How the Lord calls Prophets and Apostles today...

[Amonhi]

Oh, I didn't know that...

After strenuous campaigning, and over the objections of some of the twelve, Brigham held a vote and got himself elected president of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints at Winter Quarters in December 1847.

Anyone know who voted and who objected? Any info on this would be helpful. Thanks!

Amonhi

[Finrock]

You must gain a testimony in the current leadership if you don't want to be a tare at the last day. That is really what I believe.

Hi Sarah!

I say this because I want people to know that Jesus Christ is where it is at. It is about Jesus Christ. It is about Him. The leaders don't matter any more than the members do. Thinking that your identity as a wheat or a tare is connected to a testimony of current leadership is just as useful as thinking that your identity as a wheat or a tare is connected to a testimony of the current membership of the Church. It's not useful at all. When you look at reality and consider what actually is true, then that whole statement is nonsense because, salvation (being a wheat) is contingent upon gaining a testimony of Jesus Christ and being converted to Him and His gospel and NOT to gaining a testimony of any mortal.

There is no scripture that supports your statement Sarah. I will never accept your doctrine above, yet I know I will be saved in the last day!

-Finrock

[ebenezerarise]

Amonhi,

You've got so much wrong here. From revelation to priesthood, I'm not sure where to start with you. I haven't got time today to go point by point. I'll just add that we're miles apart and that your interpretation is unique at best but grossly in error. I would suggest you make a prayerful study of priesthood especially. God is a god of order and what you've described is pure chaos.

I would also encourage to study the Manifesto. President Woodruff changed no doctrine. He stopped the practice of plural marriage, not the belief in it. He plainly states this was done to comply with the law of the land. His direction was later confirmed by common consent in a sustaining vote. Nothing changed as a result of the decision. Not one thing. Section 132 remains in effect and has been accepted by the body as revelation.

[Sarah]

I was just reading about the Law of Consecration yesterday and Brigham told of how he went from family to family and everyone had an excuse as to why they had no surplus to offer.

That's too bad for Brigham really. It's the mentality of a busybody:

“When the revelation which I have read was given in 1838, I was present, and recollect the feelings of the brethren. A number of revelations were given on the same day. The brethren wished me to go among the Churches, and find out what surplus property the people had, with which to forward the building of the Temple we were commencing at Far West. I accordingly went from place to place through the country. Before I started, I asked brother Joseph, “Who shall be the judge of what is surplus property?” Said he, “Let them be the judges themselves, for I care not if they do not give a single dime. So far as I am concerned, I do not want anything they have.” (JD, 2:306)

Which leads to this:

In Great Basin Kingdom, Leonard Arrington relates the following:

...one early Mormon recalled:
"In those days there was a tendency of feeling that each should share alike in everything, so much so that it was impossible for any man to do business in the mercantile line. A good brother who was needy would think it was selfish if he could not go to a store and get what he wanted without paying the money for it.
...Let a brother commence the mercantile business, and the first thing he knew his whole capital stock was credited out to the brethren. He could not refuse to credit a brother. O, no! If he did it was said at once that he was selfish and was no friend to the poor."

You must gain a testimony in the current leadership if you don't want to be a tare at the last day. That is really what I believe.

I believe this is off the mark.

If "the mark" is Christ, then you either believe he calls apostles or you don't. You either believe we have apostles today, that lead in righteousness or you don't. So, to me it seems absolutely necessary for you to have a testimony in this current Latter-Day-Work, and in the guidance our apostles give us, or you risk not following Christ. What if you don't have that testimony and you end up not following the commandments the Lord has revealed to the Church through them? That means you are a member that is fighting against one of the commandments, and fighting against the apostles.

As for the quote of from Joseph, of course Joseph would say he did not care what was given. He understood that this was a decision to be made between the giver and the Lord, but Joseph had just received the revelation, and knew that surplus must be collected somehow. Before the part you quoted, he says this:
“Concerning the consecration of property:—First, it is not right to condescend to very great particulars in taking inventories. The fact is this, a man is bound by the law of the Church, to consecrate to the Bishop, before he can be considered a legal heir to the kingdom of Zion; and this, too, without constraint; and unless he does this, he cannot be acknowledged before the Lord..."

So Joseph understood that this was not for him, this would be a blessing for the individual, and for the Church as a whole.

When Brigham said he would go out and collect the surplus, that was immediately after the revelation was given. They didn't have any system set up, they hadn't taught the doctrine to anyone. Calling him a busybody seems quite rude to me. Here is the account he gave...

“When the revelation … was given in 1838, I was present, and recollect the feelings of the brethren. … The brethren wished me to go among the Churches, and find out what surplus property the people had, with which to forward the building of the Temple we were commencing at Far West. I accordingly went from place to place through the country. Before I started, I asked brother Joseph, ‘Who shall be the judge of what is surplus property?’ Said he, ‘Let them be the judges themselves. …’

“Then I replied, ‘I will go and ask them for their surplus property;’ and I did so; I found the people said they were willing to do about as they were counselled, but, upon asking them about their surplus property, most of the men who owned land and cattle would say, ‘I have got so many hundred acres of land, and I have got so many boys, and I want each one of them to have eighty acres, therefore this is not surplus property.’ Again, ‘I have got so many girls, and I do not believe I shall be able to give them more than forty acres each.’ ‘Well, you have got two or three hundred acres left.’ ‘Yes, but I have a brother-in-law coming on, and he will depend on me for a living; my wife’s nephew is also coming on, he is poor, and I shall have to furnish him a farm after he arrives here.’ I would go on to the next one, and he would have more land and cattle than he could make use of to advantage. It is a laughable idea, but is nevertheless true, men would tell me they were young and beginning [in] the world, and would say, ‘We have no children, but our prospects are good, and we think we shall have a family of children, and if we do, we want to give them eighty acres of land each; we have no surplus property.’ ‘How many cattle have you?’ ‘So many.’ ‘How many horses, &c?’ ‘So many, but I have made provisions for all these, and I have use for every thing I have got.’

“Some were disposed to do right with their surplus property, and once in a while you would find a man who had a cow which he considered surplus, but generally she was of the class that would kick a person’s hat off, or eyes out. … You would once in a while find a man who had a horse that he considered surplus, but at the same time he had the ringbone, was broken-winded, spavined in both legs, and had the pole evil at one end of the neck and a fistula at the other, and both knees sprung.” (In Journal of Discourses, 2:306–7.)

[Sarah]

You must gain a testimony in the current leadership if you don't want to be a tare at the last day. That is really what I believe.

Hi Sarah!

I say this because I want people to know that Jesus Christ is where it is at. It is about Jesus Christ. It is about Him. The leaders don't matter any more than the members do. Thinking that your identity as a wheat or a tare is connected to a testimony of current leadership is just as useful as thinking that your identity as a wheat or a tare is connected to a testimony of the current membership of the Church. It's not useful at all. When you look at reality and consider what actually is true, then that whole statement is nonsense because, salvation (being a wheat) is contingent upon gaining a testimony of Jesus Christ and being converted to Him and His gospel and NOT to gaining a testimony of any mortal.

There is no scripture that supports your statement Sarah. I will never accept your doctrine above, yet I know I will be saved in the last day!

-Finrock

And who reveals to us his Gospel - the prophets. We must not forget that the scriptures are just that - words of prophets. You can desire to follow Christ all you want, but if you reject the words he has given to his servants, simply waiting on everything to come directly to you, you are going to miss out on them most important things. Seriously, I can't believe you would say that the leaders don't matter, that they are no different than the members. You are denying the existence of Priesthood keys, of powers given to seal, etc., authority given to teach, to build up the Church, to receive revelation on using tithing funds. Salvation is not just contingent on gaining a testimony of Jesus Christ. It is becoming like him by receiving his words, and ordinances, at the hands of his apostles.

