Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Alaris

An Introduction to The Davidic Servant

Recommended Posts

https://lordoftheseraphim.blogspot.com/2018/12/an-introduction-to-davidic-servant.html

I don't typically post my articles here on mormondialogue.org; however, I took it upon myself to write an article that serves as an introduction to the Davidic Servant. The article serves as a foundation of who he is, why he is, and who he isn't. The Davidic Covenant serves as the core of understanding the Davidic Servant as does Isaiah chapter 11.

My blog is not monetized, and I care neither for subscribers or views for the sake of such. However, I do care deeply about this topic and want to spread awareness among my fellow members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Why is awareness important? I have witnessed the tendency to shoehorn prophecies into that which is known and familiar which often translates to that which has transpired already or linking prophecies to known individuals.  I understand why folks do this as the idea of an important, unknown end times servant causes much cognitive dissonance. The Davidic Servant is not Jesus Christ, Joseph Smith, or John the Beloved. Perhaps the most interesting evidence for this is an excerpt from the Times and Seasons that demonstrates the early saints in fact believed in the Davidic Servant and stated he was none of these people (look for the large section of orange text - Times and Seasons excerpt is taken from Joseph Smith Papers project)

1 Chronicles 17 is a great synopsis of the Davidic Covenant:

1 Chronicles 17:11 ¶ And it shall come to pass, when thy days be expired that thou must go to be with thy fathers, that I will raise up thy seed after thee, which shall be of thy sons; and I will establish his kingdom.

12 He shall build me an house, and I will stablish his throne for ever.

13 I will be his father, and he shall be my son: and I will not take my mercy away from him, as I took it from him that was before thee:

14 But I will settle him in mine house and in my kingdom for ever: and his throne shall be established for evermore.

15 According to all these words, and according to all this vision, so did Nathan speak unto David.

Zechariah 6 ties into the Davidic Covenant as well and provides a beautiful summary of who this man is and where he is on his eternal progression.

Zechariah 6:12 And speak unto him, saying, Thus speaketh the Lord of hosts, saying, Behold the man whose name is The BRANCH; and he shall grow up out of his place, and he shall build the temple of the Lord:

13 Even he shall build the temple of the Lord; and he shall bear the glory, and shall sit and rule upon his throne; and he shall be a priest upon his throne: and the counsel of peace shall be between them both.

We are anointed to become Priests and Kings in the Holy Temple. The Davidic Servant is a Priest becoming a King pure and simple. That is where he is on his eternal progression and the fact his ascension is such a big deal speaks to the process of how men become Gods. 

Please feel free to read the article and chime in with thoughts, questions, and friendly debate. I will do my very best to not feed any trolls. :D

 

 

Edited by Alaris

Share this post


Link to post

Alaris -- 

I think you have provided very strong evidence that some early Church leaders held beliefs about a divinely-guided figure in the Last Days named David. However, you have not provided sufficient evidence that we should accept this information in the sources you cite.  There are plenty of things printed in the Times and Seasons that we don't accept today. Joseph Smith made a clear doctrinal error in the King Follett Discourse when he reference infants (President Smith was right to have this reference redacted from official printings of the text). Why should we accept the references you cite?  Even if Joseph said something, that doesn't mean we automatically accept it.  There is an order and process to these things.

The bigger problem with your argument is about the use of Scripture in the Hebrew Bible.  In both Ezekiel and Isaiah, we know that when the seed of David is referenced, this almost always refers to Christ and his coming Kingdom. David list his throne, but Christ is the True King.  That's how the symbolism is employed throughout the text.  I don't think your scriptural evidence supports any conclusion beyond the traditional understanding that references to David's kingship of Israel, always lead to Christ.

Lastly, I'm not sure how believing in, or concerning yourself with this coming David Servant does any practical good.  Follow the mainstream of the Church and follow the Prophet.  I think we have to tread carefully when we become highly interested in on particular aspect of the Gospel.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
12 hours ago, Michael Sudworth said:

Alaris -- 

I think you have provided very strong evidence that some early Church leaders held beliefs about a divinely-guided figure in the Last Days named David. However, you have not provided sufficient evidence that we should accept this information in the sources you cite.  There are plenty of things printed in the Times and Seasons that we don't accept today. Joseph Smith made a clear doctrinal error in the King Follett Discourse when he reference infants (President Smith was right to have this reference redacted from official printings of the text). Why should we accept the references you cite?  Even if Joseph said something, that doesn't mean we automatically accept it.  There is an order and process to these things.

