kimpearson Posted December 22, 2021 Posted December 22, 2021 46 minutes ago, JustAnAustralian said: D&C 9:7-9 Looks like what they did to me. By your own words From your link If that process was good enough for receiving revelation to translate scripture, it should be enough for writing down a set of church teachings. Unfortunately for you D&C 9:7-9 is addressed to Oliver Cowdery not Joseph Smith the prophet. D&C 9 was a direct revelation to the prophet Joseph Smith. Just read it. Don't you think there is just a little bit difference between this counsel to an individual seeking personal revelation and the direct revelation given to Joseph Smith who was the prophet that you are quoting?
JustAnAustralian Posted December 22, 2021 Posted December 22, 2021 How about Joseph's own accounts of reading James? He read it, pondered his question, and then asked God about it? 3
Teancum Posted December 22, 2021 Posted December 22, 2021 14 hours ago, CV75 said: Your comment is more about your rejection of former beliefs and practice (including the proclamation), your obscurity and your ego, than an accurate description of members of the Church on the whole (which comes across as very prejudiced). No it is not. Not one whit.
Teancum Posted December 22, 2021 Posted December 22, 2021 15 hours ago, JLHPROF said: Merry Christmas! Merry Christmas to you as well. I hope to see hobbits and elves Christman AM.😁
Teancum Posted December 22, 2021 Posted December 22, 2021 15 hours ago, BRMC said: Beats me. I don't worry about things that don't really matter. The only people that concern themselves with things of that nature are antagonists or those trying to circumvent God's law. Good thing it is not God's law then.
Teancum Posted December 22, 2021 Posted December 22, 2021 15 hours ago, BRMC said: So? My point stands. Not really.
BRMC Posted December 22, 2021 Posted December 22, 2021 2 minutes ago, Teancum said: Not really. Really
BRMC Posted December 22, 2021 Posted December 22, 2021 5 minutes ago, Teancum said: Good thing it is not God's law then. Good thing it is.
CV75 Posted December 22, 2021 Posted December 22, 2021 9 hours ago, sunstoned said: The argument is valid and logical. The tired old part is the rehashing of out dated 19th century religious biases. Are you suggesting you know how mind-body-spirit alignment are determined in the resurrection? Wow! 2
Teancum Posted December 22, 2021 Posted December 22, 2021 4 minutes ago, BRMC said: Good thing it is. Thus is fun. I will roll with Occam's razor on most things LDS.
Teancum Posted December 22, 2021 Posted December 22, 2021 15 hours ago, JLHPROF said: I most certainly wouldn't want an echo chamber. Healthy discussion and even debate is good for the soul. But at the same time, this board is for discussion of a religion. To expect to discuss a religion based on science, proof, social norms, cultural shifts is only one tiny aspect of what this board is about. It HAS to be a place to also discuss from a view of belief, faith, testimony, and acceptance of the tenets of that religion. Otherwise, what's the point. There has to be room to be a believer every bit as much as there should be room for the skeptic. Being denigrated for believing or not believing serves absolutely no purpose. My intent is not to denigrate. But when believers insist that something promulgated by the LDS leaders is simply God's word to the world and it is a test for this generation should that go unquestioned by those who don't accept such a hubristic position? This is why I believe Latter day Saints have an outsized view of their importance. Most the world knows nothing about the proclamation or the Church. We have maybe 5 million active believing members. If most of the world is not getting the message and it really is God's word and proclamation then God and the Church are doing a poor job getting the word out. Just because you and other believers have faith it is Gods word to the world does not make it so. Just like your view of Jesus being a polygamist. 99.9% of Christianity has faith that your idea on that is rubbish. Are they wrong? If yes why? 1
BRMC Posted December 22, 2021 Posted December 22, 2021 36 minutes ago, Teancum said: Thus is fun. I will roll with Occam's razor on most things LDS. Sure. And I'll follow the Prophet. We've already established why.
BRMC Posted December 22, 2021 Posted December 22, 2021 29 minutes ago, Teancum said: My intent is not to denigrate. But when believers insist that something promulgated by the LDS leaders is simply God's word to the world and it is a test for this generation should that go unquestioned by those who don't accept such a hubristic position? This is why I believe Latter day Saints have an outsized view of their importance. Most the world knows nothing about the proclamation or the Church. We have maybe 5 million active believing members. If most of the world is not getting the message and it really is God's word and proclamation then God and the Church are doing a poor job getting the word out. Just because you and other believers have faith it is Gods word to the world does not make it so. Just like your view of Jesus being a polygamist. 99.9% of Christianity has faith that your idea on that is rubbish. Are they wrong? If yes why? No, because God tells us through His Prophets that it is His word. You don't have to believe it, but that doesn't change the fact. If you aren't willing to accept, and be respectful of, the fact that we are followers of God then I'm really not sure why you're here unless it's to stand on the sidelines and denounce/ridicule.