[Separatist]

Judging others and their "excuses" of not contributing what he, Brigham, thinks is appropriate is beyond the duty of a mere collector. It is a busybody.

[Mark]

"Priesthood also exists outside of the church. Priesthood is the authority to act for God. Anyone acting under the direction of the Holy Ghost (gift or power) is acting with God's authority, ie. Priesthood."

Amonhi you just single-handedly dismissed the necessity for the restoration of proper Priesthood keys and authority required to administer the saving ordinances of the gospel. I guess Joseph was just bamboozling us right? He went through all that persecution and abuse for nothing. John the Baptist and Peter James and John also wasted their time as well appearing to Joseph and conferring proper priesthood authority and keys upon him. Oh well life is tough then you die!

[Finrock]

You must gain a testimony in the current leadership if you don't want to be a tare at the last day. That is really what I believe.

Hi Sarah!

I say this because I want people to know that Jesus Christ is where it is at. It is about Jesus Christ. It is about Him. The leaders don't matter any more than the members do. Thinking that your identity as a wheat or a tare is connected to a testimony of current leadership is just as useful as thinking that your identity as a wheat or a tare is connected to a testimony of the current membership of the Church. It's not useful at all. When you look at reality and consider what actually is true, then that whole statement is nonsense because, salvation (being a wheat) is contingent upon gaining a testimony of Jesus Christ and being converted to Him and His gospel and NOT to gaining a testimony of any mortal.

There is no scripture that supports your statement Sarah. I will never accept your doctrine above, yet I know I will be saved in the last day!

-Finrock

And who reveals to us his Gospel - the prophets. We must not forget that the scriptures are just that - words of prophets. You can desire to follow Christ all you want, but if you reject the words he has given to his servants, simply waiting on everything to come directly to you, you are going to miss out on them most important things. Seriously, I can't believe you would say that the leaders don't matter, that they are no different than the members. You are denying the existence of Priesthood keys, of powers given to seal, etc., authority given to teach, to build up the Church, to receive revelation on using tithing funds. Salvation is not just contingent on gaining a testimony of Jesus Christ. It is becoming like him by receiving his words, and ordinances, at the hands of his apostles.

I follow Jesus Christ. I want to do the things that He did. When I study His life, I see that He did not do or teach what you are saying. Jesus Christ did not receive His words and ordinances at the hands of His apostles, therefore, if I am to be like Him, I must get my words and ordinances the way that He did...directly from God.

How can you say that I deny priesthood keys, powers, and authority when I testify to you that no mortal will save you but that priesthood power, keys, and authority are in Christ? I do not deny Christ, but I validate that the prophets testify of Him and are there to lead you to Him. Sarah, true prophets and apostles will never ask you to venerate or worship them in anyway or capacity. They will not desire your adulation. They will feel sick by it. They will deny their flesh and point you to Christ. They will suffer for Christ and will do all that they can to lead others to Christ. They will be willing to be mocked, scorned, ridiculed, and falsely accused for Christ and for His sake. They will tell you that their power is in Christ and that they themselves are less than the dust of the earth. If there are people on this earth who know they are nothing, it will be true Prophets and Apostles.

Sarah, God is no respector of persons. You are just as special as Thomas S. Monson. You are just as good and wonderful. You have equal right to all that God has in store for His children. Every gift is available to you. We can/must all commune directly with God. That is what all true prophets and apostles have taught.

-Finrock

[Sarah]

Amonhi, the Church is God's family. And with every family, the children change over time. Sometimes they grow up and mature in good ways, and sometimes they mature in bad ways. As parents, you have to respond according to how your children are behaving, including to how your children's "friends" or those outside the Church are behaving. Your "rules" or policies are going to change with different circumstances.

I was just reading about the Law of Consecration yesterday and Brigham told of how he went from family to family and everyone had an excuse as to why they had no surplus to offer. No doubt the Lord had to establish the Law of Tithing, and make it binding on the saints over time for their own good. How tithing is commanded or collected or required is not as important as the need for the Saints to learn to OBEY AND SACRIFICE AND CONSECRATE. Those are the big laws to be concerned about. Whether the Lord commands us to obey specific laws in the early days of the Church vs. how we obey those commandments now, matter little. You must gain a testimony in the current leadership if you don't want to be a tare at the last day. That is really what I believe. Who are you going to follow when the rains descend in the form of persecution, and immorality. We have a storm of immorality and corrupt laws being passed. We have the ABOMINATION of gay marriage, and saints today who are criticizing the brethren for their policies. You either believe The Family: a Proclamation, or you do not. If you don't believe it then you will be with the tares.

I appreciate your post. I disagree with your definition of a wheat and a tare. Obedience doesn't define a wheat. If it did, then the obedient and yet nonspiritual would make it to the wedding feast simply by relying on the light of their leaders. The test that separates the wheat from the tares will be based on personal revelation. It will determine who really has their own oil lamps and are able to light their own way. Those who are obedient and used to relying on the light of others will go seek light from other sources because they have none for themselves. They will look to leaders to tell them what to do to give them light in their darkness. They will miss the marriage supper because following their leaders and relying on the light of their leaders will not get them in.

They look the same growing up, because they are all going to church and paying tithing and praying, but some are doing it having a spiritual experience and others are doing it out of obedience/supposed to. Your post here emphases the need to obey the current leaders of the church and gain a testimony of them as opposed to gaining a testimony of what they are telling us. Those are two very different things. One will get you in and one will not. No power or influence ought to be maintained by virtue of a person's priesthood position, only by persuasion... D&C 121.

But, yes, I agree with your first paragraph!

Peace,
Amonhi

I actually think obedience has more to do with the final cut than you think. There is a spectrum, and you have to be in the middle. In the center of the spectrum is obeying for the right reason, out of love, out of testimony, out of a desire to change to become like Christ. On one extreme side of the spectrum are those who obey out of fear or selfishness, but their heart isn't in the right place, and on the opposite side of the spectrum are those who don't obey but sincerely desire to love the Lord. They don't obey because they have a false sense of themselves being "good," or have been blinded by the craftiness of men and of Satan, into believing certain commandments are good and some are bad or not necessary.

I get the fact that there are some in the Church who are obeying out of fear or selfishness. I have an entire segment of my family who is that way, who worship the idea of duty, obeying exactly etc. But that sometimes leads them to be perfectionists with themselves and with others, leading them to overly criticize and judge, and remain convinced that obeying the hard laws should be good enough. I see them not letting the commandments of mercy, forgiveness and love work in their lives as much as they could. But I also see the Lord blessing them in their sincere efforts to change. Some just can't let go of pride in certain areas of their lives.

I actually don't know too many members in the Church like these I've described. I see much more who think they are doing "good enough" when it comes to obeying the hard laws of fulfilling callings and assignments, paying tithing, keeping the Sabbath day holy, obeying the word of Wisdom, keeping away from immorality and the cares of the world. These are things that the other group is really good at. But often this other group who have a hard time obeying the specific commandments, are better at loving, forgiving, and being missionaries. It's really is a manifestation of different personalities and family traditions, and the strengths and weaknesses of each side

The center place, obeying for the right reasons, is where change occurs, love and freedom and blessings and revelation are all felt. As one obeys for the right reasons, more commandments are given, or at least brought to your attention so that you can perfect yourself even further. If you are not obeying certain commandments because you think our apostles are off track, them I suggest you get a testimony of those commandments and of the Lord's servants.

