anyone read "Visons of Glory"? 4/14-13 "summary"

[EmmaLee]

anyone read "Visons of Glory"?... Looks like Hitler did. =))

http://youtu.be/NumdgNY3Z7A

Looks like we found out what Mark and/or Shadow have been doing with their time... B-)

Also this one - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fViXgaJ3uCE" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[A Random Phrase]

Also this one - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fViXgaJ3uCE" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I'm watching it now. At this point, Hitler is yelling that DS was arrested. (-|

So was JS jr., though for things more serious than lapsed tickets. B-)

[A Random Phrase]

Never trust a man named after a liberal city.

)

[A Random Phrase]

Aussie, one of the things that marks a follower of Christ is to be persecuted for His sake. Remember that if you watch the video.

Someone is acting very much like those who stoned the prophets/saints and cast them out in the Bible and in the Book of Mormon. They are fulfilling prophecy, though they know it not. We gentiles are on the way out. "Contention is not of me, saith the Lord." Those who fight, contend, condemn, and shout are not of Light, no matter how sincere they may be.




Speaking of Denver Snuffer (he is the subject of the last video linked to this thread), here is an apropos quote from him:

We must develop love for those who persecute us, or despitefully use and abuse us to reach what Christ taught. He really meant it. And He really wants us to get there. When we do, we find ourselves standing on holy ground. For that ground was sanctified by His own blood, shed in His own sacrifice, when He poured out the last full measure of devotion to His Father’s will. When you hear His words echoing in your own voice, “forgive them for they know not what they do,” then you will begin to see the Master in the mirror. His image will appear to you there first. Your countenance will look more like His: more humble, more contrite, more obedient and filled with more light than you are right now.

The Second Comforter, p. 194

[North_Star]

From isaiahreport.com today:
An "Assyrian" Identity for the Ten Lost Tribes

Isaiah predicts that three branches of God's people will live into a millennial age of peace: "In that day Israel shall be the third party to Egypt and to Assyria, a blessing in the midst of the earth. Jehovah of Hosts will bless them, saying, 'Blessed be Egypt my people, Assyria the work of my hands, and Israel my inheritance'" (Isaiah 19:24–25). Five cities-states in the land of "Egypt," moreover, will swear loyalty to God and covenant with him by sacrifice. These appear to be the sole survivors when God "smites Egypt" with a civil war and a foreign (Assyrian) invasion. God sends these covenanters a "savior" and in the end heals Egypt (Isaiah 19:2–22).

When Israel's ten tribes of the Northern Kingdom went captive into Assyria in 722 B.C. (2 Kings 15:29; 17:6), they disappeared from known historical records. The emergence of an end-time people of God called "Assyria"--which parallels the similar emergence of an end-time people of God called "Egypt"--thus implies that those of end-time Assyria who survive God's Day of Judgment consist of the descendants of those who were taken captive into ancient Assyria. While the Assyrian armies who conquer the world ultimately perish (Isaiah 10:16–18, 24–26; 14:24–27; 30:30–32; 31:8–9), some "Assyrians," whose names are recorded, survive (Isaiah 10:19).

Speaking of economic collapse, Isaiah gives us a pretty good glimpse into the coming troubles.....

Chapter 19

8 The fishers also shall mourn, and all they that cast angle into the brooks shall lament, and they that spread nets upon the waters shall languish.

9 Moreover they that work in fine flax, and they that weave networks, shall be confounded.

10 And athey shall be broken in the purposes thereof, all that make sluices and ponds for fish.

And is it not clear these verses give us clue about the current "Pharaoh of Egypt" and his princes?

11 ¶Surely the princes of Zoan (think Wash. DC here) are fools, the counsel of the wise counsellors of Pharaoh is become brutish: how say ye unto Pharaoh, I am the son of the wise, the son of ancient kings?

12 Where are they? where are thy wise men? and let them tell thee now, and let them know what the Lord of hosts hath purposed upon Egypt.

