Has Time Been Good To The Teachings Of Bruce R. Mcconkie And Joseph Fielding Smith?

[Rivers]

Are you going to leave me out here all alone with nobody to turn to?

You should go out and invesitgate and pray about things for yourself rather than put all you trust in one person.

[ERayR]

You should go out and invesitgate and pray about things for yourself rather than put all you trust in one person.

I thought that wasn't allowed.

[Craig Paxton]

It is the question I asked, but you didn't address, in the post you followed up with a question of your own that I had already answered in the post you were following up on. Here it is again:

"However, do we all agree that the relatively few things we may disagree with Bro. McKonkie, are inconsequential in relation to our growth in faith in the restored gospel, and certainly not the kinds of things that ought to be used to take the measure of the man over time?"

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Actually Wade, McConkie’s name is spelled with a “C” rather than an "K" and no I wouldn’t agree with your premises at all…I think some things that you call inconsequential in relation to our growth in faith in the so called restored gospel are in fact central to one’s ability to have faith and trust in that restored gospel’s claims.

Take for example the following McConkie comment:

“If death has always prevailed in the world, there was no fall of Adam which brought death to all forms of life. If Adam did not fall, there is no need for atonement. If there was no atonement, there is no salvation, no resurrection, no eternal life, nothing in all of the glorious promises that the Lord has given us. If there is no salvation, there is no God. The fall affects man, all forms of life, and the earth itself”.

But the problem is that death has existed on this earth for billions of years…to claim otherwise is a falsehood and is not true. This falsehood was taught by none other than Bruce R. McConkie. But in a wild twist I actually agree with Elder McConkie on this…I believe that if death has always prevailed…which it has…then there was no fall of Adam and since Adam did not fall there was no need for an atonement, no salvation, no resurrection and no eternal life.

This theme is still taught in the church…as recently as October 1996 Russell M. Nelson gave an address titled “The Atonement”, published in the November 1996 Ensign beginning on page 33 wherein he stated:

"The Creation required the Fall. The fall required the Atonement. The Atonement

enabled the purpose of the Creation to be accomplished. Eternal life, made

possible by the Atonement, is the supreme purpose of the Creation. To phrase

that statement in its negative form, if families were not sealed in holy temples, the

whole earth would be utterly wasted.

The purposes of the Creation, the fall, and the Atonement all converge on the

sacred work done in temples of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

The earth was created and the Church was restored to make possible the sealing of

wife to husband, children to parents, families to progenitors, and worlds without end.

This is the great latter-day work of which we are a part. That is why we have

missionaries; that is why we have temples—to bring the fullest blessings of the

Atonement to faithful children of God."

The very fall that both McConkie and Nelson taught required no death prior to that fall. This concept is still being taught by missionaries who preach said gospel to prospective investigators when they teach that the two consequences of the fall were 1. Physical death and 2. Spiritual death see

http://www.lds.org/languages/additionalmanuals/preachgospel/PreachMyGospel___00_00_Complete__36617_eng_.pdf

So to answer your question…while I have great respect for the life that Bruce R. McConkie lived…and while I also believe him to have had good intentions with the falsehoods he taught as truth…I also believe that in doing so he has led generations of LDS members down a pathway to a faith based on a false foundation.

Thanks, -Craig Paxton-

[wenglund]

Actually Wade, McConkie’s name is spelled with a “C” rather than an "K" and no I wouldn’t agree with your premises at all…I think some things that you call inconsequential in relation to our growth in faith in the so called restored gospel are in fact central to one’s ability to have faith and trust in that restored gospel’s claims.

The problem, as I see it, is that we have someone here (you) who has flunked the test of faith (at least from the perspective of the restored gospel of Christ) presuming to lecture on faith to someone who continues to pass the test of faith (me). Do you see anything upside-down with that picture?

Whatever the case, you, of course, are free to elevate and ordinate various precepts however you wish. You are free to choose for yourself what you deem most important and relevant to salvation and exaltation.

However, in so doing, you have effectively created your own private gospel, as differentiated from the restored gospel of Christ. You have created a gospel where you evidently think you know better than Christ and his chosen leaders what is true or not and what is most important in the eternities to come.