The tares are those individuals and false doctrines and ideas sown by Satan, within the Church, to bring down the Church. I guess I need to post this again.

2 Behold, verily I say, the field was the world, and the apostles were the sowers of the seed;

3 And after they have fallen asleep the great persecutor of the church, the apostate, the whore, even Babylon, that maketh all nations to drink of her cup, in whose hearts the enemy, even Satan, sitteth to reign—behold he soweth the tares; wherefore, the tares choke the wheat and drive the church into the wilderness.

The wheat originates from where? The apostles!! It is those who are truly converted to their words! That is the wheat. The tares are those who persecute the church and choke it from WITHIN. Don't be a tare by teaching contrary to the apostles. Sure, have your own relationship with Christ. That is what they are trying to get the members to do anyway.

[Sarah]

You must gain a testimony in the current leadership if you don't want to be a tare at the last day. That is really what I believe.

Hi Sarah!

I say this because I want people to know that Jesus Christ is where it is at. It is about Jesus Christ. It is about Him. The leaders don't matter any more than the members do. Thinking that your identity as a wheat or a tare is connected to a testimony of current leadership is just as useful as thinking that your identity as a wheat or a tare is connected to a testimony of the current membership of the Church. It's not useful at all. When you look at reality and consider what actually is true, then that whole statement is nonsense because, salvation (being a wheat) is contingent upon gaining a testimony of Jesus Christ and being converted to Him and His gospel and NOT to gaining a testimony of any mortal.

There is no scripture that supports your statement Sarah. I will never accept your doctrine above, yet I know I will be saved in the last day!

-Finrock

And who reveals to us his Gospel - the prophets. We must not forget that the scriptures are just that - words of prophets. You can desire to follow Christ all you want, but if you reject the words he has given to his servants, simply waiting on everything to come directly to you, you are going to miss out on them most important things. Seriously, I can't believe you would say that the leaders don't matter, that they are no different than the members. You are denying the existence of Priesthood keys, of powers given to seal, etc., authority given to teach, to build up the Church, to receive revelation on using tithing funds. Salvation is not just contingent on gaining a testimony of Jesus Christ. It is becoming like him by receiving his words, and ordinances, at the hands of his apostles.

I follow Jesus Christ. I want to do the things that He did. When I study His life, I see that He did not do or teach what you are saying. Jesus Christ did not receive His words and ordinances at the hands of His apostles, therefore, if I am to be like Him, I must get my words and ordinances the way that He did...directly from God.

How can you say that I deny priesthood keys, powers, and authority when I testify to you that no mortal will save you but that priesthood power, keys, and authority are in Christ? I do not deny Christ, but I validate that the prophets testify of Him and are there to lead you to Him. Sarah, true prophets and apostles will never ask you to venerate or worship them in anyway or capacity. They will not desire your adulation. They will feel sick by it. They will deny their flesh and point you to Christ. They will suffer for Christ and will do all that they can to lead others to Christ. They will be willing to be mocked, scorned, ridiculed, and falsely accused for Christ and for His sake. They will tell you that their power is in Christ and that they themselves are less than the dust of the earth. If there are people on this earth who know they are nothing, it will be true Prophets and Apostles.

Sarah, God is no respector of persons. You are just as special as Thomas S. Monson. You are just as good and wonderful. You have equal right to all that God has in store for His children. Every gift is available to you. We can/must all commune directly with God. That is what all true prophets and apostles have taught.

-Finrock

So you deny that Christ can delegate the power to confer this priesthood on others, and rather claim that a priesthood holder cannot lay his hands on another to confer that priesthood? It happened all throughout scripture.

You say, "true prophets and apostles will never ask you to venerate or worship them in anyway or capacity. They will not desire your adulation. They will feel sick by it. They will deny their flesh and point you to Christ. They will suffer for Christ and will do all that they can to lead others to Christ. They will be willing to be mocked, scorned, ridiculed, and falsely accused for Christ and for His sake. They will tell you that their power is in Christ and that they themselves are less than the dust of the earth. If there are people on this earth who know they are nothing, it will be true Prophets and Apostles."

I believe our apostles do feel this way. Do you think they want to be worshiped?

Look, just because our leaders teach us to follow their words, does not mean they are placing themselves above Christ. They are acknowledging that Christ has inspired them to say certain things, and guide the Church as a whole in certain ways. We are bound to obey those words as the spirit confirms them to us, and as we experiment upon those words and put them to the test in our own lives.

[Matthew.B]

You must gain a testimony in the current leadership if you don't want to be a tare at the last day. That is really what I believe.

Hi Sarah!

I say this because I want people to know that Jesus Christ is where it is at. It is about Jesus Christ. It is about Him. The leaders don't matter any more than the members do. Thinking that your identity as a wheat or a tare is connected to a testimony of current leadership is just as useful as thinking that your identity as a wheat or a tare is connected to a testimony of the current membership of the Church. It's not useful at all. When you look at reality and consider what actually is true, then that whole statement is nonsense because, salvation (being a wheat) is contingent upon gaining a testimony of Jesus Christ and being converted to Him and His gospel and NOT to gaining a testimony of any mortal.

There is no scripture that supports your statement Sarah. I will never accept your doctrine above, yet I know I will be saved in the last day!

-Finrock

And who reveals to us his Gospel - the prophets. We must not forget that the scriptures are just that - words of prophets. You can desire to follow Christ all you want, but if you reject the words he has given to his servants, simply waiting on everything to come directly to you, you are going to miss out on them most important things. Seriously, I can't believe you would say that the leaders don't matter, that they are no different than the members. You are denying the existence of Priesthood keys, of powers given to seal, etc., authority given to teach, to build up the Church, to receive revelation on using tithing funds. Salvation is not just contingent on gaining a testimony of Jesus Christ. It is becoming like him by receiving his words, and ordinances, at the hands of his apostles.

If we receive the words of the prophets, and they speak by the power of the Holy Ghost, then it is for the sake of Christ that we receive them--not their authority as leaders of the Church.

If one were to suppose that their status before God was contingent on accepting the leaders of a religious organization that had its start in revelation and the investiture of divine authority, then they must conclude that the Jews who killed Christ were justified for following their leaders, and that the Catholic Church is the true Christian religion.

If the leaders of the Church speak the words of Christ, then accept them for the Word's sake. If the words of Christ lead you to oppose the current leadership of the Church, then do so for the Word's sake.

Being a tare has always been contingent on preferring Babylon over Zion, and rejecting the Christ (D&C 88;94, 101:65). Many who are "of Paul, of Apollo" or even "of Christ"--meaning they follow these leaders without accepting their message to receive the Spirit and follow Christ--will receive the Telestial kingdom as an inheritance and won't be gathered with the wheat to be saved (D&C 76:98-102).

[Sarah]

Judging others and their "excuses" of not contributing what he, Brigham, thinks is appropriate is beyond the duty of a mere collector. It is a busybody.

The one collecting is the Bishop, and in this instance my guess is that there wasn't an assigned Bishop wherever Brigham traveled to. But the Bishop's job isn't just to collect. He too must be a righteous judge.

Joseph Smith explains...

“The matter of consecration must be done by the mutual consent of both parties; for to give the Bishop power to say how much every man shall have, and he be obliged to comply with the Bishop’s judgment, is giving to the Bishop more power than a king has; and upon the other hand, to let every man say how much he needs, and the Bishop be obliged to comply with his judgment, is to throw Zion into confusion, and make a slave of the Bishop. The fact is, there must be a balance or equilibrium of power, between the Bishop and the people, and thus harmony and good will may be preserved among you.

