Is The Church Ashamed Of The Prophet Joseph Smith?

[Scott Lloyd]

 

 

That being said, I think the only rational response the graph is "So what, this isn't the Church of Joseph Smith". 

 

If one did that, they would just come with the quick response: "Then why not discard Joseph Smith?"

 

The fact of the matter is, Joseph Smith and his divine role and mission are essential to our faith. We can't hide that, nor should we. The Lord decreed that this "generation" (meaning this gospel dispensation) would have His word through Joseph Smith.

 

There will be no de-emphasizing of or distancing the Church from Joseph Smith, not while Jesus Christ remains at the head.

[CCRW]

Scout, since say 2005 what would you say is the leading cause of individual’s voluntarily leaving the church?

[Scott Lloyd]

Any chance that brianspro is related to cinepro? I assume that, just like cine, his name is pronounced "brianspro."

 

 

No. I've never even remotely thought that.

 

Beautiful. I hereby predict that within 25 years Scott will have lost track of all of his prediction trackers, including the one he will now start to begin tracking this prediction.

 

 

But, you see, I have better facilities now, and I'm older and wiser.

 

Just as I will never make the mistake again of predicting how the federal judiciary will behave,* I will never again lose track of my prediction trackers.

 

Incidentally, I think the Dehlin/Rockpond deadline countdown must have dropped below the 39-year-and-10-month mark by now. Let me check ...

 

Yep.

 

Time remaining by which the Church will have caved in to social pressure on same-sex "marriage": 39 years, 9 months, 4 weeks, 6 hours, 28 minutes and 55 seconds.

 

Edited to add:

 

*Actually, I was blindsided on my prediction. I had in mind that the state of Utah would be allowed to chart its own destiny according to prevailing community standards. I had not counted on the actions of heavy-handed and despotic federal courts. That took me totally by surprise.

Edited April 13, 2015 by Scott Lloyd

[JLHPROF]

I think he just wants to know what "standard view" you expressed that illicted negative responses.

 

Well I can't provide the references for the "negative" responses because my post history doesn't go back that far.

But members have posted objection to my agreement with:

 

1. Joseph Smith will be one of our judges.

2. Anything in the King Follett, particularly anything to do with theosis.

3. Joseph's polyandrous marriages were ok with God.

4. Head of the dispensation gives Joseph unique authority not held by his successors.

 

All of these were pretty well taught or known and accepted 100 years ago.  Not so today.  Again, this is individual members I'm talking about, not the Church as a whole.

 

However, I am fully prepared to admit that I have also advocated the occasional belief about Joseph Smith that was NOT standard teaching so I own responsibility for any disagreement in that area.

[ttribe]

 

CFR, if you please, regarding your last statement ("I've received enough negative response from members on this site for expressing what was a standard view of the Prophet Joseph 100 years ago.").

Thanks,

-Smac

 

Did you really just "CFR" an anecdotal observation?

[The Nehor]

Scout, since say 2005 what would you say is the leading cause of individual’s voluntarily leaving the church?

I would go with apathy and sin. In my own experience many of those who claim they left over historical issues found out and started talking about those issues after they slipped into low activity or no activity states. These surveys never have anyone saying they wanted to sleep in on Sunday but I am sure more then a few people have left over that issue.

[Scott Lloyd]

Scout, since say 2005 what would you say is the leading cause of individual’s voluntarily leaving the church?

Well, Silver, I don't really have a handle on that. Do you?

 

(This is fun speaking in the peronae of the horses of the Lone Ranger and Tonto. How long shall we continue?)

Edited April 13, 2015 by Scott Lloyd

[CCRW]

Wade would be with you on that one as well Nehor ... does he still post here?

[smac97]

My post history doesn't go back that far.  Do you expect me to go thread by thread?

 

No.  Just a few posts will do.

 

Thanks,

 

-Smac

[smac97]

Did you really just "CFR" an anecdotal observation?

 

It's a testable, quantifiable observation, so yes.

[Tacenda]

I think there are many things the church is doing to mainstream.  Calling ourselves Christians.  Explaining Grace much differently word wise than before, this year!  Playing down our being Gods and having our own planets, or theosis.  A cross on the Paris temple perhaps, door I believe, and church publications showing crosses.  Probably a lot more than these, I'll come back and edit when I think of more, or if I think of more.  

 

Scott, I believe that guy's predictions came in time.  But I wonder now, with so many having difficulty with church essay's and secularism, if the church will switch back to being more fundamental.  It might just have to.  Because if it becomes too mainstream the conservatives will probably leave.  And I think that's a bigger threat.       

[Scott Lloyd]

Wade would be with you on that one as well Nehor ... does he still post here?

Didn't he just post?

[cinepro]

There is a huge difference between the role of Joseph Smith and the role of Heber J. Grant.

But I agree that this is Christ's Church first and foremost.

 

Maybe 100 years from now the role of Joseph Smith will still be recognized and respected, but in a more...moderated fashion.

[CCRW]

Well, Silver, I don't really have a handle on that. Do you?

 

(This is fun speaking in the peronae of the horses of the Lone Ranger and Tonto. How long shall we continue?)Hey

 

Is this one of those I'm being insulted and don't even know it kind of things?

 

Nehor was quick to be honest, I appreciate that.  I assumed you might also feel that way.

[Scott Lloyd]

 

Scott, I believe that guy's predictions came in time.    

So you're saying the Church of Jesus Christ today is indistinguishable from any average Protestant sect?

