Why does Joseph not do as D & C 129 says...

[Tacenda]

In these scriptures it explains what to do if you're visited by an angel. I wonder why Joseph never did it? How do we know the angels are who they say they are? 

[oremites]

How do you know Joseph never did it?

[Tacenda]

https://www.lds.org/scriptures/dc-testament/dc/129?lang=eng

Forgot to link this. To answer Oremite's question...I believe the way the church keeps records, surely this would be shown. 

[Kenngo1969]

Let's talk logic for a sec.  An elementary rule of logic says that absence of evidence is evidence of absence.  Joseph never mentioned having done it, ergo, he must never have done it.  And there you have it!  I don't believe I've ever mentioned relieving myself on this board, so that must mean I simply plan on exploding when I'm 50.  Q.E.D.  

Edited August 27, 2016 by Kenngo1969

[Tacenda]

7 minutes ago, Kenngo1969 said:

Let's talk logic for a sec.  An elementary rule of logic says that absence of evidence is evidence of absence.  Joseph, he never mentioned having done it, ergo, he must never have done it.  And there you have it!  I don't believe I've ever mentioned relieving myself on this board, so that must mean I simply plan on exploding when I'm 50.  Q.E.D.  

Miss your posts Kenn! Why do you always have to be right though? 

[oremites]

1 hour ago, Tacenda said:

I believe the way the church keeps records, surely this would be shown. 

I think you're comparing apples to oranges here.  These aren't church meetings where a secretary is recording minutes.  These are supernatural visitations.  To answer this question, I think we need to look at those occurrences.

Is there a list of the times that Joseph was visited by angels?  How many of those visits occurred after section 129 was received?  Was there any difference between those that happened before and those that happened after?  What was the level of detail recorded for each of those visitations?

[Cold Steel]

Joseph was ago spiritually attuned that I'm certain he didn't need such things. Once Moses beheld the power of both God and Satan, he instantly knew whether the manifestation was of God. This is a simple test that was given before the temple ordinances were conceived. The more people know about the Kingdom of God, the less likely it is that they'll be deceived. I personally believe such manifestations are increasing throughout the world. One well known magician has a spirit "imaginary friend" named Desmont. He maintains that this spirit has been with him since he was a child and that his act depends on Desmont, whose presence is necessary for him to complete his show. 

Then there are the Marian apparitions happening all over the earth. If the Keys of the Kingdom really reside with the Papal authority, as I told a Catholic friend, why would instructions from God come through village children instead of to the Pontiff? There has to be a designated chain of command in the world. Any counsel from a supernatural force would have to recognize that chain of command or it is not of God. Yet there are stories of the Pope poring over these supposed messages from children. 

 

[boblloyd91]

5 hours ago, Tacenda said:

In these scriptures it explains what to do if you're visited by an angel. I wonder why Joseph never did it? How do we know the angels are who they say they are? 

This has been on my mind a lot at different times, as its important to know that we're not being deceived (something I worry about). Something that has always reassured me is the report given of Michael interfering with Satan as an angel of light on the banks of the Susquehanna. I believe it was told by Oliver Cowdery, and it sounds like a clear cut example of them avoiding deception. I believe also it's in section 50 where we are strongly encouraged to pray and discern through the Holy Ghost to recognize what we are feeling and what the source is. I also think that on a moral and ethical level, Joseph and the early saints were sincerely trying to know who God was, and that with all their praying and searching, if Moroni was an angel of light, and God didn't reveal it, the problem is God, not us. That may sound blasphemous or boastful but as I have thought about it, I realize more and more that the scriptures pointing to God being in control. If we are going to pray and always be deceived then what kind of God are we worshiping? 