After reading Brigham's description, it seemed to me that he was simply stating the facts of what he was told, and making a righteous assessment, that the majority of the time the people were keeping any degree of surplus for their children's future, and what things they were offering were often inferior animals. I think if I had Brigham's experience I would also lament the fact that the Saints were unable to live the Law of Consecration in their present state.

[Finrock]

So you deny that Christ can delegate the power to confer this priesthood on others, and rather claim that a priesthood holder cannot lay his hands on another to confer that priesthood? It happened all throughout scripture.

I didn't think I spoke to this question at all. I say that true Prophets have power because of Christ, or rather because Jesus Christ gave them power, not because of any other reason (ex., not because of lineage, not because of a charter, not because of ancestry, not because of tradition, not because a man said so, etc.). Jesus Christ loves all people equally. If He is willing to give one person power, He is just as equally willing to give another person power. God controls His power and He wants ALL to receive it (wink, wink). If you don't believe God can give you power then you won't receive it. If you believe that He can (because He certainly can) then you will receive it.

Once a person becomes a prophet because they have a testimony of Jesus through the Spirit, they do not want to start making commands and leading and directing folks. They might do it if they are asked to do it because they want to love and serve and lead others to Christ, but it will not be motivated out some personal sense of superiority or status. They don't expect to be followed or respected.

Why am I saying this to you? Because true Prophets are not jealous of their position or power because they know it isn't theirs and in fact, they don't care about crap like that anyways and just want people to be baptized by fire and the Holy Ghost so they can be lead to Christ. But, ANYBODY can and in fact ought to become a Prophet or even an Apostle. So, more than you think I believe that God does "delegate" and confer His priesthood upon others. It is important to understand that if something is done by the power of the Spirit, it is done by priesthood power. Power of the Spirit and Priesthood power are the same.

I believe our apostles do feel this way. Do you think they want to be worshiped?

I don't think any of them want to be worshiped, but I don't know their hearts. However, I believe the best about the Apostles of the Church and sustain them. I will say that if I were an apostle and I were at an event where there were people crying and screaming and fainting at my presence, I would put a stop to that nonsense there and then.

Look, just because our leaders teach us to follow their words, does not mean they are placing themselves above Christ. They are acknowledging that Christ has inspired them to say certain things, and guide the Church as a whole in certain ways. We are bound to obey those words as the spirit confirms them to us, and as we experiment upon those words and put them to the test in our own lives

I'm going to be blunt and I don't mean to be mean by being blunt, but I must speak plainly. The leaders may not be placing themselves above Christ (and I sincerely believe that our current Apostles are not doing this), but you are and so are many members by making the qualification for salvation anything more or less than having faith in Jesus Christ, being baptized, and receiving the Holy Ghost.

-Finrock

[Amonhi]

Amonhi,

You've got so much wrong here. From revelation to priesthood, I'm not sure where to start with you. I haven't got time today to go point by point. I'll just add that we're miles apart and that your interpretation is unique at best but grossly in error. I would suggest you make a prayerful study of priesthood especially. God is a god of order and what you've described is pure chaos.

Yes, God is a God of order, but not the order we are taught in the church, the order we are taught in the scriptures. It doesn't matter who performs anything, it is either sealed by the Holy Spirit of Promise through the POWER of the Holy Ghost, or it is not. If it is, then God accepts it. If if is not, then God does not accept it. That if God's order. It doesn't matter what position you hold or priesthood you have been given. If you are not acting under the direction of the holy Ghost, then God has not authorized you. If you are, then you are authorized. Here is a very clear expression of this "order" as given by God.

The name of God is his spirit. It is His signature as in He signs His name to it. We must do all things in His name. His spirit IS his law.

7 And verily I say unto you, that the conditions of this law are these: All covenants, contracts, bonds, obligations, oaths, vows, performances, connections, associations, or expectations, that are not made and entered into and sealed by the Holy Spirit of promise, of him who is anointed, both as well for time and for all eternity, and that too most holy, by revelation and commandment through the medium of mine anointed, whom I have appointed on the earth to hold this power (and I have appointed unto my servant Joseph to hold this power in the last days, and there is never but one on the earth at a time on whom this power and the keys of this priesthood are conferred), are of no efficacy, virtue, or force in and after the resurrection from the dead; for all contracts that are not made unto this end have an end when men are dead.
8 Behold, mine house is a house of order, saith the Lord God, and not a house of confusion.
9 Will I accept of an offering, saith the Lord, that is not made in my name?
10 Or will I receive at your hands that which I have not appointed?
11 And will I appoint unto you, saith the Lord, except it be by law, even as I and my Father ordained unto you, before the world was?
12 I am the Lord thy God; and I give unto you this commandment—that no man shall come unto the Father but by me or by my word, which is my law, saith the Lord.
13 And everything that is in the world, whether it be ordained of men, by thrones, or principalities, or powers, or things of name, whatsoever they may be, that are not by me or by my word, saith the Lord, shall be thrown down, and shall not remain after men are dead, neither in nor after the resurrection, saith the Lord your God.
14 For whatsoever things remain are by me; and whatsoever things are not by me shall be shaken and destroyed. - D&C 132:7-14

See the references above to "my word"... Compare them with this one that tells us what is spoken by the Power of the Holy Ghost IS the word of Lord.

2 And, behold, and lo, this is an ensample unto all those who were ordained unto this priesthood, whose mission is appointed unto them to go forth—
3 And this is the ensample unto them, that they shall speak as they are moved upon by the Holy Ghost.
4 And whatsoever they shall speak when moved upon by the Holy Ghost shall be scripture, shall be the will of the Lord, shall be the mind of the Lord, shall be the word of the Lord, shall be the voice of the Lord, and the power of God unto salvation. - D&C 68:2-4

In those verses, he wasn't speaking about the Prophet and President of the church. He was talking about simple missionaries. He was saying that Missionaries speaking by the power of the Holy Ghost are speaking for the Lord, the voice of God, the power of God to salvation in equal authority as the voice of God as the Prophet and President of the church speaking under the influence of the Holy Ghost. The word of the Lord is whatever is spoke by the power of the Holy Ghost. D&C 132:13 says that "And everything that is in the world, whether it be ordained of men, by thrones, or principalities, or powers, or things of name, whatsoever they may be, that are not by me or by my word (Meaning by the Power of the Holy Ghost), saith the Lord, shall be thrown down, and shall not remain after men are dead, neither in nor after the resurrection, saith the Lord your God. D&C 132:9-11 is telling us that a priesthood holder, authorized by the church cannot force God to accept anything. If they permit a man to be married to a woman in the temple by the authority of a sealer, it does not bind God to accept that sealing as valid. God makes His own covenants through the Holy Ghost. A priesthood holder can't force God to accept any ordinance by virtue of his priesthood. Nothing is valid until it is sealed by the Holy Ghost through what is known as the Holy Spirit of Promise. IN addition, God can and does seal things all the time without a priesthood hold being present. And they are binding and valid because God did it Himself with His own name or signature (the Holy Ghost). This is why we see God giving the gift of the Holy Ghost over and over in the scriptures without the laying on of hands or even when no man is present who has the power to give the gift of the Holy Ghost. And it is valid to God because God did it. And they have the blessings associated with the gift showing that it was actually given and received.

