Wednesday, March 7, 2018

Proposed Voting Timetable


After considering our request for a few weeks, the scriptures committee has agreed to the February 9th proposal and has promised to publish whichever document the majority selects through this process.  A number of people who will not be in attendance at the conference have requested the opportunity to participate on line on the second vote, the vote to accept the majority choice.  Therefore, there will be an opportunity beginning March 22-23 for them to do so.  If there are those who prefer to vote by proxy, that will also be possible. The vote will follow the timetable below.

Timetable for Proposal 

Now until Thursday, March 15
Receive Guide and Standard submissions for later vote
March 15-March 22nd
Online- Link to be provided
Online ranking of documents

🔹7 pm

🔹7 pm March 22 - 7 pm March 23
🔹Results of Vote announced and a
🔹 24 hour period begins- 7 pm,  in which those who will not attend the conference can vote on-line to accept or reject the majority’s choice.
Friday, March 23 7 pm

Online voting ends to accept or reject the majority choice for those NOT attending the conference
Saturday, March 24 at the conference in Phoenix
Voice vote to support the majority or dissent (for those WHO ARE attending the conference)
Saturday, March 24 after the conference
Delegates meet with those still in opposition to the majority to listen and ask them to join with the majority
Sunday, March 25 at the conference in Phoenix
Announce the number of those still in opposition to the majority’s choice and ask the conference if they are willing to proceed with the adoption of the G&S despite the opposition.

Please post this on discussion groups, Facebook or blogs as you are able. 

Gordon Platt
Jeanene Custer
Donald and Christy Danner
Paul Durham
Rebecca Wolford 
and others


  1. The Scripture Committe and their co-conspirators to defraud the Lord: "After considering our request for a few weeks, the scriptures committee has agreed to the February 9th proposal and has promised to publish whichever document the majority selects through this process."

    The Lord: "Behold, mine house is a house of order, saith the Lord God, and not a house of confusion. Will I accept of an offering, saith the Lord, that is not made in my name? Or will I receive at your hands that which I have not appointed?"

    The Lord: "I require a statement of principles to be adopted by the mutual agreement of my people, for if you cannot do so you will be unable to accomplish other works that I will require at your hands. When you have an agreed statement of principles I require it to also be added as a guide and standard for my people to follow."

    The Lord: "Do you indeed desire to be my people? Then accept and do as I have required."

    Do you really want to be found among the number of those who publicly reject the Lord's requirement and fail to do as the Lord has required, and thereby declare by their deeds that they do not desire to be his people?

    Jared Livesey

    1. Jared, I'm not understanding where this new, strong, condemning language is coming from. Do you believe it helpful or hurtful to call people conspirators and their potential actions fraudulent? If helpful, I must inform you it only appears to cause further pain and widens the gulf between many. Your words are not being received. Can you see that?

      Perhaps you feel inspired by a duty to defend a truth you see, but if anyone were interested in the truth I see it is that Christ also said " will is to have you love one another." What does obedience to Christ with regard to that look in practice to you? Maybe that answer will help me see what is not obvious yet.

      You do not have any direct control over what people experience when reading your thoughts, so perhaps you can anticipate that and speak in a way that their hearts may understand and encourages openness? I have concern people are simply going to put on headphones otherwise.

      Just some thoughts. I believe we each desire oneness, but the struggle is very real. Are we each striving to be charitable and measuring our words, as Christ also counseled? The struggle is real for me.

    2. Lori,

      I appreciate that you mean well.

      Jared Livesey

    3. Jared, do more of that!

      Show appreciation, verbally express compassion, verbally express warmth towards others. I believe THAT, at this point, will get you much further with people than all your other comments on this blog combined.

      People have a hard time warming up to someone when their words come across very cold and rigid and condemning. But your simple expression of appreciation towards Lori just now did more to soften my heart that any of the other things you've said lately.

    4. In order to counsel someone in the execution of their tasks, you first have to know what their tasks are. But this brings up another interesting fact: one of the intended outcomes of "the Restoration" we're allegedly "preserving" is that man should not counsel his fellow man, neither trust in the arm of flesh.

      Jared Livesey

    5. And yet, here we are, posting in the comments. Part of me wonders if the big twist at the end is that all who have been commenting on the G&S are all disqualified, and only the ones who have been silent get to go to Zion, while Oompa Loompas sing songs about us.

    6. Jared:

      I was just sharing some outsider ideas, and my personal belief of what would be helpful to you. But it kind of felt like you threw it in my face and say I'm "counseling my fellow man" contrary to the scriptures of the restoration.

      That definitely took a major withdrawal out of the relationship account I was attempting to build with you. But, no matter, all is forgiven. I don't know if I dare ask you to forgive me of my "counseling of my fellow man" because frankly you leave me with little confidence that my apology wouldn't be thrown back as well and maybe even condemned.

      But here goes anyway, forgive me for counseling my fellow man as you state occurred. I won't do it again.


    7. What is my counsel except "trust in the Lord and do exactly and only as he has commanded"?

      Jared Livesey

    8. My intent is to seek to become one with others of the covenant. In case I didn't communicate well, my last comment was a gesture of good will asking if you would forgive me for counseling you, as my fellow man, in the execution of your tasks.


    9. Anon,

      My comment was to TBM, as I was typing as you entered yours, apparently.

      I don't take offense. Nothing to forgive.

      Jared Livesey

    10. Oh ok, thanks. No offenses on my side either.


    11. Jared, thank you for always being kind and respectful toward me. I know I can get a little animated at times. I have been working on that, not reacting so much but instead taking pause and considering what someone means instead of simply words used. Your proposal really has helped me understand the foundation of a good Christian life. Maybe if we Christians were better at walking the talk of the sermons more would be turned to Christ and not be so angry at Him, blaming Him for all the evil in the world.

      I'll just end with this: I would love to see you gather with others and bond over some games or hikes or good food or whatever you might feel inclined to share in. I do believe most others here would be welcoming of you, even to discuss and listen as you share your understanding of this task we have been given. I don't know where you guys live, but if you are in UT (ever) my home is open to you and yours. It ain't much, but if no one minds a very humble, small abode and the craziness of my family then mi casa es tu casa. And everyone here can consider that an invitation. Lori

    12. log--

      "trust in the Lord and do exactly and only as he has commanded" pretty much sums it up.

  2. When I read the scriptures about Lots, Voting, Majority Rules, I see it differently. I don’t see how one verse, in the BOM guides us to utilize lots as a way to determine the Lord’s choice. The Book of Mormon talks about hearing and abiding the Voice of the Lord. Its argued that the Voice of the Lord can be heard by the lots process. But if that is the case, then a lot more would be said about this process in the Book of Mormon.

    It seems its very clear to some that the voting process to obtain the Voice of the People is what the BOM suggests. If that is the case, then a lot more would be said about this process in the BOM.

    The process I get from the BOM is: desire to know the things the Lord is teaching, believe that the Lord can make it known to me, ponder in my heart, and then get “caught away in the Spirit of the Lord.” This to me is a reliable process, that is spoken about all throughout the scriptures.

    If this was about a personal preference, my actions would be different. I am standing up and making my voice known to all, right here and right now about my belief and desire. I don’t need to wait for a conference to do so. I get it we disagree, you can go on and I will not stop you. I just know for myself, I can’t go down this path with you. I don’t see this to be kind in word or deed for at least my tribe or my ancestors.

    Q Adolpho

  3. I have a question for the committee:

    The final step on Mar 25 is:
    >Announce the number of those still in opposition to the majority’s choice and ask the conference if they are willing to proceed with the adoption of the G&S despite the opposition.

    How many (%) are needed to adopt the G&S despite the opposition? A majority? Mutual agreement? (Is it meta-mutual agreement at this point?)

    I would make an alternative proposal for the final step:

    If we don't have mutual agreement at the end of the process (and it is unlikely that we will) I propose that we publicly admit our failure to the Lord, and ask Him to give us a path forward.

    This is better than going forward without mutual agreement (i.e. if there are those who still choose to dispute), since it seems that God requires mutual agreement.

    1. Even if that number is one, my heart is broken. I just quite literally don't know what do at this point. I want to support everyone. If it is decided to move forward I won't be rejoicing or congratulating myself or others. I like your suggestion though. Very much! I (we) need more light!

    2. TBM

      Supposing we do this, (I like your idea) and supposing we get a path forward from God, won't there STILL be those who probably disagree with it? They won't like who the answer came through, they won't like some of the phrases or ideas, or methods it involves etc. etc... There will be opposition to anything the Lord does and says right? Even the Lord himself during his physical ministry in Jerusalem had constant opposition and straight up rejection.

