Heart hurt...

[h_p]

I think maybe his step 3 is the scariest. the response you may get may not be from who you are hoping to get it from, and who you may believe you got it from. I think that once you start pleading with God for permission to go against his commandments (you know that John 3:5, Matthew 10:22, Nephi 22:31, Alma 5:13 and on and on and on...Don't try and get permission to go against what God has commanded), you are already listening to the wrong spirit

I'm confused, are you saying that asking God who He wants you to become is equivalent to asking Him for permission to go against His commandments? Let's set aside your opinions of the kind of person Amonhi is, I'm just asking the interpretation of these words, regardless of who uttered them. Or are you actually saying his step 3 is wrong simply because he's Amonhi?

[gclayjr]

h_p,

I'm confused, are you saying that asking God who He wants you to become is equivalent to asking Him for permission to go against His commandments? Let's set aside your opinions of the kind of person Amonhi is, I'm just asking the interpretation of these words, regardless of who uttered them. Or are you actually saying his step 3 is wrong simply because he's Amonhi?

No I am saying that the scriptures are clear what God's commandments are (see my references), and when you go inquiring looking for exemption from those commandments, you may get the response you are looking for, but not from whom you are looking for it from. And if you are distant enough from God to make that request, that response may seem godly.

I just pointed out my personal experience with Amonhi to show that this is not just a theoretical idea, but I found it extremely disturbing that he thought that Jesus Christ was visiting him in his bedroom regularly. That to me was evidential proof of what I already knew.

Regards,

George Clay

[AI2.0]

I'm sorry, but while at the very least, 'trying' is usually commended, in this instance, it is not. It's not to their improvement or betterment if they are seeking after this sacred gift for their own aggrandizement, because of the damage it can do if done for the wrong reason. If someone seeks after Calling and Election made sure for selfish reasons, they have NO UNDERSTANDING of what this gift truly means and they could be headed towards their own damnation--because of the very nature of what Calling and Election really means.

I'm not sure how we're actually disagreeing here, so please help me understand better what you're saying. So if you would, if someone tells you they are praying and hoping to one day return to Father's presence, do you also question their motives, fearing that they may be doing it for selfish reasons?

I'm just having a hard time understanding why someone wanting to make their calling and election sure is treated with so much suspicion.

I can see your confusion. Ten years ago, if a person told me they were seeking to have their calling and election made sure, I would have applauded their desire and felt like I'd found a kindred spirit with whom I could discuss this topic. But, since reading more on this on internet forums, my feelings are mixed. I've seen people who left the church because they were seeking for this and it didn't come within the time frame they felt it should, they felt rejected by God and so they rejected him and the church. And on this forum I've been exposed to those who claim to have received this gift and now they are out of the church, they think that they've moved on past the church, it's teachings and commandments. Some of the most obvious are the Denver Snuffer adherents. They seek their calling and election and they are already out of the church, following after a man who was excommunicated.

I believe the doctrine of Calling and Election made sure, and what it's morphed into to some members on the fringes, is a perfect example of a last days warning against False prophets and false teachers and that; 'if it were possible, even the very elect will be deceived'... Because we see some very good, well-meaning, once devout LDS members who've been deceived into thinking that their church leaders aren't to be trusted, and instead, they put their trust in an anonymous group of people writing as 'Amonhi' to follow their admonitions in how to receive this gift, or following an excommunicated man who has made this the central tenet of his faith--except that it's been twisted into a bizarre belief that this is required for entrance into the Celestial kingdom, and it must happen while a person is living.

So, yes. Sadly, I DO treat it with suspicion these days, because of what's been done to this doctrine by people like Denver Snuffer and the Elliason group. It's also sometimes cited by people who want to discount church leaders because they do not publicly share their spiritual manifestations, and to criticize the church, accusing them of keeping important doctrines from the members or not teaching them anymore because they believe the LDS church is corrupt, fallen or simply a 'corporation'.

[h_p]

No I am saying that the scriptures are clear what God's commandments are (see my references), and when you go inquiring looking for exemption from those commandments, you may get the response you are looking for, but not from whom you are looking for it from. And if you are distant enough from God to make that request, that response may seem godly.

I just pointed out my personal experience with Amonhi to show that this is not just a theoretical idea, but I found it extremely disturbing that he thought that Jesus Christ was visiting him in his bedroom regularly. That to me was evidential proof of what I already knew.

Nothing you said here or in your previous comments has anything to do with what this statement means:

3. And only if you get a negative response ask the following…Who do I need to “become” to be worthy of the promise? – Wait for a response…

I'm not talking about Amonhi the person, or his character. I'm just asking about how AI2.0 interprets this statement, as it stands. All I've gotten from her and you are just evasion, straw men, and sidestepping. That's ok, it doesn't really matter to me what you two think. I've heard all I need to hear from both of you.

