You can't both be right? Right?

[rewcox]

Christ told us to look at the fruit.

What is the fruit?

Telling George that Christ will say he never knew him is certainly bad fruit.

I don't know if Amonhi said that or not but I don't think saying such a thing constitutes bad fruit.

I think bad fruit is when an individual bids you partake of an idea, principle, counsel, doctrine, etc and it is harmful and separates you from God rather than reinforcing your relationship with God.

It certainly is if you claim to meet with Jesus all the time. Moroni said something about charity I think. And Amonhi's doctrine is harmful, unless you're trying to leave the church, Christ's church.

rewcox,

You keep making false accusations and judgments against Amonhi. He hasn't done any of the things you've accused him of. Its a rhetorical tactic to try to silence your opponent. It unethical to do that.

Demonstrate, in full context, and fairly, where Amonhi has acted in the way you say. I will believe you if you can make your point using the principles of intellectual honesty, empathy, courage, and humility as opposed to the childish tactics you keep using. I call it the common internet speech.

Treat Amonhi fairly. Treat him as if he were your brother that you love with all your heart. Make sure you are honest in all that you say about him.

-Finrock

See this post: viewtopic.php?f=14&t=44651#p761316

[gclayjr]

Finrock,

Same, here George, look at what you just wrote to me. You have assigned all of these negative traits to me, unfairly, and then expect that there will be some dialogue? Seriously, drop the attitude, and lets communicate in a Christ-like way. Demonstrate intellectual integrity, empathy, courage, and humility and make your point that way. If you can take my best argument and then demonstrate that I err using the principles I've outlined, then you will have done something amazing. Right now, this is just common internet speech. It's no convincing, it isn't edifying, it doesn't do anything but perpetuate contention.

So bottom line. No straight answer!

Why do you think that you get the responses back that you do? You and Amonhi, write, and write, and write, but never give clear honest answers. It leads many of us to conclude that you are not being honest.

If you simply said something like "I don't agree with much that the brethren say", "So I only support that which I agree with and discount that which I don't agree with" and "I don't agree with this". You would not get the responses you get. But when you say

That quote doesn't mean what you think it means,

It appears that you are deceptively trying to have it both ways. You are pretending to support the brethren, and don't have the cojones to come out and honestly say that you reject that and many other things, so you slyly say that I and other TBMs don't understand the scriptures and the brethren, while you never really clearly and simply state what you mean.

Regards,

George Clay

[Amonhi]

Amonhi,

I do not think that you are not a special HP of 144K, simply because you will not reveal your true identity. I think you are a coward for hiding in the shadows while making such claims about your greatness in God's Kingdom.

I am no more valuable than any other person. This has always been something I have taught. Everyone should strive for the blessings of God and Anyone can receive them.

However, I do know that you are a fraud because you are just as noted by Elder Russel M Ballard, in his 1999 Conference talk:

Today we warn you that there are false prophets and false teachers arising; and if we are not careful, even those who are among the faithful members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints will fall victim to their deception.

President Joseph F. Smith gave wise and clear counsel that applies to us today:

“We can accept nothing as authoritative but that which comes directly through the appointed channel, the constituted organizations of the Priesthood, which is the channel that God has appointed through which to make known His mind and will to the world. … And the moment that individuals look to any other source, that moment they throw themselves open to the seductive influences of Satan, and render themselves liable to become servants of the devil; they lose sight of the true order through which the blessings of the Priesthood are to be enjoyed; they step outside of the pale of the kingdom of God, and are on dangerous ground. Whenever you see a man rise up claiming to have received direct revelation from the Lord to the Church, independent of the order and channel of the Priesthood, you may set him down as an imposter” (Gospel Doctrine, 5th ed. [1939], 41–42).

Hmm, I wonder if he speaking for hte church or for God. Authoitative for the church or authoritative for God. Any other source than the organization of the priesthood... Is the spirit considered another source? Is he saying that authoritative doctrine comes through the priesthood or through the spirit? And where do we find the authoritative doctrine? The Bishop's hand book, general conference or the scriptures?

What do you people thinks?

However, if you do not believe that which is current doctrine in the Church of Jesus Christ, and you are following a different Master, THAT would be a good reason to:

I should turn in my temple recommend and give up my membership in the church. 8-|

At least then you would be honest to yourself.

I believe in the gospel of Jesus Christ as taught by Jesus Christ. I believe that anyone who teaches more or less than this and declares it to be his doctrine commeth of evil. As long as the LDS Church believes this, I am happy to side with the church.

Peace,
Amonhi

[Amonhi]

Whether or not someone is great in the Kingdom because of having their calling and election made sure is debatable. Obviously Jesus is great, and He should get all the credit for any good we do. If Amonhi gave out his real name, he would probably be scrutinized for every little thing he does. He shouldn't be held to a higher level of behavior because he has a relationship with the Savior. He should just be able to testify of the Savior's goodness which is a lovely gift. And everybody has a gift. It is a gift not an achievement.

As a flute performance major, I watched my teacher perform once. I couldn't help it, I scrutinized every single note she played. I couldn't help but be jealous because she was, according to her credetentials, better than me. It is sad I couldn't just enjoy the music.

It certainly feels like what is driving these angry responses to Amonhi is not this altruistic attempt to protect and defend truth or to protect the innocent from being gobbled up by the wolf, "Amonhi", but it certainly appears the real motivation for all of this is spiritual envy.

