Jump to content

Brad Wilcox fireside to Alpine youth on Feb 6.


Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

Yep, the idea that God cannot work through us is a) contrary to so many of my happiest, most sacred, most life-altering, most grace-filled personal experiences and, therefore, b) literally the saddest thing I've read all day.

I've long wondered why, as a Latter-day Saint, I often feel a much closer connection with my Orthodox and Catholic brothers -- and in many cases with my faithful non-Christian brothers -- than I do with many Protestants, but this outright aversion to God sharing anything with His children has brought me a bit more clarity today. After having experienced what I have, this concept feels barren and impoverished to me.

Yes.

Theoretically if it were true, we could not even have an altar call experience to "accept Jesus".

God could not share his teachings to others of his children.

So much for Protestant missionaries or ministers doing good for anyone.

Sounds like they are deterministic robot dummies for God as a ventriloquist.

That cannot be right.  

Link to comment
9 hours ago, Bernard Gui said:

I am surprised that you equate not setting one’s heart on the things of the world and the honors of men, not dealing with hypocrisy and guile, not covering sins or gratifying pride, but rather seeking persuasion, knowledge, gentleness, meekness, patience, long-suffering, brotherly kindness, unfeigned love, faithfulness, charity, and virtuous thoughts with FundamentalIst preachers. They must have been exemplars of Christlike-like men…someone I would like to hang around with.

I think I must not have expressed myself well. My view is the exact opposite of what you are saying. I am not correlating the Fundamentalists of the 1950s with any of the fruits of the Spirit that you mention. Quite the opposite.

Link to comment
17 hours ago, carbon dioxide said:

I would agree they were not lies.  A lie is when someone knows the truth of something but says something different than what they know to be true.  To be in error is not a lie.  If one believes a false view, it is not a lie even if the view is false.  It simply means to be wrong.  Being wrong is a human condition that we all are guilty of from time to time.

Here’s the problem for me. I was born in the 70s and for almost a half century now I haven’t seen an actual prophet do any prophety stuff. We read about mighty miracles in the scriptures all the time. Joseph saw extraterrestrial beings, numerous extraterrestrials visited him up to 28 times. Not only did he restore the gospel of Christ, he restored the priesthood, the system that is going to govern this earth for 1000 years upon his return. 
 

You said “being wrong is a human condition that we are all guilty of time to time”, you’re are correct, 100%. But I was raised to believe these men are in direct contact with God. And it hurts my heart to see my religion 20 years behind the rest of the world on almost every single major decision. I’m yearning for leadership! When will the rest of the world look at our church and say, yep!! The Mormons are on the right track?

Link to comment
9 hours ago, mfbukowski said:

You are not seeing God as a Father who teaches his children by allowing them to do things in his name so they can grow up to be like Him.

You probably are right. But I would add this nuance. What role did the child play in asking God to heal? He or she simply asked God to heal via His (God's own power). That is not a power or an authority, it is a petition. If as a result God heals, it is not because of some special authority or power on the part of the petitioner, is it? Does God grant a petition of a male LDS priesthood holder in a special way that He would not to in the presence of a petition of a daughter of His, or His child from another faith?

To use your analogy any child can petition a parent for something. Is that not true?  A person's experience of God's healing as a result of a petition, or in the absence of any petition (grace) is wonderful, is it not? When I pray in Christ's name, I do so to indicate that if and when anything comes of that prayer it is solely and only by and through Him. In my humanity I may in an imperfect way mirror His love, grace, and mercy to a dying world. However I have no capacity to reflect His power as did an OT prophet for example.

If I think I am the one accomplishing any good in His name, then I may become like Elijah under the broom tree, depressed and forlorn when my supposed efforts didn't have the effect I thought they would or should. You (Mark) often bring greater understanding of the LDS faith to me. I appreciate that. If you truly believe that you are doing something unique and specifically different as an LDS priesthood holder, when you ask for healing . . . special or different from any other petitioner doing the same (your wife, daughter, sister, Methodist neighbor) then I understand better some of the exceptionalism I often see and hear in the mind of the LDS priesthood holder, as I did in listening to the talk of Brad Wilcox.

