A greater chance than becoming LDS President

Pinning down what comprises ascending “Jacob’s ladder” is kind of an elusive thing. There isn’t an exact overlay between the plethora of pattern’s of ascension.  In fact another seeming path of ascension seldom discussed is that of gaining the experience, thus the titles of so many players there seems to be a need of, in the running of a world like this one.  For instance it requires an Adam, a Noah, a Melchizedek, an Abraham, dispensation heads, greater and lesser prophets, etc, etc, etc.  And standing as a great light above all, one who becomes a Savior of us all.  

Granted there is experiential overlap between some or all these characters, so I don’t know if it’s absolutely essential to become every one of these, and so thus I don’t know if it’s even proper to consider all these roles as a pattern of ascension.  Maybe that’s the same order of thinking, we indulged in when we thought the line of ascension was elder’s quorum president, bishop’s councilor, bishop, high councilor, sp councilor, sp, mission president, 70, apostle, and then becoming that high and holy luminary, president of the church, which none of us ever had a snowball’s chance in hell of becoming. I term this the BY – RMN pattern of ascension.

No; I think the most likely pattern of ascension is ordinance based, with these ordinances grounded in commandment, covenant and subsequently knowledge. For example, marrying a woman who will covenant with you that you are her choice, and that she will remain with you and love and sustain you; and then having that association and those promises ratified by the Holy Spirit of Promise, thus constituting an ordinance recognized as a required part of ascension on Jacob’s ladder. In fact nothing higher than where that ordinance puts you on that ladder will be attained unless or until this ordinance is in place.

The above paragraphs are a segue into the something below that has consumed a lot of my thinking lately.

If Jesus Christ and myself are begotten sons of the same spiritual parents, then it would seem that the redemptive sacrifice made by our Father in His round of creation would have been for both of us.  I am assuming that the Father made a similar redemptive sacrifice in a realm of creation which would have been created for Him as the selected Redeemer because of the many times Christ said, in this creation, “I only do those things which I have seen my Father do.”

This redemptive sacrifice which the Father made, would have been for all of the inhabitants of that world for which He (The Father) would have been designated as God.  But just as in this round of creation most will not reap the full effects of the sacrifice offered and given by the Son, so that redemptive sacrifice by the Father as the Son may be that which is termed by Alma as a preparatory redemption for those coming here who were prepared to only accept a portion.  Not for Christ, however, because He made full acceptance of what was offered by the Father, and became entitled to become a redeemer Himself.

So, for those that accept in this round of creation the full effect of what our Savior has now made possible again, we (they) become entitled to the right to be a redeemer, and for those that don’t accept the offered fullness, that which Christ has done will be considered for them another preparatory redemption, and they will move on again, added upon by what they have received.  In other words they will receive a resurrection and a portion of glory, but not a fullness.  And around it goes, each round being a preparatory redemption for the one to follow.  However, each round spinning off a few who become Sons to Him who becomes their Father, becoming redeemers themselves in this path of ascension.

It seems implausible to me that Christ’s redemptive sacrifice saved Himself (that’s almost an oxymoron).  It, however, did propel Him into becoming like the Father, having life and resurrection endemic within Himself, and it did save His Wife, just as we have learned that the Father’s redemptive sacrifice saved the Mother.  That redemptive sacrifice by the Father also saved the Son.  And for those who are now prepared for, and accept the fullness of the redemptive offering of the Son in this round will also be saved as Sons to Him who now becomes their Father.  For where was there ever a Son without a Father or a Father without a Son?

For those to whom the offered, redemptive sacrifice remains only a preparatory sacrifice, will, when they awake and resume and complete the climb, probably be saved as a Son to a completely different Father than the one to whom they now pray.

I think there may very well be the potential for a significant number of redeemers produced from this round of creation, and creations a plenty created by their Father (He whom we now call the Son) for which there is a need and opportunity. 

