Saturday, October 9, 2021

What In The World Is Going On With The Church Leaders Lately?


Previously: Religious Exemptions: You Don't Need Your Bishop's Permission

Many thousands of devout members of the church are understandably confused by recent statements of the First Presidency and the Council of the Twelve. Setting aside some of the more bizarre presentations heard at general conference last week, what most disturbs these faithful members is how blatantly the leaders have been lying to them.

The most notable falsehood was the official statement by the First Presidency encouraging members to submit to the Covid "vaccine," wherein they made the outrageous claim that the shot has been "proven safe and effective." 

The reason these members find that statement troubling is because those who have been following the actual science know it is an outright lie. The data simply doesn't exist to support such an outrageous claim.  The very reason the FDA has not approved those medicines manufactured by Pfizer, Moderna, and Johnson & Johnson is specifically because there has not been adequate time to test them to find out if they are safe and effective.  All the data so far shows the opposite to be true. A report released just yesterday shows that the covid shot kills five times more people than it saves.

Just as this controversy was really heating up, I was shown this report about an admission made by Elder Ronald Rasband of the Quorum of the Twelve:

"Elder Rasband was speaking at a meeting in Boise last week.  Our nephew was in attendance. Someone asked about the vaccine and Elder Rasband responded that each person should understand that the Church is being threatened and sued on a continual basis.  The CDC has the Church in their crosshairs.  This request for the members to participate in the vaccine was simply to reduce liability for the Church from the government.  He said that members are to go to the Lord with this...and do what feels right for them.  This has never been, nor ever will be a commandment."

Whew! Well, that's a relief, ain't it? So members of the Church aren't really being told to take the vaccine after all! It's just a ploy to keep the government at bay. 

But hold on a second... doesn't that raise at least two very troubling questions?

1. Given that members of the Church are raised to believe that when the president of the Church speaks he is relating instructions directly from God, is it then moral for President Nelson to put the lives of the saints at risk just to keep a government agency off his back?

2.  Since our constitution prohibits the government from dictating policy to any religious entity, what possible jurisdiction can the government claim that would give one of its agencies authority to make demands on a church? 

Allow me to take a stab at answering those questions:

1. No, it is not moral. 
2. The reason the federal government has jurisdiction over the LDS Church is because the LDS /Church is not really a church.

Oh, it used to be, make no mistake about that. The church that was organized by Joseph Smith and five others on April 6th, 1830 had been properly organized under American common law principles.  And like every other church in its day, the Church of Christ (as it was originally known) stood independent of, and immune from, governmental interference. But in 1851 Brigham Young directed the territorial legislature to convert the church into a  corporation under federal law. That shadow "Church" was now a creature of the federal government, and in 1887 the United States government, as was its right, dissolved that territorial corporation and directed federal marshals to seize its assets. We came within an inch of losing Temple Square.

The lesson that should have been learned by that scary episode (but was not) is this: The State giveth, and the State taketh away.

Because 36 years later Church lawyers convinced President Heber J. Grant to incorporate the church under a model identical to that held by the Catholic Pope.  In addition to several unscriptural "improvements" to its operation, this corporate charter legally changed the name of the Church to reflect the executive office held by a man.[1]  All this was done in secret without informing the members, who up until then had been the rightful Holders of Interest in the church. 
[1] "How be it my church," Jesus asked rhetorically, "save it be called in my name? If it be called in the name of a man then it be the church of a man."  Ever wonder why the Lord saw fit to point that out? Other than the Lutheran church, I can think of no other church at the time that was named after a man, so what do you think compelled the Lord to even bring that topic up? Well, perhaps he was preparing us for a future event. The actual, legally recognized name of the LDS church today is The Corporation of the President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, or "Corporation of the President" for short.  The fact that the corporate charter is named after the president is a clear indication that for the past 96 years, this "church" has been named after a man. 

If the Church held the same status under the law as when it was organized in 1830, it would be directed by those principles contained in the Book of Mormon and Doctrine & Covenants.  Alas, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints was long ago converted from a church into a Corporation Sole, an act that gutted the Church's basic structure and gave the erstwhile "Church" an entirely different status, leaving it vulnerable to the whims of societal change. To read a detailed explanation of how it all went wrong, see "How Corporatism Has Undermined and Subverted The Church of Jesus Christ."

Whereas the church that was founded by Joseph Smith operated under the distinct doctrines revealed by Christ, The Corporation of the President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints operates under the doctrine of political expediency. By definition, any church that has been incorporated cannot claim the Lord Jesus Christ as its sovereign head. In an incorporated church, the State is sovereign.

That's not just speculation on my part; it's a legal reality. What it all translates to is this: if the Board of Directors of the Corporation of the President expect to keep the Corporation intact, at times they will be forced by circumstances to set aside the religion. This abandonment of principle has occurred many more times than we would like to believe, as documented here.

But That Was Only The Beginning

Converting what was once a religious society of equals into a corporate entity controlled by a single man at the top was just phase one of the transformation. In the middle part of the last century, leaders of the LDS Church, along with those of many other denominations, were tricked into applying for special 501(c)3 status under Title 26 of the United States Code. This status, government lawyers assured them, would provide their churches special benefits, as well as guarantee their churches remained exempt from taxation.

But Churches were already non-taxable, and guaranteed to remain so under the First Amendment to the Constitution. That exclusion is still plainly codified in the government's own Code of Federal Regulations at 26 IRC 508 (c)(1)(A). But Americans in the 1950s tended to completely trust their government, so when the government began actively promoting a way for churches to better protect their assets, it was an easy sell. Most churches, including our own, willingly signed up.

Well, it was a scam.  Known as The Johnson Amendment after its chief promoter, senator and future president Lyndon B. Johnson (according to this guy, the 'B' stands for "Butthole"), the law had one purpose and one purpose only: to neuter and muzzle America's churches.  According to author David Fiorazo:
"Texas Democrat Lyndon B. Johnson was a powerful politician running for reelection as Senator, but two anti-communist, tax-exempt groups were opposing him and passing out literature during the campaigns. He contacted the IRS and found the group’s activity was legal, so he sought other options to fight them. 
"Johnson shrewdly appeared on the Senate floor on July 2, 1954, and offered his amendment to a pending, massive, tax code overhaul bill. The bill was supposed to modernize the tax code. Records indicate an absence of committee hearings on the amendment. No legislative analysis took place to examine the effect the bill and the amendment would have, particularly on churches and religious organizations. The amendment was simply created to protect Johnson." (The Cost of Our Silence: Consequences of Christians Taking the Path of Least Resistance.)
Under this radical overhaul of the tax code, churches were now restricted as to what could be preached from the pulpit. If they dared talk about the bible as it relates to cultural, political, fiscal, and social issues, they were in danger of losing their tax exempt status. If a pastor preached contrary to what the courts refer to as "fundamental public policy" he was walking a thin line.

If you remember LDS Church leaders preaching vigorously against abortion in the nineteen sixties, and you were puzzled when they suddenly seemed to shut up about it following the Supreme Court's decision in Roe v. Wade; or if you wondered why Gordon Hinckley, in his wishy-washy conference talk on the Iraq war did not once reference the many places in our scriptures that clearly prohibit God's people from participating in pre-emptive warfare; well now you have your answer. In the LDS Church of today, the revealed word of God is disallowed where it contradicts government practices and policies.

The Church Of Public Policy Of Latter-day Saints
Our leaders have not forgotten the beating the Church took in 1887 when their predecessors were on the losing side of a battle with the feds.  As Denver Snuffer documented at the 2014 Sunstone Conference, every major policy change in the Church since then has been the result of the Church bowing to political and social pressure from outside the Church.  Not one of these changes has come by way of revelation from God.  Don't believe me? Look around. When was the last time you saw any president of the Church issue even one bona fide revelation the way Joseph Smith did on a regular basis?