Having said that I must agree with you that I absolutely do not see that we will ever grow up to be as God is. Perhaps that inability to comprehend that fact is what separates us the most. It may be profound or it may be as simple as the difference between "like" and "as."

If I might offer you an analogy of my own. Friday morning at 4:30am my son and I took off for the four hour drive to the states to see the doctor, pick up his new glasses, buy groceries and get our mail. At around 7am we were five miles south of the border. A rather large coyote ran out into the highway and we struck him (her). The coyote died and the accident resulted in the destruction of the car bumper and radiator. Yes, we have big coyotes here. We found ourselves on the side of the road, shaken but without injury.  Fortunately we had cell phone service so I called my wife back at home. I explained what happened and our situation, asking our employees to borrow a trailer, bring it and the truck to us to load up the car and return home. We have one road that leads to the US and it is heavily traveled by big trucks! I prepared my son that we would be missing his appointment and glasses and would have a three hour wait in the car. He did well with that.

My wife unbeknownst to me got on our ward whatsapp list and asked if anyone was traveling to the states between Entronque and Palomas, she would greatly appreciate it if they would offer us any help they could. Within half an hour my cell phone began ringing with offers of help from our LDS friends, whether they were all the way back in Colonia Juarez or half an hour down the highway headed on their own trip to the states. As you all know we are not members - they call us "faithful non-Members -Our Mennonites!" We had a number of offers of help from them including men who were willing to drive the three hours each way to bring our car back.

None of them knew that we had an accident and were in trouble. That would have been acting "as" God. They had no special foresight into our situation - now that would have been prophetic-like power! Having said that, when they found out we were in trouble, they jumped to action with no regard to their own schedule to help us. That was being "like" God. They reflected His love to us, even some who aren't particularly thrilled we are in the ward! I explained to them that our workers were bringing a truck and trailer and that we were safe and fine waiting for them to come get us.

I would be remiss if I didn't also mention that two complete strangers also stopped to help us, offering a "Mexican chain" tow into Palomas where they knew of a radiator repair shop. Another gave us water to drink and some snacks. We accepted the offer of the chain tow (if you know what that is) and the snacks, and found ourselves in half an hour in Palomas where there were restrooms and places to get something to eat, etc. I will probably never see the man who gave us the tow again. He also reflected Christ to us (I have no idea what if any faith he had) and refused all offers of money for his help. He wished us God's blessings and went on his way. As only can happen in a small Mexican town, people driving by us in the town began yelling at us "Aqui esta el mata coyote!" Here is the coyote killer! It was all in good humor. We were famous!

By mid-afternoon we were back home. Many people that day reflected kindness and love to us. Some were LDS, others probably Catholic or Pentecostal, my wife who has a "special" love for us, and my faithful workers who performed above and beyond! Our LDS friends were wonderful examples of God's love; not of His power. Both the ladies and men offered  to help. We are grateful for all those who offered or helped, and understand those who hurried along on their own life's journey that morning. God's love and His power (authority) are not the same. We saw lots of the former Friday morning and were grateful. In that sense all those who took time out of their busy day to offer us help were exceptional, weren't they? Thanks for reading this epistle.

Link to comment
2 hours ago, Olmec Donald said:

Back when I was active LDS perhaps the most "real" part of my religion, in my mind at least, was when I was asked to give someone a blessing.  Just about everything else I did was pretty much administrative or ecclesiastical.  While I did approach my various duties prayerfully, there is something about being asked to give a blessing that puts you on the spot, because now YOU have got to be a conduit for God's power and you can't fake that.  Diligence and study and common sense can get you through most things in life, but none of them will heal someone else. 

