Hugh Nibley explains the five laws covenanted to in the Temple

[Luke]

I was reading "Approaching Zion" recently and found these brilliant explanations by Nibley on how the laws covenanted to in the Temple are given so as to build on top of the previous one, step-by-step. They follow each other in succession, right up to the end goal of consecration. He is describing how the Temple ordinances have been conducted, in both ancient and modern times. Two quotes:

• "(1) Do you, first of all, agree to do things his way rather than your way—to follow the law of God? (2) If so, will you be obedient to him, no matter what he asks of you? (3) Will you, specifically, be willing to sacrifice anything he asks you for? (4) Will you at all times behave morally and soberly? (5) Finally, if God asks you to part with your worldly possessions by consecrating them all to his work, will you give his own back to him to be distributed as he sees fit, not as you think wise?
  That last test has been by far the hardest of all, and few indeed have chosen that strait and narrow way." (Hugh Nibley, "We Will Still Weep for Zion", 1984, as quoted in The Collected Works of Hugh Nibley, Vol. 9, Approaching Zion, pg. 342)

• "One does not enter lightly into such a covenant. To organize a race of priests in ancient as in modern days, God processed all volunteers by a series of preparatory steps. First, there is an initiatory stage in which one is physically set apart from the world: actually washed, anointed, given a protective garment, and clothed in sanctified robes. This is merely preliminary and qualifies one to proceed, in earnest not of what one has become, but of what one may and wishes to become.
  After the initiatory, the candidates are assembled and asked (and this we find in the Dead Sea Scrolls as well as in many other ancient works): 'Do you agree and are you resolved to do things his way rather than your way—to follow the law of God?' The candidate is not told at this time what the law of God requires, only whether he is willing to trust God's judgment and accept it no matter what it is. After that, all argument is out of the question.
  Next the candidate is asked, 'If so, will you be obedient to him no matter what he asks of you?'—a commitment to obedience before demand is made.
  The next step is more specific and more serious: 'Will you willingly sacrifice anything he asks for, including your own life?'
  Whoever accepts this in the solemnity of the occasion may easily relax his resolve in days that follow, and so the next question is, 'Will you at all times behave morally and soberly?'—that is, take all this very seriously, not just now but every day throughout your life. Thus a pattern of life is set to implement this. Your determination must be confirmed by your deportment at all times. This is the law of the gospel.
  Finally God says, 'Very well, this is what I want you to do' (see Deuteronomy 5:6)." (Hugh Nibley, "Law of Consecration", 6 February 1986, as quoted in The Collected Works of Hugh Nibley, Vol. 9, Approaching Zion, pg. 424-425)

[JLHPROF]

I was reading "Approaching Zion" recently and found these brilliant explanations by Nibley on how the laws covenanted to in the Temple are given so as to build on top of the previous one, step-by-step. They follow each other in succession, right up to the end goal of consecration. He is describing how the Temple ordinances have been conducted, in both ancient and modern times. Two quotes:

• "(1) Do you, first of all, agree to do things his way rather than your way—to follow the law of God? (2) If so, will you be obedient to him, no matter what he asks of you? (3) Will you, specifically, be willing to sacrifice anything he asks you for? (4) Will you at all times behave morally and soberly? (5) Finally, if God asks you to part with your worldly possessions by consecrating them all to his work, will you give his own back to him to be distributed as he sees fit, not as you think wise?
  That last test has been by far the hardest of all, and few indeed have chosen that strait and narrow way." (Hugh Nibley, "We Will Still Weep for Zion", 1984, as quoted in The Collected Works of Hugh Nibley, Vol. 9, Approaching Zion, pg. 342)

• "One does not enter lightly into such a covenant. To organize a race of priests in ancient as in modern days, God processed all volunteers by a series of preparatory steps. First, there is an initiatory stage in which one is physically set apart from the world: actually washed, anointed, given a protective garment, and clothed in sanctified robes. This is merely preliminary and qualifies one to proceed, in earnest not of what one has become, but of what one may and wishes to become.
  After the initiatory, the candidates are assembled and asked (and this we find in the Dead Sea Scrolls as well as in many other ancient works): 'Do you agree and are you resolved to do things his way rather than your way—to follow the law of God?' The candidate is not told at this time what the law of God requires, only whether he is willing to trust God's judgment and accept it no matter what it is. After that, all argument is out of the question.
  Next the candidate is asked, 'If so, will you be obedient to him no matter what he asks of you?'—a commitment to obedience before demand is made.
  The next step is more specific and more serious: 'Will you willingly sacrifice anything he asks for, including your own life?'
  Whoever accepts this in the solemnity of the occasion may easily relax his resolve in days that follow, and so the next question is, 'Will you at all times behave morally and soberly?'—that is, take all this very seriously, not just now but every day throughout your life. Thus a pattern of life is set to implement this. Your determination must be confirmed by your deportment at all times. This is the law of the gospel.
  Finally God says, 'Very well, this is what I want you to do' (see Deuteronomy 5:6)." (Hugh Nibley, "Law of Consecration", 6 February 1986, as quoted in The Collected Works of Hugh Nibley, Vol. 9, Approaching Zion, pg. 424-425)