No one really knows where the courts will draw the line on "fundamental public policy" so preaching the gospel with boldness can be risky. The primary reason why incorporated Churches will do anything to avoid a confrontation with civil authorities, even to the point of giving up religious principles, has been neatly summarized by author Jerry Finney:

"The IRS determines, subject to costly and time-consuming challenge, whether a restriction has been breached by a 501(c)3 organization. These restrictions subject a religious organization to suit in the courts for violating a federal government law. Fundamental public law is above biblical principle if the two conflict."  (Jerald Finney, Separation of Church and State: God's Churches: Spiritual or Legal Entities? pg 37.)  

Because the LDS Church today is a legal entity and no longer a spiritual one, it's safer to avoid making waves.  The bottom line is that our leaders have sold us out. The Lord said we cannot serve both God and mammon. They chose mammon.

"When a church incorporates, it becomes a 'creature' of the state. Having created the incorporated church, the State governs them via corporate law and public policy, grants and revokes privileges, burdens them, restricts them, penalizes them, and can dissolve them." (Peter Kershaw, "Does the Government Control Our Churches?")
Remember how, until very recently, Church leaders vigorously resisted any hint of accommodation toward homosexuality?  And did you notice how quickly the Church began to palliate its position as soon as it became apparent the Supreme Court would be ruling in favor of same-sex marriage?  What you're seeing is the Church that used to be directed by Jesus Christ frantically trying not to displease its new master.

Fellow blogger Anonymous Bishop tells of a priesthood meeting he conducted where he, as the bishop, had made an innocuous statement on the importance of standing up for traditional values.  After they dismissed, a general authority who happened to be a member of his ward asked to see the bishop in his office. He gave the bishop a very stern look.
"He then proceeded to warn me to 'not get ahead of the Brethren on these issues.' He said, 'Things are changing in the church and it’s important we await further direction from the prophets.' ”
One has to ask: further direction from the prophets, or further direction from the State?

The bishop tells how, back in 2008, this same general authority had actively encouraged members in that very ward to do all they could to work for passage of California's Proposition 8, stressing how important it was for the Church and its members to "continue fighting on these eternally important issues."
"But now, only a few years later, the same church leader was warning me, as his bishop, to 'not get ahead of the brethren' as the church 'upgrades' its position."
This is why the Church in recent years has spent so much time and energy instructing local leaders on the importance of following the Church Handbook of Instruction. When government lawyers are investigating an incorporated church for infractions, they aren't interested in that Church's religious beliefs. What they want to see is the Church's policies, practices, and procedures. I've been on the phone with three former bishops who all informed me they had been instructed by their higher-ups that the CHI is the only source they are to consult in the performance of their duties, barring even the scriptures. This would also explain why the Church released a training video back when Monson was President featuring Monson actually testifying of the Church Handbook, and did so in the name of Jesus Christ!

If that doesn't qualify as taking the name of the Lord in vain, I don't know what does.

The thing that made Monson's odd testimony all the more disconcerting to me is that at least one blogger has noted and documented that in the past ten years, Thomas Monson "has not borne testimony of any of his own Church’s unique foundational doctrines, including the truth of the Book of Mormon or the prophetic calling of Joseph Smith in any of the church’s General Conference meetings"

But he enthusiastically bears his testimony of the corporate handbook.

Painting Themselves Into A Corner
As I pointed out in my blog post of August 29th, when the First Presidency issued its egregious policy recommendation, they made no pretense that they were relaying a message from God.  Yet I've heard numerous otherwise good members insist that "the Lord will never let the president of the church lead us astray."  Why do they believe such nonsense?  God never made that promise.

So now the Brethren find themselves in the unenviable position of having to try to justify a teaching that the Lord has not backed them up on, while at the same time trying not to appear to be backbedaling too frantically. Perhaps they weren't expecting such an overshelming amount of disappointment on the part of their most dedicated followers.  So now they've sent out Rasband the new guy to offer an awkward reassurance: Hey really, don't worry about it; this was all just a show we put on for the gentiles.  

If the leaders really want this headache to go away, they could easily solve all their problems by dis-incorporating the Church. That would place them once again under the protection of the first amendment to the constitution, removing the church from any and all interference from government harrasment.

But this they will not do. As Moroni observed when looking into the Church in our day, "ye do love money, and your substance, and your fine apparel, and the adorning of your churches..." The risk involved in dis-incorporating the Church is the very real certainty that all those perks the Brethren enjoy would evaporate, and they would be forced to get regular jobs between conference gigs just like the Book of Mormon says they should.

As I related in an earlier post, Congressman George Hansen confided in me some years ago that he personally knew several general authorities who would prefer the Church rescind its corporate status. He did not name those particular apostles, but he did say they differed from the newcomers in that the old school apostles were firmly rooted in the doctrines of the faith. Those general authorities are all dead now, replaced by corporate yes-men who can't imagine the Church operating in any other form than the business model they have become accustomed to.

I grew up in a different era. I can't imagine such theological giants as LeGrand Richards, Mark Petersen, Ezra Taft Benson, Howard Hunter, Harold B. Lee, Joseph Fielding Smith, or even Bruce McConkie sitting still while their lesser informed Brethren gutted the church of its core teachings and turned it into the obvious counterfeit it is today.

The good news is this: leaders can only lead as long as they can hold on to a cadre of followers. So maybe the upside of this is that devout believers will finally stop trusting in the arm of flesh and re-learn the importance of having an eye single to the glory of God.  It is possible -indeed preferable- for members of the Lord's church to affirm the divine role of the prophet Joseph Smith, embrace the Book of Mormon, celebrate the Restored gospel, and love the Savior while still concluding that the current leaders are seriously lacking inspiration. "Hold fast to that which is true," the apostle Paul taught. That also requires letting go of that which is not true. Tens of thousands of devout believers worldwide have been learning to simply let go of the hollow dross for the past several years now. You can, too. 

I highly doubt the Church will ever be reformed from within, because that would require the current administrators to give up all that wealth, prestige, power, and adoration.  I get the sense they don't have the moral capacity for that.


Next Entry: Let's Talk About Conspiracies!

Notes & Asides:
Much of the information in this post was previously covered in a couple of posts I wrote back in 2015. Rather than recreate that information from scratch, I lifted whole sections for inclusion in this one. There was necessarily a lot left behind and not included in here, so if you would like to see the originals, here they are:

The Real Threat to Traditional Marriage Part Three

The Hidden Reason for the Policy Change on Baptisms

From way back in 2010, here's the granddaddy of Momon hidden history, courtesy of information provided mostly by Damon Smith who worked deep in the bowels of the Magisterium.  He's the guy who revealed the actual name of the modern LDS church, and pointed out that one subdivision of the corporation, Intellectual Reserve, Inc, retains ownership of the name "The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints" as a trademark utilized by the corporation as needed, which is why most Mormons are not aware that isn't the actual name of the entity that runs things:

How Corporatism Has Undermined and Subverted The Church of Jesus Christ

Finally (for now), a reminder that there have been several updates to my last blog post, consisting mostly of important information you'll need to know if you intend to challenge the vaccine mandates (if and when those mandates ever go into effect).  Go to that site and scroll down to the bottom (just before the comments begin):

Religious Exemptions: You Don't Need the Approval of Your Bishop

UPDATE, October 14, 2021:
For those who may have clicked on the second link in the piece above and didn't find the story to that link ("the covid shot kills five times more people than it saves") I have corrected the link. Dr. Mercola only leaves his articles on his website for 48 hours, after which other mirror sites pick it up so it can always be found. I've linked to the piece at, one of my favorite news and commentary sites, where it goes by the title "More Than 200,000 Have Already Died From the Covid Jab in the US." 

