I had an interesting conversation yesterday. It provoked this comment.
When Julius ended the Republic by crossing the Rubicon with the 13th Legion from Gaul, he established a dictatorship that would change into the Empire thereafter. The Republic was dead. The Empire lived on.
Julius' great nephew is regarded as the first fully recognized Emperor of the Roman Empire. He ruled until his death in 14 AD as dictator for life.
Rome dominated the world, subduing other peoples who were considered inferior to Romans. They believed it was Rome's right to rule the world. Roman control was benefiting others. This was the Pax Romana, or peace of Rome. It came at the point of a spear. Such is the peace offered by the leaders of this world.
Among the lands under Roman control was the Judean province in which Jesus Christ was born. The place of His birth was directly affected by Augustus' taxing. (Luke 2: 1-6.) He was a Jewish subject to the vassal king of the Herodian family. His life was lived between two Roman controlled provinces.
Jesus was asked if it was lawful to give tribute to Rome. He responded by asking for a coin, noting Caesar's image on it, and remarking "give unto Caesar the things that are Casear's; and unto God the things that are God's." (Matt. 22: 17-22.)
Jesus never challenged Roman authority. He submitted to it. When the time comes for the establishment of Zion, it will not be necessary for us to deviate from Christ's example. Those who are in the promised latter-day Zion will be protected by the "the terror of the Lord." The residents will be those who "will not take up arms against their neighbor." (D&C 45: 66-71.) There is no need to overthrow the world. It will overthrow itself. The Lord will not permit the wicked to destroy the righteous. (1 Ne. 22: 16.) It is the wicked who destroy the wicked. (Mormon 4: 5.)
Jesus never challenged Roman authority. He submitted to it. When the time comes for the establishment of Zion, it will not be necessary for us to deviate from Christ's example. Those who are in the promised latter-day Zion will be protected by the "the terror of the Lord." The residents will be those who "will not take up arms against their neighbor." (D&C 45: 66-71.) There is no need to overthrow the world. It will overthrow itself. The Lord will not permit the wicked to destroy the righteous. (1 Ne. 22: 16.) It is the wicked who destroy the wicked. (Mormon 4: 5.)
We live in a world today in which Pax Americana has established controlled violence the world over. The fear of destruction holds forces at bay which would gladly destroy one another if permitted. The key to replacing the current world order with another one, as many insurgencies the world over recognize, is the destruction of Pax Americana by destroying American hegemony. A lot of people are working on that, both inside and outside the United States.
Latter-day Zion will not need to take up the sword to defend themselves. The Lord will be their shield and protection. Since the wicked are responsible for killing the wicked, you join them when you decide to take up arms. You also exclude yourself from those who are to come to Zion - for that group will be composed only of those who refuse to take up arms against their neighbor. (D&C 45: 68, above.)
Read again how Zion was protected in the days of Enoch. (Moses 7: 13-17.) It wasn't an army or arms which protected them. It was the Lord who dwelt among them.
Our challenge as a people is to live so the Lord can dwell among us. He will "take up His abode" with us as the Second Comforter, if we are prepared to receive Him. This is why I have written what I have written. Zion will be a byproduct of a prepared people. It never has been and never will be the result of a violent, armed, and politically motivated insurrection by people who want to isolate themselves from the world. Such people will only be a part of those who take up arms, and acting as part of the wicked, join in the destruction of the wicked, including themselves.
This does not mean that some righteous will not be required to die. The Lord's ability to protect us will require His hand move in "justice and mercy" to fulfill His promises. Those who die will die unto the Lord. Those who live will live unto the Lord. But the battle is the Lord's.
Thank you for your ever-practical approach. I had a personal experience regarding this very thing. You don't have to publish it, but I thought I would share.
ReplyDeleteOver a year ago, I felt prompted to get myself prepared. My wife and I set out to gather our food storage (which we did) and make other preparations. One day I found myself in the isles of a gun store, determined to walk out with a shotgun, rifle, and 22. As I looked down the barrel of the guns, I thought to myself, "What am I really going to be using this for?" I cringed at the thought, but part of being prepared was having a means to defend my family, right?
