JojoBag

Point taken. It seems you have not read any writings from any of the earlier prophets and apostles. I have read several times from Pres. Benson, Lee, McKay, Grant, Elders Clark, Moyle, Smoot, Ivins, Wirthlin, Lyman, Andersen, Merrill, and Romney among others, that absolutely condemn socialism in no uncertain terms. Anyone who believes in socialism or accepts the fruits of socialism are deceived. It cannot be stated any plainer. What I think I'm seeing is mostly nitpicking while missing my whole point. All too many LDS are complacent; the "all is well in Zion" syndrome. If you look at the statistics on pornography, you will see that fully half of all evangelical Christian men and 25% of women have a problem with porn. I would say that LDS fall within this category. I read in the Deseret News that 1 in 3 referrals to LDS social services are for porn problems. I've talked with several bishops and stake presidents and without exception, every single one has agreed with those statistics. Take those stats and then add in the serious lack of home teaching. Almost every ward I've ever been in has had dismal home teaching. I heard our Stake YA rep say that fully 85% of young adults are less active. I'm not going simply by what Elder Andersen wrote in his books. I'm going by everything I have observed and the facts that I've gathered. Based on the totality of the evidence I have observed, and what you pointed out, I would say that the 18% figure I've come up with should be revised up another 10% or so.

One of the things I do is observe people. It comes from being a former cop. In observing them, I primarily listen to what they say and what I hear coming from church members concerns me. I hear them say that, "I can't be perfect, so God will understand when I make mistakes." That is true if those "mistakes" are not the product of slothfulness, laziness, ignorance, apathy, or lack of obtaining knowledge. The mistake must not be because you really aren't trying to do your best and then not correcting the mistake and making an honest effort to never make that same mistake again. What I see are LDS who are not strict in observing the law of God. I looked up the words, “strict, strictly, and strictness” in the scriptures. These words appear 21 times in the B of M, D&C and P of GP and all of them refer to strictness in commandments/law and observing them. When I hear church members talk about commandments, what I don't ever hear is that living them strictly is important. I do hear excuses and justifications for not living the law. I hear all about the “spirit of the law,” but it almost always is in context of justifying breaking the law. I think the number one reason for "mistakes" is a lack of knowledge. According to Joseph Smith, the very first attribute of Heavenly Father is knowledge. We work out our salvation through gaining knowledge. Knowledge is power and knowledge is salvation. However, as Elder Bednar said in his book, “Increase in Learning,” that there is a lot of useless knowledge. We need to concentrate on knowledge that will help us to return to our Heavenly Father. We need to gain knowledge regarding what is from God and what is deception by Satan. Elder Andersen said that the foolish virgins were those who were deceived by the craftiness of men. He also said that to keep from being deceived, you must gain a knowledge of how Satan operates. This is in line with what was taught by Joseph Smith, Brigham Young and James E. Faust to study evil and it's consequences. If you gain knowledge of what Satan is planning, what organizations is using and how he's implementing his plans, you will be aware of this and be able to spot his deceptions.

The answer is NO! No married man or woman has any business having friends of the opposite sex. It is a recipe for disaster. You can be friends with another married couple, but not friends with another man's wife.

Sorry. I wasn't clear. I'm referring to those waiting for marriage or going on a mission, or those who are converts that have not yet been members long enough to get their endowments. Teenagers and children who for whatever reason can't go because their bishop deems it too soon. Members such as these. I'm not including members who are not full tithe payers or for whatever reason, either personal laziness or transgression, or simply apathy do not and cannot qualify for a recommend.

No. He wrote "faithful." Here is the quote. You can decide for yourself. I cannot see that less-active members could possibly be among the "faithful" LDS. I would even go further in saying that the "faithful" should only include those who hold a temple recommend or qualify for one but for whatever reason, i.e. age, not married, etc., cannot hold one. I admit that is a pretty narrow interpretation, though. I also take into consideration Elder Heber C. Kimball's quote from the book, "Life Everlasting,: by Duane Crowther. Elder Kimball stated that he doubted that more than "one in twenty" LDS will enter the gates of the Celestial Kingdom. That's only 5%. I also take into consideration another study I read about in a 1976 conference talk in which a University of Utah study was quoted. That study stated that only 5% of LDS had a year supply of grain on hand. Less than 3% had vegetables and meat. I can easily believe the figure of 18% when all that is taken into consideration.

