Come Follow Me Rainbow Tree? "Reaction" and Comments 

Hi, I'm the artist of "The Love of God" piece. I think it's important to hear from my own mouth about myself as a person and artist, as well as how this piece came to be and what it represents. I am a child of the 80s and 90s and grew up on Rainbow Brite and Lisa Frank--I just barely turned 42 this month. As a current art teacher of over 500 children, I can see this love of the colors--especially rainbows--is something engrained in most children. My first art teaching job was in the Dominican Republic, where I learned Spanish, which helps me in the school I work at since almost half are English Language Learners. I come from pioneer stock on both sides, and that blood runs strong in my veins today--I'm an avid hiker and backpacker and love Utah for that reason. I'm a conservative and faithful member of the Church of Jesus Christ and fully support the Proclamation to the Family. The one way I would consider myself a rebel is that I don't cater to political correctness and social agenda--I think it's the Idahoan in me (I grew up there). This piece was created in response to the 12th International Art Competition the Church holds every 3 years. The theme was "All Are Alike Unto God", and my intent was to create the appearance of as much variation as possible in relation to God's love. The competition goes through several rounds of judging, the final one involving the direct leadership of the Church. In my work, I use a layer of national geographic pages and paint on top of them and wanted the texture to be as visible as possible. We live in a global Church now, and I believe what everyone has to bring to the table will continue to make it even more beautiful. That was what I was attempting to portray. I enjoyed the privilege of teaching a lesson in my friend's young women's class using this painting, and the spiritual insight they were able to see was astounding to me. They saw how the tree expanded forever to allow growth, how the people in the painting gathered and shared God's love, and the little child who leans on the tree with the simple knowledge that God is there for us to lean on. Choosing how to portray a variety of individuals was a challenge--I tried to indicate families while not making it exclusively so--there are all ages, as many races as I could fit, and indications of family with the presence of children. I grew up in a single parent home and am currently single...half the Church is now single, and I can attest that it's not easy or what most of us planned. I remember the pain my mother faced in a religious setting being single--you already feel like the odd person out. I wanted to try and speak to that population while still maintaining a presence of family. I agree that putting a piece out there is going to cause criticism, and I don't expect everyone to like it, but what concerns me is when there are assumptions about what I meant or the kind of person that I am. There are ways I grew up, views I hold, and experiences I've had that shaped the way I in which I interpreted the theme of the Competition, and the majority of people have accepted this piece without question of the intent.

I’m 42. I have a daughter whose mental health deteriorated drastically and swiftly when she immersed herself in pride culture. I cannot say enough of the havoc it wreaked in her life and inner peace. She’s better now. Because of this, I am especially sensitive about anything with a rainbow. There is a great distinction between those who experience SSA or gender confusion and the Pride movement. Pride agenda is evil and it nearly took our daughter from us.

I'm old enough to remember when the rainbow was a symbol of God's covenant to his people that he would never flood the Earth again. Let's take back the rainbow!

There's no way the artist didn't know how her piece could be interpreted. But even beyond that, I'd like to know who chose the piece for inclusion in the manual, knowing full well what it signaled to the general church membership.

The rainbow shards are not scriptural and take away from the sacred symbolism of the tree of life meaning. Thanks for your bravery and willingness to stand up for the gospel of Jesus Christ.

This is a tangent but I keep thinking of this scene from Lord of the Rings: '...For I am Saruman the Wise, Saruman Ring-maker, Saruman of Many Colours!' I [Gandalf] looked then and saw that his robes, which had seemed white, were not so, but were woven of all colours, and if he moved they shimmered and changed hue so that the eye was bewildered. 'I liked white better,' I said. 'White!' he sneered. 'It serves as a beginning. White cloth may be dyed. The white page can be overwritten; and the white light can be broken.' 'In which case it is no longer white,' said I. 'And he that breaks a thing to find out what it is has left the path of wisdom.' - Gandalf J.R.R. Tolkien

Artists need to be aware of how their art will be perceived. I think you were spot on. When you put the colored stripes under the painting, it lined up so exactly. I don't know why the artist was surprised by any of this interpretation.

I find it very hard to believe that the artist didn't know how the image would be interpreted in today's environment. I have personally seen the evil influences of DEI being used in the Church. As beautiful as the art is, as a stand alone piece of art, but I don't think that it should have been used on an official Church cover.

I remember when my oldest son was in second grade he was practicing his violin while wearing a Darth Vader helmet and the helmet fell and broke his G string. (Strings on the violin are G, D, A, E) It was a big event in our house. At school the next day he couldn't wait to tell his teacher "I broke my G string last night!" The teacher and my wife had a very interesting talk after school - as she was not thinking a violin string. Context matters very much and the church ought to avoid ambiguity on this subject as much as possible.

