What Mormons don’t know about the “Highest Office” in the LDS Church

[@GLM]

What do you guys think? Is the LDS Church's elimination of the Presiding Patriarch Office a problem? I've not heard many people talk about this issue, so would really love to hear your thoughts.

[@GeorgeDemetz]

Read my comments!

[@josiphorus]

Not an issue. All the church’s mysteries are solved once you understand that the Mormon church is just a church: a well-structured, but ultimately man-made, institution.

[@99blackbirds]

this is interesting. More stuff the LDS leaders hide from us. To me Joseph Smith was a good man he didn't start polygamy and he was the last real prophet and seer. Our current leaders just play Prophet. ANother Christian woke me up and taught me Gods real Grace. Mormons don't understand Grace cuz we have covenants shoved down our throats and shmaed with sin. But the church is changing we are more mercy and grace now, true Christianity is seepng into the LDS church. Our leaders need to repent!!

[@BellaDigital-p7e]

Honestly I dont think many LDS members would be aware of this or taken much notice.

[@99blackbirds]

My comment was removed.I'm a huge Joseph Smith fan and believe he was good! many lies he did not start polygamy that was Brigham Young. the point is joseph smith was the last real prophet. Another Christian showed me God Grace. CHristian Grace is more important than the current Mormons "covenant Path".

[@dabblerdan5353]

I'm LDS and find your comments fair, balanced, and kind. Something to give thought to. Thank you.

[@GLM]

I appreciate that!

[@Fefo419]

​@@GLM why don't you comment on others ?

[@Ironrodlife]

I'm LDS and I find this cleverly deceitful. Kimball clearly stated that there were patriarchy established at stake levels which include majority of members no just the top 15 presidency and apostles. Acting like the church patriarch position was eliminated is silly.

[@wayvire6126]

@@Ironrodlife It is definitely deceitful. He conveniently left out parts of D&C that make it clear the presiding patriarch was NOT the most authoritative office, and that the apostles actually had more authority. Not to mention that apostles are also seen as "prophets, seers, and revelators." He skips the part where William Smith was let go after a church general conference sustaining vote revealed he had lost the confidence of the whole church. He also didn't know/add, that William Smith initially asked NOT to be considered Joseph's successor. If this was made in good faith, then it was very poorly researched. But I have much reason to believe this video was not made in good faith.

[@chasewilkinson1977]

Somehow managed to make it 20 years in the church without learning this. Big "we're as honest as we know how to be" moment

[@caffeinated_mama_bear]

Wow, very well done! Thank you for all your research. You made it easy to follow along the timeline of events, and I appreciate your thoughts at the end! I've never heard this talked about before 🤯

[@AnsweringLDS]

Thank you for doing these videos! Proclaim the true gospel of Jesus Christ🙏

[@BruceWilliams]

I just found your channel. This video is fantastic. I am an active member of the church who loves studying my churches history and doctrine. Sadly, most members of my church are completely ignorant of our history. Most who feel they aren't, only read filtered, and selective (a kind way to phrase it) content published by the church. I would say most dont know the real Joesph, Hyrum, Brigham, and other early saints. If God were to take an active latter day saint from today, and place them in the church in Kirtland Nauvoo or early Salt Lake, they would find the early church completely unrecognizable in almost every aspect, from practices to many doctrines. Thanks for using original sources and presenting what actually took place, as well as posing valid questions. My own opinion- it is a problem, and the Church went largely astray after Brighams power grab, and the death of Joseph and Hyrum.

[@BNichols021]

So in summary: • Joseph Smith and other early authorities said there must be a Patriarch that presides over all the other patriarchs and administers blessings to the apostles and prophet • This role was exclusively determined based on lineage within the Smith family • The role was absolutely necessary for carrying out the Gospel • Joseph Smith regarded it as one of the highest (if not THE highest) ranking offices in the church. And then it was just done away with, seemingly without any clear revelation behind it. It’s hard not to see this as a political decision rather than a spiritual one.

[@madiplowman5436]

I can get behind a moving church. The world changes and therefore certain policies and procedures should change with it. But the issue the church has is refusing to draw lines of eternal truths and doctrine. Something is considered deeply important doctrine until it isn’t. Then it is dismissed as a “procedural change”. This has happened time and time again.

[@BNichols021]

Wow, I'd never heard of this before. It really begs the question: If the argument is that the Presiding Patriarch's role is now distributed among various stakes, then couldn't the same theoretically happen with, say, the prophet's role? It's hard to see why a role of such significance could be divvied up, but we should not expect the same for another role of similar authority, especially given Joseph's own words about its importance.

[@matthewreed7159]

Kinda yeah. I've heard a stake president share his interview with the General Authority (I can't remember if it was an Apostle or one of the presidency). He was told that he is the president of the church, for his stake. He needs to get to know the Savior like the President of the church. But a stake president doesn't have the authority to recurve revelation for the world, like the President, although the revelation for his stake may be good if the whole world followed.

[@micheleh3851]

Hello @BNichols021- The role of the prophet of the Church is to have prophetic stewardship over the entire Church. Patriarchs have stewardship over individuals whom they are blessing. God is not the author of confusion. If there were a prophet over each stake, then what would the stake president's role be since his calling is already to have stewardship over the whole stake?

[@BNichols021]

@micheleh3851 hi, thanks for the thoughtful response. It seems like you could break it down this way: 1. The presiding patriarch held the keys of patriarchal blessing over all the local patriarchs. 2. Now, those keys are given at the local level to all local patriarchs 3. Similarly, while the prophet administers prophetic revelation over the whole church, it seems plausible that this could be disseminated to a local level, with each stake having its own “prophet” who administers revelation at a local level (after all, revelation can be specific to certain groups / regions, similar to the multiple prophets that operates simultaneously in the OT). I don’t really see why that would overrule anything a stake president does, since (to my knowledge) they are not tasked with revealing the oracles of God to their stake.

[@curtcarver392]

Really liked this video, very unbiased and straightforward and not unduly slanderous. My father and his great grand father were local Patriarchs. If there was a presiding Patriarch and he held authority over the first presidency he could have served as a check and balance to the first presidency. Brigham Young change the authority structure to give him more unfettered control, by modifcation of the revelation for the governing of the church. You have a good argument about how the church believes it has no more need for the office of presiding Patriarch just as Christians believe there's no more need for additional prophets and apostles. There are other reasons too that the church is in apostasy. The prophets after Joseph Smith had no "thus saith the Lord" written revelations. ( I believe Brigham forged his only one.) The church also teaches more and yet less than the fulness of the gospel as contained in 3 Nephi. The temple covenants take the symbolic and make it seem literal, and take the literal and do away with it or make it seem merely symbolic to hide that it's not a tangible fruit of the church, such as the baptism of fire and the Holy Ghost.

[@BrianTerrill]

Some of "the prophets role" has been handed to stake presidents. That's why when you read parts of the Doctrine and Covenants, you'll see areas that refer to the president that apply to both the president of the church and stake president.

[@bryanpratt5850]

Thanks for this video.

[@Gideonslc]

That's quite an interesting predicament I've been blind to as one "Born in the Covenant" or born into membership in 1971. It's not been on my deconstruction radar, until now. Thank you

[@BrianTerrill]

You are making the claim that the Patriarchal of the church being eliminated means that the office of Evangelist was removed, and it wasn't. Each stake has a patriarch, so saying the office was eliminated is a lie.

[@selvinavila6783]

Each stake has a Patriarch! That "Office" never desappeared.