13 The princes of Zoan are become fools, the princes of Noph are deceived; they have also seduced Egypt, even they that are the stay of the tribes thereof.

14 The Lord hath mingled a perverse spirit in the midst thereof: and they have caused Egypt to err in every work thereof, as a drunken man staggereth in his vomit.

One need only read the advise of one of those "princes" from Nevada, who today urged more taxes are needed to avoid an Obamacare train wreck.

I'd say "Egypt" has been seduced.

Any guesses what Lord of Hosts has in mind for Egypt? Look at verse 22.

[TZONE]

“forgive them for they know not what they do,” then you will begin to see the Master in the mirror. His image will appear to you there first.

What a profound statemetn, thanks ARP for quoting that. We will see him when our countenance is like him... Very interesting.

[A Random Phrase]

“forgive them for they know not what they do,” then you will begin to see the Master in the mirror. His image will appear to you there first.

What a profound statemetn, thanks ARP for quoting that. We will see him when our countenance is like him... Very interesting.

Good catch. I didn't notice that.

[davedan]

My take:

1. Bible and D&C say Christ will be wearing RED when He returns in glory and not WHITE as in the book.

2. Dust in atmosphere makes climate cold not warm by reflecting light back into space.

3. Most Nukes in America will get to US by missiles by Russia and China (read Zechariah 5)

4. Clean water will be a much bigger problem than indicated in the book due to nuclear fallout.

5. LDS wouldn't hold EQ-conference in a EQ-damaged Conference Center. I just toured it with a contractor. It is way overbuilt but only meant to NOT collapse in an EQ not necessarily to be used after. After damage, its cheaper and safer to rebuild. (LDS built a twin Conference Center at BYU-Idaho) Maybe we will see a General Conference in Rexburg one day?

http://youtu.be/wd7XrRYNfW8" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

6. No one who had an authentic vision would publicize it in this way.

[Fort Nine]

davedan, those are rather weak arguments to refute Spencer's account.
1. Christ in red - "He was clothed in spotless white with a red sash around his waist." That's Spencer's description of the actual 2nd Coming.
2. Dust - I don't think you can predict how warm the earth will be. Spencer indicates that the earth left its orbit and the climate changed. Based on the destructive power of the quakes, my bet is that the earth moved entirely, or a passing celestial body triggers these global calamities.
3. Who uses the Bible as basis for how nuclear weapons might be delivered? Look at the current social climate. Saboteurs and traitors are in control of this government.
4. Water - you're denying the power of God, and you're overstating the effects of fallout. I don't think Utah is going to be carpet-nuked, based on Spencer's account.
5. The church will be in no position to rebuild anything like the conference center after the SHTF.
6. Spencer is publicizing his vision just like Lehi published his vision--only with more anonymity, which lends credibility to himself in this era of social media. Scriptures tell us that in the last days, people will see visions.

For an example of a real LDS fraud, read Ranae Lee's account.

[Sheol27]

davedan, those are rather weak arguments to refute Spencer's account.
1. Christ in red - "He was clothed in spotless white with a red sash around his waist." That's Spencer's description of the actual 2nd Coming.
2. Dust - I don't think you can predict how warm the earth will be. Spencer indicates that the earth left its orbit and the climate changed. Based on the destructive power of the quakes, my bet is that the earth moved entirely, or a passing celestial body triggers these global calamities.
3. Who uses the Bible as basis for how nuclear weapons might be delivered? Look at the current social climate. Saboteurs and traitors are in control of this government.
4. Water - you're denying the power of God, and you're overstating the effects of fallout. I don't think Utah is going to be carpet-nuked, based on Spencer's account.
5. The church will be in no position to rebuild anything like the conference center after the SHTF.
6. Spencer is publicizing his vision just like Lehi published his vision--only with more anonymity, which lends credibility to himself in this era of social media. Scriptures tell us that in the last days, people will see visions.

For an example of a real LDS fraud, read Ranae Lee's account.

