The 2nd coming of christ

[Moksha]

The Apostle Paul had the idea that the gospel needed to be spread to the gentiles before the return. I have wondered what life would have been like for Western Civilization if he had firmly declared we need to be good to one another first.

[Vort]

The Apostle Paul had the idea that the gospel needed to be spread to the gentiles before the return. I have wondered what life would have been like for Western Civilization if he had firmly declared we need to be good to one another first.

Much worse than it is presently, without doubt. People have been preaching "Be excellent to each other, and party on, dude!" since long before Paul, Bill, or Ted. The gospel is much more than good advice and a warm fuzzy feeling.

[Prodigal_Son]

I do not believe we have received any such revelation.

Sorry, this is belated, but I came across this and your post popped into my head. So, here you go:

Harold B. Lee G.C. April 1973

This is the annual conference of the Church. April 6, 1973, is a particularly significant date because it commemorates not only the anniversary of the organization of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in this dispensation, but also the anniversary of the birth of the Savior, our Lord and Master, Jesus Christ.

Gordon B. Hinckley, Christmas Devotional of 1987, printed in the Ensign, 02/1988

Men had no knowledge of the time of His birth, and so they came to bond the celebration of Christmas with the celebration of the return of the sun. While we now know through revelation the time of the Savior’s birth [April 6], we observe the 25th of December with the rest of the Christian world.

Spencer W. Kimball, Ensign 05/1980

My brothers and sisters, today we not only celebrate the Sesquicentennial of the organization of the Church, but also the greatest event in human history since the birth of Christ on this day 1,980 years ago. Today is Easter Sunday.

[Moksha]

Much worse than it is presently, without doubt. People have been preaching "Be excellent to each other, and party on, dude!" since long before Paul, Bill, or Ted. The gospel is much more than good advice and a warm fuzzy feeling.

Being good to one another may be just a warm fuzzy feeling for some and the path of Christ for others. Yes, it was a message before Paul, Bill, Ted or even Pam.

[MormonMama]

Well, personally, it doesn't matter to me when the Second Coming happens. I think that even if we had a definitive date for when the Second Coming will happen, it still wouldn't matter. It doesn't matter if it's tomorrow, as any of us could die today. We need to live our lives to the best of our abilities to be prepared now.

[phatbac]

Well, personally, it doesn't matter to me when the Second Coming happens. I think that even if we had a definitive date for when the Second Coming will happen, it still wouldn't matter. It doesn't matter if it's tomorrow, as any of us could die today. We need to live our lives to the best of our abilities to be prepared now.

i think this is exactly the right attitude....we must live our life the same (following the gospel) and the end of times will take care of itself.

[Vort]

Sorry, this is belated, but I came across this and your post popped into my head. So, here you go:

Harold B. Lee G.C. April 1973

Gordon B. Hinckley, Christmas Devotional of 1987, printed in the Ensign, 02/1988

Spencer W. Kimball, Ensign 05/1980

These are not revelations presented to the Church.

[Prodigal_Son]

These are not revelations presented to the Church.

Wow. A prophet declaring in General Conference from the pulpit is NOT revelation? What are you smoking?

[Hemidakota]

I thought of something interesting on my drive to work this morning.

2030 will mark 200 years from the organization of the Church, and 2,000 years from the time Christ started His ministry.

April 6th, 2030 could be an interesting day, even if it's not "the" day.

Over the years, I have heard this from some brethren...[sunday] April 6th 2025.

[Hemidakota]

I do not believe we have received any such revelation.

How many of the brethren decided with Joseph, this was the Lord's birthday?

[Prodigal_Son]

Over the years, I have heard this from some brethren...[sunday] April 6th 2025.

Is that "Brethren" with a capital "B"? I just don't know why'd they'd be so bold as to hazard a date, given the fact that no man knows... Seems... incongruous.

