Does the Church Use Paid Persons to Monitor Our Discussions?

[durangoutcaptain of 1,000]

Of course there are many better things they should be doing.
But these are the same leaders who would rather tear down a mall to build a bigger mall worth billions, than help the amost 1 billion men, women & children are starving to death... all in the name of Jesus Christ. Aparently the "good Samaritan" parable only applies to us lesser members, not the top leaders.

Thinker: You need new material. This is really getting boring.

btw the true meaning of the parable of the good Samaritan is not what you imply.

[awakecaptain of 100]

...It is really interesting to see people on one side of the debate always talking about finding safety in following the "brethren" and staying true to the "church" while the people on the other side of the debate speak of "following the Holy Ghost" and being true to the "gospel".

It was corrected and restored to it's original statement in the JST

"Judge not unrighteously, that ye be not judged; but judge righteous judgment."

Why did the Lord provide specific instructions on how to hold a church court for the President of the Church?

Was he being facetious or disingenuous when he gave us that protocol or was he being serious?

If it is really a cardinal sin to ever be critical of the Prophet of the Church and if we are to turn and look the other way and leave it up to the Lord to correct the situation whenever the president of the Church does something that is potentially harmful to the church or his own personal spiritual well being, WHY DID THE LORD GIVE US INSTRUCTIONS ON HOW THE PRESIDENT OF THE CHURCH CAN BE DISCIPLINED OR EXCOMMUNICATED?

I would suggest that it is because the Lord, in his infinite foreknowledge and wisdom knew that Presidents of the church are human beings that are subject to making serious mistakes just like everyone else.

I would suggest that He knew that there would (or at least could) be future circumstances when a president of the church might do something wrong for which he would need to be corrected, if not cut off.

Interestingly, there are people in this forum who seem to believe that it would be a mortal sin to ever be critical of the president of the church and other general authorities.

The very belief that nobody should ever be critical of the president of the church completely negates the Lords instructions on how to hold a church court on the president of the church.

If church members have no right or responsibility to make righteous judgments about how the church is being governed then it appears as if the Lord made a very serious error in providing a protocol for holding a disciplinary counsil concerning the conduct of the president of the church.

It is interesting to note that Joseph Smith was actually brought before a disciplinary court as a result of a complaint by a fellow saint stemming from issues that took place during Zions Camp.

The brother who filed the charges was named Sylvester Smith, one of the captains who served in the Zion's Camp expedition. The charges had to do with "criminal conduct" along with the fact that Sylvester felt that Joseph had used "insulting and abusive language" towards him.

One can only imagine what was going on in the minds of the council members who tried the case. Perhaps they were wondering what would ever happen to the church in the event that the Lord's prophet seer and revelator was ever excommunicated from the church.

The court ultimately rendered a verdict in favor of Joseph.

To the credit of Sylvester Smith, who was reprimanded as a result of the church council that he caused to be held, he did not leave the church because of that incident.

To the credit of Joseph Smith who was deeply humiliated in front of the entire church by the court proceedings and some of the testimony that was given by other witnesses that sided with Sylvester, he did not seek retribution of any kind.

Within a year after Sylvester brought charges against the Prophet, he was called to serve on the Kirtland High Council and shortly after that, he was called and ordained as one of the inaugural presidents of the Seventies which would indicate to me that neither Joseph Smith or the Lord harbored ill will against him for bringing the critical charges against the prophet.

There are obviously some disagreements between members of this forum as to whether there are serious problems within the church.

One thing is for sure, if there ever are serious problems with the leaders of this church, the problem can never be corrected based on the absurd notion that members of the church never have the right to ever be critical of church leaders and that only the leadership of the church have the right to be critical of their own sins.

The truth is that church leaders need to have the positive burden and tension of knowing that they are being watched by loving members who understand sound doctrine and want to accept their responsibility of participating in keeping the church on the right path.

I believe the Lord originally put two very important measures for a checks and balances between the leadership and the lay membership of this church. I believe those two measures are as follows:

1- He made members of the church responsible for bringing anyone, including church authorities into a church court anytime they commit a grievous sin.

2- He put in place the law of common consent giving the membership the right to reject new doctrines, commandments or church callings that is presented before the church

I believe both of those checks and balances have been negated by false teachings and perceptions currently held in the church.

Members have been brainwashed to believe that they can never be justified in bringing criticism against a general authority and they have been brain washed into believing that refusing to sustain the brethren in any doctrine, commandment or new leadership calling is categorically wrong and sinful.

If the church was running the way the Lord meant for it to run, someone would request that the Church look into the allegations and associated evidence that has been publicly provided regarding the use of paid employees to sway public opinion and to lie about who they actually represent.

After all, two separate witnesses who probably don't even know each other have obtained evidence and made allegations. One has actually provided compelling information which the church has made no attempt to refute or explain. (and you can be sure there are people in high places that know about the post that started this discussion.

"in the mouth of two or three witnesses shall every word be established"

If the allegations turn out to me wrong, everyone including the general authority over the strengthening the church members committee will feel much better after having the truth be brought to light and the authorities vindicated.

If in fact the allegations are true, an investigation needs to be held to see just how far up the chain of command the responsibility goes and the necessary disciplinary action needs to take place even if it goes all the way up to an Apostle or President. By that holy process given to us by the Lord we can correct the problem and move forward.

Yes, the Church and the Gospel are two very different things. The Church can fall, as it has many times before in history & throughout the scriptures, but the Gospel, which has been restored over & over throughout history, is always true & the same forever.

Great post! Thanks for explaining this issue so well. I totally agree.