Propaganda requires that the majority not perceive the manipulative intent of the messaging. The whole point of propaganda messaging is that it is perceived as something “good and desirable”. Once a person or group of people have bought into the message, they will often then propagate the message themselves, unwittingly serving the manipulative intent of its authors. These people are called “useful idiots” by the authors of the propaganda messaging because they are serving the authors cause without knowing it. This is what we see happening in the church. At its core, the rainbow flag or the use of the rainbow colors, is a contentious symbol, meaning, anyone flying it is saying to others that I stand against you if you do not capitulate to the demands of my stance. It is a symbol of rebellion and revolution.

We are commanded to live within the bounds the Lord has set. I have seen a very big change of thought within the wards I have been in, where many, if not the majority, are openly embracing both the LGBTQIA+ and pro-abortion messaging. Christ said render unto Caesar what is Caesar's and render unto God what is God's. When Caesar's and God's wills conflict, which side do we choose? Caesar's or God's? We as a people must be very careful we are like Daniel and Abinadi, and follow God and His will, even when the consequences are heavy.

I agree with the comment that said this sort of imagery will be confusing for people. As a 24 y/o woman, I grew up thinking there was something wrong with me because I couldn't reconcile lgbtq with the Church. My faith crisis in 2021 was over this exact sort of message. The new generations take cues from these external branches of the Church. I'm grateful that last conference the brethren seemed to be firmer on these issues.

The most interesting part of the picture is the point that you made in the first video was that only individuals are shown and not families gathered around the tree. If diversity was the intent then individuals and families of color could have been included, but that is not the focus. It is the colours of the rainbow as you pointed out. It is the subtle insinuation of of ideology in the beginning that leads to full on inclusion in short order.

I am 60 years old. My husband is 65. We saw the rainbow flag in the painting. We watched your video before you took it down and thought you were spot on. Thank you for your correction. We will learn more about the artist. We were uncomfortable with the images you showed that mixed religion and politics.

I think an important point you made in your last video is that the Come Follow Me cover does not show any families. Lehi was highly desirous of his family to be with him at the Tree of Life, but that is lacking in the cover and seeing that families are central to God's plan you would think the church would want to emphasize that in the Come Follow Me cover. So it is not only the rainbow colors that lead one to think it is Pride related

The Lord warns us that wolves in sheep’s clothing will be among us in the last days.

I recently moved to a more liberal area. My new Relief Society lessons are full of the "never judge", "love all", "everyone's path is different." To some extent all of those are true but they get mutated in our lessons to a lesson that we can do anything because our Heavenly Father loves us just the way we are. This image chosen in a study manual and journal combined with somewhat vague conference talks about love and tolerance would utterly confuse my ward. I can see it now people comenting that it really is just a matter of time before the family proclamation is altered yo include the alphabet gang. The rainbow has been hyjacked and is a symbol that the church should no longer use in my opinion. I am utterly shocked that this image was used in the Come Follow Me manual. There are so many confused people from my generation and the generation after mine. This will just increase that. I am 33 by the way

Well done Greg. I am 76 and the painting reminded me of the pride symbol. Also, I could not see the real Saviour in any of those paintings. We have to remember that the world is here to distract us but as members of the church we are here to help build Zion.

Totally agree with Greg's feelings about mixing Jesus with any flag symbol

the rainbow is the building without foundation full of mockers

You were 100% right about her intentions. She’s gaslighting you.

When I saw the journal edition, my first thought were pride flag also. The main reason for that was the ground where the colors were divided like the pride flag. I personally don't want that journal edition in my home because of it. If the artist wanted to display all the different races, then make the people on the path look like their race. Maybe the artist should be mature enough to be able to handle the backlash they would get from this, without whining? I saw your first video and agreed with it. Like I said, I had already seen the book and chose not to buy it because of the pride colors. I am saddened by the fact that the rainbow has been taken over. It is such a beautiful display of God's love for us.

It's a beautiful painting, but the problem I have with it is that the colors overwhelm the fruit of the tree which is the whole point of going-to partake of the fruit. They're almost an afterthought here and the focal point are the rainbow shards.

I'm an older and I have studied a lot about the tree of Life and it represents and the purity of Jesus Christ in Lehi dream what's the tree of Life , there are families there and the fruit is white.

Im in my 70s and am with you Greg, Sacred art is not to be combined with political or other issues in the current culture. Also, I feel the Saviors return wipes away nations and symbols as we are one with Him.

I thought your original post was well done. Even if the artist intended or did not attend it still represented an ideology. Intended or not. I appreciate the clarity added.

Two critical questions to measure intent: 1) Is the artist willing to also denounce nuclear family destroying LGBTQ, Feminism, Marxism, BLM and CRT? 2) And do they wholeheartedly back the Proclamation of the Family? That would be an interesting thing to weigh against / for their intentions and reveal their intentions. Would make a large bet that they dont in very clear and decisive terms Safe bet that the Artist knew what she was doing (artists push boundaries) but more importantly the person(s) at HQ that selected the art knew exactly what they were doing. Same questions for people who selected the art would be interesting to hear.

34 years old I've grown up with the knowledge of the rainbow being associated with LBGTQ+. I don't remember much from my time I church being taught about the rainbow. My first thought when seeing a rainbow is LGTBQ+. Not God's promise.