[@GLM]

The office of *Presiding Patriarch* disappeared. To again quote B.H. Roberts - "a presiding patriarch over all the patriarchs of the church, and he is known as the presiding patriarch of the church, holding the keys of the patriarchal blessings upon the heads of the Lord's people…and he presides over, instructs and directs the labors of all the patriarchs of the church.”

[@GLM]

Presiding Patriarch ≠ stake patriarchs

[@Autamnleaves65]

So happy to have found you. I never knew about this or that I was related. This is my Grandmother's 1st cousin. Her father was Martha's brother. I would not have looked further into this if it hadn't been for the name Gee. This was a treasure. Thank you.

[@caffeinated_mama_bear]

Random thoughts/questions: 1.) So who is supposed to be the patriarch now if the LDS church hadn't gotten rid of the office? Do we know who is next in the bloodline? I'm curious to hear their thoughts on it. (Maybe that's what the book was about that you mentioned). 2.) What did Jospeh Smith's mom think of William being excommunicated?? That was pretty crazy they did that after she had a vision from god telling her William was the rightful leader. 3.) I'm just astonished by the whiplash. There was so much back and forth on what the office actually meant. Why didn't they just listen to what Joseph Smith said about it? 4.) Sooooo many Joseph Smiths. I couldn't havent gotten through the history without the pictures and timelines lol - thank you

[@Imtryingtobelikejesus-m1m]

Marisa. There is no point in researching these things if you are not willing to see both sides. Do you have LDS friends there in Utah?

[@karenl7791]

@@Imtryingtobelikejesus-m1m Are you telling Marisa that it is not a good idea to ask questions and do research? Research helps one to see both sides. The very definition of the word research is the systematic investigation into and study of materials and sources in order to establish facts and reach new conclusions.

[@Imtryingtobelikejesus-m1m]

@@karenl7791 Do you or Marisa research your own beliefs? Do you listen to people like Bart Erhman to see the contradictions in the Bible and to get a better view or the history of the Bible? Do you research about John Calvin and Martin Luther and see both the good and Bad in their history? Did you know that John Calvin supported the killing of people that did not believe like him? It fascinates me that Bradley is so consumed by bringing Mormons down that it appears he fails to even look at his own beliefs. I would like him to do videos that talk about his own research into the good and bad in his own beliefs. Otherwise, he just sounds hypocritical.

[@GLM]

I'm aware of Bart Erhman's claims, but I reject his conclusions about a whole host of topics - including the presuppositions he brings to his research. Re: Martin and Luther, they're men. They can error. They're not my prophets, I just happen to agree with them on some doctrinal points. Many people often point to Calvin and Servetus - I'm not convinced that when the situation is properly evaluated (especially given the nature of the era in which they lived) the "murderous spirit" that many attribute to Calvin accords with reality. But even if it DID-I sing tons of Psalms of David, and he was a adulterer and murderer who was forgiven by grace. I'm not ignorant of these things, they're just not the focus of these videos.

[@Imtryingtobelikejesus-m1m]

@@GLM Let us talk about Bart Erhman then. I think the point I am getting at is the following. You spend SO much time trying to discredit Mormon beliefs. And then you say you are aware of Bart Erhman's claims but reject his conclusions, as though you, for some reason, must have a monopoly on truth and understanding. YOU have better understanding than Bart Erhman. YOU have better understanding of the Bible, God and revelation then Mormons. If there is anything I have learned from Evangelical beliefs, it is that we are all imperfect. That is common sense. So then, why is your logic and understanding better than Bart Erhman who does NOT believe the Bible is infallible as you do. In a way, You are doing to others what you believe Bart Erhman is doing to you. Except I respect Bart more than I respect you. Because he looks at history, he looks at all aspects of belief. He is not coming from a biased viewpoint like you and I are. I was raised LDS. You get paid to preach. We both have a biased view. Can you not at least admit that. Let us be honest. I am not trying to discredit you spiritual beliefs. I will not poke fun at the Trinity as you poke fun at Mormon beliefs. I know God loves you because there is something in me (that I can not explain) that tells me that and I tear up just thinking about it. I can not deny it. I understand I am sinful. But I can not deny that God loves you and me and that we are both his children. I will continue to try to look at ALL belief systems from an outside view, like Bart Erhman does. I wish you would do the same. I wish you would be as critical about your own beliefs as you are about the beliefs of others. Matthew 7:5 Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye. I wish you would share Gods love instead of attack. I have not seen the love Christ in your eyes.

[@samuelcampbell9017]

This was very educational, and I learned a lot that isn't really taught in the LDS church. Thank you!

[@AyeAyeAyeCaptain]

Interesting material and excellently presented. Definitely not a topic often discussed, and with great implications, as the intellectually honest must admit. Also interesting that patriarchal blessings used to be given in exchange for a fee, with Joseph Smith Sr. saying he was making a comfortable living off of giving them. People could request more than one, back then. Because this position was set up to be inherited by the founder of the religion's (Joseph Smith Jr.) relatives, the fact that it was a position which included pay is interesting. In any case, the LDS quorum of the 12 do also receive a 'stipend' or salary today, still. And a number of them happen to be related to each other in extended family, and to the founding LDS leadership, too. D&C 42:71-73, which is said to be received by Joseph Smith from the LDS Heavenly Father, does state that their church leaders are to "[...] receive a just remuneration for all their services..." so it is strange how the LDS take issue with paid ministry amongst actual Christian churches, given that the Mormon religion did that from the beginning, until this day.

[@OneTrueSteve]

Took us a while.

[@GregBosshardt]

Ha! At 18:50 John Taylor and William Smith being like Dwight and Jim fighting over assistant regional manager vs. assistant TO the regional manager...

[@jeaigroup]

The president of the church holds and is authorized to use all the keys and keep a house of order. Patriarchal keys are still passed down from him to stake patriarchs. The council of the 12 apostles is a council and they will not always agree as they council together. I would expect and hope that they would all throw in their advice and life experience when combating the challenges of today. They are all awesome people and I love them.

[@OneTrueSteve]

While prophets, apostles, and evangelists my be labeled the foundation, what building ever discards its foundation?

[@defendingjoseph1529]

I met and visited Eldred Smith several times. Two times at his home. The first time his wife Hortense was still alive. The second time was about 6 months before his passing. He was 105 at the time. My oldest son visited with him many times over a 5-year period. The conversations I had with him were fascinating. He knew every president of the Church from Hyrum’s son Joseph F. Smith to Thomas Monson. Eldred did not like Heber J. Grant and was very vocal about that to me. Yes, if you read the book by his son E. Gary Smith, Lost Legacy “The Mormon office of Presiding Patriarch” you will have an idea why. Eldred told me not to read that book. I thought that strange since his son wrote it. I think he was trying to protect me thinking it would hurt my testimony. However, I had already read it before he told me that. Eldred loved President George Albert Smith. He said he was like a father to him. He told me that his best friend was Harold B. Lee. In 2007, I also had the opportunity to attend Eldred Smith’s 100-birthday reception at the Joseph Smith Memorial Building. The last time I visited Elder Smith he told me that he had shared things with my son that he told no other person including President Lee. He specifically mentioned President Lee when he said that to me. I knew my son was close to him and visited him often, but I was surprised with that comment. I concluded that perhaps because of his advanced age he became less restrictive in his discussions. One interesting note not in your video is that after President Kimball released Eldred Smith, he gave him the clothing worn by Hyrum Smith when he and Joseph were murdered. He also gave him the wood chest once belonging to Alvin Smith who was Joseph Smith’s oldest brother. It was in that chest the golden plates of the Book of Mormon were once contained. Eldred Smith and his wife then went on a tour throughout the LDS Stakes giving show and tell Firesides with Hyrum’s clothing and Alvin’s box. It was at one of these firesides held in Mesa Arizona in 1987 I first met Eldred and his wife. I believe this was done by President Kimball to appease Eldred Smith from the shock of releasing him. The video attached here was taken by my son at Eldred’s home. Eldred was 100 years old at the time. He lived another 6 years. He gave over 18,000 patriarchal blessings. More blessings than any other patriarch with the exception of his father Hyrum G. Smith who died in 1932 at the age of 52. kzbin.info/www/bejne/aaSmd3SKobJgprs

[@Jsppydays]

Excellent video thank you very much for your knowledge and excellent research

[@Idk40003]

Well they obviously had to get rid of the office because all of Eldred G Smiths conference talks were BANGERS and clearly stealing the spotlight from all other general authority 😎

[@Imtryingtobelikejesus-m1m]

​ @GLM Do you think you could perhaps do more videos about Christ. No need to bring in Mormonism. I watched the LDS video 'Mr. Kruegers Christmas' this evening. It is only 15 minutes or so and is talks of Christ. I would truly appreciate more videos about Christ.

