'Hitherto shalt thou come, and no further'

[stemelbow]

On ‎5‎/‎19‎/‎2017 at 4:59 PM, pogi said:

What makes you think it is driven by fear and not inspiration, or desire for greater unity or oneness of heart and mind (Moses 7:18)?

No doubt it's probably continued on account of a number of reasons.  Fear may be part of those. 

On ‎5‎/‎19‎/‎2017 at 4:59 PM, pogi said:

While Joseph clearly cherished freedom of belief, he also sought for unity in the church under the direction of the prophet.  There are a lot of good quotes in this link to that end:

https://www.lds.org/manual/teachings-joseph-smith/chapter-23?lang=eng

“Wherefore, meaning the church, thou shalt give heed unto all his words and commandments which he shall give unto you as he receiveth them, walking in all holiness before me;  For his word ye shall receive, as if from mine own mouth, in all patience and faith” (D&C 21:4–5)

It was the struggle of the apostles after Christ's death to unify the church in doctrine.  I think they all would have sustained the concept of correlation.  

 

I don't.  Correlation isn't the prophet speaking for God. 

[stemelbow]

22 hours ago, cinepro said:

Just so we're all clear, these are the purposes the Church gives for the Correlation program:

 

https://www.lds.org/manual/doctrine-and-covenants-and-church-history-gospel-doctrine-teachers-manual/lesson-42-continuing-revelation-to-latter-day-prophets?lang=eng

If the classes I've attended (and the seminary lessons my kids have gotten over the last few years) are any indication, then there isn't enough "correlation" by those standards.

I think that speaks to the reasons given aren't really the reasons.  I'd say correlation likely came about, at least partially, because there was fear, particularly since the Church doesn't really receive revelation anymore, that people will speak up and oppositions would be formed.  of course they wouldn't completely stop that.  But it was a measure put in place to help keep people in line, I'm guessing. 

[pogi]

1 hour ago, stemelbow said:

I don't.  Correlation isn't the prophet speaking for God. 

Are you saying that the early apostles didn't care about unifying the church in doctrine?  The First Presidency and quorum of the 12 oversee correlation.  They are all prophets, seers, and revelators for the church, so why couldn't God speak through his prophets via correlation in the direction of His church?

The link Cinepro gave says this:

Quote

 ...correlation was initiated and continues to operate today by revelation from the Lord to His prophets.

 

1 hour ago, stemelbow said:

I think that speaks to the reasons given aren't really the reasons.  

In other words, they are lying?

1 hour ago, stemelbow said:

 I'd say correlation likely came about, at least partially, because there was fear

Based on what evidence?  

1 hour ago, stemelbow said:

particularly since the Church doesn't really receive revelation anymore

“We testify to the world that revelation continues and that the vaults and files of the Church contain these revelations which come month to month and day to day. We testify also that there is, since 1830 when The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints was organized, and will continue to be, so long as time shall last, a prophet, recognized of God and his people, who will continue to interpret the mind and will of the Lord. …

“Expecting the spectacular, one may not be fully alerted to the constant flow of revealed communication. I say, in the deepest of humility, but also by the power and force of a burning testimony in my soul, that from the prophet of the Restoration to the prophet of our own year, the communication line is unbroken, the authority is continuous, a light, brilliant and penetrating, continues to shine. The sound of the voice of the Lord is a continuous melody and a thunderous appeal. For nearly a century and a half there has been no interruption” (in Conference Report, Apr. 1977, 115; or Ensign, May 1977, 78).

1 hour ago, stemelbow said:

I'm guessing. 

Yes...yes you are.  But you are also making accusations without any evidence.

[stemelbow]

4 minutes ago, pogi said:

Are you saying that the early apostles didn't care about unifying the church in doctrine?

Not even close.

4 minutes ago, pogi said:

 The First Presidency and quorum of the 12 oversee correlation.  They are all prophets, seers, and revelators for the church, so why couldn't God speak through his prophets via correlation in the direction of His church?

Could.  Just don't know that's the case.  As it is, it doesn't seem like correlation is bringing enough useful to the table.  I wonder how much it has caused, say, that which Teryl Givens called the deplorable condition of our teaching manuals?  I get the attempted virtuous explanation of why correlation but in practice it's not working out. 

4 minutes ago, pogi said:

The link Cinepro gave says this:

 

In other words, they are lying?

Whose "they".  That's hard to pin down exactly.  Some speak in ignorance and that could be the case here.  Some speak in trying to be very PR or political.  I can't really tell int his case. 

4 minutes ago, pogi said:

Based on what evidence?  

The circumstantial evidence of the explanation of why correlation doesn't seem to apply, the manuals, as Givens has pointed out, are deplorable, and that it as a standard contradicts Joseph's messages as the OP suggested.  Most of all for me the problem is...Church should be a place where people are free to talk about the welfare of our souls, which would entail and include individual's ideas shared freely, without fear of social condemnation or Church sanction.  That's just not the Church as I see it.  It's a place where we feel pressure to stay in line, speak at a surface level, and repeat weird sounding platitudes as they've been given us through correlation. 