[AI2.0]

I think maybe his step 3 is the scariest. the response you may get may not be from who you are hoping to get it from, and who you may believe you got it from. I think that once you start pleading with God for permission to go against his commandments (you know that John 3:5, Matthew 10:22, Nephi 22:31, Alma 5:13 and on and on and on...Don't try and get permission to go against what God has commanded), you are already listening to the wrong spirit

I'm confused, are you saying that asking God who He wants you to become is equivalent to asking Him for permission to go against His commandments? Let's set aside your opinions of the kind of person Amonhi is, I'm just asking the interpretation of these words, regardless of who uttered them. Or are you actually saying his step 3 is wrong simply because he's Amonhi?

Here's my take on it: Step three is not a problem in and of itself--if you are thinking of it as was referred to in a recent General Conference talk; paraphrased-- 'What yet do I lack?' I think it's a great thing for all of us to ask God to see where we need to grow and improve. But, in the context of what Amonhi is teaching, it's a problem, because his method opens one up to deception so step three can be an opportunity to take an inquirer into wrong paths or off the mark.

You might think this can't happen, or I'm being overly pessimistic, but I recall a person on this forum telling of having what she claimed as some sort of spiritual manifestation of Jesus--she said he told her to drink coffee and get a tattoo. I can only go by what I read, but I absolutely perceived this as her claiming to receive 'permission' and even encouragement to do things that she normally would not have done and knew that other LDS would not approve of, because of the Word of Wisdom and the admonishment of Pres. Hinckley. It's amazing that this person could not see how bizarre it would be for Jesus to tell a supposedly devout LDS person something like this. It should have been obvious that she was being deceived, but apparently, she couldn't see it.

So, should there be a concern that some are unconsciously trying to get permission to break commandments or to 'sin'...I'd say absolutely. I also know of examples of LDS members who thought they were being told to leave their spouse or have an affair because 'God wanted them to'...this does happen, as crazy as it sounds, and these were members who claimed to be close to the spirit or to have had marvelous spiritual experiences.

[AI2.0]

No I am saying that the scriptures are clear what God's commandments are (see my references), and when you go inquiring looking for exemption from those commandments, you may get the response you are looking for, but not from whom you are looking for it from. And if you are distant enough from God to make that request, that response may seem godly.

I just pointed out my personal experience with Amonhi to show that this is not just a theoretical idea, but I found it extremely disturbing that he thought that Jesus Christ was visiting him in his bedroom regularly. That to me was evidential proof of what I already knew.

Nothing you said here or in your previous comments has anything to do with what this statement means:

3. And only if you get a negative response ask the following…Who do I need to “become” to be worthy of the promise? – Wait for a response…

I'm not talking about Amonhi the person, or his character. I'm just asking about how AI2.0 interprets this statement, as it stands. All I've gotten from her and you are just evasion, straw men, and sidestepping. That's ok, it doesn't really matter to me what you two think. I've heard all I need to hear from both of you.

I'm sorry you feel this way hp, I've tried to answer your questions as best I know how and I did offer my thoughts on number three above.

I also gave you examples that I've seen and tried to be straight and honest as to why this is a concern for me. No evasion, straw men arguments or sidestepping. I only use Amonhi (we don't know how many people have actually posted, claiming to be a person, 'Amonhi' ) because 'he' is the 'ringleader' of the Elliason group and that calling and election thread Brlenox linked to is most likely their creation. If you don't care what we think, that's fine, you are free to ignore or dissmiss what others say, I just hope that readers of this thread who haven't made up their minds will at least consider what we've shared. I've spent more time on this than I should, I've got many other things I really ought to be doing.

[h_p]

Here's my take on it: Step three is not a problem in and of itself--if you are thinking of it as was referred to in a recent General Conference talk; paraphrased-- 'What yet do I lack?' I think it's a great thing for all of us to ask God to see where we need to grow and improve.

Then it would be nice if you could stop misrepresenting what he's saying. If you think he's leading people astray, that's one thing, and you should address that. But claiming he's saying something he's clearly not in order to discredit and mock him is something else entirely.

[ETA]: and for what it's worth, I'm not one of his followers. I don't have a dog in that race, nor do I have an opinion on the truthfulness of his claims to be having daily visits from Christ. So please don't start making assumptions about my motives here.

[AI2.0]

Here's my take on it: Step three is not a problem in and of itself--if you are thinking of it as was referred to in a recent General Conference talk; paraphrased-- 'What yet do I lack?' I think it's a great thing for all of us to ask God to see where we need to grow and improve.

Then it would be nice if you could stop misrepresenting what he's saying. If you think he's leading people astray, that's one thing, and you should address that. But claiming he's saying something he's clearly not in order to discredit and mock him is something else entirely.

[ETA]: and for what it's worth, I'm not one of his followers. I don't have a dog in that race, nor do I have an opinion on the truthfulness of his claims to be having daily visits from Christ. So please don't start making assumptions about my motives here.

Excuse me? Who am I misrepresenting? You think I'm misrepresenting what 'Amonhi' has said? I'm sorry, but you are wrong, I'm not, I know exactly what Amonhi is saying. Some of you don't actually read his posts, you don't discuss with him, but then you get defensive when others challenge what he says. I don't know why you do that, and frankly, it's not something I concern myself with.

