Pres Monson hasn't borne a(n LDS Morg) testimony in 8 years.

[keep the faith]

With other latter-day prophets, I testify of the truthfulness of this “most correct of any book on earth,”  even the Book of Mormon, another testament of Jesus Christ. Its message spans the earth and brings its readers to a knowledge of the truth. It is my testimony that the Book of Mormon changes lives. May each of us read it and reread it. And may we joyfully share our testimonies of its precious promises with all of God’s children. ◼

TSM from the 2011 Ensign linked to above. This seems pretty clear testimony to me. I didn't read the article linked in the OP so I don't know what sort of requirements he is imposing.

Seems that way to me as well Gad. Thanks for highlighting the testimony.

[hyloglyph]

Hmmm...I think some may be missing what is happening on this thread. It's not a thread about bashing Monson or his testimony.

Aussie linked an article by some people that seem to have a real agenda against the church.

In the very first sentence of that article it says that Monson has not born testimony of the Book of Mormon, or of Joseph's prophetic calling, in General Conference, since October 2005.

Aussie says he wanted to refute that to a friend, but it looks like he won't be able to do that?

Everyone knows President Monson has a testimony of it, I guess the requirements of the article were just being unnecessarily strict.

Anyway, I'm just gonna leave the whole thing be. Thanks to Infowarrior and KeeptheFaith and others for posting links. President Monson bares a strong and good testimony I think we can all agree.

[Gad]

With other latter-day prophets, I testify of the truthfulness of this “most correct of any book on earth,”  even the Book of Mormon, another testament of Jesus Christ. Its message spans the earth and brings its readers to a knowledge of the truth. It is my testimony that the Book of Mormon changes lives. May each of us read it and reread it. And may we joyfully share our testimonies of its precious promises with all of God’s children. ◼

TSM from the 2011 Ensign linked to above. This seems pretty clear testimony to me. I didn't read the article linked in the OP so I don't know what sort of requirements he is imposing.

Seems that way to me as well Gad. Thanks for highlighting the testimony.

You are welcome.

I've spent a few minutes in the original document posted. It strikes me that the author has defined "testimony of any of his church's unique foundational doctrines" very strictly.

For example:

"including the historicity of the Book of Mormon, the divine calling of Joseph Smith, the restoration of the priesthood, or the status of the church’s top leaders as prophets, seers, and revelators."

Most members do not bear testimony using words like "historicity"

It looks like he only reference GC talks. And it looks like he used search terms to locate the testimony:

"(using the keyboard shortcut Ctrl+F) for the following words and phrases(or any others you think might accompany an LDS testimony):
“I know”, “I testify”,“I believe”, “I declare”, “I bear”, “I have a”, “I have the”, “I am certain”, “my testimony”, “my witness”, “my personal”, “it is my”, “is true”, “is a true”, “was a true”, "Joseph", “Book of Mormon”, “prophet”, “restore ”, “restoration”. You can then read the context around each word/phrase to see if a testimony is present.

If that is the case then he would have missed the testimony above.

In the very first sentence of that article it says that Monson has not born testimony of the Book of Mormon, or of Joseph's prophetic calling, in General Conference, since October 2005.

Aussie says he wanted to refute that to a friend, but it looks like he won't be able to do that?

Everyone knows President Monson has a testimony of it, I guess the requirements of the article were just being unnecessarily strict.

Yeah, I think the author was cherry picking the requirements a bit too much.

[TruthIsReason]

I’m shocked and disappointed by the fact that so many people here have taken the shoot-first-ask-questions/read/think-later approach. All anyone had to do was read the first paragraph of the paper to know what it was actually claiming and that would have prevented more than half of the comments in this thread. A few posters here have pointed this out multiple times and many of you have continued to make the same irrelevant points over and over. Perhaps if people were more interested in learning and less fixated on frantically rushing to the defense of the apparently-fragile church and its leaders every time someone tried to have an open and candid discussion about them, disasters like this wouldn’t happen and we might actually be able to learn something from each other. I’ve been called a liar and deceiver twice in this thread for writing this paper by someone who clearly hadn’t even taken the time to see what I was saying and thus couldn’t back up these very serious accusations. Unfortunately, no one called him on it. It's unbecoming and I would have expected better.

