Our mission is to promote the study of the doctrines and principles of the Gospel of Jesus Christ as restored in our day by the Prophet Joseph Smith. We believe that “by study and also by faith” our knowledge and love of our Father in Heaven, His Son, Jesus Christ, and the “finer points of [Their] doctrine” will lead us to that “sure foundation, a foundation whereon if men build they cannot fall”.
We believe that our Savior Lives and is ever-present in our lives and that through Joseph Smith, the LORD restored His true church with all of the authority, power, doctrine, covenants, and ordinances necessary for our salvation and exaltation. “By way of commandment, and also by the Spirit of prophecy and revelation” did the LORD bring forth the Book of Mormon record out of darkness and into light to be a beacon of hope to the world- “to the convincing of Jew and Gentile that Jesus is the Christ, the Eternal God, manifesting Himself unto all nations”.
Yeah there was one revelation that was most important, the only one that god sent an angel with a flaming sword. The one where joe was supposed to have seggs with 14 year olds.
The Gospel is hear, believe, confess, repent, be baptized for the forgiveness of your sins then walk in the light as he’s in the light 💡 And all of this is faith thru grace so no man can boast
According to the testimony of the scriptures, we are not judged according to our beliefs or theology (whether right or wrong); rather, we are judged on our works (which is the evidence of our faith). The Israelite way of looking at things is to live right and do right. The Greek way of looking at things (which was a part of the corruption of the great apostasy) is to believe right or have the right philosophy. This is why argue about the trinity - because of the Greek/Roman corruption of the worship of the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.
Jesus is our High Priest; He is the reigning Priest over the house of God. The entirety of the believer's life can only be lived in the light of the priesthood of Christ. The Priesthood is the perfection of mediation and Jesus is our great Priest and mediator. He is sufficient, He is all we need, nothing more.
How about this example for canonization and decanninization: The two revelations, dated October 13, 1882, and April 14, 1883, published in English, were eventually included in the 1888 Swedish edition of the Doctrine and Covenants as sections 137 and 138 respectively. Over the course of the next forty years, these documents-the October 13, 1882, and the revelation and the instructions regarding the Seventies, dated April 14, 1883-were also printed in other European editions of the book, including three German editions (1893, 1903, and 1920), a Danish edition (1900), and a 1928 Swedish edition (this edition omitted the April 14, 1883, revelation but included the instructions to the Seventies and the October 13, 1882, revelation); See L. R. Jacobs, Mormon Non-English Scriptures, Hymnals, and Periodicals 1830-1986 (Ithaca, NY: L. R. Jacobs, 1986). This is footnote 99 from an article called, “John the Revelator”: The Written Revelations of John Taylor, which is part of a larger compilation called, Champion of Liberty: John Taylor.
The Proclamation on the Family is an excellent document and should certainly be canonized! I have kept a copy glued into my D&C ever since it was released. It’s teachings are more timely now than when it was first released.
Hanna you have so much knowledge of Joesph Smith and the Book of Mormon I enjoy so much how you present any subject it makes things make more sense. I enjoyed listening to you and your husband on Rod Meldrum podcast but you weren’t aloud to speak and share what you knew. Thank you
The Family Proclamation had no input from the Relief Society and supports rigid conservative gender roles. And contains words not found in scripture (such as "preside over" as a replacement for "rule over" in Genesis 3:16 that describes a curse of the fall.) It should absolutely not be canonized. In fact, it needs to be revised with the Relief Society's input.
39:00 and the immediate question that should be given to protestants is "where does the bible teach that it is "god breathed", "complete", and teach "sola scriptura" ?" then once they try to give a scripture, then the next immediate question should be. "if the bible is god breathed, complete, and you are supposed to use the bible alone, then why did protestants remove books from the bible ?
the problem is this. saved by grace ... but .... works are required by jesus. in fact ... the preaching and outreach of the protestants are works they believe they are required to do.