The bigger problem with your argument is about the use of Scripture in the Hebrew Bible.  In both Ezekiel and Isaiah, we know that when the seed of David is referenced, this almost always refers to Christ and his coming Kingdom. David list his throne, but Christ is the True King.  That's how the symbolism is employed throughout the text.  I don't think your scriptural evidence supports any conclusion beyond the traditional understanding that references to David's kingship of Israel, always lead to Christ.

Lastly, I'm not sure how believing in, or concerning yourself with this coming David Servant does any practical good.  Follow the mainstream of the Church and follow the Prophet.  I think we have to tread carefully when we become highly interested in on particular aspect of the Gospel.

Thank you for your reply. "Problems with my argument" is an unfortunate perspective to take while reading the article. The article certainly isn't intended to persuade the reader to see the Davidic Servant as I do by argument. Like I state in the article, the awareness of the Davidic Servant seems to be an esoteric awakening process with most folks who believe such. Many either ignore the clear prophecies and scriptures that indicate there is an important unknown end times prophet who prepares the way of the Lord before the Second Coming or tend to shoehorn all prophecies of the marred servant, the end times Moses, the OMAS, etc. into what is known and comfortable.

"There is an order and process to these things." Though I wholeheartedly agree with that statement, I believe you and I may disagree on that process since you later state "Follow the mainstream of the Church and follow the Prophet." Please don't misunderstand me as I have a testimony of Russell M. Nelson, but I believe him when he says things like this:

Our Savior and Redeemer, Jesus Christ, will perform some of His mightiest works between now and when He comes again. We will see miraculous indications that God the Father and His Son, Jesus Christ, preside over this Church in majesty and glory. But in coming days, it will not be possible to survive spiritually without the guiding, directing, comforting, and constant influence of the Holy Ghost. ~ Russel M. Nelson

That statement is in direct conflict with the tone of your statements above. Please show me in the scriptures where it says to wait for the Prophet to reveal the deep mysteries to you and I will show you were the prophets teach the same principle as above - you must learn to receive directly for yourself!

1 Nephi 10:19 For he that diligently seeketh shall find; and the mysteries of God shall be unfolded unto them, by the power of the Holy Ghost, as well in these times as in times of old, and as well in times of old as in times to come; wherefore, the course of the Lord is one eternal round.

Those who are of the Spirit, "wait and see" or "wait for the Prophet and the mainstream" are of the same spirit as "We have enough." We have enough prophets and mainstream where we can't and shouldn't trust ourselves to learn because we have to be careful! Yes, we do have to be careful - careful not to lull ourselves into a false sense of security. Here is another even more recent statement by Russell M. Nelson:

If you think the Church has been fully restored, you're just seeing the beginning. Wait till next year, and then the next year. Eat your vitamin pills. Get some rest. It's going to be exciting. ~ Russell M. Nelson

I'm not saying any of this is an "argument" for the Davidic Servant - certainly not! Neither was that the intention of my article. However, I wonder if you did begin reading with a prayer - did you? I'm not saying you didn't, but not seeking would be yet another symptom of the spirit of "we have enough." This is the spirit that should be carefully avoided.

Let's speak for a moment on precedent rather than argument. No one can argue the Book of Abraham is true - there are some interesting active threads on this topic right now. To try to argue for its truth is futile - and that is by design. Think again on President Nelson's remark. You must learn to receive directly from the Holy Spirit, or it will not be possible for you to survive spiritually. Though no one can make a convincing argument of the veracity of the Book of Abraham, that truth is by design. I can't argue you into convincing you the Times and Seasons article was legitimate - or any Joseph Smith quote for that matter. I noticed you didn't mention the other Joseph Smith quote:

Although David was a king, he never did obtain the spirit and power of Elijah and the fullness of the Priesthood; and the Priesthood that he received, and the throne and kingdom of David is to be taken from him and given to another by the name of David in the last days, raised up out of his lineage. ~ Joseph Smith, March 10, 1844

You can argue away any single quote, but what is that scripture about two or more witnesses? The above quote is a second witness that not only did the early apostles but Joseph Smith himself believe in an end times "David." This is not an argument. This is precedent that reinforces what I know spiritually.

