I'm confused;

Tell us about yourself...
Locked
User avatar
InfoWarrior82
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 9307
Location: "There are 15 on the earth today, you can trust them completely." -President Nelson (Jan 2022)

Re: I'm confused;

Post by InfoWarrior82 »

LDS Watchman wrote: November 3rd, 2022, 6:03 am
InfoWarrior82 wrote: November 3rd, 2022, 5:56 am
LDS Watchman wrote: November 2nd, 2022, 5:37 pm
ransomme wrote: November 2nd, 2022, 5:29 pm

It's unfortunately not ironic that you advise others of moving the goalpost, and now yours is standing far from what anyone actually said.

"that the Savior was encouraging rebellion against Rome."

This goal post is on the next field over and it's the wrong kind of football 🏈 vs⚽

Again, I haven't moved the goal posts. InfoWarrior82 was literally saying that the Savior was encouraging rebellion against Rome and I responded to that.

Your false accusations are lame. It's just an attempt to distract from the fact that you aren't able to provide any evidence to support your claims.


No, my point was that Christ understood that by simply following Him, this would automatically be seen as open rebellion against Rome.
If this is true, why did Pilate find no fault with him?
But still put him to death at the end of the day. Do you not remember this very important detail? How is that possible?

LDS Watchman
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 7227
Contact:

Re: I'm confused;

Post by LDS Watchman »

InfoWarrior82 wrote: November 3rd, 2022, 6:08 am
LDS Watchman wrote: November 3rd, 2022, 6:03 am
InfoWarrior82 wrote: November 3rd, 2022, 5:56 am
LDS Watchman wrote: November 2nd, 2022, 5:37 pm

Again, I haven't moved the goal posts. InfoWarrior82 was literally saying that the Savior was encouraging rebellion against Rome and I responded to that.

Your false accusations are lame. It's just an attempt to distract from the fact that you aren't able to provide any evidence to support your claims.


No, my point was that Christ understood that by simply following Him, this would automatically be seen as open rebellion against Rome.
If this is true, why did Pilate find no fault with him?
But still put him to death at the end of the day. Do you not remember this very important detail? How is that possible?
Do you seriously not remember why he put him to death?

Here, let me jog your memory for you.

22 Pilate saith unto them, What shall I do then with Jesus which is called Christ? They all say unto him, Let him be crucified.
23 And the governor said, Why, what evil hath he done? But they cried out the more, saying, Let him be crucified.
24 ¶ When Pilate saw that he could prevail nothing, but that rather a tumult was made, he took water, and washed his hands before the multitude, saying, I am innocent of the blood of this just person: see ye to it.

14 Then Pilate said unto them, Why, what evil hath he done? And they cried out the more exceedingly, Crucify him.
15 ¶ And so Pilate, willing to content the people, released Barabbas unto them, and delivered Jesus, when he had scourged him, to be crucified.

4 Then said Pilate to the chief priests and to the people, I find no fault in this man.
5 And they were the more fierce, saying, He stirreth up the people, teaching throughout all Jewry, beginning from Galilee to this place.
13 ¶ And Pilate, when he had called together the chief priests and the rulers and the people,
14 Said unto them, Ye have brought this man unto me, as one that perverteth the people: and, behold, I, having examined him before you, have found no fault in this man touching those things whereof ye accuse him:
20 Pilate therefore, willing to release Jesus, spake again to them.
21 But they cried, saying, Crucify him, crucify him.
22 And he said unto them the third time, Why, what evil hath he done? I have found no cause of death in him: I will therefore chastise him, and let him go.
23 And they were instant with loud voices, requiring that he might be crucified. And the voices of them and of the chief priests prevailed.
24 And Pilate gave sentence that it should be as they required.

38 Pilate saith unto him, What is truth? And when he had said this, he went out again unto the Jews, and saith unto them, I find in him no fault at all.
4 Pilate therefore went forth again, and saith unto them, Behold, I bring him forth to you, that ye may know that I find no fault in him.
5 Then came Jesus forth, wearing the crown of thorns, and the purple robe. And Pilate saith unto them, Behold the man!
6 When the chief priests therefore and officers saw him, they cried out, saying, Crucify him, crucify him. Pilate saith unto them, Take ye him, and crucify him: for I find no fault in him.
15 But they cried out, Away with him, away with him, crucify him. Pilate saith unto them, Shall I crucify your King? The chief priests answered, We have no king but Cæsar.
16 Then delivered he him therefore unto them to be crucified. And they took Jesus, and led him away.

Pilot gave in to the will of the Jewish mob, even though he said that he found no fault with Jesus and that he was a just man.
Last edited by LDS Watchman on November 3rd, 2022, 6:34 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
InfoWarrior82
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 9307
Location: "There are 15 on the earth today, you can trust them completely." -President Nelson (Jan 2022)

Re: I'm confused;

Post by InfoWarrior82 »

LDS Watchman wrote: November 3rd, 2022, 6:23 am
InfoWarrior82 wrote: November 3rd, 2022, 6:08 am
LDS Watchman wrote: November 3rd, 2022, 6:03 am
InfoWarrior82 wrote: November 3rd, 2022, 5:56 am



No, my point was that Christ understood that by simply following Him, this would automatically be seen as open rebellion against Rome.
If this is true, why did Pilate find no fault with him?
But still put him to death at the end of the day. Do you not remember this very important detail? How is that possible?
Do you seriously not remember why he put him to death?

Here, let me jog your memory for you.

22 Pilate saith unto them, What shall I do then with Jesus which is called Christ? They all say unto him, Let him be crucified.
23 And the governor said, Why, what evil hath he done? But they cried out the more, saying, Let him be crucified.
24 ¶ When Pilate saw that he could prevail nothing, but that rather a tumult was made, he took water, and washed his hands before the multitude, saying, I am innocent of the blood of this just person: see ye to it.

14 Then Pilate said unto them, Why, what evil hath he done? And they cried out the more exceedingly, Crucify him.
15 ¶ And so Pilate, willing to content the people, released Barabbas unto them, and delivered Jesus, when he had scourged him, to be crucified.

4 Then said Pilate to the chief priests and to the people, I find no fault in this man.
5 And they were the more fierce, saying, He stirreth up the people, teaching throughout all Jewry, beginning from Galilee to this place.
13 ¶ And Pilate, when he had called together the chief priests and the rulers and the people,
14 Said unto them, Ye have brought this man unto me, as one that perverteth the people: and, behold, I, having examined him before you, have found no fault in this man touching those things whereof ye accuse him:
20 Pilate therefore, willing to release Jesus, spake again to them.
21 But they cried, saying, Crucify him, crucify him.
22 And he said unto them the third time, Why, what evil hath he done? I have found no cause of death in him: I will therefore chastise him, and let him go.
23 And they were instant with loud voices, requiring that he might be crucified. And the voices of them and of the chief priests prevailed.
24 And Pilate gave sentence that it should be as they required.

Pilot gave in to the will of the Jewish mob, even though he said that he found no fault with Jesus and that he was a just man.
Yes, the reason why Romans put Christians to death was because they were seen as a threat to the stability of their authority. My point still stands:

Christ didn't need to call for rebellion, because simply being Christian was automatically seen as rebellion to the state.

Dude, it's not complicated.

LDS Watchman
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 7227
Contact:

Re: I'm confused;

Post by LDS Watchman »

InfoWarrior82 wrote: November 3rd, 2022, 6:33 am
LDS Watchman wrote: November 3rd, 2022, 6:23 am
InfoWarrior82 wrote: November 3rd, 2022, 6:08 am
LDS Watchman wrote: November 3rd, 2022, 6:03 am

If this is true, why did Pilate find no fault with him?
But still put him to death at the end of the day. Do you not remember this very important detail? How is that possible?
Do you seriously not remember why he put him to death?

Here, let me jog your memory for you.

22 Pilate saith unto them, What shall I do then with Jesus which is called Christ? They all say unto him, Let him be crucified.
23 And the governor said, Why, what evil hath he done? But they cried out the more, saying, Let him be crucified.
24 ¶ When Pilate saw that he could prevail nothing, but that rather a tumult was made, he took water, and washed his hands before the multitude, saying, I am innocent of the blood of this just person: see ye to it.

14 Then Pilate said unto them, Why, what evil hath he done? And they cried out the more exceedingly, Crucify him.
15 ¶ And so Pilate, willing to content the people, released Barabbas unto them, and delivered Jesus, when he had scourged him, to be crucified.

4 Then said Pilate to the chief priests and to the people, I find no fault in this man.
5 And they were the more fierce, saying, He stirreth up the people, teaching throughout all Jewry, beginning from Galilee to this place.
13 ¶ And Pilate, when he had called together the chief priests and the rulers and the people,
14 Said unto them, Ye have brought this man unto me, as one that perverteth the people: and, behold, I, having examined him before you, have found no fault in this man touching those things whereof ye accuse him:
20 Pilate therefore, willing to release Jesus, spake again to them.
21 But they cried, saying, Crucify him, crucify him.
22 And he said unto them the third time, Why, what evil hath he done? I have found no cause of death in him: I will therefore chastise him, and let him go.
23 And they were instant with loud voices, requiring that he might be crucified. And the voices of them and of the chief priests prevailed.
24 And Pilate gave sentence that it should be as they required.

Pilot gave in to the will of the Jewish mob, even though he said that he found no fault with Jesus and that he was a just man.
Yes, the reason why Romans put Christians to death was because they were seen as a threat to the stability of their authority. My point still stands:

Christ didn't need to call for rebellion, because simply being Christian was automatically seen as rebellion to the state.

Dude, it's not complicated.
You're right, it's not complicated.

We're talking about what Jesus actually taught, not how his teachings and the actions of his followers were perceived decades later.

At the time of Jesus trial, when all the evidence was presented against him, Pilate found no fault with him. So clearly he didn't consider his teachings and actions to be a threat to Rome, let alone rebellion against Rome.

User avatar
InfoWarrior82
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 9307
Location: "There are 15 on the earth today, you can trust them completely." -President Nelson (Jan 2022)

Re: I'm confused;

Post by InfoWarrior82 »

LDS Watchman wrote: November 3rd, 2022, 6:41 am
InfoWarrior82 wrote: November 3rd, 2022, 6:33 am
LDS Watchman wrote: November 3rd, 2022, 6:23 am
InfoWarrior82 wrote: November 3rd, 2022, 6:08 am

But still put him to death at the end of the day. Do you not remember this very important detail? How is that possible?
Do you seriously not remember why he put him to death?

Here, let me jog your memory for you.

22 Pilate saith unto them, What shall I do then with Jesus which is called Christ? They all say unto him, Let him be crucified.
23 And the governor said, Why, what evil hath he done? But they cried out the more, saying, Let him be crucified.
24 ¶ When Pilate saw that he could prevail nothing, but that rather a tumult was made, he took water, and washed his hands before the multitude, saying, I am innocent of the blood of this just person: see ye to it.

14 Then Pilate said unto them, Why, what evil hath he done? And they cried out the more exceedingly, Crucify him.
15 ¶ And so Pilate, willing to content the people, released Barabbas unto them, and delivered Jesus, when he had scourged him, to be crucified.

