God will make lemonade of the Church

[Michael Sherwin]

He will become the leader of the remnant and gather all the remnant of Israel. Before that he will be despised and rejected by the vast majority of the Church. If he is accepted prior to the overwhelming scourge then there would be no overwhelming scourge. And the remnant will know who he is because the Holy Ghost will give them that knowledge. The formalities of the presidency will not be needed. He will be the prophet and the people remaining will follow him.

So, you are telling us that the Lord will reject his church and lead a break off sect through a former member as the end times servant who is likely excommunicated. We have so many who claim this honor, which one is it, or has he not left the church yet? Also, where did you get your knowledge of this?

In 1985 before I ever heard of John Taylor and his vision (in 2012) I had essentially the same vision. I did not see the same type of gory scenes of people killing their children. The piled up bodies with no one to bury them I did see. Anyway my vision was so similar to the John Taylor vision that I did not question the origin of his vision. I told the brother that brought me into the church of my vision. He is the one that told me of the John Taylor vision in response. As far as my original post, I have known it for quite some time. Two nights ago it popped into my head that Isaiah 28 actually was talking of the LDS Church. I was not contemplating on it or even studying anything related. I really don't remember what I was doing at the time. It just came to me that Ephraim is the LDS Church and all of Isaiah 28 just flashed in my awareness with new meaning that I never realized before. I use Isaiah 28 a lot because I consider it to be one of the most important precepts for understanding the end times. One that is misused by everyone that I have seen use it. It never once dawned on me before that it pointed specifically at the LDS Church. That literally came like a flood, pun intended.

Then I investigated that idea using my own human logic abilities and it makes total sense. Isaiah 28 specifically references Ephraim. Joseph Smith was from the tribe of Ephraim. The majority of LDS in this country are of Ephraim. The United States is said by many including non LDS to be Ephraim. There are LDS prophecies of the LDS Church becoming much larger. Even the largest Church. I have not investigated those prophecies. I'm just aware of them.

The inescapable part is what the Church believes of itself. As far as I know it is official Church doctrine that it is the true kingdom of God on this earth. That it will one day encompass the whole world. That the president of the Church rules in Jesus place until Jesus comes at which time all the keys of the kingdom will be handed over to Jesus. HOWEVER, before Jesus rules the kingdom the man of sin will rule the kingdom. Jesus will come back and defeat this man of sin. So if the Church is correct and it is the kingdom of God on earth then the man of sin will become the president of the LDS Church. Then what of the oaths sworn in the temple? Would those oaths give absolute authority to the man of sin over the oath makers? Sure it would. It would be the premortal plan of Lucifer come to full fruition. It boggles my mind how one of the first things we learn is Lucifer's plan of not allowing man to have agency and then we surrender our agency to an organization with a man at the lead. So I ask you, what if (when) the man of sin becomes the president is that not the culmination of Lucifer's plan. And if the Church is wrong and it is not the kingdom of God on earth then this is all bs. Either way it is not good. And if the man of sin does become the president then that would mean Joseph Smith is the false prophet of Revelation. And the church he setup is the church of Lucifer. I believe the true LDS Church is the remnant that survives the overwhelming scourge. I guess we'll have to wait to see who the DS is. It looks like satan is working overtime to obfuscate the DS from being seen or heard by creating so many counterfeits.

So basically you think the church is run by Satan and not by the Lord, am I right?

Just saw this. No, I don't "think" because I don't know that anyone but men are running the church at this time.

[Rand]

And oh yeah. Do you see that with the Lord is his anointed one the one that is termed the DS?

You think? The spirit of his writings have always been off putting to me. I have to say it is funny you put so much credibility in your PB, but it came from a fallen corrupt tree from what you say. How can you trust it that much?

[Michael Sherwin]

And oh yeah. Do you see that with the Lord is his anointed one the one that is termed the DS?

You think? The spirit of his writings have always been off putting to me. I have to say it is funny you put so much credibility in your PB, but it came from a fallen corrupt tree from what you say. How can you trust it that much?

I said to myself that I really need to go take a nap if there isn't anything else. I really need a nap. Oh well.

Before I joined the Church I had "a story". As amazing as my story is how can I trust it. It is not a matter of trust. It is a matter of consistency and persistence. My story went from coincidences to synergy a long time ago. So I was looking forward to my PB mostly , selfishly, because I was hoping for confirmation of my story. So I prayed inwardly with much fervor before and during my PB for that confirmation. I think the Lord answered my prayer because my PB totally confirms my story. I consider it as just as much hard evidence as the USS Mitscher was and the alignment of the planets on my birth date just to name a few. There is nothing in my PB that is contradictory to my story. What are the odds? My story is not random. It is either of God or the adversary. However, the planetary alignment on my birth date can only be coincidence or from God. And I have ruled out coincidence a long time ago.

[oneClimbs]

"God will make lemonade of the Church" – just as he always has. We always seem to be the lemons and effective prophets the sugar.

[Gage]

How does someone have the sense of smell in an unconscious vision or dream? Can we smell things in our dreams?

[jmack]

So, you are telling us that the Lord will reject his church and lead a break off sect through a former member as the end times servant who is likely excommunicated. We have so many who claim this honor, which one is it, or has he not left the church yet? Also, where did you get your knowledge of this?