Keith
 

EQUIVALENCIES

Since the blog post “Why a Temple” came out, I have sat in on way too many conversations which weigh the pro’s and con’s of being taken “up to a high mountain” into the presence of Jesus Christ in order to receive one’s Calling and Election versus receiving it through what most are convinced is the way more mundane process of receiving one’s covenants and ordinances through a temple ceremony in Zion. When I’m asked what I think, I usually just say “sounds like they are equivalent for the purpose to me.” Here’s why I say that:

There are too many equivalencies made in too many of Denver’s writings for us to not understand that the rites, and covenants, and ordinances received in the temple In Zion will be the same as though we had stood in the presence of Christ to receive these things. Below I have presented some things he has said:

. “Information can be sacred. It can be controlled by God so that when He determines to communicate it to man He will do so either by catching the individual up into the heavenly realm or by commanding that a temple be built to house His revelations. Either option will require that those who enter in must be approved by His decree, because the way is guarded by sentinels who protect what is Holy from what is profane.” (The Holy Order paper. P.4, last paragraph.). the “either/or” in this case is the establishing of an equivalency.

. “The purpose of a temple (meaning an actual temple commissioned, ordered, blessed, accepted, and visited with His Presence) becomes holy ground and the means for making available to faithful people in every state of belief and hope the opportunity to receive, by authorized means, the same covenant, obligation, association, expectation and sealing through an authorized and binding arrangement in sacred space. This is the SAME THING they can receive from God directly if they enter into His presence while still in the flesh.” (“Why a Temple” P. 3, 1st paragraph. Emphasis mine.)

. “The purpose of a temple (meaning a real temple) is to substitute for the temporary ascent of a mortal into God’s presence.” (“Why a Temple” P. 3, 2nd paragraph.) Now my personal feeling about the word “substitute” is that it doesn’t just mean “to stand in place of, until….” If I substitute a different brand of yeast in bread making, it is intended that it will work just as well in making the bread rise. And if it does so, then it is an effective “substitute.”

. “In ritual (through the temple) it is possible to convey a great body of information with symbolism, metaphor, relationships, and types that work on the mind the same way that visionary experiences directly with God convey.” (“Why a Temple” P. 3 Paragraph #3.)

. “The LDS version of temple rites is insufficient to allow anyone to obtain the right to ascend to God’s presence in eternity. The Lord will fix this, as He intends to establish an Ensign to which all nations (meaning scattered, covenant Israel) will return in the last days and there receive their crowns at the hands of servants who will minister covenants for this purpose” (D&C 133: 31-34). (Why a Temple” P. 4-5.)

So, if we are hinging our belief against the equivalency of these things because of a statement made by Denver wherein he said; “The Temple ceremony is not the real thing. It is a symbol of the real thing.” Then we must also say that a visionary experience with Christ is also not the real thing (meaning exaltation) but is a symbol of the real thing. Both accomplish the same thing, which is to convey information that the individual is authorized after death to continue the upward ascent. Neither a promise from the lips of Christ nor temple rites are the upward ascent, but both promise that we are authorized, and teach how to continue in that ascent. And according to JS that will still be a long while after we die and have accomplished many things which make us exactly as Christ is, with life and resurrection within us.

The great thing about having one with The Holy Order on the earth is that he can minister as the Holy Spirit of Promise, which to my mind is to minister as, and in the stead of Jesus Christ, according to His command.

And God does this all for mankind, because He will not even be thwarted by the weakness of men.

Keith

PS Now by making these comparisons am I saying there is no need to seek the face of Jesus Christ? Heavens no, it’s a commandment!!

Cooperative Behavior

A popular university psychology professor offered an exercise to his students each semester just before the final exam. In this offer he emailed each student the choice that they could accept a 2 point extra credit addition to their final exam score or they could accept a 6 point addition.

The hitch to the offer was, that if more than 10% of the class chose the 6 point offer, none of the class would receive any extra credit points.

