (as are many other things).

The only way I can respond is to reiterate those last three verses, but to do that with any writing you ever read. How does the Holy Ghost speak to you?

[Reluctant Watchman]

I think you're making WAY too much out of this. It's not nearly the problem you are making it out to be.

Just want to clarify. You said, "And yes, there is zero doubt in my mind that I have been deceived."

Are you saying that you know for certain that you have been deceived or that you know for certain that you have not been deceived?

I think you are taking this too lightly. Breaking literally the first commandment is a big deal. 100% contradicting the words of Christ, big deal. (Anti-Christian actually) The epitome of pride, big deal.

I have not been deceived. Zero doubt.

How does believing that God won't let a true prophet lead his people astray violate the 1st commandment? How is that Anti-Christian and the epitome of pride?

The fact that you don't believe that there's even the slightest chance that you could be deceived speaks volumes. Beware of pride friend.

He believes the answer he’s received is knowledge, experiential first hand knowledge. It’s the same type of knowledge people seem to express each Sunday when they say they “know the church is true”.

Are all those makes such statements of knowledge guilty of pride? I would imagine most of them would say they are sure they aren’t deceived in that thing they have expressed knowledge of….

A very paradoxical situation indeed.

You could condemn any truth using such logic.

[Reluctant Watchman]

I think both of you missed the entire point of the OP. A man who says that he cannot lead you astray is making himself a false god.

I think i've had these things brewing in the back of my mind the past couple days, and specifically wanna hone in on just how vastly different peoples' conception of the prophetic role/function was anciently, as opposed to Lds of the modern era.

And ive come to think that, unironically, a big factor w/ this vast conceptual divide is that, likely, ancient peoples simply just weren't dumb enough to believe such a thing, that a mortal man, even a prophet, was incapable of failure. People didn't even think gods were infallible back then lmao let alone prophets. gods rose and fell all the time, just as cities, nations and kings rose and fell all the time (tho the latter were worshipped by some as divine, or at least the embodiment of the deity) the concept of an infallible god was truly unique to Israel, and speaks to how they thought other gods, while real, were also on a fundamentally different category, and fundamentally lower level of divinity as compared w/ the god JHWH, on a qualitative basis. but despite Israel's unique belief in an infallible god, they certainly never thought that of prophets, nor of priests, nor of kings. they had a long history and a well-established scriptural record of all 3 of those failing literally all the time going straight back to the very beginning w/ the garden drama.

I unironically think that TBM "prophet-culture" Lds are just uniquely naïve, uniquely hoodwinked with a false (heretical) self-constructed tradition, one which happens to fly in the face of all scriptural precedent, which is filled to the brim of mortal protagonists (prophets, priests & patriarchs included) who fail to measure up (Christ being the ultimate exception), as well as no precedent whatsoever for any mortal peoplegroup/institution who never go astray and become corrupted/destroyed over time (Christ's kingdom the ultimate exception).

But the proper solution to these false traditions and heretical customs in the Church is not to make up fake scripture calling it out.

Just because you don’t think these people were that stupid, doesn’t mean that they didn’t elevate their prophets to the status of infallibility. People have relied too heavily on their leaders from almost the beginning of time. Why else would Christ teach the doctrine he did in JST Mark 9? Why else would Nephi and the Savior repeatedly teach that a curse would follow those who blindly trust the arm of flesh?

[cab]

I think you are taking this too lightly. Breaking literally the first commandment is a big deal. 100% contradicting the words of Christ, big deal. (Anti-Christian actually) The epitome of pride, big deal.

I have not been deceived. Zero doubt.

How does believing that God won't let a true prophet lead his people astray violate the 1st commandment? How is that Anti-Christian and the epitome of pride?

The fact that you don't believe that there's even the slightest chance that you could be deceived speaks volumes. Beware of pride friend.

He believes the answer he’s received is knowledge, experiential first hand knowledge. It’s the same type of knowledge people seem to express each Sunday when they say they “know the church is true”.

Are all those makes such statements of knowledge guilty of pride? I would imagine most of them would say they are sure they aren’t deceived in that thing they have expressed knowledge of….

A very paradoxical situation indeed.

You could condemn any truth using such logic.

Right. Hence the paradox. All sorts of people claiming to “know” all sorts of things. Hence the need for sure knowledge, rather than a confirmation bias of our traditions that we mistake for knowledge. And hence the need for true doctrine rather than dogmatic precepts.

