Dissenters Trying To Oppose Sustaining At Conference

[mfbukowski]

No, first vision "critics" would just point out that it wouldn't be a good idea to canonize your memory as a 100% accurate recall of the event(s).

Sorry but this is totally absurd.

 

It was a private experience- there is no one available to verify what "accurate" even would be in this context.  Do you have "accurate" memories of your dreams?  How would you or anyone else possibly know if they were "accurate" or not??

 

That is why their position is so ridiculous.  How "accurate" is your memory of a dream you had 20 years ago?

 

For all we know, he made it all up.  So what?  How would anyone know??   The whole thing is based on faith anyway and these silly people want to slice and dice and parse the "accuracy" of it?  

 

There is nothing there to make "accurate".  It's like trying to put a knife edge on a puddle of water that isn't even frozen.  The very material is not subject to "accuracy".   It is literally his testimony that this happened.  You can't use a stick of butter as a knife.

 

Next testimony meeting you should stand up and challenge someone's testimony, ok?   Tell them that NO, that's not the experience they had at all, and they do not believe what they said they believe.

 

Good luck on all of that.

[cinepro]

Sorry but this is totally absurd.

 

It was a private experience- there is no one available to verify what "accurate" even would be in this context.  Do you have "accurate" memories of your dreams?  How would you or anyone else possibly know if they were "accurate" or not??

 

That is why their position is so ridiculous.  How "accurate" is your memory of a dream you had 20 years ago?

 

For all we know, he made it all up.  So what?  How would anyone know??   The whole thing is based on faith anyway and these silly people want to slice and dice and parse the "accuracy" of it?  

 

There is nothing there to make "accurate".  It's like trying to put a knife edge on a puddle of water that isn't even frozen.  The very material is not subject to "accuracy".   It is literally his testimony that this happened.  You can't use a stick of butter as a knife.

 

Next testimony meeting you should stand up and challenge someone's testimony, ok?   Tell them that NO, that's not the experience they had at all, and they do not believe what they said they believe.

 

Good luck on all of that.

 

If Joseph's First Vision were currently classified as a "dream", and an experience about which LDS believe there is no objective "truth" or reality, I would agree with you 100%.

 

And if someone stood up in Testimony meeting and told a story about being visited by God and Jesus 20 years ago and being told that all churches were wrong (including the LDS Church), I suspect the Bishop would beat me to the pulpit to challenge their "testimony".

 

 

Years from now, when the Church removes section 132 from the D&C and takes out the facsimiles and introduction to the Book of Abraham, maybe they'll redo the Joseph Smith History by including all the different accounts of the First Vision and adding this introduction:

 

"In the early 1820s, Joseph Smith had a spiritual experience that changed his life. Over the years, he shared several accounts of this experience, now commonly known as "The First Vision".  While we don't know exactly what happened, these stories can help us understand what Joseph experienced and how it changed his life.  As with all scripture, these recollections are an imperfect record of a spiritual experience. For all we know, he made it all up.  So what?  How would anyone know??   The whole thing is based on faith anyway."

Edited March 12, 2015 by cinepro

[Stone holm]

The only serious alleged attempt at non sustaining vote that I have ever heard of was one supposedly attributed to followers of ETB with regards to David O. McKay. Not even sure how serious that attempt was.

[KevinG]

If Joseph's First Vision were currently classified as a "dream", and an experience about which LDS believe there is no objective "truth" or reality, I would agree with you 100%.

 

And if someone stood up in Testimony meeting and told a story about being visited by God and Jesus 20 years ago and being told that all churches were wrong (including the LDS Church), I suspect the Bishop would beat me to the pulpit to challenge their "testimony".

 

 

Years from now, when the Church removes section 132 from the D&C and takes out the facsimiles and introduction to the Book of Abraham, maybe they'll redo the Joseph Smith History by including all the different accounts of the First Vision and adding this introduction:

 

"In the early 1820s, Joseph Smith had a spiritual experience that changed his life. Over the years, he shared several accounts of this experience, now commonly known as "The First Vision".  While we don't know exactly what happened, these stories can help us understand what Joseph experienced and how it changed his life.  As with all scripture, these recollections are an imperfect record of a spiritual experience. For all we know, he made it all up.  So what?  How would anyone know??   The whole thing is based on faith anyway."

