spamlds

A lot of the misconceptions and misunderstandings about the Church come from people confusing us with other sects.  When I was getting ready to join the Church, my mom said, "If you think we'd let you die instead of letting you have a blood transfusion, you have another thing coming!"  "No Mom," I replied, "That's the Jehovah's Witnesses."  Then she though I wouldn't celebrate Christmas anymore--again, that was the Jehovah's Witnesses.  She didn't know the difference.
 
My best friend thought I'd give up on using technology and go around wearing black.  I had to explain that the Amish aren't Mormons.  (They're actually Anabaptists.)
 
Some other crazy things included:
 
"Mormons will come into your house and just eat anything they want from your refrigerator!"  (Must have known some missionaries, lol!)
 
"A Mormon woman has to sleep with any man who asks her."  (My wife heard that one from her mother before she joined the Church.)
 
"On their wedding night, the Mormons sew the newly married couple into a big sack for their 'honeymoon.'"  (Seriously).
 
When I was running the S.P.A.M. web site, I used to get statistics that included search terms that brought people to the site.  One recurring question was, "Can Mormons swim?"  Somewhere people think that Mormons aren't allowed to swim.  (Maybe because mission insurance doesn't allow missionaries to swim, do martial arts, ride a motorcycle, etc.)

A lot of the misconceptions and misunderstandings about the Church come from people confusing us with other sects.  When I was getting ready to join the Church, my mom said, "If you think we'd let you die instead of letting you have a blood transfusion, you have another thing coming!"  "No Mom," I replied, "That's the Jehovah's Witnesses."  Then she though I wouldn't celebrate Christmas anymore--again, that was the Jehovah's Witnesses.  She didn't know the difference.
 
My best friend thought I'd give up on using technology and go around wearing black.  I had to explain that the Amish aren't Mormons.  (They're actually Anabaptists.)
 
Some other crazy things included:
 
"Mormons will come into your house and just eat anything they want from your refrigerator!"  (Must have known some missionaries, lol!)
 
"A Mormon woman has to sleep with any man who asks her."  (My wife heard that one from her mother before she joined the Church.)
 
"On their wedding night, the Mormons sew the newly married couple into a big sack for their 'honeymoon.'"  (Seriously).
 
When I was running the S.P.A.M. web site, I used to get statistics that included search terms that brought people to the site.  One recurring question was, "Can Mormons swim?"  Somewhere people think that Mormons aren't allowed to swim.  (Maybe because mission insurance doesn't allow missionaries to swim, do martial arts, ride a motorcycle, etc.)

The mods here are like shepherds who do a good job protecting the flock.  I appreciate their vigilance.

The mods here are like shepherds who do a good job protecting the flock.  I appreciate their vigilance.

A lot of the misconceptions and misunderstandings about the Church come from people confusing us with other sects.  When I was getting ready to join the Church, my mom said, "If you think we'd let you die instead of letting you have a blood transfusion, you have another thing coming!"  "No Mom," I replied, "That's the Jehovah's Witnesses."  Then she though I wouldn't celebrate Christmas anymore--again, that was the Jehovah's Witnesses.  She didn't know the difference.
 
My best friend thought I'd give up on using technology and go around wearing black.  I had to explain that the Amish aren't Mormons.  (They're actually Anabaptists.)
 
Some other crazy things included:
 
"Mormons will come into your house and just eat anything they want from your refrigerator!"  (Must have known some missionaries, lol!)
 
"A Mormon woman has to sleep with any man who asks her."  (My wife heard that one from her mother before she joined the Church.)
 
"On their wedding night, the Mormons sew the newly married couple into a big sack for their 'honeymoon.'"  (Seriously).
 
When I was running the S.P.A.M. web site, I used to get statistics that included search terms that brought people to the site.  One recurring question was, "Can Mormons swim?"  Somewhere people think that Mormons aren't allowed to swim.  (Maybe because mission insurance doesn't allow missionaries to swim, do martial arts, ride a motorcycle, etc.)

The mods here are like shepherds who do a good job protecting the flock.  I appreciate their vigilance.

