I have almost come to dread running into Jana Reiss’s blog posts because they are so inept and activist for modern progressive/liberal propaganda. I don’t know what missionaries taught her the discussions/Preach My Gospel, but either they did one lousy job, or she didn’t listen, and instead got her “gospel” knowledge from internet dissidents and our severely troubled society at large.
These erroneous sources of information have enabled her to misunderstand and misstate most everything she muses or complains about in her aptly named “flunking” blog. Perhaps she knows she is clueless about what she writes; I don’t know. Yet she does have the modern misinformed activists agenda, and that keeps her from gaining any improvement or enlightenment regarding gospel subjects.
She recently criticized President Dallin H. Oaks, pitting her false understanding of the gospel against his correct teachings in General Conference. The result is that she looks like a fool with a third-grade level of competence. (I sometimes wonder why someone so poorly informed feels to open her mouth and remove all doubt.)
First example, she writes: “What I think Oaks was trying to communicate is that it is our task as members of the church to balance the love of neighbor with the love of God, which he equated with obedience to God’s commandments.” She didn’t like that equation, even though Jesus did: “If ye love me, keep my commandments” (John 14:15). So Jesus taught it, President Oaks affirmed it, but Jana rejects it. Her choice, her consequences, which she then seeks for herself.
“I am frustrated by the single-mindedness of many of Oaks’ recent talks and remarks,” she says. “And faith, hope, charity and love, with an eye single to the glory of God, qualify him for the work: (D&C 4:5), is what the Lord said, “And if your eye be single to my glory, your whole bodies shall be filled with light, and there shall be no darkness in you; and that body which is filled with light comprehendeth all things” (D&C 88:67). Seems Jana’s eye is single to LGBT activism, while Pres. Oaks eye is single to the glory of God. Each will earn a reward for what they single-mindedly pursue and teach and do.
Jana’s erroneous interpretation ensues: “Implicit in this particular talk is the notion that there is no Celestial Kingdom possible for LGBTQ Saints who do not renounce this core part of their identity.” There is no Celestial Kingdom for unrepentant non-covenant making and keeping “Saints.” If LGBT members keep the commandments, including the law of chastity, they are promised the same exaltation as anyone else that obeys the gospel. If they sin willfully and do not repent and overcome the flesh/world, they will end up elsewhere, same as anyone else that rejects the gospel.
Much of the rest of Jana’s blog is whining about Pres. Oaks’ talk because of how she herself feels about it, which I won’t requote here. But her conclusion is appalling and I hope no one is foolish enough to take it for a guide in their own lives: “So here’s my take and my promise. I do not believe, as Oaks said, that our ultimate concern in life is to make it to the Celestial Kingdom. We are Christians, and our ultimate concern should be to follow the teachings and example of Christ. My own exaltation is not of great importance to anyone else except to me and my family … and that’s a lot of eternal focus on 'me' and 'my' that Jesus never spoke about in the Scriptures.” Jana just rejected and misinterpreted the scriptures. She states she doesn’t believe Pres. Oaks’ teachings to the Church in General Conference; she states she doesn’t believe D&C 76; she gives her own (false) definition of what being a Christian is, but then misstates what Christ taught, completely forgetting about His great Intercessory Prayer (John 17) where He refutes Jana’s false claims and beliefs.
Her conclusion: “If I am so fortunate as to return to be with my Heavenly Parents and their son for all of eternity, that would be great cause for rejoicing. But it would be hollow and incomplete without the company of my LGBTQ brothers and sisters who have been knocked down, misunderstood and consigned to second-class status.” So it would be nice to be with God in heaven, but not without gay people—she again purposely forgets to indicate whether they are willfully practicing their sinful lifestyle or not, which is the real issue—and then she assigns herself to where she may well end up: “If they don’t get to sit at the front of the bus to the Celestial Kingdom, I’ll gladly hang out with them in the terrestrial. Or wherever else. And that, to me, is the gospel.”
I am so very glad that her skewed gospel is not the true gospel of Jesus Christ, where if we love Him we keep His commandments. Since Jana wants to go to the Terrestrial or Telestial Kingdoms, I am sure the Lord will accommodate her come judgment day, and she can feel like a self-righteous activist and Christian for all eternity, cut off from the presence of the God whom Pres. Oaks knows and teaches and testifies of, but whom she obviously does not know, and whose teachings she has wrong.
Regarding Jana, and Peggy Stack (the LGBT activist Salt Lake Tribune religion reporter) and others of their ilk, who seek to foist their error on others, Elder M. Russell Ballard has said: “Therefore, let us beware of false prophets and false teachers, both men and women, who are self-appointed declarers of the doctrines of the Church and who seek to spread their false gospel and attract followers by sponsoring symposia, books, and journals [and blogs] whose contents challenge fundamental doctrines of the Church. Beware of those who speak and publish in opposition to God’s true prophets and who actively proselyte others with reckless disregard for the eternal well-being of those whom they seduce. Like Nehor and Korihor in the Book of Mormon, they rely on sophistry to deceive and entice others to their views. They “set themselves up for a light unto the world, that they may get gain and praise of the world; but they seek not the welfare of Zion” (2 Ne. 26:29).”
Talk about being prophetic! President Ballard (and President Oaks) know exactly what they are talking about, and exactly Whom they are speaking for. Jana’s version of Christianity and the gospel may well get her exactly what she asks for and she is welcome to it, while those who follow the prophets and believe and obey the true gospel will get so very much more.
On a side note, I notice that the Salt Lake Tribune often reprints Jana’s specious musings. While it may be one thing to run alleged negative news stories about the Church, it is quite another to repost pure opinion blogs that criticize and slander the teachings of a prophet of God. Surely Peter Huntsman, the current owner of that critical newspaper, will one day bear accountability for what he permits to be printed/posted therein. That fact hasn’t stopped him from allowing Peggy Stack to use that paper for her personal liberal activist agenda either. Too bad. I wouldn’t want to be any of them come judgment day. Of course, I don’t want Terrestrial glory in the resurrection like Jana desires.