Energy Healing/Denver Snuffer/NDE and apostasy within the church

[Finrock]

If God answered the very second of every beckoning call you made, how much faith would you exercise?

I wanted to address this separate.

I think that we can build our faith to the point where God will give us what we ask, reveal to us when we seek, and open to us when we knock.

There have been men and probably women too who have been given the sealing power. Anything that they ask, God will do, because God knows that they will not ask amiss. This is still possible today. If it isn't happening, it isn't God's fault, its because of a lack of faith and anybody has access to this gift.

Nephi received this gift after exercising faith. So, I'm not talking about not exercising faith. I'm talking about what is available to us as a result of great faith.

-Finrock

[AI2.0]

If you want to, it's OK with me.

It's not about what I want or not want. It's about taking what you posted to its logical conclusion and applying it fairly to every situation.

I'm asking you if you believe that because we can't empirically verify priesthood blessings, should we reject priesthood and God's power to heal?

-Finrock

Once again, you twist 'logic' by comparing things that are not the same. Medical science is verifiable, it has to be, the procedures and treatments have been tested for years before being used on patients. Energy healing is not verifiable through scientific methods, it's not based on science but energy practitioners want to claim their methods work through subjective and unverifiable claims. Priesthood blessings are different from Medical science AND Energy work, they are rooted in the Gospel of Jesus Christ and are reliant on Faith in Christ and the power of God, through the Priesthood of God. How can anyone compare Priesthood to the new age practice of Energy Healing?

Energy healing does not equal Priesthood blessings. Energy healing grew out of Occult practices and beliefs. It is not based in the Gospel of Jesus Christ, energy healers do not need to live worthily to wield this power, they do not need authority from God use it, Energy healing is not reliant on the faith of the individual to be healed--and not all energy healing even acknowledges God. You really cannot compare the two, so why would we judge Priesthood blessings against Energy healing?

A belief in Priesthood blessings is also something not based on science, but it has never been claimed to be. Priesthood power is the power to act in God's name to bless others and is based on principles of righteousness, obedience as well as the faith of the one receiving the blessing. Priesthood blessings are not a 'treatment' and those who give them do not charge money to do so.

One reason your arguments seem to not change is, I believe, that your thinking on this topic has not changed or evolved at all, regardless of the additional information you are provided to help gain a greater, more balanced understanding of it, it seems to have no effect on your opinions.

[AI2.0]

My responses:

As you explained, defining what we mean by healing is important. Butterfly's comments are more round about thinking that muddies spiritual waters and understanding IMO. I don't think any of us would be comfortable making a statement like 'Satan can heal'. Satan can obstruct, he can destroy, belittle, damage, etc, and he can deceive. Satan has no interest in doing any good, but there's no question that he can imitate what seems to be good. He inspires people to set up churches, supposedly to worship God, but they are to draw people away from God.
I wonder about that. I have read many people who have set up churches because they felt called to do it, obviously doing much good to bring others closer to God. No doubt some have done so for priestcraft or other reasons, and yes, a few led by evil spirits.

The Lord said that our church is the 'only true and living church on the earth', so if someone sets up another one, that's wrong.
It's wrong to set up a competing church to the Lord's church, regardless of good intentions.

He inspires people to pursue things that might look good on the outside, but in fact, will destroy them morally or spiritually. So, I think we need to avoid limiting what we think Satan is capable of, if we do, we run the risk of being deceived by him, because we underestimate him. If we try to concentrate our thoughts into a simple statement like; 'Satan can't heal', then we come to the erroneous conclusion that all the 'healings' we observe come from God, since Satan isn't capable of doing that. If we trust this logic, we will be wrong. We know that Revelation warns us that the Anti christ will perform great miracles. Are these miracles all going to be evil things? Of course not, they will look wondrous and appealing, they will imitate 'good' because while many people are foolish, they aren't all idiots-- who in their right mind wants to worship a being that only makes them miserable with his miracles and wonders? He will seem like a Savior and will use his power to impress and gain followers. Satan is the great imitator, he has power, he gives 'gifts' too...we must be discerning.
Good points, also.

Elder Hales spoke about the gifts of the spirit and reminded us that they can be imitated by Satan. In this talk, he gives wise counsel for those seeking to be healed and how they ought to be careful and discerning: I think those seeking healing through Energy practitioners should consider his advice--that is, if they are mainstream, active LDS. If they no longer believe or have joined a break off sect, they probably won't care what Elder Hales had to say on the subject and maybe that's why Energy Healing was seen as a sort of gate way drug to Denver Snuffer. If a person is listening to other 'voices', they are in danger of being deceived by false spirits and they will also put themselves in danger falling for practices which are imitations of God's true power.


https://www.lds.org/ensign/2002/02/gift ... t?lang=eng

I see that Elder Hales is talking about anointing with oil, prescribed ordinances, using the HG or priesthood. I don't understand what he means.

He means the proper way to give blessings; two priesthood holders, one anoints with consecrated oil, one seals and pronounces the blessing, using Melchizedek priesthood and through the Holy ghost. Elder Hales would think it inappropriate to give a blessing in any other way, if this is available.

And it goes back to the problem of doctors et. al., who also do not perform in the way that Elder Hales describes. If you want to condemn EH with this, you must also condemn any other "healers", including doctors et. al. Modern medicine doesn't have it's origins in the Occult. Modern medicine NEVER uses God's/Christ's power or faith to heal, so why would we condemn Medical doctors? They aren't practicing or using any of the methods Energy healers use. Modern medicine has little in common with Energy healing, it has nothing in common when we consider what is condemned in Energy healing.

I still don't see why the double standard and special pleading for "Western", "scientific", "accepted" healings being perfectly fine, but EH not. Could anyone give a thoughtful, clear response on this?

I will try.
A medical doctor is licensed and practices medical science. They attend years of school, training, residency, etc. sometimes specializing. This can mean almost 20 years of schooling for some specialties. They spend 100's of thousands of dollars for this training. They learn surgery, prescribing medicines, blood work,
urinalysis, how to recognize pathogens, diseases, illnesses, they learn to set fractures, perform surgeries, xrays, sonograms, etc. Their practices have been created through trial and error over time as they've learned how to treat the human body. In none of their teaching do they ascribe their work and training to God or to Christ. They are not practicing priestcraft, they don't suggest that they heal through the power of God or Christ--they would have to do this to be guilty of priestcraft.

Energy healing is not science based. It costs a pittance to learn compared to medical school. The results of treatments can't be measured and are not obvious. If the patient says they feel better, then it's considered a cure. An energy healer who does not claim to use God's or Christ's power or their faith to heal is not practicing priestcraft, they are simply practicing something that is New Age or occult based--because that's what Energy healing grew out of. For LDS members, this is something we are told to avoid, but not everyone listens to these warnings. The reason for the warning is that we believe New Age and Occult practices were not inspired by God, but are an imitation, therefore they can bring false and lying influences into our lives--but people are free to ignore this warning.

Where energy healing crosses a line into real condemnation, is when it becomes priestcraft--Not all energy healers practice priestcraft. It is priestcraft when the Energy practitioner claims that their power comes from God/Christ or faith and THEY CHARGE MONEY TO use this power. If an energy healer says that their power comes from the techniques they've learned about energy and say nothing of God/Christ then I'd say that's not priestcraft. It may be suspect because of it's origins and whether or not it even works, but it wouldn't be priestcraft.

You sound like you are praising the fact that modern medicine requires training, and schooling, and that it rejects God, Christ, and all but empirically verifiable data/evidence. But, did you know that modern western medicine has its roots in the supernatural, the occult, and other esoteric and mystical traditions? Modern Medicine is NOT based in the supernatural or the occult. You are thinking of the non Modern types of medicine which was practiced for centuries and had little to do with Modern medicine other than it was called 'medicine'. This kind of medicine had no influence over Modern Medical science.Indeed, what you see today in modern western medicine "grew out of" what you would consider occult practices and the belief in supernatural powers. It wasn't until the 18th century where doctors began to be more "scientific". The real changes came in the 19th century and the colleges of medicine that are the origins of Modern medical science. Modern medicine has nothing to do with the occult or supernatural beliefs. Modern medicine is based on the sciences-- chemistry, physics, anatomy physiology, biology, endocrinology, genetics etc.

Also, priestcraft is not just limited to claiming you are healing through the power of Christ. Priestcraft as defined by Mormons is "men preaching and setting themselves up for a light to the world that they may get gain and praise of the world; they do not seek the welfare of Zion".When do medical doctors 'preach' ? Unless they are attempting to gain a religious following, they don't, so this is irrelevant to your claims against Medical doctors. By your own admission doctors are not seeking the welfare of Zion. But they aren't 'preaching' either. Did you miss that word? How can they if they don't acknowledge God and Christ in all things? How many doctors do their craft for free? In general, how are doctors treated in our society?We're back to this argument again? This is getting tiresome.
A medical doctor is not guilty of priestcraft, period. Only someone with a misunderstanding of priestcraft would make such an accusation. Why is it that I often feel like I'm talking to no one.
A medical doctor is NOT guilty of priestcraft because he doesn't give praise to god and he doesn't treat his patients for free, and he's not expected to 'give praise to God' just as we don't expect a drywall hanger or an accountant to 'give praise to god' in their career. He isn't guilty of priestcraft if he enjoys success and praise for his skills, just as the drywall hanger or accountant who are good at what they do. A medical doctor doesn't claim to use the power of god to heal. I will say it again. A MEDICAL DOCTOR DOES NOT CLAIM TO USE THE POWER OF GOD TO HEAL. That's a requirement for it to be priestcraft, and it's not present.

If an Energy healer or a faith healer, or any other person CLAIMS TO USE THE POWER OF GOD TO HEAL AND THEY CHARGE MONEY FOR THIS SERVICE, that's the textbook definition of Priestcraft.

-Finrock

[AI2.0]

If God answered the very second of every beckoning call you made, how much faith would you exercise?

I wanted to address this separate.

I think that we can build our faith to the point where God will give us what we ask, reveal to us when we seek, and open to us when we knock.

There have been men and probably women too who have been given the sealing power. Anything that they ask, God will do, because God knows that they will not ask amiss. This is still possible today. If it isn't happening, it isn't God's fault, its because of a lack of faith and anybody has access to this gift.

Nephi received this gift after exercising faith. So, I'm not talking about not exercising faith. I'm talking about what is available to us as a result of great faith.

-Finrock

The sealing power is not something given to just anyone, it is associated with the position of a prophet. Nephi was given this power because he was the Lord's prophet. The sealing power is not given out to the general population and I can't think of a time when it might have been given to a woman. One does not need to have the 'sealing power' to have God give them the righteous things they ask for in their prayers--that comes when we get to the point that we only ask in righteousness and we understand the mind of God and would not ask for something which is amiss.

[AI2.0]

Also, priestcraft is not just limited to claiming you are healing through the power of Christ. Priestcraft as defined by Mormons is "men preaching and setting themselves up for a light to the world that they may get gain and praise of the world; they do not seek the welfare of Zion". By your own admission doctors are not seeking the welfare of Zion. How can they if they don't acknowledge God and Christ in all things? How many doctors do their craft for free? In general, how are doctors treated in our society?

-Finrock

Good points - some I agree with. God (& his miraculous creation of our bodies) does the healing and the doctor gets paid for it.

Still, doctors are not up preaching that they're doing this all for and through God. Doctors study science, not religion. If they began practicing based on religion, they could lose clients, get sued etc.

I think one key element of healing, and why I don't believe in charging for spiritual powers, is also because healing and spiritual experiences don't work like science. You can't set up a control group/scientific method and demand the spirit work FOR you every time the same way. The spirit doesn't work like that - at least not good spirits. The spirit works by God's timing and ways, NOT ours. That doesn't mean divination tools (scriptures, temple rituals, various healing art tools) are useless - they can help us, but they can't be counted on to work every time. It's a reminder that we are not in control - God is. The moment someone tries to CONTROL the spirit - is when they lose it. Similarly, I believe that when people try to summon spirits - maybe loved one's who died - they attract negative spirits who seek to control... On the other hand, I believe that God and others on the other side of the veil will communicate with us when it's good and right to - but again, it seems to be on God's timing, not ours.

They may not be "preaching" that God is doing all of this, but "preaching" isn't limited to just preaching religion. They preach their craft and they preach in support of their craft.

-Finrock

This is a fallacy. They are not guilty of 'preaching' any more than anyone with a trade or a skill or career. Would you say a Piano teacher is preaching her craft if she advertises for students? Is an accountant or a Pharmacist or a teacher 'preaching' their craft?

You are so insistent to try and make your point, you've completely missed what priestcraft actually is.

[DesertWonderer]

If you want to, it's OK with me.

Wow, DW, you have your own thought to share instead of trolling with other people's stuff. ;)

If I posted scriptures decrying this practice, would I be trolling too? After all it is other people's stuff.

[JohnnyL]

If you want to, it's OK with me.

Wow, DW, you have your own thought to share instead of trolling with other people's stuff. ;)

If I posted scriptures decrying this practice, would I be trolling too? After all it is other people's stuff.

If they were actually pertinent to the discussion, no.