 

[Storm Rider]

Since I was a boy my relationship was focused on our Heavenly Father.  Jesus Christ, I learned, was and is my intermediary to approach the Father.  I certainly came to believe in prophets and respected many of them by feeling a kinship to them as men and leaders.  However, I acknowledge that I have never sensed a particularly close relationship with the prophet Joseph.  I had others I felt closer to, but none of these relationship did anything but ameliorate my primary dependence upon and appreciation for our Father in Heaven. 

 

There was a point where the Church made a more conscious effort to focus on the Savior and through those efforts I believe my relationship has strengthened, but has never replaced my primary spiritual relationship with our Father. 

 

That appears to be a very significant drop in mentioning the prophet, Joseph; however, I think there could be many reasons for that, the least of which would be a conscious effort to become more mainstream.  We believe in prophets; that God continues to talk and guide his children today through those he chooses to guide us. 

 

It is fanciful thinking to conclude the Church is striving to become like those churches that we teach are organizations of man and without authority to act in God's name. 

[Calm]

They may have switched to using the more personal "Joseph" rather than the full name "Joseph Smith" more often

Was there any mention of this possibility?

[Scott Lloyd]

Is this one of those I'm being insulted and don't even know it kind of things?

 

 

Just having some fun with you, Silver.

 

Nehor was quick to be honest, I appreciate that.  I assumed you might also feel that way.

 

Didn't you just ask if Nehor still posts here?

 

And I was being honest. I really don't have a handle on your question.

 

Your friend,

 

Scout

[Buckeye]

Well I can't provide the references for the "negative" responses because my post history doesn't go back that far.

But members have posted objection to my agreement with:

 

1. Joseph Smith will be one of our judges.

2. Anything in the King Follett, particularly anything to do with theosis.

3. Joseph's polyandrous marriages were ok with God.

4. Head of the dispensation gives Joseph unique authority not held by his successors.

 

All of these were pretty well taught or known and accepted 100 years ago.  Not so today.  Again, this is individual members I'm talking about, not the Church as a whole.

 

However, I am fully prepared to admit that I have also advocated the occasional belief about Joseph Smith that was NOT standard teaching so I own responsibility for any disagreement in that area.

 

That's helpful, thanks. I am familiar with each of these teachings, but I agree they are not widely discussed today.

[CCRW]

sorry, was it not Wade England?  maybe I'm not remembering ... the chemo really messed with my memory

[Scott Lloyd]

They may have switched to using the more personal "Joseph" rather than the full name "Joseph Smith" more often

Was there any mention of this possibility?

Well, any conscientious word-count survey would include any variations on Josephs' name or identity, including references to "the Prophet" (upper case) or "the Seer."

 

But I have no idea how conscientious these people are.

[CCRW]

So you're saying the Church of Jesus Christ today is indistinguishable from any average Protestant sect?

 

getting a bit closer every decade

[Scott Lloyd]

sorry, was it not Wade England?  maybe I'm not remembering ... the chemo really messed with my memory

Oh, I see. The "does he still post here?" had reference to Wade, not Nehor.

 

I was confused because both names were a possible antecedent. And Nehor's name was closest to your question.

[Scott Lloyd]

getting a bit closer every decade

brianspro, is that you? I didn't think I'd ever hear from you again!

 

Care to put a specific deadline on your prediction? I track these things with a timer app now.

Edited April 13, 2015 by Scott Lloyd

[bcuzbcuz]

This thread is prompted by a blog post I just saw from Daniel Peterson.

 

It would seem there is a graph floating around whose authors purport to demonstrate that the Church is backing away from honoring the Prophet Joseph Smith as the prophet of the Restoration and is becoming more "mainstream" -- whatever that is supposed to mean.

 

As Dr. Peterson points out in the blog post, the authors of the graph, which is based on spoken references in general conference, missed some obvious reasons for the ups and downs (click on the link to read the details).

 

This comes to my attention the day after our high priests meeting lesson on Joseph Smith from the Ezra Taft Benson Teachings of Presidents of the Church manual.

 

The question was posed in the lesson: "How has your life been influenced by the Prophet Joseph Smith."

 

I will repeat unabashedly what I replied then: In every meaningful way, my life has been influenced by the Prophet Joseph.

 

When I served my mission back in the '70s, one of the tracts we had available to us for distribution was a pamphlet, the title of which (retranslated back into English from Swedish; I never learned the original English title) was "This We Have Received through Joseph Smith". It enumerated a long list of truths and doctrines that are available to the world today through the instrumentality of the Prophet Joseph, not the least of which is a knowledge of the Plan of Happiness, or the Plan of Salvation, or the Plan of Exaltation. This gives meaning to my life, as it has done since I first learned of it while a young boy.

 

As an aside, I have become somewhat known for the timers I set for predictions people make.

 

The first time I did such a thing was back in the days of the old Zion's Light Message Board back in the '90s and early 2000s.. A poster there who went by the screen name "brianspro" predicted that within I think it was 10 years, the Church would have drifted so far from its uniqueness and into the "mainstream" that it would be virtually indistinguishable from any Protestant sect. I didn't have the timer app then that I do now, but I did set an alarm in my Palm PDA for 10 years into the future.

 

In the meantime, Palm went out of business, the PDA became space junk, and consequently, I lost track of brianspro's prediction. But a year or so ago, I ran across a post I had written that made reference to it, and realized the deadline -- in 2013, I think it was -- had come and gone, and the Church had not drifted into the "mainstream" in any meaningful sense.

Fullständigt meninslös att tro att någon kan sätta ett datum där kyrkan falla sönder. Tio år är i alla fall ett ögonblick i människans existens. Men en sak är säker, kyrkan har slutat framföra den uppfattning att den är den enda sanningen och att alla andra trosuppfattningar fördöms av gud.