That precedent is clearly laid out in the article. I guess that's the real problem with my "argument" is they are not arguments at all! They are witnesses and invitations to read, ponder, and pray to learn by the Spirit rather than by me. If you have not done so in humility, I invite you to do so again by beginning with a prayer, reading, and ending in a prayer. Please read the full article if you have not done so.

I want to offer another perspective on the Davidic prophecies as you say they are almost always about Jesus Christ. Isaiah, for example, is all about duality. There is a duality to the events in his day and in the end times. Likewise there is a duality in the Davidic Covenant and within the covenants participators - I invite you to open your heart to this idea and plant the seed and perhaps you will see there is a deeper meaning to the Davidic prophecies. Of course, these prophecies point to Jesus Christ, but is there no precedent to there being more than Jesus Christ to whom these prophecies point? Of course there is:

D&C 113:1 Who is the Stem of Jesse spoken of in the 1st, 2d, 3d, 4th, and 5th verses of the 11th chapter of Isaiah?

2 Verily thus saith the Lord: It is Christ.

3 What is the rod spoken of in the first verse of the 11th chapter of Isaiah, that should come of the Stem of Jesse?

4 Behold, thus saith the Lord: It is a servant in the hands of Christ, who is partly a descendant of Jesse as well as of Ephraim, or of the house of Joseph, on whom there is laid much power.

5 What is the root of Jesse spoken of in the 10th verse of the 11th chapter?

6 Behold, thus saith the Lord, it is a descendant of Jesse, as well as of Joseph, unto whom rightly belongs the priesthood, and the keys of the kingdom, for an ensign, and for the gathering of my people in the last days.

Those who wait for the prophet and the mainstream rather than following the prophet's advice will very likely be those without oil in their lamps. For without oil you cannot light your own path.

Edited by Alaris

Share this post


Link to post

If God is going to judge me as not having oil in my lamp for not seeking an “esoteric awakening” about a vague prophetic figure promulgated on an obscure website on the Internet by someone without authority then God is not anything like who I imagine Him/Them to be.

That being said I do agree that we must seek out the mysteries on our own and that God reveals those mysteries unto many. I have gotten a few. I also believe that God meant what was said through many prophets that these are revelations for us alone and that we are to preach only the general gospel and that if we wanted what was revealed to us individually taught generally he would do it through normal Priesthood channels. You are violating this principle.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, The Nehor said:

If God is going to judge me as not having oil in my lamp for not seeking an “esoteric awakening” about a vague prophetic figure promulgated on an obscure website on the Internet by someone without authority then God is not anything like who I imagine Him/Them to be.

Thank you for your thoughtful response. Dispensations have started on far less with zero precedent and by far less educated men. Good thing I'm not starting a dispensation but sharing a belief with a clear precedent that traces back to the foundation of this dispensation to Joseph Smith and his Apostles. Sure you can say they're wrong and / or I'm wrong in my interpretation. However, I am far from being alone in my belief - far more educated men believe in the Davidic Servant such as Avraham Gileadi (still haven't read any of his books.) Speaking of which - were any of those mysteries you learned confirmed later by an LDS Isaiah Scholar? That's a thrilling experience I highly recommend! ;)
 

4 hours ago, The Nehor said:

That being said I do agree that we must seek out the mysteries on our own and that God reveals those mysteries unto many. I have gotten a few. I also believe that God meant what was said through many prophets that these are revelations for us alone and that we are to preach only the general gospel and that if we wanted what was revealed to us individually taught generally he would do it through normal Priesthood channels. You are violating this principle.

You mean this scripture?

Alma 12:9 And now Alma began to expound these things unto him, saying: It is given unto many to know the mysteries of God; nevertheless they are laid under a strict command that they shall not impart only according to the portion of his word which he doth grant unto the children of men, according to the heed and diligence which they give unto him.