[simpleton]

Well according to Joseph even the doctors are crafters..
:((
I am like a huge, rough stone rolling down from a high mountain; and the only polishing I get is when some corner gets rubbed off by coming in contact with something else, striking with accelerated force against religious bigotry, priestcraft, lawyer-craft, doctor-craft, lying editors, suborned judges and jurors, and the authority of perjured executives, backed by mobs, blasphemers, licentious and corrupt men and women—all hell knocking off a corner here and a corner there. Thus I will become a smooth and polished shaft in the quiver of the Almighty, who will give me dominion over all and every one of them, when their refuge of lies shall fail, and their hiding place shall be destroyed, while these smooth-polished stones with which I come in contact become marred.

[JohnnyL]

They may not be "preaching" that God is doing all of this, but "preaching" isn't limited to just preaching religion. They preach their craft and they preach in support of their craft.

I don't know about that, Finrock.
If you applied that reasoning universally, it would mean that everyone who does any work is engaged in priest-craft because they're claiming they can do their craft for money.
Were the same standard used for EH be applied to other professions, yes. Luckily, though, there IS a convenient double standard, so you are ok with making money! :ymsigh:

Priestcraft is unique because it is essentially using God, the temple, or God's powers to make money. Or as in the case of most healing arts (most of which work via placebo effect), they are making false claims as well as trying to use spirituality to make money.
Where in the scriptures, according to your definition, do you see priestcraft using the temple or God's power to make money?
"Most of which work via placebo effect"--reference, please. Or is that your... um... personal opinion? ;)
"Making false claims"--?
"Trying to use spirituality to make money"--?


I suppose, this can get tricky... I mean, personally, I LOVE psych-ology (study of the soul) - I see it as an essential, but often neglected, aspect of spirituality. I studied it for a while, but couldn't bring myself to pursue it further because it seems wrong to charge money for being a friend, as it seems is often the case, and who is one imperfect person to tell another imperfect person how to live? Still, they study various counseling and therapeutic ways and apply it both scientifically and creatively - and help a lot of people. But as Carl Jung said, really, they're just facilitating healing - the patient heals him/herself. Nobody can emotionally or spiritually progress for another person.
So, they are the same as EH, but luckily--since they are doing it scientifically--they win the prize of a double standard! :ymparty: :ymparty:

And I guess that's another aspect of this topic... spiritual healing is like praying - it's deeply personal. I believe that people come into our lives at the right time to teach us certain things, that inspire more opportunities to heal - and it's FREE!!!
And when I need physical healing, I can get a priesthood blessing--and it's FREE!!!

Though there may be a few charges of hurt feelings and trying to overcome unrealistic expectations, but the people themselves don't charge a penny!

Let me ask, what is your definition of "spiritual healing"?

[Sarah]

They may not be "preaching" that God is doing all of this, but "preaching" isn't limited to just preaching religion. They preach their craft and they preach in support of their craft.

I don't know about that, Finrock.
If you applied that reasoning universally, it would mean that everyone who does any work is engaged in priest-craft because they're claiming they can do their craft for money.
Were the same standard used for EH be applied to other professions, yes. Luckily, though, there IS a convenient double standard, so you are ok with making money! :ymsigh:

Priestcraft is unique because it is essentially using God, the temple, or God's powers to make money. Or as in the case of most healing arts (most of which work via placebo effect), they are making false claims as well as trying to use spirituality to make money.
Where in the scriptures, according to your definition, do you see priestcraft using the temple or God's power to make money?
"Most of which work via placebo effect"--reference, please. Or is that your... um... personal opinion? ;)
"Making false claims"--?
"Trying to use spirituality to make money"--?


I suppose, this can get tricky... I mean, personally, I LOVE psych-ology (study of the soul) - I see it as an essential, but often neglected, aspect of spirituality. I studied it for a while, but couldn't bring myself to pursue it further because it seems wrong to charge money for being a friend, as it seems is often the case, and who is one imperfect person to tell another imperfect person how to live? Still, they study various counseling and therapeutic ways and apply it both scientifically and creatively - and help a lot of people. But as Carl Jung said, really, they're just facilitating healing - the patient heals him/herself. Nobody can emotionally or spiritually progress for another person.
So, they are the same as EH, but luckily--since they are doing it scientifically--they win the prize of a double standard! :ymparty: :ymparty:

And I guess that's another aspect of this topic... spiritual healing is like praying - it's deeply personal. I believe that people come into our lives at the right time to teach us certain things, that inspire more opportunities to heal - and it's FREE!!!
And when I need physical healing, I can get a priesthood blessing--and it's FREE!!!

Though there may be a few charges of hurt feelings and trying to overcome unrealistic expectations, but the people themselves don't charge a penny!

Let me ask, what is your definition of "spiritual healing"?

Maybe it would help if you explained exactly what you do and which forms of "Energy Healing" you think are okay and which are not. What is involved in some of the techniques?

[Finrock]

If God answered the very second of every beckoning call you made, how much faith would you exercise?

I wanted to address this separate.

I think that we can build our faith to the point where God will give us what we ask, reveal to us when we seek, and open to us when we knock.

There have been men and probably women too who have been given the sealing power. Anything that they ask, God will do, because God knows that they will not ask amiss. This is still possible today. If it isn't happening, it isn't God's fault, its because of a lack of faith and anybody has access to this gift.

Nephi received this gift after exercising faith. So, I'm not talking about not exercising faith. I'm talking about what is available to us as a result of great faith.

-Finrock

The sealing power is not something given to just anyone, it is associated with the position of a prophet. Nephi was given this power because he was the Lord's prophet. The sealing power is not given out to the general population and I can't think of a time when it might have been given to a woman. One does not need to have the 'sealing power' to have God give them the righteous things they ask for in their prayers--that comes when we get to the point that we only ask in righteousness and we understand the mind of God and would not ask for something which is amiss.

I agree, the sealing power is not something given to just anyone and you will almost certainly be a prophet before you receive this gift, although receiving the sealing power is not a result of a position. Further, a prophet is not an office or a position in the priesthood.

Nephi was given the sealing power on an account of his faith, not on account of him being in a particular priesthood office. Nobody receives power from God on account of being ordained to an office of the priesthood.

God is no respecter of persons. It may be true that God doesn't give out the sealing power to the general population, but its not because the general population doesn't have access to it or because they aren't in the right class or because they don't have a special office. Sealing power and all of God's power is received through faith and through the principles of righteousness, as you yourself acknowledge. If the general population exercised faith and were exercising the principles of righteousness, they too can obtain sealing power. All have access to all of God's gifts. Nothing is holding us back except our faith, which is of course tied to our righteousness.

There is no recorded time that I'm aware of where a woman received the sealing power. That is why I said "probably women too". What I'm teaching here is that God is no respector of persons and that priesthood power can be accessed and used by women. I see no doctrinal or scriptural reason to exclude women from having the sealing power, outside of traditions, speculations, and certain paradigms.

You are essentially saying the same thing I just said in your last sentence, but by trying to be contrary you missed my point. As I said, we can build our faith to the point where God will give us what we ask for, reveal when we seek, and open when we knock. The idea is that most often if we don't see miracles in our life or if the priesthood is "not working for us" it isn't because God doesn't want to heal us or because it isn't the right time, its because we lack faith. Nephi is an example of a person who could receive anything he asked of God, apparently immediately, on account of his faith. Since God is no respector of persons and because God is the same yesterday, today, and forever, we can count on the fact that we have access to the same conditions, gifts, and powers if we emulate the Nephis in the scriptures in our faith.

-Finrock

[Finrock]

If you want to, it's OK with me.

It's not about what I want or not want. It's about taking what you posted to its logical conclusion and applying it fairly to every situation.

I'm asking you if you believe that because we can't empirically verify priesthood blessings, should we reject priesthood and God's power to heal?

-Finrock

Once again, you twist 'logic' by comparing things that are not the same. Medical science is verifiable, it has to be, the procedures and treatments have been tested for years before being used on patients. Energy healing is not verifiable through scientific methods, it's not based on science but energy practitioners want to claim their methods work through subjective and unverifiable claims. Priesthood blessings are different from Medical science AND Energy work, they are rooted in the Gospel of Jesus Christ and are reliant on Faith in Christ and the power of God, through the Priesthood of God. How can anyone compare Priesthood to the new age practice of Energy Healing?

Energy healing does not equal Priesthood blessings. Energy healing grew out of Occult practices and beliefs. It is not based in the Gospel of Jesus Christ, energy healers do not need to live worthily to wield this power, they do not need authority from God use it, Energy healing is not reliant on the faith of the individual to be healed--and not all energy healing even acknowledges God. You really cannot compare the two, so why would we judge Priesthood blessings against Energy healing?

A belief in Priesthood blessings is also something not based on science, but it has never been claimed to be. Priesthood power is the power to act in God's name to bless others and is based on principles of righteousness, obedience as well as the faith of the one receiving the blessing. Priesthood blessings are not a 'treatment' and those who give them do not charge money to do so.

One reason your arguments seem to not change is, I believe, that your thinking on this topic has not changed or evolved at all, regardless of the additional information you are provided to help gain a greater, more balanced understanding of it, it seems to have no effect on your opinions.

You assert that I am twisting logic, but that is all that it is...an assertion. Do you understand what my point is? From what you are saying you seem to be missing the point that I'm making. What you are saying and the differences you point out are immaterial to my point. I'm not trying to say that priesthood is energy healing or that EH is priesthood or that either is science in my responses to DesertWonderer.

Science says that any such thing as "priesthood power" is a figment of a person's imagination, placebo, or wishful thinking, and that it has no basis in science. Science does not recognize the existence of God thus they do not recognize the existence of God's power. Science would say that priesthood blessings can't be empirically verified. They would say that it is mythology. Because science says this about priesthood or God's power, should we deny God's power?

Science says that Energy healing is pseudoscience. Science says that EH is a result of placebo, wishful thinking, or a person's imagination and that it has no basis in real science. Science does not recognize the claims of EH. Science says that EH can't be empirically verified. They would say it is just a con. Because science says this about EH should we deny EH?

-Finrock

[Finrock]

Also, priestcraft is not just limited to claiming you are healing through the power of Christ. Priestcraft as defined by Mormons is "men preaching and setting themselves up for a light to the world that they may get gain and praise of the world; they do not seek the welfare of Zion". By your own admission doctors are not seeking the welfare of Zion. How can they if they don't acknowledge God and Christ in all things? How many doctors do their craft for free? In general, how are doctors treated in our society?

-Finrock

Good points - some I agree with. God (& his miraculous creation of our bodies) does the healing and the doctor gets paid for it.

Still, doctors are not up preaching that they're doing this all for and through God. Doctors study science, not religion. If they began practicing based on religion, they could lose clients, get sued etc.

I think one key element of healing, and why I don't believe in charging for spiritual powers, is also because healing and spiritual experiences don't work like science. You can't set up a control group/scientific method and demand the spirit work FOR you every time the same way. The spirit doesn't work like that - at least not good spirits. The spirit works by God's timing and ways, NOT ours. That doesn't mean divination tools (scriptures, temple rituals, various healing art tools) are useless - they can help us, but they can't be counted on to work every time. It's a reminder that we are not in control - God is. The moment someone tries to CONTROL the spirit - is when they lose it. Similarly, I believe that when people try to summon spirits - maybe loved one's who died - they attract negative spirits who seek to control... On the other hand, I believe that God and others on the other side of the veil will communicate with us when it's good and right to - but again, it seems to be on God's timing, not ours.

They may not be "preaching" that God is doing all of this, but "preaching" isn't limited to just preaching religion. They preach their craft and they preach in support of their craft.

-Finrock

This is a fallacy. They are not guilty of 'preaching' any more than anyone with a trade or a skill or career. Would you say a Piano teacher is preaching her craft if she advertises for students? Is an accountant or a Pharmacist or a teacher 'preaching' their craft?

You are so insistent to try and make your point, you've completely missed what priestcraft actually is.

Here is something you may or may not recognize; I am familiar with your paradigm. I've lived it, been there, and done that. So, I've considered your definition and understanding of priestcraft.

What I'm suggesting is that the idea behind "priestcraft" extends beyond just someone "preaching religion for money." If you take the definition given of "priestcraft" on lds.org it is inclusive of more than just religious things. But, not only that, the idea of priestcraft is at its core where a person tries to set themselves up as a light unto the world and to get a profit using the craft of their choice. The Babylonian system is one of making money using your craft, seeking praise, status, wealth, and power through the use of your intellect and your power. It does not recognize God. Those who practice priestcraft, in the sense of preaching God for money, don't have to really believe in God and often they really don't. They are just taking advantage of people's belief systems. My point is that the whole idea behind priestcraft is that you neglect the power of God and you are not seeking after the welfare of Zion.

The reality is that all skills, talents, gifts...everything...comes from God and is because of God. This is true even if someone doesn't recognize and/or acknowledge this. What is and what ought to be are vastly different right now, but we can still speak to what ought to be. I am speaking to what ought to be. What ought to be the case is that people should recognize where they received their talents/skills/gifts from and they ought to be using these things to bring about God's purposes. Of course this should be done by people's own free will and choice, but in a Zion society you will not find people who are preaching their craft, setting themselves up as a light unto the world, and attempting to gain wealth, status, and power. What you will find in a Zion society are doctors, for instance, who treat others because they love others and not for any profit (because money will be irrelevant in such a society). You find a family of individuals who use their craft, their skills, their power to uplift, to help, to build up, and to support one another.

-Finrock

[JohnnyL]

Had some fun! How fitting these are...