The video that leads into the piece is a must-watch, and though it's two hours long, if you can't spare the time you can get the gist of the data by watching just the first few minutes.  Steve Kirby's research is impeccable and no one has challenged or refuted the data.




jstcommentary said...


Great work my unmet friend. I always look forward to reading anything you have to share.

John Scott Peterson

MonicaGG said...

I love your writings and wisdom. You always lay things out so simple and yet so true and easy to discern with eyes to see and ears to hear.
Keep up your good work as a watchman and brother in Christ! Talk to you soon!

Rhone said...

Good stuff, sir.

That LDSFF topic was an interesting read. I can't, for the life of me, comprehend the viewpoint of the posters who were advocating 'submitting to the process' in order to get ones voice heard in the church. Human history shows that corrupt organizations cannot be saved, reformed, or healed by submitting to that corruption. It will resist or ignore any voice of reason. It will eliminate any opposition, with force if necessary. Once such an organization has fallen too far, the only choice one has is to vote with their feet and wait for God to either cleanse it, or start something new. The church is no more likely to abandon its corporatism than politicians would abandon mail-in voting and counting machines.

In addition, at this point in my journey, it's difficult to see members putting such faith in these leaders and their claims of having 'saving ordinances'. I've heard that argument before from a good and learned friend who claimed that he couldn't bear the thought of his posterity not being able to go through the temple (therefore requiring them all to continue to submit to church authority). It's hard to fathom a perfect, loving, omnipotent God only using the ordinance/temple recommend checklist to determine whether people are considered saved/righteous. This would put imperfect mortal men, as the self-proclaimed arbiters of those ordinances, in the precarious position of having to judge and condemn their fellow man into eternity. "Trust the process" indeed.

Heather Moore said...

Hi, Rock! Great job! The only thing that has me scratching my head is the supposed Elder Rasband's Boise statement that I have seen circulating on social media, but can't seem to substantiate. It runs counter to all known public statements made by Rasband (and the church in general) regarding masks, vaccines, covid-19 compliance and the church's own stance on vaccination, being partnered with the UN, UNICEF, GAVI, the WHO, and several other globalist organizations of which they hail, promote, praise and give homage. I am calling bluff on the guy's nephew. However, if I am wrong and Rasband did indeed make that statement, then to your point, Elder Rasband is lying.

Here are a couple of examples of Rasband's duality, if the Boise statement does prove true.
“I’ve been inspired personally by how the Lord, who presides at the head of this Church, has guided his Apostle leaders on how to deal with this pandemic. … We are in the Lord’s hands.” The scriptures are replete with references to the watchman on the towers in the latter days, he said. “That is exactly what is happening.” Those who look to the watchman on the tower “can notch their fear index down a little, they can drop their anxiety, they can lessen their loneliness to know that this Church is in the hands of the Lord. And He is guiding and directing His Apostles and Prophets.”

Thank you for calling out the church craziness!

A Disciple said...

Thank you Rock. You have explained with reason and clarity the duplicity of the current Church leadership and why they persist in worshiping both God and Mammon. Unfortunately, this dishonesty is misleading the saints and causing great spiritual, emotional and physical harm.

The doctrine of Christ is clear. We are to lay aside the things of this world and seek the things of a better world - the things offered to us and made possible for us by our Lord and Savior. The words of Christ are also clear. The things of this world and the works of men will fail. Any who put their trust in the world - in the arm of flesh - will fail.

Jesus said, "Beware ye of the leaven of the Pharisees." The philosophies of the world are corrosive. Unfortunately, we see worldly philosophies ever more embraced by Church leadership even as they claim to teach otherwise. This dissonance is becoming all the more apparent and yet cowardly, Church leaders refuse to accept responsibility for their words and actions that push members to trust in the arm of flesh.

The trajectory is untenable. For one, the incredible evil, lies, dishonesty and treachery of world governments cannot be ignored. To ignore this evil and to not speak out about it is to reveal Church Leaders as empty suits who will speak repetitively against trivialities but who otherwise ignore gross iniquities so as to protect their standing in the world.

The larger issue is good, faithful saints are hearing the voice of the Lord telling them truths that are not being affirmed by Church leaders. This yields an impasse that is only solved by the member choosing between God and Man. And as Church leaders demand unearned loyalty, the tension mounts.

The answer is to not contest with Church leaders. Nothing is gained by trying to "fix" the Church. Rather, we are to each work out our salvation, relying alone on the merits of Christ who is the author and finisher of our faith. We need teachers of righteousness. And their words and example should be constructive to our faith in Christ. We have the gifts of the Spirit. We have the scriptures, especially the Book of Mormon. We have the knowledge that God hears the prayers of the righteous and He will fulfill His Covenant. There is the reason to wait patiently on the Lord and be constantly looking for Him to make bare his Arm.

Alan Rock Waterman said...

Oh, I have no doubt these guys are globalist hacks and are clearly in favor of vaccinating, Heather. I think they're all in favor of compulsion. They have no problem going along to get along. At the same time, they have been hit with a whole lot of pushback by active members pointing out that their position is contrary to the gospel.

I think they've found themselves in a position they can't defend, but let's not fool ourselves: Church leaders today are not the scriptorians they were 40 years ago. Their conference talks are ghost-written and they spout platitudes, but their personal views are not gospel-centered. I doubt very much they are the least bit aware of the scientific research quoted by that dear sister I linked to near the end (words highlighted as "their most dedicated followers." That woman reads a letter she wrote where she told Nelson she loves and sustains him but was not sure he even knew the vaccine was still experimental.
She was clearly disappointed and offended (she said as much) as she reminded him of the reasons his encouragement was anti-fact AND anti-gospel. She felt rightly compelled to humbly and gently set him straight. She is clearly pained to be doing what she is doing because, after all, in her mind he is the prophet of God.

I think Rasband is totally on board with this belief that the wearing of masks is "a Christlike act of love." Either of two things are happening here: either he spoke out of turn and off the record, or they sent him out as junior apostle to try to mollify those members who cannot be corralled. Either way, it's a hell of a fix they've gotten themselves into. Never underestimate the proud and haughty being surprised to learn not everyone in the Church is as dumbed down as they expect them to be.

We are swiftly getting to that point however. Soon the only "faithful" members of the Church will be those who have never studied the gospel but are simply cult-like automatons. I think the leaders weren't ready for such a massive pushback among the faithful, just as our politicians are surprised that not everyone is ready to live in a totalitarian State.

That being said, I too would like confirmation that Rasband was in Boise, or hear from someone else who was at that meeting. It sounds like it was an informal Q&A among a relatively small group. I believe that story, though, because it's just the sort of thing the leaders would say in so many words: The church is continually being sued, and we have to be careful what we say and do, etc. They ARE being sued, of course; some plaintiffs are legit while others are without merit, but they are always under attack, which they would not be if the church was not such a monolith. The Church of Christ should not own property. Like the primitive Christian Church, members should be meeting in small groups in each other's homes and not have anything at all resembling a hierarchial leadership. The Book of Mormon is our guide in how the church was in those days.

What Rasband shoudn't have said (assuming he did, which is likely, because he's just not that bright) is name the government agency. That raises questions. Of course we know the government is leaning heavily on churches to do its bidding because the government is competing to be the one true God. Rasband spoke up because the leaders are in a position where they have to say SOMETHING, even if he had no idea he was inadvertently letting the cat out of the bag.

gruden said...

If one thinks about the idea that "God would not allow his modern prophets to go astray" implies that God is resorting to the kind of strategies and tactics that got Lucifer thrown out of heaven. If God does respect agency as we are told He does (D&C 29:35-36, among others), then those who are regarded as prophets are allowed to lead you astray if they choose to do so.

Also, God is not a respecter of persons. There is no record in the scriptures of any people receiving any such kind of assurance from God in the past, why would He make it any easier on those of us living now?