4 minutes ago, pogi said:

“We testify to the world that revelation continues and that the vaults and files of the Church contain these revelations which come month to month and day to day. We testify also that there is, since 1830 when The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints was organized, and will continue to be, so long as time shall last, a prophet, recognized of God and his people, who will continue to interpret the mind and will of the Lord. …

“Expecting the spectacular, one may not be fully alerted to the constant flow of revealed communication. I say, in the deepest of humility, but also by the power and force of a burning testimony in my soul, that from the prophet of the Restoration to the prophet of our own year, the communication line is unbroken, the authority is continuous, a light, brilliant and penetrating, continues to shine. The sound of the voice of the Lord is a continuous melody and a thunderous appeal. For nearly a century and a half there has been no interruption” (in Conference Report, Apr. 1977, 115; or Ensign, May 1977, 78).

Yes...yes you are.  But you are also making accusations without any evidence.

So.  I'm one person.  I'm drawing my conclusions based on my experience. Why are you concerned?  There's plenty of problems in the dominant narrative, which narrative seems to find it's happiest benefactor in correlation.  That to me is evidence.  I suppose it's rather circumstantial, which would mean, it seems, that correlation may not be the cause of any of these ills.  But, I don't know that correlation has helped alleviate.  But again, my biggest issue is it seems to me correlation, in practice, seems to limit our people and keeps people from sharing the welfare of their souls.  That should be the concern rather than following some and sticking to some manual.

[pogi]

48 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

Not even close.

Ok, then why do you suggest that the early apostles would not sustain the idea of correlation?

50 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

Whose "they".  That's hard to pin down exactly.  Some speak in ignorance and that could be the case here.  Some speak in trying to be very PR or political.  I can't really tell int his case. 

Again, the First Presidency and quorum of the 12 oversee correlation, so they are the "they" who are ultimately responsible for all correlated material. 

52 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

and that it as a standard contradicts Joseph's messages as the OP suggested.

The OP was a question, not a suggestion.  I wanted to see how others reconciled the two, and I have been satisfied in the responses.  Joseph Smith said many other things in support of the principles behind correlation as well.  Joseph always sought to unify the people in doctrine via the prophet-down approach, and he would shut down anyone who attempted to preach contrary to the revelations - that is what correlation does.

59 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

Most of all for me the problem is...Church should be a place where people are free to talk about the welfare of our souls, which would entail and include individual's ideas shared freely, without fear of social condemnation or Church sanction.  

I agree with you on this, but I think this is the result of a cultural side-effect of correlation rather than the intended purpose.  We should feel free to talk and discuss topics in church, but there must be limits otherwise church would be as contentious and directionless as these forums.  As much as I enjoy discussions here, I rarely feel the spirit and would be sorely disappointed if church ended up like these forums. 

Correlation has done more good than I think you give it credit for.   

 

[stemelbow]

1 hour ago, pogi said:

Ok, then why do you suggest that the early apostles would not sustain the idea of correlation?

I'm suggesting correlation is a terrible avenue to take to unify in doctrine.  The early leaders knew it, apparently, and since it's been implemented it hasn't really worked. 

1 hour ago, pogi said:

Again, the First Presidency and quorum of the 12 oversee correlation, so they are the "they" who are ultimately responsible for all correlated material. 

In a sense sure.  But that doesn't mean everything put out was by revelation. 

1 hour ago, pogi said:

The OP was a question, not a suggestion.  I wanted to see how others reconciled the two, and I have been satisfied in the responses.  Joseph Smith said many other things in support of the principles behind correlation as well.  Joseph always sought to unify the people in doctrine via the prophet-down approach, and he would shut down anyone who attempted to preach contrary to the revelations - that is what correlation does.

Good for you.  I'm certainly not satisfied with what we get from correlation. 

1 hour ago, pogi said:

I agree with you on this, but I think this is the result of a cultural side-effect of correlation rather than the intended purpose.  We should feel free to talk and discuss topics in church, but there must be limits otherwise church would be as contentious and directionless as these forums.  As much as I enjoy discussions here, I rarely feel the spirit and would be sorely disappointed if church ended up like these forums. 

Correlation has done more good than I think you give it credit for.   

 

Ok.  Thanks for the input. 

[Gray]

I've heard it said that correlation sucked some of the life and fun out of church and that previously wards had a lot more autonomy. But, if that's the case, it's not something I observed. Maybe the fun was before my time!

It does make sense to have something like correlation - to keep a consistent message across thousands of units across the world. Whether or not it's working well is another question. 

Edited May 22, 2017 by Gray

[pogi]

9 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

I'm suggesting correlation is a terrible avenue to take to unify in doctrine. 

Ok, what do you suggest?  How do you maintain order and unity among church entities without correlation across a world-wide church, which has expanded greatly in number and complexity of organizations within the church, "each with their own general and local officers, curricula, reporting systems, meetings, magazines, funding, and lines of communication"?  I don't know if you really want to go back to the days before correlation and consolidation simplified things.  Much of what we did was excessively complex and expensive and was an impediment to the growth of the church and took away from family time according to this:

 http://eom.byu.edu/index.php/Correlation_of_the_Church_Administration

13 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

The early leaders knew it, apparently

They did?