Helaman 13:26 Behold ye are worse than they; for as the Lord liveth, if a {pro-EH} come among you and declareth unto you {a different paradigm}, ye are angry with him, and cast him out and seek all manner of ways to destroy him; yea, you will say that he is a false prophet, and that he is a sinner, and of the devil, because he testifieth that your {beliefs} are evil.

Helaman 16:6 But the more part of them did not believe in the words of {the pro-EH}; they cried unto their captains, saying: Take this fellow and bind him, for behold he hath a devil; and because of the power of the devil which is in him {he can heal}; therefore take him and bind him, and away with him.

Helaman 16:20 But behold, we know that this is a wicked tradition, to cause us that we should believe in some great and marvelous thing which should come to pass, but not {supported by the Church of Science or the Church of Western Medicine}, but in a {place} which is far distant {than our beliefs}, a land which we know not; therefore they can keep us in ignorance, for we cannot witness with our own eyes {and cannot read in a science journal} that {EH} is true.
21 And they will, by the cunning and the mysterious arts of the evil one, work some great mystery which we cannot understand, which will keep us down to be servants to their words, and also servants unto them, for we depend upon them to teach us the word; and thus will they keep us in ignorance if we will yield ourselves unto them, all the days of our lives, {for we cannot do EH ourselves}.
22 And many more things did the people imagine up in their hearts, which were foolish and vain; and they were much disturbed, for Satan did stir them up to do iniquity continually; yea, he did go about spreading rumors and contentions upon all the face of the land, that he might harden the hearts of the people against that which was good and against that which should come.

Huh? Twisting words, missing points, etc.:
Alma 10:28 And now it came to pass that when Amulek had spoken these words the people cried out against him, saying: Now we know that this man is a child of the devil, for he hath lied unto us; for he hath spoken against our law. And now he says that he has not spoken against it.

Beware you speak in favor of an EH:
Alma 14:7 And it came to pass that he began to cry unto the people, saying: Behold, I am guilty, and these men are spotless before God. And he began to plead for them from that time forth; but they reviled him, saying: Art thou also possessed with the devil? And they spit upon him, and cast him out from among them, and also all those who believed in the words which had been spoken by {the EH}; and they cast them out, and sent men to cast stones at them.

Alma 15:15 But as to the people that were in the land of Ammonihah, they yet remained a hard-hearted and a stiffnecked people; and they repented not of their sins, ascribing all the power of {the EH} to the devil; for they were of the profession of {The Church of Science and rigid belief in additional dogma to the CoJCoLdS}, and did not believe {they needed to repent}.

3 Nephi 2:2 Imagining up some vain thing in their hearts, that it was wrought by men and by the power of the devil, to lead away and deceive the hearts of the people; and thus did Satan get possession of the hearts of the people again, insomuch that he did blind their eyes and lead them away to believe that {EH} was a foolish and a vain thing.

3 Ne. 14:22 Many {con-EH} will say to me in that day: Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name, and in thy name have cast out devils, and in thy name done many wonderful works {correcting the pro-EH}?

///
Do false churches that are built up to glorify God fit in here? No, they don't.

1 Ne. 22:22 And the righteous need not fear, for they are those who shall not be confounded. But it is the kingdom of the devil, which shall be built up among the children of men, which kingdom is established among them which are in the flesh—
23 For the time speedily shall come that all churches which are built up to get gain, and all those who are built up to get power over the flesh, and those who are built up to become popular in the eyes of the world, and those who seek the lusts of the flesh and the things of the world, and to do all manner of iniquity; yea, in fine, all those who belong to the kingdom of the devil are they who need fear, and tremble, and quake; they are those who must be brought low in the dust; they are those who must be consumed as stubble; and this is according to the words of the prophet.

///
Do the men around you believe? Then they are doing this, right?:

1 Ne. 11:31 And he spake unto me again, saying: Look! And I looked, and I beheld the Lamb of God going forth among the children of men. And I beheld multitudes of people who were sick, and who were afflicted with all manner of diseases, and with devils and unclean spirits; and the angel spake and showed all these things unto me. And they were healed by the power of the Lamb of God; and the devils and the unclean spirits were cast out.

Morm. 9:24 And these signs shall follow them that believe—in my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues; they shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick and they shall recover;

[AI2.0]

If God answered the very second of every beckoning call you made, how much faith would you exercise?

I wanted to address this separate.

I think that we can build our faith to the point where God will give us what we ask, reveal to us when we seek, and open to us when we knock.

There have been men and probably women too who have been given the sealing power. Anything that they ask, God will do, because God knows that they will not ask amiss. This is still possible today. If it isn't happening, it isn't God's fault, its because of a lack of faith and anybody has access to this gift.

Nephi received this gift after exercising faith. So, I'm not talking about not exercising faith. I'm talking about what is available to us as a result of great faith.

-Finrock

The sealing power is not something given to just anyone, it is associated with the position of a prophet. Nephi was given this power because he was the Lord's prophet. The sealing power is not given out to the general population and I can't think of a time when it might have been given to a woman. One does not need to have the 'sealing power' to have God give them the righteous things they ask for in their prayers--that comes when we get to the point that we only ask in righteousness and we understand the mind of God and would not ask for something which is amiss.

I agree, the sealing power is not something given to just anyone and you will almost certainly be a prophet before you receive this gift, although receiving the sealing power is not a result of a position. Further, a prophet is not an office or a position in the priesthood.

Nephi was given the sealing power on an account of his faith, not on account of him being in a particular priesthood office. Nobody receives power from God on account of being ordained to an office of the priesthood.

God is no respecter of persons. It may be true that God doesn't give out the sealing power to the general population, but its not because the general population doesn't have access to it or because they aren't in the right class or because they don't have a special office. Sealing power and all of God's power is received through faith and through the principles of righteousness, as you yourself acknowledge. If the general population exercised faith and were exercising the principles of righteousness, they too can obtain sealing power. All have access to all of God's gifts. Nothing is holding us back except our faith, which is of course tied to our righteousness.

There is no recorded time that I'm aware of where a woman received the sealing power. That is why I said "probably women too". What I'm teaching here is that God is no respector of persons and that priesthood power can be accessed and used by women. I see no doctrinal or scriptural reason to exclude women from having the sealing power, outside of traditions, speculations, and certain paradigms.

You are essentially saying the same thing I just said in your last sentence, but by trying to be contrary you missed my point. As I said, we can build our faith to the point where God will give us what we ask for, reveal when we seek, and open when we knock. The idea is that most often if we don't see miracles in our life or if the priesthood is "not working for us" it isn't because God doesn't want to heal us or because it isn't the right time, its because we lack faith. Nephi is an example of a person who could receive anything he asked of God, apparently immediately, on account of his faith. Since God is no respector of persons and because God is the same yesterday, today, and forever, we can count on the fact that we have access to the same conditions, gifts, and powers if we emulate the Nephis in the scriptures in our faith.

-Finrock

We learn about the sealing power from revealed LDS doctrine, so, rather than speculating on what you or I think it is, lets look at it from the LDS doctrinal point of view.

By the time Elijah appeared in the Kirtland Temple on 3 April 1836, Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery had already received the Melchizedek Priesthood under the hands of Peter, James, and John (May–June 1829); however, they yet lacked essential keys to that priesthood. President Joseph Fielding Smith explained the power and authority Elijah came to restore:

“The keys that Elijah held were the keys of the everlasting priesthood, the keys of the sealing power, which the Lord gave unto him. And that is what he … gave to the Prophet Joseph Smith; and that included a ministry of sealing for the living as well as the dead—and it is not confined to the living and it is not confined to the dead, but includes them both. …

“Elijah’s mission was the sealing power. He held the keys by which the parents could be sealed together and children sealed to parents. He bestowed these keys upon the Prophet Joseph Smith. And that applies to the dead as well as the living since the coming of the Lord Jesus Christ.

“But what was the nature of his mission to the earth in these latter days? It was to restore power and authority which once was given to men on the earth and which is essential to the complete salvation and exaltation of man in the kingdom of God. In other words, Elijah came to restore to the earth, by conferring on mortal prophets duly commissioned of the Lord, the fulness of the power of priesthood. This priesthood holds the keys of binding and sealing on earth and in heaven of all the ordinances and principles pertaining to the salvation of man, that they may thus become valid in the celestial kingdom of God.” (Doctrines of Salvation, 2:111–12, 117.)

D&C 2:1. Why Was Elijah the One Chosen to Restore the Sealing Powers of the Priesthood?

According to President Joseph Fielding Smith, an understanding of the central role of Elijah comes from an understanding of his role when he lived on this earth.

“It has been a mystery to many members of the Church why this important mission was reserved for Elijah and why these authorities could not have been bestowed by some other prophet, or prophets, presumably Peter, James, and John, who held the keys of authority in the days of the dispensation of the meridian of time. Without question Peter, James, and John could have bestowed this authority, if they had been commissioned; so could Adam, for he held the keys of all the dispensations. The reason why Elijah was reserved for this mission, according to the Prophet Joseph Smith, was that:

“‘Elijah was the last prophet that held the keys of the priesthood, and who will, before the last dispensation, restore the authority and deliver the keys of the priesthood, in order that all the ordinances may be attended to in righteousness. It is true the Savior had authority and power to bestow this blessing; but the sons of Levi were too prejudiced. … Why send Elijah? Because he holds the keys of the authority to administer in all the ordinances of the priesthood; and without the authority is given, the ordinances could not be administered in righteousness.’”.......


D&C 2:3. Why Would the Earth Be Cursed and Utterly Wasted If the Sealing Powers Had Not Been Restored?

Ratification in heaven is given to all ordinances of the gospel through the sealing powers of the priesthood. This sealing power makes possible the welding together of fathers and children, a work essential for exaltation to the living and the dead (see D&C 128:18). The curse spoken of by Malachi is clarified by Moroni, who explained that “the whole earth would be utterly wasted” at the Lord’s coming if the sealing powers were not restored. President Joseph Fielding Smith explained why: “The sealing power of Elijah makes it possible for this joining of the families, generation to generation, back to the beginning. Now, if these units of authority were not here, then the work of sealing, by which the family units are preserved, could not be performed; then the binding power by which all blessings are sealed in heaven, as well as on earth, would be lacking. If this were so, the earth would be smitten with a curse, for all work which had been done, without these binding or sealing ordinances, would fall to the ground unfulfilled.” (Doctrines of Salvation, 2:121–22.)

https://www.lds.org/manual/doctrine-and ... s?lang=eng

The sealing power is the power to bind in heaven and on earth. Both Elijah and Nephi used the sealing power to control the elements. It was necessary for them to have this power because they were the Lord's prophets who the people looked to for God's guidance. Because of the circumstances of serving as Prophet when the people became wicked and forgot their God, Both prophets needed to used this power to bring the people to repentance.

Elijah also restored the sealing power to Joseph Smith Jr., the Prophet of the Restoration, which was necessary to bind the hearts of the children to the fathers in doing the work of the temple in sealing families, in preparation for the Second coming of the Savior.

This is what the Sealing power is. Where this definition agrees with your thoughts on the subject, I agree.

[AI2.0]

Well according to Joseph even the doctors are crafters..
:((
I am like a huge, rough stone rolling down from a high mountain; and the only polishing I get is when some corner gets rubbed off by coming in contact with something else, striking with accelerated force against religious bigotry, priestcraft, lawyer-craft, doctor-craft, lying editors, suborned judges and jurors, and the authority of perjured executives, backed by mobs, blasphemers, licentious and corrupt men and women—all hell knocking off a corner here and a corner there. Thus I will become a smooth and polished shaft in the quiver of the Almighty, who will give me dominion over all and every one of them, when their refuge of lies shall fail, and their hiding place shall be destroyed, while these smooth-polished stones with which I come in contact become marred.

The majority of Doctors in Joseph Smith's time, did not practice what we call modern medicine, as it was in it's infancy, however, Dr. Smith, who operated on Joseph's leg and managed to save it and him, was one of the early practitioners of modern medical science. Do you really think that Joseph was so ungrateful as to attack ALL Doctors, even the one who saved his life and limb as well? Of course not, Joseph was not ungrateful or foolish.

As for the doctors, Joseph WAS calling out the quacks and the charlatans, the snake oil salesmen and the deceivers. Yes, he would have called out those who pretended to be treating desperately ill people with fake medicines and made up treatments which did nothing for the patient (that was the better outcome, sometimes their treatments made them worse, even killing at times) but served to make the practitioners money.

Joseph was not calling out ALL lawyers, doctors, editors, judges, jurors etc. He was calling out the wicked ones, which I have no problem with today either.

[AI2.0]

If you want to, it's OK with me.

It's not about what I want or not want. It's about taking what you posted to its logical conclusion and applying it fairly to every situation.

I'm asking you if you believe that because we can't empirically verify priesthood blessings, should we reject priesthood and God's power to heal?

-Finrock

Once again, you twist 'logic' by comparing things that are not the same. Medical science is verifiable, it has to be, the procedures and treatments have been tested for years before being used on patients. Energy healing is not verifiable through scientific methods, it's not based on science but energy practitioners want to claim their methods work through subjective and unverifiable claims. Priesthood blessings are different from Medical science AND Energy work, they are rooted in the Gospel of Jesus Christ and are reliant on Faith in Christ and the power of God, through the Priesthood of God. How can anyone compare Priesthood to the new age practice of Energy Healing?

Energy healing does not equal Priesthood blessings. Energy healing grew out of Occult practices and beliefs. It is not based in the Gospel of Jesus Christ, energy healers do not need to live worthily to wield this power, they do not need authority from God use it, Energy healing is not reliant on the faith of the individual to be healed--and not all energy healing even acknowledges God. You really cannot compare the two, so why would we judge Priesthood blessings against Energy healing?