10 And therefore, he that will harden his heart, the same receiveth the lesser portion of the word; and he that will not harden his heart, to him is given the greater portion of the word, until it is given unto him to know the mysteries of God until he know them in full.

11 And they that will harden their hearts, to them is given the lesser portion of the word until they know nothing concerning his mysteries; and then they are taken captive by the devil, and led by his will down to destruction. Now this is what is meant by the chains of hell.

Those who receive actual mysteries likely have a strong enough understanding of the Spirit to understand what they should or shouldn't share. (They probably don't spend much time trolling folks online - just sayin')

I pray and seek God's will on what I can and should share before writing and posting anything. Does this mean I'm circumventing the normal Priesthood channels? Let's not forget that God can and does inspire individuals to reveal and share information and it would be silly to suggest that anyone who does that is in danger of "violating this principle" unless that individual is claiming to be receiving revelation on behalf of the Church at large in place of the prophet - I'm fairly sure I haven't made any such claim. Or have I?

That said, what if there is a Davidic Servant to come who is not Jesus or Joseph Smith or any patriarch (just as described in the Times and Seasons)? What if a latter-day King of Israel of the line of David is in the queue? Will he be subject to our church's leaders, or will our church and our Priesthood be subject to him? Read Isaiah 28 with this question in mind. Personally, I don't believe the crown of pride of the drunkards of Ephraim is fulfilled by our Apostles and Prophets but by Ephraim at large in situations exactly such as this one where Ephraimites claim to know what prophecides don't mean, what isn't possible, what isn't a sign, etc. which is clearly a struggle with pride.

If you have truly brought this question to the Lord, I commend you and pray God will answer you in his time according to his will. If read the entire article, thank you - if you read with a closed mind I suggest you will get about as much from the article as the scribes, lawyers, and pharisees did Jesus when He was standing right in front of them because they too approached Him knowing He couldn't possibly be who He said He was. Most of them likely died in their conviction.

The servant of Jehovah has been described on more than one occasion as someone who is hidden in the shadow of His hand. Thus, the fact that awareness of such a servant isn't mainstream is actually quite fitting. The article in the OP, and this thread by consequence, is not intended to convince anyone of the existence of this servant but to establish a clear precedent as to the belief in a Davidic Servant to help the initiate to understand the basics, and hopefully serve as an arrow in the quiver of the Lord for those humble truth seekers out there who don't already "know better" without asking.

 

Edited by Alaris

Share this post


Link to post
40 minutes ago, Alaris said:

Thank you for your thoughtful response. Dispensations have started on far less with zero precedent and by far less educated men. Good thing I'm not starting a dispensation but sharing a belief with a clear precedent that traces back to the foundation of this dispensation to Joseph Smith and his Apostles. Sure you can say they're wrong and / or I'm wrong in my interpretation. However, I am far from being alone in my belief - far more educated men believe in the Davidic Servant such as Avraham Gileadi (still haven't read any of his books.) Speaking of which - were any of those mysteries you learned confirmed later by an LDS Isaiah Scholar? That's a thrilling experience I highly recommend! ;)
 

You mean this scripture?

Alma 12:9 And now Alma began to expound these things unto him, saying: It is given unto many to know the mysteries of God; nevertheless they are laid under a strict command that they shall not impart only according to the portion of his word which he doth grant unto the children of men, according to the heed and diligence which they give unto him.

10 And therefore, he that will harden his heart, the same receiveth the lesser portion of the word; and he that will not harden his heart, to him is given the greater portion of the word, until it is given unto him to know the mysteries of God until he know them in full.

11 And they that will harden their hearts, to them is given the lesser portion of the word until they know nothing concerning his mysteries; and then they are taken captive by the devil, and led by his will down to destruction. Now this is what is meant by the chains of hell.

Those who receive actual mysteries likely have a strong enough understanding of the Spirit to understand what they should or shouldn't share. (They probably don't spend much time trolling folks online - just sayin')

I pray and seek God's will on what I can and should share before writing and posting anything. Does this mean I'm circumventing the normal Priesthood channels? Let's not forget that God can and does inspire individuals to reveal and share information and it would be silly to suggest that anyone who does that is in danger of "violating this principle" unless that individual is claiming to be receiving revelation on behalf of the Church at large in place of the prophet - I'm fairly sure I haven't made any such claim. Or have I?

