NOM

Posted: **Mon Apr 06, 2020 8:10 am**

He said that your behavior in the pre-existence not only determined THAT you would come to earth but that it also determined your circumstances ON earth? He said with his little smirk that implies, "this is why you should all bow down to me because you can only imagine what a kick-ass superstar I was in the pre-existence."

My wife was told by a visiting apostle (I forget which one) on her mission that, since she's Asian, she was a fence-sitter in the pre-existence. Oak's talk didn't go down well for her. Uchtdorf really saved the day for her.

So these guys can just invent doctrine like that? Now that an apostle has said it in GC it's pretty much doctrine as far as the general membership is concerned. Right up there with Bednar saying that Joseph Smith didn't really mean that having your children sealed to you means you'll be with them in the eternities. He only meant that would be the case if all of you live perfectly obedient lives.

This is like handing people a license to discriminate. I can't help but wonder if the underlying motivation will be to develop a doctrine that LGBT people are less worthy by nature because of something they did in some nebulous, unremembered fantasy world-before-the-world. So, go ahead and abuse them. They have it coming.

Posted: **Mon Apr 06, 2020 8:30 am**

Yep, he really said that. I had flashbacks of the old non-doctrinal doctrine regarding why blacks were restricted from the priesthood.

But I thought they were trying hard to bury that non-doctrinal doctrine. So big surprise that Oaks would drag that thing back out from under the rug. I would bet there were more than a few GAs who had a big cringe moment right there. And probably quite a few of those members who pay attention to such things as well.

B.K. Packer was probably applauding from wherever he's currently residing.

Posted: **Mon Apr 06, 2020 8:43 am**

Hagoth wrote: ↑
Mon Apr 06, 2020 8:10 am
He said that your behavior in the pre-existence not only determined THAT you would come to earth but that it also determined your circumstances ON earth? He said with his little smirk that implies, "this is why you should all bow down to me because you can only imagine what a kick-ass superstar I was in the pre-existence."

My wife was told by a visiting apostle (I forget which one) on her mission that, since she's Asian, she was a fence-sitter in the pre-existence. Oak's talk didn't go down well for her. Uchtdorf really saved the day for her.

So these guys can just invent doctrine like that? Now that an apostle has said it in GC it's pretty much doctrine as far as the general membership is concerned. Right up there with Bednar saying that Joseph Smith didn't really mean that having your children sealed to you means you'll be with them in the eternities. He only meant that would be the case if all of you live perfectly obedient lives.

This is like handing people a license to discriminate. I can't help but wonder if the underlying motivation will be to develop a doctrine that LGBT people are less worthy by nature because of something they did in some nebulous, unremembered fantasy world-before-the-world. So, go ahead and abuse them. They have it coming.

This is by no means new doctrine. It was around when I was a child until about 198? when there was an attempt to debunk it, part because they were trying to disown the idea that blacks were fence sitters and less valient, and partly because people were taking Saturday’s Warrior too seriously. Oaks is older than I am, so he grew up with “kids who are Down’s syndrome were so special in the preexistence that they earned the CK, without ever having to be tested” and blacks were fence sitters, and those of us blessed to be born into the church were extra valiant, and those born into situations of poverty kinda earned it, and those born into strong Mormon families... everyone had their life situation given to them according to the prosperity gospel of the preexistence. Church leaders were like Abraham and selected as leaders before birth, so God sent them to the best Mormon families, which helps to justify the nepotism that goes on

I even learned in primary that I was less valiant in preexistence because my parents were inactive, and I projected from there that God didn’t love me at all because they were also abusive. I must have been terrible in the preexistence and deserve abuse.

It really was a prosperity gospel of preexistence.

Posted: **Mon Apr 06, 2020 10:00 am**

Palerider wrote: ↑
Mon Apr 06, 2020 8:30 am
I would bet there were more than a few GAs who had a big cringe moment right there.

I asked my wife if she has the same impression I do, that Oaks and Uchtdorf are sitting there cringing during each others' talks. She dislikes Oaks almost as much as I do, which is quite a bit to say the least.

Posted: **Mon Apr 06, 2020 10:01 am**

The Book of Abraham explicitly teaches that leaders were selected in the Pre-existence. Presumably because of their awesomeness. They were "good". In the weird world of Mormonism, President Oak's assertion is doctrinally consistent with Mormon doctrine such as it is.

Bat crap crazy and a license to indulge your racist musings about why certain people are born in certain races, but doctrinally consistent insofar as anything is. The idea that leaders were selected in the Pre-existence, and therefore your behavior in the previous life determined your circumstances in this one, is in fact scriptural to Mormons.