And, given the way you have ordinated the precepts and the conclusions you have drawn therefrom, you have effectively created a gospel of harsh judgementalism, hyper-criticalness, negativity, cynicism, fundamentalism, etc.--which gospel you seem to bear witness to in your every post.

As Christ once said, "For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again." (Matthew 7:2)

So to answer your question…while I have great respect for the life that Bruce R. McConkie lived…and while I also believe him to have had good intentions with the falsehoods he taught as truth…I also believe that in doing so he has led generations of LDS members down a pathway to a faith based on a false foundation.

From my perspective, this strikes me as remarkably ironic, though decidedly fitting, given that it is coming from a vocal apostate.

Be that as it may, I appreciate your candor and acknowledgment of our differences. I wish you well with your own gospel. To each their own.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Edited July 9, 2012 by wenglund

[Craig Paxton]

The problem, as I see it, is that we have someone here (you) who has flunked the test of faith (at least from the perspective of the restored gospel of Christ) presuming to lecture on faith to someone who continues to pass the test of faith (me). Do you see anything upside-down with that picture?

Ironic…I’ve always thought of myself as having graduated by having figured it out in the only logical way that it actually all made sense (to me)…but hey that’s just me. I respect those who are able to find peace and yes even faith in a religion that I wasn’t able to.

I find it interesting to be able to witness firsthand the nuancing of Mormonism …where believers like yourself are able to discount and ignore apostolic pronouncements when they are no longer supported by reality. It is interesting to me to see just how fast a thinker such as yourself is able to jettison false teachings from their personal faith paradigm and continue believing….something I wasn’t able to do…so in that you have both my respect and incredulity.

Whatever the case, you, of course, are free to elevate and ordinate various precepts however you wish. You are free to choose for yourself what you deem most important and relevant to salvation and exaltation.

Isn’t free agency wonderful…

However, in so doing, you have effectively created your own private gospel, as differentiated from the restored gospel of Christ. You have created a gospel where you evidently think you know better than Christ and his chosen leaders what is true or not and what is most important in the eternities to come.

Were I alone in the conclusions that I’ve come to I would agree with you…but in reality there is an ever growing cadre of individuals coming to the same logical conclusions that I have….that Mormonism is not what it claims to be.

And, given the way you have ordinated the precepts and the conclusions you have drawn therefrom, you have effectively created a gospel of harsh judgementalism, hyper-criticalness, negativity, cynicism, fundamentalism, etc.--which gospel you seem to bear witness to in your every post.

Well I completely disagree with you here Wade…no surprise to you I’m sure…while I would be surprised if you ever did agree with me…defend at all costs right…to subscribe my posts as harsh judgementalism, hyper-criticalness, negativity, cynicism, fundamentalism is hyperbole at its finest.

Thanks, -Craig Paxton-

[Craig Paxton]

NO, a million times NO! I would never agree with slandering an Apostle of the Lord Jesus Christ, even if I stand alone! (Which from some of the posts I have read I do not think I am alone.) I am sick and tired of the bleating of goats who are trying to dishonor men who were spiritual giants. I would never agree with the "accuser of the brethren" who try to undermine faith by trying to discredit those who stood in faithfulness and held keys of authority. It is just another way of Anti-Mormon scum trying to discredit the current general authorities of the church by implication.

Tone it way down if you want to stay in the thread.

Soooo...you believe that there was no death prior to Adams fall 4,000ish BCE?...just like McConkie? Then I'll wear your "Anti-Mormon scum" badge with pride...and by slandering an apostle of the Lord Jesus Christ is to merely point out where he was wrong warrents being tagged as an anti-mormon scum...I'll accept that one also...because Bruce R. McConkie simply got it wrong...death has always existed on this earth since the beginning of life itself..billions and billions of years ago. But somehow I don't believe that you are interested in this truth ..so enjoy and wallow in your ignorance....I'm glad it reinforces your faith...

Edited July 9, 2012 by Craig Paxton

[wenglund]

Ironic…I’ve always thought of myself as having graduated by having figured it out in the only logical way that it actually all made sense (to me)…but hey that’s just me.