Keep up the good work, Greg! I wish I would have caught the original video before you removed it, but I completely understand why you did so. You're incredibly gracious and fair. I look forward to seeing everything you produce. You keep me informed of things that I wouldn't normally have the time to investigate.

@CwicShow Thanks again for covering these important topics. Just like you articulated so well, in order to pull truth from information we always have to parse out meaning and symbols. In doing so I've found that it is important to note that technically the rainbow has not been highjacked, it's been counterfeited. The natural light rainbow reveals 7-colors (red, orange, yellow, green, blue, indigo and violet) to our naked eye that manifest in a specific order man cannot change. Thankfully the pride bow is only a 6-color bow omitting blue. Unfortunately most people see either one and connect them both rainbows just like counterfeit money is passed off as real money when they are not exactly the same.

@CwicShow From your previous video you included what I thought was a very legitimate criticism of the painting. You pointed out that there were no families present under the Tree of Life, but rather a hodgepodge of individuals. Pride flag allusions or not, the focus of the painting was not on families.

Everyone needs to relax. I'm an artist myself and I love color! It's a beautiful painting full of color. I find it a very calming painting with everyone dressed in white as though they are in the temple.

You should take a poll on who saw the pride flag and who didn’t. I’m 38 and my first thought was Pride.

The Church and Deseret Book need to know that the demographic group leaving the church the most will immediately see the pride flag implied in the painting. I am 39 and have teenage girls that I am trying to constantly safe guard from this ideology. This makes it difficult to do when Desert Book is putting this on their covers. I'm a dull math and engineer guy and even I understand the importance and use of symbols. The artist has a out by saying, "oh it really means diversity in God's creations and the human family." That to me seems a little too convenient. The under fourties will clearly eat that up like a drug that reinforces their world view of the gospel being a message of inclusion with no bounds.

My maiden name is “Sanders “. I have an old t-shirt that has my last name in huge letters on it. Since Bernie Sanders has entered the public political forum representing Socialism, I will not wear the t-shirt in public because I am NOT naive nor delusional. I am ABSOLUTELY certain that persons who see the shirt will have their minds go directly to thoughts of BS. I can argue to the end of days that it has every reference to MY name and not to his nor his support of Socialism. People will believe that I support BS and Socialist beliefs just by seeing the name. I am an artist of jewelry and other design products. I’ve heard the tempting whisperings that if I just take out the gender labels (Womens/girls products and Mens/boys products) I will appeal to the masses and potentially make more money by not turning anyone off by gendering my products. I declined the adversary’s invitation to appeal to the masses through rationalizing that I “didn’t exactly ‘say’ I was in support of their ideologies”. I did immediately see the pride flag in her work. My sister suggested that maybe I’ve now been conditioned to see it as pride every time I see rainbow colors. Yes, it is true. However, the SAME holds true on the other side of the fence; they too have been conditioned to see pride colors. Isn’t it the goal in ALL that we do to steer persons to the gospel and keep the opportunity for sinful thoughts out? Isn’t that the very point of dressing modestly?! The covenant is not dead but sadly the rainbow is. Pioneers died on the trail after making covenants in the temple but they did not dig up their bodies to keep the actual covenant alive just to believe and SHOW that it is. I detest sounding like I’m judging her, but I know that the Holy Ghost presented me with a choice to forsake increased sales so that ALL things, even the possibility of subtle nuisances, that extend from me point to the gospel of Christ, without confusion, but in its purest and simplistic form. She and others that have produced this kind of “art” have been deceived by whatever “Angel of light” ‘inspired’ them. We all at some point have listened to the “father of all lies”, thus the purpose of the great Redeemer. We all are required to humble ourselves and admit our error and return to the Sacrament table pledging to hear and do better. May she and all of us do the same.

Listening in Hawaii. I noticed the take down when my podcast player wouldn’t play the episode so I was interested to find out what happened. While listening to this episode my wife said “oh I saw that journal edition and I always buy the journal, but the pride colors was why I didn’t buy it this time.” She’s 46 for your data purposes.

This is exactly what the adversary wants. He wants to conflate the gospel/Savior with the pride flag. He works by playing on our sympathies. This is heartbreaking. So many good hearted people falling right in line with this tactic. It is a very slippery slope.

I don't like Jesus wrapped in the flags, any flag. I don't see Jesus being political which the flags represent.

I’m over 60 and do not like any of the dual symbol pictures. I personally would not have thought too much about the painting if it was left as the small print inside the book. It was placing it on the front cover of the journal version that I still think was specifically chosen by someone at Deseret books to be inclusive to the pride flag just as you said. The artist may have had no intention for that meaning, unfortunately I don’t think we can use those colors anymore when it relates to Christ, unless Noah is in the picture too.

The Savior wrapped in a pride flag is seriously offensive to me.

