What's new
By:

Question about LDS Church after Smith's death.

dalamon said:
You imply that when you say "He won't be saved". Big difference from "I don't think he'll be saved".


You think you can figure some things out. Don't conflate your abilities and responsibilities with a deity (at least IMO).
Click to expand...

Dude, what are you talking about? I never said "He won't be saved." I said there are people who do good works who won't be saved. I made it a general phrase exactly because of what you're talking about. Because I do not have the ability to know who will or won't be saved on a specific basis.
 
Howard said:
I do not have the ability to know who will or won't be saved on a specific basis.
Click to expand...

I do.
Me and the big woman up in heaven speak on the regular.
You are safe. She tells me in visions that you are misguided, but mean well so you get in.

 
Howard said:
I've never said I know who will or who won't be saved. With that said, I can still figure some things out based on what the Bible says.
Click to expand...

Your enslavement to text-based interpretations as a key to "divine" truths is..... welll...... I'm going to go with sad. Books don't have to be slavers.
 
Howard said:
I've never said I know who will or who won't be saved. With that said, I can still figure some things out based on what the Bible says.
Click to expand...

rather than let the naysayers back you into a corner, you should go big. Afterall, the Catholic Church, for a thousand years plus, held a monopoly on God/Jesus and taught the doctrine of burning sulgerous torment pots, and did monster business selling indulgences and in other ways delivering folks out of them for some frame of time. Indulgences were limited to time specified, to keep the market from drying up.

Some bible scholars like Martin Luther got annoyed with drunks not confessing, showing documents absolving them from a need for confession. . . . It was hot competition between Rome and local authorities. The Pope sold indulgences, and the locals collected offerings near the confession boxes. If you bought the indulgences, you didn't go to confession and hence did not drop some silver in the collection box either.

Johhnny-come-lately idealists can smugly sniffle at the "sacrilege", but I assure they are complete liars historically speaking. Muslims who wouldn't confess Allah and pay the fees were just slaughtered. Israelites were for over a thousand years hauling stuff to the Priests' altars. Historically, there has never been any corner of the whole Abrahamic tradition where folks couldn't say, with hardly a glance, whether the other guy was going to Hell or not.

Dal is right about the God thing in one respect. The Trinity is unbiblical, and was only invented hundreds of years after the latest Christian scriptures were written in a vain attempt to clear up all the contradictory statements about their God. And all that confusion created a pretty simple and easy way out for Mohammad. . . . ignore all that scripture and just write his own.
 
NAOS said:
Your enslavement to text-based interpretations as a key to "divine" truths is..... welll...... I'm going to go with sad. Books don't have to be slavers.
Click to expand...

who ever said that there is not a sort of symmetry to universal truth. . . . and who knows whether enslavement to passing cerebral notions automatically presumed to be "divine" is worse than trying to shape-shift written texts to fit what we want to believe. . . . .
 
So a Mormon a Muslim and a born again Christian walk into this discussion thread and.. Oh wait I left out the atheist. So anyway they all walk into this thread and...
 
I'm going to "The Book Of Mormon tonight". Pretty excited.

Also, I couldn't help but notice that the LDS church decided to release photos of JS's seer stone as well as some other historical documents. I've also heard to expect a few LDS ads on my playbill this evening. Pretty interesting that the church decides to leak photos of artifacts that they've had in their possession for 150+ years right smack dab in the middle of the Utah arrival of this much publicized play.

Whether or not you believe it is the true church, you better believe in their PR department.
 
Jaymz said:
Church released photos of the sacred stone used to translate the BoM from the Gold plates.

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entr...ight-on-joseph-smith_55c0e22ae4b0c9fdc75dfd79
Click to expand...

Is it bad that I found this comment under that article hilarious?

Richard S Vaughn · Patrón at My Ranch
I have sacred stones.....God sent them to me through my kidneys. They were delivered unto me with a primal scream.....perhaps it was mine, I'm a little fuzzy on the details.
Click to expand...
 
colton said:
I don't think there was that much confusion. Something like 99% of the church members followed Brigham Young. Brigham Young seemed perfectly clear that he was to be the successor. Or are you saying that the other church leaders should have been clear about Brigham Young? The vast majority of them were.
Click to expand...

