Tom Philips Tells Mormon Stories About The Second Annointing

[ERayR]

I think he was making a point, not trivializing the ordinance but I'll let cobalt speak for himself. In any case some worthy people will have the mysteries of godliness and the fulness of the priesthood kept secret from them in this life.

I think, judging from past performance, he would not pass up a chance to trivialize the sacred.

[jwhitlock]

I expect that I'll know the secret formula of Coca Cola in the next life. That doesn't mean it isn't a secret.

So what's your point with that? That there are secrets in life? That the church is wrong because Coca Cola is secret? That all secrets are bad, including your own? That everyone should know everything?

Are you claiming that just because you don't know something, it's a "secret", and That's Bad? That would be rather absurd.

Everyone and every organization entails something that someone else doesn't know. All this sniffing about the church having "secrets", and how it should be required to be "open" in absolutely everything (whoops, I lost track of President Monson's daily activities yesterday, so the church is being secretive) is simply ridiculous. Splitting hairs to try and label something secret, rather than understanding the perspective from the church's standpoint is just wasted effort.

[jwhitlock]

That's why it's called Mormon Stories. John is covering all of them. The faithful and the unfaithful. Though he may lean more toward the "un" it's because he see's there are discrepencies in the truth claims of the church.

Faithful mormons shouldn't listen to some of these. It may be harmful to their beliefs. I believe GC talks etc. should be their direction. At the most DBMormon's podcasts. Things that are brought up here on MDD could even be harmful. Maybe John felt since the subject of a second annointing isn't common in the church he was touching hallowed ground and decided not to put it out in the public.

Listening to Dehlin blow gas isn't harmful to my belief as a Latter-day Saint. That's because I recognize him for what he's doing. If one presupposes that he's being accurate in his questioning, and that all of his interviews are accurate, and then makes a decision from that about the truth claims of the church, then that person has made a significant error in judgment.

[KevinG]

I have distaste for people who claim "insider knowledge" for purposes of notoriety. It doesn't matter if they are trying to promote faith or sew doubt- they are still pretending to be authoritative in order to gain attention.

In this case it sounds like Dehlin was struck by a sudden case of good judgement when it came to Philips gas-bagging. I congratulate him on the decision not to expose sacred things (or someone's claim of knowing about sacred things) the the trampling of porcine hooves.

[Tacenda]

I have distaste for people who claim "insider knowledge" for purposes of notoriety. It doesn't matter if they are trying to promote faith or sew doubt- they are still pretending to be authoritative in order to gain attention.

In this case it sounds like Dehlin was struck by a sudden case of good judgement when it came to Philips gas-bagging. I congratulate him on the decision not to expose sacred things (or someone's claim of knowing about sacred things) the the trampling of porcine hooves.

He does make a disclaimer at the beginning that this information from Philips is already out there on the web. Not that this matters.

Edited August 30, 2012 by Tacenda

[KevinG]

He does make a disclaimer at the beginning that this information from Phillips is already out there on the web. Not that this matters.

Yup. There is a lot of information "out there" that I would never choose to replicate or distribute even if I could gain personally from doing so.

[alter idem]

I'm not endowed yet and I don't feel comfortable listening to the podcast. For those of you who listened to it, is there anything interesting in it that I can't learn from reading the article cinepro linked to?

I haven't listened to it, and I don't plan to, but I have read the article--but there is no comparison between a carefully researched article and someone's spending hours telling about their dissafection from the church.

No question. Read the link from Cinepro. Tom Phillips even admits that he didn't remember everything that took place so he went to old diary accounts for details--details he most likely gleaned from reading the article.

[ERayR]

He does make a disclaimer at the beginning that this information from Philips is already out there on the web. Not that this matters.

Kind of reminiscent of Pontius Pilate washing his hands?

[alter idem]

Ok... say a member desires to receive their second anointing. Said member is fully temple worthy, an exemplary member, and faithful in all other ways. Said members spouse decides to leave the church or is otherwise less faithful. How does this member qualify Him/herself for the second anointing? divorce and remarrying a more righteous spouse?

I think that if you study the teachings of the gospel, you'll come to realize that the answer lies in honoring an ETERNAL covenant made to a spouse in the temple. I for one, would certainly question the qualifications of a person who discarded their spouse so that they could gain a celestial glory--that smacks of something totally opposite to everything the Savior exemplified and the gospel teaches.

