NOM

Once upon a time God spoke to prophets and said, "thus saith the Lord," and it was written down as scripture. Lately we have learned that revelation to LDS prophets comes as an impression, without actual words from God, and without the need to be recorded as scripture. Can someone tell me how we tell the difference between:

1) Someone who is receiving genuine impressions from God.

2) Someone who thinks they are receiving genuine impressions from God.

3) Someone who is pretending to receive genuine impressions from God.

If the answer is pray about it and see if you get an impression, then you could fall under either category 1) or 2).

4) Someone who bullshits so well they make their followers and themselves believe they receive genuine impressions from God.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IgoB2JMEowc

Hagoth wrote: ↑Thu Jan 24, 2019 6:22 pm 1) Someone who is receiving genuine impressions from God.

2) Someone who thinks they are receiving genuine impressions from God.

3) Someone who is pretending to receive genuine impressions from God.

If the answer is pray about it and see if you get an impression, then you could fall under either category 1) or 2).

I have to admit that I personally fall into Category 3 whenever someone asks me to give them a priesthood blessing. I suppose I might be in category 1 assuming that a god might be channeling power through me, but there is no chance I would be in category 2.

I've been reading Ist Samuel lately (Samuel,Saul, David are the major figures) It talks about a "School of the Prophets," but it seems quite different from what we might think. The prophets seem to go into hysterics (perhaps speaking in tongues?) at times and sometimes speak under the influence of evil spirits.(Samuel 10:9-14,18:10 NIV) I think a big fault of Church leaders is they talk about the Spirit as a flawless source of truth. A close study of the Old Testament combined with a modern understanding of the mind does not bear that out; neither does a close study of the Church.

The smell test helps. Does it smell like someone is pushing their own particular agenda of hating on some group, object, or idea? Does it smell totally unenlightened to you? Does it smell like it was designed for the prophet's self-aggrandizement or to allow him to achieve a carnal desire?

moksha wrote: ↑Fri Jan 25, 2019 5:03 pm The smell test helps. Does it smell like someone is pushing their own particular agenda of hating on some group, object, or idea? Does it smell totally unenlightened to you? Does it smell like it was designed for the prophet's self-aggrandizement or to allow him to achieve a carnal desire?

Does it come with a requirement for money and/or labor?

How do you tell the difference between a psychotic serial killer and a worthy convert? Another strike against the super power of LDS discernment.

On June 28, (1975) Susan Curtis vanished from the campus of Brigham Young University in Provo, 45 miles (70 km) south of Salt Lake City. Curtis's murder became Bundy's last confession, tape-recorded moments before he entered the execution chamber.[144] The bodies of Wilcox, Kent, Cunningham, Culver, Curtis, and Oliverson were never recovered.

In August or September 1975, Bundy was baptized into The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, although he was not an active participant in services and ignored most church restrictions.[145][146][147] He would later be excommunicated by the LDS Church following his 1976 kidnapping conviction.[145] When asked his religious preference after his arrest, Bundy answered "Methodist", the religion of his childhood.[148]

I've seen so many rebuttals to church issues with the phrase "if they didn't say 'Thus saith the Lord, they were giving their own thoughts and not speaking as a prophet.'"

The idea is absurd of course because if that's the rule than prophets haven't giving any meaningful revelation in a very, very long time.

But it really works for church leaders so well - if you don't say it you can talk with the impression you speak for God, but you provide a ton of wiggle room for yourself down the road.

The fact that no church president has been willing to make a meaningful prophecy speaks volumes about how little they know about the world, and the fact that no prophet since Joseph Smith has been willing to give such a clear idea that they speak to God is such a clear indication that Joseph Smith made it up and no one really knew how to replicate it (or they knew it was a lie and couldn't bring themselves to do it).

Either way, you can't tell the difference because they don't want you to be able to tell the difference.

Hagoth wrote: ↑Thu Jan 24, 2019 6:22 pm Once upon a time God spoke to prophets and said, "thus saith the Lord," and it was written down as scripture. Lately we have learned that revelation to LDS prophets comes as an impression, without actual words from God, and without the need to be recorded as scripture. Can someone tell me how we tell the difference between:

1) Someone who is receiving genuine impressions from God.

2) Someone who thinks they are receiving genuine impressions from God.

3) Someone who is pretending to receive genuine impressions from God.

If the answer is pray about it and see if you get an impression, then you could fall under either category 1) or 2).

First, just a reminder using the words of the Savior and Moses.

Matt. 7:15, 20

"Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves....... Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them."

Deut. 18:22

"When a prophet speaketh in the name of the Lord, if the thing follow not, nor come to pass, that is the thing which the Lord hath not spoken, but the prophet hath spoken it presumptuously: thou shalt not be afraid of him."

The truth is, it may not be immediately evident who speaks for God and who doesn't. It may be a bit of a waiting game. "Fools rush in....."