[@MrMarcand100]

What happened to the office? The natural outcome of a man made religion.

[@sotl97]

This is a great, historical look at patriarch's in the church. A few things to consider... The first was still being established under Joseph Smith. There were several things he claimed still needed to be worked on after his death. I don't have a historical knowledges here but it seems that patriarch was probably one of them. Cowdry was correct though, that Joseph was the first patriarch. It was Joseph that was called and ordained to that office under the hand Peter, James, and John, through Oliver. He held all of the keys of the restoration having received them directly from the dispensation holders themselves. It was Joseph who called and ordained his father to the office of Patriarch, so, it was Joseph who was the key holders and the one authorized to make this designation.

[@bmmoody]

Ongoing modern revelation. The prophet could toss the entire structure tomorrow if God so revealed.

[@briandavis6898]

I think it's just a ramification of a growing church. A single patriarch makes sense for a church with 10,000 members. I remember as a kid we had stake 70s as well. I also think it's related to the priesthood keys being given to all men regardless of lineage.

[@GLM]

Understood. I would note that the Presiding Patriarch coexisted with the local patriarchs for years. The reason he was called the "Presiding Patriarch" was because he *presided over* the local patriarchs. So the increased need of local patriarchs doesn't inherently make the office of Presiding Patriarch redundant.

[@briandavis6898]

@GLM what I found fascinating is they removed an office tied to lineage at the same time as removing all lineage restrictions

[@daniallemmon5453]

Looks like they’re going to need another restoration

[@trazersutcliffe9087]

Active member of the Lds church here…….you couldn’t be more right. Our church is in apostasy and great error. I suspect the next restoration and establishment of christs church will be the second coming of Jesus. But who knows

[@alantomlinson5740]

There are literally thousands of Patriarch's in the current LDS church today.

[@GLM]

*Presiding Patriarch* - who was to preside over the local patriarchs

[@galoflor1]

The office of Patriarch is still in full use by the church. The members called as patriarchs don’t necessarily have the calling to officiate in the stakes.

[@aloesecretinc]

Great presentation.

[@davidchristensen-qg2ut]

More Mormon "plain and precious things" once essential gone down the Mormon Memory Hole.

[@stevenodell7662]

If you believe in revelation to prophets, you have your answer. Jesus Christ is still in charge of his own Church.

[@houseitgoing7711]

I was 10 years old when this happened. No big deal. Every stake now has a patriarch.

[@GLM]

My quippy response: If the LDS Church can say that local patriarchs are sufficient to fulfill the office of evangelist, then I can reasonably say that local pastors are sufficient to fulfill the office of apostle.

[@houseitgoing7711]

@GLM except pastor is equivalent to a bishop in the LDS church, not an apostle so, "quippy" or not, your answer is incorrect.

[@kyloren1054]

@@GLM Congratulations, you have created mainstream protestantism and evangelical christianity. Try again

[@GLM]

Beyond just titles, consider my logic: The role, tasks, and authority of the Presiding Patriarch (who was original given to preside over the local patriarchs) were localized and distributed among the local patriarchs. The keys that once particularly belonged to the Presiding Patriarch were (presumably) given to the stake patriarchs, once the LDS Church had reached a certain degree of maturity. Thus the local stake patriarchs continue on the work which the Presiding Patriarch began. Similarly - The role, tasks, and authority of the Apostles (were were originally given for the establishment of the Christian Church) were localized and distributed among local church leaders once the Christian Church reached a certain degree of maturity. Thus, the local church leaders continue on the work which the Apostles began.

[@kyloren1054]

@@GLM Patriarchs do not hold priesthood keys.

[@paulinebenjamin613]

This actually really isn’t an inconsistency like you think. We have patriarchs now all over the world. The early restorationists took the tribes as a literal dna thing. We don’t anymore, thus we shouldn’t expect the other roles predicated on dna to last either.

[@lukewayne2953]

That's a lot to take in. Gonna have to ponder this one, definately watch again later.

[@BlazeHawk1315]

Not really

[@lukewayne2953]

@BlazeHawk1315 Yeah, well, I'm still gonna think about it. And the fact you are scrolling the comments looking for people like me who are taking it seriously so you can make dismissive replies to us makes it SEEM like you actually take it pretty seriously too, in your own way.

[@1VoiceOfReazon]

Why was beer and cigar shown? I replayed it to see if it aligned with what was said, it did not. Was this from a previous video?

[@GLM]

"John Smith struggled to obey the Word of Wisdom" - specifically (from my understanding) beer and cigars.

[@Fefo419]

There are many things wrong in the Church, to the point that it seems that we are in apostasy. I am hopeful that the patriarchs could straighten out the Church.

[@clydeLedford]

It is my understanding that the sealing power, in all sealings, has to be done by the Patriarch or his appointed delegate.

[@sotl97]

I am not seeing the connection between the church eliminating the Presiding Patriarch Office to mainstream Christianity's elimination of Prophets and Apostles. In the church there are still patriarchs, as you mentioned. The operate under the presiding elder in the church, the Stake Presidents. Without Prophets and Apostles you have NO authority. It isn't even close to a one to one comparison. Jesus Christ didn't sunset the patriarchs, nor did he sunset Prophets and Apostles. Additionally, while Joseph Smith designated that the Presiding Patriarch is the head or should be sustained as the head, that isn't necessarily the way it needed to be and stay. Ephesians clearly designates that Apostles then Prophets and then Evangelists is the proper order.

[@AustinD1646]

This is... a huge issue.

[@Eddy002]

But it’s not. The church still calls and has patriarchs. The argument in the video holds no water.

[@BlazeHawk1315]

Not really

[@AustinD1646]

@Eddy002 If the LDS Church can say that local patriarchs are successors to Evangelists, then Christians can say that local pastors are successors to Apostles and Prophets.

[@BNichols021]

@@Eddy002per the video, there was supposed to be one patriarch who presides over the others and who administers the blessings to the apostles

[@Eddy002]

@ seeing as how the role of evangelist is detailed nowhere in the Bible, there is no saying what role it actually covered. Whereas prophet and apostle are pretty well known since we read what prophets and apostles did throughout their ministries. Many Christian’s say an evangelist is a proclaimer of the gospel, but there is nothing in the Bible that supports that. It is a confusion from a charge given from Paul to “watch thou in all things, endure afflictions, do the work of an evangelist, make full proof of thy ministry.” He is charging them to do each of these 4 things. He isn’t saying that these are the things that constitute an evangelist. This is a hard thing for many people to understand because in the modern Christian understanding, evangelist means to be a spreader of the gospel, but without biblical support for that, we shouldn’t read it with our modern understanding of it, but what it was ancient, which we don’t know. For this reason, Joseph smith could be right in his claim that it is a patriarch. The popular Christian meaning of missionary could be correct, or maybe it means something completely different. But again, no proof either way, so it’s anyone’s guess unless God declares it to us, which is what LDS believe since they believe in revelation through prophets just like God had in the past.