I have a huge question. I watched a video of an ex warlock saying that when we sin we are taking off our garment and giving the devil access to us because we are no longer clothed, therefore making us naked. So I have been truly walking with Christ for about one year and almost six months. I grew up with a lot of bad things and demonic spirits. Abuse and condemnation. So in my walk with Christ, when I would sin, I would run away from God out of guilt and shame. God very recently broke that chain of guilt and condemnation. But my question is, did I lose my garment because of my sin? Am I truly naked forever? If I lost my garment can I ever get it back?
And I would like to add, I DID repent of my sins after running away for a little while out of guilt. I am now starving my flesh for my deliverance coming soon.
I believe that those who turn to Christ and repent will always have the promise of redemption. For some of us that walk is longer and more winding, but the Lord's promises of Atonement are to all.
Lectures on faith was not reviewed by JS from what I heard... he died first. So there is a mention of the trinity in there that sounds like a scribal error... JS would never have gotten that wrong and that's part of why it was not cannon. It was when he spoke it but errors need to be removed from the scribe. JS didn't have time or it would have been corrected to match the first vision accounts and to match what he said.
I understand your sentiment. However, this is not correct. Joseph personally commissioned and oversaw the publication of the Lectures on Faith in 1834-35 (9 years before his death). It's understood by historians that Sydney Rigdon and others of the school of the prophets wrote most of the content of the lectures, with Joseph likely writing one of them, personally. The specific lecture that later became misunderstood as possibly teaching some form of the trinity was lecture 5. Ironically, this is the very lecture that was supposedly written by Joseph himself. Of course, with a more careful study of the lecture and Joseph’s own teachings on the matter, it becomes more clear that the lecture isn't teaching the trinity at all. Much has been said on this subject by scholars/historians. I also covered each of the 7 lectures on this channel in case you're interested.
I don't believe the process has been the same! When Joseph was alive, the voice of the members had power. People were not punished for voting against the pushed decision.
This was a fun one. We don't get too caught up in the weeds, but hopefully, it'll lead to more conversation on the subject. Their book is great - pretty concise with a number of interesting revelations. We talked about a couple of them in part 2.
Lies. Yahweh doesn't need no Book of Mormons lol Leviticus 26:40-46 King James Version 40 If they shall confess their iniquity, and the iniquity of their fathers, with their trespass which they trespassed against me, and that also they have walked contrary unto me; 41 And that I also have walked contrary unto them, and have brought them into the land of their enemies; if then their uncircumcised hearts be humbled, and they then accept of the punishment of their iniquity: 42 Then will I remember my covenant with Jacob, and also my covenant with Isaac, and also my covenant with Abraham will I remember; and I will remember the land. 43 The land also shall be left of them, and shall enjoy her sabbaths, while she lieth desolate without them: and they shall accept of the punishment of their iniquity: because, even because they despised my judgments, and because their soul abhorred my statutes. 44 And yet for all that, when they be in the land of their enemies, I will not cast them away, neither will I abhor them, to destroy them utterly, and to break my covenant with them: for I am the Lord their God. 45 But I will for their sakes remember the covenant of their ancestors, whom I brought forth out of the land of Egypt in the sight of the heathen, that I might be their God: I am the Lord. 46 These are the statutes and judgments and laws, which the Lord made between him and the children of Israel in mount Sinai by the hand of Moses.
We talk about a couple of them in part 2, but their book is much more comprehensive. Of course, most of them can be found in the Joseph Smith Papers as well for anyone who doesn't want to buy the book.
Joseph Smith approved the 1844 printing of the D&C. He taught Section 101 publicly at least 8 times. It remained in the D&C until 1880. The Doctrine of Monogamy, as taught by Joseph throughout his life, was Canon until after Brigham’s death.
