53 Comments | leave a comment | RSS 2.0 for this post | trackback |
Fascinating! I really want to know how other pet doctrines (often bandied about in Sunday school but not necessarily scriptural) stand up. |
I’m curious why your BYU class was deflated when the professor disproved the theory. Before the professor did this, how many students actually believed this White Horse? Essentially, how prevalent is this thinking? For those who believe in the White Horse, I would like to know specifics. Exactly how is the Constitution hanging by a thread? Isn’t that thread quite strong if it has been hanging by a thread since the 1840s? Exactly how would the Elders of Israel “save” the Constitution? By turning it into a theocracy? Should non-Mormons be concerned about a group of LDS Elders running to Washington to reform the Constitution to their liking? Would slavery be brought back? I mean, after all, it was in the original Constitution. Would women no longer get to vote? After all, it isn’t expressly written in the Constitution that women can vote. It is particularly damning seeing that it is LDS Elders that are supposedly saving the Constitution. How exactly is Rex Rammell misinterpreting Joseph Smith? |
Although the idea that Joseph prophesied the Constitution would hang by a thread etc. was popularized later by the White Horse Prophecy, there is no doubt he did prophesy that based on the many statements of his contemporaries prior to its publication. As Nibley realized “it is abundantly evident that the Prophet Joseph Smith did make the marvelous prediction …” (Des News, 15 Dec 1948) Brigham Young spoke of Joseph stating it on multiple occasions (JD 7:13-15, 12:204, 2:182) as did John Taylor (JD 21:8, 31, 22:143-4, 26:38-39), and other Apostles (JD 24:31, 6:152, 26:234, 23:104, 122). Eliza R. Snow also recollected him saying it (Des News, 19 Jan 1870), and Pres. Ezra Taft Benson accredited to Joseph also (Conf. Report, 7 Oct 1961) Perhaps the spreadsheet needs to be revised, but there is little doubt that those who knew Joseph considered him certain about it. |
Again I say here as I and others have said other places (like Mahonri), the White Horse Prophecy has always been from the start rejected as a true prophecy. However, the “hanging by a thread” has been repeated many times over by General Authorities and that Joseph Smith stated it has been authenticated. These are two different issues. To conflate them together is disingenuous and, I feel sorry to say, misleading. |
Jettboy, When a General Authority has said that the Constitution hangs by a thread, did they get specific? I realize you yourself don’t really know what that phrase actually means, from our conversation over at BCC. But did Ezra Taft Benson ever explain what he meant? Or did he leave it purposefully vague as well? |
Oh come on…#2,5 When someone says, “that book isn’t worth the paper it was written on.” Do you remark that it wasn’t written but offset printed? Is it not obvious to everyone that the constitution hanging by a thread means that the government will pretty much be able to ignore the protections and language in the constitution and proceed with doing whatever it wanted anyway? — and you could make a pretty good case that ship sailed a long time ago, but we always stayed close to the harbor, so to speak. Now we’re heading into the deep waters… (is the water deep if a dinosaur could still stand in it I hear you ask?) “Constitutional” has become a euphemism for “Fair” for many people. I think if it’s not hanging by a thread at that point, maybe it’s hanging by 4 threads… |
again, sam, that’s all totally and completely vague and meaningless. Give me some meat. Some good red meat to chew on. Does anyone who believes in this kind of thought have any? Or are you just skin and bones? |
Hey Dan[iel], I have a question for you: How will we look when we are damned? |
I know some youth in our ward and surrounding wards who were talking about this after coming back from EFY. If that’s true, and it’s embedded in EFY thinking, that means it’s fairly mainstream… |
Orwell, how we look when we are damned matters not to me because it doesn’t affect the course of the future of this nation. Charged fears of destruction of liberties does. |
Daniel (2),
I did, sort of. I had seen it mentioned in a book or two, and I had no reason to disbelieve it as I had not yet read anything calling it into question. A lot of people want to believe it because it taps into all kinds of yearnings we saints have for validation, vindication, etc. |
