Ashes of a rye straw...

[mfbukowski]

3 hours ago, Eph2,8 said:

I read the quotes, no poofing happened for me. I checked out your blog a little bit, and it looks like you believe in subjective truth, as opposed to an objective, ultimate, and absolute truth. If I'm wrong, please correct me! Last thing I want is to strawman. Fun thought experiments for sure, but that seems a very dangerous and un-Christian worldview. God stands above men, with Himself being the embodiment of truth (John 14:6). Truth absolutely exists outside of the human mind and creation. Just like I said to another person, truth exists regardless of our ability to articulate, process, perceive, even to string sentences together as you seem so attached to. 

Perhaps you are confusing the WORD true, as meaning an alleged statement about "things as they are", with how how you PERCEIVE the world around you.

Truth is about statements, not the world outside.

NOW we see through a glass, darkly, as things APPEAR, not as they ARE, but THEN, as spirits, we will see God -and the spirit world- "face to face".

How is that "dangerous"? 

Do you reject that scripture?

Do you think our fleshy eyes and brains made of meat see things "as they are"?

That would mean that all of reality AS WE SEE IT would be constructed by the human brain?

Can we see God with our natural eyes?

THAT is what atheists believe- they cannot see Him "darkly" with their natural eyes, therefore he is not "TRUE! "

That is the jumbled world of the natural man, not the world of God.

THAT is the illusion.

Edited August 28, 2021 by mfbukowski

[Islander]

On 8/12/2021 at 4:13 PM, JLHPROF said:

You don't think a prophet has ever contradicted scripture?  According to the pharisees even Christ contradicted their scripture.  Because he had a higher law.  Joseph Smith contradicted their scriptures of the day.  There were numerous disagreements over scripture among the 12 from time to time.   And if your interpretation of scripture disagrees with your leader's?   It happens. 

The topic is canon vs prophet on doctrine.  It's not about one encouraging a sin.

I believe the issue hinges on one's view of scripture. A high view of scripture as the true, sound and authoritative word of God would render it as the final arbiter when it comes to theological issues. Because scripture is the ONLY true interpreter of scripture. In it we have a clear view of the character, attributes, promises and actions of God in regards to His people and His own words. So, an issue that may not be clear in one passage would be made transparent in another. 

Now, if a (later) prophet contradicts the explicit word of God; what He has said and settled previously, according to His words (scripture) as articulated earlier, he is a false prophet. 

"If there arise among you a prophet, or a dreamer of dreams, and giveth thee a sign or a wonder, And the sign or the wonder come to pass, whereof he spake unto thee, saying, Let us go after other gods, which thou hast not known, and let us serve them; Thou shalt not hearken unto the words of that prophet, or that dreamer of dreams: for the LORD your God proveth you, to know whether ye love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul. Ye shall walk after the LORD your God, and fear him, and keep his commandments, and obey his voice, and ye shall serve him, and cleave unto him. And that prophet, or that dreamer of dreams, shall be put to death; because he hath spoken to turn you away from the LORD your God, which brought you out of the land of Egypt, and redeemed you out of the house of bondage, to thrust thee out of the way which the LORD thy God commanded thee to walk in. So shalt thou put the evil away from the midst of thee." Deut 13:1-5

To "go after other gods" in the language of the OT means to worship, embrace doctrine or practices not commanded or prescribed by the Lord. So, we go the scriptures and see what God has said about its own word, what the Savior has stated about the written word of God and we have a clear pattern. Any pronouncement, regardless of who it comes from, that is contrary to what God has said is therefore false and unreliable.

[JLHPROF]

37 minutes ago, Islander said:

I believe the issue hinges on one's view of scripture. A high view of scripture as the true, sound and authoritative word of God would render it as the final arbiter when it comes to theological issues. Because scripture is the ONLY true interpreter of scripture. In it we have a clear view of the character, attributes, promises and actions of God in regards to His people and His own words. So, an issue that may not be clear in one passage would be made transparent in another. 

Now, if a (later) prophet contradicts the explicit word of God; what He has said and settled previously, according to His words (scripture) as articulated earlier, he is a false prophet. 

"If there arise among you a prophet, or a dreamer of dreams, and giveth thee a sign or a wonder, And the sign or the wonder come to pass, whereof he spake unto thee, saying, Let us go after other gods, which thou hast not known, and let us serve them; Thou shalt not hearken unto the words of that prophet, or that dreamer of dreams: for the LORD your God proveth you, to know whether ye love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul. Ye shall walk after the LORD your God, and fear him, and keep his commandments, and obey his voice, and ye shall serve him, and cleave unto him. And that prophet, or that dreamer of dreams, shall be put to death; because he hath spoken to turn you away from the LORD your God, which brought you out of the land of Egypt, and redeemed you out of the house of bondage, to thrust thee out of the way which the LORD thy God commanded thee to walk in. So shalt thou put the evil away from the midst of thee." Deut 13:1-5

To "go after other gods" in the language of the OT means to worship, embrace doctrine or practices not commanded or prescribed by the Lord. So, we go the scriptures and see what God has said about its own word, what the Savior has stated about the written word of God and we have a clear pattern. Any pronouncement, regardless of who it comes from, that is contrary to what God has said is therefore false and unreliable.

Big fancy way of saying continuing revelation doesn't contradict previous revelation but it can contradict previous prophetic opinion.

The question is whether just because something is official canon does that change its authority, especially when things that aren't revelation make it into canon?

[Islander]

3 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

Big fancy way of saying continuing revelation doesn't contradict previous revelation but it can contradict previous prophetic opinion.

The question is whether just because something is official canon does that change its authority, especially when things that aren't revelation make it into canon?

Official canon is the scriptures. For the LDS it relates to the OT, NT, BoM, D&C and the PGP. Beyond that, we have counsel from the GA's, ecclesiastical direction and guidance, church policies and procedures and instruction which we hold as authoritative. Direct revelation from God is a completely different category. The prophet would be obligated to say: "thus sayeth the Lord..." because after all direct revelation is the actual voice/words of God. It can never be confused with opinion, well informed as it may be. And that has not happened in 150 years.