[AshleyBcaptain of 1,000]

All very good points Etherial Blue. I wish more people could understand these things. The original constitution was all about checks and balances and the Lord made it that way in his infinite wisdom and if he would make it that way for the laws of the land why wouldn't he do the same for the body of the church to protect the people? People wonder why Denver used someone elses quote in his book comparing current LDS mindset about the general authorities and President of the church to the Pope. This is EXACTLY why. It's interesting to see others point out the flaws in other churches and the Catholic Church especially while not realizing within our own ranks we have begun to fall for these same types of false traditions. People treat it like blasphemy to ask questions or to even have concerns. I agree that one needs to be humble about these things and seek to humbly find the truth and do so without condemnation but the truth is the only things that sets us free and keeps us from giving away our free agency. People don't realize they give away free agency when they look at things that way and don't seek their own witnesses about where things stand from the Lord.

The truth is that the Church as a whole is so different then what it was when it began. It has evolved so much and not necessarily in good ways but regardless of who is to blame for this which I believe the people in the church collectivelly are to blame. But regardless of blame the point is to learn from the past and from the lessons strategically placed in the BOM. The bom already has made it very clear that the gentiles would at some point reject the Fullness and turn away from the truth. It is each of our responsibility to collect our own oil and to seek to do what is good and just in the Lord's eyes. Some people say that the church has evolved because times have changed so much and its a bigger organization but how is that argument any different then the worlds views? The world says: these are new times and those old ways of doing things are just "old fashioned" or are no longer useful or true. But that is not the case. The truth does not change because the times change no matter how much people like to think so.

[Randcaptain of 1,000]

Etherial Blue, I have to say you have done an amazing job of doing an awful caricture of recapping what has been stated on this site by several people: Mark, Helaman etc.

No one here would suggest that following the spirit is anything but one of the most important skills/gifts you can develop in your life. Now whether we believe, if I can speak for others, that you have the ability to follow the spirit so well that you are safe criticizing the brethren on numerous issues and feel you are safe acting within your God given rights by so doing, is another issue.

Let me give it one more try. If my three year old child told me that she had the right to walk on the busy road behind our home, I might suggest, yes she has the right, but it isn't a good idea. She might resent my discouraging her from exercising her rights. She might even accuse me of removing her freedom to exercise her rights. She might suggest that what I am trying to do is to stop her from walking. Walking is vital to life. What a silly parent I am. While she may feel fully capable of handling that challenge, as a parent, I would love to see her not feel so confident in such a potentially dangerous activity as that. She would be right, she has that right. But the question remains is it a good idea? Well, there may be circumstances in which it is the best scenario. But I would still discourage her from using that right in almost any situation. Then comes the question; Do I try and teach her to do so safely at this stage in life? What if I don't and she does it anyway without any instruction. That would be bad. But if I teach her more about it, and she practices and gains some level of mastery, she now has more confidence and may try and take on more than she is able at this point.

I am not trying to categorize you as a three year old, nor to demean you or your position. Nor do I intend to convey that I am your superior by using this example. But, You can criticize the brethren till the cows come home. Go for it. It is your right. My suggestion to you, as would be to my daughter that though you may do it successfully many times, the consequences may suddenly overwhelm you with a negative outcome. By so doing you are opening up cracks that adversary could easily use to cause a split in your covenant relationships.

If I were to gauge most peoples ability to stay safe in their spiritual life by following the spirit or following the brethren, 98% will be better off just following the brethren. There may be a small few who are so mature and sound in their spiritual life that they could accurately evaluate and maybe even criticize them and never risk their spiritual integrity. Maybe you are one such. My suggestion is that if you were, you would understand my/our position better than you have. And since you don't understand my stance better than you have, the chance that you are accurate in your criticism of the brethren is frankly nil. So my plea with you is to work on yourself, let the Lord rite his ship. One day you may be called upon by the spirit to rite the church. Then do so with abandon. But I deeply suspect that day will never come, and all of your preparation to do so would have been better spent in your personal spiritual development.

[AshleyBcaptain of 1,000]

Rand, I deeply respect your views and you as a person just in general. From what I know you seem to be a humble follower of Christ. I am also incredibly grateful for help you have given me at times. There are many times I agree with you but on this one issue I have to respectfully disagree. IMO, what you just laid out is one of the problems that were are facing. Just the fact that you somehow see yourself as a 3 year old in spiritual terms compared to the authorities saddens me. I know that you were just using that as an example and perhaps you dont see the gap to be quite that wide but I think you should have a lot more confidence in your own abilities to seek the Lord. The only post I have read of Etherial Blue's was the last one so Im not even sure what has been discussed up to this point. I have mostly stayed away from this thread. Truthfully we are all called to right the church. Individually and you don't have to be a president or apostle to do that. We can still respect those lines of authority and have charity for those in charge while also following the dictates of our own conscience. The Lord would not have endowed us each with the Light of Christ and the ability to reason and ask and do these things for ourselves if he just intended for us to be followers of someone else. That sounds like the adversary's plan to me to be honest. The role of a prophet is not to stand between us and Christ forever. The Prophet is there to help guide us so that we can learn how to come unto Christ for ourselves and that means learning how to get our own answers and our own revelations and to become prophets in our own right. If we are not growing towards that end then we are not following in the way that was intended. We are just giving away free agency. I understand why so many think its just safer to agree with everything the brethren say and do but I would say the opposite is really the case. And that was taught openly in the beginning of the church. But as I said, the key is to seek the will of the Lord humbly and if we do see something we don't agree with or we see as wrong then we just make sure not to do those things ourselves but we must also have charity for others in the process and be very careful not to condemn. It's true that there can be a fine balance in doing so but if a person is TRULY seeking the Lord and is sincere it's not only possible to remain humble and faithful but probably all the more likely that, that person will receive the the blessings that await the faithful and that they will not fall off the path. I understand that others may not see that way and if for them just trusting everything the brethren say and those who run the church do is what they think is the right things to do then so be it. But I think others who don't see it that way should be allowed to have the same freedom to do it by the dictates of their own conscience as well. I'm not saying you are or are trying to keep anyone from doing that at all. But I think both sides could do more to try and understand the other sides point of view and not think of ourselves as so separated. At the end of the day hopefully we are all on the same side and trying to seek the Lord the best way we know how.

