LDS Freedom Forum

It is actually very easy to do.

Here is how it is done: The Lord God had choice prophets record the doings of their civilizations at great sacrifice spanning over thousands of years. In these records He revealed who He is and what His one true doctrine is.

He had a choice prophet and his son at great sacrifice abridge these records and provide vehicles for the translations of them. He provided angelic ministrations revolved around the translation and publication of the abridgement. He provided a total of 12 witnesses that swore to the truthfulness of the record. He then provided a promise that the Holy Ghost would be given to any honest approach of knowing if the record is not true to anyone so inclined to ask.

He commanded that the recipients receiving the record should rely upon it for all things related to His true church, gospel and Rock.

Then, all that was necessary to reject it was to come up with other revelations and stories, and say they should be what should be relied upon to build up the church, add to the fulness of the gospel with precepts not in the record, and build upon a sandy foundation instead of the true Rock.

Easy-peasy... All we have to do to reject the fulness of the gospel is to rely upon false revelations, fables, and lies instead of the record God gave us.

Can you think of an easier way to reject it?

CaptainM wrote: ↑June 26th, 2023, 3:51 pm He commanded that the recipients receiving the record should rely upon it for all things related to His true church, gospel and Rock.

Then, all that was necessary to reject is was to come up with other revelations and stories, and say they should be what should be relied upon to build up the church, add to the fulness of the gospel with precepts not in the record,

Did I miss where God said the canon of scripture was closed after the Book of Mormon?

“Hear it, ye elders of Israel, and mark it down in your log books: the fulness of the gospel is the United Order and the order of Plural Marriage, and without these two principles, this gospel can never be full, and I much fear that when I am gone, this people will give up these two principles which we prize so highly; and if they do, this church cannot advance as God wishes it to advance.” (April 1877, The Complete Discourses of Brigham Young 5:3112)

“One of the grand fundamental principles of Mormonism is to receive truth, let it come from whence it may.” (Discourses of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p. 199)

“The best way to obtain truth and wisdom is not to ask from books, but to go to God in prayer, and obtain divine teaching.” (History of the Church, 4:425) quoting Joseph Smith Jr.

“We should gather all the good and true principles in the world and treasure them up, or we shall not come out true Mormons.”
(Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p. 316)

“Mormonism is truth; and every man who embraces it feels himself at liberty to embrace every truth: consequently the shackles of superstition, bigotry, ignorance, and priestcraft, fall at once from his neck; and his eyes are opened to see the truth, and truth greatly prevails over priestcraft… Mormonism is truth, in other words the doctrine of the Latter-day Saints, is truth. … The first and fundamental principle of our holy religion is, that we believe that we have a right to embrace all, and every item of truth, without limitation or without being circumscribed or prohibited by the creeds or superstitious notions of men, or by the dominations of one another, when that truth is clearly demonstrated to our minds, and we have the highest degree of evidence of the same.” (Letter from Joseph Smith to Isaac Galland, Mar. 22, 1839, Liberty Jail, Liberty, Missouri, published in Times and Seasons, Feb. 1840, pp. 53–54; spelling and grammar modernized.)

“I stated that the most prominent difference in sentiment between the Latter-day Saints and sectarians was, that the latter were all circumscribed by some peculiar creed, which deprived its members the privilege of believing anything not contained therein, whereas the Latter-day Saints … are ready to believe all true principles that exist, as they are made manifest from time to time.” (History of the Church, 5:215; from “History of the Church” (manuscript), book D-1, p. 1433, Church Archives.) quoting Joseph Smith Jr., emphasis mine

“The [Muslim] condemns the heathen, the Jew,and the Christian, and the whole world of mankind that reject his Koran, as infidels, and consigns the whole of them to perdition. The Jew believes that the whole world that rejects his faith and are not circumcised, are Gentile dogs, and will be damned. The heathen is equally as tenacious about his principles, and the Christian consigns all to perdition who cannot bow to his creed, and submit to his ipse dixit. But while one portion of the human race is judging and condemning the other without mercy, the Great Parent of the universe looks upon the whole of the human family with a fatherly care and paternal regard; He views them as His offspring, and without any of those contracted feelings that influence the children of men, causes “His sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust.” (Times and Seasons, 15 April 1842, 758) quoting Joseph Smith Jr.

JLHPROF wrote: ↑June 26th, 2023, 4:33 pm

CaptainM wrote: ↑June 26th, 2023, 3:51 pm He commanded that the recipients receiving the record should rely upon it for all things related to His true church, gospel and Rock.

