JLHPROF Posted October 23, 2015 Posted October 23, 2015 The only prophet on your list is Thomas S, Monson. The rest are false prophets. I agree with you completely, but how do you prove it beyond stating it repeatedly?The obvious answer is by their fruits I suppose, but lots of people produce good fruits.
CV75 Posted October 23, 2015 Posted October 23, 2015 Yes. Take Spencer W. Kimball and Adam-God for one. Or whichever prophet was the first to proclaim Jehovah in the OT to be Jesus.Or Heber J. Grant and the changes to the garment in direct opposition to the teaching of his predecessor. Or Ezra Taft Benson and the temple ordinances.They had reasons, but no recorded word of the Lord to do what they did. Historical precedent (see above).How do you know these were done without revelation? Or that change necessarily constitutes contradiction?
filovirus Posted October 23, 2015 Posted October 23, 2015 I guess that would be me, then. Bible Dictionary still has Paul down as the author. To whom should I ascribe the glory of Hebrews' authorship?If you haven't listened to Jared Anderson, he usually has good insight into bible history. If I remember correctly he attributes the authorship to an anonymous temple priest who converted to Christianity. His podcast is Mormon Sunday school. http://mormonsundayschool.org/about-the-teacher/teaching-engaging-lds-gospel-doctrine-episode-list/ 1
JLHPROF Posted October 23, 2015 Posted October 23, 2015 (edited) How do you know these were done without revelation? Or that change necessarily constitutes contradiction? And we come full circle to the same old explanation - assumed revelation/no actual contradictions or changes. This is why I often use the Pres. Monson & baptism example. The majority of members today wouldn't even question if it was God's will to stop immersion baptism. They just assume the prophet got a revelation and move on. And this is what I explained to Tony on another thread: that these discussions always come full circle and the arguments on both sides are repetitive. I have faith in the Church and our leaders, but I am not THAT blind and they don't get any more of a pass on having to show their work than the early prophets do. Edited October 23, 2015 by JLHPROF
Calm Posted October 23, 2015 Posted October 23, 2015 From the LDS point-of-view, if someone follows a prophet's particular teaching, and that prophet turns out to be wrong (like the examples given already: blacks and the priesthood, interracial marriage, etc), is that person absolved of guilt? Is following the prophet an acceptable excuse for God? Likewise, if someone goes against a prophet's teaching and it turns out the prophet is wrong (examples already given), is that person guilty of not following the prophet in God's eyes?In general, yes to the absolved of guilt. However, I believe that if the Spirit is telling the individual to do something else, depending on the circumstances they may be held responsible for not following the Spirit even if they have chosen to follow the prophet (say if they are rationalizing a selfish choice using prophetic guidance...think of attending meetings to avoid dealing with family or using involvement in genealogy to ignore other personal development projects). 1
Tsuzuki Posted October 23, 2015 Posted October 23, 2015 Thelema is nowhere near as fun as Luciferianism or Neo-Luciferianism.They are not mutuality exclusive, and in my own practice there's a lot of overlap. 1
Damien the Leper Posted October 23, 2015 Posted October 23, 2015 (edited) The only prophet on your list is Thomas S, Monson. The rest are false prophets.Nice opinion. Now back it up. Testimony is insufficient. Edited October 23, 2015 by Valentinus
Damien the Leper Posted October 23, 2015 Posted October 23, 2015 I agree. It was just my first reaction. Definitely oversimplified. But if one is going to accept, at face value, the manner in which each set of writings was collected -- then there is a difference between the two books. For me, I'm satisfied with knowing that all three volumes (OT, NT, and BofM) bring me closer to Christ. I try not to let too many questions interfere with that. #evenmorereductive I can give you a fist bump for this.
Damien the Leper Posted October 23, 2015 Posted October 23, 2015 If you haven't listened to Jared Anderson, he usually has good insight into bible history. If I remember correctly he attributes the authorship to an anonymous temple priest who converted to Christianity. His podcast is Mormon Sunday school. http://mormonsundayschool.org/about-the-teacher/teaching-engaging-lds-gospel-doctrine-episode-list/Or you could go with one of Bart Ehrman's students.