This is chaos to the understanding of men, but not to God. It makes perfect sense. This is God's order. In D&C 132:8, God says His house is a house of order because he doesn't follow the chaos of fallible men who have authority in the church to force him into contracts that He doesn't accept. In his view, the church teaching is chaos and doesn't make any sense. It makes God subject to the intelligence, knowledge and limitations of men. So the guy who slept with a girl the day before getting married in the temple to his bride would get a valid sealing that God has to live with. That is chaos and disorder. God is at the helm, but not the way people think! It doesn't matter what the church does because God isn't bound to honor it through eternity, He is at the helm. :))

I have studied the priesthood extensively, not from the point of view of what the church does and teaches, but from the point of view that God doesn't change and the scriptures are a history of His dealing with men, actual examples of what he has done and what He taught us from His own mouth so that we understand what to expect. I enjoy being challenged on my understanding of the priesthood.

I would also encourage to study the Manifesto. President Woodruff changed no doctrine. He stopped the practice of plural marriage, not the belief in it. He plainly states this was done to comply with the law of the land. His direction was later confirmed by common consent in a sustaining vote. Nothing changed as a result of the decision. Not one thing. Section 132 remains in effect and has been accepted by the body as revelation.

Nothing except that plural marriage was taught to be a requirement for exaltation and the church is now incapable of exalting people. (I don't believe that, just referencing what was taught by the Prophets from BY to WW.)

Peace,
Amonhi

[Sarah]

You must gain a testimony in the current leadership if you don't want to be a tare at the last day. That is really what I believe.

Hi Sarah!

I say this because I want people to know that Jesus Christ is where it is at. It is about Jesus Christ. It is about Him. The leaders don't matter any more than the members do. Thinking that your identity as a wheat or a tare is connected to a testimony of current leadership is just as useful as thinking that your identity as a wheat or a tare is connected to a testimony of the current membership of the Church. It's not useful at all. When you look at reality and consider what actually is true, then that whole statement is nonsense because, salvation (being a wheat) is contingent upon gaining a testimony of Jesus Christ and being converted to Him and His gospel and NOT to gaining a testimony of any mortal.

There is no scripture that supports your statement Sarah. I will never accept your doctrine above, yet I know I will be saved in the last day!

-Finrock

And who reveals to us his Gospel - the prophets. We must not forget that the scriptures are just that - words of prophets. You can desire to follow Christ all you want, but if you reject the words he has given to his servants, simply waiting on everything to come directly to you, you are going to miss out on them most important things. Seriously, I can't believe you would say that the leaders don't matter, that they are no different than the members. You are denying the existence of Priesthood keys, of powers given to seal, etc., authority given to teach, to build up the Church, to receive revelation on using tithing funds. Salvation is not just contingent on gaining a testimony of Jesus Christ. It is becoming like him by receiving his words, and ordinances, at the hands of his apostles.

If we receive the words of the prophets, and they speak by the power of the Holy Ghost, then it is for the sake of Christ that we receive them--not their authority as leaders of the Church.

If one were to suppose that their status before God was contingent on accepting the leaders of a religious organization that had its start in revelation and the investiture of divine authority, then they must conclude that the Jews who killed Christ were justified for following their leaders, and that the Catholic Church is the true Christian religion.

If the leaders of the Church speak the words of Christ, then accept them for the Word's sake. If the words of Christ lead you to oppose the current leadership of the Church, then do so for the Word's sake.

Being a tare has always been contingent on preferring Babylon over Zion, and rejecting the Christ (D&C 88;94, 101:65). Many who are "of Paul, of Apollo" or even "of Christ"--meaning they follow these leaders without accepting their message to receive the Spirit and follow Christ--will receive the Telestial kingdom as an inheritance and won't be gathered with the wheat to be saved (D&C 76:98-102).

I don't disagree. I don't believe my status with Christ depends upon following one particular person, unless of course that one particular person happens to be the prophet of God AND AM GOING AGAINST WHAT HE IS SAYING. That is the key. Of course we must determine if a prophet is true or not! That has been the point I've been trying to make. How many times where the Jews condemned because they stoned and cast out the prophets? How many times were they stricken with pestilence or were allowed to be overrun by their enemies because they did not listen to the prophet? When it was the time of Christ, the only true prophet around was John the Baptist. After Jesus died, the true prophets were Peter and the other apostles. If you chose to not listen and obey them, you would have missed out on blessings and saving ordinances. That is my point. It is not that obeying men will save you, it is determining for yourself if you are obeying Christ by following his prophet.

[Sarah]

So you deny that Christ can delegate the power to confer this priesthood on others, and rather claim that a priesthood holder cannot lay his hands on another to confer that priesthood? It happened all throughout scripture.

I didn't think I spoke to this question at all. I say that true Prophets have power because of Christ, or rather because Jesus Christ gave them power, not because of any other reason (ex., not because of lineage, not because of a charter, not because of ancestry, not because of tradition, not because a man said so, etc.). Jesus Christ loves all people equally. If He is willing to give one person power, He is just as equally willing to give another person power. God controls His power and He wants ALL to receive it (wink, wink). If you don't believe God can give you power then you won't receive it. If you believe that He can (because He certainly can) then you will receive it.

Once a person becomes a prophet because they have a testimony of Jesus through the Spirit, they do not want to start making commands and leading and directing folks. They might do it if they are asked to do it because they want to love and serve and lead others to Christ, but it will not be motivated out some personal sense of superiority or status. They don't expect to be followed or respected.

Why am I saying this to you? Because true Prophets are not jealous of their position or power because they know it isn't theirs and in fact, they don't care about crap like that anyways and just want people to be baptized by fire and the Holy Ghost so they can be lead to Christ. But, ANYBODY can and in fact ought to become a Prophet or even an Apostle. So, more than you think I believe that God does "delegate" and confer His priesthood upon others. It is important to understand that if something is done by the power of the Spirit, it is done by priesthood power. Power of the Spirit and Priesthood power are the same.

I believe our apostles do feel this way. Do you think they want to be worshiped?

I don't think any of them want to be worshiped, but I don't know their hearts. However, I believe the best about the Apostles of the Church and sustain them. I will say that if I were an apostle and I were at an event where there were people crying and screaming and fainting at my presence, I would put a stop to that nonsense there and then.

Look, just because our leaders teach us to follow their words, does not mean they are placing themselves above Christ. They are acknowledging that Christ has inspired them to say certain things, and guide the Church as a whole in certain ways. We are bound to obey those words as the spirit confirms them to us, and as we experiment upon those words and put them to the test in our own lives

I'm going to be blunt and I don't mean to be mean by being blunt, but I must speak plainly. The leaders may not be placing themselves above Christ (and I sincerely believe that our current Apostles are not doing this), but you are and so are many members by making the qualification for salvation anything more or less than having faith in Jesus Christ, being baptized, and receiving the Holy Ghost.

-Finrock

Your last statement seems to be the big stumbling block, the offense that is taken so often. I don't disagree with what you say are the qualifications for salvation. If you have faith in Jesus Christ, and if you are baptized, you will keep all his commandments. If you receive the Holy Ghost, you will be inspired to keep all the commandments. And how do you know what those commandments are? Every commandment that the Lord wants you to live has been revealed to his servants the prophets. The spirit will inspire you each step of the way as to which commandment lived will bring you closer to becoming like Him.

[Matthew.B]

I don't disagree. I don't believe my status with Christ depends upon following one particular person, unless of course that one particular person happens to be the prophet of God AND AM GOING AGAINST WHAT HE IS SAYING.

