I Wish The Canon Would Expand Just A Teeny Bit

[Nathair/|\]

Most, if not all of the stuff above would be wonderful, plus the Zohar, the vedas, the Norse sagas, the Barddas of Iolo Morganwg, and many many other revealed texts, however I have to ask:

Do the Saints as a whole make full use of the scriptures we have and claim the blessings pertaining to them?

[Ahab]

Why would we need a recording when we have a living prophet? If it was such significant doctrine, why doesn't the lord just reveal it through his living prophet so there's no more guessing what exactly he meant?

It was a living prophet who shared the doctrine to begin with, and if we have trouble understanding what he meant we can always ask God for help through Jesus and the Holy Spirit.

[CASteinman]

More Church history could be added as scripture. The Bible and BoM are simply Church history including the notable religiously related events. I would like to see a divinely inspired/guided account of our history canonized, the same as the Israelite history and the Nephite/Lamanite history, so that it can be studied more thoroughly.

That would seem to me to be a whole new separate book. An interesting idea.

[daz2]

My point was not that the Proclamation does not address the Church's law of chastity--it certainly does that by implication. My point was that the Proclamation says nothing about whether, as a legal matter, those who choose not to live that law should or should not have legal recognition. For example, the Proclamation is silent about whether Church members should favor or oppose laws recognizing polygyny, which is legal and has long existed in a number of other countries. While the Church doesn't baptize people who are in such marriages, to my knowledge, the Church has never taken the position that the laws should change there to make poygyny illegal or not recognized as a legal matter. Similarly, the Church opposes pre-marital sex, but it would be a stretch to interpret the Proclamation to mean members should favor laws making fornication illegal, or oppose laws that in some countries might prohibit it.

I also think that if, in the future, God revealed that committed same sex relationships are not inconsistent with the Proclamation, it will not be difficult to distinguish them from the Proclamation--that the Proclamation by its literal terms only addresses chastity in the context of heterosexuals.

[daz2]

As to the degrees of glory, a contemporary of Joseph Smith, Emanuel Swedenborg, taught a very similar concept, drawing it from the same verses of the New Testament. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Degrees_of_glory I have heard a number of preachers state that while we are "saved" entirely by grace without regard to our works, our works do influence the types or amounts of "rewards" we get in heaven--which, in my mind, is similar to what Joseph taught.

[daz2]

As to the Lectures on Faith, I am well aware of their decanonization in the 1920s. It is interesting to me that Elder McConkie, who was also well aware of that, still advocated treated them essentially on the same level as the standard works (notwithstanding some of the quirks in the LoF).

Part of why I doubt that the Proclamation will be added to the Standard Works any time soon is because it might be seen as a slap at the LGBT community inside or outside the Church--even though, read literally, the Proclamation is silent on that issue. That is, given that many people think Proclamation=opposition to same sex marriage or civil unions, canonizing it now might be seen as a provocative move. If anything, the Church seems to be moving toward improving relationships with the LGBT community, and canonization of the PoF might seem inconsistent with that.

[Rivers]

I vote:

1. King Follett Discourse

2. Sermon in the Grove

3. All the First Vision accounts

4. All the Books of Enoch

5. All the Apocrypha

6. A bunch of fun stuff like the Wisdom of Ben Sira, the Shepherd of Hermas, the Gospels of Thomas and Phillip, various pieces from Nag Hammadi, etc.

That would make for a very large set of scriptures for all of us to carry around. We can always add to the digital scriptures with no problem but it wouldn't be practical to keep add to much more to the printed version.

And I would add The God Who Weeps by the Givens to that list.

Edited March 23, 2013 by Rivers

[CASteinman]

As is frequently pointed out by opponents of gay marriage, there aren't any procreative powers within a same gender couple. Technically speaking.

Its a euphemism for sexual relations.

[CASteinman]

I also think that if, in the future, God revealed that committed same sex relationships are not inconsistent with the Proclamation, it will not be difficult to distinguish them from the Proclamation--that the Proclamation by its literal terms only addresses chastity in the context of heterosexuals

They are out of harmony with the PoF and other scriptures.

The following from the PoF sews it up without being unpleasantly provocative. You should not just claim that it does not say what it says though, merely because it speaks politely.

"Gender is an essential characteristic of individual premortal, mortal, and eternal identity and purpose....We declare that God’s commandment for His children to multiply and replenish the earth remains in force. We further declare that God has commanded that the sacred powers of procreation are to be employed only between man and woman, lawfully wedded as husband and wife.... WE WARN that individuals who violate covenants of chastity... will one day stand accountable before God. ... WE CALL UPON responsible citizens and officers of government everywhere to promote those measures designed to maintain and strengthen the family as the fundamental unit of society."

Edited March 23, 2013 by CASteinman

[rockpond]

Its a euphemism for sexual relations.

Yeah, I got that. Just pointing out the little bit of irony contained therein.

[cinepro]

I vote:

1. King Follett Discourse

2. Sermon in the Grove

3. All the First Vision accounts

4. All the Books of Enoch

5. All the Apocrypha

6. A bunch of fun stuff like the Wisdom of Ben Sira, the Shepherd of Hermas, the Gospels of Thomas and Phillip, various pieces from Nag Hammadi, etc.

...and the Beatles "Abbey Road" album

[JeremyOrbe-Smith]

Oh, look out! Boy, you're gonna carry that weight, carry that weight a long time. Everybody's laughing, everybody's happy.

[Yep]

That would seem to me to be a whole new separate book. An interesting idea.

Yes, it would probably require a new separate book.