In my opinion those who are interacting with Amonhi in a blatantly unreasonable and uncharitable way are those who believe they are faithful Latter-day Saints, who can probably check off a lot of the items on the list of what they believe makes one a faithful, good, Mormon. I suspect that because they go to Church every Sunday, pay their tithing, faithfully fulfill their callings, listen and obey their leaders without question, do their genealogy, go to the temple frequently, have family home evenings, do their home teaching, etc. they feel that they are superior to Amonhi. Of course they aren't perfect, but they certainly feel they are more righteous than Amonhi who doesn't advocate the true blue Mormon game plan. Regardless of them being such faithful good Mormons, none of them have ever met Christ personally and none of them have had their calling and election made sure and they simply cannot accept that a person who isn't following the "faithful Mormon game plan" and striving to keep all the commandments like they are can possibly have seen Christ and can't possibly have their calling and election made sure, and most assuredly they aren't members of the 144,000. Because they haven't qualified for these blessings, in their minds anyways, they deny them on others. In my opinion, all of this negativity towards Amonhi comes down to jealously and envy and self-righteousness. Much like Laman and Lemuel refused to accept Nephi's standing with God, supposing that Nephi was trying to place himself at their head and further supposing that they were faithful and righteous in keeping God's commandments because they fulfilled the letter of the law.

Anyways, that is my sidebar psycho-analysis of the Amonhi "haters". So far I do not sense charity and compassion as the driving force behind their treatment and actions against Amonhi and that is a big indicator to me as to where their hearts are. But, I will forebear because I don't know their hearts with absolute certainty.

-Finrock

They absolutely feel more righteous than me without the slightest doubt. Good call Finrock. I have seen this before, but never put it together. Others have said, "Who are you to have had such experiences!" and were angry because they hadn't.

Interesting observation.

Peace,
Amonhi

[Amonhi]

Amonhi,

I do not think that you are not a special HP of 144K, simply because you will not reveal your true identity. I think you are a coward for hiding in the shadows while making such claims about your greatness in God's Kingdom. In that deleted thread, I did suggest to Mark, and Rewcox, that they had made their point and that repeating it would not be useful.

However, I do know that you are a fraud because you are just as noted by Elder Russel M Ballard, in his 1999 Conference talk:

Today we warn you that there are false prophets and false teachers arising; and if we are not careful, even those who are among the faithful members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints will fall victim to their deception.

President Joseph F. Smith gave wise and clear counsel that applies to us today:

“We can accept nothing as authoritative but that which comes directly through the appointed channel, the constituted organizations of the Priesthood, which is the channel that God has appointed through which to make known His mind and will to the world. … And the moment that individuals look to any other source, that moment they throw themselves open to the seductive influences of Satan, and render themselves liable to become servants of the devil; they lose sight of the true order through which the blessings of the Priesthood are to be enjoyed; they step outside of the pale of the kingdom of God, and are on dangerous ground. Whenever you see a man rise up claiming to have received direct revelation from the Lord to the Church, independent of the order and channel of the Priesthood, you may set him down as an imposter” (Gospel Doctrine, 5th ed. [1939], 41–42).

When we think of false prophets and false teachers, we tend to think of those who espouse an obviously false doctrine or presume to have authority to teach the true gospel of Christ according to their own interpretation. We often assume that such individuals are associated with small radical groups on the fringes of society. However, I reiterate: there are false prophets and false teachers who have or at least claim to have membership in the Church. There are those who, without authority, claim Church endorsement to their products and practices. Beware of such.

https://www.lds.org/general-conference/ ... s?lang=eng


However, if you do not believe that which is current doctrine in the Church of Jesus Christ, and you are following a different Master, THAT would be a good reason to:

I should turn in my temple recommend and give up my membership in the church. 8-|

At least then you would be honest to yourself.

Regards,

George Clay

Agreed. Quite sad to see someone proclaim falsely they are one of the 144k.

Someone has to be, or the prophecy won't be fulfilled. If not me then someone else. If me, then another 139,999 other people just as crazy. How do you suppose that you will recognize these messengers of God prophesied to come in the last days while the church is organized?

Peace,
Amonhi

[Amonhi]

PS. I assume you reject Elder Russel M. Ballard's conference talk, because I can not see how you can in any way reconcile Amonhi's claim with what he said... although I would be amused to see if there is any way you can twist his position to appear to be not fulfilling that prophetic warning.

In a previous thread, I showed how you were the target of Elder Ballards comments, because you are the one rejecting the scriptures and the prophets like Joseph Smith. You couldn't even explain why you rejected them. I think that you are standing on sandier ground than I am.

Peace,
Amonhi

[Amonhi]

I wonder what motivates Amonhi to continue and participate in these "discussions". It seems to me, after observing for a few years now, that Amonhi's points are rarely discussed. Usually the discussion turns towards an attack on him rather than a trial of his beliefs.

All I can figure is that Amonhi must be harvesting enough through PM's and such to justify the lack of discussion on the points. And it is probably most helpful to have those who contend against him draw attention to his threads and bring in even more for the harvest.

Way to go defenders of the truth. :ymapplause:

Jeremy.... Don't go giving away my secrets! I count on these guys, don't go blowing it for me.

I would suggest and encourage us to focus on the points that Amonhi is trying to share. Regardless of belief, let us weigh the points and not the messenger. I believe this will result in at least two beneficial things.

One - Those who disagree with Amonhi's ideas will be able to think things out and practice presenting their beliefs and ideas in a way sufficient to persuade. I would imagine this would be through a persona of humility and an invitation of the spirit.

Two - Based on observation, chances are the thread will die in a day or two. There have only been a few threads in which Amonhi's ideas were consistently contended against without an attack against him personally. I believe that minimizing the personal attacks and focusing on responses targeted at the points will result in significantly less posts and posts with significantly more value.

You make very good points and reasonable requests. I accept your call to repentance/humility/honesty and will attempt to keep my personal attacks of other to none and stay focused on the discussion topics.

LDSFF might be a lot more pleasant if we tried this.

AGREED!

Peace,
Amonhi

[Amonhi]

Finrock,

It certainly feels like what is driving these angry responses to Amonhi is not this altruistic attempt to protect and defend truth or to protect the innocent from being gobbled up by the wolf, "Amonhi", but it certainly appears the real motivation for all of this is spiritual envy.

I'm sure it helps your smug self righteousness to continually refer to my responses as angry. They are not, no matter how superior that makes you feel. I am not angry with Amonhi, nor you. I pity you, and I don't care much one way or the other about Amonhi.