I think this is where your argument breaks down (in the first sentence, ironically--I thought the rest was good, particularly when you put the onus on the individual for "determining for [one's self] if you are obeying Christ").

You won't find the phrasing "follow the prophet" in the scriptures, and you won't find God ever saying to anyone to "follow" "one particular person". The commandment, repeatedly, is to "receive" a prophet or a prophet's message/testimony--which, I suggest, has a distinctly different nuance and connotation than "follow" and becomes very important once you reach a certain spiritual level or capacity.

I would suggest that if a person "follows" a prophet they will always require the prophet to act as an intermediary between them and Christ. Christ, however, employs no such servant or intermediary (2 Nephi 9:41). Christ wants us all to come to Him directly, first through the medium of the Holy Spirit and, when the time is finally right, through direct interaction with Him without a veil. Christ employs mortal and heavenly servants to give messages to mankind, and these messages must be received to receive the message's intended benefit--but if we were to attempt to set these servants up on a pedestal, then we would be idolaters. Judging by what you've said, I think we are in agreement on that.

Having laid that foundation, where these principles ultimately come to a head is when we face the questions of how we identify a "true" prophet (as opposed to a religious authority) and whether the leaders of the Church are "true" prophets--but that's not the point of this particular discussion.

Peace, Sarah! God bless.

[Sarah]

I don't disagree. I don't believe my status with Christ depends upon following one particular person, unless of course that one particular person happens to be the prophet of God AND AM GOING AGAINST WHAT HE IS SAYING.

I think this is where your argument breaks down (in the first sentence, ironically--I thought the rest was good, particularly when you put the onus on the individual for "determining for [one's self] if you are obeying Christ").

You won't find the phrasing "follow the prophet" in the scriptures, and you won't find God ever saying to anyone to "follow" "one particular person". The commandment, repeatedly, is to "receive" a prophet or a prophet's message/testimony--which, I suggest, has a distinctly different nuance and connotation than "follow" and becomes very important once you reach a certain spiritual level or capacity.

I would suggest that if a person "follows" a prophet they will always require the prophet to act as an intermediary between them and Christ. Christ, however, employs no such servant or intermediary (2 Nephi 9:41). Christ wants us all to come to Him directly, first through the medium of the Holy Spirit and, when the time is finally right, through direct interaction with Him without a veil. Christ employs mortal and heavenly servants to give messages to mankind, and these messages must be received to receive the message's intended benefit--but if we were to attempt to set these servants up on a pedestal, then we would be idolaters. Judging by what you've said, I think we are in agreement on that.

Having laid that foundation, where these principles ultimately come to a head is when we face the questions of how we identify a "true" prophet (as opposed to a religious authority) and whether the leaders of the Church are "true" prophets--but that's not the point of this particular discussion.

Peace, Sarah! God bless.

I too like the word "receive" a lot better than follow, and agree with your post, that I think it really comes down to disagreeing about whether or not any one person is a true prophet or not and what that prophet is preaching is true or false. I think the frustration that comes from members on this board that do "receive" our prophet, is that often the argument strays from the actual words or actions that come from the particular prophet, and becomes a condemnation that we are "idolators" or "blind followers" or making some broad statement like "you will never be saved by following a man." That is a sound-bite, just like we hear from the main-stream Christians, and has little meaning to me. I like it when people get into specifics of what they really believe.

[investigator]

This has been a great thread. Sarah said one thing that I think is a common misconception about prophets...

Every commandment that the Lord wants you to live has been revealed to his servants the prophets.

This statement is not true. We are to "live by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God." D&C 88:44. If we are not following the spirit and doing what it says we are concidered wicked by the Lord...

D&C 84:52 And whoso receiveth not my voice is not acquainted with my voice, and is not of me.

53 And by this you may know the righteous from the wicked, and that the whole world groaneth under sin and darkness even now.

We are to feast upon the words of Christ. Angels speak by the power of the Holy Ghost and they speak the Words of Christ. The words of Christ will teach us all things that we should do. The prophet does not know all things that we should do. We have to have a connection to Christ through the Holy Ghost. He (Christ) will guide our lives. That is the Doctrine of Christ and there will be no more doctrine until he manifests Himself unto us in the flesh. Then we must continue to do the things He shall say for us to do. 2 Nephi 32 & 32

[Contemplator]

In addition to President Joseph F. Smith, Francis Lyman testified in the Reed Smoot hearings. Elder Lyman was the president of the Quorum of the Twelve at the time. Here is the section where he described the revelatory process for selecting apostles. And, at the end of this segment he is asked about President Smith's testimony about revelation:

Mr. Tayler. I understood you to say that some of your apostles have been chosen through revelations?
Mr. Lyman. Every one of them.
Mr. Tayler. Every one of them?
Mr. Lyman. Oh. yes.
Mr. Tayler. Mr. Smoot was chosen, then, through a revelation?
Mr. Lyman. Yes. sir.
Mr. Tayler. Who received that revelation?
Mr. Lyman. Lorenzo Snow—President Lorenzo Snow.
Mr. Tayler. What kind of a revelation was it?
Mr. Lvman. From the Lord.
Mr. Tayler. Was it written or—-
Was Voice of the Lord.
Mr. Lyman. Oral. It was not written. It was the voice of the Lord to Lorenzo Snow.
Mr. Tayler. Speaking directly to him.
Mr. Lyman. To him.
Mr. Taylor. And specifically indicating Mr. Smoot?
Mr. Lyman. Yes. sir; It pointed him out exactly.
Mr. Tayler. You do not define it as being a desire of Lorenzo Snow?
Mr. Lyman. No, sir.
Mr. Tayler. To have Mr. Smoot one of the apostles, which he imagined would be approved by God?
Mr. Lyman. No, sir.
Mr. Tayler. But it is more specific and certain and substantive than what I have just stated.
Mr. Lyman. Yes, sir.

Senator Hoar. Do you know whether that voice was audible, in the sense of an ordinary sound?
Mr. Lyman. It was, no doubt, audible to him.
Senator Hoar. Audible as a sound rather than a light?
Mr. Lyman. Yes, sir.
Senator Hoar. How do you know?
Mr. Lyman. How do I know?
Senator Hoar. Yes.
Mr. Lyman. The Lord revealed It to me.
Senator Hoar. The Lord revealed it to you also?
Mr. Lyman. Yes; by his spirit.
Senator Hoar. How did He reveal it to you?
Mr. Lyman. By the spirit of the Lord.

Senator Hoar. Did He reveal it to you by an audible sound, as you hear the voice of an ordinary person speaking to you?
Mr. Lyman. He spoke to me by His spirit.
Senator Hoar. How?
Mr. Lyman. By His holy spirit.
Senator Hoar. How?
Mr. Lyman. To my soul.
Senator Hoar. How?
Mr. Lyman. And heart.
Senator Hoar. How?
Mr. Lyman. By the spirit of the Lord.
Senator Hoar. How did the spirit of the Lord speak by the spirit of the Lord to your soul? In what way was the speech made?
Mr. Lyman. I could tell you. Mr. Senator, how I obtained that spirit and testimony so that not only when Mr. Smoot has been chosen, but when every other apostle has been chosen, the spirit of the Lord has borne record to my spirit.
Senator Hoar. I understood Mr. Smith to testify that he had never had a revelation since he has been president of the church.
Mr. Lyman. Yes.
Senator Hoar. You have had some?
Mr. Lyman. What President Smith does as the president of this church he does by the direction of the spirit of the Lord, not a written revelation. Two of the apostles were chosen, and revelation was written when George Teasdale was chosen, and Heber J. Grant, but
Always Obeyed Revelations.