It also is someone who is not thinking in an eternal scheme and our individual mission on earth. We are sent down here to learn and grow--and to help others around us learn and grow. If we throw away from our lives--for no other reason than that we think someone is 'holding us back', someone we loved and are tied to, we are not understanding the reason we are here and need to repent and let the spirit teach us what we should do.

[Tacenda]

Kind of reminiscent of Pontius Pilate washing his hands?

I think that in my listening to the podcast, (I haven't been able to finish it), he doesn't really get into the "Second Annointing" much, he talks of losing his testimony by research into things like man living on the earth before Adam etc. And how in the BoM the earth was created in 6 days vs. in the bible it is a little different where the earth is created in six segments (my memory fails me sometimes so forgive me if this isn't precise).

But IMO he shouldn't have even brought up the "Second Annointing" since it isn't what made him question, according to what I've listened to so far. It wasn't called for and maybe he should have quietly left the church and kept it to himself but it's fine that he wanted to tell his family of his feelings and his findings.

[DBMormon]

Libs, on 30 August 2012 - 01:02 AM, said:

I think John is pretty guileless. His questions seem to come from an honest interest in people and their ideas and struggles.

I disagree. Flatly. Completely. Utterly.

SELEK - do you disagree as strongly as you disagreed that John Dehlin should not be disciplined by the church? As I never got an answer on that one.

Edited August 30, 2012 by DBMormon

[Alan]

Having read some background on this guy, and some of his correspondence with Elder Holland, I have very little time for him. A lot of his concerns regarding the BofM etc have been answered by better scholars than him. (Incidently, he is not a scholar, nor is he a scientist) If he is as well read as he claims, he must know there are answers out there. He may not agree with them, but that is not the same as there being none.

He is a typical example of someone who has left the church but can't leave it alone.

[DBMormon]

I listened to the Podcast and will share a couple of thoughts.

1.) While for no reason really at all, listening to this broadcast made me begin to doubt my testimony once again. Just listening to people share stories of leaving the church seems to affect many of us negatively in our testimonies even without dealing with the reasoning.

2.) I am bothered by this "secret" ordinance.... why... I don't know. In reality, why should it bother anyone? there is no real concrete reason. Why can't there be this ordinance? no reason.

3.) In the podcast he shares several places where he felt the spirit and even admits that it was very real at the time.

4.) Rather then look for ways to make it work, it seems he leaned towards not allowing any flexibility. Prophets speak God's will at all times, the Fall has to applied to the whole earth and not just the Garden which scripture speaks of, Expecting church leaders to have scientific explanations for religious questions.

5.) Elder Holland's response while not answering the questions, was the right answer. Who is Elder Holland to give scientific answers to questions of faith? I do not want Elder Holland or any other GA answering questions of faith with scientific data as that is what got earlier leaders in trouble. It is what got biblical leaders in trouble as well when judging by current standards and data and info.

6.) I don't think what he has done would be considered the unpardonable sin as I define that sin as rebelling against the truth when one knows it aka "open rebellion" so perhaps he will still find himself exhalted at that day.

[DBMormon]

multiple times he wants proof. I have learned Proof outside that which are spiritual will not prove spiritual questions.

Prove

- there is a god

- Jesus rose

- I lived before this life

- any other spiritual question - no proof. (evidence and proof are 2 different things)

[William Schryver]

Tom Phillips, former Stake President, recently did an interview with John Dehlin about his experiences in the church including his participation in the Second Annointing (having his calling and election made sure). ...

The release of the interview and Phillips other writings (under the name AnointedOne) clearly indicate that he's not keeping his views to himself but wishes to influence others to join his point of view against the church.

This is exactly what I meant when I coined the term "apostate evangelist." The Great and Spacious Trailer Park is dominated by such types.

My question for discussion is, should the church be pursuing disciplinary action against Phillips and Dehlin?

Whether they do or not, it doesn't change the fact that both Phillips and Dehlin are apostates from the restored gospel, and evangelists for their unbelief.

[Saints Alive]

So what's your point with that? That there are secrets in life? That the church is wrong because Coca Cola is secret? That all secrets are bad, including your own? That everyone should know everything?