      So, really, your alternate proposal sounds awesome, and I support it. I just don't think we should have an expectation that even if the Lord gives us a path forward, there won't be those who disagree with it, and then STILL claim, yet again, we don't have mutual agreement. So in that sense, nothing may change from where we are now, except there may be some who have more confidence that they are doing the will of the Lord in-spite of opposition. And for that reason, I like your idea.

      In our present state, I think we need to acknowledge that our decisions will need to be made in the presence of opposition, not in the absence of it. Opposition is necessary. The issue in my estimation is discerning correctly what is opposition, and should be ignored, and what is from the Lord and should be heeded despite the opposition.

      Thoughts? Do I see this wrong? Sincerely, if you see more clearly can you assist me?

    3. Anon, I'm not TBM, but I wanted to share my perspective that I am withholding any thinking about that possibility--opposition, and I do believe it is only a possibility rather than a given, until we are in that moment and facing it. I want to put my energy--thoughts, prayers, faith, and hope, in each of us to be prepared to receive Christ's part. Who knows? Maybe it will be something amazing that none of us has considered as an option or idea? That is why I think we need more light, His Light, cause all I know is what I know, and that is the way decisions have always been decided upon in the political and religious cultures of my life. I need Him to help me see a different way. Lori

    4. Indeed Anon. As long as free will exists, there will be someone who opposes. That's why the whole requirement of mutual agreement has been so perplexing for me. I just don't see how mutual agreement is ever possible.

      That's why I can't help but think the whole G&S is about something besides getting a G&S. Maybe about developing our hearts or developing patience, or forcing us to ask ourselves why we want Zion and what w are willing to do to get it.

      God can do anything...except force our minds. He can give leprosy to the dissenters, if He wants to remove people from the covenant so that the remaining people have mutual agreement that is His prerogative (not ours).

      I think the best thing we can do is wait. We are commanded to get mutual agreement; we are also commanded to seek to become of one heart with those who seek the Lord to establish His righteousness? (and we don't get to decide who is seeking the Lord). We have conflicting commandments. I am hoping that waiting for further light & knowledge will resolve it. I don't know that it will.

      I don't know how this ends; we have no assurance of success. I've believed for awhile that angels gather Zion. This means to me that only a subset of body at large might be selected. Maybe the test is in the waiting. On the other hand, maybe the clock is ticking and we're running out of time. Then the test becomes "What are we willing to do to achieve Zion?"

      Are we willing to break the 4 questions to achieve the G&S?

      Are we willing to take liberties with the definition of "seek to become of one heart with those who seek the Lord to establish His righteousness?" in order to get the G&S done?

      I didn't feel this way before. I was on the side of '91% is enough' some months ago. Now I'm not sure. Now I think that mutual agreement means that there is no one left disputing. But I'm not at all sure I'm right.

    5. TBM I have these same struggles and have had many similar thoughts as you shared. We are united in that!

      Maybe we all start by simply being united in our struggle to get this right. :)


      P.S. Lori you sound like an awesome person. Would love to meet one day soon.

    6. We can be united in failure. We can be united in asking for mercy & knowledge.

    7. I suppose, BTW, that we don't need 100% mutual agreement in admitting failure to the Lord, since an admission of failure is not in itself a G&S.

    8. Some of my profound moments of progress came from admitting my failure or weaknesses to the Lord.

    9. Wow, TBM. We must be on the same wavelength. I commented on the same alternative yesterday on the two other posts about this proposal. But, I'm not certain on anything, except trying to do what is required of us. Maybe this it. It seemed like a good idea to me at the time, but like I said, I'm not certain.

      Sarah S

    10. Sarah S--

      I was inspired by your post yesterday.

    11. I support TBM is publicly admitting to the Lord that we have failed. Collectively we have failed, we take this to the Lord and plead for mercy and further light and knowledge.

    12. TBM,

      If there are a few who remain in opposition to the nearly unanimous majority, but if every effort is made to lovingly listen to their concerns, and if we all do our best to assure them that despite our difference of opinion we continue to want to be with them in fellowship, if all of that happens but the majority decides to adopt a G&S despite their opposition and add it to the scriptures in fulfillment of the Lords command, is it fair to say that we have chosen to not dispute?

      I recently wanted to buy a hunting rifle. My wife thought diapers were more important (the two-year old twins probably also favored the diapers). My wife went ahead and bought the diapers. When I complained, she smiled sweetly and kissed me on the ear. When I complained the next day, she made me breakfast. When I moped around the day after that, she suggested we go get ice cream. Despite our opposing agendas she chose to not dispute.

      This is one of the wisest things I think has been written about this proposed vote. Janeen wrote it on Feb 10.

      “We may have children who perhaps have chosen differently than we would have hoped. We don't stop loving, serving, praying and doing all we can for them any more than Lehi or the Lord did and does. However that doesn't mean we stand still our efforts to move forward. We can acknowledge and respect those who have different views without their views keeping us from moving forward as we feel we should.”

      If there is a nearly unanimous decision to adopt a G&S despite the opposition of a few, then we are following a pattern practiced by holy men. If we respond to any who may disagree with patience and love, we are doing as the Lord does. We do NOT need unanimity to proceed. It is pointless to insist on unanimity when the Lord has defined our duty otherwise.

      We’re making this harder than it needs to be. Let the majority choose a document. Give the minority a chance to show their generosity and support. Let those that are united decide if they want to proceed despite a few who remain in opposition. And let it all be done with a surfeit of love.


    13. So Gordon, you and the others who have created this plan are unwilling to change that last step? Is that what I am understanding?

    14. Mutual Agreement Re-Revisited

      To make the issue of mutual agreement understandable, imagine the following scenario.

      The Lord comes to Adam and Eve and tells them, "I require you two to choose a restaurant by mutual agreement and order dinner there. The restaurant should serve only healthful and nutritious food. The dinner is for you to eat. If you fulfill these conditions, I will pay for your meals, and not otherwise."

      Adam ponders a bit. He thinks to himself that he and Eve don't often agree on where to eat dinner and asks the Lord, "What do you mean by 'mutual agreement'?"

      The Lord says, "As between one another you choose not to dispute."

      Adam is still confused. He asks himself - isn't disputation always a sin? If so, isn't the Lord really saying no choice of restaurant should be disputed, and, if so, that the first one to select any restaurant effectively picks the restaurant for the both of them? But Adam doesn't ask the Lord to explain further.

      Eve understands. Adam and Eve must be mutually agreed, which means unanimous, upon their choice of restaurant. If either she or Adam chooses to dispute going to a particular restaurant, then they both know they are not mutually agreed upon that restaurant and shouldn't go there. Eve also understands that there aren't very many restaurants that serve only healthful and nutritious food. There might be only one restaurant that fulfills the Lord's condition. Since Eve is the family cook, by long experience and study she knows what foods are healthful and nutritious.

      Adam decides that what matters most to him is who wields power in his and Eve's relationship, and he decides that person will be him. Because of that decision, he further decides that what the Lord means is that he and Eve shouldn't dispute; Adam thinks if he chooses not to dispute with Eve, then he can say he is mutually agreed with himself and can go wherever he wants and the Lord will pay for his meal. The Lord's condition that the restaurant should serve only healthful and nutritious foods does not enter into his thoughts at all. Adam thinks if food tastes good, it must be good.

      When Eve tells him his choice of restaurant serves unhealthful and non-nutritious foods, he does not believe her. When Eve tries to explain calories and vitamins and minerals and protein and fat and carbohydrates to Adam, he thinks she's trying to deceive him so she can take power over the choice and their relationship. But Adam chooses not to dispute with Eve when she chooses the only restaurant that she knows serves only healthful and nutritious food. Instead, Adam condemns Eve for disputing, and then gives her the silent treatment as he leaves to go to his choice of restaurant and not hers.

      Question: Does the Lord pay for Adam's meal?

      Question: Is this a celestial marriage?

    15. Amen, Gordon.

    16. Lux,

      Those that are proposing this plan, did not create the plan. As I have said, I believe this process is inspired. Because I am confident that this is true I am unwilling to change the particulars. If the plan fails, however, I will be happy to support whatever plan you propose that can get us to a G&S that fills the Lord's requirements.