Thank you for quoting this. It is very interesting that an Apostle is speaking like this while the President is not.

...

The other question I have between the two quotes is, "Why would President Joseph F. Smith say what he said if he didn't think it was true?" Was he lying to please the Congress so they would seat Elder Smoot? Was he being honest and presenting his own view point from his experience as the president and prophet of the church? How do we account for or discount what he said? As you can tell, I have taken a realest approach here, not because I don't believe in revelations, visions, etc. (I have them often enough). But I believe I am pretty accurate at recognizing others who have had or who had not had such experiences by the way they talk and what they say, (anyone who has had such experiences can likely say the same because it changes you.)

I honestly want to know how others account for or discount President Joseph F. Smiths words in the OP? Did he lie or was he speaking his honest views & feelings? What do you think?

Peace,
Amonhi

As I understand your question, you are asking about a comparison with President Smith's testimony where he said (viewtopic.php?f=14&t=41769#p695477" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;):

McComas: I should like to ask one question. You say that the councilors are appointed by the president of the church. How are the apostles selected?
Smith: In the first place they were chosen by revelation. The council of the apostles have had a voice ever since in the selection of their successors.
…
McComas: When vacancies occurred thereafter, by what body were the vacancies in the twelve apostles filled?
Smith: Perhaps I may say in this way: Chosen by the body, the twelve themselves, by and with the consent and approval of the first presidency.
Hoar: Was there a revelation in regard to each of them?
Smith: No, sir; not in regard to each of them. Do you mean in the beginning?
Hoar: I understand you to say that the original twelve apostles were selected by revelation?
Smith: Yes, sir.
Hoar: Through Joseph Smith?
Smith: Yes, sir; that is right.
Hoar: Is there any revelation in regard to the subsequent ones?
Smith: No, sir; it has been the choice of the body.
McComas: Then the apostles are perpetuated in succession by their own act and the approval of the first presidency?
Smith: That is right.

So, we have seemingly contradictory testimony. President Smith says that subsequent apostles are selected by the quorum of the twelve apostles and approval of the first presidency. Elder Lyman says that the apostles, Elder Smooth in particular, were selected by revelation. I don't know if this is the answer, but there seems to be an inconsistent use of terms. President Smith seems to use the word "revelation" when there is a written and published document that gives the will of the Lord. He describes the call of the original 12 in this testimony. He describes the OD on polygamy as a revelation in other testimony. And, he says there have not been other revelations since.

During the same time frame, Elder Lyman says that they work by "revelation" to the mind and the heart. So, he seems to be describing more private revelation. He seems to use the term in a broader sense. If this is the case, then they are both correct, if imprecise.

I don't know if this is the answer. But, you asked and this is a plausible story.

[Matthew.B]

I think the frustration that comes from members on this board that do "receive" our prophet, is that often the argument strays from the actual words or actions that come from the particular prophet, and becomes a condemnation that we are "idolators" or "blind followers" or making some broad statement like "you will never be saved by following a man." That is a sound-bite, just like we hear from the main-stream Christians, and has little meaning to me. I like it when people get into specifics of what they really believe.

I think people on both "sides" of this discussion feel this kind of frustration, and it's easy to have discussion devolve into insult matches. I think that what unites us all in believers of the Restoration and the work of Joseph Smith is so much greater than what divides us, but it's HARD to keep humility in discussions when your dearest and most treasured beliefs are being discussed (and sometimes challenged). Personally, having more humility in discussions like this is my goal.

So, if I've ever hurt your feelings by saying something cruel, I ask for your forgiveness. Much love, sister.

[Sarah]

I think the frustration that comes from members on this board that do "receive" our prophet, is that often the argument strays from the actual words or actions that come from the particular prophet, and becomes a condemnation that we are "idolators" or "blind followers" or making some broad statement like "you will never be saved by following a man." That is a sound-bite, just like we hear from the main-stream Christians, and has little meaning to me. I like it when people get into specifics of what they really believe.

I think people on both "sides" of this discussion feel this kind of frustration, and it's easy to have discussion devolve into insult matches. I think that what unites us all in believers of the Restoration and the work of Joseph Smith is so much greater than what divides us, but it's HARD to keep humility in discussions when your dearest and most treasured beliefs are being discussed (and sometimes challenged). Personally, having more humility in discussions like this is my goal.

So, if I've ever hurt your feelings by saying something cruel, I ask for your forgiveness. Much love, sister.

I don't think anyone on this forum has hurt my feelings. But thank you for offering your apology. I too hope I haven't offended you or anyone else, despite the fact that I will strongly disagree sometimes.

[Sarah]

This has been a great thread. Sarah said one thing that I think is a common misconception about prophets...

Every commandment that the Lord wants you to live has been revealed to his servants the prophets.

This statement is not true. We are to "live by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God." D&C 88:44. If we are not following the spirit and doing what it says we are concidered wicked by the Lord...

D&C 84:52 And whoso receiveth not my voice is not acquainted with my voice, and is not of me.

53 And by this you may know the righteous from the wicked, and that the whole world groaneth under sin and darkness even now.

We are to feast upon the words of Christ. Angels speak by the power of the Holy Ghost and they speak the Words of Christ. The words of Christ will teach us all things that we should do. The prophet does not know all things that we should do. We have to have a connection to Christ through the Holy Ghost. He (Christ) will guide our lives. That is the Doctrine of Christ and there will be no more doctrine until he manifests Himself unto us in the flesh. Then we must continue to do the things He shall say for us to do. 2 Nephi 32 & 32

I realize that I made a very generalized, blanket statement. When I said that every commandment that the Lord wants us to live has been revealed to the prophets, I was thinking that anything that the Spirit could direct you to do or to live, would fall under a category of something that has already been revealed to at least one prophet who has lived on the earth. It was in the context of everything else I was saying in my post, but obviously I didn't communicate what I was thinking in my mind. The point I was making is that if we have faith, are baptized and receive the Holy Ghost, we will be lead by the Holy Ghost to live commandments. But the Holy Ghost isn't going to give us a personal list. If we want to know what the commandments are, we can't just rely on the personal revelation. The Lord expects us to study the scriptures and listen to living prophets. The spirit confirms their words to us and we experiment upon their words. I realize that they don't give us everything possible that the Lord might want us to do individually. I've been prompted to do numerous things that were not ever commanded or counseled for us to live and do, some that I really had to question if I was listening to the right spirit or not, but ultimately, it falls under the category to love, trust, and obey.

[Amonhi]

If "the mark" is Christ, then you either believe he calls apostles or you don't. You either believe we have apostles today, that lead in righteousness or you don't. So, to me it seems absolutely necessary for you to have a testimony in this current Latter-Day-Work, and in the guidance our apostles give us, or you risk not following Christ. What if you don't have that testimony and you end up not following the commandments the Lord has revealed to the Church through them? That means you are a member that is fighting against one of the commandments, and fighting against the apostles.

I know this logic seems to make sense, but it is flawed. The Jewish Church under the Sanhedrin was setup by Moses under God. Even in it's corrupt state, it was able to bring people to God and Christ. This is why so many people recognized Jesus as a baby by the Power of the Holy Ghost. Even John the Baptist whose father was a temple priest did his work using the same authority he gained through the church and linage of his father. Jesus was baptized by John the Baptist under the authority of the Aaronic Priesthood he received from his father who worked in the temple doing actual ordinances with actual authority. His father met an Angel in the temple which was still considered a Holy Place. This means that the priesthood was on the earth and in operation in the corrupt church when Jesus was born. Jesus was baptized by John the Baptist was was a righteous man in a corrupt church which still had priesthood authority. People were still coming to God through that corrupt church, and receiving revelations, angels and visions. Their priesthood power, salvation and relationship with God had nothing to do with sustaining their leaders who ran the churches and temples and were corrupt not knowing God for themselves.

