How Do You Obey A Fallible Prophet With "Exactness"?

[The Grimace]

Upon those points about which our eternal salvation depends, yes. Upon other points that lie in the realm of speculation about matters of geologic history etc not so much..

Gaining a testimony of the prophet's calling involves making changes in one's behavior and at some point one has to simply act in faith and give a new lifestyle a try. Afterwards one can know that the new lifestyle is an improvement over where they were before and also become worthy of the companionship of the Holy Ghost which will continue to confirm true teachings and guide the individual in his personal life.

How about wearing more than one earring per ear for ladies and none for men? Is our eternal salvation dependent on that? A prophet said it, so what should I expect as an answer from the Holy Ghost? If I got, "Sure, Grimace, go pierce your ears, this counsel was meant for others, not you", am I being deceived?

[The Grimace]

The Grimace -

Helaman 3:35 - this life is about change, and that change comes from yielding our heart to God.... Speaking only for myself, I have a lot of yielding to do.

It isn't easy... but truth is available to those who seek. Then each of us have agency to choose what we feel is right. But it better be "his" right and not "our" right. Tough... very tough but that is the way... choose for yourself as for me and my house...

I feel the pain that comes from your heart in sorting this out now or whether your dark night was years ago. If you follow truth the best you can, God will judge. Certainly not any other poster here myself included. For me... I find truth here (in the church) and am willing to deal with the nonsense in an effort for God to change me. So that I might receive the Mighty Change and have his countenance upon me and written on my heart.

There is no perfect answer here other then the one God gives.

I appreciate that you want to testify to me, DBMormon, but I'm more interested in the topic at hand and a response to my questions.

[cinepro]

Upon those points about which our eternal salvation depends, yes. Upon other points that lie in the realm of speculation about matters of geologic history etc not so much..

Of course, each member seems to have the power to define for themselves which points are eternal-salvation depending, and which aren't. So if we don't want to follow the prophet (or the Church leaders in general), we have the freedom to define those points with which we disagree as not being "core", or "essential."

Ultimately, I suspect each member looks at what they agree with and what they don't, and they follow the stuff we agree with with "exactness", and categorize the rest as optional (and fallible), and so to be followed with "looseness".

[shalamabobbi]

How about wearing more than one earring per ear for ladies and none for men? Is our eternal salvation dependent on that? A prophet said it, so what should I expect as an answer from the Holy Ghost? If I got, "Sure, Grimace, go pierce your ears, this counsel was meant for others, not you", am I being deceived?

A lot of counsel for youth has to do with helping them to circulate among friends that will influence them to end up the best person they can become. Adults follow such counsel to provide a consistent example for their youth. Otherwise the matter would be pretty inconsequential.

How old are you if you don't mind my asking?

[shalamabobbi]

Of course, each member seems to have the power to define for themselves which points are eternal-salvation depending, and which aren't. So if we don't want to follow the prophet (or the Church leaders in general), we have the freedom to define those points with which we disagree as not being "core", or "essential."

Ultimately, I suspect each member looks at what they agree with and what they don't, and they follow the stuff we agree with with "exactness", and categorize the rest as optional (and fallible), and so to be followed with "looseness".

Especially those points upon which leaders disagree with one another

[The Grimace]

Of course, each member seems to have the power to define for themselves which points are eternal-salvation depending, and which aren't. So if we don't want to follow the prophet (or the Church leaders in general), we have the freedom to define those points with which we disagree as not being "core", or "essential."

Ultimately, I suspect each member looks at what they agree with and what they don't, and they follow the stuff we agree with with "exactness", and categorize the rest as optional (and fallible), and so to be followed with "looseness".

Yup. Here's an example:

The other night I went to see the new movie, Lawless. This movie is violent and has swearing and shows a few scenes with bare breasts. The next night, my active LDS friend, a member of a bishopric no less, asked if I wanted to go see Lawless. I told him I saw it already, and then told him it had nudity, swearing, and violence. He just laughed and off he went. Enjoyed the movie.

Now, I'm pretty sure prophets have counselled us not to see that kind of stuff. But, like my friend, I've seen many members rationalize viewing it. "Oh, I'm married, I've seen breasts before"..."I hear worse stuff at work"...."It's just fake violence/sex"

In other words, a very personal game of "Guess what is essential to my salvation and guess what's not".

