Monday, December 15, 2014

Is it accusing or simply acknowledging the truth?

I have been reading Rock's post here (I'm on my phone so the link says "mobile" to me even though I requested the regular site. If the link doesn't work on computers, let me know and I will fix it when I have access to a computer) and the following comments. 

One poster seems extremely concerned that we treat "the Brethren" with kid gloves and close our eyes and mouths. I intend to post the following as a comment on Rock's post but it is so important that I am posting it here as well. Here it is:

I know log doesn't like what is happening, but the Lord is behind it. He is causing the religious "super power" to crumble by stripping off its facades.

First, people began to see and talk about prophets who don't prophesy, revelators who don't reveal, and seers who don't see. 

And the altering of general conference talks began to be known (who can honestly deny, when they see the original Poelman talk and compare it with the altered one?). 

And people who wondered why the prophet could not see Mark Hofmann's mind and intent began to talk to each other and ask openly why a man who saw Jesus every week could not discern a man with a dishonest and murderous heart.

Then, people researched tithing. They looked for the original sources of what was written in a RS/PH manual and discovered that a quote about who should pay tithing lacked three vital words: "who has means," and more and more people began to see that tithing (according to scripture) was a law to help the poor, not a law to make a wealthy church richer.

Then Rock Waterman uncovered instructions for mission presidents that proved further corruption/grinding upon the face of the poor.

And people were also realizing that they DID NOT need the church's approval to partake of the sacrament (with wine, as directed by the scriptures) in their families and among their friends and acqaintances.

People saw that drinking ale and beer was not really against the word of wisdom. They saw that it was okay to drink wine for sacramentS (ie weddings) even if, probably, no one has done it yet.

People began to see that there really is no such thing as a personal line of revelation versus a priesthood (church TM) line of revelation nor that personal revelation must ALWAYS bow to the priesthood (church TM) especially if Jesus, Himself, tells you something the church doesn't approve of.

People began to say things like, "The emperor is wearing no clothes." They began to stop fearing excommunication, finally recognizing that no man nor group of men have the keys to heaven. 

Their eyes began to be opened. They began to see the ploy, "Follow the prophet. Follow the Brethren. He and we will not, even CANNOT lead you astray," for what it really is: a vain attempt to control the church's masses, keeping them faithful to their leaders, keeping the income rolling in, keeping the power over minds and souls they have gotten used to having. 

It is difficult to let go of the wealth and power and adoration. The "Brethren" are simply men. How can this worship and adoration and access to billions of dollars NOT go to their heads? Our love for them should cause us to beg God to pull down their pride and push them into the depths of humility before it is too late for them. I know that I don't want them to wake up to the horror of what they have done and are doing after it is too late to fix it. I wouldn't wish that feeling of "everlastingly too late" on anyone.


  1. has a good post (No Poor Among "Them") and there seem to be a thousand comments.

    Here is mine:

    It is interesting that some point to kind (or unkind) bishops to prove what the general rulers in the church are doing.

    I have had some great and incredibly helpful bishops and wards for the most part. Awesome men who deserve accolades. But they are not the ones using the Lord's money and the Lord's interest to pay themselves and mission presidents. They are not responsible for funneling money away from the poor and into great and spacious buildings built for pride and "show".

    I have also had and seen bishops who think they do God and the Church a service by refusing to help the suffering poor.

    My awakening came when I realized that if I had not paid tithing, I not only would have been able to buy food for us, I would have been able to have a greater choice.

    I also realized something else: "The evils of a dole" only applies to the poor. I have doled out thousands of dollars to the church and it went into the possession of the general authorities, who have been and are a thousand times wealthier than I, yet they have not cleaned my house nor done anything to pay me for this dole. The bishops who have helped me did not have access to my tithing. That was sent to Salt Lake City.

    Those who give the church money should have that subtracted from what they "owe" the church for financial aid - as long as we continue to be a Babylonic church.

    If we desire to be a church of Christ, there should be no score-keeping on either side. Money or goods should be freely given if there is a need if we have the means to give. If we have no means, we should not be punished for not giving.

    I have a place to live, a car and a job as a direct result of those who chose to pay tithing directly to those in need (I could not have even applied for the job without a car; it was a prerequisite for applying). In turn, I pay my tithing the same way - first providing for myself and family and going out from there.

  2. Toni,

    I also responded at Rock's blog. If you are going to name me and present an argument against what you think I'm saying, is it not fair to also present my response?

  3. Here is what log responded (I just went over to Rock's blog to find it:


    What I don't like are accusations.

    When Rock says the leadership willfully breaks the commandments by failing to get the required common consent for the administration of tithes, that's not an accusation. That's a statement of public fact, and I can say nothing against that.

    When Rock says the leadership stopped publicizing the adminstration of tithes out of a sense of embarrassment over some failed investments, that, strictly speaking, is an accusation as it stands for it asserts intent without citing evidence sufficient to establish the truth of it. This is not to say the accusation is false, for it may well be true, for all I know. If Rock knows more than he said, well, he didn't say.