Every quote that’s been given in this thread has either been A) a testimony of some basic Christian idea, B) made prior to October 2005, C) not spoken but written (which is an important distinction as explained below), or D) containing mere gratitude, implications, or equivocation rather than testimony. If anyone here wants to claim that they or anyone else has said something that disproves the paper’s thesis, they need to say exactly what it is and provide a reasoned explanation of how it disproves it. Just saying things like “it’s obvious that Monson testifies of the Restoration all the time” is ridiculous because, as you can see, there are people here besides myself who have put real effort into finding such testimonies and have come up empty handed.

Hyloglyph is right that the clip from the video “Special Witnesses” has been around for a while. It was actually first released in April 2000, as you can see in this 2001 Ensign article, which includes the transcript:
http://www.lds.org/ensign/2001/04/speci ... -of-christ" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The other shorter video clip that’s been posted here (from history.lds.org) is more recent but it actually drives home the point I’m making. Listen to his words carefully: “I have a testimony of THIS GREAT WORK in which we are engaged… This is the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. I honor that name. I honor this church. THE WORK IS TRUE and I testify of THAT TRUTH…” Twice, he testified of the “work” (which could mean many things and could be said by any Christian) even right after he specifically mentioned the church. That was a perfect opportunity to testify that THE CHURCH is true or that one or more of its core unique doctrines are true, but he sidestepped the opportunity… as he has every time for the last eight years. Can you see how carefully he is selecting his words? If a church president does it once, whatever. If he does it consistently over several years of time, there’s a reason for it. Something strange is happening here.

Since no one could find any verbal quotes that disprove the paper’s thesis, some of you have settled on the Ensign quote and decided that the paper’s requirement that the testimony be spoken rather than written is too strict. But this position is ludicrous. General Conference talks are Monson’s ONLY opportunities to verbally testify to the world of what he knows, so expecting there to be just ONE testimony of the church’s unique foundational doctrines in 56 of those talks (over 200 pages worth) over a period of eight years is NOT too much to ask. Now, I figured people would try to rest on this Ensign testimony as a last resort, so the paper includes a whole page addressing it and explaining why it should absolutely not be included in this research (see pg. 16 – yes, this means you will actually have to read a whole page from the paper you've been blindly attacking). And contrary to what Gad said, the keywords I provided for searching actually would find this quote because it contains the term “Book of Mormon”.

Notice that I’ve given you everything you need to prove me wrong in the intro of the paper. I’ve compiled all of Monson’s last 56 talks into a single document that you can use to search for key words and/or or scan the last few paragraphs of each talk and provided the link, which I’ll also include here. Search away but know that I’ve double, triple, and quadruple checked everything that went into the paper since I knew that people wouldn’t believe it at first.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/159460375/Mon ... Since-2006" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Now can we please calm down, take some time to carefully read and ponder the ideas being proposed, and have a civilized, intellectually honest discussion where we work together in search of truth? Or is it more important for everyone to convince themselves that I'm wrong and evil?

[Gad]

I am not sure I buy the written vs verbal distinction as being important, but whatever it is your paper and you can make whatever criteria you want. One thing is for sure, I'll be listening more carefully this coming conference.

[AussieOi]

Can't argue with his post. Don't want to anyone.

Welcome, please continue to participate with us.

Personally, I think it is because we are in a process of mainstreaming the LDS religion.

Pres Hinckley kicked it on with "I don't know if we teach that", which was not truthful statement.

It is more than coincidental. Those 5 key elements were bread and butter, core to any LDS "testimony". Heck, they defined testimony!.


Is it because market research showed lots of non LDS were watching GC and we were trying to bridge to them?

Thats entirely plausible.

Did your paper include samples of his GC talks for the previous periods by any chance? I think it did but I cant remember. I do this on a phone with a 2" screen.