4 Then said Pilate to the chief priests and to the people, I find no fault in this man.
5 And they were the more fierce, saying, He stirreth up the people, teaching throughout all Jewry, beginning from Galilee to this place.
13 ¶ And Pilate, when he had called together the chief priests and the rulers and the people,
14 Said unto them, Ye have brought this man unto me, as one that perverteth the people: and, behold, I, having examined him before you, have found no fault in this man touching those things whereof ye accuse him:
20 Pilate therefore, willing to release Jesus, spake again to them.
21 But they cried, saying, Crucify him, crucify him.
22 And he said unto them the third time, Why, what evil hath he done? I have found no cause of death in him: I will therefore chastise him, and let him go.
23 And they were instant with loud voices, requiring that he might be crucified. And the voices of them and of the chief priests prevailed.
24 And Pilate gave sentence that it should be as they required.

Pilot gave in to the will of the Jewish mob, even though he said that he found no fault with Jesus and that he was a just man.
Yes, the reason why Romans put Christians to death was because they were seen as a threat to the stability of their authority. My point still stands:

Christ didn't need to call for rebellion, because simply being Christian was automatically seen as rebellion to the state.

Dude, it's not complicated.
You're right, it's not complicated.

We're talking about what Jesus actually taught, not how his teachings and the actions of his followers were perceived decades later.

At the time of Jesus trial, when all the evidence was presented against him, Pilate found no fault with him. So clearly he didn't consider his teachings and actions to be a threat to Rome, let alone rebellion against Rome.
The fact of the matter is, persecutions will come naturally as part of being on the side of the Lord. Our task is to stand firm and resist Babylon. To stand in holy places and not be moved. It doesn't matter whether or not YOU define this as an act of rebellion because THEY are going to see it this way regardless.

LDS Watchman
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 7227
Contact:

Re: I'm confused;

Post by LDS Watchman »

InfoWarrior82 wrote: November 3rd, 2022, 6:49 am
LDS Watchman wrote: November 3rd, 2022, 6:41 am
InfoWarrior82 wrote: November 3rd, 2022, 6:33 am
LDS Watchman wrote: November 3rd, 2022, 6:23 am

Do you seriously not remember why he put him to death?

Here, let me jog your memory for you.

22 Pilate saith unto them, What shall I do then with Jesus which is called Christ? They all say unto him, Let him be crucified.
23 And the governor said, Why, what evil hath he done? But they cried out the more, saying, Let him be crucified.
24 ¶ When Pilate saw that he could prevail nothing, but that rather a tumult was made, he took water, and washed his hands before the multitude, saying, I am innocent of the blood of this just person: see ye to it.

14 Then Pilate said unto them, Why, what evil hath he done? And they cried out the more exceedingly, Crucify him.
15 ¶ And so Pilate, willing to content the people, released Barabbas unto them, and delivered Jesus, when he had scourged him, to be crucified.

4 Then said Pilate to the chief priests and to the people, I find no fault in this man.
5 And they were the more fierce, saying, He stirreth up the people, teaching throughout all Jewry, beginning from Galilee to this place.
13 ¶ And Pilate, when he had called together the chief priests and the rulers and the people,
14 Said unto them, Ye have brought this man unto me, as one that perverteth the people: and, behold, I, having examined him before you, have found no fault in this man touching those things whereof ye accuse him:
20 Pilate therefore, willing to release Jesus, spake again to them.
21 But they cried, saying, Crucify him, crucify him.
22 And he said unto them the third time, Why, what evil hath he done? I have found no cause of death in him: I will therefore chastise him, and let him go.
23 And they were instant with loud voices, requiring that he might be crucified. And the voices of them and of the chief priests prevailed.
24 And Pilate gave sentence that it should be as they required.

Pilot gave in to the will of the Jewish mob, even though he said that he found no fault with Jesus and that he was a just man.
Yes, the reason why Romans put Christians to death was because they were seen as a threat to the stability of their authority. My point still stands:

Christ didn't need to call for rebellion, because simply being Christian was automatically seen as rebellion to the state.

Dude, it's not complicated.
You're right, it's not complicated.

We're talking about what Jesus actually taught, not how his teachings and the actions of his followers were perceived decades later.

At the time of Jesus trial, when all the evidence was presented against him, Pilate found no fault with him. So clearly he didn't consider his teachings and actions to be a threat to Rome, let alone rebellion against Rome.
The fact of the matter is, persecutions will come naturally as part of being on the side of the Lord. Our task is to stand firm and resist Babylon. To stand in holy places and not be moved. It doesn't matter whether or not YOU define this as an act of rebellion because THEY are going to see it this way regardless.
I agree that persecutions will naturally come as part of being on the side of the Lord, but that's not what we're talking about here.

We're talking about whether or not Jesus taught his followers to defy the authority of the worldly governments who have authority over them. And clearly he did not.

21 Let no man break the laws of the land, for he that keepeth the laws of God hath no need to break the laws of the land.
22 Wherefore, be subject to the powers that be, until he reigns whose right it is to reign, and subdues all enemies under his feet.
(D&C 58)

12 We believe in being subject to kings, presidents, rulers, and magistrates, in obeying, honoring, and sustaining the law. (AoF 12)

User avatar
InfoWarrior82
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 9307
Location: "There are 15 on the earth today, you can trust them completely." -President Nelson (Jan 2022)

Re: I'm confused;

Post by InfoWarrior82 »

LDS Watchman wrote: November 3rd, 2022, 6:57 am
InfoWarrior82 wrote: November 3rd, 2022, 6:49 am
LDS Watchman wrote: November 3rd, 2022, 6:41 am
InfoWarrior82 wrote: November 3rd, 2022, 6:33 am

Yes, the reason why Romans put Christians to death was because they were seen as a threat to the stability of their authority. My point still stands:

Christ didn't need to call for rebellion, because simply being Christian was automatically seen as rebellion to the state.

Dude, it's not complicated.
You're right, it's not complicated.

We're talking about what Jesus actually taught, not how his teachings and the actions of his followers were perceived decades later.

At the time of Jesus trial, when all the evidence was presented against him, Pilate found no fault with him. So clearly he didn't consider his teachings and actions to be a threat to Rome, let alone rebellion against Rome.
The fact of the matter is, persecutions will come naturally as part of being on the side of the Lord. Our task is to stand firm and resist Babylon. To stand in holy places and not be moved. It doesn't matter whether or not YOU define this as an act of rebellion because THEY are going to see it this way regardless.
I agree that persecutions will naturally come as part of being on the side of the Lord, but that's not what we're talking about here.

We're talking about whether or not Jesus taught his followers to defy the authority of the worldly governments who have authority over them. And clearly he did not.

21 Let no man break the laws of the land, for he that keepeth the laws of God hath no need to break the laws of the land.
22 Wherefore, be subject to the powers that be, until he reigns whose right it is to reign, and subdues all enemies under his feet.
(D&C 58)

12 We believe in being subject to kings, presidents, rulers, and magistrates, in obeying, honoring, and sustaining the law. (AoF 12)


You forget that this only applies when the laws are righteous and moral. Christ said that any more or less than this cometh of evil.

How much more clear can I make it for you? Following Christ IS defying authority.

LDS Watchman
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 7227
Contact:

Re: I'm confused;

Post by LDS Watchman »

InfoWarrior82 wrote: November 3rd, 2022, 7:01 am
LDS Watchman wrote: November 3rd, 2022, 6:57 am
InfoWarrior82 wrote: November 3rd, 2022, 6:49 am
LDS Watchman wrote: November 3rd, 2022, 6:41 am

You're right, it's not complicated.

We're talking about what Jesus actually taught, not how his teachings and the actions of his followers were perceived decades later.

At the time of Jesus trial, when all the evidence was presented against him, Pilate found no fault with him. So clearly he didn't consider his teachings and actions to be a threat to Rome, let alone rebellion against Rome.
The fact of the matter is, persecutions will come naturally as part of being on the side of the Lord. Our task is to stand firm and resist Babylon. To stand in holy places and not be moved. It doesn't matter whether or not YOU define this as an act of rebellion because THEY are going to see it this way regardless.
I agree that persecutions will naturally come as part of being on the side of the Lord, but that's not what we're talking about here.

We're talking about whether or not Jesus taught his followers to defy the authority of the worldly governments who have authority over them. And clearly he did not.

21 Let no man break the laws of the land, for he that keepeth the laws of God hath no need to break the laws of the land.
22 Wherefore, be subject to the powers that be, until he reigns whose right it is to reign, and subdues all enemies under his feet.
(D&C 58)

12 We believe in being subject to kings, presidents, rulers, and magistrates, in obeying, honoring, and sustaining the law. (AoF 12)


You forget that this only applies when the laws are righteous and moral. Christ said that any more or less than this cometh of evil.

How much more clear can I make it for you? Following Christ IS defying authority.
No, Christ did NOT say that this only applies if the laws are righteous and moral. And no, following Christ is NOT defying the authority of one's government.

You can't just make things up.

User avatar
InfoWarrior82
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 9307
Location: "There are 15 on the earth today, you can trust them completely." -President Nelson (Jan 2022)

Re: I'm confused;

Post by InfoWarrior82 »

LDS Watchman wrote: November 3rd, 2022, 7:08 am
InfoWarrior82 wrote: November 3rd, 2022, 7:01 am
LDS Watchman wrote: November 3rd, 2022, 6:57 am
InfoWarrior82 wrote: November 3rd, 2022, 6:49 am

The fact of the matter is, persecutions will come naturally as part of being on the side of the Lord. Our task is to stand firm and resist Babylon. To stand in holy places and not be moved. It doesn't matter whether or not YOU define this as an act of rebellion because THEY are going to see it this way regardless.
I agree that persecutions will naturally come as part of being on the side of the Lord, but that's not what we're talking about here.

We're talking about whether or not Jesus taught his followers to defy the authority of the worldly governments who have authority over them. And clearly he did not.

21 Let no man break the laws of the land, for he that keepeth the laws of God hath no need to break the laws of the land.
22 Wherefore, be subject to the powers that be, until he reigns whose right it is to reign, and subdues all enemies under his feet.
(D&C 58)

12 We believe in being subject to kings, presidents, rulers, and magistrates, in obeying, honoring, and sustaining the law. (AoF 12)


You forget that this only applies when the laws are righteous and moral. Christ said that any more or less than this cometh of evil.

How much more clear can I make it for you? Following Christ IS defying authority.
No, Christ did NOT say that this only applies if the laws are righteous and moral. And no, following Christ is NOT defying the authority of one's government.

You can't just make things up.

Jesus wrote: 76 And again I say unto you, those who have been scattered by their enemies, it is my will that they should continue to importune for redress, and redemption, by the hands of those who are placed as rulers and are in authority over you—

77 According to the laws and constitution of the people, which I have suffered to be established, and should be maintained for the rights and protection of all flesh, according to just and holy principles;

78 That every man may act in doctrine and principle pertaining to futurity, according to the moral agency which I have given unto him, that every man may be accountable for his own sins in the day of judgment.

5 And that law of the land which is constitutional, supporting that principle of freedom in maintaining rights and privileges, belongs to all mankind, and is justifiable before me.

6 Therefore, I, the Lord, justify you, and your brethren of my church, in befriending that law which is the constitutional law of the land;

7 And as pertaining to law of man, whatsoever is more or less than this, cometh of evil.



Whenever the government gets to a point where they will no longer permit you to have any other gods before them, they will simply see you as a threat to their authority and label you as a rebellious seditionist. And when this happens, indeed following Christ IS defiance of authority of one's government.

