LDS Freedom Forum

dennis wrote: ↑November 27th, 2022, 6:14 pm Joseph Smith gave a key indicator to help avoid deception, “That man who rises up to condemn others, finding fault with the Church, saying that they are out of the way, while he himself is righteous, then know assuredly, that that man is in the high road to apostasy; and if he does not repent, will apostatize, as God lives.”

Robert Millet proposed five questions that a person might ask to determine if something is false.

1. Is the person claiming the revelation acting within the bounds of his or her respective stewardship? There is a specific pattern that the Lord uses for revelation, Brother Millet said. He asked the audience if they could imagine if everyone received revelation for any part of the Church. It would be total chaos, he said. He then quoted Joseph Smith: “It is contrary to the economy of God for any member of the Church, or any one, to receive instructions for those in authority, higher than themselves.”

2. Is the person receiving the revelation worthy to receive such?
As a reference Brother Millet cited Doctrine and Covenants 52:14–15: “And again, I will give unto you a pattern in all things, that ye may not be deceived; for Satan is abroad in the land, and he goeth forth deceiving the nations—wherefore he that prayeth, whose spirit is contrite, the same is accepted of me if he obey mine ordinances.”

3. Is the communication in harmony with the standard works and teachings of the prophets?
Leave the exceptions to the prophets, Brother Millet counseled. “Elder [Bruce R.] McConkie taught to stay within the mainstream of the Church,” said Brother Millet. He advised class members to watch out for new interpretations of scripture or people claiming that following something outside the mainstream of the Church brings deeper spirituality.

4. Does the revelation edify or instruct?
Is it consistent with the dignity that ought to be associated with revelation from God? God does not work against Himself, said Brother Millet.

5. Does the communication build a person’s faith and strengthen commitment?
If what a person is claiming weakens faith in Christ or resolve to follow the leaders of the Church or a desire to do what is right, it is not of God, said Brother Millet.

BeNotDeceived wrote: ↑November 27th, 2022, 6:17 pm

dennis wrote: ↑November 27th, 2022, 6:14 pm Joseph Smith gave a key indicator to help avoid deception, “That man who rises up to condemn others, finding fault with the Church, saying that they are out of the way, while he himself is righteous, then know assuredly, that that man is in the high road to apostasy; and if he does not repent, will apostatize, as God lives.”

Robert Millet proposed five questions that a person might ask to determine if something is false.

1. Is the person claiming the revelation acting within the bounds of his or her respective stewardship? There is a specific pattern that the Lord uses for revelation, Brother Millet said. He asked the audience if they could imagine if everyone received revelation for any part of the Church. It would be total chaos, he said. He then quoted Joseph Smith: “It is contrary to the economy of God for any member of the Church, or any one, to receive instructions for those in authority, higher than themselves.”

2. Is the person receiving the revelation worthy to receive such?
As a reference Brother Millet cited Doctrine and Covenants 52:14–15: “And again, I will give unto you a pattern in all things, that ye may not be deceived; for Satan is abroad in the land, and he goeth forth deceiving the nations—wherefore he that prayeth, whose spirit is contrite, the same is accepted of me if he obey mine ordinances.”

3. Is the communication in harmony with the standard works and teachings of the prophets?
Leave the exceptions to the prophets, Brother Millet counseled. “Elder [Bruce R.] McConkie taught to stay within the mainstream of the Church,” said Brother Millet. He advised class members to watch out for new interpretations of scripture or people claiming that following something outside the mainstream of the Church brings deeper spirituality.

4. Does the revelation edify or instruct?
Is it consistent with the dignity that ought to be associated with revelation from God? God does not work against Himself, said Brother Millet.

5. Does the communication build a person’s faith and strengthen commitment?
If what a person is claiming weakens faith in Christ or resolve to follow the leaders of the Church or a desire to do what is right, it is not of God, said Brother Millet.

