Rock Waterman interviewed on AM 630 in Salt Lake today

For discussion of liberty, freedom, government and politics.
User avatar
Hyrcanus
captain of 100
Posts: 716

Re: Rock Waterman interviewed on AM 630 in Salt Lake today

Post by Hyrcanus »

ebenezerarise wrote:Who says -- besides Rock Waterman or others -- that they have been dishonest about it? Who says these were ordered from the top? You don't have to be the prophet to see the apostasy here with these people.

The assumption that the Twelve or the First Presidency is behind this is just that -- an assumption. Now we have people calling them dishonest.
I don't think we have incontrovertible proof that this was organized by the full Qot12 or First Presidency, but I think there is good reason to believe these actions weren't all independently undertaken by local congregations. Kate Kelly, John Dehlin, Rock Waterman and several others all received notifications within a few days of each other. There is very little chance that this wasn't organized centrally by someone.

Like others have said, I don't think it would hurt the Church to acknowledge it was centrally organized, so it is frustrating that they've left people with the impression that several different Bishop's/Stake President's all got the idea independently at exactly the same time.

cayenne
captain of 100
Posts: 758

Re: Rock Waterman interviewed on AM 630 in Salt Lake today

Post by cayenne »

laronius is correct,

This is something that should not be a controversy. This is bordering on bizarre…..A lesser authority cannot ex a higher authority. A bishop cannot ex an Elder. A bishop or stake president cannot ex the President of the priesthood.

Have we not read the whole thing in context (sec 107)


78 Again, verily, I say unto you, the most important business of the church, and the most difficult cases of the church, inasmuch as there is not satisfaction upon the decision of the bishop or judges, it shall be handed over and carried up unto the council of the church, before the Presidency of the High Priesthood.

79 And the Presidency of the council of the High Priesthood shall have power to call other high priests, even twelve, to assist as counselors; and thus the Presidency of the High Priesthood and its counselors shall have power to decide upon testimony according to the laws of the church.

80 And after this decision it shall be had in remembrance no more before the Lord; for this is the highest council of the church of God, and a final decision upon controversies in spiritual matters.

81 There is not any person belonging to the church who is exempt from this council of the church.

82 And inasmuch as a President of the High Priesthood shall transgress, he shall be had in remembrance before the common council of the church, who shall be assisted by twelve counselors of the High Priesthood;

83 And their decision upon his head shall be an end of controversy concerning him.

(So obviously no one is exempt from the highest council in the church vs 81, so the common council that can Ex the President is part of this highest council…..not some local court)….yes even with Joseph Smith's so called trial before the council their was controversy on how to run it. The scriptures are clear…..a lesser office can hold a court for a higher office, but only those equal in authority to the higher office can actually ex the individual. So regardless of a lesser court trying the President…they can't ex him and it would have to be only the Highest court that could.

And also that the president of the High Priesthood does run the whole church….(107 again)


91 And again, the duty of the President of the office of the High Priesthood is to preside over the whole church, and to be like unto Moses—

92 Behold, here is wisdom; yea, to be a seer, a revelator, a translator, and a prophet, having all the gifts of God which he bestows upon the head of the church.


Let us also remember that originally when the Stake High councils were equal to the 12, this was before all the keys were rolled onto the 12 as part of the Holy order.

Mala_Suerte
captain of 100
Posts: 204
Location: Western Slope

Re: Rock Waterman interviewed on AM 630 in Salt Lake today

Post by Mala_Suerte »

Who is Rock Waterman?

User avatar
Hyrcanus
captain of 100
Posts: 716

Re: Rock Waterman interviewed on AM 630 in Salt Lake today

Post by Hyrcanus »

Mala_Suerte wrote:Who is Rock Waterman?
A blogger being disciplined (likely excommunicated) by the Church.