Then, all that was necessary to reject is was to come up with other revelations and stories, and say they should be what should be relied upon to build up the church, add to the fulness of the gospel with precepts not in the record,

Did I miss where God said the canon of scripture was closed after the Book of Mormon?

This guy thinks the plates of brass were only applicable to the one who lived it and died for our sins.

JLHPROF wrote: ↑June 26th, 2023, 4:33 pm

CaptainM wrote: ↑June 26th, 2023, 3:51 pm He commanded that the recipients receiving the record should rely upon it for all things related to His true church, gospel and Rock.

Then, all that was necessary to reject is was to come up with other revelations and stories, and say they should be what should be relied upon to build up the church, add to the fulness of the gospel with precepts not in the record,

Did I miss where God said the canon of scripture was closed after the Book of Mormon?

The canon is NOT closed, but we have not proved worthy of more.

Book of Commandments Chapter 15
2 Behold I have manifested unto you, by my Spirit inmany instances, that the things which you have written are true:
3 Wherefore you know that they are true; and if you know that they are true, behold I give unto you a commandment, that you rely upon the things which are written; for in them are all things written, concerning my church, my gospel, and my rock.
4 Wherefore if you shall build up my church, and my gospel, and my rock, the gates of hell shall not prevail against you.

3 Nephi 26
9 And when they shall have received this (Book of Mormon), which is expedient that they should have first, to try their faith, and if it shall so be that they shall believe these things then shall the greater things be made manifest unto them.
10)And if it so be that they will not believe these things, then shall the greater things be withheld from them, unto their condemnation.
11)Behold, I was about to write them, all which were engraven upon the plates of Nephi, but the Lord forbade it, saying: I will try the faith of my people.

13)Come unto me, O ye Gentiles, and I will show unto you the greater things, the knowledge which is hid up because of unbelief.
14)Come unto me, O ye house of Israel, and it shall be made manifest unto you how great things the Father hath laid up for you, from the foundation of the world; and it hath not come unto you, because of unbelief.
15)Behold, when ye shall rend that veil of unbelief which doth cause you to remain in your awful state of wickedness, and hardness of heart, and blindness of mind, then shall the great and marvelous things which have been hid up from the foundation of the world from you-yea, when ye shall call upon the Father in my name, with a broken heart and a contrite spirit, then shall ye know that the Father hath remembered the covenant which he made unto your fathers, O house of Israel.

If there is a belief the false revelations of JS (starting 6 April 1830) are the word of God, I feel bad for you.

Bronco73idi wrote: ↑June 26th, 2023, 5:32 pm

JLHPROF wrote: ↑June 26th, 2023, 4:33 pm

CaptainM wrote: ↑June 26th, 2023, 3:51 pm He commanded that the recipients receiving the record should rely upon it for all things related to His true church, gospel and Rock.

Then, all that was necessary to reject is was to come up with other revelations and stories, and say they should be what should be relied upon to build up the church, add to the fulness of the gospel with precepts not in the record,

Did I miss where God said the canon of scripture was closed after the Book of Mormon?

This guy thinks the plates of brass were only applicable to the one who lived it and died for our sins.

Bronco, I guess we are not on good terms. I thought we were good. Looks like you have been lurking in the dark waiting to strike. Pathetic.

And besides I am always left guessing what the heck you are talking about.

Go ahead. Spew out your venom.

Luke wrote: ↑June 26th, 2023, 4:35 pm “Hear it, ye elders of Israel, and mark it down in your log books: the fulness of the gospel is the United Order and the order of Plural Marriage, and without these two principles, this gospel can never be full, and I much fear that when I am gone, this people will give up these two principles which we prize so highly; and if they do, this church cannot advance as God wishes it to advance.” (April 1877, The Complete Discourses of Brigham Young 5:3112)

If you believe in false prophets ... it is a great quote.

Don't feel sorry, Sunday the spirit came over me so powerfully and testified of Joseph's later teaching that the bishop that never speaks to me came down and hugged me to see why I was glowing.

I guess your intellectual answer overrides the spirit, so I guess you're happy with rejecting the fullness. I guess I'm not.

TheDuke wrote: ↑June 26th, 2023, 6:34 pm Don't feel sorry, Sunday the spirit came over me so powerfully and testified of Joseph's later teaching that the bishop that never speaks to me came down and hugged me to see why I was glowing.

I guess your intellectual answer overrides the spirit, so I guess you're happy with rejecting the fullness. I guess I'm not.

At least you are decent in your responses unlike some of your peers. However, a hug from a bishop doesn't prove much. I could get the same if I went to church.