As I walked into the isle, looking at ammunition, I said a little prayer, because it didn't feel right. The distinct message came then and there: "You can go ahead and get the weapons, for that is the easy way. It is understandable that you want to protect your family. However, you can also choose not to go down this road, and instead, look to the Lord for the protection of your family. It will require your faith and preparedness on a spiritual level. But I promise that if you choose this path, the Priesthood will be magnified in you, and you will not disqualify yourself for greater things."
There were a couple other witnesses at the time of this experience which confirmed that I had the choice. I walked out of the store empty-handed, but determined to do my best to come unto the Savior for my protection.
I don't know what the future holds, and perhaps I will be one of those required to die in the days ahead. But I do know that I will trust in Him, regardless.
Well said... Amen.
ReplyDeleteEvery so often our High Priest's group in Orem offers a concealed weapons permit class under the umbrella of "preparedness".Every time that they announce it, I obnoxiously protest that concealed weapons permits have nothing to do with the gospel of peace.
ReplyDeleteAfter reading your material on the sealing power in Beloved Enos last year I recieved some insight into the verses you quoted from in Section 45. I read from verse 70 "it shall be said among the wicked: Let us not go up to battle against Zion, for the inhabitants of Zion are terrible; wherefore we cannot stand"
I asked my gospel doctrine class this rhetorical question, "Why would a bunch of war-mongering ferocius killers be afraid to go up against a bunch of peace-loving Mormons where no one will take up arms?
The Book of Moses answers the question for me.
,,,Enoch...led the people of God, and their enemies came to battle against them; and he spake the word of the Lord, and the earth trembled, and the mountains fled, even according to his command; and the rivers of water were turned out of their course; ... and all nations feared greatly, so powerful was the word of Enoch..
I picture a time when Zion's residents all have seen the Lord, where all have the faith to move mountains, a city with sanctified residents, who have the sealing power and who are authorized to use it to defend Zion. Will I be there or hunkered down in Utah with my shotgun defending my stash?
We have the priesthood, as Elder Packer pointed out in General Conference, but not yet the power to be had within the priesthood.
"The priesthood does not have the strength that it should have and will not have until the power of the priesthood is firmly fixed in the families as it should be."
I love your blog and always feel edified by your gospel commentary.
Thanks and keep it up.
The Lord said, "Nevertheless, thine enemy is in thine hands; and if thou rewardest him according to his works thou art justified; if he has sought thy life, and thy life is endangered by him, thine enemy is in thine hands and thou art justified."
ReplyDelete(Doctrine and Covenants | Section 98:31)
The Lord does not say you can never be sanctified if you protect your own or your families life by taking your enemies life. You are justified before the Lord and your enemy is in your hands if this is the case. Where does it say if you take your enemies life then you cannot come to Zion? It is true, everyone that will not take up arms against his neighbor will need to flee to Zion for safety, and there will be no need for arms in Zion. I want to know where it says that before you get to Zion, if you protect yourselves by taking another life, you are automatically excluded from Zion.
Denver you say "Since the wicked are responsible for killing the wicked, you join them when you decide to take up arms." How can you say this given what the Lord says in 98:31? Are you saying the Lord will justify the wicked?
How can we square any of this when Moroni was allowed to put to death people that there only sin was not to take up arms in defense of their freedoms? People were put to death for not taking up arms, and the people that put them to death were not wicked people and I'm sure some even are in the celestial kingdom as we speak.
I read your blog regularly Denver but I do not totally agree with your sentiments on this topic.
I am not trying to persuade anyone. I'm only stating what I understand and why.
ReplyDeleteAs to your comment, I agree one would be "justified." There is, of course, a difference between being "justified" and being "sanctified." I do not seek merely to be justified in defending myself, but to offer sacrifice that I might be sanctified.
