SeekingUnderstanding Posted April 10, 2014 Posted April 10, 2014 Be careful, just because you reject them does not invalidate them. It just shifts the responsibility and consequences for the rejection squarely to your shoulders. Once they have admonished, taught etc then they no longer have to answer for not telling you but you are directly responsible and the consequences are yours. Its called AGENCY.It shifts nothing. I am just as responsible if I accept what they say and it is error as I am when I reject what they say and it turns out to be error.
wtrdog Posted April 10, 2014 Posted April 10, 2014 No, that is always what the God has advocated. You didn't see the little bit I highlighted did you? Part of receiving that word is verify it with your own inquiry just as Nephi did. The highlighted portion is separate from the statement that the Leaders = God. Don't change the subject. Either we should treat everything coming from the mouth of a leader as if it came straight from Christ Himself or we shouldn't. Which is it? Hallstrom thinks we should. Hallstrom didn't say, "Hey, you're going to hear a lot of opinions here. You should earnestly pray about what's right for you." Yes, they do say to pray, no doubt, but generally the impression I get is that "if your answer isn't the same as what I just told you, you need to keep praying, cause you clearly didn't get the right answer." They aren't encouraging people to pray for their own guidance so much as telling people to pray to get an answer confirming that they should do that the leader said. Amiwrong? 1
ERayR Posted April 10, 2014 Posted April 10, 2014 (edited) The highlighted portion is separate from the statement that the Leaders = God. Don't change the subject. Either we should treat everything coming from the mouth of a leader as if it came straight from Christ Himself or we shouldn't. Which is it? Hallstrom thinks we should. Hallstrom didn't say, "Hey, you're going to hear a lot of opinions here. You should earnestly pray about what's right for you." Yes, they do say to pray, no doubt, but generally the impression I get is that "if your answer isn't the same as what I just told you, you need to keep praying, cause you clearly didn't get the right answer." They aren't encouraging people to pray for their own guidance so much as telling people to pray to get an answer confirming that they should do that the leader said. Amiwrong? Nowhere does the Church , it's doctrine or teachings say Leaders = God. Come back when you can present the argument honestly. Edited April 10, 2014 by ERayR
wtrdog Posted April 11, 2014 Posted April 11, 2014 Nowhere does the Church , it's doctrine or teachings say Leaders = God. Come back when you can present the argument honestly. Have you been paying attention to this thread at all? Read the quote by Hallstrom. He said the voice of the church leaders is the SAME as Christ's voice. They claim to speak FOR Christ, literally.
ERayR Posted April 11, 2014 Posted April 11, 2014 (edited) Have you been paying attention to this thread at all? Read the quote by Hallstrom. He said the voice of the church leaders is the SAME as Christ's voice. They claim to speak FOR Christ, literally. Are you not familiar with the scripture he is quoting? It is D&C 1:38. It is not talking about the leaders being equal to God and Christ it is a warning not to reject the message because it is delivered by a GA because the message and warning is just as valid whether Christ delivers it in person or through his messengers - the GAs. It in no way intimates they are equal to God and Christ. 38 What I the Lord have spoken, I have spoken, and I excuse not myself; and though the heavens and the earth pass away, my aword shall not pass away, but shall all be bfulfilled, whether by mine own cvoice or by the dvoice of my eservants, it is the fsame. Edited April 11, 2014 by ERayR 3
wysteria Posted April 11, 2014 Posted April 11, 2014 #2 - It is an easy assumption to make but one must take on further study to realize this is not as one would think on the surface. I would simply think by now that we have moved past some of the nonsense of Mormonism.... Today I am incredibly dissapointed not by his error which is easy enough to make, though incorrect... but rather our need to defend nonsense to the nth degree to justify our false assumption in what a prophet is and isn't Being my first time to reply, I hope that my comments are taken with great patience. I have enjoyed reading all the comments thus far except for the one quoted above. I believe that Elder Bednar is normally a very conscience speaker and writer. I do not think he would have either confirmed previous revelations indiscriminately, nor spoken without a lot of research and prayer. Many people of other faiths are also struggling with the question of the date of Jesus's birth. There is much current debate and research for a spring date and April 6th. It does have ecliastical significance and importance and one could easily see its ramifications in other revelations, future revelations and the way that many passages are read and understood in such a new context. If we re-date things like the journey to Jerusalem, when he was baptized, when Mary was visited, etc....you can see where it is not just a mark on some old calendar. To infer that it is nonsense or justification for the sake of being "right" is fairly insulting. Elder Bednar surely consulted the president or three before just "throwing it out there" in the middle of GC. He is confirming what 2 other prophets have already said to be true. Consensus does not make a revelation more valid does it? I believe that Elder Bednar's intelligence and sensitivity to the Church's doctrine deserves a much more considered view of what he is saying....and not just that one fact...but also in the context of his entire speech. Truly this is a very important point...especially considering it coincides with the anniversary of church. I just wanted to question the shrugging off of what I see to be of greater importance in the study of the Bible and doctrine. Most Respectfully.......