[Fairmindedcaptain of 1,000]

Rand.

You're comparing a parent exercising their responsibility to protect their child to Church leaders doing the same for an adult trying to find the truth as directed by the Spirit?

Children are not capable of understanding some things at their stage of development, and it is a parent's obligation to keep them away from such dangers until they're old enough to understand them, forcibly if necessary. Nobody would look twice at a parent pulling their child back from a busy street.

The members whom Church leaders have stewardship over are capable of making their own decisions and coming to their own conclusions. They're capable of going directly to the Holy Ghost for answers to dilemmas. In fact, for Church leaders to forcibly compel them, even along the correct path, would be an exercise of unrighteous dominion.

I'm all for metaphors and similes, but they have to make sense.

[awakecaptain of 100]

If my three year old child told me that she had the right to walk on the busy road behind our home, I might suggest, yes she has the right, but it isn't a good idea.

I'm afraid I don't agree that it's a correct comparison to say we and the Prophets are like a 3 year old and it's parents. We are more on the same level as leaders of the church, for they are all as human as us and can and do error at times. We are even all commanded to be prophets and I believe we must become so if we want to keep from being led astray. I believe it takes one to know one.

I also don't believe that it's safer to just follow blindly, even if one doesn't have the Spirit, for then all thinking and questioning seems to shut down. People without the Spirit can still see and judge at least some right and wrong, but when we just assume we can follow unquestioningly, that is where I believe we get into trouble. We need to always keep our thinking caps on and working.

I agree though that only those with the Spirit can see and judge correctly and making righteous judgments becomes more risky for those without the Spirit.

But I don't believe the Lord will right his ship, if it ever went astray. I believe he will stand by and test the members and leaders to see if they will do it, and if they can even see that it's going in the wrong direction.

[shadowcaptain of 1,000]

Here's the analogy-less truth-
Prophets and apostles have keys, callings, authorities and offices that others do not. Does that mean they are more worthy or more righteous? Not necessarily (well, in my case yes), but it does mean they have something I don't. I try to sustain (in ALL that that entails) them in their God-given stewardship's. Their role/calling/office, and authority in that office is different than mine. I think some of you guys think the office of prophets and apostles is just the same as any other office. You deny the power of the keys they hold.

[AshleyBcaptain of 1,000]

Its not that we deny the power of the keys they hold. We recognize that holding those keys entitles them to power in the priesthood and with every calling there are ways the Lord upholds his servants. But, just because someone has keys conferred upon them doesn't mean they are automatically righteous or that they automatically use the power that those keys give them the right to. Maybe I should just be speaking more for myself actually. Sorry. I recognize those things absolutely and don't take the calling of prophet,seer, and revelator lightly. But again there job is to direct the whole of a church and that does not discount in any way our own needs for personal revelation. It is not part of thier callings to receive personal revelation for each of us.

[awakecaptain of 100]

Prophets and apostles have keys, callings, authorities and offices that others do not. Does that mean they are more worthy or more righteous? Not necessarily

Their role/calling/office, and authority in that office is different than mine. I think some of you guys think the office of prophets and apostles is just the same as any other office. You deny the power of the keys they hold.

Even having keys, authority and position do not mean that a leader is more righteous or understands the gospel better than other members. It only means he has more responsibility, obligation and accountability to live worthy of the Spirit and to gain an understanding of the Gospel so he can fulfill his calling as the Lord would desire him to.

"Though General Authorities are authorities in the sense of having power to administer church affairs, they may or may not be authorities in the sense of doctrinal knowledge, the intricacies of church 'procedures' or the receipt of the promptings of the Spirit. A call to an administrative position of itself adds little knowledge or power of discernment to an individual, although every person called to a position in the Church does grow in grace, knowledge, and power by magnifying the calling given him."
Elder Bruce R. McConkie, Mormon Doctrine, p. 309.

[shadowcaptain of 1,000]

But again there job is to direct the whole of a church and that does not discount in any way our own needs for personal revelation. It is not part of thier callings to receive personal revelation for each of us.

Nobody has argued that point

[AshleyBcaptain of 1,000]

But again there job is to direct the whole of a church and that does not discount in any way our own needs for personal revelation. It is not part of thier callings to receive personal revelation for each of us.

Nobody has argued that point

[Droopycaptain of 50]

I admit that I visit and read several blog sites from members of the Church. I tend to agree with Brother Snuffer's content and views and several others, while also finding myself disagreeing with some others. I have read all of Brother Snuffer's books, more than once. And, I get it!

Today I was sent information from a blog site that I have never visited, or knew even existed. The content is fairly similar to some of what DS is trying to convey and teach. I must say that as I proceeded to read it, I experienced a range of emotions stemming from unbelief at first, to intrigue as I ventured further, and then finally feeling frustrated and concerned as I finished. My conclusion? I am not surprised. I will let you make your own decisions hence forth.

