Midwest LDS

The nice thing about that kind of bet is that if you’re wrong, you’ll no longer be around to pay up (you being a gambler, and the earth being cleansed by burning and all . . .)  

It's hidden in plain sight in the Doctrine and Covenants, for those who know where to look. Section 1 contains the letter "m". Section 2 contains the letter "a". Section 3 contains the letter "r".
But I've said too much already.

I frankly don’t believe that the scriptures were written with the level of deliberation/precision/stylistic consistency/linguistic consistency/narrative “tightness”, that would justify the sort of hyper-literalistic and hyper-legalistic approach that underlies the timelines most folks propose.

Thank you so much for sharing this. I was looking for this very quote actually. 
 
It is an incredibly interesting video he made, but I worry the excitement of it distracts from what the goal is on this.
my stance he always been “my judgment day comes when I die”, so I try to prepare for that day

Elder Russell M. Ballard - 1996 BYU Devotional
 

I'm just trying to make it through today, my friend.  Just trying to make it through today.

I am not familiar with this guy, but from my mission and since I have been home I have run into a couple of people who follow this line of thinking. That the scriptures reveal the time and date for Christ to come.

I would still have to go though with Christ's words, the author and finisher of our faith. We have signs for sure that will give us when, if we are prepared (i.e. I only care about the two prophets in Jerusalem -- I will start my repentance then for three days and two/three nights ), the day really doesn't matter. We will be ready.

I agree with you about the need to “go into the wilderness” as much as possible—though of course, in a physical sense, I’m not sure there’s really anywhere left to go.  If we can rely on the prophecies that have come down from Brigham Young, Heber Kimball, Wilford Woodruff, and the like—our lot (or those of our children or grandchildren) will be to buckle down and stay away from the violence as best we can, avoiding alliances with any of the Babylonish factions that will be turning on each other and ultimately destroying themselves. 
But as for the “lesser of two evils”, I would reply as follows: 
1)  Our current commission is that “honest men and wise men should be sought for diligently, and good men and wise men ye should observe to uphold; otherwise whatsoever is less than these cometh of evil.  And I give unto you a commandment, that ye shall forsake all evil and cleave unto all good, that ye shall live by every word which proceedeth forth out of the mouth of God.”  (D&C 98:10-11)
That instruction has not been revoked.  To throw our lot in with Trump, knowing what he is, to me risks forfeiting the commission and blessings promised on American citizens in these latter days, and amounts to us choosing to have God leave us to our own strength.  I understand why, in light of everything that’s happening on the left, many Saints feel they have no choice but to ally with Trump.  But I also believe that there is divine precedent for God promising deliverance to His people if they would just trust Him and avoid running to the nearest strongman (this theme consumes the book of Isaiah).  If God wants us to disregard D&C 98:10 and quietly submit ourselves to (and even support) leaders who are dishonest, foolish, and bad; then I’m reasonably confident that we’ll be hearing about it through proper channels.  But so far, that hasn’t happened. 
2)  The Bible is, as you suggest, a record of a wholly different society than our own; one where private citizens could not and did not expect to significantly influence public policy.  Jeremiah’s pro-Babylon agenda was not geared towards Judah’s populace, or even its rulers, helping Babylon to advance its interests or geopolitical standing; it was simply a pragmatic “look, if you fight this, you will die; so don’t fight it”.  (See Jeremiah 27.)  Nonresistance to a tyrant we didn’t choose, is very different than active support of a degenerate politician we did choose.   
3)  One issue with likening Trump to Nebuchadnezzar in this particular discussion (which, as I understand it, is the preservation of a western-style, individual-rights-oriented democratic republic as advocated by President Benson) is that Nebuchadnezzar was a *king* who oversaw high taxation, imprisonment without due process, and state-sanctioned murder and rape and prohibition of religious expression.   Daniel and his friends lived out their lives as slaves (very comfortable slaves, but slaves nonetheless) to Nebuchadnezzar and his successors.  Indeed, Nebuchadnezzar is the embodiment of everything Benson abhorred. 
If we’re at the point where we feel like, for the sake of self-preservation, God wants us to submit to someone like Nebuchadnezzar in order to prevent a worse thing from happening; then it’s probably time for us to admit that the American experiment has failed, resign ourselves to serfdom, and leave it to future generations to reclaim the traditional American liberties that we grew up with.

I don’t know Fox, and haven’t seen the videos by or against him.  I’ve read a synopsis of his arguments, and was frankly thunderstruck that a man of his credentials and background would cite to so many relatively-easily-discernible falsehoods in furtherance of his position.
IIRC, Fox’s broadside first sought to establish his own credentials by citing to his background at BYU and his past work under the auspices of the First Presidency.     I will leave it for others to argue over whether he’s setting himself up as some sort of “prophet”; but it does seem quite clear that he wanted this to be distributed widely and he wanted it to be associated with both BYU and the Church.   In that context it would seem odd for him or his supporters to insist that any pushback should only be offered in private.