A lot of the misconceptions and misunderstandings about the Church come from people confusing us with other sects.  When I was getting ready to join the Church, my mom said, "If you think we'd let you die instead of letting you have a blood transfusion, you have another thing coming!"  "No Mom," I replied, "That's the Jehovah's Witnesses."  Then she though I wouldn't celebrate Christmas anymore--again, that was the Jehovah's Witnesses.  She didn't know the difference.
 
My best friend thought I'd give up on using technology and go around wearing black.  I had to explain that the Amish aren't Mormons.  (They're actually Anabaptists.)
 
Some other crazy things included:
 
"Mormons will come into your house and just eat anything they want from your refrigerator!"  (Must have known some missionaries, lol!)
 
"A Mormon woman has to sleep with any man who asks her."  (My wife heard that one from her mother before she joined the Church.)
 
"On their wedding night, the Mormons sew the newly married couple into a big sack for their 'honeymoon.'"  (Seriously).
 
When I was running the S.P.A.M. web site, I used to get statistics that included search terms that brought people to the site.  One recurring question was, "Can Mormons swim?"  Somewhere people think that Mormons aren't allowed to swim.  (Maybe because mission insurance doesn't allow missionaries to swim, do martial arts, ride a motorcycle, etc.)

I'm not making any accusations here, because the tone on the replies has bee good so far.  However, I want to issue a caution to the original poster and the respondants. 
 
For several years, I operated a site called the Society for the Prevention of Anti-Mormonism (S.P.A.M.) The site was not an apologetics site in the usual sense.  What we did was study anti-Mormon tactics and their methodology.  The answers to almost every gospel question, like the ones Byron posted are readily available on any number of good LDS sites.  The best site on the planet to get answers to these questions is the Church's main portal, LDS.org.
 
The posting of several topics at once like this is very similar to what we called a "shotgun attack" on the S.P.A.M. web site.  You see these all over the Internet.  There are articles like "50 Questions for Mormons" or "20 Questions Every Mormon Must Answer," etc.  It is very often the case that anti-Mormons will join a discussion forum like this and then try to dominate all the discussions asking questions that either conflict with sectarian doctrines or address esoteric doctrines not essential to salvation.  They will toss out questions, either in a list, or in rapid-fire succession so that it is unlikely that a coherent presentation can be presented.
 
The questions like, "Do Mormons believe Jesus and Satan are brothers?" or "Do Mormons believe they can become gods?" or "Does God live on planet Kolob?" fall into these two categories.  
 
I'm not saying that Byron is anti-Mormon and I'm not judging his motives. I'm just cautioning that this is a tactic that is taught to evangelical Protestants in "anti-cult" seminars hosted by their churches.  It is just exactly that: a tactic.  When they apply the tactic, it is often without sincere intent, or with the sincere intent to instill doubt and contention among faithful Mormons.  In particular, they hope the questions themselves will cause doubt to germinate in the heart of weaker LDS members.  
 
The "shotgun attack" used by anti-Mormons is one technique that Mormons should be aware of and able to identify.  Over the course of several years, we analyzed hundreds of anti-Mormon articles, books, videos, and websites and determined that anti-Mormon attacks fall into one of six tactics. I'll list them here just for information.
 
1. Use of non-authoritative sources and out-of-context quotations
2. Attack the story of the Book of Mormon's origin, not its contents
3. Distort Mormon doctrines by comparing them to the unscriptural teachings of Christian creeds
4. When all else fails, lie!
5. Use slander, personal attacks, and character assassination
6. Accuse your opponent of doing the very thing you are doing
 
Again, I'm not saying Byron is an anti-Mormon, but when I saw several topics posted by a new forum member, whose profile says "Christian," my "Spidey-senses" went active.  This has all the hallmarks of a "shotgun attack."  Hopefully, the OP will participate in respectful discussion by sincerely considering responses with an open mind.  In the end, our position is to seek truth from God, through the Holy Spirit to know the truth of anything.  

You are being way to literal.  The temples are about symbolism.  The meaning of the symbolism is sacred and should not be discussed on this forum.

https://www.lds.org/liahona/2015/10/joseph-the-seer?cid=HP_TU_10-27-2015_dPFD_fLHNA_xLIDyL2-4_〈=eng
 
This article goes into great depth on the seer stone, the urim-and-thummin, and how the Book of Mormon was brought forth.  Good read.