    17. Gordon, okee dokee. I'm confused now since there are names attached to the idea, but thanks for responding at least.

    18. Hi Lux,

      Sometimes, these groups who work with Denver, get info from him and then present the plan and then say it was inspired, without really saying where the direction came from. I could be wrong, but this is what I have observed. I don't mind being corrected. Even if Denver did come up with this plan, I would still be saying and asking the same things, because, based on Denver's blog post, I know he doesn't mind questions.

    19. Q,

      I had no idea. Thank you for shedding some light for me to see by. What the swear words? I thought it was a total lockout to have Denver helping? Or am I misunderstanding something? I guess I am showing my naivete and gullibility. Lori

    20. Lux and Q,

      The basic idea for this vote first dawned on me about three months ago. I don't claim that It was unique to me, however. I had been thinking about the dilemma we faced, and wondered how to come together as a body of believers. The idea was fleshed out over the next few weeks as I talked to my family and others. I felt all along that the Spirit was guiding the growth of the idea. Things that Denver has taught served as confirmation that an approach along these lines was acceptable to the Lord given our weakness as a people.

      But he did not suggest we follow this approach. I have no idea if he approves of this effort or not. I don’t even know if he is aware of it. As far as I know he has been scrupulous in avoiding getting involved. I have tried all along to communicate that I believed this idea was inspired, therefore I can’t take credit for it. I have suggested repeatedly, however, that folks find out for themselves if it is an acceptable approach. I believe heaven will tell you if you ask.


    21. Gordon, I'm one of those folks who trusts things as they appear to present themselves; a dangerous weakness in these days. And my trust is stretched ever so much right now. Too much is left unsaid, too many remain anonymous or don't even speak openly, lots of people have ideas, and it all contributes to the atmosphere.

      I believe you are sincere and desire only good things that will enable us to move forward as one. That's all I can offer for now.

      Voting is acceptable and honours agency when allowed to happen freely in an informed way. It was inspired by God as part of the U.S. Constitution. I was thinking today of the contentious nature and difficulties faced by the fathers of this country to agree on The Constitution's principles. Slavery, in particular, was a heated topic. Ultimately, the few who still wanted it won the day. Otherwise the document would never have been ratified. Such is the fallen, stubborn nature of man. An opportunity was missed to spare our nation a civil war.

      Can we learn from our past?

      For myself, I can choose not to dispute any proposal, but so what? Plus, there are only two ideas I think worth supporting, and only one has been fully fleshed out and written. So I just don't know how that helps. I think lots of people are disputing, they just don't say so.

      And I do not know who is making decisions around here. I need a rest.

    22. Thanks Gordon,

      So you are saying that God inspired it, not you, so you can't take credit for it and that's s why you can't change anything about it. Thanks for clearing that up. Q

  4. Rob,

    Mormons mistakenly emphasize their relationship with their dead ancestors in the spirit world, when what they should emphasize is a reconnection to their fathers in heaven. Which is more important a devotion to our departed dead or a commitment to be grafted in to the tree of life? I would like nothing more, Rob, than to be a member of your tribe. But, I do not refer to culture or ethnicity. I want to be a part of the family of God — with you. In order for that to happen we have to comply with the Lord’s commands. He has directed us to come to mutual agreement on a statement of principles. This vote is a pathway to help us make that happen. It may be an imperfect pathway. It may be culturally tainted. It is no doubt inferior to a process where we just all come together in love and patience. But, it is a process that can get us over the hurdle to mutual agreement in the next few weeks. Please join with us in supporting the effort to come together as a tribe.

    your brother, Gordon

  5. Gordon,

    Sorry bro, you might be addressing my wife, and not me, as I haven't posted a comment here. But, as we are united, I can respond concerning what my wife has stated concerning our dead ancestors.

    You see, those who know nothing as of yet of what the Lord is doing INCLUDES the dead. Not only does it include our dead, it also includes the Earth, the vegetation, and the animals. However, not only do you disregard ethnicity and culture, you haven't considered that the family of God includes our dead too. Do not underestimate a tribal mentality, projecting on us your cultural upbringing of what that means. It is our cultural upbringing that has given us an advantage regarding the concept of the family of God, and the importance of belonging to it. No harm done in misinterpreting. You were raised differently than us, and that ought to make us valuable to one another.

    The Lord has commanded us to come to mutual agreement, and then defined mutual agreement as not disputing. Yet, the recommended option above has chosen to lock down documents, put them up for a vote, and then… Then what? It’s obvious that I am in disagreement, and will not continue based on the voice of the Lord to me. It’s also obvious that Jared Livesay will not continue with any of the documents based on the voice of the Lord to him. And by adding more emphasis on finishing the work, we have ignored the actual doing of the work, which is to be a people who are mutually agreeable.

    Meetings, votes, counseling with opposers, trying to turn their chip into looking the same as everyone is does not make the material mutually agreeable. Naturally, people have returned like a dog to it’s vomit by using guilt, using clubs of the masses, and using the threat of a take-away (loosing the covenant) to force a unitary result. That’s not right, and I’ll have nothing to do with it.

    The work of “relationships” has been substituted by what you call “process.” The quality of our relationships suck, as we haven’t the time to thoroughly understand one another, allowing agency to rule out, refusing to dispute. Rather than doing the work of relationships, we are forced to institute a process.

    Good Luck Brutha!
    Rob Adolpho

    1. Rob you make a really good point. If we are to become of one heart, that seems like it's going to involve some relationships. Right now most of the people in the movement don't have that. As you put it, the relationships suck. Most hardly know each other outside small pockets. I suppose inspired processes can lead to unity of heart but it seems like relationships would do so more effectively and are part of it.

      The only way I know how to let relationships grow and develop is by honest and heartfelt interaction, time together, and shared experiences together. Which is very difficult when you are spread across the globe. And even with relationships there is no guarantee that it will completely put a stop to any disputes about the G&S by anyone in the fluctuating body of believers.

      Rob, I hope you don't leave, or give up on this. You and Q's views are valuable and welcome. I have hope we can just put up with this feeble attempt we are all making to fulfill an assignment, until we all grow in light and knowledge.

    2. Taylor,

      You got a point, it's tough to have long distance relationships. And I don't have any plans on giving up on working towards a mutual agreeable document. I've been trying to keep working through all of the different iterations. But, ...each time, ...those who feel "in charge" of things quickly slaps things together, not spending much time on the content, and spends an exorbitant amount of time pushing everyone to agree with them. I am always left to wonder why we don't spend tons of time on the content, requiring us to spend less time on getting people to agree, because they already agreed through the process?

      For my family and I, we will not stop working on this project and working to be united with this entire movement. If the document of the winning votes are printed in the scriptures, and it is still not mutually agreeable to me, I will be unable to keep the covenant. I know better than to take a covenant that I cannot keep. But I will have not left those who voted. They will have left me.

      It is really nice to be valued, Taylor. I appreciate your concern.


      Rob Adolpho

  6. Rob. Could you submit or re-submit a G&S that you would be able to mutually agree upon and then see if everyone else can come to mutual agreement with? The only issue that still exists is that if it isn't "The Rock of Jesus Christ" there will never be "mutual agreement". So, maybe the other option mentioned of admitting our failure and praying for a path forward is the only option?

    1. Mark,

      I don't have anything to re-submit. I have been trying to continue working through this process, adding more to the subject matter, concerning the King Follet Discourse. I have also been asking the question of how the project will be used, rather than designing something that has doesn't function. The more I ask questions, the more answers I am given. I have proposed these stones of progression here, but people are too busy running to the finish line, that new perspective is an unwanted attribute, as it means restarting, and restarting after each circus of miscommunications just doesn't seem very appealing.

      When others are ready to continue working, there's more to think through. However, if it goes to a vote, and the current documents are published in the scriptures, then the window of opportunity has closed, and we all must move on as we all choose.

      That's the reason I like the ideas proposed by both Edwin Wilde and Sam Vaughn. It gives me hope of working things out still. If I were to be totally honest, I'm waiting to hear the voice of the Lord in a document, and frankly all I hear is men regurgitating His voice. So, I'll join you in praying for a path forward, to hear the voice of the Lord. When that happens I intend to stay there.

      Rob Adolpho

  7. This is where theology meets the real world. Heads might be in the clouds, but feet must be on the ground. There is an opposition in all things, even in the remnant world.

  8. I'm at the point where I don't really love any of the proposals that I have seen, but I could go along with them, because I see nothing harmful in them, and I don't think that the G&S is the end-all, be-all document. It is merely a starting point, a framework that helps us and "those who know nothing of the Lord's work" work together and begin to align our hearts.