The Google Apostasy Part 2 The Mormon Church Uses Paid Shills to Influence the Way People Think-

On Saturday, March 31, 2012 a blogger by the name of Denver Snuffer claimed that the Mormon Church was using employees to post online responses using personas and anonymous identities with the intent to influence public opinion within church circles. Here are his comments below:

” The City Creek multi-billion dollar project has excited a lot of criticism. The result has been dismay by many faithful Latter-day Saints. Their anxiety over the project has become the subject of many conversations on the Internet.

To grapple with this outpouring of criticism and in some cases disgust, the church has paid employees and volunteers who post on-line responses using personas, or anonymous identities to beat back those who express concern. Many of the multiple personas are put up by the same church employee.”
.

Snuffer is a faithful member of the church and an attorney. He did not explain how he obtained this sensitive information however; it is difficult to believe that he just made it up.
Although I found his accusations fascinating, that the LDS church was using paid shills to influence the thinking of members of the church, I didn’t really put much additional thought into it. Recently however, I encountered a situation that has caused me to focus my attention on this issue. In my last blog post I commented on the recent remarks of Elder Marlin K. Jensen at Utah State University and how the current “Google Apostasy” represents the greatest turbulence and crises of faith among Mormons since the Kirtland apostasy back in the 1830′s.

Jensen had acknowledged that many Mormons were experiencing a crisis of faith because Google and the internet was bringing to light some very perplexing and distressing doctrinal and historical issues pertaining to the LDS religion. Jensen then assured the audience he was speaking to, that the church was taking measures to deal with the situation. In that post I mentioned that the church had hired an SEO expert to try and redirect people searching on the internet to neutral and positive websites instead of negative anti-Mormon websites. I speculated that they were probably doing some online reputation management work as well.

In my blog I also mentioned that I am working on a paper that will provide a biblical profile of the calling of the Prophet Joseph Smith that will explain why he did all of the bazaar, contradictory things that he did. I claimed that my paper would provide a legitimate biblical/prophetic answer for every single disturbing issue that skeptics of Mormonism like to bring up. ( I had hoped to release the paper by April 6th but now it is looking like it will be closer to May 20th)

Within a very short period of time I had several visitors make comments… three of the visitors that made comments are the topic of this post. The first commenter I want to speak about had a screen name of “Ted“. Ted took issue with one of the critical comments that I made where I claimed that the current general authorities of the Mormon Church were not very knowledgeable about church history or doctrine. He felt that the talks from the brethren are inspiring and that they do contain scriptural references. He then appeared to be in somewhat of an agreement with me that difficult issues should be addressed more adequately by the Church on their websites. Here is one of his comments:
“I love Rough Stone Rolling, and would love more direct approaches to dealing with challenging issues on the Church websites“.

This passionate statement appeared to be agreeing in part with some of the things I had said on my post. Nevertheless, the person who was presenting himself as a hard-hitting and passionate member of the church ( who loves controversial books on LDS church history) made the authoritarian observation that:
“..what these men [the general authorities] speak is scripture“

I will come back to Ted and his very calculated remarks in a minute but for now, let me just say that the IP address from which Ted’s comments came is 216.49.181.254

Within 5 minutes after Ted posted his remarks, a fellow by the screen name of Evan Valenatine made the following declaration:
“I am glad that the church is putting in an effort to counteract the effects of these websites, and I hope that they do more.“

I will also return to Evan in a minute but for now, please make note of the IP address that he was posting from: 216.49.181.254

I thought it was interesting that these two different people were coming from the same IP address. Perhaps they live in the same home or apartments I thought to myself. At this point my curiosity got the better of me so I did a reverse IP address search to see who owns that particular IP address. Guess who owns it…Well, we will get to that in a minute. The story gets better.

A few days later a person using the screen name of “Mark-e-Mark and the Funky Bunch” paid my blog post a visit quoting Heber C. Kimball and warning that the “very first step of apostasy commenced with losing confidence in the leaders of the church“

He then lovingly counseled me to “not rely so much on the logical“.

“faith is rarely logical” he assured me.

You will never guess what IP address he was posting from so I will simply tell you. 216.49.181.254

That’s right, he was posting from the same IP address as Ted and Evan. Imagine that, Ted, Evan and Mark-E were all taking issue with me, sticking up for the modern corporate church and they were all posting from the same IP address, what a coincidence!

I had a doctrinal exchange with Mark-e-Mark, and told him why I felt he was putting his faith in the “arm of flesh“. He visited me again to make a rebuttal. Following his rebuttal, he apparently began making comments on another controversial LDS blog using a different screen name. Then, he had another thought that he wanted to make on my post. In his rush to make the response on my blog, he forgot to change the screen name he had been using to make comments on a different controversial LDS related blog site.

The screen name he mistakenly used this time was “I love the Circus“

Naturally, that screen name also came from IP address 216.49.181.254

He then acknowledged that he had made a mistake in using the circus screen name and changed back to Mark-E-Mark..In the spirit of mocking me and my screen name, Mark-E-Mark decided to create a unique screen name of “onewhoiswaiting” which would apparently be dedicated to making comments on my blog. Apparently, in anticipation of cyberstalking my future posts he decided to go to the trouble of creating a screen name that would be dedicated to countering the information on my future blog posts.

As you have probably already guessed, all of these people and comments that I have been speaking about were coming from the same IP address and according to the reverse search service that I used, that IP address is owned by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

After doing a little further research, I believe I have identified exactly who one of the people is. I have reason to believe he is a full time employee of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter day Saints. He was hired away from Microsoft and works in the LDS Church “user research” division. Perhaps the user research division is the same division that Denver Snuffer was referring to. I even know which arm of the church he works for and the general physical location of the building that houses their “user research” specialists. The block it is on appears to be located on or close to 21st South between 4th and 5th East in Salt Lake City Utah. The map below shows an Arial view of the general location where their facility is located, according to the analytics provided by wordpress.