Not easy.

(Fred)

[Seek the Truth]

So Aussie what is the appropriate rate of testimony that would satisfy your requirements. I assume your standards are based on scriptures so please give us some citations.

[gruden2.0]

It's already been done. Twice actually. I'll add a couple more.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VGyJPI89 ... h46HxuuGJa" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h6qF6XTcKBY" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I'm convinced Mormons don't read anymore, but simply jump to conclusions, and this thread bears it out. If anyone bothered to read the paper, it makes a very interesting point. NONE of the GC links above refuted it. None. Scary, huh?

The first youtube link above is the ONLY one in this thread that provides some kind of refutation. Good job IW82 for finding it.

I know a thread like this is going to rub a bunch of people the wrong way, but it's not going to kill anyone to be intellectually curious to see if the writer is making a valid point and if it stacks up. That a whole bunch of dyed-in-the-wool Mormons could only come up with one single video over a 5-year period of Monson's presidency to refute the writer's thesis is, to me, troubling. So far I have seen nothing that refutes the point about Elder Packer.

So, let's make it a challenge to READ the article, then to go about finding evidence that actually refutes the paper. So far IW82 has ONE. Can anyone find a second or third? Think of it as an easter egg hunt. Whoever finds the most articles/videos/etc. that actually refutes the author's points wins. To me it's very discouraging that a message board full of Mormons only found ONE in over a week's time. A lot of groupthink and assumptions, not much research.

[Gad]

I am curious how often TSM bore this type of testimony prior to becoming President. Personally, I find the author's findings mildly interesting. My own testimony is not based on Monson's. I don't really see why this is a big issue. But different strokes for different folks.

[gruden2.0]

My own testimony is not based on Monson's.

Which is as it should be.

I don't really see why this is a big issue. But different strokes for different folks.

Possibly. As a missionary years ago it was drilled into my head that a proper testimony consisted of all 5 elements listed in the paper. I do think it curious that the current church president has largely avoided bearing witness of the founder's divine calling. To me that's a significant omission, but others might think differently.

And BTW, I'm giving IW82 the benefit of the doubt that the video link is a refutation of the author's assertion. The video clip did not have a date when it was made, because it might be older than 8 years, in which case it would not be a valid refutation. If no one else can find anything else that refutes the paper, I may do some digging to see if it actually was filmed more than 8 years ago, which is very possible.

[Gad]

My own testimony is not based on Monson's.

Which is as it should be.

I don't really see why this is a big issue. But different strokes for different folks.

Possibly. As a missionary years ago it was drilled into my head that a proper testimony consisted of all 5 elements listed in the paper. I do think it curious that the current church president has largely avoided bearing witness of the founder's divine calling. To me that's a significant omission, but others might think differently.

And BTW, I'm giving IW82 the benefit of the doubt that the video link is a refutation of the author's assertion. The video clip did not have a date when it was made, because it might be older than 8 years, in which case it would not be a valid refutation. If no one else can find anything else that refutes the paper, I may do some digging to see if it actually was filmed more than 8 years ago, which is very possible.

Hmm that is interesting. I was never taught that on my mission. I wonder if this is more of a generational thing?

I have seen this paper on some of the ex-mo boards. A lot of them there seem to be thinking that Monson is going to announce in conference that the LDS church is a scam... or he became President and doesn't have any belief in the Book of Mormon and etc.

I kind of figure his speaking style has always been more flowery and less direct. Coupled with his age and that the President has "talks" in conference that are more like introductions and closings... plus I really think the OP has been overly strict in his criteria. But like I said maybe I am minimizing this and don't realize it.

[sonofliberty]

My own testimony is not based on Monson's.

Which is as it should be.

I don't really see why this is a big issue. But different strokes for different folks.

Possibly. As a missionary years ago it was drilled into my head that a proper testimony consisted of all 5 elements listed in the paper. I do think it curious that the current church president has largely avoided bearing witness of the founder's divine calling. To me that's a significant omission, but others might think differently.