I have absolutely no idea what your assumptions are and I have no idea if you are a member of Elliason either--I never thought this, hinted at it or considered the possibility, so I don't know why you are responding in this defensive manner.

I think we can end this conversation since you've already said you've heard enough from me.

[thisisspartaaa]

My sweet 3 months away from being 4 year old girl --I had to help her read the scripture in primary today. In asking what scripture she was assigned-- they said you pick the one you want". So I picked something sweet and simple yet beautiful and profound... "where your heart is there your treasure will be also" I promptly made my way to Sunday school after this satisfying little experience to learn that the lesson was on D&C 76 .As we got to the point where they were talking about Celestial Kingdom requirements--- a very faithful ward member, probably in her mid-sixties, made the statement that when she was a young adult there was consistent emphasis placed / taught in the church about receiving your calling and election and laying hold upon the deeper things in the Kingdom. This sister expressed her gratitude on what has been taught for the last little while in church (the past 4 decades) about Just having to endure to the end. Comments were flying around in agreeance about how we should not look beyond the mark etc. It was such a struggle and challenge for me to hear all this. More than anything it was very sad for me to realize that this is and has been where we are at in the church for some time... the more I read and truly understand the scriptures the more sad I am by the narrative in church that suggest a different type of hungering and thirsting and obtaining then what holy writ and the Prophet Joseph Smith etc admonised... There is so much treasure to lay hold upon . Is it safe to say hearts have and are waxing cold in our desire and understanding in the necessity of obtaining these **salvational truths**? These "said" most important truths have been and are tragically minimized in Church.

Um, I fail to see how your heart is hurt. The church should be a place where the imperfect can come and learn without fear of being judged for the comments they make. The most liberating part in my life is realizing I am no better off than anyone else.

My imperfections disqualify me from being in the Lord's presence. I'd be shut out forever if it wasn't for the Savior. We seem to think that just because our boat may have only a few holes and someone else's has a whole lot more, we are somehow better off or more spiritually "mature." The reality is that both boats won't ever make their destination unless those holes are plugged up.

[diligently seeking]

My sweet 3 months away from being 4 year old girl --I had to help her read the scripture in primary today. In asking what scripture she was assigned-- they said you pick the one you want". So I picked something sweet and simple yet beautiful and profound... "where your heart is there your treasure will be also" I promptly made my way to Sunday school after this satisfying little experience to learn that the lesson was on D&C 76 .As we got to the point where they were talking about Celestial Kingdom requirements--- a very faithful ward member, probably in her mid-sixties, made the statement that when she was a young adult there was consistent emphasis placed / taught in the church about receiving your calling and election and laying hold upon the deeper things in the Kingdom. This sister expressed her gratitude on what has been taught for the last little while in church (the past 4 decades) about Just having to endure to the end. Comments were flying around in agreeance about how we should not look beyond the mark etc. It was such a struggle and challenge for me to hear all this. More than anything it was very sad for me to realize that this is and has been where we are at in the church for some time... the more I read and truly understand the scriptures the more sad I am by the narrative in church that suggest a different type of hungering and thirsting and obtaining then what holy writ and the Prophet Joseph Smith etc admonised... There is so much treasure to lay hold upon . Is it safe to say hearts have and are waxing cold in our desire and understanding in the necessity of obtaining these **salvational truths**? These "said" most important truths have been and are tragically minimized in Church.

Um, I fail to see how your heart is hurt. The church should be a place where the imperfect can come and learn without fear of being judged for the comments they make. The most liberating part in my life is realizing I am no better off than anyone else.

My imperfections disqualify me from being in the Lord's presence. I'd be shut out forever if it wasn't for the Savior. We seem to think that just because our boat may have only a few holes and someone else's has a whole lot more, we are somehow better off or more spiritually "mature." The reality is that both boats won't ever make their destination unless those holes are plugged up.

I think the word of the day from posts I read is "assumptions" I see a lot of it in your remarks. No doubt you probably could say the same about me. At the end of the day a person's expressions are best understood in part from what type of experiences we've had ( where we can relate) and where our understanding is(our knowledge base) and frankly what emotions we strive to nurture etc. When assumptions / personal bias rule the day-- it makes for great forum zingers / contention.

I know we are discussing heavy matters... I'm still amazed at positions people take to get their point across that are so contrary to how a disciple of Christ should communicate / persuade. No doubt I got to look closer at my approach and make improvements. We are all striving to arrive. Here's hoping there's a little more --Jesus-- in the way we engage on this forum.

[BTH&T]

My thoughts in blue.....

I think the word of the day from posts I read is "assumptions" I see a lot of it in your remarks. No doubt you probably could say the same about me. ...

I believe that IS the issue! Too many moats and beams!

Why do we ever get so concerned of what is said or done by others?

Are there errors and misconceptions from others in church or here on this forum?

Absolutely, each of us has our own perspectives and points of reference and hence it becomes critical that we do not judge unrighteously.



I know we are discussing heavy matters...
I'm still amazed at positions people take to get their point across that are so contrary to how a disciple of Christ should communicate / persuade.

