Drag Queen Story hour protected by the Church

[Obeone]

As for "starting over": do you not believe God that this is the last dispensation, and that the kingdom is coming forth "for the last time?"

If God needs to start over, then there must be another dispensation after this one. But that's not what He said.

This agrees even with the Bible:

 D&C 138:44 
44 Daniel, who foresaw and foretold the establishment of the kingdom of God in the latter days, never again to be destroyed nor given to other people;

Read the BoM. Both Nephi and Christ prophesied that there would first be a restoration, then a period of tribulation, and THEN the work of the Father would COMMENCE. This is repeated over and over again in 3 Nephi by Christ himself. Search the word "commence" in the BoM and you'll find both instances.

Combine this with 3 Nephi 16:10-11, the Lord did have a restoration, then the gentile LDS church fell away, but the fullness of the gospel will be given to the literal descendants of the House of Israel. Whether you want to believe that as another dispensation is up to the reader to decipher. But regardless, the Lord isn't sticking around a wicked church that trashes His gospel and partakes in all manner of wickedness.

Most of the Church are literal descendants of the House of Israel. The kingdom will not be given to another people. God said it, not just me.

You are the apostate, my friend!

[Godislove]

I called church HQ and was given this link to submit questions for the communications dept. Anyone else willing to write and get clarification on this statement? If it came from a woman and if was really a church sanctioned statement?

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/fee ... v_feedback

[helloitsme]

As for "starting over": do you not believe God that this is the last dispensation, and that the kingdom is coming forth "for the last time?"

If God needs to start over, then there must be another dispensation after this one. But that's not what He said.

This agrees even with the Bible:

 D&C 138:44 
44 Daniel, who foresaw and foretold the establishment of the kingdom of God in the latter days, never again to be destroyed nor given to other people;

Read the BoM. Both Nephi and Christ prophesied that there would first be a restoration, then a period of tribulation, and THEN the work of the Father would COMMENCE. This is repeated over and over again in 3 Nephi by Christ himself. Search the word "commence" in the BoM and you'll find both instances.

Combine this with 3 Nephi 16:10-11, the Lord did have a restoration, then the gentile LDS church fell away, but the fullness of the gospel will be given to the literal descendants of the House of Israel. Whether you want to believe that as another dispensation is up to the reader to decipher. But regardless, the Lord isn't sticking around a wicked church that trashes His gospel and partakes in all manner of wickedness.

Most of the Church are literal descendants of the House of Israel. The kingdom will not be given to another people. God said it, not just me.

You are the apostate, my friend!

"I'm not your fwend, guy."
"Hey guy, don't call me your buddy, fwend!"
"I'm not your 'fwend', buddy!"

Thank the Dear Lord for South Park.

Why do people say "friend" when what they really want to say is GFY? Just sayn'... lol

[spiritMan]

I’m not sure on this, but I believe it possibly came from a woman and he may be trying to protect her from the mob.

Hold up, hold up.

Just to be clear on this. The statement that he was directed to publish from the Church came from a woman? In other words, no Priesthood authority directed him to state it?

So effectively some diversity and inclusion HQ hire from Church COB tells him he has to publish this statement and he does?

This gets stranger and stranger.

Maybe that's why it's being so carefully protected. Wouldn't that be interesting if it didn't come from the brethren at all.

Sorry if this is a duplicate. I thought I already posted this.
I don’t think the brethren have time to comment on everything that’s in the news, but what I don’t know is are church spokesman authorized to speak for the church, or do they have to authorize their statement with a priesthood authority? These are good and tough questions I don’t know the answer to. I can try and find out .

I appreciate you finding out.

But a WHAT THE EVERY LOVING . . . !!!!

So you are confirming then in effect that some HQ weenie who works in a Church Communications department at COB "told" this SP to put out this statement, she appears to have no priesthood authority, no priesthood direction and your brother was just like "yeah okay, sure" and that he isn't going to say the name of the person because he doesn't want "the mob" to come after her??????

[Obeone]

Most of the Church are literal descendants of the House of Israel. The kingdom will not be given to another people. God said it, not just me.

You are the apostate, my friend!

"I'm not your fwend, guy."
"Hey guy, don't call me your buddy, fwend!"
"I'm not your 'fwend', buddy!"