I'm 60, but am fairly involved in pop cultural issues. I'd like to avaid such, but as an active musician playing locally, I can't avoid the cultural issues. I feel like I can pretty readily spot activist bits snuck into various types of art. I will say that I say this, and I did not pick up pride vibes at all. The moment I heard you make the association, I could see it - but again, only after. So I also went to the artist's page to look at her art and see if there was any other vibes. I see a lot of color, but nothing that is overt in any way, and only very loosely that I could really associate with pride. So I went to her bio page. I still know nothing about her, but I do see that she mentions her first art teaching job in the Domincan Republic. and how much it impacted her art. That gave me enough information to dispell any doubts. Anyone with any aquaintance with DR art would know the huge impact rainbow colors have in that art. It's full of rich, vibrant and colorful - and often rainbow palette colors. It's immediately obvious that it influenced her work. While I don't know her or anything about her beyond her bio, I can't honestly make any pride connections in her work. That doesn't mean anything about her one way or the other, but suggesting there is anything there is unreasonable. In fact, I'm completely enamored with her other Tree of Life painting (Lehi's Dream - very green tree, the white people, and the iron rod and path with the dark building in the background). I'm wishing there were prints available. In the same way, I swas at a DB Saturday lookking at Natvity sets - there were a number from Haiti and Kenya and also full of color, and in rainbow layouts. Yet there is no connotation of pride there as well. However, that does not mean it can't be appropriated, and the alphabet community is very aggressive in coopting things. I don't see anything wrong with this work being the cover, but knowing the current culture, I could easily see someone at DB selecting it for coopted perpose to create a underlying message. It enrages me that activist groups have done this enough that it now becomes a default and puts a shadow over work such as this. I feel so bad for the artist, particularly as wonderful as her work is.

Very grateful to see the open dialogue with the Artist. We can all learn from each other and I was glad to see to Greg clarify his video. Ultimately the best approach is by love and keeping our focus on The Lord.

When I first saw the tree of life picture with colors, I totally loved it and still do! It's so beautiful to me and I didn't even think of the "pride" aspect. I love the rainbow and I believe God made it. We all know that light is made up of all these colors, so we should be able to enjoy them without others thinking we are supporting "pride"!

thanks greg for the word of your testimony. the truth is important to speak to defeat evil.

I saw your original video. I could be mistaken, but you never brought up in this reaction video THE MOST IMPORTANT point you touched on in the one you took down: namely, the LACK of families being represented. Aside from this, I see what you say about the painting, but for me, it is very beautifully done, and is ambiguous enough to be explained both sides.

Good job at correcting the mistake Greg. But if she was this angry about your video, why hasn't she told the progressive mormon influencers claiming her tree painting is the flag to stop? Why doesn't she say they are wrong as well?

Well done. The spirit of fairness even to those who may not deserve it as much was in this message while still standing up for the truth.

I'm 70 yrs old and viewed the original TOP piece. I was one of those who did not see the Pride flag in the artist's art. I just thought it was a beautiful representation. It wasn't until you combined your video premise with Elder Oaks words that I caught the danger. In some ways I feel sad that our innocence and wonder has been hijacked by the LGBTQ movement. But for me the rainbow will always remain a sacred symbol that I don't associate with evil or the Pride movement first. The Adversary will continue to have his Dominion. I'm not required to go there!

An over-emphasis on diversity is a kind of pride. The truth is--> Diversity is something that must be overcome through the Gospel. Normal worldly human behavior produces suboptimal results as diversity of a population increases. However, the Gospel is a path to develop improved relationships with all people and to develop the capability that is possible in the unique experiences and understanding that come with a variety of backgrounds.

Hi Greg! Glad you thought my comment on the other video was interesting! Yes, the way I interpreted the last video was that perhaps it was made with the sole purpose of seeing where people might fall on this particular issue of this journal. The art, to me, seemed like it could go either way on the political spectrum as far as what the artist's intent was and my thinking was you may have been interested to see what some of your viewers would think of it, with a little help from the host of course. Maybe this was some sort of commentary on mass mainstream media and it's influence on us as members of the church (was also a thought I had)? The idea that it was maybe some sort of experiment and what the responses would be is what intrigued me. Thank you for the update and clarification on this video. Keep up the good work!

I appreciate your clarification, Greg. I, too, love colorful art and also have a piece by Leonid Afremov hanging in my living room. I am sad that the rainbow has been co-opted by the "pride" movement and find it fascinating that they embrace pride, which is one of the deadly sins.

I have watched your CFM and other podcasts for years … I agree with your perspective and totally get your clip of Pres Oaks stating our goal is to be One in Christ … we maybe diverse but our goal is to be one in Christ 👍 Keep up the good work.

The tree of pride/diversity picture is also used in the come follow me manual on page 16. Not on the cover, but it's in there.

Wow, I respect you. You did the right thing taking it down... we're not all wanting to stir up contention, nor are we wanting misunderstandings. It leaves space open for others to come after us with THEIR contentions and misunderstandings. Lol. You get what I mean I hope. I've noticed it's getting hard to navigate my words and actions as I try to maneuver through everyday life. Someone is always offended and all I can ever say to them is, "I'm never meaning to offend anyone so I offer you 1000 apologies for the misunderstanding"... it works half the time. I do pray each night for the people in my paths who seem to intentionally take things out of context to suit their personal agendas of victimization,,, I even pray with gratitude for those who understand my apologies and those who don't miscontectualize what the good intentions of my heart are. So Greg, you are doing fantastic and I am grateful for your content, always!