“and the Elders of the Church (perhaps led by…..” God is speaking….. God just told me…. “it will be David Archuleta” |
#12 Nah, just kidding. Actually the prophesy is very true and the constitution is currently hanging by a thread after that war criminal George W Bush’s 8 years and his signed the Patriot Act which etched away basic constitutional rights. Plus he created Guantanamo prison and an assortment of other clandestine detention centers around the globe, all very unconstitutional. Well… actually the problem is for democrats and other undesirables, republicans off course don’t need to worry :) |
I think you can always complain about any prophecy or scripture being too vague. How can they avoid being a little vague when most prophecies are not more than a line or two? We will never have all the specifics until we either have an open vision, or the prophecy itself, is fulfilled. The fact we may not agree as to interpretation, may be more our fault, than the prophecies itself. That said, I don’t think the WHP deserves a 32% rating. When I read it, it feels like there is something true there, but something is not quite right. |
Too bad, I’ve always wondered and was really hoping for some specifics. I guess there’s no Hell after all. |
Is it not obvious to everyone that the constitution hanging by a thread means that the government will pretty much be able to ignore the protections and language in the constitution and proceed with doing whatever it wanted anyway? Not at all, sam. You see it as “obviously” referring to an internal conspiracy because that’s how you want to see it in today’s political climate. In other eras, it was “obvious” that the threat was an external one, that the Constitution would be at risk because we would be nearly conquered by an outside force. So maybe instead of taking over the Idaho governor’s mansion, Brother Rex and all [seventeen of] his supporters should enlist in the armed forces. No? That’s the trouble with a purported prophecy that is as vague as this one, and on which we (you and me and the living generation, at the very least) have been given no guidance from a living prophet. It can mean, and be used for, just about anything you want. Like a horoscope. And homeopathy. And all other forms of quackery. |
Orwell,
Technically you are correct. There really isn’t a Hell, is there? ;) |
Thanks, Ardis (no. 16). Once again, you said it better than I knew was possible. |
Ardis, Are you serious? You think Joseph Smith was not disappointed in the failure of the Federal Government to do anything to help the Saints, and his view of government allowing the rights of citizens to be trampled had nothing to do with the constitution hanging by a thread, but instead was reference to an invasion? |
Sheesh, why do you (some of) you guys have to get all political and read Dem. vs. Repub. in this? Bush respected the constitution in one area and completely disregarded it in another. Dems go overboard in the opposite direction in other areas. I’m just a bit amazed that someone could really view Joseph Smith about being more concerned at a foreign invasion destroying the rights of citizens, rather than those rights being destroyed or disregarded by the government. He was witnessing it in his day. Getting caught up in how many angels are on a pin is just as silly as mocking the strength of the thread. It’s very glib, and does not charitably consider the words of a Prophet, but rather mocks them in order to make a crass political point and your supposed enemies just because the voted for the other guy. Let’s mock the Lord for all those sheep or olive tree analogies while we’re at it. Or rather, lets not. Take a step back from your politics and think about both political parties completely disregard the constitution, while at the same time drawing near to it with their lips. Our political class is not much different than the Pharisees (at least in how they often approach publicity/campaigning and legislation). |
sam,
This is where I cannot take you, or those who subscribe to this philosophy seriously. Both parties may disregard parts of the Constitution, but neither party “completely disregards” the Constitution. You yourself state this earlier. You say “Bush respected the constitution in one area and completely disregarded it in another. Dems go overboard in the opposite direction in other areas.“. So is it a complete disregard, or only partial disregard? |