"After the initiatory, the candidates are assembled and asked (and this we find in the Dead Sea Scrolls as well as in many other ancient works): 'Do you agree and are you resolved to do things his way rather than your way—to follow the law of God?' The candidate is not told at this time what the law of God requires, only whether he is willing to trust God's judgment and accept it no matter what it is. After that, all argument is out of the question.
Next the candidate is asked, 'If so, will you be obedient to him no matter what he asks of you?'—a commitment to obedience before demand is made."

You mean you don't get to know what you're agreeing to do in advance, go away for a while, and confirm that you agree with it and confirm that it's what you think God wants? You just have to obey?
Crazy!

[marc]

Approaching Zion is my absolute favorite book and number one in my library.

[TheDuke]

Interesting because I'm currently reading NIbley's book on OT studies. He makes good sense of things. I mentioned the other day that if the book was written today, he'd probably get the X for some comments.

Also, I think when we covenant with god about each law, the covenants evolve as we progress, which is why it is hard to nail them down. Each law and covenant seems to have shallower and deeper levels, which is why we have so much diversity on this forum. Many are at different levels of understanding for the different laws (and associated covenants).

[Niemand]

The trouble with the mainstream LDS is that "God's will" is supposed to be whatever the FP says. Like promoting the notorious "Godsend" of 2021 which has poisoned our society in more ways than one. Do we really want to consecrate everything to Davos? Seems that the world is trying to do so and the LDS by a more indirect route.

Not a dig at you, Luke, I know some of your basic views on this matter and think we agree on at least some things.

[marc]

Interesting because I'm currently reading NIbley's book on OT studies. He makes good sense of things. I mentioned the other day that if the book was written today, he'd probably get the X for some comments.

Also, I think when we covenant with god about each law, the covenants evolve as we progress, which is why it is hard to nail them down. Each law and covenant seems to have shallower and deeper levels, which is why we have so much diversity on this forum. Many are at different levels of understanding for the different laws (and associated covenants).

I have that book, too. Looking forward to reading it. I'm eager to have the entire collected works.

[Robin Hood]

Approaching Zion is my absolute favorite book and number one in my library.

When I first read it I couldn't put it down.

[JLHPROF]

Interesting because I'm currently reading NIbley's book on OT studies. He makes good sense of things. I mentioned the other day that if the book was written today, he'd probably get the X for some comments.

Also, I think when we covenant with god about each law, the covenants evolve as we progress, which is why it is hard to nail them down. Each law and covenant seems to have shallower and deeper levels, which is why we have so much diversity on this forum. Many are at different levels of understanding for the different laws (and associated covenants).

I have that book, too. Looking forward to reading it. I'm eager to have the entire collected works.

Temple and Cosmos is an absolute must read.

[Luke]

The trouble with the mainstream LDS is that "God's will" is supposed to be whatever the FP says. Like promoting the notorious "Godsend" of 2021 which has poisoned our society in more ways than one. Do we really want to consecrate everything to Davos? Seems that the world is trying to do so and the LDS by a more indirect route.

Not a dig at you, Luke, I know some of your basic views on this matter and think we agree on at least some things.

I don’t think that the actual Temple covenants as instituted by God have anything to do with the LDS Church, but everything to do with the laws God has instituted. I’m sure we agree on that though.

[Niemand]

The trouble with the mainstream LDS is that "God's will" is supposed to be whatever the FP says. Like promoting the notorious "Godsend" of 2021 which has poisoned our society in more ways than one. Do we really want to consecrate everything to Davos? Seems that the world is trying to do so and the LDS by a more indirect route.

Not a dig at you, Luke, I know some of your basic views on this matter and think we agree on at least some things.

I don’t think that the actual Temple covenants as instituted by God have anything to do with the LDS Church, but everything to do with the laws God has instituted. I’m sure we agree on that though.

