The great and abominable church of the devil

lundbaek · Post by **lundbaek** » January 28th, 2008, 7:20 pm

1 Nephi 14:9-11

“And it came to pass that he (the angel) said unto me (Nephi): Look, and behold that great and abominable church, which is the mother of all abominations, whose foundation is the devil.

“And he said unto me: Behold there are save two churches only; the one is the church of the Lamb of God, and the other is the church of the devil; wherefore, whoso belongeth not to the church of the Lamb of God belongeth to that great church, which is the mother of abominations; and she is the whore of all the earth.

“And it came to pass that I looked and beheld the whore of all the earth, and she sat upon many waters; and she had dominion over all the earth, among all nations, kindreds, tounges, and people.

Verse 10 tells some people that any person who does not belong to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints automatically belongs to the great and abominable church of the devil. That seemed to be the consensus in our Sunday School class this past Sunday. It is also used to claim that Ron Paul, not being LDS, belongs to the great and abominable church of the devil, while Mitt Romney belongs to the Church of Jesus Christ, and therefore is more righteous and thus should be the choice of all LDSs.

H. Verlan Andersen's book "The Great and Abominable Church of the Devil" teaches me just the opposite.

I’d appreciate comments on this.

SwissMrs&Pitchfire · January 28th, 2008, 7:48 pm

I think this is the point that I personally am forced to separate out the church and it's members and the gospel itself. Ron Paul has truth and truth is the gospel. Mitt Romney has less relevant truth (to the political spectrum) and his "truth" is in fact not truth at all but adheres to the doctrine of the church of the devil. If you see this on strict LDS membership record terms then you miss the point entirely.

Was Joseph Smith a member of the church of the devil or of no church prior to the restoration? I would answer neither but rather clung to the truth that he was able to find (James 1:5 for example) and in that was a member of the church of Christ.

Same with the founders and Columbus etc... probably the same with Ron Paul.

(Thanks by the way, for the genealogy help, I am making some progress on it now I think.)

Stephen · Post by **Stephen** » January 28th, 2008, 8:08 pm

It is interesting that those that would take a extremely figurative approach to their interpretation of the "church of the devil"....that it represents "all things that are evil" and not want to put a face on what that evil is.........would not do the same to the "church of the lamb of God"...and make it "all things that are good"...and not put a face on what the good is.

It makes me ill to read that people who profess to belong to the same church I do would misinterpret the scriptures for evil.

I have been pleased this week that I have been approached by several LDS that want to know about Ron Paul. In my immediate ward I am a lone wolf. I'm sure there are many that think I have joined the "church of the devil" by supporting him!!

sally · Post by **sally** » January 28th, 2008, 9:22 pm

Stephen wrote: In my immediate ward I am a lone wolf. I'm sure there are many that think I have joined the "church of the devil" by supporting him!!

I am in the same boat. I was chastized for sending a video that included Prophet quotes and encouraged people to vote for Ron Paul. She wrote back that she was offended that Ron Paul would use quotes by the prophets to get votes (he being a Baptist and all)
I had violated the law to separate church and state. I sent her a few paragraphs about Jefferson's original use of that statement to say that the federal government had no right to do any thing concerning religion, that religion was a matter for the states or individuals. She then sent me a note that we need to obey even kings.(the new way of looking at things, I guess)

A high counselor to our ward would not look at me on Sunday when he visited my ward. I had canvased at his home a week or so before. I tried to get his attention and smile at him, but he refused to look my way.

I just want to throw my hands up and quit. Instead, I will go and get more food supply.

I feel that if I can convince them, then my chances of not being turned in by them when things get really bad, will be greater.

I had a dream 2 nights ago that my 2 youngest children and I were forced to jump out of a plane without a parachute over some kind of body of water. My kids were pushed off first and I saw them go and jumped after them. I woke up at that point. I don't know if I survived or not.

Do you think I have watched too many violent documentaries?