After realizing that Ted, Evan, Mark-E, and “I love the Circus” were all coming from the same IP address that is owned by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter day Saints and that the people (or person) posting comments were undoubtedly employees of the Mormon Church, I wanted to give Mark-E Mark the opportunity to come clean and admit that he was a paid influencer working for the Mormon Church. I made the following statement/question:

“I am going to invite you to publicly acknowledge whether or not you are on the payroll of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter day Saints. I think readers of this blog have a right to know if you are an independent influencer acting solely on your own, or if you are a paid influencer who is attempting to do damage control and retain tithe payers for the LDS Church who are troubled about disconcerting things they are finding out about church doctrine and history.“

Here is his response: “I am just a normal guy. My goal is not to influence anyone. I do act independently and if my statements are of influence, then so be it. That is for your readers to decide. I am not [a] paid influencer “attempting to do damage control and retain tithe payers for the LDS Church”. Truth stands on it’s own.“

There you have it… I guess that is called “lying for the Lord”.

It also occurred to me that perhaps these people were just rogue employees of the church who were making these posts from their employers IP (some during work hours, some late at might) without being directed to do so. So I emailed MarkE and the others and showed them this post, giving them the opportunity to respond and explain what their real motivation was and whether they were directed by their employer or not. It has been over a week with no response. I have been feeling pretty important and honored to realize that the user experience department of the LDS Church (which is financed by investments from the sacred tithing funds of the Church), is among my very small group of blog followers. Members of the church should be aware that this is the type of covert activity the leaders of the church are investing in.

Apparently the brethren are very concerned about the information I have been blogging about. They must deem something that I am saying to be disruptive enough to merit paying shills to monitor my posts and to try and discredit the information I am trying to share. Something has them concerned and desperate enough to pay influencers to try and dissuade people from reading the historical and doctrinal documentation that I am presenting. What exactly is it they don’t want you to know?

The powers that be apparently don’t want people who are experiencing a crisis in faith to see the shocking, yet comforting and faith promoting answers to all of the disturbing information out there about Joseph Smith and the LDS restoration movement. It appears they would prefer that people lose their faith in the gospel of Jesus Christ rather than to learn the truth about the modern corporate church.

My how the evolving leadership of the corporate church over the last 180 years has deviated from being focused on taking care of the poor and the cause of Zion, to building billion dollar shopping malls and encouraging shoppers to purchase $10,000 designer watches. It would appear as if they have become preoccupied with silencing the small voices like mine instead of listening to THE still small voice.

Naturally, I am curious to know which of the apostles is over the arm of the church that finances the use of “paid employees and volunteers who post on-line responses using personas, or anonymous identities to beat back those who express concern.”

Is all of this done under the direction of Russell M. Nelson and the “Strengthening Church Members Committee” of the Church?

Ultimately, there is one person at the head of the organization in the large and spacious building who oversees the entire operation of the building up of the financial kingdom of God on earth. This business of employing shills to influence the thinking of the sheeple is happening during his administrative watch. In my next post I am going to provide a link to a synopsis of what actually happened during the 14 year public ministry of the prophet Joseph Smith. In that synopsis I will provide a credible biblical explanation of what took place during the LDS restoration movement. In it, I am going to bring to light the disruptive information that the leaders of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter days Saints desperately don’t want to the membership of the church to know. It will contain a response to all of the difficult questions being asked by skeptics and unbelievers.

https://onewhoiswatching.wordpress.com/2012/05/17/the-google-apostasy-part-2-the-mormon-church-uses-paid-shills-to-influence-the-way-people-think/

In cases such as this, the very first reflex from any intellectually serious interlocutor should be to ask for a CFR (call for references). Secondly, Mr. Denver Snuffer's (sounds like a character from Mayberry RFD or an old Dr. Seuss book) claims should have a appreciative audience over at the Great and Spacious Trailer Park.

[Messengercaptain of 100]

Trying to restrict Agency never works, no matter who is doing it.

[Legioncaptain of 1,000]

Trying to restrict Agency never works, no matter who is doing it.

Although there is a large chasm between restricting agency and setting/enforcing laws.

Most seem to misinterpret the two. For example Prohibition. Many think that the legal law regarding alcohol was a restriction on agency (ability to choose) all while ignoring the impact alcohol has on agency (chemically altering the mind and the ability the mind has to make decisions - loss of agency). Calling good evil and evil good???

The law doesn't effect your ability to make decisions. Sure depending on enforcement levels there are perhaps very serious consequences to breaking law that can lead to a loss of liberty/freedom (prison) but one still has full capacity over their mind and can make their respective decisions. The loss of agency, on the other hand, can lead to further losses.....which if not corrected by calling upon Jesus Christ to break the chains and doing everything within one's personal capability to regain that agency by being obedient to law........will lead to complete loss of agency. Substances or stimulation of bodily chemicals that alter the mind's capability to make decisions play a key role in undermining that respective soul's agency.

Each of Heavenly Father’s children had the opportunity to exercise the agency Heavenly Father had given him or her. We chose to have faith in the Savior Jesus Christ—to come unto Him, follow Him, and accept the plan Heavenly Father presented for our sakes. But a third of Heavenly Father’s children did not have faith to follow the Savior and chose to follow Lucifer, or Satan, instead. 7

And God said, “Wherefore, because that Satan rebelled against me, and sought to destroy the agency of man, which I, the Lord God, had given him, … I caused that he should be cast down.” 8 Those who followed Satan lost the opportunity to receive a mortal body, live on earth, and progress. Because of the way they used their agency, they lost their agency.

