Jump to content

Mowing Poison Grass


Magyar

Recommended Posts

Reading D&C 38 last night, I was intrigued by the statement that "the angels are waiting the command to go down and reap the tares, gathering them to be burned."

Every Primary kid worth his CTR ring knows that "tares" means the bad folk, "wheat" the good guys. It's a pretty common New Testament metaphor ... or not.

In reality, Biblically only the Gospel of Matthew uses it, and only in one chapter. I wonder how Mark, Luke and John missed it completely. And I wonder what exactly does the phrase from D&C 38 mean. Will we see angels in the Millennium flitting around and herding miscreants into holding cells for punishment? What is the dividing line between tare and wheat? According to LDS? According to other Christians?

I'm not being flippant, just trying to understand how in a real-world sense this prophecy will be enacted.

Link to comment

Reading D&C 38 last night, I was intrigued by the statement that "the angels are waiting the command to go down and reap the tares, gathering them to be burned."

Every Primary kid worth his CTR ring knows that "tares" means the bad folk, "wheat" the good guys. It's a pretty common New Testament metaphor ... or not.

In reality, Biblically only the Gospel of Matthew uses it, and only in one chapter. I wonder how Mark, Luke and John missed it completely. And I wonder what exactly does the phrase from D&C 38 mean. Will we see angels in the Millennium flitting around and herding miscreants into holding cells for punishment? What is the dividing line between tare and wheat? According to LDS? According to other Christians?

I'm not being flippant, just trying to understand how in a real-world sense this prophecy will be enacted.

Only God knows this and I don't think he will ever reveal this to us. We will learn how this happens when it happens, not before least people foresee the gathering of the wicked, remember that the second coming and the destruction of the wicked is like the unexpected return of the vineyard owner or the thief who strikes at the unknown hour of the night.

God will never reveal any details because we are not suppose to expect when Christ will return and destroy the wicked.

Link to comment

When the coming collapse of world economies is here, the people will gather in even more haste into the cities, while God's people- the pure in heart- will gather to Zion, and build the New Jerusalem. The wicked and their cities will be burned and the Saints of God- the pure in heart- shall inherit the desolate places and the wicked will, literally, be ash under their feet. Then the work of the Millennium will begin, where righteousness and peace will be established, and the earth shall return to its garden state.

Link to comment

Reading D&C 38 last night, I was intrigued by the statement that "the angels are waiting the command to go down and reap the tares, gathering them to be burned."

In part, it is the Lord's deliberate destruction of the wicked who pose a threat to the Kingdom if permitted to tarry and continue their activities. In most general terms, it is the final preparation of the earth and its people immediately prior to Second Coming, accomplished in measure by the destruction of the wicked (when the righteous suffer tribulation, it is not to the detriment of themselves or the Kingdom).

Link to comment

When the coming collapse of world economies is here, the people will gather in even more haste into the cities, while God's people will gather to Zion, and build the New Jerusalem. The wicked and their cities will be burned and the Saints of God shall inherit the desolate places and the wicked will, literally, be ash under the feet. Then the work of the Millennium will begin, where righteousness and peace will be established, and the earth shall return to its garden state.

NOTE -- This is not LDS doctrine or belief, it is the personal belief of the above poster.

Link to comment

What is the dividing line between tare and wheat? According to LDS?

The dividing line is how one reacts to any of the things below.

the Death of Joseph Smith and the naming/choosing of his successor

all tribulations suffered by the early saints

trek to Utah

life in Utah

end of polygamy

being sent by BY to pioneer hell on earth ( ie St George and much of Arizona)

The Priesthood being given to all worthy males.

firings of BYU professors

Local Stakes/Wards holding combined RS/Priesthood political meetings during the Sunday 3 hour block.

Link to comment

The dividing line is how one reacts to any of the things below.

the Death of Joseph Smith and the naming/choosing of his successor

all tribulations suffered by the early saints

trek to Utah

life in Utah

end of polygamy

being sent by BY to pioneer hell on earth ( ie St George and much of Arizona)

The Priesthood being given to all worthy males.

firings of BYU professors

Local Stakes/Wards holding combined RS/Priesthood political meetings during the Sunday 3 hour block.