[Tacenda]

You see, this is *exactly* what is wrong with the notion of a prophet. A prophet speaks God's will, but no one can ever know if he is speaking God's will unless one goes to this middle-man, the Holy Ghost who will tell you whether the prophet was speaking as a man or as a conduit of God.

Yet...here we have Dallin Oaks saying:

"Unfortunately, it is common for persons who are violating God’s commandments or disobedient to the counsel of their priesthood leaders to declare that God has revealed to them that they are excused from obeying some commandment or from following some counsel. Such persons may be receiving revelation or inspiration, but it is not from the source they suppose. The devil is the father of lies, and he is ever anxious to frustrate the work of God by his clever imitations."

While we have this Holy Ghost middle-man, it appears that the only thing the Holy Ghost is capable of doing is saying, "Yes, the prophet spoke with the authority of God" Any time the Holy Ghost says, "No, the prophet is speaking as a man", the Holy Ghost is clearly not involved.

So, I don't understand how it's possible to EVER get an answer from the Holy Ghost that is anything BUT in agreement with the prophet. And if this is the case, we don't need the Holy Ghost at all because the a prophet that is ALWAYS validated by the Holy Ghost is NEVER wrong.

Or, in other words, infallible.

I'm old but some things through the years that I've had trouble following leaders advice are on these...no card playing, staying in your Sunday Best all day on Sundays, no levi dresses (relief society president really advised this) for church wear. These few I just couldn't adhere to and don't think it made a bit of difference to my maker, no Bunko parties (women play this with dice and certain people win a prize and everyone puts in 5.00, I only played once) the list goes in.

I think the leaders should concentrate less on legalist issues and stick with the biggies and stress those more which I think is happening, especially with our current first presidency, I don't recall hearing anything like the items described above, in our current administration.

Edited September 3, 2012 by Tacenda

[The Grimace]

A lot of counsel for youth has to do with helping them to circulate among friends that will influence them to end up the best person they can become. Adults follow such counsel to provide a consistent example for their youth. Otherwise the matter would be pretty inconsequential.

How old are you if you don't mind my asking?

I don't understand. The earring counsel was only for youth? And adults only follow it to be good example for youth? So those without kids will be told by the Holy Ghost that they can wear more than one pair of earrings?

Why does my age matter?

[The Grimace]

I'm old but some things through the years that I've had trouble following leaders advice are on these...no card playing, staying in your Sunday Best all day on Sundays, no levi dresses (relief society president really advised this) for church wear. These few I just couldn't adhere to and don't think it made a bit of difference to my maker, no Bunko parties (women play this with dice and certain people win a prize and everyone puts in 5.00, I only played once) the list goes in.

I think the leaders should concentrate less on legalist issues and stick with the biggies and stress those more which I think is happening, especially with our current first presidency, I don't recall hearing anything like the items described above,in our current admininistration.

Right! Focus on the do's and don'ts just makes it seem as though Mormonism is one big game of Monopoly with rules and win/loss scenarios.

[shalamabobbi]

Yup. Here's an example:

The other night I went to see the new movie, Lawless. This movie is violent and has swearing and shows a few scenes with bare breasts. The next night, my active LDS friend, a member of a bishopric no less, asked if I wanted to go see Lawless. I told him I saw it already, and then told him it had nudity, swearing, and violence. He just laughed and off he went. Enjoyed the movie.

Now, I'm pretty sure prophets have counselled us not to see that kind of stuff. But, like my friend, I've seen many members rationalize viewing it. "Oh, I'm married, I've seen breasts before"..."I hear worse stuff at work"...."It's just fake violence/sex"

In other words, a very personal game of "Guess what is essential to my salvation and guess what's not".

Well here you've made a value judgement. You are your own judge whether to do good or not. With what judgement you judge you shall be judged. My theory about cinepro is that he is a child stuck in an adult body..

Why does my age matter?

Nevermind..

[DBMormon]

I appreciate that you want to testify to me, DBMormon, but I'm more interested in the topic at hand and a response to my questions.

Didn't know I did. It thought I told you it's a personal choice and no one can judge you here for following your heart.

Edited September 3, 2012 by DBMormon

[DBMormon]

Of course, each member seems to have the power to define for themselves which points are eternal-salvation depending, and which aren't. So if we don't want to follow the prophet (or the Church leaders in general), we have the freedom to define those points with which we disagree as not being "core", or "essential."