CaptainM wrote: ↑June 26th, 2023, 6:18 pm

Bronco73idi wrote: ↑June 26th, 2023, 5:32 pm

JLHPROF wrote: ↑June 26th, 2023, 4:33 pm

Did I miss where God said the canon of scripture was closed after the Book of Mormon?

This guy thinks the plates of brass were only applicable to the one who lived it and died for our sins.

Bronco, I guess we are not on good terms. I thought we were good. Looks like you have been lurking in the dark waiting to strike. Pathetic.

Go ahead. Spew out your venom.

We are on good terms.

I don’t understand how one could know that there are 116 pages missing of the BOM and still say the BOM is complete, thus it can stand by itself. It boggles my mind…

Sorry brother.

Bronco73idi wrote: ↑June 26th, 2023, 6:49 pm

CaptainM wrote: ↑June 26th, 2023, 6:18 pm

Bronco73idi wrote: ↑June 26th, 2023, 5:32 pm

This guy thinks the plates of brass were only applicable to the one who lived it and died for our sins.

Bronco, I guess we are not on good terms. I thought we were good. Looks like you have been lurking in the dark waiting to strike. Pathetic.

Go ahead. Spew out your venom.

We are on good terms.

I don’t understand how one could know that there are 116 pages missing of the BOM and still say the BOM is complete, thus it can stand by itself. It boggles my mind…

Sorry brother.

My bad. Thanks for the clarity.

I would say the Lord knew this ahead of time per the Words of Mormon.

And ... I didn't say it was complete. It is the lesser things per my scripture references.

CaptainM wrote: ↑June 26th, 2023, 6:47 pm

TheDuke wrote: ↑June 26th, 2023, 6:34 pm Don't feel sorry, Sunday the spirit came over me so powerfully and testified of Joseph's later teaching that the bishop that never speaks to me came down and hugged me to see why I was glowing.

I guess your intellectual answer overrides the spirit, so I guess you're happy with rejecting the fullness. I guess I'm not.

At least you are decent in your responses unlike some of your peers. However, a hug from a bishop doesn't prove much. I could get the same if I went to church.

true but things were pretty dicey when I called him out on mother's day in the chapel. Took the Lord to intervene else it would have been much more time as I wasn't interested in discussing with him again. But, he came directly too me after seeing my countenance.

CaptainM wrote: ↑June 26th, 2023, 6:16 pm

JLHPROF wrote: ↑June 26th, 2023, 4:33 pm

CaptainM wrote: ↑June 26th, 2023, 3:51 pm He commanded that the recipients receiving the record should rely upon it for all things related to His true church, gospel and Rock.

Then, all that was necessary to reject is was to come up with other revelations and stories, and say they should be what should be relied upon to build up the church, add to the fulness of the gospel with precepts not in the record,

Did I miss where God said the canon of scripture was closed after the Book of Mormon?

The canon is NOT closed, but we have not proved worthy of more.

If there is a belief the false revelations of JS (starting 6 April 1830) are the word of God, I feel bad for you.

Joseph never had a false revelation. Period.

JLHPROF wrote: ↑June 27th, 2023, 10:45 pm

CaptainM wrote: ↑June 26th, 2023, 6:16 pm

JLHPROF wrote: ↑June 26th, 2023, 4:33 pm

Did I miss where God said the canon of scripture was closed after the Book of Mormon?

The canon is NOT closed, but we have not proved worthy of more.

If there is a belief the false revelations of JS (starting 6 April 1830) are the word of God, I feel bad for you.

Joseph never had a false revelation. Period.

I don’t think this is true. You have to know the bad to know the good (i.e. discernment). I don’t think that he publicly propounded false revelations, though.

CaptainM wrote: ↑June 26th, 2023, 3:51 pm It is actually very easy to do.

Here is how it is done: The Lord God had choice prophets record the doings of their civilizations at great sacrifice spanning over thousands of years. In these records He revealed who He is and what His one true doctrine is.

He had a choice prophet and his son at great sacrifice abridge these records and provide vehicles for the translations of them. He provided angelic ministrations revolved around the translation and publication of the abridgement. He provided a total of 12 witnesses that swore to the truthfulness of the record. He then provided a promise that the Holy Ghost would be given to any honest approach of knowing if the record is not true to anyone so inclined to ask.

He commanded that the recipients receiving the record should rely upon it for all things related to His true church, gospel and Rock.

Then, all that was necessary to reject is was to come up with other revelations and stories, and say they should be what should be relied upon to build up the church, add to the fulness of the gospel with precepts not in the record, and build upon a sandy foundation instead of the true Rock.