The reason that many take such hardened stands is that we each are standing up for truth as we know it, and these are serious matters.


No doubt I got to look closer at my approach and make improvements. We are all striving to arrive. Here's hoping there's a little more --Jesus-- in the way we engage on this forum.

For the most part there has been a civil discussion from what I've read

[diligently seeking]

My thoughts in blue.....

I think the word of the day from posts I read is "assumptions" I see a lot of it in your remarks. No doubt you probably could say the same about me. ...

I believe that IS the issue! Too many moats and beams!

Why do we ever get so concerned of what is said or done by others?

Are there errors and misconceptions from others in church or here on this forum?

Absolutely, each of us has our own perspectives and points of reference and hence it becomes critical that we do not judge unrighteously.



I know we are discussing heavy matters...
I'm still amazed at positions people take to get their point across that are so contrary to how a disciple of Christ should communicate / persuade.

The reason that many take such hardened stands is that we each are standing up for truth as we know it, and these are serious matters.


No doubt I got to look closer at my approach and make improvements. We are all striving to arrive. Here's hoping there's a little more --Jesus-- in the way we engage on this forum.

For the most part there has been a civil discussion from what I've read

Thanks for your thoughts!

https://www.ldsfreedomforum.com/viewtop ... 14&t=45692

[BackBlast]

You've read that thread? Uh... You do know it's like 49 pages long! I find it hard to believe you're complaining about Brlenox's posts but yet managed to get through Amonhi's tomes in that monstrosity of a thread????

I read what I felt were satisfactory portions of that thread, and I read them approximately 8-10 months ago. No, I did not read all 49 pages, but I think the meat of what is being referenced isn't all 49 pages either.

So, I suspect you actually skimmed even the first post on that thread, since Amonhi is pretty hard to read through carefully, so let me just point out a section of his post that shows it IS a 'short cut' which Amonhi is putting forward.

First it's titled 'The Fastest way to make your calling and election sure'. You don't see 'short cut' in the title?? Cause he means for his audience to view is as a short cut, a 'simple' way to get a blessing which our LDS doctrine teaches is not so simple.

How is praying for the next step and getting an answer a shortcut? If you can receive revelation from prayer then you will be led to the next step, whatever that is. Instead of flailing about doing your own thing you're doing His will.

Short cut implies that you're skipping parts of the process. He is telling you that if you stick to the business and progress intentionally step by step you will get there the quickest. I agree with him. It is not a "cheat".

Amonhi is suggesting that many life long, spiritually sanctified and justified, fully qualified members of the LDS church don't receive this because they failed to ask for it in the manner he specifies. So in Amonhi's opinion, God is like some petulant and snippy parent who refuses to give this sacred, glorious gift, even though you've earned it, because you didn't say the magic word; 'pleeeeeeazzzze????' And truthfully, we know it's not actually necessary to 'ask' since Moriancumr, the Brother of Jared did not ask and still received a manifestation of the Lord's finger. This doesn't mean we shouldn't ask, it just means that God will not withhold this gift if we fail to ask.

I don't believe he is saying you are required to ask exactly in that manner. He isn't trying to say this is the *only* way as you imply here. One of Amonhi's points is that we fail to receive things that are freely offered of the Lord. One of the reasons I like that thread is because I was in that exact position when I encountered it. Not everyone need ask because some are humble enough to accept and receive without asking. Some others of us need to let go of false belief before we can receive. I have mentioned all this earlier in the thread.

Also, look at his steps. Where is redemption through the atoning blood of Christ? There is no mention of obedience to commandments, which is a serious omission, as well as the fact that there's no mention of a need to be continually repentant and for the person to have shown a life of having lost oneself in the service of others, as Christ did. These are things that Joseph Smith Jr. taught when he put this doctrine forward, but Amonhi ignores them.

You are right, seeking and asking isn't in itself a 'shortcut', but telling us that all we need to do is 'seek and ask', without having lived a life which qualifies us for this gift, is leading others astray--getting them to believe something false and the worst outcome is that they foolishly try Amonhi's suggestion and end up being deceived by a false manifestation, which can and does happen (Joseph Smith warned of this).

1) So you admit it isn't a shortcut, thank you.
2) No where does he say you get to skip required steps, you are pulling that out of thin air and putting it here without basis. Open ended requests for what the next step is, is hardly progressing to it without ... having lived a life which qualifies us for this gift... It is intentionally getting to the business, and some of those steps may well take years and be very difficult.
3) If you cannot receive or distinguish answers from prayer, asking any inquiry of the Lord can result in deception. With this attitude you shouldn't ask if the church or book of mormon holds truth either. You might be deceived and lead astray.

From my point of view, it's Celestial kingdom and exaltation or bust. Full speed ahead. If I need to deal with devils and lies, so be it. I've had my share of them to swat. I do not let their existence or possible moves hinder my actions, requests, or desires. Being aware of potential tricks on their part is, indeed, part of the business. Being able to distinguish the voice of the Lord from the others is, I believe, a primary test here. Those who can, can benefit from some of the ideas in that thread. Those who can't, aren't really any worse off than they were before. Perhaps through making the attempt they will learn a bit they need.