It has been interesting reading the various comments here.  I made a lengthy comment earlier and, since then, some chapters in Alma I read in my daily scripture study came to mind.  
 
I just started the "war chapters" of Alma, which I think have great bearing on our time.  The thing that impresses me most is that the wars came upon the Nephites because the Church fell  into pride and dissenters began to cause trouble.  That impacted the whole of the Nephite community because the vehicle for message of salvation got distracted from its core missions.
 
After Alma put the Church into Helaman's hands, Helaman and the high priests of the Church saw the need for a regulation of the Church.  By "regulation" here, the scripture means corrective attention from its leaders.  I attended a conference convened for the benefit of stake presidents, bishops, and branch presidents in the the state of Virginia.  Elder Nelson presided and one of the Seventy (I don't recall his name and my notes from the meeting are packed away from recent move) who was on the Scripture Committee of the Church.  They described this meeting as a a "regulation" meeting.  They spoke of "establishing" the Church as described in Alma, meaning that these kinds of meetings were to ensure that the Church in an area is founded or established on sound doctrine.  The teachings in that meeting were gentle, instructive, and corrective in some areas.  This is the kind of meeting Helaman and his brethren held among the Nephites.  In Alma 45:21 it says:
 
For behold, because of their wars with the Lamanites and the many little dissensions and disturbances which had been among the people, it became expedient that the word of God should be declared among them, yea, and that a regulation should be made throughout the church.
 
Note that the corrective action was to deal with "little dissensions and disturbances."  That's the kind of stuff that arises on forums like LDS Freedom Forum or A Voice of Warning.  Julie Rowe's teachings cause disturbances that cause problems in the Church.  Many well-meaning people get drawn away by these false oracles.  When the General Authorities issue the correction (or when it comes through stake presidents or their bishops), some of these people will become "dissenters."  They become critical of the Church for not being "awake" to the dangers that their chosen oracle is proclaiming.
 
In Helaman, the next verses tell us:
 
23 And now it came to pass that after Helaman and his brethren had appointed priests and teachers over the churches that there arose a dissension among them, and they would not give heed to the words of Helaman and his brethren;
 
24 But they grew proud, being lifted up in their hearts, because of their exceedingly great riches; therefore they grew rich in their own eyes, and would not give heed to their words, to walk uprightly before God.
 
Invariably, the dissenters start with criticizing leaders, then they object to paying tithing, complaining how the Church allocates its funds.  Then they cause contention in their quorums or in their Church classes.  Some of them go inactive, but they haunt Internet forums stirring up dissent. Others leave the Church and follow cult-like offshoots, like Bishop Koyle's "Relief Mine" group.  A few will apostatize completely and go to other churches where, like Amalickiah, they go to "stir up the Lamanites" to anger against their former brethren, and seek to persecute the Church.  
 
Once the poison of these false oracles get into an Internet forum, the greatest mistake is to debate the doctrinal points or the accuracy of the supposed prophecy.  That's what causes dissent.  The dissent is the symptom of the poison.  It gives Satan his opening to divide and conquer.  The people who want to follow the true oracles become the constant targets of the dissenters' harping and they eventually will leave the forum.  
 
That just leaves the dissenters to argue among themselves until the Church itself loses credibility in the eyes of other visitors.  Just go to one of these "prophecy" discussions on these other web sites and you'll see predictions that the collapse of society or the "call-out" to the "tent cities" was imminent in 2010 and again in 2012 and again this year with the Shemitah and the blood moon eclipses.  It doesn't take much to see that their track record of accuracy is pitiful.
 
I'm not saying that those things aren't going to happen, but they're not going to happen without the Lord giving the real prophets of our dispensation the warnings we need.  The nature of the warnings we receive are clear and unambiguous.  If we heed them, we'll be ready.  If we don't we won't. 
 
As interesting as these things can be, the prophecies of Bishop Koyle, the dreams of Julie Rowe, Hopi prophecies, or the vision of Catholic St. Malacky are not the oracles the Lord has appointed.  If we trust in them more than we trust in the legitmate oracles, we will be deceived and lead ourselves and others astray.

