a TEST is coming

[Just_A_Guy]

(Raises hand tentatively) All of the above?

Tests can have multiple problems.  Lack of charity is one.  Too much "false" charity--especially charity masquerading as permissiveness-- is another.  Absolutism/statism from the political left, as well as suspicion and paranoia from the right (and divisive rhetoric from both).  Criticisms from the social left who think we're compromising too little, and from the social right who think we're giving up too much.  Attacks on the GAs from within the Church by Dehlinites and feminists from the extreme heterodox wing as well as from Snufferites and doomsday prepper-militia types from the extreme orthodox wing.  Dogmatic, intellectually lazy fundentalism; as well as faithless skepticism.  Excessive allegiance to the self-appointed intelligentsia on the one hand; self-satisfied know-nothingism on the other.  And so on, and so on.

To the extent that "the test" can be reduced to anyone factor, I would say it is simply this:  who will stand with the Lord and His modern prophets; versus who will be blown away with the social movement of the hour.

Edited September 19, 2017 by Just_A_Guy

[skippy740]

9 hours ago, The Folk Prophet said:

I think the test is leftist values. Which is to say, the test is "love". The true love of Christ is the key to Sainthood. The false "love" of the progressive left is the obvious correlative state that deceives. How else could we look at fellow members and fail to see who is and isn't a true Saint? Pornography and the like doesn't cut it for me. No one aware of another, or even themselves, engulfed in that chasm considers such a characteristic of Sainthood.

I'm going to challenge you on this a bit.  After proposition 8 in California was overturned, I had to do some re-evaluating on some things.

The war in heaven was fought over agency - the right to choose.  Who are WE to impose our way of life as the law of the land?  If the right to choose is restricted... then where is the test?  If that test does not exist, then it's the Lord's plan with Satan's method.  (Kind of like forcing your kids to go to church - right intention, wrong method.)

Yes, there are leftist values seeking to twist traditional meanings behind things... but if it doesn't occur, where is the choice?  Where is the test?  None of these outcomes, if and when passed, affects an individual from choosing the right path.  Changing secular laws, as long as they don't interfere with the freedom of religion and religious practices... won't interfere with anyone else living the life they choose to live.

Making marijuana legal... same thing.  Now it's just a LEGAL choice, not just a health choice.  Might as well have it regulated and collect the tax revenue.  Doesn't mean that people can't be arrested for being under the influence or fired from jobs for being unable to perform their duties.

[Midwest LDS]

Interesting question, and I think there have been a lot of good answers. I'm going to keep mine simple pride. The pride of thinking we know better than the church. I've seen it in multiple guises, but generally it manifests itself in ark steadying. Especially by members who pretend they are doing ok. I don't think the test comes from open apostates like Kate Kelly. I think it comes from members inside the church who pretend to be members in good standing but never miss a beat in criticizing President Monson and the 12 Apostles about how they are handling major issues, and insidiously imply by their comments that they don't really believe they are prophets and apostles. That is the test I'm most concerned about for the Saints, and I hope we choose to cling to our Savior rather than lean on our own understanding when we have doubts about church decisions.

Edited September 19, 2017 by Midwest LDS

[The Folk Prophet]

2 hours ago, skippy740 said:

I'm going to challenge you on this a bit.  After proposition 8 in California was overturned, I had to do some re-evaluating on some things.

The war in heaven was fought over agency - the right to choose.  Who are WE to impose our way of life as the law of the land?  If the right to choose is restricted... then where is the test?  If that test does not exist, then it's the Lord's plan with Satan's method.  (Kind of like forcing your kids to go to church - right intention, wrong method.)

Yes, there are leftist values seeking to twist traditional meanings behind things... but if it doesn't occur, where is the choice?  Where is the test?  None of these outcomes, if and when passed, affects an individual from choosing the right path.  Changing secular laws, as long as they don't interfere with the freedom of religion and religious practices... won't interfere with anyone else living the life they choose to live.

Making marijuana legal... same thing.  Now it's just a LEGAL choice, not just a health choice.  Might as well have it regulated and collect the tax revenue.  Doesn't mean that people can't be arrested for being under the influence or fired from jobs for being unable to perform their duties.

Think about what you're saying about law in regards to the following questions: Which of the two positions in the war in heaven proposed a punishment for sin? Does the law of the land actually restrict behavior or does it propose punishment for behavior?

