Reconciling bruce r. McConkie

[Fair Dinkum]

I have to admit that I have a bro-mance for Bruce R. McConkie.  I absolutely loved this man especially for his testimony of Christ, especially the most memorable one he gave just prior to his death from cancer. An extremely powerful articulate testimony indeed and for the clear manner in which he viewed the gospel of Jesus Christ and made all of the pieces fit together.

But of all of the brethren who were such giants to me in my youth, Elder McConkie is perhaps the one of several who have not aged well with the passage of time. The other being President Kimball & President Joseph Fielding Smith (but I'll save them for another day)

Elder McConkie held to a very literal young earth biblical timeline.  While I loved that young earth 6,000 year timeline, since it put everything in such a pretty little box all tied up with a beautiful ribbon, it was all make believe and false.

In fact so many of the teachings of Elder McConkie have turned out not to be true.

He held to a Literal:

Adam and Eve living in a Garden in Missouri 6,000 years ago

No evolution

No death before the Fall

The Catholic Church being the Great and Abominable Church of the Devil (Oh the fun we had with that one with my Catholic neighborhood friends)

Dinosaur Bones coming from other planets (bizarre I know)

Prophets who's pronouncements could be taken to the bank and withstand the test of time

A hemispheric setting for the Book of Mormon where all native peoples of both the Americas and the pacific were descendants of Lehi

Native American's being the principle ancestors of Lehi instead being a small undetectable trace

A literal curse of Cain (glad that one turned out to be false)

I could go on and on with teachings and beliefs held by Bruce R McConkie that have been proven beyond doubt to be false and not true.

Given the fact that so many of his teachings and beliefs have not stood the test of time, It makes me question even those that have.  I mean why should I or anyone else for that matter give any credence to any of his teachings if so many of this teachings have been proven to be false.  Does he even carry any credibility with anything anymore?

So how have YOU been able to reconcile Bruce R. McConkie knowing that so many of his teachings have been shown to be not true?

Edited July 15, 2021 by Fair Dinkum

[rpn]

I think we are counseled to learn everything about every subjects not because that means we'll then understand everything, but to realize the more we learn the more we understand differently than we did before.

I don't believe prophets testify of facts, but of doctrine.

[Amulek]

This seems like an interesting topic. When you have a sec, see if you can go back and clean up the copy/paste/formatting issues - will make it much easier to discuss.

 

[LoudmouthMormon]

I think about how God reveals certain things to His prophets, and He also allows us to figure things out for ourselves.  The human race went umpteen thousands of years of recorded history, before coming to grips with the reality of mental illness, for example.  We had to figure out germ theory for ourselves, and other advances in medicine that expanded our lifespans, usually because of reduced infant mortality.

My wife (who was treated horribly by LDS folks who pretended to know better) has a simple saying.  "I trust God to act like God, and man to act like man."  

 

[CV75]

35 minutes ago, Fair Dinkum said:

So how have YOU been able to reconcile Bruce R. McConkie knowing that so many of his teachings have been show to be not true?

I don't feel I need to reconcile him.

I joined the Church in college (1975) and after I was ordained an Elder in 1977, I felt I had to know more, so I read Mormon Doctrine (cross references and everything) over the Spring Break. As a young and enthusiastic convert, a) I found his authoritative tone off-putting; b) some of his teachings incomplete; but c) on the whole his book very helpful in my quest to learn more doctrine. I had a testimony and experience with the Spirit, and plenty of experience with imperfect members and leaders, so the few relatively minor drawbacks didn't bother me. 

The gift of the Holy Ghost, among other things, helps us learn to know and do better.

[pogi]

1 hour ago, Fair Dinkum said:

So how have YOU been able to reconcile Bruce R. McConkie knowing that so many of his teachings have been show to be not true?

What do you mean by "reconcile Bruce R. McConkie", exactly?  Are you talking about his teachings, or his calling as an apostle? 

The answer to both of those is pretty simple - he is human and fallible.  Perfection is not a prerequisite of apostleship. 

I choose to sup from the edifying and enlightening teachings of his, which FAR outweigh the questionable statements, instead of wasting my time meandering in the fault and error inherent in human fallibility.   Seriously, what a waste!  One need not disregard the good and true and respectable qualities of Elder Bruce R. McConkie because he was human. 

Brigham Young taught us well when he said "don't just take my word for it".

 

Edited July 14, 2021 by pogi

[CV75]

48 minutes ago, Fair Dinkum said:

Given the fact that so many of his teachings and beliefs have not stood the test of time, It makes me question even those that have.  I mean why should I or anyone else for that matter give any credence to any of his teachings if so many of this teachings have been proven to be false.  Does he even carry any credibility with anything anymore?