Thomas
captain of 1,000
Posts: 4622

Re: Rock Waterman interviewed on AM 630 in Salt Lake today

Post by Thomas »

cayenne wrote: Let us also remember that originally when the Stake High councils were equal to the 12, this was before all the keys were rolled onto the 12 as part of the Holy order.
Can you show me any revelation that says the Stake High councils are no longer equal to the twelve and the First Presidency? Once again, someone makes up their own rules instead of following revelation from God.
78 Again, verily, I say unto you, the most important business of the church, and the most difficult cases of the church, inasmuch as there is not satisfaction upon the decision of the bishop or judges, it shall be handed over and carried up unto the council of the church, before the Presidency of the High Priesthood.
This scripture says higher authorities are where appeals can be made. If a member is unsatisfied upon the decision of the bishop or Stake President, they can take it to a higher judge for appeal. It doesn't say that higher judge can also be the prosecutor or accuser, which corrupts the process and does not allow for righteous judgment.

Thomas
captain of 1,000
Posts: 4622

Re: Rock Waterman interviewed on AM 630 in Salt Lake today

Post by Thomas »

laronius wrote: This is very straightforward. If someone who holds keys delegates the authority of some of those keys, this does not mean he relinquishes that authority himself. And yet it is being asserted in this thread that contrary to how the church functions today that local leaders stand independent of everone else, yet no one can show where it says so. Where is the order in thousands of individuals across the earth, in the form of bishops and stake presidents, who can do what they want without being accountable to anyone?
Where is the order in a judge being an accuser? A judge is supposed to be unbiased. You describe a kangaroo court.

BrentL
captain of 100
Posts: 331

Re: Rock Waterman interviewed on AM 630 in Salt Lake today

Post by BrentL »

I directly asked my SP where my disciplinary council originated. I was told he received notification. he said it had happened before on other cases, such as if someone was charged with embezzlement or something he would get notified but usually they already knew of the problems.

from Rocks blog:
For that matter, what do we need with a prophet of God when we can heed the words of someone whose name appears on the corporate flow chart in the box right under "Marketing Dept."?
its your church now, not mine, but I cannot understand how you would not find this a bit disconcerting, given that you have an "official spokesperson" for the Church that you equate with the "official spokesperson" of God.

the PR arm of the church is now issuing the press releases that define your church, that PR arm has clearly refuted things prior first presidency's have said. so... have unwavering faith and doubt your doubts about the law firms and marketing departments and public relations experts that have been set aside and given keys to the kingdom.

God wants you to find him. read the Book of Mormon. His arm is still extended. we are just as capable of building golden calf's as any other generation. anything other that that is a lie. nothing can keep you from God but your own choices. Jospeh was a choice seer, if you lack wisdom, do as he did.

User avatar
shadow
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 10542
Location: St. George

Re: Rock Waterman interviewed on AM 630 in Salt Lake today

Post by shadow »

BrentL wrote:
God wants you to find him. read the Book of Mormon. His arm is still extended. we are just as capable of building golden calf's as any other generation. anything other that that is a lie. nothing can keep you from God but your own choices. Jospeh was a choice seer, if you lack wisdom, do as he did.
Perfect. This is also what the church teaches.

Rock Waterman
captain of 50
Posts: 71

Re: Rock Waterman interviewed on AM 630 in Salt Lake today

Post by Rock Waterman »

Hyrcanus wrote: Regarding the Price's I'm not dismissing anything.... I I think they avoid some of the hardest historical pieces to deal with (Whitney Letter as an example) and they are extremely guilty of cherry picking their sources.
They haven't avoided the hard historical pieces, they just didn't include everything in volume I, which serves as really only a preface and overview. Volume II is coming out in hardback soon, followed by a third volume. Meanwhile you can read all the chapters free online, and they certainly didn't avoid the Whitney letter, which is the most transparent of frauds (in the redacted form it is usually presented) and the furthest thing from a smoking gun in the arsenal.