Tacenda Posted April 11, 2014 Posted April 11, 2014 (edited) I think Elder Bednard and 99.9 % of the members out there don't even think about such things. The only time he would is if he lived on this board like we do. I exaggerate, but isn't it true? In fact, just a short time ago it seemed we were discussing this very thing, and some were stating they don't really believe it's doctrine about Jesus being born on April 6th. But hey, not everyone follows stuff like we do on here. ETA: When I say the members don't think of such things, I mean they hear a doctrine once and its kind of permanent, never really questioned. Therefore, Elder Bednar never got the memo it was any different. Edited April 11, 2014 by Tacenda
DBMormon Posted April 11, 2014 Author Posted April 11, 2014 #2 - It is an easy assumption to make but one must take on further study to realize this is not as one would think on the surface. I would simply think by now that we have moved past some of the nonsense of Mormonism.... Today I am incredibly dissapointed not by his error which is easy enough to make, though incorrect... but rather our need to defend nonsense to the nth degree to justify our false assumption in what a prophet is and isn't Being my first time to reply, I hope that my comments are taken with great patience. I have enjoyed reading all the comments thus far except for the one quoted above. I believe that Elder Bednar is normally a very conscience speaker and writer. I do not think he would have either confirmed previous revelations indiscriminately, nor spoken without a lot of research and prayer. Many people of other faiths are also struggling with the question of the date of Jesus's birth. There is much current debate and research for a spring date and April 6th. It does have ecliastical significance and importance and one could easily see its ramifications in other revelations, future revelations and the way that many passages are read and understood in such a new context. If we re-date things like the journey to Jerusalem, when he was baptized, when Mary was visited, etc....you can see where it is not just a mark on some old calendar. To infer that it is nonsense or justification for the sake of being "right" is fairly insulting. Elder Bednar surely consulted the president or three before just "throwing it out there" in the middle of GC. He is confirming what 2 other prophets have already said to be true. Consensus does not make a revelation more valid does it? I believe that Elder Bednar's intelligence and sensitivity to the Church's doctrine deserves a much more considered view of what he is saying....and not just that one fact...but also in the context of his entire speech. Truly this is a very important point...especially considering it coincides with the anniversary of church. I just wanted to question the shrugging off of what I see to be of greater importance in the study of the Bible and doctrine. Most Respectfully....... I very much respect your thoughts. My suggestion would be this. Keep your eyes open and watch for this to be addressed soon in some way even if very small. 1
DBMormon Posted April 11, 2014 Author Posted April 11, 2014 Have you been paying attention to this thread at all? Read the quote by Hallstrom. He said the voice of the church leaders is the SAME as Christ's voice. They claim to speak FOR Christ, literally. It is a tough bind WTRDOG. They do when speaking as prophets, speak for the LORD. If they caution people not to accept their every word, people will ignore and discard way more then they what is not of God. If they don't caution people, people will be fanatics and take every word to be the will of the LORD. Therefore there must be balance. That balance in some ways may seem disproportionate (not 50/50) but in reality it is proportionate to the the need of those who would discard too much and those who would be fanatics. For talks offering the counter balanceCheck out https://www.lds.org/general-conference/2012/04/the-doctrine-of-christ?lang=enghttps://www.lds.org/general-conference/2012/10/trial-of-your-faith?lang=enghttps://www.lds.org/broadcasts/article/print/ces-devotionals/2013/01/what-is-truth?lang=eng We all too often want to pick apart what seems like an unfair balance but usually it is there and those who have ears can hear and eyes to see can see