Back in my prideful days I used to buy in somewhat to the same nonsense. When I did poorly in math during junior high and high school, I used to sooth my ego by thinking I had "graduated" to my own math, and a higher math that made sense to me.

However, life later intruded in humbling ways, and I realized that, in many respects, there are people and beings far more intelligent that me, and who actually knew what they were talking about, and that I am better served by deferring to their wisdom and understanding.

Perhaps someday you will learn that useful lesson.

I find it interesting to be able to witness firsthand the nuancing of Mormonism …where believers like yourself are able to discount and ignore apostolic pronouncements when they are no longer supported by reality.

I don't think you correctly grasp well enough what I am doing, in part because you may be ironically nuance-challenged.

It is interesting to me to see just how fast a thinker such as yourself is able to jettison false teachings from their personal faith paradigm and continue believing….something I wasn’t able to do…so in that you have both my respect and incredulity.

Again, you are mistaken as to what I have jettisoned and why, though you assume that you do. Hence, your lack of credibility.

Isn't free agency wonderful...

Yes, and also at once terrible, depending upon how one employs one's free agency.

Were I alone in the conclusions that I’ve come to I would agree with you…but in reality there is an ever growing cadre of individuals coming to the same logical conclusions that I have….that Mormonism is not what it claims to be.

There are a growing number of people who have come to that conclusion, though not necessarily logically. They, like you, oft come to that conclusion without correctly understanding what Mormonism is really about and how it is intended to work. You make this clear with your every post, and so do various other apostates.

Well I completely disagree with you here Wade…no surprise to you I’m sure…while I would be surprised if you ever did agree with me…defend at all costs right…to subscribe my posts as harsh judgementalism, hyper-criticalness, negativity, cynicism, fundamentalism is hyperbole at its finest.

That, or you haven't a healthy sense of proportion. By their fruits ye shall know them.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Edited July 9, 2012 by wenglund

[Craig Paxton]

Back in my prideful days I used to buy in somewhat to the same nonsense. When I did poorly in math during junior high and high school, I used to sooth my ego by thinking I had "graduated" to my own math, and a higher math that made sense to me.

However, life later intruded in humbling ways, and I realized that, in many respects, there are people and beings far more intelligent that me, and who actually knew what they were talking about, and that I am better served by deferring to their wisdom and understanding.

Perhaps someday you will learn that useful lesson.

I don't think you correctly grasp well enough what I am doing, in part because you may be ironically nuance-challenged.

Again, you are mistaken as to what I have jettisoned and why, though you assume that you do. Hence, your lack of credibility.

Yes, and also at once terrible, depending upon how one employs one's free agency.

There are a growing number of people who have come to that conclusion, though not necessarily logically. They, like you, oft come to that conclusion without correctly understanding what Mormonism is really about and how it is intended to work. You make this clear with your every post, and so do various other apostates.

That, or you haven't a healthy sense of proportion. By their fruits ye shall know them.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

My favorite quote from Herman Melville's Moby **** seems somehow appropreiate as I hear you say...

The prophecy was that I should be dismembered; and—Aye! I lost this leg. I now prophesy that I will dismember my dismemberer. Now, then, be the prophet and the fulfiller one. That’s more than ye, ye great gods, ever were. I laugh and hoot at ye, ye cricket-players, ye pugilists, ye deaf Burkes and blinded Bendigoes! I will not say as schoolboys do to bullies—Take some one of your own size; don’t pommel me! No, ye’ve knocked me down, and I am up again; but ye have run and hidden. Come forth from behind your cotton bags! I have no long gun to reach ye. Come, Ahab’s compliments to ye; come and see if ye can swerve me. Swerve me? ye cannot swerve me, else ye swerve yourselves! man has ye there. Swerve me? The path to my fixed purpose is laid with iron rails, whereon my soul is grooved to run. Over unsounded gorges, through the rifled hearts of mountains, under torrents’ beds, unerringly I rush! Naught’s an obstacle, naught’s an angle to the iron way! -

If I remember correctly...in the end...the truth (Moby ****) prevailed...as I believe will be the case with us...

