Robert F. Smith Posted December 21, 2015 Posted December 21, 2015 6 hours ago, theplains said: What do you think about the de-canonizing of the Lectures on Faith? Did they enter and leave canon by revelation? Thanks, Jim I don't know the thinking of the Brethren on that, but I do know that the Lectures were a kind of catechism and theological work created primarily by Sidney Rigdon. So I don't see it necessarily entering or leaving the Canon by revelation. 1
theplains Posted December 23, 2015 Posted December 23, 2015 On 21/12/2015 at 0:28 AM, Robert F. Smith said: I don't know the thinking of the Brethren on that, but I do know that the Lectures were a kind of catechism and theological work created primarily by Sidney Rigdon. So I don't see it necessarily entering or leaving the Canon by revelation. Why was it considered part of the church's authorized canon between 1835 until 1921? Thanks, Jim
JLHPROF Posted December 23, 2015 Posted December 23, 2015 14 minutes ago, theplains said: Why was it considered part of the church's authorized canon between 1835 until 1921? Thanks, Jim Because canonization means nothing. It's just whatever the leaders and membership of the day want to include at that time. Something is either from God or not. Many things make it into canon only to be later removed. Many things that should be in canon are never included.
theplains Posted December 23, 2015 Posted December 23, 2015 Just now, JLHPROF said: Because canonization means nothing. It's just whatever the leaders and membership of the day want to include at that time. Something is either from God or not. Many things make it into canon only to be later removed. Many things that should be in canon are never included. So a church saying it has an open canon really means nothing? Jim
Robert F. Smith Posted December 23, 2015 Posted December 23, 2015 13 minutes ago, theplains said: Why was it considered part of the church's authorized canon between 1835 until 1921? Thanks, Jim Like I say, Jim, I don't know the thinking of the Brethren on the matter, but Sidney Rigdon was a very important figure in the Church and was well trained in theology. In 1835, the Brethren in Kirtland were seriously studying that sort of thing, including Hebrew and Greek. It isn't hard to imagine them thinking that a good theological exposition was to be desired in the Canon. By 1921, someone probably noticed that it didn't really fit that well into the LDS Canon, so sought approval to remove it. I don't see that revelation needed to play a role at all.
Recommended Posts