I just finished reading the first 30 posts that “Someone who is watching” has posted on his blog. I also have now read all that Spektator has written on his website (assuming that Spektator is a he). These two voices, crying in the wilderness (on the Internet), have refreshingly intriguing and interesting interpretations of LDS scripture and prophecy. I encourage everyone to review their interpretations. Here are their links:
Three Watches
I recommend that you read the posts in order, from #1 to #30, which is what I did. Basically, “Someone who is watching” (I’ll call him SWIW from now on) explains that the Restoration did not occur with Joseph Smith. Joseph Smith, according to his interpretation, established the Foundation. Later, as in still in the future, comes the Restoration, which is also known as the Great Work or Great and Marvelous Work. SWIW explains that Joseph will also be involved in the Restoration, in other words, that Joseph has two commissions, not just one.
I appreciate SWIW’s generous use of scriptures in his expositions. You can follow along with your own scriptures and come to your own conclusions as whether his interpretation is correct or not. I also appreciate his mentioning of a David Whitmer comment, in Post #26, that adds to my own understanding that anarchy is prophesied to occur in this nation.
Fulness.com
Spektator has gotten a bad rap on other blogs, but none of the comments he has made (that I have read) have triggered a “red flag” in me as they have in others. In fact, when I came across the first comment of his that I’d read on another blog, I found myself mentally taking note that here seemed to be one whose understanding of the scriptures paralleled my own. As I usually don’t come across such individuals, I made a point of clicking the link on his name and going into his site.
I have been wanting since I started this blog to expound the doctrine of sanctification (as well as justification and purification) as I understand it, but have been distracted with other topics. The most I’ve done, so far, is mention sanctification in certain articles. I will, eventually, get to these subjects, but in the meantime, Spektator’s writings will do as his understanding of sanctification is quite similar to my own and he makes many of the same points that I’ve always intended to make.
The same person?
The names ‘Spektator’ and ‘Someone who is watching’ are synonymous. I wouldn’t be at all surprised if Spektator and SWIW is one and the same person. However, I hope that they are two different people, acting on their own, under inspiration from heaven, and using essentially the same name-meaning. Until one of them confesses that they are the same person, I will continue to refer to them as two voices crying in the wilderness.
Complete List of Articles authored by LDS Anarchist
7 Comments
LDS Anarchy 
Thank you for your generous assessment.
For the record, we are two different people. As coinsidence would have it, I recently read all of the pages on fulness.com and absolutely loved it.
Although I would disagree on a few minor and insignificant items, I feel that his ability to identify and focus on the scriptures that show forth the profound simplicity of the Fulness of the Gospel and sanctifying process of the baptism of fire and the holy ghost is indeed refreshing and motivating.
I appreciate your work on this site. Very thought provoking!
Yes, we are two different people but, perhaps, of one mind. I appreciate your comments.
I have been traveling this last week and have not had the time to dig into the threewatches site. SWIW has taken a much broader view some issues I am still working to understand.
While I was traveling, I listened to one of John Dehlin’s Mormon Stories podcasts that resonated very strongly with my heart. It was his interview with Chris Foster (#72). Two things stuck with me. The first was his characterization of the ‘feeding of the sheep’ within the church. He felt that members were being fed a diet of ‘TV dinners’ which was lacking in essential vitamins and minerals. I feel a lot of sorrow for the youth of the church who are taught to give the pat answer and not the desire to seek God. One of the missing nutrients is indeed the second baptism.
The second thought expressed by Prof. Fowler came from a quote that went something like this:
In the beginning there was THE WAY, The way became corrupted and became religion. Religion, when corrupted became ritual. Many may consider the Catholics as example of a ritual-based belief system. I posit that the LDS church is fast becoming steeped in rituals such as testimony bearing; an act of recitation of the same ideals with little mind and less heart.
It is my fond hope that there are more people out there who share a desire to understand what to message of the restored gospel truly is.