The above assumes the church wasn’t condemned and &#%!@? by brother Brigham and company. True messages will correlate with the name of Christ or Crist.

dennis wrote: ↑November 27th, 2022, 6:14 pm Joseph Smith gave a key indicator to help avoid deception, “That man who rises up to condemn others, finding fault with the Church, saying that they are out of the way, while he himself is righteous, then know assuredly, that that man is in the high road to apostasy; and if he does not repent, will apostatize, as God lives.”

Robert Millet proposed five questions that a person might ask to determine if something is false.

1. Is the person claiming the revelation acting within the bounds of his or her respective stewardship? There is a specific pattern that the Lord uses for revelation, Brother Millet said. He asked the audience if they could imagine if everyone received revelation for any part of the Church. It would be total chaos, he said. He then quoted Joseph Smith: “It is contrary to the economy of God for any member of the Church, or any one, to receive instructions for those in authority, higher than themselves.”

2. Is the person receiving the revelation worthy to receive such?
As a reference Brother Millet cited Doctrine and Covenants 52:14–15: “And again, I will give unto you a pattern in all things, that ye may not be deceived; for Satan is abroad in the land, and he goeth forth deceiving the nations—wherefore he that prayeth, whose spirit is contrite, the same is accepted of me if he obey mine ordinances.”

3. Is the communication in harmony with the standard works and teachings of the prophets?
Leave the exceptions to the prophets, Brother Millet counseled. “Elder [Bruce R.] McConkie taught to stay within the mainstream of the Church,” said Brother Millet. He advised class members to watch out for new interpretations of scripture or people claiming that following something outside the mainstream of the Church brings deeper spirituality.

4. Does the revelation edify or instruct?
Is it consistent with the dignity that ought to be associated with revelation from God? God does not work against Himself, said Brother Millet.

5. Does the communication build a person’s faith and strengthen commitment?
If what a person is claiming weakens faith in Christ or resolve to follow the leaders of the Church or a desire to do what is right, it is not of God, said Brother Millet.

The Red Pill wrote: ↑September 4th, 2022, 10:09 am This is very well researched, and one of those..."they didn't ever teach this in Sunday-school" moments.

This 2 part series covers how Brigham seized control of the church and made sure he stayed in control. Also discusses the "mysterious" death of Samual Smith shortly after Joseph and Hyrum were murdered.

dennis wrote: ↑November 27th, 2022, 6:14 pm Joseph Smith gave a key indicator to help avoid deception, “That man who rises up to condemn others, finding fault with the Church, saying that they are out of the way, while he himself is righteous, then know assuredly, that that man is in the high road to apostasy; and if he does not repent, will apostatize, as God lives.”

edify wrote: ↑November 27th, 2022, 10:07 pm

dennis wrote: ↑November 27th, 2022, 6:14 pm Joseph Smith gave a key indicator to help avoid deception, “That man who rises up to condemn others, finding fault with the Church, saying that they are out of the way, while he himself is righteous, then know assuredly, that that man is in the high road to apostasy; and if he does not repent, will apostatize, as God lives.”

This is a description of actual/real prophets they rise up against the church and call it to repentance because the leaders are corrupted and are leading the members astray.

BeNotDeceived wrote: ↑November 27th, 2022, 6:17 pm

dennis wrote: ↑November 27th, 2022, 6:14 pm Joseph Smith gave a key indicator to help avoid deception, “That man who rises up to condemn others, finding fault with the Church, saying that they are out of the way, while he himself is righteous, then know assuredly, that that man is in the high road to apostasy; and if he does not repent, will apostatize, as God lives.”

Robert Millet proposed five questions that a person might ask to determine if something is false.

1. Is the person claiming the revelation acting within the bounds of his or her respective stewardship? There is a specific pattern that the Lord uses for revelation, Brother Millet said. He asked the audience if they could imagine if everyone received revelation for any part of the Church. It would be total chaos, he said. He then quoted Joseph Smith: “It is contrary to the economy of God for any member of the Church, or any one, to receive instructions for those in authority, higher than themselves.”