[Hemidakota]

We can suspect or assume no man knows but that isn't the case as it was stated in D&C 20. I suspect Joseph knew as some others had also and it is not needful to know the exact date anyway. The important date to remember is the commandment given to restore the church in this timeframe – 6th April 1830.

A good friend John Pratt, some here may know him, is what I call subject matter expert on ancient calendars. He looked into this dating and gave several possibilities on the date.

Link: LDS.org - Ensign Article - The Restoration of Priesthood Keys on Easter 1836, Part 1: Dating the First Easter

[Vanhin]

These are not revelations presented to the Church.

No, but the Brethren in these quotes are referring to canonized scripture, which they interpret to be revelation on the date of Christ's birth.

THE rise of the Church of Christ in these last days, being one thousand eight hundred and thirty years since the coming of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ in the flesh, it being regularly organized and established agreeable to the laws of our country, by the will and commandments of God, in the fourth month, and on the sixth day of the month which is called April— (D&C 20:1)

Many significant events in the Church occur on or around this date, because of the belief in the Church that it is the Savior's birth day. So on one hand we have Vort, who says that it is not so, and on the other hand we have multiple prophets and apostles who say it is so. Hmmm, I'm not sure which one to go with here... :)

Regards,

Vanhin

Edited December 21, 2009 by Vanhin

[Vort]

So on one hand we have Vort, who says that it is not so, and on the other hand we have multiple prophets and apostles who say it is so. Hmmm, I'm not sure which one to go with here...

If that is how you see it, then you are a fool not to know "which one to go with".

Please explain to me what "April 6, AD 1" means.

[rameumptom]

While on my mission in 1979, my companion received a letter from his family that included a photocopy of a "letter" from a missionary in South Africa. According to the letter, Elder Gordon B. Hinckley had visited the area recently and during a missionary conference was asked when the 2nd Coming would be. Elder Hinckley noted that while it once was true we didn't know, now we knew it would be on a Sunday, April 6th. The letter then speculated on upcoming dates that fit, and suggested the Second Coming would occur in the 1980s.

Not long after that, a message came out in both the Ensign and Church News from Elder Hinckley, stating the discussion never occurred, and was not true.

I am not convinced that the Second Coming will be on April 6th, as I believe that date has become too convenient for LDS to focus upon as a magic date. We assume that the First Vision occurred on that date. Why? Because D&C 20:1 states that was the day Jesus was born. Of course, that is only true IF we follow B.H. Roberts' assumptions and interpretation of the verse. Evidence shows that Jesus was actually born in 4 BC, not 1AD (regardless of John Pratt's insistence otherwise). That others picked up on B. H. Roberts assertion does not mean it was/is understood correctly.

If April 6th was such an important date, why wasn't the Kirtland temple dedicated on that day, or at least have the keys restored to Joseph and Oliver on that date? It is because there was more important symbolism to be achieved by having Elijah come on the day of Passover, rather on an arbitrary date that was and is ONLY the official starting date of the LDS Church. No other date or event can be definitively attached to April 6th, without speculation.

[Vanhin]

If that is how you see it, then you are a fool not to know "which one to go with".

I was being facetious. I know which one to go with. :)

Please explain to me what "April 6, AD 1" means.

Why don't you just go ahead and explain it. I'm sure you have it all figured out, complete with Herod's death and all.

The point is Lee, Hinckley, and Kimball (and many others) refer to April 6th as the date of Christ's birth, as a product of revelation. You say it's not "revelation" - they say it is. That's all I'm saying.

Regards,

Vanhin

[Hemidakota]

A reminder of the story of Moroni's suspecting his death was nigh when four years after the fact, he re-dug up the plates and wrote the remainder on what was left of the plates. Even the Prophets do not know the exactness and if they did, I highly doubt they would share it with the world or the church. A good case and point to what I am stating, did not Joseph asked this same question? What was the Lord response? :)

Though, I have come to see pattern with a few important dates over the years but that is not the case on when the Savior returns as I heard it stated on my previous posting. Even if I had mentioned this causally, nothing is more important in seeking for an exact date but are we ready to meet Him, either here or the next life right now.