    I have a question for Rob and Q Adolpho and a few others, who have expressed a desire for us to be more aligned with each other, hear the voice of the Lord, and put that into a G&S. I would love for that to happen. What I am struggling with is, what do I do about it? I'm already praying for this, I'm already trying to align my heart with the Lord, I'm already doing everything that I can (to my knowledge) to hear the voice of the Lord. Of course I could be studying scriptures more. Of course I could be crying to the Lord more. I think we all could say that.

    Perhaps I have little imagination, but as far flung as we all are (there isn't a single covenant holder within 150 miles of me, and the nearest actual fellowship is 3 hours away), how do we knit our hearts together? How do we move forward in any way other than voting? How can I really get to know all of you? How do we do the work of relationships?

    I guess what I am struggling with is, what alternative do I have to voting that I am not already doing?

    I'm sorry, I'm just an idiot working through all of this, and I need concrete choices.

    Preaching to me that I am not following the voice of the Lord or that we are "defrauding" the Lord, is not helpful. I truly believe that almost all of us are doing our best to seek and follow the voice of the Lord, and accusations that any of us are not are only going to delay and derail the work before us.

    1. Well put Blair. I second all of that.

    2. Thank you Blair. There are many, many quiet, humble souls in this movement that are NOT in the popular cliques of this movement that are doing their best to do what is right and align with God. Surely the Lord is more merciful than what we are making Him out to be. Be one and if ye are not one, ye are not mine.

    3. Blair, you are awesome! I agree with and believe all you expressed. Maybe it is for us to learn how to have faith in each other, to believe the best of each other, to uplift each other because we have learned to care deeply for each other, more than we care for a document of words? What was it that created an atmosphere of no contention among the post-resurrection Nephite-Lamanite people? Was it not love of God, which is love for everyone? Like Christ has told us, it is not enough to say we love God. Our actions have to match our words.

      Maybe we need to consider small gatherings being "called," like conferences except not so heavily planned? Where we just spend time with people? A remnant version of FHE? This could mean traveling to someone farther away, like you are, to simply hang out or help with whatever you or your neighbors need. It would be like we simply feel a desire to meet and then act on it; or someone shares a need in their area, and those who feel inspired with specific talents or skills or resources offer to assist. I guess we can just start thinking outside the box and be willing to move out of comfort zones. I believe we are trying our best to sort ourselves out.

    4. Blair,

      You certainly have a point concerning long distance relationships, especially through digital words. Most times the digital communications fall short because people project their own perceptions instead of verifying and understanding. Rather than talking to the person, they talk to their own perceptions. They may as well just talk to themselves, because they sure aren't talking to the person.

      How this is to be resolved would depend on our individual ability to check ourselves as we seek to understand. It takes a lot of time. It's an investment of time. There's a risk involved. You gotta have thick skin too. I believe it is worth every minute. For an eternal relationship, I am willing to risk it.

      Not sure if that helps at all. Good luck.

      Rob Adolpho

    5. Well, until I get more knowledge from the Lord, or get a better, more concrete idea from any of you, then I will continue to vote for what fits best with the light I have been able to receive. I support this plan to vote, even though it is exhausting and seems like it was done already.

      I will also ignore those who cry foul and declare that the majority is oppressing them, because I honestly have not seen any proposals from them that I can act on. I’m really tired of fluffy words, and am ready for concrete proposals.

    6. "Give to every man that asks you to, and do not ask for your stuff back from anyone who takes it" (Luke 6:30).

      This is concrete, actionable, specific, and commanded.

      Jared Livesey

    7. Log, I agree completely with your statement regarding Luke 6:30. It is clear that you are referencing your own G&S proposal as being the right course. I have already considered your proposal, and I absolutely think that the doctrine of Christ and the sermon on the mount/at bountiful both need to be included in the G&S. I disagree, however, that they provide enough information to inform those who know nothing of the Lord's work in these days.

      There was a time that I was very sympathetic to your proposal. However, your conduct has convinced me that while you preach exhaustively the sermon on the mount, you really don't understand it. This will be the last time that I respond to you.

    8. Blair,

      That's your agency. In the end, the question has been simplified for you down to two options: either accept and do as the Lord has required, or do something else and defraud him.

      Jared Livesey

    9. Blair, if you don't mind me interjecting myself here for a moment. May I ask you to help me understand this statement you just made?

      "...I absolutely think that the doctrine of Christ and the sermon on the mount/at bountiful both need to be included in the G&S. I disagree, however, that they provide enough information to inform those who know nothing of the Lord's work in these days."

      What do you understand the Lord's work to be right now? This is something I have pondered since He gave us His answer last July. I am interested in understanding what you have come to understand. Perhaps I am in need for the greater light you can offer.

      Also, a week or two ago I had posted a comment in frustration. I basically said that I could not support any proposal because of the behaviours of everyone in supporting their various statements. But then I was corrected through Spirit and given an example of the Book of Mormon. Would I reject or not study it due to the "poor" examples of Mormons? Of course not. So why can I not look past any supposed failings and weaknesses of each of us here when considering their proposals and ideas? I went back and deleted the comment and have tried to repent.

      Too much of what I have thought has come because I choose to judge others instead of allowing them to be, accepting them as they are and where they are. I hedge up the way with all manner of brambles and thorns that I choose to believe exist or think I see.

      I would ask you and any others who may feel fed up with trying to dialogue with Jared to be keep that door open. Please keep trying to understand and extend mercy in moments you may feel someone is being a butt. Lori

    10. Blair,

      You gotta do what you gotta do. If you have no idea how to do something, and in the absence of knowing you choose to go with the crowd, then be free to go with the crowd. We are all defined by how we choose, not just by what we choose.

      Choose wisely young padawan.

      Rob Adolpho

    11. Rob,
      You have talked a lot about trying to understand others. Why must you assume that you understand me, and know my motivations? If I wanted to go with the crowd, I wouldn’t be on this path at all.

      I’m trying to understand your position and thoughts on this, and the patronizing behavior doesn’t help.

    12. Rob,
      Please don’t take my last comment to you the wrong way. I’m just tired of being accused by those who consider themselves ‘the minority’ (a term that I have not given to anyone) of going along with the crowd, or trying to force a plan through. We are all different, we are all trying. I have tried not to lump everyone into the same label, and I think that is the only way that any of this is going to work.

    13. Lori, I am still working out what the Lord is doing in our time (as I’m sure all of us are). I think that there are a number of nuts and bolts type stuff that should be included to better help others who know nothing of this work. Stuff like the mode and words used in baptism, and the prayers over the sacrament. I think how fellowships work with each other and how decisions can be made without an organization are also important (as we can see from this whole mess we are in). I don’t pretend to have any or all of the answers, but I do know that there are some important things that the Doctrine of Christ and the Sermons on the Mount and at Bountiful leave out. Things that people who know nothing of Mormonism or even of Christ would need to know.

      As for my decision not to respond do Log anymore, if communication with him was the respectful give-and-take between equals, then I would continue to discuss, persuade, and seek to be persuaded. However, dialogue with him isn’t a dialogue, no matter how much I or anyone else tries.

    14. Blair,

      No worries, I never claimed to understand you, or your drivers. Those who desire a vote simply don't appeal to me as concerned about the results of what that will do, but are to be free to do as they desire. It's tough to face being falsely accused, and I guess by writing your comments here, your bound to get falsely accused for something. If you can get past it quickly though, it helps. Otherwise, it will eat you up.

      The problem with trusting in processes is, relationships suffer. With processes, people project their perceptions on others. And rather than engaging with people, we engage with our perceptions of people instead. We talk, looking past the people, having a conversation with our perceptions of them, rather than talking to them. Don't let it get you down. It's a natural byproduct of trusting in institutional systems.

      The best franchises succeed because they remove discretion. A 16 year old can manage a McDonalds, yet can't even clean his room. Discretion is removed because processes replace the need to make choices. In this movement, we have been given our agency and discretion. I will never give that up, even if I am a singular minority. Take that or leave that however you like. I mean no offense by it. It's actually quite neutral.

      If I sounded patronizing, I wasn't intending to be, so I'm sorry.

      Rob Adolpho

    15. Rob, I get it, and I agree with you. I was just pointing out that ALL sides in this issue are doing it. You are making assumptions about what others think, and they are doing it to you. This is what we need to get past. We need to treat everyone individually, and give people the benefit of the doubt.

      I recognize that it is the natural tendency of people to engage with their perceptions of others, and not with the real people. This is a natural man behavior that we need to cast off. We're all doing it, and we all need to stop.