It's all definitions. These things should be of God, but for some it has meant turning themselves into pin cushions recently because Pres. Nelson told them to. I never did, thank God, but I know many who did.

Do I agree with giving time and money to build up God's kingdom? Yes. Do I think all the time and money I give to the institution is doing that? No. (Although some things we do at church are godly.)

My temple covenants are made with sincerity to God. I probably end up breaking them occasionally and I'm not a fan of the endowment to put it bluntly... but I did it as a covenant between me and God. I don't even bother with General Conference nowadays or subscribe to Ensign.

[TheDuke]

It is always this way. Jesus honored the temple even with the evil HP running it. The prayers and covenants are still valid. I know it says CoJCoLDS in covenants but, I'm sure they were the same issues anciently. But, unlike Luke, I don't think you can just make them up on your own without authority and knowledge (and I'm not a follower of Wooley and others with their claims of both). So, we have the best we have.

Again, I must say that it people pondered the purpose of the endowment and where it fits in exaltation, it would make more sense. It is a bit twisted due to misunderstandings and traditions but hit the mark as far a god is concerned.

We never even discuss baptism wording and such. We call it a covenant but not is made at the time. We all believe baptism is required but we have much more vagueness and changes to baptism since Jesus and John the Baptist than the endowment. So, it appears the issues with the endowment is so few (including LDS leaders and temple workers) really know the purpose and without knowing the purpose it is not possible to judge it, other than outwardly with the understandings of men, mingled with ancient scripture.

[ParticleMan]

As there may be some confusion on this point, having a perfect knowledge is not a prerequisite for action. We are not required to know what is coming before it comes. We are to act in faith, which is prerequisite for blessings.


Moroni 4:3
". . . that they may eat in remembrance of the body of thy Son, and witness unto thee, O God, the Eternal Father, that they are willing to take upon them the name of thy Son, and always remember him, and keep his commandments which he hath given them . . . ."

Moroni 5:2
". . . that they may witness unto thee, O God, the Eternal Father, that they do always remember him . . . ."

Ether 3:11–13
"And the Lord said unto him: Believest thou the words which I shall speak?

"And he answered: Yea, Lord, I know that thou speakest the truth, for thou art a God of truth, and canst not lie.

"And when he had said these words, behold, the Lord showed himself unto him, and said: Because thou knowest these things ye are redeemed from the fall; therefore ye are brought back into my presence; therefore I show myself unto you."

D&C 131:5–6
". . . a man’s knowing that he is sealed up unto eternal life . . . . It is impossible for a man to be saved in ignorance."

[innocentoldguy]

The trouble with the mainstream LDS is that "God's will" is supposed to be whatever the FP says. Like promoting the notorious "Godsend" of 2021 which has poisoned our society in more ways than one. Do we really want to consecrate everything to Davos? Seems that the world is trying to do so and the LDS by a more indirect route.

Not a dig at you, Luke, I know some of your basic views on this matter and think we agree on at least some things.

Just to make sure I'm understanding your position: Are you saying that obeying the prophet is "trouble"? Once you separate the Lord from his prophet, you've started jogging down the road to apostasy, my friend.

[Niemand]

The trouble with the mainstream LDS is that "God's will" is supposed to be whatever the FP says. Like promoting the notorious "Godsend" of 2021 which has poisoned our society in more ways than one. Do we really want to consecrate everything to Davos? Seems that the world is trying to do so and the LDS by a more indirect route.

Not a dig at you, Luke, I know some of your basic views on this matter and think we agree on at least some things.

Just to make sure I'm understanding your position: Are you saying that obeying the prophet is "trouble"? Once you separate the Lord from his prophet, you've started jogging down the road to apostasy, my friend.

1) Do you support Davos?

2) I'd be more concerned about anyone pushing a shot developed from foetal cell lines.* Do you think it was godly and holy for President Nelson to suggest we inject ourselves with dead baby parts? If you support this, maybe it is you that is in apostasy, my friend. It is an abortion in more ways than one. If Jesus' NT followers could fall into Apostasy after meeting him in person, so can RMN who has apparently never met him.

I gained a clear witness that these things were a precursor to the Mark.

* https://www.nationalgeographic.com/scie ... 9-vaccines

[innocentoldguy]

The trouble with the mainstream LDS is that "God's will" is supposed to be whatever the FP says. Like promoting the notorious "Godsend" of 2021 which has poisoned our society in more ways than one. Do we really want to consecrate everything to Davos? Seems that the world is trying to do so and the LDS by a more indirect route.