Jesus however did tell us there would be false prophets around in these times, maybe that's something to keep in mind. Anyone called a prophet who guarantees you they can't lead you astray from God is by definition a false prophet since this is an unscriptural and unsupported tenant.

Thanks for your good work, Rock. Always happy when I stop by and see you have a new post.

PNW_DPer said...

"But in 1851 Brigham Young directed the territorial legislature to convert the church into a corporation under federal law. That shadow "Church" was now a creature of the federal government, and in 1887 the United States government, as was its right, dissolved that territorial corporation and directed federal marshals to seize its assets."

Hmmm, how ironic. The "Prophet" that publicly proclaimed and established polygamy as a church "doctrine" was also the "Prophet" who gave power to the Feds to be able stop the church from practicing it.

Alan Rock Waterman said...

I wish this platform allowed me to click a "like" button. All you guys have made some great points.

dx said...

Monson also gave his testimony of the Boy Scouts! Monson was really out of touch.

dx said...

Ever since BY et al. took over and attached their polygamy onto Joseph Smith, the Utah-based church has been an endless series of fumbles and mistakes driven by false doctrine and uninspired leaders. They have no intention of fixing the mistakes of the past. Fortunately, God uses them for his purposes to preserve a few important things despite themselves.

I can't watch conference anymore. Too boring and pointless. The best I'll do is watch a playback on 2x speed for a few people that have an interesting topic. Not much wisdom or insight to be gained. Sad state of things.

Rebecca C. said...

Great article as always. I've gone the rounds with BY lovers this week. There are a lot of polygamists around that have a lot at stake. I'm just waiting until they bring it back openly in the lds church. Just cause I want to see what people do. Or open temples for gay marriages. Lol what a shame. I firmly believe at some point probably not too far away that everyone will know the truth about everything and no one will have the luxury of ignorance any longer. Can't wait.

Taylor said...

Rock, what are some of the more bizarre presentations heard at general conference last week that you made reference to?

Heather Moore said...

I emailed you more about what I found out when digging about that Rasband quote. Very interesting...

Anthony Stephan said...

It’s all on its way out, to be replaced by the real Church of Christ, the Church of the Firstborn…… 3rd Nephi 27: 11 But if it be not built upon my gospel, and is built upon the works of men, or upon the works of the devil, verily I say unto you they have joy in their works for a season, and by and by the end cometh, and they are hewn down and cast into the fire, from whence there is no return.
12 For their works do follow them, for it is because of their works that they are hewn down; therefore remember the things that I have told you.

Watch for the burn…

Tony said...

Your wrongful position on vaccine effectiveness and passing around of unsubstantiated rumors notwithstanding, I agree that the church has caught itself between a rock and a hard place and its causing serious division within the church. I'm likely on my way out.

Shannon said...

Hello. You need to know that that quote from Elder Rasband is 100% false. Completely made up. Didn’t even speak remotely to Boise any time as of late! It is sad it is promulgated as fact without any further research. Elder Rasband wouldn’t speak like this; he would never go against or diminish anything the prophet has said. And he feels completely differently on this issue, from his own personal experience with the prophet. Passing this around further is only leading people away from the truth. Sorry to say so, but it’s true. Sincerely, his daughter, Shannon Rasband Norton

OpenMind said...


A person “going along” doesn’t mean they are in favor of compulsion. Some people try not to be so quick to anger and want to follow that Lord who didn’t push back against those who took His own life. Your anger and quickness to judge on this topic is is getting pretty out of hand. That is the only end goal of all this. Covid and the vaccines and masks are literally meaningless. All they want is for us to be angry, and they are winning. Basically the entire comment threads on these recent posts is proof of that.

OpenMind said...

Don’t worry to lds will never allow faithful, monogamous, gay marriages. They are exactly as intolerant as you. Never underestimate their hatred and closed minds. They love polygamy and hate love.

Telavian said...

Thank you for this write up. The LDS church is stuck in a hard place however if the leaders really trusted in God they would rip the band-aid off and do whatever it took to right themselves with God.

Doing the will and work of God is the most important thing we can do regardless of the consequences. The Gileadi translation of Isaiah 28 makes it very clear that we are being feed vomit from our leaders when we could be eating the meat from God.

Last, I want to thank you so much for the book recommendation of "Teaching for Doctrines the Commandments of Men". That book is the most important non scriptural book I have ever read. It is pure gold along with your blog of course 😀.

dx said...

I believe you, Shannon. These rumors are hurtful and unacceptable. We should deal in facts and truth. For example, we should take the Prophet Joseph Smith at his word when he testified many times of having nothing to do with polygamy or anything like unto it. Unfortunately, many apostles and prophets after him have led many to believe Joseph Smith was lying publicly and carrying on polygamy in secret. I wonder who Elder Rasband believes: Joseph Smith or his accusers? It would be a great blessing if the Elders would clear up things like these. Sincerely, dx

Alan Rock Waterman said...

The Elder Rasband Rumor

Well, it looks like I have been careless. (First Time Ever!)

As it turns out, the story of Elder Rasband in Boise may have been apocryphal. I say “may have” because I'm not entirely certain something like that did not occur somewhere, just not likely in Boise, as I'll explain below. So for those who are interested, I'll walk you through the reasons for my decision to publish it even though I was unable to confirm its accuracy.

I was in conversation earlier today with Heather Moore (see above), who, it turns out, made similar attempts as I did to trace the story's provenance. She hit the same dead end I did. I was originally sent the story from a friend, but he was unable give me any further information on where he got it from. So I did a word search online and found it posted on a blog I normally find to be trustworthy and accurate. I made an attempt to contact the blog's author but did not receive a reply in time. Heather informed me that the piece has disappeared from that blog, and at least I was able to confirm THAT was true. It simply is no longer there-at least, I can't find it.

Which tells me the author was smarter than me and realized it was a story he could not confirm, or it tells me...well, I'm not sure WHAT it tells me.

But here's where I really fell down: Just before sitting down to write this piece on Saturday, I did another google search to see if I could get better confirmation and found the story appeared on Daniel C. Peterson's website, where he proclaimed it untrue.

Now, what you get to know about me and Daniel Peterson is that I used to LOVE his stuff. I still do love his earlier work. I can't give an opinion on anything he has done lately because at one point I found him not always reliable.

Two or three decades back, Peterson was Editor of The F.A.R.M.S Review of Books (previously The F.A.R.M.S Review of Books on the Book of Mormon). In those pages Daniel C. Peterson published devastating rebuttals of anti-Mormon publications, thoroughly debunking their lies, distortions, and inaccuracies. You can read my high praise for Daniel Peterson in my post titled “Best Evidence for the Book of Mormon, linked here:

That's also where you'll see me losing faith in him because he refused to look at certain evidence when it was right in front of him.

Daniel Peterson was a brilliant writer. Still is, when he sticks to telling the truth and debunking lies. But in recent years I noticed Peterson had gone from defending the Book of Mormon to defending the corporate Church, or more accurately, simply dismissing out of hand valid criticisms if those criticisms centered on the activities of the leaders. One of the things I liked best about Peterson was his penchant for ridiculing his opponents. But ridicule alone doesn't cut it. You have to present a valid argument as to WHY your opponent is in error, and I simply don't think Daniel Peterson brought a lot of evidence to the table during some of his diatribes. Like many committed Brethrenites, Peterson seemed to equate an attack on the Brethren as an attack on God Himself. That, I believe, is an unfortunate departure from the Daniel C. Peterson I had come to admire.

So when I saw that Peterson's reaction to the Boise story was little more than a dismissal, I simply dismissed his opinion. He didn't offer much more than an unsubstantiated opinion in liu of evidence, but then it may not have been possible for him to do more, seeing as even he did not know where the story originated from. Nevertheless, where I failed was by reacting in the same way I have accused Peterson of acting: by dismissing him out of hand.

