BofM myths

[happyinhisgrace]

To nip this in the bud-the prophet is only the prophet when he is acting as such. So, only when he says that it is revelation do we accept it as revelation. We can conclude that some things are his opinion. And-if you look in the letter-it makes NO CLAIM to Godron B. Hinckley respnding to that letter. It says that a letter was passed to Hinkley, and the secretary responded stating that THE CHURCH has long maintained it. It is therefore not a metter that the Prophet answered, and was only a matter that a secretary answered.

God Bless,
Emerald Dragon

Dragon, I realize you believe what you are saying but the point I was so inadiquatly trying to make is that past LDS prophets have said that anything they speak is scripture and also some some-what current lds leaders have said the prophet does not have to say it is scripture for it to be so. So, who do you believe. Do you believe the lds leaders and past prophets that have said it is scripture whenever they speak or do believe the members who say it is only scripture when the prophet says, "thus saith the Lord". If you read back through all the posts on this thread you will see what I mean. (I for one am not going to read back that far, it would take too long...lol)

Grace

 

[emerald Dragon]

I believe the statement, "The prophet is only the prophet of the Lord, when he is acting as such." It is impossible to be a prophet 24/7, like it is impossible to be a doctor 24/7. They may be on call 24/7,but the prophet is not recieveing revelation for the whole church 24/7. And I have never know a prophet to say that all of what they speak becomes scripture.

God Bless,
Emerald Dragon

ps-scripture is only scripture when it is designated as such-in other words, it must be said that it is a revelation from the Lord. Everything else, such as the First Presidency message at the beginning of the Ensign each month, or General Conference, is the use of scripture to teah and edify us.

God Bless

 

[emerald Dragon]

Yes, but did he say it as a prophet, or just a man? Is this actual Church doctrine, since, from what I see, if it's not, it's false

THis was written (as I see it) in response to the quote saying that Brigham Young asked the people to take all scripture, and everything that they learn and use the Spirit to testify of it, if it is indeed scripture, or teahing to their understanding, which can be imperfect.

In the scriptures, it says to study all scripture with the guidance of the Holy Ghost. So, it is actuall church doctrine, and not false.

God Bless,
Emerald Dragon

 

[emerald Dragon]

Based on the above letter from the office of your first presidency, it sounds like you and President Hinkley are in disagreement.

Since president Hinckley did not write this letter, or even hint at the fact that he maintains this belief, I am inclined to disagree with your statement. This letter was written when Hinckley was a First Counseler, not Prophet, and it is written and signed by a secretary.

God Bless,
Emerald Dragon

 

[happyinhisgrace]

THis was written (as I see it) in response to the quote saying that Brigham Young asked the people to take all scripture, and everything that they learn and use the Spirit to testify of it, if it is indeed scripture, or teahing to their understanding, which can be imperfect.

In the scriptures, it says to study all scripture with the guidance of the Holy Ghost. So, it is actuall church doctrine, and not false.

God Bless,
Emerald Dragon

Emerald, actually BY said that he has never preached anything from the pulpit that may not be called scripture.

Grace

 

[Doc T]

Emerald, actually BY said that he has never preached anything from the pulpit that may not be called scripture.

Grace

Doc: If he had a chance to review it and correct it. You don't want to miss this important part of the statement as it changes the whole meaning of the statement.

~

 

[emerald Dragon]

Hey DocT- out of interest, since you recognize this quote,could you give the whole quote, or tell me where I can find it? Thanks.

God Bless,
Emerald Dragon

 

[happyinhisgrace]

Doc: If he had a chance to review it and correct it. You don't want to miss this important part of the statement as it changes the whole meaning of the statement.

~

Doc, I can't remember right now where I read this but I will look for it, but anyway...my understanding is that BY endorsed the JofD ? Why would he endorse something and then the lds church turn around and claim what is in it is not true?

Grace

 

[Doc T]

Hey DocT- out of interest, since you recognize this quote,could you give the whole quote, or tell me where I can find it? Thanks.

God Bless,
Emerald Dragon

Doc: No problem. Brigham Young said: "I have never yet preached a sermon and sent it out to the children of men that they may not call Scripture. Let me have the privilege of correcting a sermon, and it is as good Scripture as they deserve.
[emphasis added](Journal of Discourses, Vol. 8, p.58.)


~

 

[happyinhisgrace]

Doc: No problem. Brigham Young said: "I have never yet preached a sermon and sent it out to the children of men that they may not call Scripture. Let me have the privilege of correcting a sermon, and it is as good Scripture as they deserve.
[emphasis added](Journal of Discourses, Vol. 8, p.58.)


~

Ok, so the JofD are sermons from BY and he endorsed them so they should be considered scripture by the church today, right?

Grace

 

[Doc T]

Ok, so the JofD are sermons from BY and he endorsed them so they should be considered scripture by the church today, right?

Grace

Doc: Nope. BY never endorsed the JofD nor reviewed his or any of the sermons.


~

 

[baker]

Doc: Nope. BY never endorsed the JofD nor reviewed his or any of the sermons.