Yes. Brigham started polygamy because he was obsessed with money, power and s*×. The voice of innocence is what came from Joseph and that can be found in the papers as well
@@Rudyard_StriplingYeah....Brigham Young made that up too along with blood atonement, the priesthood ban and Adam God theory. No where in scripture has it ever said that, only Brigham said it. But most members made him their God so good for you
@@StompMom5It's honestly a bit of a shame to see you fall so low as to deny polygamy and slander Brigham Young like that. Michelle Stone is a liar. There’s too much data from too many parties from Joseph’s inner circle and antagonists that confirm Joseph Smith practiced polygamy and D&C 132 was read to the Nauvoo Council. There are affidavits made by William Law, Jane Law, and Austin Cowles that describe and corroborate key details of D&C 132 on May 4, 1844, published in the Nauvoo Expositor on June 7, 1844. Among the things about D&C 132 verified, William Law recalled it said “this is the law” and to “enter into my law.” matching D&C 132:32-34. Jane Law recalled that it authorized some men to have up to “the number of ten” wives, and that women who did not allow their husbands to have more than one wife would “be under transgression before God” matching D&C 132:61-65. Austin Cowles recalled that the revelation Hyrum Smith read to the High Council taught sealing up to Eternal Life against all sins except the shedding of innocent blood (D&C 132:26) and that David and Solomon had many wives yet in this they sinned not save in the matter of Uriah (D&C 132:38-39). In response to the Expositor Affidavits, both Joseph and Hyrum in the Nauvoo city council confirmed that these statements were not fabrications out of nothing, that indeed there was an authentic revelation received and read to the Nauvoo High Council. They even admitted that it was about polygamy, but they said it was just about polygamy in former days and/or in the afterlife. These minutes were published in the Nauvoo Neighbor on June 19, 1844. William Clayton recorded in his journal that he wrote the original revelation on July 12, 1843 as it was dictated to him by the Prophet: “This A.M, I wrote a Revelation consisting of 10 pages on the order of the priesthood, showing the designs in Moses, Abraham, David and Solomon having many wives and concubines &c. After it was wrote Presidents Joseph and Hyrum presented it and read it to E[mma] who said she did not believe a word of it and appeared very rebellious” Which Joseph Smith’s own journal also says “Wednesday July 12 [1843] Receivd a Revelation in the office in presence of Hyrum & Wm. Clayton.” (Joseph Smith Papers: Journals Volume 3, May 1843-June 1844 page 57) Then one or two days later, Newell K. Whitney requested permission to have a copy made. Joseph C. Kingsbury described the copying process in 1886: ”Bishop Newel K. Whitney handed me the Revelation… the day [after] it was written or the day following and stating what it was asked me to make a copy of it. I did so, and then read my copy of it to Bishop Whitney, who compared it with the original to which he held in his hand while I read to him. When I had finished reading, Bishop Whitney pronounced the copy correct and Hyrum Smith came into the room at the time to fetch the original. Bishop Whitney handed it to him. I will also state that this copy, as also the original are identically the same as published in the present edition [1876] of the Book of Doctrine and Covenants.” Clayton later affirmed that the Kingsbury manuscript was an exact copy: “Towards evening Bishop Newel K. Whitney asked Joseph if he had any objections to his taking a copy of the revelation; Joseph replied that he had not, and handed it to him. It was carefully copied the following day by Joseph C. Kingsbury . . . The copy made by Joseph C. Kingsbury is a true and correct copy of the original in every respect. The copy was carefully preserved by Bishop Whitney.” (Andrew Jenson, “Plural Marriage,” Historical Record 6 (July 1887): 226.) Sidney Rigdon, who was excommunicated from the Church and tried to start his own sect and claiming to be the rightful successor of Joseph Smith, knew very well that Joseph and Hyrum practiced because after the Smith's deaths Sidney Rigdon made statements in his own Newspaper called the Latter Day Saints Messenger & Advocate where he said that they both died because of it, which you can look up yourself. There is also Mary Fielding Smith, the wife of Hyrum Smith, who had she not accepted and entered into plural marriage while Hyrum was alive and had not been taught the principle of sealings for eternity then she certainly would not have agreed to be sealed to Heber C. Kimball and she would not have gone west with the polygamous Brighamites. Even people who were in the RLDS, whose claim of being the true Church was dependent on whether Joseph practiced polygamy or not, even admitted it was practiced. In a meeting of the RLDS First Presidency on May 1, 1865 “The Question arose as to whether Joseph the Martyr taught the