This darned internets thing... I took you as constantly being angry too!

Peace,
Amonhi

[Jeremy]

The message that is most damaging is that the physical ordinances performed within the Church are not necessary, that the only thing that matters is that you get these spiritual type of ordinances from Heavenly Messengers. He frequently quotes sec. 132, yet it says in there that only one on the earth at a time holds the keys to this sealing power, and that would imply that these ordinances need to be performed under a certain order of priesthood authority. How could this be if one can receive all these spiritual ordinances straight from messengers. The messenger gives the keys and then the keys are here to administer the ordinances. On his forum Elliason, he made the comment that a man and woman having sex before their official marriage would be okay if they were spiritually sealed. How could this be? This is not the Lord's way.

:ymhug:
Thank you Sarah. I appreciate the points of disagreement you have expressed. This kind of post is the kind I would enjoy to see here more often.

[Amonhi]

I wonder what motivates Amonhi to continue and participate in these "discussions". It seems to me, after observing for a few years now, that Amonhi's points are rarely discussed. Usually the discussion turns towards an attack on him rather than a trial of his beliefs.

All I can figure is that Amonhi must be harvesting enough through PM's and such to justify the lack of discussion on the points. And it is probably most helpful to have those who contend against him draw attention to his threads and bring in even more for the harvest.

Way to go defenders of the truth. :ymapplause:

I would suggest and encourage us to focus on the points that Amonhi is trying to share. Regardless of belief, let us weigh the points and not the messenger. I believe this will result in at least two beneficial things.

One - Those who disagree with Amonhi's ideas will be able to think things out and practice presenting their beliefs and ideas in a way sufficient to persuade. I would imagine this would be through a persona of humility and an invitation of the spirit.

Two - Based on observation, chances are the thread will die in a day or two. There have only been a few threads in which Amonhi's ideas were consistently contended against without an attack against him personally. I believe that minimizing the personal attacks and focusing on responses targeted at the points will result in significantly less posts and posts with significantly more value.

LDSFF might be a lot more pleasant if we tried this.

You seem to be missing the giant elephant in the room here Jeremy. Amonhi has made bold declarations that he is part of the 144,000 high priests ordained by angels and sent by the Lord to teach people the fastest way to make their calling and election made sure among other things by, as scripture clearly states of these 144,000, taking them to the temples of our God and facilitating them being sealed them up unto eternal life. His teachings and proclamations are intrinsiccally connected to his claims.

You lost me on the part that is red. Could you please clarify in more to detail what you think I do or believe? Very confused about that.

I try to disconnect my teaching from my claims as much as possible. There is rarely any need to associate them because the scriptures and prophets and reasoning stands for itself without ANY claim to authority, position or power. I brought it up when it was relevant. Others keep bringing it up when it isn't. They don't seem to know the difference between when it is and is not relevant.

False Prophets like Jim Harmston made very similar claims and taught many of the same things that Amonhi teaches

. Cool. I'll have to look into his teachings. What are some of the things he taught that I teach?

Those Saints who believed his claims were sucked into his web of deceit and eventually found themselves conned and defrauded by that charlaton.

So, I must be false too. Been doing this 15 plus years and haven't taken a dime for it, no followers, I remain anonymous so I can't be blamed for seeking popularity...

I have helped a lot of people to come closer to God.

So, it appears that you are judging me for the sins of Jim
Harmston. He was a bad man, so by default so am I. Got it.

Integrity matters. If you claim to be commissioned by God as a prophet to teach eternal principles and you are just conning everyone about your legitimacy I would say that lack of integrity does matter. Don't you?

Sure. Where is the con? How do I win? How long do you expect it to take before I cash in on my time investment?
When do I get paid or promoted? I suggest that 15 years is a long time to go for a con man. Especially with what I have to deal with. I think I would teach more flattering doctrine if I were a con.

There is a fellow on this site who claims to be our Lord and Savior. Does that little claim have any impact on what he is peddling here?

What does he teach?

I think it does. If someone has been deceived how can you really take much of any of his bold declarations serious?

So you assume the bold declarations are the sign of deception?

I know that you and others here like Jules and many more in the past were very committed Snuffer advocates and Remnant disciples. I suspect that Amonhi is knee deep in that movement as well.

I claim no association with them, never have. I disagree with Snuffer on a number of things and might agree with him on some things if I ever read his writtings.

I am sure that most of those who have listened to Amonhi and followed his advice and counsel and believed in his extraordinary claims are now alienated from the LDS church.

Some are, most I think are not.

Many I'm sure are part of the remnant movement.

Some are, but I find that many in that movement have just replace one prophet to follow with another. This has never been my teaching, so they aren't listening to me.

His influence if anything have caused people to draw themselves away from the LDS church. Many have put themselves directly at odds with their Priesthood authorities and have gone thru church disciplinary counsels just as Snuffer did.

You are now judging me with Snuffer. You can't say that my influence has caused people to leave the church because I can't say that. There is no evidence to that effect. You are making up facts to support justify your actions and words against me.

This being an LDS oriented board I think all that matters. If Amonhi is nothing more than a deceived wolf in sheeps clothes then that fact should be at least brought forward and substantiated. I have tried to do just that. If true many innocent people can jeopardize their futures by falling for his deceptive methods.

Substantiate it in showing my error rather than presenting unfounded accusations. If we are in a war of words, then meet me on the field of battle. Challenge my words and sources with greater wisdom and truth. If my words are false then it is them that lead people astray and unless you a can undo the error in the words, you will not save anyone who believes them by judging me guilty of the sins of others.


Peace to you,
Amonhi

[Finrock]

Finrock,

Same, here George, look at what you just wrote to me. You have assigned all of these negative traits to me, unfairly, and then expect that there will be some dialogue? Seriously, drop the attitude, and lets communicate in a Christ-like way. Demonstrate intellectual integrity, empathy, courage, and humility and make your point that way. If you can take my best argument and then demonstrate that I err using the principles I've outlined, then you will have done something amazing. Right now, this is just common internet speech. It's no convincing, it isn't edifying, it doesn't do anything but perpetuate contention.