Thank the Dear Lord for South Park.

Why do people say "friend" when what they really want to say is GFY? Just sayn'... lol

I say "friend" because I feel for the guy and wish only the best for him.

[Reluctant Watchman]

Most of the Church are literal descendants of the House of Israel. The kingdom will not be given to another people. God said it, not just me.

You are the apostate, my friend!

I'm sure there are many descendants, but the ones specifically noted in this verse are the Native Americans, and yes, their blood has been mixed with the seed of many others. In the end, it is those who receive their personal commission from the Lord. We can debate who the House of Israel is all day long, but what we should be focused on is the verse before, 3 Nephi 16:10, and WHY the fullness was taken away from the covenant gentiles. Hence the entire premise of this thread. They have and are committing abominations.

I'll gladly take the title of apostate if defending truth is what is required.

[Trucker]

As for "starting over": do you not believe God that this is the last dispensation, and that the kingdom is coming forth "for the last time?"

If God needs to start over, then there must be another dispensation after this one. But that's not what He said.

This agrees even with the Bible:

 D&C 138:44 
44 Daniel, who foresaw and foretold the establishment of the kingdom of God in the latter days, never again to be destroyed nor given to other people;

Read the BoM. Both Nephi and Christ prophesied that there would first be a restoration, then a period of tribulation, and THEN the work of the Father would COMMENCE. This is repeated over and over again in 3 Nephi by Christ himself. Search the word "commence" in the BoM and you'll find both instances.

Combine this with 3 Nephi 16:10-11, the Lord did have a restoration, then the gentile LDS church fell away, but the fullness of the gospel will be given to the literal descendants of the House of Israel. Whether you want to believe that as another dispensation is up to the reader to decipher. But regardless, the Lord isn't sticking around a wicked church that trashes His gospel and partakes in all manner of wickedness.

Most of the Church are literal descendants of the House of Israel. The kingdom will not be given to another people. God said it, not just me.

You are the apostate, my friend!

Most are adopted, not literal.

[helloitsme]

Most of the Church are literal descendants of the House of Israel. The kingdom will not be given to another people. God said it, not just me.

You are the apostate, my friend!

"I'm not your fwend, guy."
"Hey guy, don't call me your buddy, fwend!"
"I'm not your 'fwend', buddy!"

Thank the Dear Lord for South Park.

Why do people say "friend" when what they really want to say is GFY? Just sayn'... lol

I say "friend" because I feel for the guy and wish only the best for him.

I know, it just made me think of all those split-headed Canadians who make us all laugh! And the more I hang out on this forum I want to cry, scream and pull out what hair I have left. Damn interweb!! All good bruh.

[Obeone]

Most are adopted, not literal.

There are very few who are adopted, they are the rare exception. The overwhelming majority are literal blood and lineage of Israel.

[spiritMan]

I’m not sure on this, but I believe it possibly came from a woman and he may be trying to protect her from the mob.

Hold up, hold up.

Just to be clear on this. The statement that he was directed to publish from the Church came from a woman? In other words, no Priesthood authority directed him to state it?

So effectively some diversity and inclusion HQ hire from Church COB tells him he has to publish this statement and he does?

This gets stranger and stranger.

Maybe that's why it's being so carefully protected. Wouldn't that be interesting if it didn't come from the brethren at all.

Sorry if this is a duplicate. I thought I already posted this.
I don’t think the brethren have time to comment on everything that’s in the news, but what I don’t know is are church spokesman authorized to speak for the church, or do they have to authorize their statement with a priesthood authority? These are good and tough questions I don’t know the answer to. I can try and find out .

"good, tough questions".

Hmm . . .you know maybe, just maybe before putting out some insane statement your brother should have done his due diligence.

You want to know what really happened?

I'll tell you what really happened b/c I have a REALLY, REALLY good idea as to how these wicked individuals work.