That said, what if there is a Davidic Servant to come who is not Jesus or Joseph Smith or any patriarch (just as described in the Times and Seasons)? What if a latter-day King of Israel of the line of David is in the queue? Will he be subject to our church's leaders, or will our church and our Priesthood be subject to him? Read Isaiah 28 with this question in mind. Personally, I don't believe the crown of pride of the drunkards of Ephraim is fulfilled by our Apostles and Prophets but by Ephraim at large in situations exactly such as this one where Ephraimites claim to know what prophecides don't mean, what isn't possible, what isn't a sign, etc. which is clearly a struggle with pride.

If you have truly brought this question to the Lord, I commend you and pray God will answer you in his time according to his will. If read the entire article, thank you - if you read with a closed mind I suggest you will get about as much from the article as the scribes, lawyers, and pharisees did Jesus when He was standing right in front of them because they too approached Him knowing He couldn't possibly be who He said He was. Most of them likely died in their conviction.

The servant of Jehovah has been described on more than one occasion as someone who is hidden in the shadow of His hand. Thus, the fact that awareness of such a servant isn't mainstream is actually quite fitting. The article in the OP, and this thread by consequence, is not intended to convince anyone of the existence of this servant but to establish a clear precedent as to the belief in a Davidic Servant to help the initiate to understand the basics, and hopefully serve as an arrow in the quiver of the Lord for those humble truth seekers out there who don't already "know better" without asking.

 

I do not have problems with scholars playing with the text of scripture or propounding theories or members trying to find meaning in scripture and sharing it. I do worry when people announce their teaching as revelation or “esoteric awakening” which I assume/hope are synonyms. I have not prayed much about it. I wondered at one point about a latter day David while remembering the D&C verses you quoted while I was reading certain passages in Ezekiel. I remember asking my Mission President about it afterwards and he said he did not know enough to give a yeah or nay but pointed me to some parts of Isaiah. Still unsure. I have not even thought about it in years.

I am not convinced that those who receive the mysteries automatically have insight into what and when they can share it. I had the privilege of being in a meeting with an Apostle where he shared a story where he got an incredible insight and shortly afterwards shared it with his wife. He said he felt the Spirit diminish for several days due to this lapse of sharing what was intended for him alone. I am not suggesting you are trying to speak on behalf of the church or its leaders. I always worry about preachers of this kind of “spiritual insights the Brethren have not revealed yet” stuff. I have seen a few cults of personality or doctrine form around them and apostasy often follows.

I also find it disturbing that you ascribe sin to not accepting your teachings with your “drunkards of Ephraim” bit as if it is definitely the hard hearted who will not listen. And you compare yourself to those who started dispensations. And then you compare yourself to Jesus and those who disagree with you or will not listen to you to the Pharisees and that if I read your article without an open mind I am metaphorically rejecting the teachings of the Savior. You are putting your article on par with the teachings of Jesus and scripture? And I thought I had an ego.............And you call those seeking for what you have “initiates”? Secret covens within the church where the true knowledge of the mysteries reside.......it is almost a cliche at this point and always ends badly. Last one I saw cropped up around the Second Comforter. Ended in adulteries and excommunication.

Many have the mysteries of God revealed to them but when they want to preach them without authority I stop listening.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
5 hours ago, The Nehor said:

I do not have problems with scholars playing with the text of scripture or propounding theories or members trying to find meaning in scripture and sharing it. I do worry when people announce their teaching as revelation or “esoteric awakening” which I assume/hope are synonyms. I have not prayed much about it. I wondered at one point about a latter day David while remembering the D&C verses you quoted while I was reading certain passages in Ezekiel. I remember asking my Mission President about it afterwards and he said he did not know enough to give a yeah or nay but pointed me to some parts of Isaiah. Still unsure. I have not even thought about it in years.

I am not convinced that those who receive the mysteries automatically have insight into what and when they can share it. I had the privilege of being in a meeting with an Apostle where he shared a story where he got an incredible insight and shortly afterwards shared it with his wife. He said he felt the Spirit diminish for several days due to this lapse of sharing what was intended for him alone. I am not suggesting you are trying to speak on behalf of the church or its leaders. I always worry about preachers of this kind of “spiritual insights the Brethren have not revealed yet” stuff. I have seen a few cults of personality or doctrine form around them and apostasy often follows.