(Continued Below)

Alan Rock Waterman said...

The Elder Rasband Rumor (Continued)

So, as my deadline approached I had no way of either confirming or denying the accuracy of the Rasband story, so I figured I would offer it with a caveat such as “I have no way of knowing whether this story is true or not, so take it for what it's worth.” But for some reason I forgot to include that disclaimer once I started writing.

So I was careless, no doubt about it. But I should admit I believe the essence of the story MAY be true in some form. By which I mean that although I didn't think it likely that Rasband had addressed that issue before a large crowd, I have been present when a Church official has confided information “off the record” before a small, intimate gathering of people he trusted. (including me, believe it or not.)

I still think that might have happened in this case, although it's not likely it took place in Boise, and certanly not before a large crowd. I hold this view because the Church hierarchy is experiencing unexpected resistance from among their most devoted followers, an example being the letter from Jamie Hepworth and others that you can see near the end of this blog post if you click on the highlighted words “their most dedicated followers.”

Jamie is very well-informed on both the science of the current vaccine controvesy AND the scriptures, and you can tell by watching how pained she is to have to point out to the prophet she loves and sustains how and where he has gone wrong. One of the most devastating moments in the video is when she quotes the section in the Church Handbook of Instruction that proves President Russell is asking the members to violate the Church's own written policies.

So despite Rasband's daughter Shannon above asserting the story was entirely made up because her father has not recently been in Boise, I don't dismiss out of hand that the rumor could have been deliberately disseminated in order to mollify the devout and get them to calm down.

But again, I just don't know. Which is why I was wrong to put that thing out there without some kind of caveat. So I accept responsibility for spreading an unconfirmed rumor. And although that rumor cannot be verified until either Elder Rasband confirms or denies it himself, or if two or three additional witnesses testify they were present, it does not feel out of character to me. Call me gullible, but SOMEONE in the hierarchy has to palliate the damage done by the statement of the First Presidency, even if that palliation is informal and unofficial. One thing that Boise story has done is quiet the mob, now that they believe someone in the church hierarchy has given them permission not to get the vaccine.

Finally, I would note that the veracity of that story does not negate the theme of this blog post, which is that the LDS Church is no longer a church, and has instead been purposely converted into a Corporation Sole with all power in the president and none other. The reality that Jesus Christ no longer directs this church can be tested simply by showing up at nn LDS church meeting some Sunday where you will notice the spirit of God simply is not in attendance.

Telavian said...

Yes, the indicated quote may or may not be accurate however I certainly agree with the sentiment of the article.

The LDS church is legally stuck between God and man because of their earlier choices.

Alan Rock Waterman said...

I am relieved to hear that your father did not speak in Boise, because Boise is a fully formed stake of the church and as I'm sure you know, had your father given instruction to the Saints in Boise, he would have been violating God's clear instructions to the Twelve.

You appear proud of the fact that your father would never "go against" President Nelson, yet your father seems to have no problem consistenly going against the clear instructions the Lord has given to members of the Twelve. Are you not concerned that every day he shows up for work at the Church Office Building he is bringing damnation on his head? Doctrine & Covenants section 42 was received in the presence of the Twelve, where Jesus made it clear that the law he was dispensing was ALWAYS to be followed by them, without fail. Jesus was clear as glass when He said those who departed from that law would be damned if they continued. Maybe you might want to remind your dad he's skating on thin ice.

I offer further explication in the blog post "Unchained Salary." If you're interested, scroll down to the subheading "What Exactly is The Job of the Twelve Apostles, Anyway?" then decide for yourself: Should your dad be following Russell Nelson or should he be following Jesus Christ? Here's the link:

Unknown said...

I do not believe the Rasband statement is authentic.

It is my observation that in the same way many have rationalized Lying for Polygamy (in the blasphemous name of "Lying for the Lord"), so also do many rationalize Lying for Liberty.

Harry said...

This is what a "Prophet" sounds like.

Alan Rock Waterman said...

Harry, I sure with Mormon leaders would stand against tyranny the way Palowsky continues to do. The fact that there are people like him out there standing up for Christ puts our own weak "leaders" to shame. Mormon leaders were the first to roll over and cancel church meetings. Shouldn't surprise us, but it's sad just the same.

Heather Moore said...

I also tend to believe Shannon when she says the quote is 100% false. Having done a bunch of research on puzzling quotes floating around the internet, most of them I find to be a conglomeration of falsehoods, misrepresented truth, with a smidgen of some verifible truth. Sounds like you have found the same. I can see how things can quickly get out of hand--like telephone. Intent is a critical thing, so I have to ask:

1. Why on earth did this thing get promulgated if it was not true?
2. Where did it originate?
3. What was the intent?

So, just my take, for whatever it's worth:

1. Half of the members haven't been vaxxed. They are questioning, praying, and have studied secret societies akin to Book of Mormon times now happening today, and know something is severely wrong in the world. They are confused and conflicted for lots of reasons, but most especially because faithfulness is now culturally synonymous with "sustaining the prophet." Prophet says jump; the faithful members ask, "How high?" Your temple recommend, your social circles and your eternal salvation are severely called into question if you go against said prophet. So, here comes an "under the table" quote from Elder Rasband, finally saying what the scriptures have said all along (minus the CDC owning the church and having them in their crosshairs, of course), and I can understand why people are clinging to the hope that perhaps maybe there might be some inkling that these men are actually smarter than they are appearing to be. I happen to know several members who believe that church leaders are actually abreast of the covid/corporate/globalist corruption, but are under duress and can't expose the truth or else the work of the Lord would be stopped, so their messages are cryptic--you just have to have eyes to see and ears to hear. For those who have that bias, they spread Rasband's quote like wildfire, relieved to be some of the few to find a loophole. For those who see the cracks and spewing water from the fallible dam the church built, Rasband's quote is further proof that leaders are hypocritical at best, and lying at worst.

Heather Moore said...

2. There are two quotes floating out there in cyberland, from what I can tell. The shorter one that you quoted, Rock (someone's nephew who was supposedly at the meeting in Boise), and a longer one that is now only documented on Daniel C. Peterson's blog because the original quote was taken down (Rian Nelson's friend from Kansas who said someone in Boise said Elder Rasband said, "Those who allow themselves to have their free agency taken by men aren't Celestial Kingdom material. Those whose testimonies are in the church and in men are not the Saviors followers."). I won't quote the entire three paragraphs here, but it seems like someone shortened it to produce the shorter, more believable quote. It is wildly unlike anything our currect Q15 have ever said, even under the sly, without calling into question their pensions. Neither one can be substantiated. Both are hearsay. Both would not be submissible in court. I was going to reach out to Rian, but figured it unneccesary after Shannon responded. Bottom line in the end for me, what he said or didn't say or might have said doesn't matter since the Lord is my prophet, priest and king--and not Elder Rasband, President Nelson, Governor Cox, Mitt Romney, Deseret News, CNN, my doctor, Pfizer, Moderna, Johnson & Johnson, the CDC, President Biden, the Pope, Anthony Fauci or Bill Gates (who all, incidentally, say I should take it). The fact that President Nelson and his entourage are all aligned with these people should make anyone take pause.