Here is what actually happened:
1) No one at the protest ever said or mentioned it was officially sanctioned by the Church.
2) Someone who is FOR DQSH and pro-rainbow decides to make a "report" (i.e. false report) that there was name-calling, saying it was officially sanctioned etc.
3) That someone has connections with the pro-rainbow in the Church. That person could have connections with Ben Schilitly (pro-rainbow BYU Honor Code Admin), or Ostler, or any other number of individuals who are connected.
4) They have connections within Church HQ
5) Someone in Church HQ directed that a counter statement be made due to the false report (they may or may not be pro-rainbow)
6) Admin person is pro-rainbow, creates statement and sends to SP.
7) SP is pro-rainbow (or a as they called them in the soviet times "useful idiot")

Whether or not this actually was directed by an actual Church Authority figure (i.e. Area President, GA) is in doubt. Either the SP is a "useful idiot" and tool . . . or somebodies need to respond that it was authorized by a higher authority than the SP.

[Serragon]

It has been my experience that any communications to the SP would come from the Area presidency. The AP may be working with church PR employees to craft a message for the Stake, but I haven't seen an instance where the final communication was not through the area presidency. Even when the incident in question was front page news in the local newspaper and there were nightly protests in front of the stake building.

Perhaps things have changed, though.

[Godislove]

It has been my experience that any communications to the SP would come from the Area presidency. The AP may be working with church PR employees to craft a message for the Stake, but I haven't seen an instance where the final communication was not through the area presidency. Even when the incident in question was front page news in the local newspaper and there were nightly protests in front of the stake building.

Perhaps things have changed, though.

Apparently though, according to his sister this communication came from a woman, which opens up a whole new can of worms as to the communications process.

[Badgerone45]

Hold up, hold up.

Just to be clear on this. The statement that he was directed to publish from the Church came from a woman? In other words, no Priesthood authority directed him to state it?

So effectively some diversity and inclusion HQ hire from Church COB tells him he has to publish this statement and he does?

This gets stranger and stranger.

Maybe that's why it's being so carefully protected. Wouldn't that be interesting if it didn't come from the brethren at all.

Sorry if this is a duplicate. I thought I already posted this.
I don’t think the brethren have time to comment on everything that’s in the news, but what I don’t know is are church spokesman authorized to speak for the church, or do they have to authorize their statement with a priesthood authority? These are good and tough questions I don’t know the answer to. I can try and find out .

"good, tough questions".

Hmm . . .you know maybe, just maybe before putting out some insane statement your brother should have done his due diligence.

You want to know what really happened?

I'll tell you what really happened b/c I have a REALLY, REALLY good idea as to how these wicked individuals work.

Here is what actually happened:
1) No one at the protest ever said or mentioned it was officially sanctioned by the Church.
2) Someone who is FOR DQSH and pro-rainbow decides to make a "report" (i.e. false report) that there was name-calling, saying it was officially sanctioned etc.
3) That someone has connections with the pro-rainbow in the Church. That person could have connections with Ben Schilitly (pro-rainbow BYU Honor Code Admin), or Ostler, or any other number of individuals who are connected.
4) They have connections within Church HQ
5) Someone in Church HQ directed that a counter statement be made due to the false report (they may or may not be pro-rainbow)
6) Admin person is pro-rainbow, creates statement and sends to SP.
7) SP is pro-rainbow (or a as they called them in the soviet times "useful idiot")

Whether or not this actually was directed by an actual Church Authority figure (i.e. Area President, GA) is in doubt. Either the SP is a "useful idiot" and tool . . . or somebodies need to respond that it was authorized by a higher authority than the SP.

Oh spiritMan…there you go again. You can’t use the words “actually happened” unless you were present in every part of this. Your assumptions have been wrong more than they have been right. Haven’t we established that already? Have you been in a leadership position? Yes or no??
I’m going to now make an assumption. No, you haven’t or you would know this isn’t how it works. Lucky for you if you haven’t. It’s a thankless calling that comes with a lot of criticism. These are normal people trying to serve god, their family, and work full time jobs. Then they have mean people coming out of the woodwork making assumptions.
Not all on here are mean. You are mean. Every comment you make is mean. I’m sorry if you have been hurt by the church, but attacking one person and making false claims about them is just wrong.

[Chip]

Check out Australia's new Ambassador for gender equality.


https://youtube.com/shorts/zwwLqfP2l3U?feature=share

[spiritMan]

Maybe that's why it's being so carefully protected. Wouldn't that be interesting if it didn't come from the brethren at all.