 

There are two ways to look at these statements.

 

1) A vision is a dream, an alternate recollection of events with fantasy coloring memory.

 

2) A vision is an inspired state, where we can see beyond mortal limitations, and further light and knowledge inform and fill in our past limited recollections.

 

I have experienced #2 when looking back on inspired events of my life with new knowledge.  I'm not so cynical to think differences in accounts are all due to faulty wiring or memories.

 

And for the question "how do we know?"  I refer back to an oldie but goodie by Brother Brigham.  "Let every man and woman know, by the whispering of the spirit of God to themselves, whether their leaders are walking in the paths the Lord dictates or not.”( JoD )

Edited March 13, 2015 by KevinG

[Kenngo1969]

The only serious alleged attempt at non sustaining vote that I have ever heard of was one supposedly attributed to followers of ETB with regards to David O. McKay. Not even sure how serious that attempt was.

I know that you, on your own behalf and on behalf of your fellow members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, often claim ignorance of and indifference to what happens "in Salt Lake."  (To be fair, I can easily see how such attitudes might be exacerbated when General Conference is broadcast at 2 a.m. local time and the Stake Center is 100 miles away.)  In any event, at least allow me to attempt to allay your skepticism that such things ever happen in the Church of Jesus Christ:

 

https://www.lds.org/general-conference/1980/10/the-sustaining-of-church-officers?lang=eng#watch=video

[Calm]

The only serious alleged attempt at non sustaining vote that I have ever heard of was one supposedly attributed to followers of ETB with regards to David O. McKay. Not even sure how serious that attempt was.

Would be interested in seeing any references to this as I've never heard of it before.

 

Perhaps you are thinking of the notice against Joseph Fielding Smith and his First Presidency that was sent to local leaders in 1970 but resulted in no opposing votes and as far as I can tell may have been the work of one person?

Edited March 18, 2015 by calmoriah

[Kenngo1969]

There are two ways to look at these statements.

 

1) A vision is a dream, an alternate recollection of events with fantasy coloring memory.

 

2) A vision is an inspired state, where we can see beyond mortal limitations, and further light and knowledge inform and fill in our past limited recollections.

 

I have experienced #2 when looking back on inspired events of my life with new knowledge.  I'm not so cynical to think differences in accounts are all due to faulty wiring or memories.

 

And for the question "how do we know?"  I refer back to an oldie but goodie by Brother Brigham.  "Let every man and woman know, by the whispering of the spirit of God to themselves, whether their leaders are walking in the paths the Lord dictates or not.”( JoD )

 

Quoted for truth.  That is all.

Edited March 20, 2015 by Kenngo1969

[Stone holm]

Would be interested in seeing any references to this as I've never heard of it before.

 

Perhaps you are thinking of the notice against Joseph Fielding Smith and his First Presidency that was sent to local leaders in 1970 but resulted in no opposing votes and as far as I can tell may have been the work of one person?

"David O. McKay and the Rise of Modern Mormonism.

[Calm]

A whole book is not a reference....page please.

[Kenngo1969]

The only serious alleged attempt at non sustaining vote that I have ever heard of was one supposedly attributed to followers of ETB with regards to David O. McKay. Not even sure how serious that attempt was.

 

 

Would be interested in seeing any references to this as I've never heard of it before. ...

 

 

"David O. McKay and the Rise of Modern Mormonism.

 

 

A whole book is not a reference....page please.

 

That appears to be code for, "I haven't actually read it, but people who have tell me it's in there."

[mfbukowski]

If Joseph's First Vision were currently classified as a "dream", and an experience about which LDS believe there is no objective "truth" or reality, I would agree with you 100%.

 

And if someone stood up in Testimony meeting and told a story about being visited by God and Jesus 20 years ago and being told that all churches were wrong (including the LDS Church), I suspect the Bishop would beat me to the pulpit to challenge their "testimony".

 

 

Years from now, when the Church removes section 132 from the D&C and takes out the facsimiles and introduction to the Book of Abraham, maybe they'll redo the Joseph Smith History by including all the different accounts of the First Vision and adding this introduction:

 

"In the early 1820s, Joseph Smith had a spiritual experience that changed his life. Over the years, he shared several accounts of this experience, now commonly known as "The First Vision".  While we don't know exactly what happened, these stories can help us understand what Joseph experienced and how it changed his life.  As with all scripture, these recollections are an imperfect record of a spiritual experience. For all we know, he made it all up.  So what?  How would anyone know??   The whole thing is based on faith anyway."