At some point I took an interest in church history, and came across accounts of women giving blessings in the Nauvoo and early Utah Valley eras.  This had been approved by Joseph Smith, who cited Mark 16:17-18:  "And these signs shall follow them that believe, in my name they shall... lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover."  No priesthood authority needed.  Hmmm.

Subsequent experiences led me to conclude that "priesthood authority" is not a necessary component of giving a blessing.  In fact the only instances of instantaneous healing of which I have first-hand knowledge did not include any citation of priesthood authority.  Briefly, I think the power that blesses someone comes from the exact same source whether the format involves a priesthood blessing, or some other practice, or prayer, or visualization, or intention, or making mud from dirt & spit and rubbing it on the person's eyes, or whatever.  And in my experience this power is indistinguishable from love. 

What then is the benefit of the LDS priesthood paradigm, in this area?

In my opinion the person believing that he has been given specific authority from God to bless people, that he has the right format to follow, which format has worked for many others in similar situations, helps to overcome FEAR and to have faith.  Fear is the barrier, as it is effectively the opposite of faith. 

Just to be clear, I no longer believe priesthood holders have been given a special healing power that is not completely accessible to everyone.  In my opinion what the priesthood ordination does is this:  It spotlights and validates something that was actually true about the person all along.  By way of analogy, the Scarecrow did not become intelligent when the Wizard gave him the diploma; he had been intelligent all along, but that diploma "gave" him permission to believe and behave consistent with his true nature.

So why would giving someone a blessing be any different from saying a prayer for them?  Well for one thing when YOU bless someone you have a lot more "skin in the game".  You can pray and it's all up to God and so you can "get away with" putting less of your energy into it; YOU laying your hands on the person puts YOU in the loop, and ime THAT is a magnificent learning experience.  Imo the LDS church lost something when it moved away from Joseph Smith's practice of allowing women to give blessings. 

So in other words I see the priesthood, in this context, as being a useful apprenticeship-like teaching device for a person who is trying to become more like Christ.  I do not see the priesthood as being an exclusive power and authority, in part because I've seen too many non-priesthood-holders do what the priesthood is supposed to enable (within the context of blessing and healing people). 

Obviously the above is NOT what the LDS Church teaches, it is just a snapshot of the belief of one ex-Mormon at this point in time. 
 

 

there’s a lot here that I really like, actually. I think it does capture one aspect of the power of God in general, tied up in love. And when I was a temple worker and did have authority to put my hands on other’s heads to proclaim blessings i often felt that earnest tug, wishing I could have that outside of the walls. There’s things that I’ve found as useful point of accessing god’s power to fill in the Gap a bit, but i still do wonder if one day, that will come back. 
 

that said, your post made me think about an experience on my mission. Pre-mish i had been blessed with the gift if being perceptive and discerning things with people in my Patriarchal blessing. It was something I strongly believed and saw in myself more than once before, but on my mission, set apart via priesthood authority, that gift went on steroids. For example.. I could tell when people were lying, when things weren’t of God even if someone insisted they were, and I could recognize and name certain mental illnesses just by looking into their eyes on first meeting. It was weird…and cool. Now part of it I think ties with what you mentioned here. My mission gave me space to work out some of my biggest kinks that were blocking me in a lot of ways spiritually. So my personal capacity to use my spiritual gifts were magnified as I was personally healed. Being more at peace, more filled with love, less angry…that frees up a lot of spiritual space. But some of it wasn’t that. I got off my mission, have healed even more, and have continued to grow in faith…I’m still not perceptive like I was then.

This and other experiences are the ones that come to mind a lot when thinking about priesthood…it’s not just the spirit, but an induction into our role or apprenticeship with God. And in that capacity who we are is often magnified to meet the challenges we are called to work/face in the restorative work among god’s children. Here and on the other side. 

