Books By General Authorities

[Thinking]

Bruce R. McConkie is possibly the favorite GA for critics because of his numerous controversial statements that he published in his written works. Apologists will counter with the fact that his personally published works do not officially represent the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. If this is true, then what purpose do they serve?

 

Can you imagine holding the President of the United States to the same medium standard that has been adopted for LDS leaders?

 

"He wasn't speaking as the president when he said that."

 

"That was his opinion and not the official view of the U.S."

 

If a book written by an official representative of the LDS Church does not officially represent the LDS Church, what purpose does it serve?

 

 

[ksfisher]

Bruce R. McConkie is possibly the favorite GA for critics because of his numerous controversial statements that he published in his written works. Apologists will counter with the fact that his personally published works do not officially represent the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. If this is true, then what purpose do they serve?

 

Can you imagine holding the President of the United States to the same medium standard that has been adopted for LDS leaders?

 

"He wasn't speaking as the president when he said that."

 

"That was his opinion and not the official view of the U.S."

 

If a book written by an official representative of the LDS Church does not officially represent the LDS Church, what purpose does it serve?

If the Preisdent of the United States were to write a book would it be considered law?  Has a State of the Union address ever been written into the Constitution?

 

Books by the general authorities provide counsel and direction, but they are not he official voice of the church.

[JLHPROF]

Because it makes us feel better to be able to do that.  In truth only the Church as a body (usually through the First Presidency) can issue official doctrine for the Church.  It can't be an individual (unless it's the prophet).

But even when that happens, if we don't like it years later the item is still relegated to opinion.

 

It's kind of an easy out for us.  To me the big issue it raises is "why do I bother to listen to the current doctrine if it's just going to change?"

I mean, 30 years from now everything we've just had officially pronounced at General Conference could be dismissed as opinion not to be believed.  It's happened before.

[Coreyb]

Bruce R. McConkie is possibly the favorite GA for critics because of his numerous controversial statements that he published in his written works. Apologists will counter with the fact that his personally published works do not officially represent the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. If this is true, then what purpose do they serve?

 

Can you imagine holding the President of the United States to the same medium standard that has been adopted for LDS leaders?

 

"He wasn't speaking as the president when he said that."

 

"That was his opinion and not the official view of the U.S."

 

If a book written by an official representative of the LDS Church does not officially represent the LDS Church, what purpose does it serve?

That is a bit of a mischaracterization about the standard the president is held to. The U. S. does not hold "official views", just laws subject to change through reinterpretation of our founding texts and ammendments, and many disagree with what the commander in chief says.

Edited April 7, 2014 by Coreyb

[Coreyb]

We should be accepting revealed doctrines through common consent, not just leaders

[Duncan]

A well considered opinion. Plus it's neat to see their experiences and their thoughts on scripture and life

[ERMD]

 

I mean, 30 years from now everything we've just had officially pronounced at General Conference could be dismissed as opinion not to be believed.  It's happened before.

 

 

 

Everything that was heard in a General Conference has since been dismissed as opinion?

 

Really?

[JLHPROF]

Everything that was heard in a General Conference has since been dismissed as opinion?

 

Really?

 

Well, I obviously don't mean 100% of everything.  You'll have to forgive me a touch of hyperbole.

But, yes.  Some of the General Conferences from 1850-1900 featured lots of sermons with doctrines we no longer accept as true.

[Duncan]

Well, I obviously don't mean 100% of everything.  You'll have to forgive me a touch of hyperbole.

But, yes.  Some of the General Conferences from 1850-1900 featured lots of sermons with doctrines we no longer accept as true.

 

 

how about this beauty from Elder Hyrum M. Smith of the Council of the Twelve!!!

 

"Skating rinks are a menace, and at the present time the desire to frequent them is a craze. They are being introduced in certain Stakes of Zion, and the young people are going wild over this pastime, which they carry to excess. As a result of enthusiasm in relation to this so-called pleasure we mark the downfall of far too many young men and young women. I disapprove of these and other places of amusement where young people are thrown promiscuously into the society of the wicked, who care neither for God nor man, for virtue or decency." April 1907 GC 

[Anteojito]

Its been awhile since I have read any books from GAs but from what I remember most of them are feel good books that motivate people to try harder and so on. BRM's Mormon Doctrine stands out as an exception. I would think that from his perspective he was speaking for the church, how else would he have been so bold as to title the book the way he did?

[The Nehor]

how about this beauty from Elder Hyrum M. Smith of the Council of the Twelve!!!

