Sunday, February 8, 2015

Dates and Numbers

I was thinking of this post I made on LDSFF a while ago. It may mean nothing at all - and rereading it, I see flawed logic - but I wanted to post it because I love playing with numbers.

Post written September 1, 2013:
Dates and Numbers
Posted: Sun Sep 01, 2013 4:51 pm
by A Random Phrase

During Sunday School today, my daughter and I were looking at dates and came up with some interesting patterns. If anyone has ideas to add, please feel free.

1820 – 1st vision
1823 – 1st Moroni visit
1827 – Got the gold plates
1830 – 1st publication of the Book of Mormon

Years between each: 3, 4, 3

Years between 1st vision and getting the gold plates – 7

Years between 1st vision and 1st publication – 10

1831 – Zion in Missouri was given in revelation (D&C 57)

1833 – They were kicked out of Missouri because of their wickedness (D&C 101)

1838 – They got another chance (D&C 124)

1844 – They turned over the prophets to murderers

1830-1844 – The time from the 1st publication of the BofM until the death of the prophets. There are two sevens (14 years) and they got two chances.

1973 – a prophet-to-be joined the church

2006 – The Second Comforter published – The beginning of the 3rd chance for the institution.

1973-2013 – Years the prophet was a member – 40

1844-2006 – 162 years. This is divisible by 3 four times, then times two – 3*3*3*3*2 or 3 to the power of 4 times 2.

2006-2013 – Years between the 1st book and the casting out of a prophet by the powers that answer to God for the people, and that speak to the people for God – 7

Let's look at some of those dates again:

2 years – 1831-1833 – Missouri Zion

7 years – 1831-1838 – Next chance at Zion

7 years – 2006-2013 – 1st book to casting out – last chance for Zion (gentle info)

2 years – 2011-2013 – PtHG to casting out – last chance for Zion (plain & painful info)

It's a chiasmus. 2 7 7 2 – 1831-1833 and 2011-2013 on the outside.

One more:
2011 – PtHG 1st published

2013 – The institutional Gentiles reject the message, thus ending the times of the Gentiles and beginning the times of the Remnant.

2012 is the mean of these two numbers.

2012 – The Mayan “end of an age” and the beginning of a new one.

It appears we are on the tail end of one age and the beginning of the next age.

One thought: If the days begin at sunset, when night is drawing nigh, do the years begin in the fall when the days begin to grow shorter?

So, how much time do we lay Gentiles have? 7 years if we listen and do? 3 years if we don't? Could we safely say that the destruction will begin in earnest in 2020? If prophets are killed before then, would the destruction/cleansing of "my house" begin within a few months to a couple of years? And the 2020 date would be the country?

Thoughts? Insights?

End of post.

Added thought: 40 years to the day after his baptism, DS began the Lord's lecture circuit. 10 years after his baptism, the following March, his ministry began. Does that mean the Lord is giving us 10 1/2 years to succeed or blow this opportunity?

March 2024?

The servant may mean nothing in and of himself, but the Lord seems to use them as signs (was it Isaiah whose marriage and sons were for signs? Was he the one who walked around naked to show the people what lifestyle they could expect if they did not repent?). It is the dates and numbers and "What is God doing?" that I am focusing on in this post, not any individual.

Friday, February 6, 2015

Take Care

This is semi-related to my previous post. A couple of days ago, I was able to meet with some friends to partake of the sacrament. We got there a few hours early and spent time conversing on spiritual things. They brought up something I think is important.

Those of us in this movement are mostly a friendly bunch. We greet each other with hugs. We help each other freely. We are glad to converse and share. We love to see each other. In fact, a big bonus of the ten-lecture sermon for most of us was that we got to meet each other in person. We spent hours talking to each other, ate at restaurants and in parks together, partook of the sacrament, and even performed baptisms on occasion.

The friends I conversed with a couple of days ago brought up something important. That is that our friendliness could be our undoing if we are not careful. They have made a rule about the husband not hugging other women and the wife not hugging other men. It could be very easy for wrong thoughts and wrong desires to enter one's mind and heart (if not immediately, then over the course of time).

They pointed out that some of the people who meet do not have companions who are "on board" with the ideas we are espousing. The friendliness can lead to sins or weird ideas, borne of the loneliness of being on the path without one's spouse. Ideas like being "spiritually" sealed to a man or a woman who is not one's husband or wife. A great deal of mischief can ensue, limited only by the imagination of men and women.