Talking about patterns, as I do believe, there are some important members or soon-to-be members that are part of the mission of preparation for the Savior’s return. One of which, I had the opportunity, I suspect it was GOD who sent him in aiding him with his past problems, will be one of those artist who will creating some of the figurine statues for the New Jerusalem. Others I had encountered, are of the same age group is another pattern that I noticed when I asked the age factor. I am deeply grateful to the FATHER in allowing in meeting some important children of GOD that will stand in the last days.

[Vort]

Why don't you just go ahead and explain it. I'm sure you have it all figured out, complete with Herod's death and all.

Nope, I don't. In fact, I don't think "April 6, AD 1" is meaningful without a great deal of further clarification. You can't simply walk the date back, since the Gregorian calendar is not well-defined for earlier dates. The Julian calendar is likewise not precise (moreso than the Gregorian). So what does it mean that "Jesus was born on April 6"? You made the claim, so please elucidate.

[Vanhin]

Nope, I don't. In fact, I don't think "April 6, AD 1" is meaningful without a great deal of further clarification. You can't simply walk the date back, since the Gregorian calendar is not well-defined for earlier dates. The Julian calendar is likewise not precise (moreso than the Gregorian). So what does it mean that "Jesus was born on April 6"? You made the claim, so please elucidate.

That's not the claim I made... again. I made the claim that the brethren above claim that April 6th was received as revelation, as the day of Christ's birth, and I posted the scripture that their claim was based on. In other words, it's not my words, it's theirs. They called it revelation on the birth of Christ - April 6th that is.

Regards,

Vanhin

Edited December 21, 2009 by Vanhin

[Prodigal_Son]

We're kind of arguing in circles, and perhaps not acting like we ought. So since I've become fairly adept in my role as "thread-killer" (usually through posts so intellectually anemic that nobody bothers to respond), here's my attempt on this one:

WHEN SHALL THE LORD RETURN?

THE SECOND COMING WILL ARRIVE JUST AS QUICKLY AS WE, THE DESCENDANTS OF JOSEPH, GET THE WORK DONE THAT THE LORD IS WAITING ON US TO DO... AND NOT A MOMENT SOONER.

(So maybe if we all log out now and go do something good and righteous, we can advance His return by a good 30 minutes. )

[Hemidakota]

I concur with Vanhiin statement. I also heard it from President Kimball and few others who still live [Apostles and past prophets] the date and do not have a problem with the D&C 20 section as the given date.

[rameumptom]

I also don't have a problem with the date. I think it is one of a few possibilities. What I have a problem with is making doctrine by reading things into the scriptures. That Jesus was born on April 6, 1AD is just one interpretation/meaning of D&C 20:1. Yes, several General Authorities in the past have accepted it as correct. But I have yet to see anyone really have a discussion on that.

I've seen other interpretations on "doctrine" that have slowly changed, as religion has caught up to science in some areas. Joseph F Smith and Joseph Fielding Smith were very strongly against evolution, yet the concept of evolution being acceptable seems to be making strong headway in the Church today. There was a time when GAs defended the priesthood ban, and Alvin R. Dyer even wrote a book on how the "curse" came about; but you won't find a General Authority today who would espouse such ideas.

I'm thinking that Jesus probably WAS born on April 6th. Just not necessarily in 1AD. But to put so much energy into such a thing is to swallow camels and strain at gnats. What is important is that Jesus was BORN, and became the Messiah of all mankind. Dates are of tertiary importance, at best.

And I think we do ourselves a disservice to attempt to link all key events to April 6th. It doesn't hold. It isn't necessary for our theology. That we occasionally do certain things in that timeframe (General Conference, for instance), as a recognition and celebration of the Lord's birth, does not connote that all important events are mystically tied to the date.