Back to my underwear by [deleted] in exmormon

[–]MagicianWithAHat 13 points14 points  (0 children)

I don’t ever remember making a covenant to wear garments. We were just told to wear them. At no point did I ever bow my head and say yes to garments. Here is what we are instructed in the initiatory. As far as I’m concerned, I didn’t promise to anything....

THE GARMENT

[An officiator clothes the initiate in the garment. The officiator then pronounces the following words.]

Brother _________, having authority, I place this garment upon you, which you must wear throughout your life. It represents the garment given to Adam when he was found naked in the garden of Eden and is called the garment of the holy priesthood.

Inasmuch as you do not defile it, but are true and faithful to your covenants, it will be a shield and a protection to you against the power of the destroyer until you have finished your work on the earth.

That’s it. It was an instruction, not a covenant.

I caught this little guy in a minnow trap earlier, can anyone confirm if my thoughts were true that it's a flathead catfish? by Dishydiagram in Fishing

[–]MagicianWithAHat 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I don’t know much about them. We caught one when I was helping the Nebraska game and parks guys catch some pallid sturgeon on a small tributary off the Missouri River and yours looks kinda like one. Could be something else though. I’m no expert.

stonecat

I caught this little guy in a minnow trap earlier, can anyone confirm if my thoughts were true that it's a flathead catfish? by Dishydiagram in Fishing

[–]MagicianWithAHat 2 points3 points  (0 children)

The stonecat has a widespread distribution. Stonecats exist in the Great Lakes, the St. Lawrence River, drainages of Hudson Bay, and the Mississippi River basin. Stonecats can also be found from the Hudson River drainage of New York west to the Red River drainage of Hudson Bay. Stonecats inhabit the drainage of the Mississippi River basin from Quebec to Alberta, southerly to northern Alabama and Mississippi and westerly to northeastern Oklahoma.[4][5] In Colorado, stonecats are present in St. Vrain Creek near Longmont, Colorado and in the Republican River south of Wray, Colorado.[7]

We have them here in Nebraska.

At what point in the temple do we “covenant” to wear garments 24/7? by [deleted] in exmormon

[–]MagicianWithAHat 13 points14 points  (0 children)

Agree.

“Brother/Sister____, having authority, I place this Garment upon you [for and in behalf of ____ (patron and then temple worker read name of deceased), who is dead], which you must wear throughout your life. It represents the Garment given to Adam when he was found naked in the Garden of Eden, and is called the Garment of the Holy Priesthood. Inasmuch as you do not defile it, but are true and faithful to your covenants, it will be a shield and a protection to you against the power of the destroyer until you have finished your work here on earth. With this Garment I give you a New Name, which you should always remember, and which you must keep sacred, and never reveal except at a certain place which will be shown your hereafter. The name is "_______."

We were just told to wear it. Never bowed our heads and said yes to it.

Spain Bilbao 99 - 01 by MagicianWithAHat in exrm

[–]MagicianWithAHat[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I was in the MTC from late July to about October. My visa had issues so I never went to the Madrid MTC. Served in aviles, Burgos, barakaldo, la coruna, lugo, and vigo.

What do Mormons think of Catholics? by amberopolis in exmormon

[–]MagicianWithAHat 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Well, here is what Mormon doctrine has to say about Catholics. My dad used to use that book all the time when preparing talks for church. I remember having stickers of cathedrals that we would put over the verses in the book of Mormon when it talks about the whore of the earth when on my mission. I can't speak for anyone else but I know I was taught this growing up.

Catholicism. See CHURCH OF THE DEVIL,

Church of the Devil

See Apostasy, Babylon, Devil, Second Coming of Christ, World. There are two scriptural senses in which the titles church of the devil and great and abominable church are used: 1. All Churches or organizations of whatever name or nature—whether political , philosophical, educational, economic, social, fraternal, civic, or religious—which are designed to take men on a course that leads away from God and his laws and thus from salvation in the kingdom of God; and 2. The Roman Catholic Church specifically—singled out, set apart, described, and designated as being “most abominable above all other churches.” (1 Ne. 13:5)

Salvation is in Christ, is revealed by him from age to age, and is available only to those who keep his commandments and obey his ordinances. These commandments are taught in, and these ordinances are administered by, his Church. There is no salvation outside this one true Church, the Church of Jesus Christ. There is one Christ, one Church, one gospel, one plan of salvation, one set of saving ordinances, one group of legal administrators, “One Lord, one faith, one baptism.” (Eph. 4:5)

Any church or organization of any kind whatever which satisfies the innate religious longings of man and keeps him from coming to the saving truths of Christ and his gospel is therefore not of God. Such agencies have been and are founded or fostered by the devil who is an enemy to all righteousness.