Not a dig at you, Luke, I know some of your basic views on this matter and think we agree on at least some things.

Just to make sure I'm understanding your position: Are you saying that obeying the prophet is "trouble"? Once you separate the Lord from his prophet, you've started jogging down the road to apostasy, my friend.

1) Do you support Davos?

Be specific.

2) I'd be more concerned about anyone pushing a shot developed from foetal cell lines.* Do you think it was godly and holy for President Nelson to suggest we inject ourselves with dead baby parts? If you support this, maybe it is you that is in apostasy, my friend. It is an abortion in more ways than one. If Jesus' NT followers could fall into Apostasy after meeting him in person, so can RMN who has apparently never met him.

There are so many things wrong with this paragraph:

1. There are no aborted fetal cells in any of the vaccines. Johnson & Johnson used "fetal cell lines," which are laboratory-grown, during their testing and development, but the vaccine doesn't contain fetal cell lines or fetal cells. These same fetal cell lines are also used in the testing and development of acetaminophen, ibuprofen, aspirin, and to treat Alzheimer's and hypertension. Did you bother to read the site you're using as a reference in your comment?

2. President Nelson didn't tell you to get vaccinated. He said that he had been praying for a vaccine, considered the fact that one arrived a "godsend," and then told members to consult the Holy Ghost and their medical professionals to see if getting vaccinated was right for them.

3. Meeting Christ in person is NOT what gives people a testimony of the truthfulness of the gospel. That can only be obtained through the Holy Ghost. This is why denying Christ isn't an unpardonable sin but denying the Holy Ghost is.

I gained a clear witness that these things were a precursor to the Mark.

* https://www.nationalgeographic.com/scie ... 9-vaccines

By completely failing to understand your own citation?

[innocentoldguy]

The trouble with the mainstream LDS is that "God's will" is supposed to be whatever the FP says. Like promoting the notorious "Godsend" of 2021 which has poisoned our society in more ways than one. Do we really want to consecrate everything to Davos? Seems that the world is trying to do so and the LDS by a more indirect route.

Not a dig at you, Luke, I know some of your basic views on this matter and think we agree on at least some things.

I don’t think that the actual Temple covenants as instituted by God have anything to do with the LDS Church, but everything to do with the laws God has instituted. I’m sure we agree on that though.

Where else on earth do you find those laws and the priesthood authority necessary to live up to them?

[Wondering Wendy]

1. There are no aborted fetal cells in any of the vaccines. Johnson & Johnson used "fetal cell lines," which are laboratory-grown, during their testing and development, but the vaccine doesn't contain fetal cell lines or fetal cells. These same fetal cell lines are also used in the testing and development of acetaminophen, ibuprofen, aspirin, and to treat Alzheimer's and hypertension. Did you bother to read the site you're using as a reference in your comment?

This gross justification does not in any way make the jabs OK. Being lab grown does not justify the initial aborted baby. Using murdered baby parts for any reason is disgusting.

From the Book of Jasher:

76:28 And when the Lord had inflicted the plague upon Pharaoh king of Egypt, he asked his wise men and sorcerers to cure him.

29 And his wise men and sorcerers said unto him, That if the blood of little children were put into the wounds he would be healed.

30 And Pharaoh hearkened to them, and sent his ministers to Goshen to the children of Israel to take their little children.

31 And Pharaoh's ministers went and took the infants of the children of Israel from the bosoms of their mothers by force, and they brought them to Pharaoh daily, a child each day, and the physicians killed them and applied them to the plague; thus did they all the days.

32 And the number of the children which Pharaoh slew was three hundred and seventy-five.

33 But the Lord hearkened not to the physicians of the king of Egypt, and the plague went on increasing mightily.

And, yes, I am consistent. I no longer partake of any of these products or foods that use or have been tested on aborted baby parts. I try my best to be aware of the ones that have been. I have repented unto the Lord for ignorantly partaking of any of these things in the past.

It is gross and satanic. It is getting gain from the death of innocents. So, no, I cannot in good conscience call anyone who recommends these things a person of God in any way, shape or form, let alone a true prophet actually sent by Him.

Do you really think these lab-grown baby parts contain no blood of the innocent crying out to the Father in accusation?

[innocentoldguy]

1. There are no aborted fetal cells in any of the vaccines. Johnson & Johnson used "fetal cell lines," which are laboratory-grown, during their testing and development, but the vaccine doesn't contain fetal cell lines or fetal cells. These same fetal cell lines are also used in the testing and development of acetaminophen, ibuprofen, aspirin, and to treat Alzheimer's and hypertension. Did you bother to read the site you're using as a reference in your comment?