And of course that would be an absurd statement.  I never said anything close to that.

 

There is no such thing possible as an "imperfect record of a spiritual experience".  How could anyone possibly know if some else's account of ANY experience is "imperfect"?

 

Totally an absurd notion. 

 

Your recollection of the pain in your toe is imperfect.   I know because I felt exactly what you felt because I was inside your brain and then made a perfect recording of your experience and compared it to your description, and therefore proved it 'imperfect'.

 

This doesn't even begin to cover the problems with this kind of assertion since of course how does one put ANY experience into words as a "description" anyway?

 

Please give us a perfect description of something we all know- like the sound of a trumpet- described so that a deaf person could himself have a "perfect" record of that experience.

[Kaleb Webb]

 

The only serious alleged attempt at non sustaining vote that I have ever heard of was one supposedly attributed to followers of ETB with regards to David O. McKay. Not even sure how serious that attempt was. 

 

 

 

Would be interested in seeing any references to this as I've never heard of it before.

 

Michael Quinn also talks about it in the Mormon Hierarchy: Extensions of Power. I haven't read it for a year, but he has an entire chapter devoted exclusively to Ezra Taft Benson. I believe it's chapter four. It's been a year though, so I don't remember any references or page numbers off the top of my head.

[cinepro]

Your recollection of the pain in your toe is imperfect.   I know because I felt exactly what you felt because I was inside your brain and then made a perfect recording of your experience and compared it to your description, and therefore proved it 'imperfect'.

 

This doesn't even begin to cover the problems with this kind of assertion since of course how does one put ANY experience into words as a "description" anyway?

 

Please give us a perfect description of something we all know- like the sound of a trumpet- described so that a deaf person could himself have a "perfect" record of that experience.

 

 

Experience A:

 

Yesterday, I spoke with two friends, Bill and Larry, in the hall at Church.  Bill told me that he is moving to Idaho next month.  Larry mentioned that he saw the "Cinderella" movie with his daughter and he hated it.

 

Experience B:

 

Last night, I had a dream in which George Washington and Abraham Lincoln appeared to me.  They told me that the country is heading in the wrong direction, and that all current members of congress are leading the country to destruction.  They also told me many other things.

 

Which of these experiences is more similar to The First Vision as the Church describes it?  Either way, I didn't find it hard to describe either of them.

[mfbukowski]

Experience A:

 

Yesterday, I spoke with two friends, Bill and Larry, in the hall at Church.  Bill told me that he is moving to Idaho next month.  Larry mentioned that he saw the "Cinderella" movie with his daughter and he hated it.

 

Experience B:

 

Last night, I had a dream in which George Washington and Abraham Lincoln appeared to me.  They told me that the country is heading in the wrong direction, and that all current members of congress are leading the country to destruction.  They also told me many other things.

 

Which of these experiences is more similar to The First Vision as the Church describes it?  Either way, I didn't find it hard to describe either of them.

I am not interested in playing games here.  Either we stick to the original question or I am out of the discussion with you.   Perhaps your smoke and mirrors were intentional perhaps you really don't see the difference.

 

The original question was how we can be sure our 20 year old memories are "accurate" and whether or not a vision "really happened" whatever that means.

 

That has nothing to do with your examples above.   See that?

 

We are talking about the recollection of private experience and how one could know what the "reality" was.   That is the topic,

 

More relevant would be if that dream happened 20 years ago, what difference would it make if your description TODAY was different than your description 20 years ago?

 

Suppose George and Abe told you a specific direction the country could go.  Suppose you decided to act on that and found a political party, or run for office based on what they told you.

 

Suppose now you have an entire movement dedicated to the cinepro political philosophy.

 

Suppose someone says "But wait!   What he is saying now is different than what he said George and Abe told him!!   He is a heretic from his own movement!!"

 

What difference would it make to the movement and what the people in the movement believed if that happened?

 

How would you know if George and Abe were "really there" or if it was "just a dream"?  What difference would it make to your followers?  Would your present position be "accurate" to what George and Abe told you, or thought you said or whether or not they really said that?  And what difference would that make??