I also find it disturbing that you ascribe sin to not accepting your teachings with your “drunkards of Ephraim” bit as if it is definitely the hard hearted who will not listen. And you compare yourself to those who started dispensations. And then you compare yourself to Jesus and those who disagree with you or will not listen to you to the Pharisees and that if I read your article without an open mind I am metaphorically rejecting the teachings of the Savior. You are putting your article on par with the teachings of Jesus and scripture? And I thought I had an ego.............And you call those seeking for what you have “initiates”? Secret covens within the church where the true knowledge of the mysteries reside.......it is almost a cliche at this point and always ends badly. Last one I saw cropped up around the Second Comforter. Ended in adulteries and excommunication.

Many have the mysteries of God revealed to them but when they want to preach them without authority I stop listening.

So my article would have been OK by "The Nehor's" estimation had I not claimed any spiritual confirmation to these truths? Yet you who says, "I have not prayed much about it." can chime in and tell me I'm wrong not only in my interpretations but how dare I share mysteries! Got it.

I won't address your other attempts at flaming but I do wonder how well you would have done in Jesus' day or Joseph Smith's if you establish who does or doesn't have authority to speak without having "prayed much about it." I don't equate myself with them but do equate truth with truth, and the methods for recognizing truth are the same whether spoken by a babe or Jesus Himself. 

A good starting place for authority - Those who have received a witness by the Holy Spirit - often after study & prayer - have authority to testify of such (unless of course forbidden vs permitted by that same Spirit) You should start there! I promise you - despite you having perhaps invested in my being wrong in my views - can still discover the truthfulness of all things by the power of the Holy Ghost - including what I have shared that I know to be true.

Edited by Alaris

Share this post


Link to post
5 hours ago, Alaris said:

So my article would have been OK by "The Nehor's" estimation had I not claimed any spiritual confirmation to these truths? Yet you who says, "I have not prayed much about it." can chime in and tell me I'm wrong not only in my interpretations but how dare I share mysteries! Got it.

Except I did not tell you you were wrong and your whole statement falls apart with that stunning fact.

5 hours ago, Alaris said:

I won't address your other attempts at flaming but I do wonder how well you would have done in Jesus' day or Joseph Smith's if you establish who does or doesn't have authority to speak without having "prayed much about it." I don't equate myself with them but do equate truth with truth, and the methods for recognizing truth are the same whether spoken by a babe or Jesus Himself. 

So you want me to pray about whether you have authority to reveal new doctrine? Really? It would probably be easier to just use Hiram Page’s seerstone.

5 hours ago, Alaris said:

A good starting place for authority - Those who have received a witness by the Holy Spirit - often after study & prayer - have authority to testify of such (unless of course forbidden vs permitted by that same Spirit) You should start there! I promise you - despite you having perhaps invested in my being wrong in my views - can still discover the truthfulness of all things by the power of the Holy Ghost - including what I have shared that I know to be true.

I think that is a bad starting place for authority.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
41 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

Except I did not tell you you were wrong and your whole statement falls apart with that stunning fact.

So you want me to pray about whether you have authority to reveal new doctrine? Really? It would probably be easier to just use Hiram Page’s seerstone.

I think that is a bad starting place for authority.

I don't know that I would call it stunning. I guess you didn't actually say I was wrong in content but in delivery which is you assuming the role of the Holy Ghost authoritatively stating I was in violation of principle. Only the Spirit can permit or restrict such. Considering only one of us has truly studied out and prayed about the content... That's quite the claim indeed. Stunning even. 

Your stuck in a loop of twisting words and making accusations including your first response. I ask you to pray about the message and you deliberately misstate me to say I've asked you to pray about me. Truly vile and reprehensible, dishonest behavior. Your prior post had several more examples of this base behavior. The fact there are any folks online who troll in the name of the Lord with the tactics of the devil is what is stunning. Or have I made another error wherein you've never claimed to be gathered here in the Lord's name? Why are you here? Are you seeking, sharing, or just trolling? Do you enjoy antagonizing folks in a Gospel forum by deceptive tactics?