I actually had an awful experience for a number of months where I was debating if all of us LDS were in fact secretly in the clutches of Satan and all the experiences I and my loved ones had were of the devil. This led to me about losing my mind and almost being hospitalized. I was in grad school working at a psychiatric hospital at the time, which made it ironic I was going through this. I had recurring thoughts and fears of the possibility of me and my loved ones being tormented by the devil while also being condemned by God and Christ for not worshiping the "right Jesus" even though we had prayed and sought answers. I'm happy to report this has mostly passed, due to several things:

 

1. Reading the New Testament, especially the sermon on the mount, where Jesus talks about giving us better gifts than our parents. I actually believe I had a spiritual experience where this hit me like a bolt of lightning and caused me to ponder how much God answers our prayers. Also in the New Testament I read a lot that indicated to me that God wants us to be saved and is much more powerful than Satan
2. I examined the theology and backgrounds of those who accuse us of being devil worshipers. Almost invariably they wound up being into other weird things like conspiracy theories, and often played fast and loose with the truth (people like Ed Decker and Bill Schnoebelen seem to be the poster boys for this). I also noticed that many of our critics who adhere to this model seem to have a Pentecostal/Charismatic background, and this movement has plenty of issues of its own (and itself has also been accused of being demonic in nature).
3. Personal experiences of myself and loved ones. I must admit that my mother is still a major influence on my beliefs. She has had experiences with both the the dark and the light. She isn't crazy or eccentric, in fact she is the manager of a hospital in Salt Lake and is a very level headed lady (no bias on my part obviously!) She has had experiences which I believe were prophetic, as well as experiences where she has had to resist evil. 
4. The inability of our critics to give a good moral and ethical reason for why God would allow Joseph Smith or others to be deceived when they were so obviously looking for answers. It is basically the equivalent of saying that God gave him a stone instead of the bread he was seeking. There are about three different people on this board who have made this accusation (LDS experiences are demonic) but none of them can give any kind of answer for why this is. 

I could probably list more but I can't think of anything else right now. In spite of all I put above could I be wrong? Yes, it's possible but that would open up a bigger can of worms then us being deceived...that being that God is ultimately cruel and an insidious respecter of persons. I do not feel that is the God of the bible.

[Rivers]

I wonder if Joseph followed section 129 when the angel with the drawn sword came to him.

[rongo]

D&C 129 wasn't given (or recorded) until 1843. The assumption I seem to see here is that he knew this "grand key" since the 1820s. Doesn't it seem reasonable that this knowledge, borne of experience, would have come much later, after many experiences --- including at least the incident on the banks of the Susquehanna with Satan trying to deceive and being detected by Michael? And many others that are unknown?

[PeterPear]

11 hours ago, Tacenda said:

In these scriptures it explains what to do if you're visited by an angel. I wonder why Joseph never did it? How do we know the angels are who they say they are? 

Why don't you study the preceding Section about the divers angels which appeared to Joseph Smith and the devil as angel of light. No wonder Isaiah was a man of unclean lips.

 

 20 And again, what do we hear? Glad tidings from Cumorah! Moroni, an angel from heaven, declaring the fulfilment of the prophets—the book to be revealed. A voice of the Lord in the wilderness of Fayette, Seneca county, declaring the three witnesses to bear record of the book! The voice of Michael on the banks of the Susquehanna, detecting the devil when he appeared as an angel of light! The voice of Peter, James, and John in the wilderness between Harmony, Susquehanna county, and Colesville, Broome county, on the Susquehanna river, declaring themselves as possessing the keys of the kingdom, and of the dispensation of the fulness of times!

 21 And again, the voice of God in the chamber of old Father Whitmer, in Fayette, Seneca county, and at sundry times, and in divers places through all the travels and tribulations of this Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints! And the voice of Michael, the archangel; the voice of Gabriel, and of Raphael, and of divers angels, from Michael or Adam down to the present time, all declaring their dispensation, their rights, their keys, their honors, their majesty and glory, and the power of their priesthood; giving line upon line, precept upon precept; here a little, and there a little; giving us consolation by holding forth that which is to come, confirming our hope!

Edited August 27, 2016 by PeterPear

[JLHPROF]

4 hours ago, rongo said:

D&C 129 wasn't given (or recorded) until 1843. The assumption I seem to see here is that he knew this "grand key" since the 1820s. Doesn't it seem reasonable that this knowledge, borne of experience, would have come much later, after many experiences --- including at least the incident on the banks of the Susquehanna with Satan trying to deceive and being detected by Michael? And many others that are unknown?