A belief in Priesthood blessings is also something not based on science, but it has never been claimed to be. Priesthood power is the power to act in God's name to bless others and is based on principles of righteousness, obedience as well as the faith of the one receiving the blessing. Priesthood blessings are not a 'treatment' and those who give them do not charge money to do so.

One reason your arguments seem to not change is, I believe, that your thinking on this topic has not changed or evolved at all, regardless of the additional information you are provided to help gain a greater, more balanced understanding of it, it seems to have no effect on your opinions.

You assert that I am twisting logic, but that is all that it is...an assertion. Do you understand what my point is? From what you are saying you seem to be missing the point that I'm making. What you are saying and the differences you point out are immaterial to my point. I'm not trying to say that priesthood is energy healing or that EH is priesthood or that either is science in my responses to DesertWonderer.

Science says that any such thing as "priesthood power" is a figment of a person's imagination, placebo, or wishful thinking, and that it has no basis in science. Science does not recognize the existence of God thus they do not recognize the existence of God's power. Science would say that priesthood blessings can't be empirically verified. They would say that it is mythology. Because science says this about priesthood or God's power, should we deny God's power?

Science says that Energy healing is pseudoscience. Science says that EH is a result of placebo, wishful thinking, or a person's imagination and that it has no basis in real science. Science does not recognize the claims of EH. Science says that EH can't be empirically verified. They would say it is just a con. Because science says this about EH should we deny EH?

-Finrock

Yes, If Energy healing cannot be empirically verified, then that's a fact which ought to be recognized. It's a valid statement to say that energy healing has not been empirically verified (maybe in the future, but not now). Don't you think we ought to admit what is fact?

If Energy healing has not been scientifically verified to do anything, then sorry, but we must admit that--that can be considered negative or positive, depending on how one feels about how necessary it is to know that something has verifiable results and there is clear evidence it works.

There is no reason to be concerned about the scientific view of Priesthood power, one does not go to a priesthood holder for a blessing because they are expecting a certain, scientific, verifiable outcome, and of course, there is no exchange of money-- but you can BET that if someone goes to a medical doctor for a procedure, like heart surgery, an appendectomy, gall bladder operation, whatever--that patient rightly EXPECTS a certain outcome that the surgery will have been performed properly as it is supposed to be done, there is a verifiable, expected outcome. If it doesn't, then the Doctor will probably be sued. I don't think anyone sues Energy healers since there is no expectation of a certain outcome. That's because it's not based in science and empirical evidence. As far as I know, they aren't licensed or regulated by the govt. either. As far as I know, there is no one to hold them accountable.

[JohnnyL]

I wanted to address this separate.

I think that we can build our faith to the point where God will give us what we ask, reveal to us when we seek, and open to us when we knock.

There have been men and probably women too who have been given the sealing power. Anything that they ask, God will do, because God knows that they will not ask amiss. This is still possible today. If it isn't happening, it isn't God's fault, its because of a lack of faith and anybody has access to this gift.

Nephi received this gift after exercising faith. So, I'm not talking about not exercising faith. I'm talking about what is available to us as a result of great faith.

-Finrock

The sealing power is not something given to just anyone, it is associated with the position of a prophet. Nephi was given this power because he was the Lord's prophet. The sealing power is not given out to the general population and I can't think of a time when it might have been given to a woman. One does not need to have the 'sealing power' to have God give them the righteous things they ask for in their prayers--that comes when we get to the point that we only ask in righteousness and we understand the mind of God and would not ask for something which is amiss.

I agree, the sealing power is not something given to just anyone and you will almost certainly be a prophet before you receive this gift, although receiving the sealing power is not a result of a position. Further, a prophet is not an office or a position in the priesthood.

Nephi was given the sealing power on an account of his faith, not on account of him being in a particular priesthood office. Nobody receives power from God on account of being ordained to an office of the priesthood.

God is no respecter of persons. It may be true that God doesn't give out the sealing power to the general population, but its not because the general population doesn't have access to it or because they aren't in the right class or because they don't have a special office. Sealing power and all of God's power is received through faith and through the principles of righteousness, as you yourself acknowledge. If the general population exercised faith and were exercising the principles of righteousness, they too can obtain sealing power. All have access to all of God's gifts. Nothing is holding us back except our faith, which is of course tied to our righteousness.

There is no recorded time that I'm aware of where a woman received the sealing power. That is why I said "probably women too". What I'm teaching here is that God is no respector of persons and that priesthood power can be accessed and used by women. I see no doctrinal or scriptural reason to exclude women from having the sealing power, outside of traditions, speculations, and certain paradigms.

You are essentially saying the same thing I just said in your last sentence, but by trying to be contrary you missed my point. As I said, we can build our faith to the point where God will give us what we ask for, reveal when we seek, and open when we knock. The idea is that most often if we don't see miracles in our life or if the priesthood is "not working for us" it isn't because God doesn't want to heal us or because it isn't the right time, its because we lack faith. Nephi is an example of a person who could receive anything he asked of God, apparently immediately, on account of his faith. Since God is no respector of persons and because God is the same yesterday, today, and forever, we can count on the fact that we have access to the same conditions, gifts, and powers if we emulate the Nephis in the scriptures in our faith.

-Finrock

We learn about the sealing power from revealed LDS doctrine, so, rather than speculating on what you or I think it is, lets look at it from the LDS doctrinal point of view.

By the time Elijah appeared in the Kirtland Temple on 3 April 1836, Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery had already received the Melchizedek Priesthood under the hands of Peter, James, and John (May–June 1829); however, they yet lacked essential keys to that priesthood. President Joseph Fielding Smith explained the power and authority Elijah came to restore:

“The keys that Elijah held were the keys of the everlasting priesthood, the keys of the sealing power, which the Lord gave unto him. And that is what he … gave to the Prophet Joseph Smith; and that included a ministry of sealing for the living as well as the dead—and it is not confined to the living and it is not confined to the dead, but includes them both. …

“Elijah’s mission was the sealing power. He held the keys by which the parents could be sealed together and children sealed to parents. He bestowed these keys upon the Prophet Joseph Smith. And that applies to the dead as well as the living since the coming of the Lord Jesus Christ.

“But what was the nature of his mission to the earth in these latter days? It was to restore power and authority which once was given to men on the earth and which is essential to the complete salvation and exaltation of man in the kingdom of God. In other words, Elijah came to restore to the earth, by conferring on mortal prophets duly commissioned of the Lord, the fulness of the power of priesthood. This priesthood holds the keys of binding and sealing on earth and in heaven of all the ordinances and principles pertaining to the salvation of man, that they may thus become valid in the celestial kingdom of God.” (Doctrines of Salvation, 2:111–12, 117.)

D&C 2:1. Why Was Elijah the One Chosen to Restore the Sealing Powers of the Priesthood?

According to President Joseph Fielding Smith, an understanding of the central role of Elijah comes from an understanding of his role when he lived on this earth.

“It has been a mystery to many members of the Church why this important mission was reserved for Elijah and why these authorities could not have been bestowed by some other prophet, or prophets, presumably Peter, James, and John, who held the keys of authority in the days of the dispensation of the meridian of time. Without question Peter, James, and John could have bestowed this authority, if they had been commissioned; so could Adam, for he held the keys of all the dispensations. The reason why Elijah was reserved for this mission, according to the Prophet Joseph Smith, was that:

“‘Elijah was the last prophet that held the keys of the priesthood, and who will, before the last dispensation, restore the authority and deliver the keys of the priesthood, in order that all the ordinances may be attended to in righteousness. It is true the Savior had authority and power to bestow this blessing; but the sons of Levi were too prejudiced. … Why send Elijah? Because he holds the keys of the authority to administer in all the ordinances of the priesthood; and without the authority is given, the ordinances could not be administered in righteousness.’”.......


D&C 2:3. Why Would the Earth Be Cursed and Utterly Wasted If the Sealing Powers Had Not Been Restored?

Ratification in heaven is given to all ordinances of the gospel through the sealing powers of the priesthood. This sealing power makes possible the welding together of fathers and children, a work essential for exaltation to the living and the dead (see D&C 128:18). The curse spoken of by Malachi is clarified by Moroni, who explained that “the whole earth would be utterly wasted” at the Lord’s coming if the sealing powers were not restored. President Joseph Fielding Smith explained why: “The sealing power of Elijah makes it possible for this joining of the families, generation to generation, back to the beginning. Now, if these units of authority were not here, then the work of sealing, by which the family units are preserved, could not be performed; then the binding power by which all blessings are sealed in heaven, as well as on earth, would be lacking. If this were so, the earth would be smitten with a curse, for all work which had been done, without these binding or sealing ordinances, would fall to the ground unfulfilled.” (Doctrines of Salvation, 2:121–22.)

https://www.lds.org/manual/doctrine-and ... s?lang=eng

The sealing power is the power to bind in heaven and on earth. Both Elijah and Nephi used the sealing power to control the elements. It was necessary for them to have this power because they were the Lord's prophets who the people looked to for God's guidance. Because of the circumstances of serving as Prophet when the people became wicked and forgot their God, Both prophets needed to used this power to bring the people to repentance.

Elijah also restored the sealing power to Joseph Smith Jr., the Prophet of the Restoration, which was necessary to bind the hearts of the children to the fathers in doing the work of the temple in sealing families, in preparation for the Second coming of the Savior.

This is what the Sealing power is. Where this definition agrees with your thoughts on the subject, I agree.

Are you forgetting that probably thousands of men hold this sealing power, right now?

[JohnnyL]

Well according to Joseph even the doctors are crafters..
:((
I am like a huge, rough stone rolling down from a high mountain; and the only polishing I get is when some corner gets rubbed off by coming in contact with something else, striking with accelerated force against religious bigotry, priestcraft, lawyer-craft, doctor-craft, lying editors, suborned judges and jurors, and the authority of perjured executives, backed by mobs, blasphemers, licentious and corrupt men and women—all hell knocking off a corner here and a corner there. Thus I will become a smooth and polished shaft in the quiver of the Almighty, who will give me dominion over all and every one of them, when their refuge of lies shall fail, and their hiding place shall be destroyed, while these smooth-polished stones with which I come in contact become marred.

The majority of Doctors in Joseph Smith's time, did not practice what we call modern medicine, as it was in it's infancy, however, Dr. Smith, who operated on Joseph's leg and managed to save it and him, was one of the early practitioners of modern medical science. Do you really think that Joseph was so ungrateful as to attack ALL Doctors, even the one who saved his life and limb as well? Of course not, Joseph was not ungrateful or foolish.

As for the doctors, Joseph WAS calling out the quacks and the charlatans, the snake oil salesmen and the deceivers. Yes, he would have called out those who pretended to be treating desperately ill people with fake medicines and made up treatments which did nothing for the patient (that was the better outcome, sometimes their treatments made them worse, even killing at times) but served to make the practitioners money.

Joseph was not calling out ALL lawyers, doctors, editors, judges, jurors etc. He was calling out the wicked ones, which I have no problem with today either.

The majority of doctors DID practice modern medicine. Note that Alvin was killed by a REAL doctor, and four other REAL doctors couldn't save him. This was hardly the first, and hardly the last.

So you're saying that even though it came from a bad source (Satan), it "got better" and became good? Is this yet ANOTHER double standard?

In 1843 Joseph Smith told the Saints: “The doctors in this region don’t know much… doctors won’t tell you how to go to be well. They want to kill or cure you to get your money. Calomel doctors will give you calomel to cure a sliver in the big toe and not stop to know whether the stomach is empty or not."

Army doctor Sanderson with the Mormon Battalion killed a guy or two with his medicine (calomel--oh, you don't want mercury?).

Even Nathan Smith's procedure of saving JS's leg was not condoned by the medical profession--until WW1. No peer reviews on that, so I guess it wasn't really science.

In 1869 instead of commenting that the Mormons relied too much upon the Lord, he commented that the Saints relied too much upon modern medicine. It must be acknowledged that the Relief Society, the women’s organization of the Church, had been very pro-active in training women as nurses and midwives and in establishing good medical care among the Saints. The practice of plural marriage actually liberated women to go east for medical schooling because they had other women to care for their children at home. Brigham Young called a number of men and women in the Church to go east for medical education.

In 1872, the year he sent a nephew off to medical school, he said,
Would you want doctors? Yes, to set bones. We would want a good surgeon for that, or to cut off a limb. Do you want doctors? For not much of anything else, let me tell you, only the traditions of the people lead them to think so, and here is a GROWING EVIL IN OUR MIDST. … Now the cry is “Send for a doctor.’ If you have a pain in the head, ‘Send for a doctor, if you feel aches, “I want a doctor’ …

Herbalist John Heinerman observed:

“First of all, he believed in doctors, but only to the extent of fractures, sprains and such, with a surgeon necessary for amputation when they may occur … the real reason is because a good majority of the Mormon people wanted these services for themselves in the territory.”