I had the gift of tongues come upon me in France as a missionary on a couple of occasions.  One off them, was when I was having a conversation with a professor of theology who taught at a university near Toulouse.  For over an hour, I answered his theological and doctrnal questions at a very high level.  At the end of our meeting, he asked me how long I had been in France.  I answered that I had only been there for two months.  He was amazed.  He asked how much French experience I had had before coming to France and I said that I had two years of high school French and eight weeks at the MTC.  He was astounded and remarked, "I wonder if I've just seen a manifestation of the gift of tongues?"  I testified that it was so.
 
When under the influence of this gift, I did not feel any different than usual.  My ability to express the thoughts in my mind simply flowed naturally, but only in hindsight, was it remarkable.  Two days later, my bicycle broke and and I struggled to communicate with the bike shop mechanic trying to explain that the bearings in the crank of my pedals were shot.  No gift of tongues was given and I was left to struggle with the language according to my own faculties.  

I had the gift of tongues come upon me in France as a missionary on a couple of occasions.  One off them, was when I was having a conversation with a professor of theology who taught at a university near Toulouse.  For over an hour, I answered his theological and doctrnal questions at a very high level.  At the end of our meeting, he asked me how long I had been in France.  I answered that I had only been there for two months.  He was amazed.  He asked how much French experience I had had before coming to France and I said that I had two years of high school French and eight weeks at the MTC.  He was astounded and remarked, "I wonder if I've just seen a manifestation of the gift of tongues?"  I testified that it was so.
 
When under the influence of this gift, I did not feel any different than usual.  My ability to express the thoughts in my mind simply flowed naturally, but only in hindsight, was it remarkable.  Two days later, my bicycle broke and and I struggled to communicate with the bike shop mechanic trying to explain that the bearings in the crank of my pedals were shot.  No gift of tongues was given and I was left to struggle with the language according to my own faculties.  

I really feel strongly about the topic of these false oracles that are distracting members of the Church from the true ones.  In the Doctrine and Covenants, we have an example that the Lord used for instruction and correction.
 
In Kirtland, Ohio, there was a wave of successful missionary work that added hundreds of members to the Church in a place far from the first home of the Church in New York.  The members were excited and filled with zeal.  That zeal led them to many errors.  Satan led new members astray with false revelations.  The members meant well.  They were so excited that God had restored prophecy and revelation to the earth that they got carried away.  People did all kinds of unseemly things in the name of "having the Spirit."  One man, for example, followed a glowing orb that he saw in a vision and it led him to jump off a bluff in pursuit of it.  He might have been seriously injured, but he landed in a tree.  The manifestations were similar to those swooning, fainting, trances that were common among spiritualists of the time.
 
The Prophet arrived in Kirtland and found there was much to correct.  He had to teach these new members that there was an order and economy in the house of God.  The Lord is not disorderly in the way he gives revelation.  Revelations come according to one's stewardship.  Also, the "spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets" (1 Corinthians 14:32).  What a living prophet receives will dovetail with that of previous prophets.  
 
In Kirtland, Joseph had to take aside Brother Hiram Page, who was receiving revelations for the whole Church via his own personal "seer stone."  The instructions the Lord gave Joseph are in Section 28 of the D&C.
 
 11 And again, thou shalt take thy brother, Hiram Page,between him and thee alone, and tell him that those things which he hath written from that stone are not of me and that Satan deceiveth him;
 12 For, behold, these things have not been appointed unto him, neither shall anything be appointed unto any of this church contrary to the church covenants.  (D&C 28)
 
When I taught Seminary about 20 years ago, I learned that the contents of Hiram Page's revelations had to do with the location of the future Zion in Missouri.  In other words, Satan was trying to disrupt the plan of the Gathering by introducing some truths out of sequence, before the Lord had given them to the Church through Joseph.  Joseph had to correct Brother Page and had him destroy the stone to remove the temptation to resort to it again. 
 
Today we have all kinds of people repeating so-called revelations from Julie Rowe, Bishop Koyle, Denver Snuffer, and others--some of whom profit from their "revelations."  Members are unwilling to wait for the Lord to speak through the called and sustained prophets.  Even though some of the things these people say may seem true, the Lord is not speaking to the Church through them.  They will lead whoever follows them astray.  I want to say that with as much emphasis as I can.  These are modern-day Hiram Pages who are not called by the Lord to reveal these things, even if there were truth to their "visions."
 