Seriously....think on this some more. You have it wrong. Punishment for misbehavior is God's plan, as is plainly taught in 2 Nephi 2. 

That being said, I don't understand how your point is meant to challenge the idea that the test is "love".

[The Folk Prophet]

5 hours ago, Just_A_Guy said:

(Raises hand tentatively) All of the above?

Tests can have multiple problems.  Lack of charity is one.  Too much "false" charity--especially charity masquerading as permissiveness-- is another.  Absolutism/statism from the political left, as well as suspicion and paranoia from the right (and divisive rhetoric from both).  Criticisms from the social left who think we're compromising too little, and from the social right who think we're giving up too much.  Attacks on the GAs from within the Church by Dehlinites and feminists from the extreme heterodox wing as well as from Snufferites and doomsday prepper-militia types from the extreme orthodox wing.  Dogmatic, intellectually lazy fundentalism; as well as faithless skepticism.  Excessive allegiance to the self-appointed intelligentsia on the one hand; self-satisfied know-nothingism on the other.  And so on, and so on.

To the extent that "the test" can be reduced to anyone factor, I would say it is simply this:  who will stand with the Lord and His modern prophets; versus who will be blown away with the social movement of the hour.

Obviously, and in theory, you are right, and the point of the discussion isn't, actually, meant to narrow things down and determine THE test, (which clearly [not] must be one and only one thing alone. ) The point is to ponder on the matter.

However, I think that in regards to the specific quote in question, one of the variable that must be considered and is being somewhat overlooked is: "Then, brethren, look out for the great sieve, for there will be a great sifting time, and many will fall".

Now, clearly, this could be generic and simply refer to an eternal salvific fall, rather than a specific, leaving of the church. But -- it strikes me (perhaps mistakenly) that the point was specific, and that the test, Test, TEST, if being itself a specific thing, would also lead to an actual division in the church.

[Rob Osborn]

4 hours ago, skippy740 said:

I'm going to challenge you on this a bit.  After proposition 8 in California was overturned, I had to do some re-evaluating on some things.

The war in heaven was fought over agency - the right to choose.  Who are WE to impose our way of life as the law of the land?  If the right to choose is restricted... then where is the test?  If that test does not exist, then it's the Lord's plan with Satan's method.  (Kind of like forcing your kids to go to church - right intention, wrong method.)

Yes, there are leftist values seeking to twist traditional meanings behind things... but if it doesn't occur, where is the choice?  Where is the test?  None of these outcomes, if and when passed, affects an individual from choosing the right path.  Changing secular laws, as long as they don't interfere with the freedom of religion and religious practices... won't interfere with anyone else living the life they choose to live.

Making marijuana legal... same thing.  Now it's just a LEGAL choice, not just a health choice.  Might as well have it regulated and collect the tax revenue.  Doesn't mean that people can't be arrested for being under the influence or fired from jobs for being unable to perform their duties.

You might as well argue that we need porn shops and bars on every corner so that we can have choice. But that isnt the Lords plan. We are commanded to live righteously, to build zion and do away with all forms of idleness and wickedness. Laws themselves are based upon moral principles. There is nothing wrong with strict moral law. We do not have to allow evilness and idolatry in society to survive and live Gods plan. God commands that we do away with "all" evilness and idolatry.

Agency is actually best preserved as people choose to live righteously and do away with evilness. In the past some great prophets were able to completely do away with all evilness. Enoch was one such individual that created zion and because of its righteousness God removed it from the earth. Jesus, in the Americas after his resurrection, was able to establish righteousness for almost 4 generations where "none" in their civilization were lost and all were saved.

Satan destroys agency through temptations, evilness and idleness. As people give in to temptations and sin they slowly become bound in his chains and are led "captive" to his will and doom. That is precisely how Satan destroys agency.

[CV75]

16 hours ago, The Folk Prophet said:

In 1990 in an Ensign article by Gordon B. Hinkley (First Presidency Message) he quotes Orson F. Whitney quoting Heber C. Kimball:

“I want to say to you, my brethren, the time is coming when we will be mixed up in these now peaceful valleys to that extent that it will be difficult to tell the face of a Saint from the face of an enemy to the people of God. Then, brethren, look out for the great sieve, for there will be a great sifting time, and many will fall; for I say unto you there is a test, a Test, a TEST coming, and who will be able to stand?” (Orson F. Whitney, Life of Heber C. Kimball, Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1945, p. 446.)