The world teaches many falsehoods about agency. Many think we should “eat, drink, and be merry; … and if it so be that we are guilty, God will beat us with a few stripes, and at last we shall be saved.” 17 Others embrace secularism and deny God. They convince themselves that there is no “opposition in all things” 18 and, therefore, “whatsoever a man [does is] no crime.” 19 This “destroy[s] the wisdom of God and his eternal purposes.” 20

Contrary to the world’s secular teaching, the scriptures teach us that we do have agency, and our righteous exercise of agency always makes a difference in the opportunities we have and our ability to act upon them and progress eternally.

http://www.lds.org/general-conference/2 ... e?lang=eng

[Gadcaptain of 1,000]

Trying to restrict Agency never works, no matter who is doing it.

Although there is a large chasm between restricting agency and setting/enforcing laws.

Most seem to misinterpret the two. For example Prohibition. Many think that the legal law regarding alcohol was a restriction on agency (ability to choose) all while ignoring the impact alcohol has on agency (chemically altering the mind and the ability the mind has to make decisions - loss of agency). Calling good evil and evil good???

The law doesn't effect your ability to make decisions. Sure depending on enforcement levels there are perhaps very serious consequences to breaking law that can lead to a loss of liberty/freedom (prison) but one still has full capacity over their mind and can make their respective decisions. The loss of agency, on the other hand, can lead to further losses.....which if not corrected by calling upon Jesus Christ to break the chains and doing everything within one's personal capability to regain that agency by being obedient to law........will lead to complete loss of agency. Substances or stimulation of bodily chemicals that alter the mind's capability to make decisions play a key role in undermining that respective soul's agency.

Each of Heavenly Father’s children had the opportunity to exercise the agency Heavenly Father had given him or her. We chose to have faith in the Savior Jesus Christ—to come unto Him, follow Him, and accept the plan Heavenly Father presented for our sakes. But a third of Heavenly Father’s children did not have faith to follow the Savior and chose to follow Lucifer, or Satan, instead. 7

And God said, “Wherefore, because that Satan rebelled against me, and sought to destroy the agency of man, which I, the Lord God, had given him, … I caused that he should be cast down.” 8 Those who followed Satan lost the opportunity to receive a mortal body, live on earth, and progress. Because of the way they used their agency, they lost their agency.

The world teaches many falsehoods about agency. Many think we should “eat, drink, and be merry; … and if it so be that we are guilty, God will beat us with a few stripes, and at last we shall be saved.” 17 Others embrace secularism and deny God. They convince themselves that there is no “opposition in all things” 18 and, therefore, “whatsoever a man [does is] no crime.” 19 This “destroy[s] the wisdom of God and his eternal purposes.” 20

Contrary to the world’s secular teaching, the scriptures teach us that we do have agency, and our righteous exercise of agency always makes a difference in the opportunities we have and our ability to act upon them and progress eternally.

http://www.lds.org/general-conference/2 ... e?lang=eng

Satan's plan to restrict agency wasn't that he was going to force everyone to do good. He was going to remove the law and thereby the consequences. If there was no law, he reasoned, then nothing that man did could be counted against him. But, God is a God of laws. He must obey the eternal laws laid down by the generations of eternities (if He didn't he would cease to be God). You cannot disconnect an action from its consequence. Satan's plan would have resulted in God losing His station. It would have resulted in all of the children stuck in this Hell subject to Lucifer. Agency cannot exist without the law. You exercise agency wisely by choosing your actions based on your desired consequences.

[awakecaptain of 100]

Trying to hide the 'truth and reality' of church history also never works, it all eventually comes out and just makes the one who tried to hide it look suspect.

[Gadcaptain of 1,000]

Trying to hide the 'truth and reality' of church history also never works, it all eventually comes out and just makes the one who tried to hide it look guilty.

I agree. It may not be appropriate in Gospel Principles... it may not even be appropriate in Sunday School... The best place to learn these things is from a righteous father and mother who themselves are connected to the living vine. Thereby children can learn the truth from the perspective of those that clearly see the state of the church.

It is a shame that there are those who in the 30s, having gone through the complete church program (primary, young men/women, sunday school, seminary, institute, temple, mission, etc) are shocked by these events. At some point it is much better to have had these facts addressed by faithful members.

It is only recently that we even have members addressing these things from a faith perspective.

I personally believe that this is the apostasy foretold by David O. McKay as the result of correlation.

[Legioncaptain of 1,000]

Trying to restrict Agency never works, no matter who is doing it.

Although there is a large chasm between restricting agency and setting/enforcing laws.

Most seem to misinterpret the two. For example Prohibition. Many think that the legal law regarding alcohol was a restriction on agency (ability to choose) all while ignoring the impact alcohol has on agency (chemically altering the mind and the ability the mind has to make decisions - loss of agency). Calling good evil and evil good???

The law doesn't effect your ability to make decisions. Sure depending on enforcement levels there are perhaps very serious consequences to breaking law that can lead to a loss of liberty/freedom (prison) but one still has full capacity over their mind and can make their respective decisions. The loss of agency, on the other hand, can lead to further losses.....which if not corrected by calling upon Jesus Christ to break the chains and doing everything within one's personal capability to regain that agency by being obedient to law........will lead to complete loss of agency. Substances or stimulation of bodily chemicals that alter the mind's capability to make decisions play a key role in undermining that respective soul's agency.

Each of Heavenly Father’s children had the opportunity to exercise the agency Heavenly Father had given him or her. We chose to have faith in the Savior Jesus Christ—to come unto Him, follow Him, and accept the plan Heavenly Father presented for our sakes. But a third of Heavenly Father’s children did not have faith to follow the Savior and chose to follow Lucifer, or Satan, instead. 7

And God said, “Wherefore, because that Satan rebelled against me, and sought to destroy the agency of man, which I, the Lord God, had given him, … I caused that he should be cast down.” 8 Those who followed Satan lost the opportunity to receive a mortal body, live on earth, and progress. Because of the way they used their agency, they lost their agency.