User avatar
Hyrcanus
captain of 100
Posts: 716

Re: Rock Waterman interviewed on AM 630 in Salt Lake today

Post by Hyrcanus »

Rock Waterman wrote:
Hyrcanus wrote: Regarding the Price's I'm not dismissing anything.... I I think they avoid some of the hardest historical pieces to deal with (Whitney Letter as an example) and they are extremely guilty of cherry picking their sources.
They haven't avoided the hard historical pieces, they just didn't include everything in volume I, which serves as really only a preface and overview. Volume II is coming out in hardback soon, followed by a third volume. Meanwhile you can read all the chapters free online, and they certainly didn't avoid the Whitney letter, which is the most transparent of frauds (in the redacted form it is usually presented) and the furthest thing from a smoking gun in the arsenal.
Can you point me to where they address the Whitney letter? I must have missed it. I'm not familiar with the claim that the letter is a fraud, can you articulate your basis for that?

keep the faith
captain of 100
Posts: 798

Re: Rock Waterman interviewed on AM 630 in Salt Lake today

Post by keep the faith »

12 Prepare ye, prepare ye for that which is to come, for the Lord is nigh;

13 And the anger of the Lord is kindled, and his sword is bathed in heaven, and it shall fall upon the inhabitants of the earth.

14 And the arm of the Lord shall be revealed; and the day cometh that they who will not hear the voice of the Lord, neither the voice of his servants, neither give heed to the words of the prophets and apostles, shall be cut off from among the people;

15 For they have strayed from mine ordinances, and have broken mine everlasting covenant;

16 They seek not the Lord to establish his righteousness, but every man walketh in his own way, and after the image of his own god, whose image is in the likeness of the world, and whose substance is that of an idol, which waxeth old and shall perish in Babylon, even Babylon the great, which shall fall.

User avatar
Hogmeister
captain of 100
Posts: 850
Location: Sweden/Norway

Re: Rock Waterman interviewed on AM 630 in Salt Lake today

Post by Hogmeister »

Hyrcanus wrote:
Rock Waterman wrote:
Hyrcanus wrote: Regarding the Price's I'm not dismissing anything.... I I think they avoid some of the hardest historical pieces to deal with (Whitney Letter as an example) and they are extremely guilty of cherry picking their sources.
They haven't avoided the hard historical pieces, they just didn't include everything in volume I, which serves as really only a preface and overview. Volume II is coming out in hardback soon, followed by a third volume. Meanwhile you can read all the chapters free online, and they certainly didn't avoid the Whitney letter, which is the most transparent of frauds (in the redacted form it is usually presented) and the furthest thing from a smoking gun in the arsenal.
Can you point me to where they address the Whitney letter? I must have missed it. I'm not familiar with the claim that the letter is a fraud, can you articulate your basis for that?

http://en.fairmormon.org/Joseph_Smith/P ... ney_letter" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

User avatar
Hyrcanus
captain of 100
Posts: 716

Re: Rock Waterman interviewed on AM 630 in Salt Lake today

Post by Hyrcanus »

Hogmeister wrote:
Hyrcanus wrote:
Rock Waterman wrote:They haven't avoided the hard historical pieces, they just didn't include everything in volume I, which serves as really only a preface and overview. Volume II is coming out in hardback soon, followed by a third volume. Meanwhile you can read all the chapters free online, and they certainly didn't avoid the Whitney letter, which is the most transparent of frauds (in the redacted form it is usually presented) and the furthest thing from a smoking gun in the arsenal.
Can you point me to where they address the Whitney letter? I must have missed it. I'm not familiar with the claim that the letter is a fraud, can you articulate your basis for that?

http://en.fairmormon.org/Joseph_Smith/P ... ney_letter" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Sorry, for clarity I was looking for where the Price's deal with the Whitney letter. I'm familiar with FAIR's treatment.

farfromhome
captain of 100
Posts: 333

Re: Rock Waterman interviewed on AM 630 in Salt Lake today

Post by farfromhome »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=p ... Nt1k3ohkbs" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Video notes a growing sense in corporations and government to silence even peaceful dissent.

Its quite simple, really, if that dissent threatens corporate profits, then it is considered "terrorism" and the terrorist must be discredited (or worse).

User avatar
pjbrownie
captain of 1,000
Posts: 3070
Location: Mount Pleasant, Utah

Re: Rock Waterman interviewed on AM 630 in Salt Lake today

Post by pjbrownie »

Perhaps this should be another thread, but I just read the polygamy stuff and at least found it compelling. Like others, I have always been puzzled by Joseph's bizarre behavior, where on one hand he promised to "root out polygamy" and on the other hand, was practicing it in secret. If it was a secret doctrine, it's more likely he would have said nothing other than outright lying. That is not usually the pattern with him. I would prefer to believe him, and when I thought about it, it felt true.