What is (or are) this (or these) test (tests), do you think?

President Hinckley says, "I do not know precisely the nature of that test. But I am inclined to think the time is here and that the test lies in our capacity to live the gospel rather than adopt the ways of the world." The ways of the world are made up of "divers ways and means, even so many that I cannot number them (Mosiah 4:29)." And I don' think President Hinckley in his commentary was was referring to Utah alone.

[skippy740]

2 hours ago, The Folk Prophet said:

Think about what you're saying about law in regards to the following questions: Which of the two positions in the war in heaven proposed a punishment for sin? Does the law of the land actually restrict behavior or does it propose punishment for behavior?

Seriously....think on this some more. You have it wrong. Punishment for misbehavior is God's plan, as is plainly taught in 2 Nephi 2. 

That being said, I don't understand how your point is meant to challenge the idea that the test is "love".

Not everyone has our beliefs, therefore when new laws of the land are proposed, those who are of other faiths OR atheist do not RECOGNIZE an eternal punishment for sin.  The law of the land can do both to restrict behavior and propose punishment for behavior.

You talked about Leftist values.  The Left is trying (and generally has succeeded) in redefining marriage.  And if you don't agree with it, they call you a bigot.  I may not agree with it, but it's not MY place to tell people how they can live their lives.  Remember that marriage has not only a MORAL value, but it has CONTRACT values in this country of ours.  I may not like it, but I get it.  THEY don't recognize an eternal nature of marriage.  They only see and CARE about their life now.  Unless you can actually teach and convert at the ballot box, I don't see how it's going to make a difference.

You want to know what the "love" test is?  Letting other people re-define "love" and we can keep true to our own faith and beliefs and teach our children the same.

[skippy740]

1 hour ago, Rob Osborn said:

You might as well argue that we need porn shops and bars on every corner so that we can have choice. But that isnt the Lords plan. We are commanded to live righteously, to build zion and do away with all forms of idleness and wickedness. Laws themselves are based upon moral principles. There is nothing wrong with strict moral law. We do not have to allow evilness and idolatry in society to survive and live Gods plan. God commands that we do away with "all" evilness and idolatry.

Agency is actually best preserved as people choose to live righteously and do away with evilness. In the past some great prophets were able to completely do away with all evilness. Enoch was one such individual that created zion and because of its righteousness God removed it from the earth. Jesus, in the Americas after his resurrection, was able to establish righteousness for almost 4 generations where "none" in their civilization were lost and all were saved.

Satan destroys agency through temptations, evilness and idleness. As people give in to temptations and sin they slowly become bound in his chains and are led "captive" to his will and doom. That is precisely how Satan destroys agency.

We don't need to.  You have a computer.  You have access to a MILLION TIMES the "porn shops" right at your fingertips and in the privacy of your own home.

 

Please show me the latest "moral law" that has been passed.  I would agree that there should be zoning restrictions for bars and strip clubs.  They shouldn't be near schools - not because of temptation for children (not that it would be a good thing by any means - we restrict the access and sale of pornography for the same reason), but because of the kinds of people who could be leaving there and it could be a public danger.  But if you make those places illegal, you restrict freedom of moral choice.  

Years ago, we were encouraged to vote against Indian Gaming in California.  It passed anyway, but just because it passed doesn't mean that *I* have to walk in, right?  You sound like "if you build it, you HAVE to go in."  What happened to "stand ye in holy places"?  Aren't we strong enough and good enough to teach our children?  If you're not, the problem is INWARD, not a problem with the country and the FREEDOMS to live as anyone sees fit - within the laws of society to respect each other.

The test is to see if we will follow what the Lord our God commands us.  That's our test and that's our challenge.  For those who don't KNOW that that's the test... we can teach one-on-one, one-by-one... but not at the ballot box. 

If you want to change society, you teach them.  But if they won't let you in, you won't teach them by imposing your will for them.  Again, Lord's intentions, but Satan's plan.  You cannot force someone to be righteous.

Edited September 19, 2017 by skippy740

[The Folk Prophet]

17 minutes ago, skippy740 said:

Not everyone has our beliefs, therefore when new laws of the land are proposed, those who are of other faiths OR atheist do not RECOGNIZE an eternal punishment for sin.  The law of the land can do both to restrict behavior and propose punishment for behavior.