In 1985 before I ever heard of John Taylor and his vision (in 2012) I had essentially the same vision. I did not see the same type of gory scenes of people killing their children. The piled up bodies with no one to bury them I did see. Anyway my vision was so similar to the John Taylor vision that I did not question the origin of his vision. I told the brother that brought me into the church of my vision. He is the one that told me of the John Taylor vision in response. As far as my original post, I have known it for quite some time. Two nights ago it popped into my head that Isaiah 28 actually was talking of the LDS Church. I was not contemplating on it or even studying anything related. I really don't remember what I was doing at the time. It just came to me that Ephraim is the LDS Church and all of Isaiah 28 just flashed in my awareness with new meaning that I never realized before. I use Isaiah 28 a lot because I consider it to be one of the most important precepts for understanding the end times. One that is misused by everyone that I have seen use it. It never once dawned on me before that it pointed specifically at the LDS Church. That literally came like a flood, pun intended.

Then I investigated that idea using my own human logic abilities and it makes total sense. Isaiah 28 specifically references Ephraim. Joseph Smith was from the tribe of Ephraim. The majority of LDS in this country are of Ephraim. The United States is said by many including non LDS to be Ephraim. There are LDS prophecies of the LDS Church becoming much larger. Even the largest Church. I have not investigated those prophecies. I'm just aware of them.

The inescapable part is what the Church believes of itself. As far as I know it is official Church doctrine that it is the true kingdom of God on this earth. That it will one day encompass the whole world. That the president of the Church rules in Jesus place until Jesus comes at which time all the keys of the kingdom will be handed over to Jesus. HOWEVER, before Jesus rules the kingdom the man of sin will rule the kingdom. Jesus will come back and defeat this man of sin. So if the Church is correct and it is the kingdom of God on earth then the man of sin will become the president of the LDS Church. Then what of the oaths sworn in the temple? Would those oaths give absolute authority to the man of sin over the oath makers? Sure it would. It would be the premortal plan of Lucifer come to full fruition. It boggles my mind how one of the first things we learn is Lucifer's plan of not allowing man to have agency and then we surrender our agency to an organization with a man at the lead. So I ask you, what if (when) the man of sin becomes the president is that not the culmination of Lucifer's plan. And if the Church is wrong and it is not the kingdom of God on earth then this is all bs. Either way it is not good. And if the man of sin does become the president then that would mean Joseph Smith is the false prophet of Revelation. And the church he setup is the church of Lucifer. I believe the true LDS Church is the remnant that survives the overwhelming scourge. I guess we'll have to wait to see who the DS is. It looks like satan is working overtime to obfuscate the DS from being seen or heard by creating so many counterfeits.

So basically you think the church is run by Satan and not by the Lord, am I right?

Just saw this. No, I don't "think" because I don't know that anyone but men are running the church at this time.

Sounds like you're backpedaling what you said. You were talking about the man of sin, heading the church and administering oaths in the temple to bind the members and how this was following Lucifer's plan. You can see why I asked, you even suggested it would be the church of Lucifer because you believe the Lord's church will not be the lds church.

[Michael Sherwin]

In 1985 before I ever heard of John Taylor and his vision (in 2012) I had essentially the same vision. I did not see the same type of gory scenes of people killing their children. The piled up bodies with no one to bury them I did see. Anyway my vision was so similar to the John Taylor vision that I did not question the origin of his vision. I told the brother that brought me into the church of my vision. He is the one that told me of the John Taylor vision in response. As far as my original post, I have known it for quite some time. Two nights ago it popped into my head that Isaiah 28 actually was talking of the LDS Church. I was not contemplating on it or even studying anything related. I really don't remember what I was doing at the time. It just came to me that Ephraim is the LDS Church and all of Isaiah 28 just flashed in my awareness with new meaning that I never realized before. I use Isaiah 28 a lot because I consider it to be one of the most important precepts for understanding the end times. One that is misused by everyone that I have seen use it. It never once dawned on me before that it pointed specifically at the LDS Church. That literally came like a flood, pun intended.

Then I investigated that idea using my own human logic abilities and it makes total sense. Isaiah 28 specifically references Ephraim. Joseph Smith was from the tribe of Ephraim. The majority of LDS in this country are of Ephraim. The United States is said by many including non LDS to be Ephraim. There are LDS prophecies of the LDS Church becoming much larger. Even the largest Church. I have not investigated those prophecies. I'm just aware of them.

The inescapable part is what the Church believes of itself. As far as I know it is official Church doctrine that it is the true kingdom of God on this earth. That it will one day encompass the whole world. That the president of the Church rules in Jesus place until Jesus comes at which time all the keys of the kingdom will be handed over to Jesus. HOWEVER, before Jesus rules the kingdom the man of sin will rule the kingdom. Jesus will come back and defeat this man of sin. So if the Church is correct and it is the kingdom of God on earth then the man of sin will become the president of the LDS Church. Then what of the oaths sworn in the temple? Would those oaths give absolute authority to the man of sin over the oath makers? Sure it would. It would be the premortal plan of Lucifer come to full fruition. It boggles my mind how one of the first things we learn is Lucifer's plan of not allowing man to have agency and then we surrender our agency to an organization with a man at the lead. So I ask you, what if (when) the man of sin becomes the president is that not the culmination of Lucifer's plan. And if the Church is wrong and it is not the kingdom of God on earth then this is all bs. Either way it is not good. And if the man of sin does become the president then that would mean Joseph Smith is the false prophet of Revelation. And the church he setup is the church of Lucifer. I believe the true LDS Church is the remnant that survives the overwhelming scourge. I guess we'll have to wait to see who the DS is. It looks like satan is working overtime to obfuscate the DS from being seen or heard by creating so many counterfeits.