And rather than suffer to see some corrupt Gentile practitioners come in and work their stuff upon the members of the Church, he felt that if they had to have doctors, they might as well have those of their own faith treat them. The territory had already been “blessed” with a few of those kind of the world, and he did not want any more if he could help it. (Joseph Smith and Herbal Medicine, page 93). https://historyofmormonism.com/2013/04/ ... -medicine/

Mercury, arsenic, lead, and more--good ol' doctor cures for what ailed you. :ymapplause: #-o

[Sarah]

Well according to Joseph even the doctors are crafters..
:((
I am like a huge, rough stone rolling down from a high mountain; and the only polishing I get is when some corner gets rubbed off by coming in contact with something else, striking with accelerated force against religious bigotry, priestcraft, lawyer-craft, doctor-craft, lying editors, suborned judges and jurors, and the authority of perjured executives, backed by mobs, blasphemers, licentious and corrupt men and women—all hell knocking off a corner here and a corner there. Thus I will become a smooth and polished shaft in the quiver of the Almighty, who will give me dominion over all and every one of them, when their refuge of lies shall fail, and their hiding place shall be destroyed, while these smooth-polished stones with which I come in contact become marred.

The majority of Doctors in Joseph Smith's time, did not practice what we call modern medicine, as it was in it's infancy, however, Dr. Smith, who operated on Joseph's leg and managed to save it and him, was one of the early practitioners of modern medical science. Do you really think that Joseph was so ungrateful as to attack ALL Doctors, even the one who saved his life and limb as well? Of course not, Joseph was not ungrateful or foolish.

As for the doctors, Joseph WAS calling out the quacks and the charlatans, the snake oil salesmen and the deceivers. Yes, he would have called out those who pretended to be treating desperately ill people with fake medicines and made up treatments which did nothing for the patient (that was the better outcome, sometimes their treatments made them worse, even killing at times) but served to make the practitioners money.

Joseph was not calling out ALL lawyers, doctors, editors, judges, jurors etc. He was calling out the wicked ones, which I have no problem with today either.

The majority of doctors DID practice modern medicine. Note that Alvin was killed by a REAL doctor, and four other REAL doctors couldn't save him. This was hardly the first, and hardly the last.

So you're saying that even though it came from a bad source (Satan), it "got better" and became good? Is this yet ANOTHER double standard?

In 1843 Joseph Smith told the Saints: “The doctors in this region don’t know much… doctors won’t tell you how to go to be well. They want to kill or cure you to get your money. Calomel doctors will give you calomel to cure a sliver in the big toe and not stop to know whether the stomach is empty or not."

Army doctor Sanderson with the Mormon Battalion killed a guy or two with his medicine (calomel--oh, you don't want mercury?).

Even Nathan Smith's procedure of saving JS's leg was not condoned by the medical profession--until WW1. No peer reviews on that, so I guess it wasn't really science.

In 1869 instead of commenting that the Mormons relied too much upon the Lord, he commented that the Saints relied too much upon modern medicine. It must be acknowledged that the Relief Society, the women’s organization of the Church, had been very pro-active in training women as nurses and midwives and in establishing good medical care among the Saints. The practice of plural marriage actually liberated women to go east for medical schooling because they had other women to care for their children at home. Brigham Young called a number of men and women in the Church to go east for medical education.

In 1872, the year he sent a nephew off to medical school, he said,
Would you want doctors? Yes, to set bones. We would want a good surgeon for that, or to cut off a limb. Do you want doctors? For not much of anything else, let me tell you, only the traditions of the people lead them to think so, and here is a GROWING EVIL IN OUR MIDST. … Now the cry is “Send for a doctor.’ If you have a pain in the head, ‘Send for a doctor, if you feel aches, “I want a doctor’ …

Herbalist John Heinerman observed:

“First of all, he believed in doctors, but only to the extent of fractures, sprains and such, with a surgeon necessary for amputation when they may occur … the real reason is because a good majority of the Mormon people wanted these services for themselves in the territory.”

And rather than suffer to see some corrupt Gentile practitioners come in and work their stuff upon the members of the Church, he felt that if they had to have doctors, they might as well have those of their own faith treat them. The territory had already been “blessed” with a few of those kind of the world, and he did not want any more if he could help it. (Joseph Smith and Herbal Medicine, page 93). https://historyofmormonism.com/2013/04/ ... -medicine/

Mercury, arsenic, lead, and more--good ol' doctor cures for what ailed you. :ymapplause: #-o

There are plenty of people who agree that modern medicine can be influenced by evil, or selfish, or conspiring men and women. I would not argue for example that going to a doctor for depression is "right" and seeking alternative medicine is "wrong." That's why I asked for specifics, because each technique must stand on it's own.

I see a problem if someone is commanding the body to do something. I also see a problem with things like hypnosis where you are placed in a state that makes you less conscious/accountable, and open to outside influences. All these techniques open the door for Satan's influence. And yes, prescription drugs can do the same thing. But pointing out the corruption in the medical field in order to justify or excuse Energy Healers who invoke the name of Christ for example, or use other techniques that are spiritual in nature, does not make sense, nor does it strengthen your arguments in favor of it. Unless you have an injury or an acute illness due to infection, the best course is to change your diet, concentrating on what you put into your body, avoiding all evil, and seeking divine help. Doing that will change your mental and emotional state.

[JohnnyL]

Well according to Joseph even the doctors are crafters..
:((
I am like a huge, rough stone rolling down from a high mountain; and the only polishing I get is when some corner gets rubbed off by coming in contact with something else, striking with accelerated force against religious bigotry, priestcraft, lawyer-craft, doctor-craft, lying editors, suborned judges and jurors, and the authority of perjured executives, backed by mobs, blasphemers, licentious and corrupt men and women—all hell knocking off a corner here and a corner there. Thus I will become a smooth and polished shaft in the quiver of the Almighty, who will give me dominion over all and every one of them, when their refuge of lies shall fail, and their hiding place shall be destroyed, while these smooth-polished stones with which I come in contact become marred.

The majority of Doctors in Joseph Smith's time, did not practice what we call modern medicine, as it was in it's infancy, however, Dr. Smith, who operated on Joseph's leg and managed to save it and him, was one of the early practitioners of modern medical science. Do you really think that Joseph was so ungrateful as to attack ALL Doctors, even the one who saved his life and limb as well? Of course not, Joseph was not ungrateful or foolish.

As for the doctors, Joseph WAS calling out the quacks and the charlatans, the snake oil salesmen and the deceivers. Yes, he would have called out those who pretended to be treating desperately ill people with fake medicines and made up treatments which did nothing for the patient (that was the better outcome, sometimes their treatments made them worse, even killing at times) but served to make the practitioners money.

Joseph was not calling out ALL lawyers, doctors, editors, judges, jurors etc. He was calling out the wicked ones, which I have no problem with today either.

The majority of doctors DID practice modern medicine. Note that Alvin was killed by a REAL doctor, and four other REAL doctors couldn't save him. This was hardly the first, and hardly the last.

So you're saying that even though it came from a bad source (Satan), it "got better" and became good? Is this yet ANOTHER double standard?

In 1843 Joseph Smith told the Saints: “The doctors in this region don’t know much… doctors won’t tell you how to go to be well. They want to kill or cure you to get your money. Calomel doctors will give you calomel to cure a sliver in the big toe and not stop to know whether the stomach is empty or not."

Army doctor Sanderson with the Mormon Battalion killed a guy or two with his medicine (calomel--oh, you don't want mercury?).

Even Nathan Smith's procedure of saving JS's leg was not condoned by the medical profession--until WW1. No peer reviews on that, so I guess it wasn't really science.

In 1869 instead of commenting that the Mormons relied too much upon the Lord, he commented that the Saints relied too much upon modern medicine. It must be acknowledged that the Relief Society, the women’s organization of the Church, had been very pro-active in training women as nurses and midwives and in establishing good medical care among the Saints. The practice of plural marriage actually liberated women to go east for medical schooling because they had other women to care for their children at home. Brigham Young called a number of men and women in the Church to go east for medical education.

In 1872, the year he sent a nephew off to medical school, he said,
Would you want doctors? Yes, to set bones. We would want a good surgeon for that, or to cut off a limb. Do you want doctors? For not much of anything else, let me tell you, only the traditions of the people lead them to think so, and here is a GROWING EVIL IN OUR MIDST. … Now the cry is “Send for a doctor.’ If you have a pain in the head, ‘Send for a doctor, if you feel aches, “I want a doctor’ …

Herbalist John Heinerman observed:

“First of all, he believed in doctors, but only to the extent of fractures, sprains and such, with a surgeon necessary for amputation when they may occur … the real reason is because a good majority of the Mormon people wanted these services for themselves in the territory.”

And rather than suffer to see some corrupt Gentile practitioners come in and work their stuff upon the members of the Church, he felt that if they had to have doctors, they might as well have those of their own faith treat them. The territory had already been “blessed” with a few of those kind of the world, and he did not want any more if he could help it. (Joseph Smith and Herbal Medicine, page 93). https://historyofmormonism.com/2013/04/ ... -medicine/

Mercury, arsenic, lead, and more--good ol' doctor cures for what ailed you. :ymapplause: #-o

There are plenty of people who agree that modern medicine can be influenced by evil, or selfish, or conspiring men and women. I would not argue for example that going to a doctor for depression is "right" and seeking alternative medicine is "wrong." That's why I asked for specifics, because each technique must stand on it's own.

I see a problem if someone is commanding the body to do something. I also see a problem with things like hypnosis where you are placed in a state that makes you less conscious/accountable, and open to outside influences. All these techniques open the door for Satan's influence. And yes, prescription drugs can do the same thing. But pointing out the corruption in the medical field in order to justify or excuse Energy Healers who invoke the name of Christ for example, or use other techniques that are spiritual in nature, does not make sense, nor does it strengthen your arguments in favor of it. Unless you have an injury or an acute illness due to infection, the best course is to change your diet, concentrating on what you put into your body, avoiding all evil, and seeking divine help. Doing that will change your mental and emotional state.

Every con-EH I have met invokes a double-standard when it comes to EH vs. Western medicine (WM). They use many arguments that are also double standards. This and many of my content shows that and how hypocritical it is. To them, WM is God's gift to mankind, while EH is Satan's gift to mankind. Nonsense on both. They CAN both be.

Not only do you have to take into account each different way, but you have to take into account each person.

Energy Healers who invoke the name of Christ

It would depend on how they did it, and what they meant by it. Would you prefer your surgeon to pray before operating? Don't people pray that their hands will be guided by God, and that they will know what to do? Or that the doctors will?

Hypnosis and "Mesmerism" have shown to be very beneficial (not talking much about the typical clinical hypnosis where you're in a relaxed state). Yes, as with all things, you are open to something other than yourself, though for some people, this would likely be beneficial, lol. But you do that every time you see a doctor, too. I'd rather have my child see a hypnotist than a psychiatrist, especially unsupervised.

use other techniques that are spiritual in nature

What is actually meant by "spiritual techniques", or as another person wrote, "spiritual healing"?

Yes, much could be avoided by lifestyle changes, especially the diseases we are dying from now. Unfortunately, much of what is behind our lifestyle, are nonconsious thoughts that drive and control us. This is often where EH comes in--to get rid of/ change the controlling negative thoughts. Most of those drivers were attained before the age of 8, or through trauma at any age. Do you believe that trauma is more likely of God, or of Satan?

I have never had EH affect me with a negative spirit like OTC--not prescription--drugs have. I lost my conscience on occasions, and could be brutal. Let's see, would that be God or Satan?

Anyway, as I was reading I came across this, which I have mentioned a few times before as JS quoting--there are three spirits (God, Satan, man), not just two (God, Satan): DC 46:7 But ye are commanded in all things to ask of God, who giveth liberally; and that which the Spirit testifies unto you even so I would that ye should do in all holiness of heart, walking uprightly before me, considering the end of your salvation, doing all things with prayer and thanksgiving, that ye may not be seduced by evil spirits, or doctrines of devils, or the commandments of men; for some are of men, and others of devils.

[AI2.0]

Johnny, I'm going to share with you some information about the origins of Modern Medicine. I hope this will help you to have a more accurate view of the history of medicine. In Joseph's day, the standards were low and there were many different kinds of medical practices--in his day, you could have billed yourself as a 'doctor' doing Energy work and it would have been legal to do so. This also explains why people in Joseph Smith's day were wary of Doctors--and well they should have been, treating patients and calling oneself a Doctor, was not regulated, and they followed different beliefs, it was not at all the way Medicine is taught or practiced today. Joseph's brother Alvin died in the 1820's. I already explained to you that Joseph Smith's leg and life was saved by a surgery which was based in the science of the human body, not superstition, Dr. Nathan Smith was the only Doctor who performed this surgery, it didn't catch on for over 50 years, possibly because it was so difficult a procedure.

When you look at the timeline, you will see that many of the things we take for granted in Modern Medicine were not discovered until several decades later. And the Science of Medicine continues to discover and invent new procedures and practices to improve the lives of people.