You talked about Leftist values.  The Left is trying (and generally has succeeded) in redefining marriage.  And if you don't agree with it, they call you a bigot.  I may not agree with it, but it's not MY place to tell people how they can live their lives.  Remember that marriage has not only a MORAL value, but it has CONTRACT values in this country of ours.  I may not like it, but I get it.  THEY don't recognize an eternal nature of marriage.  They only see and CARE about their life now.  Unless you can actually teach and convert at the ballot box, I don't see how it's going to make a difference.

You want to know what the "love" test is?  Letting other people re-define "love" and we can keep true to our own faith and beliefs and teach our children the same.

The question at hand isn't about "the world" though. It's about a quote that implies a test for the Saints, whereupon we won't be able to recognize the true Saint from the enemy within our own midst, and whereupon there will be a great sifting.

[Rob Osborn]

17 minutes ago, skippy740 said:

We don't need to.  You have a computer.  You have access to a MILLION TIMES the "porn shops" right at your fingertips and in the privacy of your own home.

 

Please show me the latest "moral law" that has been passed.  I would agree that there should be zoning restrictions for bars and strip clubs.  They shouldn't be near schools - not because of temptation for children, but because of the kinds of people who could be leaving there and it could be a public danger.  But if you make those places illegal, you restrict freedom of moral choice.  

Years ago, we were encouraged to vote against Indian Gaming in California.  It passed anyway, but just because it passed doesn't mean that *I* have to walk in, right?  You sound like "if you build it, you HAVE to go in."  What happened to "stand ye in holy places"?  Aren't we strong enough and good enough to teach our children?  If you're not, the problem is INWARD, not a problem with the country and the FREEDOMS to live as anyone sees fit - within the laws of society to respect each other.

The test is to see if we will follow what the Lord our God commands us.  That's our test and that's our challenge.  For those who don't KNOW that that's the test... we can teach one-on-one, one-by-one... but not at the ballot box. 

If you want to change society, you teach them.  But if they won't let you in, you won't teach them by imposing your will for them.  Again, Lord's intentions, but Satan's plan.  You cannot force someone to be righteous.

As you teach righteous principles in society you also curtail evil practices and place laws into preserving those righteous principles. More righteous cities have fewer porn shops, or none alltogether, have fewer bars, less crime and more happiness and a people that enjoy greater freedoms. As you move that slide of righteous behavior further towards perfection it is actually possible to create and enjoy laws that completely disallow wickedness in all its perverted manners. As a society begins to achieve this status they create zion- the place where Gods people dwell. A cities righteousness or wickedness is generally noted by what laws they have in place- what they allow and what they banish. Its no wonder then that cities like Las Vegas is a wicked city where the general population on average do not enjoy more freedoms and people are not happy.

As we slide the scale all the way over to Gods ways we find the very highest and strictest moral laws. In fact, so much so that every form and practice of wickedness is strictly forbidden. And yet, its only there where the fullest enjoyment of agency and freedom is found.

We should never confuse agency as the ability to freely choose evil. Agency is a gift, its the continued freedom to choose and act as one lives according to righteous principles. That gift can be taken away and is taken away in varrying measures as people disobey Gods laws.

Edited September 19, 2017 by Rob Osborn

[skippy740]

No.  When you slide the scale all the way over to God's ways, we have those who CHOOSE to follow those laws, rather than having that standard FORCED upon you.

Remember:  "In my Father's house, there are many mansions.  I go prepare a place for you."

No one is compelled to follow ANYTHING.  You CHOOSE to be there.  Compulsion is Satan's plan. Stop looking outward and relying on society to make one live righteously.  

[skippy740]

9 minutes ago, The Folk Prophet said:

The question at hand isn't about "the world" though. It's about a quote that implies a test for the Saints, whereupon we won't be able to recognize the true Saint from the enemy within our own midst, and whereupon there will be a great sifting.

I'm reminded of a recent article where church members were choosing to go to an "alternative" conference and they were deciding on commandments and things.  For example - making the Word of Wisdom as counsel rather than as commandment.  I can't find the article, but they are redefining many things to create their own "customized" faith.

Who knows where they are.  I may have some different views than some, but I'm not looking to lead anyone away from the Church.  Only to think differently and consider an alternative view.

[Rob Osborn]

14 minutes ago, skippy740 said:

No.  When you slide the scale all the way over to God's ways, we have those who CHOOSE to follow those laws, rather than having that standard FORCED upon you.