I believe the “thread” spoken of in this Prophesy is the network of Priesthood-based relationships among those of the Wards and Stakes of Zion in these last days, a network of trusted and respected authority based on prophesy and revelation, that will bind good people together when all else falls apart. This web of interconnected good people who love and trust each other in the Lord, taking care of their families and neighbors (the visiting teachers and home teachers), spread out across all of the world through the Stakes of Zion that will be what “saves” us from the chaos and destructions that are and will come upon us. This is what the White Horse Prophesy is all about. |
I suppose that the book of Revelation is also absolutely untrue and false. We should throw that whole thing out because of how vague it is, having been used for Centuries to support this or that interpretation. I say get rid of a belief in “The stone cut without hands” prophecy because again it is vague and used for all kinds of political and religious theories. In fact, lets get rid of all revelation and scriptures. They are have been used for nothing but vain excuses leading to wars and death. My contention, from the beginning, has been have the prophets taught the hanging by a thread or not? If it isn’t accepted prophecy, why isn’t it? |
Daniel, I may have overstated. Perhaps like Smith? Is it two threads or 100? Actually, I will probably never hang by a thread so therefore it must be a false prophecy? But if you are charitable enough to allow me to rephrase I’ll say that many of their actions do completely disregard the constitution. If there is any regard given, it is an after thought, such as, how can we justify this if the consitutional question comes up, but that ship has long sailed for many things. This is not to say that Bush did not respect the constitution in terms of the 2nd Amendment or that some on the left have not respected it with regard to the 1st Amendment. They can do this and still have complete disregard for the constitution with their next piece of legislation. Of if you really object to that, just cross about complete and say mostly. Does it really matter or do you just want to cling to your politics-as-personal-identity? |
Robert, #22, Sure sucks if you’re not Mormon then eh? Jettboy, #23,
Actually the Book of Revelation is quite specific. We may have a difficult time understanding what the specifics mean, because John was writing them as he understood them, but there is little vague in Revelation. Oh, and stop being so melodramatic! You’re not 15 anymore. sam, #24, It’s the melodramaticism that makes me not want to take anything you guys say seriously. Like Jettboy, for example. Instead of thinking reasonably, he replies by saying, “let’s just throw out all revelation because it’s all used for bad things.” How can a reasonable person reply to that? There is nothing mature about a response like that. Same thing with saying one administration or another “completely disregards” the Constitution. |
You can’t have it both ways. You disagree with my exaggeration of the world complete. It’s really just to show frustration at a government that is seemingly out of control. You would prefer a lot of qualifiers to make everything nice and tidy. But apparently you have no problem saying things like “Exactly how is the Constitution hanging by a thread? Isn’t that thread quite strong if it has been hanging by a thread since the 1840s?” And then in another post you ask for specifics, otherwise you apparently claim it’s just useless for a GA or Prophet to make the statement. Do you also raise a similar beef with Nephi and an entire nation dwindling in unbelief? How do they dwindle anyway? And could they really be in unbelief? I mean really, they must surely believe something, even if their belief is that they don’t believe right? That’s not melodrama, it’s just using your game against you where you go off on a tangent about a thread and then try to claim the high ground when someone calls you on it. I don’t know exactly what the statement means or really if it was ever said. But I can hear and and apply it to what I see today as well as what has happened in the past. I don’t think we need to get worked up into the literal truth of the statement. I think it makes a clear point about our constitutional protections (which aren’t perfect, and aren’t gospel truth, but they do help out a lot) being infringed upon. I don’t worship the constitution. But I admire it for what it is. And I also think our nation would not be what it is today were it not for the respect of many individuals for the constitution. That it is less and less adhered to, or rather used to justify a whole swath of things that perhaps it does not speak about, is troubling for me. Our nation is great because the people are great, and they live up to many of the precepts embodied in the constitution, among other things too. In that sense I do find it worrisome to see it not only disregarded, but construed to mean whatever you want it to mean to achieve a desired policy prescription. |