So basically you think the church is run by Satan and not by the Lord, am I right?

Just saw this. No, I don't "think" because I don't know that anyone but men are running the church at this time.

Sounds like you're backpedaling what you said. You were talking about the man of sin, heading the church and administering oaths in the temple to bind the members and how this was following Lucifer's plan. You can see why I asked, you even suggested it would be the church of Lucifer because you believe the Lord's church will not be the lds church.

I also said that if the man of sin does become the president that would make Joseph Smith the false prophet of Revelation. Then just minutes ago I was prompted to look at Joseph Smith's birth date in Stellarium. So I say something and even the stars testify to the truth of what I say. Saturn represents Satan and Uranus represents a fallen angel. And Virgo represents the earth.

Isaiah 66:7 Before she travailed, she brought forth; before her pain came, she was delivered of a man child.

Isaiah 66:8 Who hath heard such a thing? who hath seen such things? Shall the earth be made to bring forth in one day? or shall a nation be born at once? for as soon as Zion travailed, she brought forth her children.

She is the sign of the woman, Virgo. She also is the earth.

So the fallen angel Satan is on the earth on Joseph Smith's birth date. What can you say when even the stars testify to the truth?

[Doc]

So basically you think the church is run by Satan and not by the Lord, am I right?

Just saw this. No, I don't "think" because I don't know that anyone but men are running the church at this time.

Sounds like you're backpedaling what you said. You were talking about the man of sin, heading the church and administering oaths in the temple to bind the members and how this was following Lucifer's plan. You can see why I asked, you even suggested it would be the church of Lucifer because you believe the Lord's church will not be the lds church.

I also said that if the man of sin does become the president that would make Joseph Smith the false prophet of Revelation. Then just minutes ago I was prompted to look at Joseph Smith's birth date in Stellarium. So I say something and even the stars testify to the truth of what I say. Saturn represents Satan and Uranus represents a fallen angel. And Virgo represents the earth.

Isaiah 66:7 Before she travailed, she brought forth; before her pain came, she was delivered of a man child.

Isaiah 66:8 Who hath heard such a thing? who hath seen such things? Shall the earth be made to bring forth in one day? or shall a nation be born at once? for as soon as Zion travailed, she brought forth her children.

She is the sign of the woman, Virgo. She also is the earth.

So the fallen angel Satan is on the earth on Joseph Smith's birth date. What can you say when even the stars testify to the truth?

So let me make sure I understand...you think Joseph Smith is Lucifer?

[BeNotDeceived]

... minutes ago I was prompted to look at Joseph Smith's birth date ...

https://www.ldsfreedomforum.com/viewtop ... ed#p913180

Check interval between posts compared to 7yrs prosperity remaining.

[The Airbender]

The covenant with death was when the church gave up the Kingdom of God, the United Order and Plural Marriage in order to fit in and take the pressure off. It was a covenant with Babylon and it was the day we decided we preferred to live in the world and be of the world rather than build Zion.

To be clear, we will never build Zion until we have begun to live again the things we abandoned in 1890.

What is it about the allure of practicing polygamy? So many have left the church and some even started their own so they could get more than one woman to have sex with them and pretend it's a godly thing to do. It was never meant to replace the Lord’s standard of marriage, but to be temporary, to raise seed. It was part of the restoration of all things and was stopped when the time came. Let it go, before it drives you crazy because if you look at the eventual outcome of those who have done it after it was forbidden, for many it is horrible. Murder, abuse, oppression, sexual deviance, ignorance and fear, suffering of innocents. For the lucky ones it still removes them from the true Church to wander in strange paths. Do yourself a favor and don't dwell on the desires you may feel, don't entertain those thoughts.

I listed several reasons and most latched on to plural marriage. There have been many, many discussions on that topic here. Let’s not make this about plural marriage. But I will say you do not understand the nature of the thing or the motivation if that’s what you believe. And you must have never studied what the prophets have said about it or if you did you don’t believe them.

[Michael Sherwin]

Just saw this. No, I don't "think" because I don't know that anyone but men are running the church at this time.

Sounds like you're backpedaling what you said. You were talking about the man of sin, heading the church and administering oaths in the temple to bind the members and how this was following Lucifer's plan. You can see why I asked, you even suggested it would be the church of Lucifer because you believe the Lord's church will not be the lds church.

I also said that if the man of sin does become the president that would make Joseph Smith the false prophet of Revelation. Then just minutes ago I was prompted to look at Joseph Smith's birth date in Stellarium. So I say something and even the stars testify to the truth of what I say. Saturn represents Satan and Uranus represents a fallen angel. And Virgo represents the earth.

Isaiah 66:7 Before she travailed, she brought forth; before her pain came, she was delivered of a man child.