A young boy and his father were in an argument about the weather. His father., Rudolph, was a leader in the communist party, and was a very smart man. The mother looked fondly on as they argued. “Father, I do believe it will snow.” “No, son, it will rain.” “You're wrong, it will snow.” “No, son, it will rain.” This went for an hour until the mother stepped it. “Son, listen to your father. Rudolph the Red, knows rain deer.”

Read his books. His writing is unambiguous. You'll see that is exactly what he means.

Socialism/communism's published goals are to break up the family and require children to be educated in a public indoctrination system. Easy divorce is encouraged as part of this goal. It is and always has been God's plan for a woman with children to nurture and teach them. The home is the cradle of virtue and it is where a child's values are taught by the mother. If a woman pursues a career or works outside the home when it is not necessary, she has joined the Devil's church. I'm not talking about circumstances where there is absolutely no choice, but where through no fault of her own she must work. But, "no fault" is very deceptive. If you caused the reason through bad choices, or you want a bigger house, a new car, can't make due with what you do have, then you've got a problem.

I got the 36% activity rate from the a Pew poll. Elder Andersen said that the 5 foolish, 5 wise virgins applied to the "faithful" church members, not the Christian world as a whole. If you really want to nit pick, I would say that faithful members actually are those who have a temple recommend, or would qualify for a recommend if they were not permitted to attend the temple for whatever reason. That raises the percentage of those who join the church of the Devil. As for the "all or part" part, I would have to agree with Elder Andersen. We do need some limited government, but government handouts are simply wrong and against the doctrine of work. If anyone willingly accepts these handouts, they have joined the Devil's church. You are supporting yourself on the labor of another person when you do this. The government can only "help" the "poor" by taking money from someone who earned it. Additionally, if you support the idea of public welfare, you also have joined that church. The idea of public welfare is very much accepted by a large number of LDS. I'm not against all government, but I am against all the subsidies, pork barrel projects and outright waste the government uses to keep sheeple mentally medicated as to the reality of the world. The deception runs very deep and you can unknowingly be a member of the Devil's church because of that deception. It requires knowledge to not be deceived. The vast majority of LDS do nothing to gain knowledge.