BTW, I’m not talking about the white horse bit… that’s not my concern and I don’t care if it was true or not, although really it does seem like something Smith might say, and I can see why the church wouldn’t want to discuss it in the slightest. It’s like declaring to the world we are the ones we’ve been waiting for or something…who would actually have the nerve to say that huh! |
Daniel (#25), I thought this blog site was one concerning a positive “mormon mentality” – sorry, I guess I misunderstood – your flippant response and put-down suggests a different mentality. Dan, I believe this prophesy and this issue are entirely about Mormons – the Constitution hanging by a thread and being “saved” by the Elders (by the Priesthood network). Yea, so I guess the answer might very well be, in Daniel #25′s words, “Sure sucks if you’re not Mormon then eh?.” Yea, it sure does – but that’s the reality of it! Suck it up Daniel! Jesus Christ is the God of Israel and Israel alone, Pre-Existent Israel. All of Heavenly Father’s chiildren are children of glory; just not of this glory. This entire drama here on earth has to do with a very select group of Heavenly Father’s children chosen in the PreMortal time to be of Israel and to live here with the blessings of the Abrahamic Covenant; the earth’s inheritances were divided according to the number of those children. So, what is the White Horse Prophesy all about – it is about Israel and God’s promises to Israel in these last days; this drama is what Revelations is about too. So, the Prophecy has to do with Constitutional rights in protection of the Priesthood network, in the Stakes of Zion (in the face of ‘all hell breaking loose’), where Israel will continue to blessed and protected to establish and build the infrastructure needed for our Savior to bring about His second coming. The rights protected by the Constitution in this day are to ensure that His people are protected to get the work done (missionary work, temple family history work, and charity humanitarian work). The “rights” of the Constitution will remain to protect the network of Priesthood relationships ONLY until the Savior establishes His theocracy (the Kingdom of God) that will institutionalize and make eternal those Priesthood network relationships. Then, the US Constitution will become a long distant memory of a blessing in a war and battle in a world and time long ago. |
sam, #26, Look, I’m not looking for qualifiers. I’m looking for a realistic assessment. I’ve gotten plenty frustrated at our government (particularly over the past nine years) so I understand the desire to exaggerate. I’ve said stupid things like “let’s remove the Senate” out of sheer frustration at how poor the Senate has become.
Actually I do question those assessments. It is a very simplistic analysis of otherwise complex people and individuals. But that’s for another time. :)
This is where specifics are required. Exactly what constitutional protections are being infringed upon? The problem with tying religion (which tends to be generalistic and vague) with law and government is that law and government is actually supposed to be exact. So when you state that your constitutional protections are being infringed upon, you are capable of being specific, since the constitutional protections in the Constitution are actually specific. So which protections are being infringed?
But that’s the beauty of the combination of a malleable Constitution and a people-powered Democratic Republic. Our ability to interpret the Constitution does actually change through the generations because generations change. Situations change. Take for example slavery. How dare any generation remove slavery as a right under the Constitution! Take for example giving women the right to vote. How dare any generation add that to the Constitution! Silly I tell you. ;) |
Robert #28,
Then it would have been called Positive Mormon Mentality. :)
I’m Mormon. I’m saved already.