    16. Blair,

      You might interact with your perceptions. But I interact with people, clarifying my perceptions, welcoming correction, and seeking accuracy. You have lumped me into a group of people you have experienced. But you haven't experienced me, so you can accuse me all you like, it won't make it true.

      You are free to have your opinions about me. I'm glad you recognize that people engage online with perceptions rather than people. At least you can see it. While you call it natural, I think that we should be better than that, engaging with one another, instead of our assumptions.

      I think people are afraid though.

      Rob Adolpho

  9. This is what you could be doing instead of voting.

    Don't you agree that being faithful to the Lord is preferrable to defrauding the Lord?

    Does anyone need an explanation of why "majority rules" is not "mutual agreement" when a proposal is disputed?

    Does anyone need an explanation of how placing a guide and standard into the scriptures by majority rules is defrauding the Lord, who has publicly required of us to adopt a guide and standard by mutual agreement?

    You have a way forward to succeed in this assignment already. The way has been prepared for you.

    All you have to do to succeed is accept and do as the Lord requires of you. If you choose to defraud him, you fail.

    Jared Livesey

  10. If there is another vote, it will not be an accurate representation of numbers. Many like myself have been so emotionally and spiritually beat up over this whole thing that we just have to say no to another vote, and another vote, and another, and infinitum. How will you measure us?

    "We can be united in failure. We can be united in asking for mercy & knowledge."

    "TBMMarch 7, 2018 at 10:32 AM
    I suppose, BTW, that we don't need 100% mutual agreement in admitting failure to the Lord, since an admission of failure is not in itself a G&S."

    I do, however "vote" for a united petition to the Lord for mercy in our failure. And whether it is admitted or not, we have failed. We have broken tender hearts and alienated newcomers who see this stuff (it's public...hello) and want nothing to do with it. Or us. Or this movement. I dare not share this link, or this view into the insider infighting with those tender investigators who have been searching and sacrificing all their life to find us. We have failed. Another vote is another failure: it will not count those who are at the verge of not caring anymore because we have cared so deeply, and have been so thoroughly wounded in this process. God help us and have mercy on us....

  11. Lynne McKinley lays her finger on what may be the core problem facing this people.

    Lynne believes we do not care enough about what others think of us.

    On the other hand, our entire problem may be reduced to the fact that we care what others think of us above what God thinks of us, forgetting the teaching of the Savior in The Rock of Jesus Christ:

    Blessed are ye, when men shall hate you, and when they shall separate you from their company, and shall reproach you, and cast out your name as evil, for the Son of man’s sake.

    Rejoice ye in that day, and leap for joy: for, behold, your reward is great in heaven: for in the like manner did their fathers unto the prophets.

    Woe unto you, when all men shall speak well of you! for so did their fathers to the false prophets.

    In order to be as Jesus, we also must no more care what men think of us, but God alone.

    "I receive not honour from men."

    Jared Livesey

  12. Failure is simply the opportunity to begin again, this time more intelligently. Henry Ford

    I have not failed. I've just found 10,000 ways that won't work. Thomas Edison

    You build on failure. You use it as a stepping stone. Close the door on the past. You don't try to forget the mistakes, but you don't dwell on it. You don't let it have any of your energy, or any of your time, or any of your space. Johnny Cash

    Failures, repeated failures, are finger posts on the road to achievement. One fails forward toward success. CS Lewis

    The greatest glory in living lies not in never falling, but in rising every time we fall. Ralph Waldo Emerson

    There is no innovation and creativity without failure. Period. Brene Brown

    A man can fail many times, but he isn't a failure until he begins to blame somebody else. John Burroughs

    There's a silly notion that failure's not an option at NASA. Failure is an option here. If things are not failing, you are not innovating enough. Elon Musk

    Many of life's failures are people who did not realize how close they were to success when they gave up. Thomas Edison

    If you look at great human civilizations, from the Roman Empire to the Soviet Union, you will see that most do not fail simply due to external threats but because of internal weakness, corruption, or a failure to manifest the values and ideals they espouse. Cory Booker

    We are broken humans attempting as a large group who are strangers mostly to do something we have no current example how to do. We only know imperfect and broken ways due to the cultures we have been raised in, which are also filled with broken people. Let us cloak each other in charity as we look to Christ for direction.

  13. I support the call for a representation of the voice of the people. And I appreciate the scripture committee’s agreement to post a document based on that voice. However, do we have a method that ensures only valid votes are being counted? As impressed as I have been at the level of knowledge, charity and understanding of most who post on this site, there may be those not especially in agreement with this movement (and I am not talking about those who are sincere and just disagree with one G&S vs another), who could try to throw off the vote through falsification in some way. Do we have a way to ensure the vote is verifiable? Just a thought. No Russian jokes please. Hehe
    Thanks! Lisa

    1. Lisa,

      Only one vote will be counted per device. That should take care of most shenanigans. But of course any on-line participation is open to malfeasance. We will do all we can to ensure a fair vote, and then we're going to pray for heaven's help.

      Thanks. Gordon

  14. Part 1.

    Do not the Lord's words to us in the A&C about learning to "respectfully disagree" imply that He expects us, as a people, to have differences of opinion? Does this imply that we will not always 100% agree? We all come from different backgrounds and cultures, and have different opinions and perspectives. Therefore, can the work of developing the G&S include imbedded within it an opportunity to learn how to respectfully disagree with one another? Is respectfully disagreeing part of "relationship building", as suggested by the Adolphos? In that spirit, I would like to respectfully disagree with the essence of two proposals put forward, and ask their authors to persuade me otherwise.

    We've been taught to not add to nor subtract from God's commandments, which invites confusion and error. As we know, Adam instructed Eve to not only partake of the fruit, but also to not even touch it [his innovation], which later led to confusion when Eve was confronted by the adversary who held the fruit and yet remained "alive".

    The commandment from the Lord to us regarding the G&S is simply: "Remember there are others who know nothing, as yet, of my work now underway, and therefore the guide and standard is to bless, benefit and inform them-so I command you to be wise in word and kind in deed as you write what I require of you." (A&C, p8) And so I ask:

    Does Jared's proposal, the Rock of Jesus Christ, potentially subtract from this commandment, not quite reaching the mark? (ie, does the Sermon on the Mount, though timeless and still relevant for today, provide sufficient guidance regarding the Lord's "work ***now*** underway" in terms of ordinances, priesthood, etc?)

    Do the Adolphos' ideas potentially add to this commandment, going beyond the mark? (ie, does the idea that the G&S should circumscribe all truth into one great whole - serving as a vehicle to build relationships and becoming Zion as part of the writing process, as well as incorporating the King Follett discourse concept of becoming Gods, and that the document should simultaneously appeal to all peoples, nations, cultures, as well as the dead, animals, and plant life - go beyond the Lord's commandment?)

    As both approaches include concepts, teachings, and aspirations that are true and noble, I do not necessarily find fault with the underlying content of either. However, does not the Lord work with us line upon line, precept upon precept, here a little, and there a little? Has He not asked us to collectively take a small step forward with this assignment? Does adopting the Rock of Jesus Christ proposal represent even a step or is it merely standing still? Do the Adolpho's ideas represent a step or a quantum leap or somewhere in between? Does an infant grow from laying on its back to crawling to walking to running to climbing a mountain in a single day or in one step? Are we not a diverse, weak, and disorganized people, at differing levels of spiritual development, with many incorrect understandings of His ways among us? Is the Lord expecting an Olympic team of marathon runners at this point? Would He not be happy, as any parent would be, if we were able to collectively "butt-scoot" across the floor just a few inches? - to which some may say, "That's not even a crawl! We can do better! We can run!", and they'd be right, as we have a brain and legs and feet, we have the potential, but a "butt-scoot" may be all we can collectively muster given our current developmental stage. As we successfully navigate each step in humility, will not the Lord will give us more guidance and commandments (not a few) that will help us to unify, bring us closer to Zion, and become more like Him in the process? I am grateful for the loving and merciful way in which the Lord brings all of us along together.