18 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

since it's been implemented it hasn't really worked. 

In a lot of ways it has worked.  I do see some unintended and unfortunate consequences of correlation, but it is not ALL bad.  

 

[pogi]

2 hours ago, Gray said:

I've heard it said that correlation sucked some of the life and fun out of church and that previously wards had a lot more autonomy. But, if that's the case, it's not something I observed. Maybe the fun was before my time!

You are not too young to remember the roadshows are you?

I remember being forced to sacrifice my free play time to rehearse the part of a munchkin singing "We represent the lollipop kids...", ugh, I HATED being forced to participate in the roadshows, but I guess some people really thought they were "fun". 

Edited May 22, 2017 by pogi

[JLHPROF]

1 minute ago, pogi said:

You are not too old to remember the roadshows are you?

I remember being forced to sacrifice my free play time to rehearse the part of a munchkin singing "We represent the lollipop kids...", ugh, I HATED being forced to participate in the roadshows, but I guess some people really thought they were "fun".

I have a picture of my mother dressed in a bird suit performing the "birdie dance" for one of those.
Yeah...glad that's gone.

[Gray]

49 minutes ago, pogi said:

You are not too young to remember the roadshows are you?

I remember being forced to sacrifice my free play time to rehearse the part of a munchkin singing "We represent the lollipop kids...", ugh, I HATED being forced to participate in the roadshows, but I guess some people really thought they were "fun". 

I remember hearing about them from my older siblings, but I don't remember ever seeing one myself. 

[stemelbow]

16 hours ago, pogi said:

Ok, what do you suggest?  How do you maintain order and unity among church entities without correlation across a world-wide church, which has expanded greatly in number and complexity of organizations within the church, "each with their own general and local officers, curricula, reporting systems, meetings, magazines, funding, and lines of communication"?  I don't know if you really want to go back to the days before correlation and consolidation simplified things.  Much of what we did was excessively complex and expensive and was an impediment to the growth of the church and took away from family time according to this:

 http://eom.byu.edu/index.php/Correlation_of_the_Church_Administration

Free market place of ideas.  Ideas being shared, run through the grinder and come out better on the other side.  Control and capping people's thoughts doesn't help.  The Church can't seriously claim all knowledge.  We must learn to embrace truth from not matter it's source and all that. 

16 hours ago, pogi said:

They did?

In a lot of ways it has worked.  I do see some unintended and unfortunate consequences of correlation, but it is not ALL bad.  

 

 

[pogi]

49 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

Free market place of ideas.  Ideas being shared, run through the grinder and come out better on the other side.  

What does that look like to you?  No manuals, no structure, where each teacher is free to teach their favorite pet theory or uninspired folk doctrine?  Or, do you want to do away with teachers all together and have a free for all discussion every-week?

2 hours ago, stemelbow said:

Control and capping people's thoughts doesn't help.  

How does correlation control and cap people's thoughts? I view it more as a foundation to freely discuss from.  It grounds us in the revelations, from which we are free to discuss.  Should church really be the place to discuss non-revealed theories, or should that be reserved for exploration outside of church meetings?

2 hours ago, stemelbow said:

The Church can't seriously claim all knowledge.  

No, it can't, but neither can you come in and pretend to teach new knowledge that the church does not have.  I seem to remember something in the D&C about that.  We are a prophet down church in terms church teachings, but in terms of personal beliefs, you are free explore beyond that.

2 hours ago, stemelbow said:

We must learn to embrace truth from not matter it's source and all that. 

Agreed...but again, what does this have to do with correlation?  You are free to embrace whatever you want, but keep it out of church.  Church is a place to discuss the prophetic revelations, not pet theories - that's what this place is for.  

2 hours ago, stemelbow said:

Free market place of ideas.  Ideas being shared, run through the grinder and come out better on the other side. 

The following prophets and apostles like that idea too, but they seem to understand that this can work within the framework of correlation which you seem to have a misconception of.

Quote

 

“I admire men and women who have developed the questing spirit, who are unafraid of new ideas as stepping stones to progress. We should, of course, respect the opinions of others, but we should also be unafraid to dissent–if we are informed. Thoughts and expressions compete in the marketplace of thought, and in that competition truth emerges triumphant. Only error fears freedom of expression… This free exchange of ideas is not to be deplored as long as men and women remain humble and teachable. Neither fear of consequence or any kind of coercion should ever be used to secure uniformity of thought in the church. People should express their problems and opinions and be unafraid to think without fear of ill consequences. … We must preserve freedom of the mind in the church and resist all efforts to suppress it.”

— Hugh B. Brown

“I did not like the old man being called up for erring in doctrine. It looks too much like the Methodist, and not like the Latter-day Saints. Methodists have creeds which a man must believe or be asked out of their church. I want the liberty of thinking and believing as I please. It feels so good not to be trammeled. It does not prove that a man is not a good man because he errs in doctrine.”

