Doctrine and Covenants 134
I believe God organize some children to take lead in each generation. Some intelligence that could serve the people in the right way or perhaps an example for goodness and an experience of failures. God gave us understanding that can help us understand the way of perfection.We believe in being subject to kings, presidents, rulers, and magistrates, in obeying, honoring, and sustaining the law.
Sustaining and supporting our leaders are the best example of our spiritual maturity. Either in times of success or failures. I believe that the leaders has the capacity or ability to serve the people despite of personal matters and interested. It's not about it, it's all about our contribution for them to pursue their Leadership.
Doctrine and Covenants Section 134
A declaration of belief regarding governments and laws in general, adopted by unanimous vote at a general assembly of the Church held at Kirtland, Ohio, August 17, 1835. Many Saints gathered together to consider the proposed contents of the first edition of the Doctrine and Covenants. At that time, this declaration was given the following preamble: “That our belief with regard to earthly governments and laws in general may not be misinterpreted nor misunderstood, we have thought proper to present, at the close of this volume, our opinion concerning the same.”
1–4, Governments should preserve freedom of conscience and worship; 5–8, All men should uphold their governments and owe respect and deference to the law; 9–10, Religious societies should not exercise civil powers; 11–12, Men are justified in defending themselves and their property.
1 We believe that governments were instituted of God for the benefit of man; and that he holds men accountable for their acts in relation to them, both in making laws and administering them, for the good and safety of society.
2 We believe that no government can exist in peace, except such laws are framed and held inviolate as will secure to each individual the free exercise of conscience, the right and control of property, and the protection of life.
3 We believe that all governments necessarily require civil officers and magistrates to enforce the laws of the same; and that such as will administer the law in equity and justice should be sought for and upheld by the voice of the people if a republic, or the will of the sovereign.
4 We believe that religion is instituted of God; and that men are amenable to him, and to him only, for the exercise of it, unless their religious opinions prompt them to infringe upon the rights and liberties of others; but we do not believe that human law has a right to interfere in prescribing rules of worship to bind the consciences of men, nor dictate forms for public or private devotion; that the civil magistrate should restrain crime, but never control conscience; should punish guilt, but never suppress the freedom of the soul.
5 We believe that all men are bound to sustain and uphold the respective governments in which they reside, while protected in their inherent and inalienable rights by the laws of such governments; and that sedition and rebellion are unbecoming every citizen thus protected, and should be punished accordingly; and that all governments have a right to enact such laws as in their own judgments are best calculated to secure the public interest; at the same time, however, holding sacred the freedom of conscience.
6 We believe that every man should be honored in his station, rulers and magistrates as such, being placed for the protection of the innocent and the punishment of the guilty; and that to the laws all men owe respect and deference, as without them peace and harmony would be supplanted by anarchy and terror; human laws being instituted for the express purpose of regulating our interests as individuals and nations, between man and man; and divine laws given of heaven, prescribing rules on spiritual concerns, for faith and worship, both to be answered by man to his Maker.
7 We believe that rulers, states, and governments have a right, and are bound to enact laws for the protection of all citizens in the free exercise of their religious belief; but we do not believe that they have a right in justice to deprive citizens of this privilege, or proscribe them in their opinions, so long as a regard and reverence are shown to the laws and such religious opinions do not justify sedition nor conspiracy.
8 We believe that the commission of crime should be punished according to the nature of the offense; that murder, treason, robbery, theft, and the breach of the general peace, in all respects, should be punished according to their criminality and their tendency to evil among men, by the laws of that government in which the offense is committed; and for the public peace and tranquility all men should step forward and use their ability in bringing offenders against good laws to punishment.
9 We do not believe it just to mingle religious influence with civil government, whereby one religious society is fostered and another proscribed in its spiritual privileges, and the individual rights of its members, as citizens, denied.