First I'll use the amplified Bible version of 1Timothy 5:24:

"The sins of some men are conspicuous (openly evident to all eyes), going before them to the judgment [seat] and proclaiming their sentence in advance; but the sins of others appear later [following the offender to the bar of judgment and coming into view there]."

Think about it. Have you ever wondered why the church has always emphasized making a quick commitment to baptism with investigators? My thoughts were always, "Why"? What is the rush? Are you afraid they might really begin to research the church? Are you afraid they might find something ugly or incomprehensible? What's the big hurry?

The resulting bad fruits that are produced by the false doctrines in the LDS church take time to ripen. They aren't always immediately apparent. By the time most members begin to feel the effects of consuming those false fruits they are already psychologically snared and in many cases unable to come to grips with the downside of Mormonism.

Especially in the case of parents who are terribly susceptible to the concept of losing their children for eternity. They tend to want to pay any price to avoid that horror.

The church is truly using a bait and switch tactic. When we young and dumb missionaries go out to teach investigators, what do we sell them? We sell them that we have a true prophet of God who is in direct communication with him or with Christ.
Later, after all the commitments are made they either blindly continue to believe that misrepresentation or they find out that the apostles and 1st Pres. are receiving "impressions".
But what they never hear is someone standing up in conference and saying something that is actually verifiable and beginning or ending with "Thus saith the Lord" as a true prophet would.

Isn't this just a little cunning or crafty on the part of leadership? To dumby down the expectations of what revelation is? I mean isn't that what Apostles and prophets were given for? To verify true doctrine and give direct revelation? To avoid being taken advantage of by deceitful men?

Paul spoke well of these tactics in this verse that should be familiar to all LDS members:

Ephesians 4:14

"That we henceforth be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive..."

If, as the LDS church has said, "Direction is more important than speed in the Lord's eyes" then I would have to believe that taking one's time and thoroughly vetting a self-proclaimed "prophet" would be seen as a wise thing by Heavenly Father.

Better safe than sorry....

Palerider wrote: ↑Fri Jan 25, 2019 11:56 pm Think about it. Have you ever wondered why the church has always emphasized making a quick commitment to baptism with investigators? My thoughts were always, "Why"? What is the rush? Are you afraid they might really begin to research the church? Are you afraid they might find something ugly or incomprehensible? What's the big hurry?

This is something that Mrs. Hagoth, who is an adult convert to the church, mentions frequently. She wonders why she was taught one version of the church as an investigator and then suddenly things became very different once she had been baptized. For one thing, she wasn't given any warning about how much would be required of her and to what degree she would be expected to change every aspect of her life to orient everything toward the church. Just for comparison, Jehovah's Witnesses require you to study with them for two years before you can be considered for membership. Yes, it's also a very high-demand, cultish organization, but at least its proselytes know what they're getting into.

Hagoth wrote: ↑Sat Jan 26, 2019 6:57 am This is something that Mrs. Hagoth, who is an adult convert to the church, mentions frequently. She wonders why she was taught one version of the church as an investigator and then suddenly things became very different once she had been baptized. For one thing, she wasn't given any warning about how much would be required of her and to what degree she would be expected to change every aspect of her life to orient everything toward the church. Just for comparison, Jehovah's Witnesses require you to study with them for two years before you can be considered for membership. Yes, it's also a very high-demand, cultish organization, but at least its proselytes know what they're getting into.

I joined as an adult... I went through all the missionary discussions when they showed the pictures with the gold plates, etc.

And, yes, once you're in then you start to quickly see that things aren't what you were taught. And the temple prep classes were horrifying to me because they never mentioned 'garments' or that we (the men) would have our own planets... they never mention that polygamy was such a huge part of the early temple ceremony. It wasn't even so much the time required that was hard for me but the fact that as I'd learn more and more that wasn't taught to me through the missionary discussions (or in the three hours of church as well) it just felt like something was not right if they had to be so evasive about their true doctrines.

There is a reason the church loses so many converts, and you've laid it out here perfectly. I went for about 10 years before I couldn't do it anymore, and that was before I really did the deep dive. I had big problems with polygamy and the treatment of black members, and my really awful experience in the temple really was the beginning of the end although it took years before I finally walked away for good.

My background with the church is really screwy, so I know I'm not speaking for anyone else... but I think there's a good reason why they are so tight with correlated materials when trying to convert members (and keep them).

Another Mormon Bishop bites the dust.

https://www.ksl.com/article/46495111/fo ... tion-sting

Just one more example of inspired priesthood holders using their power of discernment to put someone like this into a position of trust. Human trafficking...WTF!?

The TBM ghost of Sam Young will continue to haunt all of these instances of the failure of the COB to protect children.

Hagoth wrote: ↑Fri Jan 25, 2019 5:11 pm Does it come with a requirement for money and/or labor?

Yes...And does it require leader-worship as if infallible?