— Joseph Smith, History of the Church, 5:340

“If we have the truth, it cannot be harmed by investigation. If we have not the truth, it ought to be harmed.”

– President J. Reuben Clark

“…regardless of your circumstances, your personal history, or the strength of your testimony, there is room for you in this Church.”

— President Dieter Uchtdorf

“I think you’d be as aware as I am that that we have many people who are members of the church who do not have some burning conviction as to [the origins of the Book of Mormon], who have some other feeling about it that is not as committed to foundational statements and the premises of Mormonism. But we’re not going to invite somebody out of the church over that any more than we would anything else about degrees of belief or steps of hope or steps of conviction. … We would say: “This is the way I see it, and this is the faith I have; this is the foundation on which I’m going forward. If I can help you work toward that I’d be glad to, but I don’t love you less; I don’t distance you more; I don’t say you’re unacceptable to me as a person or even as a Latter-day Saint if you can’t make that step or move to the beat of that drum.” … We really don’t want to sound smug. We don’t want to seem uncompromising and insensitive.”

– Elder Jeffrey R. Holland

“Let us have the courage to defy the consensus, the courage to stand for principle. Courage, not compromise, brings the smile of God’s approval. Courage becomes a living and an attractive virtue when it is regarded not only as a willingness to die manfully, but as the determination to live decently. A moral coward is one who is afraid to do what he thinks is right because others will disapprove or laugh. Remember that all men have their fears, but those who face their fears with dignity have courage as well.”

– Thomas S. Monson, “Courage Counts,” Ensign, Nov. 1986, 41.

“As a means of coming to truth, people in the Church are encouraged by their leaders to think and find out for themselves. They are encouraged to ponder, to search, to evaluate, and thereby to come to such knowledge of the truth as their own consciences, assisted by the Spirit of God, lead them to discover. Brigham Young said: ‘I am more afraid that this people have so much confidence in their leaders that they will not inquire for themselves of God whether they are led by him. I am fearful they settle down in a state of blind self-security. … Let every man and woman know, by the whispering of the Spirit of God to themselves, whether their leaders are walking in the path the Lord dictates, or not’ (Discourses of Brigham Young, sel. John A. Widtsoe [1941], 135). In this manner no one need be deceived.”

– James E. Faust, “The Truth Shall Make You Free,” Ensign, September 1998

“Brothers and sisters, as good as our previous experience may be, if we stop asking questions, stop thinking, stop pondering, we can thwart the revelations of the Spirit. Remember, it was the questions young Joseph asked that opened the door for the restoration of all things. We can block the growth and knowledge our Heavenly Father intends for us. How often has the Holy Spirit tried to tell us something we needed to know but couldn’t get past the massive iron gate of what we thought we already knew?”

– Dieter F. Uchtdorf, “Acting on the Truths of the Gospel of Jesus Christ,” Worldwide Leadership Training, 2/11/12

“In this Church there is an enormous amount of room—and scriptural commandment—for studying and learning, for comparing and considering, for discussion and awaiting further revelation. We all learn ‘line upon line, precept upon precept,’ with the goal being authentic religious faith informing genuine Christlike living. In this there is no place for coercion or manipulation, no place for intimidation or hypocrisy.”

– Jeffrey R. Holland, “A Prayer for the Children,” Ensign, May 2003

“Some are lost because they are different. They feel as though they don’t belong. Perhaps because they are different, they find themselves slipping away from the flock. They may look, act, think, and speak differently than those around them and that sometimes causes them to assume they don’t fit in. They conclude that they are not needed.  Tied to this misconception is the erroneous belief that all members of the Church should look, talk, and be alike. The Lord did not people the earth with a vibrant orchestra of personalities only to value the piccolos of the world. Every instrument is precious and adds to the complex beauty of the symphony. All of Heavenly Father’s children are different in some degree, yet each has his own beautiful sound that adds depth and richness to the whole. This variety of creation itself is a testament of how the Lord values all His children. He does not esteem one flesh above another, but He “inviteth them all to come unto him and partake of his goodness; and he denieth none that come unto him, black and white, bond and free, male and female; … all are alike unto God.”

– Joseph B. Wirthlin, “Concern for the One,” Ensign, May 2008

discourage someone from taking full advantage of Church membership, we fail them–and the Lord. The Church is made stronger as we include every member and strengthen one another in service and love.”

– Jeffrey R. Holland, “Helping Those Who Struggle with Same-Gender Attraction,” Liahona, October 2007

“We have heard men who hold the priesthood remark that they would do anything they were told to do by those who preside over them (even) if they knew it was wrong; but such obedience as this is worse than folly to us; it is slavery in the extreme; and the man who would thus willingly degrade himself, should not claim a rank among intelligent beings, until he turns from his folly. A man of God would despise the idea. Others, in the extreme exercise of their almighty authority have taught that such obedience was necessary, and that no matter what the saints were told to do by their presidents, they should do it without any questions. When the Elders of Israel will so far indulge in these extreme notions of obedience as to teach them to the people, it is generally because they have it in their hearts to do wrong themselves.”