Brigham Young won a narrow vote. Actually, the Quorum of the 12 won the vote, Brigham was just the Presiding Elder. I don't think he was ever ordained a prophet, seer, revelator.. yadda yadda. (Although I don't believe those titles are given through ordination, but actual practice. Which means there are likely no prophets, seers, or well... certainly no revelators, anymore in the LDS religion).

I'm of the opinion that if Joseph Smith did indeed restore the gospel, then we must already be back into a state of apostasy. I'm not a Snufferite, but I think his ideology is much closer to what JS reestablished than the church currently practices.
 
Narrow vote? Please share your sources.

"At 2*P.M.thousands of Saints gathered for what they knew would be a significant meeting. With the quorums of the priesthood seated in order, Brigham Young spoke frankly about the proposed guardianship of Sidney RigDon and his alienation from Joseph Smith during the previous two years. He boldly prophesied, “All that want to draw away a party from the church after them, let them do it if they can, but they will not prosper.”....

Brigham Young then arose and asked the basic question: “Do you want Brother Rigdon to stand forward as your leader, your guide, your spokesman. President Rigdon wants me to bring up the other question first, and that is, Does the church want, and is it their only desire to sustain the Twelve as the First Presidency of this people?” The vote was then taken, and all hands went up. Brigham then asked, “If there are any of the contrary mind, every man and every woman who does not want the Twelve to preside, lift up your hands in like manner.” No hands went up." HoC 7:240

Without looking anything up I seem to recall that church membership was around 18k at the time of the martyrdom. 2.5k to 5k followed Strangites or Rigdon. Some others, most notably Joseph's widow Emma and mother Lucy, just blended in to their communities and didn't go with the body of the church into Iowa then westward. Some of them came west later.

As for snuffer, I see many similarities to Allred, strange, and Harmstom...there are probably others who have already been lost to memory. They ride an exciting wave that soon is lost on the beach of time.
 
mellow said:
Narrow vote? Please share your sources.

"At 2*P.M.thousands of Saints gathered for what they knew would be a significant meeting. With the quorums of the priesthood seated in order, Brigham Young spoke frankly about the proposed guardianship of Sidney RigDon and his alienation from Joseph Smith during the previous two years. He boldly prophesied, “All that want to draw away a party from the church after them, let them do it if they can, but they will not prosper.”....

Brigham Young then arose and asked the basic question: “Do you want Brother Rigdon to stand forward as your leader, your guide, your spokesman. President Rigdon wants me to bring up the other question first, and that is, Does the church want, and is it their only desire to sustain the Twelve as the First Presidency of this people?” The vote was then taken, and all hands went up. Brigham then asked, “If there are any of the contrary mind, every man and every woman who does not want the Twelve to preside, lift up your hands in like manner.” No hands went up." HoC 7:240

Without looking anything up I seem to recall that church membership was around 18k at the time of the martyrdom. 2.5k to 5k followed Strangites or Rigdon. Some others, most notably Joseph's widow Emma and mother Lucy, just blended in to their communities and didn't go with the body of the church into Iowa then westward. Some of them came west later.

As for snuffer, I see many similarities to Allred, strange, and Harmstom...there are probably others who have already been lost to memory. They ride an exciting wave that soon is lost on the beach of time.
Click to expand...


We know that it's false that the vote was unanimous. Therefore you have to take the HoC account with a grain of salt. I imagine they could say it was unanimous because all who voted against the quorum were excommunicated. in fact most records about this instance are difficult to believe, considering there has been so much subsequent manipulation.

as for sources: quinn, mckiernan, and van wagoner

regarding that last point, it's less about snuffer than it is about what exists now is not what js reestablished.
 
Last edited:
scootsy said:
We know that it's false that the vote was unanimous. Therefore you have to take the HoC account with a grain of salt. I imagine they could say it was unanimous because all who voted against the quorum were excommunicated. in fact most records about this instance are difficult to believe, considering there has been so much subsequent manipulation.

as for sources: quinn, mckiernan, and van wagoner

regarding that last point, it's less about snuffer than it is about what exists now is not what js reestablished.
Click to expand...

Actually, what JS "reestablished" was different from what ever was. Yah, and it's called further revelation and better principles that what God gave earlier epochs. I could make a really really long post on this subject, discussing specifics, but in the end it might look like the principle of continuing revelation is about the only thing constant, and that holds even for the Bible through the time when accretions were being included.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top