I think in part, if I was going to go with a singular word to describe it…it’s purpose. The thing you mentioned among others align us within said purpose and that then magnifies our capacities. As a missionary I was on a very singular purpose in a way I haven’t been called to do before or since. It magnified the traits in me that could most aptly be used in said work…including ones that I was still understanding myself. Said priesthood power still has an effect now, it’s just different in duration and avenues. Usually less of me is required and more of my talents are integrated into who I am/more easily accessible. Not that it’s less important or that I forget where they initially came from.
 

But it’s still different in ways I’m still working to describe and still don’t have a full picture of. It’s one that is growing though. Back as a missionary to say I, as a woman, was acting in priesthood power or authority was still taboo. It has become more normative now. Still, both in the topics for women and for a general understanding, i think we have a bit to go. 

 

With luv, 

BD

Link to comment
6 hours ago, mfbukowski said:

Sounds like they are deterministic robot dummies for God as a ventriloquist.

That cannot be right.  

I see you are one in accord with Brad Wilcox! I have no idea what would lead you to say such a hateful thing! I cannot believe such a statement is the teaching of your church. So Protestants are "deterministic robot dummies for God as a ventriloquist!" May I quote you? I am sure that will go a long way toward positive inter-faith relationships! Congratulations! You have just outdone yourself and Brad Wilcox! I just spent an hour trying to craft a positive reply to your previous comment. How does your comment possibly not violate forum rules? More importantly how does it not violate your own faith? Now I am really confused!

Link to comment
10 hours ago, Mike Drop said:

Here’s the problem for me. I was born in the 70s and for almost a half century now I haven’t seen an actual prophet do any prophety stuff. We read about mighty miracles in the scriptures all the time. Joseph saw extraterrestrial beings, numerous extraterrestrials visited him up to 28 times. Not only did he restore the gospel of Christ, he restored the priesthood, the system that is going to govern this earth for 1000 years upon his return. 
 

You said “being wrong is a human condition that we are all guilty of time to time”, you’re are correct, 100%. But I was raised to believe these men are in direct contact with God. And it hurts my heart to see my religion 20 years behind the rest of the world on almost every single major decision. I’m yearning for leadership! When will the rest of the world look at our church and say, yep!! The Mormons are on the right track?

The Church is way ahead of the rest of the world: the policy change on the priesthood ban has been a blessing for Black members around the world, an institutional fixture for 44 years. The same cannot be said for social policy changes for Black people in the USA (for example). There is still a good deal of upheaval concerning their experience socially, economically, health disparity, etc. The Church did a much better job, as an institution, implementing and maintaining the change. That is hard for the world to accept, so critics look to the past. 

This does not excuse individual Church members or leaders for things such as those for which Brother Wilcox apologized.

Institutions by nature are conservative in that they generally maintain those things that work for them. They are successful, but take a long time to get things done, which helps entrench good things for the long term (look how long it takes to build Zion). The US government took 177 years and a war to get to the point of passing the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (and people are still unhappy about these issues); the Church took only 148 years to lift the ban -- and only 14 years from the Civil Rights Act --  and members of all races are happy with the blessings of the priesthood. So yes, we are, relatively speaking, right on track and ahead of society, and more successful in implementing change, in the ecclesiastical arena in which we operate, on this issue of equal rights for Blacks.

 

 

Edited by CV75
Link to comment
7 minutes ago, Navidad said:

I see you are one in accord with Brad Wilcox! I have no idea what would lead you to say such a hateful thing! I cannot believe such a statement is the teaching of your church. So Protestants are "deterministic robot dummies for God as a ventriloquist!" May I quote you? I am sure that will go a long way toward positive inter-faith relationships! Congratulations! You have just outdone yourself and Brad Wilcox! I just spent an hour trying to craft a positive reply to your previous comment. How does your comment possibly not violate forum rules? More importantly how does it not violate your own faith? Now I am really confused!

I agree with you. That type of rhetoric has no place on this forum or in our faith. Please be that not all members of the LDS church believe this way. 