The world teaches many falsehoods about agency. Many think we should “eat, drink, and be merry; … and if it so be that we are guilty, God will beat us with a few stripes, and at last we shall be saved.” 17 Others embrace secularism and deny God. They convince themselves that there is no “opposition in all things” 18 and, therefore, “whatsoever a man [does is] no crime.” 19 This “destroy[s] the wisdom of God and his eternal purposes.” 20

Contrary to the world’s secular teaching, the scriptures teach us that we do have agency, and our righteous exercise of agency always makes a difference in the opportunities we have and our ability to act upon them and progress eternally.

http://www.lds.org/general-conference/2 ... e?lang=eng

Satan's plan to restrict agency wasn't that he was going to force everyone to do good. He was going to remove the law and thereby the consequences. If there was no law, he reasoned, then nothing that man did could be counted against him. But, God is a God of laws. He must obey the eternal laws laid down by the generations of eternities (if He didn't he would cease to be God). You cannot disconnect an action from its consequence. Satan's plan would have resulted in God losing His station. It would have resulted in all of the children stuck in this Hell subject to Lucifer. Agency cannot exist without the law. You exercise agency wisely by choosing your actions based on your desired consequences.

Well said! I might also add...

He further explained that for these opposites or alternatives to exist, there must be law. Law provides us the options. It is by the operation of laws that things happen. By using or obeying a law, one can bring about a particular result—and by disobedience, the opposite result. Without law there could be no God, for He would be powerless to cause anything to happen (see 2 Nephi 2:13). Without law, neither He nor we would be able to predict or choose a particular outcome by a given action. Our existence and the creation around us are convincing evidence that God, the Creator, exists and that our mortal world consists of “both things to act and things to be acted upon” (2 Nephi 2:14)—or, in other words, choices.

Freedom of choice is the freedom to obey or disobey existing laws—not the freedom to alter their consequences. Law, as mentioned earlier, exists as a foundational element of moral agency with fixed outcomes that do not vary according to our opinions or preferences. Elder Dallin H. Oaks of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles observed, “We are responsible to use our agency in a world of choices. It will not do to pretend that our agency has been taken away when we are not free to exercise it without unwelcome consequences.”

http://www.lds.org/ensign/2009/06/moral-agency?lang=eng

“There is a law, irrevocably decreed in heaven before the foundations of this world, upon which all blessings are predicated — And when we obtain any blessing from God, it is by obedience to that law upon which it is predicated” (D&C 130:20–21).

“All kingdoms have a law given” (D&C 88:36)

“He who is not able to abide the law of a celestial kingdom cannot abide a celestial glory. And he who cannot abide the law of a terrestrial kingdom cannot abide a terrestrial glory. And he who cannot abide the law of a telestial kingdom cannot abide a telestial glory” (D&C 88:22–24).

We read again and again in the Bible and in modern scriptures of God’s anger with the wicked 3 and of His acting in His wrath 4 against those who violate His laws. How are anger and wrath evidence of His love? Joseph Smith taught that God “institute[d] laws whereby [the spirits that He would send into the world] could have a privilege to advance like himself.” 5 God’s love is so perfect that He lovingly requires us to obey His commandments because He knows that only through obedience to His laws can we become perfect, as He is. For this reason, God’s anger and His wrath are not a contradiction of His love but an evidence of His love. Every parent knows that you can love a child totally and completely while still being creatively angry and disappointed at that child’s self-defeating behavior.

...the kingdom of glory to which the Final Judgment assigns us is not determined by love but by the law that God has invoked in His plan to qualify us for eternal life, “the greatest of all the gifts of God” (D&C 14:7)

http://www.lds.org/general-conference/2 ... w?lang=eng

As the great Lawgiver, He gave laws and commandments for the benefit of all our Heavenly Father’s children. Indeed, His law fulfilled all previous covenants with the house of Israel. Said He:

“Behold, I am the law, and the light. Look unto me, and endure to the end, and ye shall live; for unto him that endureth to the end will I give eternal life.” (3 Ne. 15:9.)

His law required all mankind, regardless of station in life, to repent and be baptized in His name and receive the Holy Ghost as the sanctifying power to cleanse themselves from sin. Compliance with these laws and ordinances will enable each individual to stand guiltless before Him at the day of judgment. Those who so comply are likened to one who builds his house on a firm foundation—so that even “the gates of hell shall not prevail against them.” (3 Ne. 11:39.)

http://www.lds.org/ensign/1990/06/jesus ... r?lang=eng

[shadowcaptain of 1,000]

[“There is a law, irrevocably decreed in heaven before the foundations of this world, upon which all blessings are predicated — And when we obtain any blessing from God, it is by obedience to that law upon which it is predicated” (D&C 130:20–21).

“All kingdoms have a law given” (D&C 88:36)

“He who is not able to abide the law of a celestial kingdom cannot abide a celestial glory. And he who cannot abide the law of a terrestrial kingdom cannot abide a terrestrial glory. And he who cannot abide the law of a telestial kingdom cannot abide a telestial glory” (D&C 88:22–24).

Great points.
Elder Christofferson said this in the Oct. 2011 GC-
"Repentance is a divine gift, and there should be a smile on our faces when we speak of it. It points us to freedom, confidence, and peace."

[minganocaptain of 1,000]

I personally believe that this is the apostasy foretold by David O. McKay as the result of correlation.