~

Doc,

Do you really want to go into this in detail or are you just trying to put on a good face for the bretheren here.

You know, but are not telling others here, your founding prophets and apostles held the JODs in very high esteem. So much so that one had testified so in a federal trial.

If you would like I could provide the documentation. Just let me know.

 

[Kevin Graham]

http://www.anti-mormonism-revealed.com/JD.htm

May be of interest. Something I wrote a few years ago.

 

[twhite982]

Doc,

Do you really want to go into this in detail or are you just trying to put on a good face for the bretheren here.

You know, but are not telling others here, your founding prophets and apostles held the JODs in very high esteem. So much so that one had testified so in a federal trial.

If you would like I could provide the documentation. Just let me know.

Baker,



Here is another link for you to check out. The link is from Farms, but you can check out the references at the bottom of the page where the archaelogical work was done.



http://farms.byu.edu/display.php?table=jbms&id=246&previous=L3B1YmxpY2F0aW9ucy9ib29rb2Ztb3Jtb252aWV3LnBocA==

TW

 

[Svt4Him]

Doc,

Do you really want to go into this in detail or are you just trying to put on a good face for the bretheren here.

You know, but are not telling others here, your founding prophets and apostles held the JODs in very high esteem. So much so that one had testified so in a federal trial.

If you would like I could provide the documentation. Just let me know.

I'd like.

 

[baker]

I'd like.

Here's a start:

http://journals.mormonfundamentalism.org/

A summary of the reliance placed on them by the early Church prophets and apostles (with references).

 

[happyinhisgrace]

Here's a start:

http://journals.mormonfundamentalism.org/

A summary of the reliance placed on them by the early Church prophets and apostles (with references).

Thank you baker, I have only started to read the front page of that site but so far it looks like the JofD were at one time endorced by the LDS presidency. Perhaps this is what I had read before that lead me to that conclusion. I was thinking it was BY but I have not yet read that on this site so perhaps I got the names mixed up. Anyway, thank you for the link...looks to be an interesting read.

Grace

 

[baker]

Thank you baker, I have only started to read the front page of that site but so far it looks like the JofD were at one time endorced by the LDS presidency. Perhaps this is what I had read before that lead me to that conclusion. I was thinking it was BY but I have not yet read that on this site so perhaps I got the names mixed up. Anyway, thank you for the link...looks to be an interesting read.

Grace

Also here is the short article written by Bill McKeever that Kevin was refering to above: http://www.mrm.org/multimedia/text/opinion-truth.html

I suggest you read it and then read Kevin's article here:

http://www.anti-mormonism-revealed.com/JD.htm


I printed both out. It took Kevin about 21 pages to address what McKeever stated and referenced in about 6 pages. IMHO, Kevin goes into all kinds of non-relevent tangents to use up space.

Read them for yourself, though, as it is the only way to see my point.

At any rate, regardless of what McKeever or Kevin say, one needs only to look at what the prophets and apostles, WHO WERE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE JOD's, say about this work. Their descriptions and acknowlegment, as to the importance of these discourses, says it all.

 

[happyinhisgrace]

Also here is the short article written by Bill McKeever that Kevin was refering to above: http://www.mrm.org/multimedia/text/opinion-truth.html

I suggest you read it and then read Kevin's article here:

http://www.anti-mormonism-revealed.com/JD.htm


I printed both out. It took Kevin about 21 pages to address what McKeever stated and referenced in about 6 pages. IMHO, Kevin goes into all kinds of non-relevent tangents to use up space.

Read them for yourself, though, as it is the only way to see my point.

At any rate, regardless of what McKeever or Kevin say, one needs only to look at what the prophets and apostles, WHO WERE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE JOD's, say about this work. Their descriptions and acknowlegment, as to the importance of these discourses, says it all.

Ok, I am only half way through Mckeever's article but this is what stuck out in my mind....obviously BY DID endorce the JofD's.

In volume eleven, Mormon Apostle Brigham Young, Jr. said in his preface, "The Journal of Discourses is a vehicle for doctrine, counsel, and instruction to all people, but especially to the Saints. It follows, then, then, (sic) that each successive volume is more and more valuable as the Church increases in numbers and importance in the earth, and its doctrines become more abundantly developed and are brought into practical exercise by his peculiar people. No Saint can afford to do without these precious precepts until they are able to exemplify them in their daily lives and conversation."

Grace

 

[baker]

What mormon president Woodruff testified to regarding the Journal of Discourses:

"Sermons reported by G. D, Watts, one of the official reporters, were considered as reported correctly, and they are found in the Journal of Discourses; they are considered correct. Some of my own sermons are published there, and they are correct" (Woodruff, Temple Lot Case Testimony; pg 309; 1893).

It is also interesting to note that the preface to volume eight of the JOD's included this statement:

"The Journal of Discourses deservedly ranks as one the the standard works of the Church and every rightminded saint will certainly welcome with joy every Number as it comes forth from the press as an additional reflector of "the light that shines from Zion's hill".

It seems rather ridiculous now to try and argue that these discourses were not getting any scrutiny for content from those responsible for their issuance.