Timeline of medical milestones during the 19th century
1800 - Humphry Davy (1778- 1829), a British chemist and inventor, described how nitrous oxide (laughing gas) has anestheric properties. It is said he was addicted to the stuff.
1816 - Rene Laennec (1781-1826), a French doctor, invented the stethoscope. He also pioneered stethoscope use in diagnosing chest infections.
1818 - James Blundell (1791-1878) was a British obstetrician. He performed the first successful blood transfusion on a patient who had a hemorrhage.
1842 - Crawford Long (1815 -1878), an American pharmacist and surgeon, now recognized as the first doctor to have used inhaled ether anesthesia on a patient for a surgical procedure. For many years only a few colleagues in his inner circle knew about this achievement.
1847 - Ignaz Semmelweis (1818 -1865), a Hungarian doctor, known as the savior of mothers. He found that childbed fever (puerperal fever) incidence could be considerably reduced if doctors, midwives and nurses disinfected their hands before touching the mother during childbirth or a miscarriage. Childbed fever was common in the 19th century; between 10% and 35% of mothers who became infected died.
1849 - Elizabeth Blackwell (1821-1910), an American, was the first woman to become a fully qualified doctor in the USA, and also the first female to be on the UK Medical Register. Blackwell dedicated much of her time to promoting the education of women in medicine.
1867 - Joseph Lister, 1st Baron Lister OM, FRS, PC (1827-1912), a British surgeon and a pioneer of antiseptic surgery. He introduced phenol (then known as carbolic acid) successfully to clean wounds as well as sterilizing surgical instruments. His work contributed greatly towards a reduction in post-operative infections. He published a book Antiseptic Principle of the Practice of Surgery, which was strongly influenced by Louis Pasteur's work.
1870 - The Germ Theory of Disease is established by Louis Pasteur and Robert Koch.
1879 - Louis Pasteur produced the first laboratory-developed vaccine - the vaccine for chicken cholera.
1881 - An anthrax vaccine developed by Louis Pasteur. Pasteur made a public demonstration with 50 sheep. He tested his vaccine, created by attenuating the anthrax bacterium with carbolic acid. All the 25 unvaccinated sheep died, while only one of the vaccinated ones perished, which was probably due to a miscarriage.
1882 - The first rabies vaccine. Louis Pasteur managed to prevent rabies in Joseph Meister, a 9-year old boy, by post-exposure vaccination.
1890 - Emil von Behring Emil Adolf von Behring (1854-1917), a German physiologist, discovered antitoxins and utilized them to develop diphtheria and tetanus vaccines. He received the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine; the first time the prize was ever awarded.
1895 - Wilhelm Conrad Röntgen (1845-1923), a German physicist. He produced and detected electromagnetic radiation in a wavelength range; what we call today Röntgen rays or X-rays. In 1901 he received the Nobel Prize in Physics. The International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry named element 111, Roentgenium after him.
1897 - Aspirin was invented. Chemists working in the German company Bayer AG produced a synthetic version of salicin, which was derived from the species Filipendula ulmaria (meadowsweet). This synthetically altered version was easier on the stomach than pure salicylic acid. Bayer says that the invention of aspirin should be attributed to Felix Hoffmann; however, Arthur Eichengrün, a Jewish chemist later said that he was the lead researcher, but records of his participation were erased under the Nazi regime.

Bayer AG named the new drug Aspirin. Within two years Aspirin became a global blockbusting drug.
Timeline of medical milestones during the 20th century
1901 - Different human blood types were discovered by Karl Landsteiner (1868-1943), an Austrian biologist and physician. He identified the presence of agglutinins in blood and developed the modern system of classifying blood groups. He received the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine in 1930.
1901 - The first case of Alzheimer's disease was identified by Alois Alzheimer (1864-1915), a German psychiatrist and neuropathologist. He called it "presenile dementia". His colleague, Emil Kraepelin, later called the it Alzheimer's disease.
1903 - The first practical electrocardiogram (ECG or EKG) was invented by Willem Einthoven (1860-1927), a Dutch doctor and physiologist. In 1924 he received the Nobel Prize in Medicine in 1924.
1906 - Vitamins were discovered by Frederick Hopkins (1861-1947), an English biochemist. He also suggested that scurvy and rickets were caused by a lack of vitamins. Along with Christiaan Eijkman, he received the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine.
1907 - A chemotherapeutic cure for sleeping sickness was developed by Paul Ehrlich (1854-1915), a German doctor and scientist. Ehrlich's lab also discovered Arsphenamine (Salvarsan), the first treatment for syphilis that was effective, and thus initiated and named the concept of chemotherapy.
1908 - The stereotactic method (stereotactic device) was invented by Victor Horsley (1857-1916) and R. Clarke. It allows experimental and surgical intervention in deep-seated structure of the brain.
1910 - The first laparoscopy performed on a human was done by Hans Christian Jacobaeus (1879-1937), a Swedish internist. Jacobaeus became a professor at the prestigious Karolinska Institute in Stockholm, and was also a member of the Nobel Prize Committee.
1921 - Vitamin D discovered by Sir Edward Mellanby (1884-1955), a British physician. He also explained Vitamin D's role in preventing rickets.
1921 - Insulin was discovered by Sir Frederick Banting (1891-1941), a Canadian medical scientist, and Charles Herbert Best (1899-1978), an American-Canadian medical scientist. Banting received the Nobel Prize in Medicine in 1923 (along with John James Rickard Macleod) when he was 32 years old. He is still the youngest ever Nobel Laureate for Medicine.
1921 - The technique of epidural anesthesia was pioneered by Fidel Pagés (1886-1923), a Spanish military surgeon.
1923-1927 - The first vaccine for diphtheria, pertussis (whooping cough), TB (tuberculosis) and tetanus were developed and used successfully.
Alexander Fleming 3
Sir Alexander Fleming, FRSE, FRS, FRCS(Eng) 1928 - Penicillin from the mould Penicillium notatum was discovered by Sir Alexander Fleming (1881-1955), a Scottish biologist and pharmacologist. He was awarded the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine in 1945, along with Howard Florey and Ernst Boris Chain.

The discovery of penicillin changed the course of history and saved hundreds of millions of lives.

Fleming said: "When I woke up just after dawn on September 28, 1928, I certainly didn't plan to revolutionized all medicine by discovering the world's first antibiotic, or bacteria killer ....... But I suppose that was exactly what I did."
1929 - Human electroencephalography was discovered by Hans Berger (1873-1941), a German doctor. He was the first to record brain waves or EEGs (electroencephalograms). He discovered the alpha wave rhythm in the brain, which is also known as "Berger's wave".
1932 - A chemotherapeutic cure for streptococcus was developed by Gerhard Domagk (1895 -1964), a German pathologist and bacteriologist. He is credited with discovering Sulfonamidochrysoidine (KI-730), the first antibiotic to go on the market (brand name: Prontosil). He was awarded the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine in 1939.
1933 - Insulin shock therapy for patients with some mental illnesses was discovered by Manfred Sakel (1900-1957), a Jewish Austrian neurophysiologist and psychiatrist who later became an Austrian-American.
1935 - The first successful vaccine for Yellow Fever was developed. The yellow fever virus was isolated in West Africa in 1927; this led to the development of two vaccines in the 1930s. 17D was developed by Max Theiler, a South African microbiologist at the Rockefeller Institute. He used chicken eggs to culture the virus. Theiler was awarded the Nobel Prize in 1951.
1943 - The world's first dialysis machine was built by Willem J Kolff (1911-2009), a Dutch doctor. He is known as a pioneer of hemodialysis and artificial organs. In 1950, Kolff emigrated to the USA.
1946 - The first effective cancer chemotherapy drug - nitrogen mustard - was discovered by Alfred G. Gilman (1908-1984) an American pharmacologist, and Louis S. Goodman (1906-2000), also an American pharmacologist, while doing research together at Yale University. They discovered that the blood of soldiers who had been exposed to nitrogen mustard had exceptionally low levels of white cells.
1948 - Acetaminophen (paracetamol, Tylenol) was invented by Julius Axelrod (1912-2004), an American biochemist, and Bernard Brodie (1907-1989), an American chemist, considered by many to be the founder of modern pharmacology.
1952 - The first polio vaccine was developed by Jonas Salk (1914-1995), an American medical researcher and virologist. The vaccine came onto the market in 1955.

Salk set up a field trial to test the vaccine - a trial of immense proportions; it included 20,000 doctors, 64,000 school staff, and 220,000 volunteers. More than 1,800,000 school kids took part in the study. When news of the trial's success became public in April 12th, 1955, Salk was hailed a "miracle worker". After WWII polio became a serious public health problem in the USA.

In a TV interview, Salk was asked about who owned the patent for the polio vaccine. He answered "There is no patent. Could you patent the sun?"
1953 - The Heart-Lung Machine was invented by Dr John Heysham Gibbon (1903-1973), an American surgeon. He performed the first open heart surgery ever, repairing an atrial septal defect.
1953 - Medical Ultrasonography (echocardiography) was invented by Inge Edler (1911-2001), a Swedish physicist.
1954 - The first human kidney transplant (on identical twins) was performed by Joseph Murray (born 1919). During the following years, as immunosuppressive agents came onto the market and science understood the mechanisms of rejection better, Murray managed to performed transplants with donor organs from unrelated people.
1955 - Tetracycline was produced by catalytic reduction by Lloyd Conover (born 1923), an American chemist. He and his team substituted hydrogen for chlorine chlortetracycline. He was the first scientist ever to make an antibiotic by chemically modifying a naturally-produced drug. Within three years, tetracycline became the most popular broad spectrum drug in the United States. Conover has nearly 300 patents in his name.
1958 - The first implantable pacemaker was developed by Rune Elmqvist (1906-1996), a medical doctor who later worked as an engineer and inventor. Elmqvist also developed the first inkjet ECG printer.
1959 - In vitro fertilization led to the first "test tube baby", by Min Chueh Chang (1908-1991), a Chinese American reproductive biologist. M.C. Chang is also famous for contributing towards the development of the combined oral contraceptive pill ("The Pill").
1960 - Cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) was invented by James Jude, Guy Knickerbocker, Peter Safar, William Kouwenhoven and Joseph S. Redding, all Americans. CPR was originally developed at Johns Hopkins University. They first tested CPR successfully on a dog. Not long afterwards, a child's life was save using the technique.
1960 - The first combined oral contraceptive pill (COCP), often referred to as the birth-control pill or informally as "The Pill" was approved by the FDA. "Combined" refers to the two hormones within it - estrogen and progestin. Hundreds of millions of women use COCP today.
1962 - The first beta blocker was invented by Sir James W. Black (1924 - 22 March 2010), a Scottish doctor and pharmacologist. After founding the physiology department at the University of Glasgow, Black became interested in how adrenaline might impact on the functioning of the human heart. While working for ICI Pharmaceuticals, he developed Propranolol, a beta blocker, which was used to treat heart disease. Black also developed Cimetidine, a medication used in a similar way for the treatment of stomach ulcers. He received the Nobel Prize for Medicine in 1988.
1963 - The first human liver transplant was performed by Thomas Starzl (born 1926), an American physician and researcher.
1963 - The first human lung transplant was performed by James Hardy (1918-2003), an American surgeon.
1963 - Valium (diazepam) was discovered by Leo H Sternbach (1908-2005), a Polish chemist. Sternback also discovered chlordiazepoxide (Librium), trimethaphan (Arfonad), clonazepam (Klonopin), flurazepam (Dalmane), flunitrazepam (Rohypnol) and nitrazepam (Mogadon).
1964 - The first measles vaccine came out. It was developed by Maurice Hilleman (1919-2005), an American microbiologist/vaccinologist. Hilleman developed over 36 vaccines, more than anybody else ever.
1965 - The rubella vaccine was developed by Harry Martin Meyer (1928-2001), an American pediatric virologist.
1966 - The first human pancreas transplant was performed by C. Walton Lillehei (1918-1999), an American surgeon. Lillehei also pioneered open-heart surgery, as well as new equipment, prostheses, and techniques for cardiothoracic surgery.
1967 - The first human heart transplant was successfully performed by Christiaan Barnard (1922-2001), a South African cardiac surgeon.
1970 - The first vaccine for rubella (German measles) came on the market. It was developed by Harry Martin Meyer (see 1965).
1970 - the first effective immunosuppressive drug, Cyclosporine, became used in organ transplant procedures. The active ingredient was first isolated from the fungus Tolypocladium inflatum (Beauveria nivea), which had been collected in a soil sample by Dr. Hans Peter Frey, a biologist who was working at pharmaceutical company Sandoz. Cyclosporine is also used to treat psoriasis, pyoderma gangrenosum, chronic autoimmune urticaria, and less often for severe cases of rheumatoid arthritis.
1971 - Magnetic Resonance Imaging was invented by Raymond Vahan Damadian (born 1936), an Armenian-American medical practitioner and inventor.
1971 - The CT Scan, also known as CAT scan (Computed Tomography) was invented by Sir Godfrey Hounsfield (1919-2004), an English electrical engineer. He was awarded the Nobel Prize for Physiology or Medicine in 1979 (with Allan McLeod).
1972 - The insulin pump was invented by Dean Kamen (born 1951), an American entrepreneur and inventor.
1973 - Laser eye surgery (LASIK) was performed for the first time by Mani Lal Bhaumik (born 1941), an Indian-born American physicist. Dr. Bhaumik demonstrated the world's first efficient excimer laser - this application would eventually do away with the need for contact lenses or glasses in many cases.
1974 - Liposuction was carried out successfully for the first time by Giorgio Fischer (born 1934), a gynecologist from Rome, Italy.
1978 - The last recorded fatal case of smallpox (Variola minor).
1979 - George Hitchings (1905-1998), an American doctor, and Gertrude Elion (1918-1999), an American biochemist and pharmacologist, made important breakthroughs with antiviral medications. Their pioneering works eventually led to the development of AZT, the AIDS drug.
1980 - Hepatitis B diagnostic test and vaccine developed by Dr Baruch Samuel Blumberg, an American doctor. Dr. Blumberg received the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine (with Daniel Carleton Gajdusek).
1981 - The first human heart-lung combined transplant procedure was successfully performed by Bruce Reitz (born 1939), an American cardiothoracic surgeon.
1985 - Kary Banks Mullis (born 1944), an American biochemist, author, and lecturer, invented improvements to the polymerase chain reaction (PCR), a biochemical technology in molecular biology which amplifies one or some copies of a piece of DNA across various orders of magnitude, to generate thousands and possibly millions of copies of that particular DNA sequence. In 1993 he was awarded the Nobel Prize in Chemistry (with Michael Smith).
1985 - A surgical robot was created by Dr Yik San Kwoh (born 1946), a Chinese-American Bioengineer and inventor. Initial experiments were tried with a watermelon; a BB was shot into it, the robot had to locate it and remove it (which it did).
1985 - Sir Alec John Jeffreys (born 1950), a British geneticist, developed techniques for DNA fingerprinting and DNA profiling which every competent forensic department in the world uses today. The technique is also used to resolve immigration and paternity disputes.
1986 - (Prozac) (fluoxetine HCl), a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) class antidepressant was launched by Eli Lilly after being approved by the US FDA for the treatment of major depression. It went off patent in August 2001. Fluoxetine is also approved for pediatric depression, bulimia nervosa, panic disorder, obsessive-compulsive disorder (adults and children), and premenstrual dysphoric disorder.