woohoo, hail to us righteous and damn the rest of those gentile sinners! … I can’t. I can’t snark this. It’s just not in me. |
I guess instead of snarking I should just remind you, Robert, of what John the Baptist told the Pharisees. See, they thought themselves special because they were Israelites. John the Baptist reminded them that God can create children of Abraham of mere stones. |
Are you serious? You think Joseph Smith was not disappointed in the failure of the Federal Government to do anything to help the Saints, and his view of government allowing the rights of citizens to be trampled had nothing to do with the constitution hanging by a thread, but instead was reference to an invasion? I’m late getting back to this, so I apologize if the conversation has moved along too far. sam, Joseph’s approach to Martin Van Buren was a last-ditch, long-shot effort. I am pretty dang sure that he expected nothing from the federal government and was merely resigned to — neither surprised nor disappointed by — the reaction. You and I have grown up with the version of those events that Van Buren’s response was “I can do nothing for you, for I would lose the vote of Missouri” — just about as cynical and political a response as anyone could invent and seemingly a refusal by Van Buren to do something that you interpret as his sworn duty as Chief Executive. But Joseph’s earliest accounts of this event don’t say that at all; this is a later “embroidery” with the effect of making our treatment at the hands of later federal administrations all the more outrageous. The response as originally recorded and reported was just “I can do nothing for you.” Period. Nothing about Missouri or votes. That is because in the 1840s (indeed, until the Civil War, in fact), the federal government could NOT interfere in the states’ internal matters, which is exactly what our troubles with first Ohio and then Missouri and then Illinois were: internal state affairs. Van Buren was simply reporting the true state of affairs: as president, he could do nothing for us. He had no jurisdiction over the matter, no legal recourse, no power to force Illinois or any other state to take or cease any action toward us. (Before you howl too loudly in protest, recognize that this “states rights” view of government is precisely why Joseph Smith’s destruction of the Nauvoo Expositor press was not a constitutional matter — until the Civil War, the Bill of Rights applied only to the federal government, not to state or local governments.) This Van Buren episode in no reasonable way can be interpreted as reflecting upon the federal Constitution, or a threat to it, or any supposed “trampling.” Rather, it was the legal, lawful, intended and expected response of a federal government that could not supersede the rights of individual states. (My comment about invasion has nothing to do with the 1840s. I refer to 20th century fears of “the Commies are coming! the Commies are coming!”) |
“I believe the “thread†spoken of in this Prophesy is the network of Priesthood-based relationships among those of the Wards and Stakes of Zion in these last days, a network of trusted and respected authority based on prophesy and revelation, that will bind good people together when all else falls apart. This web of interconnected good people who love and trust each other in the Lord, taking care of their families and neighbors (the visiting teachers and home teachers), spread out across all of the world through the Stakes of Zion that will be what “saves†us from the chaos and destructions that are and will come upon us. This is what the White Horse Prophesy is all about.” I completely agree with you. |
Sorry I didn’t cite. That comment was #22 from robert. |
Re: Robert (#22) and Sean (#33) Interesting comments on all sides here. It would appear that you agree with Brother Rammell’s acceptance/interpretation of the WHP, and that President Monson does not. Without intending to be/sound snarky, how do you suggest a sincere member of the Church resolve that conflict? |
J. Michael #35. You ask two questions and in my mind there is no “conflict”: 1. As for Brother Rammel, I think Brother Rammell’s “male only” interpretation of the WHP is silly and doctrinally wrong, Sealing ordinances in the Temple are to create a Priesthood partnership between a male and female that is the center of the Priesthood network that we are talking about as the “thread” in the WHP – Priesthood and Relief Society, home teachers and visiting teachers. ‘Male only’ contradicts everything the Temple and Plan of Salvation are all about and has nothing to do with the WHP. His is an entirely wrong and apostate and fundamentalist interpretation of the WHP; further, ‘Mormon only’ is such a confusion of Church and State as to be silly – taking Priesthood meeting concepts into national or state politics is only confusion and chaos on all sides, as Governor Mitt Romney experienced. It breeds bigotry, hatred, confusion in the world