Stone holm Posted October 5, 2013 Author Posted October 5, 2013 Let us hold hands and sing "Kum-ba-ya."And shave our beards and shorten our hair and whisper platitudes to the world...oh sorry...it was just to overwhelming to last.
DBMormon Posted October 7, 2013 Posted October 7, 2013 Good Topic. Question Is pointing out the errors in the teachings of Past Leaders in order to show to the struggling doubter Doctrine is not what he thinks it is, Speaking ill of the Lord's annointed?
Stone holm Posted October 7, 2013 Author Posted October 7, 2013 Good Topic. Question Is pointing out the errors in the teachings of Past Leaders in order to show to the struggling doubter Doctrine is not what he thinks it is, Speaking ill of the Lord's annointed?Apparently Pres Uchtdorf does not think so.
Lady_Lullaby Posted October 7, 2013 Posted October 7, 2013 Given some of the arguments and accusations aimed at various commentators on this board, there seems to be differing opinions as to what constitutes evil speaking of the Lords anointed. Anyone care to describe it? EVIL SPEAKINGSee also Contention; Gossip; Lying; RumorSaying things that are wrong, hurtful, and wicked. Often in scripture such speaking is directed at a person with the specific intent to cause pain.Keep thy tongue from evil:Ps. 34:13; ( 1 Pet. 3:10; )An ungodly man diggeth up evil:Prov. 16:27;Blessed are ye, when men shall say all manner of evil against you falsely:Matt. 5:11; ( 3 Ne. 12:11; )Out of the heart proceed evil thoughts:Matt. 15:19; ( Mark 7:21; )Thou shalt not speak evil of the ruler:Acts 23:5;Let all evil speaking be put away from you:Eph. 4:31;Speak not evil one of another:James 4:11;See that there is no backbiting, nor evil speaking:D&C 20:54;
DBMormon Posted October 7, 2013 Posted October 7, 2013 Apparently Pres Uchtdorf does not think so. He didn't name anyone specifically
Bill “Papa” Lee Posted October 7, 2013 Posted October 7, 2013 Constructive criticism is not evil speaking. Just ask Dallin Oaks.Everyone things their criticism is constructive, while others view the same a Destructive. But some are without doubt.
Stone holm Posted October 7, 2013 Author Posted October 7, 2013 He didn't name anyone specificallyNo he didn't. Would you have liked it better had he checked off the list?
benbritton Posted October 7, 2013 Posted October 7, 2013 It's obviously a touchy subject, calling out past prophets on mistakes. However, the church has done it in the past at least with Adam-God doctrine (I recently wrote an article addressing that issue and how believing members of the church can deal with it here). I think if we are careful to take our cue from what church leaders have already said then we'll certainly be on the Lord's side, especially if we have a positive purpose like helping others deal with the issues resulting from said mistakes.
Stone holm Posted October 7, 2013 Author Posted October 7, 2013 It's obviously a touchy subject, calling out past prophets on mistakes. However, the church has done it in the past at least with Adam-God doctrine (I recently wrote an article addressing that issue and how believing members of the church can deal with it here). I think if we are careful to take our cue from what church leaders have already said then we'll certainly be on the Lord's side, especially if we have a positive purpose like helping others deal with the issues resulting from said mistakes.As I understand it BY was not a past Prophet when Orson Pratt called him out on it. I suspect that Pres Uchtdorf was referring to more recent gaffes such as some of the past racial comments and ongoing citation of some Cold War era rhetoric, but that is just my speculation.
Stone holm Posted October 7, 2013 Author Posted October 7, 2013 Only slightly related, I heard parts of the next to last speaker's talk from an adjoining room did he suggest that our views on SSM would be part of Christ last judgment interview. I asked my wife who was sitting in the room with the computer, but she confessed to dozing off because of all the gender comments.
Storm Rider Posted October 7, 2013 Posted October 7, 2013 There have been times when I thought this verse was really only addressing the leadership, but because of this thread I have come to a fuller understanding that it is meant for all. We have a spiritual obligation to learn to curb our tongue and thoughts in regards to others. The old adage that we all heard in our youth rings just as important today, "If you cannot say something nice don't say anything at all."
Stone holm Posted October 7, 2013 Author Posted October 7, 2013 There have been times when I thought this verse was really only addressing the leadership, but because of this thread I have come to a fuller understanding that it is meant for all. We have a spiritual obligation to learn to curb our tongue and thoughts in regards to others. The old adage that we all heard in our youth rings just as important today, "If you cannot say something nice don't say anything at all." And then quietness descended upon this Board....