And BTW, I'm giving IW82 the benefit of the doubt that the video link is a refutation of the author's assertion. The video clip did not have a date when it was made, because it might be older than 8 years, in which case it would not be a valid refutation. If no one else can find anything else that refutes the paper, I may do some digging to see if it actually was filmed more than 8 years ago, which is very possible.

The video clip actually predates the April 2000 session of Conference (see link: http://www.lds.org/ensign/2001/04/speci ... t?lang=eng" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;). However, I think the article and all of this public criticism of the Brethren (or of Denver Snuffer or anyone else for that matter) is not a Christ like use of one's time. I have just two points to make in regards to all of this. First, Latter-day Saints, or any follower of Christ for that matter, should not base their testimony on another man--it should be based on what we learn from feasting upon the words of Christ (keeping in mind that the words of the Prophets--modern day included--are the words of Christ), and the guidance and inspiration we receive from the Holy Spirit. Second, Latter-day Saints, or any follower of Christ for that matter, should not focus on finding fault in others (especially those who are in the service of the Lord) and then publicly identifying those faults. Remember the words of the Savior himself:

36 Master, which is the great commandment in the law?

37 Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt alove the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.

38 This is the first and great commandment.

39 And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.

40 On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.

Matthew 22:36-40

So all the law and the prophets hang on these two commandments. This is guidance from the Lord to help us determine for ourselves which laws are of Him and which prophets are of Him. Also, perhaps we should be asking ourselves does this discussion help you love thy neighbor as thyself?

Next:

1 Judge not, that ye be not judged.

2 For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.

3 And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother’s eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?

4 Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye?

5 Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother’s eye.

Matthew 7:1-5

I do not think anyone on this forum should be trying to cast the beam out of President Monson's eye, President Packer's eye, Denver Snuffer's eye, or anyone else's eye unless it so happens to be in your stewardship to do so. And if that is the case, then I recommend you do so in accordance with the Lord's way of doing so as pointed out in D&C 121:41-44

41 No power or influence can or ought to be maintained by virtue of the priesthood, only by persuasion, by long-suffering, by gentleness and meekness, and by love unfeigned;

42 By kindness, and pure knowledge, which shall greatly enlarge the soul without hypocrisy, and without guile—

43 Reproving betimes with sharpness, when moved upon by the Holy Ghost; and then showing forth afterwards an increase of love toward him whom thou hast reproved, lest he esteem thee to be his enemy;

44 That he may know that thy faithfulness is stronger than the cords of death.

[AussieOi]

Conference has come and gone.
And the results are in.
LDS church is clearly mainlining.


.....I listened to all 5 sessions of General Conference and posted Cryptnotes shortly after each session. Not one of the 15 Apostles said, "I know this Church is true." Or this is “the only true Church on the earth.” Or this is the “only true Gospel on the earth.” That is their responsibility and calling as Apostles to make such declarations without hesitation and before the whole world – even on camera. They should have absolutely no reason to remain silent, unless they can’t say it, or they are trying to mainstream the Church. You see, to make such emphatic declarative statements would be picked up by the press and the PR department of the Church would have to defend the Christian criticism that TSCC is really saying:

¡ATENCIÓN! . . . ВНИМАНИЕ . . . ATTENZIONE . . . ATENÇÃO . . . ACHTUNG . . . ATENCIÓ . . . all other religions are NOT true. You see, back in the 1960’s and 1970’s that was their testimony, but not today.

If one of the 15 had made such a statement I definitely would have made a huge notation and reported the comment. In fact I often posted a note at the end of an Apostle’s talk that he did not bear testimony as a special witness of Christ that this is the only true Church on the earth.

[marc]

Much further back in history: "I have seen Him and He has ministered to me."

[Hyrcanus]

Conference has come and gone.
And the results are in.
LDS church is clearly mainlining.