CV75 Posted October 23, 2015 Posted October 23, 2015 And we come full circle to the same old explanation - assumed revelation/no actual contradictions or changes. This is why I often use the Pres. Monson & baptism example. The majority of members today wouldn't even question if it was God's will to stop immersion baptism. They just assume the prophet got a revelation and move on. And this is what I explained to Tony on another thread: that these discussions always come full circle and the arguments on both sides are repetitive. I have faith in the Church and our leaders, but I am not THAT blind and they don't get any more of a pass on having to show their work than the early prophets do.I am asking just two questions, making no assumptions: How does one who knows know these were done without revelation? How does one who knows know that change constitutes contradiction? If we did not live in the times of the prophets we would have been under covenant to sustain, we cannot really understand and apply what they taught in the context of our current time unless we use a similar process as “liken all scriptures unto us,” and build arks after a fashion. They showed us nothing (we weren’t there to see it as presented), and we cannot assume we would have received it anyway (because we can change over time and circumstance), but in retrospect we may now see something of value. If we progress over our lifetime in understanding spiritual matters and the teachings of those living prophets we’ve sustained along the way (and do currently sustain), we can only understand and apply what they taught and showed us in the context of our current time, circumstance and stage of development.
SmileyMcGee Posted October 23, 2015 Posted October 23, 2015 The only prophet on your list is Thomas S, Monson. The rest are false prophets.I think your statement should begin with "in my opinion..." or "I believe that..." 2
filovirus Posted October 23, 2015 Posted October 23, 2015 (edited) Nice opinion. Now back it up. Testimony is insufficient.RevelationWilford Woodruff, G. Homer Durham, Discourses of Wilford Woodruff (Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1946)THE SCRIPTURES AND THE LIVING ORACLES. Now, we may take the Bible, the Book of Mormon, and Doctrine and Covenants, and we may read them through, and every other revelation that has been given to us, and they would scarcely be sufficient to guide us twenty-four hours. We have only an outline of our duties written; we are to be guided by the living oracles. The Ten Commandments are very good, and the great and glorious principles pertaining to the redemption of man, the revelations pertaining to events that are past and to the things of the mysterious and unborn future, and there are also many choice and precious things relating to the redemption of man, to the present and future greatness of the Saints; but where can we find one revelation that tells us that we should raise three hundred teams, or twelve hundred yoke of cattle, to bring up the poor from the Missouri river. We have been informed by the revelations of the Lord Jesus Christ that there should be a temple built in Jackson county; but has there been a revelation to tell us how long or how high it should be? No, we have got to be governed by the mind and will of God, and this must be apparent to this people; it shows itself more and more.—JD 9:324, April 8, 1862.A CLARIFYING STATEMENT. Before dismissing this assembly I feel it my duty to say a few words. I addressed the Saints a short time this afternoon upon a certain subject, and that was in bearing my testimony to the keys of the kingdom of God. . . . After the meeting I began to reflect, from remarks which I made, that perhaps many of the people might get an entirely wrong idea of my views with regard to the kingdom of God. I referred to the Doctrine and Covenants—a code of revelations which the Lord gave to Joseph Smith. This book contains some of the most glorious revelation upon doctrine, upon principle, upon government, upon the kingdom of God and the different glories, and upon a great many things which reach into the eternal worlds. My leaving this subject there, perhaps, might lead my friends to suppose that I did not believe in any more revelation. This would be a great mistake. For if we had before us every revelation which God ever gave to man; if we had the Book of Enoch; if we had the untranslated plates before us in the English language; if we had the records of the Revelator St. John which are sealed up, and all other revelations, and they were piled up here a hundred feet high, the church and kingdom of God could not grow, in this or any other age of the world, without the living oracles of God. Edited October 23, 2015 by filovirus
filovirus Posted October 23, 2015 Posted October 23, 2015 Nice opinion. Now back it up. Testimony is insufficient.George Q. Cannon, Gospel Truth, sel. Jerreld L. Newquist, 2 vols. (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 1974), 1:323We have the Bible, the Book of Mormon and the Book of Doctrine and Covenants; but all these books, without the living oracles and a constant stream of revelation from the Lord, would not lead any people into the Celestial Kingdom of God. This may seem a strange declaration to make, but strange as it may sound, it is nevertheless true.Of course, these records are all of infinite value. They cannot be too highly prized, nor can they be too closely studied. But in and of themselves, with all the light that they give, they are insufficient to guide the children of men and to lead them into the presence of God. To be thus led requires a living Priesthood and constant revelation from God to the people according to the circumstances in which they may be placed.