  15. Part 2.

    Relationship building is critical, but is working towards such an outcome specifically mentioned as a primary purpose of writing the G&S as per the A&C? What if we were to simply try to take our first step in relationship building, even a "butt-scoot", by learning to respectfully disagree with one another throughout the remainder of this process? And a real "butt-scoot" at that…beyond a "Good point bro, but…" or a "Whatever you're into is cool dude, but…" or a "You can believe what you want to believe, but you are breaking covenant if…" and so on, only feigning respectful disagreement. Can we really learn to respectfully disagree so that we will know that we are loved by and precious to one another, and come away from a conversation, email, blog post, or text knowing that the quality of our relationships, our respect for, and our tenderness towards one another has increased and not been diminished by virtue of how we have interacted with one another, even if we disagree? Can we do better than we have done since last June or July or August? Can we start now? Jared, Rob, Q, and others: You are precious to me in this movement, just as anyone is. You have strengths that most of us cannot fathom. There is no handbook of instructions to guide us in this assignment, so we are trying to figure this out together. We all have different opinions and backgrounds. However, despite our diversity, the Lord is tender and patient with all of us. I hope you will see my intent above was merely to ask questions and not to accuse or criticize your positions? I hope I have understood and stated your positions accurately. If not, I would welcome a correction to my understanding.

    God has asked us to write a statement of principles that will bless, benefit, and inform those that are new to the work now underway - no more, no less. Let's complete the task at hand with exactness, refraining from adding to or subtracting from the Lord's commandment. I may respectfully disagree with the views of others, but I choose not to dispute them, so perhaps that means I mutually agree with them given our new understanding of these things. I really don't know anymore and so I am glad to join in with the majority on this one, and continue to walk with my brothers and sisters towards Zion.

    What I do know, however, is that no one among us is trying to intentionally break the covenant or disappoint the Lord in anything that has been put forward here. Even though I respectfully disagree with their positions, I have benefitted from many of Jared's perspectives and have taken my own study of the Sermon on the Mount more seriously because of his advocacy; and I have gleaned insights from the Adophos' different perspectives on issues for which I will be eternally grateful. However, I believe the Lord will be pleased with whatever our collective efforts produce, because it will be our first attempt at crawling, from which we may immediately tumble onto our backs again with a look of shock and surprise on our faces, "we did it, we crawled!", but we will find ourselves looking up, to the Lord, and He will encourage us along with gentle correction and guidance as would a loving parent. He will make marathon runners of us all if we allow Him to do the training…step by step, line upon line, precept upon precept, here a little, there a little.

    May God bless us with more tender and kinder hearts, and to learn to build our relationships by respectfully disagreeing with one another.

  16. Anonymous asks:

    "Does Jared's proposal, the Rock of Jesus Christ, potentially subtract from this commandment, not quite reaching the mark? (ie, does the Sermon on the Mount, though timeless and still relevant for today, provide sufficient guidance regarding the Lord's "work ***now*** underway" in terms of ordinances, priesthood, etc?)"

    The Lord, in the A&C, said this: "The Book of Mormon was given as my covenant for this day and contains my gospel, which came forth to allow people to understand my work and then obtain my salvation."

    How does the gospel allow people to understand his work? The Lord in the A&C tells us: "All must come unto me or they cannot be saved. And how do men come unto me? It is by faith, repentance, and baptism, which bring the Holy Ghost to then show you all things you must know."

    It is the Holy Ghost and not men which will show those who believe and obey the gospel all things they must know. That excludes any further teaching role from us, including on such topics as rites, ordinances, priesthood, temple-building, tithing, and anything else. The Lord said, in the A&C: "Cry peace. Proclaim my words. Invite those who will repent to be baptized and forgiven, and they shall obtain my Spirit to guide them."

    That is all we are to do. To teach more or less is to curse, harm, and misinform those who as yet know nothing concerning the Lord's work now underway.

    So does The Rock of Jesus Christ fall short of the mark? To the contrary: it is the only means by which those who know nothing as yet concerning the Lord's work now underway may be blessed, benefitted, and informed. It is by freely believing and doing what The Rock of Jesus Christ contains that men may obtain the visitation by fire and by the Holy Ghost and are then led by the Lord to all truth and every good thing. The Lord directly instructs men about his work. If men do not freely believe and do what is contained in The Rock of Jesus Christ and are led by men instead of the Holy Ghost, they languish in darkness and ignorance, ever learning yet unable to come to a knowledge of the truth, even if the man they are led by is a prophet.

    Jared Livesey

  17. Here is an additional observation on "the mark."

    The word "sin" means, literally, "to miss the mark."

    We learn from James that sin is transgression of the law.

    To miss the mark is to transgress, or go outside of, the law. Therefore, the mark is the law - of God.

    We know what the law of God is: "All things whatsoever ye would that men should do unto you, do ye even so unto them, for this is the law and the prophets."

    And then we have this: Behold, I am the law, and the light. Look unto me, and endure to the end, and ye shall live; for unto him that endureth to the end will I give eternal life. Behold, I have given unto you the commandments; therefore keep my commandments. And this is the law and the prophets, for they truly testified of me.

    Hence The Rock of Jesus Christ is, quite literally, the written mark: it is the law and commandments of God, which all men must obey or abide without salvation.

    The Rock of Jesus Christ is, in other words, what Jesus Christ requires all mankind to accept and do (1 Nephi 13:40-41; 3 Nephi 15:1).

    Jared Livesey

  18. Remember this also: "But behold, the Jews were a stiffnecked people; and they despised the words of plainness, and killed the prophets, and sought for things that they could not understand. Wherefore, because of their blindness, which blindness came by looking beyond the mark, they must needs fall; for God hath taken away his plainness from them, and delivered unto them many things which they cannot understand, because they desired it. And because they desired it God hath done it, that they may stumble."

    The Jews looked beyond the mark - the law and commandments of God - and wanted to know about things they couldn't understand, since they were not led by the Holy Ghost because they did not believe and keep the law and commandments of God, so God gave them things by the prophets that they couldn't understand so that they might stumble and fall.

    The Lord in the A&C said this: "If the gentiles unto whom the Book of Mormon was given had hearkened unto the Holy Ghost they would have come unto me in Hyrum and Joseph’s day. But they did not hearken, and would not allow me to abide with them in word, and in power and in very deed."

    As Joseph said to the Church of his day, the people were darkened in their minds because they depended upon the prophet - they were not being led by the Holy Ghost.

    They were taking Joseph, who was a prophet, to be their leader instead of executing the law and commandments of God - the gospel - in the Book of Mormon so that they would be led by the Holy Ghost. Therefore they did not come unto Christ. They misunderstood the Lord's work and received things through Joseph that they could not understand, stumbled, and fell.

    If we do not wish the same outcome as our fathers, let us learn from their outcome and take The Rock of Jesus Christ for our written foundation, both to execute and teach as it is written, and no more lean upon men, even if those men are prophets.

    Jared Livesey

    1. Help Me UnderstandMarch 8, 2018 at 9:20 AM

      I am the "anonymous" who wrote the 2-part entry above and have given myself the handle "Help Me Understand" to differentiate myself from other generic anonymous posters. Jared, I thank you for taking the time to explain your position so thoroughly. I found myself agreeing with many of your points. Your concerns are valid and I appreciate your sincerity and dedication to the Lord, and the Lord alone. And to be sure, Jesus Christ is the only foundation upon which we can or must build, for all others can fail.

      I do not dispute your position, and I could probably live with your proposal. However, if I may press the issue a bit further, I wonder if the issue we are having here is how far the needle should or can go in terms of what are considered Christ's words and what may not be.

      Let me try to explain, and forgive me, for you are probably growing tired of continually defending your position, but I have not been able to read every post on this forum. Certainly Christ spoke words while mortal, words which were recorded by men who wrote them down, such as His disciples in Israel, including Matthew, or Nephi (and then Mormon). Those words, including the Sermons on the Mount and at Bountiful, went through various translational processes and then came to be as they are in our scriptures. However, I'm sure we all can agree that when the Lord died on the cross He did not cease to speak, true? Just as before He was in the flesh He spoke, true? And that since the death of His mortal tabernacle He continues to appear and to speak to His servants, telling us "whether by mine own voice or by the voice of my servants, it is the same" (D&C 1:38), true?