Good points. I thought Spencer mentioned that water was contaminated and that foreign troops brought in water and rationed it? He said they had enough but there wasn't an over abundance? I don't see how that is unrealistic?

[A Random Phrase]

davedan, those are rather weak arguments to refute Spencer's account.
1. Christ in red - "He was clothed in spotless white with a red sash around his waist." That's Spencer's description of the actual 2nd Coming.

The scriptures say Christ will be red in his apparel, not red in his sash. The sash idea came from an artist who was painting a picture for the LDS church. He knew people would not accept a painting of Christ dressed in red, so he added the sash as a token of the real thing.

When Christ suffered, His sash did not turn red; His whole body bled, bathing his garments in blood. "I have tread the winepress alone," He says.

It may be more literal than we think that he was squeezed as grapes are squeezed in a press. Wine not water for sacrament (unless it is impossible for wine to be procured from safe sources), because red wine is symbolic of blood. (I expect some will challenge the idea of red wine. Go for it. If you think a) wine (liquid part of the sacrament) does not symbolize Christ's blood and/or Christ's blood was clear like water, good for you.)

[Fort Nine]

To all of you who rely solely on scriptures as definitive statements about our day and how things will play out, you sound like Evangelicals, Protestants, and Catholics who refuse to accept modern revelation. If you think that the end times is going to remotely resemble how the writings from antiquity--particularly Isaiah--describes things, you're in for a rude awakening. We cannot even agree on what it means for the moon to "turn to blood." It isn't until after something has occurred can we ever reliably interpret what the associated prophecy even means. Scriptures are reliable for telling us how to behave. That's about it. As predictors for events, they are subject to unreliable interpretation.

I'll take the vision of a guy like Spencer--a modern, honest, worthy priesthood holder--any day over a guy in a cave who's never even seen a light bulb.

[A Random Phrase]

If you think that the end times is going to remotely resemble how the writings from antiquity--particularly Isaiah--describes things, you're in for a rude awakening.

Personally, I don't think Jesus is ever outdated, especially in a book written for us wonderful people who need not listen to dead prophets, nor to scriptures, for living prophets trump dead ones:

3 Nephi 23:1
1 And now, behold, I say unto you, that ye ought to search these things. Yea, a commandment I give unto you that ye search these things diligently; for great are the words of Isaiah.

2 For surely he spake as touching all things concerning my people which are of the house of Israel; therefore it must needs be that he must speak also to the Gentiles.

3 And all things that he spake have been and shall be, even according to the words which he spake.

Nor do I think Nephi is outdated, since the BofM was written as a guidebook and warning for us, even in this enlightened and wicked day:

1 Nephi 19:23
23 And I did read many things unto them which were written in the books of Moses; but that I might more fully persuade them to believe in the Lord their Redeemer I did read unto them that which was written by the prophet Isaiah; for I did liken all scriptures unto us, that it might be for our profit and learning.

[singyourwayhome]

+1

[EmmaLee]

+1

+2

[Thomas]

To all of you who rely solely on scriptures as definitive statements about our day and how things will play out, you sound like Evangelicals, Protestants, and Catholics who refuse to accept modern revelation. If you think that the end times is going to remotely resemble how the writings from antiquity--particularly Isaiah--describes things, you're in for a rude awakening. We cannot even agree on what it means for the moon to "turn to blood." It isn't until after something has occurred can we ever reliably interpret what the associated prophecy even means. Scriptures are reliable for telling us how to behave. That's about it. As predictors for events, they are subject to unreliable interpretation.

I'll take the vision of a guy like Spencer--a modern, honest, worthy priesthood holder--any day over a guy in a cave who's never even seen a light bulb.

Here is some modern revelation for you.

10. “It makes no difference what is written or what anyone has said, if what has been said is in conflict with what the Lord has revealed, we can set it aside. My words, and the teachings of any other member of the Church, high or low, if they do not square with the revelations, we need not accept them. Let us have this matter clear. We have accepted the four standard works as the measuring yardsticks, or balances, by which we measure every man’s doctrine” (Doctrines of Salvation,3:203).