It seems to me that we typically believe and assume that the people of Ammon who refused to take up arms to defend themselves were more righteous than the Nephites who were willing to defend themselves. But it also seems that we are forgetting three things:
ReplyDelete1) It says in the Book of Mormon that the Lord commanded the Nephites to defend their families.
Alma 43: 47
And again, the Lord has said that: Ye shall defend your families even unto bloodshed. Therefore for this cause were the Nephites contending with the Lamanites, to defend themselves, and their families, and their lands, their country, and their rights, and their religion.
2) The 2,060 Stripling Warriors of Helaman, who were children of the people of Ammon, had incomparable faith in God and yet took up arms and were willing to sacrifice their lives in defense of their brethren, their country, their religion, etc.
3) Nephi was commanded to kill Laban.
I think it is scary whenever we make a rule of righteousness that excludes direct revelation from the Lord, either to ourselves personally or through a priesthood leader with stewardship over us (his counsel always being subject to confirmation by the Spirit).
Abraham became the Father of the Covenant because he was willing to follow a commandment of the Lord that went against everything he believed and desired.
Captain Moroni and according to his words, many of the Nephites, were sorry to be the means of sending so many of their brethren to the eternal world unprepared to meet their God. They weren't sitting home on top of their food storage with a shotgun and a snarl on their faces. They were truly righteous men. I can easily imagine it being the Lord's will in any number of specific cases that men be willing to sacrifice BY a willingness to defend their wives and children from rape and murder rather than by adherence to a rule that they have established in their own minds and hearts that it is always higher to die than to defend.
For one man, the Lord might require that he have the faith to trust in the Lord to defend him and his family or to have the faith to let them die. For another man, his acid test might be to be willing to follow direction from the Lord to take up arms in defense of himself and others.
We love to keep ourselves safe. It's a deep human need. Some people do it with guns. Some people do it with rules. Neither one is working. Following the Spirit is the only thing that is going to work and lead us back into His presence.
"I am not trying to persuade anyone. I'm only stating what I understand and why." Understood, but, you are an intelligent person, when you say "you join the wicked when you take up arms", your "understanding" is totally different than what Christ is actually saying. Obviously Christ does not agree with you. Christ will not justify the wicked, yet he will justify someone who is living his laws who takes up arms to defend themselves. So it follows that anyone that takes up arms will not fall into the ranks of the wicked as you proclaim. Your understanding confuses me since it does not agree with what Christ appears to be saying.
ReplyDeleteI agree that there is a huge difference between justification and sanctification. But, according to Christs own words, defending yourself does not appear to disqualify you from becoming sanctified or being a citizen of Zion as you say it does.
Defending yourself is not mutually exclusive to these things according to the scriptures. You cannot assume if it says one thing it also says the other.
I have not asserted that "Christ agreed with me." But I would note that Christ never took up arms. His only resort to a physical demonstration was to make a small scourge with a rope to drive out money changers from the Temple. No one was hurt. His display was of righteous indignation, not of physical compulsion. Those who retreated did so from shame, not from risk of physical injury.
ReplyDeleteHe suffered injury, but did not inflict it. He healed injuries and infirmities in others, but never imposed them. He took others pains upon Himself, but did not cause it.
There is also the example of Alma and Amulek, where women and children were being burned to death and Amulek wanted to end it using the power of God. Alma counseled to the contrary, saying the actions of the wicked would result in them being held accountable for shedding innocent blood. He went on to explain his own and Amulek's death were unimportant, as well. (See Alma 14: 10-13.)
When Joseph surrendered he expected to die. He said he would be killed if he fell into the hands of the mob again before he left Nauvoo. When his friends came to persuade him to return, he said if his life was of no worth to his friends it was of no worth to himself. Then as he departed Nauvoo he said he went as a lamb to the slaughter. He had a legion of warriors; and he asked them to surrender their arms. The small pepperbox handgun he had was given to him in jail, and was no match for 200 men armed with .50 caliber rifles. Discharging it was not intended to repel the mob, but was merely symbolic. When his brother fell dead, Joseph rushed to the window to end the killing by letting them have his blood. It worked, and it saved Bro. Taylor's and Bro. Richards' lives. He laid down his life, and when he could have summoned an army to his defense, he disarmed them instead.