This attitude is the exact one I would encounter while teaching as a missionary. Prayer is dangerous. Don't do it, don't ask about those messengers, their book, or their church.

[BackBlast]

You are not really responding to the information and the warning I put out. That is always a point for concern. However, you prove my point in this paragraph above. God always has to strive with man. Not just you but with all of us and the wonderful thing is will do it. He even got through stubborn, obstinate BackBlast to teach you what you needed to know. That is how it works.

I cannot fully digest your posts in the time I have available for it. If I didn't find the point you wanted me to, I suggest you make your post simpler and more concise because I cannot allow you to monopolize my time in that fashion.

I guess if you feel it proves your point then we are not in disagreement.

I'll keep this brief...However, I sense undertones in your post ...ie. "I can't allow you" as if you sense or feel something that I am at a loss to understand. Perhaps you might briefly explain. However, if you do take the time to explain yourself well and in detail, know that I value your opinion sufficient to read the entirety of it. I was recently taught how to wink and am expanding on my use of it.

My apologies for being a little dismissive. In the last two week my entire family has been sick (flu, seasonal allergies), I had a car totaled, and I sold a house (FSBO, which in retrospect was a bit large of a bite to chew for me right now), while trying to work two jobs. The reality is this forum is waaay down my list of priorities and not tagged with essential. When I'm flooded with things that are, non essential things get cut.

I generally feel obligated to respond to people who present reasonable arguments. You can make your points a bit more briefly and citations do not need to be made inline. There is such a thing as too long, and at least for me, you're are getting there with some of the responses. Length is recognized by some as a poor debate tactic ( Protest-too-much quantity of sources: https://johntreed.com/blogs/john-t-reed ... te-tactics ). Not saying you are guilty of this as I'm just rather burdened at this time, though perhaps you would find it interesting to reflect on.

[brlenox]

This attitude is the exact one I would encounter while teaching as a missionary. Prayer is dangerous. Don't do it, don't ask about those messengers, their book, or their church.

This is a false association. There is a world of difference between missionaries encouraging a prayer as a means of getting sufficient instruction from the spirit for an investigator to derive the strength and purpose necessary to entire the Gospel path. Which path will place them in a position to gain the spirit as a permanent guide which if they embrace will bring them back into the presence of their God. The Holy Ghost will tailor a course of instructions perfect for the individual according to their strengths and weaknesses as they serve God. That is the process. Others in other religions, actually might discourage this type of prayer as they observe its potential influence.

However, when members to misunderstand or illustrate the lack of faith that that same spirit is the chosen guide, it is telling. The Holy Ghost as the guide will guide them to wherever the Lord would have them be. When other men circumvent the process by placing themselves as guide and instructor they have no means of taking stock of an individuals progress. It is also a clear indication that they cannot answer in the affirmative the question of the Lord, "Believest thou the words which I shall speak?" because they do not believe that he can see to his own work, after his own manner and in his own time through his appointed means.

Yours is simply a semantical defense. Someone calls it a shortcut, or fastest or quickest and you want to debate the relevance of the term without gauging the implication of what they are trying to say. It is surprising that you do not discern the spirit of the message and recognize it's fallibility or maybe it is not...Let's change the venue a bit.

Instead of Webstering this to death educate us as to where the scriptures advocate or illustrate any example to seek to build up ones kingdom in such a fashion. Show us where any of the prophets had to approach the Lord in this fashion to receive their calling and election. Or even your contention that people fail to receive this blessing simply because they fail to ask for it. In my opinion this is the first part of he lie that Satan's needs you to believe. However, perhaps I am missing something. Any scriptural example will do , or even story from one of our general authorities that follows a similar tact will be adequate for me to potentially concede your point.

Satan generally in the beginning of trying to deceive others deals in very subtle means. These diversions from the scriptural or prophetic utterance illustrate the process and are just that - subtle means. Consider the clearest statement on the subject in my opinion and note that it does not place the emphasis where some are attempting to place it:

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

[brlenox]

You are not really responding to the information and the warning I put out. That is always a point for concern. However, you prove my point in this paragraph above. God always has to strive with man. Not just you but with all of us and the wonderful thing is will do it. He even got through stubborn, obstinate BackBlast to teach you what you needed to know. That is how it works.

I cannot fully digest your posts in the time I have available for it. If I didn't find the point you wanted me to, I suggest you make your post simpler and more concise because I cannot allow you to monopolize my time in that fashion.

I guess if you feel it proves your point then we are not in disagreement.

I'll keep this brief...However, I sense undertones in your post ...ie. "I can't allow you" as if you sense or feel something that I am at a loss to understand. Perhaps you might briefly explain. However, if you do take the time to explain yourself well and in detail, know that I value your opinion sufficient to read the entirety of it. I was recently taught how to wink and am expanding on my use of it.

My apologies for being a little dismissive. In the last two week my entire family has been sick (flu, seasonal allergies), I had a car totaled, and I sold a house (FSBO, which in retrospect was a bit large of a bite to chew for me right now), while trying to work two jobs. The reality is this forum is waaay down my list of priorities and not tagged with essential. When I'm flooded with things that are, non essential things get cut.