Doctrine of polygamy. President [William] Marks said Brother Hyrum came to his place once and told him he did not believe in it and he was going to see Joseph about it and if he had a revelation on the subject he would believe it, and after that Hyrum read a revelation on it in the High Council and He Marks felt it was not true but he saw the High Council received it.” (RLDS First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve meeting, 1 May 1865, RLDS Archives) In 1883, RLDS apostle Zenos Gurley Jr. interviewed Leonard Soby, who confirmed that the Utah affidavits were truthful and also signed an affidavit confirming that D&C 132 was the same revelation that he heard Hyrum Smith read. Zenos Gurley Jr. resigned his apostleship in the RLDS Church in response to Soby’s testimony. Let’s also not forget that all of the women have said they were sealed to Joseph Smith, which you can read about in Brian Hale’s books. You can even see the deeds of the property he gave to some of his wives on the Joseph Smith Papers. The data is overwhelming and to deny it is to deny reality and established historical facts. Your evidence is complete garbage that blatantly manipulates, or more you blatantly or ignorantly lie, about what was said and done to force a false claim that Joseph Smith never practiced polygamy. It's anti historical and only a pseudo intellectual person would make this claim, and I mean that as harshly as possible.
One common things that I've noticed about podcasts/videos in general are extra long,drawn out introductions. Please, a quick into and get to the topic. I so appreciate these educational and uplifting presentations. Thank you!!!!!!!
Gentlemen, the substance of your podcast could have been delivered in 30 minutes and spared us your agonizing and meandering musings and ummings. Your substance is good, but help us out. Thanks.
i think that it is instructive to remember that Dr. Peterson is on a spiritual journey and has asked us to come along. That is BOLD! I dont know that I would have wanted to share my own spiritual journey step be step. There were alot of missed steps along my path and embarrassing moments. As we all probably have but he has taken it upon himself to share it with us step by step. Hes not though with his journey yet but i feel honored to be able to see it unfold and encourage him on his path.
@stephtimms1776 - I have changed my comment 😊.. like #ByWayOfCommansment said... both are correct... I was adding more context. And yes it seems a struggle to us who want to come unto Christ. The Father is helping us put off the natural man... we are really struggling with our old self and God is helping us with that process... kind of like a BJJ instructor wrestling with a student to teach them technique so the student improves and becomes stronger.
I think you guys might be underestimating Jordan Peterson's integrity. I don't think he is playing a game in order to retain followers. Are you familiar with his back story? He was reluctantly thrust into the public spotlight because he stood up for freedom of speech in regards to being forced to say certain things as a college professor. He almost died because of negative side effects from prescription medication. I am actually disappointed that you spent so much of this video trying to determine the motivation of a person whom you don't even know personally.
There’s nothing wrong with wanting a message to appeal to a broader audience. We’re not claiming his intent is at all malicious, just that his goals are to reach as many people as possible while still staying true to his core values & beliefs. We agree with you his integrity is exceptional.
@@stephtimms1776 The assumption that he doesn’t join a particular church do to fear of loosing followers. He does say he’s believes, it’s just not thought of in the same way you do. I would also say that the way he believes is more real than I’ve ever seen anyone else believe. His remaining unjointed to a particular church is more real that anyone that’s apart of any church. He truly does not subscribe to any man made rules. It’s pure God. I appreciate that fact people are talking about it and trying to work out reason, reguardless.
@@jenniferflower9265 Fair enough, and I do respect his reasons, but is it more courageous to try and fail sometimes in some ways or to not try because you might fail? Through Christ our failures can be turned around into success eventually.
Let's give Dr. Peterson a copy of The Pearl of Great Price so he has more of Abraham's story. I love Jordan Peterson, but I think "failure to launch" is a little harsh.
The different interpretation doesn't bother me much. Just another example of likening the scriptures to ourselves. Many times the interpretation from a likening experience is different from the "textualist" meaning that was likely intended by the author but that doesn't discount the impact in our lives. That being said IF Peterson would treat the PoGP or BoM with the same seriousness as he does traditional biblical scriptures it would be fascinating.