I am content in my views. You needn't share them.
When Amulek wanted for himself and Alma to use the power of God which was in them to save the women and children from the flames, Alma didn't ever say he was counseling from his own understanding of a true principle. He said specifically that the Spirit constrained him not to do it. When he went on to say why, it seems to follow that the Spirit was telling him the "whys" for that instance because that the Lord doesn't always follow that pattern, as evidenced by most of the Book of Mormon, which, by the way, was written by the warrior prophet, Mormon, someone skilled in the use of weapons.
ReplyDeleteAlma 14:
10 And when Amulek saw the pains of the women and children who were consuming in the fire, he also was pained; and he said unto Alma: How can we witness this awful scene? Therefore let us stretch forth our hands, and exercise the power of God which is in us, and save them from the flames.
11 But Alma said unto him: The Spirit constraineth me that I must not stretch forth mine hand; for behold the Lord receiveth them up unto himself, in glory; and he doth suffer that they may do this thing, or that the people may do this thing unto them, according to the hardness of their hearts, that the judgments which he shall exercise upon them in his wrath may be just; and the blood of the innocent shall stand as a witness against them, yea, and cry mightily against them at the last day.
12 Now Amulek said unto Alma: Behold, perhaps they will burn us also.
13 And Alma said: Be it according to the will of the Lord. But, behold, our work is not finished; therefore they burn us not.
Notice that these are the exact same words Nephi used about killing Laban: 1 Nephi 4:10 And it came to pass that I was constrained by the Spirit that I should kill Laban; but I said in my heart: Never at any time have I shed the blood of man. And I shrunk and would that I might not slay him.
According to the scriptures, we are sanctified by the Savior's Atonement, by His blood. First, however, we must keep the commandments, and then be justified by the Spirit. Following the Spirit and thereby being justified is not a lower law, it's a prerequisite.
Moses 6: 60 For by the water ye keep the commandment; by the Spirit ye are justified, and by the blood ye are sanctified;...
It's true that the Savior never took up arms to defend Himself, but He is the one who commanded Nephi to kill Laban, the Nephites to defend themselves, and other examples of the same.
Joseph Smith of course knew he couldn't stop a mob with small handgun, but that doesn't mean he didn't kill someone with it. It's highly likely that he did when he shot into the mob coming up the stairs.
I'm content for both you, Denver, and you, Steve, to have and keep your views. I'm just interested that neither one of you is addressing the concept of following the Spirit. Denver, according to your own writings, it's by following the Spirit that we come into Christ's presence. That principle applies here, no?
As was stated earlier, D&C 98 gives some insight into this. The Lord lays out two choices. You get to choose.
ReplyDeleteVerse 32 says that this same law is what was given unto the prophets, including Nephi.
Abraham's sacrifice is different in that it was his son, but this is talking about those seeking to hurt you. Isaac was only helpful to Abraham.
98:29,31 (31 quoted above) gives the one choice.
98:30 gives another choice. “And then if thou wilt spare him, thou shalt be rewarded for thy righteousness; and also thy children and thy children’s children unto the third and fourth generation.”
It is worthy to mark that the choice of sparing is the one that brings further blessings, while the other one has no such blessings attached.
There is also a hint the Lord gives. The key word is “spare”. Spare means to save or set free. Earlier in that section the Lord says, “I, the Lord God, make you free, therefore ye are free indeed; and the law also maketh you free.” (D&C 98:8).
This seems to have kicked in for the Ammonites, at least twice in the record. Once when some did die, but they were all saved and more were converted than died that day. Another is the stripling warriors. Because of their parents following this, they were blessed greatly. They even admitted they gained it from their parents, specifically mothers (an important distinction). Had they followed the same path, just imagine the greater power that would have been given by God. It would have radically changed the story in the Book of Mormon.