In the Book of Mormon, Lehi's son Jacob explains why the Jews in Jerusalem were smitten and scattered, even though they had living prophets among them.  He wrote:
 
"....Wherefore, because of their blindness, which blindness came by looking beyond the mark, they must needs fall; for God hath taken away his plainness from them, and delivered unto them many things which they cannot understand, because they desired it" (Jacob 4:14). 
 
If any saints hunger for the "more sure word of prophecy," there are ample writings from true, called, ordained, and sustained Church leaders all the way back to Joseph Smith.  John Taylor, Wilford Woodruff, Brigham Young, Orson Pratt, George Albert Smith, and others prophesied exactly how America will meet its demise.  Those hungry for descriptions of plagues, earthquakes, fires, floods, and war will find it from the words of these true oracles without having to resort to today's pretenders.  All of these men held the appropriate priesthood keys and offices to give the revelations they left for us.  
 
Consider for example, Orson Pratt.  Pratt was specifically commanded by the Lord in D&C 38 to "...lift up your voice and spare not, for the Lord God hath spoken; therefore prophesy, and it shall be given by the power of the Holy Ghost.." (D&C 38:10).
 
Pratt was called by the Lord to prophesy.  He has his critics because was strong-minded and stubborn at times.  He published a speculative work on "The Great First Cause" that went beyond revelation into his speculations and it was declared non-doctrinal by the First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve.  Pratt repented and returned in time.  Aside from that, no one in authority every criticized his prophecies.  Likewise, Wilford Woodruff and John Taylor gave remarkable prophecies and we know where their authority came from and how they got it.  
People have a tendency to say, "Oh, Orson Pratt was excommunicated, so we shouldn't listen to him." Then these same people will turn around and follow a Bishop Koyle or a Denver Snuffer, who were excommunicated and never repented or returned to the fold.  There is plenty of true revelation from reliable sources upon which we can focus our studies.  
 
My point is that the Church has a rich body prophetic and apocalyptic utterances from true oracles who were called by God for that purpose.  I value all of these teachings and I have done my utmost to study them and understand them.  I stay grounded in the scriptures and bless God that he has given us these additional words of knowledge to help us and motivate us.  Most of all, I'm thankful for living prophets who we can trust to lead the way and tell us what needs to be done at the time the Lord sees fit to provide those instructions.

I think the General Authorities are always old, and have been for most of the Church's history. And I think I won't listen to an excommunicated member to find revealed truth.

I'm surprised that no one has chimed in with Joseph Smith's explanations from Lectures on Faith.  Here is a snippet:
 
9 From this we learn, that faith is the assurance which men have of the existence of things which they have not seen; and the principle of action in all intelligent beings.
10 If men were duly to consider themselves, and turn their thoughts and reflections to the operations of their own minds, they would readily discover that it is faith, and faith only, which is the moving cause of all action, in them; that without it, both mind and body would be in a state of inactivity, and all their exertions would cease, both physical and mental.
 
Everyone exercises faith in something every day.  We set the alarm clock at night expecting that it will wake us in the morning.  We flip on the light switch when we get out of bed with the assurance that (so long as we have paid the electric bill and that there isn't a disruption of service) the light will come on.  We turn the key in the ignition in the car with the assurance that, barring mechanical problems, it will start.
 
Anyone who enrolls in college has the assurance that, if he meets the conditions for success, he will pass the classes and earn a degree.  Anyone who goes on a diet and successfully loses weight exercised faith.  A farmer plants a crop and expects that it will grow.
 
All of these things are actions based on faith.  Faith is a choice we make.  Everyone has faith in something.  Atheists have faith in science.  I read an article a couple of years ago from a NASA scientist who is sure (has faith) that we will contact extraterrestrials in the next 20 years.
 
That last one is really significant, because these scientist lobby Congress for billions of dollars every year in the hope (faith) that they will find extraterrestrial life if they have the right tools and look in the right places.  How is that different from a person who seeks God?  If he looks in the right way, ine right frame of mind, with real intent, he'll succeed.  Discouragement and trials may buffet him, but eventually he'll succeed.  The faith is manifest in the actions he takes to achieve it.
 
