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

[supersnail]

No there are not. Seriously. Sex outside of marriage is considered a very serious sin- in fact it has been classified as second to murder in seriousness.

The entire church is based on the importance of the family and violating the sanctity of the family is a major sin. It is my personal belief that gay marriage will never be acceptable to the church because the strength of belief in the roles of gender and its importance in the metaphysical theology of the church. The imagery of the Bridegroom as Christ and the church as his bride is basic as also is the notion of men having the priesthood, and then there is the idea of the unity of opposites- or "opposition in all things"- a kind of Mormon version of yin and yang.

I know you are an investigator, but somehow you have missed this in your training. Culturally the mores against sex outside of marriage are very very strong- to the point that in serious cases, it is quite possible that one who flaunts these kinds of behaviors would be excommunicated.

If you read the gospels- Christ says that if one even looks upon a woman with lust, he "denies the faith". That sounds ridiculous in today's society but when you realize that anything which has potential to break a family is indeed a "denial of the faith" for a faith which literally deifies the family structure. It is a little hard to spread the idea that "families can be together forever" if indeed one is going to strip clubs and engaging in extra marital sex.

I am aware that LDS are more consistent in their attitudes toward various types of sex outside marriage, perhaps more consistent than other Christian denominations. It is my impression that they practice what they preach. That was the reason for "few," "nominal" and "assume" in my post. This is a church with 15 million members. Anything is possible at the fringes. Also, I wrote, "I'm bracketing the issue of the relationship between policy and doctrine or scripture, and the relationship between same-sex temple marriage and secular same-sex marriage."

What I was trying to convey is that hypocritical foot-dragging was not the reason for the church's lack of embrace of the same-sex marriage movement in the USA. There may be good reasons we aren't aware of. You point out there are reasons we *are* aware of, including reasons based on scripture. I was addressing the viewpoint of those who may find obedience a challenge and find those reasons unconvincing. I can see how I may assume too much for the sake of argument.

Edited September 4, 2012 by supersnail

[The Nehor]

Ignoring the manual and guided by the Spirit don't go together. The curriculum is in fact the standard works, not the manual. The manual has been prepared by the Spirit to assist the teacher teach from the standard works. You cannot be guided by the Spirit if you ignore the manual or the standard works in your teaching.

Iagree that you can't teach without the standard works. I disagree about the manual. As a CES employee and Mission President once told me the scriptures are written by prophets while manuals are written by CES employees working in a commitee. One is the work of God. The other resembles the creation of the creeds with perhaps a light seasoning of revelation.

As to not being able to be guided by the Spirit without much manual use I have been doing exactly that for over a decade. While it does not always happen at times I have felt overcome with or as if I was bathing in the Spirit while teaching. I will take personal experience as evidence that I am not failing God by doing what I am doing.

[zerinus]

Iagree that you can't teach without the standard works.

It is not a question of teaching with or without the standard works. It is matter of teaching the standard works. The idea is not to teach a bunch of other stuff, and season it with the scriptures. The idea is to teach the scriptures themselves.

I disagree about the manual. As a CES employee and Mission President once told me the scriptures are written by prophets while manuals are written by CES employees working in a commitee. One is the work of God. The other resembles the creation of the creeds with perhaps a light seasoning of revelation.

Then I would say you don't understand the manual, its purpose, how it was created, and how it is to be used.

As to not being able to be guided by the Spirit without much manual use I have been doing exactly that for over a decade. While it does not always happen at times I have felt overcome with or as if I was bathing in the Spirit while teaching. I will take personal experience as evidence that I am not failing God by doing what I am doing.

I can't comment on someone's personal spiritual experience. I can only express my own observation that those who ignore the manual and try to go it alone end up teaching very bad lessons, whereas those who follow the directions given in the manual usually do a much better job of it.

[DBMormon]

I get what you are saying, bishop, and have to hand it to you, you have more patience than Job on this thread. To boil it all down, I just can't turn my life over to a church that has great expectations of me without having those expectations returned. An imperfect prophet I can accept, what I can't accept is the expectation that I will obey his imperfect, unverifiable, and potentially incorrect words because he is supposedly the Lord's mouthpiece.