Joseph knew this key before D&C 129, because this key is directly related to the endowment which was first given almost a year earlier in 1842.

Logic would say that if this revelation was taught to Joseph as part of his receiving the endowment that he probably never used this key prior to that time.

 

[mfbukowski]

7 hours ago, boblloyd91 said:

 

I could probably list more but I can't think of anything else right now. In spite of all I put above could I be wrong? Yes, it's possible but that would open up a bigger can of worms then us being deceived...that being that God is ultimately cruel and an insidious respecter of persons. I do not feel that is the God of the bible.

If God is evil or doesn't care about us we are all screwed anyway and there is nothing we can do about it

Worrying about it won't help

But that does not make sense.  If there is evil in the world there has to be good and I am worshiping the good.  I suppose you can pick who you want to worship.

Whoever it is that talks to me is the best being I can even imagine.   He is always helping me out with some stupid problem.  

[mfbukowski]

6 hours ago, Rivers said:

I wonder if Joseph followed section 129 when the angel with the drawn sword came to him.

That is a VERY interesting point

Since when does God threaten us with death if we do not comply?   Isn't the gospel about agency?

[Tacenda]

7 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

That is a VERY interesting point

Since when does God threaten us with death if we do not comply?   Isn't the gospel about agency?

I guess not in this case.

 

[Rivers]

52 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

I guess not in this case.

 

Maybe he did and found it to be a legitamite angel. 

[Bobbieaware]

On August 26, 2016 at 11:31 AM, Tacenda said:

In these scriptures it explains what to do if you're visited by an angel. I wonder why Joseph never did it? How do we know the angels are who they say they are? 

Because when one has sufficient experience with angelic visitations, as Joseph Smith most certainly did, the Spirit of God inspires such an individual with the revelatory insight needed to know who is an angel of light and who isn't without having to resort to using this test. I believe the prophet's counsel here is meant for those inexperienced individuals who might encounter a heavenly visitor for the first time but who lack the spiritual powers of discernment to know, by revelation, who is and who isn't an angel of light. In other words, there are more ways than one to detect an angel of light from an angel of darkness in disguise, and this test is meant to be used as a last-resort by those individuals who lack experience and revelatory insight when dealing with visitors from the other side of the veil. Simple as that.

Edited August 28, 2016 by Bobbieaware

[Kenngo1969]

Agency is about choices ... and consequences.  Too many people, including members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, forget that second part. We want the freedom to make choices without suffering any adverse consequences, and that ain't the way mortality works.  Yes, an angel appearing to me wielding a drawn sword would portend grave consequences if I were to refuse to obey, but that still doesn't take away my ability to make a choice, any more than I lack the ability, in my current situation, to say either:

(1) No, I didn't envision making $12 an hour answering phones when, nearly 20 years ago, I decided I didn't want to do that for the rest of my life, left a job making just over $11 an hour doing the same thing, and eventually decided to go to law school.  Yes, it sucks.  Yes, I'd prefer to be doing something else.  No, I don't really like any of my choices at the moment.  But that still doesn't take away my ability to make choices (even when all of my choices are less-than-ideal alternatives), and I'll simply do my best to make the best of a less-than-ideal situation for as long as necessary until my circumstances, choices, and outlook improve; or

(2) I hate this; it sucks; it's not what I signed up for; I didn't spend years in law school sacrificing untold amounts of blood, sweat, tears, and pounds of flesh, spending tens of thousands of dollars, going through scarcely imaginable intellectual and emotional turmoil, so that I could simply come full circle back to where I was nearly 20 years ago answering phones.  Forget it.  I'm done.  Chuck it all!   [Imagine gruesome ending here.]  (Or, less drastically, I could simply pull the covers over my head one morning when the alarm goes off and start singing to myself, "Make the world go away, and get it off of my shoulders ..." and/or, "One less ... phone to answer ...")  As Dr. Phil always says (he may be something of a publicity hound, if not a bit of a quack, but he's absolutely right here), "How's that workin' for ya?"

Just because someone doesn't like any of the alternatives doesn't mean he lacks agency.  Gotta go!  There are phones to answer!

 

[JLHPROF]

12 hours ago, mfbukowski said:

That is a VERY interesting point

Since when does God threaten us with death if we do not comply?