LDS Watchman
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 7227
Contact:

Re: I'm confused;

Post by LDS Watchman »

InfoWarrior82 wrote: November 3rd, 2022, 7:27 am
LDS Watchman wrote: November 3rd, 2022, 7:08 am
InfoWarrior82 wrote: November 3rd, 2022, 7:01 am
LDS Watchman wrote: November 3rd, 2022, 6:57 am

I agree that persecutions will naturally come as part of being on the side of the Lord, but that's not what we're talking about here.

We're talking about whether or not Jesus taught his followers to defy the authority of the worldly governments who have authority over them. And clearly he did not.

21 Let no man break the laws of the land, for he that keepeth the laws of God hath no need to break the laws of the land.
22 Wherefore, be subject to the powers that be, until he reigns whose right it is to reign, and subdues all enemies under his feet.
(D&C 58)

12 We believe in being subject to kings, presidents, rulers, and magistrates, in obeying, honoring, and sustaining the law. (AoF 12)


You forget that this only applies when the laws are righteous and moral. Christ said that any more or less than this cometh of evil.

How much more clear can I make it for you? Following Christ IS defying authority.
No, Christ did NOT say that this only applies if the laws are righteous and moral. And no, following Christ is NOT defying the authority of one's government.

You can't just make things up.

Jesus wrote: 76 And again I say unto you, those who have been scattered by their enemies, it is my will that they should continue to importune for redress, and redemption, by the hands of those who are placed as rulers and are in authority over you—

77 According to the laws and constitution of the people, which I have suffered to be established, and should be maintained for the rights and protection of all flesh, according to just and holy principles;

78 That every man may act in doctrine and principle pertaining to futurity, according to the moral agency which I have given unto him, that every man may be accountable for his own sins in the day of judgment.

5 And that law of the land which is constitutional, supporting that principle of freedom in maintaining rights and privileges, belongs to all mankind, and is justifiable before me.

6 Therefore, I, the Lord, justify you, and your brethren of my church, in befriending that law which is the constitutional law of the land;

7 And as pertaining to law of man, whatsoever is more or less than this, cometh of evil.




Whenever the government gets to a point where they will no longer permit you to have any other gods before them, they will simply see you as a threat to their authority and label you as a rebellious seditionist. And when this happens, indeed following Christ IS defiance of authority of one's government.
You're forgetting a few important details.

1) The Constitution allows for the local, state, and federal governments to make laws. Whether or not laws are Constitutional is a matter of opinion, with the Supreme Court being the authority that ultimately determines this under the Constitution. God clearly expects to follow the laws of the land.

2) Last I checked, we still have the right to believe in and worship Almighty God according to the dictates of our own conscience in this country and most countries throughout the world.

The time may come that true believers are actually persecuted and hunted down by the government, but that's not what's going on in this country.
Last edited by LDS Watchman on November 3rd, 2022, 7:38 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
InfoWarrior82
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 9307
Location: "There are 15 on the earth today, you can trust them completely." -President Nelson (Jan 2022)

Re: I'm confused;

Post by InfoWarrior82 »

LDS Watchman wrote: November 3rd, 2022, 7:36 am

You're forgetting a few important details.

1) The Constitution allows for the local, state, and federal governments to make laws. Whether or not laws are Constitutional is a matter of opinion, with the Supreme Court being the authority that ultimately determines this under the Constitution. God clearly expects to follow the laws of the land.

2) Last I checked, we still have the right to believe in and worship Almighty God according to the dictates of our own conscience in this country and most countries throughout the world.

If you want to openly rebel against the government, go for it. But that's not what Christ taught us to do.


https://journalofdiscourses.com/23/8
Joseph F. Smith wrote: This, as I understand it, is the law of God to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in all the world. And the requirements here made of us must be obeyed, and practically carried out in our lives, in order that we may secure the fulfillment of the promises which God has made to the people of Zion. And it is further written, that inasmuch as ye will do the things which I command you, thus saith the Lord then am I bound; otherwise there is no promise. We can therefore only expect that the promises are made and will apply to us when we do the things which we are commanded.

We are told here that no man need break the laws of the land who will keep the laws of God. But this is further defined by the passage which I read afterwards—the law of the land, which all have no need to break, is that law which is the Constitutional law of the land, and that is as God himself has defined it. And whatsoever is more or less than this cometh of evil. Now it seems to me that this makes this matter so clear that it is not possible for any man who professes to be a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints to make any mistake, or to be in doubt as to the course he should pursue under the command of God in relation to the observance of the laws of the land. I maintain that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has ever been faithful to the constitutional laws of our country. I maintain also, that I have a right to this opinion, as an American citizen, as one who was not only born on American soil, but who descended from parents who for generations were born in America. I have a right to interpret the law in this manner, and to form my own conclusions and express my opinions thereon, regardless of the opinions of other men.

I ask myself, What law have you broken? What constitutional law have you not observed? I am bound not only by allegiance to the government of the United States, but by the actual command of God Almighty, to observe and obey every constitutional law of the land, and without hesitancy I declare to this congregation that I have never violated, nor transgressed any law, I am not amenable to any penalties of the law, because I have endeavored from my youth up to be a law-abiding citizen, and not only so, but to be a peacemaker, a preacher of righteousness, and not only to preach righteousness by word, but by example. What therefore have I to fear? The Lord Almighty requires this people to observe the laws of the land, to be subject to "the powers that be," so far as they abide by the fundamental principles of good government, but He will hold them responsible if they will pass unconstitutional measures and frame unjust and proscriptive laws, as did Nebuchadnezzar and Darius, in relation to the three Hebrew children and Daniel. If lawmakers have a mind to violate their oath, break their covenants and their faith with the people, and depart from the provisions of the Constitution where is the law human or divine, which binds me, as an individual, to outwardly and openly proclaim my acceptance of their acts?

I firmly believe that the only way in which we can be sustained in regard to this matter by God our Heavenly Father is by following the illustrious examples we find in holy writ. And while we regret, and look with sorrow upon the acts of men who seek to bring us into bondage and to oppress us, we must obey God, for He has commanded us to do so; and at the same time He has declared that in obeying the laws which He has given us we will not necessarily break the constitutional laws of the land.

I wish to enter here my avowal that the people called Latter-day Saints, as has been often repeated from this stand, are the most law-abiding, the most peaceable, long-suffering and patient people that can today be found within the confines of this republic, and perhaps anywhere else upon the face of the earth; and we intend to continue to be law-abiding so far as the constitutional law of the land is concerned; and we expect to meet the consequences of our obedience to the laws and commandments of Godlike men. These are my sentiments briefly expressed, upon this subject.

5 We believe that all men are bound to sustain and uphold the respective governments in which they reside, while protected in their inherent and inalienable rights by the laws of such governments; and that sedition and rebellion are unbecoming every citizen thus protected, and should be punished accordingly; and that all governments have a right to enact such laws as in their own judgments are best calculated to secure the public interest; at the same time, however, holding sacred the freedom of conscience.

6 We believe that every man should be honored in his station, rulers and magistrates as such, being placed for the protection of the innocent and the punishment of the guilty; and that to the laws all men owe respect and deference, as without them peace and harmony would be supplanted by anarchy and terror; human laws being instituted for the express purpose of regulating our interests as individuals and nations, between man and man; and divine laws given of heaven, prescribing rules on spiritual concerns, for faith and worship, both to be answered by man to his Maker.

7 We believe that rulers, states, and governments have a right, and are bound to enact laws for the protection of all citizens in the free exercise of their religious belief; but we do not believe that they have a right in justice to deprive citizens of this privilege, or proscribe them in their opinions, so long as a regard and reverence are shown to the laws and such religious opinions do not justify sedition nor conspiracy.


So, you see that AOF12 is not a blanket endorsement of bad laws and bad governments.

LDS Watchman
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 7227
Contact:

Re: I'm confused;

Post by LDS Watchman »

InfoWarrior82 wrote: November 3rd, 2022, 7:38 am
LDS Watchman wrote: November 3rd, 2022, 7:36 am

You're forgetting a few important details.

1) The Constitution allows for the local, state, and federal governments to make laws. Whether or not laws are Constitutional is a matter of opinion, with the Supreme Court being the authority that ultimately determines this under the Constitution. God clearly expects to follow the laws of the land.

2) Last I checked, we still have the right to believe in and worship Almighty God according to the dictates of our own conscience in this country and most countries throughout the world.

If you want to openly rebel against the government, go for it. But that's not what Christ taught us to do.


https://journalofdiscourses.com/23/8
Joseph F. Smith wrote: This, as I understand it, is the law of God to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in all the world. And the requirements here made of us must be obeyed, and practically carried out in our lives, in order that we may secure the fulfillment of the promises which God has made to the people of Zion. And it is further written, that inasmuch as ye will do the things which I command you, thus saith the Lord then am I bound; otherwise there is no promise. We can therefore only expect that the promises are made and will apply to us when we do the things which we are commanded.

We are told here that no man need break the laws of the land who will keep the laws of God. But this is further defined by the passage which I read afterwards—the law of the land, which all have no need to break, is that law which is the Constitutional law of the land, and that is as God himself has defined it. And whatsoever is more or less than this cometh of evil. Now it seems to me that this makes this matter so clear that it is not possible for any man who professes to be a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints to make any mistake, or to be in doubt as to the course he should pursue under the command of God in relation to the observance of the laws of the land. I maintain that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has ever been faithful to the constitutional laws of our country. I maintain also, that I have a right to this opinion, as an American citizen, as one who was not only born on American soil, but who descended from parents who for generations were born in America. I have a right to interpret the law in this manner, and to form my own conclusions and express my opinions thereon, regardless of the opinions of other men.

I ask myself, What law have you broken? What constitutional law have you not observed? I am bound not only by allegiance to the government of the United States, but by the actual command of God Almighty, to observe and obey every constitutional law of the land, and without hesitancy I declare to this congregation that I have never violated, nor transgressed any law, I am not amenable to any penalties of the law, because I have endeavored from my youth up to be a law-abiding citizen, and not only so, but to be a peacemaker, a preacher of righteousness, and not only to preach righteousness by word, but by example. What therefore have I to fear? The Lord Almighty requires this people to observe the laws of the land, to be subject to "the powers that be," so far as they abide by the fundamental principles of good government, but He will hold them responsible if they will pass unconstitutional measures and frame unjust and proscriptive laws, as did Nebuchadnezzar and Darius, in relation to the three Hebrew children and Daniel. If lawmakers have a mind to violate their oath, break their covenants and their faith with the people, and depart from the provisions of the Constitution where is the law human or divine, which binds me, as an individual, to outwardly and openly proclaim my acceptance of their acts?

I firmly believe that the only way in which we can be sustained in regard to this matter by God our Heavenly Father is by following the illustrious examples we find in holy writ. And while we regret, and look with sorrow upon the acts of men who seek to bring us into bondage and to oppress us, we must obey God, for He has commanded us to do so; and at the same time He has declared that in obeying the laws which He has given us we will not necessarily break the constitutional laws of the land.

I wish to enter here my avowal that the people called Latter-day Saints, as has been often repeated from this stand, are the most law-abiding, the most peaceable, long-suffering and patient people that can today be found within the confines of this republic, and perhaps anywhere else upon the face of the earth; and we intend to continue to be law-abiding so far as the constitutional law of the land is concerned; and we expect to meet the consequences of our obedience to the laws and commandments of Godlike men. These are my sentiments briefly expressed, upon this subject.