There just is no escaping this expectation in Mormonism. To say a prophet is wrong, especially a living one, is blasphemy in the LDS Church. wish it were different.

Was Moses ever wrong.... the israelites seemed to lose faith in him at every turn. Ever consider we don't have all the let downs. We only got the posititves. Ever wonder why the early Christians were continually apostasizing? Perhaps it wasn't all miracles and revelations in the early church and again you only got the good news.

This life isn't about expectations at all. It is about God's mercy and forgiveness and the mighty change that comes through his grace.

The commandment was to preach nothing but faith and repentance unto this people......

[DBMormon]

Ignoring the manual and guided by the Spirit don't go together. The curriculum is in fact the standard works, not the manual. The manual has been prepared by the Spirit to assist the teacher teach from the standard works. You cannot be guided by the Spirit if you ignore the manual or the standard works in your teaching.

He said mostly ignore the manual. I have done that plenty and taught by the spirit. I disagree once again with you. The teachers that read from the lesson verbatim are missing the directive to let the spirit guide you and are taking the easy way out, many from a lack of preparation (many... not all).

Edited September 4, 2012 by DBMormon

[The Grimace]

This life isn't about expectations at all. It is about God's mercy and forgiveness and the mighty change that comes through his grace.

The commandment was to preach nothing but faith and repentance unto this people......

Sure, I'm fine with becoming a better person. But there are a million paths to that goal and Mormonism isn't the best one. Like I said, Mormons are expected to follow a fallible prophet with exactness without a way to determine if his counsel really comes from god.

Once again, bring mercy, bring love. But leave the judgment and the laundry list of prohibitions at home, especially if you can't get even figure out if those things are opinion.

[Storm Rider]

Sure, I'm fine with becoming a better person. But there are a million paths to that goal and Mormonism isn't the best one. Like I said, Mormons are expected to follow a fallible prophet with exactness without a way to determine if his counsel really comes from god.

Once again, bring mercy, bring love. But leave the judgment and the laundry list of prohibitions at home, especially if you can't get even figure out if those things are opinion.

A prophet is nothing other than a servant of God. You are rationalizing and shortsighted to put serving God in terms of following a prophet. We follow Jesus Christ, a perfect being, who uses fallible humans to accomplish his will. I am sure that great, enlightened people have no need of other servants because they have God on their direct-dial, but the rest of us sinners are left with the humble need to follow Jesus' request that we we come unto him.

Now, let's talk about that other earth-shattering, enlightened, all-knowing conclusion of yours, "But there are a million paths to that goal and Mormonism isn't the best one." What pray tell has God told you about the better path among those million you have identified? Now, while you play with your Sesame street, god wannabes, the rest of us mere mortals are just trying to follow God and where he leads us. Maybe you should check out the Cookie Monster, his has a pretty good gig, if God calls you there. As for me and my house, we will trust and follow the Lord.

Ignorance is one thing; but arrogance combined with ignorance is a killer where the Spirit is concerned. What is even more apparent is that the ignorant don't even know they don't know. They come a dime a dozen.

[The Grimace]

A prophet is nothing other than a servant of God. You are rationalizing and shortsighted to put serving God in terms of following a prophet. We follow Jesus Christ, a perfect being, who uses fallible humans to accomplish his will. I am sure that great, enlightened people have no need of other servants because they have God on their direct-dial, but the rest of us sinners are left with the humble need to follow Jesus' request that we we come unto him.

I was trying to stay on topic in the thread. But, to clarify: when you say "the rest of us sinners are left with the humble need to follow Jesus' request that we come unto him", do you mean everyone else on earth, or just Mormons?

Now, let's talk about that other earth-shattering, enlightened, all-knowing conclusion of yours, "But there are a million paths to that goal and Mormonism isn't the best one." What pray tell has God told you about the better path among those million you have identified?

Why does god need to tell me what the best path is? Why can't I figure that out on my own?

Now, while you play with your Sesame street, god wannabes, the rest of us mere mortals are just trying to follow God and where he leads us. Maybe you should check out the Cookie Monster, his has a pretty good gig, if God calls you there. As for me and my house, we will trust and follow the Lord.

Ignorance is one thing; but arrogance combined with ignorance is a killer where the Spirit is concerned. What is even more apparent is that the ignorant don't even know they don't know. They come a dime a dozen.