 

"Skating rinks are a menace, and at the present time the desire to frequent them is a craze. They are being introduced in certain Stakes of Zion, and the young people are going wild over this pastime, which they carry to excess. As a result of enthusiasm in relation to this so-called pleasure we mark the downfall of far too many young men and young women. I disapprove of these and other places of amusement where young people are thrown promiscuously into the society of the wicked, who care neither for God nor man, for virtue or decency." April 1907 GC 

Next thing you know they will start playing pool. I say we organize a band for the boys to keep them out of trouble.

[theplains]

Bruce R. McConkie is possibly the favorite GA for critics because of his numerous controversial statements that he published in his written works. Apologists will counter with the fact that his personally published works do not officially represent the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. If this is true, then what purpose do they serve?

 

When anyone writes a book called "Gospel Doctrine", "Gospel Principles", "Mormon Doctrine",

or "Doctrines of the Gospel Student Manual", etc, one would expect that you would not find

the words "lies" or "speculations" in the Preface.

 

Apparently Bruce R. McConkie's teachings were along the same lines as Joseph Smith's -  

" ... and if you don't like it, you must lump it!" (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p.363).

 

A sure way to see the consequences of teaching falsely is excommunication, shunning, or

public apology.

 

Thanks,

Jim

 

[seed]

Bruce R. McConkie is possibly the favorite GA for critics because of his numerous controversial statements that he published in his written works. Apologists will counter with the fact that his personally published works do not officially represent the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. If this is true, then what purpose do they serve?

 

Can you imagine holding the President of the United States to the same medium standard that has been adopted for LDS leaders?

 

"He wasn't speaking as the president when he said that."

 

"That was his opinion and not the official view of the U.S."

 

If a book written by an official representative of the LDS Church does not officially represent the LDS Church, what purpose does it serve?

 

is there any chance that a book is written for the purpose of selling it for income ?   useing the skills a person has to do that seems to be logical.

[Scott Lloyd]

how about this beauty from Elder Hyrum M. Smith of the Council of the Twelve!!!

 

"Skating rinks are a menace, and at the present time the desire to frequent them is a craze. They are being introduced in certain Stakes of Zion, and the young people are going wild over this pastime, which they carry to excess. As a result of enthusiasm in relation to this so-called pleasure we mark the downfall of far too many young men and young women. I disapprove of these and other places of amusement where young people are thrown promiscuously into the society of the wicked, who care neither for God nor man, for virtue or decency." April 1907 GC 

I've seen this before.

 

It occurred to me then and does now that there may be an element of presentism in the derision with which we might be inclined to view this.

 

What were skating rinks in early Utah like? Were they of a similar character as they are today? Has anyone really explored those questions? Perhaps, in the context of times and circumstances, there was at least measure of truth in the statement of Elder Smith.

 

Perhaps not. I'm saying that without further investigation we can't really know.

Edited April 11, 2014 by Scott Lloyd

[Duncan]

I've seen this before.

 

It occurred to me then and does now they there may be an element of presentism in the derision with which we might be inclined to view this.

 

What were skating rinks in early Utah like? Were they of a similar character as they are today? Has anyone really explored those questions? Perhaps, in the context of times and circumstances, there was at least measure of truth in the statement of Elder Smith.

 

Perhaps not. I'm saying that without further investigation we can't really know.

 

 

true, without knowing what they were like we can't know. I was just responding to the assertion that there were things talked about in conference that we of today would find different as talk about the internet to them they would find bizarre!

[Scott Lloyd]

true, without knowing what they were like we can't know. I was just responding to the assertion that there were things talked about in conference that we of today would find different as talk about the internet to them they would find bizarre!

True enough.

 

President Hinckley on one occasion not too long ago in general conference decried rave parties, and justifiably so.

 

Suppose a hundred years from now, rave parties would have evolved to the extent that they had become rather tame affairs. Would President Hinckley's remarks be looked upon then as being as bizarre as we see Elder Smith's remarks today about skating rinks?

 

Far-fetched I suppose, but a serviceable analogy for comparison.

[Duncan]

True enough.

 

President Hinckley on one occasion not too long ago in general conference decried rave parties, and justifiably so.

 

Suppose a hundred years from now, rave parties would have evolved to the extent that they had become rather tame affairs. Would President Hinckley's remarks be looked upon then as being as bizarre as we see Elder Smith's remarks today about skating rinks?

 

Far-fetched I suppose, but a serviceable analogy for comparison.

 

 

for sure