I am not sure if you are being serious or not.

Do you really believe that only faithful, accept all the church does, LDS, will be spared to enter the Millennium?

I don't even think Brigham agreed with that.

Link to comment

I am not sure if you are being serious or not.

Do you really believe that only faithful, accept all the church does, LDS, will be spared to enter the Millennium?

I don't even think Brigham agreed with that.

I am serious, and I understand why what I posted could be confusing.

No, I do not believe ONLY LDS will be spared.

I answered the question "According to LDS". I interpretation of "according to LDS", was meant to mean the wheat and tares within the LDS Church. I believe, everything I listed as being a "threshing" of the LDS Church.

Link to comment

I am serious, and I understand why what I posted could be confusing.

No, I do not believe ONLY LDS will be spared.

I answered the question "According to LDS". I interpretation of "according to LDS", was meant to mean the wheat and tares within the LDS Church. I believe, everything I listed as being a "threshing" of the LDS Church.

Gotcha. good.gif

Link to comment

Sometimes,in my darker moments,I look forward to the "gathering" so as to see the "comeupance" that the wicked will receive.Then I remember that it is quite likely that I will be in the wrong sheaves .I do get the feeling from some of our more evangelical brothers that they will watch with glee(or at least a Mona Lisa smile) the torment of the wicked.

Link to comment

The implication is that its NOT LDS belief or Doctrine and is only your personal opinion of what will happen and why. You can not provide any doctrinal sources to back your opinion up.

Will the scriptures suffice?

I will work on it for you (because I'm just that kind of guy.)

Link to comment
What is the dividing line between tare and wheat?

A tare is one who is in opposition to the doctrine of the Church. So of course we may all have a little bit of tare in us. But I'm going to posit that the drop off point is where one opposes the Church (God's vehicle for disseminating doctrine) in moral and/or economic (agency) issues for it is there that salvation is gained or lost. Therefore it's not difficult to identify beliefs and philosophies that make one a tare. All it takes is a simple comparison with LDS doctrine.

Link to comment

Since the BOM was written for our day I think we can use it as a prototype. We read in 3 Nephi 10:12

And it was the more righteous part of the people who were saved, and it was they who received the prophets and stoned them not; and it was they who had not shed the blood of the saints, who were spared
Link to comment

Show me in the scriptures where a coming financial crises is going to cause non-Mormons to move to the cities and Mormons to move to "Zion"

Ezekiel 7:19

They shall cast their silver in the streets, and their gold shall be removed: their silver and their gold shall not be able to deliver them in the day of the wrath of the Lord: they shall not satisfy their souls, neither fill their bowels: because it is the stumbling block of their iniquity.

Where did I say anything about "Mormons" and "non-Mormons", it is "the Pure in Heart" and the "Wicked". I don't hold an exclusivist standpoint- Zion is the Pure in Heart, not the pure in doctrine. When the Pure in heart are gathered doctrinal points of the Gospel will be put in order.

Anyhoo..

D&C 45:68

And it shall come to pass among the wicked, that every man that will not take his sword against his neighbor must needs flee unto Zion for safety.

So if the Pure in Heart are in Zion, where does that leave the wicked?

Link to comment

So take 2 seperate verses out of of 2 different sets of scriptures, seperated by at least 3000 years (when they were written), put them together, interpret them to mean what you want them to mean and call it 'proof' of your opinion.

No thanks -- I'll stick with my original statement, your post is not doctrinal and is only your opinion.

Link to comment

So take 2 seperate verses out of of 2 different sets of scriptures, seperated by at least 3000 years (when they were written), put them together, interpret them to mean what you want them to mean and call it 'proof' of your opinion.

No thanks -- I'll stick with my original statement, your post is not doctrinal and is only your opinion.

Kind of like how I am supposed to accept one extremely vague verse as evidence for baptism for the dead?

Both verses are speaking of the last days.

What do you think is going to happen?

It is easy to mock someone's belief when you don't offer any counter or evidence for it. I know the answer you'll give, "I don't know. The prophet hasn't revealed it." Yet prophets, in the OT, NT, and BofM have spoken of the events of the last days.

So, again, what do you think is going to happen? since you are so certain I am wrong.