2. Is the person receiving the revelation worthy to receive such?
As a reference Brother Millet cited Doctrine and Covenants 52:14–15: “And again, I will give unto you a pattern in all things, that ye may not be deceived; for Satan is abroad in the land, and he goeth forth deceiving the nations—wherefore he that prayeth, whose spirit is contrite, the same is accepted of me if he obey mine ordinances.”

3. Is the communication in harmony with the standard works and teachings of the prophets?
Leave the exceptions to the prophets, Brother Millet counseled. “Elder [Bruce R.] McConkie taught to stay within the mainstream of the Church,” said Brother Millet. He advised class members to watch out for new interpretations of scripture or people claiming that following something outside the mainstream of the Church brings deeper spirituality.

4. Does the revelation edify or instruct?
Is it consistent with the dignity that ought to be associated with revelation from God? God does not work against Himself, said Brother Millet.

5. Does the communication build a person’s faith and strengthen commitment?
If what a person is claiming weakens faith in Christ or resolve to follow the leaders of the Church or a desire to do what is right, it is not of God, said Brother Millet.

The above assumes the church wasn’t condemned and &#%!@? by brother Brigham and company. True messages will correlate with the name of Christ or Crist.

endlessismyname wrote: ↑November 27th, 2022, 9:56 pm I guess Robert Millet is an okay source if you can’t, I don’t know, do what the scriptures tell you to in order to learn about whether a thing is true or false.

But why didn’t Robert Millet just quote the relevant scripture?

dennis wrote: ↑November 27th, 2022, 6:14 pm Joseph Smith gave a key indicator to help avoid deception, “That man who rises up to condemn others, finding fault with the Church, saying that they are out of the way, while he himself is righteous, then know assuredly, that that man is in the high road to apostasy; and if he does not repent, will apostatize, as God lives.”

This particular quote is cited as follows:

History of the Church, 3:385; from a discourse given by Joseph Smith on July 2, 1839, in Montrose, Iowa; reported by Wilford Woodruff and Willard Richards.

Therefore, this quote is cited from three sources:
History of the Church by B.H. Roberts;
Wilford Woodruff
Willard Richards

The quote does indeed appear in Source 1, History of the Church, but that's not the original source. History of the Church simply lifted the quote from the other two sources, as follows:

First is Wilford Woodruff’s Journal, where we find the lengthy notes Woodruff took during the meeting in question. Trouble is, Woodruff's Journal completely omits this quote, though it directly (and without interruption) supplies the rest of the sermon used in History of the Church.

The other source is Willard Richards' Pocket Companion, which does contain this quote.

OK, so got that so far? Woodruff omits this paragraph from the sermon. Richards has this paragraph in the middle of the sermon. Woodruff, no. Richards, yes.

Woodruff, who was present at the meeting in question, is considered the most reliable source because he recorded the notes of the meeting while in attendance. But this quote does not appear in that record. The sermon before and after this quote appears there uninterrupted, but the quoted paragraph is completely absent.

Richards' Pocket Companion is actually a collection of material Willard Richards copied from other sources. Therefore, though this material appears there, Richards was not actually present when Joseph gave this sermon, and Richards copied the material from elsewhere, most likely Wilford Woodruff’s journal. As to how the quote in question got into Richards' Pocket Companion while NOT appearing in the original record is a mystery. Nobody knows where it came from. It is therefore hearsay and not a historical record.

We are left to wonder where Richards obtained the quote and why he stuck it in the middle of a sermon he didn’t hear Joseph give. There is no original source that contains this quotation, and Richards was on a mission in England when Joseph was supposed to have said it.