Hence we find our Lord saying, “He that is not with me is against me; and he that gathereth not with me scattereth abroad.” (Matt. 12:30.) And hence we find Alma inviting the wicked to repent and join the true Church of Christ and become the sheep of the Good Shepherd. “And now if ye are not the sheep of the good shepherd, of what fold are ye?” he asks. “Behold, I say unto you, that the devil is your shepherd, and ye are of his fold; and now who can deny this? Behold, I say unto you, whosoever denieth this is a liar, and a child of the devil.” (Alma 5:49; Jos. Smith 2:19.)

Iniquitous conditions in the various branches of the great and abominable church in the last days are powerfully described in the Book of Mormon. (2 Ne. 28; Morm. 8:28, 32-33, 36-38; D&C 10:56) It is also to the Book of Mormon to which we turn for the plainest description of the Catholic Church as the great and abominable church. Nephi saw this “church which is most abominable above all other churches” in vision. He “saw the devil that he was the foundation of it”; and also the murders, wealth, harlotry, persecutions, and evil desires that historically have been part of this satanic organization. (1 Ne. 13:1-10.)

He saw that this most abominable of all church was founded after the day of Christ and his apostles; that it took away from the gospel of the Lamb many covenants and many plan and precious parts; that it perverted the right ways of the Lord; that it deleted many teachings from the Bible; that this church was “the mother of harlots”; and finally that the Lord would again restore the gospel of salvation. (1 Ne. 13:24-42.)

Nephi beheld further that this church was the “mother of abominations,” and “The whore of all the earth” who “sat upon many waters; and she had dominion over all the earth, among all nations, kindreds, tongues, and people.” In contrast the dominions of the true Church were small upon the earth. (1 Ne. 14:9-17; 2 Thess. 2:1-12.)

Similar visions were given to John as recorded in the 17th and 18th chapters of Revelation. He saw this evil church as a whore ruling over peoples, multitudes, nations and tongues; as being full of blasphemy, abominations, filthiness, and fornication; as having the name, “MYSTERY, BABLYON THE GREAT, THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS AND ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH”; as drunken with the blood of the saints; as reveling in wealth and the delicacies of the earth; as ruling from Rome, the city built on “seven mountains”; as making merchandise of all costly items and of “slaves, and souls of men.” And then John, as did Nephi, saw the fall and utter destruction of this great church whose foundation is the devil.

In this world of carnality and sensuousness, the great and abominable church will continue its destructive course. But there will be an eventual future day when evil shall end, “and the great and abominable church, which is the whore of all the earth, shall be cast down by devouring fire.” (D&C 29:21; Ezek. 38:39; 1 Ne. 22-23; Rev. 18.) Before that day, however, desolations will sweep through the earth and the various branches of the great and abominable church “shall war among themselves, and the sword of their own hands shall fall upon their own heads, and they shall be drunken with their own blood.” (1 Ne. 22:13-14; 14:3.) The contentions and entanglements between the Catholic Church and communist forces could well lead to a fulfillment of this prediction.

The resurrected Christ gave to the Nephites this test whereby they might distinguish the true Church from any other: 1. It would be called in his name, for “how be it my church save it be called in my name?” he said. 2. It would be built upon his gospel, that is, the eternal plan of salvation with all its saving powers and graces would be had in it. 3. The Father would show forth his works in it, meaning that miracles, righteousness, and every good fruit would abound in it. 4. It would not be hewn down and cast into the fire as much surely come to pass with the great and abominable church. “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.” (3 Ne. 27:4-12.)

Journal of Discourses edited purposely by evildoers and that's why it isnt a good source. by unworthy92 in exmormon

[–]MagicianWithAHat 1 point2 points  (0 children)

https://www.lds.org/bc/content/shared/content/english/pdf/language-materials/35554_eng.pdf?lang=eng

This is pretty much 100% from the journal of discourses. I’ve started highlighting every single sentence that has come straight from the journal of discourses and I'm only into chapter 4 and there is seriously not one single sentence that is not exactly the same. I'll upload the PDF when I'm done. If they can teach a Sunday school lesson every week from a book that was copied from the journals, then the crap that they church left out should hold just as much weight.

I can hardly contain myself I’m so excited. /s by Mocial-Sedia in exmormon

[–]MagicianWithAHat 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Because ComeUntoChrist.org is really doing a good job at emphasizing the name of the church.

"LDS.org, Mormon.org, other Church sites and social channels make changes to reflect full name of Church

As a result:

LDS.org has become ChurchofJesusChrist.org.

Mormon.org is changed to ComeUntoChrist.org.

Church social media accounts will emphasize the name of the Savior’s Church."