 

THOSE are the questions here, not your recollection of someone's opinion of the Cinderella movie

 

Surely you see the difference?

 

How can we tell if Joseph was dreaming/hallucinating about God "really" appearing and what difference could it possibly make?

Remember that even according to Joseph's recollection, the Moroni experiences happened in the middle of the night, while he was in bed.

 

Could they have been "dreams"??   Who could possibly care?

Edited March 23, 2015 by mfbukowski

[Scott Lloyd]

I am not interested in playing games here.  Either we stick to the original question or I am out of the discussion with you.   Perhaps your smoke and mirrors were intentional perhaps you really don't see the difference.

 

The original question was how we can be sure our 20 year old memories are "accurate" and whether or not a vision "really happened" whatever that means.

 

That has nothing to do with your examples above.   See that?

 

We are talking about the recollection of private experience and how one could know what the "reality" was.   That is the topic,

 

More relevant would be if that dream happened 20 years ago, what difference would it make if your description TODAY was different than your description 20 years ago?

 

Suppose George and Abe told you a specific direction the country could go.  Suppose you decided to act on that and found a political party, or run for office based on what they told you.

 

Suppose now you have an entire movement dedicated to the cinepro political philosophy.

 

Suppose someone says "But wait!   What he is saying now is different than what he said George and Abe told him!!   He is a heretic from his own movement!!"

 

What difference would it make to the movement and what the people in the movement believed if that happened?

 

How would you know if George and Abe were "really there" or if it was "just a dream"?  What difference would it make to your followers?  Would your present position be "accurate" to what George and Abe told you, or thought you said or whether or not they really said that?  And what difference would that make??

 

THOSE are the questions here, not your recollection of someone's opinion of the Cinderella movie

 

Surely you see the difference?

 

How can we tell if Joseph was dreaming/hallucinating about God "really" appearing and what difference could it possibly make?

Remember that even according to Joseph's recollection, the Moroni experiences happened in the middle of the night, while he was in bed.

 

Could they have been "dreams"??   Who could possibly care?

That the visit of Moroni may well have been a dream is suggested by the fact that Joseph would not have been alone at the time, but rather, likely sharing a bed with siblings. Why weren't they awakened and conscious of the visit if it was something other than a dream?

 

And I agree with you that the character of the experience doesn't matter so much as the fact that authentic divine communication was conveyed to the young prophet who subsequently followed the Lord's directive.

[Garden Girl]

That the visit of Moroni may well have been a dream is suggested by the fact that Joseph would not have been alone at the time, but rather, likely sharing a bed with siblings. Why weren't they awakened and conscious of the visit if it was something other than a dream?

 

And I agree with you that the character of the experience doesn't matter so much as the fact that authentic divine communication was conveyed to the young prophet who subsequently followed the Lord's directive.

 

In Joseph Smith History 1:30-47... Joseph relates that Moroni visited him three times in his room, each time the light being lighter than at noonday, and each time giving him the same instructions "without the least variation."  After the third visit and ascension of Moroni, the rooster crowed and he found that the day was approaching so realized the interviews must have occupied the whole of the night.  I suspect that if there were any children sleeping in the room, they could very well have remained asleep if that was the Lord's will so as not to interrupt the visitations.  I don't recall mention of children in the room. 

 

GG

Edited March 24, 2015 by Garden Girl

[mfbukowski]

That the visit of Moroni may well have been a dream is suggested by the fact that Joseph would not have been alone at the time, but rather, likely sharing a bed with siblings. Why weren't they awakened and conscious of the visit if it was something other than a dream?

 

And I agree with you that the character of the experience doesn't matter so much as the fact that authentic divine communication was conveyed to the young prophet who subsequently followed the Lord's directive.

And of course the only way we can know whether or not "authentic divine communication was conveyed" is by praying about it.

[Stone holm]

That appears to be code for, "I haven't actually read it, but people who have tell me it's in there."

Have read it, suggest you do the same, it is very enlightening.

[smac97]

That the visit of Moroni may well have been a dream is suggested by the fact that Joseph would not have been alone at the time, but rather, likely sharing a bed with siblings. Why weren't they awakened and conscious of the visit if it was something other than a dream?

