HappyJackWagon Posted July 30, 2015 Posted July 30, 2015 I agree. A prophet is a spiritual teacher. What they do in their personal life doesn't change that.For this to be true God would need to be extremely liberal in his concept of worthiness. 1
ttribe Posted July 30, 2015 Posted July 30, 2015 In my experience, the difference is that Brigham was open about his marriages. Joseph concealed his marriages from the public, from his followers, and from Emma. That bothers some people a lot, and the lack of proven offspring allows them to believe that he wasn't concealing sexual relationships, just sealings.But I agree with the general sentiment: a prophet's behavior doesn't necessarily invalidate his prophetic calling. Seems odd, given such thinking, that the general membership of the Church is held to a higher standard of 'worthiness' than certain prophets.
ERayR Posted July 30, 2015 Posted July 30, 2015 For this to be true God would need to be extremely liberal in his concept of worthiness. True but it has happened. Balaam for instance.
ERayR Posted July 30, 2015 Posted July 30, 2015 In my experience, the difference is that Brigham was open about his marriages. Joseph concealed his marriages from the public, from his followers, and from Emma. That bothers some people a lot, and the lack of proven offspring allows them to believe that he wasn't concealing sexual relationships, just sealings.But I agree with the general sentiment: (disapproval from a 21st century paradigm of) a prophet's behavior doesn't necessarily invalidate his prophetic calling.This is how I see it.
Gray Posted July 30, 2015 Posted July 30, 2015 For this to be true God would need to be extremely liberal in his concept of worthiness. I don't think worthiness has anything to do with it, but like I said, I'm operating under a different paradigm.
HappyJackWagon Posted July 30, 2015 Posted July 30, 2015 I don't think worthiness has anything to do with it, but like I said, I'm operating under a different paradigm. We usually agree on quite a bit so I'm not sure what this "different paradigm" is. I'm open to an unorthodox view of worthiness and works based merit so if there's another paradigm through which to view this I'm not sure what that is. Can you explain?
Tacenda Posted July 30, 2015 Posted July 30, 2015 http://infantsonthrones.com/who-is-mormon-genome-project/ http://www.gofundme.com/MormonGenome The two websites above show where someone else has set up an account for testing, besides Dr. Yugo Perego. The guy on infants also said Dr. Perego works for the CES, is that true? BTW, Josephine is my ex- sister in law's 3rd Great Grand Aunt.
Gray Posted July 30, 2015 Posted July 30, 2015 We usually agree on quite a bit so I'm not sure what this "different paradigm" is. I'm open to an unorthodox view of worthiness and works based merit so if there's another paradigm through which to view this I'm not sure what that is. Can you explain? Well, to quickly summarize and hopefully avoid derailing, I don't believe that God gives commandments, or rewards or punishes, or gives literal word for word revelation. I don't believe in a human-like God, but rather I say that God is the only thing that exists. Revelation is more about awakening to true principles, not literally receiving messages in your brain from a third party. So a prophet is not someone who needs to be "worthy". To be a prophet you need to be a spiritual teacher. A spiritual teacher can make all kinds of human errors and still impart spiritual teachings. 1
ERayR Posted July 30, 2015 Posted July 30, 2015 Well, to quickly summarize and hopefully avoid derailing, I don't believe that God gives commandments, or rewards or punishes, or gives literal word for word revelation. I don't believe in a human-like God, but rather I say that God is the only thing that exists. Revelation is more about awakening to true principles, not literally receiving messages in your brain from a third party. So a prophet is not someone who needs to be "worthy". To be a prophet you need to be a spiritual teacher. A spiritual teacher can make all kinds of human errors and still impart spiritual teachings. This I can agree on
Thinking Posted July 31, 2015 Posted July 31, 2015 So a prophet is not someone who needs to be "worthy". That is the unequivocal word of the Lord concerning His divine authority. What a tremendous obligation this places upon each of us. We who hold the priesthood of God must stand above the ways of the world. We must discipline ourselves. We cannot be self-righteous, but we can and must be decent, honorable men. Our behavior in public must be above reproach. Our behavior in private is even more important. It must clear the standard set by the Lord. We cannot indulge in sin, let alone try to cover our sins. We cannot gratify our pride. We cannot partake of the vanity of unrighteous ambition. We cannot exercise control, or dominion, or compulsion upon our wives or children, or any others in any degree of unrighteousness. If we do any of these things, the powers of heaven are withdrawn. The Spirit of the Lord is grieved. The very virtue of our priesthood is nullified. Its authority is lost. Link
Robert F. Smith Posted July 31, 2015 Posted July 31, 2015 The lack of children is not solid forensic evidence to the contrary, as there are a number of other possible reasons why someone could have sexual relations and not bear a child. Until there's a definitive answer with Josephine Lyon, all we have is firsthand testimony that the marriages were consummated. Given that sexuality is at the core of Joseph's stated question about adultery that led to the revelation of section 132, it seems a little odd to suggest that, once the revelation was given, sexuality was taken out of the equation. Also, Joseph's actions (the secrecy from the public and Emma, most notably) make little to no sense if sexuality were not involved. ..................................................................................... Nope, but when people tell us they consummated their marriage, it's fairly safe to believe them, unless there is good evidence to the contrary. You are equivocating, jk. You may have an inclination "to believe them," but "safe"? Plenty of women have lied about such matters for a variety of reasons. Only the forensic evidence (DNA) proves the claim, and none have been verified -- despite Fawn Brodie's strong claims -- and just the opposite has thus far been found. How is that likely? And what are the other explanations you suggest? What sort of assured birth control technique was being employed?
Gray Posted July 31, 2015 Posted July 31, 2015 You are equivocating, jk. You may have an inclination "to believe them," but "safe"? Plenty of women have lied about such matters for a variety of reasons. Only the forensic evidence (DNA) proves the claim, and none have been verified -- despite Fawn Brodie's strong claims -- and just the opposite has thus far been found. How is that likely? And what are the other explanations you suggest? What sort of assured birth control technique was being employed? "Of the several alleged descendants tested and disconfirmed, most never had much chance of being Joseph's anyway. There is only one of them that I believed there was any substantive evidence for as his descendant. And the DNA evidence for another likely child (Josephine) is still pending. However, the historical evidence for her being Joseph's child is extremely strong. I believe I know of five such children--Josephine, two who died in infancy, and two I have identified in my own research and whose descendants are potentially testable." - Don Bradleyhttp://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/60966-wrestling-with-polyandry/?p=1209265207
Recommended Posts