Edited by Alaris

Share this post


Link to post
7 hours ago, Alaris said:

I don't know that I would call it stunning. I guess you didn't actually say I was wrong in content but in delivery which is you assuming the role of the Holy Ghost authoritatively stating I was in violation of principle. Only the Spirit can permit or restrict such. Considering only one of us has truly studied out and prayed about the content... That's quite the claim indeed. Stunning even. 

Your stuck in a loop of twisting words and making accusations including your first response. I ask you to pray about the message and you deliberately misstate me to say I've asked you to pray about me. Truly vile and reprehensible, dishonest behavior. Your prior post had several more examples of this base behavior. The fact there are any folks online who troll in the name of the Lord with the tactics of the devil is what is stunning. Or have I made another error wherein you've never claimed to be gathered here in the Lord's name? Why are you here? Are you seeking, sharing, or just trolling? Do you enjoy antagonizing folks in a Gospel forum by deceptive tactics?

I did not take the role of the Holy Ghost. I stated rules of revelation as laid out by prophets and scripture. You think you are enlightened enough to decide when they do not apply to you. I wish you luck with that.

Yes, I am an incredibly evil person sing the power of the devil to cast out a devil 👿.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Similar Content

    • By Benjamin Seeker
      I started a thread earlier this year addressing some verses in D&C 86 on Joseph Smith and lineal priesthood. I recently followed up on it and put the puzzle pieces together.
      D&C 86:8-10 appears to state that Joseph Smith had the priesthood through birthright. An early hint of JS' beliefs about his lineage come from 2 Ne 3, which teaches that JS is a descendant of Joseph (11th son of Israel), and though the lineage of Ephraim is one of leadership, it's not apparent that there is a lineal priesthood associated with it like there is for the Levites or the sons of Aaron. However, a Smith family lineal priesthood authority is actually well attested. JS established the position of Patriarch of the church, which originally was something akin to second in command, as a lineal position given to the eldest in a direct line from Joseph Smith Sr. This clear example of a lineal priesthood eventually disappeared when the position of church Patriarch was done away with due to conflict between the church Patriarch and the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles (EDIT: Robert points out later in this thread that the absence of the Church Patriarch can be seen as a result of the homosexual status of the second to last patriarch, and that the position may still be filled at a future point. Radio Free Mormon, and others I'm sure, have made other arguments, but this point is pretty peripheral to the discussion).

      The position of Patriarch to the church is only half of the story. D&C 113 states, "What is the rod spoken of in the first verse of the 11th chapter of Isaiah, that should come of the Stem of Jesse? Behold, thus saith the Lord: It is a servant in the hands of Christ, who is partly a descendant of Jesse as well as of Ephraim, or of the house of Joseph, on whom there is laid much power." It is common in Mormon thought to believe these verses apply to Joseph Smith, and that seems to be a correct assumption. The line of Jesse refers to the kingly line of David, and significantly, JS prophesied "the throne and kingdom of David is to be taken from him and given to another by the name of David in the last days, raised up out of his lineage," which apparently referred to one of JS' offspring. He made this clear when he prophesied that his unborn son, David, would be a "church president and king over Israel."

      In Mormon theology, a King in the kingdom of Israel is a priesthood position. Notably, JS himself was ordained as a King in this sense in the Council of Fifty, also known in revelation as the "The Kingdom of God and His Laws with the Keys and Power thereof, and Judgment in the Hands of His Servants, Ahman Christ." According to Nauvoo theology the priesthood role of King was the ultimate leader of the Church, and according to contemporary accounts, Hyrum Smith was to fill JS' shoes should he die. All of this together gives a pretty clear answer to the lineal priesthood mentioned in D&C 86. The Smith family was a royal family in Israel destined to lead the restoration.
    • By prisonchaplain
      Since King David had his general set up to be murdered, is he limited in is eternal destiny to the Telestial Kingdom?  I've heard this suggested, based on the LDS teaching that murderers can only receive grace sufficient for entry into the lowest heavenly kingdom.  I find the idea troubling. 
×
×
  • Create New...