Isaiah 66:8 Who hath heard such a thing? who hath seen such things? Shall the earth be made to bring forth in one day? or shall a nation be born at once? for as soon as Zion travailed, she brought forth her children.

She is the sign of the woman, Virgo. She also is the earth.

So the fallen angel Satan is on the earth on Joseph Smith's birth date. What can you say when even the stars testify to the truth?

So let me make sure I understand...you think Joseph Smith is Lucifer?

Haven't I said enough? Joseph Smith fits the bill for the false prophet. Is the false prophet Lucifer in the flesh? Idk. I think it is more complicated than what English can describe. The Lamb with seven horns and seven eyes is the manifestation of the Father in his creation. The Lamb is also the seven Spirits of God that are sent forth into all the earth. They are all God when they are in the earth. But only one of them is our God. And our God is the highest of the seven and is the LORD of Lords. I do not fully understand that. Do you? Is Satan also one of the seven. Or is he just below them? Idk. I think he is one of the seven. If he is one of the seven and is one, "who is like God" then can he be in more than one place at a time? Does he have multiple avatars like the Father? Idk. What I do know is that the false prophet will have his spirit. What does that mean exactly? Idk. I don't think human language can express all this heavenly stuff.

[Silas]

Simple question (maybe simple minded). Won't the one mighty and strong or the davidic servant or whatever you call him, just be whoever is the president of the church at that future time? Regardless of all the myriad of philosophies covered on this forum if you were to ask a typical member I think what you would hear would be the simple approach of it being the prophet.

He will become the leader of the remnant and gather all the remnant of Israel. Before that he will be despised and rejected by the vast majority of the Church. If he is accepted prior to the overwhelming scourge then there would be no overwhelming scourge. And the remnant will know who he is because the Holy Ghost will give them that knowledge. The formalities of the presidency will not be needed. He will be the prophet and the people remaining will follow him.

So, you are telling us that the Lord will reject his church and lead a break off sect through a former member as the end times servant who is likely excommunicated. We have so many who claim this honor, which one is it, or has he not left the church yet? Also, where did you get your knowledge of this?

In 1985 before I ever heard of John Taylor and his vision (in 2012) I had essentially the same vision. I did not see the same type of gory scenes of people killing their children. The piled up bodies with no one to bury them I did see. Anyway my vision was so similar to the John Taylor vision that I did not question the origin of his vision. I told the brother that brought me into the church of my vision. He is the one that told me of the John Taylor vision in response. As far as my original post, I have known it for quite some time. Two nights ago it popped into my head that Isaiah 28 actually was talking of the LDS Church. I was not contemplating on it or even studying anything related. I really don't remember what I was doing at the time. It just came to me that Ephraim is the LDS Church and all of Isaiah 28 just flashed in my awareness with new meaning that I never realized before. I use Isaiah 28 a lot because I consider it to be one of the most important precepts for understanding the end times. One that is misused by everyone that I have seen use it. It never once dawned on me before that it pointed specifically at the LDS Church. That literally came like a flood, pun intended.

Then I investigated that idea using my own human logic abilities and it makes total sense. Isaiah 28 specifically references Ephraim. Joseph Smith was from the tribe of Ephraim. The majority of LDS in this country are of Ephraim. The United States is said by many including non LDS to be Ephraim. There are LDS prophecies of the LDS Church becoming much larger. Even the largest Church. I have not investigated those prophecies. I'm just aware of them.

The inescapable part is what the Church believes of itself. As far as I know it is official Church doctrine that it is the true kingdom of God on this earth. That it will one day encompass the whole world. That the president of the Church rules in Jesus place until Jesus comes at which time all the keys of the kingdom will be handed over to Jesus. HOWEVER, before Jesus rules the kingdom the man of sin will rule the kingdom. Jesus will come back and defeat this man of sin. So if the Church is correct and it is the kingdom of God on earth then the man of sin will become the president of the LDS Church. Then what of the oaths sworn in the temple? Would those oaths give absolute authority to the man of sin over the oath makers? Sure it would. It would be the premortal plan of Lucifer come to full fruition. It boggles my mind how one of the first things we learn is Lucifer's plan of not allowing man to have agency and then we surrender our agency to an organization with a man at the lead. So I ask you, what if (when) the man of sin becomes the president is that not the culmination of Lucifer's plan. And if the Church is wrong and it is not the kingdom of God on earth then this is all bs. Either way it is not good. And if the man of sin does become the president then that would mean Joseph Smith is the false prophet of Revelation. And the church he setup is the church of Lucifer. I believe the true LDS Church is the remnant that survives the overwhelming scourge. I guess we'll have to wait to see who the DS is. It looks like satan is working overtime to obfuscate the DS from being seen or heard by creating so many counterfeits.

The scriptures teach us to be obedient. Obedience does not remove our agency and it does not require anyone to do something they know is wrong.

[Michael Sherwin]

... minutes ago I was prompted to look at Joseph Smith's birth date ...

https://www.ldsfreedomforum.com/viewtop ... ed#p913180

Check interval between posts compared to 7yrs prosperity remaining.

4:43 - 4:18 = 25 minutes. Allowing for lag because of time to type, preview reword etc I'd say that a few minutes is accurate enough. Next time I'll use a stopwatch!