Sorry if this is a duplicate. I thought I already posted this.
I don’t think the brethren have time to comment on everything that’s in the news, but what I don’t know is are church spokesman authorized to speak for the church, or do they have to authorize their statement with a priesthood authority? These are good and tough questions I don’t know the answer to. I can try and find out .

"good, tough questions".

Hmm . . .you know maybe, just maybe before putting out some insane statement your brother should have done his due diligence.

You want to know what really happened?

I'll tell you what really happened b/c I have a REALLY, REALLY good idea as to how these wicked individuals work.

Here is what actually happened:
1) No one at the protest ever said or mentioned it was officially sanctioned by the Church.
2) Someone who is FOR DQSH and pro-rainbow decides to make a "report" (i.e. false report) that there was name-calling, saying it was officially sanctioned etc.
3) That someone has connections with the pro-rainbow in the Church. That person could have connections with Ben Schilitly (pro-rainbow BYU Honor Code Admin), or Ostler, or any other number of individuals who are connected.
4) They have connections within Church HQ
5) Someone in Church HQ directed that a counter statement be made due to the false report (they may or may not be pro-rainbow)
6) Admin person is pro-rainbow, creates statement and sends to SP.
7) SP is pro-rainbow (or a as they called them in the soviet times "useful idiot")

Whether or not this actually was directed by an actual Church Authority figure (i.e. Area President, GA) is in doubt. Either the SP is a "useful idiot" and tool . . . or somebodies need to respond that it was authorized by a higher authority than the SP.

Oh spiritMan…there you go again. You can’t use the words “actually happened” unless you were present in every part of this. Your assumptions have been wrong more than they have been right. Haven’t we established that already? Have you been in a leadership position? Yes or no??
I’m going to now make an assumption. No, you haven’t or you would know this isn’t how it works. Lucky for you if you haven’t. It’s a thankless calling that comes with a lot of criticism. These are normal people trying to serve god, their family, and work full time jobs. Then they have mean people coming out of the woodwork making assumptions.
Not all on here are mean. You are mean. Every comment you make is mean. I’m sorry if you have been hurt by the church, but attacking one person and making false claims about them is just wrong.

"Your assumptions have been wrong more than they have been right."
lololol . . . you are just pissed b/c I'm the one who brought light to this wickedness!

"Have you been in a leadership position? "
Yes I have and am. And it's clear you haven't.

There are so many back-channels that happen in leadership; networking between individuals, passing of information, etc. I am very, very aware that a lie gets around the world before the truth gets up out of bed.

"These are normal people trying to serve god, their family, and work full time jobs. Then they have mean people coming out of the woodwork making assumptions."
Oh my these poor, poor souls. I should feel such pity for a man who doesn't stand behind his own words until he is forced to; who doesn't give a straight answer. He is just a poor, pitiful man to have "mean" (i.e. people who hold his feet to the fire) coming out of the woodwork.

It's pretty simple. If you can't take the heat, then get the hell out of the kitchen.

[madvin]

I used my own revelation and didn’t get it, so I have no reason to be angry.

Spend some time reading or listening to their stories. Maybe you’ll understand the hurt and anguish so many people are feeling.

https://www.reluctantwatchman.com/vaccine-reactions

I know this vaccine was harmful to many people. I don’t need to read the stories l, because I know people that it personally effected. My dad passed away from covid and he was vaccinated. You don’t have to educate me. I am well educated about harmful vaccines and I did my own research. I’m sorry for the heartache that was caused to these people, it’s truly devastating.

...covid is a myth...a fraud...imaginary...

Be prepared to face shortages, because THAT is the reason for this covid plandemic scare.

[spiritMan]

Maybe that's why it's being so carefully protected. Wouldn't that be interesting if it didn't come from the brethren at all.

Sorry if this is a duplicate. I thought I already posted this.
I don’t think the brethren have time to comment on everything that’s in the news, but what I don’t know is are church spokesman authorized to speak for the church, or do they have to authorize their statement with a priesthood authority? These are good and tough questions I don’t know the answer to. I can try and find out .

"good, tough questions".

Hmm . . .you know maybe, just maybe before putting out some insane statement your brother should have done his due diligence.

You want to know what really happened?

I'll tell you what really happened b/c I have a REALLY, REALLY good idea as to how these wicked individuals work.