5 We believe that all men are bound to sustain and uphold the respective governments in which they reside, while protected in their inherent and inalienable rights by the laws of such governments; and that sedition and rebellion are unbecoming every citizen thus protected, and should be punished accordingly; and that all governments have a right to enact such laws as in their own judgments are best calculated to secure the public interest; at the same time, however, holding sacred the freedom of conscience.

6 We believe that every man should be honored in his station, rulers and magistrates as such, being placed for the protection of the innocent and the punishment of the guilty; and that to the laws all men owe respect and deference, as without them peace and harmony would be supplanted by anarchy and terror; human laws being instituted for the express purpose of regulating our interests as individuals and nations, between man and man; and divine laws given of heaven, prescribing rules on spiritual concerns, for faith and worship, both to be answered by man to his Maker.

7 We believe that rulers, states, and governments have a right, and are bound to enact laws for the protection of all citizens in the free exercise of their religious belief; but we do not believe that they have a right in justice to deprive citizens of this privilege, or proscribe them in their opinions, so long as a regard and reverence are shown to the laws and such religious opinions do not justify sedition nor conspiracy.


So, you see that AOF12 is not a blanket endorsement of bad laws and bad governments.
I never claimed that AoF12 is a blanket endorsement of bad laws and bad governments.

But I do find it interesting that you are relying on a pre-manifesto statement by JFS, while ignoring all of the context.

He made this statement during the time that the church was challenging anti-polygamy laws believing that the Supreme Court would overturn them as unconstitutional. When this effort failed what did the church do?

Did they say that God commanded that the people continue to resist what they believed were unjust laws or submit to them?

User avatar
InfoWarrior82
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 9307
Location: "There are 15 on the earth today, you can trust them completely." -President Nelson (Jan 2022)

Re: I'm confused;

Post by InfoWarrior82 »

LDS Watchman wrote: November 3rd, 2022, 8:30 am
InfoWarrior82 wrote: November 3rd, 2022, 7:38 am
LDS Watchman wrote: November 3rd, 2022, 7:36 am

You're forgetting a few important details.

1) The Constitution allows for the local, state, and federal governments to make laws. Whether or not laws are Constitutional is a matter of opinion, with the Supreme Court being the authority that ultimately determines this under the Constitution. God clearly expects to follow the laws of the land.

2) Last I checked, we still have the right to believe in and worship Almighty God according to the dictates of our own conscience in this country and most countries throughout the world.

If you want to openly rebel against the government, go for it. But that's not what Christ taught us to do.


https://journalofdiscourses.com/23/8
Joseph F. Smith wrote: This, as I understand it, is the law of God to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in all the world. And the requirements here made of us must be obeyed, and practically carried out in our lives, in order that we may secure the fulfillment of the promises which God has made to the people of Zion. And it is further written, that inasmuch as ye will do the things which I command you, thus saith the Lord then am I bound; otherwise there is no promise. We can therefore only expect that the promises are made and will apply to us when we do the things which we are commanded.

We are told here that no man need break the laws of the land who will keep the laws of God. But this is further defined by the passage which I read afterwards—the law of the land, which all have no need to break, is that law which is the Constitutional law of the land, and that is as God himself has defined it. And whatsoever is more or less than this cometh of evil. Now it seems to me that this makes this matter so clear that it is not possible for any man who professes to be a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints to make any mistake, or to be in doubt as to the course he should pursue under the command of God in relation to the observance of the laws of the land. I maintain that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has ever been faithful to the constitutional laws of our country. I maintain also, that I have a right to this opinion, as an American citizen, as one who was not only born on American soil, but who descended from parents who for generations were born in America. I have a right to interpret the law in this manner, and to form my own conclusions and express my opinions thereon, regardless of the opinions of other men.

I ask myself, What law have you broken? What constitutional law have you not observed? I am bound not only by allegiance to the government of the United States, but by the actual command of God Almighty, to observe and obey every constitutional law of the land, and without hesitancy I declare to this congregation that I have never violated, nor transgressed any law, I am not amenable to any penalties of the law, because I have endeavored from my youth up to be a law-abiding citizen, and not only so, but to be a peacemaker, a preacher of righteousness, and not only to preach righteousness by word, but by example. What therefore have I to fear? The Lord Almighty requires this people to observe the laws of the land, to be subject to "the powers that be," so far as they abide by the fundamental principles of good government, but He will hold them responsible if they will pass unconstitutional measures and frame unjust and proscriptive laws, as did Nebuchadnezzar and Darius, in relation to the three Hebrew children and Daniel. If lawmakers have a mind to violate their oath, break their covenants and their faith with the people, and depart from the provisions of the Constitution where is the law human or divine, which binds me, as an individual, to outwardly and openly proclaim my acceptance of their acts?

I firmly believe that the only way in which we can be sustained in regard to this matter by God our Heavenly Father is by following the illustrious examples we find in holy writ. And while we regret, and look with sorrow upon the acts of men who seek to bring us into bondage and to oppress us, we must obey God, for He has commanded us to do so; and at the same time He has declared that in obeying the laws which He has given us we will not necessarily break the constitutional laws of the land.

I wish to enter here my avowal that the people called Latter-day Saints, as has been often repeated from this stand, are the most law-abiding, the most peaceable, long-suffering and patient people that can today be found within the confines of this republic, and perhaps anywhere else upon the face of the earth; and we intend to continue to be law-abiding so far as the constitutional law of the land is concerned; and we expect to meet the consequences of our obedience to the laws and commandments of Godlike men. These are my sentiments briefly expressed, upon this subject.

5 We believe that all men are bound to sustain and uphold the respective governments in which they reside, while protected in their inherent and inalienable rights by the laws of such governments; and that sedition and rebellion are unbecoming every citizen thus protected, and should be punished accordingly; and that all governments have a right to enact such laws as in their own judgments are best calculated to secure the public interest; at the same time, however, holding sacred the freedom of conscience.

6 We believe that every man should be honored in his station, rulers and magistrates as such, being placed for the protection of the innocent and the punishment of the guilty; and that to the laws all men owe respect and deference, as without them peace and harmony would be supplanted by anarchy and terror; human laws being instituted for the express purpose of regulating our interests as individuals and nations, between man and man; and divine laws given of heaven, prescribing rules on spiritual concerns, for faith and worship, both to be answered by man to his Maker.

7 We believe that rulers, states, and governments have a right, and are bound to enact laws for the protection of all citizens in the free exercise of their religious belief; but we do not believe that they have a right in justice to deprive citizens of this privilege, or proscribe them in their opinions, so long as a regard and reverence are shown to the laws and such religious opinions do not justify sedition nor conspiracy.


So, you see that AOF12 is not a blanket endorsement of bad laws and bad governments.
I never claimed that AoF12 is a blanket endorsement of bad laws and bad governments.

But I do find it interesting that you are relying on a pre-manifesto statement by JFS, while ignoring all of the context.

He made this statement during the time that the church was challenging anti-polygamy laws believing that the Supreme Court would overturn them as unconstitutional. When this effort failed what did the church do?

Did they say that God commanded that the people continue to resist what they believed were unjust laws or submit to them?


Wilford Woodruff was the last president of the church to receive literal revelation from the resurrected Savior, Jesus Christ. Because, in my opinion, he went against His commandments.


https://zomarah.wordpress.com/2010/10/0 ... evelation/
https://archive.is/tGxvr



Revelation given to President Wilford Woodruff on 24 November 1889. This revelation was received during a period of intense difficulty by the Church, with many of the brethren living in hiding or otherwise seeking to avoid capture by the law because of the practice of plural marriage. President Woodruff was seeking to know the will of the Lord on what path to take in these difficulties, as he was being pulled on one hand by those within the Church who wanted to cease the practice of plural marriage, and on the other hand by those who wanted no compromise to doctrines of the Church regarding plural marriage as an eternal principle given to the Church for this dispensation. Finding himself unable to confirm which path to pursue through his own wisdom, President Woodruff inquired of the Lord on this day and then received this revelation. (Messages of the First Presidency 3:171-176)
Jesus Christ wrote: Thus saith the Lord to my servant Wilford. I, the Lord, have heard thy prayers and thy request, and will answer thee by the voice of my spirit.

Thus saith the Lord unto my servants the Presidency of My Church, who hold the Keys of the Kingdom of God on the earth. I the Lord hold the destiny of the courts in your midst, and the destiny of this nation, and all other nations of the earth, in mine own hands, and all that I have revealed and promised and decreed concerning the generation in which you live shall come to pass, and no power shall stay my hand.

Let not my servants who are called to the Presidency of my Church deny my word or my law, which concerns the salvation of the children of men.

Let them pray for the Holy Spirit which shall be given them to guide them in their acts. Place not yourselves in jeopardy to your enemies by promise. Your enemies seek your destruction and the destruction of my people. If the Saints will hearken unto my voice, and the counsel of my servants, the wicked shall not prevail.

Let my servants who officiate as your counselors before the courts make their pleadings as they are moved upon by the Holy Spirit, without any further pledges from the Priesthood, and they will be justified.

I, the Lord, will hold the courts, with the officers of government and the nation responsible for their acts towards the inhabitants of Zion.

I, Jesus Christ, the Saviour of the world, am in your midst. I am your advocate with the Father. Fear not, little flock, it is your Father’s good pleasure to give you the Kingdom. Fear not the wicked and ungodly.

Search the scriptures, for they are they which testify of me; also those revelations which I have given to my servant Joseph, and to all my servants since the world began, which are recorded in the records of divine truth.

Those revelations contain the judgments of God which are to be poured out upon all nations under the heavens, which include Great Babylon. These judgments are at the door. They will be fulfilled as God lives. Leave judgment with me, it is mine, saith the Lord. Watch the signs of the times and they will show the fulfillment of the words of the Lord.

Let my servants call upon the Lord in mighty prayer, retain the Holy Ghost as your constant companion and act as you are moved upon by that Spirit, and all will be well with you.

The wicked are fast ripening in iniquity, and they will be cut off by the judgments of God. Great events await you and this generation and are nigh at your doors. Awake! O Israel, and have faith in God and his promises and he will not forsake you. I the Lord will deliver my Saints from the dominion of the wicked in mine own due time and way.

I cannot deny my Word, neither in blessings nor judgments. Therefore let mine anointed gird up their loins, watch and be sober, and keep my commandments. Pray always and faint not. Exercise faith in the Lord and in the promises of God; be valiant in the testimony of Jesus Christ.

The eyes of the Lord and the Heavenly Hosts are watching over you and your acts. Therefore be faithful until I come. I come quickly to reward every man, according to the deeds done in the body. Even so, Amen.

LDS Watchman
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 7227
Contact:

Re: I'm confused;

Post by LDS Watchman »

InfoWarrior82 wrote: November 3rd, 2022, 8:34 am
LDS Watchman wrote: November 3rd, 2022, 8:30 am
InfoWarrior82 wrote: November 3rd, 2022, 7:38 am
LDS Watchman wrote: November 3rd, 2022, 7:36 am

You're forgetting a few important details.

1) The Constitution allows for the local, state, and federal governments to make laws. Whether or not laws are Constitutional is a matter of opinion, with the Supreme Court being the authority that ultimately determines this under the Constitution. God clearly expects to follow the laws of the land.

2) Last I checked, we still have the right to believe in and worship Almighty God according to the dictates of our own conscience in this country and most countries throughout the world.