I just found it interesting that you were accused of being prideful for expressing no doubt, when the individual would likely express similar assurance that he hadn’t been deceived in his currently held beliefs.

[Reluctant Watchman]

I wasn't fishing for anything, but I was sincerely hoping for a tiny bit of humility and some acknowledgement on your part that you recognize that there's at least a slight chance that you could be deceived.

But now I'm just dumbfounded that you are lecturing us on how true prophets can be deceived and we can't trust them while simultaneously insisting that you can't possibly be deceived.

SMH

In this thing, I have zero doubt. I have planted God's word, and it has grown unto a perfect knowledge that the "cannot lead astray" doctrine is completely false and of the devil. Of that, I have no doubt. The true doctrine, expressed in both the NT, BoM, and other writings are plain to me. I have zero doubt in that doctrine, that we are to verify all things through the Spirit and that all men can lead you astray. Do I know all things? No. Have I been deceived before? Yes, most certainly. Especially by the LDS church. And I would also agree that I am not perfect. There is much for me to learn.

And guess what LDSW, you don't have to listen to me. You have the agency to discount all of my words. You can cast aside all that I've said, so that you are not deceived.

Alma 32

33 And now, behold, because ye have tried the experiment, and planted the seed, and it swelleth and sprouteth, and beginneth to grow, ye must needs know that the seed is good.

34 And now, behold, is your knowledge perfect? Yea, your knowledge is perfect in that thing, and your faith is dormant; and this because you know, for ye know that the word hath swelled your souls, and ye also know that it hath sprouted up, that your understanding doth begin to be enlightened, and your mind doth begin to expand.

Yeah, I don't think you know what it means to experiment on the word in Alma 32.

How would you even experiment on this? It's not like there's anything you can test. Basically all you could have done is just keep telling yourself that you are right over and over again until you convinced yourself that you can't possibly be wrong.

There's no faith and then action involved. There's no seed to plant.

But I'm sure this belief does feel good to you. Now you just believe and do whatever you want irregardless of what any prophet may have said or written. I'm sure that's a great feeling, but that doesn't mean that you're belief is true and that this feeling is from God.

You obviously didn’t read what I wrote. You didn’t understand those precepts that I did test. For one, if we believe the Holy Ghost can show us the truth of all things, that certainly must mean that he can reveal the lies and falsehoods as well. Learning truth also exposes lies.

Read 2 Nephi 28:31 again, read JST Mark 9 again, read the OP verses again, the one unifying precept among all of these is that we gain our own personal witness of truth. And yes, I can see the fruits that come from living a false doctrine. The Lord called this a “curse” in 2 Nephi 28:31. If we plant a seed of truth, we were clearly taught in Alma 32 what that looked like. The inverse is also true. False precepts produce written fruit, or they produce no fruit at all. So yes, I have tested and tried both of these precepts. 1. Believing men can never lead astray and 2, trusting the witness of the Holy Ghost over the precepts taught by man. Both of these can be tested using the analogy given in Alma 32.

[cab]

For anyone interested in where Samuel continued w/ his writings and prophesied of our day. His words could not be more accurate to our current situation in the LDS org:

58) Behold, I say unto you who shall receive these things and ponder them, you shall live in a time when men do seek to elevate the Prophets unto that status wherein they may speak no error nor act in any mean thing. This is a great pitfall to the righteous.

59) For, such men shall make regulations that begin to deny the right of every Covenant Child of the Peacemaker to seek the confirmation of the Holy Ghost. (The "sustaining" doctrine to enter baptism and the temple is but one example. The handbook also includes language, aka "regulations", that your revelation cannot contradict that of a church leader, and if you publicly oppose them, you are labeled an apostate.)

60) Yea, in your day, if a man hears the words of some Prophet and, seeking the confirmation of the Holy Ghost, fails to receive it, but receives instead a witness that the utterance is false or misguided, behold, he shall be brought up before the counsels and he shall be persecuted for having received such a witness. And they shall scourge him bitterly with their words and shall even cast him out from among them. (These words hit close to home for me. I was released from my calling as the senior high councilor for not wearing a mask and would have had my temple recommend revoked. I was subsequently called to repentance by my stake president for questioning the "safe and effective" claims by the church presidency. He would excommunicate me today if we sat down for a chat.)

