Embrace the living Prophets (context repentance, chastity, do your best)

[The Nehor]

4 minutes ago, Fred said:

If one doesn't accept the fact that masturbation is a same sex act, the sex of one's self, then it may take a miracle for that one to be able to see any obvious fact.

[bluebell]

2 hours ago, Fred said:

 

So if given a choice between fighting and being raped, I would hope most people would choose to fight than to voluntarily choose rape. 

I don't believe that God would rather have us dead than sexually assaulted.

[Calm]

2 hours ago, Fred said:

would hope most people would choose to fight than to voluntarily choose rape. 

If it is rape, it is not voluntary.

[Amulek]

1 hour ago, The Nehor said:

And the cycle continues.

Quite so. If only everyone else's Ahab-dar was as keen as yours...

 

[JLHPROF]

6 hours ago, pogi said:

There were a lot of incorrect principles he taught that have been abandoned by the church today. 

That can be said of each Church prophet.  One day it will be said of Pres. Nelson.

[pogi]

58 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

That can be said of each Church prophet.  One day it will be said of Pres. Nelson.

That is very true.  The sooner we can acknowledge that, the sooner we can all move on with eternal progression as a people.  Some people have a hard time letting go and moving on. 

[JLHPROF]

42 minutes ago, pogi said:

That is very true.  The sooner we can acknowledge that, the sooner we can all move on with eternal progression as a people.  Some people have a hard time letting go and moving on. 

Any guesses which current teachings we'll get to disavow?  We Mormons can get a head start.

[Tacenda]

44 minutes ago, pogi said:

That is very true.  The sooner we can acknowledge that, the sooner we can all move on with eternal progression as a people.  Some people have a hard time letting go and moving on. 

It's people like you and a few others that keep my foot in the church door. 

[bluebell]

12 hours ago, JLHPROF said:

That can be said of each Church prophet.  One day it will be said of Pres. Nelson.

Do you have any thoughts on what might have been the incorrect principles that were taught by JS or BY?

[JLHPROF]

1 hour ago, bluebell said:

Do you have any thoughts on what might have been the incorrect principles that were taught by JS or BY?

Well the Church has publicly and repeatedly disavowed teachings on race from that era.  Brigham's teachings on Adam were specifically denounced in the days of President Kimball.
There are many 19th century teachings on race, gender, marriage, that have all fallen out of favor in the Church today, to the point where a small group of members would want D&C 132 decanonized.
And there are doctrines and ordinances that have been completely done away with from many of the early administrations of the Church.
President Monson's emphasis on Mormon was done away with by his successor, calling it a victory for Satan to use Mormon instead of the Savior's name.

And when President Nelson passes through the veil his successors may well correct some principles he emphasized.

[bluebell]

3 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

Well the Church has publicly and repeatedly disavowed teachings on race from that era.  Brigham's teachings on Adam were specifically denounced in the days of President Kimball.
There are many 19th century teachings on race, gender, marriage, that have all fallen out of favor in the Church today, to the point where a small group of members would want D&C 132 decanonized.
And there are doctrines and ordinances that have been completely done away with from many of the early administrations of the Church.
President Monson's emphasis on Mormon was done away with by his successor, calling it a victory for Satan to use Mormon instead of the Savior's name.

And when President Nelson passes through the veil his successors may well correct some principles he emphasized.

I'm really more interesting in your thoughts on it, not what the church is doing?  Or did you not really mean it when you said that every prophet has taught incorrect principals?  Maybe you were being sarcastic and I didn't catch it though.  

[JLHPROF]

16 minutes ago, bluebell said:

I'm really more interesting in your thoughts on it, not what the church is doing?  Or did you not really mean it when you said that every prophet has taught incorrect principals?  Maybe you were being sarcastic and I didn't catch it though.  

Well, in reading the Lectures on Faith (attributed to Joseph Smith) I can see incorrect teachings he made based on limited understanding of the Kirtland era.
Joseph's understanding grew line upon line, precept upon precept, and so he himself taught incorrect principles that he later corrected.

I personally find some of Brigham's teachings to be quite harsh in the Journals.  For example, I agree with the doctrinal principles behind blood atonement but his rhetoric crossed a line I think.

[bluebell]

Just now, JLHPROF said:

Well, in reading the Lectures on Faith (attributed to Joseph Smith) I can see incorrect teachings he made based on limited understanding of the Kirtland era.
Joseph's understanding grew line upon line, precept upon precept, and so he himself taught incorrect principles that he later corrected.

I personally find some of Brigham's teachings to be quite harsh in the Journals.  For example, I agree with the doctrinal principles behind blood atonement but his rhetoric crossed a line I think.

Thanks for sharing.  I always enjoy your insights into things.

[bOObOO]

16 hours ago, bluebell said:

I don't believe that God would rather have us dead than sexually assaulted.

I don't either, but I have known of some rape victims who said they felt like they would have rather been killed than raped, after they had been raped.

16 hours ago, Calm said:

If it is rape, it is not voluntary.