.....I listened to all 5 sessions of General Conference and posted Cryptnotes shortly after each session. Not one of the 15 Apostles said, "I know this Church is true." Or this is “the only true Church on the earth.” Or this is the “only true Gospel on the earth.” That is their responsibility and calling as Apostles to make such declarations without hesitation and before the whole world – even on camera. They should have absolutely no reason to remain silent, unless they can’t say it, or they are trying to mainstream the Church. You see, to make such emphatic declarative statements would be picked up by the press and the PR department of the Church would have to defend the Christian criticism that TSCC is really saying:

I actually think there is a reasonable case to be made that some of the Apostles in the past lost their testimony, B.H. Roberts probably being the best example. I haven't seen the case made for the current batch, although it is harder to do for contemporaries.

That said, Aussie, the claim about this recent General Conference is a stretch at very best. I went to fact check it quickly. The first talk of the first session has Robert D. Hales:

My brothers and sisters, I bear my special witness that the Lord Jesus Christ lives and stands at the head of this Church. This is His general conference. I promise you in His name that if you pray with a sincere desire to hear your Heavenly Father’s voice in the messages of this conference, you will discover that He has spoken to you to help you, to strengthen you, and to lead you home into His presence. In the name of Jesus Christ, amen.

How does that not qualify as testimony of the truth of the LDS Church?

[leth]

For behold, the Lord hath poured out upon you the spirit of deep sleep. For behold, ye have closed your eyes, and ye have rejected the prophets; and your rulers, and the seers hath he covered because of your iniquity.

[keep the faith]

Conference has come and gone.
And the results are in.
LDS church is clearly mainlining.


.....I listened to all 5 sessions of General Conference and posted Cryptnotes shortly after each session. Not one of the 15 Apostles said, "I know this Church is true." Or this is “the only true Church on the earth.” Or this is the “only true Gospel on the earth.” That is their responsibility and calling as Apostles to make such declarations without hesitation and before the whole world – even on camera. They should have absolutely no reason to remain silent, unless they can’t say it, or they are trying to mainstream the Church. You see, to make such emphatic declarative statements would be picked up by the press and the PR department of the Church would have to defend the Christian criticism that TSCC is really saying:

I actually think there is a reasonable case to be made that some of the Apostles in the past lost their testimony, B.H. Roberts probably being the best example. I haven't seen the case made for the current batch, although it is harder to do for contemporaries.

That said, Aussie, the claim about this recent General Conference is a stretch at very best. I went to fact check it quickly. The first talk of the first session has Robert D. Hales:

My brothers and sisters, I bear my special witness that the Lord Jesus Christ lives and stands at the head of this Church. This is His general conference. I promise you in His name that if you pray with a sincere desire to hear your Heavenly Father’s voice in the messages of this conference, you will discover that He has spoken to you to help you, to strengthen you, and to lead you home into His presence. In the name of Jesus Christ, amen.

How does that not qualify as testimony of the truth of the LDS Church?

I would ask that same question of this poster Aussie quotes from here. The premise is beyond ridiculous. I am reminded of Elder Uchtdorf's wonderful message given in a CES devotional fireside titled What is Truth. The last part of his talk is especially relevant here. There are faithless and deceitful people everywhere whose hearts are not pure who want to create doubt and a loss of faith for those who are foolish enough to give heed to their faithlessness. They serve a different master. Don't be taken in by such charlatans. They will take you away from the safety of the Lords peaceful spirit and the fruits contained therein.



"As we all know, it is difficult enough to sort out the truth from our own experiences. To make matters worse, we have an adversary, “the devil, [who] as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour.”10

Satan is the great deceiver, “the accuser of [the] brethren,”11 the father of all lies,12 who continually seeks to deceive that he might overthrow us.13

The adversary has many cunning strategies for keeping mortals from the truth. He offers the belief that truth is relative; appealing to our sense of tolerance and fairness, he keeps the real truth hidden by claiming that one person’s “truth” is as valid as any other.

Some he entices to believe that there is an absolute truth out there somewhere but that it is impossible for anyone to know it.

For those who already embrace the truth, his primary strategy is to spread the seeds of doubt. For example, he has caused many members of the Church to stumble when they discover information about the Church that seems to contradict what they had learned previously.