Ultimately, I suspect each member looks at what they agree with and what they don't, and they follow the stuff we agree with with "exactness", and categorize the rest as optional (and fallible), and so to be followed with "looseness".

Cinepro - Isn't that really the point anyway. Moroni 7 - way to judge is those things that bring you closer to Christ, do; those that don't, don't.

"For behold, it is not meet that I should command in all things; for he that is compelled in all things, the same is a slothful and not a wise servant; wherefore he receiveth no reward.

"Verily I say, men should be anxiously engaged in a good cause and do many things of their own free will, and bring to pass much righteousness;

"For the power is in them, wherein they are agents unto themselves. And inasmuch as men do good they shall in nowise lose their reward.

"But he that doeth not anything until he is commanded, and receiveth a commandment with doubtful heart and keepeth it with slothfulness, the same is damned." (D&C 58:26-29.)

Teach them good principles, and let them govern themselves..... I think this is exactly why the Prophets and Apostles of today (those living now) rarely ever say thou shalt or Thou shalt not - instead they teach prnciples and ask us to use our judgement and agency to bring about much good

Edited September 3, 2012 by DBMormon

[DBMormon]

Yup. Here's an example:

The other night I went to see the new movie, Lawless. This movie is violent and has swearing and shows a few scenes with bare breasts. The next night, my active LDS friend, a member of a bishopric no less, asked if I wanted to go see Lawless. I told him I saw it already, and then told him it had nudity, swearing, and violence. He just laughed and off he went. Enjoyed the movie.

Now, I'm pretty sure prophets have counselled us not to see that kind of stuff. But, like my friend, I've seen many members rationalize viewing it. "Oh, I'm married, I've seen breasts before"..."I hear worse stuff at work"...."It's just fake violence/sex"

In other words, a very personal game of "Guess what is essential to my salvation and guess what's not".

Sorry but that is not being led by the spirit or choosing what brings us closer to Christ... that is justification

[DBMormon]

staying in your Sunday Best all day on Sundays

Never read this offcially - where is this taught by leaders?

[The Grimace]

Sorry but that is not being led by the spirit or choosing what brings us closer to Christ... that is justification

Didn't you just say, "...no one can judge you here for following your heart" ?

I've heard this line before - only make choices that bring you closer to Christ. As if there are only ever two choices to make: those that bring us closer and those that move us away. What about those things that do neither, are neutral? Perhaps scenes of nudity don't affect my friend the same way they affect others and don't push him any further away from Christ than, say, ordering a hamburger and fries for dinner.

You can't have it all ways - you can't say that people ought to chose the right, when guided by fallible prophets, by seeking the Holy Ghost, who always validates a prophet's claim, and never disagrees with a prophet. And then say that any choice outside of some arbitrary moral code dictated by a fallible human being acting as God's mouthpiece is simply justification.

[The Nehor]

I find the manuals to be very good. What makes them good is that (1) that they are scripture based, and (2) they are flexible and adaptable; they allow a good teacher to adapt the lessons to the circumstances of the class. Ignoring the manual and resorting to extraneous sources is likely to result in failure in teaching.

I find them bad. I find them pedantic and simplistic. The question they suggest are unlikely to lead to real discussion and for bad teachers they are a crutch used where they just read them. Following them generally leads to a class where the teacher asks people to read scriptures from the lesson and hold shallow discussions based on leading questions.

If the Saints could be trusted to teach well (something I am unsure of) the lessons should instead be taught by saying discuss chapters such and such and giving the teacher a quad.

I like what Nibley said. Sometimes it seems that Church Meetings and lessons are designed to test the saints' tolerance of boredom. I am not saying we need to wander off into what some people call "deep doctrine" and we shouldn't. Most people who want to teach or be taught that are reveling in a kind of intellectual vanity. I am saying that we nibble at topics like faith and repentance in a shallow way instead of feasting.

[rpn]

We absolutely were taught of our obligation to seek divine confirmation ---- it was a quote from Brigham Young in his year of teachings of the presidents (a statement he made not long after the Mountain Meadows Massacre)

"the greatest fear I have is that the people of this Church will accept what we say as the will of the Lord without first praying about it and getting the witness within their own hearts that what we say is the word of the Lord."

