Can a Prophet lead us astray?

[MDalby]

I know he did ... turns out I have a tape that proves it (hope it still plays after all these years). And I doubt there was little, about old school Mormon Doctrine, that Hyrum was wrong on. Are you familiar with him?

Yes, I am very familiar with his writings.

Now, certain principles of the Gospel will continue to need to be restored until the restoration of all things is complete but not as you put it that the Gospel as a whole would need to be restored "again".

[wenglund]

For what it is worth, I am not the least bit worried whether prophets will lead me astray. Ny concern in that regard is with myself and others. Most, if not all of the loss of faith and falling away from the Church since the time it was restored has not been prophet-led, but a function of personal choice and action. As such, wouldn't we be better served to focus on the far more probable sources for being led astray?

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[MDalby]

As is clear from the inspired account, Zion shall be built up

[zeezrom]

Can a man lead us astray?

Is a prophet a man?

After answering those two questions, think about the OP and the answer should become obvious.

[MDalby]

The restitution of all things will continue. One specifically that has bene mentioned is that Malachi prophesied that the sons of Levi would offer an offering unto the Lord. (Mal 3:3) John the Baptist again mentioned this at the restoration of the Aaronic Priesthood in D&C 13. Sacrifices will again take place when the temples have been built in Jerusalem and the New Jerusalem. (D&C 84:31, D&C 124:39, D&C 128:24)

...it is generally supposed that sacrifice was entirely done away when the Great Sacrifice [i.e.,] the sacrifice of the Lord Jesus was offered up, and there will be no necessity for the ordinance of sacrifice in future; but those who assert this are certainly not acquainted with the duties, privileges and authority of the Priesthood, or with the Prophets.

These sacrifices, as well as every ordinance belonging to the Priesthood, will, when the Temple of the Lord shall be built, and the sons of Levi be purified, be fully restored and attended to in all their powers, ramifications, and blessings. This ever did and ever will exist when the powers of the Melchizedek Priesthood are sufficiently manifest;

else how can the restitution of all things spoken of by the Holy Prophets be brought to pass

. It is not to be understood that the law of Moses will be established again with all its rites and variety of ceremonies; this has never been spoken of by the prophets; but those things which existed prior to Moses

[David T]

The restoration that began with Joseph Smith is still going on, folks. It hasn't finished.

[rockslider]

Yes, I am very familiar with his writings.

Now, certain principles of the Gospel will continue to need to be restored until the restoration of all things is complete but not as you put it that the Gospel as a whole would need to be restored "again".

I'd always heard that JS held the keys of the Dispensation of the Fullness of Times and that it was his to restore the gospel, to fullness, here on this earth.

It's my assumption that JS already did that, but it only lasted

[wenglund]

Can a man lead us astray?

Is a prophet a man?

After answering those two questions, think about the OP and the answer should become obvious.

That works until one wisely considers the question in terms of probabilities--which, by doing so will lead to the point I made above.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[Jason]

Can a man lead us astray?

Obviously.

Is a prophet a man?

Yes.

But, will God allow a prophet He has chosen to lead His Church on Earth to lead us astray?

Your two questions don't get us any closer to answering that question.

[MDalby]

I'd always heard that JS held the keys of the Dispensation of the Fullness of Times and that it was his to restore the gospel, to fullness, here on this earth.

It's my assumption that JS already did that, but it only lasted

[Lightbearer]

First off, is this part of OD1 considered canon and therefore binding on the LDS church:

So here we read that WW said it's not in the mind of God to allow his Prophet to lead the church astray. Yet this is what JFS had to say about it:

Personally, I align more with JFS. We have both biblical and modern day precedent for being taught something that was later determined to be false doctrine or incorrect (Adam/God doctrine comes to mind).

What are your thoughts on the subject? Can WW and the JFS quote be reconciled in your mind? If not, which do you hold to?

First you should look at the context of JFS remarks. Quote mining and cherry picking is an old trick, to make it appear that two prophets disagree, when in fact they may have been referring to two different things entirely. For example I have a referenced quote from President Smith that agrees with WW:

(Conference Report, April 1972, pg. 99) "I think there is one thing which we should have exceedingly clear in our minds. Neither the President of the Church, nor the First Presidency, nor the united voice of the First Presidency and the Twelve will ever lead the Saints astray or send forth counsel to the world that is contrary to the mind and will of the Lord."

Sounds familiar? Also the quote from OD-1 is from the Standard Works! So it would trump anything a prophet or apostle may say as his own opinion....

[Ahab]

Can WW and the JFS quote be reconciled in your mind? If not, which do you hold to?

Yes, they can be reconciled in my mind. I believe WW was referring to men/people who are actually prophets of God, rather than just people who may have the title of prophet or Prophet bestowed upon them by others. In other words, a real and true prophet of God will never lead us astray from God, because a real and true prophet of God speaks the word of God, as part of the definition of what a real and true prophet of God does.

JFS was basically saying the same thing, based on the fact that a real and true prophet of God will also be in harmony with other real and true prophets of God as they speak the word of God.

[Ceeboo]

Most, if not all of the loss of faith and falling away from the Church since the time it was restored has not been prophet-led, but a function of personal choice and action. As such, wouldn't we be better served to focus on the far more probable sources for being led astray?