Abraham 3:

22 Now the Lord had shown unto me, Abraham, the aintelligences that were organized before the world was; and among all these there were many of the bnoble and great ones;

23 And God saw these souls that they were good, and he stood in the midst of them, and he said: These I will make my rulers; for he stood among those that were spirits, and he saw that they were good; and he said unto me: Abraham, thou art one of them; thou wast achosen before thou wast born.

Posted: **Mon Apr 06, 2020 11:23 am**

I don't listen to Oaks. He has nothing to say that has value.

Posted: **Mon Apr 06, 2020 11:30 am**

LDS leaders have long labored under a long shadow pre-ordination arrogance. This really needs to be turned around on them and note that we, as lay members, have quite a lot of expectations of anyone who boldly proclaims themselves to be prophets, seers, and revelators. If Oaks is truly trying to establish his credentials as one of "the noble and great ones" (Abraham 3:22-23) of the pre-existence, we have some huge expectations of what that looks like in the real world.

Posted: **Mon Apr 06, 2020 11:41 am**

The idea that down syndrome kids are pure CK chosen ones is a later attempt to bury the prevalent doctrine that all handicaps in mortal life are because of being less valiant.

Behold, the Johnathan Streeter blog article on the subject:

https://thoughtsonthingsandstuff.com/mormon-handicaps/

Posted: **Mon Apr 06, 2020 2:12 pm**

Not Buying It wrote: ↑
Mon Apr 06, 2020 10:01 am
The Book of Abraham explicitly teaches that leaders were selected in the Pre-existence.

I have also heard this interpreted as all of us who were not cast out of heaven. I have also heard it used to justify the story they were teaching the young men about how they were Generals in Heaven and all of the people from the past will bow down to them in adoration. The church tried to quash that teaching by claiming that we're all the same in God's eyes. I'm aware of three official statements asking people to stop teaching it. When I was a YM leader I sat down with my bishop and educated him about them (he had no idea). He said he would make sure it stopped. I also brought it to the attention of my fellow YM leaders. About a month later they were teaching it again.

Posted: **Mon Apr 06, 2020 4:11 pm**

it's just not skin colour or physical bodies, but also what country you are born into! HBL seems like a nice guy.

Posted: **Mon Apr 06, 2020 7:58 pm**

Such a teaching could be very harmful to almost everyone who took it seriously. It encourages pride in a particularly disgusting way. I think it's ironic that BYU Prof. Randy Bott was reprimanded for repeating what Harold B. Lee taught.

I would think they would edit this talk, just as they did some of Boyd Packer's more erroneous statements.

Posted: **Mon Apr 06, 2020 8:27 pm**

Being the uninspired bumpkins these old boys are, it's no surprise there is no consistency in their views. They wing it from a 1950's perspective. It's so obvious.

Posted: **Mon Apr 06, 2020 9:33 pm**

Obadiah_Dogberry wrote: ↑
Mon Apr 06, 2020 4:11 pm
it's just not skin colour or physical bodies, but also what country you are born into! HBL seems like a nice guy.

Never knew H.B.Lee said this. It's pretty twisted and truly demonstrates the branches of false doctrine that have been and still are grafted into this church.

This little tree may produce some of the works of Christ but it also produces so much fruit that is toxic.

Thank you JOSEPH!!!

Posted: **Tue Apr 07, 2020 2:55 am**

Immediately preceding Oak's comment about mortal circumstances, he said something that surprised me even more.

Dallin Oaks wrote:[After the council in heaven] many also made covenants with the Father concerning what they would do in mortality.

This was new "doctrine" to me. How long before we start getting berated for not keeping covenants that we supposedly made but don't even remember?

Posted: **Tue Apr 07, 2020 5:20 am**

This isn't new to me. It's been sort of re-routed and now back again, I guess. The spin I grew up with was that members of THIS TRUE CHURCH were more valiant than nonmembers. Basically, white people from USA were golden (white and delightsome). If you grew up from pioneer stock you got extra points. If you are a descendent from a high, mucky-muck, GA, it was super special status. I always thought of Gentiles vs God's people. Lame.

Posted: **Tue Apr 07, 2020 5:55 am**

deacon blues wrote: ↑
Mon Apr 06, 2020 7:58 pm
Such a teaching could be very harmful to almost everyone who took it seriously. It encourages pride in a particularly disgusting way. I think it's ironic that BYU Prof. Randy Bott was reprimanded for repeating what Harold B. Lee taught. I would think they would edit this talk, just as they did some of Boyd Packer's more erroneous statements.