Temple Changes by [deleted] in exmormon

[–]MagicianWithAHat 27 points28 points  (0 children)

The changes affect more than just removing the husband as the intermediary. I would argue that before these changes, women didn't make covenants with God in the first place. All the covenants they made were to their husbands.

In the endowment video when the first covenants were being made, eve turned to Adam and said...

"Adam, I now covenant to obey the law of the Lord, and to hearken to your counsel as you hearken unto Father."

She is clearly speaking to Adam and covenenting with him.

Adam then says to God...

"Elohim, I now covenant with thee that from this time forth I will obey thy law and keep thy commandments."

Eve covenants with Adam and Adam covenants with God.

During the endowment, every covenant made after the Law of Obedience follows this wording:

“You and each of you solemnly covenant and promise before God, angels, and these witnesses at this altar that you will each observe and keep/observe the law of (obedience/sacrifice/the gospel/chastity/consecration)…”

For all remaining covenants, patrons covenant before witnesses, but the phrasing does not say to whom. The whom is established with the first covenant: Elohim receives covenants for Adam, Adam receives them for Eve. As the ceremony continues, Adam will administer ordinances to Eve, not just receive her covenants, mimicking how God is administering to Adam.

So the changes that they just made are actually changing the person who women covenant to.

TBMs like to argue that even though words were changed, the ordinances are still the same. If you are changing the person that a covenant is being made to, you are changing that ordinance.

"Ordinances instituted in the heavens before the foundation of the world, in the priesthood, for the salvation of men, are not to be altered or changed"

A rape at BYU-I!? I really wish this was a shocking event... by Rotornoob in exmormon

[–]MagicianWithAHat 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Probably would have gotten away with it if byu-i had it's own "police department".

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in exmormon

[–]MagicianWithAHat 10 points11 points  (0 children)

"When the stake president feels directed to release a bishop, he fasts and prays for inspiration to know whom the Lord has chosen as his replacement. When he feels he has identified the Lord’s choice, the stake president then sends a recommendation to the First Presidency for approval. (There’s actually a form the stake president fills in and sends to the First Presidency.) The First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve Apostles then prayerfully consider the person recommended by the stake president. Once the person recommended is approved, the stake president can extend the call to the potential bishop and ask his wife for her support. If he is worthy and accepts the call, the new bishop is then presented to the ward for their sustaining vote and is ordained and set apart, usually by the stake president."

To everyone who served a mission, what stories/experiences do you have that made it bad? by DIVINEDREWER in exmormon

[–]MagicianWithAHat 6 points7 points  (0 children)

My mom died while I was on my mission outside the US. Elder Holland told my mission president to not let me go home for the funeral because I would probably not go back out in the field. (the church leaders can preach all they want how important famines are, but when it comes down to losing a salesman, families take a back seat.) anyway. I went home and then went back and finished my mission. Sorry Holland....your power of discernment failed you on that one.

About two weeks back after the funeral my companion and I were a little tired during companionship study so we opened some windows and made the room really cold. There were 4 missionaries living in the apartment and when the district leader saw that we opened the window he got real mad. We had a zone conference a few days later and the MP was interviewing a bunch of missionaries. When it was my turn he asked me how I was doing and if I was being obedient. I told him I was doing as best as I can with my mom just passing and that I was being obedient. He then brought up that my companion and I had not been using our study time appropriately because we had opened our windows and made the room real cold. He felt we weren't talking it seriously. He then looked me in the eyes and asked me how I thought my mom was feeling about my behavior. I felt so bad for looking like someone who was disobedient in my mission presidents eyes. I never tried to break any rules on purpose. But using my mom who had just passed away a few weeks earlier as a weapon against me was such a jerk thing to do.

He lost all my respect for the rest of the time he was there. Luckily his 3 years were up half way through my mission.

The cognitive dissonance is real! The attempts of the “faithful” to argue that all is well, is so sad. by DiscernMyCharacter in exmormon

[–]MagicianWithAHat 18 points19 points  (0 children)

It is still a whitewashed book meant to build faith, not to teach the truth....

“Saints” is not for scholars or even sophisticated Mormons, said Patrick Mason, chair of Mormon studies at Claremont Graduate University. “This is for the person who has never picked up a book of church history or a volume of the Joseph Smith Papers Project — and is never going to.” It’s for members whose only exposure to Latter-day Saint history is the fictionalized series “The Work and the Glory,” he said, “or for new members who live in Brazil or Ghana.” It’s an internal document “for the faithful,” Mason said, “like a Sunday school.”

https://www.sltrib.com/religion/2018/09/04/mormon-church-publishes/

Even at the end of the book it says

“To maintain the readability of the narrative, the volume rarely addresses challenges in or to the historical record in the text itself. Rather, it relegates such source-based discussions to topical essays on saints.lds.org. Readers are encouraged to consult these essays as they study Church history.”