Why focus on him when you can decide whether or not to believe the teachings of the living prophets? I think the restored keys trump everything else, and receiving the ordinances is the most important mortal / tangible tie-in we have to benefiting from the Atonement of Jesus Christ.

[Fether]

The church is always growing in light and understanding. I think MANY church leaders in his era spoke their minds as if they were doctrine. I do appreciate how the leaders are more careful today about what they say in settings… however… it is also annoying that we do t get to hear all the opinions and wisdom of our leaders… but with so many members struggling to separate doctrine from opinion, it makes sense that they are more careful these days.

How do I reconcile it? They were wrong and that’s ok

[strappinglad]

Assertions do not necessarily equate to truth. That sword cuts both ways. 

[Kevin Christensen]

How do I deal with Bruce R. McConkie?

If he does not measure up to your expectations, it is always beneficial to ask, "What should I expect?"  That is precisely the point of Jesus telling us to check our own eye for beams before making judgements.  "Then shall ye see clearly."

So, I want to see clearly.

First, as usual, I consider D&C 1:6, 24-28, where the Lord formally sets out what I should expect from his servants.  Not perfection.  If I need that lesson re-enforced, I can read the scriptures and look for examples of all-knowing, infallible prophets who never made mistakes, whose words are never questioned or superceded by anything.  That, I notice, is a fruitless enterprise.   And I did spend a great deal of time figuring out what a prophet should be, rather than deciding from the start that my preconceptions were sufficient.

https://www.fairlatterdaysaints.org/answers/Biblical_Keys_for_Discerning_True_and_False_Prophets

The main reason to expect perfection is emotional, rather than logical.  If I want, nay, if I demand perfection from one of the Lord's servants, so that I can put my total trust in their fleshly arm, never be wrong myself, never be disappointed, never have to change my thoughts or opinions, that is not the same thing as having valid reason for making that claim, for having abundant evidence for making that demand.

I consider people.  What people are like.  Not just what all people are like, but what different people are like.  And Elder McConkie, I think, was an ENTJ, one of 16 different types.

Quote

ENTJ is an acronym used to describe one of the sixteen personality types created by Katharine Briggs and Isabel Myers. It stands for Extraverted, iNtuitive, Thinking, Judging. ENTJ indicates a person who is energized by time spent with others (Extraverted), who focuses on ideas and concepts rather than facts and details (iNtuitive), who makes decisions based on logic and reason (Thinking) and who prefers to be planned and organized rather than spontaneous and flexible (Judging). ENTJs are sometimes referred to as Commander personalities because of their innate drive to lead others.

ENTJs are often very motivated by success in their careers and enjoy hard work. They are ambitious and interested in gaining power and influence. To the ENTJ, decision-making is a vocation. They want to be in a position to make the call and put plans into motion.

ENTJs tend to be blunt and decisive. Driven to get things done, they can sometimes be critical or brusque in the pursuit of a goal. They are typically friendly and outgoing, although they may not pick up on emotional subleties in other people. They often love working with others toward a common goal, but may not find time to attend to their feelings. They are focused on results and want to be productive, competent, and influential.

https://www.truity.com/personality-type/ENTJ

Each type has "Gifts differing" said Isabel Myers and Kathering Briggs, deliberately invoking Paul in the New Testament.  So with Elder McConkie's gifts come with contributions related to those gifts, and limitations also related to those gifts.

I looked up the word Sustain.  What does it mean?

Quote

1.  To keep up; keep going; maintain. Aid, assist, comfort.
2.  to supply as with food or provisions:
3.  to hold up; support
4.  to bear; endure
5.  to suffer; experience: to sustain a broken leg.
6.  to allow; admit; favor
7.  to agree with; confirm.

 I grew up with Elder McConkie as a constant figure in conferences I attended, and knew many people who lived by Mormon Doctrine.   Where I read it, I eventually began to feel that reading him was like putting my head in a vice and cranking.  Not mind expanding.  Rather the opposite.  But I had options who provided mind expansion within the LDS community.  A few decades back, I got Elder Peterson's review of Mormon Doctrine, submitted to President McKay, highlighting numerous errors.  And a decision to not fret because Elder McConkie was effective, and they did not think that criticizing one book, written by an individual on his own initiative, would be all that helpful.   So I can sustain Elder McConkie.  

And I consider human development.  So the Perry Scheme of Cognitive and Ethical Growth.  I discussed that at the most length here.

https://journal.interpreterfoundation.org/sophic-box-and-mantic-vista-a-review-of-deconstructing-mormonism/

The point is, at the early positions, people look to authority to settle things.  