David T Posted April 11, 2014 Posted April 11, 2014 (edited) I very much respect your thoughts. My suggestion would be this. Keep your eyes open and watch for this to be addressed soon in some way even if very small. Because of the 'we know by revelation' claim, this is going to be a very, very tricky thing to back away from. I don't envy those who might or might not be tasked with it. Although the most awesome thing would be if Bednar himself would sound off, acknowledging the uncertainty on it. That would be a big deal, IMHO, and would give me a lot of additional respect for him. I think this is a perfect illustration of President Uchtdorf's observation that "Unfortunately, we sometimes don’t seek revelation or answers from the scriptures or the handbooks because we think we know the answers already. Brothers and sisters, as good as our previous experience may be, if we stop asking questions, stop thinking, stop pondering, we can thwart the revelations of the Spirit. Remember, it was the questions young Joseph asked that opened the door for the restoration of all things. We can block the growth and knowledge our Heavenly Father intends for us. How often has the Holy Spirit tried to tell us something we needed to know but couldn’t get past the massive iron gate of what we thought we already knew?" This is a significant opportunity, and for it to be able to be done with something so small as a birthday is well, pretty much a godsend. I really, really, really hope they take advantage of it. Seriously - a note by Bednar addressing it and doing more than just "A prophet said it, so it must be true" would raise my view of him by several notches. I already do think he has taught very good things, and does much good. But this would put humility and willingness to be corrected on display. Something I value deeply in a Leader. Edited April 11, 2014 by David T 1
wtrdog Posted April 11, 2014 Posted April 11, 2014 Are you not familiar with the scripture he is quoting? It is D&C 1:38. It is not talking about the leaders being equal to God and Christ it is a warning not to reject the message because it is delivered by a GA because the message and warning is just as valid whether Christ delivers it in person or through his messengers - the GAs. It in no way intimates they are equal to God and Christ. 38 What I the Lord have spoken, I have spoken, and I excuse not myself; and though the heavens and the earth pass away, my aword shall not pass away, but shall all be bfulfilled, whether by mine own cvoice or by the dvoice of my eservants, it is the fsame. Yes, this is true. But perhaps this has been grossly misinterpreted...? If you read verse 37 the "what I have spoken" is specifically referring to the scriptures. I don't disagree that when moved by the spirit, when receiving official revelation, yes, the "voice of the servants" is the same as Christ. The problem is: Define Official Revelation! Leaders are talked about like every word they utter is coming straight from Christ, but that isn't true. Clearly that wasn't the case with Bednar. To my knowledge it's only official revelation if it's declared as such, and that hasn't happened since 1978. Brigham Young said, “Is this (the spirit of prophesy) the privilege of every person? It is.” (Journal of Discourses 3:89) Joseph Smith said, “Salvation cannot come without revelation; it is in vain for anyone to minister without it. No man is a minister of Jesus Christ without being a Prophet. No man can be a minister of Jesus Christ except he has the testimony of Jesus; and this is the spirit of prophecy.” (DHC 3: 389) And the scriptures also say: And others he will pacify, and lead them away in to carnal security, that they will say: All is well in Zion, yea, Zion prospereth, all is well - and thus the devil cheateth their souls, and leadeth them away carefully down to bell ... . Wo unto him that is at ease in Zion! Wo be unto him that crieth All is well! ... Cursed is he that putteth his trust in man, or maketh flesh his arm, or shall hearken unto the precepts of men, save their precepts shall be given by the power of the Holy Ghost. Wo be unto the Gentiles, saith the Lord of Hosts! For not withstanding I shall lengthen out mine arm unto them from day to day, they will deny me. When talking about putting trust in man, I wonder if idolizing leaders would fall in this category? Don't forget, WE are the gentiles. D&C 1:24-25 says that the Lord's servants aren't perfect and their errors should be made known, out in the open. We could discuss many scriptures which talk about imperfect leaders and leading the church in the wrong direction. Why does 2 Nephi 13 say, "O my people, they who lead thee cause thee to err and destroy the way of thy paths"? 1
ERayR Posted April 11, 2014 Posted April 11, 2014 Joseph Smith said, “Salvation cannot come without revelation; it is in vain for anyone to minister without it. No man is a minister of Jesus Christ without being a Prophet. No man can be a minister of Jesus Christ except he has the testimony of Jesus; and this is the spirit of prophecy.” (DHC 3: 389) Yes Joseph was quite adamant that each should prepare for and learn to receive personal revelation.