[Michael Sherwin]

He will become the leader of the remnant and gather all the remnant of Israel. Before that he will be despised and rejected by the vast majority of the Church. If he is accepted prior to the overwhelming scourge then there would be no overwhelming scourge. And the remnant will know who he is because the Holy Ghost will give them that knowledge. The formalities of the presidency will not be needed. He will be the prophet and the people remaining will follow him.

So, you are telling us that the Lord will reject his church and lead a break off sect through a former member as the end times servant who is likely excommunicated. We have so many who claim this honor, which one is it, or has he not left the church yet? Also, where did you get your knowledge of this?

In 1985 before I ever heard of John Taylor and his vision (in 2012) I had essentially the same vision. I did not see the same type of gory scenes of people killing their children. The piled up bodies with no one to bury them I did see. Anyway my vision was so similar to the John Taylor vision that I did not question the origin of his vision. I told the brother that brought me into the church of my vision. He is the one that told me of the John Taylor vision in response. As far as my original post, I have known it for quite some time. Two nights ago it popped into my head that Isaiah 28 actually was talking of the LDS Church. I was not contemplating on it or even studying anything related. I really don't remember what I was doing at the time. It just came to me that Ephraim is the LDS Church and all of Isaiah 28 just flashed in my awareness with new meaning that I never realized before. I use Isaiah 28 a lot because I consider it to be one of the most important precepts for understanding the end times. One that is misused by everyone that I have seen use it. It never once dawned on me before that it pointed specifically at the LDS Church. That literally came like a flood, pun intended.

Then I investigated that idea using my own human logic abilities and it makes total sense. Isaiah 28 specifically references Ephraim. Joseph Smith was from the tribe of Ephraim. The majority of LDS in this country are of Ephraim. The United States is said by many including non LDS to be Ephraim. There are LDS prophecies of the LDS Church becoming much larger. Even the largest Church. I have not investigated those prophecies. I'm just aware of them.

The inescapable part is what the Church believes of itself. As far as I know it is official Church doctrine that it is the true kingdom of God on this earth. That it will one day encompass the whole world. That the president of the Church rules in Jesus place until Jesus comes at which time all the keys of the kingdom will be handed over to Jesus. HOWEVER, before Jesus rules the kingdom the man of sin will rule the kingdom. Jesus will come back and defeat this man of sin. So if the Church is correct and it is the kingdom of God on earth then the man of sin will become the president of the LDS Church. Then what of the oaths sworn in the temple? Would those oaths give absolute authority to the man of sin over the oath makers? Sure it would. It would be the premortal plan of Lucifer come to full fruition. It boggles my mind how one of the first things we learn is Lucifer's plan of not allowing man to have agency and then we surrender our agency to an organization with a man at the lead. So I ask you, what if (when) the man of sin becomes the president is that not the culmination of Lucifer's plan. And if the Church is wrong and it is not the kingdom of God on earth then this is all bs. Either way it is not good. And if the man of sin does become the president then that would mean Joseph Smith is the false prophet of Revelation. And the church he setup is the church of Lucifer. I believe the true LDS Church is the remnant that survives the overwhelming scourge. I guess we'll have to wait to see who the DS is. It looks like satan is working overtime to obfuscate the DS from being seen or heard by creating so many counterfeits.

The scriptures teach us to be obedient. Obedience does not remove our agency and it does not require anyone to do something they know is wrong.

If the man of sin becomes the president he will not act kindly to someone that breaks his oath to give everything he has and everything he is to the church and its leader which is him. You can break your oath but he will take your head. That is okay though because if he takes your head you will receive a new white robe from Jesus.

[BeNotDeceived]

What times are those?

Sat Dec 22, 2012 11:04 pm
Sat Feb 16, 2019 4:54 pm

^^ Those post times was my reference.

That’s GMT-08

[Michael Sherwin]

What times are those?

Sat Dec 22, 2012 11:04 pm
Sat Feb 16, 2019 4:54 pm

^^ Those post times was my reference.

That’s GMT-08

This one.
https://www.ldsfreedomforum.com/viewtop ... 59#p960112

Then this one.
https://www.ldsfreedomforum.com/viewtop ... 30#p960117

[Doc]

Sounds like you're backpedaling what you said. You were talking about the man of sin, heading the church and administering oaths in the temple to bind the members and how this was following Lucifer's plan. You can see why I asked, you even suggested it would be the church of Lucifer because you believe the Lord's church will not be the lds church.

I also said that if the man of sin does become the president that would make Joseph Smith the false prophet of Revelation. Then just minutes ago I was prompted to look at Joseph Smith's birth date in Stellarium. So I say something and even the stars testify to the truth of what I say. Saturn represents Satan and Uranus represents a fallen angel. And Virgo represents the earth.

Isaiah 66:7 Before she travailed, she brought forth; before her pain came, she was delivered of a man child.

Isaiah 66:8 Who hath heard such a thing? who hath seen such things? Shall the earth be made to bring forth in one day? or shall a nation be born at once? for as soon as Zion travailed, she brought forth her children.

She is the sign of the woman, Virgo. She also is the earth.

So the fallen angel Satan is on the earth on Joseph Smith's birth date. What can you say when even the stars testify to the truth?