Quote

POSITION 3 - Multiplicity Legitimate but Subordinate. (Snake's logic considered)

The person still feels that the nature of things naturally produces differing opinions, but it's as it should be, because the Authorities will figure it all out and hand on their conclusions eventually.

ALL OF THE POSITIONS ABOVE FEEL ABANDONMENT IN UNSTRUCTURED LEARNING ENVIRONMENTS. WHEN CHANGES IN THINKING START TO HAPPEN, IT CAN BE A DANGEROUS TIME.  (The forbidden fruit has been partaken and one is out of the Garden of Eden.)
 

Here is POSITION 6, and notice how in later positions, rather than craving structure (for example, Mormon Doctrine as a Big Book of What to Think), people feel frustration in too structured of an environment. 

Quote

POSITION 6. Commitment Foreseen.

FROM HERE ON THE PERSON WILL FEEL FRUSTRATION IN TOO-STRUCTURED OF AN ENVIRONMENT. 

Now the person thinks he is alone in an uncertain world, making his own decisions, with no one to say he is right.  He makes choices aware of relativism and accepts that the agency to do so is within the individual. He sees that to move forward he must make commitments coming from within. He foresees the challenge of responsibility and feels he needs to get on with it.  He also senses that the first steps require arbitrary faith or willing suspension of disbelief.  He knows he needs to narrow his focus, center himself and become aware of internal, what could be called, spiritual strength.

He starts to see how he must be embracing and transcending of: certainty/doubt, focus/breadth, idealism/realism, tolerance/contempt, stability/flexibility. He senses need for affirmation and incorporation of existential or logical polarities. He senses need to hold polarities in tension in the interest of Truth.

He begins to maintain meaning, coherence, and value while conscious of their partial, limited, and contradictable nature. He begins to understand symbol as symbols and   acknowledges the time-place relativity of them. He begins to affirm and hold absolutes in symbols while still acknowledging them to be relativistic. He begins to embrace viewpoints in conflict with his own. Now the person has a field-independent learning style, has learned to scan for information, accepts that hierarchical and analytic notes are evidence of sharpening of cognition.  He is willing to take risks, is flexible, perceptive, broad, strategy-minded, and analytical.

The TRANSITION position between Position 6, "Commitment Foreseen", and position 7, "Commitments in Relativism developed" is as follows:

Besides the above, the person feels he is lost if he doesn't decide, that if he can once make one decision, everything else will be OK.
 

Now I made the case at length in "Sophic Box and Mantic Vista" that Joseph Smith by precept and example encourages us to POSITION 9.  But in the community as a whole, there are people of all types (16 different Myers Briggs Types) and different backgrounds, and at different stages of development.  Some of them, where they are, want, and perhaps even need someone like Elder McConkie to help them where they are.   Joseph Smith taught that God adapts himself to our capacity to understand.  Where would we be if He did not?  How much could we understand unless he reached out to us where we are?

That is how I deal with Elder McConkie.  He was one, not all, of the Lord's servants, called on the Lord's errand to do what the Lord wanted of him, helping many who responded well to his gifts and talents and commitment.  There have been a great many of the Lord's servants besides him, with different talents, also needed by many in the community, also called on the Lord's errand to do what the Lord wanted of them.  

FWIW,

Kevin Christensen

Canonsburg, PA

Edited July 15, 2021 by Kevin Christensen

[Tacenda]

49 minutes ago, LoudmouthMormon said:

I think about how God reveals certain things to His prophets, and He also allows us to figure things out for ourselves.  The human race went umpteen thousands of years of recorded history, before coming to grips with the reality of mental illness, for example.  We had to figure out germ theory for ourselves, and other advances in medicine that expanded our lifespans, usually because of reduced infant mortality.

My wife (who was treated horribly by LDS folks who pretended to know better) has a simple saying.  "I trust God to act like God, and man to act like man."  

 

I'll add, my sister, who is a believer said churches are man made. 

[MustardSeed]

I expect that like Bruce R. M ., present leaders are not always correct.  I govern myself and take responsibility for my choices. Life is not primary class, where things fall into right and wrong categories and the teacher dictates which goes where.  Life is messy, nuanced, complicated, and leaders help but we should all think and operate as though we do…and live with the outcome. 

[Fair Dinkum]

1 hour ago, Amulek said:

This seems like an interesting topic. When you have a sec, see if you can go back and clean up the copy/paste/formatting issues - will make it much easier to discuss.

 

Yeah botched that didn't I

[Fair Dinkum]

56 minutes ago, pogi said:

What do you mean by "reconcile Bruce R. McConkie", exactly?  Are you talking about his teachings, or his calling as an apostle? 