But . . . if Joseph was telling the truth, and the Apostles and women that testified later (decades later) that he was the first polygamist, that he practiced it in secret, then that would make them liars. That casts a pall on the whole Brigham Young enterprise. I also still believe the Lord directed His church and still does today, using very imperfect men and a very imperfect organization.

User avatar
Hyrcanus
captain of 100
Posts: 716

Re: Rock Waterman interviewed on AM 630 in Salt Lake today

Post by Hyrcanus »

pjbrownie wrote:Perhaps this should be another thread, but I just read the polygamy stuff and at least found it compelling. Like others, I have always been puzzled by Joseph's bizarre behavior, where on one hand he promised to "root out polygamy" and on the other hand, was practicing it in secret. If it was a secret doctrine, it's more likely he would have said nothing other than outright lying. That is not usually the pattern with him. I would prefer to believe him, and when I thought about it, it felt true.

But . . . if Joseph was telling the truth, and the Apostles and women that testified later (decades later) that he was the first polygamist, that he practiced it in secret, then that would make them liars. That casts a pall on the whole Brigham Young enterprise. I also still believe the Lord directed His church and still does today, using very imperfect men and a very imperfect organization.
I think it makes a great deal of sense to study out both sides. You go in knowing that every author potentially has an agenda. Once you've read everything you can decide where you stand. I also agree that the fact that a big chunk of the Church's early leaders were willing to lie about Polygamy is hard to reconcile. The difference between what people were saying in public and what they were saying in private is really stark. Lying isn't unprecedented in scripture, but that doesn't make it any more comfortable to me.

User avatar
shadow
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 10542
Location: St. George

Re: Rock Waterman interviewed on AM 630 in Salt Lake today

Post by shadow »

pjbrownie wrote:Perhaps this should be another thread, but I just read the polygamy stuff and at least found it compelling. Like others, I have always been puzzled by Joseph's bizarre behavior, where on one hand he promised to "root out polygamy" and on the other hand, was practicing it in secret. If it was a secret doctrine, it's more likely he would have said nothing other than outright lying. That is not usually the pattern with him. I would prefer to believe him, and when I thought about it, it felt true.

But . . . if Joseph was telling the truth, and the Apostles and women that testified later (decades later) that he was the first polygamist, that he practiced it in secret, then that would make them liars. That casts a pall on the whole Brigham Young enterprise. I also still believe the Lord directed His church and still does today, using very imperfect men and a very imperfect organization.
I've concluded that he taught against polygamy. He also taught for it. When God commands it, it's of God. When He doesn't, it's an abomination. There have been plenty of LDS's that wanted it, lived it, but weren't commanded. There have been many that were commanded. One bad. One good. This is how Joseph Smith could on one hand condemn it and on the other live it.

User avatar
Hyrcanus
captain of 100
Posts: 716

Re: Rock Waterman interviewed on AM 630 in Salt Lake today

Post by Hyrcanus »

shadow wrote:
pjbrownie wrote:Perhaps this should be another thread, but I just read the polygamy stuff and at least found it compelling. Like others, I have always been puzzled by Joseph's bizarre behavior, where on one hand he promised to "root out polygamy" and on the other hand, was practicing it in secret. If it was a secret doctrine, it's more likely he would have said nothing other than outright lying. That is not usually the pattern with him. I would prefer to believe him, and when I thought about it, it felt true.

But . . . if Joseph was telling the truth, and the Apostles and women that testified later (decades later) that he was the first polygamist, that he practiced it in secret, then that would make them liars. That casts a pall on the whole Brigham Young enterprise. I also still believe the Lord directed His church and still does today, using very imperfect men and a very imperfect organization.
I've concluded that he taught against polygamy. He also taught for it. When God commands it, it's of God. When He doesn't, it's an abomination. There have been plenty of LDS's that wanted it, lived it, but weren't commanded. There have been many that were commanded. One bad. One good. This is how Joseph Smith could on one hand condemn it and on the other live it.
It's more complicated than that. Joseph taught that God would never allow polygamy while he was living it.