This gross justification does not in any way make the jabs OK. Being lab grown does not justify the initial aborted baby. Using murdered baby parts for any reason is disgusting.

From the Book of Jasher:

76:28 And when the Lord had inflicted the plague upon Pharaoh king of Egypt, he asked his wise men and sorcerers to cure him.

29 And his wise men and sorcerers said unto him, That if the blood of little children were put into the wounds he would be healed.

30 And Pharaoh hearkened to them, and sent his ministers to Goshen to the children of Israel to take their little children.

31 And Pharaoh's ministers went and took the infants of the children of Israel from the bosoms of their mothers by force, and they brought them to Pharaoh daily, a child each day, and the physicians killed them and applied them to the plague; thus did they all the days.

32 And the number of the children which Pharaoh slew was three hundred and seventy-five.

33 But the Lord hearkened not to the physicians of the king of Egypt, and the plague went on increasing mightily.

And, yes, I am consistent. I no longer partake of any of these products or foods that use or have been tested on aborted baby parts. I try my best to be aware of the ones that have been. I have repented unto the Lord for ignorantly partaking of any of these things in the past.

It is gross and satanic. It is getting gain from the death of innocents. So, no, I cannot in good conscience call anyone who recommends these things a person of God in any way, shape or form, let alone a true prophet actually sent by Him.

Do you really think these lab-grown baby parts contain no blood of the innocent crying out to the Father in accusation?

Justification? I don't know what you're talking about. I simply stated the fact that the vaccines DO NOT contain fetal cells or fetal cell lines, and that we use those same fetal lines in testing and developing a wide variety of other drugs and treatments. You do understand that pointing out that something is a certain way isn't an endorsement of it, right?

I agree.

That's your choice to make and your loss to endure.

[Wondering Wendy]

1. There are no aborted fetal cells in any of the vaccines. Johnson & Johnson used "fetal cell lines," which are laboratory-grown, during their testing and development, but the vaccine doesn't contain fetal cell lines or fetal cells. These same fetal cell lines are also used in the testing and development of acetaminophen, ibuprofen, aspirin, and to treat Alzheimer's and hypertension. Did you bother to read the site you're using as a reference in your comment?

This gross justification does not in any way make the jabs OK. Being lab grown does not justify the initial aborted baby. Using murdered baby parts for any reason is disgusting.

From the Book of Jasher:

76:28 And when the Lord had inflicted the plague upon Pharaoh king of Egypt, he asked his wise men and sorcerers to cure him.

29 And his wise men and sorcerers said unto him, That if the blood of little children were put into the wounds he would be healed.

30 And Pharaoh hearkened to them, and sent his ministers to Goshen to the children of Israel to take their little children.

31 And Pharaoh's ministers went and took the infants of the children of Israel from the bosoms of their mothers by force, and they brought them to Pharaoh daily, a child each day, and the physicians killed them and applied them to the plague; thus did they all the days.

32 And the number of the children which Pharaoh slew was three hundred and seventy-five.

33 But the Lord hearkened not to the physicians of the king of Egypt, and the plague went on increasing mightily.

And, yes, I am consistent. I no longer partake of any of these products or foods that use or have been tested on aborted baby parts. I try my best to be aware of the ones that have been. I have repented unto the Lord for ignorantly partaking of any of these things in the past.

It is gross and satanic. It is getting gain from the death of innocents. So, no, I cannot in good conscience call anyone who recommends these things a person of God in any way, shape or form, let alone a true prophet actually sent by Him.

Do you really think these lab-grown baby parts contain no blood of the innocent crying out to the Father in accusation?

Justification? I don't know what you're talking about. I simply stated the fact that the vaccines DO NOT contain fetal cells or fetal cell lines, and that we use those same fetal lines in testing and developing a wide variety of other drugs and treatments. You do understand that pointing out that something is a certain way isn't an endorsement of it, right?

I agree.

That's your choice to make and your loss to endure.

It sure sounded like you were downplaying the death of these babies to me, as if growing their tissue in a lab and only using for it for testing was actually better, somehow. I am glad you agree.

So, how do you justify their acceptance of the jab? How do you justify them getting gain on the murder of innocents? And calling such gain a godsend?

Also, I have no loss. I have gained unimaginably. I hear from the Lord just fine on my own. If these men actually speak with the tongue of angels, someday, I will listen as the Spirit directs.

[Original_Intent]

Approaching Zion is my absolute favorite book and number one in my library.