and in the Church. To avoid such a situation, when asked on national television about the “God was once a man” doctrine, President Hinckley said, “I don’t know that we know much about that.” He refused to bring heavy doctrine into the “world.” So should we. 2. Interestingly, as for President Monson and the Church, there are many reasons to adhere to the stated policy of neutrality concerning political people and issues, so it is no surprise that Rammel will not find endorsement from the Church for his campaign. As for the WHP and “thread” and doctrine and Pres. Monson and the Brethren, all of the conference talks center on key issues of the Gospel that create the “Priesthood network,” the “thread” that is the message of the WHP. Family, marriage, fidelity, Temple, charity, restoration, prophesy and revelation, the Plan of Salvation, tithes and offerings, keeping Sabbath Day holy, happy and willing service – these are the “forces” that create the saving and protecting “Priesthood network” that is the “thread” of safety of the WHP. With “thread” interpreted this way, I don’t think any of the Brethren would say the White Horse Prophecy is false. So, as a fellow “sincere member of the Church” I find no conflict. I reject the non-sense (Rammel) that surfaces now and again, (Moses to Lucifer, “who are you that I should follow you?”) and I wait and in the quiet of my life follow those who speak through prophecy and revelation. When we were baptized, we became Children of Christ (Mosiah) and we took upon us His name and if we are worthy He will always be with us. I believe those of Christ are His sheep and they know His voice. I believe the Priesthood network of good people doing their best and trying hard to strengthen each other is what will be the “thread” of safety, the “Priesthood network,” that sustains Constitutional principles against the forces of evil in these last days until the Lord’s work is finished and He comes again. |
Robert - Thank you. |
J. Michael- Forgive me for being vague. I do not know if the “white horse prophecy” is true or not, but I do know that there will be a time of great danger in the future, be it near or not, and that the priesthood connections that Robert speaks of will sustain the Saints and anyone who dwells with us and lives by our laws (not necessarily the religious laws). I live not in fear that the apocalypse is around every corner, but in caution, knowing from experience that situations can change very, very quickly from good to extremely bad. |
Sean, There’s always some great danger in the future, some great, unspecified, vague danger which we cannot prepare for except, surprisingly, by being good and righteous people. All generations in history teach this. It’s a way to keep people in line. Be good or the monster in the closet will get you! |
The White Horse Prophecy has been clearly rejected as valid by multiple prophets. But it appears to be close enough to what JS had said that it persists as accepted doctrine. The truth is the white horse is no prophecy but that doesn’t mean JS didn’t convey similar sentiments. The big question is was it Joseph talking the way many of us do when we talk politics or was there some actual revelation. I would expect if it was an actual prophecy that mattered it would have been included in some official church publication. The fact that we worship every utterance as if it comes from God may be the real issue. |
Robert, you bother me. I like what you said about that priesthood bond thing, and I agree. But, you sound kind of exclusive, Jehovah Witness, born-again-ish. The kind of people I surmise will be surprised when they die and other people are actually there. Who are not Male, Mormon, and Misconstrued. |
Daniel- Are you saying that being prepared is foolish? I see nothing wrong with food storage. Panicking and obsessing over “the Apocalypse” is wrong. However, pretending that horrible, unexpected events never occur and that the prophets are just paranoid is not wise either. |
Sean, I’m all for preparing, I’m just not a fan of irrational fearmongering. |
I thought I would post here the “only known contemporary account of this well-known prophecy of Joseph Smith” to the effect that the United States Constitution to Hang by a Thread. Although he did not specifically state this in this account, in May 1843 James Burgess reported that he said, “that the time would come when the Constitution and Government would hand by a brittle thread and would be ready to fall into other hands but this people the Latter day Saints will step forth and save it. General Scott and part of his staff on the American Army was present on the occasion. I James Burgess was present and testify to the above (James Burgess Notebook, Church Archives). Dan – thank you for the reference to Elder Oaks’ comments. Since the U. S. Constitution is a topic that occupies a fair amount of content on my site I appreciate Rex E. Lee’s statement concerning this prophecy of Joseph