The Tree of Life represents Jesus Christ (The Love of God) , which is very bright white light , it should never be painted over with rainbow colors in the name of "diversity" (like her description) This will confuse thousands of people in the church. Especially people who think gay marriage is somehow coming into the church. Hopefully everyone will learn a lesson to not to mess with the beautiful symbolism of Jesus (The light of the world) ....

Well done Greg you didn't do anything wrong

At first thought I think reclaiming the rainbow is a worthy and admirable endeavor. But I have two thoughts that give me pause. First, I believe that the rainbow is so totally captured and corrupted that any attempt to recapture it will be a metaphorical Trojan horse. No matter our intent, political activists will see it as them gaining ground. They love to use it as a signal of solidarity, and any adoption of the rainbow to reclaim it might provide a shadow to mask a growing rot. But my second thought is a reflection of the first, is the icon too far gone that we can only see it as a political symbol. Just as this video demonstrates, even when the use of the rainbow is innocent we see political activism. A hypothetical that comes to mind would be rainbow imagery in the temple would be, in my opinion, a strong attempt to reclaim it, but activists would love it and the rest of us would hate it. Other icons that come to mind would be the swastika, once a religious symbol for peace is now blurred in images because of the evil connotation. But icons used in Christmas and Easter holidays people say were pagan (whether or not that's true I don't know) and if true points out an example of taking bad icons and turning them good. So I'm not saying it isn't impossible.

Classic gaslighting. Behind lgbt doors they’ll celebrate this painting and it being the cover. Then in public they’ll tell you you’re crazy for seeing the lgbt flag in it. Then if a quote comes out next year after the manual is don’t being used, and says the painting WAS meant to represent lgbt people, they’ll argue there was nothing wrong with sneaking it in. It’s a lose, lose, lose situation

I did not mind the first two paintings of the couple at all, I thought the paintings were beautiful, but I was uncomfortable with all of the Jesus Christ paintings in all the different robes.

This episode is so well done! Thank you for your humble and very well spoken approach to such a tricky subject.

The journal cover picture does not remind me of the tree in Lehi’s vision. It was white to represent the sacred.

Greg I saw your first video and sent it to my sister and another friend and said “let’s discuss, and specifically the comments”. I’m a Boomer and have given up my rights to the rainbow. That ship has sailed. In 2015 I gave my 100 yr old dad a bday party with 100 people. I used colorful fiesta lights and kaleidoscopes and all the colors on the color wheel. It was fantastic. Pride flags had already been waving for decades but I didn’t feel it would restrict me in my celebration choices. Today, 8 years later in Jan, I would not use rainbow colors for a party, sadly. My sister’s insightful comment (who had bought the journal because she likes to journal by hand) said “if it’s all about diversity why are all (one or two of the figures I can’t tell) of the people in the painting women? Artistic folks have a unique way of seeing things but in the artist’s own words, she can’t be blind to the meaning of the word diversity in today’s society, which is much different than diverse. Within our culture we celebrate individuality and uniqueness that build up Zion. Diversity is something else. We all know that. It’s a “signal” as stated Naomi Wolf on X today said she’d been visiting her friends in NY where she learned that the middle school aged girls who at one time may have been goth, awkward, grunge, or on the fringe are now all binary. The arrow has hit the target. So sad.

I appreciate your candor! The painting is beautiful and I never made a connection between it and the "community". I only saw beautiful colors found on the earth. The gay pride business at BYU is a different story imo. Would BYU post pictures from the artwork ruins at Pompeii? We don't celebrate sin and we don't pretend it is not what it is. Certain "professors" are more concerned with their own popularity than they are about offending God. I have to wonder: do they really believe? Apostasy begins in the church. Christ wrapped in flags? I don't like them. He stands with His Father over all the earth. I'm waiting to see an artist paint a rainbow and flames. He said the earth wouldn't be flooded again, it would be burned. Very interesting video!

Thank you, well done Greg.

I’m close to your age. When I first saw the journal cover I did not see rainbow. When I saw your podcast was glad I didn’t buy it. - I once saw an old movie coming on tv and told my children we should watch it. It was a good one. As an adult I saw all the sexual innuendo and things that must have gone over my head as a young person. I was not educated in such things. Now I am the child- not as educated as the young people. 😳

Cultural images, like language, are negotiated with everyone and the idea of “taking back” the rainbow is silly because the political association has been embedded very deep. But, I do not think all rainbows are the same and not all bright colors are rainbows so of course artists are free to use them because Pride is a specific set of shades and hues in my opinion. Coming to the painting in question, I absolutely believe it was selected with intent. Editors and people in charge of graphic design are hyper aware of meaning in their imagery. If those people cared about staying above politics, I think it would be responsible to “avoid the appearance of evil” on something to be highly visible. But they ran the opposite way, the way I see it.

