"The first bullet"

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
_Roger Morrison
_Emeritus
Posts: 1831
Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2006 4:13 am

"The first bullet"

Post by _Roger Morrison »

From BCSpace's signature:

Not every statement made by a Church leader, past or present, necessarily constitutes doctrine. A single statement made by a single leader on a single occasion often represents a personal, though well-considered, opinion, but is not meant to be officially binding for the whole Church. With divine inspiration, the First Presidency (the prophet and his two counselors) and the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles (the second-highest governing body of the Church) counsel together to establish doctrine that is consistently proclaimed in official Church publications. This doctrine resides in the four “standard works” of scripture (the Holy Bible, the Book of Mormon, the Doctrine and Covenants and the Pearl of Great Price), official declarations and proclamations, and the Articles of Faith. Isolated statements are often taken out of context, leaving their original meaning distorted.


That being the case how would the following be tagged?

"...another doctrine of the Church (to keep) in mind, namely, that the conduct of spirits in the premortal existance has some determining effect upon the conditions and circumstances under which spirits take on mortality, and while details of this principle have not been made known, the principle itself indicates that coming to this earth and taking on mortality is a privilege...the worth of (which) is so great that spirits are willing to come to earth and take on bodies no matter what the handicap may be as to the kind of bodies they are to secure; and that among the handicaps...(is) deprivation as to holding of the priesthood by the negroes" (The First Presidency, 8/17/51) From, Mormonism and the Negro (Walmart. E. Berrett)

Of course, besides the "handicap" of a black skin, all and every physical/mental/emotional challenge that one might be born with, as well as what circumstances one will be born into, is determined--according to this "Official declaration & proclimation"--by pre-existance "faithfulness"... Thoughts, comments???
Have you noticed what a beautiful day it is? Some can't...
"God": nick-name for the Universe...
_truth dancer
_Emeritus
Posts: 4792
Joined: Tue Oct 24, 2006 12:40 pm

Re: "The first bullet"

Post by _truth dancer »

Hi Roger...

I'm thinking this whole, "Prophets just speak their opinion" excuse is fairly new... is it?

I could be wrong, and it might be that I just was unfamiliar with apologetics but until recently, I had never, EVER heard such a thing.

I was taught that prophets are in communion with Christ who is leading the church; that prophets are inspired, receive revelation, and are the mouthpiece for Jesus.

You know... "whether by my voice or the voice of my servants, it is the same."

Actually I still here this in church, particularly prior to General Conference.

However, I'm wondering if this new mantra will find its way into mainstream chapel Mormonism? I don't know.

I think the evolving "doctrine" concerning those with African ancestry (which is really all of us.. sigh), and dark skin, is going to be similar to the LDS stance on the SSA community. Just give it a few years (decades?), and this whole "Satan is behind homosexuality, which is just a horrible choice by misled people" idea will be eliminated as just the silly opinion of these leaders who just didn't understand, (or further light and knowledge... smile).

by the way, I also have a copy of Mormonism and the Negro... WOW! :-(

~td~
"The search for reality is the most dangerous of all undertakings for it destroys the world in which you live." Nisargadatta Maharaj
_John Larsen
_Emeritus
Posts: 1895
Joined: Fri Jan 12, 2007 7:16 pm

Re: "The first bullet"

Post by _John Larsen »

William Berrett was a high official in CES, but he wasn't ever a GA.
_Scottie
_Emeritus
Posts: 4166
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2007 9:54 pm

Re: "The first bullet"

Post by _Scottie »

truth dancer wrote:Hi Roger...

I'm thinking this whole, "Prophets just speak their opinion" excuse is fairly new... is it?

I could be wrong, and it might be that I just was unfamiliar with apologetics but until recently, I had never, EVER heard such a thing.

I was taught that prophets are in communion with Christ who is leading the church; that prophets are inspired, receive revelation, and are the mouthpiece for Jesus.

You know... "whether by my voice or the voice of my servants, it is the same."

Actually I still here this in church, particularly prior to General Conference.

However, I'm wondering if this new mantra will find its way into mainstream chapel Mormonism? I don't know.

I think the evolving "doctrine" concerning those with African ancestry (which is really all of us.. sigh), and dark skin, is going to be similar to the LDS stance on the SSA community. Just give it a few years (decades?), and this whole "Satan is behind homosexuality, which is just a horrible choice by misled people" idea will be eliminated as just the silly opinion of these leaders who just didn't understand, (or further light and knowledge... smile).

by the way, I also have a copy of Mormonism and the Negro... WOW! :-(

~td~

TD, I hear this from chapel Mormons ALL the time. The concept of a prophet's words being opinion only is almost blasphemy to them! Some will seriously get mad if you suggest it.
If there's one thing I've learned from this board, it's that consensual sex with multiple partners is okay unless God commands it. - Abman

I find this place to be hostile toward all brands of stupidity. That's why I like it. - Some Schmo
_Brother of Mahonri
_Emeritus
Posts: 43
Joined: Sun Jul 27, 2008 5:24 pm

Re: "The first bullet"

Post by _Brother of Mahonri »

John Larsen wrote:William Berrett was a high official in CES, but he wasn't ever a GA.


The above quote is from Berrett's book, but I'm pretty sure he is quoting a letter issued by the first presidency about the Negro doctrine. In other words, those are the words of a carefully crafted position letter issued by the first presidency, not a CES official.

