Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
SettingDogStar

The New WoW Question

Recommended Posts

22 hours ago, JAHS said:

It is to some degree it is obedience for obedience sake. It's part of our test in this life. But I don't consider it blind obedience. It's called having faith and trusting in God.  There are plenty of times in the scriptures where people obeyed, not know how they were going to do something but they trusted in God and did it anyway.
When Nephi was commanded to get the plates of Brass:

"I, Nephi, crept into the city and went forth towards the house of Laban.
And I was led by the Spirit, not knowing beforehand the things which I should do. (1 Nephi 4:  5-6)

He had no knowledge of how he was going to do this but he obeyed anyway and trusted that God had a reason for him to do it.

 

You have validated my entire point.  Trust in God.  I know what God said.  It is written down in the D&C.  Now God's instructions have been changed, and no one can seem to identify why and how it changed.  No new revelation, it just kind of evolved.  none of the church leaders have ever claimed a second revelation happened.  So the question concerning the WoW in its present form is not trusting God. It is trusting the policies of men.  And we know by reading the essays that decisions and policies of men can sometimes be very, very wrong.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
20 hours ago, The Nehor said:

I am not convinced that written revelation is necessary for most changes. Why would it be?

I would think it would have to be some significant event to change canonized scripture.  However, to avoid argument, I will concede your point. With that said,  show me where any church leader (written or verbal) has made a claim of a second revelation that changed the original WoW.

Share this post


Link to post
20 hours ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

I think what you're trying to identify here is what Margaret Barker in her Old Testament research noted was the persistent peskiness of prophets to be constantly updating the Lord's instructions to His people. From her perspective, the Jews who faced the Exile had made the choice to privilege static law over the inevitable chaos of prophets doing their thing. I appreciate your being upset on our behalves, but as you noted above, you've 'moved on' from believing in latter-day prophets, and I'm quite happy to have them doing what prophets have always done. It is, in my opinion, the hallmark of a 'living church'.

All as I am saying is that men changed canonized scripture.  That is not a good precedent.  It is also not good just to obey for obedience sake just because a church leader said so.  We as members did that for 150 years with the racist priesthood policy.  

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, sunstoned said:

I know what God said.  It is written down in the D&C.  Now God's instructions have been changed, and no one can seem to identify why and how it changed.  No new revelation, it just kind of evolved.

What we have 'written down in the D&C' came to us from a man who was also a prophet. What we have now comes to us from men who were/are also prophets. I pointed out earlier in this thread that, by 1867, Brigham Young had formulated the Word of Wisdom into exactly what the Church teaches now, and he did so, by his claim, under divine inspiration: 'I said to the Saints at our last annual Conference, the Spirit whispers to me to call upon the Latter-day Saints to observe the Word of Wisdom, to let tea, coffee, and tobacco alone, and to abstain from drinking spirituous drinks. This is what the Spirit signifies through me'. (Everything else Pres Young may have said or done in relation to the matter before this point in time needs to be understood within this historical context.)

Your concerns, repeated here, make no sense to faithful Latter-day Saints. The process you seem to be wringing your hands over is precisely what prophets are called to do.

By the way, when you write, 'I know what God said', do you personally believe (a) there is a God and (b) He said those words, or are you just trying to create confusion amongst those who do but who don't know enough on this topic not to be bothered?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
8 minutes ago, sunstoned said:

All as I am saying is that men changed canonized scripture.  That is not a good precedent.

Rejection of a closed, immutable canon is a central facet of the Restoration. That is the precedent to Latter-day Saints. If God can't continually update His instructions to His people by revealing 'His secret unto His servants the prophets', we might as well go back to the situation before Joseph walked into the grove that spring morning.

Edited by Hamba Tuhan
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
41 minutes ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

Rejection of a closed, immutable canon is a central facet of the Restoration. That is the precedent to Latter-day Saints. If God can't continually update His instructions to His people by revealing 'His secret unto His servants the prophets', we might as well go back to the situation before Joseph walked into the grove that spring morning.

I agree with you.  Prophets can update us with God's current instructions.  My only point is that these changes were made, not by God, but by men.  

Share this post


Link to post
22 minutes ago, sunstoned said:

I agree with you.  Prophets can update us with God's current instructions.  My only point is that these changes were made, not by God, but by men.  

And why should we believe you about that? Did God tell you? 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, sunstoned said:

I would think it would have to be some significant event to change canonized scripture.  However, to avoid argument, I will concede your point. With that said,  show me where any church leader (written or verbal) has made a claim of a second revelation that changed the original WoW.

I thought I had an old quote from President Grant about this squirreled away but I cannot find it or it never existed and I imagined it so I will concede the point.

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, sunstoned said:

All as I am saying is that men changed canonized scripture.  That is not a good precedent.  It is also not good just to obey for obedience sake just because a church leader said so.  We as members did that for 150 years with the racist priesthood policy.  

Even if that is true I do not think the two are comparable as getting this wrong means some people missed out on a few beers and with the crap they are putting in beer now I doubt it qualifies as a mild barley drink anymore in most cases.

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, sunstoned said:

I agree with you.  Prophets can update us with God's current instructions.  My only point is that these changes were made, not by God, but by men.  

I need to understand the context in which you've reached that conclusion. When you write, 'Prophets can update us with God's current instructions', do you personally believe (a) there is a God and (b) He revealed His instructions to Joseph Smith and his successors in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints?

Share this post


Link to post
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...