[@andrewdurfee3896]

Church history matters already did an episode on this. A patriarch over the whole church became unnecessary when there came a point where there were enough patriarchs in the church to cover all the regions.

[@GLM]

Would love a link to that episode, if you have it!

[@GeorgeDemetz]

In the second chapter of Daniel, the king had a dream in which he saw a great image which we will call Babylon representing the earthly kingdoms before Christs return. The golden head of the image represented Babylon, the present kingdom then. Continued ..

[@noctissky794]

The Book of Mormon is true. The Book of Mormon never teaches churches are protected from falling into apostasy. The LDS church teaches a false doctrine that it is protected from falling into apostasy. The LDS church isn't necessarily evil but it fell into apostasy and has been in a steady/slow decline since Joseph died. The LDS church is less than what it claims to be (the only true and living church led by 15 prophets, seers and revelators, the stone cut from a mountain without hands from Daniel's vision).

[@Eddy002]

The church got rid of the presiding patriarch, not patriarchs in general. They are still very much called and exercise their calling. So the claim that the church isn’t following its own claim that Christs church must have evangelists (patriarchs) is unfounded. On a second note, all apostles and prophets are also patriarchs so even if stake level patriarch don’t count to however you’re measuring it, it’s a moot point because there would still be the prophets and apostles that hold that authority. Now let’s examine most of the Christian world that denies that God still speaks to His people and all people as a whole through prophets as he always had in the past, even after he ascended. Let’s also examine why almost no other Christian church has apostles even though we know, even after Christ ascended, the apostles were replaced if there was a vacancy as much as they reasonably could until they were all killed. They lead the ancient church and corrected the uncorrected practices within the church, yet why does nobody do that today?

[@GLM]

Hi! So Joseph Smith says that Christ's Church needs a Patriarch (meaning a Presiding Patriarch, a descendant of the Smith family), he identifies the Presiding Patriarch as the Evangelist in Ephesians 4:11, and then the modern LDS Church eliminates that office in favor of local patriarchs. That's all fine and dandy-but then why is it a problem for us to say we've done the same thing with apostles and prophets? The figurehead leaders were needed for the establishing years of the Christian Church (similar to the LDS Patriarch), but after the Church came into a state of maturity, the essence of their ministry continues on a local level (just like local patriarchs). If the LDS Church can say that local patriarchs are sufficient to fulfill the office of evangelist, then I can say that local pastors are sufficient to fulfill the offices of apostle and prophet.

[@Eddy002]

@ here is the quote from Joseph Smith, “An Evangelist is a Patriarch…Wherever the Church of Christ is established in the earth there should be a Patriarch for the benefit of the posterity of the Saints, as it was with Jacob in giving his patriarchal blessing unto his sons” If I understand, according to your statement about what Joseph smith said, your argument isn’t so much on if there should be a patriarch or not, but if there can be *multiple* patriarchs concurrently. Let me know if I have misunderstood you on this point. If this is your argument, it’s quite weak since you could also say that if a patriarch died and isn’t replaced immediately, the church is also not Christs church since you can only have 1 patriarch, not 2 or more, and certainly not 0. Your argument uses the quote that Joseph Smith understood that Jacob was a patriarch with which he blessed his family, yet assumes the Joseph didn’t have the mind to realize that no purely mortal person could have blessed each and every descendent of Jacob throughout the history of the Israelites. All Joseph’s quote is saying is you need *a* patriarch. Not exclusively one patriarch. That’s just what they set up at the time because that was all that was needed. This is also why we believe in continued revelation. Sure God could communicate every last detail of everything we need all at once, but there are several reasons why a wise God would not do that. We are imperfect so can’t retain all that information on one go. We also retain things much more when we currently need the information. We also believe that God doesn’t need to command us with everything we do. One of our purposes here is to grow. No child grows by only following commands. Free will and free thought must be exercised to fully learn.

[@GLM]

Joseph was referring to the Presiding Patriarch specifically - as one who presided over local patriarchs. (To be clear - I don't think there needs to be a patriarch of any sort, since evangelist means something totally different from the LDS version of patriarchs) But within the system taught by early LDS leaders, it seems to me there should be BOTH a Presiding Patriarch AND local patriarchs, as there was legitimate hierarchy of authority between the Patriarch to the Church and the stake patriarchs. Re: continuing revelation, alright - fair. But again I reiterate, if it's permissible that the authority of the singular figure was distributed to the local patriarchs (which is the claim, if I understand you correctly), then it is categorically fair game for us to say that the same thing happened with apostles.

[@sotl97]

Apostles never should disagree on anything if they are truly Apostles, right? Then you read the New Testament and you realize in the beginning this was more akin to a wild west show with very few apostles called at the time agreeing or even getting along. Interesting that GLM would hold the Apostles of this generation to a higher standard than he does Peter, Paul, Barnabas, and Judas too.

[@nefipereira]

Why do some people seem so determined to diminish The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints? This would make a great topic for WARd radio. It’s a reminder that we’re living in a time when prophecy is being fulfilled-the great persecution of the latter days. But guess what? We’ll stand firm and victorious, because our testimonies are rooted in the unshakable rock of Christ. To those with subtle anti-Mormon sentiments: we see you, we love you, and we remain steadfast.

[@GLM]

Can you explain how this video is persecution? I'm bringing up a point that I think demonstrates an internal inconsistency, and my own perspectives on the issue...but 95% of what I'm quoting here is just LDS leaders.

[@Imtryingtobelikejesus-m1m]

​@GLM Have some integrity Bradley. You know what you are doing is trying to bring Mormons down. That is your whole purpose. be honest! To you, it looks like love. To us, it looks like persecution. You say you love us Bradley but you know that you will not love us in the next life. In fact, when you go out to the streets and the stores and the schools, you "know" that most of the people you see will go to a hell that you would describe as void of any of God's love. That is significantly worse than this life. And you support it. YOU support it. That is the type of person you are becoming and it scares me.

[@CuriousThinker1776]

Have you seen things against Scientology? Does that make that church persecuted and therefore true, too?

[@Imtryingtobelikejesus-m1m]

​@CuriousThinker1776 huh? No one should persecute anyone like GLM is doing. It is wrong.

[@RobertDuncombe-f4s]

Understand the guidelines of ongoing revelation like other things. The church out grew the Patriarch of the Church.

[@davapalm]

We still have patriarchs.

[@wengel21]

Prophets and apostles are in councils. They council with each other no different than Peter fighting with Paul as to who would preach to the gentiles. But what matters is they are one in Christ in full filling the duty after the meeting. They go with whats decided and move together.

[@GeorgeDemetz]

To: I am trying to be like Jesus Before I explain the second chapter of Daniel to you, I want you to know that even though everything was restored just as Peter prophesied in Acts 3:19-21, but that does NOT mean that nothing will ever be changed as the Lord sees fit, polygamy for example, that earlier prophets did not realize that it would be stopped!!! Now, I will explain to you in part of the second chapter of Daniel. Continued...

[@Jsppydays]

Smith Senior was a full-blown alcoholic. I'm wondering if he quit drinking before he got this calling.