Remember:  "In my Father's house, there are many mansions.  I go prepare a place for you."

No one is compelled to follow ANYTHING.  You CHOOSE to be there.  Compulsion is Satan's plan. Stop looking outward and relying on society to make one live righteously.  

So, we should just let people do whatever they freely choose to do? Let rapists go free? Let murderers continue to murder?

No, we put laws in place that enforce the curtailing effects of wickednesd. Disobedience causes the law to be enforced that forces penalties. 

[JohnsonJones]

15 hours ago, The Folk Prophet said:

I think the test is leftist values. Which is to say, the test is "love". The true love of Christ is the key to Sainthood. The false "love" of the progressive left is the obvious correlative state that deceives. How else could we look at fellow members and fail to see who is and isn't a true Saint? Pornography and the like doesn't cut it for me. No one aware of another, or even themselves, engulfed in that chasm considers such a characteristic of Sainthood.

I would counter and say it's not.   Many would say I'm leftist, and yet, I'd say I have pretty strong views on morality.  Looking at it from the other side towards the conservatives of the US...

Lack of charity, attributing our riches to ourselves instead of the Lord and hence justifying why you should not share that wealth with others, condemning the poor because the Lord has blessed you with more than they...all values of the political right.  Stating that you are being robbed (as if you can be, it is the Lord that blesses and takes away) by having to help your fellow man, or other such ideas...is that really Christian?

However, I do NOT see the values of the liberal or conservative as the great sieve, or really anything dealing with it in particular.  It is not just a USA thing, or a Europe thing and is NOT defined by the political values of either of those locations.

I would say we currently are undergoing a great sieve...not just in the Valleys of Utah and Northern Arizona and Southern Idaho, but in much of the church.  I think we see it as more and more members fall away and reveal themselves as being anti-Mormon, or who truly do not have testimonies and hence are deceived by the cunning of men.  More and more anti-Mormon arguments (and most of them are age old arguments that are from the beginning of the church) are regurgitated in more and more areas online which are accessed by many people and members all the time. 

Hence, many who seem to be good Mormons, fall away, deceived by these practices and evil arguments, thinking that they know better and are now among the educated of the earth.  Many of these turn very vile and angry towards the church, hating those who are Mormon for no other reason than that their neighbors are Mormon...not for any other good reason at all.

I'd say the sifting has already begun, and unfortunately it brings tragedy and sadness for many in it's wake.  However, in this process, I see that as it occurs, slowly but surely the wheat is being separated from the chaff inside the church.  I don't see it ending anytime soon, but I do see that those who keep and attain their testimonies make the church core itself more solid and sturdy.

Edited September 19, 2017 by JohnsonJones

[Traveler]

15 hours ago, The Folk Prophet said:

I think the test is leftist values. Which is to say, the test is "love". The true love of Christ is the key to Sainthood. The false "love" of the progressive left is the obvious correlative state that deceives. How else could we look at fellow members and fail to see who is and isn't a true Saint? Pornography and the like doesn't cut it for me. No one aware of another, or even themselves, engulfed in that chasm considers such a characteristic of Sainthood.

 

I agree with your observation about a TEST – I also agree that the test is a matter of love; specifically, the love of Christ (sometimes called charity).  I think a big portion of the test is that of rejecting or separating because of anger (lack of charity) towards someone or group of someone’s.  Thus, a feeling of “they” do not belong or I do not have enough in common to make any effort to be a part of “them”.

I am not sure that we can categorize the “progressive left” as the single source of problems.  I know some individuals that consider themselves progressive left; that are concerned that many conservatives (right wing) are the heartless, cold and unfeeling that are more interested in punishing via the law (or by separating or not dealing with as a minimum) than in helping and lifting those that have errored or see things differently. 

I am thinking the test is that of love which finds common ground verses contention that brings separating and dividing.  In short, an extension of things begun long before any of us were born.   I also think we have an interesting example in scripture when Jesus (at the last supper) said that a test was coming that would lead to betrayal.  All but one asked, “L-rd is it I?”  The one that did not ask that question was the one that had betrayal in his heart.

 

The Traveler

 

P.S.  I do not think we should give anyone involved with the progressive left; the impression that they do not belong (or have any place) with us

Edited September 19, 2017 by Traveler

[skippy740]

1 minute ago, Rob Osborn said:

So, we should just let people do whatever they freely choose to do? Let rapists go free? Let murderers continue to murder?