Hate to tell you this, but Gavin Newsom is as big an idiot as Jay Inslee. And since he runs a state more than five times larger, he'll do more than five times the damage.

This is in reply to no one in particular.
I have never had (up to this point in my life) a "faith crisis". I have been told by the spirit several times that Jesus is the Christ, and that His church was restored to the earth by His prophet Joseph Smith. Each succeeding prophet since that time has held the keys necessary to move His work forward. It doesn't matter if a policy in the church changes, or if the world as a whole moves farther away from the principles of Christianity. The spirit has conveyed truth to me in a very clear way. I have received a witness the work is true, so nothing else matters. I take what comes my way with faith, and don't worry about asking why...why would I question a loving God who knows more than I do? Why would I not trust the answers He gave me? The efficacy or truth in those answers do not lessen over time, so why should my convictions? Why would I allow the opinion of another person in regards to a topic that has no real impact on my life or how I worship sway my testimony? Who really cares? Let them think what they think. The gospel is simple, and it is the adversary who constantly pushes pointless questions into people's minds - they are pointless because their answers cannot possibly be answered in this life, and their answers would really have no meaningful impact anyway. The evidences of the restored gospel that we do have strengthen my faith, but they are not my foundation...it is the testimony of the Holy Ghost. Some may call me the prototypical sheep...just blindly following what the leaders of the church tell me to do. But, the fact remains that every single trial I have had in my life has been overcome as I put the Lord first and wait upon Him. When I follow the counsel from the living prophet, I am happy, and all things eventually work themselves out. Every part of my life is better because of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, and I have seen the lives of so many who leave the church fall into disarray, emptiness, and confusion. I try to help them as best I can, but I do not let their their lives or actions influence what I know to be true. The church's message is true or it isn't; so we as a people need to stop forcing some middle ground to appear. It is hard at times to be a member of this church, but life is ultimately harder when you are not a part of it. Think back to, remember, and trust in the answers that a loving Father in Heaven has given to you...not in the philosophies of men.

Dat Biden tho.  He never said he wanted fracking banned, but he wants to transition out of the oil industry?
Best Trump Troll Tweet ever:
 

Catholic poster on another board puts it this way:
As I hear news about Popes, for decades, I've heard similar things from Catholics after this or that news story gets everyone all excited.

The last video led me to the following: Political Neutrality

That would make sense to me. From a historical perspective some of the most successful empires in history practiced religious toleration towards their subjects. Persia is one of the best known examples of this, but several of the great Indian empires including the Mauryan and Gupta empires also demonstrate this principle. Religious toleration, from a purely secular viewpoint, reduces civil unrest and foments loyalty amongst your subjects. Of course it's also ideal from a religious perspective as well, Agency being of supreme importance to God, but there is lots of good historical data backing up the concept.

That would make sense to me. From a historical perspective some of the most successful empires in history practiced religious toleration towards their subjects. Persia is one of the best known examples of this, but several of the great Indian empires including the Mauryan and Gupta empires also demonstrate this principle. Religious toleration, from a purely secular viewpoint, reduces civil unrest and foments loyalty amongst your subjects. Of course it's also ideal from a religious perspective as well, Agency being of supreme importance to God, but there is lots of good historical data backing up the concept.

That would make sense to me. From a historical perspective some of the most successful empires in history practiced religious toleration towards their subjects. Persia is one of the best known examples of this, but several of the great Indian empires including the Mauryan and Gupta empires also demonstrate this principle. Religious toleration, from a purely secular viewpoint, reduces civil unrest and foments loyalty amongst your subjects. Of course it's also ideal from a religious perspective as well, Agency being of supreme importance to God, but there is lots of good historical data backing up the concept.

From the Church Newsroom - What is Religious Freedom?
I suppose that means the opposite it true. As religious freedom goes down so does: prosperity, harmony and stability. Food for thought as we look around at ourselves and others.
 