The quote's dubious provenance is not helped by its doctrinal difficulties. For example, scripture is replete with true prophets, called of God, who did indeed "rise up to condemn others, finding fault with the church, saying they are out of the way." Some obvious examples are as follows:
Noah
Abraham
Moses
Lehi
Jacob
Benjamin
Abinadi
Alma the Younger
Samuel the Lamanite
John the Baptist
Jesus Christ
Joseph Smith

In fact, you can pretty much summarize the mission of any true prophet as calling people to repentance. (D&C 11:9) How is this not "condemn[ing] others, finding fault with the Church, saying that they are out of the way?"

Therefore, since Joseph Smith himself was "on the high road to apostasy" if this quote were true, it is utterly preposterous that Joseph Smith ever said this. Nobody quite knows where this quote came from, but it wasn't Joseph Smith.

innocentoldguy wrote: ↑November 28th, 2022, 12:41 am

BeNotDeceived wrote: ↑November 27th, 2022, 6:17 pm

dennis wrote: ↑November 27th, 2022, 6:14 pm Joseph Smith gave a key indicator to help avoid deception, “That man who rises up to condemn others, finding fault with the Church, saying that they are out of the way, while he himself is righteous, then know assuredly, that that man is in the high road to apostasy; and if he does not repent, will apostatize, as God lives.”

Robert Millet proposed five questions that a person might ask to determine if something is false.

1. Is the person claiming the revelation acting within the bounds of his or her respective stewardship? There is a specific pattern that the Lord uses for revelation, Brother Millet said. He asked the audience if they could imagine if everyone received revelation for any part of the Church. It would be total chaos, he said. He then quoted Joseph Smith: “It is contrary to the economy of God for any member of the Church, or any one, to receive instructions for those in authority, higher than themselves.”

2. Is the person receiving the revelation worthy to receive such?
As a reference Brother Millet cited Doctrine and Covenants 52:14–15: “And again, I will give unto you a pattern in all things, that ye may not be deceived; for Satan is abroad in the land, and he goeth forth deceiving the nations—wherefore he that prayeth, whose spirit is contrite, the same is accepted of me if he obey mine ordinances.”

3. Is the communication in harmony with the standard works and teachings of the prophets?
Leave the exceptions to the prophets, Brother Millet counseled. “Elder [Bruce R.] McConkie taught to stay within the mainstream of the Church,” said Brother Millet. He advised class members to watch out for new interpretations of scripture or people claiming that following something outside the mainstream of the Church brings deeper spirituality.

4. Does the revelation edify or instruct?
Is it consistent with the dignity that ought to be associated with revelation from God? God does not work against Himself, said Brother Millet.

5. Does the communication build a person’s faith and strengthen commitment?
If what a person is claiming weakens faith in Christ or resolve to follow the leaders of the Church or a desire to do what is right, it is not of God, said Brother Millet.

The above assumes the church wasn’t condemned and &#%!@? by brother Brigham and company. True messages will correlate with the name of Christ or Crist.

There is no evidence to suggest your position is true, so may I suggest reading this list a bit more closely and applying the patterns to your own studies? From my own personal experiences, I can tell you that you'll never grow spiritually via criticism and condemnation. It's like trying to build a house by repeatedly running into your building materials with your truck. It will only produce a worthless mess for you to deal with.

ransomme wrote: ↑November 28th, 2022, 10:47 am

innocentoldguy wrote: ↑November 28th, 2022, 12:41 am

BeNotDeceived wrote: ↑November 27th, 2022, 6:17 pm

dennis wrote: ↑November 27th, 2022, 6:14 pm Joseph Smith gave a key indicator to help avoid deception, “That man who rises up to condemn others, finding fault with the Church, saying that they are out of the way, while he himself is righteous, then know assuredly, that that man is in the high road to apostasy; and if he does not repent, will apostatize, as God lives.”

Robert Millet proposed five questions that a person might ask to determine if something is false.