It turned out that over a period of several years enough students in each class justified to themselves their need or desire or right to those 6 points, that not once in those years did those choosing 6 points fall in number below the 10% required for any in the class to receive extra credit points.

1st variant

The teacher then devised an interesting variant on the exercise, which made it possible for a student to choose 0 extra credit points. For each student choosing 0 points, 1 person, randomly selected, would be eliminated from the group choosing 6 points, losing everything.

From that point on almost half of the classes qualified under the original requirement that required less than 10% of the class to opt for 6 points in order for all of the students to receive the extra credit points they selected. It even accomplished this at times with no one choosing the 0 point option.

I have sat here for a long time now pondering what this all means and what I would do. Of the 0 pointer’s or 2 pointer’s or 6 pointer’s, which do you think has a higher developed sense of altruism?

Perhaps we might consider a couple of other questions:

. Do you think so many persons attempting to maximize their personal benefit means it’s human nature to be greedy and selfish, or are some simply being strategic?
. Do you think the ones who choose 0 points do it because they are selfless or is there possibility for other motives?
. Which option of the exercise – the original or the variant – do you think demonstrates a more highly developed cooperative nature as a class unit?
. What would you do?

There are some lines from an old Beatles song that tells us: “All the world is a birthday cake / so take a piece / but not too much.”

Keith Henderson

Furthermore

Furthermore, besides the history which it would seem the claimants of the receipt of the sealed plates got wrong, and the little (make that no) work or effort those claimants went through to get them, (see blog post May 10, 2018. Denver Snuffer.) it would seem to me there are other things to be considered.

By the time Joseph Smith received the plates promised him by the resurrected angel Nephi, four more years of personal preparation had gone into being prepared and deemed trustworthy by the powers of heaven to deal with the information which they would transmit to him through those plates and personal revelation they would give him attending to issues therein.

In the economy of the Lord another has now been in process of being prepared for the receipt of items and knowledge which will continue the Restoration which was begun through Joseph. This man began delivering information given him by Jesus Christ in 2005 and since that time the pace has progressively increased to the point that today there is a covenant group of people actively contemplating the establishment of Zion.

This man – Denver Snuffer – has been consistently revealing God’s words of required repentance, increasing our knowledge of how God deals with man, and the beauties and simplicity of Christ’s Gospel, through series of lectures, written books, written papers on many vital topics, personal examples of sacrifice, and a single minded commitment to God and His work.

He has gained our trust through consistency and untiring work trying to teach us not to be like him, but to surpass that and be like Jesus Christ. He has gained no monetary value from the work he has performed. He has been the greatest promoter of the virtue and the works of Joseph Smith Jr. helping us to understand that before a restoration can continue after a long hiatus, what went before must also be understood.

Where are there any others who can rival the trust we can all have in God’s choice of Denver Snuffer as the servant He has chosen to be His mouthpiece, as He continues the restoration? Where is their consistency over the past 13 years? Did they speak truths at the very first of their calling which they hardly understood, which are now being fleshed out in added glory?

Why would God choose this group in Brazil to deliver these precious plates to, by the hand of Moroni/Nephi when they can’t even tell correctly who delivered them? Where is their personal preparation? What have they done? Where is the group they have prepared with God’s word? Where will their Zion be? Brazil?

I shudder to think that these people probably did have a messenger who called himself Moroni, who did deliver a set of plates of some kind with some kind of content on them. I shudder that others are leaving their salvation to follow such things. But even Lehi followed a man dressed in white for hours through a dark and dreary wilderness. But then he prayed.

As for us, we will wait for those real plates to be given through a trusted messenger, and in the meantime we will, with relish, savor many of the teachings in those very plates given by the mercy and generosity of God through that same trusted messenger, as God tries us, and prepares us for what is still to come. If we can only believe, there will not be many great surprises when we finally get our individual chance to check that precious volume out of the Temple treasury and see with our own eyes, that which we already know through the Record of Heaven.