Joseph Fielding Smith

http://www.lds.org/manual/doctrine-and- ... r?lang=eng" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Any revelation that is not in line with scriptures should be rejected.

[Fort Nine]

This would apply if Spencer's account were out of line with revealed scripture. Visions of Glory does not contradict doctrine or revelation. It only contradicts a person's interpretation of doctrine. For example, I've seen people say VoG can't be true because Spencer describes angels administering ordinances, and we believe that only mortals can perform ordinances. If that were true, how did Peter, James, and John ordain Joseph Smith?

I'm simply stating that descriptions of the last days in ancient scripture are scant at best, so to dismiss a person's vision--despite the fact that scriptures tell us that in the last days men would see visions--is narrow minded.

[Still Learning]

I'm simply stating that descriptions of the last days in ancient scripture are scant at best, so to dismiss a person's vision--despite the fact that scriptures tell us that in the last days men would see visions--is narrow minded.

I understand where you are coming from regarding the narrow mindedness. I think that people generally reject anyone that says they have had a vision. Perhaps because there are many false prophets among us. That does not mean there does not exist true prophets among us nor that any of us cannot receive visions. Visions are a form of revelation and regardless of how we receive it we should seek it and seek to know it is from God.

However, I absolutely reject your comment that "descriptions of the last days in ancient scripture are scant at best." I could hardly believe you actually posted that, let alone believe it. Just as someone just referenced Nephi admonishing us to read Isaiah, how can you say such? I humbly have to say that the only thing that is scant is your understanding of those prophecies. And I say "humbly" because I don't understand those things perfectly either - my understanding is also scant, but that is not to say that those descriptions are inaccurate by any means. It is to say that we lack understanding of them and that they are mysteries wrapped in sacred symbolism that we depend upon the spirit to bring to our understanding. Yes, there are varying interpretations to them and many mistaken beliefs regarding them. Many also hold multiple meanings. Just as each time I study the Book of Mormon I learn something new that I never recognized before...even after dozens of times reading the same book...things can be unlocked unto us. We should never toss aside the writings that our merciful father in heaven has preserved for us for thousands of years and demean their value. If Isaiah's writings lack clarity and give us scant descriptions of whatever it is he was writing, why did our father in heaven not only preserve those writings for us in the bible, but give them again to us in the Book of Mormon? I would submit that those so called scant writings are of more value than any other scripture - thus the Book of Mormon bringing us closer to god than any other book.

Maybe I am misunderstanding your point. I have read visions of glory. I found it very interesting and thought provoking. I also believe spencer received those visions. I don't know how to apply it. I can testify that we all can receive heavenly revelation and including through visions. But I just felt that those things in ancient scripture should be studied and pondered and prayed upon and their value and meaning will be given to us and we should not sweep them aside. We should also not rely upon the arm of flesh - other men or ourselves - to understand them. We need to rely on confirmation and teaching of the spirit. I can agree that we are misled in many cases by reading other men's interpretations of those ancient descriptions of the end times. Perhaps that is what you are getting at? Anyway, I know my words are direct and I don't mean to come across as harsh, just looking to understand your point of view.

[Fort Nine]

I think you misunderstand me. I do not mean to dismiss scriptural prophecy. They're valuable. I am saying that they are scant in detail (by design) and require us to envision and interpret how things will play out in our day. All books do this--words offer only so much detail, then we mentally fill in the setting, a character's appearance, a manner of speech. For example, would you suggest that the information we have about the Lost 10 Tribes is not scant? Because I'd love to hear more. Is their story rich enough in detail that we know when and how they'll return? Do we know where they are? Everyone's still debating all of that. So when someone comes a long, like Spencer, with a highly detailed, visceral narrative, we dismiss him because his description does not line up with our interpretation. This goes back to the Christ in Red issue--a nondoctrinal detail like this is not enough to brand Spencer as a liar. Where's the proof that he's all in red, or only wearing a red sash, or that the writer's using "red" wasn't merely symbolic?