The pride flag has only 6 colors, a real rainbow has 7. What is said right there without being said is powerful.

Very reasonable, Greg. Thank you for your example.

Thanks, Brother, for the information. Let hold our ground and faith.

Great show Greg. I'm glad I found your channel this past year. Your thinking often resonates with me. Kudos pulling back your previous video on this topic after you did more research on the artist - it shows that you strive for integrity and are humble enough to admit publicly when your product needs improvement . I share your opinion about conflating symbols with religious art. I didn't care for any of the images where the artist (or AI) shows a picture of Jesus draped in a flag - regardless of whether it's a rainbow flag, US Flag, or anything of the sort. I seriously doubt that the "rainbow" can be "taken back" by Christians, I think a more prudent approach is to proceed with caution, and an abundance of forethought, when considering the use of anything that utilizes the rainbow colors. We live in a world of symbols, and we don't get to pick what they mean to other people. Imagine an organization trying to convince society that the Stars and Bars flag is simply a symbol of southern pride and is not broadcasting the racist undertones from the civil war. As a 65 year old veteran I had strong feelings about people who chose to symbolically kneel for the National Anthem, no matter how hard some tried to convince me it wasn't an afront to veterans or first responders. By the way - Great Tip on ScriptureNotes.com! It's been a gamechanger for me.

Greg I love your show. I watched the first rendition and thought it was accurate. I think the bottom line is, does it pass the ‘smell test’? Any artistic incorporation of rainbow sequenced colors carries with it an agenda in 2023, which is very unfortunate. The rainbow has been hijacked and usurped for millennia. What once was once a God sent symbol of protection is now ubiquitous with one thing, namely, gay pride. The rainbow flag was first introduced 25 June 1978 and therefore has been around so long it has sifted its way into our common visual and aesthetic paradigm; leading some to say ‘what’s the big deal?’ But interestingly it was used and usurped anciently by the Mesopotamian religions and symbolized the goddess of sexuality, Ishtar. The rainbow colored banner was flown freely in processionals in honor of her. And at festivals where men dressed as women and women as men and free love was abundant. The use of the rainbow color pattern is no accident by the LGBT community. I urge all to read “The Return of the Gods” by Jonathan Cahn, he lays it all out in disturbing black and white. DEI is a cancer. One can see how broad the metastasis due to its Stage IV invasion into the creeds and now into The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Diversity is the exact opposite of Jesus Christ. Members of the Church should seek for HARMONY. Go to a broadcast of the Choir at Temple Square to watch and listen as 360 voices produce the most beautiful music in harmony. They are unified in purpose. They are unified in message. They are unified in volume. They are unified in the bearing of testimony. They are unified in cadence. They are unified in dress. They are unified in so many things, but they are not unified in pitch. The harmony of pitch between the multiple variables of the singers’ range is what makes this Choir the most beautiful choir in the world. We should seek for unity in loving Jesus Christ and unite our individual harmony into a choir of Zion.

I absolutely love this painting! It is stunning. Thank you so much for creating this beautiful painting. It is breathtaking. Can I buy a print somewhere?

I absolutely love the two paintings you have in your family room.

Very powerful speech

In response to th artist's explanation: Dear Sister and "direct leadership of the church," the two problems that arise from depicting the tree of life in rainbow colors are these: First, whether it was innocent or unintended to be controversial, depicting the tree in rainbow colors was woefully short sighted in today's cultural battle. From the tenderly young and most vulnerable generation to the older but not necessarily wiser generation, we are all being heavily indoctrinated at every societal level to accept and embrace all sexual identity and behavior in the name of " love," under the banner of the rainbow. To think that the rainbow could, today, represent anything other than LGBT+++ is naive. Saddly using rainbow colors to represent nothing more than a covenant of God or the beautiful diversity of ethnicity is lost. Secondly and perhaps foremost, the artistic rainbow depiction of the tree if life is doctrinally flawed. A careful reading of 1 Nephi chapter 11: 13, 15-18, 31, and 33, makes it abundantly clear that tree of life DOES represent the virgin mother bringing forth "the Son of God in the flesh" to heal and redeem those who repent and obey his laws and does NOT represent the members of the Church or his children. Futhermore, the "exceeding whiteness" of the tree is not only significant but vital and essential. The "exceeding whiteness" represents the purity and glory of the love of God. Without the purity of Christ, his atonement, resurrection and glorification would not have been possible. To paint over the "exceeding white" tree in rainbow colors is to pollute it. As ethnically diverse children of God, we are all, as his children, united in a unity of faith, invited to take hold of the iron rod, come unto the tree of life and partake of its fruit which is "most precious above all."As explained in 1 Nephi 11 : 25, the iron rod, represents the word of God that leads us to Christ. The word of God invites us ALL to put off the natural man and be cleansed in the blood of the unblemished lamb of God. When we take hold of the rod and come and partake of his fruit, we will not only be cleansed of our sins, but we will receive, by grace, of his glory. The "exceeding whiteness" of the tree should not be overshadowed!