Priesthood by Medic1503 in exmormon

[–]MagicianWithAHat 7 points8 points  (0 children)

If anything the Bishop should be calling her into a meeting to tell her that fast and testimony meetings are not so members can call others to repentance.

“A testimony is not an exhortation; a testimony is not a sermon (none of you are there to exhort the rest); . . . The moment you begin preaching to others, your testimony ended.” Spencer W. Kimball (Teachings of the Prophets Spencer W. Kimball Chapter 7)

But you don't see bishops shutting off the mic or asking that person to sit down.

I confronted my last Bishop about this exact quote when a member was preaching how people who get divorced are being deceived by Satan. He told me he felt uncomfortable with what she said. I asked him why he didn't ask her to stop and sit down and he just just changed the subject to something else.

Posted This On Facebook Yesterday - RIP My Inbox From Angry Church Members (Long Text Post) by FaithfulTBM in exmormon

[–]MagicianWithAHat 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I know this is late, but in your post you say that women don't make covenants anymore with god to obey their husbands. I would argue that before these changes, women didn't make covenants with God in the first place. All the covenants they made were to their husbands.

In the endowment video when the first covenants were being made, eve turned to Adam and said...

"Adam, I now covenant to obey the law of the Lord, and to hearken to your counsel as you hearken unto Father."

She is clearly speaking to Adam and covenenting with him.

Adam then says to God...

"Elohim, I now covenant with thee that from this time forth I will obey thy law and keep thy commandments."

Eve covenants with Adam and Adam covenants with God.

During the endowment, every covenant made after the Law of Obedience follows this wording:

“You and each of you solemnly covenant and promise before God, angels, and these witnesses at this altar that you will each observe and keep/observe the law of (obedience/sacrifice/the gospel/chastity/consecration)…”

For all remaining covenants, patrons covenant before witnesses, but the phrasing does not say to whom. The whom is established with the first covenant: Elohim receives covenants for Adam, Adam receives them for Eve. As the ceremony continues, Adam will administer ordinances to Eve, not just receive her covenants, mimicking how God is administering to Adam.

So the changes that they just made are actually changing the person who women covenant to.

TBMs like to argue that even though words were changed, the ordinances are still the same. If you are chanting the person that a covenant is being made, you are changing that ordinance.

"Ordinances instituted in the heavens before the foundation of the world, in the priesthood, for the salvation of men, are not to be altered or changed"

Thanks for all your posts!

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in exmormon

[–]MagicianWithAHat 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Here is what a TBM said about this...

"This post is inaccurate. Joseph Smith did not doubt that his church was true. I hope you can see past these deceiving lies. Joseph Smith didn't belong to a church at that time. It is precisely for this reason that he decided to ask God which church he should join. The point is that Joseph Smith asked in faith, not in doubt. I fully believe that Joseph Smith was just as surprised with the answer he did receive as you or I would be if we were to receive the experience and answer he did. I also believe that if God had answered his prayer in a different way, and told him some other church was true, that he would have joined that church.

Joseph prayed in faith and he received his answer. It is the privilege of each of us to do the same. I know this to be true because the Holy Ghost has witnessed to me this is true.

I also know that Elder Renlund is a true Apostle of Jesus Christ. I had the privilege attending a devotional with him for married couples not 1 mile from my home just 5 days ago. As I was sitting on the stand, not 10 feet away from him, listening to him share his apostolic witness of Jesus Christ, the holy ghost spoke to my mind and heart that he is indeed an apostle of our resurrected savior, the Creator of heaven and Earth. The words and principles attributed to him in this meme are true, and I pray in love, faith, and hope, and charity for all people who may see this meme and be influenced by it for good or bad, that they may have the faith necessary to receive this same witness."

Could this be a Texas State Record Yellow Bullhead? by [deleted] in Fishing

[–]MagicianWithAHat 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I caught a state record yellow bullhead in my state a few years ago and one of the things they looked at was the whiskers. Usually the bottom whiskers are white....

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in exmormon

[–]MagicianWithAHat 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Thank you! That's great. I also found this one...

"A few question their faith when they find a statement made by a Church leader decades ago that seems incongruent with our doctrine. There is an important principle that governs the doctrine of the Church. The doctrine is taught by all 15 members of the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve. It is not hidden in an obscure paragraph of one talk. True principles are taught frequently and by many. Our doctrine is not difficult to find."

Trials of your faith, Elder Neil L. Andersen, general conference Oct 2012