Thanks, -Craig Paxton-

[ERayR]

I realize not everyone is expected to read every single post in long threads, but it shouldn't be too much to expect people to read the first line of the first post:

From cinepro's post

Quote

For the purpose of this post let me state emphatically that I am only referring to those teachings that have been shown to be false….and I freely acknowledge that many of their timeless teachings continue as touchstones of inspiration for many in the church today.

Translation: There may be timeless teachings but how can you trust anything he said because he got some things wrong.

I was reading between the lines. The history of the poster who posted that OP makes it rather easy to see where he is going. I am not a mind reader but even I can follow a trail as obvious as the one he has left on this board.

Edited July 9, 2012 by ERayR

[cinepro]

Translation: There may be timeless teachings but how can you trust anything he said because he got some things wrong.

I was reading between the lines. The history of the poster who posted that OP makes it rather easy to see where he is going. I am not a mind reader but even I can follow a trail as obvious as the one he has left on this board.

You don't have to read between the lines. You just have to read to the end of the post:

how are believing members of the church able to reconcile the fact that these men and other black and white thinkers in the church like them got it so wrong. Despite claiming inspiration directly from God…They got so many things wrong at the very time when they were claiming divine inspiration and revelation. If these men got God’s revelations and inspiration to them so wrong, how are we to accept any of Gods revelations to anyone who makes similar claims to this same revelatory power today?

[ERayR]

You don't have to read between the lines. You just have to read to the end of the post:

I guess I answered it with a resounding YES!!!

[wenglund]

My favorite quote from Herman Melville's Moby **** seems somehow appropreiate as I hear you say...

The prophecy was that I should be dismembered; and—Aye! I lost this leg. I now prophesy that I will dismember my dismemberer. Now, then, be the prophet and the fulfiller one. That’s more than ye, ye great gods, ever were. I laugh and hoot at ye, ye cricket-players, ye pugilists, ye deaf Burkes and blinded Bendigoes! I will not say as schoolboys do to bullies—Take some one of your own size; don’t pommel me! No, ye’ve knocked me down, and I am up again; but ye have run and hidden. Come forth from behind your cotton bags! I have no long gun to reach ye. Come, Ahab’s compliments to ye; come and see if ye can swerve me. Swerve me? ye cannot swerve me, else ye swerve yourselves! man has ye there. Swerve me? The path to my fixed purpose is laid with iron rails, whereon my soul is grooved to run. Over unsounded gorges, through the rifled hearts of mountains, under torrents’ beds, unerringly I rush! Naught’s an obstacle, naught’s an angle to the iron way! -

If I remember correctly...in the end...the truth (Moby ****) prevailed...as I believe will be the case with us...

Thanks, -Craig Paxton-

Like Melville, you have a wild imagination. However, I wouldn't start planning the victory celebration just yet. You, personally, barely garner attention here, and so it is very unlikely that you will register even a passing footnote in the annals of Church history. Let us hope, though, that whoever may look back on you, will do so more fairly and charitably than your warped judgments of Smith and McConkie.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[ERayR]

Like Melville, you have a wild imagination. However, I wouldn't start planning the victory celebration just yet. You, personally, barely garner attention here, and so it is very unlikely that you will register even a passing footnote in the annals of Church history. Let us hope, though, that whoever may look back on you, will do so more fairly and charitably than your warped judgments of Smith and McConkie.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

With his approach and tone I barely take any note of his posts. I occasionally will skim through them but don't find much worthwhile.

[Craig Paxton]

Like Melville, you have a wild imagination. However, I wouldn't start planning the victory celebration just yet. You, personally, barely garner attention here, and so it is very unlikely that you will register even a passing footnote in the annals of Church history. Let us hope, though, that whoever may look back on you, will do so more fairly and charitably than your warped judgments of Smith and McConkie.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Wade somehow you always seem to find away to make me laugh and at the same time, for some bizarre reason, like you. You do put a smile on my face.