Truly Benjamin spoke rightly when he said, "And finally, I cannot tell you all the things whereby ye may commit sin; for there are divers ways and means, even so many that I cannot number them."
Book of Mormon | Mosiah 4:29

I sincerely hope and sincerely pray that we can do this, that we can connect with our Lord, that He will bring us to Zion, that darkness may leave and have no power over us anymore, at all. I pray that we will all be sensitive to the many ways in which we can err and sin so that we may be clean vessels of the Lord. I pray that we will all be sensitive to the many ways in which we can do good and serve our Lord, that we may be clean vessels of the Lord.


We need to be ever so careful about becoming strongmen and following strongmen. It can begin oh-so-innocuously. I realized this recently.

A community I know has split. As far as I know, it was a peaceful split (they met on Sundays and I work that day, so know very little about it). There was disagreement on the manner of administering the sacrament and on baptism. (This is not a post on splitting communities, though.)

One of the men understood the scriptures to mean that one must receive God's own voice before one has authority to baptize. A couple other men were willing to baptize those who desired it and were warned by the first man that they did not have authority without that voice. The other men baptized, anyway, following the pattern of Alma Senior (crying unto the Lord, then immediately began to baptize). The first man did not consider those baptisms to be valid.

I was not in the group baptism(s) but I was baptized by one of these (Alma-oriented) men later. I felt clean afterward and I noticed that the scriptures opened up to me. I began to understand them like never before. I would read and wonder why I hadn't seen that before; it was so obvious. That is still happening to me. Consequently, I believe my baptism to be valid.

The first man finally got the voice of the Lord giving him authority to baptize and was told to baptize beginning in the spring. He offered his services, including to those who felt their previous baptism was invalid (I was one who got that email. I didn't understand it completely until it was explained to me by a couple of friends).

Now, I don't judge or condemn either side. One desires an audible voice and believes that is the way to go. The others did not. One is now offering his services. The others offered their services last fall. That's okay.

What I saw, though, is this: we, perhaps, think of a strongman as easy to discern. We may think we know if we are becoming one. But, maybe it isn't so easy to figure out. Saying, "I think it should be done this way," was fine - but saying, "You are doing it wrong. Your baptisms are not valid," was not.

In the LDS Church, there is a concept of "stewardships". That is to say, you have the right to receive revelation for whoever you are a steward over, but no one else. A parent, a bishop, a Relief Society president, and on up to the general authorities and president of the church. We are supposed to not receive revelation for anyone outside our stewardship.

I bring that up because, in this movement created by the Lord, there is no such thing as that type of stewardship - i.e. no one has the right to tell another that their revelation is wrong, their way of performing ordinances is wrong, their manner of living and being in their communities is wrong (though they should be perfectly free to disagree, to say, "I don't think that is the right way." The difference is that one is spoken by way of opinion and the other is spoken by way of commandment). The only one who could do that would be one to whom the Lord, personally, has given the commandment and obligation of teaching everyone what the Lord desires. (Now, that man exists, but his current job is to step back and let us figure it all out.)

The purpose of these communities, the purpose of this last (new?) chance by the Lord is so that no one may say, "Hear ye the voice of the Lord," but that they may all hear the voice of the Lord, themselves. We are each to connect to heaven. We are each to see, hear, and touch the Lord ourselves, relying on no man (or woman) to take us to Him.

It was a small thing. I'm sure that those who may be following the first man (I don't know if anyone is actually "following" him or if they simply agree with his opinions) don't think of him as a strongman. I know the man and he is the kindest, biggest-hearted man I know. I am positive he is not trying to be a strongman, but is simply trying to do what he feels is right.

The reason I'm writing this post is to open our eyes to ourselves. Are we doing anything that is pointing in the direction of being a strongman? Am I? Is someone around us doing that? If we follow their position and agree with it, is it because we genuinely agree that that position is correct, or are we thinking that they might have a better connection to heaven or know more than we do?

It so so easy to fall into the trap of becoming a strongman or being led by one. We can't even see it when it begins, most likely.

You see, I used to think that "the strongman model" would be a man who wanted followers. He wanted people to think he was hot stuff, that he had a special connection to heaven. This man, this friend of mine, opened my eyes to the idea that we are all in danger of being one, no matter how loving and honest and sincere we may be.

It is such a treacherous road we have chosen to follow. Dangers loom on every side. And they may very well be disguised as, "I'm trying to help you," "You've gone off the path and you need to do what I want you to do or else you are in need of repentance." And that is not to mention the dangers of, "We are doing great!" "We are having much success!" "Let's go forward and create Zion because we know how to do it, now," without God actually appearing and telling you to do so. (And if He did appear, was it really Him?)