I don't see failure to launch as an insult, but rather a way of describing someone with a lot of potential who hasn't received the guidance yet. The term a vessel, such as a boat or rocket, that is prepared to go, should go, wants to go, but something has prevented it from leaving it's dock. Applying this description, I consider how our youth have to wait to advance in Priesthood, or just how many capable individuals need to be extended a calling to realize just how much they will magnify it. Of course, the term can be used in jest or with negative connotation. I'm not trying to defend it that way. I'd love to hear how Jordan delivered the line.
Is the endowment now not sacred? Why is it talked about so much on different channels outside the temple now? I haven't gone in a while, and there have been changes but I can't imagine it would change that much.
The endowment is sacred. Always has been. Prophets and apostles have (especially in more recent years, including a general conference talk be Elder Bednar) openly spoken about the covenants made in the temple and encouraged the church membership to do the same that we might better understand them and the power of those covenant promises. There are only a relatively few things that we covenant specifically not to disclose outside the temple.
@@stephtimms1776 - If we can find in scripture the covenants we make - ie: the 5 covenants - we can talk about them outside of temple and encourage each other to live those covenants. If we were to read through much of our scripture we would realise that there is lots that is temple text... teaching us about our temple covenants and giving us examples of how we can live them. ie: Abraham - taught us about obedience (leaving babylon). Isaac - taught us about sacrifice (he was the one who allowed it to go ahead, he wasn't a little boy). Jacob/Rachel - taught us about the law of the Gospel . Joseph - taught us about the law of chasity (Potiphars's wife), Ephraim and Manasseh taught us about the law of consecration (the loved and worked together as a team).
Loved the discussion, I've been waiting to hear conversations on the overlap between Jordan Peterson and the Church of Christ's doctrines as interpreted by Church members. You guys are my people! A couple questions... I would love to know each of your backgrounds (specifically education, career, interests/hobbies, level of political interest, and personality types) as I have found that my own background colors my view of Jordan Petersons insights differently from others. As psychology major with a human development minor (just a bachelor's, nothing huge) I've realized that the terms or examples he uses which sound odd or are glanced over by others are actually specific psychology and developmental terms. By using those field-specific terms or examples, a great deal of further insights and support for the point he is making is added, making his already information sense style seems even more supported (and even more information rich, ha). For example, I have a good friend who is a software engineer and a member of the church who has said a couple of times to me now that Jordan Peterson sounds like he's saying basic truisms but in a kind of complicated way. In the same way I wonder if the perception shared by two of the three of you about the audiences applauding at a shared sentiment of support for a counter-culture "life is work and work is hard" type of narrative has to do with the level of political awareness or involvement. Admittedly weird questions, but I'm very curious to know if one of you have a second to reply... What I am ultimately wondering (not specifically from any of you on this) is whether there is space for some of Jordan Petersons ideas which emphasize things like valuing the symbolic and practical truths over litteral truths to be academically and doctrinally "fleshed out". I wonder whether there would be hidden value here towards the furthering of one of our missions as a church, to continue to restore Christ's church here upon the earth. Could be a stretch here, but one example of possible utility in this pursuit is the reconciliation of seemingly god-commanded old testament attrocities.
Like the riches of the man who Jesus called to follow him but didn't, intellectualism can get in the way. It can be removed with God's help. Jesus taught, with God all things are possible.
2 Nephi 9:28-29 "O the vainness, and the frailties, and the foolishness of men! When they are learned they think they are wise, and they hearken not unto the counsel of God, for they set it aside, supposing they know of themselves, wherefore, their wisdom is foolishness and it profiteth them not. And they shall perish. 29 But to be learned is good if they hearken unto the counsels of God."
100% I have thought this for a long time and have been looking for others who believed this! When President Nelson gave the talk, Overcome the World and Find Rest, I believe this is what he was teaching us. Thank you for doing this episode!