Scott Lloyd Posted October 7, 2013 Posted October 7, 2013 (edited) It's obviously a touchy subject, calling out past prophets on mistakes. However, the church has done it in the past at least with Adam-God doctrine (I recently wrote an article addressing that issue and how believing members of the church can deal with it here). I think if we are careful to take our cue from what church leaders have already said then we'll certainly be on the Lord's side, especially if we have a positive purpose like helping others deal with the issues resulting from said mistakes.Interesting take on Adam-God. It had never occurred to me before that Brigham Young was giving a garbled version of something Joseph Smith had given him earlier that was, in itself, incomplete or imperfectly understood by Joseph himself. And by the time it gets to us it is so hopelessly messed up that it must be disavowed and rejected by later prophets. Food for thought. Edited October 7, 2013 by Scott Lloyd
Scott Lloyd Posted October 7, 2013 Posted October 7, 2013 (edited) Good Topic. Question Is pointing out the errors in the teachings of Past Leaders in order to show to the struggling doubter Doctrine is not what he thinks it is, Speaking ill of the Lord's annointed?I think that would depend on the manner in which one went about pointing out the past errors. To take an example, Elder McConkie was a noble Church leader and apostle. The good that he accomplished in his life far outweighs the occasional incorrect things he spoke or wrote. Yet I occasionally see him unmercifully and uncharitably disparaged to the point that I can't help but conclude the critic is speaking evil of the Lord's anointed. Edited October 7, 2013 by Scott Lloyd
benbritton Posted October 7, 2013 Posted October 7, 2013 Interesting take on Adam-God. It had never occurred to me before that Brigham Young was giving a garbled version of something Joseph Smith had given him earlier that was, in itself, incomplete or imperfectly understood by Joseph himself. And by the time it gets to us it is so hopelessly messed up that it must be disavowed and rejected by later prophets. Food for thought.Thanks, Scott. It's one possibility of a few that make sense to me. John Buerger lays out some interesting facts as far as what Brigham might have been going on too. I link to his article at the end of my post.
Brenda Posted October 7, 2013 Posted October 7, 2013 I think that would depend on the manner in which one went about pointing out the past errors. To take an example, Elder McConkie was a noble Church leader and apostle. The good that he accomplished in his life far outweighs the occasional incorrect things he spoke or wrote. Yet I occasionally see him unmercifully and uncharitably disparaged to the point that I can't help but conclude the critic is speaking evil of the Lord's anointed.I SO agree. Elder McConkie, with all his human flaws, dwarfed the rest of us in spirituality. It seems to be fashionable now to zero in on LDS leaders' mistakes, and totally miss the volumes we could learn from them. Perfect example of trees VS forest. 1
canard78 Posted October 7, 2013 Posted October 7, 2013 EVIL SPEAKINGSee also Contention; Gossip; Lying; RumorSaying things that are wrong, hurtful, and wicked. Often in scripture such speaking is directed at a person with the specific intent to cause pain.Keep thy tongue from evil:Ps. 34:13; ( 1 Pet. 3:10; )An ungodly man diggeth up evil:Prov. 16:27;Blessed are ye, when men shall say all manner of evil against you falsely:Matt. 5:11; ( 3 Ne. 12:11; )Out of the heart proceed evil thoughts:Matt. 15:19; ( Mark 7:21; )Thou shalt not speak evil of the ruler:Acts 23:5;Let all evil speaking be put away from you:Eph. 4:31;Speak not evil one of another:James 4:11;See that there is no backbiting, nor evil speaking:D&C 20:54; Excellent. So therefore saying "I don't agree..." isn't Evil Speaking.
Stone holm Posted October 7, 2013 Author Posted October 7, 2013 I SO agree. Elder McConkie, with all his human flaws, dwarfed the rest of us in spirituality. It seems to be fashionable now to zero in on LDS leaders' mistakes, and totally miss the volumes we could learn from them. Perfect example of trees VS forest. Well yes he was a much loved and beloved Apostle who worked tirelessly for the Lord....but given label that he laid on persons of African descent, I think pointing out the mistakes is more than just a fashion statement. The reason being that if we ladel out only praise under such circumstances we run the very serious risk of non-members and even some members mistakenly thinking that he absolutely nailed everything right all the time. To abuse his character is absolutely innappropriate, but to attack some of his conceptual doctrines as being erroneous is appropriate.
Scott Lloyd Posted October 7, 2013 Posted October 7, 2013 Well yes he was a much loved and beloved Apostle who worked tirelessly for the Lord....but given label that he laid on persons of African descent, I think pointing out the mistakes is more than just a fashion statement. The reason being that if we ladel out only praise under such circumstances we run the very serious risk of non-members and even some members mistakenly thinking that he absolutely nailed everything right all the time. To abuse his character is absolutely innappropriate, but to attack some of his conceptual doctrines as being erroneous is appropriate.Which brings us back to my response to the question posed by DBMormon: The way one goes about disagreeing with past pronouncments makes a great deal of difference in determining whether one is speaking evil of the Lord's anointed. 1
Brenda Posted October 7, 2013 Posted October 7, 2013 (edited) Which brings us back to my response to the question posed by DBMormon: The way one goes about disagreeing with past pronouncments makes a great deal of difference in determining whether one is speaking evil of the Lord's anointed.I agree with you and Stone. We can correct his errors why emphasizing all that he got right, so as to not create doubt. Remember his final testimony? I will never forget it. Some of the most powerful words spoken. That's what I'm talking about. Edited October 7, 2013 by Brenda
canard78 Posted October 7, 2013 Posted October 7, 2013 Which brings us back to my response to the question posed by DBMormon: The way one goes about disagreeing with past pronouncments makes a great deal of difference in determining whether one is speaking evil of the Lord's anointed. I agree with this. Sometimes people flinch when I say (as respectfully as I can), "I don't agree with the conclusion Elder XYZ reached" and warn me of speaking evil etc. I don't think I am.
Stone holm Posted October 8, 2013 Author Posted October 8, 2013 Which brings us back to my response to the question posed by DBMormon: The way one goes about disagreeing with past pronouncments makes a great deal of difference in determining whether one is speaking evil of the Lord's anointed.Scott this is embarrassing you keep saying things I agree with.
Recommended Posts