So bottom line. No straight answer!

Why do you think that you get the responses back that you do? You and Amonhi, write, and write, and write, but never give clear honest answers. It leads many of us to conclude that you are not being honest.

If you simply said something like "I don't agree with much that the brethren say", "So I only support that which I agree with and discount that which I don't agree with" and "I don't agree with this". You would not get the responses you get. But when you say

That quote doesn't mean what you think it means,

It appears that you are deceptively trying to have it both ways. You are pretending to support the brethren, and don't have the cojones to come out and honestly say that you reject that and many other things, so you slyly say that I and other TBMs don't understand the scriptures and the brethren, while you never really clearly and simply state what you mean.

Regards,

George Clay

George,

You are once again just simply asserting that I am not giving honest answers. Basically, you setup a post where you are stacking the cards against me. You make nonsensical assertions and then ask me to respond to them as if they were true. It's like the classic loaded question, "So, how long have you been beating your wife?" Well, I don't beat my wife, so its a stupid question. Stop the BS and ask me an honest question that isn't loaded with assumptions and false accusations and I will answer. Until you actually start treating me as your brother (which I am) then you are simply just playing unethical games. When you start being sincere then I will be able to answer your questions. But, even despite your loaded questions, false accusations, etc. I have tried to look past that and have a conversation with you. Unfortunately I'm very used to dealing with the type of crap that is being tossed at me and even though I recognize what is going on, I still try to turn the other cheek in the hopes that you and those like you will come to your senses and start having a sincere, Christ-like conversation with me.

I forgive you and am ready to discuss and answer any sincere question you put forth. I'm not going to play dumb games though or pretend that your loaded questions aren't loaded questions nor am I going to agree to answer or respond to a stacked deck. Get it?

-Finrock

[Finrock]

I wonder what motivates Amonhi to continue and participate in these "discussions". It seems to me, after observing for a few years now, that Amonhi's points are rarely discussed. Usually the discussion turns towards an attack on him rather than a trial of his beliefs.

All I can figure is that Amonhi must be harvesting enough through PM's and such to justify the lack of discussion on the points. And it is probably most helpful to have those who contend against him draw attention to his threads and bring in even more for the harvest.

Way to go defenders of the truth. :ymapplause:

I would suggest and encourage us to focus on the points that Amonhi is trying to share. Regardless of belief, let us weigh the points and not the messenger. I believe this will result in at least two beneficial things.

One - Those who disagree with Amonhi's ideas will be able to think things out and practice presenting their beliefs and ideas in a way sufficient to persuade. I would imagine this would be through a persona of humility and an invitation of the spirit.

Two - Based on observation, chances are the thread will die in a day or two. There have only been a few threads in which Amonhi's ideas were consistently contended against without an attack against him personally. I believe that minimizing the personal attacks and focusing on responses targeted at the points will result in significantly less posts and posts with significantly more value.

LDSFF might be a lot more pleasant if we tried this.

You seem to be missing the giant elephant in the room here Jeremy. Amonhi has made bold declarations that he is part of the 144,000 high priests ordained by angels and sent by the Lord to teach people the fastest way to make their calling and election made sure among other things by, as scripture clearly states of these 144,000, taking them to the temples of our God and facilitating them being sealed them up unto eternal life. His teachings and proclamations are intrinsiccally connected to his claims.

You lost me on the part that is red. Could you please clarify in more to detail what you think I do or believe? Very confused about that.

I try to disconnect my teaching from my claims as much as possible. There is rarely any need to associate them because the scriptures and prophets and reasoning stands for itself without ANY claim to authority, position or power. I brought it up when it was relevant. Others keep bringing it up when it isn't. They don't seem to know the difference between when it is and is not relevant.

False Prophets like Jim Harmston made very similar claims and taught many of the same things that Amonhi teaches

. Cool. I'll have to look into his teachings. What are some of the things he taught that I teach?

Those Saints who believed his claims were sucked into his web of deceit and eventually found themselves conned and defrauded by that charlaton.

So, I must be false too. Been doing this 15 plus years and haven't taken a dime for it, no followers, I remain anonymous so I can't be blamed for seeking popularity...

I have helped a lot of people to come closer to God.

So, it appears that you are judging me for the sins of Jim
Harmston. He was a bad man, so by default so am I. Got it.

Integrity matters. If you claim to be commissioned by God as a prophet to teach eternal principles and you are just conning everyone about your legitimacy I would say that lack of integrity does matter. Don't you?

Sure. Where is the con? How do I win? How long do you expect it to take before I cash in on my time investment?
When do I get paid or promoted? I suggest that 15 years is a long time to go for a con man. Especially with what I have to deal with. I think I would teach more flattering doctrine if I were a con.

There is a fellow on this site who claims to be our Lord and Savior. Does that little claim have any impact on what he is peddling here?

What does he teach?

I think it does. If someone has been deceived how can you really take much of any of his bold declarations serious?

So you assume the bold declarations are the sign of deception?

I know that you and others here like Jules and many more in the past were very committed Snuffer advocates and Remnant disciples. I suspect that Amonhi is knee deep in that movement as well.

I claim no association with them, never have. I disagree with Snuffer on a number of things and might agree with him on some things if I ever read his writtings.

I am sure that most of those who have listened to Amonhi and followed his advice and counsel and believed in his extraordinary claims are now alienated from the LDS church.

Some are, most I think are not.

Many I'm sure are part of the remnant movement.

Some are, but I find that many in that movement have just replace one prophet to follow with another. This has never been my teaching, so they aren't listening to me.

His influence if anything have caused people to draw themselves away from the LDS church. Many have put themselves directly at odds with their Priesthood authorities and have gone thru church disciplinary counsels just as Snuffer did.

You are now judging me with Snuffer. You can't say that my influence has caused people to leave the church because I can't say that. There is no evidence to that effect. You are making up facts to support justify your actions and words against me.