I generally feel obligated to respond to people who present reasonable arguments. You can make your points a bit more briefly and citations do not need to be made inline. There is such a thing as too long, and at least for me, you're are getting there with some of the responses. Length is recognized by some as a poor debate tactic ( Protest-too-much quantity of sources: https://johntreed.com/blogs/john-t-reed ... te-tactics ). Not saying you are guilty of this as I'm just rather burdened at this time, though perhaps you would find it interesting to reflect on.

Unfortunate that you have experienced such challenges. I hope your lot is improving and I agree this forum should not be that high on your priority list.

You misunderstand my use of quotes or such. The very issues we are discussing often come down to opinion versus correct understanding. My opinion is as worthless as most on this forum. However when I link my observations to the works of the prophets or properly elaborated on scriptural sources where I suggest what I am using that verse to illustrate it provides clarity and weight to my comments and will be persuasive to those who value the servants of God. I never toss out long runs of scriptures with no effort to illustrate how they apply to the concept under discussion.

The value of using words of the prophets and such is that it seems to tap that gift of enmity in some degree and the way others deal with this source of affirmation often clarifies whose on the Lords side. Reading your link, I immediately recognize we see this forum perhaps differently. I do not come to debate, I come to teach and provide venue where the spirit can affirm or deny. My words are weak sources for the spirit to affirm. The words of the prophets and scriptures are the perfect resource for my goals. Nonetheless, I can appreciate much of the material your link presents especially as it applies to this discussion.

[BackBlast]

This attitude is the exact one I would encounter while teaching as a missionary. Prayer is dangerous. Don't do it, don't ask about those messengers, their book, or their church.

This is a false association. There is a world of difference between missionaries encouraging a prayer as a means of getting sufficient instruction from the spirit for an investigator to derive the strength and purpose necessary to entire the Gospel path. Which path will place them in a position to gain the spirit as a permanent guide which if they embrace will bring them back into the presence of their God. The Holy Ghost will tailor a course of instructions perfect for the individual according to their strengths and weaknesses as they serve God. That is the process. Others in other religions, actually might discourage this type of prayer as they observe its potential influence.

However, when members to misunderstand or illustrate the lack of faith that that same spirit is the chosen guide, it is telling. The Holy Ghost as the guide will guide them to wherever the Lord would have them be. When other men circumvent the process by placing themselves as guide and instructor they have no means of taking stock of an individuals progress. It is also a clear indication that they cannot answer in the affirmative the question of the Lord, "Believest thou the words which I shall speak?" because they do not believe that he can see to his own work, after his own manner and in his own time through his appointed means.

Yours is simply a semantical defense. Someone calls it a shortcut, or fastest or quickest and you want to debate the relevance of the term without gauging the implication of what they are trying to say.

I don't see it as a false association. Prayer is valid in one venue but not in another? Just because one asks about the first step and the other the next step? You spoke for two paragraphs and I am no closer to see why you believe this or what this world of difference is. Because a man outlaid a possibility? Missionaries aren't men too? The whole point of asking in prayer is to tap into another source of knowledge that isn't of man.

Semantical defense? Hogwash. I understand the implication just fine. The implication is error, misleading, false, bad, evil, apostate, darkness, heretic, double plus ungood. The precise adjective used to describe the path is less important than the clear negativity associated with it. Negativity that is poorly supported.

Instead of Webstering this to death educate us as to where the scriptures advocate or illustrate any example to seek to build up ones kingdom in such a fashion. Show us where any of the prophets had to approach the Lord in this fashion to receive their calling and election. Or even your contention that people fail to receive this blessing simply because they fail to ask for it.

"Show thyself unto me." from the example being used over and over in this thread. He was lead to this request, but he made it none the less.

It is more than simply failing to ask for it, as I have stated previously. If you allow false belief or unbelief to encumber your path, you cannot receive. These must be cleared away first. Asking can be a valid tool to do that, if you ask in faith, it does not mix with false belief or unbelief. The act helps you clear your stumbling block.

Satan generally in the beginning of trying to deceive others deals in very subtle means. These diversions from the scriptural or prophetic utterance illustrate the process and are just that - subtle means.

Because you choose to view the scriptural support as otherwise doesn't mean it isn't there.

D&C 88:33

33 For what doth it profit a man if a gift is bestowed upon him, and he receive not the gift? Behold, he rejoices not in that which is given unto him, neither rejoices in him who is the giver of the gift....

Consider the clearest statement on the subject in my opinion and note that it does not place the emphasis where some are attempting to place it:

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

Which is a beautiful statement indeed. I disagree with your conclusion about emphasis.

[brlenox]

This attitude is the exact one I would encounter while teaching as a missionary. Prayer is dangerous. Don't do it, don't ask about those messengers, their book, or their church.