I see that you are from Oz. I'm married to an Aussie and currently live in the Sydney area. One thing I've learned about the Australian Saints, and my wife agrees with me, is that they are much more deceived into accepting the fruits of socialism than their American cousins. This isn't an attack on you, just a statement of fact. However, to be fair, in my view, a majority of American Saints also accept it, also. According to Elder Andersen, the great and abominable church consists of socialism/communism, its supporters (knowing or unknowing), and its fruits. This takes in a very wide variety of groups. Like nearly every other government in the world (U.S. included), Australia is what I'd call a modified form of semi-socialism. Even the conservative Liberal Party is semi-socialist. When I put in a lot of overtime, the government takes 48% of my paycheck. Then there are all the shire council fees and GST (sales tax) on every single item including services, parking fees, traffic tickets, licensing fees, court fees and with your petrol (gasoline), taxes on your taxes, of 10% (with the government wanting 15%). The semi-socialism government (federal and state) of the U.S., can take up to 50% of your wages. In Oz and the U.S., the government then doles out some of the taxes, a large portion of them, to social programs and subsidies to the “less fortunate.” You get things like socialist medicine, child endowment, spousal allowance if she doesn't work, unemployment, welfare of many varying types, TAFE and other subsidized schools, and a myriad of other wasteful programs. To get the funding for this, the government takes your hard earned money and gives it to other people. This is wrong in the eyes of God. We have the doctrines and principles of self-sufficiency and work. Knowingly and willingly taking any form of government subsidy means you are taking money earned through the work of other people. Some people claim this is charity, but according to Elder Andersen, Pres. Benson and several other prophets and apostles, it is not charity. Anytime a government takes money through force, it is stealing no matter what the government calls it. And whenever force is used, it is Satan's plan, not God's plan. The Church will not come right out and say you are part of the Devil's church. You will and do get constant, ongoing warnings and are expected to research the writings of the apostles and prophets. Their writings are replete with statements that socialism and all its fruits are part of the Devil's church. Too many LDS think that they will learn all they need from attending church. NOT! If anyone is deceived into joining the Devil's church, it is their own fault, because there is no excuse for being deceived. We have the scriptures, the writings of modern prophets and apostles, and the statements of our current prophet to guide us. Most importantly we have the Holy Spirit to guide us. If we cannot see through Satan's deception because of whatever reason, it is entirely our problem. You are expected and required by God to gain knowledge for yourself, by yourself. In the late 50's and 60's, at the behest of Pres. David O. McKay, Elder Benson used to go around the U.S. giving speeches at various organizations, and especially at BYU against the acceptance of socialism/communism and its fruits. At one point, over fifty BYU professors signed a petition requesting the Pres. McKay step down as prophet emeritus because of his stance on socialism. Needless to say, there were over fifty vacancies at BYU. Elder Benson eventually said that his greatest enemies were from BYU. (You can read this in the book, “There Are Save Two Churches Only”) Take that along with Elder Andersen's statement that almost without exception, BYU students unknowingly accept all or part of the communist manifesto. Then add to that, Elder Heber C. Kimball once stated (I'll have to dig up the quote) that he doubted that more than 1 in 20 LDS would make it through the gates of the Celestial Kingdom. That's only 5%. Plain and simple, many LDS are simply deceived.

OK, this is really sad. I asked my wife to look at my avatar and I asked her what she thought. It looked like a pig to her at first. Time for a new avatar.

Good point

The account I got this from is a book written by Elder George Q. Cannon and published in 1908. I'm willing to take his word over a rumor or a story of a story told by a friend of a friend of a friend, whose sister heard it from her dad who.....

I just came across this quote: If a law is unjust a man is not only right to disobey it he is obligated to do so. Thomas Jefferson

Did you know: Joseph Smith was a wrestler and “jumper” of great strength and skill. He was able to walk under a bar set at six feet, “then take a step or two back and proceed to jump over it.” The Latter-day Prophet: Young People's History of Joseph Smith, Pg. 32 Did you know: When Brigham Young and Heber C. Kimball met Joseph Smith the very first time, the gift of tongues was given to Brigham, who spoke the Adamic language. This was prior to him being baptized. This was the first time Joseph had ever heard the gift of tongues and he understood everything Brigham had said. The Latter-day Prophet: Young People's History of Joseph Smith, Pg. 67 Did you know: In 1853, the Deseret News ran an editorial essentially telling the Saints how not to become possessed by evil spirits and what type of actions cause possession. Deseret News, To The Saints, Feb 21, 1853, Vol. 2, No. 8 Did you know: After the Prophet Joseph Smith was killed, one of his murderers approached his body with the intent of beheading it when a dazzling light came from heaven and protected Joseph's body. “The Missourians had offered a large reward for Joseph's head; and the ruffian who had set him against the well curb now approached with a glittering knife for the purpose of severing the head from the body. William M. Daniels who claims to have been an eye-witness to the proceedings says that as he was about to make the awful stroke a vivid light burst from the heavens upon the bloody scene. It passed between Joseph and his murderers, and they were struck with terror. 1 he knife fell from the powerless hand of the ruffian, and he stood transfixed. The muskets dropped from the arms of Williams' four executioners, and they had not the power to move a limb. Horrified, the mob scattered in all directions. Williams cried to them to come back and carry off the four men who still stood like marble statues, frozen with terror. They obeyed, and these men were lifted into the baggage wagons as inert as corpses.” The Life of Joseph Smith the Prophet, Pgs. 527-528

The only reason for the 2nd Amendment is self-defense. The first part of the self-defense is defense against a tyrannical government. The second is defense of your country from any and all aggressors. The third part is defense of self, family, and others against those who would harm you or steal your property. All of these are spiritual in nature and commanded by God.