The answer to both of those is pretty simple - he is human and fallible.  Perfection is not a prerequisite of apostleship. 

I choose to sup from the edifying and enlightening teachings of his, which FAR outweigh the questionable statements, instead of wasting my time meandering in the fault and error inherent in human fallibility.   Seriously, what a waste!  One need not disregard the good and true and respectable qualities of Elder Bruce R. McConkie because he was human. 

Brigham Young taught us well when he said "don't just take my word for it".

 

He taught things as an apostle that are demonstrable false.  How have you been able to accept anything else he taught as being authoritative given the fact that so much of what he taught is not true.  The man simply has no credibility.

[Fair Dinkum]

58 minutes ago, CV75 said:

Why focus on him when you can decide whether or not to believe the teachings of the living prophets? I think the restored keys trump everything else, and receiving the ordinances is the most important mortal / tangible tie-in we have to benefiting from the Atonement of Jesus Christ.

Yet at one time he WAS the one holding the keys of being a living prophet and yet anyone following his directives would have been led into falsehoods.  How can we place any faith in those who hold the keys today given the fact that we know given enough time even their pronouncement could come back to bit us in the ...

[Fair Dinkum]

1 hour ago, pogi said:

What do you mean by "reconcile Bruce R. McConkie", exactly?  Are you talking about his teachings, or his calling as an apostle? 

The answer to both of those is pretty simple - he is human and fallible.  Perfection is not a prerequisite of apostleship. 

I choose to sup from the edifying and enlightening teachings of his, which FAR outweigh the questionable statements, instead of wasting my time meandering in the fault and error inherent in human fallibility.   Seriously, what a waste!  One need not disregard the good and true and respectable qualities of Elder Bruce R. McConkie because he was human. 

Brigham Young taught us well when he said "don't just take my word for it".

 

This is only a guess...but I'm going to guess that you take President Nelsons pronouncements as gospel and run your life accordingly and yet in a few years many of the key things you made important life descission on might turn out to be false.  So you made decisions on a false foundation.

[ksfisher]

5 minutes ago, Fair Dinkum said:

Yet at one time he WAS the one holding the keys of being a living prophet and yet anyone following his directives would have been led into falsehoods.  How can we place any faith in those who hold the keys today given the fact that we know given enough time even their pronouncement could come back to bit us in the ...

Are there any of Elder McConkie's teachings which you disagree with that has put anyone's salvation at risk?  Some of the things you mention (dinosaur bones, young earth creation, death before the fall) really don't seem to have much to do with salvation.  Is there any part of Elder McConkie's testimony of Christ that is incorrect?

Elder McConkie certainly had his opinions, but we know that it is the united voice of the Quorum of the Twelve and the First Presidency that defines doctrine, not just one person. 

The below quote from Kevin Christensen's earlier post bears repeating.

53 minutes ago, Kevin Christensen said:

If he does not measure up to your expectations, it is always beneficial to ask, "What should I expect?"  That is precisely the point of Jesus telling us to check our own eye for beams before making judgements.  "Then shall ye see clearly."

 

[pogi]

36 minutes ago, Fair Dinkum said:

He taught things as an apostle that are demonstrable false.  How have you been able to accept anything else he taught as being authoritative given the fact that so much of what he taught is not true.  The man simply has no credibility.

Most people are familiar with the Biblical accounts of Jesus rebuking the apostles for their unbelief and mistakes in the gospel.  Most will recognize their stiff disagreements on different teachings. 

This is from a different religion, but I concur with their teachings:

Quote

Genuine apostles do make mistakes and are fallible, but that doesn’t negate the fact that they are called, and have a grace from God for certain tasks. Nobody expects pastors or evangelists or teachers to be infallible, and neither are apostles or prophets. All are called by God, given grace, and anointed and still must walk with Christ in humility to fulfil their call.

https://www.peace.org.au/apostolic/the-apostolic-revelation/do-apostles-make-mistakes.html

Because he made mistakes doesn't remove the credibility of his calling as an apostle, it simply means that he made mistakes.   We have a fundamentally different understanding of apostleship. 

Edited July 14, 2021 by pogi

[pogi]

28 minutes ago, Fair Dinkum said:

This is only a guess...but I'm going to guess that you take President Nelsons pronouncements as gospel and run your life accordingly and yet in a few years many of the key things you made important life descission on might turn out to be false.  So you made decisions on a false foundation.

You are assuming I am a blind follower.  Why?

Even if we were to assume that was true, we could only conclude that I too am human and fallible in doing so, and have much to learn and grow along with the apostles.