3. What I have noticed in my research over the past few years, is that there are many well-meaning people out there who don't always verify before sharing everything (don't we all?). I am not so quick to throw them down into the pit of despair, because I am guilty as charged. (Just makes me more cautious the next time.) So thanks, Rock for being quick to take the blame for that and trying to do your due diligence. I also know there are sick people out there who actually enjoy dropping a rat in a room full of cats just to see what will happen. Cheap thrills, but whatever. It's very effective, because we are all having this discussion, now aren't we? There are also such a thing as psyops (not saying that is what this is, but it has been super effective in the political arena--Q-anon for one--which keeps up the illusion that people are complacently safe because they think someone will step in and save them). It is never, Jesus, by the way. I don't know that the dizziness of that reality is something church leaders would actually do, but hey, they are partnered with the church of the devil, so anything is possible. I didn't ever think every single institution on the planet could be so corrupt, and yet here I am going down rabbit holes that still surprise the heck out of me. The end result of any of this is, it adds to the already crazy pot of "man mingled with scripture" so that people will either gravitate to their confirmation bias, or just throw it out. There is just so much to corroborate that it would take up your whole day. In the end, many of us think we are in the right instead of going to the Lord where we should be going with all of our questions, but put our trust instead in so-called experts, titled "bought out" individuals, self-professed prophets in name only but devoid of the fruits of the spirit, our favorite NBA player, or our preferred news aggregate.

Heather Moore said...

From my perspective, Shannon's revelation proves her dad is completely loyal to President Nelson, which is what has to happen for any of the upper eschelon to retain their good standing, title, status, and eventually, pension. If Rasband goes rogue, then bye-bye narrative to which the church has been promoting all these years, and cannonized in Official Declaration 1, but has no doctrinal basis except President Woodruff said so:

"The Lord will never permit me or any other man who stands as President of this Church to lead you astray. It is not in the programme. It is not in the mind of God. If I were to attempt that, the Lord would remove me out of my place, and so He will any other man who attempts to lead the children of men astray from the oracles of God and from their duty. (Sixty-first Semiannual General Conference of the Church, Monday, October 6, 1890, Salt Lake City, Utah. Reported in Deseret Evening News, October 11, 1890, p. 2.)

It matters not who lives or who dies, or who is called to lead this Church, they have got to lead it by the inspiration of Almighty God. If they do not do it that way, they cannot do it at all."

And so, that leaves us with this stark reality: President Nelson can and has clearly led people astray. The vaccine is not safe, nor effective. (Look up the WHO's worldwide database and plug in "covid vaccine" to see the tens and hundreds of thousands of adverse reactions and deaths categorized by type.) The vaccine, if so effective, would not require boosters nor an ad nauseum array of fear-mongering and divisive media propaganda reminiscent of Nazi Germany to convince you that it is. President Nelson is using manipulative tactics, urging and pleading with members to do what he has done, which has taken top priority over members getting their own revelation on the matter. That, alone is sad. And wrong. And absolutely un-prophet-like. The collateral damage is all around us, as anyone reading this blog could very well testify.

So, yes...abolutely the church (which is really a corporation) is stuck between a rock and a hard place.

Heather Moore said...

Oops. Meant to say, look up "covid-19 vaccine" on to find all the worldwide adverse reactions and deaths (not covid vaccine).

Telavian said...

In a 2016 worldwide devotional President Nelson said:
"Plead with the Lord for the gift of discernment. Then live and work to be worthy to receive that gift so that when confusing events arise in the world, you will know exactly what is true and what is not."

Why would we need the "gift of discernment" if everyone is doing it? Why would we need to worry about "confusing events" if everyone is doing it? Why do we need to worry about "what is true and what is not" if everyone is doing it?
The other conclusion I guess is do what the world does and you will be spiritually fine.

If President Nelson expects the church to go along with the world then we need no spiritual skills except to follow the crowd. If he expects us to not follow the crowd then why ask us to do so?

It certainly does remind me of the example in 1 Kings 13. One prophet is asked to fast, another prophet is asked to tempt the first to not fast. The first decides to not fast and is then eaten by a lion.

Is God asking his people to go against the advice of a medical doctor prophet to see if they will listen to Him and not man?

Alan Rock Waterman said...

All excellent points, as always. Your contributions to this page certainly do enhance the dialogue. Thanks again for weighing in.

I'm still embarassed that I included that apocryphal quote without adding any caveat, but when I first came across it, it struck me as the perfect imptetus to bring up the main theme of this essay, which is that the church restored through Joseph Smith has been hijacked and converted into something entirely corrupt. I could have used any one of dozens of other verifiable examples straight from the mouths of the leaders, but I guess this one was so juicy I forgot to engage in critical thinking before presenting it as if it were verified fact.

Anyhow, as you and I both agree, the real issue is what I hope readers will focus on and not my silly foible. I find it interesting that, other than in the TITLE of the Papers of Incorporation, Jesus isn't mentioned at all, certainly not as having any governing role in this new "Church." And the president is never referred to as the "prophet" as is the title the members are encouraged to refer him by. The main purpose of incorporation was to exclude the members from having any say-so in what the president decides to do with the member's tithes. The articles of incorporation makes that unnecessary since now every dime collected is the property of the members. (The Lord REQUIRES input from the members on this, but hey, that was back when it was HIS church, not the president's.)

Although it took a while (and the deaths of every one of the old-timers), eventually the leaders dropped the pretense that their role had anything to do with "serving the church" and made it clear that what they expect from the members is unquestioning obedience.

Dudeguy said...

“A report released just this yesterday shows that the covid shot kills five times more people than it saves.”

Can you point out where in the linked article it says this? I can’t find it anywhere. Thanks

Alan Rock Waterman said...

You asked "what are some of the more bizarre presentations heard at general conference last week that you made reference to?"

Well, I'm a little gun-shy now, since I just apologized for repeating something I could not confirm. As the reports I heard about conference were not obtained directly by watching it myself (I almost never watch it anymore; what would be the point?) I did read what others said about it so I think I'll not repeat what others said rather than try and quote the speakers themselves. I'm willing to repeat their reactions. Most of these are true believers who don't know anything about the church being corrupted, and would probably deny the church ever COULD be corrupted or undermined. Many of these people were having trouble accepting the counsel given to them this time out. "A lot of things felt off with this conference," was a comment I frequently saw from members who in the past have said nothing but good things about it.

So I'll mention some here. I copied them from threads known for their positive discussions of the Church Most of these are devout members fond of saying how much they love and sustain the leaders. They are also very well informed on both the science and the gospel, so even though they don't usually question the leaders, they're smart enough to recognize when the things they are hearing in conference don't line up with the scriptures or with their personal experience.

Here's a reaction to a speaker who warned members to stay off of social media. As more than one woman responded, the internet is ofen the the only source of real news and first hand accounts from real people. "That is how we connect," she said.

The sentiment seems to be that the speaker (I don't recall who it was, but I suspect it was Nelson) is recommending that, since there is so much misinformation on the internet, we should depend only on "approved" sources. To many, that smacked of what the news media and politicians are saying: "you can't trust anyone but us."

If we followed that counsel, commenters insisted, we would not see and hear from the multiple scientists warning against the dangers of the vaccine, and we certainly would be shielded from hundreds of firsthand accounts by people who have taken the vaccine and regret doing so due the resulting permanent disabilities. Such vital information is "definitely not on the news or touted from church leaders," said one woman in a comment, "I feel like things are becoming increasing deceptive. Everywhere."

Apparently President Nelson advised the Saints to follow the prophet because he is the only source of "pure truth, pure doctrine, pure revelation." As one member groused, THIS prophet is failing to come through with any of those. Here is a smattering of different voices:

"Im dissapointed to be honest. Our prophet "promised" us pure doctrine truths. He did not foresee Rasband."

"I am really struggling."

"same here. I have never been like this. I find myself at war."

"I don’t know about you but I have just been feeling so sick in my heart and not at peace since yesterday. Why am I struggling so bad?"

"I have been on my knees more than I have in years over the last year and especially over the last couple of weeks preparing for conference. Something is just not sitting right. I feel like everything that they’re doing goes against everything that the spirit has told me is right. Now I keep questioning if I’ve been deceived by the wrong spirit? I am in turmoil."