No, it has everything to do with people within a religion whose avowed purpose is to maim, mutilate and kill anyone who disagrees with them, so you are right and wrong at the same time. It is and isn't about religion. Islam is a religion, but anarchy and terrorism are not. This isn't any better than if a "Christian" murdered someone who worked at a child murder clinic because he thought that God would approve. It has everything to do with keeping people out of the country who have a propensity to commit terroristic acts. I and other conservative prudential candidates do not call for the unilateral ban of all Muslims. WE call for a stricter vetting process that digs extensively into the "refugee's" background. If the potential refugee is a single male of military age, I would look very closely at his application. I would find out what mosque he attended and investigate it to determine if the mullah preached anything radical. I would attempt to find out if the refugee had military training. I would require access to email and social media accounts, bank accounts, friends and associates, family, etc., anything and everything that would give evidence for or against his refugee status. As for a religious test for refugees, there already is one in place by law. What Obama said about the U.S. not having a religious test is a bare faced lie, among all his many, many other bare faced lies. Under the provision governing asylum (section 1158 of Title 8, U.S. Code), an alien applying for admission "must establish that … religion [among other things] … was or will be at least one central reason for persecuting the applicant." Moreover, to qualify for asylum in the United States, the applicant must be a “refugee” as defined by federal law. That definition (set forth in Section 1101(a)(42)(A) of Title , U.S. Code) also requires the executive branch to take account of the alien’s religion: The term “refugee” means (A) any person who is outside any country of such person’s nationality … and who is unable or unwilling to return to … that country because of persecution or a well-founded fear of persecution on account of … religion [among other things] …[.]

I agree that gun ownership is not a spiritual principle, however, defending your family and your country is a spiritual principle. The Book of Mormon is replete with stories of the Nephites taking up arms in defense of their families, their country, and their freedoms. Captain Moroni put to death traitors and the kingmen who refused to take up arms in defense of their country. In Elder Andersen's book, he said that the Constitution might as well as have been written by God, Himself. He chose and foreordained the writers of the Constitution and worked with them to complete its composition. To me, that says it all.

Real intent is doing the right thing for the right reason.

There are some interesting unanswered questions regarding the San Bernardino terrorist attack. 1. Several witnesses reported a third shooter who was white, male and well built. One thing I learned as a cop is that eye witness accounts are not the most reliable. However, when several witnesses all report essentially the same thing, then I begin to give credibility to their account. These same witnesses have come back to the media insisting that there were in fact, three shooters. Why are they being dismissed? 2. The attack occurred at a newer government facility, but there is no video evidence. Where is it? The overwhelming majority of government buildings have surveillance video in place. Did the attackers just decide to attack a place where the government was lax in its security? Well, yeah, they did, but I mean the surveillance. How convenient if the video was corrupted or erased, or non-existent. 3. Why did the FBI open the terrorist's apartment, which was a crime scene, to the media 48 hours after the attack? I did investigations for two years as a cop and believe me, this is not the norm. It takes time to fully process a crime scene even for the FBI. You like to revisit the scene to see if you missed anything. I saw the video from the TV station that made entry and I didn't seen any finger print dust on the walls or any of the surfaces. I've used enough dust to know that it is messy and you never clean it up. There were shredded documents in a trash can that could have been reconstructed. Why weren't they seized as evidence? This was shoddy work; not the norm for the FBI. 4. Why is CAIR running interference for the family and several Muslim witnesses? Why is the FBI allowing CAIR to do this? Is the FBI bowing to political pressure from the Muslim-in-Chief? When something like this happens, my sensitive olfactory senses begins to smell something odiferous like a cover-up.