This being an LDS oriented board I think all that matters. If Amonhi is nothing more than a deceived wolf in sheeps clothes then that fact should be at least brought forward and substantiated. I have tried to do just that. If true many innocent people can jeopardize their futures by falling for his deceptive methods.

Substantiate it in showing my error rather than presenting unfounded accusations. If we are in a war of words, then meet me on the field of battle. Challenge my words and sources with greater wisdom and truth. If my words are false then it is them that lead people astray and unless you a can undo the error in the words, you will not save anyone who believes them by judging me guilty of the sins of others.


Peace to you,
Amonhi

Thanks, Amonhi.

-Finrock

[Finrock]

What is the fruit?

I don't know if Amonhi said that or not but I don't think saying such a thing constitutes bad fruit.

I think bad fruit is when an individual bids you partake of an idea, principle, counsel, doctrine, etc and it is harmful and separates you from God rather than reinforcing your relationship with God.

It certainly is if you claim to meet with Jesus all the time. Moroni said something about charity I think. And Amonhi's doctrine is harmful, unless you're trying to leave the church, Christ's church.

rewcox,

You keep making false accusations and judgments against Amonhi. He hasn't done any of the things you've accused him of. Its a rhetorical tactic to try to silence your opponent. It unethical to do that.

Demonstrate, in full context, and fairly, where Amonhi has acted in the way you say. I will believe you if you can make your point using the principles of intellectual honesty, empathy, courage, and humility as opposed to the childish tactics you keep using. I call it the common internet speech.

Treat Amonhi fairly. Treat him as if he were your brother that you love with all your heart. Make sure you are honest in all that you say about him.

-Finrock

See this post: viewtopic.php?f=14&t=44651#p761316

Okay, what am I looking for in that post that is relevant to what I asked of you?

-Finrock

[Amonhi]

When someone claims to have their C&E, that they are a prophet, that they have visited several times with Christ, then this is activated:

Words from Christ, Matthew 24;11
11 And many false prophets shall rise, and shall deceive many.

Oh, I see. A default judgement. A person who makes any claim is false by default.

So when Amonhi (not his real name) gets irritated with George (his real name) and says the next time he talks with Christ and mentions George, that Christ will say he never knew him (George).

Speculation based on available information already presented and information I have which is not available to this audience.

Amonhi also said:

I don't understand. We are talking about How God calls prophets, what God will and will not tell certain prophets and the role of prophets. I thought you were a prophet, but you just clearly stated multiple timeS that you are absolutely not a prophet.

If you are not a prophet, then you are not a qualified to teach on this OR ANY OTHER GOSPEL RELATED TOPIC. Either you don't know what a prophet is and because of your ignorance you are not qualified to teach, PREACH OR MINISTER TRUTH OR else you aren't ignorant you know what a prophet is but you are a false witness and a liar because you aren't a minister of Jesus Christ, or a teacher or preacher of righteousness and knowingly admit it. Either way, if you aren’t a prophet, then you aren’t qualified to teach about what prophets are, how they are called and what they can do let alone any other gospel topic.

When I get some time, I'll provide some material to discuss what a prophet is in the hopes that you are just ignorant on this topic.

Peace,
Amonhi

Yeah do you remember the 5 quotes from Joseph Smith and the various scriptures that I provided which said exactly that almost word for word? The ones you refused to address and couldn't argue against so you just rejected and ignored?

So yes, it is easy to see Amonhi is a false prophet. A TBM like George shouldn't be able to get under his skin.

Do you remember Joseph Smith saying,

“There has been a great difficulty in getting anything into the heads of this generation. It has been like splitting hemlock knots with a corn-dodger [a piece of corn bread] for a wedge, and a pumpkin for a beetle [a wooden mallet]. Even the Saints are slow to understand.

Not very prophet like right...

Peace,
Amonhi

[Amonhi]

Finrock,

As far as Elder Ballard's quote: Seems obvious that in the last days there will be false prophets and false teachers. I agree that no one, other than the President of the Church (via the revealed process) can claim to have received direct revelation from the Lord to the Church. I agree that no one is authorized to claim Church endorsement to their products and practices independent of the authorized channels of the Church. Seems like common sense to me. Honestly, I don't see how it applies to the current situation. Who is claiming to have received direct revelation from the Lord to the Church? Who is claiming Church endorsement to their products and practices?

That quote could apply to anyone, although I'm guessing you are implying that it clearly applies to Amonhi and/or to myself. That wouldn't surprise me, though, given the dislike you seemingly have for him or myself.

I cannot quote Ahmoni as to specifically what specific revelation he has claimed, partially because the thread in which this discussion started has been removed, and partially because Amonhi says so may self conflicting things that it is a bit hard to "pin him down".

He did tell me that he accepted that only the current prophet could receive "revelation" as to where to build the next temple or who to call for Bishop (Although I would have thought that that came under the pervue of the Stake president), but he clearly said, that anything else, including any revelation pertaining to the Saints in general, including revelation of eternal truths not previously not revealed to the saints is open to anybody whom God decides to call.

In fact I never knew anything about Amonhi, or his thoughts prior to his "jumping" on me when I posted that an easy way to tell that a prophet is a false prophet is if he broadcasts any "revelations" pertaining to the whole church or world of any new eternal truths not previously revealed. I said that only the Lords anointed prophet would broadcast such a revelation. I further stated that a righteous person could RECEIVE such a revelation, but it would be only for his person and family.

Amonhi (and I think you ) went through rant after rant after rant, trying to defend against a false accusation that I was saying that unless you were the Prophet to the Church, you could not receive any revelation at all, including whether the Gospel is true, or if you were a Bishop what is necessary for a ward. I rejected this over. and over, and over, and then Amonhi would return to making those same false assertion about me. That led to an effort to describe the meaning of the word STEWARDSHIP, and me explaining to him the concept of "Straw Man" arguments. He would always return to vomiting scriptures and quotes saying that a man must be a "prophet" to testify about almost anything, and I would return to reminding him that I agreed with that, and that it neither supported his contention that anybody could be called today to prophesy about anything...except those relatively administrative things nor refuted what I said, nor that I was wrong in saying that you could identify a false prophet, because he claims to be able to receive new revelations pertaining to the Church and World, then broadcasts these revelations.