Even above Following the Light of Christ into His Presence? That's my favorite, I think. Or maybe The Law. Love Approaching Zion too.

[innocentoldguy]

1. There are no aborted fetal cells in any of the vaccines. Johnson & Johnson used "fetal cell lines," which are laboratory-grown, during their testing and development, but the vaccine doesn't contain fetal cell lines or fetal cells. These same fetal cell lines are also used in the testing and development of acetaminophen, ibuprofen, aspirin, and to treat Alzheimer's and hypertension. Did you bother to read the site you're using as a reference in your comment?

This gross justification does not in any way make the jabs OK. Being lab grown does not justify the initial aborted baby. Using murdered baby parts for any reason is disgusting.

From the Book of Jasher:

76:28 And when the Lord had inflicted the plague upon Pharaoh king of Egypt, he asked his wise men and sorcerers to cure him.

29 And his wise men and sorcerers said unto him, That if the blood of little children were put into the wounds he would be healed.

30 And Pharaoh hearkened to them, and sent his ministers to Goshen to the children of Israel to take their little children.

31 And Pharaoh's ministers went and took the infants of the children of Israel from the bosoms of their mothers by force, and they brought them to Pharaoh daily, a child each day, and the physicians killed them and applied them to the plague; thus did they all the days.

32 And the number of the children which Pharaoh slew was three hundred and seventy-five.

33 But the Lord hearkened not to the physicians of the king of Egypt, and the plague went on increasing mightily.

And, yes, I am consistent. I no longer partake of any of these products or foods that use or have been tested on aborted baby parts. I try my best to be aware of the ones that have been. I have repented unto the Lord for ignorantly partaking of any of these things in the past.

It is gross and satanic. It is getting gain from the death of innocents. So, no, I cannot in good conscience call anyone who recommends these things a person of God in any way, shape or form, let alone a true prophet actually sent by Him.

Do you really think these lab-grown baby parts contain no blood of the innocent crying out to the Father in accusation?

Justification? I don't know what you're talking about. I simply stated the fact that the vaccines DO NOT contain fetal cells or fetal cell lines, and that we use those same fetal lines in testing and developing a wide variety of other drugs and treatments. You do understand that pointing out that something is a certain way isn't an endorsement of it, right?

I agree.

That's your choice to make and your loss to endure.

It sure sounded like you were downplaying the death of these babies to me, as if growing their tissue in a lab and only using for it for testing was actually better, somehow. I am glad you agree.

So, how do you justify their acceptance of the jab? How do you justify them getting gain on the murder of innocents? And calling such gain a godsend?

Also, I have no loss. I have gained unimaginably. I hear from the Lord just fine on my own. If these men actually speak with the tongue of angels, someday, I will listen as the Spirit directs.

I'm not downplaying anything. I'm just telling you the facts. A lot of our current medical science exists because of death, torture, and mutilation. Some knowledge came from abusing animals. Some medical advances occurred because Nazi Germany conducted evil medical experiments on people. Some occurred because of the lethal human experimentation conducted by Unit 731 during WWII. Some have occurred because of abortion (I believe modern fetal cell lines originated from three aborted children from the 70s).

Here is a short list of some of the myriad things we enjoy today as a direct result of the above mentioned atrocities:

• Sulfa drugs.
• Hypothermia treatments.
• Safer x-rays.
• Frostbite treatments.
• Surgical procedures.
• Food products from Nestle, Kraft, Campbell Soup, Pepsi, and many others (some have recently changed their policies not to use fetal cells, but many still do).
• Skin care products.
• Treatments for Alzheimer's, Parkinson's, and other degenerative conditions.
• Vaccines such as those for Chicken Pox, Rubella, and Shingles.
• Artificial flavors.
• Over-the-counter and prescription medications like Pepto Bismol, Tums, Lipitor, Claritin, Prilosec, Zoloft, Maalox, aspirin, Preparation H, Sudafed, etc.

The truth is that you have used many, many, many products that were developed using fetal cell lines. You probably still do and don't even know it.

Regarding your last comment, the second you separate the Lord from his prophets via condemnation, unrighteous judgement, and putting your faith in your doubts, you've started down the road to apostasy. Sorry, that's just how it is.

[Luke]

The trouble with the mainstream LDS is that "God's will" is supposed to be whatever the FP says. Like promoting the notorious "Godsend" of 2021 which has poisoned our society in more ways than one. Do we really want to consecrate everything to Davos? Seems that the world is trying to do so and the LDS by a more indirect route.