[Still Learning]

I think you misunderstand me. I do not mean to dismiss scriptural prophecy. They're valuable. I am saying that they are scant in detail (by design) and require us to envision and interpret how things will play out in our day. All books do this--words offer only so much detail, then we mentally fill in the setting, a character's appearance, a manner of speech. For example, would you suggest that the information we have about the Lost 10 Tribes is not scant? Because I'd love to hear more. Is their story rich enough in detail that we know when and how they'll return? Do we know where they are? Everyone's still debating all of that. So when someone comes a long, like Spencer, with a highly detailed, visceral narrative, we dismiss him because his description does not line up with our interpretation. This goes back to the Christ in Red issue--a nondoctrinal detail like this is not enough to brand Spencer as a liar. Where's the proof that he's all in red, or only wearing a red sash, or that the writer's using "red" wasn't merely symbolic?

Ok. Understand your point better now. As you mentioned regarding the red sash - perhaps that is just part of Spencer's paradigm...he had a preconceived notion that that is how Christ would appear. It could be due to that notion or any other preconceived beliefs for discrepencies in his visions. I don't think you can dismiss him solely based on that assessment.

[A Random Phrase]

No one I know of is saying that Spencer is a liar. I believe he really saw visions. I also believe that he saw them through his own paradigms. Also, John admitted that he tweaked a bit of it here and there in the details - to make it flow better, I believe (perhaps someone is interested in looking at the book for the disclaimer in the front, where John is giving an introduction).

Here is the scripture about red apparel. Note the symbology: "with dyed garments" - "red in his apparel, and his garments like him that treadeth in the wine-vat" - "their blood have I sprinkled upon my garments, and stained all my raiment." It doesn't sound like a red sash to me.

Doctrine and Covenants section 133:

42 O Lord, thou shalt come down to make thy name known to thine adversaries, and all nations shall tremble at thy presence—

43 When thou doest terrible things, things they look not for;

44 Yea, when thou comest down, and the mountains flow down at thy presence, thou shalt meet him who rejoiceth and worketh righteousness, who remembereth thee in thy ways.

45 For since the beginning of the world have not men heard nor perceived by the ear, neither hath any eye seen, O God, besides thee, how great things thou hast prepared for him that waiteth for thee.

46 And it shall be said: Who is this that cometh down from God in heaven with dyed garments; yea, from the regions which are not known, clothed in his glorious apparel, traveling in the greatness of his strength?

47 And he shall say: I am he who spake in righteousness, mighty to save.

48 And the Lord shall be red in his apparel, and his garments like him that treadeth in the wine-vat.

49 And so great shall be the glory of his presence that the sun shall hide his face in shame, and the moon shall withhold its light, and the stars shall be hurled from their places.

50 And his voice shall be heard: I have trodden the wine-press alone, and have brought judgment upon all people; and none were with me;

51 And I have trampled them in my fury, and I did tread upon them in mine anger, and their blood have I sprinkled upon my garments, and stained all my raiment; for this was the day of vengeance which was in my heart.

[Sheol27]

Is it possible that he has a 2nd Coming and once again comes at the end of the world as well? Could those 2 be confused?

[Rose Garden]

What are you saying exactly? You mean a Second Coming before the millennium and then another appearance at the end of the millennium? I don't think the scriptures support two appearances in the sky like that, but I might be wrong.

[Fort Nine]

The "Second Coming" refers to his coming when the whole world sees him. But he's appeared to Joseph Smith already, and who knows who else.

[Sheol27]

What are you saying exactly? You mean a Second Coming before the millennium and then another appearance at the end of the millennium? I don't think the scriptures support two appearances in the sky like that, but I might be wrong.

I wasn't saying there was. Just curious..... The Jews didn't think there was a 2nd coming. Sounds like I have more studying to do.