Keith Henderson

Education

Sloyd advocates the principle that:
“Education is what you are left with after you have forgotten everything you learned in school.”

“Sloyd,” is a system of handicraft-based education started by Uno Cygnaeus in Finland in 1865. The system was taught in the United States until the early 20th Century. It is still taught as a compulsory subject in Sweden and other European schools.

It’s initial aim was to promote social and moral betterment by means of such education as shall increase efficiency and respect for labor….To move from the known to the unknown. Hence the main educational tool in its beginning was the knife, because every farm boy prior to the turn of 20th century had knowledge of how to use a knife without hurting himself.

OF GOD OR BY CHANCE

I am aware that some have not appreciated the effort of drawing lots as the means to choose seven individuals to write the Statement. As I contemplate what has happened and delve deeper into the many “coincidence’s” which have come to light in the effort, I simply stand all amazed at what has taken place, and thought, perhaps, you might enjoy the following.

The Equality Factor

Perhaps there are other processes which could give participants the equality of which we have been taught so much lately, but so does drawing of lots. There were 185 unique numbers in the (now famous/infamous) spittoon. Each number was unique to a person who had accepted this process and submitted their own name, or had submitted another’s name [who also accepted]. Without factoring in other things such as shape and size of Elaine’s hand, or size of the spittoon, or the type of tag used, or other tools of the statistician’s trade, each number in the pot had, at first drawing, 1 in 185 chances of being drawn. As Elaine dipped her hand into the pot the second time each number had 1 in 184 chances of being drawn, etc., until the 14th consecutive drawn number offered a 1 in 171 chance for each number in the pot to be drawn. Every number in the pot had, at each picking, as equal a chance as every other number in the pot to be drawn. Every person had the same offer to put his/her name in for the drawing. This WAS a way to produce equality among all this Covenant group.

There were 114 unique numbers in the pot representing males, while there were 71 representing females. This means that by random chance alone there should have been 5 numbers drawn representing women, to 9 numbers drawn representing men. Yet there were 12 men vs 2 women, and those two women are split, one in the first group of 7, and one in the second group of 7. The probability that it would happen this way in each group of 7 is about 1 in 2,500.

I am told that the odds of drawing a husband and wife were approximately 33,000 to 1. And the odds of drawing the husband and wife consecutively would be 33,000 to one, to the 185th power. Other things we could list that would effect the probability of this couple would be the couple themselves, who they are among us. Another could be the drawing of the husband first and the wife next. In other words the result is so small as to be statistically zero.

Other improbabilities exist.

In the first group of seven one of the individuals lives in the United Kingdom, but happens to be the son in law of another member in that group, and is in regular communication with his father in law.

The fact that Jeff Savage’s name was drawn in the 14th spot or even drawn at all is very very very small (I couldn’t get anyone to calculate the numbers for this, but this was the common opinion). I wonder if for Jeff the case could be made that “the first shall be last and the last shall be first. At the very least God is aware of Jeff Savage. Jeff, many of us love you for what you did.

But, perhaps for me the greatest evidence of God’s hand in this drawing is the product itself. Read for yourself the “Plea” and then the “Guide and Standard” and experience for yourself the message of peace contained in them, and see if perhaps you can also agree.

I would like to echo the sentiment expressed by the compilers, Praise be to our God for His mercy and goodness. These are His words compiled by those He chose.

Keith

Drawing of Lots – Part 2

RESULTS OF LAST NIGHTS DRAWING OF LOTS

DRAWING OF THE FIRST SEVEN

#52 Jack Hinkle
#198 Jason Carlson
#36 John Webster
#44 Doug Larson
#186 Jeff Reber
#175 Jonathan Dippold
#96 Shalyce Woodard

DRAWING OF THE SECOND SEVEN (alternates to be used if needed in the order chosen at drawing and as given here)

#38 Kirk Strong
#133 David Kay
#181 Jeff Brown
#32 Adrian Larsen
#30 Tausha Larsen
#105 Christian Meyer
# 62 Jeff Savage

I would personally like to thank all who offered their services. Again there were 184 who volunteered or were volunteered and accepted to participate in this drawing of lots. As I saw this effort mature I was amazed and said to myself quite often, “so this is how this is done.” Well, at least this is how it was done by us.