I don't see how you can read that talk and conclude that a man is only a false prophet if he steps up and tells the Church where to build a new temple, or who to call as a new Bishop. If that is how you read it, then you DO have the same reading comprehension problems as Amonhi.

Regards,

Geroge Clay

It sounds like from your recap of the conversation that we were not communicating well. I will take the blame for that. My apologies for neither listening to and understanding your positions and intended communication nor clearly expressing and addressing the differences in our views.

We were clearly having different conversations.

Peace,
Amonhi

[Obrien]

Christ told us to look at the fruit.

What is the fruit?

Telling George that Christ will say he never knew him is certainly bad fruit.

I don't know if Amonhi said that or not but I don't think saying such a thing constitutes bad fruit.

I think bad fruit is when an individual bids you partake of an idea, principle, counsel, doctrine, etc and it is harmful and separates you from God rather than reinforcing your relationship with God.

Given Rewcox' logic, Christ was creating "bad fruit"every time he made reference to "a generation of vipers" or called out "scribes, Pharisees and hypocrites". Calling a spade a spade isn't bad fruit, but it can be uncomfortable.

[rewcox]

Christ told us to look at the fruit.

What is the fruit?

Telling George that Christ will say he never knew him is certainly bad fruit.

I don't know if Amonhi said that or not but I don't think saying such a thing constitutes bad fruit.

I think bad fruit is when an individual bids you partake of an idea, principle, counsel, doctrine, etc and it is harmful and separates you from God rather than reinforcing your relationship with God.

Given Rewcox' logic, Christ was creating "bad fruit"every time he made reference to "a generation of vipers" or called out "scribes, Pharisees and hypocrites". Calling a spade a spade isn't bad fruit, but it can be uncomfortable.

So a TBM is a viper to you and Amonhi and Finrock. And you cant handle President Monson being senile. Take a Tums.

[gclayjr]

Amonhi, Finrock

I do want to thank you for your responses that have lead me into a position where the truth is so clear that a spotlight couldn't highlight it more.

I have a choice between believing the well thought out clearly spoken words of Elder Ballard, in General conference, which are spoken in clear English, and supported by the words of Joseph F. Smith and scriptures, which after reading, I feel a warm feeling of truth and understanding, particularly when he says what he says clearly and eloquently. I am specially touched when he says:

Whenever you see a man rise up claiming to have received direct revelation from the Lord to the Church, independent of the order and channel of the Priesthood, you may set him down as an imposter” (Gospel Doctrine, 5th ed. [1939], 41–42).

and

However, I reiterate: there are false prophets and false teachers who have or at least claim to have membership in the Church. There are those who, without authority, claim Church endorsement to their products and practices. Beware of such.

And I get to compare it to your dissembling, vague assertions, and ramblings about blood atonement, specifically directed towards discrediting Brigham Young. And when I point out the simple clarity of what Elder Ballard said in his conference talk,. Finrock says:

That quote doesn't mean what you think it means

And when either of you are asked to explain simply, and clearly (without vomiting volumes of quotes attached to incoherent, and inconsistent assertions) how it is that it isn't that you reject the words of Elder Ballard, but it is that I don't actually understand them, I get responses like:

In a previous thread, I showed how you were the target of Elder Ballards comments, because you are the one rejecting the scriptures and the prophets like Joseph Smith. You couldn't even explain why you rejected them. I think that you are standing on sandier ground than I am.

or

You are once again just simply asserting that I am not giving honest answers. Basically, you setup a post where you are stacking the cards against me. You make nonsensical assertions and then ask me to respond to them as if they were true. It's like the classic loaded question, "So, how long have you been beating your wife?" Well, I don't beat my wife, so its a stupid question. Stop the BS and ask me an honest question that isn't loaded with assumptions and false accusations and I will answer. Until you actually start treating me as your brother (which I am) then you are simply just playing unethical games. When you start being sincere then I will be able to answer your questions. But, even despite your loaded questions, false accusations, etc. I have tried to look past that and have a conversation with you. Unfortunately I'm very used to dealing with the type of crap that is being tossed at me and even though I recognize what is going on, I still try to turn the other cheek in the hopes that you and those like you will come to your senses and start having a sincere, Christ-like conversation with me.

I forgive you and am ready to discuss and answer any sincere question you put forth. I'm not going to play dumb games though or pretend that your loaded questions aren't loaded questions nor am I going to agree to answer or respond

That which I knew to be true, before is so reinforced, that it is now as clear as if illuminated by a thousand suns!

So again

Thank You,

George Clay

[AI2.0]

Amonhi, you claim to be one of the 144,000 and have your calling and election sure. But, I've come to the conclusion that you and the LDS church are at odds, so either you are 'true' (in other words, you are what you claim to be) or the church is 'true'(it is what it claims to be), but the fact is, you both can't be 'true' (what you claim to be). One of you is false.

Would you like to be more specific regarding the ways you think that I and the church are at odds?

Peace,
Amonhi

Here's some off the top of my head:

Your 'teaching' of how to make your calling and election itself is at odds. LDS don't teach that this is some kind of course you can take or writings you can read to fastract a member into seeing Christ. LDS believe this is something that comes with time, service, commitment, living a purified and sanctified life.

Your belief that once you receive your calling and election, you no longer need to follow the commandments (but can pick and choose what you want to follow), that you've transcended them, that they are for lesser individuals to still have to follow.

Your belief that you don't need to listen to or follow the counsel of church leaders--because you know more than them, because you've seen Christ. You are at odds most definitely in this.

Your perception of some Prophets, such as Brigham Young, is at odds with LDS teachings. You present things as coming from Brigham Young which the church denies.