wtrdog Posted April 12, 2014 Posted April 12, 2014 Yes Joseph was quite adamant that each should prepare for and learn to receive personal revelation. Woah, woah, woah. Ought to prepare for and learn to? You seem to be saying that personal revelation is only important for "preparing" for leadership positions, or something, do I have that right? So for all us lay folk, it doesn't really matter? As I understand it the holy ghost and personal revelation is the medium through which we partake of the atonement. You cannot be saved without personal revelation, period. It's not a nice-to-have.
ERayR Posted April 12, 2014 Posted April 12, 2014 Woah, woah, woah. Ought to prepare for and learn to? You seem to be saying that personal revelation is only important for "preparing" for leadership positions, or something, do I have that right? So for all us lay folk, it doesn't really matter? As I understand it the holy ghost and personal revelation is the medium through which we partake of the atonement. You cannot be saved without personal revelation, period. It's not a nice-to-have. Go back and read for comprehension. I didn't say or intimate anything like that.
EllenMaksoud Posted April 12, 2014 Posted April 12, 2014 Elder Bednar stated it is our Doctrine by revelation that Jesus was born on April 6th Incorrect http://www.deseretnews.com/article/700094707/What-was-the-real-date-of-Jesus-birth.html?pg=all http://en.fairmormon.org/Jesus_Christ/Date_of_birth https://byustudies.byu.edu/PDFViewer.aspx?title=8651&linkURL=49.4ChadwickDating-61f85baf-ef24-4584-ba44-1892097daede.pdfI thought that his statement was a bit needless.
Tiki Posted April 12, 2014 Posted April 12, 2014 Elder Bednar stated it is our Doctrine by revelation that Jesus was born on April 6th Incorrect http://www.deseretnews.com/article/700094707/What-was-the-real-date-of-Jesus-birth.html?pg=all http://en.fairmormon.org/Jesus_Christ/Date_of_birth https://byustudies.byu.edu/PDFViewer.aspx?title=8651&linkURL=49.4ChadwickDating-61f85baf-ef24-4584-ba44-1892097daede.pdfIt's a good thing the FAIRLDS CULT is around to correct the Apostles of The Lord Jesus Christ.I bet if Elder Bednar had studied FAIR more intently, he would have declared as doctrine that Joseph Smith went to a grove of trees to pray because Joseph Smith discovered in the Bible that trees represent Asherah. Could this not have helped to appease the OW movement?http://en.fairmormon.org/FAIR_Study_Aids/Gospel_Doctrine/Book_of_Mormon/Lesson_ThreeElder Bednar could also have declared that Adam and Eve evolved from two separate sets of monkeys, Noah's flood was a local event, the Garden of Eden was likely in present-day Iraq, and Joseph Smith made false statements about the geographical location of the Book of Mormon because F.A.R.M.S. was 100% accurate about Nephites living in the world of the Maya, but not of it.Yes, thank you FAIRLDS CULT for keeping our priesthood leaders in line. Your cultists members steady the ark so very well.