Easy-peasy... All we have to do to reject the fulness of the gospel is to rely upon false revelations, fables, and lies instead of the record God gave us.

Can you think of an easier way to reject it?

I think it is quite simple for the Church to reject the fulness of the Gospel. While I don't see that the Church has done that just yet, there are members alongside some leaders that ARE indeed doing just that.

When you got Church members redacting the Proclamation of the Family in order to go along with their preconceived ideas about family, you have a problem.

When you have Church leadership hiding away billions of dollars in shell company accounts and only fess up to it because the SEC told you to you have a huge problem.

When you have bishops and stake presidents send out missionaries that openly admit they are gay and do not show any signs of repentance from that lifestyle, that is a major problem.

When you have members in general chide at those that speak "severely" about the family (but what really happens is that you testify about the Family Proclamation using non-controversial language) because that isn't what Christ would do, now one starts to understand more about how the Anti-christ is going to hoodwink billions of people on the earth to follow his ideas. Christ was not smooth. He was quite rough. As were his disciples. You don't get called a Son of Thunder without being particularly aggressive, like John and James were. You don't get called out as a satan unless you really messed up, and Christ called Peter by that name when Peter described his intent to try to buck the prophecies.

We need a J Golden Kimball back as a General Authority. At least, someone who speaks like him.

CaptainM wrote: ↑June 26th, 2023, 3:51 pm It is actually very easy to do.

Here is how it is done: The Lord God had choice prophets record the doings of their civilizations at great sacrifice spanning over thousands of years. In these records He revealed who He is and what His one true doctrine is.

He had a choice prophet and his son at great sacrifice abridge these records and provide vehicles for the translations of them. He provided angelic ministrations revolved around the translation and publication of the abridgement. He provided a total of 12 witnesses that swore to the truthfulness of the record. He then provided a promise that the Holy Ghost would be given to any honest approach of knowing if the record is not true to anyone so inclined to ask.

He commanded that the recipients receiving the record should rely upon it for all things related to His true church, gospel and Rock.

Then, all that was necessary to reject is was to come up with other revelations and stories, and say they should be what should be relied upon to build up the church, add to the fulness of the gospel with precepts not in the record, and build upon a sandy foundation instead of the true Rock.

Easy-peasy... All we have to do to reject the fulness of the gospel is to rely upon false revelations, fables, and lies instead of the record God gave us.

Can you think of an easier way to reject it?

You left out the part that should come right after "He had a choice prophet and his son at great sacrifice abridge these records and provide vehicles for the translations of them", which would go something like this:

God gave another choice prophet in modern times a treasure digging stone (known in treasure digging circles in the 1820s and 1830s as a scrier stone, peep stone, or seer stone) from a famous treasure digger woman in Palmyra who encouraged this modern day prophet to use the stone to locate buried treasure and also as a way to bolster his claims of having the power to locate treasure and ancient relics, and then, ounce a gold plate ancient record was found, to use that seer stone to translate, word for word, the ancient text by placing it in a hat, and peer into the hat as the words from the ancient record miraculously appeared in phrases which were then dictated to a scribe who sat on the other side of a curtain, and who then read back the dictation of the phrase before the next set of words appeared on the stone and he did it without any need to turn the pages of the ancient gold plate record or even reference the ancient record in any way.

Thankfully, after the first 8 books of the record were translated and subsequently stolen by the scribe's wife, and the scribe fired, nine months later another scribe arrived with information about a bible related means of translation called the urim and thumim but which was never used, and the seer stone in the hat method continued as the sole method for translation, though, the urim and thumim method was alluded to in later accounts of the translation and even as a relic found with the ancient record, leaving the reader to wonder why the urim and thumim means of translation was mentioned in the first place or why it was included as one of the ancient relics found with the record since it wasn't known to exist of until years after the first encounter of the ancient record and no witness ever saw the translation device.

Even more miraculously, the seer stone was able to language transliterate, word for word, the ancient text from an unknown reformed Egyptian dialect into 16th century King's English including Aramaic words like RACA in the Sermon on the Mount, an Aramaic word meaning vain, empty or worthless, and preserved in the ancient text as a word used in a sermon given to this ancient American people who didn't speak Aramaic and would never know what it meant in the first place.

Its less problematic to stick with "translated by the gift and power of god."

The title of this post is a catch 22. If you have a comment that doesn't align with the historical narrative outlined above, then you are admitting to rejecting the fullness of the gospel. You can't win. Either you accept the premise from beginning to end, or you're "damned". Yikes.