So let me make sure I understand...you think Joseph Smith is Lucifer?

Haven't I said enough? Joseph Smith fits the bill for the false prophet. Is the false prophet Lucifer in the flesh? Idk. I think it is more complicated than what English can describe. The Lamb with seven horns and seven eyes is the manifestation of the Father in his creation. The Lamb is also the seven Spirits of God that are sent forth into all the earth. They are all God when they are in the earth. But only one of them is our God. And our God is the highest of the seven and is the LORD of Lords. I do not fully understand that. Do you? Is Satan also one of the seven. Or is he just below them? Idk. I think he is one of the seven. If he is one of the seven and is one, "who is like God" then can he be in more than one place at a time? Does he have multiple avatars like the Father? Idk. What I do know is that the false prophet will have his spirit. What does that mean exactly? Idk. I don't think human language can express all this heavenly stuff.

If Joseph Smith fits the bill...then why are you in these forums?

There is only one author of confusion...and you my friend are being deceived by him. You’re drawing incorrect interpretations and not acknowledging the full ramifications of your claims. If Joseph Smith is not a dispensational prophet called to restore the fullness of the gospel...then you should forget everything you know about Mormonism and move on because it would be a terrible waste of time. There is no gray area here.

[Michael Sherwin]

I also said that if the man of sin does become the president that would make Joseph Smith the false prophet of Revelation. Then just minutes ago I was prompted to look at Joseph Smith's birth date in Stellarium. So I say something and even the stars testify to the truth of what I say. Saturn represents Satan and Uranus represents a fallen angel. And Virgo represents the earth.

Isaiah 66:7 Before she travailed, she brought forth; before her pain came, she was delivered of a man child.

Isaiah 66:8 Who hath heard such a thing? who hath seen such things? Shall the earth be made to bring forth in one day? or shall a nation be born at once? for as soon as Zion travailed, she brought forth her children.

She is the sign of the woman, Virgo. She also is the earth.

So the fallen angel Satan is on the earth on Joseph Smith's birth date. What can you say when even the stars testify to the truth?

So let me make sure I understand...you think Joseph Smith is Lucifer?

Haven't I said enough? Joseph Smith fits the bill for the false prophet. Is the false prophet Lucifer in the flesh? Idk. I think it is more complicated than what English can describe. The Lamb with seven horns and seven eyes is the manifestation of the Father in his creation. The Lamb is also the seven Spirits of God that are sent forth into all the earth. They are all God when they are in the earth. But only one of them is our God. And our God is the highest of the seven and is the LORD of Lords. I do not fully understand that. Do you? Is Satan also one of the seven. Or is he just below them? Idk. I think he is one of the seven. If he is one of the seven and is one, "who is like God" then can he be in more than one place at a time? Does he have multiple avatars like the Father? Idk. What I do know is that the false prophet will have his spirit. What does that mean exactly? Idk. I don't think human language can express all this heavenly stuff.

If Joseph Smith fits the bill...then why are you in these forums?

There is only one author of confusion...and you my friend are being deceived by him. You’re drawing incorrect interpretations and not acknowledging the full ramifications of your claims. If Joseph Smith is not a dispensational prophet called to restore the fullness of the gospel...then you should forget everything you know about Mormonism and move on because it would be a terrible waste of time. There is no gray area here.

You can say anything you want but God is not going to abandon the remnant.

I thought I was here because this is the LDS freedom forum. If you do not like the freedom then maybe it is you that should leave and find somewhere else to hang out.

[Doc]

So let me make sure I understand...you think Joseph Smith is Lucifer?

Haven't I said enough? Joseph Smith fits the bill for the false prophet. Is the false prophet Lucifer in the flesh? Idk. I think it is more complicated than what English can describe. The Lamb with seven horns and seven eyes is the manifestation of the Father in his creation. The Lamb is also the seven Spirits of God that are sent forth into all the earth. They are all God when they are in the earth. But only one of them is our God. And our God is the highest of the seven and is the LORD of Lords. I do not fully understand that. Do you? Is Satan also one of the seven. Or is he just below them? Idk. I think he is one of the seven. If he is one of the seven and is one, "who is like God" then can he be in more than one place at a time? Does he have multiple avatars like the Father? Idk. What I do know is that the false prophet will have his spirit. What does that mean exactly? Idk. I don't think human language can express all this heavenly stuff.

If Joseph Smith fits the bill...then why are you in these forums?

There is only one author of confusion...and you my friend are being deceived by him. You’re drawing incorrect interpretations and not acknowledging the full ramifications of your claims. If Joseph Smith is not a dispensational prophet called to restore the fullness of the gospel...then you should forget everything you know about Mormonism and move on because it would be a terrible waste of time. There is no gray area here.

You can say anything you want but God is not going to abandon the remnant.

I thought I was here because this is the LDS freedom forum. If you do not like the freedom then maybe it is you that should leave and find somewhere else to hang out.

You can’t call the LDS church Ephraim and then proceed to say Joseph Smith is a false prophet. Name another (non Book of Mormon believing) church who claims a large chunk of Ephraim resides within the United States. If Joseph Smith is a false prophet, then a different country and remnant would be Ephraim, since that interpretation is an LDS view. Look, all I’m saying is you cannot logically use LDS interpretations of the Bible against the LDS church in that manner. If the LDS church was founded by the devil, then a different religion or interpretation thereof should be correct...then you would have to use that interpretation against us.

