Close Topic Options

Amonhi Submission - Page 3

I do not understand what the problem is... who's Doctrine is it if it is not Amonhi's take on things? There are only two types of Doctrine for me... True Doctrine and the Doctrine of Men. Are you saying it is Christ's True Doctrine? If it is for you then be guided. I have not gotten that out of it, but once again we must be weary.

I only deal with issues here regarding the Rules and Policies of the Community and not a person's character.

Again, it is a matter of perspective... My line of questioning for Amonhi was to ascertain if he should be in the LDS Mature section because: 1. Only LDS Members are allowed here, and 2. Only LDS Members that are not willfully trying to sway Members from the Church are allowed here. Therefore my questions are appropriate because we are 1. In the LDS Mature section and not the public Forum, 2. It helps others get a gist for Amonhi's position because he intentionally tries to keep who he is a secret as can be seen by his Rave Thread.

How is the Member Isiah53 coming into this or are you assuming my reference is that? Interaction with Amonhi for us extends beyond this Community, I believe that was mentioned before.

As far as this Thread was concerned it was a Discussion started by me based on an Amonhi submission as the Thread is titled ('Amonhi Doctrine', see if you can find out the name of the person(s) who wrote it and their positions, good luck if you can) because he wanted it posted here based on his request, and the Discussion progressed between him and me when I asked who wrote the document. I asked based on a sum of things which as I said before will be for you to discover, but I already knew who wrote the document.

I would like to add, for anyone still wondering in awe about this Thread, that I asked simple, straight forward questions that required "yes" or "no" answers, but instead of just doing so he chose to answer with sarcasm and a three Post discourse, which then opened a channel for the replies he got. You will notice I did not delete his responses, if I did I would not have been able to reply in the manner I did, again everything is with reason.

I find it interesting that you are actually not questioning anything he is saying, I actually 'helped' by quoting two key points from his reply to me that should make any reasonable LDS Member be on instant guard (especially if you are looking for evidence), but instead you choose to question why I am replying the way I did to him. You sound convinced... just be careful dear, the road taken by a few subtle words can lead to a lifetime of hurt and do follow the fruits, by that you will know. If you do find the answer for yourself feel free to follow up with a reply here.

Submission Amonhi

AlaskanLDS:

Anti-Mormons and those fighting against the Church or wishing to divide and conquer come in all sizes and packages. The Antis you're speaking about are only ONE type. Or didn't you hear of wolves in sheep clothing? Even the very elected, will fall. Amonhi does not wish to unmask himself because he knows that some of the things he teaches are not approved by the Church.

A decision? What kind of decision do you need to take? JB explained our purpose in the Community but just like I took my time to research who he is and what he stands for, then you and all members interested in this can do the same for yourselves IF you choose to do so. Now if you decide to believe someone who wishes to remain anonymous, in the dark, who says Elliaison is a couple when in fact is himself and his wife, someone that lies...then is your decision as well since you're an adult and well capable to take care of yourself. What we did was a warning.... now is up to you and everyone else to do as you wish with it. I don't have to proof anything, let the ones that have eyes to see.

Amonhi Submission Studies Doctrine Mormon

JB:

Amonhi:

Really? So Elliaison is this friendly couple Amonhi and his wife met through their travels and they have such deep understanding of things. It's good to read he has such a high esteem of himself and his wife because Elliaison IS Amonhi.

From "Can Satan Mimic the Holy Ghost thread":

Source 1

Amonhi:

Wait a minute, I thought it was Elliaison who wrote it?: From SAME thread:

Amonhi:

On his Rave thread, he also speaks about HIS OWN WORK:

Source 8

Well, we know now that Elliaison AND Amonhi are the same person. It is MORE than obvious when you read the documents, their writing styles and personality traits are exactly the same. Also, in my personal research I linked both Amonhi's real name and Elliaison as the SAME person. One of the many lies of the person who teaches "Truth".

Page 3 Submission Amonhi

There are several things that tell me right off the bat that Amonhi, in my opinion, is a fraud.

To be a member of the Church of the First Born is not something you boast of on a public forum. True, this particular forum is a bit more private than some others, but it is basically discussing a singularly sacred event with total strangers. In addition, I forget where the thread is, but he speaks of having is Calling and Election Made Sure. Another particularly sacred event that should not be discussed lightly with strangers.

To do so tells the story that Amonhi wishes YOU and ME to believe that he is somehow above us, more spiritual, more knowledgeable, touched by the Savior, and therefore you should hang on his every word as Gospel Truth (can you say hallelujah - amen!)

--- even though he specifically says that everything he talks about are the "philosophies of men mingled with scripture."

Everything he has said here is HIS opinion -- not any type of true doctrine but to persuade others to believe in HIM and not the Savior.

Amonhi, you're a fraud. A very smooth talking, intelligent fraud, but a fraud all the same. Your blizzard of words in response to direct, simple questions is just a verbal Library of Congress to cover yourself and try to erase what the original questions were. Also, some of your more shocking posts (singing hymns while masturbating, and taking a 7-year-old to a nudist beach, for instance) do the same thing. A diversionary tactic, as it were, ie. if you were as SPIRITUAL as I AM, you could do this too and STILL be SAVED! But, you poor misguided mortals are so weak and pathetic you actually believe that masturbation is wrong!..." I can just see him laughing at this.

Just wanted you to know that I'm not deceived, brother. I also know that your response will be that by posting this and calling you on it, you will tell me that I'm attacking the messenger instead of the message. Well, no. I'm unequivocally stating that you AND your messages are wrong. You may have mixed in some great gospel truths to make it SEEM as though you are on the strait and narrow path, but when you dilute it and mix it up as you have, you've sullied even the simple truths.