Smith: “A final area of constitutional interest unique to Latter-day Saints finds its source in the well-known “hanging by a thread” statements by the Prophet Joseph Smith. Similar statements have been reiterated by no fewer than six of his successors, including the current prophet. In a forthcoming book to be published by the Religious Studies Center, Professor Donald Cannon lists over forty instances in which these seven presidents have either used the “thread” metaphor or something like it. But in none of those quotations cited by Professor Cannon has any Church leader ever been very specific as to the metaphor’s meaning. Unfortunately, some members of the Church have been all too ready to offer their own explanations. The only thing consistent about these explanations is that in each instance, it was the Church member’s own unresolved, often very private, grievance that supplied evidence that the thread was beginning to fray, sometimes beyond repair. Among some people, any problem from a tax increase to a failure to collect the garbage on time to a boundary dispute with one’s neighbor is likely to call forth the observation that it is certainly easy to see how the Constitution is hanging by a thread. A companion assertion is that the election or appointment of certain persons, often the person making the assertion, to designated positions provides the key to preventing the demise of our constitutional system. In my view, this is another instance in which going beyond what our leaders have said can be misleading at best, and potentially fraught with mischief. Even though we have not been given the exact meaning of the prophets’ statements about the Constitution hanging by a thread, the scriptures do define the conditions on which freedom in the land of America ultimately depends. I am satisfied that whatever else may eventually hang in the constitutional balance, this much is clear: The continuation of the blessings of liberty depends finally on our spiritual righteousness. As the Lord told the Jaredites in the Book of Ether, this is a ‘land of promise.’ And ‘whatsoever nation shall possess it shall be free from bondage, and from captivity, . . . if they will but serve the God of the land, who is Jesus Christ.’ If the people fail to keep this covenant, they ‘shall be swept off when the fulness of his wrath shall come upon them. And the fulness of his wrath cometh upon them when they are ripened in iniquity’” (Ether 2:9-12). (The Constitution and the Restoration). |
Greg, That is a good Rex Lee quote. I’m glad that he doesn’t try to read more into the phrase than what Joseph Smith purportedly said. In this case, it seems, according to Elder Lee, that the only way to “save” the Constitution would be to live righteous lives. Thus, Mr. Rammell of Idaho is going “beyond the mark” in his interpretation of Joseph Smith, as are most of the commentators who have supported Mr. Rammell’s interpretation of the thread remark. Now, as one can live a righteous life and disagree about political ideology, it doesn’t seem possible that a group of Elders who disagree politically, but are righteous nonetheless, can get together and “save” the Constitution as some like Mr. Rammell believes. As I am a generally righteous Elder in the church, I would be participating in this “saving” of the Constitution. But my ideology leans liberal. I’m guessing that the likes of Mr. Rammell are going to dismiss someone like me from participating in the “saving” of the Constitution, not because I am not righteous, but because they do not agree with my political ideology. And just like that, their attempt at “saving” the Constitution has failed, because they have discluded individuals who otherwise fit the criteria for those who are supposed to “save” the Constitution. |
Jerry $40, “The big question is was it Joseph talking the way many of us do when we talk politics or was there some actual revelation. I would expect if it was an actual prophecy that mattered it would have been included in some official church publication. The fact that we worship every utterance as if it comes from God may be the real issue” Smartest thing said all year. Should be memorized by all adults in our church. By the way the WHP could have been about the Civil War, when the constitution did hang by a thread by very definition of “civil war”. Maybe the two gentlemen concerned later innocently added details since they thought it was about the second coming days or they simply misunderstood what Smith was getting at. Anything could have happened but the only sure thing is that many modern prophets have declared it “not prophesy” |
Yeah, I can’t really see someone like Daniel saving the U.S. constitution literally or figuratively, militarily or politically. |
I guess then the white horse prophecy is untrue, because the elders of the church can’t even get together on this. |
I’m not a mormon but… I’m pretty sure when it comes to all this, youre the weakest link, Daniel. |