– Joseph Smith, Millennial Star, Vol. 14, Num. 38, pp.593-595

“More thinking is required, and we should all exercise our God-given right to think and be unafraid to express our opinions, with proper respect for those to whom we talk and proper acknowledgment of our own shortcomings. We must preserve freedom of the mind in the church and resist all efforts to suppress it. The church is not so much concerned with whether the thoughts of its members are orthodox or heterodox as it is that they shall have thoughts.”

– Hugh B. Brown, “A Final Testimony,” Edward B. Firmage, The Memoirs of Hugh B. Brown: An Abundant Life, Signature Books, Salt Lake City, 1988, pg. 135-140 http://www.sciencemeetsreligion.org/lds/brown-final.php

“But while the Atonement is meant to help us all become more like Christ, it is not meant to make us all the same. Sometimes we confuse differences in personality with sin. We can even make the mistake of thinking that because someone is different from us, it must mean they are not pleasing to God. This line of thinking leads some to believe that the Church wants to create every member from a single mold—that each one should look, feel, think, and behave like every other. This would contradict the genius of God, who created every man different from his brother, every son different from his father. Even identical twins are not identical in their personalities and spiritual identities.  It also contradicts the intent and purpose of the Church of Jesus Christ, which acknowledges and protects the moral agency—with all its far-reaching consequences—of each and every one of God’s children. As disciples of Jesus Christ, we are united in our testimony of the restored gospel and our commitment to keep God’s commandments. But we are diverse in our cultural, social, and political preferences.  The Church thrives when we take advantage of this diversity and encourage each other to develop and use our talents to lift and strengthen our fellow disciples.”

– Dieter F. Uchtdorf April 2013, “Four Titles”

“The first and fundamental principle of our holy religion is, that we believe that we have a right to embrace all, and every item of truth, without limitation or without being circumscribed or prohibited by the creeds or superstitious notions of men, or by the dominations of one another, when that truth is clearly demonstrated to our minds, and we have the highest degree of evidence of the same.”

– Joseph Smith, Jr., Letter from Joseph Smith to Isaac Galland, Mar. 22, 1839, Liberty Jail, Liberty, Missouri, published in Times and Seasons, Feb. 1840, pp. 53–54

“I want to say to my friends that we believe in all good. If you can find a truth in heaven, earth or hell, it belongs to our doctrine. We believe it; it is ours; we claim it.”

– Brigham Young, Discourses of Brigham Young. Selected by John A. Widtsoe. 1941.

 

 

[stemelbow]

15 minutes ago, pogi said:

What does that look like to you?  No manuals, no structure, where each teacher is free to teach their favorite pet theory or uninspired folk doctrine?  Or, do you want to do away with teachers all together and have a free for all discussion every-week?

Any and all the above look better than what we have.  It doesn't really matter as long as we finally have a place where people are free to gather and feel empowered and free to share the true condition of their souls. 

you don't need correlation to have a manual, though. 

Quote

How does correlation control and cap people's thoughts? I view it more as a foundation to freely discuss from.  It grounds us in the revelations, from which we are free to discuss.  Should church really be the place to discuss non-revealed theories, or should that be reserved for exploration outside of church meetings?

Church is fine for such in my view.  Gathering in large groups to talk about shallow level stuff because meat sounds so difficult and controversial is nearly pointless to me.  I get people love it.  But it doesn't work for me. 

Quote

No, it can't, but neither can you come in and pretend to teach new knowledge that the church does not have.  I seem to remember something in the D&C about that.  We are a prophet down church in terms church teachings, but in terms of personal beliefs, you are free explore beyond that.

I hope so.  Individuals can explore thought as they want.  Of course when you do so, you best keep your ideas to yourself these days.  There's no sharing the welfare of your soul with Church members. 

Quote

Agreed...but again, what does this have to do with correlation?  You are free to embrace whatever you want, but keep it out of church.  Church is a place to discuss the prophetic revelations, not pet theories - that's what this place is for.  

You just answered your own question.  Keep it out of Church is correlation. 

Quote

The following prophets and apostles like that idea too, but they seem to understand that this can work within the framework of correlation which you seem to have a misconception of.

 

if you say so.  I know I aint' changing nothing.  Not many want it quite like I do, so....here we are. 

Edited May 23, 2017 by stemelbow

[pogi]

56 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

Any and all the above look better than what we have.  

You don't see any wisdom in maintaining the teachings within church meetings to the revelations and prophetic statements?  Do you really think it wise to let every man be free to teach whatever they want, no matter how controversial?  Do you really think that would be unifying and non-contentious?  Why not maintain the purity of the church while fully exploring other venues for further research and discussion?

56 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

There's no sharing the welfare of your soul with Church members.

I don't know what you are talking about, I do all the time!

56 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

Gathering in large groups to talk about shallow level stuff because meat sounds so difficult and controversial is nearly pointless to me.