In 2010, 24 years after fluoxetine's approval and nine years after it went off patent, it was the third most prescribed antidepressant in the USA (after sertraline and citalopram) - 24.4 million prescriptions were written that year.
1987 - The first statin ever, Lovastatin (Mevacor), was approved by the US FDA. Merck & Co had isolated the active ingredient lovastatin (mevinolin MK803) from Aspergillus terreus, a fungus. Clinical trials had shown that lovastatin reduced LDL cholesterol by 40%; far more than any other treatment at the time.
1989 - The birth of the WWW (World Wide Web); a major milestone in the way humans globally behave, gather information, express themselves, make friends,work, and go about exchanging data on medical and pharmaceutical issues and innovations. Sir Timothy John "Tim" Berners-Lee, (born 1955), an English computer scientist and MIT professor invented the World Wide Web. With the help of Robert Cailliau (a student at CERN), they implemented the first successful communication between an HTTP (Hypertext Transfer Protocol) client and server through the internet.
1998 - James Alexander Thomson (born 1958), an American developmental biologist, derived the first human ES (embryonic stem) cell line. Later in 2007, he derived induced pluripotent (iPS) stem cells. Thomson's breakthrough in 1998 generated controversy because the technology involved destroying human embryos. At the same time as Dr. Shinya Yamanaka, in 2007 Thomson wrote that he had discovered a method for creating stem cells which closely resemble human embryonic stem cells from human skin cells; this breakthrough was much more widely accepted because it ended the ethical controversy regarding embryonic stem cell research.
Timeline of medical milestones from 2000 to the present day
2000 - The Human Genome Project (HGP) draft was completed. The HGP is a project involving collaborators from all over the world; their main goal being to determine the sequence of chemical base pairs which make up DNA, and to identify and map the circa twenty-to-thirty thousand genes of the human genome from both a functional and physical perspective.

The Human Genome Project has other objectives, apart from understanding the genetic makeup of human beings. It has also focused on other species, such as the laboratory mouse, E. coli, and the fruit fly. The HGP continues to be one of the most important single investigative projects in modern medical science.
2001 - Dr. Kenneth Matsumura, of the Alin Foundation, created the first bio-artificial liver. The liver removes toxins from blood and manufactures nearly 1,000 proteins, metabolites and other crucial substances; it is a very complex organ, and one of the most difficult to replace. Dr. Matsumura and team found a way around the liver's complexities by letting rabbit liver cells sort out the issues.

Dr. Matsumura's bio-artificial liver had a two-part chamber - one side contained the patient's blood, while on the other he placed live rabbit cells suspended in a solution; there was a semi-permeable membrane separating the two chambers. The toxins from the human blood passed through the membrane and were metabolized by the rabbit cells; the resulting proteins and other needed substances were then sent back to the other side. The likelihood of the rabbit cells causing infection or being rejected were minimized because they never came into direct contact with the human blood.

The artificial liver was intended as a bridge to an eventual liver transplant for people with acute liver failure, as well liver transplant recipients whose bodies have rejected the organ. There is even the possibility that damaged livers may be given time to health themselves, doing away with a transplant requirement altogether.
2001 - Jacques Marescaux, a French doctor, carried out the first ever TeleSurgery; he operated on the gallbladder of a patient who was in Strasbourg, France, while he was in New York, USA (The Lindbergh Operation). A remotely-controlled robot, guided by Dr. Marescaux, carried out the procedure.
2002 - HemCon Medical Technologies Incorporated, of Portland, Oregon, USA, invented Chitosan Bandages. Chitosan is a substance found in the shells of crabs, shrimps and other crustaceans. They have been used extensively by the American army in Iraq and have been shown to save many lives. Chitosan bandages seal massive bleeding wounds amazingly quickly, in most cases within 30 seconds. The positively charged chitosan material bonds with red blood cells, forming an artificial clot which stops bleeding. HemCon scientists pointed out that chitosan derives it superiority from nature.
2005 - A partial face transplant was performed by Jean-Michel Dubernard, a French transplant specialist. The partial face transplant was carried out on Isabelle Dinoire, whose face had been very badly mauled by a dog. Dubernard had been a Deputy in the French National Assembly.
2006 - Gardasil became the first HPV vaccine to be approved by the US FDA; by the end of 2007 it was approved in 80 countries, according to Merck & Co. In 2009, GSK's (GlazoSmithKline's) Cervaris (another HPV vaccine) was approved by the FDA.
2007 - A bionic eye (a visual prosthetic), the Argus II Retinal Stimulation System, was created. It provides visual function to blind patients with severe to profound retinitis pigmentosa.

Dr. Robert Greenberg of Second Sight Medical Products Inc., Drs. Mark Humayun,and Eugene DeJuan at the Doheny Eye Institute (USC), and Dr Wentai Liu at University of California, Santa Cruz, invented the original prototype api-retinal prosthesis.

The first generation implant consisted of 16 electrodes and was implanted in 6 completely blind volunteers. After implantation, they were able to perform a surprising number of tasks. A trial of its second generation, 60 electrode implant, called Argus II, was started in 2007 in Europe and the United States. Thirty volunteers took part in the studies which spanned 10 sites in four countries.

Argus II was approved in Europe, and the product was launched in 2011.
2010 - the first full face transplant was carried out by Spanish doctors on a male adult who had injured himself in a shooting accident five years previously. The patient had been left unable to breathe or swallow as a result of the accident. The 20-hour operation was performed by a team of 30 doctors, led by Dr Joan Pere Barret, at Vall d’Hebron University Hospital, Barcelona, Spain.

In March 2011, Dallas Wiens underwent a full face transplant at Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, USA; the first such procedure ever in the USA. Wiens had had his face severely disfigured in a power line accident. The 30-strong medical team, led by Bohdan Pomahac, replaced the patient’s nose, lips, facial skin, movement muscles and nerves.

In March 2012, the largest face transplant ever was successfully performed at the R. Adams Cowley Shock Trauma Center at the University of Maryland Medical Center, USA. The 36-hour operation, led by Eduardo D. Rodriguez, replaced the entire face, including tongue, both jaws and teeth of Lee Norris, a 37-year old male who had been severely injured in a gun accident.
Targeted Cancer Therapy - seen as a major advancement in cancer treatment. Cancer treatment had focused on destroying rapidly dividing cells, which also destroyed a number of healthy rapidly-dividing cells. Cancer patients had to endure some extremely unpleasant side effects from radiation therapy and chemotherapy because of this.

Targeted cancer therapies focus just on specific molecules; the ones that cause tumors to grow. Only the cancer cells are hunted down, resulting in considerably less damage to healthy cells, and subsequently fewer and less severe side effects.

At the moment, this technology is only effective for some forms of cancer. However, experts are sure that eventually most cancers will be effectively treated with Targeted Cancer Therapy.

Anti-smoking legislation - several countries, initially in Western Europe and North America introduced legislation forbidding smoking in public places. Despite resistance from the smoking lobby and organizations representing bars and restaurants, there has been a considerable drop in national smoking rates in several countries, as well as non-smokers' exposure to second-hand smoke (passive smoking).

A Scottish study found that since the country introduced a national comprehensive smoke-free legislation, rates of preterm deliveries and small-for-date infants have fallen dramatically.

A European study found that smoking bans may even encourage smokers to consume fewer cigarettes at home.

HIV survival extended with combination drug therapy - a 20-year-old AIDS patient in 1996 had an expected survival time of three to five years, today he/she is expected to live till the age of 69 years (average). This is thanks to the introduction of HAART (highly active retroviral therapy), a combination therapy, which has turned HIV/AIDS from a deadly disease into a serious but chronic one with good long-term survival.

Combination drug therapy has also improved treatment outcomes for patients with cancer, heart disease and other illnesses.

http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/info/me ... dicine.php

Before you go dismissing all that Modern Medicine has given us, maybe you should read a bit about it.

And here's an article about the surgery which was performed to save Joseph Smith jr's leg. You've shared disparaging comments he made about some doctors, but you ought to be honest about just what kind of Doctors he was complaining about. NOT the ones who saved his leg, the pioneers of Modern Medicine--but the ones who used questionable methods and lacked real training in anatomy, chemistry, biology, pharmacology etc. Those were the ones he was complaining about. Men and Women studied a couple of books, or took a course, who then put out a shingle and claimed to be able to treat and heal the sick, when they had no idea what they were doing and relied on unproven and even dangerous practices to treat their patients. If Energy healing had been around in Joseph's day, I think we have a pretty good idea what he would have thought of it.

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/7053 ... e-leg.html

[Finrock]

It's not about what I want or not want. It's about taking what you posted to its logical conclusion and applying it fairly to every situation.

I'm asking you if you believe that because we can't empirically verify priesthood blessings, should we reject priesthood and God's power to heal?

-Finrock

Once again, you twist 'logic' by comparing things that are not the same. Medical science is verifiable, it has to be, the procedures and treatments have been tested for years before being used on patients. Energy healing is not verifiable through scientific methods, it's not based on science but energy practitioners want to claim their methods work through subjective and unverifiable claims. Priesthood blessings are different from Medical science AND Energy work, they are rooted in the Gospel of Jesus Christ and are reliant on Faith in Christ and the power of God, through the Priesthood of God. How can anyone compare Priesthood to the new age practice of Energy Healing?

Energy healing does not equal Priesthood blessings. Energy healing grew out of Occult practices and beliefs. It is not based in the Gospel of Jesus Christ, energy healers do not need to live worthily to wield this power, they do not need authority from God use it, Energy healing is not reliant on the faith of the individual to be healed--and not all energy healing even acknowledges God. You really cannot compare the two, so why would we judge Priesthood blessings against Energy healing?

A belief in Priesthood blessings is also something not based on science, but it has never been claimed to be. Priesthood power is the power to act in God's name to bless others and is based on principles of righteousness, obedience as well as the faith of the one receiving the blessing. Priesthood blessings are not a 'treatment' and those who give them do not charge money to do so.

One reason your arguments seem to not change is, I believe, that your thinking on this topic has not changed or evolved at all, regardless of the additional information you are provided to help gain a greater, more balanced understanding of it, it seems to have no effect on your opinions.

You assert that I am twisting logic, but that is all that it is...an assertion. Do you understand what my point is? From what you are saying you seem to be missing the point that I'm making. What you are saying and the differences you point out are immaterial to my point. I'm not trying to say that priesthood is energy healing or that EH is priesthood or that either is science in my responses to DesertWonderer.

Science says that any such thing as "priesthood power" is a figment of a person's imagination, placebo, or wishful thinking, and that it has no basis in science. Science does not recognize the existence of God thus they do not recognize the existence of God's power. Science would say that priesthood blessings can't be empirically verified. They would say that it is mythology. Because science says this about priesthood or God's power, should we deny God's power?

Science says that Energy healing is pseudoscience. Science says that EH is a result of placebo, wishful thinking, or a person's imagination and that it has no basis in real science. Science does not recognize the claims of EH. Science says that EH can't be empirically verified. They would say it is just a con. Because science says this about EH should we deny EH?

-Finrock

Yes, If Energy healing cannot be empirically verified, then that's a fact which ought to be recognized. It's a valid statement to say that energy healing has not been empirically verified (maybe in the future, but not now). Don't you think we ought to admit what is fact?

If Energy healing has not been scientifically verified to do anything, then sorry, but we must admit that--that can be considered negative or positive, depending on how one feels about how necessary it is to know that something has verifiable results and there is clear evidence it works.

There is no reason to be concerned about the scientific view of Priesthood power, one does not go to a priesthood holder for a blessing because they are expecting a certain, scientific, verifiable outcome, and of course, there is no exchange of money-- but you can BET that if someone goes to a medical doctor for a procedure, like heart surgery, an appendectomy, gall bladder operation, whatever--that patient rightly EXPECTS a certain outcome that the surgery will have been performed properly as it is supposed to be done, there is a verifiable, expected outcome. If it doesn't, then the Doctor will probably be sued. I don't think anyone sues Energy healers since there is no expectation of a certain outcome. That's because it's not based in science and empirical evidence. As far as I know, they aren't licensed or regulated by the govt. either. As far as I know, there is no one to hold them accountable.