SmileyMcGee Posted October 23, 2015 Posted October 23, 2015 George Q. Cannon, Gospel Truth, sel. Jerreld L. Newquist, 2 vols. (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 1974), 1:323We have the Bible, the Book of Mormon and the Book of Doctrine and Covenants; but all these books, without the living oracles and a constant stream of revelation from the Lord, would not lead any people into the Celestial Kingdom of God. This may seem a strange declaration to make, but strange as it may sound, it is nevertheless true.Of course, these records are all of infinite value. They cannot be too highly prized, nor can they be too closely studied. But in and of themselves, with all the light that they give, they are insufficient to guide the children of men and to lead them into the presence of God. To be thus led requires a living Priesthood and constant revelation from God to the people according to the circumstances in which they may be placed.In circles and circles we go....
filovirus Posted October 23, 2015 Posted October 23, 2015 In circles and circles we go....With the three ways to get the word of God, (scriptures, livings oracles, and personal revelation) I would hope it is circular, each one reaffirming the other two. 1
Tsuzuki Posted October 23, 2015 Posted October 23, 2015 With the three ways to get the word of God, (scriptures, livings oracles, and personal revelation) I would hope it is circular, each one reaffirming the other two.You forgot peer review.
filovirus Posted October 23, 2015 Posted October 23, 2015 You forgot peer review.https://rsc.byu.edu/archived/things-which-my-father-saw/8-strait-and-narrow-path-covenant-path-discipleship-leading-treeElder Neil L. Andersen described the threefold meaning of the “word of God” in these terms: “The word of God contains three very strong elements that intertwine and sustain one another to form an immovable rod. These three elements include, first, the scriptures, or the words of the ancient prophets. . . . The second element of the word of God is the personal revelation and inspiration that comes to us through the Holy Ghost. . . . The third element, a critical addition intertwining with the other two, . . . represents the words of the living prophets. We must also hold fast to the word of God as delivered by the living prophets.”
Damien the Leper Posted October 23, 2015 Posted October 23, 2015 George Q. Cannon, Gospel Truth, sel. Jerreld L. Newquist, 2 vols. (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 1974), 1:323We have the Bible, the Book of Mormon and the Book of Doctrine and Covenants; but all these books, without the living oracles and a constant stream of revelation from the Lord, would not lead any people into the Celestial Kingdom of God. This may seem a strange declaration to make, but strange as it may sound, it is nevertheless true.Of course, these records are all of infinite value. They cannot be too highly prized, nor can they be too closely studied. But in and of themselves, with all the light that they give, they are insufficient to guide the children of men and to lead them into the presence of God. To be thus led requires a living Priesthood and constant revelation from God to the people according to the circumstances in which they may be placed.And yet it says nothing about the others. This is biased. You'll have to do better than this.
JLHPROF Posted October 23, 2015 Posted October 23, 2015 I am asking just two questions, making no assumptions: 1. How does one who knows know these were done without revelation? 2. How does one who knows know that change constitutes contradiction? 1. It is impossible to know what revelation has been received or not received. Assuming God spoke without evidence strikes me as the much more dangerous practice than assuming he didn't, lest we believe every sagebrush prophet out there. 2. Contradiction - a person, thing, or situation in which inconsistent elements are present., the statement of a position opposite to one already made.Not too hard to spot.God says do what I say. We stop doing what he said. Contradiction.
filovirus Posted October 23, 2015 Posted October 23, 2015 And yet it says nothing about the others. This is biased. You'll have to do better than this.I just provided teachings from Wilford Woodruff, George Q. Cannon, and Niel L. Anderson, not to mention the religious studies chair at BYU Hawaii and you reject them all.
SmileyMcGee Posted October 23, 2015 Posted October 23, 2015 With the three ways to get the word of God, (scriptures, livings oracles, and personal revelation) I would hope it is circular, each one reaffirming the other two.I hope you see the circularity of your reasoning when you try to answer the following question: how do you know what you are receiving from those sources is the word of God?
SmileyMcGee Posted October 23, 2015 Posted October 23, 2015 I just provided teachings from Wilford Woodruff, George Q. Cannon, and Niel L. Anderson, not to mention the religious studies chair at BYU Hawaii and you reject them all. and why should they be trusted? Authority?
Lachoneus Posted October 23, 2015 Posted October 23, 2015 All good stuff, Tony, but be advised that Hebrews was not written by Paul. Joseph Smith thought it was. ”It is said by Paul in his letter to the Hebrew brethren, that Abel obtained witness that he was righteous” (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, 59). If Tony is wrong, then he is in good company.
Damien the Leper Posted October 23, 2015 Posted October 23, 2015 I just provided teachings from Wilford Woodruff, George Q. Cannon, and Niel L. Anderson, not to mention the religious studies chair at BYU Hawaii and you reject them all.You provided a biased argument without addressing the other persons listed as prophets. I'll reject your argument until you broaden the scope and address each person individually. Epic fail, filovirus.
filovirus Posted October 23, 2015 Posted October 23, 2015 Or you could go with one of Bart Ehrman's students.Thx for the tip.
Recommended Posts