Faith appears when action is taken, whereas belief is only passive.  A person might think there are aliens out in the universe, but it takes great faith to ask a government to fork over billions of dollars worth of the citizens' labor to find them.  
 
In that light, faith can be misguided.  We can have faith and act in error.  We can place faith in something that is erroneous or false, but the fruits that result will not be correct.  Faith manifested in something that is true brings forth good fruit, positive results, and increased understanding--leading to greater faith to act.  

I'm surprised that no one has chimed in with Joseph Smith's explanations from Lectures on Faith.  Here is a snippet:
 
9 From this we learn, that faith is the assurance which men have of the existence of things which they have not seen; and the principle of action in all intelligent beings.
10 If men were duly to consider themselves, and turn their thoughts and reflections to the operations of their own minds, they would readily discover that it is faith, and faith only, which is the moving cause of all action, in them; that without it, both mind and body would be in a state of inactivity, and all their exertions would cease, both physical and mental.
 
Everyone exercises faith in something every day.  We set the alarm clock at night expecting that it will wake us in the morning.  We flip on the light switch when we get out of bed with the assurance that (so long as we have paid the electric bill and that there isn't a disruption of service) the light will come on.  We turn the key in the ignition in the car with the assurance that, barring mechanical problems, it will start.
 
Anyone who enrolls in college has the assurance that, if he meets the conditions for success, he will pass the classes and earn a degree.  Anyone who goes on a diet and successfully loses weight exercised faith.  A farmer plants a crop and expects that it will grow.
 
All of these things are actions based on faith.  Faith is a choice we make.  Everyone has faith in something.  Atheists have faith in science.  I read an article a couple of years ago from a NASA scientist who is sure (has faith) that we will contact extraterrestrials in the next 20 years.
 
That last one is really significant, because these scientist lobby Congress for billions of dollars every year in the hope (faith) that they will find extraterrestrial life if they have the right tools and look in the right places.  How is that different from a person who seeks God?  If he looks in the right way, ine right frame of mind, with real intent, he'll succeed.  Discouragement and trials may buffet him, but eventually he'll succeed.  The faith is manifest in the actions he takes to achieve it.
 
Faith appears when action is taken, whereas belief is only passive.  A person might think there are aliens out in the universe, but it takes great faith to ask a government to fork over billions of dollars worth of the citizens' labor to find them.  
 
In that light, faith can be misguided.  We can have faith and act in error.  We can place faith in something that is erroneous or false, but the fruits that result will not be correct.  Faith manifested in something that is true brings forth good fruit, positive results, and increased understanding--leading to greater faith to act.  

The question involves some fallacious thinking.  It seems to suggest that the righteousness of the man in question was reflected by his serving in various Church callings.  It focuses on works and does not include grace in the least.  Many latter-day saints are mistaken in this kind of thinking.
 
The Book of Mormon clearly teaches that we are saved by grace.  
 
"And since man had fallen he could not merit anything of himself; but the sufferings and death of Christ atone for their sins, through faith and repentance, and so forth; and that he breaketh the bands of death, that the grave shall have no victory, and that the sting of death should be swallowed up in the hopes of glory; and Aaron did expound all these things unto the king" (Alma 22:14, italics added).
 
None of us deserve to be saved.  Nothing we do merits it.  Whether like the man in the "scenario" we lie or we don't, none of us do anything that can merit salvation.  We are saved by the atonement of Christ.  If we exercise faith and repentance, Christ is merciful and saves us despite our errors and mistakes.  Nobody will be error-free when we leave this life.  
 
We keep the commandments because we love God, not because we earn his love or forgiveness by doing so.  We practice living a celestial law on this earth so we may be able to enjoy the blessings of heaven here while we are in mortality.  We will be pleasantly surprised when we see who Father has forgiven because they called upon the name of his Son for mercy, despite the imperfection of their lives.  

Missionaries and bishops can probably tell you a little bit about discernment.  When I was on my mission, I was knocking on doors one day in a large French city.  We had a conversation with a guy who lived in a large walk-up apartment building.  He didn't let us in, but he kept talking to us through the door.  He kept challenging us with various questions about faith and why it isn't logical or scientific to believe. There was an edge of bitterness in his voice, but my companion didn't quite pick up on it.  All of a sudden, I knew (discerned) that this guy had been a former member of the Church.  
 