It always amazes me when people who profess to follow Jesus Christ come up with stuff like this. Do you believe that a prophet of god AND the very god you worship has taught you to be disrespectful of the beliefs of others? Or does Jesus sanction mockery?

[Storm Rider]

I was trying to stay on topic in the thread. But, to clarify: when you say "the rest of us sinners are left with the humble need to follow Jesus' request that we come unto him", do you mean everyone else on earth, or just Mormons?

Why does god need to tell me what the best path is? Why can't I figure that out on my own?

It always amazes me when people who profess to follow Jesus Christ come up with stuff like this. Do you believe that a prophet of god AND the very god you worship has taught you to be disrespectful of the beliefs of others? Or does Jesus sanction mockery?

I tolerate fools poorly. I tolerate sanctimonious ones even worse. Please do not attempt to play word games with me. Who was Jesus talking to when he said come unto me? Come on, you can think of the right answer; just take a leap of faith, oh, maybe not. Jesus' invitation was to everyone. Let's try another; did Jesus appreciate and did the early apostles confirm the need for prophets and apostles? No need to think too hard, the answer is yes. Where in these topics is it proclaimed that it is just for LDS or Mormons? Viola, you now have your answer. Quit the BS.

God needs to tell you what he thinks because you are simply a mortal and cannot tell the difference between an eternal truth and the lint in your navel. Do you think that you are fully capable of enlightenment on your own? If so, why on God's green earth are you here? Go out and find your Nirvana and meditate on the great probability that you don't know that you don't know.

I tend to treat fools harshly. I tend to treat those that are sanctimonious even more harshly. Your typical pseudo-intellectual drivel repels me and repels all those who are serious about God, his teachings, and our purpose on this earth. You the type of individual when found in the temple dong business, exchanging money, etc., Jesus prompted excluded them from the temple grounds. You may think that everyone should treat you with kid-gloves, but you are mistaken. I don't' need to tolerate your behavior and your insincerity. I just call them as I see them.

You are out of the thread.

[DBMormon]

Sure, I'm fine with becoming a better person. But there are a million paths to that goal and Mormonism isn't the best one. Like I said, Mormons are expected to follow a fallible prophet with exactness without a way to determine if his counsel really comes from god.

Once again, bring mercy, bring love. But leave the judgment and the laundry list of prohibitions at home, especially if you can't get even figure out if those things are opinion.

Mormonism isn't the best one -

your opinion

My opinion - It is the best path... It is the path that forces you to the precipice of faith and makes you choose between faith and unbelief. Is it the only path... unlike many LDS who would disagree, I too believe there are many paths in this life that can assist us in this sanctification process, though this is the Church where God placed his authority and ordinances that carry his sanction.

We are left to agree to disagree

Mormons are expected to follow a fallible prophet

Very true

But so were Muslims, followers or non-followers of old testament Prophets like Moses, Noah, David, Solomon, and Elisha and EIlijah

So were Followers Of Peter James and John.

In fact it can be said of any group following a prophet throughout history in search of God and in becoming like him, that they must follow the falliable earthly man who was called of God. Weak things made strong must be learned from experience and Grace and not come as a birthright.

Once again, bring mercy, bring love. But leave the judgment and the laundry list of prohibitions at home, especially if you can't get even figure out if those things are opinion.

And yet Moses, Noah, Peter, Paul, David, Solomon, and all of scripture is full of do's and don'ts.

I have my own list of issues I wonder about, things I struggle with, venom I spew. But in the end I choose to believe in God, in his Son, and in his Church. We each have to make our choices but we must be careful not to shove our choice down another's throat forcing their choice to match ours. I am grateful for agency and am also grateful you have yours.

[DBMormon]

ALSO Grimace - (purple is my favorite color by the way) Where ever you find peace in this life, have at it, and god bless you as you seek it. But I agree with an earlier Post. Alma 32 - says we test various principles and "truths" and if they bear fruit we stay with it, and if it doesn't we set those things down and seek elsewhere. Here I find what I need to become like my Father in Heaven. I feel God has placed me here and has asked me to accept his truth here.

