Outdated sermons- is there benefit to discussing? Denouncing? Denying?

[Islander]

3 hours ago, CV75 said:

I’m talking about the basics of the gospel, the metaphorical rock and foundation, not metaphorical quicksand. In scripture, Jesus abrogated the law of Moses, interestingly in fulfillment of that law, and the basic law remained unchanged. Later prophets of this dispensation have abrogated their own and earlier prophets’ revelations in fulfilment of the restoration, while the basics of the restoration remain unchanged.

We need the First Presidency because we need the gift of the Holy Ghost. The tension between the presence of God and mortal culture, history, circumstance, expediency, etc., the connection between the two being revelation, is par for the course. But the Holy Ghost cuts through that. I see apologetics as one form of mortal communication.

Jesus fulfilled the Law of Moses, not abrogated it. "Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil." Mat. 5:17. The idea that revelation from God can be revoked is not biblical. God does not change his mind based on what is happening. He already knows what will happen so no need for course corrections. I referred to teachings from years past that now we can't touch with a ten foot pole and "revelation" that drives certain measures that the church has been forced to retract due to public backlash. You may want to deny that there is tension there to be resolved, but there are many voices, not a few, that see such occurrences with suspicion.  

[CV75]

2 hours ago, Islander said:

Jesus fulfilled the Law of Moses, not abrogated it. "Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil." Mat. 5:17. The idea that revelation from God can be revoked is not biblical. God does not change his mind based on what is happening. He already knows what will happen so no need for course corrections. I referred to teachings from years past that now we can't touch with a ten foot pole and "revelation" that drives certain measures that the church has been forced to retract due to public backlash. You may want to deny that there is tension there to be resolved, but there are many voices, not a few, that see such occurrences with suspicion.  

Yes, God does change His mind (do a word search for 'expedient" in the D&C for example). Not on the basics. The law of Moses was not one of the basics.

As I said, the tension -- which I am fully recognizing -- is between God and mortals, His ways and their ways. That is part of the design, otherwise there would be no stretching and no growth, with the tension reconcilable only through the atonement of Christ. The voices of the suspicious notwithstanding.

Here's a challenge for you, since I can't do it: list 3 gospel basics that have been abrogated. 

[Amulek]

30 minutes ago, CV75 said:

Here's a challenge for you, since I can't do it: list 3 gospel basics that have been abrogated. 

Pinewood Derby Races, Road Shows, and Green Jello.

Okay, maybe just the two then.

 

[Hamba Tuhan]

6 hours ago, Rain said:

I think part of the problem is that temple workers sometimes share what their own rules are and not actual rules. They just assume their rules are the actual rules.

This happens across all parts of the Church. We have to be constantly vigilant not to add to this problem ourselves and to carefully correct it when it happens.

When Elder Bednar was here for our priesthood leadership training about eight years ago, he said to the assembled temple president, mission presidents, stake presidency members, bishopric members, and elders quorum presidents: 'Brethren, there is far, for too much tradition in this room'. He then called us out for substituting our personal/familiar ways of doing things for what's actually written in the Handbook/s.