The Levitical Priesthood also stayed in tack through the corruption of the Children of Israel while they were slaves in Egypt. We see how corrupt they were when they came out of Egypt and began making a golden calf and sacrificing, and doing all manner of evil. Yet, they still had this smallest bit of priesthood.

I have no reason to believe that the Aaronic Priesthood is still not active among the Jews today and they still baptize just as they did since Moses.

I see in history 4 major lines of authority active and in play at the same time.

1) One went to Asia with Japeth (Son of Moses) which record we as a church don't have, but you can get some of the history translated into english. Let me know if you want a book on the subject and I'll look it up. It reads like the Book of Mormon following pride cycles and wars and prophets. They had prophets that called people to repentance and righteous and wicked leaders, etc. and they learned many great things by revelation.

2) One went down through Melchizedek, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob to their posterity and it was promised that the his posterity would continue and the priesthood would not be taken from his posterity. There were a number of other blessings Abraham secured for himself and his posterity that few can easily accept. It's all about being born into the covenant and these same blessings are given to anyone who has their C&E made sure and their posterity who are born into the covenant. While they had the Melchizedek Priesthood, it was at some point lost and they only had the Levitical Priesthood when Moses was born. (Regarding priesthood, see Abrahamic Covenant and realize that God will not beak that covenant. We see God telling Moses that he wants to wipe out all the Children of Israel and just keep thee covenant through Moses and his posterity, but Moses refuses so God repents and the Children of Israel remain, with priesthood authority, but at this point Moses introduces a new line of authority by giving them the Aaronic Priesthood which does not go through Abraham.)

3) The Line started by God directly during the time of Melchizedek and Abraham. Even though the Church existed and Abraham paid tithes to Melchizedek, his church official, God decided to start another line of authority through Esaias. This line is detailed from God to Esaias down to Moses in D&C 84:13. This line was running parallel to the Abraham/Isaac line and in the same region. I find it notable that Jethro, who became Moses Father-in-law was a descendant of Abraham through his son Ishmael who was cast out with his mother. Now we have a history of this line by revelation in the D&C. We wouldn't know about this line and how it traced down without that revelation. What we don't know about is what other lines existed, AND, who else that line gave authority to as a separate group. You see, the Bible follows a single line or people. It doesn't follow all the people or all the dealings with God with his children on earth. There could be hundreds of Books of Mormon out there for other cultures. We just don't have them. The line of priesthood that gave the priesthood to Jethro remained intact and with the Melchizedek priesthood while the line though Isaac remained intact but lost everything except the Levitical Priesthood. The Jethro line was righteous and living the higher law while the Isaac line was wicked and lived the lower law. And both lines continued on the earth through the ages, just as the Japeth line did in Asia.

5) The line through Shem which went to the tower of Babel and from there split to various directions including the Americas via the Brother of Jared. The Brother of Jared and his people existed in America from a few years after the tower of Babel, when they arrived until the Nephite nation found the last descendant after their great war that destroyed them. That line existed from Noah, past Melchizedek and Abraham, down through the Children of Israel and time when Lehi took his family across the sea to America until the last prophet was taken as we read in the Book of Ether (in the BoM)

An honorable mention is the various lines of Melchizedek Priesthood and Sealing power that God gave to individual people like 4th Nephi (Hel. 10), Elijah and Elisha and anyone else who held the Melchizedek priesthood from Moses to Christ when they as a people were only given the Aaronic priesthood. Same thing with the book of Mormon from Lehi to Christ as they also were only given the Aaronic Priesthood as a people however individuals were given the Melchizedek priesthood and even Sealing power.

Also, as an interesting foot note, and relevant to a previous point about the priesthood being a birthright of Abraham's posterity, (which is why we get adopted as seed of Abraham) is the point that Aarons descendants have a birthright to the Aaronic Priesthood and the keys to preside in that priesthood so much so that if a direct descendant of Aaron is found, they become the bishop in whatever ward they are in and they don't need Counselors. Our Bishops are High Priests filling in the position of Bishop in the Aaonic Priesthood but they are not rightful heirs to the role.

69 Nevertheless a bishop must be chosen from the High Priesthood, unless he is a literal descendant of Aaron;
70 For unless he is a literal descendant of Aaron he cannot hold the keys of that priesthood.
71 Nevertheless, a high priest, that is, after the order of Melchizedek, may be set apart unto the ministering of temporal things, having a knowledge of them by the Spirit of truth;
72 And also to be a judge in Israel, to do the business of the church, to sit in judgment upon transgressors upon testimony as it shall be laid before him according to the laws, by the assistance of his counselors, whom he has chosen or will choose among the elders of the church.
73 This is the duty of a bishop who is not a literal descendant of Aaron, but has been ordained to the High Priesthood after the order of Melchizedek.
74 Thus shall he be a judge, even a common judge among the inhabitants of Zion, or in a stake of Zion, or in any branch of the church where he shall be set apart unto this ministry, until the borders of Zion are enlarged and it becomes necessary to have other bishops or judges in Zion or elsewhere.
75 And inasmuch as there are other bishops appointed they shall act in the same office.
76 But a literal descendant of Aaron has a legal right to the presidency of this priesthood, to the keys of this ministry, to act in the office of bishop independently, without counselors, except in a case where a President of the High Priesthood, after the order of Melchizedek, is tried, to sit as a judge in Israel. - D&C 107

Notice that they have a right to the "keys". They can hold keys as opposed to having keys delegated to them or acting under the direction of the President of the church who holds the keys.

To conclude with my original point, The corrupt Church Jesus was born into which had priesthood authority to administer the Law of Moses which (included all the teachings and principles of the Aaronic Priesthood including Baptism), was able to perform ordinances and bring people to God. Jesus received his various ordinances through that church and fulfilled the law of Moses (Aaronic Priesthood) by receiving all of the ordinances that church could give. The people's standing before God and their priesthood was not dependent upon the righteousness of the leaders or their testimony of their being called of God.

Peace,
Amonhi

[zionminded]

Amonhi, the Church is God's family. And with every family, the children change over time. Sometimes they grow up and mature in good ways, and sometimes they mature in bad ways. As parents, you have to respond according to how your children are behaving, including to how your children's "friends" or those outside the Church are behaving. Your "rules" or policies are going to change with different circumstances.

I was just reading about the Law of Consecration yesterday and Brigham told of how he went from family to family and everyone had an excuse as to why they had no surplus to offer. No doubt the Lord had to establish the Law of Tithing, and make it binding on the saints over time for their own good. How tithing is commanded or collected or required is not as important as the need for the Saints to learn to OBEY AND SACRIFICE AND CONSECRATE. Those are the big laws to be concerned about. Whether the Lord commands us to obey specific laws in the early days of the Church vs. how we obey those commandments now, matter little. You must gain a testimony in the current leadership if you don't want to be a tare at the last day. That is really what I believe. Who are you going to follow when the rains descend in the form of persecution, and immorality. We have a storm of immorality and corrupt laws being passed. We have the ABOMINATION of gay marriage, and saints today who are criticizing the brethren for their policies. You either believe The Family: a Proclamation, or you do not. If you don't believe it then you will be with the tares.

The god you worship sounds very angry.