    I also do not accuse Rock of evil intent in that thing. I acknowledge that it is very hard to withhold judgement - and I admit the accusation seems likely to me.

    But the truth is more persuasive when there are no leaps to intent, in my view - when there are no accusations. Let accusations, if they must be made, be made by the reader, not the author. Or, if the author knows whereof he speaks, let him say how he knows.

    That is why PTHG is so effective.

    (End of quote.)

  4. Thank you for responding. Your reasoning makes sense. Perhaps I misunderstood some of your posts, because I got the impression you were saying we should ignore the things that are wrong, and that speaking about the Brethren or Church's negative fruit or lack of fruit was and is accusing.

  5. To fairly present Log's side of things, I would encourage anyone reading this to go to Rock's post and do a search for all of Log's comments. There is a great deal of interaction between him and other commentors. Decide for yourself. (I readily admit that my perception may be in error, though it seems to me that I have a real basis for my perception of him.)

  6. Toni,

    What is your perception of me, and what is your real basis for it?

  7. You confuse me. Sometimes you seem like an apologist for the church and brethren. Other times you say some pretty awesome things. I can't really tell where you stand.

    My views come from your comments. I've read them on various blogs in the last couple of years.

    You shouldn't worry about what I think, however. You are annonymous to me . I'm quite sure that your real name is not Log. You could stand next to me in a public place and I would have no idea who you are.

    I think what I said in this blog is important. However, if it bothers you, I will remove your name and the comments that have your name in them (the ones I made and the ones you made). Let me know, okay?


    1. Oh, no worries. I don't bite.

      I am an apologist for true principles. One principle in particular I have been trying to get across to people - that of just judgement - has been challenging.

      A just judge, for example, applies the same standard of judgement to friends and foes alike. I'm asking for the same standards of judgement one would wish applied to oneself to be applied to the leadership and the Church, and, ultimately, to all. In effect, this means to leave people alone unless God gives one a judgement to speak against them, and that not of ourselves. If we had charity, and someone was condemned of God, I think we would mourn them, not point fingers at them. But that goes for all, doesn't it?

      I don't know that we will enter Zion if we despise anyone, even those we esteem to be our enemies. Yet the one thing that seems to unite the so-called "Mormon Remnant" is their disdain of the Church and her leadership. Is this the way of Zion? Is this the foundation of Zion?

      "30 As for you, son of man, your people are talking together about you by the walls and at the doors of the houses, saying to each other, ‘Come and hear the message that has come from the LORD.’ 31 My people come to you, as they usually do, and sit before you to hear your words, but they do not put them into practice. Their mouths speak of love, but their hearts are greedy for unjust gain. 32 Indeed, to them you are nothing more than one who sings love songs with a beautiful voice and plays an instrument well, for they hear your words but do not put them into practice." - Ezekiel 33, NIV

  8. You have given me food for thought.

    In talking to my daughters recently, I realized that I don't see myself very clearly. It is often difficult to recognize or see our own faults.

    I think it is important to be aware of all the things that are wrong in the church. I think it is important to not be blinded by those who lead us and who claim to have the authority to cast us down to hell if we don't do what they say.

    Do people like me cross some sort of boundary into being unChristlike? Probably. I would like to know where that line is for me, in my own life. I suppose only God can tell me what it is that I say and and do that displeases Him.

    I appreciate your comments because I am becoming aware of some areas in which I need to improve.

    It's dark, it's foggy, but I'm getting an idea of where you might actually be coming from.

    I knew that scripture applied to US when Denver read it to us. I knew the warning was not just to Church leaders, but also to those who love to hear Denver speak.

    I am open to correction and improvement. With the Lord's help, I hope I will continue to move forward.

    1. I think it is important to be aware of all the things that are wrong in the church. I think it is important to not be blinded by those who lead us and who claim to have the authority to cast us down to hell if we don't do what they say.

      Let me suggest an alternative. Why not ignore the Church and the leaders? Why not give strict heed to the words of Christ instead, and try an experiment upon the word - like doing exactly what he said, nothing varying? Think of it as a game, if you like; a divine scavenger hunt. See how many of his precepts you can perform in a given day.

    2. By paying attention to the faults and flaws of the Church or the leadership, you give them power and place in your mind where other things might be better; certainly it keeps wounds open and pains fresh. There is therefore no profit to examining their perceived flaws or publicizing them, but great profit to looking inward to discern one's own flaws and acting against them, praying always, and focusing on the Lord.

  9. Ignore them. It sounds like a no-brainer, but I had not thought of that before.

    I love behavioral experiments. I think I'll take you up on it, beginning with "just ignore them," and go from there. (It would certainly be more peaceful in my soul if I didn't care what others were doing or saying.)

  10. (My phone won't let me reply right under your last comment.)

    True. Very true.


Comments for this blog are moderated. It may take a few days for you to see your comment.