False Doctrine At Conference

[SeekingUnderstanding]

Please give an example where a doctrine turns out to be folklore. Since it is throughout this thread, you should have no problem giving us an example.

The doctrine that blacks were less valiant in the preexistence comes to mind. Taught as doctrine by the first presidency in the late 40's, rejected as racist folklore in just the last year.

[SeekingUnderstanding]

It is consistent with Elder LeGrand Richards guidance. "If you are unhappy with the church, you should find one where you will be happy" (in his biography)

Who said I was unhappy with the church. Projecting much?

[SeekingUnderstanding]

You are treading down the path of becoming "an accuser of the brethren". Perhaps that is a topic you should discuss with the bishop, or not. Talk with him about your experience with Alma 32 and the church policies, how the leaders sometimes govern by folklore.

You'll have to take that up with the FP and Qof12. They are the ones who approved the recent priesthood essay.

[mfbukowski]

That's exactly what Jacob said to Nephi after Nephi shocked Laman and Lemuel by the power of God...

54 And it came to pass that I stretched forth my hand unto my brethren, and they did not wither before me; but the Lord did shake them, even according to the word which he had spoken. And my brother Jacob said, "you rock Nephi, that'll show those skeptics!" (1 Nephi 17)

You know, that's the wonder of the Book of Mormon.

 

Every time you read it, you find something you never noticed before! 

[DBMormon]

Sounds like you were dealing with a very irresponsible person, to lead you on like that.

Do you always call the top leaders of the Church irresponsible?  ouch

[cdowis]

The doctrine that blacks were less valiant in the preexistence comes to mind. Taught as doctrine by the first presidency in the late 40's, rejected as racist folklore in just the last year.

 

CFR, specifically a statement from the first presidency as doctrine.

 

I think you are full of baloney, but let's see what you got.

Edited May 31, 2014 by cdowis

[SeekingUnderstanding]

I think you are full of baloney, but let's see what you got.

Your kind tone is endearing. Thank you!

 

 

CFR, specifically a statement from the first presidency as doctrine.

 

August 17, 1949 

The attitude of the Church with reference to Negroes remains as it has always stood. It is not a matter of the declaration of a policy but of direct commandment from the Lord, on which is founded the doctrine of the Church from the days of its organization, to the effect that Negroes may become members of the Church but that they are not entitled to the priesthood at the present time. The prophets of the Lord have made several statements as to the operation of the principle. President Brigham Young said: "Why are so many of the inhabitants of the earth cursed with a skin of blackness? It comes in consequence of their fathers rejecting the power of the holy priesthood, and the law of God. They will go down to death. And when all the rest of the children have received their blessings in the holy priesthood, then that curse will be removed from the seed of Cain, and they will then come up and possess the priesthood, and receive all the blessings which we now are entitled to." 

President Wilford Woodruff made the following statement: "The day will come when all that race will be redeemed and possess all the blessings which we now have." 

The position of the Church regarding the Negro may be understood when another doctrine of the Church is kept in mind, namely, that the conduct of spirits in the premortal existence has some determining effect upon the conditions and circumstances under which these spirits take on mortality and that while the details of this principle have not been made known, the mortality is a privilege that is given to those who maintain their first estate; and that the worth of the privilege is so great that spirits are willing to come to earth and take on bodies no matter what the handicap may be as to the kind of bodies they are to secure; and that among the handicaps, failure of the right to enjoy in mortality the blessings of the priesthood is a handicap which spirits are willing to assume in order that they might come to earth. Under this principle there is no injustice whatsoever involved in this deprivation as to the holding of the priesthood by the Negroes. 

The First Presidency

[Calm]

It has also been taught, often as folklore, that those with handicaps that render them not accountable in this lifetime were so good in the previous lifetime they were able to bear the hardships given them. I have heard this stated for even those mentally accountable but physically limited in some way.

If one chooses to measure preexistence valour by the level of hardship and deprivation in this life, then those born as slaves or in other oppressed situations would be more likely to be among the greatly valiant rather than the less.

But then LDS folklore and interpretation of the implications of doctrine has never been completely consistent in my opinion and in some cases consistency is so far off it is over the horizon.