[@clsboo2348]

The answer to your question is yes we are in apostasy I am a temple recommend holder and former temple worker and bishop It is a tragedy but true none the less

[@99blackbirds]

Yes I agree!! Im a huge Joseph Smith fan and believe he was a good great man. But the church has gone downhill and misses the mark. Just read and follow what Jesus Christ said and did in the bible our current leaders do almost the opposite of Jesus Christ. They decided to be a corporation control and make every obey and make covenants. to streamline our salvation.

[@wengel21]

I think that this change was done due to scale. If you look at any of changes done with in the church its mostly focused on be efficient and productive while still following the outlines given by Christ to full fill the mission of the church to bring to pass immortality and eternal life of man. Presiding Patriarch for a church of 10,000 member, can be practical. But presiding Patriarch for millions across the whole earth? A bit more difficult or unmanageable. Each revelation has its own time and season to fit the dynamics of a changing world and growing membership. Patriarchs now are at a stake level appointed by a stake president or an apostle. Giving more flexibility to its members to better serve in the area theyre in and know more of their culture and can have a more softened heart to the people of that region.

[@prophetcentral]

In as much as you lay claim to the same logic, your conclusions are similar and one is right while the other is wrong. Does that make sense? Could it be that perhaps you are both wrong or both right?

[@GLM]

From a strictly logical perspective - yeah, we could both be right or both be wrong.

[@prophetcentral]

​@@GLMso the better question is the probability of either both being right or both being wrong versus one being right and the other being wrong. Additionally, how do you deal with either of the more probable situations if yours stance is least probable?

[@Ironrodlife]

Kimball clearly said they established patriarchy at a stake level. I guess that doesn't mean anything to you all OP and commenter's but what this means is there are now 10000z of the same.office and they guide all levels not just the top 15... Such a out of context missing the point video. Then the uninformed bandwagon. Got to love it.

[@GLM]

The Presiding Patriarch was to *preside over* the local patriarchs. He held all the keys of the patriarchal priesthood - but the local patriarchs did not. Different offices with different degrees of authority.

[@GeorgeDemetz]

Bryan, you don't know xxxx! You just think you do!! I have studied theology and Mormon doctrine for more than 60 years! You are just sn ignorant fool, but I will give you a chance! Try to explain the second chapter of Daniel in detail, but if you can't, I will do it for you!!!

[@Imtryingtobelikejesus-m1m]

please do

[@Imtryingtobelikejesus-m1m]

It is interesting that you GLM doesnt even know me but thinks my problems arise from Mormonism. Do you not understand yet where my concerns stem from? It has to do with your Biblical beliefs. Even if Mormonism was not true, how do I even begin to believe in this God you talk about? Do you think if I believe like you, I will be happy as can be? When I try to believe like you, I get so terrified of God that I am paralyzed with fear. I really don't understand how you are not. lt fascinates me and terrifies me simultaneously. I dont see how I can happy believing how Evangelicals believe. I have tried.

[@gatecrashercanadamb]

Not paralyzed because we rest in God’s love, his promises are he’s and amen in Christ, based on His faithfulness

[@kimroerig6337]

Would you like prayer? Jesus can set you free from this fear you are experiencing!

[@GeorgeDemetz]

The second kingdom after that, the Medes-Persian kingdom is represented ny the silver nreasts and srms, and the brass loins represented the next kingdom, of Aleander the great. Continued ..

[@GeorgeDemetz]

The foundation of Christ's TRUE church is prophets and apostles! And it has ONE faith and ONE baptism! You false evangelicals have many faiths and many baptisms and NO foundation!!! Look in the mirror for all your falsehoods before you question a true revelation to a true prophet!!!

[@GLM]

1 - what does that have to do with my arguments in the video? 2 - Check out this OTHER video I made about the substantial spiritual unity that Christians have, even through we're a part of different visible institutions: kzbin.info/www/bejne/f4qlqYOkg7Cmedksi=dYzkrCEmxPpI1byn

[@germanslice]

@@GLM You have no unity for your leaders are not unified For they are opposed to one another over different points of doctrine in all your 46,000 different churches of Non Latter day Saint Christianity the members are always disagreeing and walking in their own ways according to their own interpretation of the same passage of scripture which is what they contend and argue about in all their different churches and they split and divide because of ongoing disagreements with the members with the priests and the teachers in those churches they don't agree with so they leave and start a new church. But here's your problem, the kingdom of God is not divided up against itself with everybody doing what they think is right in their own eyes through splits and divisions.. Because god don't work that way. For his kingdom is not divided up against itself.

[@austinnajar]

@@germanslicecan you tell me the source of the 46k number you quoted? Can you also tell me how many times the LDS Church appears on the list? Can you also tell me how many times the Roman Catholic Church appears on the list?

[@GLM]

(You should watch that video I linked where I explain where people get that 46k number from, and why it's an absurd claim.)

[@germanslice]

@@austinnajar I don't know what the list is called, but Its around 46,000. So there's roughly 46,000 private bible book clubs that are out there and more being created each day that you can join, kinnda makes finding the straight and narrow covenant path quite difficult when you have got a maze of all these thousands of bible clubs springing up all over the place. Well they can't all have the law of God complete in them because Isaiah and Joel both tell us that the law of the Lord will come from out of Zion and from Jerusalem in the latter-days and that the Lord will speak his voice and roar it from out of Zion in the days of the blood moons leading up the Second Coming of the Lord.. Its definitely in our day and time right now about what the Lord is going to do in Zion in the last days.

[@cooldad895hess8]

You answered your own question when showing the clip when they announced the termination of the official position in salt lake. It was because of church growth and patriarchs being called to local areas, namely stakes, around the world. The prophet has ALL the keys of the priesthood on the earth. Don’t you realize that would include the keys of a patriarch? This being the case, there would be no reason to keep a patriarch in salt lake in addition to the prophet over all the patriarchs in the church. ‘RIGHTS’ to the keys of the priesthood come through lineage. I believe the Smith’s are descendants of King David, son of Jesse, which is why any of the Smith’s would have the ‘RIGHT’ to the keys to the priesthood (assuming they’re worthy). Why the position was eliminated is irrelevant considering the priesthood has already been re-established on the earth with all the keys necessary to perform any and all ordinances necessary for now.

[@GLM]

So, would you say the early LDS leaders were wrong about the stated necessity of a "Presiding Patriarch" to preside/organize/call the local patriarchs?

[@cooldad895hess8]

@ No. All keys needed here and now, to the priesthood are necessary. Who holds them is irrelevant. Clearly as any organization grows authorization of those keys would need to expand to accommodate the growth. People get upset and leave the church when changes are made claiming it can’t be true because of those changes. The problem with that idea is that one constant is change. What might be necessary in one day and age might not be necessary in another day and age. It’s like the recent change in the B of M introduction. My reply to this is “so?” It doesn’t change the B of M itself. It only changes what people of our day need to hear before they start reading the book. Clearly God knows his children better than they know themselves. But the anti’s will always nit pick any change in an attempt to disprove. To those people I ask “who are you to tell God what he can and cannot do?” Good luck with that.

[@AmericanwrCymraeg]

As a counterpoint, the choices aren't just that either that the New Testament offices disappeared and needed to be restored or that they disappeared and didn't need to be restored. It's very clear, historically, that those offices didn't go anywhere. Read the Apostolic Fathers, those who knew the apostles personally and were ordained by them. Bishops continued to succeed bishops to the present. My current bishop, Saba, was previously the bishop of a diocese in Syria that was founded by St Timon, one of the seven deacons from the Book of Acts, who later became a bishop. The diocese has continued to exist from then until now. Both LDS and Protestants assume there was a falling away from the Gospel that required new men to restore what had been lost. There wasn't. Christ has continued to preserve His Church from the beginning till now.