21 His greatest fear. Brigham Young, Deseret News, 9 Dec. 1857, 317; 12 Feb. 1862, 257, as quoted by Harold B. Lee, Stand Ye In Holy Places, pp. 162-3

I should also have mentioned that all decisions at the council of the twelve are made in unanimity (david bednar spoke about this in his press conference after he was called). And sometimes it takes a while before everyone in that council agrees with a certain decision. That doesn't sound like anyone at that level thinks they should just shut up and go along in order to be faithful. The whole point of the council arrangement and having counselors is that one person can get off track and it's harder for three people to do it at the same time.

I think that when we've heard counsel to follow, it has less to do any expectation of blind obedience. And more to do with seeking to do the counsel than determine one is the exception to the rule.

Those who do blind obedience don't even honor God. He wants us to exercise our agency IN SUBMISSION TO HIS WILL. We can't do that if we just follow along without making a specific decision to seek and do His will.

Edited September 3, 2012 by rpn

[The Grimace]

We absolutely were taught of our obligation to seek divine confirmation ---- it was a quote from Brigham Young in his year of teachings of the presidents (a statement he made not long after the Mountain Meadows Massacre)

"the greatest fear I have is that the people of this Church will accept what we say as the will of the Lord without first praying about it and getting the witness within their own hearts that what we say is the word of the Lord."

21 His greatest fear. Brigham Young, Deseret News, 9 Dec. 1857, 317; 12 Feb. 1862, 257, as quoted by Harold B. Lee, Stand Ye In Holy Places, pp. 162-3

Do you think Brigham said this because:

a) He truly felt he was fallible and realized that not all revelation was for all people

or

b) He was so convinced that he was right in his revelation that there was no way anyone, with the power of the Holy Ghost, would see things differently

or

c) something else?

[mfbukowski]

P.S. Stage 15 is awesome.... You deserve a medal!

If I were really at stage 15, I wouldn't need one!

[Scott Lloyd]

Teryl Givens whom I respect very much agrees with this. He says the church manuals are deplorable and need major updating. He also followed that saying the Church is a big ship and we need to be patient in the speed of progress we expect

CFR on the indirect quote from Givens. A direct quote with a reference, please.

[mfbukowski]

Thank goodness you did not say BLINDLY!

So what happens when results of "prayerfully" conflict with "exactness"?

Thank God for Agency/Consequences...

"Blindly"? Who would take someone's word that they were a prophet if God did not verify it? You would have to be a fool!

If your primary testimony is from God, and HE is the one who is guiding you- who is some old guy to tell you that YOUR personal testimony- what God himself has told you- is wrong??

We must do what God tells us to do- that is what should have brought us into the church in the first place.

I am certainly not here because Thomas Monson or Brigham Young or Joseph Smith said they are prophets- I am here because God told me they are prophets.

And if God tells me someone is NOT a prophet- I have no choice but to obey God. It's as simple as that.

[The Grimace]

CFR on the indirect quote from Givens. A direct quote with a reference, please.

It was in a Mormon Stories podcast. I recall hearing it, too. Would have to re-listen or see if there is a transcript on the site in order to give a direct quote.

ETA: No transcript, and it's a 4 part series. Here is the reference - http://mormonstories.org/terryl-givens-an-approach-to-thoughtful-honest-and-faithful-mormonism/comment-page-1/#comments

Edited September 3, 2012 by The Grimace

[Scott Lloyd]

It was in a Mormon Stories podcast. I recall hearing it, too. Would have to re-listen or see if there is a transcript on the site in order to give a direct quote.

ETA: No transcript, and it's a 4 part series. Here is the reference - http://mormonstories.org/terryl-givens-an-approach-to-thoughtful-honest-and-faithful-mormonism/comment-page-1/#comments

Never mind. I think I already found it myself. Though spelling and punctuation errors in the transcription don't help it's credibility. (i.e. "the church is going to loose more Mormons"). I'm confident someone with Given's intellect understands the difference between "loose" and "lose," though the transcriber might not.

[cesc101]

Thanks mfbukowski, but the thread focused on following the prophet with "exactness".

I maybe wrong, but I don't see that being possible unless "blindly".

Or how else do we justify seeking spiritual confirmation (which i support), before jumping to obedience?

[The Grimace]

Never mind. I think I already found it myself. Though spelling and punctuation errors in the transcription don't help it's credibility. (i.e. "the church is going to loose more Mormons"). I'm confident someone with Given's intellect understands the difference between "loose" and "lose," though the transcriber might not.

Well, you could just listen to the primary source material and hear Givens say it himself. If you really care that much.