      Here is something else interesting the Lord also said to His servant Joseph Smith in 1831:
      "And this is the ensample unto them,
      that they shall speak as they are moved upon by the Holy Ghost.
      And whatsoever they shall speak when moved upon by the Holy Ghost shall be scripture,
      shall be the will of the Lord,
      shall be the mind of the Lord,
      shall be the word of the Lord,
      shall be the voice of the Lord,
      and the power of God unto salvation.
      Behold, this is the promise of the Lord unto you, O ye my servants.
      Wherefore, be of good cheer, and do not fear,
      for I the Lord am with you, and will stand by you;
      and ye shall bear record of me, even Jesus Christ,
      that I am the Son of the living God,
      that I was, that I am, and that I am to come."
      (D&C 68:3-6)

      At the beginning of the verse the archaic word "ensample" is used. This word means "example; a pattern, or model for imitation" as per Webster's 1828 dictionary. The Lord is telling us that this is the pattern that He follows and that we are to follow. I find that interesting and something I should take note of…the Lord pointing out a pattern. When those set apart speak when moved upon by the Holy Ghost, what they say is scripture, but not just that, as words in a book, but those words constitute the actual will, mind, word, and voice of the Lord unto salvation. His voice, His words, His mind, and His will.

      I think that is probably where many have taken issue with your position, in that it is perhaps too narrowly focused on only some of the Lord's words. And again, the sermons you are focusing on include imperative teachings of the Master. However, given that many believe that the Lord speaks His mind, will, words, and voice to His servants when they are moved upon by the Holy Ghost, and that those words constitute the Lord's words and instructions to us regarding the "work now under way", many believe that by ignoring those words and by failing to teach them to others, we risk offending the Lord by saying or suggesting that those words are not His words.

      Perhaps there is an impasse here, but perhaps there is a way to bridge the gap. Can you see a way?

    2. HMU,

      Not all words from the Lord are equally significant to every person at all times.

      The Rock of Jesus Christ contains that which suffices for the one who both freely believes its contents and freely does what it contains to receive the Holy Ghost, that they may be led by God and not men. Thus they will be blessed, benefitted, and informed by God himself, rather than cursed, harmed, and misinformed by even well-meaning individuals who as yet know nothing concerning the Lord's work now underway.

      Since it fulfills the Lord's requests, we need not look to another document, even if other documents could have potentially done the same job. Once you have found a tool that will perform the required task, you need no longer look at other tools to perform that task - or, in other words, once you found what you were looking for, you stop looking.

      Jared Livesey

  19. I object to the Rock of Jesus Christ.

    1. Anon, may I ask why you object to a proposal consisting only of the doctrine of Christ and a condensed form of His sermon on the mount? We all should take this time to speak so we can listen and be heard. I am genuinely interested in understanding your thoughts. Lori

    2. This is my answer to the question about how do we have relationships so far from each other:

      A relationship of love is being able to understand the next person, before placing judgment on the matter. A relationship is being able to see it through the lens of the next person, as best as possible. If you still have a difficult time understanding that person, then go to the Lord and ask Him to help you understand that person: He knows each one of us, by way of His experience in the garden of Gethsemane.

      Although, we live miles apart, we can use this venue to try and understand one another. A lot of research has gone into how to develop lasting relationships. Dr. Gottman did research on what makes for a satisfying marriage and what predicts divorce. It boiled down to how often a couple utilizes four styles of communication: Criticism (something is wrong with the other person), Defensiveness (defend your position without understanding the next person), Contempt (a statement that puts you on higher ground) and Stonewalling (listener withdraws from the conversation). The more a couple utilized these styles the chances of them getting a divorce was high. Conflict or disagreement are not bad, if you can learn from them and progress forward-how you go about it, is important. Hearing and understanding, being direct, seeing the next person the way Christ sees them, and dialoguing are all important in a relationship.

      Since we are far away from each other, I have chosen to discuss my beliefs here and not in private conversations and meetings. I have opened myself up, to all, to see and know my heart. I do this, in hopes that others may see why I am choosing the way I am. I do this so others do not just see me as opposition. But because people believe I am disputing they don’t want to engage in a conversation. And without conversations how do you have a relationship?

      It’s really hard to have a conversation with someone when they go radio silent or they write anonymously. I agree Lori, "we all should take this time to speak so we can listen and be heard."

      To me, being humble doesn’t mean quiet or shy. Was Alma humble? Was Samuel the Lamanite considered humble in his day? I’m sure the LDS don’t believe Denver to be humble. To me, humble means doing exactly what the Lord directs you to do.

      I believe we can start having relationships, even through these blog posts. It just starts with a continuous effort to understand.


    3. Q,

      Might the pursuit of relationships with each other be a distraction and a false path? Might not our time and efforts be better spent instead in pursuing a relationship with Jesus Christ by mighty prayer and doing the works he commanded in the Sermon?

      For when we are one with God, we will then be one with each other.

      Jared Livesey

    4. Jared, I think relationships are everything on this path to Christ. What you mention of mighty prayer and doing His works involves learning to love and serve others. We cannot do it alone. Or perhaps I misunderstand what you are saying?

      It began/begins with the man and the woman, then they have seed and those relationships flow outward to cover the whole earth. Even the sermons are based upon relationships, how we see and help others, with the goal being a continuance of serving, forgiving, blessing others until the challenges inherent among us at present are no longer even needed--sickness, poverty, homelessness, differences, etc. because we have overcome the flesh individually and collectively. Any man or woman who has learned to put others before himself or herself, I believe Heaven will not be able to restrain itself from abiding with such an one. Those in such a group will be glorious and full of light.

    5. I understand many think relationships with other mortals are everything on the path to Christ.

      I am saying this is not so. Our relationship to Christ is everything on the path to Christ. Our adherence to his law and commandments is the entire path to Christ, regardless of others.

      The Sermon isn't about relationships with those who love you, or are your friends. The Sermon is about how you behave towards your enemies, who are those who hate you, curse you, spitefully use you and persecute you, revile you, cast you out from among their society, or kill you because you love them as Christ loves them: you do good to them and tell them the truth.

      Remember - they did all these things to Christ. They did all these things to Joseph.

      And, recall, after 14 years of living with him, Joseph told the Saints that they didn't know him. They never knew his heart. Relationship building doesn't work on the path to Christ. We are either reliant upon Christ alone, and look to him for comfort and companionship, or we are looking to men for approval.

      You can't have both: friendship with the world is enmity towards God.

      Jared Livesey

    6. I will continue to ponder what you are saying. I do understand the sermons are not about only those we care for and love. As He teaches in Luke 6, which I know you are familiar with:

      31 And as ye would that men should do to you, do ye also to them likewise.

      32 For if ye love them which love you, what thank have ye? for sinners also love those that love them.

      33 And if ye do good to them which do good to you, what thank have ye? for sinners also do even the same.

      34 And if ye lend to them of whom ye hope to receive, what thank have ye? for sinners also lend to sinners, to receive as much again.

      35 But love ye your enemies, and do good, and lend, hoping for nothing again; and your reward shall be great, and ye shall be the children of the Highest: for he is kind unto the unthankful and to the evil.

      I understand that to pursue Him is to invite opposition and reviling and suffering. He says as much in scripture.

      What I mean with relationships is that I do need to care about others, not what they think of me or do to me or for me, but that my heart is filled with God's love for them in every thought, word, and action. I am a poor servant, however.

      I do believe God means for us to have friends and to be a friend, to be a wife or husband and to have a wife or husband, to have children and grandchildren, according to His wisdom and timing for our lives. We are not to walk this path completely alone, unless family and those of the world would reject us to that extent, like Moroni and Ether.

      When I consider Malachi's prophecy about hearts, I think of relationships. A relationship with Christ is to know Him, and it is my understanding that means we will also come to know the Father and the fathers, and the Mother and the mothers, and all our kin folk backwards and forwards. And there is also how the man is not saved without the woman neither the woman without the man--that is also relationship...both with Christ.

      I am not thinking of this from a perspective that relationships with others will control my heart or dictate my standing with Christ, even my pursuit of Him. But I will best come to know Him by beginning with following His example. He had family and friends, as well as spent time among strangers, serving and teaching all. Lazarus was His friend, and He cried with family and friends, mourning with them and it surprised the church leaders seeing how he cared.

      I will come back and re-read what you have shared. I trust that you always have a good perspective and understanding. It can just take me a minute to catch up, but I hope I made myself a little more clear. Probably not, but ya know.

    7. This comment has been removed by the author.

    8. Lori,

      What I am saying will take a long time to process.

      Mark 3
      There came then his brethren and his mother, and, standing without, sent unto him, calling him.

      And the multitude sat about him, and they said unto him, Behold, thy mother and thy brethren without seek for thee.

      And he answered them, saying, Who is my mother, or my brethren?

      And he looked round about on them which sat about him, and said, Behold my mother and my brethren!

      For whosoever shall do the will of God, the same is my brother, and my sister, and mother.


      John 15: 14Ye are my friends, if ye do whatsoever I command you.