 

And I agree with you that the character of the experience doesn't matter so much as the fact that authentic divine communication was conveyed to the young prophet who subsequently followed the Lord's directive.

 

I'm not sure the context justifies such an interpretation:

 

29 In consequence of these things, I often felt condemned for my weakness and imperfections; when, on the evening of the above-mentioned twenty-first of September, after I had retired to my bed for the night, I betook myself to prayer and supplication to Almighty God for forgiveness of all my sins and follies, and also for a manifestation to me, that I might know of my state and standing before him; for I had full confidence in obtaining a divine manifestation, as I previously had one.

 

30 While I was thus in the act of calling upon God, I discovered a light appearing in my room, which continued to increase until the room was lighter than at noonday, when immediately a personage appeared at my bedside, standing in the air, for his feet did not touch the floor.

 

Joseph Smith professed to being awake and in the act of "prayer and supplication," of being "in the act of calling upon God," when Moroni appeared.

 

43 After this communication, I saw the light in the room begin to gather immediately around the person of him who had been speaking to me, and it continued to do so until the room was again left dark, except just around him; when, instantly I saw, as it were, a conduit open right up into heaven, and he ascended till he entirely disappeared, and the room was left as it had been before this heavenly light had made its appearance.

 

44 I lay musing on the singularity of the scene, and marveling greatly at what had been told to me by this extraordinary messenger; when, in the midst of my meditation, I suddenly discovered that my room was again beginning to get lighted, and in an instant, as it were, the same heavenly messenger was again by my bedside.

...

46 By this time, so deep were the impressions made on my mind, that sleep had fled from my eyes, and I lay overwhelmed in astonishment at what I had both seen and heard. But what was my surprise when again I beheld the same messenger at my bedside, and heard him rehearse or repeat over again to me the same things as before.

 

Contrast these statements with Genesis 37 (Joseph's dream is specifically designated as such), Daniel 7 (Daniel's dream is specifically designated as such), 1 Nephi 2, 3, 8 and 10 (Lehi's dreams are specifically designated as such), Matthew 1 and 2 (Joseph's dreams are specifically designated as such), and Ether 9 (Omer's dream is specifically designated as such).

 

I do not mean to discount or lessen visions given by God to men through dreams.  Clearly He can and does operate that way.  But when He does communicate through dreams, we are seldom left to speculate about it, and are instead specifically told that a vision has been conveyed to a person while dreaming rather than in a wakeful state.  In the present instance, it seems fairly clear that Joseph was conscious during his interviews with Moroni ("sleep had fled from my eyes...").

 

As for other people in the room sleeping through these events, I see no problem with that.  The Lord has previously caused particular persons to fall into a deep sleep at certain times (Genesis 2:21 (Adam), Mosiah 24:19 (Lamanites)).  

 

Thanks,

 

-Smac

Edited March 24, 2015 by smac97

[Scott Lloyd]

In Joseph Smith History 1:30-47... Joseph relates that Moroni visited him three times in his room, each time the light being lighter than at noonday, and each time giving him the same instructions "without the least variation."  After the third visit and ascension of Moroni, the rooster crowed and he found that the day was approaching so realized the interviews must have occupied the whole of the night.  I suspect that if there were any children sleeping in the room, they could very well have remained asleep if that was the Lord's will so as not to interrupt the visitations.  I don't recall mention of children in the room. 

 

GG

Have you ever visited the Smith farmhouse reconstruction?

 

I haven't myself, but I understand its size and the circumstances well enough to realize that it is practically inconceivable that Joseph would have been alone in a private bedroom at the time of Moroni's visits.

 

I'm not discounting the possbility that he was awake and conscious at the time, even as his siblings were asleep. I'm just saying the idea that he may have experienced it as a dream does not lessen the authenticity of the spiritual experience in any way for me.

Edited March 24, 2015 by Scott Lloyd

[Scott Lloyd]

 

I'm not sure the context justifies such an interpretation:

 

29 In consequence of these things, I often felt condemned for my weakness and imperfections; when, on the evening of the above-mentioned twenty-first of September, after I had retired to my bed for the night, I betook myself to prayer and supplication to Almighty God for forgiveness of all my sins and follies, and also for a manifestation to me, that I might know of my state and standing before him; for I had full confidence in obtaining a divine manifestation, as I previously had one.