I completely agree with you that my meager contribution here, if you can even call it that ,warrants no more attention than you might offer an annoying gnat. Trust me..I know I don't even deserve the energy necessary to swat me away. As far as not registering as a passing footnote in the annals of church history...well we are again in agreement....I am under no delusions here mate...but I hope you don't mind that...if long after I've posted my last post here and I'm forever forgotten by the members of this board...I remember you and the impact you've had in my life. You matter. You have worth. You've made a difference.

Thanks, -Craig Paxton-

Edited July 10, 2012 by Craig Paxton

[DBMormon]

I am not trying to troll or be inflamatory but...... Can you see the issue some have. The scriptures were a one shot deal. Everything written in them , the author had one chance to get right and they have been held to it since it's inception. We take their words to be truth and assume for the most part that what is written in the scriptures is correct. Then in this dispensation we have prophets and apostles who speak in way more formats and forums then previous dispensations. They talk or write books at every turn. In doing so they at times say things that we then excuse saying

many were correct and some need revision based on an increase of our understanding and continued revelation.

And while the situation is completely different, we also have given this dispensations leaders a different standard.

Right??? in that we give them flexibility when speaking or writing in these formats or forums that are different from what those of the past spoke in. maybe not a different standard so much as a understanding they deal with way more media scrutiny due to all the ways the church today interacts with the world

Edited July 10, 2012 by DBMormon

[Calm]

I don't know about others, but I hold the modern prophets and apostles to the exact same standard as I do the ancient ones. I consider neither infallible.

[DBMormon]

I don't know about others, but I hold the modern prophets and apostles to the exact same standard as I do the ancient ones. I consider neither infallible.

Then how do you know what biblical scriptures are indeed scripture and what is Paul or Isaiah speaking as a man?

[cinepro]

I am not trying to troll or be inflamatory but...... Can you see the issue some have. The scriptures were a one shot deal. Everything written in them , the author had one chance to get right and they have been held to it since it's inception. We take their words to be truth and assume for the most part that what is written in the scriptures is correct. Then in this dispensation we have prophets and apostles who speak in way more formats and forums then previous dispensations. They talk or write books at every turn. In doing so they at times say things that we then excuse saying

And while the situation is completely different, we also have given this dispensations leaders a different standard.

Right??? in that we give them flexibility when speaking or writing in these formats or forums that are different from what those of the past spoke in. maybe not a different standard so much as a understanding they deal with way more media scrutiny due to all the ways the church today interacts with the world

With all due respect, I think you've got it wrong about the "one shot" nature of the scriptures. The authors and compilers of the scriptures have always made changes and improvements to them, especially Joseph Smith.

It's also disingenuous to say that Elder McConkie's more unusual teachings were appropriate for a different time or place. For example, I'm pretty sure there were LDS who recognized that Elder McConkie was full of beans when he published his views on race, even back in the 1950's and 1960's.

Cain

As a result of his rebellion, Cain was cursed and told that “the earth” would not thereafter yield him its abundance as previously. In addition he became the first mortal to be cursed as a son of perdition. As a result of his mortal birth he is assured of a tangible body of flesh and bones in eternity, a fact which will enable him to rule over Satan. The Lord placed on Cain a mark of a dark skin, and he became the ancestor of the black race.

Caste System

…

However, in a broad general sense, caste systems have their root and origin in the gospel itself, and when they operate according to the divine decree, the resultant restrictions and segregation are right and proper and have the approval of the Lord. To illustrate: Cain, Ham, and the whole negro race have been cursed with a black skin, the mark of Cain, so they can be identified as a caste apart, a people with whom the other descendants of Adam should not intermarry. (Gen. 4; Moses 5.)

"Mormon Doctrine", Second Edition

Edited July 10, 2012 by cinepro

[Vance]

For example, I'm pretty sure there were LDS who recognized that Elder McConkie was full of beans when he published his views on race, even back in the 1950's and 1960's.

I am sure that by June of 1978 even Elder McConkie recognized that his views on race in the 1950's and 1960's were "full of beans".

[KevinG]

I am sure that by June of 1978 even Elder McConkie recognized that his views on race in the 1950's and 1960's were "full of beans".

Yup, and here is proof...