      Luke 14
      25 ¶ And there went great multitudes with him: and he turned, and said unto them,

      26 If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple.

      27 And whosoever doth not bear his cross, and come after me, cannot be my disciple.


      33 So likewise, whosoever he be of you that forsaketh not all that he hath, he cannot be my disciple.


      Charity is the end of discipleship.

      Jared Livesey

    9. Yes, I can now see it will take some time to understand what you mean. Maybe I have a paradigm or two that need reconstructing. LOL I will study out these scriptures and anything else I am led to, as it is I have wondered in times past what Christ meant by "hate" and "friend" in these verses. Clearly he did not mean what we would mean? Gotta love the contradictions: love and bless your enemies, yet hate father, mother, wife/husband, children, brethren and sisters. Looks like I will get to learn some new ideas and truths.

    10. Jared,

      I’m responding to your question you asked my wife about relationships with each other being a false path. I totally get what you are saying, because it isn’t our relationships that save, but the relationships with Christ, as you have stated. Besides, if you give the assignment to a bunch of Gentiles to establish a relationship, it simply turns into home teaching 2.0. Our relationships will become even more surface than it already is (and it really is surface in many circles). While we might wind up with a bunch of care packages, doily cloths, flower arrangements, and an abundance of freshly baked cookies or zucchini bread, we will remain full of ignorance. So, I agree that if all our emphasis was on relationships with others, it would certainly be a false path. And to make the path even more false, to try to have a relationship with our dead (like the LDS claim), although sometimes I wonder if it wouldn’t be easier to have peaceful relationships with our dead ancestors than a peaceful relationship with the living involved in this Governing Principles document. But, a false path nonetheless.

      However, I do not believe we can have a relationship with Christ, having not proven our Christ-like behavior in our relationships with others here on this blog, in our fellowships, and in our daily walk. If a relationship with Christ is what we seek, to acquire His words, from His mouth (and I think that is precisely what’s missing from this assignment), our efforts must be driven to fulfill what is necessary to have a relationship with Him, …and that addresses our relationships. I don’t think that means what most people think it means though.

      People act really funny when they know someone is looking that they regard important. If Denver were on this thread of blog most would not be so bold in their treatment of you and others who voice opposing views, such as myself. You and I are sort of in the same position, considered the ugly ducks that stop the progression of the whole. I’m just lucky I’m brown, because let’s be honest, there’s a ton of white guys here, so if they cast you out, your kind won’t be missed (Jokes!). But, seriously, it wasn’t until the A&C came out that suddenly the Aug 5th got a 100% subscription. I’m sorry, I don’t play like that. I try to be the same guy in all instances. Trust me, it’s harder to live that way than it is to simply blend in with the crowd, shifting with opinions of social acceptance. I am not simply obstinate though, as many claim you are. Like you, I have really strong points that anchor me. If someone could satisfy those points, I would not resist, similar to your point that the words that guide us must be Christ’s words alone.

      My point is, relationships ought to matter, but only in terms of your relationship to Christ. When we see Him, we ought to know Him, because we are like Him. We ought to consider how Christ would react and respond in our day, by pondering how he responded in His Earthly ministry. And then we ought to have good relationships, as we work out our relationship with Christ.

      I think it’s unnecessary to set up billboards, mass market the world market, or go door to door. I think it will begin with our simple personal interactions, to greater capacity of fellowships, to an even greater capacity until it rolls forth to fill the Earth. Do relationships with mankind matter, yeah, but only within the terms of our relationship of Christ dictates.

      People have asked us how do we mover forward, and that is what we mean by relationships.

      Rob Adolpho

    11. Jared,

      Our first and foremost relationship should be with God. We should have a relationship/fellowship with his angels, his son and God the Father first and foremost. I believe a relationship is with all of God's creation, because all of His creation point to Him. I believe I can learn a great deal about God, through my interactions with both my friends and "enemies."


    12. LOL Rob, love you brother. Your words make sense!

  20. Jared, it appears everything must be approved by you, but if someone else disagrees with you,that is of no importance. Every other one person is as important as you are.

    1. You are able to spin this situation howsoever you wish, but in the end, the Lord's requirement is the Lord's requirement.

      The only question before you is will you accept and do as the Lord has required, or will you join with the conspiracy to defraud him?

      Jared Livesey

  21. I have a question on process, if I may ask. Who are the "delegates?" How many will there be? Who is deciding that, and who has offered themselves up as tribute? Will the delegates and those still not in agreement meet openly before the body of voters or privately? Perhaps those in disagreement can decide that? I thank those deciding things for offering online voting. Lori

    1. Lux,
      The delegates were and will be chosen from those who care more about coming together in unity than they do about selecting any particular document. We will try to find folks that are good listeners, and have shown themselves to be temperate. I don't know exactly how many there will be. Anyone who feels inspired to offer their help in this regard is invited to do so. We are trying to make this vote as open as possible.

    2. Thank you, Gordon. My hope at this point for this specific process is that everything be kept open and published. I feel inasmuch as a semi-political way of governing ourselves and deciding matters is being pursued, "voters" ought to be informed about all the who's, what's, how's, and wherefore's as possible.

  22. I have learned from the voting system that you better know what you are voting for, otherwise if you don’t, you could get stuck incorporating something you don’t want. I believe that by saying “yes” you agree with the majority in saying that these Governing Principles are written to the capacity of your understanding and these are the Governing Principles that you will abide and be judged by. The majority is also agreeing to the process in which this came about and will be judged according to that as well- because you will be judged by what you do and say. So, if you vote in favor of this, then you are bound by heaven to follow it and you will be judged by it.

    Everyone has been given time to read this document, everyone has been given time to review critically and to comment before you adopt this document as your guiding principles to follow. You will be held accountable. You can’t tell the Lord you didn’t understand, you didn’t know, or too much was required in a short period of time. You can’t say, well the majority decided. You will be held accountable. The Lord requires it and he commands us to be wise in word and in kind in deed. For these reasons, I take this assignment seriously. Therefore, I will read it, pray about it, examine it, ask questions, and voice my concerns. I should be able to do this without being called a dissenter or the opposition.

    At each new dispensation, a body of teaching is given, and each dispensation is organized according to the circumstances of the people and the work to be accomplished. In Moses’ time, they had to write Governing Principles document(Exodus 24:3). In Joseph Smith’s day, they too were required to write a Governing Principles document. These principles are to be used to guide our fellowships/relationships with God, The heavens, His creations, and His people both living and dead. We have been given knowledge, teachings from the Lord, which I consider a gift, that teach us how to do this. I believe, we receive a gift by saying and doing the things we have been given.

    Given what I understand about what is being voted on, I know it’s very important to voice my concerns, otherwise, I will be accountable for not speaking up.


  23. Gordon,

    We have perhaps fifty people who have commented on this site since the Scriptures committee invited the assembly to email recommendations on February 8th. Adrian Larsen, John Dutson and Edwin Wilde made proposals. Others offered sound advise but not proposals to accomplish the requirement we were given. Keep the commandments, love one another, humble yourself, stop talking and start listening is really sound counsel but not a proposed pathway to a G&S accepted without disputation.

    Your August 9th proposal says, “starting immediately” suggesting a fresh start. The lots G&S, August 5th, The Rock of Jesus Christ, NONMANNCAF have been been submitted for vote since this proposed vote was made. Does that mean they will not be on the ballot?


    1. I believe what you intended to say was, "have NOT been submitted." And yes, to be included in this vote someone, anyone, would have to submit their document for consideration to be published in the new scriptures. If you would like to see one of the above documents, or any other document that you believe fills the Lord's requirements, included in the new scriptures please send it to this site.


  24. I request that the NOMANNCAF, The Beginning Believers Help List (the printed pamphlet that has been sent around), and the original Governing Principles (the first document by Jeff Savage) all be submitted to the voting.

  25. I made a proposal in Sept, just following the Boise conference. It has not been presented anywhere that I have seen. I was told twice by the Spirit to present it, which I did. It was essentially the same as Jared Livesey's proposal.
    When I inquired about my proposal, I was told that it was not adequate because someone or someones felt it did not include some things "that Denver felt should be included".
    A guide and standard, or a statement of principles, in my opinion, is not to be a re-write of the LDS church handbook of instructions. It should be simple, straightforward and most important, it should tell people how to come unto Christ; how to obtain and adhere to the strait & narrow path. That, in my opinion, and according to the impressions I have received from the Spirit, is best summarized by Jared's proposal. Thank you.
    James Russell Uhl