If you want to openly rebel against the government, go for it. But that's not what Christ taught us to do.


https://journalofdiscourses.com/23/8
Joseph F. Smith wrote: This, as I understand it, is the law of God to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in all the world. And the requirements here made of us must be obeyed, and practically carried out in our lives, in order that we may secure the fulfillment of the promises which God has made to the people of Zion. And it is further written, that inasmuch as ye will do the things which I command you, thus saith the Lord then am I bound; otherwise there is no promise. We can therefore only expect that the promises are made and will apply to us when we do the things which we are commanded.

We are told here that no man need break the laws of the land who will keep the laws of God. But this is further defined by the passage which I read afterwards—the law of the land, which all have no need to break, is that law which is the Constitutional law of the land, and that is as God himself has defined it. And whatsoever is more or less than this cometh of evil. Now it seems to me that this makes this matter so clear that it is not possible for any man who professes to be a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints to make any mistake, or to be in doubt as to the course he should pursue under the command of God in relation to the observance of the laws of the land. I maintain that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has ever been faithful to the constitutional laws of our country. I maintain also, that I have a right to this opinion, as an American citizen, as one who was not only born on American soil, but who descended from parents who for generations were born in America. I have a right to interpret the law in this manner, and to form my own conclusions and express my opinions thereon, regardless of the opinions of other men.

I ask myself, What law have you broken? What constitutional law have you not observed? I am bound not only by allegiance to the government of the United States, but by the actual command of God Almighty, to observe and obey every constitutional law of the land, and without hesitancy I declare to this congregation that I have never violated, nor transgressed any law, I am not amenable to any penalties of the law, because I have endeavored from my youth up to be a law-abiding citizen, and not only so, but to be a peacemaker, a preacher of righteousness, and not only to preach righteousness by word, but by example. What therefore have I to fear? The Lord Almighty requires this people to observe the laws of the land, to be subject to "the powers that be," so far as they abide by the fundamental principles of good government, but He will hold them responsible if they will pass unconstitutional measures and frame unjust and proscriptive laws, as did Nebuchadnezzar and Darius, in relation to the three Hebrew children and Daniel. If lawmakers have a mind to violate their oath, break their covenants and their faith with the people, and depart from the provisions of the Constitution where is the law human or divine, which binds me, as an individual, to outwardly and openly proclaim my acceptance of their acts?

I firmly believe that the only way in which we can be sustained in regard to this matter by God our Heavenly Father is by following the illustrious examples we find in holy writ. And while we regret, and look with sorrow upon the acts of men who seek to bring us into bondage and to oppress us, we must obey God, for He has commanded us to do so; and at the same time He has declared that in obeying the laws which He has given us we will not necessarily break the constitutional laws of the land.

I wish to enter here my avowal that the people called Latter-day Saints, as has been often repeated from this stand, are the most law-abiding, the most peaceable, long-suffering and patient people that can today be found within the confines of this republic, and perhaps anywhere else upon the face of the earth; and we intend to continue to be law-abiding so far as the constitutional law of the land is concerned; and we expect to meet the consequences of our obedience to the laws and commandments of Godlike men. These are my sentiments briefly expressed, upon this subject.

5 We believe that all men are bound to sustain and uphold the respective governments in which they reside, while protected in their inherent and inalienable rights by the laws of such governments; and that sedition and rebellion are unbecoming every citizen thus protected, and should be punished accordingly; and that all governments have a right to enact such laws as in their own judgments are best calculated to secure the public interest; at the same time, however, holding sacred the freedom of conscience.

6 We believe that every man should be honored in his station, rulers and magistrates as such, being placed for the protection of the innocent and the punishment of the guilty; and that to the laws all men owe respect and deference, as without them peace and harmony would be supplanted by anarchy and terror; human laws being instituted for the express purpose of regulating our interests as individuals and nations, between man and man; and divine laws given of heaven, prescribing rules on spiritual concerns, for faith and worship, both to be answered by man to his Maker.

7 We believe that rulers, states, and governments have a right, and are bound to enact laws for the protection of all citizens in the free exercise of their religious belief; but we do not believe that they have a right in justice to deprive citizens of this privilege, or proscribe them in their opinions, so long as a regard and reverence are shown to the laws and such religious opinions do not justify sedition nor conspiracy.


So, you see that AOF12 is not a blanket endorsement of bad laws and bad governments.
I never claimed that AoF12 is a blanket endorsement of bad laws and bad governments.

But I do find it interesting that you are relying on a pre-manifesto statement by JFS, while ignoring all of the context.

He made this statement during the time that the church was challenging anti-polygamy laws believing that the Supreme Court would overturn them as unconstitutional. When this effort failed what did the church do?

Did they say that God commanded that the people continue to resist what they believed were unjust laws or submit to them?


Wilford Woodruff was the last president of the church to receive literal revelation from the resurrected Savior, Jesus Christ. Because, in my opinion, he went against His commandments.


https://zomarah.wordpress.com/2010/10/0 ... evelation/
https://archive.is/tGxvr
Jesus Christ wrote: Thus saith the Lord to my servant Wilford. I, the Lord, have heard thy prayers and thy request, and will answer thee by the voice of my spirit.

Thus saith the Lord unto my servants the Presidency of My Church, who hold the Keys of the Kingdom of God on the earth. I the Lord hold the destiny of the courts in your midst, and the destiny of this nation, and all other nations of the earth, in mine own hands, and all that I have revealed and promised and decreed concerning the generation in which you live shall come to pass, and no power shall stay my hand.

Let not my servants who are called to the Presidency of my Church deny my word or my law, which concerns the salvation of the children of men.

Let them pray for the Holy Spirit which shall be given them to guide them in their acts. Place not yourselves in jeopardy to your enemies by promise. Your enemies seek your destruction and the destruction of my people. If the Saints will hearken unto my voice, and the counsel of my servants, the wicked shall not prevail.

Let my servants who officiate as your counselors before the courts make their pleadings as they are moved upon by the Holy Spirit, without any further pledges from the Priesthood, and they will be justified.

I, the Lord, will hold the courts, with the officers of government and the nation responsible for their acts towards the inhabitants of Zion.

I, Jesus Christ, the Saviour of the world, am in your midst. I am your advocate with the Father. Fear not, little flock, it is your Father’s good pleasure to give you the Kingdom. Fear not the wicked and ungodly.

Search the scriptures, for they are they which testify of me; also those revelations which I have given to my servant Joseph, and to all my servants since the world began, which are recorded in the records of divine truth.

Those revelations contain the judgments of God which are to be poured out upon all nations under the heavens, which include Great Babylon. These judgments are at the door. They will be fulfilled as God lives. Leave judgment with me, it is mine, saith the Lord. Watch the signs of the times and they will show the fulfillment of the words of the Lord.

Let my servants call upon the Lord in mighty prayer, retain the Holy Ghost as your constant companion and act as you are moved upon by that Spirit, and all will be well with you.

The wicked are fast ripening in iniquity, and they will be cut off by the judgments of God. Great events await you and this generation and are nigh at your doors. Awake! O Israel, and have faith in God and his promises and he will not forsake you. I the Lord will deliver my Saints from the dominion of the wicked in mine own due time and way.

I cannot deny my Word, neither in blessings nor judgments. Therefore let mine anointed gird up their loins, watch and be sober, and keep my commandments. Pray always and faint not. Exercise faith in the Lord and in the promises of God; be valiant in the testimony of Jesus Christ.

The eyes of the Lord and the Heavenly Hosts are watching over you and your acts. Therefore be faithful until I come. I come quickly to reward every man, according to the deeds done in the body. Even so, Amen.
Oh boy, still clinging to this argument I see.

Here's what Wilford Woodruff said about the Manifesto:
I have had some revelations of late, and very important ones to me, and I will tell you what the Lord has said to me. Let me bring your minds to what is termed the manifesto. …
The Lord has told me to ask the Latter-day Saints a question, and He also told me that if they would listen to what I said to them and answer the question put to them, by the Spirit and power of God, they would all answer alike, and they would all believe alike with regard to this matter.
The question is this: Which is the wisest course for the Latter-day Saints to pursue—to continue to attempt to practice plural marriage, with the laws of the nation against it and the opposition of sixty millions of people, and at the cost of the confiscation and loss of all the Temples, and the stopping of all the ordinances therein, both for the living and the dead, and the imprisonment of the First Presidency and Twelve and the heads of families in the Church, and the confiscation of personal property of the people (all of which of themselves would stop the practice); or, after doing and suffering what we have through our adherence to this principle to cease the practice and submit to the law, and through doing so leave the Prophets, Apostles and fathers at home, so that they can instruct the people and attend to the duties of the Church, and also leave the Temples in the hands of the Saints, so that they can attend to the ordinances of the Gospel, both for the living and the dead?
The Lord showed me by vision and revelation exactly what would take place if we did not stop this practice. If we had not stopped it, you would have had no use for … any of the men in this temple at Logan; for all ordinances would be stopped throughout the land of Zion. Confusion would reign throughout Israel, and many men would be made prisoners. This trouble would have come upon the whole Church, and we should have been compelled to stop the practice. Now, the question is, whether it should be stopped in this manner, or in the way the Lord has manifested to us, and leave our Prophets and Apostles and fathers free men, and the temples in the hands of the people, so that the dead may be redeemed. A large number has already been delivered from the prison house in the spirit world by this people, and shall the work go on or stop? This is the question I lay before the Latter-day Saints. You have to judge for yourselves. I want you to answer it for yourselves. I shall not answer it; but I say to you that that is exactly the condition we as a people would have been in had we not taken the course we have.
I saw exactly what would come to pass if there was not something done. I have had this spirit upon me for a long time. But I want to say this: I should have let all the temples go out of our hands; I should have gone to prison myself, and let every other man go there, had not the God of heaven commanded me to do what I did do; and when the hour came that I was commanded to do that, it was all clear to me. I went before the Lord, and I wrote what the Lord told me to write. …
Tell me InfoWarrior82, is claiming a vision a revelation? Yes or no?

Is saying that the Lord commanded me to do this claiming a revelation? Yes or no?

Is saying I wrote what the Lord told me to write claiming a revelation? Yes or no?

User avatar
InfoWarrior82
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 9307
Location: "There are 15 on the earth today, you can trust them completely." -President Nelson (Jan 2022)

Re: I'm confused;

Post by InfoWarrior82 »

LDS Watchman wrote: November 3rd, 2022, 8:44 am
InfoWarrior82 wrote: November 3rd, 2022, 8:34 am
LDS Watchman wrote: November 3rd, 2022, 8:30 am
InfoWarrior82 wrote: November 3rd, 2022, 7:38 am



https://journalofdiscourses.com/23/8



5 We believe that all men are bound to sustain and uphold the respective governments in which they reside, while protected in their inherent and inalienable rights by the laws of such governments; and that sedition and rebellion are unbecoming every citizen thus protected, and should be punished accordingly; and that all governments have a right to enact such laws as in their own judgments are best calculated to secure the public interest; at the same time, however, holding sacred the freedom of conscience.

6 We believe that every man should be honored in his station, rulers and magistrates as such, being placed for the protection of the innocent and the punishment of the guilty; and that to the laws all men owe respect and deference, as without them peace and harmony would be supplanted by anarchy and terror; human laws being instituted for the express purpose of regulating our interests as individuals and nations, between man and man; and divine laws given of heaven, prescribing rules on spiritual concerns, for faith and worship, both to be answered by man to his Maker.

7 We believe that rulers, states, and governments have a right, and are bound to enact laws for the protection of all citizens in the free exercise of their religious belief; but we do not believe that they have a right in justice to deprive citizens of this privilege, or proscribe them in their opinions, so long as a regard and reverence are shown to the laws and such religious opinions do not justify sedition nor conspiracy.