Link to comment

Kind of like how I am supposed to accept one extremely vague verse as evidence for baptism for the dead?

.

Actually you're expected to believe what later day Prophets have said and what has gone through Church Correlation Committee's to end up in Official Church manuals.

Sorry, my statement stands -- for that matter I also don't see others running to defend your view.

Link to comment

Reading D&C 38 last night, I was intrigued by the statement that "the angels are waiting the command to go down and reap the tares, gathering them to be burned."

Every Primary kid worth his CTR ring knows that "tares" means the bad folk, "wheat" the good guys. It's a pretty common New Testament metaphor ... or not.

In reality, Biblically only the Gospel of Matthew uses it, and only in one chapter. I wonder how Mark, Luke and John missed it completely.

Why do you find that so strange when there are other teachings found in one Gospel, which are not found in any of the others?

And I wonder what exactly does the phrase from D&C 38 mean. Will we see angels in the Millennium flitting around and herding miscreants into holding cells for punishment?

According to the NT, that appears to be the case:

Matthew 13
:

49 So shall it be at the end of the world: the angels shall come forth, and sever the wicked from among the just,

50 And shall cast them into the furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth.

What is the dividing line between tare and wheat? According to LDS? According to other Christians?

According to LDS scripture, the "wheat" are characterized by the following:

D&C 45
:

57 For they that are wise and have received the truth, and have taken the Holy Spirit for their guide, and have not been deceived
Link to comment

Actually you're expected to believe what later day Prophets have said and what has gone through Church Correlation Committee's to end up in Official Church manuals.

Sorry, my statement stands -- for that matter I also don't see others running to defend your view.

Kind of like when they said blacks were banned from having the Priesthood until the end of the Millennium because of their lack of valiance in the war in heaven, or how Adam is the Father of our spirits in addition to being the first physical man on earth, etc...? Your prophets have said many things even your own faithful membership doesn't accept anymore or has very serious questions about. So how can I, one who no longer accepts their claims, be expected to fall in line?

I don't see anyone but you, poorly, trying to counter my view, either, my good brother.

Link to comment

Kind of like when they said blacks were banned from having the Priesthood until the end of the Millennium because of their lack of valiance in the war in heaven

I am going to have to CFR that this is the reason taking into consideration Elder McConkie's statement to forget everything he said before.

or how Adam is the Father of our spirits in addition to being the first physical man on earth, etc...?

I like the Two-Adam theory.

Your prophets have said many things even your own faithful membership doesn't accept anymore or has very serious questions about. So how can I, one who no longer accepts their claims, be expected to fall in line?

You don't have to. Go where your own soul wills. But those reasons you listed up there are not correct.

I don't see anyone but you, poorly, trying to counter my view, either, my good brother.

It's not our job too; to force beliefs on someone is not a good thing - you offer them, but do not force them upon them =).

Link to comment

I am going to have to CFR that this is the reason taking into consideration Elder McConkie's statement to forget everything he said before.

Therein lies the issue... I can believe what Brigham, the LDS prophet, declared as inspiration, or what some lower Apostle said years later, without claim to inspiration on the matter.

I like the Two-Adam theory.

See my answer above.

You don't have to. Go where your own soul wills. But those reasons you listed up there are not correct.

Those aren't my main reasons for leaving. In fact, if I believed in the LDS concept of eternal progression, I would gladly embrace Adam-God as taught by Brigham Young.

It's not our job too; to force beliefs on someone is not a good thing - you offer them, but do not force them upon them =).

No, but it is good to offer some type of counter view if you are so ready to dismiss the view of another. I am interested in what is wrong with my views as they pertain to the actual topic of this thread. I am more then willing to consider other views on most matters. Your brother has just dismissed my view with an arrogant wave of the hand, offering no alternative view for me to consider.

Link to comment

Your brother has just dismissed my view with an arrogant wave of the hand, offering no alternative view for me to consider.

Not at all. I merely pointed out that what your opinion is, is not a doctrine or belief of the Church, since you were presenting it as an answer to a question. I did not want someone looking for answers to think yours was correct and since no one can prove a negative - its up to you to prove its true -- You have been given a couple days now and still have not (and I for one know you can not)

Link to comment

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...