When that happened, I posted here about how horrible it was the way the Church threw Randy Bott under the bus. Don't get me wrong, what he said was reprehensible and disgusting, but the thing that chapped my hide about it was that Bott got those ideas from Church leaders in the first place, then the Church tried to play innocent like Bott had made all that crap up on his own. The Church takes zero responsibility for anything it has taught its members, and will turn on a dime and condemn members for following the very things it told them to do - like how all those members who promoted the "I'm a Mormon" campaign and went to see "Meet the Mormons" multiple times a couple of short years later were revealed to have participated in victories for Satan and condemned by President Nelson.

Posted: **Tue Apr 07, 2020 10:06 am**

We really need to turn this upside down on them and start teaching that God sends his choicest spirits to the most difficult earth assignments. Born into a loving Mormon home with uppity ups in the church as relatives? You were such a weak fence sitter that God couldn’t trust you with anything hard. Born Gay? You must have been a General in Heaven because God trusted you to rise above difficulty and persecution. Born to a starving family in Africa and forced to become a child solider before you turned six? One of the top, most beloved of God because it takes a really righteous person to even survive in such a situation? Born white? Pathetic weakling. Born Black? God knows you could handle adversity.

See, god doesn’t dump first graders into college level classes and expect them to pass. No, he gives the weak babies something easy, like being born into a general authority’s family that is white, rich, and loving.

Posted: **Tue Apr 07, 2020 10:32 am**

I have a brother in law who believes this doctrine- that blacks, handicapped, etc were less valiant in the pre-E.

He wrote it in 2019.. last year.. I wanted so badly to print it out for DW to see how crazy this stuff is, but what's the point?

The bigger problem is that Oaks bringing it up only emboldens people who believe it, but without the bluntness of Prophet Lee so that those who have no idea what Oaks is really getting at from having any idea how dangerous and abhorrent the teaching is.

Posted: **Tue Apr 07, 2020 10:34 am**

alas wrote: ↑
Tue Apr 07, 2020 10:06 am
We really need to turn this upside down on them and start teaching that God sends his choicest spirits to the most difficult earth assignments. Born into a loving Mormon home with uppity ups in the church as relatives? You were such a weak fence sitter that God couldn’t trust you with anything hard. Born Gay? You must have been a General in Heaven because God trusted you to rise above difficulty and persecution. Born to a starving family in Africa and forced to become a child solider before you turned six? One of the top, most beloved of God because it takes a really righteous person to even survive in such a situation? Born white? Pathetic weakling. Born Black? God knows you could handle adversity.

See, god doesn’t dump first graders into college level classes and expect them to pass. No, he gives the weak babies something easy, like being born into a general authority’s family that is white, rich, and loving.

YES. This is what I always thought made sense. If we are on earth to be tested and learn to be more godlike by overcoming difficulty, etc., obviously the people born into difficult circumstances would be the ones who proved themselves strong and capable in the premortal existence. Those of us born into affluent LDS families in Utah--we must have been pretty pathetic if that's all we'd be able to cope with. Afterall, God doesn't give you trials you can't overcome (or some such nonsense).

I"m not really buying into any of this, but if you really do believe the preexistence determines your here-and-now, the version Alas spells out is the only one that makes any sense. I was born and raised in the church, but somehow I never realized that people ACTUALLY believe this garbage. So disturbing and toxic. Next RS lesson I deliver, definitely going to toss this out there as food for thought.

Posted: **Tue Apr 07, 2020 11:29 am**

Hagoth wrote: ↑
Mon Apr 06, 2020 8:10 am
He said that your behavior in the pre-existence not only determined THAT you would come to earth but that it also determined your circumstances ON earth?

Oaks was merely emphasizing the rhetoric of that Nazi Mormon Housewive blog. We are the champions of the world, so bow down to our glory.

NOM

Did Oaks really say that?

Did Oaks really say that?

Re: Did Oaks really say that?

Re: Did Oaks really say that?

Re: Did Oaks really say that?

Re: Did Oaks really say that?

Re: Did Oaks really say that?

Re: Did Oaks really say that?

Re: Did Oaks really say that?

Re: Did Oaks really say that?

Re: Did Oaks really say that?

Re: Did Oaks really say that?

Re: Did Oaks really say that?

Re: Did Oaks really say that?

Re: Did Oaks really say that?

Re: Did Oaks really say that?

Re: Did Oaks really say that?

Re: Did Oaks really say that?

Re: Did Oaks really say that?

Re: Did Oaks really say that?

Re: Did Oaks really say that?