10 We believe that all religious societies have a right to deal with their members for disorderly conduct, according to the rules and regulations of such societies; provided that such dealings be for fellowship and good standing; but we do not believe that any religious society has authority to try men on the right of property or life, to take from them this world’s goods, or to put them in jeopardy of either life or limb, or to inflict any physical punishment upon them. They can only excommunicate them from their society, and withdraw from them their fellowship.
11 We believe that men should appeal to the civil law for redress of all wrongs and grievances, where personal abuse is inflicted or the right of property or character infringed, where such laws exist as will protect the same; but we believe that all men are justified in defending themselves, their friends, and property, and the government, from the unlawful assaults and encroachments of all persons in times of exigency, where immediate appeal cannot be made to the laws, and relief afforded.
12 We believe it just to preach the gospel to the nations of the earth, and warn the righteous to save themselves from the corruption of the world; but we do not believe it right to interfere with bond-servants, neither preach the gospel to, nor baptize them contrary to the will and wish of their masters, nor to meddle with or influence them in the least to cause them to be dissatisfied with their situations in this life, thereby jeopardizing the lives of men; such interference we believe to be unlawful and unjust, and dangerous to the peace of every government allowing human beings to be held in servitude.
Job Bautista: Think about it, will you?
 |
| Job Bautista, posted something he never think existed in the Bible. |
The concern is very simple. He tries to look at something in the Book of Mormon that made him think false.
There it goes as he found it as one of his best stones for Criticism -
3 Nephi 11:19 And Nephi arose and went forth, and bowed himself before the Lord and did kiss his feet.
So, Job Bautista Thinks that Nephi's act of respect was the same act like Judas did to the Saviour who kissed his cheeks and betrayed the Saviour.
Luke 22:47 ¶ And while he yet spake, behold a multitude, and he that was called Judas, one of the twelve, went before them, and drew near unto Jesus to kiss him.
48 But Jesus said unto him, Judas, betrayest thou the Son of man with a kiss?
Do you think that is Job Bautista? Did you read the Scriptures? Or just simply pick up the best part for your doctrine of INCult?
So, I responded to him with the Scripture that will help him ponder about the Scripture, but yeah, I'm pretty sure he doesn't care about it. Anyway, here's the text -
Luke 7:36 ¶ And one of the Pharisees desired him that he would eat with him. And he went into the Pharisee’s house, and sat down to meat.
37 And, behold, a woman in the city, which was a sinner, when she knew that Jesus sat at meat in the Pharisee’s house, brought an alabaster box of ointment,
38 And stood at his feet behind him weeping, and began to wash his feet with tears, and did wipe them with the hairs of her head, and kissed his feet, and anointed them with the ointment.
39 Now when the Pharisee which had bidden him saw it, he spake within himself, saying, This man, if he were a prophet, would have known who and what manner of woman this is that toucheth him: for she is a sinner.
The story goes on with the parable Jesus Christ told to help them understand that he can forgive sins. But I couldn't keep that here since it was not about it.
So, my question to Job Bautista is - Was the woman also betrayed Christ because she kissed his feet? Or was her sins forgiven?
I just couldn't help to think on this subject about Job Bautista's understanding of Scriptural text. Did you read the Scriptures and understand them?
Neil Andi Anderson and Job Bautista: Failure understanding (Christianity = Anachronism) - Neil Andi Anderson's Attempt to comment. Fail!