This is a false association. There is a world of difference between missionaries encouraging a prayer as a means of getting sufficient instruction from the spirit for an investigator to derive the strength and purpose necessary to entire the Gospel path. Which path will place them in a position to gain the spirit as a permanent guide which if they embrace will bring them back into the presence of their God. The Holy Ghost will tailor a course of instructions perfect for the individual according to their strengths and weaknesses as they serve God. That is the process. Others in other religions, actually might discourage this type of prayer as they observe its potential influence.

However, when members to misunderstand or illustrate the lack of faith that that same spirit is the chosen guide, it is telling. The Holy Ghost as the guide will guide them to wherever the Lord would have them be. When other men circumvent the process by placing themselves as guide and instructor they have no means of taking stock of an individuals progress. It is also a clear indication that they cannot answer in the affirmative the question of the Lord, "Believest thou the words which I shall speak?" because they do not believe that he can see to his own work, after his own manner and in his own time through his appointed means.

Yours is simply a semantical defense. Someone calls it a shortcut, or fastest or quickest and you want to debate the relevance of the term without gauging the implication of what they are trying to say.

I don't see it as a false association. Prayer is valid in one venue but not in another? Just because one asks about the first step and the other the next step? You spoke for two paragraphs and I am no closer to see why you believe this or what this world of difference is. Because a man outlaid a possibility? Missionaries aren't men too? The whole point of asking in prayer is to tap into another source of knowledge that isn't of man.

Semantical defense? Hogwash. I understand the implication just fine. The implication is error, misleading, false, bad, evil, apostate, darkness, heretic, double plus ungood. The precise adjective used to describe the path is less important than the clear negativity associated with it. Negativity that is poorly supported.

Instead of Webstering this to death educate us as to where the scriptures advocate or illustrate any example to seek to build up ones kingdom in such a fashion. Show us where any of the prophets had to approach the Lord in this fashion to receive their calling and election. Or even your contention that people fail to receive this blessing simply because they fail to ask for it.

"Show thyself unto me." from the example being used over and over in this thread. He was lead to this request, but he made it none the less.

It is more than simply failing to ask for it, as I have stated previously. If you allow false belief or unbelief to encumber your path, you cannot receive. These must be cleared away first. Asking can be a valid tool to do that, if you ask in faith, it does not mix with false belief or unbelief. The act helps you clear your stumbling block.

Satan generally in the beginning of trying to deceive others deals in very subtle means. These diversions from the scriptural or prophetic utterance illustrate the process and are just that - subtle means.

Because you choose to view the scriptural support as otherwise doesn't mean it isn't there.

D&C 88:33

33 For what doth it profit a man if a gift is bestowed upon him, and he receive not the gift? Behold, he rejoices not in that which is given unto him, neither rejoices in him who is the giver of the gift....

Consider the clearest statement on the subject in my opinion and note that it does not place the emphasis where some are attempting to place it:

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

Which is a beautiful statement indeed. I disagree with your conclusion about emphasis.

Thank you for your contributions.

[Finrock]

Bottom Line Up Front: It is good advice to ask God in faith to know where you stand with Him concerning your calling and election. It is good advice to pray to God if you lack wisdom in any and all situations. Don't listen to anyone who says you shouldn't pray to God to find out truth and to gain wisdom.

Substance of Amonhi's post on Calling and Election: Ask God if you have it. Ask God how you can get it if you don't have it. (NOTE: Nowhere in the thread does Amonhi suggest in any way that he is a replacement for God or replacement for the Holy Ghost and that he is to act as a guide and/or that they should trust him (Amonhi) or seek from him (Amonhi) the answer to whether they have their calling and election.)

Counter: It is dangerous to pray and ask God to find out about your Calling and Election or how to get it. You might be deceived. (In short, don't pray to God, you can't rely on prayer in this situation).

Backblast: Missionaries ask investigators to pray about the Church, Book of Mormon, etc. Anti-Mormons tell investigators of the Church "It is dangerous to pray to find out if the Church is true. You might be deceived by the Devil." That doesn't make sense.

Brlenox: False association; Praying and asking God about the Book of Mormon or the Church is very different from praying and asking God about your Calling and Election, because...it is...and Amonhi is trying to replace the Holy Spirit as the guide and instructor (a statement which can't be established).

Example of a False Association fallacy: "John is a con artist. John has black hair. Therefore, all people with black hair are con artists" (Wikipedia.org).

Finrock: Amonhi does not advocate or in any way suggest to replace the Spirit with himself as guide and instructor in the Calling and Election thread. The substance of Amonhi's instructions is to pray about your calling and election and to ask God about it, just like missionaries ask investigators to do about the Church or the Book of Mormon. This advice aligns with scripture and what God has said. God said, if anybody lacks wisdom, no matter the situation, they can and ought to ask God, who gives answers to all men, and doesn't upbraid (upbraid means God won't scold you for asking or think you are a bad person for asking Him because He wants you to ask Him). But, ask in faith without doubting, and then you will receive. The Good Spirit teaches a man to pray. The Evil Spirit teaches a man not to pray. Follow the Good Spirit and pray to God and, if you lack wisdom, ask Him for knowledge and direction. Asking God about your calling and election is exactly the same as asking God for wisdom concerning the Book of Mormon or the truth claims about the Church, etc. You can find out about the truth of all things by the power of the Holy Ghost. Of all things, don't be afraid to pray and to ask God for wisdom regardless of what wisdom you lack, whether it is about your calling and election or about who to marry, or about the Book of Mormon. Just remember to ask in faith, nothing doubting, and God will answer.