61) Look you to your own day! For speedy destruction of all that you hold dear shall surely come to
pass. For, of such pride generally were the Nephites in the land Southward, and they did persecute and even put to death they who believed the signs of the coming of the Peacemaker.
——
66) But I would not have you believe our words. Nay, believe not the words written in this book if the
Holy Ghost does not confirm them unto you.

67) Yea, though my people do call me Prophet, and they do revere me and follow my counsels, I would not have them do it but that they be moved upon by the Holy Ghost to do so.

68) Wherefore, you also may call me Prophet, and my words may touch your souls. Nevertheless, make not of me a lesser god, but seek the confirmation of the Holy Ghost in all things.

I believe there is more truth in these “verses” than any talk from the most recent General Conference (except maybe one - Elder Johnson from the Seventy gave a good one)…

For me, however, the jury is still out on this record. I’ve read quite a bit (my parents often send me long passages and I read them intently). Much of what has been shared with me is suspiciously “on the nose” and seems to be written from a contemporary LDS perspective…. But I don’t reject it out of hand… I feel there is danger in doing so…

Could it be ancient and prophetic manuscript handed down for generations (as claimed)? Maybe. Could it be written by an inspired modern man but channeled/revealed as a historical document? Maybe. Is it a fraudulent document written by a malcontent seeking to build a new church? Maybe…

My big question is where this record came from…. I often my mom specific questions about the actual provenance of the record and she can never give me any source materials or straight answers as to where the record came from, who translated it, or lead me to any actual documented history of this people who have supposedly passed down these records for generations…. I’d love to learn more about the verifiable historicity of it - but until then it’s on my shelf at an arms distance (as are many other things).

The only way I can respond is to reiterate those last three verses, but to do that with any writing you ever read. How does the Holy Ghost speak to you?

I’ve found that our idea of the role of the Holy Ghost to tell us whether or not something is “true” is a very incomplete understanding of its role. It’s not so black and white. Most things are a mix of truth and error, and thus minimizes the importance of trying to find out if something is “true”. But make no mistake, when someone is truly under the influence of God’s spirit, he is made to taste of the things of heaven and has an experiential view of the kingdom for himself… and he experiences the things that others have attempted to describe when they wrote scripture.. and indeed what he experiences is scripture and confounds all prior understanding… This is how the spirit has spoken to me.

[Luke]

You think so....? When they put on record that any person striving to live such practices will be exxed, yeah, they'd probably tell you more than just to be quiet about it.

Believing that everyone who becomes like God will eventually have to live polygamy is not even remotely the same thing as living it right now in violation of God's current command on it.

God's current command:

"I have not revoked this law, nor will I, for it is everlasting, and those who will enter into my glory must obey the conditions thereof"

Plural Marriage was never revoked and never will be.

It's just a fact.

It's a fact that YOU believe that authorized plural marriages were not suspended. That's it.

There's absolutely no reason why God could not have temporarily suspended plural marriage when the people were no longer worthy of it. See Jacob 2.

In any event, this has nothing to do with your original claim that if someone believes what Joseph Smith plainly taught that they would be called deceived by the church. This is clearly not true.

"I have not revoked this law, nor will I, for it is everlasting, and those who will enter into my glory must obey the conditions thereof"

Does this mean what it plainly says, or does it not?

[LDS Watchman]

Believing that everyone who becomes like God will eventually have to live polygamy is not even remotely the same thing as living it right now in violation of God's current command on it.

God's current command:

"I have not revoked this law, nor will I, for it is everlasting, and those who will enter into my glory must obey the conditions thereof"

Plural Marriage was never revoked and never will be.

It's just a fact.

It's a fact that YOU believe that authorized plural marriages were not suspended. That's it.

There's absolutely no reason why God could not have temporarily suspended plural marriage when the people were no longer worthy of it. See Jacob 2.

In any event, this has nothing to do with your original claim that if someone believes what Joseph Smith plainly taught that they would be called deceived by the church. This is clearly not true.

"I have not revoked this law, nor will I, for it is everlasting, and those who will enter into my glory must obey the conditions thereof"

Does this mean what it plainly says, or does it not?

I think you better read the entire 1886 revelation again. It doesn't even mention polygamy specifically. It refers to Celestial marriage, of which living polygamy is only one part. There's nothing preventing God from temporarily suspended the authorized practice of plural marriage if the people became unworthy of it, while continuing the main aspect of Celestial marriage, which is the sealing between a man and a woman.