Neil Andi Anderson attempted to reply to the article that I made. And it ended up a loser. How such a Christian claim religion could claim a true church that he cannot even prove, not a single word. Let's go dive in. Text in red for my comments -
Jerry Nuñez Bustillo Parang nagmamadali ka sa iyong pagkabutata Jerry boy, Iginigiit mo pa rin ang iyong maling paguunawa at maling paliliwanag. Seriously, that's it's the way you understand the writings? And what's your answer to that article? Uulitin ko na di po maaring ang isang pagbabansag na pangalang Cristianismo ay mauuna ni wala pa maiisilang ang nagpapasimuno nito. FAILED! Try again reading the text that I gave. You didn't read it. So tell me, who abridge the text? Was it Mormon or Alma? Bigyan kita ng isang ehemplo ulit, kailan ba may tinatawag na mormonismo? Noong may nangaral tungkol nito, wala pong matawag na mormon kung wala pa ang nangaral sa mormonito book. Balikan po natin mula 600bc hanggang 10bc may mga propheta ba na bumabanggit sa pangalang Cristo? And look how you failed to analyze the text, you claimed to be an LDS but you never understood the writings? Here let me give you my example -
As Paul understood the teaching of Christ in his days. Was his writing about Moses and some others who passed the sea were Baptized was wrong since there's no such thing as Baptism in Old Testament times? Did Moses write it, or does Paul knows the significance of Moses' days to his days?
Then here is the question for you to analyze the Book of Mormon text. Who abridges it, or should we say who's the Narrator of the Story?
Here let me give you some part to help you learn how to understand what you read in the scripture try to see who narrate the story, let's use Alma 47 since it best describes the scene -
 |
| See the red underlined text. |
So, tell me, Neil Andi Anderson. Who narrate the Story? Was the narrator writing that story on the same Timeline? If you think you know it, then most probably you understand what Paul's letter means to the Corinthians and why did he use such words unknown to Old Testament times.
Wala pa po at hindi po maaring bigkasin nila ito dahil ito ay isang propesya. Funny how you never notice the author of the book and the person who abridged was of a different Timeline. Also, it's not a prophecy, rather its rewriting and summarizing what was already written. So much of a failure understanding Neil Andi Anderson. Sino lang ba na mga propeta na madali nilang nabibigkas ang pangalang Kristianismo o Cristo? Walang iba kundi iyong mga propetang mga huwad na itoy isinulat sa kwentong pagong ni Lolo Junjun na ito ang pina ka idol sa mga taong kulang sa dilig ang mga kaiisipan kaya di nila mauunawaan ang nakasulat sa bibliya. FAIL! The word Christ is an ancient Origin. Means the "anointed one" and was in Hebrew "the Messiah". Though the New Testament was written in Greek so the word Christ was described to it as the Messiah, the Holy One of God. The word Messiah was mentioned twice in Old Testament found in Daniel 9:25-26 and the meaning remains the same which is, Christ. So, was Christ a modernized theologian term? Does it already exist in old testament times? I don't know for you Neil, I don't know if you understand the scripture. Kaya mali po ang mga paliwanag mo Jerry boy, pasensiya ka na talagang magkalayo ang ating agwat kung karunongan man sa bibliya ang ating babanggitin. Of course, your knowledge is based only on your copy paste Program, the bigoted study of INCult doctrine. I'm not surprised. Do you have anything new? Can't even analyze the content and context of the scriptures and embrace the wrong exegesis. Nothing new at all. Ang pagpapaliwanag mo ay wala sa katotohanan kaya malaking MALI. Sorry, Jerry boy butata ka ulit.
Sorry but you still missed the whole point and it seems like in our example you're just simply saying the Bible is wrong by just simply using words unknown in the Old Testament or Moses' Days. Butata? In your dreams!
Neil Andi Anderson and Job Bautista: Failure understanding (Christianity = Anachronism)
Neil Andi Anderson and Job Bautista were struggling to understand the author of the Book of Mormon who used words to describe the believers before his compilation. Let's dive in and see how his understanding goes of their very own illogical thinking -
Text in red for my comments and some others for quotes and Scriptural reference.
 |
| Job Bautista's comments addressed to me. |
His main concern is the word "Christian" mentioned in the book of Mormon while it was around approximately 73-70 BC. Good point, the only problem was, who made the abridgment and how was his understanding goes in abridging the record? Before I answer that let's just try some biblical examples of the same issue where Paul quoted the words unknown to the Old Testament Times. Here's the text -
[1 Corinthians 10]1 Moreover, brethren, I would not that ye should be ignorant, how that all our fathers were under the cloud, and all passed through the sea;2 And were all baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea;3 And did all eat the same spiritual meat;4 And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ.5 But with many of them God was not well pleased: for they were overthrown in the wilderness.