well then what the hell do you care about the white horse prophecy? You’re left out in the cold dude. |
May I point out to all that fairlds.org has an excellent “whitehorse” article that illustrates the difference between Joseph Smith’s actual statements regarding the Constitution and the reports/stories from which the “alleged prophecy” about various colored horses originated. http://www.fairlds.org/pubs/whitehorse.pdf Nothing Joseph Smith said, or that other LDS Prophets have said regarding the Constitution being on the brink of destruction even remotely hints at some sort of “takeover” of the US Government by Latter-day Saints. There is no mention of “reforming” or re-writing the Constitution either. The article details it all far better than I can. It also pretty much nukes any assertions that those who are not “LDS” would be left “out in the cold” or denied welcome and protection if the time ever comes when LDS citizens are forced to unite under the banner of the Constitution. If one studies the scriptures that relate to the New Jerusalem/City of Zion, it is fairly obvious that it acts as a beacon that draws honorable men and women (of any and all faiths)into its protection and that it operates under the Godly principles of freedom, liberty, an equal rights. How difficult is it to imagine that such a society might hold up the US Constitution (as it now stands)as its “Title of Liberty” until the Lord returns to govern personally? Daniel-Read the article please. |
We have a ton of Christmas music — 400 or so tracks, with it growing by about 50-75 tracks each year — that ranges across all genres. It is some awesome stuff; blues, reggae, pop, traditional, you name it… |
Fascinating how worked up everyone gets over this. I’m getting worked up over how worked up everyone’s getting! Ha, ha. Personally, I have little problem letting things be ambivalent. I trust that Joseph Smith said many things regarding the devolution of America and the rise of a New World. I have no problem placing the constitution somewhere in there, perhaps just not in the dramatic tense of Mr. Rammell. After all, governmental devolution is one of the strongest themes in the Book of Mormon, and the Doctrine and Covenants far more than hints at great political upheaval in an ever-changing nation. Will the Elders rise and change a nation? Well, of course they will! We are right now! Perhaps just nothing in the way we always speak about it, and notions of a “white horse” are misguided. Just because Mr. Rammell needs to get off his, ahem, white high horse, doesn’t mean the allusion/prophecy/intimation doesn’t have merit somewhere. We need to be careful, of course. The incarnation of prophecy often goes misunderstood, and takes on exaggerated meanings over time; but then, for true prophecy there is always something even greater behind it. I always think of the parting of the red sea, and how ridiculously miraculous that was, and such things will come in our day — for has the day of miracles ceased? No! No, no, no, no, no! So, sure, I mean, we have to be extremely careful not to speak for the prophets. Nobody knows what any business about a white horse means (if it’s even correct, and if it’s even true), and Mr. Rammell is more than just a case study in taking things way too far. But see, it’s so much easier than that, don’t you think? I mean, honestly. This really IS NOT THAT DIFFICULT! We KNOW with certainty that we live in dark days where all things are in commotion, and nations will be torn (and are!!!!) from their moorings, and mens hearts shall (and are!!!!) fail(ing) them, and in the midst of all this the Church will rise terrible and strong as an army. Isn’t that perfectly clear? It always puzzles me when church members question these types of prophecies, when their fruits are abundantly evident and clear all around us. So why do we get all worked over about some stupid white horse thing, when we already know there’s a lot of doctrinal speak elsewhere that’s even more clear? I don’t know. I’m just frustrated at all the bickering. We have ALL these things as witnesses as to the coming days of upheaval and change. Jesus is coming. He brings his government with him. It’s pretty clear we’re all preparing to bask in that. If the constitution hangs by a thread (and allow me the privilege to reveal my own personal biases and inclinations about the white horse prophecy for just one brief moment), I actually believe we are so close to governmental melt down…or rather, we have already witnessed dramatic governmental meltdown… Still, we know who we are, and isn’t that the point? We’re true. The constitution is valuable to us. We already hold it up. Nobody’s riding in on some horse to snatch it up. Rather, we already are! WE LOVE THIS COUNTRY exactly for what it stands for, the freedom to worship according to our hearts desires. Rex Lee is right in #44, and, well, white horse or not, it’s entirely worth fighting for when (not if) it comes to that. |