Elder Hales Last Words

[drtanner]

As quoted by Elder Anderson as the concluding speaker in conference

'When we choose to have faith, we are prepared to stand in the presence of God. After the Savior’s crucifixion, He appeared only to those who had been faithful in the testimony of Him while they lived in mortality. Those who rejected the testimonies of the prophets could not behold the Savior’s presence nor look upon His face. Our faith prepares us to be in the presence of God.'"

[Mark]

Makes me glad I'm not a doubting Thomas.

Or an ark steadying dog with a silly looking cape.


https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=qHej4ZqZDwo

[Onsdag]

Makes me glad I'm not a doubting Thomas.

Or an ark steadying dog with a silly looking cape.


https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=qHej4ZqZDwo

Hey! The cape is actually pretty nice looking, if not a bit long. It's the smashing tights that are rather silly looking.

Apologies for the irreverence, and back to the topic at hand. I really do appreciate that Elder Andersen shared those words from Elder Hales. I got the sense that there was significantly more written by Elder Hales and I hope someday soon we will get to see his talk/testimony in its fullness.

[lemuel]

Those who rejected the testimonies of the prophets could not behold the Savior’s presence nor look upon His face.

...was actually the name of his sled.

[TrueIntent]

Makes me glad I'm not a doubting Thomas.

Yeah But Thomas got to Touch the nail prints in the Saviors hands, and put his fingers through the nail marks. Mary Madeline actually "held" the savior in a clinging way. The other apostles rejected the witnesses of the women (including mary because Jesus couldn't possibly have born witness to women first), and then Thomas rejected the witnesses of the apostles because he said he needed to see it for himself...but he ended up touching the nail prints. I don't know that doubting Thomas's experience was all that bad...He waited 8 days for it but hey....he got to touch him. The Gospel of Thomas, and the gospel of Mary Madeline never made it into the canonized bible. This is just another perspective I have been pondering. The Women and the doubter...maybe their witnesses weren't so bad...maybe others just perceived that they were.

[TrueIntent]

As quoted by Elder Anderson as the concluding speaker in conference

'When we choose to have faith, we are prepared to stand in the presence of God. After the Savior’s crucifixion, He appeared only to those who had been faithful in the testimony of Him while they lived in mortality. Those who rejected the testimonies of the prophets could not behold the Savior’s presence nor look upon His face. Our faith prepares us to be in the presence of God.'"

What does "faithful" in this quote mean? Im not trying to criticize his final remarks, but Peter denied him 3 times the night before he was crucified. We must define "faithful in testimony" in a unique way. Because peter really was a good guy....but a guy who wasn't always faithful (at least until he received the witness of the resurrected Savior any way). It's okay to make mistakes....the apostles constantly questioned Jesus when they were with him, and at some point almost left him. Thats not really true either about rejecting testimonies of the prophets...that those who reject prophets don't behold his face....Paul was raiding and consenting to murdering Christians when christ appeared to him on the side of the road.
What is true in this statement is that our faith prepares us to be in the presence of God...that's about all that's true in this statement.

[Onsdag]

As quoted by Elder Anderson as the concluding speaker in conference

'When we choose to have faith, we are prepared to stand in the presence of God. After the Savior’s crucifixion, He appeared only to those who had been faithful in the testimony of Him while they lived in mortality. Those who rejected the testimonies of the prophets could not behold the Savior’s presence nor look upon His face. Our faith prepares us to be in the presence of God.'"

What does "faithful" in this quote mean? Im not trying to criticize his final remarks, but Peter denied him 3 times the night before he was crucified. We must define "faithful in testimony" in a unique way. Because peter really was a good guy....but a guy who wasn't always faithful (at least until he received the witness of the resurrected Savior any way). It's okay to make mistakes....the apostles constantly questioned Jesus when they were with him, and at some point almost left him. Thats not really true either about rejecting testimonies of the prophets...that those who reject prophets don't behold his face....Paul was raiding and consenting to murdering Christians when christ appeared to him on the side of the road.
What is true in this statement is that our faith prepares us to be in the presence of God...that's about all that's true in this statement.

I believe the answer to your question can be found in 3 Nephi chapter 10:

12 And it was the more righteous part of the people who were saved, and it was they who received the prophets and stoned them not; and it was they who had not shed the blood of the saints, who were spared—

Notice here that the specific reasons mentioned of who was saved consists of 1) those who receive the prophets of God, and 2) those who don't kill the saints and prophets of God.

[e-eye2.0]

Makes me glad I'm not a doubting Thomas.

Or an ark steadying dog with a silly looking cape.


https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=qHej4ZqZDwo

Hmmm... I always think of somebody giving me a big push on a swing set. Artificial highs and then back to reality...

[e-eye2.0]

Makes me glad I'm not a doubting Thomas.

