- Jack on 17 Thoughts About Resistance: “The prophets spoke plainly 30 years ago on the subject that has caused more damage to American lives than anything else. Let’s try to embrace that counsel first–because if we don’t it won’t matter what else the prophets might warn against.” Jan 19, 13:26
- on 17 Thoughts About Resistance: “Jesus was executed for being a political threat. For speaking out, causing a disturbance at the temple (a site of frequent violence and insurrection), entering Jerusalem like a King, creating a following. He was not executed for saying “render to Caesar” (which was actually a separatist comment, not a neutral one.) Love of neighbor is not a private sentiment, it is a public ethic. Politics are an amplified way of living out the second greatest commandment- to love your brother as yourself. Politics are HOW we do or do not live up to that commandment. Politics are enacting how we treat each other. Silence in the face of tyranny does not protect the innocent, it protects the abuser. Always has. We are guilty. Comparing the Church to Juilliard or Starbucks is a false equivalence. The Church claims divine moral authority. It preaches the God-given right to Liberty and celebrates the inspiration of our constitution and country that uniquely became the incubator for the restoration. Yet somehow we lose our backbone when any sacrifice is required (institutionally) to defend or speak up about that liberty when it is denied to others. That isn’t prudence or “strategy”, it’s moral cowardice. And I wonder, is a cowardly organization that turns its back on its values worth protecting? What is it protecting? What values? Yes, our institution must function, but function to do what? Always take and never give? Sit on the sidelines? Survival purchased through moral abdication is not really surviving, it’s a type of hell. The gospel was never about optimizing institutional longevity or supporting the church no matter what. Isn’t survival at all costs a “natural man” quality? Shouldn’t a divine organization be about bearing the torch and lighting the beacons instead, aware that no unhallowed hand can touch it? Sadly, since our early days of persecution, we developed an extremely high survivor mentality that’s probably better described as a complex. The gospel is supposed to be about truth spoken plainly, truth that cannot be purchased at any cost (social or otherwise). That’s the bravery of Abinidi, of Esther, of Jesus, of Peter and Paul, of the lamenting Prophets of old, of any and all the disciples, apostles and martyrs. That is what a P/prophet is, one who speaks truth to a culture of lies, regardless of the consequences. Your use of Abinadi fails on its own terms. Abinadi did not falter. He did not preach abstractions and hope the king would connect the dots. Today, both sides of the US political isle think church doctrine supports THEM, yet both can’t be true. There are churches and politicians as well as all the confusing voices in the media and in an explosion of online chatter creating a swill of information and misinformation. The father of all lies must be reveling in it and growing stronger and stronger with misinformation in a global megaphone while God’s servants, prudently self-censor. They hide behind corporate doublespeak and trite platitudes of happier days gone by or sing praises to the happy “good shepherd” Jesus and feel the warm fuzzies. Meanwhile, danger and lies grow stronger and stronger, people suffer, livery corrodes. Abinidi spoke plainly, publicly, and to his martyrdom. So the question is unavoidable. Which LDS Prophet has shown that kind of boldness in light of similar (lethal) stakes? Invoking Abinadi to justify strategic silence drains his story of all moral force. History does not remember those who waited to see how things played out, who rode it out in silence. As a matter of fact, when under persecution, I remember, with pain and tears, the silence of my friends. Maybe we don’t need to act for history’s sake, maybe we just need to act on our convictions. It’s quite simple. Did we really wait 7,000 years for our turn on earth to “shrink and shun the fight” and sit back with a measured a “proactive wait and see”? If so, what’s the purpose of even being here on earth- just hang out on the other side of the veil and strum harps and look askance at the world’s problems with a condescending “tisk, tisk” with your feet on the footstool of a cloud.” Jan 19, 12:35
- on What Can We Learn from Visions of Glory?: “Anyways, the discussion here about religious sensationalism and violence was anticipated a few decades ago in a scholarly dispute about medieval apocalypticism. One view frequently expressed since the 1950s if not earlier held that millennarianism inspired violence, and you’ll still come across people repeating this idea. But the outcome of the scholarly dispute was to overturn this idea: instead of causing violence, people used various aspects of apocalypticism to make sense of their lives and the events they had experienced.” Jan 19, 11:26
- on What Can We Learn from Visions of Glory?: “As Kendall is a guest here, I removed a comment that was far off topic. Then I did the same for additional comments on other posts that likewise missed the point by a mile. Please, read carefully and try to keep comments relevant.” Jan 19, 11:15
- on What Can We Learn from Visions of Glory?: “Texasabuelo, Plenty of Latter-day Saints are “standing alone” by following cultural and political extremists who criticize the First Prrsidency…. right out of the church.” Jan 19, 07:56
- on 17 Thoughts About Resistance: “You might enjoy David Dennison’s Substack “Aged Well.” All-time champion translator of the right-leaning half of the country for liberals. I could never do it so well. My only question for you is: what do you plan to do after this? If a Democrat wins 2028 what should she do?” Jan 18, 22:12
- on What Can We Learn from Visions of Glory?: “I know many people who read the book and believed every word of it. They were not inspired to abuse or murder others. They were inspired to make extremely stupid financial decisions based on the claims in the book. The book undeniably caused great harm to many.” Jan 18, 18:59
- on What Can We Learn from Visions of Glory?: “It sounds to me like the issue with Daybell, Hildebrandt, and Ballard was more about DHB having some odd religious inclinations and using VG to head in odd directions. Still makes me wonder what’s up with DHB.” Jan 18, 18:19
- on What Can We Learn from Visions of Glory?: “Non-polygamous LDS Fundamentalism is a real thing, from Julie Rowe to Hannah Stoddard at the Joseph Smith Foundation. There is a real political/cultural schism going on in the Church. It became blazingly apparent during Covid, when the First Presidency was ignored and even ridiculed regarding masking and vaccinations. There is a schism on the political/cultural left, but it doesn’t really shake the foundations like the one on the Right.” Jan 18, 16:26
- on What Can We Learn from Visions of Glory?: “I haven’t read it, but I was expecting Visions of Glory to be somehow more lurid. It actually sounds more like afterlife narratives that have been circulating for 1000 years or so.” Jan 18, 16:12