If you experience such a moment, remember that in this age of information there are many who create doubt about anything and everything, at any time and every place.

You will find even those who still claim that they have evidence that the earth is flat, that the moon is a hologram, and that certain movie stars are really aliens from another planet. And it is always good to keep in mind, just because something is printed on paper, appears on the Internet, is frequently repeated, or has a powerful group of followers doesn’t make it true.

Sometimes untrue claims or information are presented in such a way that they appear quite credible. However, when you are confronted with information that is in conflict with the revealed word of God, remember that the blind men in the parable of the elephant would never be able to accurately describe the full truth.

We simply don’t know all things—we can’t see everything. What may seem contradictory now may be perfectly understandable as we search for and receive more trustworthy information. Because we see through a glass darkly, we have to trust the Lord, who sees all things clearly.

Yes, our world is full of confusion. But eventually all of our questions will be answered. All of our doubts will be replaced by certainty. And that is because there is one source of truth that is complete, correct, and incorruptible. That source is our infinitely wise and all-knowing Heavenly Father. He knows truth as it was, as it is, and as it yet will be.14 “He comprehendeth all things, … and he is above all things, … and all things are by him, and of him.”15

Our loving Heavenly Father offers His truth to us, His mortal children.

Now, what is this truth?

It is His gospel. It is the gospel of Jesus Christ. Jesus Christ is “the way, the truth, and the life.”16

If we will only have enough courage and faith to walk in His path, it will lead us to peace of heart and mind, to lasting meaning in life, to happiness in this world, and to joy in the world to come. The Savior is “not far from every one of us.”17 We have His promise that if we seek Him diligently, we will find Him.18

Our Obligation to Seek for Truth
But how can we know that this “truth” is different from any other? How can we trust this “truth”?

The invitation to trust the Lord does not relieve us from the responsibility to know for ourselves. This is more than an opportunity; it is an obligation—and it is one of the reasons we were sent to this earth.

Latter-day Saints are not asked to blindly accept everything they hear. We are encouraged to think and discover truth for ourselves. We are expected to ponder, to search, to evaluate, and thereby to come to a personal knowledge of the truth.

Brigham Young said: “I am … afraid that this people have so much confidence in their leaders that they will not inquire for themselves of God whether they are led by him. I am fearful they settle down in a state of blind self-security. … Let every man and woman know, by the whispering of the Spirit of God to themselves, whether their leaders are walking in the path the Lord dictates.”19

We seek for truth wherever we may find it. The Prophet Joseph Smith taught that “Mormonism is truth. … The first and fundamental principle of our holy religion is, that we believe that we have a right to embrace all, and every item of truth, without limitation or … being … prohibited by the creeds or superstitious notions of men.”20

Yes, we do have the fulness of the everlasting gospel, but that does not mean that we know everything. In fact, one principle of the restored gospel is our belief that God “will yet reveal many great and important things.”21

The Restoration of the gospel of Jesus Christ came about because of a young man with a humble heart and a keen mind seeking for truth. Joseph studied and then acted accordingly. He discovered that if a man lacks wisdom, he can ask of God and the truth really will be given unto him.22

The great miracle of the Restoration was not just that it corrected false ideas and corrupt doctrines—though it certainly did that—but that it flung open the curtains of heaven and initiated a steady downpour of new light and knowledge that has continued to this day.

So we continually seek truth from all good books and other wholesome sources. “If there is anything virtuous, lovely, or of good report or praiseworthy, we seek after these things.”23 In this manner we can resist the deceit of the evil one. In this manner we learn the truth “precept upon precept; line upon line.”24 And we will learn that intelligence cleaves unto intelligence, and wisdom receives wisdom, and truth embraces truth.25

My young friends, as you accept the responsibility to seek after truth with an open mind and a humble heart, you will become more tolerant of others, more open to listen, more prepared to understand, more inclined to build up instead of tearing down, and more willing to go where the Lord wants you to go.