Here are the Comments from our very friend Neil Andi Anderson addressed to me of course. See my comments in red.
Jerry Nuñez Bustillo Ayon daw sa baluktot niyong pangangaral pwede daw tawaging Christiano iyong wala pa ang Cristo. And do you analyze how it was said and who said it? If you know who said it, then was it after Christ or Before Christ?
 |
| Mormon abridging the writings. |
 |
| I will add the definition to help Job Bautista in his study with Neil Andi Anderson. |
The word Christian was mentioned a couple of times in the Book of Mormon, and most numbers were found in the Book of Alma Chapters 46 and 48 (see Reference at the sources) as the group of people who believe in the Son of God or Christ who will soon Come for the sins of the world or the Atonement. In our days, normally we call it Christians, same thing with Mormon who has a pure understanding of their belief.
 |
| Chapter Heading of Alma 46 |
And for the record, these chapters were written as an abridged account by Mormon during their final Battle of Nephites and Lamanites. The Book of Alma was the account before Christ's ministry around 73-72 BC. This means Christianity is not yet established during those times as our Friend Neil Andi Anderson made his comments. A sure answer, yes it is true, but the question goes, who wrote it that way?
 |
| Books that were abridged by Mormon were found in the Large Plates. |
There are things that you need to know first using your logical thinking. When did the writer write it and how was his understanding of the doctrine of Christ while abridging their history?
 |
| Mormon's words before he turns over the records to his son Moroni. He inserted these words Between the Large and the small plates. Around 385 AD (See the red-underlined text of the image) |
The writer (who is Mormon) understood the doctrine of Christ and knows how the people who were ahead of his time practiced the teachings of Christ before he came. It was prophesied before him, which means Mormon already knew what teachings and what's best describes to the reader which he wrote in the plates that were prepared for future purposes, that perhaps it could help them understand who was the Christ who was their saviour to look upon.
Does it sound anachronistic? Maybe, if you don't know where to start. The only problem with these people was their useful cherry-picking ideology. They won't notice how things were written and what the context was all about, they just simply pick it up somewhere in some common lines and declare it false. In the Book of Mormon, Mormon inserted his words while abridging the records, and here's the best part of it -
Words of Mormon 1
3 And now, I speak somewhat concerning that which I have written; for after I had made an abridgment from the plates of Nephi, down to the reign of this king Benjamin, of whom Amaleki spake, I searched among the records which had been delivered into my hands, and I found these plates, which contained this small account of the prophets, from Jacob down to the reign of this king Benjamin, and also many of the words of Nephi.
4 And the things which are upon these plates pleasing me, because of the prophecies of the coming of Christ; and my fathers knowing that many of them have been fulfilled; yea, and I also know that as many things as have been prophesied concerning us down to this day have been fulfilled, and as many as go beyond this day must surely come to pass—
5 Wherefore, I chose these things, to finish my record upon them, which remainder of my record I shall take from the plates of Nephi; and I cannot write the hundredth part of the things of my people.
6 But behold, I shall take these plates, which contain these prophesyings and revelations, and put them with the remainder of my record, for they are choice unto me; and I know they will be choice unto my brethren.