In Nephi's case with Laban, it can be seen as the same law. The same key words are there, like "sought thy life", "delivered into thy hands", "justified". The justification is even given to Nephi powerfully, to enable him to make this choice. Many cases seem to give a powerful, almost overpowering, justification, like in Moroni's case. Justice is not a weak thing, but neither is mercy.
Nephi appears to recognize that this is the law. This would have been an excellent time to forgive and plead for the life of another. When the sword of justice is falling upon your enemy, can we plead for him? Do we even believe that way is open? Laban was completely sloshed at the time, and Nephi likely could have spared him and gotten the plates. Perhaps this was purely for Nephi's sake, to get him to choose.
Anyway, the Lord gives the choice. We get to choose the one we like best.
As for me, I choose to spare and heal.
Denver,
ReplyDeleteWould you overturn the counsel of the Prophets? Brigham Young wrote clearly about this issue:
"We all believe that the Lord will fight our battles; but how? Will He do it while we are unconcerned and make no effort whatever for our own safety when an enemy is upon us? If we make no effort to guard our towns, our houses, our cities, our wives and children, will the Lord guard them for us? He will not; but if we pursue the opposite course and strive to help Him to accomplish His designs, then will He fight our battles. We are baptized for the remission of sins; but it would be quite as unreasonable to expect a remission of sins without baptism, as to expect the Lord to fight our battles without our taking every precaution to be prepared to defend ourselves. The Lord requires us to be quite as willing to fight our own battles as to have Him fight them for us. If we are not ready for an enemy when he comes upon us, we have not lived up to the requirements of Him who guides the ship of Zion, or who dictates the affairs of his kingdom." (Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, Vol. 11, p. 131, August 1-10, 1865.)
Further,
"As for this people fostering to themselves that the day has come for them to sell their guns and ammunition to their enemies, and sit down to sleep in peace, they will find themselves deceived and before they know, they will sleep until they are slain. They have got to carry weapons with them, to be ready to send their enemy to hell cross lots, whether they be Lamanites or mobs who may come to take their lives, or destroy their property. We must be prepared that they dare not come to us in a hostile manner without being assured they will meet a vigorous resistance and ten to one they will meet their grave." (Brigham Young Journal of Discourses,Vol 1, P . 171 - 172, July 31, 1853)
Likewise, Joseph Smith was quoted in the Sept. 2008 Ensign, a letter he wrote from Carthage jail:
"There is one principle which is eternal…It is the duty of all men to protect their lives and the lives of their households whenever necessity requires, and no power has a right to forbid it."
Note the word "duty" by the Prophet.
Now Denver, you wrote:
"Since the wicked are responsible for killing the wicked, you join them when you decide to take up arms. You also exclude yourself from those who are to come to Zion - for that group will be composed only of those who refuse to take up arms against their neighbor."
Logical fallacy! -- is it ONLY the wicked who slay the wicked? NO! Is it "ONLY.. those who refuse to take up arms" who will be part of Zion? NO! for we have Alma, Moroni, Mormon, Nephi, Moses and many other righteous men who slayed the wicked, consistent with the Lord's commands.
Thus, there are many times noted in our scriputres when the Lord commands the righteous to defend themselves and slay the wicked. It is not ONLY the wicked who slay the wicked.
As you cite D&C 45:68-69, please quote the passage IN FULL including the important opening phrase "And it shall come to pass AMONG THE WICKED", and in context of other Prophetic statements (such as above).
You also stated: "We live in a world today in which Pax Americana has established controlled violence the world over. The fear of destruction holds forces at bay which would gladly destroy one another if permitted. The key to replacing the current world order with another one, as many insurgencies the world over recognize, is the destruction of Pax Americana by destroying American hegemony."
Are you in favor then of "American hegemony" to maintain "Pax Americana" (terms used by neo-cons)? Please explain.
--Steven E. Jones
The philosophy of "we do not need to do anything because if we are righteous God will take care of us in the end..." is Satanic, & false doctrine that is presented by those who are misinformed or deceived deceived. Indeed, the philosophy of the world ... if we disarm ourselves and proclaim peace to everyone...then evil will leave us alone, is part of this deception of the Adversary.