Edited May 31, 2014 by calmoriah

[omni]

CFR, specifically a statement from the first presidency as doctrine.

 

I think you are full of baloney, but let's see what you got.

 

You walked right into that one.

[canard78]

Alma 32.

So, you now claim to receive revelation contrary to those who hold the keys of the priesthood in the church.

Anyway, as I noted elsewhere:

You are confusing us with the historic Christian church which does not carry the keys of the priesthood, and only relies on their particular interpretation of the Bible. Not every revelation is contained nor need to be written in canonized scripture.

Elder Oaks made this whole issue quite clear. You find fault with his statements, but consider the possibility that, perhaps, you are the one who is being tested. As I have commented to others, perhaps this is not the church for you. There are many others where you can find common ground.

How ridiculous.

Isn't this a perfect illustration of the circular and failed arguments of the absolutists:

a) The prophets teach principles

b) We are invited to seek a divine answer as to their veracity or utility by prayer (Moroni 10) and application (Alma 32)

c) If you reach a different conclusion by doing "b" to what is said in "a" then you are wrong. Repeat "b" until you agree with "a."

Cdowis, do you genuinely believe that if people like SeekingUnderstanding can't agree with every principle spoken by (fallible) prophets that he should leave?

Do you suggest I do too?

[canard78]

CFR, specifically a statement from the first presidency as doctrine.

I think you are full of baloney, but let's see what you got.

From the same first presidency as SeekingUnderstanding just quoted:

The basic element of your ideas and concepts seems to be that all God’s children stand in equal positions before Him in all things... Your position seems to lose sight of the revelations of the Lord touching the preexistence of our spirits, the rebellion in heaven, and the doctrines that our birth into this life and the advantages under which we my be born, have a relationship in the life heretofore...

From the days of the Prophet Joseph even until now, it has been the doctrine of the Church, never questioned by any of the Church leaders, that the Negroes are not entitled to the full blessings of the Gospel.

Any folklore in that statement by the first presidency? Are they teaching anything in this that might have been sincerely held beliefs but based only on assumption?

Did you notice that in this statement the first presidency say that these teachings are unquestionable and revealed doctrines?

If you apply Moroni 10 and Alma 32 to these teachings, what's your answer? What would your answer have been in the 1940s?

Edited May 31, 2014 by canard78

[canard78]

It is consistent with Elder LeGrand Richards guidance.  "If you are unhappy with the church, you should find one where you will be happy" (in his biography)

That's an interesting statement. Could you provide a more detailed source please? Publication and page number?

Is this one:

http://www.amazon.com/LeGrand-Richards-Lucile-C-Tate-ebook/dp/B004MDMOSC/ref=sr_1_6?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1401515848&sr=1-6&keywords=legrand+richards

[Stone holm]

How ridiculous.

Isn't this a perfect illustration of the circular and failed arguments of the absolutists:

a) The prophets teach principles

b) We are invited to seek a divine answer as to their veracity or utility by prayer (Moroni 10) and application (Alma 32)

c) If you reach a different conclusion by doing "b" to what is said in "a" then you are wrong. Repeat "b" until you agree with "a."

Cdowis, do you genuinely believe that if people like SeekingUnderstanding can't agree with every principle spoken by (fallible) prophets that he should leave?

Do you suggest I do too?

Gave you a bump on this. That reasoning has always been a problem in my mind. Because of the reverence we extend to General Authorities in the Church, there is an unfortunate tendency to give them more credence than the deserve at times. I am not sure, however, that there is anyway to escape this predicament, or the tendency of other members to question our faith whenever we question something which has been done or said by a GA.

[cdowis]

That reasoning has always been a problem in my mind. Because of the reverence we extend to General Authorities in the Church, there is an unfortunate tendency to give them more credence than the deserve at times. I am not sure, however, that there is anyway to escape this predicament, or the tendency of other members to question our faith whenever we question something which has been done or said by a GA.

 

 Perhaps there is a third alternative -- such as, accepting and respecting their position and authority even while disagreeing with them.  The Lord Himself may not be happy with some of their decisions but He gave them the responsibility for those decisions, and I think we should respect them for that terrible responsibility.