No, we put laws in place that enforce the curtailing effects of wickednesd. Disobedience causes the law to be enforced that forces penalties. 

What you need to understand... is the definition of a fundamental right.

"A fundamental right is a right which ALL people can simultaneously claim without forcing someone to serve their needs." - Joel Skousen

In short - do what you want with your own life.  Live the way you want... but don't force me to serve your needs or impede on my liberties.

Murder, theft, rape... all impede on someone else.  I never talked about any of that.  I talked about the freedom to choose moral agency for ones self.  If you want to look at porn, go ahead.  If you want to be in a same-sex relationship with two consenting adults, go ahead.  I won't say there won't be eternal consequences, but you have the freedom to choose - as long as you don't impose your will onto another person.

You want to drink alcohol?  Fine.  Go ahead.  But don't drink and drive, because that becomes a danger to society - both in terms of property and a danger to someone else's life.  Do it in your own home or arrange a ride home.

Or do you propose a distorted interpretation of the Articles of Faith?

11 We claim the privilege of worshiping Almighty God according to the dictates of our own conscience, and allow all men the same privilege, let them worship how, where, or what they may.

... unless I don't like how you lead your life.  Then it's my job to force you through the laws of the land to live as I want you to live.

[skippy740]

8 minutes ago, Traveler said:

P.S.  I do not think we should give anyone involved with the progressive left; the impression that they do not belong (or have any place) with us

I think Harry Reid feels just fine. 

[pam]

43 minutes ago, The Folk Prophet said:

The question at hand isn't about "the world" though. It's about a quote that implies a test for the Saints, whereupon we won't be able to recognize the true Saint from the enemy within our own midst, and whereupon there will be a great sifting.

That is exactly where my thoughts were heading.  We've been warned over and over that many Saints will be pulled away by those in our midst that claim to be Saints but spend their time placing little doubts into our thoughts.  They will be crafty and we may not realize what they are doing.  But will we be strong enough and able enough to discern that is happening?  I think I can see this already happening with some of the people we've seen in the news that have gained many followers with their subtle and sometimes not so subtle teachings.  We've seen some of these people have already lost their membership in the Church.

 

 

[The Folk Prophet]

10 minutes ago, JohnsonJones said:

I would counter and say it's not.   Many would say I'm leftist, and yet, I'd say I have pretty strong views on morality.  Looking at it from the other side towards the conservatives of the US...

Lack of charity, attributing our riches to ourselves instead of the Lord and hence justifying why you should not share that wealth with others, condemning the poor because the Lord has blessed you with more than they...all values of the political right.  Stating that you are being robbed (as if you can be, it is the Lord that blesses and takes away) by having to help your fellow man, or other such ideas...is that really Christian?

However, I do NOT see the values of the liberal or conservative as the great sieve, or really anything dealing with it in particular.  It is not just a USA thing, or a Europe thing and is NOT defined by the political values of either of those locations.

I would say we currently are undergoing a great sieve...not just in the Valleys of Utah and Northern Arizona and Southern Idaho, but in much of the church.  I think we see it as more and more members fall away and reveal themselves as being anti-Mormon, or who truly do not have testimonies and hence are deceived by the cunning of men.  More and more anti-Mormon arguments (and most of them are age old arguments that are from the beginning of the church) are regurgitated in more and more areas online which are accessed by many people and members all the time. 

Hence, many who seem to be good Mormons, fall away, deceived by these practices and evil arguments, thinking that they know better and are now among the educated of the earth.  Many of these turn very vile and angry towards the church, hating those who are Mormon for no other reason than that their neighbors are Mormon...not for any other good reason at all.

I'd say the sifting has already begun, and unfortunately it brings tragedy and sadness for many in it's wake.  However, in this process, I see that as it occurs, slowly but surely the wheat is being separated from the chaff inside the church.  I don't see it ending anytime soon, but I do see that those who keep and attain their testimonies make the church core itself more solid and sturdy.

A) I'm not talking about leftist politics or politics at all.

B) Calling leftist values (note that word please) the supposed crux of "the test" doesn't meant all values on the right are true and right.*

C) You don't seem to understand the minds and hearts of conservatives very well.

D) I'm not sure we've even begun to see the falling away yet.