Yeah But Thomas got to Touch the nail prints in the Saviors hands, and put his fingers through the nail marks. Mary Madeline actually "held" the savior in a clinging way. The other apostles rejected the witnesses of the women (including mary because Jesus couldn't possibly have born witness to women first), and then Thomas rejected the witnesses of the apostles because he said he needed to see it for himself...but he ended up touching the nail prints. I don't know that doubting Thomas's experience was all that bad...He waited 8 days for it but hey....he got to touch him. The Gospel of Thomas, and the gospel of Mary Madeline never made it into the canonized bible. This is just another perspective I have been pondering. The Women and the doubter...maybe their witnesses weren't so bad...maybe others just perceived that they were.

So you're saying there's a chance. Yes! I hope he comes around.

[TrueIntent]

As quoted by Elder Anderson as the concluding speaker in conference

'When we choose to have faith, we are prepared to stand in the presence of God. After the Savior’s crucifixion, He appeared only to those who had been faithful in the testimony of Him while they lived in mortality. Those who rejected the testimonies of the prophets could not behold the Savior’s presence nor look upon His face. Our faith prepares us to be in the presence of God.'"

What does "faithful" in this quote mean? Im not trying to criticize his final remarks, but Peter denied him 3 times the night before he was crucified. We must define "faithful in testimony" in a unique way. Because peter really was a good guy....but a guy who wasn't always faithful (at least until he received the witness of the resurrected Savior any way). It's okay to make mistakes....the apostles constantly questioned Jesus when they were with him, and at some point almost left him. Thats not really true either about rejecting testimonies of the prophets...that those who reject prophets don't behold his face....Paul was raiding and consenting to murdering Christians when christ appeared to him on the side of the road.
What is true in this statement is that our faith prepares us to be in the presence of God...that's about all that's true in this statement.

I believe the answer to your question can be found in 3 Nephi chapter 10:

12 And it was the more righteous part of the people who were saved, and it was they who received the prophets and stoned them not; and it was they who had not shed the blood of the saints, who were spared—

Notice here that the specific reasons mentioned of who was saved consists of 1) those who receive the prophets of God, and 2) those who don't kill the saints and prophets of God.

YOU are referring to those who are SAVED....I am referring to exactly what Hales said which is that those who are NOT Faithful in Testimony will not behold the Savior's presence nor look upon his face....technically, the apostles didn't sound very faithful...they even rejected the women who were faithful and received the first witness of the resurrected Christ. You're talking about something completely different. It is not an accurate statement that "he appeared to only those who had been faithful in the testimony of Him while they lived in mortality".....Paul and Peter are great examples of this. It's just not true....It is also not true that "those who reject the testimonies of the prophets could not behold the Saviors presence nor look upon his face"....Joseph Smith followed no latter day prophet (other than his understanding of scripture at that time)...when the Lord appeared to him. An appearance from the Lord is not based on whether or not you reject or accept, OR have been faithful in testimony....one's mission MAY be related to that, like I said...PAUL who was SAUL....is a great example of this. It was the appearance of the Savior when he said "why persecutees thou me" that changed him.

[TrueIntent]

You also confuse being saved....Saved is those who are baptized.....THERE ARE TWO GROUPS of people who are baptized. The pharisees were baptized...but the Savior did not accept their "physical baptism". Physical baptism doesnt nessescarily make one saved either. Theres more to it than that.

[TrueIntent]

ON a side note..in reference to this scriptures and stoning.."12 And it was the more righteous part of the people who were saved, and it was they who received the prophets and stoned them not; and it was they who had not shed the blood of the saints, who were spared—


Stoning was the consequence in Jewish law of those who were accused of blasphemy. Notice that Jesus wasn't stoned, he was crucified, however they accused him of blasphemy but he wasn't stoned...they let the romans do their dirty work....prior to that...prophets were stoned...BECAUSE...they were accused of blasphemy.... What is blasphemy??

This is a dictionary wikipedia definition (not necessarily totally scriptural)"the act or offense of speaking sacrilegiously about God or sacred things; profane talk." Blasphemy is the act of insulting or showing contempt or lack of reverence to a deity, to religious or holy persons or sacred things, or toward something considered sacred or inviolable


So for speaking things they considered sacrilegious, they killed the prophets. How many times do we do that to people in the church who question the leadership? Stephen was stoned for blasphemy....and this is how it went down.....why????because they couldn't stand up to his understanding and wisdom....so they got men to say that he "spoke words of blasphemy" against moses (which are just words by the way). Then they killed him....see scripture below.

10but they could not stand up to his wisdom or the Spirit by whom he spoke. 11Then they prompted some men to say, “We heard Stephen speak words of blasphemy against Moses and against God.” 12So they stirred up the people and elders and scribes. They seized Stephen and brought him before the Sanhedrin.…

Think about what these men were killed for...their wisdom.

[TrueIntent]

BTW....if we didn't live in the day and age of the internet...a whole lot more people in the church would be "stoned" for blasphemy. People can fact check, scripture check, and even publicize their grievances on Facebook. The church is great institution, but the internet keeps it in check. Its ran by men in the flesh.