The Holy Ghost—Our Guide to All Truth
Just think about it. You actually have a powerful companion and trustworthy guide in this ongoing search for truth. Who is it? It is the Holy Ghost. Our Heavenly Father knew how difficult it would be for us to sift through all the competing noise and discover truth during our mortality. He knew we would see only a portion of the truth, and He knew that Satan would try to deceive us. So He gave us the heavenly gift of the Holy Ghost to illuminate our minds, teach us, and testify to us of the truth.

The Holy Ghost is a revelator. He is the Comforter, who teaches us “the truth of all things; … [who] knoweth all things, and hath all power according to wisdom, mercy, truth, justice, and judgment.”26

The Holy Ghost is a certain and safe guide to assist all mortals who seek God as they navigate the often troubling waters of confusion and contradiction.

The Witness of truth from the Holy Ghost is available to all, everywhere, all around the globe. All who seek to know the truth, who study it out in their minds,27 and who “ask with a sincere heart, with real intent, having faith in Christ, [will know] the truth … by the power of the Holy Ghost.”28

And there is the additional, unspeakable Gift of the Holy Ghost available to all who qualify themselves through baptism and by living worthy of His constant companionship.

Yes, your loving Father in Heaven would never leave you alone in this mortality to wander in the dark. You need not be deceived. You can overcome the darkness of this world and discover divine truth.

Some, however, do not seek for truth so much as they strive for contention. They do not sincerely seek to learn; rather, they desire to dispute, to show off their supposed learning and thus cause contention. They ignore or reject the counsel of the Apostle Paul to Timothy: “Foolish and unlearned questions avoid, knowing that they do [generate contention].”29

As disciples of Jesus Christ, we know that such contention is completely inconsistent with the Spirit upon whom we depend in our search for truth. As the Savior warned the Nephites, “For verily … I say unto you, he that hath the spirit of contention is not of me, but is of the devil, who is the father of contention.”30

If you follow the Spirit, your personal search for the truth inevitably leads you to the Lord and Savior, even Jesus Christ, for He is “the way, the truth, and the life.”31 This may not be the most convenient way; it will probably also be the road less traveled, and it will be the path with mountains to climb, swift rivers to cross, but it will be His way—the Savior’s redeeming way.

I add my witness as an Apostle of the Lord, that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God. I know this with all my heart and mind. I know this by the witness and power of the Holy Ghost.

I ask you to spare no efforts in your search to know this truth for yourself—because this truth will make you free.32

My dear young friends, you are the hope of Israel. We love you. The Lord knows you; He loves you. The Lord has great confidence in you. He knows your successes, and He is mindful of your challenges and questions in life.

It is my prayer that you will seek the truth earnestly and unceasingly, that you will yearn to drink from the fount of all truth, whose waters are pure and sweet, “a well of water springing up into everlasting life.”33

I bless you with confidence in the Lord and a deep-rooted desire to rightfully discern truth from error—now and throughout your life. This is my prayer and my blessing, in the sacred name of Jesus Christ, amen."

© 2013 by Intellectual Reserve, Inc. All rights reserved. English approval: 8/12. What Is Truth?

[SamFisher]

Conference has come and gone.
And the results are in.
LDS church is clearly mainlining.


.....I listened to all 5 sessions of General Conference and posted Cryptnotes shortly after each session. Not one of the 15 Apostles said, "I know this Church is true." Or this is “the only true Church on the earth.” Or this is the “only true Gospel on the earth.” That is their responsibility and calling as Apostles to make such declarations without hesitation and before the whole world – even on camera. They should have absolutely no reason to remain silent, unless they can’t say it, or they are trying to mainstream the Church. You see, to make such emphatic declarative statements would be picked up by the press and the PR department of the Church would have to defend the Christian criticism that TSCC is really saying:

¡ATENCIÓN! . . . ВНИМАНИЕ . . . ATTENZIONE . . . ATENÇÃO . . . ACHTUNG . . . ATENCIÓ . . . all other religions are NOT true. You see, back in the 1960’s and 1970’s that was their testimony, but not today.