The simple and pure topics of grace, faith, charity, humility, atonement, etc are not "shallow" topics in the least.  You are free to discuss as deep as you want within the framework of the topic at hand. But why introduce speculative (talk about SHALLOW!) folk doctrines in the mix?  How does speculation benefit the welfare of your soul any more than the deep waters of grace, faith, humility, charity, and atonement, etc can?

 

 

 

Edited May 23, 2017 by pogi

[stemelbow]

1 minute ago, pogi said:

You don't see any wisdom in maintaining the teachings within church meetings to the revelations and prophetic statements?

Correlation doesn't do that.  It filters the prophet statements and revelations to suit the agenda of milk before meat and many other considerations.  Most prophetic statements are ignored for another flavor.  There's no real consistency in all the prophetic statements made from the beginning. 

1 minute ago, pogi said:

 Do you really think it wise to let every man be free to teach whatever they want, no matter how controversial?

Sure.  What's wrong with that? 

1 minute ago, pogi said:

 Do you really think that would be unifying and non-contentious?  

It could be. 

1 minute ago, pogi said:

Why not maintain the purity of the church while fully exploring other venues for further research and discussion?

That doesnt' make sense to me.  there is no purity of the Church. 

1 minute ago, pogi said:

I don't know what you are talking about, I do all the time!

Sure.  Those who do are fine.  For the rest of us, well, we're not. 

1 minute ago, pogi said:

The simple and pure topics of grace, faith, charity, humility, atonement, etc are not "shallow" topics in the least.  

To the degree the manuals discuss them?  Sure they are. 

1 minute ago, pogi said:

You are free to discuss as deep as you want within the framework of the topic at hand.

not really.

1 minute ago, pogi said:

But why introduce speculative (talk about SHALLOW!) folk doctrines in the mix?

To breed ideas from which we grow. 

1 minute ago, pogi said:

 How does speculation benefit the welfare of your soul any more than the deep waters of grace, faith, humility, charity, and atonement, etc can?

 

False dichotomy if you ask me.  Who said speculation is any different from grace, faith, humility, charity and atonement etc?  I don't. 

[pogi]

41 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

Sure.  Those who do are fine.  For the rest of us, well, we're not. 

Then open your mouth.

45 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

To the degree the manuals discuss them?  Sure they are. 

The manuals are meant to be catalysts for discussion in church.  We are not restricted to reading the manuals only.

46 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

To breed ideas from which we grow. 

You really see it working that way?  I think that is a naive vision.  I see contention, confusion, dissension, division, the formation of -ites, and hurt feelings.  We would lose focus of the simplicity of the gospel principles and become lost in the deep cloudy philosophies of men.  That's what would happen if you remove the manuals and say it is a free-for-all to discuss whatever the heck you want.  Church would become MDD - please no!  Lets keep those avenues separate.  

[RevTestament]

6 hours ago, stemelbow said:

Free market place of ideas.  Ideas being shared, run through the grinder and come out better on the other side.  Control and capping people's thoughts doesn't help.  The Church can't seriously claim all knowledge.  We must learn to embrace truth from not matter it's source and all that. 

The restored gospel is different from the ideas of the gospel of other churches. To me, if one doesn't believe in the restored gospel, I don't see how they can be a member of the Church. So I believe SS does have a definite "charter" to teach the restored gospel in action. That is a good bit of doctrinal material. I believe SS should also have a mandate to study the scriptures since they in my view should be the source of that doctrine. To turn SS into a debate hour would be catastrophic imho. People don't join the church to sign up for that. They want to learn the gospel in action. They want to learn how to put it into action in their lives.  Here I think correlation does a decent job. 

My only, or at least main, gripe about correlation is that it assumes all truth will come through the presidency of the Church. That seems somewhat contradictory of one of the articles of faith. I really don't believe there is scriptural support for it either. Just holding all the keys of the Church doesn't make the Presidency the sole source of truth. It seems almost contradictory to teach that we can each search the truth on our own, but that somehow we limit acceptable Church revelation only to the Presidency. With regard to guiding operations of the Church this is apparently true, and with respect to Joseph Smith this was apparently true, but JS could apparently designate others to receive revelations as well. In short there does not seem to be a revelation that only the President can receive revelation, which is presumably why all GAs are sustained as seers and revelators - the gift of revelation is not restricted to the President nor even the GAs. Anyway, presenting additional insights in SS may not be a terrible thing as long as they are on topic.  Right now anything which seems counter to or outside the lesson material seems to come under attack almost. There seems to be a fear of it. However, exploring other insights or aspects of the scriptures is really the only way our understanding can grow, so there seems to be a dilemma in this regard. Growth beyond the Church presentation is limited to the individual rather than the Church, unless that is received as a revelation and presented to the Church through the presidency. They seem to insist on being the sole arbiters by which additional or new truth is to be introduced, and unless their name is Joseph Smith, that doesn't seem to be supported by scripture. Certainly, there is nothing saying they are the only ones allowed to interpret scripture. Essentially, we all have to do it.