Your belief that LDS Prophets such as Pres. Monson and our Apostles are not prophets, seers and revelators because (by your assumption) they haven't received their calling and election by seeing Christ. This is at odds as LDS believe they are all prophets, seers and revelators and they may or may not have seen Christ in the flesh (part of your belief that this is a requirement to receive the calling and election) which is at odds with LDS belief. LDS have an ordinance called the second endowment which I expect you reject and I'm certain Pres. Monson and the 12 have received.

If I had the time to search your posts, I'm sure I could find more.


And before you ask me to provide examples, I respectfully decline to. If you want examples, you seem to have the time now--go look at your own posts. I do not have the time to search your posts or give you any more ego strokes and attention.

Amonhi, I'm not sure what kind of person you are, but I like to think that you are simply deluded and not deceptive. I am not a 'hater' of you, but I am very wary of you and what you teach. Even your style of debate makes me wary of you. As George Clay said, you DO 'vomit scriptures' and then you include a bunch of round about thinking that makes a person feel lost in a maze of rhetoric. You also deflect from the actual charges by zeroing in on the weakest arguments of your opponents (yes, you see us as opponents) and the actual crux of what they've said is lost and/or glossed over. That's one reason I usually steer clear of you. I simply don't have the time or the talent for going up against someone with your rhetorical skills.

While you aren't a follower of Snufferism (why would someone who claims to be one of the '144,000' need to follow some other guy), you do teach doctrines which are similar and just as 'at odds' with LDS beliefs as he does(his teachings were at odds as he was exed for apostasy). We've seen many good members of the church lose their way following that man right out of the church. Since I have a testimony that the LDS church IS God's true church, this is a tragedy to me and I'd like to see no more fall away through dissenting away from the truth. I have no ill will toward you, but as long as you teach things that I believe are false, and I read them, then I feel I have just as much right to call you out on it as to praise you as your fans do.

[Jeremy]

Here's some off the top of my head...

:ymhug:
Thank you AI2.0. While I think you are interpreting incorrectly, I appreciate your effort to highlight a few specific points of Amonhi's views that you believe are wrong. I think that is helpful for everyone who reads this thread.

[Amonhi]

It would take some time to go through all of Amonhi's threads and point our all the damaging teachings, but there is no doubt he has preached doctrines that go against the Church's. The message that is most damaging is that the physical ordinances performed within the Church are not necessary, that the only thing that matters is that you get these spiritual type of ordinances from Heavenly Messengers.

Good call Sarah! I opened a new thread to discuss this point/concern.

Peace,
Amonhi

[Mark]

Amonhi, you claim to be one of the 144,000 and have your calling and election sure. But, I've come to the conclusion that you and the LDS church are at odds, so either you are 'true' (in other words, you are what you claim to be) or the church is 'true'(it is what it claims to be), but the fact is, you both can't be 'true' (what you claim to be). One of you is false.

Would you like to be more specific regarding the ways you think that I and the church are at odds?

Peace,
Amonhi

Here's some off the top of my head:

Your 'teaching' of how to make your calling and election itself is at odds. LDS don't teach that this is some kind of course you can take or writings you can read to fastract a member into seeing Christ. LDS believe this is something that comes with time, service, commitment, living a purified and sanctified life.

Your belief that once you receive your calling and election, you no longer need to follow the commandments (but can pick and choose what you want to follow), that you've transcended them, that they are for lesser individuals to still have to follow.

Your belief that you don't need to listen to or follow the counsel of church leaders--because you know more than them, because you've seen Christ. You are at odds most definitely in this.

Your perception of some Prophets, such as Brigham Young, is at odds with LDS teachings. You present things as coming from Brigham Young which the church denies.

Your belief that LDS Prophets such as Pres. Monson and our Apostles are not prophets, seers and revelators because (by your assumption) they haven't received their calling and election by seeing Christ. This is at odds as LDS believe they are all prophets, seers and revelators and they may or may not have seen Christ in the flesh (part of your belief that this is a requirement to receive the calling and election) which is at odds with LDS belief. LDS have an ordinance called the second endowment which I expect you reject and I'm certain Pres. Monson and the 12 have received.

If I had the time to search your posts, I'm sure I could find more.


And before you ask me to provide examples, I respectfully decline to. If you want examples, you seem to have the time now--go look at your own posts. I do not have the time to search your posts or give you any more ego strokes and attention.

Amonhi, I'm not sure what kind of person you are, but I like to think that you are simply deluded and not deceptive. I am not a 'hater' of you, but I am very wary of you and what you teach. Even your style of debate makes me wary of you. As George Clay said, you DO 'vomit scriptures' and then you include a bunch of round about thinking that makes a person feel lost in a maze of rhetoric. You also deflect from the actual charges by zeroing in on the weakest arguments of your opponents (yes, you see us as opponents) and the actual crux of what they've said is lost and/or glossed over. That's one reason I usually steer clear of you. I simply don't have the time or the talent for going up against someone with your rhetorical skills.

While you aren't a follower of Snufferism (why would someone who claims to be one of the '144,000' need to follow some other guy), you do teach doctrines which are similar and just as 'at odds' with LDS beliefs as he does(his teachings were at odds as he was exed for apostasy). We've seen many good members of the church lose their way following that man right out of the church. Since I have a testimony that the LDS church IS God's true church, this is a tragedy to me and I'd like to see no more fall away through dissenting away from the truth. I have no ill will toward you, but as long as you teach things that I believe are false, and I read them, then I feel I have just as much right to call you out on it as to praise you as your fans do.

Joseph Smith said this about making ones calling and election sure:

“After a person has faith in Christ, repents of his sins, and is baptized for the remission of his sins and receives the Holy Ghost, (by the laying on of hands), which is the first Comforter, then let him continue to humble himself before God, hungering and thirsting after righteousness, and living by every word of God, and the Lord will soon say unto him, Son, thou shalt be exalted. When the Lord has thoroughly proved him, and finds that the man is determined to serve Him at all hazards, then the man will find his calling and his election made sure.” (Teachings, p. 150.)