Link to comment
14 hours ago, Freedom said:

repeating a lie and being a liar is not the same thing.

I am not the one who said they were liars.

 

14 hours ago, Freedom said:

 

 

God lets his people go into the wilderness. He is not a micromanager.

DOes God do this?  How do you know this?  There was a time that the LDS Church taught that having prophets meant something and that as President Benson would say, they get today's news today.  Well the Church still teaches this but the apologists down play it because its problematic.

 

14 hours ago, Freedom said:

 

 

He works through a still small voice and not a loud speaker. If you are not listening, he does not speak. He does not open your heart, you must open it yourself. There is a very good podcast you might find interesting:https://faithmatters.org/making-sense-of-the-churchs-history-on-race/

too often people, including church leaders, try to fill in the gaps by providing a plausible explanation to justify a belief. The exclusion of blacks was wrong, and it took many years for us to finlay find out way out of this error. 

 

 

 

CFR that this is what the LDS leaders teach about themselves.

Link to comment
1 hour ago, BlueDreams said:

based on that assumption, my personal answers to your two questions are fairly simple. 1.) he couldn’t intervene, because the branches (ie. The people in the church at that time) had made it pretty obvious they weren’t ready for more…the work won’t move faster than the whole of us are willing and able to move 2) the tree (and trees) was changing to a point that further growth was possible and showing strong signs of moving forward. 

I think this position is problematic especially in light of polygamy.  God could not intervene on the alleged mistake of perpetuating a priesthood ban but he did allegedly, according to Joseph Smith ,intervene by sending an angel with a flaming sword that was going to kill Joseph if he did not institute plural marriage.  How ready for polygamy were the people of that day?  If god did this for many wives God could do it for the priesthood ban.

1 hour ago, BlueDreams said:

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
38 minutes ago, Teancum said:

I think this position is problematic especially in light of polygamy.  God could not intervene on the alleged mistake of perpetuating a priesthood ban but he did allegedly, according to Joseph Smith ,intervene by sending an angel with a flaming sword that was going to kill Joseph if he did not institute plural marriage.  How ready for polygamy were the people of that day?  If god did this for many wives God could do it for the priesthood ban.

 

The early stages in the development of an institution often involve revolution, discovery, innovation and the like. Joseph Smith's miraculous experiences with Deity and angels, etc. provided that spark. We build on the shoulders of our predecessors in slower, less dramatic ways but with greater depth, stability and permanence.  With millions of people having the gift of the Holy Ghost (instead of a handful), the restoration can roll on in a much more measured fashion.

Edited by CV75
Link to comment
3 hours ago, Navidad said:

You probably are right. But I would add this nuance. What role did the child play in asking God to heal? He or she simply asked God to heal via His (God's own power). That is not a power or an authority, it is a petition. If as a result God heals, it is not because of some special authority or power on the part of the petitioner, is it? Does God grant a petition of a male LDS priesthood holder in a special way that He would not to in the presence of a petition of a daughter of His, or His child from another faith?

To use your analogy any child can petition a parent for something. Is that not true?  A person's experience of God's healing as a result of a petition, or in the absence of any petition (grace) is wonderful, is it not? When I pray in Christ's name, I do so to indicate that if and when anything comes of that prayer it is solely and only by and through Him. In my humanity I may in an imperfect way mirror His love, grace, and mercy to a dying world. However I have no capacity to reflect His power as did an OT prophet for example.

If I think I am the one accomplishing any good in His name, then I may become like Elijah under the broom tree, depressed and forlorn when my supposed efforts didn't have the effect I thought they would or should. You (Mark) often bring greater understanding of the LDS faith to me. I appreciate that. If you truly believe that you are doing something unique and specifically different as an LDS priesthood holder, when you ask for healing . . . special or different from any other petitioner doing the same (your wife, daughter, sister, Methodist neighbor) then I understand better some of the exceptionalism I often see and hear in the mind of the LDS priesthood holder, as I did in listening to the talk of Brad Wilcox.