ReplyDeleteIn the book of Mormon it talks about the Satanic deception of all is well in Zion. Part of that is also...do nothing (don't bother to keep the commandments)....because the Lord will beat us with a few stripes...and all will be well in the end.
As Joseph and Brigham and every other prophet who has ever lived upon the earth has tried to teach... (and recently in the talk given by Elder Oaks in General Priesthood...teaching this same principle concerning faith and healing)
GOD WILL NEVER DO FOR US WHAT WE CAN DO FOR OURSELVES.
If we don't make an effort...God will not either. IT IS ONLY AFTER WE DO ALL THAT WE CAN DO...THAT GOD MAKES UP THE DIFFERENCE. (This is at the heart of the Atonement and the Grace of God.)
If Nephi, Moroni, Mormon, Alma, Enoch and others followed the philosophy of "If I am righteous I need to not do anything to defend myself and my family for the Lord will protect me." There would be no Book of Mormon. It would have ended when Laman and Lemuel first attacked Nephi. Notice that one of the very first things that Nephi did in the Wilderness was to arm his people.
There is more I would say on this subject... but suffice it to be... Brigham Young, (a prophet of God) is exactly right.
"We all believe that the Lord will fight our battles; but how? Will He do it while we are unconcerned and make no effort whatever for our own safety when an enemy is upon us? If we make no effort to guard our towns, our houses, our cities, our wives and children, will the Lord guard them for us? He will not; but if we pursue the opposite course and strive to help Him to accomplish His designs, then will He fight our battles. We are baptized for the remission of sins; but it would be quite as unreasonable to expect a remission of sins without baptism, as to expect the Lord to fight our battles without our taking every precaution to be prepared to defend ourselves. The Lord requires us to be quite as willing to fight our own battles as to have Him fight them for us. If we are not ready for an enemy when he comes upon us, we have not lived up to the requirements of Him who guides the ship of Zion, or who dictates the affairs of his kingdom." (Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, Vol. 11, p. 131, August 1-10, 1865.)
Further,
"As for this people fostering to themselves that the day has come for them to sell their guns and ammunition to their enemies, and sit down to sleep in peace, they will find themselves deceived and before they know, they will sleep until they are slain. They have got to carry weapons with them, to be ready to send their enemy to **** cross lots, whether they be Lamanites or mobs who may come to take their lives, or destroy their property. We must be prepared that they dare not come to us in a hostile manner without being assured they will meet a vigorous resistance and ten to one they will meet their grave." (Brigham Young Journal of Discourses,Vol 1, P . 171 - 172, July 31, 1853)
Roger Young
I appreciate your pointing out D&C 98. I had actually forgotten about this, and in light of what it says in this section, I am conceding that it is a higher law to not take up arms than to do so. However, it is not the highest law -- following the Spirit always is.
ReplyDeleteThe example of Nephi is the true example of this. The Spirit didn't just say to him that the Lord had delivered Laban into his hands and so he would be justified in killing Laban if he wanted to. The Lord was clearly not just giving him a choice between the law of how to be justified and the higher law of sparing his enemy. Verses 12 and 13 seem quite clear:
I Nephi 4:
12 And it came to pass that the Spirit said unto me again: Slay him, for the Lord hath delivered him into thy hands;
13 Behold the Lord slayeth the wicked to bring forth his righteous purposes. It is better that one man should perish than that a nation should dwindle and perish in unbelief.
In this case, the decision to slay Laban was not first Nephi's. It was the Lord's. Nephi could have easily gotten away with the plates without slaying Laban. But that would not have been the end of it. The Lord might have chosen to slay Laban because the collective faith and righteousness of Lehi's family was not sufficient to bring about the Lord's miraculous help in keeping them safe from Laban's armies over the next week or months. The important thing here is that it was the Lord's decision to have Laban slain. Nephi's decision was not whether he should slay Laban or not. It was whether he would obey the Spirit or not. Notice that verse 13 says, "the Lord slayeth the wicked..." The Lord chose to slay Laban. Nephi was simply his instrument. And all of Nephi's mental machinations were just what he worked through inside himself trying to feel good about doing something he didn't believe in.