Also, if Joseph Smith is a true prophet and the LDS church primarily is composed of the descendants of Ephraim, then why can the interpretation of “drunkards of Ephraim” not refer to the United States as a whole and not just specifically the LDS church?

[Michael Sherwin]

Haven't I said enough? Joseph Smith fits the bill for the false prophet. Is the false prophet Lucifer in the flesh? Idk. I think it is more complicated than what English can describe. The Lamb with seven horns and seven eyes is the manifestation of the Father in his creation. The Lamb is also the seven Spirits of God that are sent forth into all the earth. They are all God when they are in the earth. But only one of them is our God. And our God is the highest of the seven and is the LORD of Lords. I do not fully understand that. Do you? Is Satan also one of the seven. Or is he just below them? Idk. I think he is one of the seven. If he is one of the seven and is one, "who is like God" then can he be in more than one place at a time? Does he have multiple avatars like the Father? Idk. What I do know is that the false prophet will have his spirit. What does that mean exactly? Idk. I don't think human language can express all this heavenly stuff.

If Joseph Smith fits the bill...then why are you in these forums?

There is only one author of confusion...and you my friend are being deceived by him. You’re drawing incorrect interpretations and not acknowledging the full ramifications of your claims. If Joseph Smith is not a dispensational prophet called to restore the fullness of the gospel...then you should forget everything you know about Mormonism and move on because it would be a terrible waste of time. There is no gray area here.

You can say anything you want but God is not going to abandon the remnant.

I thought I was here because this is the LDS freedom forum. If you do not like the freedom then maybe it is you that should leave and find somewhere else to hang out.

You can’t call the LDS church Ephraim and then proceed to say Joseph Smith is a false prophet. Name another (non Book of Mormon believing) church who claims a large chunk of Ephraim resides within the United States. If Joseph Smith is a false prophet, then a different country and remnant would be Ephraim, since that interpretation is an LDS view. Look, all I’m saying is you cannot logically use LDS interpretations of the Bible against the LDS church in that manner. If the LDS church was founded by the devil, then a different religion or interpretation thereof should be correct...then you would have to use that interpretation against us.

Also, if Joseph Smith is a true prophet and the LDS church primarily is composed of the descendants of Ephraim, then why can the interpretation of “drunkards of Ephraim” not refer to the United States as a whole and not just specifically the LDS church?

Worldwide church of God. Herbert W. Armstrong
Minute 11 sec 30

[Doc]

If Joseph Smith fits the bill...then why are you in these forums?

There is only one author of confusion...and you my friend are being deceived by him. You’re drawing incorrect interpretations and not acknowledging the full ramifications of your claims. If Joseph Smith is not a dispensational prophet called to restore the fullness of the gospel...then you should forget everything you know about Mormonism and move on because it would be a terrible waste of time. There is no gray area here.

You can say anything you want but God is not going to abandon the remnant.

I thought I was here because this is the LDS freedom forum. If you do not like the freedom then maybe it is you that should leave and find somewhere else to hang out.

You can’t call the LDS church Ephraim and then proceed to say Joseph Smith is a false prophet. Name another (non Book of Mormon believing) church who claims a large chunk of Ephraim resides within the United States. If Joseph Smith is a false prophet, then a different country and remnant would be Ephraim, since that interpretation is an LDS view. Look, all I’m saying is you cannot logically use LDS interpretations of the Bible against the LDS church in that manner. If the LDS church was founded by the devil, then a different religion or interpretation thereof should be correct...then you would have to use that interpretation against us.

Also, if Joseph Smith is a true prophet and the LDS church primarily is composed of the descendants of Ephraim, then why can the interpretation of “drunkards of Ephraim” not refer to the United States as a whole and not just specifically the LDS church?

Worldwide church of God. Herbert W. Armstrong
Minute 11 sec 30

You seem to think that I do not know what I'm talking about. When you show that you are the one that does not know!

I read your thread about your story...I’ve read a lot of what you have posted on the forums. I won’t attack you or what you feel you may be. All I’m saying is you cannot call Joseph Smith a false prophet in one sentence, then reference your patriarchal blessing to support your cause in the next.

[Michael Sherwin]

You can say anything you want but God is not going to abandon the remnant.

I thought I was here because this is the LDS freedom forum. If you do not like the freedom then maybe it is you that should leave and find somewhere else to hang out.

You can’t call the LDS church Ephraim and then proceed to say Joseph Smith is a false prophet. Name another (non Book of Mormon believing) church who claims a large chunk of Ephraim resides within the United States. If Joseph Smith is a false prophet, then a different country and remnant would be Ephraim, since that interpretation is an LDS view. Look, all I’m saying is you cannot logically use LDS interpretations of the Bible against the LDS church in that manner. If the LDS church was founded by the devil, then a different religion or interpretation thereof should be correct...then you would have to use that interpretation against us.

Also, if Joseph Smith is a true prophet and the LDS church primarily is composed of the descendants of Ephraim, then why can the interpretation of “drunkards of Ephraim” not refer to the United States as a whole and not just specifically the LDS church?