[@Imtryingtobelikejesus-m1m]

Are you catholic?

[@gatecrashercanadamb]

There was never a falling away or a great apostasy not yet anyways. Either way, God’s Word will not fall away.

[@AspiredLife]

32:20 your personal opinion is naïve to believe ”if they were men of God they’d agree”. They are not gods but men whom are being taught and make major mistakes like Brigham Young & polygamy

[@GLM]

I understand what you're saying and appreciate your comment. However, from my own perspective (given all the Old and New Testament warnings about false prophets), those things indicate that they're not genuinely sent from God. Part of what marks a false prophet is giving teachings that are not from God. Ezekiel 13 speaks about this, where God tell Ezekiel to "prophesy against the prophets . . . who prophesy from their own hearts. . . . Thus says the Lord GOD, Woe to the foolish prophets who follow their own spirit, and have seen nothing! . . . They have seen false visions and lying divinations. They say, ‘Declares the LORD,’ when the LORD has not sent them"

[@wengel21]

Prophets and apostles are in councils. They council with each other no different than Peter fighting with Paul as to who would preach to the gentiles.

[@InigiMontoya]

Actually, incorrect. There is an ordained Presiding Patriarch, and it isnt the prophet.

[@GLM]

Who is it?

[@InigiMontoya]

@GLM currantly, its JRH.

[@AntonioAFelizJr]

The key is in the wording from Joseph Smith Junior that was quoted here: "..a prince.." This identifies "The Patriarch To The Church" as the King on Earth 🌎 or the Heir of The King of Kings; i.e.: The Son [Heir] of God. Joseph Smith, Jr. taught that "..the Patriarchal Priesthood is the highest order of the Priesthood in the church today..," but this truth is in contradiction with the Apostles in the apostolic Dispensation that is The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints as Brigham Young had changed it. The problem is, The Twelve Apostles are the highest Priesthood leaders in the apostolic Dispensation. But, the Dispensation of The Fullness of Times established by the Prophet Joseph Smith, Jr. was not organized by him as an apostolic Dispensation. The President of The Quorum of The Twelve always becomes the succeeding President of The Quorum of The First Presidency in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, and that is in conflict with the original Dispensation restored through Joseph Smith, Jr. This is why The Patriarch To The Church office was eliminated in the 1960s. The apostacy from the original Dispensation was solidified.

[@OneTrueSteve]

While in current times the next President of the church has been the President of the Quorum of the Twelve, it doesn’t have to be.

[@AntonioAFelizJr]

@OneTrueSteve I don't believe that is correct. Remember, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is an Apostolic Dispensation. Seniority reigns supreme in The Quorum of The Twelve Apostles, unlike as the process of succession is, for example, in Community of Christ, which has never been by Seniority. In Community of Christ, revelation has always been the succession vehicle for that branch of the Restoration Movement. Blessings 🙌

[@TheHistory1776]

If you want to argue apostasy, I would argue you're looking at the wrong spot. Look, and I mean, really look at Brigham young.

[@GLM]

Well, yeah. This doesn’t exclude that, just another data point for consideration.

[@hpagalla]

Wow i don't know this 😅

[@GeorgeDemetz]

The iron legs represent the Romsn empire, the tume ehen Christ set up His kingdom and church, wnd finally he sees the feet of part iron and psrt clay representing the kast days. Then he saw a lityle stone cut outvof svmountain (mount zion) without hands (without mans hands!), and this little stone representing the restored church of Jesus Christ, stikes the image on the feet, it comes in the last days, "in the days of these kings," and it eventually causes, with Christs heko, of course, the fall of Babylon, or thede esrly kingdoms, snd grows into a great moyntain and fills the whole earth, and is not left to other people like before ehen it apostasized, but it stands forever!!!

[@Megahieron]

Silly fool. It wasn't the highest office. The stake patriarchs have the same authority.

[@GLM]

Did you watch the video? What do you do with the early statements from LDS leaders? If the Presiding Patriarch was to *preside over* the local patriarchs, then does that not mean he has more authority?

[@pauldouglas5514]

Can you say power grab

[@michaelparks5669]

GLM where are the offces of seventies, apostles, bishops, bishop of bishops, priests and kings that the Early Christian church had, in your church? Your's is a fake Christianity.

[@coyproctor1359]

It's not written anywhere that there always has to be a presiding patriarch and that it has to be a Smith. Joseph Smith never said that. Also the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints believes in ongoing revelation. And honestly having a patriarch for each stake is the best option. The first presidency and has always been the presiding entity over the church. Also here are some examples of prophets in the old testament "changing" or what I call building upon past prophets revelation. For example the law of Moses. Later prophets sometimes emphasized different aspects or would fulfill these laws in new ways. Like the dietary given in Leviticus 11 was very strictly observed but later prophets just as Isaiah emphasized the Spirit of the law and obedience over sacrifice and ritual Isaiah 1:11-17. Or when Elijah confronted the prophets of Baal on Mt Carmel he performed a sacrifice outside of the temple which was against the levitical law which requires sacrifices only on the temple. But this was an example of direct intervention by a prophet to demonstrate God's power and realign Israel's worship. This information and video that was put together which I admit was well done only proves God's still doing the same as He did with prophets of old, and that is building up on revelation just as Jesus Christ did with the Mosaic law.

[@GLM]

(Copying my same response from facebook) These were in the video - but just restating for clarity's sake. Joseph said, "whenever the Church of Christ is established in the earth, there should be a Patriarch for the benefit of the posterity of the Saints.” (referencing a Presiding Patriarch). In fact, he clarifies, "An Evangelist is a Patriarch, even the oldest man of the blood of Joseph or of the seed of Abraham.” Brigham Young said, “Do you want a patriarch for the whole church? To this we are perfectly willing...The right of patriarchal blessings belongs to Joseph's family.” He also said that it was necessary to restore the Presiding Patriarch so that the devil could take no advantage of us. There was significant disagreement between the Twelve and the First Presidency in the 1930s about how important the lineal descent was to the office. In the end, they came to the consensus that it still belonged to the Smith family, though it didn't have to be the *eldest son* of the prior patriarch. So, they still saw the Presiding Patriarch as needing to remain within the Smith family. Saying there should be stake patriarchs is fine and dandy, but the Presiding Patriarch coexisted with local patriarchs from the days of Smith Sr. onward. He presided over them, directing them, calling them, etc. He was given "all the keys to the patriarchal priesthood" in order to direct the affairs of the patriarchs... So why did there need to be a shift? Why not continue to have both local patriarchs AND a Presiding Patriarch? At one point, the Presiding Patriarch was even seen as a member of the First Presidency. What do you do with the instructions in D&C 124 and the reference to Presiding Patriarch there? So - re: the ongoing need for a Presiding Patriarch, such statements (which can be found for almost 150 years) seem problematic to me (as an outsider). Later revelation doesn't completely annul prior revelation. God cared more about the hearts of the people than their strict rote observance of the Law even back during the days of Moses. But as time progressed, what was needed was a greater emphasis and clarity about how God prioritizes the heart. It's not that sacrifices were unimportant, it's that sacrifices meant nothing if people's hearts were distant from God. That was never a change.