When I first saw this painting, I just loved it. The array of colors, to me, represents this world that God has created - the beauty and variety of colors that we see and enjoy every day. What would this world be without color? I don't see a rainbow at all. The colors could represent the life cycle of the tree. The colors create a contrasting backdrop to the Celestial tree - the white of the tree of life, the fruit of the tree, and the people dressed in white. The colors could represent our earthly experience and the white our Celestial experience. The variety of races represented certainly supports our doctrine that all people on this earth are children of God. There is a similar representation in the Temple. The painting has the effect of stained glass. I think it's beautiful and I would hang it on my wall.

I grew up near the Bay Area. Age 51. I saw the rainbow. I made remarks in the video that was taken down. The artist has a responsibility to convince me what her intentions were. I think she got caught promoting the alphabet gang. I love people of all backgrounds. Like I said I grew up near the Bay Area. But she is promoting something and got caught. You can’t ride the line anymore. You have to be clear. If you aren’t clear you end up having Greg do a video about you. She probably was really excited to get chosen until the attention your video brought to her. Hopefully she doesn’t ride the line anymore.

I'll admit that the first video led me to assume that the artist was one of the ones sneaking the gospel of equity into the church. Thank you for the correction and context. Given the quotes selected to be used by D.B. it seems intentional that it was being used as your message implies, and I still agree with you. There is no taking back the rainbow. Symbols aren't so simple or finite. If the rainbow is used to go against the gospel, I will not use that art or image. If it is used in the context Christianity is used to, I'll gladly use it. We cannot let them alter our behaviour and art. This is akin to allowing them to bully us into changing our language. It changes us, changes the way we think. If we yield on the ground of our thoughts, actions, and art, we give power and control to those who hate followers of Christ and work against His work. I agree with you that I don't like putting the Savior with any other symbol of a worldly icon. It takes away from the message of the gospel and the Father's work of bringing all into a covenant relationship with Him through the Son.

The entire end goal of the pride movement and all it's symbols is undermining the law of chastity. It is an eternal law, and any symbol of pride (or anything that equates with it) should be treated as the antithesis to the established doctrine of Christ of Chastity.

Great work, Greg!

Greg, I didn't see the first video and hadn't seen the painting. While I could see the possible connection, I don't think I would have thought it connected to the pride movement if I had seen it first. A very beautiful painting. On the subject of sacred art generally I feel much as you do. The picture of Christ in the various flags, of the national flags especially the US flag, I could say I like it because God established this nation and I wouldn't be bothered too much by the Peruvian flag either but the rainbow flag I just couldn't do. With that said, I would prefer that those kinds of symbols be separated, and yes, I am 60yrs young. I also appreciate all the effort you put into your pod cast to keep the factual, accurate and free from bias. I have often felt that some listeners are not fair to you with their comments.

I'm 56 years old. I'm not on board with the pride flag and associated politics and ideology. When I saw that picture we are discussing I didn't think "pride flag", I thought "weird arrangement of non-natural colors". Then I noticed the white discs on the tree and figured out "oh, that's white fruit, that's supposed to be the tree of life". I didn't think the picture was particularly beautiful (sorry artist, just being frank and honest!)

I'm not OK with any flag being wrapped around Christ. It is the ultimate example of let us make God in our own image.

Another comment art work with colors. Your art work Greg that you put it does not have rainbow imagery in it because the colors are not tightly packed and in order. If all the colors are used but don't have order to them, it doesn't have them same effect. Your artwork had all the colors uniformly scattered for the most part with pockets of certain colors based on the object and it's lighting. The Come Follow me journal clearly has a gradation from the bright colors to the darker colors in the tree itself and in the ground. The only way that happens is if your intentionally putting certain colors next to each other and in order across a wide portion of the painting so it makes a statement when view in the entire piece at once.

I think it is a beautiful concept and piece of art.

I had a horrible reaction to all of the pictures robing or cloaking our Saviour in anything but his glory. Show him surrounded by little children with his love for them shining in his eyes. They could wear any colors they choose but don't mess with him. Acceptance can only be done one to one and should not require us to change our religion to prove it. Flags of any nation should not be anywhere near him. They aren't relevant in the long run. I agree that our religious iconography should remain as pure and true to our gospel, not our secular interests.

I glad that you reframed your argument. I do not see the rainbow flag in Sabrina's artwork.

My opinion (I'm 75) is that it does change meanings and culture. It seems to be revealing the decay in society in general. Who, in today's world, doesn't recognize that media in all forms is mostly anti morality? Your 2 colorful pictures of couples in the rain aren't my cup of tea but I do like your interpretation of them. Melding 2 symbols together seems like an attempt to control thoughts, or at least bend them.

Thank you for taking the other video down and redoing it as suggested. As far as the flags, I can see the American flag because of the principles our country was formed on. I can see Peru. Jesus Christ unifies us, when we become a part of the body of Christ.

