David T Posted December 7, 2013 Posted December 7, 2013 No, the Church notices that the leaders pondered that he made promises that in the future (specifically in the millennium or afterward) they would have the opportunity. You claimed BYs words were inspired and prophetic.I wanted to see what words you believe are inspired and prophetic.
BCSpace Posted December 7, 2013 Posted December 7, 2013 No, the Church notices that the leaders pondered that he made promises that in the future (specifically in the millennium or afterward) they would have the opportunity. That's right. Notice that in the statement it's President Brigham Young this and President Brigham Young that until you get to this part and now it's the prophet Brigham Young. Nothing could be clearer. You claimed BYs words were inspired and prophetic.I wanted to see what words you believe are inspired and prophetic. The Church has doctrinally established what those words are in the very statement in question: In 1850, the U.S. Congress created Utah Territory, and the U.S. president appointed Brigham Young to the position of territorial governor. Southerners who had converted to the Church and migrated to Utah with their slaves raised the question of slavery’s legal status in the territory. In two speeches delivered before the Utah territorial legislature in January and February 1852, Brigham Young announced a policy restricting men of black African descent from priesthood ordination. At the same time, President Young said that at some future day, black Church members would “have [all] the privilege and more” enjoyed by other members.8
bluebell Posted December 7, 2013 Posted December 7, 2013 That's right. Notice that in the statement it's President Brigham Young this and President Brigham Young that until you get to this part and now it's the prophet Brigham Young. Nothing could be clearer. The Church has doctrinally established what those words are in the very statement in question: I'm not getting that at all from what the church said there. The church is simply relaying what BY said on the topic. I see nothing that looks like the church is trying to make that statement look any more prophetic than anything else that BY said on the topic. I think you are reading way more into that paragraph than is actually there. 1
Senator Posted December 7, 2013 Posted December 7, 2013 (edited) The Church has doctrinally established what those words are in the very statement in question: But the Church has just denounced any theory or explanation for the ban. That would include any propounded by B. Young. From the recently released article on race and priesthood: "Over time, Church leaders and members advanced many theories to explain the priesthood and temple restrictions. None of these explanations is accepted today as the official doctrine of the Church." Edited December 7, 2013 by Senator 1
Stone holm Posted December 7, 2013 Posted December 7, 2013 (edited) That's right. Notice that in the statement it's President Brigham Young this and President Brigham Young that until you get to this part and now it's the prophet Brigham Young. Nothing could be clearer.The Church has doctrinally established what those words are in the very statement in question:This is not consistent with the inspired spin doctrine which requires that we come up with some cosmic reason behind every cultural practice of the Churc. Edited December 7, 2013 by Stone holm
canard78 Posted December 7, 2013 Posted December 7, 2013 Just wondering what would count as "evidence". That of course is a tricky thing in this context, and goes to the core question of what constitutes "doctrine" and how we know that doctrine itself is inspired. BC's usual answer is that if it is published by the church it is doctrine, yet of course we know of lots of things published by the church which are not doctrine. And what does "published by the church" mean? And where is that defined? None of it is defined of course. So to me, the whole discussion is problematic. On the other hand what would constitute evidence that it was NOT inspired? That's at least just as problematic. If I asked for evidence that we claim that the Word of Wisdom was claimed to be introduced by revelation I might be given this as evidence: http://josephsmithpapers.org/paperSummary/revelation-27-february-1833-dc-89?dm=image-and-text&zm=zoom-inner&tm=expanded&p=1&s=undefined&sm=none I'm not saying that this provides evidence that it really was a revelation, but at least we can base it on what is claimed to be the will and voice of God. We've nothing like that for the priesthood ban.
mfbukowski Posted December 8, 2013 Posted December 8, 2013 No, I have claimed the Church compares BY's institution of the policy with specific prophecy which is as close as one can get to declaring the policy itself as inspired. Are you claiming the Church is wrong about BY making those promises?"As close as one can get"? How many inches is that? Is it like being close to being pregnant? Cleanliness is next to Godliness and Godliness is next to impossible, therefore Cleanliness is next to impossible. 2
mfbukowski Posted December 8, 2013 Posted December 8, 2013 Wala, The prophecy has been fulfilled.http://french.about.com/od/vocabulary/a/voila.htm 2
canard78 Posted December 8, 2013 Posted December 8, 2013 http://french.about.com/od/vocabulary/a/voila.htm Thanks... I wasn't sure I could ignore it for much longer.
california boy Posted December 8, 2013 Posted December 8, 2013 http://french.about.com/od/vocabulary/a/voila.htmI thought I was making up a word. lol. Thanks for pointing out what I met to say.
mormonnewb Posted December 9, 2013 Posted December 9, 2013 I thought I was making up a word. lol. Thanks for pointing out what I met to say. Don't take it too hard. I recently used "viola" in that context. And since I am completely dependent upon spellcheck these days, I didn't see the error until it was too late. In hindsight, I think "wala" would have probably made the point better.
Stone holm Posted December 10, 2013 Posted December 10, 2013 I just read an interesting quote supposedly by Voltaire on the internet, "To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize." Does anyone know if that really is a Voltaire quote?
bluebell Posted December 10, 2013 Posted December 10, 2013 I just read an interesting quote supposedly by Voltaire on the internet, "To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize." Does anyone know if that really is a Voltaire quote? Yes, it appears he really said that. He also said "A witty saying proves nothing." 1
Stone holm Posted December 10, 2013 Posted December 10, 2013 Yes, it appears he really said that. He also said "A witty saying proves nothing." Voltaire is one of my favorites. There is some truth to be had from both sayings.
bluebell Posted December 10, 2013 Posted December 10, 2013 (edited) Voltaire is one of my favorites. There is some truth to be had from both sayings. I've only read one work by Voltaire (and i don't remember what the name of it was) but every woman in it was either 'ravaged' by a man or was on the verge of it, and then spent the rest of their lives wasting away into old hags because of being at the mercy of the men around them. I really didn't get it. Edited December 10, 2013 by bluebell
mfbukowski Posted December 11, 2013 Posted December 11, 2013 I just read an interesting quote supposedly by Voltaire on the internet, ...Gosh I didn't know that he commented on the internet- I thought it hadn't been invented yet!
Stone holm Posted December 11, 2013 Posted December 11, 2013 Gosh I didn't know that he commented on the internet- I thought it hadn't been invented yet! Yeah, isn't it amazing they installed a server in the Spirit World expect Joseph will resume personal direction of this dispensation at any moment.
Recommended Posts