Worldwide church of God. Herbert W. Armstrong
Minute 11 sec 30

You seem to think that I do not know what I'm talking about. When you show that you are the one that does not know!

I read your thread about your story...I’ve read a lot of what you have posted on the forums. I won’t attack you or what you feel you may be. All I’m saying is you cannot call Joseph Smith a false prophet in one sentence, then reference your patriarchal blessing to support your cause in the next.

NP! I feel as though I'm wanting to force my story to fruition out of frustration. I should be patient and wait on the Lord.

[Rand]

And oh yeah. Do you see that with the Lord is his anointed one the one that is termed the DS?

You think? The spirit of his writings have always been off putting to me. I have to say it is funny you put so much credibility in your PB, but it came from a fallen corrupt tree from what you say. How can you trust it that much?

I said to myself that I really need to go take a nap if there isn't anything else. I really need a nap. Oh well.

Before I joined the Church I had "a story". As amazing as my story is how can I trust it. It is not a matter of trust. It is a matter of consistency and persistence. My story went from coincidences to synergy a long time ago. So I was looking forward to my PB mostly , selfishly, because I was hoping for confirmation of my story. So I prayed inwardly with much fervor before and during my PB for that confirmation. I think the Lord answered my prayer because my PB totally confirms my story. I consider it as just as much hard evidence as the USS Mitscher was and the alignment of the planets on my birth date just to name a few. There is nothing in my PB that is contradictory to my story. What are the odds? My story is not random. It is either of God or the adversary. However, the planetary alignment on my birth date can only be coincidence or from God. And I have ruled out coincidence a long time ago.

I'm not trying to attack you. It just seems contradictory to me. I hear your story. Sounds amazing and fantastical. Sounds like your PB does give confirmation to your story. But, that doesn't mean we all have to believe it. We have to look at the fruits, taste the fruit, see if it feels good, or is congruent with other good fruit we have tasted and are currently tasting that are divine in their origin. And to me, you use your PB as validation, but it comes from what you term as a fallen entity. How can you use that as confirmation? Again, not doubting, just seems to be contradictory to me. I have learned some things from you. I have disagreed with some things. But so far for me, I am not sure what the fruit of your tree will be, so I must ask, seek and knock. Thanks for your response.

[Michael Sherwin]

Concerning whether Ephraim in Isaiah 28:1 is the US as a whole or refers specifically to the LDS Church. It refers to priest and prophets being intoxicated on false teaching and false doctrine. Already that rules out pointing at the US as a whole. It is pointing at a church. It is pointing at a church that has a prophet. Is there any other church that has a living prophet? It references the OMAS as teaching knowledge and doctrine to this people but they won't hear. So he is talking to a people and not a nation. He is talking to a people that search the scriptures! In Isaiah 28:15 it is a people that denies that the overflowing scourge will come to them. That means these people believe they are in a true church. That's because they are in a true church that death and hell cannot touch them and they are in agreement, in covenant that protects them. They don't realize that, "for we have made lies our refuge, and under falsehood have we hid ourselves".

If New Jerusalem will really be here in the US it is the remnant that will build it. It is the OMAS that will lead the remnant. The OMAS is therefore, "for a foundation a stone, a tried stone, a precious corner stone, a sure foundation: he that believeth shall not make haste". From an LDS point of view the OMAS therefore can only come to the LDS Church to sweep away the refuge of lies.

[jmack]

The covenant with death was when the church gave up the Kingdom of God, the United Order and Plural Marriage in order to fit in and take the pressure off. It was a covenant with Babylon and it was the day we decided we preferred to live in the world and be of the world rather than build Zion.

To be clear, we will never build Zion until we have begun to live again the things we abandoned in 1890.

What is it about the allure of practicing polygamy? So many have left the church and some even started their own so they could get more than one woman to have sex with them and pretend it's a godly thing to do. It was never meant to replace the Lord’s standard of marriage, but to be temporary, to raise seed. It was part of the restoration of all things and was stopped when the time came. Let it go, before it drives you crazy because if you look at the eventual outcome of those who have done it after it was forbidden, for many it is horrible. Murder, abuse, oppression, sexual deviance, ignorance and fear, suffering of innocents. For the lucky ones it still removes them from the true Church to wander in strange paths. Do yourself a favor and don't dwell on the desires you may feel, don't entertain those thoughts.

I listed several reasons and most latched on to plural marriage. There have been many, many discussions on that topic here. Let’s not make this about plural marriage. But I will say you do not understand the nature of the thing or the motivation if that’s what you believe. And you must have never studied what the prophets have said about it or if you did you don’t believe them.

You must have latched onto all the peripheral speculation (not scripural in the least) that was taught to encourage the members to practice it. All that bunk about needing it to get into the uppermost part of the Celestial kingdom, needing at least three wives to qualify, trying to mollify the women that they'll have a higher status in the hearafter sealed to a polygamist than in monogamy, telling the miserable first wife that her position in heaven will be secured and she'll be higher rank than the rest. You know who still clings to those worldly and obviously false notions that were no better than pseudospiritualpropaganda? Fundamentalist polygamists who are still desperately trying to distinguish themselves as special and elite.And a handful of members who are planning their future harems.