[Nofear]

In my opinion the prophesy of Zenos as recorded in Jacob 5 gives ample justification/explanation for correlation. Indeed, it was lack of correlation that likely greatly contributed to the apostasy of the primitive church (see Jacob 5:37). Correlation coupled with modern communication and travel allow the latter-day church to avoid the demise/apostasy of the former. Correlation helps keep the branch and roots in line with each other (see Jacob 5:65). We can't just let anything and everything go, but neither can we, as a Church, yet bear some of the truth to be practiced. Moderation, correlation!

Members are, of course, encouraged to receive as much light and truth as they can bear. But, again, the practices, teachings, and activities of the Church are to be moderated and correlated consistent with what cinepro posted.

[pogi]

1 hour ago, RevTestament said:

My only, or at least main, gripe about correlation is that it assumes all truth will come through the presidency of the Church. 

I don't see correlation as doing that though.  In fact, there are correlated materials which confirm that not all truth comes through the presidency of the church.  I think it is important to distinguish, as CV75 did, between group and individual learning.  I think it important that the direction and teaching of the church be presided over by the First Presidency and counsel of the 12 who hold the keys and are the "watchmen" of the church.  As Pres. Benson said, " "All men are entitled to inspiration, and various men are entitled to revelation for their particular assignment. But only one man stands as the Lord’s spokesman to the Church and the world, and he is the president of the Church.”  This is confirmed in D&C 28.

There is also this 1913 (pre-correlation as we know it) declaration which I think is relevant:

Quote

 

In a 1913 declaration entitled “A Warning Voice,” the First Presidency—Joseph F. Smith, Anthon H. Lund, and Charles W. Penrose—explained:

“From the days of Hiram Page (Doc. and Cov., Sec. 28), at different periods there have been manifestations from delusive spirits to members of the Church. Sometimes these have come to the men and women who because of transgression became easy prey to the Arch-Deceiver. At other times people who pride themselves on their strict observance of the rules and ordinances and ceremonies of the Church are led astray by false spirits, who exercise an influence so imitative of that which proceeds from a Divine source that even these persons, who think they are ‘the very elect,’ find it difficult to discern the essential difference. Satan himself has transformed himself to be apparently ‘an angel of light.’

...they should understand that directions for the guidance of the Church will come, by revelation, through the head. All faithful members are entitled to the inspiration of the Holy Spirit for themselves, their families, and for those over whom they are appointed and ordained to preside. But anything at discord with that which comes from God through the head of the Church is not to be received as authoritative or reliable” (Improvement Era,Sept. 1913, 1148).

 

I don't think this means that we have to accept all correlated material as our personal truth, and that there is no other truth, but I do think it prudent to not let every Hiram Page who has an "inspired" opinion to waste our time at church.  I think it more wise to leave the inspired direction of church teachings up to the presiding authorities and let each individual branch off from there in their own pursuit of truth.   

[RevTestament]

16 minutes ago, pogi said:

I don't see correlation as doing that though.  In fact, there are correlated materials which confirm that not all truth comes through the presidency of the church.  I think it is important to distinguish, as CV75 did, between group and individual learning.  I think it important that the direction and teaching of the church be presided over by the First Presidency and counsel of the 12 who hold the keys and are the "watchmen" of the church.  As Pres. Benson said, " "All men are entitled to inspiration, and various men are entitled to revelation for their particular assignment. But only one man stands as the Lord’s spokesman to the Church and the world, and he is the president of the Church.”  This is confirmed in D&C 28.

I don't read D&C 28 that way:

2 But, behold, verily, verily, I say unto thee, no one shall be appointed to receive commandments and revelations in this church excepting my servant Joseph Smith, Jun., for he receiveth them even as Moses.

3 And thou shalt be obedient unto the things which I shall give unto him, even as Aaron, to declare faithfully the commandments and the revelations, with power and authority unto the church.

4 And if thou art led at any time by the Comforter to speak or teach, or at all times by the way of commandment unto the church, thou mayest do it.

5 But thou shalt not write by way of commandment, but by wisdom;

6 And thou shalt not command him who is at thy head, and at the head of the church;

7 For I have given him the keys of the mysteries, and the revelations which are sealed, until I shall appoint unto them another in his stead.

 

So, again unless their name is Joseph Smith, I don't read them as receiving this gift, but it does say there will be another in his stead to reveal the mysteries. it doesn't say he will be Pres of the Church. There simply is not a revelation saying the Pres is the sole author of Church revelation. The Lord left it somewhat open to the Church - I think for a reason.

Also, I did not say that correlation materials are the sole source of truth, but that they present the Church presidents as this source - at least for teaching the Church.

[stemelbow]

18 hours ago, pogi said:

Then open your mouth.

Well shoot wish I thought of that before.   

18 hours ago, pogi said:

The manuals are meant to be catalysts for discussion in church.  We are not restricted to reading the manuals only.

And what can we talk about?  Well, it's often nothing more than repeating the platitudes told us.  Go outside of that and you end up being condemned or shunned, or many other things. 