Paano ka maging Cristiano kung ang taong tinutukoy mo hindi pa eksistedo o hindi pa nagsisimulang nangaral? Good question, so back to the question that I ask, who said it, and when was it when he said it? Before Christ or after Christ? Kung sa bisaya pa na salita nangabuang na kayo dahil sa pinuno niyong sex predator. His arrogance shows he knows nothing about Joseph Smith and the Polygamy Issue rather he keeps living his hocus-pocus ideology of Joseph's life as a sex predator as he said it. Do you have documented evidence, Neil? The INC members were mostly brainwashed by their ministers to avoid mingling with the people not of their belief and hate them. Most of the time, they include in their Masses about other religions and twist it such as this guy who doesn't know anything at all. But will just leave it to that. Saan niyo makikita sa diktiyonaryo na ikaw ay naging followers sa wala? Wrong, Abraham saw Christ's days and rejoice in it. Those people or prophets who saw the Saviour already follow the teachings of God and since Christ was already the God they're serving. But of course, they don't want to understand it as their Unitarian view differs from their understanding of Christ deity. Ang mga tarantado lang ang mga nangangaral iyan pero di tayo magtataka dahil matagal na ang mga mormons na mga ganyan. And look at that kind of Christian who uses swear words? Does anyone know who claims Christian that doesn't act as Christian? These people need to understand what discipleship means and what great impact does it affect on their lives. But no, I could not see anything more Christlike to this kind of Religion. They just simply attack and proclaim their very own bigoted doctrine no one even cares. Such a childish and low standard doctrine of INC. Bigyan kayo ng ehemplo mga mormonic people, bakit may tinatawag na followers of Islam? dahil silay tagasunod sa aral ni Muhammad, ikalawang ehemplo bakit may mga tinatawag na followers of Judaism? Dahil sila ay naniwala sa banal na aklat na Torah na itoy pinaghahawakan na karamihan ay mga Hudyo. Bakit may followers ng mga Buddhism dahil may aral na kanilang sinusunod na ang original teachings ay attributed kay Gautama Buddha. Kaya di ka maging followers kung wala pa nating marinig ang aral nito. Have you seen the problem here? The followers of Christ will never be called Christian not until Christian is already established. For your information, Neil Andi Anderson, Christ never said anything about Christianity or Christian Religion to those who follow him, the follower of Christ was simply called Disciples. But yes of course, since they follow Christ it is best described or distinguished as Christians, and some other apostles like Paul and Peter preached his words and claimed it as a Christian doctrine. But does this simply mean those who were before Christ are not his followers or does God teach different principles until Christ changes it to Christianity? I guess no, this is one of the best church name game strategies of INC, but never understood the ancient teaching of God. Okay, so I'll give you my example, if Christianity was only recognized in the New Testament times, why use the Old Testament? You people quoted a lot in the Old Testament as the fulfillment of your said Messenger. So, those prophets recognized it as different from what they learned about the teachings of God back them? So, how do you reconcile that? Hindi tulad ng mormonito sa kanilang maling paliwanag na may followers ang hindi pa nila marinig. Just Go back to the main question that I gave and understand it, you lack of logical thinking proves how poor you people receive the teachings of your religion. I guess your religion taught you to understand the scripture or maybe they don't. Care to teach me about it? Pitty on your Organization and I hope your ministers will help you in your study. Ang mga taong ito ay nanaginip ng gising. Maybe, if you're still asleep, good try though but you missed the whole point of your bigotry study. Thanks and have a great day.
Scripture Source
- The mention of the Word Christian (Plural Term)
[Alma 46]
13 And he fastened on his head-plate, and his breastplate, and his shields, and girded on his armor about his loins; and he took the pole, which had on the end thereof his rent coat, (and he called it the title of liberty) and he bowed himself to the earth, and he prayed mightily unto his God for the blessings of liberty to rest upon his brethren, so long as there should a band of Christians remain to possess the land—
...15 And those who did belong to the church were faithful; yea, all those who were true believers in Christ took upon them, gladly, the name of Christ, or Christians as they were called, because of their belief in Christ who should come.16 And therefore, at this time, Moroni prayed that the cause of the Christians, and the freedom of the land might be favored.[Alma 48]10 And thus he was preparing to support their liberty, their lands, their wives, and their children, and their peace, and that they might live unto the Lord their God, and that they might maintain that which was called by their enemies the cause of Christians.
- New Testament Phrases Found in the Book of Mormon (Video)