Edited May 31, 2014 by cdowis

[cdowis]

That's an interesting statement. Could you provide a more detailed source please? Publication and page number?

Is this one:

http://www.amazon.com/LeGrand-Richards-Lucile-C-Tate-ebook/dp/B004MDMOSC/ref=sr_1_6?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1401515848&sr=1-6&keywords=legrand+richards

 

It's in the chapter where he was the Southern States mission president.  If I get the chance to locate my copy of the book,  I'll give the exact reference and quote. 

Edited May 31, 2014 by cdowis

[cdowis]

The position of the Church regarding the Negro may be understood when another doctrine of the Church is kept in mind, namely, that the conduct of spirits in the premortal existence has some determining effect upon the conditions and circumstances under which these spirits take on mortality and that while the details of this principle have not been made known, the mortality is a privilege that is given to those who maintain their first estate; and that the worth of the privilege is so great that spirits are willing to come to earth and take on bodies no matter what the handicap may be as to the kind of bodies they are to secure; and that among the handicaps, failure of the right to enjoy in mortality the blessings of the priesthood is a handicap which spirits are willing to assume in order that they might come to earth. Under this principle there is no injustice whatsoever involved in this deprivation as to the holding of the priesthood by the Negroes. 

 

 

With your knowledge of the scriptures, please tell me specifically where this is "folklore".  Tell us about the blessings of Abraham and his seed, the restriction of the phd to the Levites, that Christ limited His ministry to the House of Israel during His earthly ministry, the curse upon the Lamanites as mentioned in the BOM.  Inhabitants of the world being deprived of the knowledge of the Gospel by their location, by their government, etc.

 

Why do babies die in infancy, why are some people born with crippling handicaps -- mental and physical?

 

It is clear that we are not equal regarding the timing in mortality of receiving our full blessing of the Gospel here.  Clearly this will all be taken care of in the next life.

 

WHY DOES THAT HAPPEN?

 Please use your wisdom to teach why this happens.  Why are some "elect" in this life while others are "cursed" that we can personally observe, and read in the scriptures itself.

 

Well, for those with ears to hear, the living prophets, the First Presidency, given us an inspired, revealed answer.  Now, read their statement carefully.  What they actually said, not what you think they say.

 

They teach us these things often happen because of our pre-mortal state.  They DO NOT speculate on those specific circumstances -- no mention of less valiant, disloyalty, laziness, unfaithfulness, etc.  They merely tell us, whatever the circumstances, when we go into the next live, all these things will be made clear, and that mortality was only one stage of our existence.  

 

That we agreed to these circumstances, and we will all proclaim that God is just.

Edited May 31, 2014 by cdowis

[cdowis]

You walked right into that one.

 

Yes, gladly so. This was just another weapon in the arsenal of the hate mongers.

Edited May 31, 2014 by cdowis

[Stone holm]

With your knowledge of the scriptures, please tell me specifically where this is "folklore".  Tell us about the blessings of Abraham and his seed, the restriction of the phd to the Levites, that Christ limited His ministry to the House of Israel during His earthly ministry, the curse upon the Lamanites as mentioned in the BOM.  Inhabitants of the world being deprived of the knowledge of the Gospel by their location, by their government, etc.

 

Why do babies die in infancy, why are some people born with crippling handicaps -- mental and physical?

 

It is clear that we are not equal regarding the timing in mortality of receiving our full blessing of the Gospel here.  Clearly this will all be taken care of in the next life.

 

WHY DOES THAT HAPPEN?

 Please use your wisdom to teach why this happens.  Why are some "elect" in this life while others are "cursed" that we can personally observe, and read in the scriptures itself.

 

Well, for those with ears to hear, the living prophets, the First Presidency, given us an inspired, revealed answer.  Now, read their statement carefully.  What they actually said, not what you think they say.

 

They teach us these things often happen because of our pre-mortal state.  They DO NOT speculate on those specific circumstances -- no mention of less valiant, disloyalty, laziness, unfaithfulness, etc.  They merely tell us, whatever the circumstances, when we go into the next live, all these things will be made clear, and that mortality was only one stage of our existence.  