1. Is the person claiming the revelation acting within the bounds of his or her respective stewardship? There is a specific pattern that the Lord uses for revelation, Brother Millet said. He asked the audience if they could imagine if everyone received revelation for any part of the Church. It would be total chaos, he said. He then quoted Joseph Smith: “It is contrary to the economy of God for any member of the Church, or any one, to receive instructions for those in authority, higher than themselves.”

2. Is the person receiving the revelation worthy to receive such?
As a reference Brother Millet cited Doctrine and Covenants 52:14–15: “And again, I will give unto you a pattern in all things, that ye may not be deceived; for Satan is abroad in the land, and he goeth forth deceiving the nations—wherefore he that prayeth, whose spirit is contrite, the same is accepted of me if he obey mine ordinances.”

3. Is the communication in harmony with the standard works and teachings of the prophets?
Leave the exceptions to the prophets, Brother Millet counseled. “Elder [Bruce R.] McConkie taught to stay within the mainstream of the Church,” said Brother Millet. He advised class members to watch out for new interpretations of scripture or people claiming that following something outside the mainstream of the Church brings deeper spirituality.

4. Does the revelation edify or instruct?
Is it consistent with the dignity that ought to be associated with revelation from God? God does not work against Himself, said Brother Millet.

5. Does the communication build a person’s faith and strengthen commitment?
If what a person is claiming weakens faith in Christ or resolve to follow the leaders of the Church or a desire to do what is right, it is not of God, said Brother Millet.

The above assumes the church wasn’t condemned and &#%!@? by brother Brigham and company. True messages will correlate with the name of Christ or Crist.

There is no evidence to suggest your position is true, so may I suggest reading this list a bit more closely and applying the patterns to your own studies? From my own personal experiences, I can tell you that you'll never grow spiritually via criticism and condemnation. It's like trying to build a house by repeatedly running into your building materials with your truck. It will only produce a worthless mess for you to deal with.

Try reading the Doctrine and Covenants more closely

innocentoldguy wrote: ↑November 28th, 2022, 12:19 pm

ransomme wrote: ↑November 28th, 2022, 10:47 am

innocentoldguy wrote: ↑November 28th, 2022, 12:41 am

BeNotDeceived wrote: ↑November 27th, 2022, 6:17 pm

The above assumes the church wasn’t condemned and &#%!@? by brother Brigham and company. True messages will correlate with the name of Christ or Crist.

There is no evidence to suggest your position is true, so may I suggest reading this list a bit more closely and applying the patterns to your own studies? From my own personal experiences, I can tell you that you'll never grow spiritually via criticism and condemnation. It's like trying to build a house by repeatedly running into your building materials with your truck. It will only produce a worthless mess for you to deal with.

Try reading the Doctrine and Covenants more closely

Cite specifically what you think runs contrary to what I said.

ransomme wrote: ↑November 28th, 2022, 3:07 pm

innocentoldguy wrote: ↑November 28th, 2022, 12:19 pm

ransomme wrote: ↑November 28th, 2022, 10:47 am

innocentoldguy wrote: ↑November 28th, 2022, 12:41 am

There is no evidence to suggest your position is true, so may I suggest reading this list a bit more closely and applying the patterns to your own studies? From my own personal experiences, I can tell you that you'll never grow spiritually via criticism and condemnation. It's like trying to build a house by repeatedly running into your building materials with your truck. It will only produce a worthless mess for you to deal with.

Try reading the Doctrine and Covenants more closely

Cite specifically what you think runs contrary to what I said.

Hint, look for condemnation, rebuked, taken away, removed, transgress(ed), etc.

There is evidence all over if you read the thing in various sections like 124, 82, 84, etc. and Joseph's preachings & writings etc.

innocentoldguy wrote: ↑November 28th, 2022, 4:35 pm

ransomme wrote: ↑November 28th, 2022, 3:07 pm

innocentoldguy wrote: ↑November 28th, 2022, 12:19 pm

ransomme wrote: ↑November 28th, 2022, 10:47 am
Try reading the Doctrine and Covenants more closely

Cite specifically what you think runs contrary to what I said.