So, you see that AOF12 is not a blanket endorsement of bad laws and bad governments.
I never claimed that AoF12 is a blanket endorsement of bad laws and bad governments.

But I do find it interesting that you are relying on a pre-manifesto statement by JFS, while ignoring all of the context.

He made this statement during the time that the church was challenging anti-polygamy laws believing that the Supreme Court would overturn them as unconstitutional. When this effort failed what did the church do?

Did they say that God commanded that the people continue to resist what they believed were unjust laws or submit to them?


Wilford Woodruff was the last president of the church to receive literal revelation from the resurrected Savior, Jesus Christ. Because, in my opinion, he went against His commandments.


https://zomarah.wordpress.com/2010/10/0 ... evelation/
https://archive.is/tGxvr
Jesus Christ wrote: Thus saith the Lord to my servant Wilford. I, the Lord, have heard thy prayers and thy request, and will answer thee by the voice of my spirit.

Thus saith the Lord unto my servants the Presidency of My Church, who hold the Keys of the Kingdom of God on the earth. I the Lord hold the destiny of the courts in your midst, and the destiny of this nation, and all other nations of the earth, in mine own hands, and all that I have revealed and promised and decreed concerning the generation in which you live shall come to pass, and no power shall stay my hand.

Let not my servants who are called to the Presidency of my Church deny my word or my law, which concerns the salvation of the children of men.

Let them pray for the Holy Spirit which shall be given them to guide them in their acts. Place not yourselves in jeopardy to your enemies by promise. Your enemies seek your destruction and the destruction of my people. If the Saints will hearken unto my voice, and the counsel of my servants, the wicked shall not prevail.

Let my servants who officiate as your counselors before the courts make their pleadings as they are moved upon by the Holy Spirit, without any further pledges from the Priesthood, and they will be justified.

I, the Lord, will hold the courts, with the officers of government and the nation responsible for their acts towards the inhabitants of Zion.

I, Jesus Christ, the Saviour of the world, am in your midst. I am your advocate with the Father. Fear not, little flock, it is your Father’s good pleasure to give you the Kingdom. Fear not the wicked and ungodly.

Search the scriptures, for they are they which testify of me; also those revelations which I have given to my servant Joseph, and to all my servants since the world began, which are recorded in the records of divine truth.

Those revelations contain the judgments of God which are to be poured out upon all nations under the heavens, which include Great Babylon. These judgments are at the door. They will be fulfilled as God lives. Leave judgment with me, it is mine, saith the Lord. Watch the signs of the times and they will show the fulfillment of the words of the Lord.

Let my servants call upon the Lord in mighty prayer, retain the Holy Ghost as your constant companion and act as you are moved upon by that Spirit, and all will be well with you.

The wicked are fast ripening in iniquity, and they will be cut off by the judgments of God. Great events await you and this generation and are nigh at your doors. Awake! O Israel, and have faith in God and his promises and he will not forsake you. I the Lord will deliver my Saints from the dominion of the wicked in mine own due time and way.

I cannot deny my Word, neither in blessings nor judgments. Therefore let mine anointed gird up their loins, watch and be sober, and keep my commandments. Pray always and faint not. Exercise faith in the Lord and in the promises of God; be valiant in the testimony of Jesus Christ.

The eyes of the Lord and the Heavenly Hosts are watching over you and your acts. Therefore be faithful until I come. I come quickly to reward every man, according to the deeds done in the body. Even so, Amen.
Oh boy, still clinging to this argument I see.

Here's what Wilford Woodruff said about the Manifesto:
I have had some revelations of late, and very important ones to me, and I will tell you what the Lord has said to me. Let me bring your minds to what is termed the manifesto. …
The Lord has told me to ask the Latter-day Saints a question, and He also told me that if they would listen to what I said to them and answer the question put to them, by the Spirit and power of God, they would all answer alike, and they would all believe alike with regard to this matter.
The question is this: Which is the wisest course for the Latter-day Saints to pursue—to continue to attempt to practice plural marriage, with the laws of the nation against it and the opposition of sixty millions of people, and at the cost of the confiscation and loss of all the Temples, and the stopping of all the ordinances therein, both for the living and the dead, and the imprisonment of the First Presidency and Twelve and the heads of families in the Church, and the confiscation of personal property of the people (all of which of themselves would stop the practice); or, after doing and suffering what we have through our adherence to this principle to cease the practice and submit to the law, and through doing so leave the Prophets, Apostles and fathers at home, so that they can instruct the people and attend to the duties of the Church, and also leave the Temples in the hands of the Saints, so that they can attend to the ordinances of the Gospel, both for the living and the dead?
The Lord showed me by vision and revelation exactly what would take place if we did not stop this practice. If we had not stopped it, you would have had no use for … any of the men in this temple at Logan; for all ordinances would be stopped throughout the land of Zion. Confusion would reign throughout Israel, and many men would be made prisoners. This trouble would have come upon the whole Church, and we should have been compelled to stop the practice. Now, the question is, whether it should be stopped in this manner, or in the way the Lord has manifested to us, and leave our Prophets and Apostles and fathers free men, and the temples in the hands of the people, so that the dead may be redeemed. A large number has already been delivered from the prison house in the spirit world by this people, and shall the work go on or stop? This is the question I lay before the Latter-day Saints. You have to judge for yourselves. I want you to answer it for yourselves. I shall not answer it; but I say to you that that is exactly the condition we as a people would have been in had we not taken the course we have.
I saw exactly what would come to pass if there was not something done. I have had this spirit upon me for a long time. But I want to say this: I should have let all the temples go out of our hands; I should have gone to prison myself, and let every other man go there, had not the God of heaven commanded me to do what I did do; and when the hour came that I was commanded to do that, it was all clear to me. I went before the Lord, and I wrote what the Lord told me to write. …
Tell me InfoWarrior82, is claiming a vision a revelation? Yes or no?

Is saying that the Lord commanded me to do this claiming a revelation? Yes or no?

Is saying I wrote what the Lord told me to write claiming a revelation? Yes or no?


I believe that the above explanation from Wilford Woodruff was from his own heart, and did not come from the Lord. The Lord already gave him His words which Wilford wrote down. This stuff? From the adversary. It directly contradicted previously received revelation.

Do you know how President Woodruff died?

User avatar
gruden2.0
captain of 1,000
Posts: 1377

Re: I'm confused;

Post by gruden2.0 »

cab wrote: November 2nd, 2022, 8:45 pm
gruden2.0 wrote: November 2nd, 2022, 12:13 pm
cab wrote: November 2nd, 2022, 1:46 am
gruden2.0 wrote: October 30th, 2022, 3:13 pm

Decades ago, when I was a bit young to understand it, I was shown in a dream that it was a large field with dried-up bushes and trees. Those that were spiritually alive tried with great difficulty to push through the field to get to something of value. So you have greater and lesser spirits that are spiritually dead/inert/unproductive. While I did not see it in a dream, it was quite clear the field was ready to be burned.

The question is whether or not it will be burned due to uselessness, or because there was a great harvest of ripe grains, and now just chaff left?
Given your choices, I would say uselessness.
The imagery was not of grain, it was of trees, which have a spiritual significance (Joseph notes it once or twice in TPJS). There was more to the dream; I saw a gathering in the center, but I was not shown the final outcome, although it was easy to guess.

Oh yes, so much significance to the tree. The word of Christ which has been planted in our hearts will serve to prune and nourish our heart soil until a new creation sprouts, a tree like unto the tree from which the seed came…. And when we become this tree growing after the order of everlasting life, our ministry will be to drop that fruit, sharing the love of God, to others…. Which fruit contains the seeds to produce new trees in any hearts that are soft soil. And so it is in the vineyard of the kingdom of God… His love begets new plantings and harvesting worlds upon end.

But when the ground becomes hardened and impenetrable, then necessitates the field to be cleared and burned and made ready for new, more receptive, and more useful soil.
I don't think that was the plan ;)
Someone gifted in dream interpretation told me exactly what was being communicated. One aspect of it caught me by surprise, referring to a figure that comes up on this forum occasionally.

LDS Watchman
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 7227
Contact:

Re: I'm confused;

Post by LDS Watchman »

InfoWarrior82 wrote: November 3rd, 2022, 8:53 am
LDS Watchman wrote: November 3rd, 2022, 8:44 am
InfoWarrior82 wrote: November 3rd, 2022, 8:34 am
LDS Watchman wrote: November 3rd, 2022, 8:30 am

I never claimed that AoF12 is a blanket endorsement of bad laws and bad governments.

But I do find it interesting that you are relying on a pre-manifesto statement by JFS, while ignoring all of the context.

He made this statement during the time that the church was challenging anti-polygamy laws believing that the Supreme Court would overturn them as unconstitutional. When this effort failed what did the church do?

Did they say that God commanded that the people continue to resist what they believed were unjust laws or submit to them?


Wilford Woodruff was the last president of the church to receive literal revelation from the resurrected Savior, Jesus Christ. Because, in my opinion, he went against His commandments.


https://zomarah.wordpress.com/2010/10/0 ... evelation/
https://archive.is/tGxvr
Jesus Christ wrote: Thus saith the Lord to my servant Wilford. I, the Lord, have heard thy prayers and thy request, and will answer thee by the voice of my spirit.

Thus saith the Lord unto my servants the Presidency of My Church, who hold the Keys of the Kingdom of God on the earth. I the Lord hold the destiny of the courts in your midst, and the destiny of this nation, and all other nations of the earth, in mine own hands, and all that I have revealed and promised and decreed concerning the generation in which you live shall come to pass, and no power shall stay my hand.

Let not my servants who are called to the Presidency of my Church deny my word or my law, which concerns the salvation of the children of men.

Let them pray for the Holy Spirit which shall be given them to guide them in their acts. Place not yourselves in jeopardy to your enemies by promise. Your enemies seek your destruction and the destruction of my people. If the Saints will hearken unto my voice, and the counsel of my servants, the wicked shall not prevail.

Let my servants who officiate as your counselors before the courts make their pleadings as they are moved upon by the Holy Spirit, without any further pledges from the Priesthood, and they will be justified.

I, the Lord, will hold the courts, with the officers of government and the nation responsible for their acts towards the inhabitants of Zion.

I, Jesus Christ, the Saviour of the world, am in your midst. I am your advocate with the Father. Fear not, little flock, it is your Father’s good pleasure to give you the Kingdom. Fear not the wicked and ungodly.

Search the scriptures, for they are they which testify of me; also those revelations which I have given to my servant Joseph, and to all my servants since the world began, which are recorded in the records of divine truth.

Those revelations contain the judgments of God which are to be poured out upon all nations under the heavens, which include Great Babylon. These judgments are at the door. They will be fulfilled as God lives. Leave judgment with me, it is mine, saith the Lord. Watch the signs of the times and they will show the fulfillment of the words of the Lord.

Let my servants call upon the Lord in mighty prayer, retain the Holy Ghost as your constant companion and act as you are moved upon by that Spirit, and all will be well with you.

The wicked are fast ripening in iniquity, and they will be cut off by the judgments of God. Great events await you and this generation and are nigh at your doors. Awake! O Israel, and have faith in God and his promises and he will not forsake you. I the Lord will deliver my Saints from the dominion of the wicked in mine own due time and way.