"Do you think the general authorities know this is how a lot of members feel? Are they even getting facts or are they getting info from MSM, CDC, FDA? I wish I knew if they are truly informed or not."

(Continued Below)

Telavian said...

Dudeguy, not sure about the link you reference however it says it here.

"Thus, our extremely conservative estimate for risk-benefit ratio is about 5/1. In plain English, people in the 65+ demographic are five times as likely to die from the inoculation as from COVID-19 under the most favorable assumptions! This demographic is the most vulnerable to adverse effects from COVID-19. As the age demographics go below about 35 years old, the chances of death from COVID-19 become very small, and when they go below 18, become negligible."

Alan Rock Waterman said...


Now, the thing to keep in mind is these people I'm quoting are not rogue Mormons like myself; they are 100% dedicated to following the Prophet. They watch every session of conference and hang on every word. Yet these are also people who are very well-informed on
science and the massive data showing the vaccines to be harmful, so they're cautiously beginning to speak out about some of the troubling things they heard in conference:

"I feel something is very wrong. I am done giving excuses. Vaccines were mentioned twice. We were gaslighted a few times about using free agency wisely implying harming others. I'm not going to excuse and say he did not mean what we think he means. This happened last year when he said do what you can to keep temples open. I said to my husband is he implying we get a vaccine with poison and murdered babies?! He said no he did not. But look where we are. And now he implied this. I'm tired of worshipping a vaccine that is not a vaccine. Especially in conference. I would have preferred a talk on word of wisdom, secret combinations, trusting in the god over the arm of flesh. Healings with priesthood power. Pure truth. But we got Some. Not all. It was like the chocolate chip story. It was good, Minus this."

"Me too. My discernment told me things were off. I have scripture smart friends who helped me pin point what was off. I am learning to trust my instincts."

Others are attempting to find a way to retain the faith in Nelson by suggesting he has a secret endgame we are not privy to:

"They are playing along with the Devils game... I don't know why, but there is a purpose for the time being, for them to remain quiet.
I can guarantee you, that as a Seer, and prophet, that he knows exactly what is going on...but for whatever reason, he's playing his cards closer than we expect, but that doesn't mean that he isn't aware...just give him the benefit of the doubt, and try hard to be patient (I know it's so hard!!!). You will know in time."

Here's someone on that same thread who seems to be figuring it out:

"Do you think the church is threatened to lose its 501c3 status if they don't do this? I want to see the bravery the early saints had before coming to Utah. Not catering to the mob."

Apparently at the beginning of the session, the congregation was told ""Everybody attending is fully vaccinated and tested against Covid" to which one viewer expressed skepticism:

"Are they really? Everyone had their booster shot? No? Then according to the latest narrative they are not 'fully vaccinated.' Speaking of which. What difference does that make? Are 'fully vaccinated' less contagious? No. Are they less likely to contract the virus? No. Are they less likely to die from it? No, unless you really manipulate the data.
So why bother mentioning it? How about 'all of the attending had regular bowel movements today and have fully applied their hemorrhoid cream'?"

Alan Rock Waterman said...

In your comment of October 11 you make reference to my wrongful opinion on vaccine effectiveness. Not sure what you mean, but if you're saying my opinion is that vaccines are effective at protecting a person from getting Covid, that is certainly NOT my opinion. If, however, you agree that vaccines are effective at killing and maiming many more people than they save, then we are on the same page. You'll recall that my second link on this article takes the reader to Steve Kirch's impeccable research (and to date undisputed and unchallenged) that the covid vaccine kills five times more people than it saves.

That piece has moved, since Dr. Mercola no longer archives his articles on-site. Here is one of many places it has been mirrored. Don't miss the video, even if all you can spare is a few minutes:

Telavian said...

I did watch all the sessions and think we can find truth through all sources even if the LDS church is far more like the Pharisees than we realize. I am fully convinced though that Joseph Smith would be excommunicated by the modern LDS church.

At the beginning they did mention all that junk as you listed. It was pure virtue signaling and a waste of what was supposed to be revelatory time.

The exact quote from President Nelson:
"If most of the information you get comes from social or other media, your ability to hear the whisperings of the Spirit will be diminished. If you are not also seeking the Lord through daily prayer and gospel study, you leave yourself vulnerable to philosophies that may be intriguing but are not true. Even Saints who are otherwise faithful can be derailed by the steady beat of Babylon’s band."

The quote is of course strictly false because it is not the source of the information that matters, but the information itself. For instance God used the witch of Endor for his purposes.

Alan Rock Waterman said...

The article I originally linked to was moved and replaced by a more recent one. (Dr Mercola now deletes everything he posts 48 hours later because he was tired of the harrassment he receives from the left.)

I have now updated that link to one of the many sites that mirrors that exact piece, in this instance, since it is one of my favorite news and information sites. You now find the proper link in that highlighted phrase within the body of the blog, or you can just cut and paste it here:

Alan Rock Waterman said...

Right you are, Telavian.

One wonders why President Nelson didn't say "If most of the information you get comes from mainstream sources, your ability to hear the whisperings of the Spirit will be diminished." Had he said that, most people would agree. But instead he issued a veiled attack against alternative avenues for sharing truth.

When Jesus was among the Nephites he warned three times that in the last days there would be excessive lyngs and deceptions among the people. Mainstream sources of information have now become completely unreliable for those seeking truth, and although one would be foolish to believe everything one sees on social media to be true, that format is now more reliable than the "approved" sources. The alternative media is where truth gets shared between people who know they can't rely on the mainstream.

Telavian said...

Rock, it is actually confusing because Rasband said President Nelson is using social media more.

"But with the complex issues of our day, President Nelson is speaking much more often in forums, social media, devotionals, and even press briefings."

It is certainly strange for a prophet of God to speak through press briefings. I believe you said this in one of your articles. A true prophet of God should not speak a single word unless God told him too.

Alan Rock Waterman said...

That IS funny, Telavian! I guess he doesn't want anybody on social media unless they're pulling up HIS facebook page (which we all know he doesn't write content on).

Yeah, I always thought it was odd that there's a "Church Spokesman" who delivers statements to the press when I thought the prophet was supposed to be the spokesman for the church.

Alan Rock Waterman said...

If anyone else has had trouble with the link labeled "the Covid vaccine has killed five times as many as it has saved," that link has been corrected. I also provide it in an update dated today.

Here it is again if you just want to cut and paste into your url:

PNW_DPer said...

Well, I listened to maybe a little more than half of the General Conference, and I did find it rather bizarre for President Eyring, a "Prophet, Seer, and Revelator", to engage in the woke virtue signaling of announcing "everyone is fully vaccinated and also tested" (never did quite figure out if he was talking about all members in attendance, or just the Tab Choir members).

Chip said...

Our Elder Stephenson is poised to become the first BILLIONAIRE apostle of our Lord Jesus Christ:

No other church has such successful leaders, let alone, APOSTLES. We're number one!

Telavian said...


I hope he follows the council Christ gave to the rich young ruler to sell it all and give the money to the poor.

It is crazy that an Apostle of the lord of the universe doesn't take a vow of poverty. The prosperity gospel concept that because we are rich then God approves of our behavior is utterly wrong.

Heather Moore said...

For whatever it is worth, and not to beat a dead horse, but I found this comment by Rian Nelson on Dan Peterson's blog at the bottom.

Rian Nelson • 9 days ago • edited
I should have known better than to share any hearsay. I'm very sorry. I just want all to know that we have our free agency to choose. I am thankful we all love the Gospel of forgiveness. May the Lord bless you all.

And then there were several commenters afterwards who felt the need to shame and scold him for sharing it to begin with. Ugh.

Paul Conterio said...