You can watch or listen to the whole process by clicking on one of the links in the previous post.

As entertaining as that may be, it doesn’t show the many hours of preparation which went into making that 19 minute presentation possible. There were well over a hundred who, in one manner or another, made it possible to get that video produced. We give a heartfelt thanks to the 184 mentioned above whose names were in the spittoon for the drawing. And there were almost 400 who voted to accept drawing of lots, as the means for getting a group together who will now produce a Statement of Principles, to take to our Lord for acceptance.

May God’s Spirit and blessing accompany these who develop this Statement and all those who have participated in this process. Our prayers are with you.

Keith Henderson

Casting Our Lots

WELCOME

This post has only one purpose, to solicit you to send in your name, or perhaps another you feel would be acceptable to our Lord, to be included in the jar (or box) from which names will be drawn according to the system of drawing lots, that will comprise those individuals making up the committee which will write a Statement of Principles.

Boy, that was a mouthful but I wanted to insure understanding of what we are doing here. We are only drawing lots to determine God’s will about who will write a Statement of Principles.

I was surprised at how many have responded to this tactic of selection. The great majority of those responding have expressed their desire to use this method, but even if you felt to vote against this process please know that your response was needed. I feel it is a valid way of determining God’s will. Others would perhaps disagree thinking revelation should only be a voice in the mind, or perhaps an audible voice causing air to vibrate, or others need a personal visitation. Gideon needed a piece of fleece to make it work for him; asking the lord to please have the dew of the night settle only on the fleece and the earth be dry. When that worked he asked the Lord for another sign. This time just the reverse. Have the earth be wet with dew and the fleece be dry. That worked also, and the anger of the Lord was not kindled at such a request.

At the very beginning of the Book of Mormon (a Covenant to us) we are confronted by the son’s of Lehi drawing lots to determine who gets to confront Laban about the brass plates. We see in hind sight God’s purpose in having it work out as it did, but I doubt Nephi had any grandiose scheme in mind about him finally being the one to succeed and obtain the accoutrements of kingship. It was just four brothers, sitting around a campfire, exercising faith that God’s choice would be with them in drawing the short straw (or whatever) to see who went first. And there are many others:

And they gave forth their lots; and the lot fell upon Matthias; and he was numbered with the eleven apostles.” (Acts 1:24-26.)  The same method is used here by Apostles as had been used by the Lord’s crucifiers to divide up His clothing, as He was hanging on the cross in the last throes of dying. When we think of the Roman guards using it to divide Christ’s clothing, it becomes less inspired-looking and more homely.  It looks more like expediency than revelation as a tool for choosing an Apostle.  Yet, at the same time, this same process is built into all the scriptures and has been used by those of faith for millennia. Without regard to feeling, emotion or desire, the lots are drawn and the assignments are made.  These physical objects contain within them the Lord’s mind for organizing a council by whom work gets done and things get written.

From Nephi’s casting lots to decide who would go, to choosing a scapegoat, to choosing an apostle, to choosing roles for a disciplinary court, casting lots has been the way people of faith have determined God’s will for centuries. Through it God “speaks.” But it requires faith to see it in that light. For these are ordinary, even commonplace ways of making a decision. Only through faith, however, does it acquire the “voice of God” in it. With that said let’s proceed to the work of making this work.

Read carefully that which is below. Please click on all the links and obtain all the understanding you can. And then if you feel to move forward, to submit your’s or another’s name for inclusion in the lots, click on the first link again to find the form required. Fill it out with honesty and integrity and push submit. May God bless us all in this effort.