I want to make it clear once more that I'm not comparing priesthood blessing to EH to modern medicine or any combination of comparisons. I'm speaking strictly to how you are applying standards to determine the validity or acceptableness of EH. With that in mind, what you are saying is just special pleading, AI2.0. Whatever, you can special plead, I personally don't care (I have no pony in the race), but just recognize that that is what your argument amounts to (or you are making an argument of irrelevance).

Both priesthood blessing and EH, as far as science is concerned, cannot be empirically verified and are considered bogus. For no apparent or rationally justified reason in your argument you apply the rule, "If it can't be scientifically verified and if it is considered bogus by science, then it should be dismissed", only to EH and not to priesthood blessings, when the rule in reality applies to both. Both EH and priesthood blessings fit the bill of: "Can't be empirically verified and is considered bogus by science." All of the things that DesertWonderer posted regarding EH applies just as much to priesthood blessings.

You say EH hasn't been scientifically verified to do anything and we must admit that. Priesthood blessings haven't been scientifically verified to do anything either. Why must we admit it when it applies to EH but not when it applies to priesthood blessings? You have no good reason. You can't support your argument without appealing to your bias or your ego- and sociocentric paradigm. What is really happening is that it just so happens that you believe in priesthood blessings and that is the ONLY reason why you are not applying the same standards or rules to priesthood blessings as you do to EH. Bringing up the fact that Western Medicine can be scientifically verified is irrelevant to this one point that is being made here. And it is apparent that you have great faith in modern medicine and have a bias in favor of it (which is not to imply that this is bad).

All of these differences and other things you are bringing to special plead for priesthood blessings are immaterial to the point at hand.

EH can be done free of charge and not for profit. When people get priesthood blessings or EH, in both cases people expect an outcome; in both instances people are expecting to be healed or to be made better. In neither case are people expecting or looking for a result that is supported by science.

Your argument, at the end of the day, amounts to special pleading. You can only support your position by appealing to your faith, your bias, and your ego-centric paradigm. That doesn't make a you a bad person or anything and it is quite common for people to special plead because it is quite common to be ego- and sociocentric, but it is important that you at least recognize this.

-Finrock

[JohnnyL]

Johnny, I'm going to share with you some information about the origins of Modern Medicine. I hope this will help you to have a more accurate view of the history of medicine. In Joseph's day, the standards were low and there were many different kinds of medical practices--in his day, you could have billed yourself as a 'doctor' doing Energy work and it would have been legal to do so. This also explains why people in Joseph Smith's day were wary of Doctors--and well they should have been, treating patients and calling oneself a Doctor, was not regulated, and they followed different beliefs, it was not at all the way Medicine is taught or practiced today. Joseph's brother Alvin died in the 1820's. I already explained to you that Joseph Smith's leg and life was saved by a surgery which was based in the science of the human body, not superstition, Dr. Nathan Smith was the only Doctor who performed this surgery, it didn't catch on for over 50 years, possibly because it was so difficult a procedure.

When you look at the timeline, you will see that many of the things we take for granted in Modern Medicine were not discovered until several decades later. And the Science of Medicine continues to discover and invent new procedures and practices to improve the lives of people.

Timeline of medical milestones during the 19th century
La la la.

Before you go dismissing all that Modern Medicine has given us, maybe you should read a bit about it.

And here's an article about the surgery which was performed to save Joseph Smith jr's leg. You've shared disparaging comments he made about some doctors, but you ought to be honest about just what kind of Doctors he was complaining about. NOT the ones who saved his leg, the pioneers of Modern Medicine--but the ones who used questionable methods and lacked real training in anatomy, chemistry, biology, pharmacology etc. Those were the ones he was complaining about. Men and Women studied a couple of books, or took a course, who then put out a shingle and claimed to be able to treat and heal the sick, when they had no idea what they were doing and relied on unproven and even dangerous practices to treat their patients. If Energy healing had been around in Joseph's day, I think we have a pretty good idea what he would have thought of it.

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/7053 ... e-leg.html

Please tell me why sharing someone's remarks about doctors is not being honest. If there is any disparaging in the remarks made by JS, I believe you should talk to HIM about them, not me. Perhaps you can find quotes by JS to the contrary, and post them?

I wrote about the doctor. Please do your own checking, that the medical procedure was NOT peer-reviewed, was NOT accepted by other doctors, etc. --until about 100 years later.

When JS was alive, there wasn't the distinction among doctors that you claim existed, unless you can perhaps show some sources? Perhaps you can show that the five doctors that killed/ couldn't save Alvin were "ones who used questionable methods and lacked real training in anatomy, chemistry, biology, pharmacology etc.", and [men] who "studied a couple of books, or took a course, who then put out a shingle and claimed to be able to treat and heal the sick"?

Now, doctors still give us enough deaths to the third leading cause of death in the USA, and place us #30 in OECD countries in infant mortality rate, and #49 in mother mortality rate. As BY said, if everyone were to live a healthy lifestyle, and treat with herbs, we wouldn't need most of those nice things you posted.

If Energy healing had been around in Joseph's day, I think we have a pretty good idea what he would have thought of it.

Ah, what special knowledge are you withholding from us? Seriously? I think that's choice! Is there anything else you want to speculate about "what JS would have thought about?? Though, it's no secret he DID tell us a lot about what he thought about people who judge others unrighteously, who cannot accept new thinking (even if it's true), etc.

And you still missed the entire point of what I wrote--it's about double standards, special pleading, generalization, shifting, and other biases and illogical things. It's not a new topic for me to write about when talking about EH.

Now, if anyone would like to learn about the evil of WM, pharmacology, the FDA, etc., let me know, I'll post a few references for you to read and learn from. Especially the AMA--gotta love power, bullying, money, special treatment, special politics, special support, and all that good stuff!! (I won't even touch the modern prices, the people it's left in debt and bankruptcy, the $7 bandaids and the $14 "put the bandaid on the scratch" charges, etc.)

[Sarah]

The majority of Doctors in Joseph Smith's time, did not practice what we call modern medicine, as it was in it's infancy, however, Dr. Smith, who operated on Joseph's leg and managed to save it and him, was one of the early practitioners of modern medical science. Do you really think that Joseph was so ungrateful as to attack ALL Doctors, even the one who saved his life and limb as well? Of course not, Joseph was not ungrateful or foolish.

As for the doctors, Joseph WAS calling out the quacks and the charlatans, the snake oil salesmen and the deceivers. Yes, he would have called out those who pretended to be treating desperately ill people with fake medicines and made up treatments which did nothing for the patient (that was the better outcome, sometimes their treatments made them worse, even killing at times) but served to make the practitioners money.

Joseph was not calling out ALL lawyers, doctors, editors, judges, jurors etc. He was calling out the wicked ones, which I have no problem with today either.

The majority of doctors DID practice modern medicine. Note that Alvin was killed by a REAL doctor, and four other REAL doctors couldn't save him. This was hardly the first, and hardly the last.

So you're saying that even though it came from a bad source (Satan), it "got better" and became good? Is this yet ANOTHER double standard?

In 1843 Joseph Smith told the Saints: “The doctors in this region don’t know much… doctors won’t tell you how to go to be well. They want to kill or cure you to get your money. Calomel doctors will give you calomel to cure a sliver in the big toe and not stop to know whether the stomach is empty or not."

Army doctor Sanderson with the Mormon Battalion killed a guy or two with his medicine (calomel--oh, you don't want mercury?).

Even Nathan Smith's procedure of saving JS's leg was not condoned by the medical profession--until WW1. No peer reviews on that, so I guess it wasn't really science.

In 1869 instead of commenting that the Mormons relied too much upon the Lord, he commented that the Saints relied too much upon modern medicine. It must be acknowledged that the Relief Society, the women’s organization of the Church, had been very pro-active in training women as nurses and midwives and in establishing good medical care among the Saints. The practice of plural marriage actually liberated women to go east for medical schooling because they had other women to care for their children at home. Brigham Young called a number of men and women in the Church to go east for medical education.

In 1872, the year he sent a nephew off to medical school, he said,
Would you want doctors? Yes, to set bones. We would want a good surgeon for that, or to cut off a limb. Do you want doctors? For not much of anything else, let me tell you, only the traditions of the people lead them to think so, and here is a GROWING EVIL IN OUR MIDST. … Now the cry is “Send for a doctor.’ If you have a pain in the head, ‘Send for a doctor, if you feel aches, “I want a doctor’ …

Herbalist John Heinerman observed:

“First of all, he believed in doctors, but only to the extent of fractures, sprains and such, with a surgeon necessary for amputation when they may occur … the real reason is because a good majority of the Mormon people wanted these services for themselves in the territory.”

And rather than suffer to see some corrupt Gentile practitioners come in and work their stuff upon the members of the Church, he felt that if they had to have doctors, they might as well have those of their own faith treat them. The territory had already been “blessed” with a few of those kind of the world, and he did not want any more if he could help it. (Joseph Smith and Herbal Medicine, page 93). https://historyofmormonism.com/2013/04/ ... -medicine/

Mercury, arsenic, lead, and more--good ol' doctor cures for what ailed you. :ymapplause: #-o

There are plenty of people who agree that modern medicine can be influenced by evil, or selfish, or conspiring men and women. I would not argue for example that going to a doctor for depression is "right" and seeking alternative medicine is "wrong." That's why I asked for specifics, because each technique must stand on it's own.

I see a problem if someone is commanding the body to do something. I also see a problem with things like hypnosis where you are placed in a state that makes you less conscious/accountable, and open to outside influences. All these techniques open the door for Satan's influence. And yes, prescription drugs can do the same thing. But pointing out the corruption in the medical field in order to justify or excuse Energy Healers who invoke the name of Christ for example, or use other techniques that are spiritual in nature, does not make sense, nor does it strengthen your arguments in favor of it. Unless you have an injury or an acute illness due to infection, the best course is to change your diet, concentrating on what you put into your body, avoiding all evil, and seeking divine help. Doing that will change your mental and emotional state.

Every con-EH I have met invokes a double-standard when it comes to EH vs. Western medicine (WM). They use many arguments that are also double standards. This and many of my content shows that and how hypocritical it is. To them, WM is God's gift to mankind, while EH is Satan's gift to mankind. Nonsense on both. They CAN both be.

Not only do you have to take into account each different way, but you have to take into account each person.

Energy Healers who invoke the name of Christ

It would depend on how they did it, and what they meant by it. Would you prefer your surgeon to pray before operating? Don't people pray that their hands will be guided by God, and that they will know what to do? Or that the doctors will?

Hypnosis and "Mesmerism" have shown to be very beneficial (not talking much about the typical clinical hypnosis where you're in a relaxed state). Yes, as with all things, you are open to something other than yourself, though for some people, this would likely be beneficial, lol. But you do that every time you see a doctor, too. I'd rather have my child see a hypnotist than a psychiatrist, especially unsupervised.

use other techniques that are spiritual in nature

What is actually meant by "spiritual techniques", or as another person wrote, "spiritual healing"?

Yes, much could be avoided by lifestyle changes, especially the diseases we are dying from now. Unfortunately, much of what is behind our lifestyle, are nonconsious thoughts that drive and control us. This is often where EH comes in--to get rid of/ change the controlling negative thoughts. Most of those drivers were attained before the age of 8, or through trauma at any age. Do you believe that trauma is more likely of God, or of Satan?

I have never had EH affect me with a negative spirit like OTC--not prescription--drugs have. I lost my conscience on occasions, and could be brutal. Let's see, would that be God or Satan?

Anyway, as I was reading I came across this, which I have mentioned a few times before as JS quoting--there are three spirits (God, Satan, man), not just two (God, Satan): DC 46:7 But ye are commanded in all things to ask of God, who giveth liberally; and that which the Spirit testifies unto you even so I would that ye should do in all holiness of heart, walking uprightly before me, considering the end of your salvation, doing all things with prayer and thanksgiving, that ye may not be seduced by evil spirits, or doctrines of devils, or the commandments of men; for some are of men, and others of devils.

Nothing wrong with praying before you do something, even if you are being paid to do it, but I don't think it is appropriate for a professional or anyone who is being paid to do something to pray during the time of service. Sure, pray beforehand, that you can do your job well, but if you pray during the time of service, the message you send is that this is part of what you are being paid to do.

And really, praying before-hand is not my main concern. I am concerned with anyone who would command in His name or use prayer as the main technique. I know this is not the common way Energy Healers do business, but I also am concerned with things like muscle testing or techniques that attempt to communicate with with the body/spirit/mind in order to unleash these so-called trapped emotions. It is based on this strange premise that our unconscious state can communicate and choose to do something. Yes, we have influence over ourselves, but I don't believe that your spirit/mind can unconsciously communicate or make decisions. It's like saying you have two separate intelligence's inside of you that have agency. If you are not using your own agency to communicate something, then my feeling is that another spirit is doing the communicating or influencing that communication. I can see how feelings or memories might be repressed, but at the same time, there is proof that hypnotism for example results in false memories. Are these "memories" or feelings planted by an evil spirit or the practitioner? If you have buried feelings that are causing you to act in fear then you do need healing, but that fear can be dealt with by accessing the grace of our Savior through repentance, forgiveness, and prayer. At least with traditional medicine, there is a physical manipulation, ingestion, or injection of something and the body does the work of healing from there. But things like muscle testing, where you are treating your body like it has a mind of it's own (or like a Ouija board) does not mesh with what we know about accessing healing through the Savior.