Here is what actually happened:
1) No one at the protest ever said or mentioned it was officially sanctioned by the Church.
2) Someone who is FOR DQSH and pro-rainbow decides to make a "report" (i.e. false report) that there was name-calling, saying it was officially sanctioned etc.
3) That someone has connections with the pro-rainbow in the Church. That person could have connections with Ben Schilitly (pro-rainbow BYU Honor Code Admin), or Ostler, or any other number of individuals who are connected.
4) They have connections within Church HQ
5) Someone in Church HQ directed that a counter statement be made due to the false report (they may or may not be pro-rainbow)
6) Admin person is pro-rainbow, creates statement and sends to SP.
7) SP is pro-rainbow (or a as they called them in the soviet times "useful idiot")

Whether or not this actually was directed by an actual Church Authority figure (i.e. Area President, GA) is in doubt. Either the SP is a "useful idiot" and tool . . . or somebodies need to respond that it was authorized by a higher authority than the SP.

Not all on here are mean. You are mean. Every comment you make is mean.

I have a low tolerance for BS; if that is "mean" then so be it.
Your brother wouldn't have owned his own statements if people hadn't forced him to.
Your brother was forced to retract his facebook post (and then when called out on cowardly not standing by it-put it back up).
If pictures of Drag Queens weren't on his page, others wouldn't know what he was really supporting.
You wouldn't be forced to go back and find out how all this happened if it hadn't been "mean".

Mean for you just indicates: I got caught with my hand in the cookie jar and I don't want it slapped.

It is precisely b/c I am in leadership that I have a low tolerance for BS weak, cowardly leaders who either don't do their own due diligence on what they are signing off on (which in THAT case-they shouldn't be in leadership due to incompetence) or worse pass blame to someone else for their mistakes.

I give credit where credit is due; at least your brother made the decision to put the post back up and stand by it-that took some bravery. Good for him. It just shows EXACTLY where he stands; and it ain't with God.

[spiritMan]

It has been my experience that any communications to the SP would come from the Area presidency. The AP may be working with church PR employees to craft a message for the Stake, but I haven't seen an instance where the final communication was not through the area presidency. Even when the incident in question was front page news in the local newspaper and there were nightly protests in front of the stake building.

Perhaps things have changed, though.

Apparently though, according to his sister this communication came from a woman, which opens up a whole new can of worms as to the communications process.

Slowly but surely the truth eventually comes out. All it takes is individuals not accepting BS answers and holding feet to the fire.

That's "mean" . . .b/c it causes them to own it.

[spiritMan]

It has been my experience that any communications to the SP would come from the Area presidency. The AP may be working with church PR employees to craft a message for the Stake, but I haven't seen an instance where the final communication was not through the area presidency. Even when the incident in question was front page news in the local newspaper and there were nightly protests in front of the stake building.

Perhaps things have changed, though.

Exactly. Something stinks.

[Badgerone45]

Sorry if this is a duplicate. I thought I already posted this.
I don’t think the brethren have time to comment on everything that’s in the news, but what I don’t know is are church spokesman authorized to speak for the church, or do they have to authorize their statement with a priesthood authority? These are good and tough questions I don’t know the answer to. I can try and find out .

"good, tough questions".

Hmm . . .you know maybe, just maybe before putting out some insane statement your brother should have done his due diligence.

You want to know what really happened?

I'll tell you what really happened b/c I have a REALLY, REALLY good idea as to how these wicked individuals work.

Here is what actually happened:
1) No one at the protest ever said or mentioned it was officially sanctioned by the Church.
2) Someone who is FOR DQSH and pro-rainbow decides to make a "report" (i.e. false report) that there was name-calling, saying it was officially sanctioned etc.
3) That someone has connections with the pro-rainbow in the Church. That person could have connections with Ben Schilitly (pro-rainbow BYU Honor Code Admin), or Ostler, or any other number of individuals who are connected.
4) They have connections within Church HQ
5) Someone in Church HQ directed that a counter statement be made due to the false report (they may or may not be pro-rainbow)
6) Admin person is pro-rainbow, creates statement and sends to SP.
7) SP is pro-rainbow (or a as they called them in the soviet times "useful idiot")

Whether or not this actually was directed by an actual Church Authority figure (i.e. Area President, GA) is in doubt. Either the SP is a "useful idiot" and tool . . . or somebodies need to respond that it was authorized by a higher authority than the SP.