Ummm....all the time?
 

Quote

   Isn't the gospel about agency?

Not agency without consequence.  Which sometimes includes death.

Edited August 27, 2016 by JLHPROF

[bluebell]

14 hours ago, mfbukowski said:

That is a VERY interesting point

Since when does God threaten us with death if we do not comply?   Isn't the gospel about agency?

The consequences of sin is death-the second death is one of the major themes of scripture.  Agency doesn't negate the consequences of our choices.

[Tacenda]

3 hours ago, Kenngo1969 said:

Agency is about choices ... and consequences.  Too many people, including members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, forget that second part. We want the freedom to make choices without suffering any adverse consequences, and that ain't the way mortality works.  Yes, an angel appearing to me wielding a drawn sword would portend grave consequences if I were to refuse to obey, but that still doesn't take away my ability to make a choice, any more than I lack the ability, in my current situation, to say either:

(1) No, I didn't envision making $12 an hour answering phones when, nearly 20 years ago, I decided I didn't want to do that for the rest of my life, left a job making just over $11 an hour doing the same thing, and eventually decided to go to law school.  Yes, it sucks.  Yes, I'd prefer to be doing something else.  No, I don't really like any of my choices at the moment.  But that still doesn't take away my ability to make choices (even when all of my choices are less-than-ideal alternatives), and I'll simply do my best to make the best of a less-than-ideal situation for as long as necessary until my circumstances, choices, and outlook improve; or

(2) I hate this; it sucks; it's not what I signed up for; I didn't spend years in law school sacrificing untold amounts of blood, sweat, tears, and pounds of flesh, spending tens of thousands of dollars, going through scarcely imaginable intellectual and emotional turmoil, so that I could simply come full circle back to where I was nearly 20 years ago answering phones.  Forget it.  I'm done.  Chuck it all!   [Imagine gruesome ending here.]  (Or, less drastically, I could simply pull the covers over my head one morning when the alarm goes off and start singing to myself, "Make the world go away, and get it off of my shoulders ..." and/or, "One less ... phone to answer ...")  As Dr. Phil always says (he may be something of a publicity hound, if not a bit of a quack, but he's absolutely right here), "How's that workin' for ya?"

Just because someone doesn't like any of the alternatives doesn't mean he lacks agency.  Gotta go!  There are phones to answer!

 

My heart goes out to you!! 

[The Nehor]

On 8/26/2016 at 10:45 AM, Tacenda said:

https://www.lds.org/scriptures/dc-testament/dc/129?lang=eng

Forgot to link this. To answer Oremite's question...I believe the way the church keeps records, surely this would be shown. 

For all Joseph's virtues he was a very sub-par record keeper. There is a reason we do not know when the Melchizedek Priesthood is restored and that the First Vision accounts emphasize different aspects. He was not very good as a reporter or at making comprehensive records. He may have used the technique and not mentioned it. He may not have needed it.

[mfbukowski]

41 minutes ago, bluebell said:

The consequences of sin is death-the second death is one of the major themes of scripture.  Agency doesn't negate the consequences of our choices.

I know, I just find it odd.

Look at David.  He had a direct commandment from the Lord and eventually got his consequences and another picked up the ball that he dropped.  The Lord just called another to carry out the mission.

It's interesting that the message in Joseph's case is different , and not the way the Lord usually handles things according to scriptures I have seen.  I am trying to see the difference if there is one.

[bluebell]

23 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

I know, I just find it odd.

Look at David.  He had a direct commandment from the Lord and eventually got his consequences and another picked up the ball that he dropped.  The Lord just called another to carry out the mission.

It's interesting that the message in Joseph's case is different , and not the way the Lord usually handles things according to scriptures I have seen.  I am trying to see the difference if there is one.

I agree, it is interesting. 

[theplains]

17 hours ago, JLHPROF said:

Joseph knew this key before D&C 129, because this key is directly related to the endowment which was first given almost a year earlier in 1842.

Is this type of testing with the handshake ever depicted in a temple ceremony?

Thanks,
Jim

 

Discussions on temple content are not allowed.