Edited July 14, 2021 by pogi

[Amulek]

37 minutes ago, Fair Dinkum said:

Yeah botched that didn't I

No worries. I just didn't want people to get lost in the jumble and not engage in the discussion.

[JAHS]

2 hours ago, Fair Dinkum said:

So how have YOU been able to reconcile Bruce R. McConkie knowing that so many of his teachings have been shown to be not true?

Most of his teachings are true, only a few were not true. And most of the ones that were not true have no effect on our eternal progression. The ones that were not true I chalk up to the scripture that says we learn things "line upon line, precept upon precept" (Isa 28: 10), God revealing to us new information as the people are able to bear(John 16:12) and no sooner.  This applies to all of us and the prophets.

Mormon Doctrine was Elder Bruce R. McConkie's best effort to provide Latter-day Saints with a gospel compendium to help them to instruct each other in the doctrine of the kingdom. Not he nor anyone else ever claimed it was perfect. In fact he admitted to some mistakes that appeared in the first edition and made corrections for subsequent editions. It was his best explanation of the doctrine of Christ as he understood it at the time. As Bruce R. McConkie states at the beginning of his book:  "For the work itself, I assume sole and full responsibility."

God does not take over a prophet's brain and make him do and say everything perfectly. But they certainly know a lot more about God and His doctrines than I do so I still heed their counsel and have faith that what they say will help me obtain eternal life.

[Fair Dinkum]

11 minutes ago, pogi said:

Most people are familiar with the Biblical accounts of Jesus rebuking the apostles for their unbelief and mistakes in the gospel.  Most will recognize their stiff disagreements on different teachings. 

This is from a different religion, but I concur with their teachings:

Because he made mistakes doesn't remove the credibility of his calling as an apostle, it simply means that he made mistakes.   We have a fundamentally different understanding of apostleship. 

I'm not suggesting that McConkie wasn't an apostle.  He certainly was an apostle.  But had I made important life decision on his teachings I would have paid an awful price.  Oh wait, I did make important life decisions based in part on things he taught and did pay a high price.

[Fair Dinkum]

2 hours ago, ksfisher said:

Are there any of Elder McConkie's teachings which you disagree with that has put anyone's salvation at risk?  Some of the things you mention (dinosaur bones, young earth creation, death before the fall) really don't seem to have much to do with salvation.  Is there any part of Elder McConkie's testimony of Christ that is incorrect?

We don't really know do we.  Maybe he is wrong on that as well.  Guess we'll find out/or won't when we die

2 hours ago, ksfisher said:

Elder McConkie certainly had his opinions, but we know that it is the united voice of the Quorum of the Twelve and the First Presidency that defines doctrine, not just one person. 

The below quote from Kevin Christensen's earlier post bears repeating.

 

Yeah things have changed quite a bit in the church. It has reigned in its apostles.  

Edited July 15, 2021 by Fair Dinkum

[Fair Dinkum]

12 minutes ago, pogi said:

You are assuming I am a blind follower.  Why?

Even if we were to assume that was true, we could only conclude that I too am human and fallible in doing so, and have much to learn and grow along with the apostles.

Not at all. I view you as an independent critical thinker

[Fair Dinkum]

6 minutes ago, JAHS said:

Most of his teachings are true, only a few were not true. And most of the ones that were not true have no effect on our eternal progression. The ones that were not true I chalk up to the scripture that says we learn things "line upon line, precept upon precept" (Isa 28: 10), God revealing to us new information as the people are able to bear(John 16:12) and no sooner.  This applies to all of us and the prophets.

Mormon Doctrine was Elder Bruce R. McConkie's best effort to provide Latter-day Saints with a gospel compendium to help them to instruct each other in the doctrine of the kingdom. Not he nor anyone else ever claimed it was perfect. In fact he admitted to some mistakes that appeared in the first edition and made corrections for subsequent editions. It was his best explanation of the doctrine of Christ as he understood it at the time. As Bruce R. McConkie states at the beginning of his book:  "For the work itself, I assume sole and full responsibility."

God does not take over a prophet's brain and make him do and say everything perfectly. But they certainly know a lot more about God and His doctrines than I do so I still heed their counsel and have faith that what they say will help me obtain eternal life.

So imagine you run into someone whom you view as an authority only to discover long into your relationship that 50% (Just using this as an example) of the information imparted to you to make life's decisions on was false information.  Does that not cut into the credibility of anything else this person might instruct you in? Example: A certain former politician has zero credibility with me because of his lies and belief in conspiracies.  He could almost say anything today to me and I would no more take him as being credible as  a known charlatan

Edited July 14, 2021 by Fair Dinkum