I cannot deny my Word, neither in blessings nor judgments. Therefore let mine anointed gird up their loins, watch and be sober, and keep my commandments. Pray always and faint not. Exercise faith in the Lord and in the promises of God; be valiant in the testimony of Jesus Christ.

The eyes of the Lord and the Heavenly Hosts are watching over you and your acts. Therefore be faithful until I come. I come quickly to reward every man, according to the deeds done in the body. Even so, Amen.
Oh boy, still clinging to this argument I see.

Here's what Wilford Woodruff said about the Manifesto:
I have had some revelations of late, and very important ones to me, and I will tell you what the Lord has said to me. Let me bring your minds to what is termed the manifesto. …
The Lord has told me to ask the Latter-day Saints a question, and He also told me that if they would listen to what I said to them and answer the question put to them, by the Spirit and power of God, they would all answer alike, and they would all believe alike with regard to this matter.
The question is this: Which is the wisest course for the Latter-day Saints to pursue—to continue to attempt to practice plural marriage, with the laws of the nation against it and the opposition of sixty millions of people, and at the cost of the confiscation and loss of all the Temples, and the stopping of all the ordinances therein, both for the living and the dead, and the imprisonment of the First Presidency and Twelve and the heads of families in the Church, and the confiscation of personal property of the people (all of which of themselves would stop the practice); or, after doing and suffering what we have through our adherence to this principle to cease the practice and submit to the law, and through doing so leave the Prophets, Apostles and fathers at home, so that they can instruct the people and attend to the duties of the Church, and also leave the Temples in the hands of the Saints, so that they can attend to the ordinances of the Gospel, both for the living and the dead?
The Lord showed me by vision and revelation exactly what would take place if we did not stop this practice. If we had not stopped it, you would have had no use for … any of the men in this temple at Logan; for all ordinances would be stopped throughout the land of Zion. Confusion would reign throughout Israel, and many men would be made prisoners. This trouble would have come upon the whole Church, and we should have been compelled to stop the practice. Now, the question is, whether it should be stopped in this manner, or in the way the Lord has manifested to us, and leave our Prophets and Apostles and fathers free men, and the temples in the hands of the people, so that the dead may be redeemed. A large number has already been delivered from the prison house in the spirit world by this people, and shall the work go on or stop? This is the question I lay before the Latter-day Saints. You have to judge for yourselves. I want you to answer it for yourselves. I shall not answer it; but I say to you that that is exactly the condition we as a people would have been in had we not taken the course we have.
I saw exactly what would come to pass if there was not something done. I have had this spirit upon me for a long time. But I want to say this: I should have let all the temples go out of our hands; I should have gone to prison myself, and let every other man go there, had not the God of heaven commanded me to do what I did do; and when the hour came that I was commanded to do that, it was all clear to me. I went before the Lord, and I wrote what the Lord told me to write. …
Tell me InfoWarrior82, is claiming a vision a revelation? Yes or no?

Is saying that the Lord commanded me to do this claiming a revelation? Yes or no?

Is saying I wrote what the Lord told me to write claiming a revelation? Yes or no?


I believe that the above explanation from Wilford Woodruff was from his own heart, and did not come from the Lord. The Lord already gave him His words which Wilford wrote down. This stuff? From the adversary. It directly contradicted previously received revelation.

Do you know how President Woodruff died?
It's a fact that Wilford Woodruff very plainly and directly declared that God had shown him in vision what would happen to the church if they didn't stop practicing polygamy and commanded him to issue the Manifesto ending the practice.

You can believe he was lying or deceived if you want to. But I believe him.

And yes I know how he died. It's not what the fundamentalists claim.

User avatar
InfoWarrior82
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 9307
Location: "There are 15 on the earth today, you can trust them completely." -President Nelson (Jan 2022)

Re: I'm confused;

Post by InfoWarrior82 »

LDS Watchman wrote: November 3rd, 2022, 9:20 am
InfoWarrior82 wrote: November 3rd, 2022, 8:53 am
LDS Watchman wrote: November 3rd, 2022, 8:44 am
InfoWarrior82 wrote: November 3rd, 2022, 8:34 am



Wilford Woodruff was the last president of the church to receive literal revelation from the resurrected Savior, Jesus Christ. Because, in my opinion, he went against His commandments.


https://zomarah.wordpress.com/2010/10/0 ... evelation/
https://archive.is/tGxvr

Oh boy, still clinging to this argument I see.

Here's what Wilford Woodruff said about the Manifesto:
I have had some revelations of late, and very important ones to me, and I will tell you what the Lord has said to me. Let me bring your minds to what is termed the manifesto. …
The Lord has told me to ask the Latter-day Saints a question, and He also told me that if they would listen to what I said to them and answer the question put to them, by the Spirit and power of God, they would all answer alike, and they would all believe alike with regard to this matter.
The question is this: Which is the wisest course for the Latter-day Saints to pursue—to continue to attempt to practice plural marriage, with the laws of the nation against it and the opposition of sixty millions of people, and at the cost of the confiscation and loss of all the Temples, and the stopping of all the ordinances therein, both for the living and the dead, and the imprisonment of the First Presidency and Twelve and the heads of families in the Church, and the confiscation of personal property of the people (all of which of themselves would stop the practice); or, after doing and suffering what we have through our adherence to this principle to cease the practice and submit to the law, and through doing so leave the Prophets, Apostles and fathers at home, so that they can instruct the people and attend to the duties of the Church, and also leave the Temples in the hands of the Saints, so that they can attend to the ordinances of the Gospel, both for the living and the dead?
The Lord showed me by vision and revelation exactly what would take place if we did not stop this practice. If we had not stopped it, you would have had no use for … any of the men in this temple at Logan; for all ordinances would be stopped throughout the land of Zion. Confusion would reign throughout Israel, and many men would be made prisoners. This trouble would have come upon the whole Church, and we should have been compelled to stop the practice. Now, the question is, whether it should be stopped in this manner, or in the way the Lord has manifested to us, and leave our Prophets and Apostles and fathers free men, and the temples in the hands of the people, so that the dead may be redeemed. A large number has already been delivered from the prison house in the spirit world by this people, and shall the work go on or stop? This is the question I lay before the Latter-day Saints. You have to judge for yourselves. I want you to answer it for yourselves. I shall not answer it; but I say to you that that is exactly the condition we as a people would have been in had we not taken the course we have.
I saw exactly what would come to pass if there was not something done. I have had this spirit upon me for a long time. But I want to say this: I should have let all the temples go out of our hands; I should have gone to prison myself, and let every other man go there, had not the God of heaven commanded me to do what I did do; and when the hour came that I was commanded to do that, it was all clear to me. I went before the Lord, and I wrote what the Lord told me to write. …
Tell me InfoWarrior82, is claiming a vision a revelation? Yes or no?

Is saying that the Lord commanded me to do this claiming a revelation? Yes or no?

Is saying I wrote what the Lord told me to write claiming a revelation? Yes or no?


I believe that the above explanation from Wilford Woodruff was from his own heart, and did not come from the Lord. The Lord already gave him His words which Wilford wrote down. This stuff? From the adversary. It directly contradicted previously received revelation.

Do you know how President Woodruff died?
It's a fact that Wilford Woodruff very plainly and directly declared that God had shown him in vision what would happen to the church if they didn't stop practicing polygamy and commanded him to issue the Manifesto ending the practice.

You can believe he was lying or deceived if you want to. But I believe him.

And yes I know how he died. It's not what the fundamentalists claim.


Yes it's a fact that he declared that. But, you forget that this directly contradicts what the Lord had previously commanded only months prior. Why is this manifesto added to our canon, but the literal words of the Lord, only months prior, are left out of our canon of scripture? That's weird, right?

Who was he chumming around with when he died?

LDS Watchman
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 7227
Contact:

Re: I'm confused;

Post by LDS Watchman »

InfoWarrior82 wrote: November 3rd, 2022, 10:45 am
LDS Watchman wrote: November 3rd, 2022, 9:20 am
InfoWarrior82 wrote: November 3rd, 2022, 8:53 am
LDS Watchman wrote: November 3rd, 2022, 8:44 am

Oh boy, still clinging to this argument I see.

Here's what Wilford Woodruff said about the Manifesto:



Tell me InfoWarrior82, is claiming a vision a revelation? Yes or no?

Is saying that the Lord commanded me to do this claiming a revelation? Yes or no?

Is saying I wrote what the Lord told me to write claiming a revelation? Yes or no?


I believe that the above explanation from Wilford Woodruff was from his own heart, and did not come from the Lord. The Lord already gave him His words which Wilford wrote down. This stuff? From the adversary. It directly contradicted previously received revelation.

Do you know how President Woodruff died?
It's a fact that Wilford Woodruff very plainly and directly declared that God had shown him in vision what would happen to the church if they didn't stop practicing polygamy and commanded him to issue the Manifesto ending the practice.

You can believe he was lying or deceived if you want to. But I believe him.

And yes I know how he died. It's not what the fundamentalists claim.


Yes it's a fact that he declared that. But, you forget that this directly contradicts what the Lord had previously commanded only months prior. Why is this manifesto added to our canon, but the literal words of the Lord, only months prior, are left out of our canon of scripture? That's weird, right?

Who was he chumming around with when he died?
49 Verily, verily, I say unto you, that when I give a commandment to any of the sons of men to do a work unto my name, and those sons of men go with all their might and with all they have to perform that work, and cease not their diligence, and their enemies come upon them and hinder them from performing that work, behold, it behooveth me to require that work no more at the hands of those sons of men, but to accept of their offerings. (D&C 124)

And/or

32 I command and men obey not; I revoke and they receive not the blessing.
33 Then they say in their hearts: This is not the work of the Lord, for his promises are not fulfilled. But wo unto such, for their reward lurketh beneath, and not from above. (D&C 58)

User avatar
InfoWarrior82
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 9307
Location: "There are 15 on the earth today, you can trust them completely." -President Nelson (Jan 2022)

Re: I'm confused;

Post by InfoWarrior82 »

LDS Watchman wrote: November 3rd, 2022, 1:13 pm
InfoWarrior82 wrote: November 3rd, 2022, 10:45 am
LDS Watchman wrote: November 3rd, 2022, 9:20 am
InfoWarrior82 wrote: November 3rd, 2022, 8:53 am



I believe that the above explanation from Wilford Woodruff was from his own heart, and did not come from the Lord. The Lord already gave him His words which Wilford wrote down. This stuff? From the adversary. It directly contradicted previously received revelation.

Do you know how President Woodruff died?
It's a fact that Wilford Woodruff very plainly and directly declared that God had shown him in vision what would happen to the church if they didn't stop practicing polygamy and commanded him to issue the Manifesto ending the practice.

You can believe he was lying or deceived if you want to. But I believe him.

And yes I know how he died. It's not what the fundamentalists claim.


Yes it's a fact that he declared that. But, you forget that this directly contradicts what the Lord had previously commanded only months prior. Why is this manifesto added to our canon, but the literal words of the Lord, only months prior, are left out of our canon of scripture? That's weird, right?

Who was he chumming around with when he died?
49 Verily, verily, I say unto you, that when I give a commandment to any of the sons of men to do a work unto my name, and those sons of men go with all their might and with all they have to perform that work, and cease not their diligence, and their enemies come upon them and hinder them from performing that work, behold, it behooveth me to require that work no more at the hands of those sons of men, but to accept of their offerings. (D&C 124)

And/or

32 I command and men obey not; I revoke and they receive not the blessing.
33 Then they say in their hearts: This is not the work of the Lord, for his promises are not fulfilled. But wo unto such, for their reward lurketh beneath, and not from above. (D&C 58)


President Wilford and his quorums did not go with all their might. There was a divide within the priesthood of the church. He caved. And thus, guilty of the consequences of verses 32 & 33 respectively.