[@coyproctor1359]

@GLM Joseph Smith is stating there should be a patriarchs. That doesn't mean one man😂 the church has grown drastically again. We believe in ongoing revelation. I'm glad you said "God cared more about the hearts of the people than their strict rite observance of the law" thanks your proving my point. God still cares more about the hearts of people than strict observance of law. Patriarchal blessings are sacred and important to us. God seen the need for multiple patriarchs and again the president and Q12 have always been presiding over the church even when Joseph Smith Sr and Hyrum Smith were the patriarchs Joseph Smith presided over them. Remember it's you that lives by strict observance to the laws like the abominable creeds you follow. That's why God needed a restoration, that is why God needed a prophet. I can show you more examples of old testament Prophets building upon past revelation if you would like? I can show you Peter doing it after Christ was resurrected if you want as well? I'm sorry this video only proves God doing what he has always done and that's build upon revelation it supports the decision made in 1979 and the last paragraph of your comment defiantly supports my comment. God cares more about the hearts of people than strict observance of the law.

[@GLM]

​@@coyproctor1359 For what it's worth, if you read that quote in History of the Church, Joseph is *specifically* referencing the Presiding Patriarch, not patriarchs plural/local. This issue isn't an issue of God caring about the heart vs. strict observance of the Law. Rather, it's about the consistency of revelation. Early prophets and apostles said the Presiding Patriarch was essential for the LDS Church. Modern prophets say differently. God doesn't change His mind, and thus someone, somewhere was presumptuously speaking for God. Whether then or now, someone in the organization is a false prophet.

[@coyproctor1359]

@@GLM okay do these rules apply to the Prophets in the old testament? What about Christ who got rid of the Mosaic law? Your right God doesn't change his mind but he makes things better he builds upon them. With this belief you have then you believe prophets in the old testament are false prophets. You believe Peter is a false prophet you believe Elijah is a false prophet. You believe Christ is a false prophet because of what He did with the Mosaic law. Your argument goes against the entire Bible. Was Moses not speaking for God? Was Isaiah not speaking for God? Even Elijah when he made the sacrifice outside of the temple do you believe he was speaking for God? Your argument goes against every prophet in the old testament.

[@coyproctor1359]

@@GLM I don't know if you really want to take the stance God doesn't change his mind because when I was a evangelical Christian I seen plenty of things where pastors and members of the congregation think God changed His mind. And it was because of this why I converted to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day saints. It is the only religion on earth that believes the Bible fully and actually believes God is the same yesterday, today, and tomorrow.

[@youcanknow4yourself]

There’s a reason no one really talks about this. It’s a nothing burger. Here are some problems with your arguments: -We believe in ongoing revelation. -Your apostasy argument is a strawman. Our belief isn’t that every last detail of the ancient church is to be restored. -You avoid or maybe don’t know about the differences between priesthood division and offices. -No problem at all with church leaders disagreeing. Take a look at the NT apostles. Yeah I’m done with this video. Too many problems with it for me to even care anymore.

[@GLM]

If there is no longer a "Presiding Evangelist" (And Ephesians said that God has given the Church Apostles, Prophets, Evangelists, Shepherds-Teachers), then why is it an issue that we don't have figurehead Apostles and Prophets? In other words - if Latter-day Saints are allowed to eliminate the office of "evangelist," why can it not be the case that "Apostle" and "Prophet" were also temporary offices for the establishment of the Church?

[@GLM]

My point with the "apostasy" argument: If Latter-day Saints claim that Christianity fell into apostasy because certain essential offices were lost after the time of the Apostles, then there would seem to be an issue here with the loss of evangelist. If, conversely, the loss of the evangelist isn't really an issue-then why was the loss of apostles and prophets an issue?

[@youcanknow4yourself]

@ It’s an issue because you have closed the cannon. 1. Rejection of continuing revelation is Apostasy in LDS theology. 2. Your second question is a false equivalency fallacy. The roles between prophet (and apostle) and every other “office” are fundamentally different. Removing the prophets/apostles would constitute apostasy because we would essentially close the cannon by doing so.

[@BNichols021]

@@youcanknow4yourselfcontinuing revelation doesn’t mean “contradictory revelation”. Either it is as Joseph and Brigham said and this was an essential office for the spreading of the gospel for all time, or it was not

[@youcanknow4yourself]

@@BNichols021 In the same way we reject biblical infallibility, we reject prophetic infallibility. Secondly, the office is still alive and well but what the office looks like organizationally has been adapted per continuing revelation.

[@BlazeHawk1315]

Yeah this is a nothing burger. The production value of the video has better quality than any of the arguments given. Really convenient how you didn’t mention any of the documented conversations and minutes between Joseph Smith and the Qof12. It’s easy to seem right when you don’t provide all the evidence. Seethe and weep

[@GLM]

I'll take the compliment on the production value haha I'm ignorant of what you're specifically referencing, would love to check any resources out. Have some sources I can check out? In terms of "seeming right" - would you deny my claim that early LDS leaders saw the Patriarch as important, but the modern LDS Church abolished the office? What part specifically are you saying is incorrect? (Not a gotcha question, really trying to understand your thoughts here-this is a new topic for me!).

[@thomasdixon2752]

@@GLMagain, you keep saying the leaders abolished the office of the patriarch. They merely discontinued the calling of the Patriarch of the Church. The office of patriarch is still live and well and there have been talks given by apostles about the importance of the Patriarch even after discontinuing the Patriarch of the Church.

[@thomasdixon2752]

@@GLMjust to name a few talks from apostles: President Thomas Monson: your patriarchal blessing President James Faust: Priesthood Blessings President Boyd Packer: The Stake Patriarch

[@GLM]

But there was an authoritative difference between the Patriarch to the Church and the local stake patriarchs. The Patriarch to the Church had the keys to preside OVER the local patriarchs. There was a legitimate authority hierarchy between them. I'm not claiming that there are no local patriarchs, nor that the work of the patriarchs has ceased. If the LDS Church can eliminate the calling of Presiding Patriarch and distribute his authority/keys to the local patriarchs (which is the claim, if I understand you correctly), then it is categorically fair game for us to say that the same thing happened with apostles.

[@Originaldoctrine]

GLM is a professional accuser showing again who their real Master is; Revelation 12:10.

[@Imtryingtobelikejesus-m1m]

3 reasons why LDS including myself do not care about this video. 1) we believe in continuing revelation 2) we do NOT believe that prophets are infallble. We worship Christ. You worship the Bible, which you call infallible. 3) The LDS people are too busy trying to follow Jesus and love and serve their fellow man while you are busy tearing them apart. I think many of the Athiests in this life will turn "Mormon" or make covenants in the next life. Because you will no longer love them. Because there is no love in how you treat your fellow man. There is no respect. And the God you believe in does not love most of his creation as he will only accept a falllible rejection of himself and not a fallible acceptance. You believe the one sin that Jesus'atonement will not cover is also is the most common "sin" out there. Incorrect theology as to who God is.

[@savedbygracethrufaith]

This is your 3rd long comment = evidence you cared a lot about this video 🤣

[@clydeLedford]

Wot you talk about. Stop being so ignorantly negative :.

[@ecuaman801]

I think we've struck a nerve... "Those who have ears to hear, let them hear." (Matt 11:5) You aren't ready to hear about it but I'm sure other saints are ready. I was ready - 43 years as a faithful LDS member. My eyes were opened to the true Biblical Jesus - I pray yours are as well.

[@ericb.1384]

Christians don't worship the Bible. Good luck changing hearts and minds with false accusations. What if I made the claim that LDS worship Jospeh Smith?