User avatar
shadow
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 10542
Location: St. George

Re: Rock Waterman interviewed on AM 630 in Salt Lake today

Post by shadow »

Hyrcanus wrote:
shadow wrote: I've concluded that he taught against polygamy. He also taught for it. When God commands it, it's of God. When He doesn't, it's an abomination. There have been plenty of LDS's that wanted it, lived it, but weren't commanded. There have been many that were commanded. One bad. One good. This is how Joseph Smith could on one hand condemn it and on the other live it.
It's more complicated than that. Joseph taught that God would never allow polygamy while he was living it.
I've read similar statements, all second or third hand and usually without full context. Church history can be a mess that way. I'm not suggesting that Joseph never claimed that, just that I don't know. Either way I'm settled on the matter.

User avatar
Hyrcanus
captain of 100
Posts: 716

Re: Rock Waterman interviewed on AM 630 in Salt Lake today

Post by Hyrcanus »

shadow wrote:
Hyrcanus wrote:
shadow wrote: I've concluded that he taught against polygamy. He also taught for it. When God commands it, it's of God. When He doesn't, it's an abomination. There have been plenty of LDS's that wanted it, lived it, but weren't commanded. There have been many that were commanded. One bad. One good. This is how Joseph Smith could on one hand condemn it and on the other live it.
It's more complicated than that. Joseph taught that God would never allow polygamy while he was living it.
I've read similar statements, all second or third hand and usually without full context. Church history can be a mess that way. I'm not suggesting that Joseph never claimed that, just that I don't know. Either way I'm settled on the matter.
Fair enough, I won't belabor the point unless you're interested in pursuing it.

Tribunal
captain of 1,000
Posts: 1496

Re: Rock Waterman interviewed on AM 630 in Salt Lake today

Post by Tribunal »

Hyrcanus wrote:It's more complicated than that. Joseph taught that God would never allow polygamy while he was living it.
I wonder if we've corrupted the intent of Joseph Smith regarding polygamy versus plural marriage, just like we've corrupted the meaning of the priesthood, tithing, and the very definition of marriage.

sniglet
Hi, I'm new.
Posts: 2

Re: Rock Waterman interviewed on AM 630 in Salt Lake today

Post by sniglet »

BrentL wrote:its your church now, not mine
This statement really bothers me. Why can't people who are not official members of the LDS church still consider themselves to be "Mormons"? I also don't see why people outside the LDS church can't take an interest and feel passionately about the church.

I left the Mormon church many years ago but still consider myself to be a "Mormon" from a cultural perspective (and am proud of it). I just don't believe in the theology. I don't see why anyone has to let some officials in Salt Lake define how they think of themselves.

User avatar
Hyrcanus
captain of 100
Posts: 716

Re: Rock Waterman interviewed on AM 630 in Salt Lake today

Post by Hyrcanus »

Tribunal wrote:
Hyrcanus wrote:It's more complicated than that. Joseph taught that God would never allow polygamy while he was living it.
I wonder if we've corrupted the intent of Joseph Smith regarding polygamy versus plural marriage, just like we've corrupted the meaning of the priesthood, tithing, and the very definition of marriage.
It's probably fair to say that we don't know for sure what Joseph's (/God's depending on your point of view) intent was with polygamy, priesthood, tithing, etc. At least 4 churches sprang up from the various members of the church in Illinois at the time.

boo
captain of 1,000
Posts: 1559
Location: Arizona

Re: Rock Waterman interviewed on AM 630 in Salt Lake today

Post by boo »

Hyrcanus wrote:
Tribunal wrote:
Hyrcanus wrote:It's more complicated than that. Joseph taught that God would never allow polygamy while he was living it.
I wonder if we've corrupted the intent of Joseph Smith regarding polygamy versus plural marriage, just like we've corrupted the meaning of the priesthood, tithing, and the very definition of marriage.
It's probably fair to say that we don't know for sure what Joseph's (/God's depending on your point of view) intent was with polygamy, priesthood, tithing, etc. At least 4 churches sprang up from the various members of the church in Illinois at the time.
Very good point .And it seems to me that the 2 of them I am familiar with ( LDS and RLDS) don't look exactly like Joseph's

Post Reply