[Traveler]

8 minutes ago, skippy740 said:

I think Harry Reid feels just fine. 

 

For the record – I do not believe an accusation should ever be made towards a specific individual that is not available to defend themselves.  I have my suspicions concerning a great many in politics – but they are not here posting on this forum – therefore, I see little profit in calling out someone that cannot answer. 

I also believe, in the economy of G-d that we deal with (teach and give example) to those we encounter.

 

The Traveler

[skippy740]

Harry Reid is/was a prominent democratic senator.  He is on the 'political left' in our bipartisan political world.  It's a fact.  There is nothing to defend and no accusation of wrong-doing was made.  (We can talk about his conduct and accusations during the 2012 election... but I digress.)

[Traveler]

5 minutes ago, pam said:

That is exactly where my thoughts were heading.  We've been warned over and over that many Saints will be pulled away by those in our midst that claim to be Saints but spend their time placing little doubts into our thoughts.  They will be crafty and we may not realize what they are doing.  But will we be strong enough and able enough to discern that is happening?  I think I can see this already happening with some of the people we've seen in the news that have gained many followers with their subtle and sometimes not so subtle teachings.  We've seen some of these people have already lost their membership in the Church.

 

 

 

I have also seen some that have lost their membership in the church, return.  In all cases that I know, those that return have done so because of the great love someone has shown they have for them - even though they have been a problem.  I am thinking of Joseph Smith and his love of someone that betrayed him and the saints in Missouri. 

 

The Traveler

[The Folk Prophet]

15 minutes ago, Traveler said:

anger (lack of charity)

I don't believe anger is the opposite of charity. There is such a thing as righteous anger, after all. I'd say the opposite of charity is probably apathy.

17 minutes ago, Traveler said:

I am not sure that we can categorize the “progressive left” as the single source of problems.

Well, yeah. The single source of the problem would have to be pretty broad -- as in Satan.

18 minutes ago, Traveler said:

I am not sure that we can categorize the “progressive left” as the single source of problems.  I know some individuals that consider themselves progressive left; that are concerned that many conservatives (right wing) are the heartless, cold and unfeeling that are more interested in punishing via the law (or by separating or not dealing with as a minimum) than in helping and lifting those that have errored or see things differently. 

Once more, I'm not talking about or meaning leftist politics. I said leftist "values", and I meant it.

19 minutes ago, Traveler said:

I am thinking the test is that of love which finds common ground verses contention that brings separating and dividing.

I disagree. Love is not about finding common ground. It is about salvation of souls. And there is no common ground with evil in this matter. There is only one way, one path, one means. Contention is irrelevant to separation of good and evil. They are, eternally, separate and divided. Whether we contend over the matter or not will not change this.

 

[JohnsonJones]

Just now, The Folk Prophet said:

A) I'm not talking about leftist politics or politics at all.

B) Calling leftist values (note that word please) the supposed crux of "the test" doesn't meant all values on the right are true and right.*

C) You don't seem to understand the minds and hearts of conservatives very well.

D) I'm not sure we've even begun to see the falling away yet.

Leftist values IS talking politics.

 I would counter and say I do not think you understand what leftist values are either.

IT is SAD when one cannot tell the difference between their own political leanings and the gospel of the Lord.

Both sides of the political spectrum have their problems, trying to blame it all on one side while ignoring the problems of the other is a prime way to deceive oneself until the day they need to truly make that choice between religion or politics.

I know your statements may offend some who are on what we call the leftist side of the political spectrum.  As someone who would say I'm liberal and a leftist compared to much in Mormondom...I might even say your statement was a direct attack on my political values.  I don't think that's a good thing.  We may have different political leanings, but we should both be brothers in the LORD. 

The Lord is neither on the right, nor on the left, but we may be on the right hand or the left hand.  The Lord is neither rightest nor leftist, but rules over all men. The falling away isn't something that deals with leftist values, or conservative values, or whatever you have, but more of something that deals with each individuals testimony.  There is a great deal these days that try to destroy the testimonies of members, and it are those things that are causing the great sieve in the church.  This thing is probably necessary for the church, but I think all of us should be saddened when we see members fall away from the church into apostasy or anti-Mormon hatred.

I would agree though, that though I think it's begun, it is probably going to continue until the second coming of the Lord.  I would hope that we've seen the worst of it already, but in all likelihood it will get worse if the book of Revelation or Nephi occurs like many interpret it.