Keith Henderson

THE WORK

If you have entered into the recent covenant offered, you may submit the following on the website indicated below until Sunday November 12, 2017 at 7pm MST:
1. Names, including your own if you feel called or those of others you would like to nominate, to be drawn by lot to serve on the body of 7 to compile a Statement of Principles; when submitting name(s) please include contact information such as email and/or phone number as directed in the form.
2. Versions of the Statement of Principles that you have had a primary role in developing for the body of 7 to consider when they are performing their labor. Even if you have previously posted a Statement of Principles on the Guide & Standard website, it will need to be resubmitted to the Central Recorder through this form for consideration by the body of 7.

Central Recorder Lots Form

As your information is received via the form linked to above, you (or those you nominate) will receive an email or phone call from the Central Recorder to 1) confirm that you are willing to participate (for those nominated by others), 2) verify that you meet the criteria listed below, and 3) inform you of your unique “lot number” (if your name is submitted multiple times, you will only receive 1 “lot number”):
* At least 18 years of age;
* (Re)baptized and baptism recorded with the Central Recorder;
* Entered into the recent covenant;
* Agree to perform your labor according to the criteria of composing the Statement of Principles using primarily the words of Christ directly or through an authorized servant (as described in the United Proposal).

As Statement of Principles documents are received, the Central Recorder will copy them into an electronic folder that will be shared with the body of 7. While the body of 7 are not required to incorporate any of these materials into the Statement of Principles that they compile, they are at liberty to choose one or more to use as the basis, or bring together aspects of different Statements of Principles into a single document that also includes their own labors, as guided by the Spirit.

The drawing of lots (ie, “lot numbers”) will take place on Sunday November 12, 2017 at 9pm MST. The event will be broadcast on this link or by calling 1-669-900-6833 (Meeting ID: 216 044 0046). The broadcast is limited to 150 viewers/callers, but a link to a recording will be made available soon after the drawing of lots on the Recorder’s Clearinghouse website for any who are not able to join the live broadcast. The “lot numbers” selected (including alternates) will also be posted to the Recorder’s Clearinghouse website immediately following the drawing. As soon as all those whose “lot numbers” were drawn have been confirmed and verified (if this was not completed prior to the drawing), the names of the body of 7 will be posted to the Central Recorder’s website. The Central Recorder will then put the 7 in communication with each other via email and send to them any Statement of Principles documents that have been received. The baton will then be officially passed to the body of 7 to complete the assignment as outlined in the lots proposal (see here and here) as well as the United Proposal. For whatever reason, if the body of 7 cannot complete a Statement of Principles to be presented to the Lord within two weeks, a set of 7 alternates will replace them to complete the assignment. We humbly ask that all who feel so inclined will unite in prayer and fasting on Sunday November 12th so that the Lord’s will may be manifest.

This is how Christ’s Gospel works

I want to show you something!

From Preserving The Restoration Page 227, by Denver Snuffer, we find he has written:

“King Benjamin (or, substitute any legal administrator) did not act on his own. He taught only what had been given him to teach by an angel. Because God renewed His covenant with King Benjamin, it was through King Benjamin that the people could once again make an acceptable covenant with God. The purpose of sending the angel to King Benjamin was not to offer him salvation, but to offer once again a valid covenant through which others could repent.

This is how God operates. Even the chosen people of Lehi and his son Nephi, brought to the promised land, failed to abide the conditions of the covenant. But God did not abandon them. After generations had passed and a new one would allow the Lord’s hand to be revealed, the Lord acted.

This is a great type. The Book of Mormon is far more relevant for our day than we imagine. It is a blueprint for how our own history is unfolding. It is a sobering lesson in how to fail and how to wait for the Lord to reclaim and redeem us.

We ignore or misunderstand the content of the Book of Mormon at the peril of our own salvation. When we do, then no one can be saved.”