If one of the 15 had made such a statement I definitely would have made a huge notation and reported the comment. In fact I often posted a note at the end of an Apostle’s talk that he did not bear testimony as a special witness of Christ that this is the only true Church on the earth.

Why do you bother watching conference? Based on what I've read of you, you could not pass a temple recommend interview, because you do not sustain the church authorities. I'm baffled why you bother remaining in the church.

[AussieOi]

Conference has come and gone.
And the results are in.
LDS church is clearly mainlining.


.....I listened to all 5 sessions of General Conference and posted Cryptnotes shortly after each session. Not one of the 15 Apostles said, "I know this Church is true." Or this is “the only true Church on the earth.” Or this is the “only true Gospel on the earth.” That is their responsibility and calling as Apostles to make such declarations without hesitation and before the whole world – even on camera. They should have absolutely no reason to remain silent, unless they can’t say it, or they are trying to mainstream the Church. You see, to make such emphatic declarative statements would be picked up by the press and the PR department of the Church would have to defend the Christian criticism that TSCC is really saying:

¡ATENCIÓN! . . . ВНИМАНИЕ . . . ATTENZIONE . . . ATENÇÃO . . . ACHTUNG . . . ATENCIÓ . . . all other religions are NOT true. You see, back in the 1960’s and 1970’s that was their testimony, but not today.

If one of the 15 had made such a statement I definitely would have made a huge notation and reported the comment. In fact I often posted a note at the end of an Apostle’s talk that he did not bear testimony as a special witness of Christ that this is the only true Church on the earth.

Why do you bother watching conference? Based on what I've read of you, you could not pass a temple recommend interview, because you do not sustain the church authorities. I'm baffled why you bother remaining in the church.

Yeah. Never had that question before.
Be honest. Do you think they could sustain themselves?

[keep the faith]

Conference has come and gone.
And the results are in.
LDS church is clearly mainlining.


.....I listened to all 5 sessions of General Conference and posted Cryptnotes shortly after each session. Not one of the 15 Apostles said, "I know this Church is true." Or this is “the only true Church on the earth.” Or this is the “only true Gospel on the earth.” That is their responsibility and calling as Apostles to make such declarations without hesitation and before the whole world – even on camera. They should have absolutely no reason to remain silent, unless they can’t say it, or they are trying to mainstream the Church. You see, to make such emphatic declarative statements would be picked up by the press and the PR department of the Church would have to defend the Christian criticism that TSCC is really saying:

¡ATENCIÓN! . . . ВНИМАНИЕ . . . ATTENZIONE . . . ATENÇÃO . . . ACHTUNG . . . ATENCIÓ . . . all other religions are NOT true. You see, back in the 1960’s and 1970’s that was their testimony, but not today.

If one of the 15 had made such a statement I definitely would have made a huge notation and reported the comment. In fact I often posted a note at the end of an Apostle’s talk that he did not bear testimony as a special witness of Christ that this is the only true Church on the earth.

Why do you bother watching conference? Based on what I've read of you, you could not pass a temple recommend interview, because you do not sustain the church authorities. I'm baffled why you bother remaining in the church.

Yeah. Never had that question before.
Be honest. Do you think they could sustain themselves?

Is that a joke AussieOi? Do you really think that badly of the LDS Prophets? Seriously you come across so full of disdain for these men that I would be amazed that you would continue in the church as well. My guess is that you have left it but can't seem to leave it alone.

[jbalm]

"left it but can't seem to leave it alone"

How profound.

Does anyone think those kind of platitudes have any value whatsoever? They are nothing more than a retreat when you have nothing worthwhile to contribute.

[keep the faith]

"left it but can't seem to leave it alone"

How profound.

Does anyone think those kind of platitudes have any value whatsoever? They are nothing more than a retreat when you have nothing worthwhile to contribute.

Try this one out for size jbalm. Birds of a feather flock together. I got plenty more where that one came from.

[jbalm]

I'm immune to your inanities.

[drjme]

I'm immune to your inanities.

Latterday AINT.

[jbalm]

Your's too.