Calm Posted April 12, 2014 Posted April 12, 2014 (edited) Woah, woah, woah. Ought to prepare for and learn to? You seem to be saying that personal revelation is only important for "preparing" for leadership positions, or something, do I have that right? So for all us lay folk, it doesn't really matter?One is more effective in learning anything if one prepares oneself for learning itself (though ERay is not likely referring to preparing to learn just as he is not referring to preparing for some future event of leadership, he is referring to preparing oneself to receive personal revelation in any context) whether one is learning for the purposes of teaching or just for personal usage. Personal revelation is something IMO that is learned more about through personal experience rather than just conveyed info. There are dimensions of it that don't communicate well in words, much like the experience of receiving an expression of love. So a 'beginner' needs to prepare himself to receive just in order to truly understand what it is in the first place while someone who has crafted a life filled with personal revelation still must constantly prepare himself to be a proper vessel in order to hold onto that revelation in a meaningful way.(I assume given your response to ERay you believe this as well, but I still thought it would be of value to say given the conversation.)As ERay points out, one not only needs to learn about personal revelation, one needs to prepare oneself to receive it through being worthy and open to the Spirit and being humble enough to receive instruction and other stuff. I don't see any implication in ERay's comment that revelation will only be useful for leaders and given how LDS talk extensively about using personal revelation even in 'daily life' matters, it seems to me a strange leap to make (which of course doesn't matter if you've leapt back after reading ERay's response) Edited April 12, 2014 by calmoriah 1
Calm Posted April 12, 2014 Posted April 12, 2014 (edited) It's a good thing the FAIRLDS CULT is around to correct the Apostles of The Lord Jesus Christ.If you are going to be calling us a cult, at least get the name right. It is now FairMormon...note the capitalisation of only F and M.PS: call for reference that anyone at FARMS taught or at FM teaches the Garden of Eden is in Iraq. Never read anything about that which I recall, am interested but google didn't yield any hits. Edited April 12, 2014 by calmoriah
Chronos Posted April 12, 2014 Posted April 12, 2014 Tiki, you seem to be new here so I'll let you off with a warning. Go read the guidelines, understand that we do infer that when you use all capital letters, it means you are shouting. We don't like people who shout at us, especially when they shout things like 'cult'. Doubly so when it's insulting to a group that doesn't deserve it. Clean up your posting. ~Chronos (from atop his mighty alicorn, Peaches)
Senator Posted April 12, 2014 Posted April 12, 2014 Nowhere does the Church , it's doctrine or teachings say Leaders = God. Come back when you can present the argument honestly. If what the Leaders say = What God says, then what's the practical difference?
Scott Lloyd Posted April 12, 2014 Posted April 12, 2014 It's a good thing the FAIRLDS CULT is around to correct the Apostles of The Lord Jesus Christ.I bet if Elder Bednar had studied FAIR more intently, he would have declared as doctrine that Joseph Smith went to a grove of trees to pray because Joseph Smith discovered in the Bible that trees represent Asherah. Could this not have helped to appease the OW movement?http://en.fairmormon.org/FAIR_Study_Aids/Gospel_Doctrine/Book_of_Mormon/Lesson_ThreeElder Bednar could also have declared that Adam and Eve evolved from two separate sets of monkeys, Noah's flood was a local event, the Garden of Eden was likely in present-day Iraq, and Joseph Smith made false statements about the geographical location of the Book of Mormon because F.A.R.M.S. was 100% accurate about Nephites living in the world of the Maya, but not of it.Yes, thank you FAIRLDS CULT for keeping our priesthood leaders in line. Your cultists members steady the ark so very well. I'm quite certain DBMormon is not speaking for FairMormon here. In fact, my understanding is that he's not even associated with FairMormon any longer.
Tiki Posted April 12, 2014 Posted April 12, 2014 (edited) Ok thanks Chronos for the warning that people take offense over their precious membership at fair. But I'm not sure why you're not doubly insulted when (alleged) church members declare and support the claim that False Doctrine was taught at General Conference to a group called The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, by referring to FAIR (which is capitalized) as their authority. Maybe some value their membership in fair more than in the other.Pointing out the numerous inconsistencies at fair to counter the argument is only logical. So apparently only members of a group called fair can be doubly insulted here at MDD-after their first insulting another group. So now we know that MDD exists to promote lowercase fair, despite the disclaimer? So maybe since i'm new here, you can clarify why fair can't be ridiculed, while The Church of Jesus of Christ of Latter-Day Saints can be. Edited April 12, 2014 by Tiki
Senator Posted April 12, 2014 Posted April 12, 2014 Ok thanks Chronos for the warning that people take offense over their precious membership at fair. Ohhhh..........you're in big trouble now, buddy!
Senator Posted April 12, 2014 Posted April 12, 2014 Have you learned nothing from this board over the past week? The Church's name is spelled with a lowercase "d"! (Also, FAIR rebranded as FairMormon last year.) Ohhhh..........you're even in triple dog trouble, now!!!
Recommended Posts