Tuesday, September 11, 2018

Two Scriptures Project Updates and a Conference Request

Chris Hamill has posted two important updates on the scriptures project blog. 

The first is a progress update on the scriptures project. Read it here:

Important Progress Update

The second is a very enlightening piece on the statement of principles and what it will take to get it added to the scriptures as a guide and standard. Read it here:

One More Thing on the Scriptures

I really appreciate these clarifications from Chris, and I have renewed hope of completing the Lord's assignment.

Also: The organizers of the upcoming conference in Layton need people to RSVP for the Friday and Saturday night events for purposes of planning food. 

Here is their announcement:

We are trying to make appropriate preparations for food at both the Friday evening Family Hoe-down 7-9pm (Clearfield, UT) and then Saturday afternoon/evening potluck and musical celebration. Therefore, we request an email RSVP be sent to preservingthehopeofzion@gmail.com including the total number of people who plan on attending each of those two events.


  1. IS there any way the print could be made somewhat larger? The one I have is even hard with glasses and a magnifying glass. I and my hubby would prefer that to all those huge margins. MAybe it's OK for younger eyes, but I have been unable to read it and that's very frustrating.

    1. If you are talking about the print size in the scriptures, I think there are plans to look into making a large print edition available on amazon.com. This was posted on the scriptures project blog yesterday:

      "Once the leather-bound scriptures are well underway, we will make sure that all electronic versions are made available/updated, and that a very large print set is considered through Amazon."

    2. This comment has been removed by the author.

    3. I would suggest the Dances with Wolves scenario is designed more specifically for a fellowship, or a similar "tribe" sized group. Attempting this with hundreds of people would take, at a minimum, days, and that's only if people are limited to speaking for 3 minutes each. Even a group of 50 would likely take all day (once you include questions, clarification, procedural explanations, deliberation, breaks, advice from the medicine person, etc.)

      I think the DWW approach may work very well for smaller groups, but not for the movement in general. It's infeasible to the point of being impossible for a large group.

    4. Impossible you say. Hmmmmm.............


    5. Anonymous, I assume you were commenting with your tongue firmly in your cheek in the above reference. But just in case you weren't, or for those who may not know, the term "all things" when used in scripture, often has a specific meaning that is different than "everything." Likewise, the expression, "all things are possible" has a history and a meaning more specific than "anything is possible."

      Of course, any person familiar with scripture knows there are a number of things God cannot, or will not, do: Lie. Deny justice when it has claim. Destroy the righteous. Abrogate our agency. Look upon sin with allowance. The list could go on. So obviously the statement that "with God all things are possible" does not mean "anything and everything is possible."

      For an enlightening study, look up all the occurrences of "all things" in scripture and in Denver's talks...surprises await.

    6. You can have fellowships choose reps and the reps try Dances with Wolves method.

  2. In regard to the "statement on principles" issue, it ought to be pointed out that we are never going to get 100% agreement on any statement. People are individuals and there will always be someone who is going to disagree even if the vast majority see eye to eye and have unity. We are never going to establish a Zion by insisting that everyone agree on this or that statement in order to make it official. At best, it will have to be determined an adequate number of voters to be required for a truly representative vote to be had, and what percentage will be acceptable by everyone in order to come to a settled consensus. An agreement on a total number of voters and a required percentage needed in order to settle the matter will have to be agreed upon first. Additionally, everyone will need to agree to support the electorate’s decision even if the electorate’s decision was not what they wanted or thought was right. In order to establish this kind of unity, there is going to have to be some measure of compromise. And in an imperfect world, something less than 100% will have to be considered good enough.

    Additionally, the statement of principles must have an Agency Clause which allows liberality in one’s faith and beliefs, even when and especially when a minority believes and feels a little differently. There must be no effort to use the statement to exercise control, dominion, or compulsion. In this way, even those who were not particularly in favor of the outcome can still participate in the work of establishing Zion, with full standing, and in full fellowship, with full individuality, and with unity of heart, even if the unity of mind is still a work in progress.

    I also suggest that in order to find unity with the most common denominator, that the successful statement of principles will need to be quite short, probably no more than a single page. Keep it simple, general, and Christ-centered. Allow all members of the covenant, families, and fellowships, the liberality to determine the specifics on their own, as between them and their God. This is to be a simple statement of principles, not a micromanaging mandate or ultimatum. The successful statement of principles will have to be very simple, easy, and accommodating; otherwise, it will never work to accomplish its intended purposes.

  3. DWW approach could work with a small group (20 ish) of fellowship delegates.

    1. Great minds...was just thinking that. See my comment to Peter on the last post on how to fairly choose fellowship delegates.

    2. I get from Denver's podcast that there are ways to make decisions and ways to be fair. Maybe there is some balance needed there and let's not be so afraid to decide. Yes, it is ominous. Yes, it cuts out other decisions. But fear is not faith and we are going to make mistakes. We could spend all our time bitching about the mistakes LDS decision makers have and are making, or we can try and do better ourselves. We have to forgive so we can start making decisions and be able to forgive ourselves if we make mistakes. We know that we don't have to pretend the mistakes were somehow magically "revelations" in disguise. We can admit our faults when we get it wrong. We can make corrections. We can update the open canon. It will be just fine. We will learn. We do not rely on an LDS hierarchy to bear the burden of decision making. It is up to us. What thank have we for the LDS who made decisions along the way and preserved something at all of God's teachings? We make those corporate religionists a hiss and a byword. I do it myself. Time to forgive and start making decisions ourselves.

    3. I am sorry to be verbose, but I just decided to put a short post on my blog that shows how picking reps can work with the "Dances with Wolves" format. There is a link to a pdf that is 2 pages (skip the paragraph intro) in a question and answer format.



Hey everyone,

It's been brought to my attention that comments from mobile phones and some browsers might not come through in some situations. I recommend you save the text of your comment before submitting, in case you need to submit again.

If you commented and it hasn't appeared, try sending from a different browser, or device, or use the "Contact Me" tool to reach out to me personally. Sorry for the problems! The blogger platform, though free, seems to have problems.