Which brings up an interesting observation. What does the phrase "fullness of the gospel" mean. The idea of restoration, means to bring back or restore that which was lost or polluted. The "fullness of the gospel", on the other hand, promotes the idea of something new, something created, something that didn't exist previously is now available. Which begs the question, is the church a restoration or a religious innovation?

Arm Chair Quarterback wrote: ↑June 29th, 2023, 4:16 pm The title of this post is a catch 22. If you have a comment that doesn't align with the historical narrative outlined above, then you are admitting to rejecting the fullness of the gospel. You can't win. Either you accept the premise from beginning to end, or you're "damned". Yikes.

Which brings up an interesting observation. What does the phrase "fullness of the gospel" mean. The idea of restoration, means to bring back or restore that which was lost or polluted. The "fullness of the gospel", on the other hand, promotes the idea of something new, something created, something that didn't exist previously is now available. Which begs the question, is the church a restoration or a religious innovation?

A good observation. The vast majority still seek to win arguments thru rhetorical devices than to come seeking truth, including that they might be incorrect.

As to the fulness of the gospel, that has been discussed on these forums and elsewhere before, and the answer that speaks to my soul is not hidden and readily available to anyone who earnestly seeks to know it.

And yes, we as a church are under condemnation for being given such a gift and not earnestly seeking to employ it. I am guilty also.

The D&C calls the book of Mormon aa covenant. I will opine that the Book of Mormon is the new and everlasting covenant, now if people will just exercise enough faith to understand how the Book of Mormon is a covenant, that would be progress.

And let me just nip in the bud the idea that reading the Book of Mormon fulfils our side of the covenant. It must be read, but it must also be studied. The covenant must be deciphered and then lived up to. But the COJCOLDS is far too much like ancient Israel. The words of Isaiah are closed to their minds, speaking in general and not to individuals.

Luke wrote: ↑June 26th, 2023, 4:35 pm “Hear it, ye elders of Israel, and mark it down in your log books: the fulness of the gospel is the United Order and the order of Plural Marriage, and without these two principles, this gospel can never be full, and I much fear that when I am gone, this people will give up these two principles which we prize so highly; and if they do, this church cannot advance as God wishes it to advance.” (April 1877, The Complete Discourses of Brigham Young 5:3112)

The Book of Mormon teaches that there should be no poor among us. The 1840 saints could not live this law. They loved their stuff too much- just like us. We have the dirt poor among us all over the world- Africa, Asia, Central America- and we still build hundreds of million dollar buildings instead of meaningfully helping the poor. For this, in part, the church is under condemnation.

Plural marriage is not in the least taught in the Book of Mormon. There is not one example of this being the “fullness of the gospel” in the entire Book of Mormon. It is a damnable lie that has prevented millions from listening to the gospel in its fullness.

It is easy to see the BoM doctrine of caring for the poor until there are no poor among us. Plenty of references plainly teach this principle.
There are ZERO scriptural references in the BoM that plainly teach plural marriage and many that demonstrate it is an evil practice.

Teancum1 wrote: ↑June 29th, 2023, 5:04 pm

Luke wrote: ↑June 26th, 2023, 4:35 pm “Hear it, ye elders of Israel, and mark it down in your log books: the fulness of the gospel is the United Order and the order of Plural Marriage, and without these two principles, this gospel can never be full, and I much fear that when I am gone, this people will give up these two principles which we prize so highly; and if they do, this church cannot advance as God wishes it to advance.” (April 1877, The Complete Discourses of Brigham Young 5:3112)

The Book of Mormon teaches that there should be no poor among us. The 1840 saints could not live this law. They loved their stuff too much- just like us. We have the dirt poor among us all over the world- Africa, Asia, Central America- and we still build hundreds of million dollar buildings instead of meaningfully helping the poor. For this, in part, the church is under condemnation.

Plural marriage is not in the least taught in the Book of Mormon. There is not one example of this being the “fullness of the gospel” in the entire Book of Mormon. It is a damnable lie that has prevented millions from listening to the gospel in its fullness.

It is easy to see the BoM doctrine of caring for the poor until there are no poor among us. Plenty of references plainly teach this principle.
There are ZERO scriptural references in the BoM that plainly teach plural marriage and many that demonstrate it is an evil practice.

You are correct that the fulness is not plural marriage, but incorrect, in my opinion, that it is no poor among us - although the fulness would lead to that as a follow-on effect, I think.

The bom is only a fragment of the divine record plates. Who knows wbat else is on thete. Could be tantric sex rituals.