I asked him out of the blue, "So how long has it been since you left the Church?"  My companion's head snapped around in astonishment and the guy looked at me incredulous.  Sure enough, he admitted that he had been a member and had fallen away.  It had been many years since he had left the Church after having his faith damaged by some anti-Mormon literature.  I didn't "read" his mind, but I was given the "hunch" and I was bold enough to act on it.  
 
Personally, I think that Jesus operated like we do.  Although he was a member of the Godhead, he assumed mortality fully and he overcame the veil gradually.  His personal purity and obedience to his Father's commandments gave him access to unlimited spiritual gifts.  Those gifts came, like the do with us, as he had need of them. 

The question involves some fallacious thinking.  It seems to suggest that the righteousness of the man in question was reflected by his serving in various Church callings.  It focuses on works and does not include grace in the least.  Many latter-day saints are mistaken in this kind of thinking.
 
The Book of Mormon clearly teaches that we are saved by grace.  
 
"And since man had fallen he could not merit anything of himself; but the sufferings and death of Christ atone for their sins, through faith and repentance, and so forth; and that he breaketh the bands of death, that the grave shall have no victory, and that the sting of death should be swallowed up in the hopes of glory; and Aaron did expound all these things unto the king" (Alma 22:14, italics added).
 
None of us deserve to be saved.  Nothing we do merits it.  Whether like the man in the "scenario" we lie or we don't, none of us do anything that can merit salvation.  We are saved by the atonement of Christ.  If we exercise faith and repentance, Christ is merciful and saves us despite our errors and mistakes.  Nobody will be error-free when we leave this life.  
 
We keep the commandments because we love God, not because we earn his love or forgiveness by doing so.  We practice living a celestial law on this earth so we may be able to enjoy the blessings of heaven here while we are in mortality.  We will be pleasantly surprised when we see who Father has forgiven because they called upon the name of his Son for mercy, despite the imperfection of their lives.  

The question involves some fallacious thinking.  It seems to suggest that the righteousness of the man in question was reflected by his serving in various Church callings.  It focuses on works and does not include grace in the least.  Many latter-day saints are mistaken in this kind of thinking.
 
The Book of Mormon clearly teaches that we are saved by grace.  
 
"And since man had fallen he could not merit anything of himself; but the sufferings and death of Christ atone for their sins, through faith and repentance, and so forth; and that he breaketh the bands of death, that the grave shall have no victory, and that the sting of death should be swallowed up in the hopes of glory; and Aaron did expound all these things unto the king" (Alma 22:14, italics added).
 
None of us deserve to be saved.  Nothing we do merits it.  Whether like the man in the "scenario" we lie or we don't, none of us do anything that can merit salvation.  We are saved by the atonement of Christ.  If we exercise faith and repentance, Christ is merciful and saves us despite our errors and mistakes.  Nobody will be error-free when we leave this life.  
 
We keep the commandments because we love God, not because we earn his love or forgiveness by doing so.  We practice living a celestial law on this earth so we may be able to enjoy the blessings of heaven here while we are in mortality.  We will be pleasantly surprised when we see who Father has forgiven because they called upon the name of his Son for mercy, despite the imperfection of their lives.  

excerpt from talk The restoration of Israel by Marion G Romney:
 
 
I think these scripture fairly pointedly suggest that the gospel will be taught to the Jews and that they will accept it. Joseph F Smith writes about how the Jews had become much more open to Jesus during his time. He (Jesus) went from not being discussed, or held in ill repute to being considered a wonderful teacher. This is a step in the right direction and apparently preceded Israel being literally gathered as a Jewish state.

The Bible is full of examples on how God speaks to latter-day saints.  Communications can come in the form of "the voice of the Lord" or "the still, small voice."  It can be given in dreams and visions.  It can come in the form of angelic visitations.  It can come through the words of a prophet or the faiithful counsel of a friend.  It can come from reading the word of the Lord in the scriptures and having our hearts touched by it.  It can come by having the Lord speak with you "face to face" as he did with Moses.
 
Sharing the details of these personal experiences should be done as inspired by the Spirit so as not to cast the pearls of God's merciful manifestations to us before the "swine" who might ridicule them.