Stephen · Post by **Stephen** » January 28th, 2008, 10:06 pm

I feel that if I can convince them, then my chances of not being turned in by them when things get really bad, will be greater.

Or it could go the other way and they'll know what a (constitutional) kook you are and send the jackbooted brownshirts your way!

Check this out Sally. I am in the bishopric! That has to make it even more awkward for them to just dismiss me.

I am planning on assigning myself to speak on the constitution sometime here in the next few months.

sally · Post by **sally** » January 28th, 2008, 10:14 pm

Stephen wrote:
Check this out Sally. I am in the bishopric! That has to make it even more awkward for them to just dismiss me. I am planning on assigning myself to speak on the constitution sometime here in the next few months.

LOL! You can't do that! That is so unspiritual!!

(I have actually been told that, by the way)

Seriously, that is wonderful. All you can do is pray and fast about it and say what you are led to say and leave the outcome in the hands of the Lord. What a great position you are in.

What would I do without you all.

truthseeker · Post by **truthseeker** » January 28th, 2008, 10:41 pm

I heard something different in my Sunday School class. This was a few years ago (missed the class this year as I am subbing for the primary pianist).

Anyway, I remember the teacher talking about the two churches and commenting that there are those who are members of the church that could be classified as belonging to the church of the devil. Likewise, that there are those outside the church that could be classified as belonging to the church of Christ.

Given the parable of the wheat and the tares in relation to the church in the latter days, I think the idea of members being in the church that belong to the church of the devil makes sense.

I have also met people outside the church whose faith in God, steadfastness in doing right, etc. have put me to shame when I consider my own life and faithfulness. So, there too, it is easy for me to see how the latter statement of those who are outside the "church" could be classified as belonging to the church of Christ could be true.

To be honest, I don't know what is the correct interpretation here, but I have a hard time believing in the idea that if your an LDS member your in and if your not, you belong to the devil's church. Also, what about the scripture in Revelations that talks about those who are neither hot nor cold but lukewarm- which church are they in?

ithink · Post by **ithink** » January 29th, 2008, 1:52 am

Stephen wrote:Check this out Sally. I am in the bishopric! That has to make it even more awkward for them to just dismiss me. I am planning on assigning myself to speak on the constitution sometime here in the next few months.

I was in the bishopric too Stephen, but the good meaning but very young bishop (recent convert too) didn't understand me. We just didn't see eye to eye, and when that happens, the lowest guy on the pole goes, and I'm OK with that. So watch out!

Do you notice that the only objections come from leadership, or our elder brethren? I've never had an objection from the youth! In fact, on YM camps, there is often a small crowd gathered around me and my YM age son wanting to find out about banking, money, constitution, tyranny, 9-11, what have you! Interesting! They are just dying to learn, and they soak it up like sponges! Sometimes I think we do the youth a disservice by diluting things for them.

ithink

lundbaek · Post by **lundbaek** » January 29th, 2008, 7:20 am

"So unspiritual to talk in church about the US Constitution." I am sure there are many who would consider that a topic that does not contribute to "Perfecting the Saints". Fact is, I think discussion of the proper application of constitutional principles could easily lead to schisim in a ward.

I definitely lead toward truthseeker's suggestion that "there are those who are members of the church that could be classified as belonging to the church of the devil. Likewise, that there are those outside the church that could be classified as belonging to the church of Christ."

To put it bluntly, between Paul and Romney, I see Paul as more righteous than Romney, especially based on the real Romney when he was running for the Senate and as governor in Massachusetts. I don't put much stock in "battlefield conversions", and I've come across a few in my time.

Stephen · Post by **Stephen** » January 29th, 2008, 8:57 am

ithink...