Hint, look for condemnation, rebuked, taken away, removed, transgress(ed), etc.

There is evidence all over if you read the thing in various sections like 124, 82, 84, etc. and Joseph's preachings & writings etc.

No, be specific. Cite chapter and verse or quote exactly what you're referring to. I'm not going to waste time reading and trying to guess what you might be eluding to.

ransomme wrote: ↑November 28th, 2022, 10:37 pm

innocentoldguy wrote: ↑November 28th, 2022, 4:35 pm

ransomme wrote: ↑November 28th, 2022, 3:07 pm

innocentoldguy wrote: ↑November 28th, 2022, 12:19 pm

Cite specifically what you think runs contrary to what I said.

Hint, look for condemnation, rebuked, taken away, removed, transgress(ed), etc.

There is evidence all over if you read the thing in various sections like 124, 82, 84, etc. and Joseph's preachings & writings etc.

No, be specific. Cite chapter and verse or quote exactly what you're referring to. I'm not going to waste time reading and trying to guess what you might be eluding to.

To paraphrase RMN, it takes work. Lazy learners and lax disciples don't get very far.

Maximum effort

Lizzy60 wrote: ↑November 27th, 2022, 6:50 pm Brother Millet is not authoritative.

His employment depends on his supporting church headquarters at all costs.

innocentoldguy wrote: ↑November 29th, 2022, 10:43 am

ransomme wrote: ↑November 28th, 2022, 10:37 pm

innocentoldguy wrote: ↑November 28th, 2022, 4:35 pm

ransomme wrote: ↑November 28th, 2022, 3:07 pm
Hint, look for condemnation, rebuked, taken away, removed, transgress(ed), etc.

There is evidence all over if you read the thing in various sections like 124, 82, 84, etc. and Joseph's preachings & writings etc.

No, be specific. Cite chapter and verse or quote exactly what you're referring to. I'm not going to waste time reading and trying to guess what you might be eluding to.

To paraphrase RMN, it takes work. Lazy learners and lax disciples don't get very far.

Maximum effort

Well, if it doesn't mean enough to you to spend the time articulating/citing your point, then it really isn't worth my time listening to you.

ransomme wrote: ↑November 29th, 2022, 2:05 pm

innocentoldguy wrote: ↑November 29th, 2022, 10:43 am

ransomme wrote: ↑November 28th, 2022, 10:37 pm

innocentoldguy wrote: ↑November 28th, 2022, 4:35 pm

No, be specific. Cite chapter and verse or quote exactly what you're referring to. I'm not going to waste time reading and trying to guess what you might be eluding to.

To paraphrase RMN, it takes work. Lazy learners and lax disciples don't get very far.

Maximum effort

Well, if it doesn't mean enough to you to spend the time articulating/citing your point, then it really isn't worth my time listening to you.

I clearly articulated that you were wrong. You just sling out there that there is no proof, but you won't even read what's not spoonfed to you even if it's put right under your nose.

innocentoldguy wrote: ↑November 30th, 2022, 2:47 am

ransomme wrote: ↑November 29th, 2022, 2:05 pm

innocentoldguy wrote: ↑November 29th, 2022, 10:43 am

ransomme wrote: ↑November 28th, 2022, 10:37 pm

To paraphrase RMN, it takes work. Lazy learners and lax disciples don't get very far.

Maximum effort

Well, if it doesn't mean enough to you to spend the time articulating/citing your point, then it really isn't worth my time listening to you.

I clearly articulated that you were wrong. You just sling out there that there is no proof, but you won't even read what's not spoonfed to you even if it's put right under your nose.

Yes, you clearly articulated that as your opinion. You also offered vague references to "back up" your claims, like "Read the D&C," but have been unable to cite specifically what you are referring to. I can't read your mind and I'm not going to read a bunch of sections while trying to guess what you mean. You are unable or unwilling to provide specifics of what you're talking about and cite them.