And, yes. That's MY opinion.

Edited: FarSeer on 14th Oct, 2008 - 7:48pm

Submission Amonhi

This is somewhat duplicitous. Either you believe the Church to be the church set up by God or you believe it to be a false church.

If you are part of the Church, then adhere to its core doctrines (necessity of the atonement for everyone, 13 articles of Faith) or atleast admit that you are not able to adhere to its dictates as a reflection of your own weakness. I cannot claim obedience to all commandments, but that is an error on my part , not the core doctrines of the Church.

At least have the decency to say I am not member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, I am rather a member of the "Church of the First Born".

Amonhi, please do not teach the doctrines you teach ever as LDS doctrine, or use LDS sources to do so. It brings people away from Christ and his atonement, which is about as great a sin as one can perpetrate on the world. Not to be melodramatic, but this is the perfect definition of an Antichrist.

Rather off topic, but... I am frustrated by individuals who say they have moved on to a higher level and then state they have no need to keep commandments. They state that they are equal to God but then refuse to live up to all covenants that they have made in the Temple (ergo fulfilment of the law and not just rejection of the law). Godhood demands obligation to the Laws and Ordinances that brought one to that level. It is not just a state of mind, but more a state of becoming and doing what is required to achieve a level of advancement to be equal with God. Christ gave up his own will to do the will of the Father and gave us the best example of a servant to God and Man. This was not because of a feeling alone. It was because he was willing to act, to do, to finish what the Lord had asked him to do. We should be willing to give up our own wills, including our base desires to sin. Having our calling and Election Made Sure does not take away our responsibility to follow eternal laws, it obligates to follow them more perfectly.

Amonhi Submission

Dbackers hit on something I did not clearly state, but for which I put under the realm of 'Amonhi Doctrine' and that is he uses LDS resources for his OWN opinions, and ideas. He actually uses the Church's own scripture to teach against the Church. I must admit that is the newest kind of infiltration I have seen here save for those acclaimed Book of Mormon followers who based that they can reach God without the same Church formed from the keystone. FarSeer summed it up well, because he does not come here with a tone of "I submit this as my humble opinion..." instead it as I stated, "You don't believe me, then you would not have believed Christ / Joseph...", in other words... if you do not believe me then you are in the wrong.

Amonhi Submission - Page 3

I am going to break this into a couple of messages...it is overall really long, in my opinion.
*****************
Msg 1:

I wasn't even going to touch this subject again but I have a few questions on some of the things I was able to research based on information available from the forum and a couple comments on the replies to my last post.

You keep referring to Amonhi's work--

From his rave thread it says:

He says he was not able to upload it at that time and then was told how to link to it by JB--if it indeed passed the requirements. There is nothing that I can see where it gives a link? If it is ON THE SITE, please refer me to it and I will go read it. I was under the impression that the article he wrote was an "excerpt" from his other work and dealing with the "by their fruits ye shall know them," and the paper that he actually downloaded was a Chapter one of three--Fullness of the Gospel, which was a smaller file from what I can tell. I am not a professional by any means, We were just trying to go with what we could find. So, is the article one and the same? or was he referring to something else he had written?

(continued...)

Amonhi Submission Mormon Doctrine Studies - Page 3

(continued...)

Msg 2

Next,

LDS quoted in her reply:

What I picked out that you failed to mention here is the first four words he said in his long answer: All is my opinion... That has been one of the main complaints I have heard you say about him is that he doesn't ever say it is his opinion while sharing. I guess I don't understand how much clearer he could be.

The second thing that was brought to my mind is this.

He says that Elliaison addressed the question, just because Amonhi supposedly wrote an article on the same subject why couldn't Elliaison also? Maybe they were discussing the ideas and he shared something he wrote with Amonhi? I mean, is it that far stretched to think that could happen? Maybe he plagiarizes? Does that change the message? I am sure you all remember when Paul H. Dunn had to apologize because of fabrications to his stories? It did bother me a bit but when I pondered it, I realized whatever truth was in the lesson was the same. The Spirit didn't tell me what the lies were...it didn't matter. I was only concerned with the truth. I only use this example because it is someone who is well respected in the church and was made known.

My next question would be: DOES IT MATTER who wrote the article? Does it change the truth within it, whatever that may be? I would be praying about what was in the article not who wrote it--that is just me.

LDS said:

I am only aware of one document that was submitted by Amonhi. This was my question in the first place--You are referring to things that we know nothing about supposedly. What do you want us to compare the writing styles between? Maybe it is MORE than obvious if you have other things to look at and compare but it is not yours or JBs job to supply that information...so I go on what I have found myself. I AM NOT asking you to supply it--only telling you that it is insane to ask us to make a decision and then ask me WHAT decision it is that I am referring to? As far as personality traits, I bet most people that have had their calling and election made sure, have certain types of traits, I believe they are gifts of the spirit. Just my opinion.

I want to say something though. I think it can be a sort of hypocritical thinking (not anyone specific--as a group or whatever) when you can have many controversial topics going on and I know I have found some of the sources to be more than what they have here as far as information that is not doctrinal and against the Church. With those findings, I KNEW that they were not representative of what the church teaches and are someones opinion. I KNOW That and I think everyone that is reading in the mature section does understand that our posts are opinions. But why then are they not treated like this? I know that you care about this community JB, I have no doubt, which makes it all the harder to have a different opinion on this. If I would of thought that you were some Joe-Blow that couldn't care less about me and my spiritual growth I wouldn't have wasted my time to even reply. But I know that is not the case. I know you are sincerely concerned but I wonder if you have put blinders on when it comes to this particular situation.