Not all on here are mean. You are mean. Every comment you make is mean.

I have a low tolerance for BS; if that is "mean" then so be it.
Your brother wouldn't have owned his own statements if people hadn't forced him to.
Your brother would was forced to retract his facebook post (and then when called out on cowardly not standing by it-put it back up).
If pictures of Drag Queens weren't on his page, others wouldn't know what he was really supporting.
You wouldn't be forced to go back and find out how all this happened if it hadn't been "mean".

Mean for you just indicates: I got caught with my hand in the cookie jar and I don't want it slapped.

It is precisely b/c I am in leadership that I have a low tolerance for BS weak, cowardly leaders who either don't do their own due diligence on what they are signing off on (which in THAT case-they shouldn't be in leadership due to incompetence) or worse are pass blame to someone else for their mistakes.

I give credit where credit is due; at least your brother made the decision to put the post back up and stand by it-that took some bravery. Good for him. It just shows EXACTLY where he stands; and it ain't with God.

Yes! You have proven my point! Thank you for doing that. You are part of the divisive and hateful people the church has to make statements about. Your comments are exactly that. This is been refreshing and my work is done here.

[Reluctant Watchman]

Taking a few notes from the FP is see...

"With the announcement of the order, the matter is closed."

[Badgerone45]

I used my own revelation and didn’t get it, so I have no reason to be angry.

Spend some time reading or listening to their stories. Maybe you’ll understand the hurt and anguish so many people are feeling.

https://www.reluctantwatchman.com/vaccine-reactions

I know this vaccine was harmful to many people. I don’t need to read the stories l, because I know people that it personally effected. My dad passed away from covid and he was vaccinated. You don’t have to educate me. I am well educated about harmful vaccines and I did my own research. I’m sorry for the heartache that was caused to these people, it’s truly devastating.

...covid is a myth...a fraud...imaginary...

Be prepared to face shortages, because THAT is the reason for this covid plandemic scare.

Oh so it wasn’t released from China? That was a myth also?

[Badgerone45]

It has been my experience that any communications to the SP would come from the Area presidency. The AP may be working with church PR employees to craft a message for the Stake, but I haven't seen an instance where the final communication was not through the area presidency. Even when the incident in question was front page news in the local newspaper and there were nightly protests in front of the stake building.

Perhaps things have changed, though.

Apparently though, according to his sister this communication came from a woman, which opens up a whole new can of worms as to the communications process.

You weren’t aware there are women employed by the church?

[Godislove]

It has been my experience that any communications to the SP would come from the Area presidency. The AP may be working with church PR employees to craft a message for the Stake, but I haven't seen an instance where the final communication was not through the area presidency. Even when the incident in question was front page news in the local newspaper and there were nightly protests in front of the stake building.

Perhaps things have changed, though.

Apparently though, according to his sister this communication came from a woman, which opens up a whole new can of worms as to the communications process.

You weren’t aware there are women employed by the church?

As was pointed out in a prior post, it's just not the normal chain of command for it to be passed on to a Stake Pres. that way.

[spiritMan]

It has been my experience that any communications to the SP would come from the Area presidency. The AP may be working with church PR employees to craft a message for the Stake, but I haven't seen an instance where the final communication was not through the area presidency. Even when the incident in question was front page news in the local newspaper and there were nightly protests in front of the stake building.

Perhaps things have changed, though.

Apparently though, according to his sister this communication came from a woman, which opens up a whole new can of worms as to the communications process.

You weren’t aware there are women employed by the church?

Oh no, no, no. Don't play dumb on this one.

It is a common that when someone says it came direct from Church HQ, that it means that a Priesthood Authority Figure authorized it.
Now you are very much aware of this fact.
So start from the beginning that it was from Church HQ is telling everyone that this statement has some higherup Priesthood leader who directly authorized it.

You only got caught because you mentioned it was sent by a woman (which means it was NOT sent direct from a Priesthood leader). So either your brother was DECEITFUL by abusing a common assumption or your brother is INCOMPETENT by not asking the woman who sent it "hey this is a hot topic, I want to know who authorized this".

If you believe me holding your feet to the fire is being "mean"- so be it.