[@dotero1817]

Christians worship the Christ of the Bible, not the Bible. LDS worship a Christ that is found nowhere in the Bible, the spirit brother of Lucifer, son of a god and one of spirit wives, and a figment of a fallible man's imagination. The most loving thing a Christian can do is show lost people the error of their beliefs and point them to the One who can truly save, Jesus Christ, the only true Savior of men's souls. Paul's letter to the Ephesians states to Christians: "For by faith you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; not as a result of works, so that no one may boast. For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand so that we would walk in them." This is in direct conflict with the Book of Mormon which states in 2 Nephi 25:23 which states: "For we labor diligently to write, to persuade our children, and also our brethren, to believe in Christ, and to be reconciled to God; for we know that it is by grace we are saved, after all we can do." Cease striving. There is nothing you can do to earn salvation.You cannot earn grace.Turn from your false Jesus and your false God to the only true God found in the Bible. This is true love; that you love God in spirit and in truth and expose false gods.

[@Originaldoctrine]

GLM is a professional accuser showing again who their real Master is; Revelation 12:10.

[@AaronShafovaloff1]

To be clear, you think GLM serves Satan because they... tells the history of the discontinued LDS Presiding Patriarch office?

[@richardbarrow4620]

When you call us Mormons I know where your coming from. God bless you brother.

[@GLM]

In all seriousness, I try to use Latter-day Saints when I can, but I'm limited in how many characters I can use in titles.... Not trying to be disrespectful, just need to communicate succinctly in titles.

[@TylerJaySmith007]

Good excuse for you bigotedness​@@GLM

[@BNichols021]

@@TylerJaySmith007was the LDS Church bigoted when they ran the “And I’m a Mormon”campaign?

[@TylerJaySmith007]

@BNichols021 what does the current prophet and leaders officially want members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints to be called? Anything other than Latter-day Saints is displaying that you're holding onto your traditional bigoted ways.

[@BNichols021]

@ what’s absurd is to expect someone to immediately stop using a name that’s been used for 150 years, especially when the new name is impractically long (people will certainly try to abbreviate it) and redirects the name of the church in a way that appears to be an attempt to align with other churches that reject its practices. For example, what if mainstream Christians suddenly demanded that everyone call them, “The Church of the Only True Believers that rightly recognize that Triune God”? It would be impractical to assume everyone would strictly adhere to the full name.

[@GeorgeDemetz]

What does this have to do with? Read my comment carefully! I am making the point that the LDS church is the TRUE restored church with it's true foundation of prophets and apostles, so if the prophet receives a revelation to set up or remove a position, who are you, not knowing any more theology than you, to say otherwise! Do you even understand the implications of Acts 3:19-21, or the second chapter of Daniel that clearly shows that Christ's church was set up the second time in the last days in the days of those kings! Ask yourself why this church would need to be set up again if it never went into apostasy!!! Everything was restored again, including polygamy, but Peter never said that things would never change after that!!!

[@Imtryingtobelikejesus-m1m]

It is so sad that you are getting paid to tear apart another church. This is your job. This is how you support your family. I do not see you worshiping God. All I see is you criticizing everything you possibly can about another church. It is your obsession, Your paid job, and it is NOT admirable.

[@savedbygracethrufaith]

He’s saving lost Mormon souls. That’s as good a job as there is in the entire world, sharing the truth with those who don’t know the real gospel of Jesus Christ and are deceived by a false Mormon gospel. ❤

[@AaronShafovaloff1]

"We demolish arguments and every pretension that sets itself up against the knowledge of God, and we take captive every thought to make it obedient to Christ." - 2 Corinthians 10:5

[@bryanpratt5850]

Are you familiar with what the word of God says on the subject? If tearing down another church is so wrong, why are you trying to tear down another church? Here is an article from Got Questions: A church should definitely provide for the financial needs of its pastor(s) and any other full-time ministers. First Corinthians 9:14 gives the church clear instruction: “The Lord has commanded that those who preach the gospel should receive their living from the gospel.” We pay people to prepare and serve our physical food; shouldn’t we also be willing to pay those who see to our spiritual food? And, honestly, which is more important-physical food or spiritual food-based on Matthew 4:4? First Timothy 5:17-18 says, “The elders who direct the affairs of the church well are worthy of double honor, especially those whose work is preaching and teaching. For the Scripture says, ‘Do not muzzle the ox while it is treading out the grain,’ and ‘The worker deserves his wages.’” There are several points made in this passage. Church elders should be honored, and this honor includes wages. Those elders who serve the church well-especially teachers and preachers-should receive double honor. They have earned it. It would be cruel to work an ox while denying it grain, and we should take care not to treat our pastors cruelly. Let them share in the material blessings of the congregation they serve. Our pastors are worth more than many oxen. There is nothing spiritual about making a pastor “suffer for the Lord.” Yes, a pastor has been divinely called to his ministry, but it does not follow that a congregation should say, “Let God take care of him.” God says the local church is responsible to take care of him and his family. Caring for the spiritual needs of a congregation is an important work-probably more important than other things we normally spend money on, such as meeting our physical needs, maintaining our vehicles, and entertaining ourselves. See 1 Corinthians 9:7. It is true that the apostle Paul supported himself as he ministered in Corinth (1 Corinthians 9:12). He drew no salary from the Corinthians. But he made it clear that he did this as a voluntary sacrifice on their behalf, “that in preaching the gospel I may offer it free of charge, and so not make full use of my rights as a preacher of the gospel” (verse 18). Paul did take wages from other churches (2 Corinthians 11:8). His arrangement in Corinth was the exception, not the rule. Sometimes a church is just not able to provide sufficient finances for a pastor. The pastor in such cases is forced to be bi-vocational, having no choice but to work outside the church to support his family. This is regrettable but sometimes necessary. It is usually better for a pastor to be paid full-time so he can fully dedicate himself to the Lord’s work of ministering to and shepherding the congregation God has entrusted to him.

[@ecuaman801]

Not tearing anything down. Simply revealing things that members of the church might not realize, and letting them make their own informed decisions. The church discourages informed consent and any content contrary to their own narrative because they are afraid of what people may find out. May God bless you and help you open your eyes to the truth, and learn about the true gospel of Jesus - the real biblical Jesus.

[@bryanpratt5850]

Are you familiar with what the word of God says on the subject? If tearing down another church is so wrong, why are you trying to tear down another church? Here is an article from Got Questions: A church should definitely provide for the financial needs of its pastor(s) and any other full-time ministers. First Corinthians 9:14 gives the church clear instruction: “The Lord has commanded that those who preach the gospel should receive their living from the gospel.” We pay people to prepare and serve our physical food; shouldn’t we also be willing to pay those who see to our spiritual food? And, honestly, which is more important-physical food or spiritual food-based on Matthew 4:4? First Timothy 5:17-18 says, “The elders who direct the affairs of the church well are worthy of double honor, especially those whose work is preaching and teaching. For the Scripture says, ‘Do not muzzle the ox while it is treading out the grain,’ and ‘The worker deserves his wages.’” There are several points made in this passage. Church elders should be honored, and this honor includes wages. Those elders who serve the church well-especially teachers and preachers-should receive double honor. They have earned it. It would be cruel to work an ox while denying it grain, and we should take care not to treat our pastors cruelly. Let them share in the material blessings of the congregation they serve. Our pastors are worth more than many oxen. There is nothing spiritual about making a pastor “suffer for the Lord.”

[@wengel21]

I think that this change was done due to scale. If you look at any of changes done with in the church its mostly focused on be efficient and productive while still following the outlines given by Christ to full fill the mission of the church to bring to pass immortality and eternal life of man. Presiding Patriarch for a church of 10,000 member, can be practical. But presiding Patriarch for millions across the whole earth? A bit more difficult or unmanageable. Each revelation has its own time and season to fit the dynamics of a changing world and growing membership. Patriarchs now are at a stake level appointed by a stake president or an apostle. Giving more flexibility to its members to better serve in the area theyre in and know more of their culture and can have a more softened heart to the people of that region.