First off, "Islamophobic" is a concocted, pathetic liberal/communist PC term to label or stereotype anyone who disagrees with or speaks out against radical Islam, and by extension, the liberal/communist agenda. Secondly, there is nothing in the statement from the Church that says we should put up with radical Islamic terrorism. I do take from it the idea that we should tolerate peaceful Muslims and any other peaceful religion. When you have an American president (who has connections with the Muslim Brotherhood, a proscribed terrorist organization) who practically has an apoplectic fit at the thought of saying, "Islamic terrorism;" when you have a DOJ that has a number of Muslims who are members or supporters of CAIR, another unindicted Muslim terrorist support organization; when the FBI has stripped from its teaching syllabus any mention of Islamic terrorism and instead, targets Christians, patriots, veterans, supporters of the 2nd Amendment, "Constitutionalists," and any conservative group that opposes the liberal/communist agenda, then I think a bit of caution is in order when it comes to the vetting process of so-called Muslim refugees. What we have now is pathetic. The two CA terrorists slipped right through the pathetic process and killed over a dozen people. There are precedents for stopping immigration. All immigration was stopped in the 1920's because of communists terrorists. Anyone hear of the 1920 Wall Street bombing? After that, immigration was stopped in 1924 until 1965. During the Iran crisis, Jimmy Carter stopped the immigration of all Iranians. It has nothing to do with religion. It has everything to do with terrorism and people whose whole agenda is the destruction of this country.

Well, I don't know what OD means, but Nos. 2 and 3 really aren't worth considering because those two ideas are completely contrary to the revealed word of God. It goes back to the very foundation of existence, so it will never happen; it's a moot point. As for No. 4, I would say it is actually a possibility. There are some writings from early apostles and prophets that hint at the idea of armed resistance to government authority. I do know that Joseph Smith stated that the Constitution would hang by a thread and that it would be the Elders of the Church that would save it from destruction. While he didn't come out and say that saving it would be by force of arms, there are other prophecies that do say there will be armed conflict when a foreign power invades the country.

A couple thoughts. If you are receiving revelation, it is helpful to have some knowledge on the particular subject. When I say knowledge, become familiar with the writings of the apostles and prophets, past and present. Doing this will help you to determine if the "revelation" you are receiving is your own ideas, Satan's or genuinely from the Lord. Read the scriptures and compare what you have received to them and then research what you think you know with what has been written by apostles and prophets. Three years ago, I had to completely change much of what I thought was "true" because I found out I had been deceived by inherited lies and false traditions passed on from member to member. That was a pretty big shock to me and I'm still finding things I believe that need to become more in line with the revealed word. I strongly recommend you read an editorial from the Times and Seasons written by Joseph Smith called, "Try the Spirits." it is all about false spirits and how the LDS are deceived by them. http://emp.byui.edu/marrottr/TryTheSpirits.pdf

Well, according to DSH, you can always throw sticks and stones at some guy who is blazing away with an AK-47. You might get lucky and bend the front sight if you hit it hard enough.

In light of the 12th Article of Faith, where would the Church stand when it comes to civil disobedience? Where is the line drawn when it comes to laws that are patently wrong? I know the stand on things like homosexual marriage and other morally bankrupt laws, but what do you do if laws are enacted or are judicially created out of thin air that prohibit you from freedoms guaranteed in the Constitution? I have no doubt in my mind that within the next year there will be attacks in the form of legislation against the Church's tax exempt status because of its stand that marriage is only between one man and one woman. Additionally, you have the wannabe dictator, Barry, doing everything he can to disarm law abiding citizens. There are two major precedents of civil disobedience within the church that I can think of. First was Joseph Smith refusing at times to be arrested, and when he was, members coming to his rescue and freeing him. Second is the Saints continuing to practice polygamy for 28 years in spite of it being outlawed in July 1862. Brigham Young had to hide from the government to keep from being arrested. What would you do if an unconstitutional ban on all weapons was enacted? There are states that have enacted firearm registration laws in which an overwhelming majority of gun owners refused to comply with. What if the chapels and temples were shuttered because the Church refused to permit homosexuals to be married there? What if Obama were to go ahead and implement Executive Order 13603 signed into law in 2012? If you don't know about EO13603, it allows Obama to confiscate all food, all means of food production, transportation, and just about everything else required to survive, AND implement slavery. Yes, slavery. Read the order. I believe this is where all the false flag mass shootings are headed. It gives Obama a casus belli to declare martial law and implement EO13603.