John Dehlin’s Mormon Matters site only reinforces the TV dinner diet of indigestible knowledge. I think it even goes further to inject a fair amount of Brawndo and Idiocracy. Recently they were promoting Kundalini magic and the incomprehensible Tao over at Mormon Matters, deleting all comments discussed the history of Kundalini as serpent and Earth-goddess worship. Seems to me they are worshiping (warshipping) Mystery over at Mormon Matters, and they seem to have a false sense of religious pluralism and equality (political correctness has ruined our world once again).
Don’t trick yourself into thinking John Dehlin is helping this situation in any meaningful manner.
I just completed reading all 35 posts currently on SWIW’s blog. I found them fascinating and would like to spend more time with it and also read from Spektator to better grasp the topic.
I will say that I was somewhat disheartened that in post #23 he feels the need to justify himself. It made it worse when he says that the most obvious reason why he is citing so many references is because people find what he is saying so bizarre. Given that he is in his 60’s, wrote a paper on this years ago, and studies this in a group every week (all tidbits learned from reading his posts), I would venture a guess that he has had many experiences talking with other LDS about this. The reason he feels the need to justify himself is probably because he has had to do it so much in the past. It may speak to the complacent state of the bulk of the LDS membership. If the Spirit testifies to the truth of something, it should not even enter the learners mind that the item is bizarre. If tradition has displaced the Spirit, than anything that goes against tradition could be seen as bizarre. There was no lack of the Spirit as I read what he wrote. I also appreciated his generous use of scripture, I enjoy the scriptures, especially when they are taken beyond face value, he consistently had me rethinking scriptures I have read many times.
The comments from PallasAthena remind me of numerous painful encounters I have had with people over the years who have been unreceptive to the concept that Joseph might return from the dead.
One hilarious encounter was with a good brother who kept telling me that since Joseph was dead, section 103 was really saying that Harold B Lee (the president of the church at the time) would be the one to lead the Latter day Children of Israel out of bondage with an out stretched arm.
I kept reading him the scripture over and over again and asking him “who does the Lord say is going to lead us out of bondage?”
And he would keep saying “Harold B. Lee”
I then read him the unconditional promise/prophesy in section 1:37-38 but it just wasn’t registering with him…
Just a few weeks ago my wife was visiting with two of my sisters and my younger sister from Denver asked my wife “Just what exactly is it that you guys believe?”
Before my wife could utter a word, my older sister from Salt Lake (Zion) blurted out “they think Joseph Smith is coming back from the dead!”
She rolled her eyes as she was saying this as if to say “Can you believe anyone can be simple minded and gullible enough to believe such a fairy tale?
These two experiences are very indicative of the response I have gotten from people over the years…
I have found precious few people who are open to this radical concept…
However, I am beginning to here other comments that are very encouraging…
BTW I am a youngster of only 55 years of age… I can’t imagine what I said in my blog that would have led you to believe that I was so old….. lol
Someone who is watching-
I apologize! I seem to recall one of your posts mentioning your mission as being 40 years ago, I took that to mean you were in your 60’s. My bad.
It was just what I imagined, it seems anytime one mentions something outside of the realm of “mormon norm” people laugh it off or shrug it off. Good thing they weren’t around when JS was, everything he said was out of the norm.
I appreciate your blog, my wife and I have been taking a post a night and reading, discussing, and cross referencing. You are doing good work.
PallasAthena-
I was just having some fun with you… at my age there really isn’t much difference between 55 or 60… It is just that every time I realize how old I am it shocks me…
In my mind I stopped aging a long time ago… I still think of myself as a 30 years old…
Thank you for caring enough to read and discuss and cross reference…
The main purpose of the blog is to point people to the scriptures and get them pondering and searching…
my opinions and my interpretations are just that… my opinions and my interpretations…
The important thing is for you to consult the spirit as you form your own opinions and interpretations..
I know you and your wife will be blessed for searching and seeking the truth…