I believe we have all experienced this when we have felt impressed by the Spirit to do something (and we're not talking about anything as serious as slaying someone) that we don't want to do -- something that freaks us out or is really hard for us to get ourselves to do. We work through no end of mental machinations trying work through whatever it is inside us that is in opposition to the direction from the Lord's Spirit.
My daughter was at one time directed by the Spirit to stop being friends with someone. It freaked her out of her mind. She could not come up with any reason why, nor did she know how she was going to do something that seemed to be so incredibly hurtful. She spent endless hours praying and thinking through it and it took her months before she could bring herself to do it. She has never known why. She only knows that she was finally able to bring herself to follow what she was being directed by the Spirit to do.
A couple of thoughts come to mind after reading all of these comments. Everyone is entitled to feel as they'd like regarding the topic, but seeing as how this is Brother Snuffer's blog, he is simply sharing his own beliefs. We are on our own personal journey, and all have our own rights to personal revelation. We can share our personal feelings and beliefs, but should never refute his on his own blog. After all, he obviously has something of great value to us, or we would not read his blog. It is good to be pointed in certain directions, but if we follow anyone other than the Spirit and the Lord to teach us, we are setting ourselves up for apostasy.
ReplyDeleteMy other thought is that it seems obvious to me what the higher law is regarding this issue. If Christ is our perfect example, shouldn't we try and be like Him. Christ's life was in peril from the second of His birth. As an infant and through adulthood, from a mortal's perspective he was always in peril. From His perspective however, that couldn't be further from the truth. He knew he was safe until he willfully handed over His life. He never had use for or used a harmful weapon. He was on the Earth to restore life, not to take it. Can anyone doubt that He was the most important individual to exist on the Earth? Would it not have been better then for God to protect Him with armed legions? Despite being the most important being for humanity, it was never necessary for Him to be protected by Earthly force or weapons. So are we more important than Him? He lived with higher perspective than any of us, and therefore understood His real protection. Can one be justified in taking another life? Yes. Is there a higher law? Yes. The natural man can and does react on just impulses, but he is also an enemy to God. I don't know if I personally would be brave enough to die instead of defend myself or my family, but is there anything more Christlike than to die for an enemy? A just God will make it all right in the end; which end is not here.
Denver,
ReplyDeleteI enjoy your blog and almost agree unilaterally with you. I also come to your defense here with some minor exceptions. I have had the same experience going into a gun store for preparedness purposes - the whisperings of the Spirit saying that these arms will not be necessary. But only after we are gathered as a body of terrestrial living Saints in the New Jerusalem will we have that collective power - only after we have been cleansed as a body and are living that higher law will we be able to call down the powers of heaven in our defense as in the days of Enoch.
As we are now telestial, we will have to do as the players in the Book of Mormon - and use telestial means to deal with the telestial elements that intermingle with us - even in Zion.
Just my thoughts.
I'm particularly interested in what Brother Snuffer means by this:
ReplyDelete"We live in a world today in which Pax Americana has established controlled violence the world over. The fear of destruction holds forces at bay which would gladly destroy one another if permitted. The key to replacing the current world order with another one, as many insurgencies the world over recognize, is the destruction of Pax Americana by destroying American hegemony. A lot of people are working on that, both inside and outside the United States."
Do you support "American hegemony" in order to maintain "Pax Americana"?
And from what source did you get these terms?
Thanks.
I did not know 'anonymous' was Roger Young.
ReplyDeleteI remember when President Kimball asked us to 'exercise a particle of faith..." (I think it was in his talk "The False Gods We Worship:....I'm not sure.
Sometimes I think I know what President Kimball ment..... sometimes I don't.