"Forget everything that I have said, or what President Brigham Young or President George Q. Cannon or whomsoever has said in days past that is contrary to the present revelation. We spoke with a limited understanding and without the light and knowledge that now has come into the world."

Further light and knowledge is a wonderful thing. You can mock the Saints for their past but at least we grow as individuals and as a people.

Edited July 10, 2012 by KevinG

[thesometimesaint]

DBMormon:

There is not a single scripture written by God. Every single one has mans' fingerprints all over it. So how do I tell where the inspiration came from? The only way that I know of is by the power of the Holy Ghost.

Edited July 10, 2012 by thesometimesaint

[Craig Paxton]

I am not trying to troll or be inflamatory but...... Can you see the issue some have. The scriptures were a one shot deal. Everything written in them , the author had one chance to get right and they have been held to it since it's inception. We take their words to be truth and assume for the most part that what is written in the scriptures is correct. Then in this dispensation we have prophets and apostles who speak in way more formats and forums then previous dispensations. They talk or write books at every turn. In doing so they at times say things that we then excuse saying

And while the situation is completely different, we also have given this dispensations leaders a different standard.

Right??? in that we give them flexibility when speaking or writing in these formats or forums that are different from what those of the past spoke in. maybe not a different standard so much as a understanding they deal with way more media scrutiny due to all the ways the church today interacts with the world

Actually...I see these prophets seers and revelators making the same exact misstatements and errors as...cough cough... any average man would...It is quite apparant that while very wise men they may be...IF they have some special access to a "Bat Phone" linked to the ultimate source of all knowledge...it doesn't appear that McConkie or Smith took advantage of that special previledge in any of those areas where they got it so completely wrong...

But hey...that's just me speaking as a man so I could be wrong...

Edited July 10, 2012 by Craig Paxton

[Kevin Christensen]

My favored approach has been to "experiment on the word" to see if it is a good seed. The good stuff provides ways to set up testable problems, responds to experiment, providing accurate predictions, enlightens my understanding, enlarges my soul, leads me to do that which is right, to do justly, to walk humbly, and so forth. It is delicious, and promising, rather than negative and nihilistic. It is also fruitful, which means that is does not remain in a state of crystaline stasis but can split open, put forth shoots and roots and branches going in unexpected directions, puts forth blosssoms and fruit. And it some of the branches break off now than then, if I pick them up and beat myself over the head with them, the resulting headache is not caused by the fallen branch, but what I did with it. If some of the blossoms eventually bring fortth delicious fruit, I'm not overly worried when I see some fallen fruit going bad, or a fruit on the branches with catterpillars and birds taking a few bites. I judge the quality of the tree by the best of the truit, the continued growth, the expansion of my mind, and the brilliant future promise.

If I supposed that a good seed would never change shape, but would just grow in size, like a crystal, it's my problem, a basic misunderstanding of what good seeds do. If I want something static and unchanging.

If I never ever want to deal with the unexpected, I had best make my first inquiries with complete omniscience already at hand. That way, I'll never have to learn anything new, never change an opinion, never increase in understanding, and never be surprised or disappointed by anyone or anything. However, I don't see any omniscience vending machines around, and if I did, there is the human problem of swallowing it all at once.

I actually prefer what Alma 32 recommends, as a way to figure things out. That is what Thomas Kuhn observes when looking at The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. In both cases, I could obsess over the human error, or complain that the constant change leaves me uncertain at any given moment, or I could just leave the business of dealing with this particular tree, and the need to tend it and deal with the others around it, and settle for the predictability of pre-processed goods that don't demand as much of my personal involvement. I could just settle for going with what the majority say at any particular moment, and pretend that it never changes either that the pride of the world is a stable and secure foundation. All that would cost is what I find uniquely interesting, testable enlightening, expansive, fascinating, delicious, and promising among the LDS.

FWIW

Kevin Christensen

Pittsburgh, PA

[KevinG]

They get a lot right... and their role is not to be Oracles of Delphi but to guide and bring along the church on this earth as well as testify to the divinity of Christ.

[thesometimesaint]

Craig Paxton:

God didn't make sock puppets.