Who was he chumming around with when he died?

User avatar
cab
captain of 1,000
Posts: 2770
Location: ♫ I am a Mormon! ♫ And... dang it... a Mormon just believes! ♫

Re: I'm confused;

Post by cab »

gruden2.0 wrote: November 3rd, 2022, 9:02 am
cab wrote: November 2nd, 2022, 8:45 pm
gruden2.0 wrote: November 2nd, 2022, 12:13 pm
cab wrote: November 2nd, 2022, 1:46 am


The question is whether or not it will be burned due to uselessness, or because there was a great harvest of ripe grains, and now just chaff left?
Given your choices, I would say uselessness.
The imagery was not of grain, it was of trees, which have a spiritual significance (Joseph notes it once or twice in TPJS). There was more to the dream; I saw a gathering in the center, but I was not shown the final outcome, although it was easy to guess.

Oh yes, so much significance to the tree. The word of Christ which has been planted in our hearts will serve to prune and nourish our heart soil until a new creation sprouts, a tree like unto the tree from which the seed came…. And when we become this tree growing after the order of everlasting life, our ministry will be to drop that fruit, sharing the love of God, to others…. Which fruit contains the seeds to produce new trees in any hearts that are soft soil. And so it is in the vineyard of the kingdom of God… His love begets new plantings and harvesting worlds upon end.

But when the ground becomes hardened and impenetrable, then necessitates the field to be cleared and burned and made ready for new, more receptive, and more useful soil.
I don't think that was the plan ;)
Someone gifted in dream interpretation told me exactly what was being communicated. One aspect of it caught me by surprise, referring to a figure that comes up on this forum occasionally.
So when do we finally meet the DS?

LDS Watchman
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 7227
Contact:

Re: I'm confused;

Post by LDS Watchman »

InfoWarrior82 wrote: November 3rd, 2022, 1:42 pm
LDS Watchman wrote: November 3rd, 2022, 1:13 pm 49 Verily, verily, I say unto you, that when I give a commandment to any of the sons of men to do a work unto my name, and those sons of men go with all their might and with all they have to perform that work, and cease not their diligence, and their enemies come upon them and hinder them from performing that work, behold, it behooveth me to require that work no more at the hands of those sons of men, but to accept of their offerings. (D&C 124)

And/or

32 I command and men obey not; I revoke and they receive not the blessing.
33 Then they say in their hearts: This is not the work of the Lord, for his promises are not fulfilled. But wo unto such, for their reward lurketh beneath, and not from above. (D&C 58)


President Wilford and his quorums did not go with all their might. There was a divide within the priesthood of the church.
Bull crap. Wilford Woodruff and the other apostles did all they could to keep God's commandments. They spent years hiding and running from the law, putting their trust in God to deliver them. Wilford Woodruff did more to further the work of God and was more faithful to God than 99.9% of people in history.

These men were the faithful ones who were hindered by their enemies in D&C 124:49, whose offerings were accepted by God and who were no longer required to keep this commandment.
InfoWarrior82 wrote: November 3rd, 2022, 1:42 pm He caved.
Bull crap. He would have resisted it until the end had God not commanded him to issue the Manifesto and end the practice.
InfoWarrior82 wrote: November 3rd, 2022, 1:42 pm And thus, guilty of the consequences of verses 32 & 33 respectively.
There were many saints who rejected this commandment of God in the mid to late 1800s and therefore lost out on the promised blessings, per D&C 58:32, but not Wilford Woodruff and the others who sacrificed so much to keep this commandment.

And I think D&C 58:33 is actually talking at least in part about people like you, you who like to play 21st century armchair quarterback and condemn the brethren and the church because God took the command away and the blessings from those who were unworthy of them.

33 Then they say in their hearts: This is not the work of the Lord, for his promises are not fulfilled. But wo unto such, for their reward lurketh beneath, and not from above.

InfoWarrior82 wrote: November 3rd, 2022, 1:42 pm Who was he chumming around with when he died?
The faithful saints of God.

User avatar
InfoWarrior82
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 9307
Location: "There are 15 on the earth today, you can trust them completely." -President Nelson (Jan 2022)

Re: I'm confused;

Post by InfoWarrior82 »

LDS Watchman wrote: November 3rd, 2022, 6:23 pm
InfoWarrior82 wrote: November 3rd, 2022, 1:42 pm
LDS Watchman wrote: November 3rd, 2022, 1:13 pm 49 Verily, verily, I say unto you, that when I give a commandment to any of the sons of men to do a work unto my name, and those sons of men go with all their might and with all they have to perform that work, and cease not their diligence, and their enemies come upon them and hinder them from performing that work, behold, it behooveth me to require that work no more at the hands of those sons of men, but to accept of their offerings. (D&C 124)

And/or

32 I command and men obey not; I revoke and they receive not the blessing.
33 Then they say in their hearts: This is not the work of the Lord, for his promises are not fulfilled. But wo unto such, for their reward lurketh beneath, and not from above. (D&C 58)


President Wilford and his quorums did not go with all their might. There was a divide within the priesthood of the church.
Bull crap. Wilford Woodruff and the other apostles did all they could to keep God's commandments. They spent years hiding and running from the law, putting their trust in God to deliver them. Wilford Woodruff did more to further the work of God and was more faithful to God than 99.9% of people in history.

These men were the faithful ones who were hindered by their enemies in D&C 124:49, whose offerings were accepted by God and who were no longer required to keep this commandment.
InfoWarrior82 wrote: November 3rd, 2022, 1:42 pm He caved.
Bull crap. He would have resisted it until the end had God not commanded him to issue the Manifesto and end the practice.
InfoWarrior82 wrote: November 3rd, 2022, 1:42 pm And thus, guilty of the consequences of verses 32 & 33 respectively.
There were many saints who rejected this commandment of God in the mid to late 1800s and therefore lost out on the promised blessings, per D&C 58:32, but not Wilford Woodruff and the others who sacrificed so much to keep this commandment.

And I think D&C 58:33 is actually talking at least in part about people like you, you who like to play 21st century armchair quarterback and condemn the brethren and the church because God took the command away and the blessings from those who were unworthy of them.

33 Then they say in their hearts: This is not the work of the Lord, for his promises are not fulfilled. But wo unto such, for their reward lurketh beneath, and not from above.

InfoWarrior82 wrote: November 3rd, 2022, 1:42 pm Who was he chumming around with when he died?
The faithful saints of God.


Sorry, but I'll take the literal words of Jesus Christ instead of the words of a man. I believe he caved to fear in the end instead of acting with faith.

And you're wrong. He died in San Francisco immediately after wining and dining with Bohemian Grove members.

What are your thoughts on why he was the last church president to receive literal word for word revelation from Jesus Christ to the world?

LDS Watchman
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 7227
Contact:

Re: I'm confused;

Post by LDS Watchman »

InfoWarrior82 wrote: November 3rd, 2022, 6:37 pm
Sorry, but I'll take the literal words of Jesus Christ instead of the words of a man.
The President of the church said that he had a vision and that God commanded him to write something and told him exactly what to write. And this President of the church had proven himself as a faithful apostle and servant of Jesus Christ over decades.

That's not the words of man bud.

But your words speaking evil of Wilford and his vision and revelation to issue the Manifesto sure are.
InfoWarrior82 wrote: November 3rd, 2022, 6:37 pm I believe he caved to fear in the end instead of acting with faith.
You can believe whatever you want, but your belief doesn't equal truth. And considering how warped some of your views are and how bitter and angry you are, I don't put much stock into what you believe.
InfoWarrior82 wrote: November 3rd, 2022, 6:37 pm And you're wrong. He died in San Francisco immediately after wining and dining with Bohemian Grove members.
I know where he died and know that he met with the Bohemian Grove members. Jesus also ate and drank with the sinners and died. Guess he was killed because God was punishing him for that right? Good grief.
InfoWarrior82 wrote: November 3rd, 2022, 6:37 pm What are your thoughts on why he was the last church president to receive literal word for word revelation from Jesus Christ to the world?
I don't think he was. And I don't think you understand how these "thus saith the Lord" revelations are received anyway. They are received by the Spirit to the prophet. There isn't some audible voice dictating it.

And anything the the servants of God say when moved upon by the Spirit is the word of the Lord, the mind of the Lord, and the voice of the Lord, etc. They are literally his words whether they are said in the first person as if out of his own mouth or not.

4 And whatsoever they shall speak when moved upon by the Holy Ghost shall be scripture, shall be the will of the Lord, shall be the mind of the Lord, shall be the word of the Lord, shall be the voice of the Lord, and the power of God unto salvation.

User avatar
InfoWarrior82
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 9307
Location: "There are 15 on the earth today, you can trust them completely." -President Nelson (Jan 2022)

Re: I'm confused;

Post by InfoWarrior82 »

LDS Watchman wrote: November 3rd, 2022, 6:58 pm
InfoWarrior82 wrote: November 3rd, 2022, 6:37 pm
Sorry, but I'll take the literal words of Jesus Christ instead of the words of a man.
The President of the church said that he had a vision and that God commanded him to write something and told him exactly what to write. And this President of the church had proven himself as a faithful apostle and servant of Jesus Christ over decades.

That's not the words of man bud.

But your words speaking evil of Wilford and his vision and revelation to issue the Manifesto sure are.
InfoWarrior82 wrote: November 3rd, 2022, 6:37 pm I believe he caved to fear in the end instead of acting with faith.
You can believe whatever you want, but your belief doesn't equal truth. And considering how warped some of your views are and how bitter and angry you are, I don't put much stock into what you believe.
InfoWarrior82 wrote: November 3rd, 2022, 6:37 pm And you're wrong. He died in San Francisco immediately after wining and dining with Bohemian Grove members.
I know where he died and know that he met with the Bohemian Grove members. Jesus also ate and drank with the sinners and died. Guess he was killed because God was punishing him for that right? Good grief.
InfoWarrior82 wrote: November 3rd, 2022, 6:37 pm What are your thoughts on why he was the last church president to receive literal word for word revelation from Jesus Christ to the world?
I don't think he was. And I don't think you understand how the these "thus saith the Lord" revelations are received anyway. They are received by the Spirit to the prophet. There isn't some audible voice dictating it.

And anything the the servants of God say when moved upon by the Spirit is the word of the Lord, the mind of the Lord, and the voice of the Lord, etc. They are literally his words whether they are said in the first person as if out of his own mouth or not.

4 And whatsoever they shall speak when moved upon by the Holy Ghost shall be scripture, shall be the will of the Lord, shall be the mind of the Lord, shall be the word of the Lord, shall be the voice of the Lord, and the power of God unto salvation.


Look, here are the facts:

1. We have a literal revelation with the literal words of Jesus Christ commanding the prophet NOT TO CAVE TO GOVERNMENT DEMANDS with a promise that the saints will be kept safe by His hand.
2. We have the words of a man who says God told him to directly contradict the literal revelation he got.
3. The church was broke.
4. Gadianton Robbers invited him to San Francisco to have a party together.
5. He died like a day later.
6. There's no proof any church president after W.W. received a literal revelation from Jesus Christ in first person narrative.

I'm sorry, but it doesn't add up.

Locked