-Finrock

[Jonesy]

I won't accuse anyone on here, but there are some who:

1. Do not believe the Church exclusively holds the fullness of the keys to salvation.
2. Do not believe a water baptism is needed from the Church.

Maybe this seems like an arrogant statement, but it is true that these beliefs will set up anyone to be a false teacher and on the road to deception. You can teach truth all day, but eventually the lack of testimony of this being the Lord's church and of its appointed leaders are deceived in this matter. I think this will eventually become more apparent and manifested as we move along, as has been shown with the failure of the Denver Snuffer movement.

[BackBlast]

Maybe this seems like an arrogant statement, but it is true that these beliefs will set up anyone to be a false teacher and on the road to deception. You can teach truth all day, but eventually the lack of testimony of this being the Lord's church and of its appointed leaders are deceived in this matter. I think this will eventually become more apparent and manifested as we move along, as has been shown with the failure of the Denver Snuffer movement.

The trouble is that there are many here who won't accept truth if it comes from one whom they believe is... tainted. Often even when an unassociated person says the same things. They end up judging a person instead of an idea on it's own merits. Since we are being blunt, it's essentially name-calling.

[Elefant]

We need to pray, pray often and with full intent of heart. I don't think that there are thing you can't ask the Lord. You can go before him with any matter. Imagine a loving Father whith whom you can't talk about certain things. If we take everything befor the Lord we actually sort things out. And I dont believe that people can go astray by praying to God, if the heart is sincere. Jesus told us to pray always. If a person wants to talk with God about calling and election, why not. If the heart is sincere the prayer will take the right direction.

[BackBlast]

Unfortunate that you have experienced such challenges.

On the contrary, I'm am growing accustomed to the deep end of the pool. There are times and seasons for it and it is also very much a blessing to experience.

Reading your link, I immediately recognize we see this forum perhaps differently. I do not come to debate, I come to teach and provide venue where the spirit can affirm or deny.

Whenever there are various sides to an issue, we discuss/deliberate/discuss them to communicate them. The conceptual notion here is the same whatever your word preference here, and there are proper and improper methods of accomplishing this.

[Jonesy]

Maybe this seems like an arrogant statement, but it is true that these beliefs will set up anyone to be a false teacher and on the road to deception. You can teach truth all day, but eventually the lack of testimony of this being the Lord's church and of its appointed leaders are deceived in this matter. I think this will eventually become more apparent and manifested as we move along, as has been shown with the failure of the Denver Snuffer movement.

The trouble is that there are many here who won't accept truth if it comes from one whom they believe is... tainted. Often even when an unassociated person says the same things. They end up judging a person instead of an idea on it's own merits. Since we are being blunt, it's essentially name-calling.

There is no doubt that we need to be more charitable to those that err in doctrine, on both sides of the spectrum.

Let me be more frank. Those who do not have a testimony of those things I mentioned above already have the seeds of apostasy sown in their hearts. These are fundamental testimonies that all members should have. If they do not correct this, they may end up leaving the church, if they haven't already. This is a big deal.

I was on the other side before. I was being convinced more and more that the church doesn't matter and that the keys were gone in the church. I came very close to leaving. Maybe my first step coming back was a witness I had from my bishop, although I disregarded it at the time. The second came from a friend who I'd lost contact for a few years and asked his opinion on the matter. Mind you, this friend was the whole package deal with full testimony of the church, that the leaders have the keys, and he obtained all the higher blessings I sought after. It was through his witness and words that the Spirit witnessed the truth to me. That convincing power was missing in all those that were lacking in testimony of those things I stated previously. The witness of the Spirit was with me as I studied about the higher blessings, but it was never from the words of those lacking in testimony.

So, yes, there is truth to be gained from those pushing the higher laws. But sometimes they are missing critical pieces of testimony to have that fullness of the Spirit. That's why to some, it may seem like something is a bit off. I believe that “They also that erred in spirit shall come to understanding, and they that murmured shall learn doctrine.” Probably applicable on both sides. Seek the higher blessings, but don't dismiss the doctrine that this is still Christ's church with the fullness of the keys. As long as we have the 12, this is true.

[brlenox]

Maybe this seems like an arrogant statement, but it is true that these beliefs will set up anyone to be a false teacher and on the road to deception. You can teach truth all day, but eventually the lack of testimony of this being the Lord's church and of its appointed leaders are deceived in this matter. I think this will eventually become more apparent and manifested as we move along, as has been shown with the failure of the Denver Snuffer movement.

The trouble is that there are many here who won't accept truth if it comes from one whom they believe is... tainted. Often even when an unassociated person says the same things. They end up judging a person instead of an idea on it's own merits. Since we are being blunt, it's essentially name-calling.

"You shall not die but shall become as the Gods knowing good and evil...