halconero Posted November 18, 2016 Posted November 18, 2016 Trying to find a quote. I can't remember if it was Joseph Smith or Brigham Young, but the gist was that if the people had been righteous enough in Jesus' day he could have ushered in the Millennium during their time. Can't seem to find it anywhere, but I know I've read it.
Okrahomer Posted November 18, 2016 Posted November 18, 2016 3 hours ago, halconero said: Trying to find a quote. I can't remember if it was Joseph Smith or Brigham Young, but the gist was that if the people had been righteous enough in Jesus' day he could have ushered in the Millennium during their time. Can't seem to find it anywhere, but I know I've read it. I'm with you: I know I've read it, but I haven't been able to find it. My guess is that Cal will find it. :-) By the way, some folks seem to see something similar in 2 Peter 3:12.
Calm Posted November 18, 2016 Posted November 18, 2016 Maybe tomorrow if someone else hasn't. It has too common of terms (really just Jesus and Millennium, everything else is a guess) to be easy and I have a funeral, a wedding, and dog sitting to get ready for so nighttime is goofing off time (currently switching between Dragonvale and Hulu, but running out of shows I am interested in and too shy to get on Facebook and hook up with other players for gems and dragon babies, so both may soon become too boring...maybe I can talk my grandson into playing for me, my daughter won't because Facebook makes her too nervous).
MDalby Posted November 18, 2016 Posted November 18, 2016 (edited) I know this is not considered a doctrinal source but I doubt the source you are referring to is either. This is what Elder McConkie said on the topic. Quote The time for the Second Coming of Christ is as fixed and certain as was the hour of his birth. It will not vary as much as a single second from the divine decree. He will come at the appointed time.The Millennium will not be ushered in prematurely because men turn to righteousness, nor will it be delayed because iniquity abounds. Nephi was able to state with absolute certainty that the God of Israel would come ‘in six hundred years from the time my father left Jerusalem.’ (1 Ne. 19:8.) To a later Nephi the Divine Voice acclaimed: ‘The time is at hand, and on this night shall the sign be given, and on the morrow come I into the world.’ (3 Ne.1:13.)” (Bruce R. McConkie, The Millennial Messiah, 26–27) Quote Is the Time of Christ’s Coming Fixed, or May It Be Altered by Us? We hear once in a while the plea for us as Latter-day Saints to repent and improve so that the Lord may come quickly to us. It is true that we are under obligation to be faithful to our covenants, to deny ourselves of every worldly lust and cross ourselves as to the pulls of a decaying society, and to live as becometh Saints. It is true that our labor is to build up the kingdom of God and establish Zion, all in preparation for the Second Coming. The full redemption of Zion depends on the urgency with which the Saints of the Most High pursue their sacred duty. Further, our righteous obsession to be a light to a darkened world assures our own readiness to receive the Savior. But the time of His coming is a constant, not a variable. It may not be postponed because of the Saints’ tardiness or sloth any more than it can be hastened through a burst of goodness. The Father and the Son know when the King of Zion (see Moses 7:53) shall return to earth to assume the scepter and to preside over the kingdom of God. As was the case with His first coming to earth in the meridian of time, so it is in regard to His Second Coming. The Nephite prophets, for example, did not encourage the people to be faithful so that the Lord could come; rather, they stated forthrightly that in six hundred years He would come (see, for example, 1 Nephi 10:4; 19:8; 2 Nephi 25:19)—ready or not! It will be a time. It will be a specific day, a designated hour. That day and that hour are known. The time is set. It is fixed. (Robert L. Millet, The Second Coming of Christ: Questions and Answers, Sperry Symposium Classics: The Doctrine and Covenants, ed. Craig K. Manscill (Provo, UT: Religious Studies Center, Brigham Young University, 2004), 202–220) Edited November 18, 2016 by MDalby 4
The Nehor Posted November 18, 2016 Posted November 18, 2016 The normal cause and effect pattern does not work with God. My prayer for a friend this morning was possibly factored into how the Universe was created. The Saints being righteous does not change the set time of the Coming of the Savior but the decisions they make were foreseen and accounted for before the world was and God took them into account. So no, it will not be changed but our choices might have influenced the original timetable. 1
halconero Posted November 18, 2016 Author Posted November 18, 2016 I'm just looking for the quote. As Cal said, it's kind of generic in terminology, so I haven't been able to locate it again. If anyone has a source, that would be great. Looking for it for a personal study I'm doing.