Having said that I must agree with you that I absolutely do not see that we will ever grow up to be as God is. Perhaps that inability to comprehend that fact is what separates us the most. It may be profound or it may be as simple as the difference between "like" and "as."

If I might offer you an analogy of my own. Friday morning at 4:30am my son and I took off for the four hour drive to the states to see the doctor, pick up his new glasses, buy groceries and get our mail. At around 7am we were five miles south of the border. A rather large coyote ran out into the highway and we struck him (her). The coyote died and the accident resulted in the destruction of the car bumper and radiator. Yes, we have big coyotes here. We found ourselves on the side of the road, shaken but without injury.  Fortunately we had cell phone service so I called my wife back at home. I explained what happened and our situation, asking our employees to borrow a trailer, bring it and the truck to us to load up the car and return home. We have one road that leads to the US and it is heavily traveled by big trucks! I prepared my son that we would be missing his appointment and glasses and would have a three hour wait in the car. He did well with that.

My wife unbeknownst to me got on our ward whatsapp list and asked if anyone was traveling to the states between Entronque and Palomas, she would greatly appreciate it if they would offer us any help they could. Within half an hour my cell phone began ringing with offers of help from our LDS friends, whether they were all the way back in Colonia Juarez or half an hour down the highway headed on their own trip to the states. As you all know we are not members - they call us "faithful non-Members -Our Mennonites!" We had a number of offers of help from them including men who were willing to drive the three hours each way to bring our car back.

None of them knew that we had an accident and were in trouble. That would have been acting "as" God. They had no special foresight into our situation - now that would have been prophetic-like power! Having said that, when they found out we were in trouble, they jumped to action with no regard to their own schedule to help us. That was being "like" God. They reflected His love to us, even some who aren't particularly thrilled we are in the ward! I explained to them that our workers were bringing a truck and trailer and that we were safe and fine waiting for them to come get us.

I would be remiss if I didn't also mention that two complete strangers also stopped to help us, offering a "Mexican chain" tow into Palomas where they knew of a radiator repair shop. Another gave us water to drink and some snacks. We accepted the offer of the chain tow (if you know what that is) and the snacks, and found ourselves in half an hour in Palomas where there were restrooms and places to get something to eat, etc. I will probably never see the man who gave us the tow again. He also reflected Christ to us (I have no idea what if any faith he had) and refused all offers of money for his help. He wished us God's blessings and went on his way. As only can happen in a small Mexican town, people driving by us in the town began yelling at us "Aqui esta el mata coyote!" Here is the coyote killer! It was all in good humor. We were famous!

By mid-afternoon we were back home. Many people that day reflected kindness and love to us. Some were LDS, others probably Catholic or Pentecostal, my wife who has a "special" love for us, and my faithful workers who performed above and beyond! Our LDS friends were wonderful examples of God's love; not of His power. Both the ladies and men offered  to help. We are grateful for all those who offered or helped, and understand those who hurried along on their own life's journey that morning. God's love and His power (authority) are not the same. We saw lots of the former Friday morning and were grateful. In that sense all those who took time out of their busy day to offer us help were exceptional, weren't they? Thanks for reading this epistle.

I love this epistle, brought tears of joy! Love the people that are either in their minds God's hands, or just folks that want to help on top of that. Just because.....

Link to comment
6 hours ago, Navidad said:

I think I must not have expressed myself well. My view is the exact opposite of what you are saying. I am not correlating the Fundamentalists of the 1950s with any of the fruits of the Spirit that you mention. Quite the opposite.

Then I have no idea what all this means:
 

Quote

What I can't figure out is that virtually every LDS Priesthood holder who talks about it needs to remind the listeners that it is the only authorized priesthood in the world. That need to remind everyone is the very opposite of the qualities noted in the passage you quoted. To me, it indicates a certain hubris and pride. Those are not characteristics of people who I want holding power! They remind me too much of 1950's Fundamentalist pastors and leaders, as does Brad Wilcox to bring this back to the subject. Those who truly are comfortable in their power don't need to talk about it with such obvious pride! I think it is not that I misunderstand the concept; I dislike its manifestation.