God could have told the prophets to abandon correlation at any time. And BKP still believes - and enforces - the notion that historical truth should be hidden.

[iamse7encaptain of 1,000]

And for the record, Joseph Smith also hid information and activity from the general membership because they wouldn't be able to handle it... this is a different situation, and quite a bit more complicated, due to such easy accessibility to information and people. I'm very interested to see how the Church evolves after the next few decades. Many outside pressures at this time. If any of you guys become Apostles, be sure to remember us lowly sheep.

[minganocaptain of 1,000]

If any of you guys become Apostles, be sure to remember us lowly sheep.

Chances are that all apostles who will serve in our lifetimes are already in the Q70. Look at the faces of the Q12, you will see there every prophet for the next 40 years (Bednar, Christopherson, Andersen).

[AussieOicaptain of 1,000]

So back to the question asked a hundred times,

Does the Church Use Paid Persons to Monitor Our Discussion?

[Gadcaptain of 1,000]

So back to the question asked a hundred times,

Does the Church Use Paid Persons to Monitor Our Discussion?

Yes.

[buffalo_girlcaptain of 1,000]

I don't have a clue, Aussie.

When I worked at the University of Utah Public Broadcast Station, KUED, some years ago, I had ongoing casual interaction with the Church's media spokesperson. In fact, his son was a co-worker of mine at the station.

Maybe things have changed since then, but in my experience the General Authorities who participated in programs generated at KUED, the support personnel, the media spokesperson, etc. were all really very ordinary, albeit extraordinarily gracious, people.

Their personal views were neither exalted nor complicated. I saw men who were sincerely interested in how social/economic trends impacted the lives of individuals. I had the distinct impression that the full-time leaders of the Church are so busy with the work before them they are rather isolated from 'real' people conversation and interaction. A couple of times, it happened that I was able to simply spend a few moments in sharing observations on one thing or another - as people grounded upon the same foundation talk about their everyday experiences.

Unless things have changed a very great deal since then, I cannot imagine there would be time to worry over the tangle of silliness that goes on here.

I mean what would they be looking to find, anyway?

(Of course, I don't participate in the 'private discussions'. Can the CHURCH hack 'deep doctrine' discussions without special permission? I really don't think they are interested.)

[bobhenstracaptain of 1,000]

This has been an interesting discussion at times, I haven't said much because I was interested in the various directions the subject drifted.

Since I put my treatise on Salvation (Wise Unto Salvation)
viewtopic.php?f=19&t=5645
on the web 15 years ago a small percentage of people who read the treatise threatened me by saying they were going to send it to various GA's, I always replied OK, send it whomever you wish. In the almost 4 years it has been on this site I've received arguments from several people, most of whom I later discovered were Ron Paul disciples, didn't know why they thought it a big issue, but later with understanding of the mind set of Ron Paul people it made sense.

The first several years it was on the Gospelink Forum web site, when they closed the forum down I transferred it to another site, then a bit later to this site. But not once in the 15 years it's been on the WEB has any church official ask me to remove it! My own Stake President, who admitted he had never read it, ask me to place a more clear disclaimer on it, it seemed a member in the ward had found it, declared it false doctrine, complained to our SP and insisted on it's removal. I tried working with that individual, but he would have nothing to do with me, and eventually moved out of the ward. So after discussions with my SP, I added a disclaimer he agreed with, and have heard little more about it from ward or stake members since, my current Bishop has mentioned it a few times in private conversations.

One individual who didn't agree with it in SLC sent me a scathing email demanding I remove it, I didn't, and later on he sent several more emails asking me to clarify different aspects of the treatise, his last email apologizing for the first scathing email, he now understands what the treatise is all about, and agree's with it!

So, back to the title of this thread, as far as the idea that the Church hires people to monitor websites such as this one, I don't believe they do. Judging by the several threats I received out of hundreds of emails, every GA in the Church must have a copy of it by now, or know it's here on this site, and I have heard nothing from the Church about it. And Brian could have removed it at any time. I once suggested to Brian that it be placed in one of the closed discussions, but he didn't do it, so I guess it's alright where it's at!

One last comment, since the book "Odds Are Your Going To Be Exalted!" was published by Deseret Book I simply now refer the naysayers to that book, and eventually, they'll write back and say "now" they understand.

Bob

[Gadcaptain of 1,000]

Oh I have no doubt that the GAs don't care much at all about what we talk about here; they are just too busy to monitor websites. The COB is a different story though. They hire PR firms and other employees to go on the web to get positive sites higher in Google rankings and to get negative items lower. It is called SEO.

[ithinkcaptain of 1,000]

Chances are that all apostles who will serve in our lifetimes are already in the Q70. Look at the faces of the Q12, you will see there every prophet for the next 40 years (Bednar, Christopherson, Andersen).

I don't agree with you. Section 107 stipulates that the president will be chosen from the body of the church high priests. Oh. But we don't do that anymore. I must concede: you may be correct, as the corporation sole articles specify that all future presidents come from the 12, not from the church.

[Markcaptain of 1,000]

Chances are that all apostles who will serve in our lifetimes are already in the Q70. Look at the faces of the Q12, you will see there every prophet for the next 40 years (Bednar, Christopherson, Andersen).

I don't agree with you. Section 107 stipulates that the president will be chosen from the body of the church high priests. Oh. But we don't do that anymore. I must concede: you may be correct, as the corporation sole articles specify that all future presidents come from the 12, not from the church.

We don't do that anymore? Boy thats news to me. I have always thought every Presiding High Priest from Pres. Monson on down was in fact chosen from the body of high priests. What did I miss? Were there any Presiding High Priests not chosen from the body of the existing high priests of their time?