cinepro Posted November 18, 2016 Posted November 18, 2016 (edited) 17 hours ago, halconero said: Trying to find a quote. I can't remember if it was Joseph Smith or Brigham Young, but the gist was that if the people had been righteous enough in Jesus' day he could have ushered in the Millennium during their time. Can't seem to find it anywhere, but I know I've read it. That idea seems to be very un-doctrinally sound. It also fosters an annoying "blame the people" attitude that gets bandied about whenever we need an explanation for something that otherwise doesn't make sense (the Priesthood Ban, the lack of additional translated scripture after Joseph Smith's death etc.) Sure, God wants to do this, but the people just aren't quite righteous enough, so He can't. Sorry, but the people are never going to be "righteous enough"; there are just too many people, and too many ways to not be righteous. But if time goes on and Jesus doesn't come back, I suspect such explanations will be more and more common. It's not his fault, he wants to come back, but the Church members just aren't righteous enough. It's our fault. Edited November 18, 2016 by cinepro 1
Duncan Posted November 18, 2016 Posted November 18, 2016 Just now, cinepro said: That idea seems to be very un-doctrinally sound. It also fosters an annoying "blame the people" attitude that gets bandied about whenever we need an explanation for something that otherwise doesn't make sense (the Priesthood Ban, the lack of additional translated scripture after Joseph Smith's death etc.) Sure, God wants to do this, but the people just aren't quite righteous enough, so He can't. Sorry, but the people are never going to be "righteous enough"; there are just too many people, and too many ways to not be righteous. But if time goes on and Jesus doesn't come back, I suspect such explanations will be more and more common. It's not his fault, he wants to come back, but the Church members just aren't righteous enough. It's our fault. agreed, I think it can lead to excess in members, like they are trying to hard to be members to the neglect of other things and some burn out
halconero Posted November 18, 2016 Author Posted November 18, 2016 (edited) 1 hour ago, cinepro said: That idea seems to be very un-doctrinally sound. It also fosters an annoying "blame the people" attitude that gets bandied about whenever we need an explanation for something that otherwise doesn't make sense (the Priesthood Ban, the lack of additional translated scripture after Joseph Smith's death etc.) Sure, God wants to do this, but the people just aren't quite righteous enough, so He can't. Sorry, but the people are never going to be "righteous enough"; there are just too many people, and too many ways to not be righteous. But if time goes on and Jesus doesn't come back, I suspect such explanations will be more and more common. It's not his fault, he wants to come back, but the Church members just aren't righteous enough. It's our fault. Sigh. I just want to find the quote. Not argue it's doctrinal status. I'm doing some contrast and comparing. Edited November 18, 2016 by halconero
bluebell Posted November 18, 2016 Posted November 18, 2016 (edited) If the quote isn't doctrinally sound, does that mean it's unlikely to be something JS or BY actually said? Edited November 18, 2016 by bluebell
JLHPROF Posted November 18, 2016 Posted November 18, 2016 Doesn't make much sense doctrinally. I'd be very surprised if Joseph or Brigham taught that. I had a good look and couldn't find anything close. I'd be curious to read it if you can ever find it.
rongo Posted November 18, 2016 Posted November 18, 2016 I'm pretty well-read in doctrinal statements from the Brethren, and I've never seen anything like this quote. It certainly doesn't sound like anything Joseph or Brigham would have taught. If you think about it, the notion of the quote that the Millennium is dependent on the diligence and heed of the Church is problematic from a spirit pre-existence perspective. Are there a finite number of the "two-thirds" who kept their first estate, or is this a variable number that can magically be eliminated if the Church ushers in the Millennium "early?" Etc.
MDalby Posted November 18, 2016 Posted November 18, 2016 I compiled all the references at LDSLastDays.com and I have a pretty vast database on all references regarding the signs of the times and I have never seen a quote from a church leader that would give anything close to that message, especially since it is not sound doctrine.
halconero Posted November 19, 2016 Author Posted November 19, 2016 Huh. Well, I'll put it on the back burner then. I swear I've seen it sourced once or twice, but who knows. Either I'm making stuff up or it's some obscure reference not actually said by Joseph or Brigham.
Boanerges Posted November 19, 2016 Posted November 19, 2016 5 hours ago, bluebell said: If the quote isn't doctrinally sound, does that mean it's unlikely to be something JS or BY actually said? Au contraire mon ami, especially the latter. (But I'm not sure if your comment was meant tongue-in-cheek.)
strappinglad Posted November 19, 2016 Posted November 19, 2016 WELL, we do have Matt 23:37 about chicks gathered. In a sense that implies that the righteousness of the people could affect the coming of the Lord.
rongo Posted November 19, 2016 Posted November 19, 2016 13 hours ago, halconero said: Huh. Well, I'll put it on the back burner then. I swear I've seen it sourced once or twice, but who knows. Either I'm making stuff up or it's some obscure reference not actually said by Joseph or Brigham. I think Julie Rowe said something about it . . . 2
cdowis Posted November 19, 2016 Posted November 19, 2016 Perhaps this will help. I forget the source (I believe it was JS), but I think it was said in this context: The mission or goal of Moses was to prepare the Israelites to have the presence of Jehovah, for him to be in their midst, even as Enoch was able to do this for the inhabitants of Zion.
Robert F. Smith Posted November 20, 2016 Posted November 20, 2016 On 11/18/2016 at 1:50 AM, The Nehor said: The normal cause and effect pattern does not work with God. My prayer for a friend this morning was possibly factored into how the Universe was created. The Saints being righteous does not change the set time of the Coming of the Savior but the decisions they make were foreseen and accounted for before the world was and God took them into account. So no, it will not be changed but our choices might have influenced the original timetable. Sounds like something from Talmudic tractate Pirke Abot 3:15: "All is foreseen, but free agency is given."
CMZ Posted November 28, 2016 Posted November 28, 2016 There was a conference quote I think in the last 7-8 years from Russell M. Nelson to the effect of righteousness possibly hastening the onset of the Millennium.
Recommended Posts