[LDS Watchman]

I wasn't fishing for anything, but I was sincerely hoping for a tiny bit of humility and some acknowledgement on your part that you recognize that there's at least a slight chance that you could be deceived.

But now I'm just dumbfounded that you are lecturing us on how true prophets can be deceived and we can't trust them while simultaneously insisting that you can't possibly be deceived.

SMH

In this thing, I have zero doubt. I have planted God's word, and it has grown unto a perfect knowledge that the "cannot lead astray" doctrine is completely false and of the devil. Of that, I have no doubt. The true doctrine, expressed in both the NT, BoM, and other writings are plain to me. I have zero doubt in that doctrine, that we are to verify all things through the Spirit and that all men can lead you astray. Do I know all things? No. Have I been deceived before? Yes, most certainly. Especially by the LDS church. And I would also agree that I am not perfect. There is much for me to learn.

And guess what LDSW, you don't have to listen to me. You have the agency to discount all of my words. You can cast aside all that I've said, so that you are not deceived.

Alma 32

33 And now, behold, because ye have tried the experiment, and planted the seed, and it swelleth and sprouteth, and beginneth to grow, ye must needs know that the seed is good.

34 And now, behold, is your knowledge perfect? Yea, your knowledge is perfect in that thing, and your faith is dormant; and this because you know, for ye know that the word hath swelled your souls, and ye also know that it hath sprouted up, that your understanding doth begin to be enlightened, and your mind doth begin to expand.

Yeah, I don't think you know what it means to experiment on the word in Alma 32.

How would you even experiment on this? It's not like there's anything you can test. Basically all you could have done is just keep telling yourself that you are right over and over again until you convinced yourself that you can't possibly be wrong.

There's no faith and then action involved. There's no seed to plant.

But I'm sure this belief does feel good to you. Now you just believe and do whatever you want irregardless of what any prophet may have said or written. I'm sure that's a great feeling, but that doesn't mean that you're belief is true and that this feeling is from God.

You obviously didn’t read what I wrote. You didn’t understand those precepts that I did test. For one, if we believe the Holy Ghost can show us the truth of all things, that certainly must mean that he can reveal the lies and falsehoods as well. Learning truth also exposes lies.

Read 2 Nephi 28:31 again, read JST Mark 9 again, read the OP verses again, the one unifying precept among all of these is that we gain our own personal witness of truth. And yes, I can see the fruits that come from living a false doctrine. The Lord called this a “curse” in 2 Nephi 28:31. If we plant a seed of truth, we were clearly taught in Alma 32 what that looked like. The inverse is also true. False precepts produce written fruit, or they produce no fruit at all. So yes, I have tested and tried both of these precepts. 1. Believing men can never lead astray and 2, trusting the witness of the Holy Ghost over the precepts taught by man. Both of these can be tested using the analogy given in Alma 32.

Again, this is not what Alma 32 is talking about. It's talking about planting the seed of faith, nourishing it, and then watching it grow into a perfect knowledge (eventually).

Taking an extreme and inconsistent stance on two scriptures and insisting that you can't possibly be wrong is not how this works. You can pray about it until the cows come home and try and find evidence to support your belief, like the passage in the OP, but that's not planting and nourishing the seed of faith.

And for what feels like the hundredth time now, neither 2 Nephi 28:31 or JST Mark 9 actually say what you are claiming. They don't say that it's false doctrine that the Lord will not allow a true prophet to lead his people astray. They don't say to pick and choose which teachings and revelations from true prophets we will accept based on what we "feel" the "spirit" is telling us.

So now back to the question I asked, which you dodged earlier.

How does it violate the 1st commandment to believe that God will not allow true prophets to lead his people astray? How is this Anti-Christian and the epitome of pride?

[LDS Watchman]

I think you're making WAY too much out of this. It's not nearly the problem you are making it out to be.

Just want to clarify. You said, "And yes, there is zero doubt in my mind that I have been deceived."

Are you saying that you know for certain that you have been deceived or that you know for certain that you have not been deceived?

I think you are taking this too lightly. Breaking literally the first commandment is a big deal. 100% contradicting the words of Christ, big deal. (Anti-Christian actually) The epitome of pride, big deal.

I have not been deceived. Zero doubt.

How does believing that God won't let a true prophet lead his people astray violate the 1st commandment? How is that Anti-Christian and the epitome of pride?