[Monster]

Joseph Smith was the last to have the kahoonas to claim what he said was scripture. Everyone since is still living in his shadow. I doubt you will see anything of substance added as scripture until another charismatic comes along.

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

Of course, I am not in charge of such things, but there are some works or documents that I wish were added to our canon. Three things that I wish were brought into the Scriptures:

1. Proclamation on the Family

2. The Living Christ

3. The King Follet Discourse (as perfected as possible).

I am fine with the first two, but as long as there is any question in a sermon that Joseph never listed as prophecy or put into print in D&C...not a good idea.

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

Joseph Smith was the last to have the kahoonas to claim what he said was scripture. Everyone since is still living in his shadow. I doubt you will see anything of substance added as scripture until another charismatic comes along.

GBH was very charismatic.

[mathonihah]

I Wish The Canon Would Expand Just A Teeny Bit

I would add a lot more! including the Lectures on Faith, and lots of (written) revelations that (I know on good authority) the Church has received, from the days of Brigham Young until now.

Of course, I am not in charge of such things, but there are some works or documents that I wish were added to our canon. Three things that I wish were brought into the Scriptures:

1. Proclamation on the Family

I have no objections to adding that to the canon, although I am not in a hurry to do it either.

2. The Living Christ

Ditto.

3. The King Follet Discourse (as perfected as possible).

Not in favor. The KFD is not the pure doctrine dictated by the Holy Ghost, but Joseph Smith's gloss on what God had revealed to him. It is not suitable for canonization. I would, however, be in favor of receiving a revelation direct from the Lord on the subject, which would be suitable for canonization.

[Stone holm]

I would favor the proclamation in favor of a collaborative economy before the P on F. I would support the King Follett Sermon except we do not have an accurate transcript , but the Snow couplet sums up the best of it anyway and would make a very nice addition to the D&C .

[DBMormon]

Let's Add The Strang scriptures and the book of Jaranek as well

[Stone holm]

Joseph Smith was the last to have the kahoonas to claim what he said was scripture. Everyone since is still living in his shadow. I doubt you will see anything of substance added as scripture until another charismatic comes along.

I tend to dislike revelation by committee, as a result the P on F tends to sound like Papal Bull to me.

[daz2]

CASteinman, thanks for quoting the language from the Proclamation. My point is that a future First Presidency could say that, even though people by implication read the Proclamation as disfavoring long term committed LGBT relationship, the wording you quote quite literally does not (except by implication, which I grant) mention them. As others point out, the "powers of procreation" are not those exercised in a homosexual relationship--it is on that basis that the defenders of Proposition 8 say that male-female relationships should be protected by marriage laws (because of the potential for procreation--i.e., procreation powers), but not those of same sex relationships (because there is not a potential for procreation--i.e., no procreation powers). The Brethren are very careful in choosing specific wording--it would not have been difficult to use the words "sexual relation", rather than "powers of procreation". In fact, in other cases in the Restored Gospel, the law of chastity is defined in terms of whether "sexual relations" are appropiate.

I don't doubt that the Church strongly condemns homosexual behavior. But that is not my point. My point is that there is some wiggle room in the Proclamation so that if God wanted to change things, God would not have to revoke or even substantially revise the Proclamation--perhaps just add a footnote or extra paragraph stating that homosexual relations as permissible only in a long term committed monogamous relationship, and in no other relationship.

I don't speak for God, for the Church, or for anyone but me. I have written elsewhere on this board my views about the Church and LGBT matters, and I will not repeat them here.

Of course, at least since the middle of the Twentieth Century the Church has strongly condemned homosexual behavior (the Book of Mormon, the Doctrine and Covenants, the Pearl of Great Price do not mention it. Joseph Smith never addressed it; I don't even know if Brigham Young said anything about it.)

Thus, if God revealed to a future FP and 12 that our understanding of the law of chastity should be modified to permit long-term committed monogamous relationships by people of the same sex, there is nothing in the Restoration scriptures that would need to be modified. And even if the Proclamation had been added as part of the Standard Works, the Proclamation might need to be supplemented with a paragraph about same sex monogamous relationships, but the rest of it could stand.

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

...and the Beatles "Abbey Road" album

That goes without saying...Pink Floyd "Brick in the wall". Edited March 24, 2013 by Bill “Papa” Lee

[Nathair/|\]

That goes without saying...Pick Floyd "Brick in the wall".

If we're going that route, Metallica's "Don't Tread on Me."

[cinepro]

Joseph Smith was the last to have the kahoonas to claim what he said was scripture. Everyone since is still living in his shadow. I doubt you will see anything of substance added as scripture until another charismatic comes along.

I have never yet preached a sermon and sent it out to the children of men, that they may not call Scripture. Let me have the privilege of correcting a sermon, and it is as good Scripture as they deserve. The people have the oracles of God continually. In the days of Joseph, revelation was given and written, and the people were driven from city to city and place to place, until we were led into these mountains. Let this [discourse] go to the people with "Thus saith the Lord," and if they do not obey it, you will see the chastening hand of the Lord upon them. But if they are plead with, and led along like children, we may come to understand the will of the Lord and he may preserve us as we desire.

Brigham Young, "Latter-Day Saint Families, etc.," (2 January 1870) Journal of Discourses 13:95-95.

http://en.fairmormon...y_past_prophets

Let it never be said that Brigham Young did not also have kahoonas.

Edited March 24, 2013 by cinepro

[Stone holm]

Let it never be said that Brigham Young did not also have kahoonas.

Definitely enough for ten prophets, and I believe that most of the later Prophets who had been contemporaries of the Prophet Joseph had a similar set. But he does have a point that the revelations since seem to resemble business memos more and more ... I wonder the reason for that