Are you claiming that just because you don't know something, it's a "secret", and That's Bad? That would be rather absurd.

Everyone and every organization entails something that someone else doesn't know. All this sniffing about the church having "secrets", and how it should be required to be "open" in absolutely everything (whoops, I lost track of President Monson's daily activities yesterday, so the church is being secretive) is simply ridiculous. Splitting hairs to try and label something secret, rather than understanding the perspective from the church's standpoint is just wasted effort.

Again I cant speak for cobalt but the point is that the temple IS secret. We emphasis the sacredness of it but strictly speaking it is also secret. I don't consider this a bad or devious thing, just calling a spade a spade.

[yootaw]

For what it's worth: Johns podcasts and writings tend to make me want to find a way to make the church work in my life. The vitriolic style of posting that is common here (but not ubiquitous), often makes me want to distance myself from the church (or at least from such a rigid black and white view of the church).

[KevinG]

For what it's worth: Johns podcasts and writings tend to make me want to find a way to make the church work in my life. The vitriolic style of posting that is common here (but not ubiquitous), often makes me want to distance myself from the church (or at least from such a rigid black and white view of the church).

While I will try to remain respectful in disagreement you place your salvation on very shaky ground if you depend on others tone to dictate your faith.

[William Schryver]

/snip/

I was looking at the URL (mormonthoughandopinion.blogspot.com/) in your signature, which, much to my surprise, actually led to website.

So now I'm curious: What is a Mormon "though"? ( )

Edited August 30, 2012 by William Schryver

[zerinus]

He says in the podcast that he has been sealed to Elder Holland. Does anybody know what the reasoning behind that is? In the early days of the Church many Church members chose to be sealed to General Authorities, with Joseph Smith being the favourite. But Wilfird Woodruff discourage that idea, and urged Church members to be sealed to their progenitors. Nowadays I didn't think that anybody gets sealed to General Authorities. Is it part of the ordinance, or is it something that he chose to do?

[why me]

I listened to the Podcast and will share a couple of thoughts.

1.) While for no reason really at all, listening to this broadcast made me begin to doubt my testimony once again. Just listening to people share stories of leaving the church seems to affect many of us negatively in our testimonies even without dealing with the reasoning.

This is not surprising at all. He wanted people to doubt their testimony and gave a version where doubt would fester. So, it is not surprising that you felt this way. It goes like this: give an explanation that would cause members to question. Sound sincere. And cast doubt. And it does work with some members because those members overlook the big picture. Why do you think that there are 11 witnesses to the plates? Why not 2 or 1 witness? Because one or two or even three would not be enough. But 11...not bad at all. And no one ever denied what they experienced because what they experienced was undeniable.

[why me]

For what it's worth: Johns podcasts and writings tend to make me want to find a way to make the church work in my life. The vitriolic style of posting that is common here (but not ubiquitous), often makes me want to distance myself from the church (or at least from such a rigid black and white view of the church).

That may be. But this podcast was a huge mistake and if John was not worried about his reputation, he would have stopped the interview and moved on. But he couldn't stop the interview because Phillips could have claimed censorship. And if so, how would you feel about John?

[wenglund]

For what it's worth: Johns podcasts and writings tend to make me want to find a way to make the church work in my life. The vitriolic style of posting that is common here (but not ubiquitous), often makes me want to distance myself from the church (or at least from such a rigid black and white view of the church).

This kind of testimony wishy-washy-ness is bound to occur when a person un-anchors from Christ and lets him or herself be tossed to and fro by how people behave.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[Libs]

I thought the sealing was probably to all of those who have received the second anointing...not just to Elder Holland, specifically. (But, that might be my own misunderstanding). It's difficult to know, with the little bit of information that's on the podcast. Truly, there was very little about the actual anointing, on that podcast.

[jwhitlock]

Again I cant speak for cobalt but the point is that the temple IS secret. We emphasis the sacredness of it but strictly speaking it is also secret. I don't consider this a bad or devious thing, just calling a spade a spade.

Given what's out on the Internet about the temple, strictly speaking it ain't secret at all.

And since we're strictly speaking, how can something be secret in any real sense of the word when millions of people have experienced it? Frankly, when talking about secrets, you probably need to look for an example other than the temple at this point.