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Hey Wade,

If I may ask, what are some examples of these personal choices/actions that has caused folks to leave/stray from the LDS Church since the time it was restored?

Thanks and peace,

Ceeboo

[mfbukowski]

Jacob 6:2 was one of them, but there were many. Hyrum used to do multi-day firesides. Some of these had been taped. There was one "session" (about an hour) that was dedicated to this topic. Once upon a time, I had a set of about 50 of his tapes. I wish I still had them.

Hyrum also held to the idea that God and JS had all things "restored" for a moment in time (i.e. things like JS king, Council of the 50 etc.) which just never carried on past Nauvoo .

edit:

wow, my wife stuffed them away, I still have the tapes, I need to find a cassette player, I hope they are still good.

These should be captured digital!

If anyone is familiar with this, I have the Snowflake set as well as one or two others, don't remember where they were done at.

Interesting!

But to me Jacob 6:2 is just a prophecy of the restoration- not a restoration of the restoration. If you find others, post 'em!

[mfbukowski]

It's my assumption that JS already did that, but it only lasted

[wenglund]

Hey Wade,

If I may ask, what are some examples of these personal choices/actions that has caused folks to leave/stray from the LDS Church since the time it was restored?

Thanks and peace, Ceeboo

To me, the most prevelant personal choice that has lead people astray following the restoration, is the same personal choice that has predominatly lead people astray throughout past generation and dispensations, and that is pride--choosing to trust and rely on man (the "arm of flesh") more than God.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[zeezrom]

To me, the most prevelant personal choice that has lead people astray following the restoration, is the same personal choice that has predominatly lead people astray throughout past generation and dispensations, and that is pride--choosing to trust and rely on man (the "arm of flesh") more than God.

Do you have any data to back that up?

[Jason]

Do you have any data to back that up?

My personal experiences would support wenglund's opinion.

Do you have evidence backing up an alternate hypothesis?

[zeezrom]

My personal experiences would support wenglund's opinion.

Do you have evidence backing up an alternate hypothesis?

I'll wait for data to support it before I dig up mine.

[wenglund]

Do you have any data to back that up?

For starters, try looking in the mirror.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[mfbukowski]

For starters, try looking in the mirror.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Phew! Blowtorch.......!

[zeezrom]

For starters, try looking in the mirror.

cool. Done.

Now can you give me some more data? You seemed like you had something to really back this up with.

Let me remind me of your comment:

To me, the most prevelant personal choice that has lead people astray following the restoration, is the same personal choice that has predominatly lead people astray throughout past generation and dispensations, and that is pride--choosing to trust and rely on man (the "arm of flesh") more than God.

[wenglund]

cool. Done.

Now can you give me some more data?

Sure. Check out the scriptural data HERE, particularly 1 Ne. 12:18-19 and Prov. 16:18 and Prov. 19:13.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[zeezrom]

Sure. Check out the scriptural data HERE, particularly 1 Ne. 12:18-19 and Prov. 16:18 and Prov. 19:13.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

you said "following the restoration". I was thinking of real life examples. Do you have any actual examples or statistics or historical records or 2nd/3rd/4th hand reports or anything?

[Glenn101]

First off, is this part of OD1 considered canon and therefore binding on the LDS church:

The Lord will never permit me or any other man who stands as President of this Church to lead you astray. It is not in the programme. It is not in the mind of God. If I were to attempt that, the Lord would remove me out of my place, and so He will any other man who attempts to lead the children of men astray from the oracles of God and from their duty."

So here we read that WW said it's not in the mind of God to allow his Prophet to lead the church astray. Yet this is what JFS had to say about it:

When prophets write and speak on the principles of the gospel, they should have the guidance of the Spirit. If they do, then all that they say will be in harmony with the revealed word. If they are in harmony then we know that they have not spoken presumptuously. Should a man speak or write, and what he says is in conflict with the standards which are accepted, with the revelations the Lord has given, then we may reject what he has said, no matter who he is.

Personally, I align more with JFS. We have both biblical and modern day precedent for being taught something that was later determined to be false doctrine or incorrect (Adam/God doctrine comes to mind).

What are your thoughts on the subject? Can WW and the JFS quote be reconciled in your mind? If not, which do you hold to?

I do not see a dissonance between the two. Wilford Woodruff stated that God would move him out of his place if he tried to lead the church astray. The continuation by Joseph Fielding Smith is directly in line with that. The Adam/God talks were never presented as official church doctrine and Brigham Young himself said that they were not binding upon the church. I would have to do some digging to find the actual quote. As for the blacks and the priesthood thing, I think it is something we need to let alone. We do not have enough information to make any kind of judgment about that. But we all also can believe what we wish about the pre-1978 conditions. The fact remains that it required a revelation for the ban to be lifted, this despite the now known facts that at least on former prophet and president of the church was desirous that the ban be lifted during his tenure.

We are required to "follow the brethren", our living oracles. We do not have to worry about anything that the former prophets have said unless it is canonized or validated during the current oracles. Neither of those statements were canonized, but they have been reaffirmed by later prophets.

When we have a moment of discomfort with something we hear, it is incumbent upon us to seek the confirmation of the spirit. Sometimes we may not like something, we "think it is wrong". But we must find out through the spirit if it is our personal opinion or if it is actually right or wrong.

Glenn