 

That we agreed to these circumstances, and we will all proclaim that God is just.

Not sure that you can successfully argue that God restricted the Levitical Priesthood to the Levites because of their superior behavior in the pre existence. It is more likely this is an argument for separation of Church and State since this was a theocracy, God gave all of the other tribes dominion over large tracts of land, but the Levites were denied that geographical dominion and restricted to certain Cities.

[Stone holm]

Timing mortality is probably a correct concept, but you have ascribed the wrong reason as, in my opinion did the earlier GAs. The timing in my opinion had more to do with the unrighteous bigotry of the white majority than it had to do with anything about the pre mortal activities of the Africans. It was this spin about the premortal activities that was folklore spun to explain something that the leaders did not understand.

[canard78]

It's in the chapter where he was the Southern States mission president. If I get the chance to locate my copy of the book, I'll give the exact reference and quote.

Thanks. I'm interested in the context if you get the chance.

There's a difference between saying unhappy with the church vs unhappy in the church.

[canard78]

Yes, gladly so. This was just another weapon in the arsenal of the hate mongers.

Hate mongers? That's a bit extreme? Are you referring to SeekingUnderstanding?

[canard78]

With your knowledge of the scriptures, please tell me specifically where this is "folklore". Tell us about the blessings of Abraham and his seed, the restriction of the phd to the Levites, that Christ limited His ministry to the House of Israel during His earthly ministry, the curse upon the Lamanites as mentioned in the BOM. Inhabitants of the world being deprived of the knowledge of the Gospel by their location, by their government, etc.

Why do babies die in infancy, why are some people born with crippling handicaps -- mental and physical?

It is clear that we are not equal regarding the timing in mortality of receiving our full blessing of the Gospel here. Clearly this will all be taken care of in the next life.

WHY DOES THAT HAPPEN?

Please use your wisdom to teach why this happens. Why are some "elect" in this life while others are "cursed" that we can personally observe, and read in the scriptures itself.

Well, for those with ears to hear, the living prophets, the First Presidency, given us an inspired, revealed answer. Now, read their statement carefully. What they actually said, not what you think they say.

They teach us these things often happen because of our pre-mortal state. They DO NOT speculate on those specific circumstances -- no mention of less valiant, disloyalty, laziness, unfaithfulness, etc. They merely tell us, whatever the circumstances, when we go into the next live, all these things will be made clear, and that mortality was only one stage of our existence.

That we agreed to these circumstances, and we will all proclaim that God is just.

The church today disagrees with you:

Today, the Church disavows the theories advanced in the past that black skin is a sign of divine disfavor or curse, or that it reflects actions in a premortal life.

(Emphasis added)

If skin colour is not in any way a reflection of decisions or actions in premortal life then your argument (and the 1940s argument) falls.

They and you are making false assumptions based on folklore. Much like the comment addressed in the OP.

[SeekingUnderstanding]

The church today disagrees with you:

(Emphasis added)

If skin colour is not in any way a reflection of decisions or actions in premortal life then your argument (and the 1940s argument) falls.

They and you are making false assumptions based on folklore. Much like the comment addressed in the OP.

Thank you. I was going to say that in a way that I would regret.

[SeekingUnderstanding]

Yes, gladly so. This was just another weapon in the arsenal of the hate mongers.

So first presidency statements and lds.org are weapons in the arsenal of the "hate mongers." I don't think a productive conversation is possible with you. Peace.

[CV75]

Not trying to be curt.  Rather I am at the end of what I can say.  Suffice it to know that this person would be as close to the situation as one could be without being Elder Bednar.  In regards to how he came by the info that this issue is more complex than one first thinks, my guess is that many in his group are aware that the issue isn't so simple.

OK we're good.

 

What does it mean for a person to "be as close to the situation as one could be without being Elder Bednar?" I don't understand what that means.

 

My 2nd question isn't about his coming by the "info that this issue is more complex than one first thinks," only if he shared how he came by the information "that it would be addressed as a footnote in the ensign."