Not a dig at you, Luke, I know some of your basic views on this matter and think we agree on at least some things.

I don’t think that the actual Temple covenants as instituted by God have anything to do with the LDS Church, but everything to do with the laws God has instituted. I’m sure we agree on that though.

Where else on earth do you find those laws and the priesthood authority necessary to live up to them?

I know many outside the Church who have that authority. Many Fundamentalists possess that authority.

[Niemand]

The trouble with the mainstream LDS is that "God's will" is supposed to be whatever the FP says. Like promoting the notorious "Godsend" of 2021 which has poisoned our society in more ways than one. Do we really want to consecrate everything to Davos? Seems that the world is trying to do so and the LDS by a more indirect route.

Not a dig at you, Luke, I know some of your basic views on this matter and think we agree on at least some things.

Just to make sure I'm understanding your position: Are you saying that obeying the prophet is "trouble"? Once you separate the Lord from his prophet, you've started jogging down the road to apostasy, my friend.

1) Do you support Davos?

Be specific.

2) I'd be more concerned about anyone pushing a shot developed from foetal cell lines.* Do you think it was godly and holy for President Nelson to suggest we inject ourselves with dead baby parts? If you support this, maybe it is you that is in apostasy, my friend. It is an abortion in more ways than one. If Jesus' NT followers could fall into Apostasy after meeting him in person, so can RMN who has apparently never met him.

There are so many things wrong with this paragraph:

1. There are no aborted fetal cells in any of the vaccines. Johnson & Johnson used "fetal cell lines," which are laboratory-grown, during their testing and development, but the vaccine doesn't contain fetal cell lines or fetal cells. These same fetal cell lines are also used in the testing and development of acetaminophen, ibuprofen, aspirin, and to treat Alzheimer's and hypertension. Did you bother to read the site you're using as a reference in your comment?

2. President Nelson didn't tell you to get vaccinated. He said that he had been praying for a vaccine, considered the fact that one arrived a "godsend," and then told members to consult the Holy Ghost and their medical professionals to see if getting vaccinated was right for them.

3. Meeting Christ in person is NOT what gives people a testimony of the truthfulness of the gospel. That can only be obtained through the Holy Ghost. This is why denying Christ isn't an unpardonable sin but denying the Holy Ghost is.

I gained a clear witness that these things were a precursor to the Mark.

* https://www.nationalgeographic.com/scie ... 9-vaccines

By completely failing to understand your own citation?

I'm well aware of what foetal cell lines are, thank you. They are cultures grown from old foetuses, some of which were aborted long ago. Hence the word "fœtal"


The fact remains that abortion was used to produce these serums, which is something you cannot get around. Some of the producers, not just J&J, denied or tried to cover this up early on, but were later forced to admit it. They were not up front about it during the early roll out because of how disgusting the whole concept is.

These same fetal cell lines are also used in the testing and development of acetaminophen, ibuprofen, aspirin, and to treat Alzheimer's and hypertension

Another poster has made this same point elsewhere. It is a form of whataboutery and it still doesn't justify their use in any of these instances

Your second point is patently ridiculous because you contradict yourself. Nelson said that they were a "godsend", i.e. sent from God. The church also endorsed local policies concerning the shots around the world, and in some cases was even stricter.

then told members to consult the Holy Ghost and their medical professionals to see if getting vaccinated was right for them

As I have said elsewhere, the shots are not in fact "vaccinations" according to the traditional definition, but are almost all (apart from Sinovac) an mRNA injection not inert viral material. So a misnomer there. (They had to change the dictionary to retrofit the definition!)

Guess what? I did consult the Holy Ghost. The Holy Ghost told me to stay well away. Some other Christians have received much the same witness. I certainly don't remember the church telling me to seek a witness of it, I was just told to go off and do it.

It would have been pointless for anyone to go and see medical professionals (at least round here), because all they would have done is told you to go and get it. We even had advertising here saying it was 100% safe — not even a saline injection is quite 100% safe. A complete lie. (In our ward dozens of people have become sick from getting them, one sister was even hospitalised... others felt sick for weeks on end afterwards. How do I know this? I had to sign people in over much of 2021. I spoke to them.)

[Niemand]

The truth is that you have used many, many, many products that were developed using fetal cell lines. You probably still do and don't even know it.

That is not the fault of the end user, it is the result of the sick minds that were used to develop these products. God will judge those who have done this ungodly and unholy thing.

It is something that should never have happened in the first place. Babies had to die to produce these products. That is more in line with Abaddon and Moloch than Heavenly Father and Jesus Christ.