The question involves some fallacious thinking.  It seems to suggest that the righteousness of the man in question was reflected by his serving in various Church callings.  It focuses on works and does not include grace in the least.  Many latter-day saints are mistaken in this kind of thinking.
 
The Book of Mormon clearly teaches that we are saved by grace.  
 
"And since man had fallen he could not merit anything of himself; but the sufferings and death of Christ atone for their sins, through faith and repentance, and so forth; and that he breaketh the bands of death, that the grave shall have no victory, and that the sting of death should be swallowed up in the hopes of glory; and Aaron did expound all these things unto the king" (Alma 22:14, italics added).
 
None of us deserve to be saved.  Nothing we do merits it.  Whether like the man in the "scenario" we lie or we don't, none of us do anything that can merit salvation.  We are saved by the atonement of Christ.  If we exercise faith and repentance, Christ is merciful and saves us despite our errors and mistakes.  Nobody will be error-free when we leave this life.  
 
We keep the commandments because we love God, not because we earn his love or forgiveness by doing so.  We practice living a celestial law on this earth so we may be able to enjoy the blessings of heaven here while we are in mortality.  We will be pleasantly surprised when we see who Father has forgiven because they called upon the name of his Son for mercy, despite the imperfection of their lives.  

We have to look at the context of the situation Paul presents.  The gospel going to the Gentiles was a new thing.  The Jews who had accepted Jesus as their Messiah tended to hang on to their traditions, like circumcision.  They had a strong revulsion against anything having to do with idolatry.  The Gentiles didn't have this aversion as part of their culture.
 
The first controversy in the Church was over whether Gentile converts needed to be circumcised.  In the minds of some, Christianity was a revision or reformation of Judaism.  Thus there was an anticipation that the Gentiles needed to be circumcised and follow the other parts of the law of Moses.  The Church had to resolve it in a conference in Jerusalem.  The counsel that was given by the apostles to the Church is contained in Acts chapter 15.
 
28 For it seemed good to the Holy Ghost, and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things;
29 That ye abstain from meats offered to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication: from which if ye keep yourselves, ye shall do well. Fare ye well.
 
This was a struggle for many who were Jewish converts.  It was a culture change that was appalling to them because they had to let go of certain prejudices against Gentiles and their ways.  For example, a Jew would never eat the leftover food from a feast where that food had been offered to an idol.  Even if they didn't participate in the sacrifice and offering to an idol, they would not want to even be associated with it after the fact.  A Gentile wouldn't have that aversion.
 
Sometimes social situations would occur that tested the saints and even the apostles in this regard.  Being sensitive to Jewish opinion in Antioch, Peter avoided entering into the houses of Gentiles.  Perhaps he didn't want to stir up persecution or he may have been concerned for offending potential Jewish converts.  Paul took him to task for it.  Paul's devotion to "equality" was admirable, but the Church's leaders took a more conservative approach at the moment so as not to offend many.  (Hmmm, sound like the priesthood ban to anyone?)  
 
11 But when Peter was come to Antioch, I withstood him to the face, because he was to be blamed.
12 For before that certain came from James, he did eat with the Gentiles: but when they were come, he withdrew and separated himself, fearing them which were of the circumcision.
13 And the other Jews dissembled likewise with him; insomuch that Barnabas also was carried away with their dissimulation.
14 But when I saw that they walked not uprightly according to the truth of the gospel, I said unto Peter before them all, If thou, being a Jew, livest after the manner of Gentiles, and not as do the Jews, why compellest thou the Gentiles to live as do the Jews?
 
The "political correctness" involved here was downplaying the liberality of the gospel so as not to offend conservatives.  It can also work the other way.  Today we might be the minority, conservative opinion on issues like abortion or gay marriage and in some situations, it's better for us to not cause strife or contention, even while we don't yield on our values.  We have to make the judgment call whether or not we should be strident and offend or quiet and not offend.  Situations vary.  We have to use discretion.  There is a time when life demands that we take a stand and challenge others to make their decision for Christ and another time where we might quietly keep our standards and avoid forcing a decision on those who are not yet ready to be challenged in such a manner.
 
In all things, we keep the commandments.  The need for discretion occurs when and how we declare that other people need to keep them.