[Tacenda]

I tolerate fools poorly. I tolerate sanctimonious ones even worse. Please do not attempt to play word games with me. Who was Jesus talking to when he said come unto me? Come on, you can think of the right answer; just take a leap of faith, oh, maybe not. Jesus' invitation was to everyone. Let's try another; did Jesus appreciate and did the early apostles confirm the need for prophets and apostles? No need to think too hard, the answer is yes. Where in these topics is it proclaimed that it is just for LDS or Mormons? Viola, you now have your answer. Quit the BS.

God needs to tell you what he thinks because you are simply a mortal and cannot tell the difference between an eternal truth and the lint in your navel. Do you think that you are fully capable of enlightenment on your own? If so, why on God's green earth are you here? Go out and find your Nirvana and meditate on the great probability that you don't know that you don't know.

I tend to treat fools harshly. I tend to treat those that are sanctimonious even more harshly. Your typical pseudo-intellectual drivel repels me and repels all those who are serious about God, his teachings, and our purpose on this earth. You the type of individual when found in the temple dong business, exchanging money, etc., Jesus prompted excluded them from the temple grounds. You may think that everyone should treat you with kid-gloves, but you are mistaken. I don't' need to tolerate your behavior and your insincerity. I just call them as I see them.

Just because he doesn't think like you? Maybe I missed something in another post, but this isn't going to make any headway with Grimace speaking or reacting the way you have here.

[Glenn101]

Blind obedience is better than rebellion or disobedience. Not everyone is equipped to know when a prophet is making a mistake; and some people who think they know, don't.

I really disagree with that point. Blind obedience can lead to something like the Mountain Meadows Massacre.

Glenn

[Glenn101]

Sure, I'm fine with becoming a better person. But there are a million paths to that goal and Mormonism isn't the best one. Like I said, Mormons are expected to follow a fallible prophet with exactness without a way to determine if his counsel really comes from god.

Once again, bring mercy, bring love. But leave the judgment and the laundry list of prohibitions at home, especially if you can't get even figure out if those things are opinion.

Grimace, I don't know that there are a million paths to becoming a better person, but that is really irrelevant to the discussion. The problem with following any person is that all men are fallible. But fallible men are what God has to work with, to lead His people here on this earth.

You may not feel that Mormonism is the best way to becoming a better person. That is an opinion, of course. However, Jesus Christ, through His chosen prophet(s), had declared that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints is His restored Church, and it is the only way for man to achieve salvation and exaltation. You have the opportunity to ask Him here on this earth. In the next life, you will have the opportunity to hear it from His own lips. But right now, we have the fallible prophets that we are to listen to for revelation that comes from Jesus.

Glenn

[shalamabobbi]

Grimace's take on things in a scientific analogy:

Einstein was wrong to reject Bohr's conclusions. The scientists are fallible. Therefore toss out all of science.

Once again, bring mercy, bring love. But leave the judgement and the laundry list of prohibitions at home

You do realize the self-contradictory nature of this position, No?

If there are no prohibitions, there is no sin and no need for "mercy" or forgiveness in the first place.

And if sin is wrong and damages those who engage in it, how is there any love involved with its acceptance?

Edited September 4, 2012 by shalamabobbi

[zerinus]

I really disagree with that point. Blind obedience can lead to something like the Mountain Meadows Massacre.

Glenn

MMM was not blind obedience. It was not obedience at all.

[mfbukowski]

I am aware that LDS are more consistent in their attitudes toward various types of sex outside marriage, perhaps more consistent than other Christian denominations. It is my impression that they practice what they preach. That was the reason for "few," "nominal" and "assume" in my post. This is a church with 15 million members. Anything is possible at the fringes. Also, I wrote, "I'm bracketing the issue of the relationship between policy and doctrine or scripture, and the relationship between same-sex temple marriage and secular same-sex marriage."

What I was trying to convey is that hypocritical foot-dragging was not the reason for the church's lack of embrace of the same-sex marriage movement in the USA. There may be good reasons we aren't aware of. You point out there are reasons we *are* aware of, including reasons based on scripture. I was addressing the viewpoint of those who may find obedience a challenge and find those reasons unconvincing. I can see how I may assume too much for the sake of argument.

Huh? I'm a little thick.

Can you say that in about 20 words or less?