Edited by Bernard Gui
Link to comment
1 hour ago, Teancum said:

I think this position is problematic especially in light of polygamy.  God could not intervene on the alleged mistake of perpetuating a priesthood ban but he did allegedly, according to Joseph Smith ,intervene by sending an angel with a flaming sword that was going to kill Joseph if he did not institute plural marriage.  How ready for polygamy were the people of that day?  If god did this for many wives God could do it for the priesthood ban.

 

Actually, JS never claimed that. It comes from second hand stories. Just to be accurate. 

Link to comment
1 hour ago, CV75 said:

The early stages in the development of an institution often involve revolution, discovery, innovation and the like. Joseph Smith's miraculous experiences with Deity and angels, etc. provided that spark. We build on the shoulders of our predecessors in slower, less dramatic ways but with greater depth, stability and permanence.  With millions of people having the gift of the Holy Ghost (instead of a handful), the restoration can roll on in a much more measured fashion.

I am not sure how this addresses at all my point.

Link to comment
6 minutes ago, Teancum said:

Ok.  Quite a few second hand statements.  Do you doubt those who said it?

https://www.fairlatterdaysaints.org/answers/Question:_Did_Joseph_claim_that_an_angel_threatened_him_with_a_"drawn_sword"_or_"flaming_sword"_if_a_woman_refused_to_marry_him%3F
 

Quote

The "angel with a sword" reference refers to Joseph's postponement of the practice of polygamy. Brian Hales notes that,

"Twenty-one accounts by nine polygamy insiders left recollections that the Prophet told of one specific reason: an angel with a sword who threatened him if he did not proceed. All nine witnesses could have heard the statement from the Prophet himself; however, the narratives themselves suggest that Benjamin F. Johnson and Eliza R. Snow may have been repeating information gathered from other people. Joseph Lee Robinson's narrative is difficult to date and his actual source is not clear. Lorenzo Snow, Erastus Snow, and Mary Elizabeth Rollins Lightner quote the Prophet directly and Mary Elizabeth provides details not available elsewhere. Unfortunately, with the possible exception of the Robinson account, all of the reminiscences date to at least twenty to thirty years after the event." [2]

Quote

Here are the quotes attributed to Zina on the matter:

1881: Zina Huntington—Zina D. Young told of Bro. Joseph's remark in relation to the revelation on celestial marriage. How an angel came to him with a drawn sword, and said if he did not obey this law he would lost his priesthood; and in the keeping of it he, Joseph, did not know but it would cost him his life. [3] 

1894: Zina Huntington—[Joseph] sent word to me by my brother, saying, 'Tell Zina I put it off and put it off till an angel with a drawn sword stood by me and told me if I did not establish that principle upon the earth, I would lost my position and my life.'" [4]

For a complete listing:

https://ensignpeakfoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/Encouraging-Joseph-Smith-to-Practice-Plural-Marriage-The-Accounts-of-the-Angel-with-a-Drawn-Sword.pdf

Edited by Calm
Link to comment
9 minutes ago, Teancum said:

I am not sure how this addresses at all my point.

That may be because you forgot your point that God dramatically intervenes in earlier events of Restoration (when they are not ready for change) and not later (when they are no more ready for change).

Link to comment
7 minutes ago, CV75 said:

That may be because you forgot your point that God dramatically intervenes in earlier events of Restoration (when they are not ready for change) and not later (when they are no more ready for change).

It still  does not address the point.  Also who supports your premise?  Do the LDS leaders?  If the ban was a mistake God did not correct it because it was 25,30,75 or 100 years after the restoration and there was no need for miraculous interventions?  This seems like a pretty weak argument.

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

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