This goes along with AI2.0 first point made here. Amonhi seems to be making this sacred experience a race for the swift who want this to happen now. Does the Lord really want us to look at this crowning doctrine based on The Fastest Way.. Pres Packer warned of trying to force spiritual experiences in our lives by our own timetables. He said that Satan thrives on deceiving those who try to force spiritual experiences. Elder Oaks said it this way:

"Next, the Lord declared that if our eye is single to His glory, our whole body will be filled with light and we will be able to comprehend all things. Then, His instruction continued with this great promise: “Therefore, sanctify yourselves that your minds become single to God, and the days will come that you shall see him; for he will unveil his face unto you, and it shall be in his own time, and in his own way, and according to his own will” (verse 68; emphasis added).

The principle stated in that revelation applies to every communication from our Heavenly Father. We cannot force spiritual things."

Yet Amonhi comes on here and brags about the dozens upon dozens of people who he helped to obtain their calling and election be made sure by teaching us all His fastest method. That alone should send red light warning signals to anyone who cares to think this is the way the Lord operates in assuring His children of eternal glory. It is a breeding ground for false spirits to make hay. Frankly This whole situation of some anonymous " prophet" coming on an obscure Internet forum teaching and coaching anonymous people on how the Lord will reward the with exaltation in the fastest possible way is just a joke. Have people just thrown all discernment capabilities overboard? :-ss

[Jeremy]

Nice commentary on a point Mark. Thank you.

Did you ever read the method you are referring to? It seems you have a problem with the title but do you have an issue with the method?

[rewcox]

I'm fortunate, I associate with a congregation of people who have the testimony of Jesus Christ. Except for the youngest, they have been baptized and received the gift of the Holy Ghost by the laying on of hands. Those that lay on the hands have received the Holy Priesthood.

The people strive to live Christ's gospel and help and comfort each other. Some are leaders, both men and women, young and old. They give talks, teach and bear testimony. The Spirit is rich with them.

Some I know well, others a little, yet I know all their names. When they receive callings to serve, I sustain them. I don't chose or vote for them, yet I sustain them. It is a great blessing for me to associate with them.

Some people I know through the internet, most I don't know by name. I enjoy the edification sometimes. Like Jeremy's document on the temple, Finrock's background, a couple Obrien's stories, AI2.0 and iWriteStuff's comments, Sarah, George, Eddie, Mark and shadows faith. Some have interesting and thoughtful comments, like 5tev3, some like politics like larsenb and brianm. Some like visions and prepping like kirtlandrm and kurtthemormon. Some come and go, like beprepared, all leave their mark one way or another.

I know some because of the scriptures. Their stories and sacrifice are amazing. I know some because they continued the restoration and made it possible for me to know the Gospel.

I know One because He made all things possible.

I still don't like Trump.

[Mark]

Nice commentary on a point Mark. Thank you.

Did you ever read the method you are referring to? It seems you have a problem with the title but do you have an issue with the method?

To answer your question brother I do take issue with the method that Amonhi preaches here. It to me is just a form of seeking for instant spiritual gratification. Like AI2.0 described it is trying to fast track oneself into seeing Christ and having ones exaltation guaranteed by our Lord.

This is not consistent with what many Prophets and scripture have testified. Experiencing the baptism of fire and The Holy Ghost thru the sanctification process is the prerequisite step in moving forward in this process. Then when, as Joseph stated, The Lord has thoroughly proved that person to be willing to serve Him AT ALL HAZZARDS the crowning blessing and promise of this assurance of eternal glory comes in the Lords own timetable.

Amonhi's recommended method does not adhere to these principles. To me it More easily opens a person up for deceptive spirits to whisper false revelation to one who has not properly prepared themselves spiritually to receive this glorious promise in their own life .

This is exactly what happened to many who were influenced by the TLC Jim Harmston led movement that false spirits had a party conducting. I know this because I saw it happen and saw people get sucked in based initially on pursuing their calling and election to be made sure. Calling and Election was a number 1 priority for these folks as well and they had a boatload of material on it that they were studying and advocating. Just remember that Satan is the great imitator and will use all kinds of tricks to imitate the real thing. I can tell you that many in the TLC group were having all kinds of spiritual manifestations. They were just not coming from the Lord. :-ss

What Amonhi should be admonishing all to do here is to sanctify themselves by living their sacred baptismal and temple covenants with exactness which will truly purify their hearts and then serve with all their hearts in the 4 fold mission of the church and do all that is necessary to have that new creature in Christ emerge totally from the fallen and natural man self we all struggle with. Those are the necessary initial steps that need our immediate attention.

Instead he advocates setting this magical date and then using a series of questions asking the Lord if this crowning blessing and promise of having ones calling and election made sure has been granted to them. He is putting the cart before the horse if you ask me. To me it is a convuluted misunderstanding of the way the Lord operates. It can lead an unprepared spiritually minded person to trying to force the Lords hand to satisfy ones own eternal spiritual desires which opens them up to hearing alternative voices. I really like what one of Internet buddies laronius stated on Amonhi's fastest way thread when he said:

"When talking about exaltation, we need to remember what exactly exaltation is. Essentially it means "like God." Therefore it is not merely a reward for good behavior but rather a condition we attain to with His help. So in this life we are in the process of becoming like Him. This requires thinking like him, feeling like him and doing what he does and would do in our circumstances. That is why works in addition to faith is so important because it is in living the gospel that we become like God. I think C&E is essentially one step in this process. It's not a reward but rather God saying in essence: "You have progressed sufficiently to enjoy my presence." And isn't that what life is about? So the fastest way to make one's calling and election sure, and I might add the ONLY way, is to live the gospel. That is what it was intended to do after all."

That sure makes a boatload of sense to me. I do not feel the spirit confirming to me that Amonhi's guidelines are proper and correct. In fact just the opposite. Take this as you will. I strongly feel that Amonhi is being guided by false messengers unless he is just playing games here with naive trusting people. Either way it's just off for me. I reject it.