This may sound funny but...I know for a fact that the current bishop in my ward KNOWS that God called me to that calling. He knows that it wasn't him...but God...who wanted me with all of my (to them) "extreme" beliefs. They know quite clearly that I believe that we will all be living off of our food storage by the end of 2008. They know that I will do my calling and correct doctrine in classes...(and it seems like it happens often)...they know where I stand with my political allegiences when my family pulls up to church with big Ron Paul magnets on each door and bumper stickers and when they pass by my home and see all of the signs...and as I have canvassed to their homes... When I received the calling I let my then stake presidency know that I have had dreams where the Lord has shown me the future and that I was going to be progressively vocal...and I was encouraged to keep going with it. If for some reason I am discharged of that calling that is just fine...maybe I could get back to teaching seminary...but that wouldn't close my mouth. If anyone wants to shoot arrows at Samuel the Stephenite then that's fine.

The current bishop is a great man. He doesn't "get" anything regarding secret combinations...but his WIFE has been called to be the ward preparedness person and she has just begin her journey of being awake. The other couselor also is also a great man and is somewhat awake.

As far as the constitution being controversial and causing a schism. I was thinking about seriously just reading a lot of quotes and giving little to no commentary. That way it would be hard for them to be upset with me...they'd have to take it up with all of the prophets I quote. The handbook says to avoid "controversial" subjects....when the constitution becomes controversial...we are in for a rough road.

lundbaek · Post by **lundbaek** » January 29th, 2008, 10:00 am

Stephen, one of my tricks when talking or writing on a controversial aspect of government or the Constitution, is to combine ancient and modern scripture with statements which sound or read like my own, but which are basically near plagereism of both of the above, presented to appear to be my original compositon. That way, if and when my own statements are challenged I can present the source, which I make sure originated with a prominent General Authority.

ithink · Post by **ithink** » January 29th, 2008, 11:18 am

lundbaek wrote:Stephen, one of my tricks when talking or writing on a controversial aspect of government or the Constitution, is to combine ancient and modern scripture with statements which sound or read like my own, but which are basically near plagereism of both of the above, presented to appear to be my original compositon. That way, if and when my own statements are challenged I can present the source, which I make sure originated with a prominent General Authority.

This is so funny

This is what I do as well, I give no references during the talk, but it is actually nearly quote after quote from start to finish all tied up in one -- I call it Hugh Nibley style. I really don't have much original stuff to offer, but I can paraphrase / quote quite a bit. Of course it's fully footnoted though -- that's not plagarism is it?

Stephen, I have a bumper sticker that says "9-11 was an inside job", and occasionally I'll back the van in right at the main door where 90% of the members will see it, my wife just rolls her eyes.

As for correcting doctrine, I'm the same way, I can't sit still and not open my mouth.

It gives me hope to know you are out there doing what you do!

ithink · Post by **ithink** » January 29th, 2008, 11:23 am

truthseeker wrote:...there are those who are members of the church that could be classified as belonging to the church of the devil. Likewise, that there are those outside the church that could be classified as belonging to the church of Christ.

Totally agree. Ordinances won't help you -- unless you have charity.

"But charity is the pure love of Christ, and it endureth forever; and whoso is found possessed of it at the last day, it shall be well with him."

Army Of Truth · Post by **Army Of Truth** » January 29th, 2008, 11:26 am

ithink wrote: Stephen, I have a bumper sticker that says "9-11 was an inside job", and occasionally I'll back the van in right at the main door where 90% of the members will see it, my wife just rolls her eyes. As for correcting doctrine, I'm the same way, I can't sit still and not open my mouth.

It gives me hope to know you are out there doing what you do!

LOL! I always park next to my church's main entrance too so that my bumper stickers can get the most views by everyone entering and exiting. My stickers say "Restore the Constitution", "Ron Paul Revolution", "If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy", "Ron Paul for President 2008", "National ID Card Coming Soon...", and "Stop the NAU".

I've caught many people reading them and I hope it gives them something to ponder about. 8)

Proud 2b Peculiar · January 29th, 2008, 12:34 pm

LOL now I know I truly belong here LOL

My car has a total of 8 Ron Paul for President bumper stickers on it, and I park outside the front doors also.