By promoting this knowingly, you are putting yourself under condemnation and need to repent of it.

Deuteronomy 18.10 says

There shall not be found among you any one that maketh his son or his daughter to pass through the fire

This refers to those who knowingly sacrifice their children to a greater cause, or in ancient times to avert crop failure and disease. The story of Abraham also condemns those who sacrifice their offspring as these is not seen as acceptable to God. God provides a sheep instead, and later Jesus Christ, to symbolise the end of human sacrifice.

Colossians 3.5

Mortify therefore your members which are upon the earth; fornication, uncleanness, inordinate affection, evil concupiscence, and covetousness, which is idolatry:

Aborted babies are usually the result of fornication and uncleanness, and a lack of affection, i.e. being unwilling to raise children. "Covetousness" is relevant as many people who get pregnant and abort don't want it to impinge on their finances or interfere with their career. "Concupiscence" refers to a state of lust, the predominant emotion that is encouraged by much of mass media.

This is not the fault of the foetuses themselves, of course, but the abortion is usually the fruit of such actions.

The use of dead babies, who cannot consent to anything, to produce cell lines for decades on end is clearly unclean in the sight of God, much as those who passed their children through the fire to appease pagan gods, is something which is clearly unclean to this day.

Luke 17

Then said he unto the disciples, It is impossible but that offences will come: but woe unto him, through whom they come! It were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and he cast into the sea, than that he should offend one of these little ones.

As long as you promote this behaviour knowingly and encourage it, you have this millstone around your neck. We are supposed to light the world not darken it, and use our innocent dead children as spare parts for medicine. That is down there with the darkest pagan religions.

Time for you to repent and go back to God on this matter.

[innocentoldguy]

The truth is that you have used many, many, many products that were developed using fetal cell lines. You probably still do and don't even know it.

That is not the fault of the end user, it is the result of the sick minds that were used to develop these products. God will judge those who have done this ungodly and unholy thing.

It is something that should never have happened in the first place. Babies had to die to produce these products. That is more in line with Abaddon and Moloch than Heavenly Father and Jesus Christ.

By promoting this knowingly, you are putting yourself under condemnation and need to repent of it.

Deuteronomy 18.10 says

There shall not be found among you any one that maketh his son or his daughter to pass through the fire

This refers to those who knowingly sacrifice their children to a greater cause, or in ancient times to avert crop failure and disease. The story of Abraham also condemns those who sacrifice their offspring as these is not seen as acceptable to God. God provides a sheep instead, and later Jesus Christ, to symbolise the end of human sacrifice.

Colossians 3.5

Mortify therefore your members which are upon the earth; fornication, uncleanness, inordinate affection, evil concupiscence, and covetousness, which is idolatry:

Aborted babies are usually the result of fornication and uncleanness, and a lack of affection, i.e. being unwilling to raise children. "Covetousness" is relevant as many people who get pregnant and abort don't want it to impinge on their finances or interfere with their career. "Concupiscence" refers to a state of lust, the predominant emotion that is encouraged by much of mass media.

This is not the fault of the foetuses themselves, of course, but the abortion is usually the fruit of such actions.

The use of dead babies, who cannot consent to anything, to produce cell lines for decades on end is clearly unclean in the sight of God, much as those who passed their children through the fire to appease pagan gods, is something which is clearly unclean to this day.

Luke 17

Then said he unto the disciples, It is impossible but that offences will come: but woe unto him, through whom they come! It were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and he cast into the sea, than that he should offend one of these little ones.

As long as you promote this behaviour knowingly and encourage it, you have this millstone around your neck. We are supposed to light the world not darken it, and use our innocent dead children as spare parts for medicine. That is down there with the darkest pagan religions.

Time for you to repent and go back to God on this matter.

Promoting it? Since when it pointing out a fact "promoting it"? Would you rather I lie and pretend that there are fetal cells in vaccines when there aren't? Would you rather I lie and say that COVID vaccines are the only products in the world tested using fetal cell lines? Would you rather I lie and pretend you haven't eaten, drank, and smudged things on your body that have also been tested and developed using fetal cell lines?

I think it is hypocritical to whinge about President Nelson having "pushed vaccines" with baby bits in them when a) no vaccine has fetal cells in them, b) only the Johnston & Johnston vaccine used fetal cell lines during its testing and development, c) President Nelson didn't force you to get vaccinated, and d) you're probably eating, drinking, or wearing a product developed using fetal cell lines right now. This is one of the blood and sins of our generation. That's just an ugly fact.