CA Steve Posted December 22, 2021 Posted December 22, 2021 1 hour ago, BRMC said: No, because God tells us through His Prophets that it is His word. You don't have to believe it, but that doesn't change the fact. If you aren't willing to accept, and be respectful of, the fact that we are followers of God then I'm really not sure why you're here unless it's to stand on the sidelines and denounce/ridicule. Again more question begging. Others do not have to take our word that President Neilson is a prophet nor accept it as a fact. And he has been nothing but respectful. 1
rodheadlee Posted December 22, 2021 Posted December 22, 2021 2 minutes ago, CA Steve said: Again more question begging. Others do not have to take our word that President Neilson is a prophet nor accept it as a fact. And he has been nothing but respectful. No they don't but God can say "hey I warned you". 1
BRMC Posted December 22, 2021 Posted December 22, 2021 2 minutes ago, CA Steve said: Again more question begging. Others do not have to take our word that President Neilson is a prophet nor accept it as a fact. Of course they don't, but why come here to tell us we're wrong? Would you go to another Protestant forum just to tell them their female pastor doesn't have that Priesthood office? To what end? Quote And he has been nothing but respectful. I beg to differ. -1
CA Steve Posted December 22, 2021 Posted December 22, 2021 Just now, BRMC said: Of course they don't, but why come here to tell us we're wrong? Would you go to another Protestant forum just to tell them their female pastor doesn't have that Priesthood office? To what end? This is a discussion forum. 1
CA Steve Posted December 22, 2021 Posted December 22, 2021 2 minutes ago, rodheadlee said: No they don't but God can say "hey I warned you". She might.
rodheadlee Posted December 22, 2021 Posted December 22, 2021 12 minutes ago, CA Steve said: She might. 🙄
Peacefully Posted December 22, 2021 Posted December 22, 2021 16 minutes ago, CA Steve said: She might. I have no more reactions but thank you for this! It made me chuckle:) 1
Tacenda Posted December 22, 2021 Posted December 22, 2021 1 hour ago, BRMC said: No, because God tells us through His Prophets that it is His word. You don't have to believe it, but that doesn't change the fact. If you aren't willing to accept, and be respectful of, the fact that we are followers of God then I'm really not sure why you're here unless it's to stand on the sidelines and denounce/ridicule. How far does it go? If you don't mind my asking or if you don't mind answering, what if the prophet said it's time to pack your bags, sell your home and move to Missouri today, would you?
BRMC Posted December 22, 2021 Posted December 22, 2021 1 minute ago, Tacenda said: How far does it go? If you don't mind my asking or if you don't mind answering, what if the prophet said it's time to pack your bags, sell your home and move to Missouri today, would you? I would. 1
Scott Lloyd Posted December 22, 2021 Author Posted December 22, 2021 (edited) 19 hours ago, Calm said: No, but I think it would be useful when it is used as a constant reference of our doctrine and intended to be used with nonmembers to teach for it to be canonized. But you are right, there is nothing new in it and I suppose we could look on it like a very short manual on the family and we don’t canonize manuals. Still we also don’t go around pointing to manuals generally when teaching people. We use manuals to teach ourselves how to proselyte, but then use scripture in the teaching; at least that is how I was taught, but I never went on a mission. Do they have investigators reading from the Preach My Gospel manual rather than scriptures? I’m not persuaded that your comparison of official proclamations to Church-published curriculum materials and to general conference talks is apt. Even though they are not canonized, their nature and character give them substantially greater solemnity and stature than Church manuals and conference talks. For one thing, they are rare. Relatively few have been issued throughout the history of the Church. For another, they bear the official imprimatur of the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve acting as a united body. Whenever such proclamations are issued, the occasion is treated as momentous, an event of considerable magnitude. Such proclamations are typically formulated and drafted prayerfully and with unusual care. President Oaks characterized the process with regard to the family proclamation as “revelatory.” I find great significance in that. Only two such official communications have ever been given canonical status. They are Official Declarations 1 and 2 in the Doctrine and Covenants. What do they have in common that makes them different from proclamations that have not been canonized? The answer is obvious. They were more than just a restatement, renewed emphasis, summation or clarification of doctrine. They each altered the practice of the Church in a rare, significant and impactful way, one by ending the practice of plurality of wives and the other by extending priesthood and temple worship availability without regard to race. None of the other official proclamations or declarations have been so impactful. And so I say that though I would be delighted to see the family proclamation canonized, I don’t expect it to happen, nor do I see a compelling need for it. But that doesn’t diminish its stature to any degree. Edited December 22, 2021 by Scott Lloyd 2
Scott Lloyd Posted December 22, 2021 Author Posted December 22, 2021 32 minutes ago, Tacenda said: How far does it go? If you don't mind my asking or if you don't mind answering, what if the prophet said it's time to pack your bags, sell your home and move to Missouri today, would you? 30 minutes ago, BRMC said: I would. And so would I. Though I hasten to add that the once-popular notion from yesteryear that all faithful Church members will one day be called to move to Missouri is nothing more than antiquated folk doctrine.
bluebell Posted December 22, 2021 Posted December 22, 2021 37 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said: President Oaks characterized the process with regard to the family proclamation as “revelatory.” I find great significance in that. But those words were then stricken from the written transcript, which would also seem to carry some significance.
Recommended Posts