18 hours ago, pogi said:

You really see it working that way?  I think that is a naive vision.

 

Odd you mention being naïve after the views you've expressed in this post. 

18 hours ago, pogi said:

 I see contention, confusion, dissension, division, the formation of -ites, and hurt feelings.  

uh....that already happens.  Openness, in my experience, tends to alleviate that.  But surely it'll remain to some extent. 

18 hours ago, pogi said:

We would lose focus of the simplicity of the gospel principles and become lost in the deep cloudy philosophies of men.

Do not fret on that front.  We are already lost in this regard, as the larger culture surrounding the Church has been a huge guiding force of what the Church is.  Far more at Church these days is about stuff that is not simple gospel principles. 

18 hours ago, pogi said:

 That's what would happen if you remove the manuals and say it is a free-for-all to discuss whatever the heck you want.  Church would become MDD - please no!  Lets keep those avenues separate.  

I know stagnation works for many. 

[pogi]

14 hours ago, RevTestament said:

7 For I have given him the keys of the mysteries, and the revelations which are sealed, until I shall appoint unto them another in his stead.

So again unless their name is Joseph Smith, I don't read them as receiving this gift, but it does say there will be another in his stead to reveal the mysteries. it doesn't say he will be Pres of the Church. There simply is not a revelation saying the Pres is the sole author of Church revelation. The Lord left it somewhat open to the Church - I think for a reason.

Also, I did not say that correlation materials are the sole source of truth, but that they present the Church presidents as this source - at least for teaching the Church.

I guess we will have to agree to disagree on interpretation.  I don't think the Lord did leave it open to the Church.  Only one person on Earth has all the priesthood keys necessary to guide and direct the church as a whole.  Everyone else is limited to their individual jurisdictions.  Verse 7 above makes it clear that there will only be one man, not any man, in the stead of Joseph Smith who holds the keys for the entire church.  That is largely understood to be the President of the Church who holds the same keys as Peter - the President of his time. 

D&C 43 corroborates verse 7 that there will only be one appointed to receive revelations for the church and that no one else shall receive these keys except it be through Joseph.  Collectively, the quorum of the 12 hold all the keys necessary to direct the church, so in the absence of the president they can collectively guide the church via revelation until another is appointed and ordained, via the quorum, with all the keys to direct the church.  

[RevTestament]

5 minutes ago, pogi said:

I guess we will have to agree to disagree on interpretation.  I don't think the Lord did leave it open to the Church.  Only one person on Earth has all the priesthood keys necessary to guide and direct the church as a whole.  Everyone else is limited to their individual jurisdictions.  Verse 7 above makes it clear that there will only be one man, not any man, in the stead of Joseph Smith who holds the keys for the entire church.  That is largely understood to be the President of the Church who holds the same keys as Peter - the President of his time. 

D&C 43 corroborates verse 7 that there will only be one appointed to receive revelations for the church and that no one else shall receive these keys except it be through Joseph.  Collectively, the quorum of the 12 hold all the keys necessary to direct the church, so in the absence of the president they can collectively guide the church via revelation until another is appointed and ordained, via the quorum, with all the keys to direct the church.  

Again, that is the usual assumption made by the Church, but it just doesn't say that:

3 And this ye shall know assuredly—that there is none other appointed unto you to receive commandments and revelations until he be taken, if he abide in me.

4 But verily, verily, I say unto you, that none else shall be appointed unto this gift except it be through him; for if it be taken from him he shall not have power except to appoint another in his stead.

 

Actually, all priesthood holders of the Church receive their priesthood through Joseph Smith, so any who receive this priesthood can receive this gift through him. Merely being ordained to an office, and given authority, does not give one the gift of revelation. Authority to speak in the name of the Lord, and receiving this gift of revelation are two different things.

As an example that revelation is not limited to the President of the Church, I will cite Rev 11 which informs us that two will prophesy - not one. The Lord will give the gift of revelation to whom He will. I respectfully submit that the chain of revelation taught is simply not scriptural. I'm not saying it is wrong, but the Lord is not limited by it.

[Bernard Gui]

On 5/17/2017 at 2:31 PM, pogi said:

Some people view the correlation/consolidation of the church beginning in the 1960's to be too restrictive.  What are your thoughts about correlation and how does one reconcile correlation with the following teachings of Joseph Smith?

Was this an immature/naive Joseph who said these words who later abandoned these teachings in composing the Articles of Faith, or do these principles survive today in the church?  How does one justify the Articles of Faith and correlation/consolidation in light of these teachings?  Have we become circumscribed by creeds?  I have some ideas, but I thought it would be interesting to see your different thoughts and perspectives on the matter.  

Please don't view this post as a comment or opinion on the matter, I am just asking questions for now.

One could view correlation as a prophetic program in that it anticipated the coming explosion of information (true and false) that resulted from the creation of the internet. There certainly are plenty more things now carrying people about with every wind of doctrine by the sleight of men and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive. At least something was put in place to help stay the course. Perhaps our Sunday instructional materials have been dumbed down and become repetitive as a result.