It might be a quality to cultivate.

I was addressing the viewpoint of those who may find obedience a challenge and find those reasons unconvincing.

Those folks probably don't belong in the church.

You never know how a lifestyle works until you live it.

Edited September 4, 2012 by mfbukowski

[cinepro]

MMM was not blind obedience. It was not obedience at all.

Most of the men involved were being obedient to somebody.

[zerinus]

Most of the men involved were being obedient to somebody.

They were obedient to nobody but themselves. They took upon themselves to do something that the Church had not commanded, sanctioned, or authorised. I suppose they took them to be enemies, and decided to take revenge--something that the gospel forbids.

[zerinus]

He said mostly ignore the manual.

The manual should not be ignored at all, not even partly, never mind mostly.

I have done that plenty and taught by the spirit. I disagree once again with you. The teachers that read from the lesson verbatim are missing the directive to let the spirit guide you and are taking the easy way out, many from a lack of preparation (many... not all).

One cannot teach by the Spirit by ignoring the manual. Preparation does not mean ignoring the manual.

Edited September 4, 2012 by zerinus

[sethpayne]

I really disagree with that point. Blind obedience can lead to something like the Mountain Meadows Massacre.

Glenn

But according to Church teachings shouldn't those men have been blessed for following their Priesthood leader? Or does that only apply to the President of the Church?

As it turns out many of these men led lives of shame and regret.

This thread illustrates that some believe we have an obligation to follow the teachings of the modern prophet, right or wrong, and we will be blessed for it. I, for one, don't believe BY had anything to do with the MMM and believe it was mostly Issac Haight (the Stake Pres).

Does the MMM teach us that we must follow the Church president, right or wrong, but we can safely ignore counsel and instructions from all others?

I'm of the personal opinion that the spirit reigns supreme and that if the spirit says X, do X.

Edited September 4, 2012 by sethpayne

[sethpayne]

They were obedient to nobody but themselves. They took upon themselves to do something that the Church had not commanded, sanctioned, or authorised. I suppose they took them to be enemies, and decided to take revenge--something that the gospel forbids.

Their Stake President and Bishop gave them an order and they followed it. And BTW .... D&C doesn't forbid it. It only forbids not coming down on an enemy if they have attacked you less than 4 times - down through 4 generations!!. The people in Southern Utah believed this train to include ancestors of those who had killed Joseph Smith. As such, they were following the D&C -- at least their interpretation of it.

[mfbukowski]

I'm of the personal opinion that the spirit reigns supreme and that if the spirit says X, do X.

I agree and don't see any other option that makes sense. If you are in the church in the first place because the spirit told you to be, why would you now ignore the spirit because some human told you differently?

[zerinus]

Their Stake President and Bishop gave them an order and they followed it. And BTW .... D&C doesn't forbid it. It only forbids not coming down on an enemy if they have attacked you less than 4 times - down through 4 generations!!. The people in Southern Utah believed this train to include ancestors of those who had killed Joseph Smith. As such, they were following the D&C -- at least their interpretation of it.

I don't know whom they were following, but it was not the prophets and Apostles of the Church. There is no law in Mormonism that says if your bishop tells you to go and murder people, you go and do it.

As for scriptural teachings, the Book of Mormon forbids taking revange on your enemy (Mormon 3:15; 8:20). And your interpretation of D&C 98 is utterly erroneous. It refers to people who are actually attacking you; and even then, you take up arms in selfe defense after having been commanded by the Lord. It doesn't mean that you kill people who are peacefully passing through your land.

[KevinG]

This hypothetical discussion based on absolutes is meaningless.

Of course we balance the direction of our leaders with the direction of the Holy Spirit. Brigham had a few strong things to say about that.

Of course we sustain our leaders by helping them to do a better job. That means we counsel with them, not obey them unquestioningly.

Of course leaders will make mistakes. The Lord promises we will be blessed for our honest efforts despite any mistakes that are made.

Living a life in the gospel that insures the Lord's house is a house of order, through counsels and inspired leadership is a lifelong balance between obedience and inspiration.

So what does exactness mean in this context. It means a good faith effort to do the right thing. It does not contradict the fact we and our leaders are human beings and subject to mortality.

Edited September 4, 2012 by KevinG