Great coverage of the topic. I think it is important to understand that some symbols may just be beyond reclamation. Two major ones i can think of are the pentagram (on the outside of the Salt Lake Temple and some other early temples) and the inverted cross. The inverted star is a symbol of christ and the inverted cross is a reminder of humility from how Peter was crucified. Both are not really used by broader christianity because they were coopted and corrupted by satanists in the 19th century. Sadly the rainbow has had a similar fate in the 21st century. I think the pride movement is particularly nefarious and something to be weary of because of how it comes under cover of "love" and "inclusion" but is one of the few sins specifically called out as abominable in the scriptures. I dont think that word is used lightly. Aslo reiterating what i posted on the previous video, when the Elder Holland specifically instructed staff at BYU to stop flying the pride flag because of the strife it causes i think we should take that to heart. I also think tge age split on viewing the painting is real. Im 31 and have grown up from my teens on being taught (usually by the left) that the rainbow (outside of the promise to Noah) is a representation of the alphabet community. My parents generation from the 60s was exposed to it but it was a fringe movment then. Not the mainstream polical movment is is now. They didnt have to stand and fight like i have had to.

A rainbow is a specific thing. Colors are colors. Art is art. Depictions are depictions. I judge for myself the things I like and the things I accept. I make up my own mind ... and usually people hate me for that.

Thanks, Greg. So sorry that you are often on the hot seat. Nevertheless, we need your voice. It is a voice of thoughtfulness and reason and it encourages cool heads.😊

I like the idea of taking back the rainbow. Including an olive branch is necessary, though, in my opinion.

Hi Greg, I love your approach, how you address the issue, and taking ownership on your views and how you can see that part was miscommunicated. I think our society needs more of being able to discuss hard topics, until they are not hard, and disagree, as well as being able to adjust and correct as needed. Thank you for being such a great example on this. I absolutely think we can take back the rainbow and it’s profound and beautiful promise God has made. I’ve done this for years in my quilts, which many are very rainbow ombré. I’ve always been the kids that wanted all the crayons and the biggest set with all the colors. The rainbow has always been God’s promise to me and all of His children. I’m fully aware it has been highjacked, much of what is sacred has been and Satan and his followers will not stop. I personally am not offended at rainbows, intentional or not by the artist, in sacred images. To me this is part of the taking the rainbow back. I also firmly believe that we will be judged by the intent of our hearts, and our actions…and what we can do is keep the lines of communication open, disagree with grace as necessary, and above all love. Those whose intentions are not holy and pure will be held accountable, and yes some will be deceived….but this is not new, God knew this from the beginning and in His omnipresent omniscience and perfect love and perfect balance of justice and mercy through the ultimate sacrifice of His Son, even Jesus Christ. I am comfortable in taking back, or rather staying consistent in my view of the rainbow and all colors. I know the doctrine of the family will not change, and I know God loves all His children perfectly and will not interfere with agency that He provides glories for all based on what they can abide because of their agency;and yes the ones who in perfect knowledge deny Christ and the Holy Ghost etc have their fate as well, but I also feel that is far misunderstood. Christ came not to condemn but to save, and He paid the infinite price, and all of God’s children will have the glory they can abide. How glorious is this! Hallelujah! 🌈♥️🎄♥️🌈

Given the loaded nature of the rainbow, why would the Church or any of its subsidiaries allow a rainbow inserted into an iconic story in the BofM? Why even approach the subject? I think it’s inappropriate. That said, it’s sincerely unfortunate that the rainbow has been tainted. Greg: in my opinion, you shouldn’t have taken the original video. It was spot on. Keep the great content coming! 🤙

The first thing that came to my mind when I saw the picture was Lehi’s description of the fruit-“the fruit thereof was white, to exceed all the whiteness that I had ever seen.” The colors of the tree overwhelmed the fruit in my opinion, and the fruit was the most important part of the tree. The white fruit should be the dominant feature of the tree. Seemed the focus was all wrong and it made me uncomfortable. Same impression when I saw Christ in the flags. The focus should be on Christ but the flags overtake His importance in those portrayals.

I agree with you. I do not like two symbols being put together. I was really upset when they had Jesus in a face mask.

I have to admit that the first time I saw the cover I did not think PRIDE nor did I think LGBTQ, don't laugh but I just had to ask my wife what those letters were. This is what I did think, "this is not a good representation of the Tree of Life that I have studied during my life". Sorry you saw a need took remove the original post.

It also sounds like the premise of the competition is wrong. It is a worldly outlook not a Christian value. The premise should be, "Taking the gospel to the world." Or something like that. Reading the bible there is no reason that a nation cannot keep itself separate from the world and allow limited immigration. God would care about the people actually believing him and taking his teachings seriously (same thing just about). He's not going to care if everyone is white that goes to church or black or whatever color. But the world cares about that.

Good for you Greg. Thanks for being kind and reasonable with the artist. That helps clear things up a little bit. Someone still tried to market this as a mixture of Doctrines of God and the Pride Movement, which is really the problem, using the word "diversity" inappropriately and provocatively. It makes me quite upset that certain vocabulary now has connotations and layers that are so subversive.