Great post. However, I would not be so quick to put Harold B. Lee and Joseph Fielding Smith on any sort of pedestal. They used the collaboration of Church and State in the worse possible way. Study what they did to Apostle Dr. Richard Lyman. It was appalling! Yes, at that time adultery and fornication were class B misdemeanors.

In early November 1943, one of J Reuben Clark’s spies discovered a veritable bombshell of secret information – Apostle Richard Lyman was keeping company with a woman not his wife. Clark, by then de facto acting Church president for Heber J Grant in fragile declining health, took two apostles – Joseph Fielding Smith and Harold B Lee – into his confidence about this situation and assigned them to track Lyman at night. Shortly thereafter, Clark advised Quorum of the Twelve President George Albert Smith of the alleged details; Smith prepared for a disciplinary council.

Excerpts below and the attachment from a thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in History By Shannon Caldwell Montez C. Elizabeth Raymond, Ph.D. / Thesis Advisor December 2019

On November 11, 1943, Lyman, who was in his seventies, was discovered in the bed of his secret "plural wife." It involved a police chief smashing down the door, without even knocking, of a seventy-one-year-old woman during the night. Lyman was brought outside in the November night in his (sacred) underwear in front of police and "others," then brought by police to the church office building as if he had committed a crime, not a sin. There, he was given less than ten minutes to explain himself. A notice was placed on the front page of the Deseret News the next day.

This entire operation was spearheaded by apostles (namely J. Reuben Clark, Joseph Fielding Smith, and Harold B. Lee), and involved civil rather than just ecclesiastical authority. Normally such a thing would have been handled privately in offices involving confessions rather than coercion. Even the police chief later admitted he would never have been involved had he known who he was going to get; he had only been told there were going after a "Big Shot." As a friend of Lyman's, he always felt bad about his part in the debacle.248

Lyman was deeply hurt by the actions of men he had considered friends and felt he had not been given a fair chance to explain his situation. In a letter written to the Quorum in November of 1949, six years after the incident, he wrote:

I feel as if I had no trial. I think I was in the presence of the Brethren fewer than ten minutes. Brother Joseph Fielding said "We desire to give this serious matter as little publicity as possible" then came that terrible publicity the very next day that was read all over the world. My Michigan classmates (and I had been made president for life of the class of '95) heard it everywhere. My engineering friends, some of them the greatest engineers in the world, began discussing it.

Does it not appear to you to have been a strange way to treat a friend after being in session with him all day under such conditions that at the slightest whisper he could have been held and he would gladly and quickly have explained his conduct. I say does it not seem to have been most unkind to have sent after him, not an automobile full but a bus as large as a streetcar full of armed officers who split and [s]mashed down the door as if they were endeavoring to capture the worse [sic] kind of wicked armed and fighting criminal.

At the of his excommunication Richard Lyman was married to Amy Brown Lyman who was the Relief Society General President.

Alan Rock Waterman said...

Paul Conterio,
I appreciate that information (I was aware that Lyman had been disciplined for adultery but was not aware that he had been "swat teamed" over it).

However, just to set the record straight, I was not placing those men named on a pedestal; merely putting them forward as leaders at a time when leaders -unlike the current crop today- were well-versed in the scriptures. I don't think many of the current crop could do very well in a seminary-grade scripture chase, because I just don't feel they have much familiarity with the standard works.

Long-time readers of this blog will recall my criticism of Joseph Fielding Smith, who, although author of the five volume "Answers to Gospel Questions" tended to put his own (incorrect) interpretation of the scriptures in several instances -when he was referring to the scriptures at all. On many instances he put forth his own doctrines without even attempting to back them up with the word of God.

I found this out while doing research on several topics for this blog. In attempting to get a clearer picture about certain scriptural topics, I would go to my set of Smith's books only to discover he was sometimes wildly off-base. Everyone is aware that his son-in-law Bruce McConkie was even more inclined to substitute his personal opinion in the place of actual doctrine.

Even Ezra Benson, whom I admire because he did so much to promote the reading of the Book of Mormon and applying it to our day, taught falsely when he was an apostle in his conference talk "The Fourteen Fundamentals of Following the Prophet" which promoted blind obedience to the president of the church. I don't think he ever referred to scripture in that entire presentation. I'm sure it surprised him to no end when he became president of the Church to find he himself was not automatically endowed with the gifts of a prophet, seer, and revelator, and that he was still as fallible as ever.

I consider Harold B. Lee to be a consummate scriptorian because I personally witnessed him in action, as I relate in my post titled "Evil Speaking of the Lord's Anointed" which can be found at this link:

Lee legitimately impressed me, and I like his assertion that we latter-day Saints must learn to find our answers in the scriptures.

Anyway, I've even quoted Brigham Young favorably on those rare times he admitted he was not a prophet and didn't care a hang about it. Doesn't mean he didn't do some very bad things, not the least of which was his role in completely and single-handedly derailing the entire Church. It's the fault of Brigham Young that we have a church led by nincompoops and ignoramuses today, because they HAVE TO trace their authority through him in order to claim any legitimacy at all.

All that having been said, Paul, thanks again for weighing in with that account of how they mishandled Richard Lyman's situation.

Mark said...

Nephi says don't trust any man unless he is moved upon by the Holy Ghost and the only way to know is if we are moved by the same (2 Nephi 28:31, 4:34). We prove ALL things and hold fast to that which is good. Everyone, even prophets will not have their agency taken away. It's too bad that "the infallibility of the pope" doctrine has crept into the Church.
My conviction that all will be corrected in time is the last two verses of the 90th section and the cleansing mentioned in 112 and 85. (1 Kings 13) I believe the great test will be staying strong when counsel is given by personal opinion in high places especially when injury and death result from following personal opinion. D&C 93:39.
"When the Spirit testifies that a man is of God, you are not trusting in the man, you are trusting in that Spirit that testified to you."
Time will vindicate painfully those who hold to the rod. Believers don't make haste. Whether the Church's wealth comes from big pharma or U & I Sugar it's still the only true Church on the face of the earth and and a privilege to be a member of. Jesus said He would cleanse it so I'll just work on the member in the mirror and let Him do the dirty work.

Heather Moore said...

Mic drop! No more questioning what the true, authentic stance of the church and its leaders is anymore.

Elder Rasband to youth/YSA Q&A in Africa:

Every member should get vaccinated in order to "gather Israel on both sides of the veil."

Heather Moore said...

Here is the cleaned up version of the above video without all the distractions, in case you want to share with others.

Oak said...

Someone pointed me at your article in reference to Elder Rasband's supposed comment in Idaho. I have been able to verify from a direct family member that he was not in Idaho speaking during that time frame and never made that statement. It's just hearsay and should be removed from your article and some type of correction made.

Rocco said...

Whether he said it or not, it makes sense.

Alan Rock Waterman said...

Oak, Had you been following the comments, you would see the correction was made October 11th with accompanying mea culpa. Also please see my response to Rasband's daughter to which she has yet to respond. You're a bit late to the party, but welcome aboard.

Kevin Petersen said...

Not only has the Church been taken over but your name, your marriage, your voting registration turns over your power of attorney to the STATES OF STATES. In order to be free from the encroachments of government we might want to look at what we need to do to get free of government, by rescinding voter registration, marriage license, turning the birth certificate back to it's rightful owner, we can not complain about something that is being done to the Church while letting the same thing happen to we the people, letting our lives be confused, while supporting something as evil as what this article has explained, taxes, fines, fees, permits are all something that has been brought into our lives by man, the constitution does not allow for any of this to happen.

Anonymous said...

I have always been disappointed that The Church has rejected my efforts to teach the Skousen Constitution seminars, to educate the saints on documents that the D&C declares to be inspired of Heavenly Father. Since the demise of these teachings in our schools I have believed that the LDS church should encourage members to teach and learn about the founding documents. Heavenly Father said, referring to governments, that anything more or less than this cometh of evil.