The fact that you don't believe that there's even the slightest chance that you could be deceived speaks volumes. Beware of pride friend.

He believes the answer he’s received is knowledge, experiential first hand knowledge. It’s the same type of knowledge people seem to express each Sunday when they say they “know the church is true”.

Are all those makes such statements of knowledge guilty of pride? I would imagine most of them would say they are sure they aren’t deceived in that thing they have expressed knowledge of….

A very paradoxical situation indeed.

All of this goes to show that someone is clearly deceived. Which is why I think it's very prideful for RW to lecture us on how we can't trust true prophets because they can be deceived, while he insists that he can't be.

I would never make such a declaration. There are many things that I believe I know or strongly believe in, but I would never rule out the possibility that I could be deceived.

[cab]

I think you are taking this too lightly. Breaking literally the first commandment is a big deal. 100% contradicting the words of Christ, big deal. (Anti-Christian actually) The epitome of pride, big deal.

I have not been deceived. Zero doubt.

How does believing that God won't let a true prophet lead his people astray violate the 1st commandment? How is that Anti-Christian and the epitome of pride?

The fact that you don't believe that there's even the slightest chance that you could be deceived speaks volumes. Beware of pride friend.

He believes the answer he’s received is knowledge, experiential first hand knowledge. It’s the same type of knowledge people seem to express each Sunday when they say they “know the church is true”.

Are all those makes such statements of knowledge guilty of pride? I would imagine most of them would say they are sure they aren’t deceived in that thing they have expressed knowledge of….

A very paradoxical situation indeed.

All of this goes to show that someone is clearly deceived. Which is why I think it's very prideful for RW to lecture us on how we can't trust true prophets because they can be deceived, while he insists that he can't be.

I would never make such a declaration. There are many things that I believe I know or strongly believe in, but I would never rule out the possibility that I could be deceived.

But you seem to be stating that the LDS prophets are true prophets as a matter of fact. Is it possible you could be deceived in this belief?

[David13]

Make not gods of your prophets.

I just like that title.

As I truly believe that Mormons worship, adore, and gloriously fawn over their corporate executives.
dc

[JLHPROF]

God's current command:

"I have not revoked this law, nor will I, for it is everlasting, and those who will enter into my glory must obey the conditions thereof"

Plural Marriage was never revoked and never will be.

It's just a fact.

It's a fact that YOU believe that authorized plural marriages were not suspended. That's it.

There's absolutely no reason why God could not have temporarily suspended plural marriage when the people were no longer worthy of it. See Jacob 2.

In any event, this has nothing to do with your original claim that if someone believes what Joseph Smith plainly taught that they would be called deceived by the church. This is clearly not true.

"I have not revoked this law, nor will I, for it is everlasting, and those who will enter into my glory must obey the conditions thereof"

Does this mean what it plainly says, or does it not?

I think you better read the entire 1886 revelation again. It doesn't even mention polygamy specifically. It refers to Celestial marriage, of which living polygamy is only one part. There's nothing preventing God from temporarily suspended the authorized practice of plural marriage if the people became unworthy of it, while continuing the main aspect of Celestial marriage, which is the sealing between a man and a woman.

You might want to review the marriage sealing ceremony and the covenant you are placed under as part of it.
If the temporary suspension were permanent we'd all remain covenant breakers.

[cab]

Make not gods of your prophets.

I just like that title.

As I truly believe that Mormons worship, adore, and gloriously fawn over their corporate executives.
dc

Yeah it’s my observation that we worship the Church. We believe it’s “true” and that it’s saving ordinances and covenant path can’t and won’t fail us.
If that’s not worship, I don’t know what worship is. I believe it’s a surrogate idol in the same way as Israel’s golden calf was.

[JandD6572]

Well this entire thread went all over the board, not to mention bored the heck out of me. I'll just stick with Christ, and trying to live his way as best as possible. good luck to you all in this discussion of... well, I don't even remember this far along now what the discussion was even about. something about false scripture? lol. who knows.

[JLHPROF]

Well this entire thread went all over the board, not to mention bored the heck out of me. I'll just stick with Christ, and trying to live his way as best as possible. good luck to you all in this discussion of... well, I don't even remember this far along now what the discussion was even about. something about false scripture? lol. who knows.

It's the disagreement over what constitutes Christ's way that leads to the debates.
As far as the discussion topic - the usual anti authority approach so popular in these parts, with the added bonus of false scripture.