Correct.  If it is voluntary it is fornication.  For it to be rape it would need to be against her will and she should show her resistance by trying to fight off the would-be rapist off to make it clear that she does not consent.  And she might even win the fight.

 

What we are dealing with here in this thread is a lot of misunderstanding and misinterpretation of what prophets of God have said and written.  And I can see that because I know what misunderstandings and misinterpretations look like.

[Teancum]

On 8/26/2021 at 2:03 PM, SeekingUnderstanding said:

Love the concept, but does that fit with “And now, verily I say unto you, I, the Lord, will not lay any sin to your charge; go your ways and sin no more; but unto that soul who sinneth shall the former sins return, saith the Lord your God (D&C 82:7).”

Never did like that passage of "scripture."

[Teancum]

23 hours ago, pogi said:

It is amazing how much harm  incorrect principles taught by prophets can cause on an entire generation.  The Miracle of Forgiveness was the "go to" for every bishop out there.  To see an area seventy rip it apart (metaphorically) is amazing to see.  I remember my bishop asking me to read it as part of my repentance process in my teenage years when I first confessed about my addiction.   The shame and damage that book caused on a church-wide scale is unimaginable, and on a personal level it negatively impacted my recovery greatly by reinforcing the core issue and source of my addiction - toxic shame, and created new unnecessary anxiety wondering if I am going to "get the gay" for doing what 99% of young men do.   The tone in the book was one of President Bensons regrets, and yet the book still gets glowing reviews in Amazon: 

https://www.amazon.com/Miracle-Forgiveness-Spencer-W-Kimball/dp/0884944441/ref=sr_1_1?dchild=1&keywords=miracle+of+forgiveness&qid=1630003095&sr=8-1 

That is concerning to me that these harmful principles are still in favor and in use today.  Granted, there are still good principles in the book, but that should not cause us to excuse the bad. 

Yes is is amazing. And it is amazing that we think we should listen to them and give some sort of special deference to their words.  And who is to say 20 years from now the Elder Holland recent BYU talk is given similar treatment that you are now giving to the MoF.

[Teancum]

22 hours ago, pogi said:

There were a lot of incorrect principles he taught that have been abandoned by the church today. 

And a lot more to be abandoned yet.

[JLHPROF]

21 minutes ago, Teancum said:

And a lot more to be abandoned yet.

So does that mean God is inconsistent or we just get things wrong all the time?
I don't really see a third option.

[rongo]

2 hours ago, JLHPROF said:

Well, in reading the Lectures on Faith (attributed to Joseph Smith) I can see incorrect teachings he made based on limited understanding of the Kirtland era.
Joseph's understanding grew line upon line, precept upon precept, and so he himself taught incorrect principles that he later corrected.

I think that most, if not all of the "nope" stuff in Lectures on Faith comes from Sidney Rigdon and W.W. Phelps, not Joseph Smith. The decanonization of LoF was an easy call. There isn't much in there of value, in my opinion, that isn't already in the standard works. 

[Teancum]

16 hours ago, pogi said:

That is very true.  The sooner we can acknowledge that, the sooner we can all move on with eternal progression as a people.  Some people have a hard time letting go and moving on. 

Now just take it one step further and really let go and move on.

[Teancum]

45 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

So does that mean God is inconsistent or we just get things wrong all the time?
I don't really see a third option.

Or that there is no God or that if there is he does not speak much to the LDS leaders.  If he does either they don't listen well or God is quite find with them stumbling their way along.  What good are prophets if you have to abandon a bunch of what they say as wrong and/or even damaging after they have been dead a few years?  You all are making my case for not given them any more credence than any other human being.

[JLHPROF]

11 minutes ago, Teancum said:

Or that there is no God or that if there is he does not speak much to the LDS leaders.  If he does either they don't listen well or God is quite find with them stumbling their way along.  What good are prophets if you have to abandon a bunch of what they say as wrong and/or even damaging after they have been dead a few years?  You all are making my case for not given them any more credence than any other human being.

Or perhaps we are make the case for God's instruction that we walk by faith instead of the sight you seem to prefer.

[pogi]

58 minutes ago, Teancum said:

Now just take it one step further and really let go and move on.

Move on where?

I don't want to throw the baby out with the bath water.  

This idea of perfection or nothing is really baffling to me.

[Teancum]

55 minutes ago, pogi said:

Move on where?

I don't want to throw the baby out with the bath water.  

This idea of perfection or nothing is really baffling to me.

Move on in understanding the LDS leaders, nor any other human, speaks for God and that you make your own way in life.  Sound advice from other humans is a good thing.  Thinking they have some special dispensation from a God being so being more apt to give then heed because that is not so great.

[Teancum]

1 hour ago, JLHPROF said:

Or perhaps we are make the case for God's instruction that we walk by faith instead of the sight you seem to prefer.

Faith is a crutch and tool to simply believe something that has little to know evidence.  Based on you low view of the directions LDS leaders provide it seems to me you should abandon your faith in their ability to give you sound and correct direction.