AussieOi · Post by **AussieOi** » January 29th, 2008, 3:34 pm

Stephen wrote:
I feel that if I can convince them, then my chances of not being turned in by them when things get really bad, will be greater.
Or it could go the other way and they'll know what a (constitutional) kook you are and send the jackbooted brownshirts your way!

Check this out Sally. I am in the bishopric! That has to make it even more awkward for them to just dismiss me. :wink: I am planning on assigning myself to speak on the constitution sometime here in the next few months.

stick to scripture and quotes by the brethren in regards to contemporary application , name no names, and it could be nothing but an inspired talk. lucky ward.

Shoemaker · Post by **Shoemaker** » January 30th, 2008, 11:14 am

sally wrote: She then sent me a note that we need to obey even kings.(the new way of looking at things, I guess)

Send her II Nephi 10:11: "And this land shall be a land of liberty unto the Gentiles, and there shall be no kings (King George) upon the land, who shall raise up unto the Gentiles."

CHH · Post by **CHH** » January 30th, 2008, 8:47 pm

sally wrote:
I had violated the law to separate church and state.

By the way. For those of you that do not know the words Separation of Church and State are in the Constitution.

CHH · Post by **CHH** » January 30th, 2008, 8:49 pm

ithink wrote: As for correcting doctrine, I'm the same way, I can't sit still and not open my mouth.

I was commanded to.

sally · Post by **sally** » January 30th, 2008, 9:19 pm

I have enjoyed your comments.

I want to say that though there are people that make me fustrated, there are also those who are waking up (not very many, but a couple) and it is very refreshing.

Army Of Truth · Post by **Army Of Truth** » January 31st, 2008, 12:20 pm

CHH wrote: By the way. For those of you that do not know the words Separation of Church and State are in the Constitution.

I think you meant to say the words "separation of church and state" are not in the Constitution. Nor are they in the Declaration of Independence by the way.

CHH · Post by **CHH** » January 31st, 2008, 9:37 pm

Army Of Truth wrote:
CHH wrote: By the way. For those of you that do not know the words Separation of Church and State are in the Constitution.
I think you meant to say the words "separation of church and state" are not in the Constitution. Nor are they in the Declaration of Independence by the way. :wink:

Nope. They are in the Constitution. Just not ours:

1918
Chapter IX
13. In order to secure for the laboring masses genuine freedom of conscience, the church is separated from the state and the school from the church, and freedom of religious and anti- religious propaganda is acknowledged to be the right of all citizens.
http://web.jjay.cuny.edu/~jobrien/reference/ob103.html

1977
Article 52. Citizens of the USSR are guaranteed freedom of conscience, that is, the right to profess or not to profess any religion, and to conduct religious worship or atheistic propaganda. Incitement of hostility or hatred on religious grounds is prohibited.
In the USSR, the church is separated from the state, and the school from the church.
http://www.departments.bucknell.edu/rus ... tml#chap07

1936
ARTICLE 124. In order to ensure to citizens freedom of conscience, the church in the U.S.S.R. is separated from the state, and the school from the church. Freedom of religious worship and freedom of antireligious propaganda is recognized for all citizens.

http://www.departments.bucknell.edu/rus ... tml#chap10

Proud 2b Peculiar · January 31st, 2008, 9:42 pm

I think I am going to go vomit now...

ithink · Post by **ithink** » January 31st, 2008, 11:32 pm

CHH wrote: Nope. They are in the Constitution. Just not ours:

Well done CHH, you totally sucked me in.

I know what I'm going to do. I'm going to make a small document, with these articles on them and a big fat hammer and sickle in the top corner. Whenever ANYONE brings this church / state crap up, I'm going to hand them a copy, along with "welcome to russia" across the bottom.

ChelC · Post by **ChelC** » February 1st, 2008, 8:49 am

Good idea.

The great and abominable church of the devil

The great and abominable church of the devil

Login • Register