Random thoughts:
1) This sermon was given eight years before Roe.  We have now been a nation of gleeful baby-killers for some forty-seven years.  Other elements of radical leftism have gone mainstream and infect the right as well as the left.  As Americans we are, by and large, a lazy people, an envious people, a lecherous people, a vulgar people, a profligate people, a short-sighted people, a cruel people, a power-hungry people, an intolerant people; hell-bent on exporting our “values” to every group over which we can assert power and unwilling to allow those within our jurisdiction to “opt out” of our excesses and weaknesses.  We’ve long known that the secular left hates us; but it’s been interesting for me over the past four years, lurking on a number of mainstream conservative fora and seeing the contempt *they* have not only for LDS centrists like Romney and Flake, but even for LDS hard-line conservatives like Lee; our maiming, rape, and deaths are openly fantasized about by conservatives and liberals alike.  The Saints in this country are openly hated in a way we haven’t been for perhaps a hundred years.  And as a matter of historical record, the US remains the only modern nation-state to have allowed apostles to be murdered within its borders; (as far as I know) the only modern nation-state to have imprisoned an apostle; and the only modern nation-state to have allowed (twice) an attempted genocide against the Saints.  
In that context I’m not sure the US, as a political entity, can be saved.  I’m not sure the US should be saved.  Our national sins are not, on the whole, what the leftists claim they are—but they do exist, and they are legion.
2)  Whether 1) above is absolutely true or not—conditions have nonetheless changed enough that I’m more interested in what the current Church leadership is saying than in what President Benson said fifty-five years ago.  
3)  You can destroy a free democratic republic from the top down—but you can’t save or create one that way.  The most effective and meaningful “fighting” you can do is to hold a neighborhood barbecue (and better yet, bring the missionaries).
4)  Saving the constitution doesn’t necessarily mean preserving the political union, or the power, or the natural resources, or the international statute, or the territorial integrity, of the current US.  It may mean preparing a people willing to implement the individual and civic virtues that are necessary for an individual-rights-oriented democratic republic to function.  Certainly the modern Democratic Party and their henchmen in media and academia tend to undermine that—and I would suggest they haven’t done it, since the 1960s at least.  But Trump does, too.  If we get too bound up in “winning” at the current political game of thrones, we risk being crushed by the stone cut without hands rather than becoming one with it.
5)  If I may indulge my anti-Trump hobby horse a moment:  the GOP had seventeen candidates in the 2016 primary; and we chose—if not THE most immoral candidates, certainly one of the bottom five.  What, pray tell, has the religious right done lately that would indicate to God that we give a flying flip about His protection and aid?  

In my college years was part of the Young Americans for Freedom (YAF) chapter at my college. We wanted to establish a conservative group based upon principles, not party. One of the founding fathers of the group was William F. Buckley Jr. It turns out that he and Robert Welch, founder of the John Birch Society, had a falling out. The main controversy seems to have been whether President Eisenhower was guilty of treason. The episode is recounted here: https://www.nationalreview.com/2017/06/william-f-buckley-john-birch-society-history-conflict-robert-welch/

Any mention of the John Birch Society gets immediate eye-rolls from many. The accusation is that they are quick to condemn as Communist those they disagree with. Perhaps they would be accused of being a right-wing version of cancel culture. I hunger for civility, a return to intelligent public debate, and an embrace on both sides of the aisle to the concept of "loyal opposition." We're Americans. We love our country. We disagree on how best to improve society.

The best thing you can do to prepare in my opinion is build up your food, water storage (also take an inventory and get an idea of what you have as you can forget what you already have in your storage) and have a decent first aid kit.  Listening to the Holy Spirit on what you should do for other preparations that you need to do is essential.  Exercise as well and do what you can to keep your body in decent physical condition.

To be frank, the people in my ward who are most politically active also tend to be the least Christlike and the ones to hop on the conservative Headline news (ie “the dems hate American!” Or “The dems all want to make pedophilia legal!”).
There is one brother in our ward that prides himself on being politically active and uses scripture to rebuke those who aren’t. During some political hype dealing with the Middle East, he posted a picture to FB saying “why do we dump so much money into helping other nations that don’t want us, why don’t we just let them all kill themselves!? That’s what they want!”
From what I have seen, it won’t be the saints who are watching every political breakdown and are constantly campaigning for different delegates in different offices that will be the saints saving the constitution. I see it being those that are politically aware and vote righteously, but choose to dedicate their time to serving God instead of engaging in non-stop political discourse.
I have a few members in my ward that are constantly inviting me to political stuff and I always turn them down cause I just don’t want to associate myself with them.

I would encourage folks interested in the topic to read Terryl Givens’s Wrestling the Angel, especially pp. 153-163.  It’s far too long for me to quote here, but Givens traces the history and distinction between the ideas of spirits being “begotten“ by God versus being “adopted” by God.  Joseph Smith himself made statements (and provided canonized revelations) supporting both views, as have a number of church leaders who I daresay were both smarter and more inspired than any of us.  I’d feel pretty uncomfortable telling folks on either side of the discussion that their position is “preposterous”.

Comparison between Obama/Biden response to H1N1 to Trump on COVID
https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-obama-biden-virus-response-11597966209
It is important to remember that the early predictions said that if we're lucky, the best case scenario would be about 200,000 deaths by this fall.  Well, here we are at just a bit over, and we're seeing the death percentages going down.  Hospitalizations are down.   And yet the media still wants to spin this as a failure by Trump.
Yup, it's all his fault that we were very close to the "best case scenario."  Thank you, Mr. President.