:)
Dear Denver, I bet you're sick of this topic. I have a couple of questions that I would really appreciate your help with while this topic is still up:
ReplyDelete1) I've always been bothered by the fact that Joseph Smith shot his little pistol into the mob coming up the stairs in Carthage Jail. I can't remember anymore if we know that he actually did kill someone or not, but for sure he might have, and chances are pretty good. Anyway, he said, "I'm going like a lamb to the slaughter", but with that one action, he didn't. I'm not saying he wasn't "justified", but it does bother me in light of who he was.
Do you have any light to shed on this.
2) Could you please comment on the quotes that "the Prof" (Steve Jones) and Roger Young both gave from Brigham Young. I'm not a person who believes that everything any prophet has ever said is true, so if the answer is that Brigham Young was off, I can handle that. Or is there something else to understand here?
Thanks.
Hi, I just posted a comment about 3 minutes ago here with two questions in it, the second one being about Brigham Young's quotes in the comments of this post above "The Battle is the Lord's". And then I started reading one of your newest posts about "The traditions of men, part 1" about the use of the word "prophet" vs. "president" of the Church. I already said in my comment that I don't have a problem with "the prophet" being wrong, but maybe the fact that B.Y. was really "the president" makes it easier to explain. I would, however, love it if you could address his quotes anyway. They are bothersome.
ReplyDeleteWe are not talking about the non-use of weapons when the New Jerusalem is finally built and we are living inside it! That we can agree on. We are talking about what happens between now and that wonderful city in Missouri, which does not currently exist. (Agreed?)
ReplyDeleteWe read that the whore Babylon is after the "souls of men" (Revelation), not just interested in killing our bodies. How will these "evil schemers" do this? It must be that they will try to get us to turn on each other, to hurt or betray each other.
How can they can do this? Perhaps they will try famine, stopping the flow of food or water into our cities, and simply by turning off the grid, and blockading the major highways out of each city/town. Then each city becomes a cauldron of desperate starving people, willing to "sell their souls" to get food. Not a pretty picture. But one I ask you to consider in view of the scriptures, and the need to either flee or to fight in response.
Quote:
Alma 48:24: "they could not suffer to lay down their lives, that their wives and their children should be massacred by ... barbarous cruelty"
You see, I cannot ignore the high probability that I will need to defend my wife and children from "massacre by barbarous cruelty" in the Last Days.
Quote:
"And again, the Lord has said that: "Ye shall defend your families even unto bloodshed." " Alma 43:47
Very clear. So I do not think I am obedient to Him if I refuse to take up arms.
How do you reconcile this, my brother?
It is important, I think, to consider the prophecies and the "awful situation" (Ether 8 ) head-on.
Finally, from Alma 48:
]Alma 48:8 [Moroni] had been strengthening…the Nephites, and erecting... places of resort..
14 Now the Nephites were taught to defend themselves against their enemies, even to the shedding of blood if it were necessary; yea, and they were also taught never to give an offense, yea, and never to raise the sword except.. it were to preserve their lives.
15 And this was their faith, that by so doing God would prosper them in the land… yea, warn them to flee, or to prepare for war, according to their danger;
16 And also, that God would make it known unto them whither they should go...
We will need to rely on the Lord to know WHITHER we should flee or WHETHER we should fight in any given situation. We will need the Spirit of the Lord in real time.
Best wishes,
Steven Jones
There are two parallel end-of-day scenarios prophesied of. We can choose the scenario we desire. If you love to focus on, and talk about, preach about, and pray about the doom and gloom end-day scenarios, then you will be happy. There are no end of prophecies to support your passion. There may even be some 2-fer specials to order your copies of Dreams and Visions of more doom and gloom that you can order from Roger Young. However, if you want to exercise your pass go option that allows you to skip doom and gloom in order to advance directly to the City of God,Denver has presented a simple and accurate description of a few of the requirements for this end-day option. Hmmm, almost like trying to choose between Christmas presents--depending upon where your heart is, these may be really tough choices! Doug, you are spot on!
ReplyDelete