 

30 While I was thus in the act of calling upon God, I discovered a light appearing in my room, which continued to increase until the room was lighter than at noonday, when immediately a personage appeared at my bedside, standing in the air, for his feet did not touch the floor.

 

Joseph Smith professed to being awake and in the act of "prayer and supplication," of being "in the act of calling upon God," when Moroni appeared.

 

43 After this communication, I saw the light in the room begin to gather immediately around the person of him who had been speaking to me, and it continued to do so until the room was again left dark, except just around him; when, instantly I saw, as it were, a conduit open right up into heaven, and he ascended till he entirely disappeared, and the room was left as it had been before this heavenly light had made its appearance.

 

44 I lay musing on the singularity of the scene, and marveling greatly at what had been told to me by this extraordinary messenger; when, in the midst of my meditation, I suddenly discovered that my room was again beginning to get lighted, and in an instant, as it were, the same heavenly messenger was again by my bedside.

...

46 By this time, so deep were the impressions made on my mind, that sleep had fled from my eyes, and I lay overwhelmed in astonishment at what I had both seen and heard. But what was my surprise when again I beheld the same messenger at my bedside, and heard him rehearse or repeat over again to me the same things as before.

 

Contrast these statements with Genesis 37 (Joseph's dream is specifically designated as such), Daniel 7 (Daniel's dream is specifically designated as such), 1 Nephi 2, 3, 8 and 10 (Lehi's dreams are specifically designated as such), Matthew 1 and 2 (Joseph's dreams are specifically designated as such), and Ether 9 (Omer's dream is specifically designated as such).

 

I do not mean to discount or lessen visions given by God to men through dreams.  Clearly He can and does operate that way.  But when He does communicate through dreams, we are seldom left to speculate about it, and are instead specifically told that a vision has been conveyed to a person while dreaming rather than in a wakeful state.  In the present instance, it seems fairly clear that Joseph was conscious during his interviews with Moroni ("sleep had fled from my eyes...").

 

As for other people in the room sleeping through these events, I see no problem with that.  The Lord has previously caused particular persons to fall into a deep sleep at certain times (Genesis 2:21 (Adam), Mosiah 24:19 (Lamanites)).  

 

Thanks,

 

-Smac

 

You make a solid case, and I'm certainly not arguing against it.

 

But as I just told Garden Girl, I would not be bothered in the least to learn that Joseph had experienced the visitation of Moroni as a dream. To me, it would still amount to divine revelation.

 

As for the presence of others in the bedroom, I believe the Lord can and does limit spiritual manifestations to the perception of select individuals, even if they occur while others are present and even if the person experiences the manifestation in a state of wakefulness.

 

For example, some people fuss over the fact that not everyone present on the occasion reported seeing the transfiguration of Brigham Young into the visage and voice of Joseph Smith that day in the grove in Nauvoo. For the reason I've just explained, this does not bother me at all. I don't believe everyone present that day did experence it. Rather, it was limited to certain individuals on the basis of their openness to it and their need for it.

Edited March 24, 2015 by Scott Lloyd

[Scott Lloyd]

Have read it, suggest you do the same, it is very enlightening.

Then you ought to be able to provide a specific page number, if not a direct quote.

[Calm]

So still no reference from Stoneholm?

[Kenngo1969]

The only serious alleged attempt at non sustaining vote that I have ever heard of was one supposedly attributed to followers of ETB with regards to David O. McKay. Not even sure how serious that attempt was.

 

 

Would be interested in seeing any references to this as I've never heard of it before. ...

 

 

"David O. McKay and the Rise of Modern Mormonism.

 

 

A whole book is not a reference....page please.

 

 

That appears to be code for, "I haven't actually read it, but people who have tell me it's in there."

 

 

Have read it, suggest you do the same, it is very enlightening.

 

 

Then you ought to be able to provide a specific page number, if not a direct quote.

 

So still no reference from Stoneholm?

 

I apologize for suggesting you had not read the book.  However, if you cannot reference your claim when asked to do so, per Board rules, you must withdraw it.  Shall we all wait on the edges of our seats, all aquiver, with 'bated breath, for you do to so?

Edited March 26, 2015 by Kenngo1969

[St. Bookmark]

Any new reports