Continuing further on………..(Bottom of 229, top of 230.)

“Joseph [Smith Jr,] said: Whenever men can find out the will of God and find an administrator legally authorized from God, there is the kingdom of God, but where these are not, the kingdom of God is not. All the ordinances, systems, and administrations on the earth are of no use to the children of men, unless they are ordained and authorized of God; for nothing will save a man but a legal administrator; for none others will be acknowledged either by God or angels. (TPJS, p. 274.) It is for this reason that King Benjamin and Mormon include the final ingredient in [Mosiah 4:] verse 3: “According to the words which King Benjamin had spoken unto them.” They heard the truth from one sent by God, had faith in Christ as a consequence of that, believed, asked and experienced the fruit of conversion, (and finally receive a covenant from God, through His legal administrator.) This is how Christ’s gospel works.” (All emphasis, and stuff in brackets and parenthesis, and out of quotes above is mine.)

THIS IS HOW CHRIST’S GOSPEL WORKS!

Governing Principles for me

I have taken very seriously the question Denver asked in Reconciliation (A little). “What if the meaning is that in order to receive salvation it is essential that the believer receive a message from a minister actually sent by God with a message for our day and time?”

My witness about the Ten Talks, and in the book Preserving The Restoration, as written in the back of that book Is that, “I bear solemn testimony that I have received a message by God’s own voice of their truthfulness, and also of His desire for us to believe in, and act upon these things that have been [first] spoken and [then] written [in this book].” This book contains much of the message sent by God to a minister with a message for our day and time. As such, this book, then necessarily contains “Governing Principles” by which I must abide in order to be obedient to God’s covenant with me. It doesn’t matter that this particular book has on the front that it was written by Denver C. Snuffer Jr., but it helps, because then I know that other things he writes or does must be given close scrutiny so that I don’t miss anything important.

I also believe that God has spoken through His Servant Joseph Smith, and has said, “There has been a day of calling, but the time has come for a day of choosing; and let those be chosen that are worthy. And it shall be manifest unto my servant, (now, as well as then) by the voice of the Spirit, those that are chosen; and they shall be sanctified; And inasmuch as they follow the counsel (Governing Principles) which they receive they shall have power after many days to accomplish all things pertaining to Zion.” (Le. D&C 105: 35-37. Emphasis and parentheticals mine.)

And I also believe the following, “Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel. and with the house of Judah; Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the Lord: But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the Lord,I will put my law in their inward parts , and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people. And they shall [then] teach no more every man his neighbor, and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord; for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the Lord; for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.” (Le. Jeremiah 31: 31-34.)

THEREFORE,

The principles by which I shall be governed shall be every word that proceeds from the mouth of God through His authorized minister. I do not need a list written by men [or women] in their understanding to remind me of a few things, but I need to make this declaration to God that my Governing Principles will be all the words He shall say.

I no longer care what comes of all the effort by myriads of participants to formulate a list of things they espouse as their Governing Principles, although I profusely thank them all for their effort, and will vote affirmatively for whatever they say they want as the things they will follow, even though they say they “are not by way of commandment.” I believe each should have the agency to choose their own list, or even a common list, and have others respect that list. But for me, I seek “commandments not a few, and revelations many,” and all He speaks to me through authorized servants I will accept as such. These will be my Governing Principles.

I do not believe we are to tell God what we will accept, and by omission what we will not, and require or hope of him to accept our criteria, although I think He probably will. But I believe we should bend our will to Him, and make a declaration to Him that we are willing to accept everything He is willing to give. I, for one, do not think He is through speaking through His chosen minister, even after fifteen or so volumes.

And with this I have changed my stance on Paul and also accept him as one of God’s ministers and if Joseph chose to leave some of his statements unchanged I now thoroughly agree. I will yet come to understand, but for now it is simply enough that I agree. I apologize for my adamancy in arguing for those things to be changed.

Keith