Side note: Is this the same Berrett who wrote the textbook for seminary the year we did the D nC and church history?
_Brother of Mahonri
_Emeritus
Posts: 43
Joined: Sun Jul 27, 2008 5:24 pm

Re: "The first bullet"

Post by _Brother of Mahonri »

truth dancer wrote:Hi Roger...

I'm thinking this whole, "Prophets just speak their opinion" excuse is fairly new... is it?

I could be wrong, and it might be that I just was unfamiliar with apologetics but until recently, I had never, EVER heard such a thing.

I was taught that prophets are in communion with Christ who is leading the church; that prophets are inspired, receive revelation, and are the mouthpiece for Jesus.

You know... "whether by my voice or the voice of my servants, it is the same."

Actually I still here this in church, particularly prior to General Conference.

However, I'm wondering if this new mantra will find its way into mainstream chapel Mormonism? I don't know.

I think the evolving "doctrine" concerning those with African ancestry (which is really all of us.. sigh), and dark skin, is going to be similar to the LDS stance on the SSA community. Just give it a few years (decades?), and this whole "Satan is behind homosexuality, which is just a horrible choice by misled people" idea will be eliminated as just the silly opinion of these leaders who just didn't understand, (or further light and knowledge... smile).

by the way, I also have a copy of Mormonism and the Negro... WOW! :-(

~td~


My experiences are the same as yours, I never heard that as an active mromon (prophets sometimes are just giving their opinions), nor have I ever heard that from any of my Mormon friends or relatives since that time up until algore invented teh internets and then I heard it a LOT online.
_Roger Morrison
_Emeritus
Posts: 1831
Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2006 4:13 am

Re: "The first bullet"

Post by _Roger Morrison »

John Larsen wrote:William Berrett was a high official in CES, but he wasn't ever a GA.


Correct John, but he quoted the First Pres as indicated. Another book you might be aware of: The Church and The Negro (John Lewis Lund, 1967) has much the same documentation of First Pres statements.

Here's one from II Nephi, 5:21-23 (Book of Mormon :-) "...cursed shall be the seed of him that mixeth with their seed; for they shall be cursed with even the same cursing (skin of blackness) ...that they shall be loathsome..." Here we have ref to the NA Indians...

As a person--guided by the 'Spirit of Truth"--reads such prophetic utterances of seers & revelators the ignorance and imaginations of the PS&R are made very clear. Generations who do not have a 1950 copy of the Book of Mormon of course are easily smooooged :-) by both Young & Old White Shirts. The Old deceitfully change the words; the Young ignorantly teach & preach them without question. A shameful embarrassment to honest and forthright Mormons!
IMSCO that is...

Roger
Have you noticed what a beautiful day it is? Some can't...
"God": nick-name for the Universe...
_Gadianton
_Emeritus
Posts: 9947
Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2007 5:12 am

Re: "The first bullet"

Post by _Gadianton »

The problem isn't so much accepting that prophets can make mistakes, or accepting that they give their opinions on occasion or even most of the time. The problem is with the major bait and switch swindle going on.

Recall the missionary discussions where the church is promoted on the grounds that God's truth has to be dealt by prophets, during the apostasy, that truth was taken off the earth because the mans corruptions and no more prophets were called for a long time. A big deal is made about the stark contrast between a church with a prophet in direct communication with God and those with ministers who are limited to their own study. Its a difference in kind rather than just degree. Some could study and do better than others, but a prophet has that constant communication and defined role. And without this defined role and constant communication, there is the situation of pluralism and threats of relativism. The smartest, most honest person would still be operating in a different dimension and could never compare to a prophet called by God. So that's the bait. The realization we need a single divne source for truth.

Things get more complicated in practice. And in order to not look like fools, Internet Mormons especially have to apologize for their prophets, and drastically lower the rank of church authority pronouncements while elevating their own positions as authorities to speak on LDS matters. And so guess what? Once again, we're left in a pluralistic situation where there are a lot of ideas out there and no one has any idea what the doctrine is. FAIR even claims that there is no theology, no doctrine at all, it's all up to everyone's best guess. This is the switch.

And so in the end, the church has added nothing to solve the problems of pluralism. At best, one can argue that prophets do not differ in kind from us, but rather in degree, do a little better on the curve. But since there is no way for us to know what parts to trust and what parts not to, outside of our own study and revelation, we're right back to square one. We could do all this without a prophet. Why do we even need a church? The extreme born agains have the most consistent way of dealing with this kind of world, and the Mormons, the most complicated and unnecessary.
Lou Midgley 08/20/2020: "...meat wad," and "cockroach" are pithy descriptions of human beings used by gemli? They were not fashioned by Professor Peterson.

LM 11/23/2018: one can explain away the soul of human beings...as...a Meat Unit, to use Professor Peterson's clever derogatory description of gemli's ideology.
_Roger Morrison
_Emeritus
Posts: 1831
Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2006 4:13 am

Re: "The first bullet"

Post by _Roger Morrison »

Goofed )-:
Have you noticed what a beautiful day it is? Some can't...
"God": nick-name for the Universe...
_The Nehor
_Emeritus
Posts: 11832
Joined: Mon Apr 30, 2007 2:05 am

Re: "The first bullet"

Post by _The Nehor »

I don't get what the big deal is. The idea that our existence is molded by the Premortal Life. There's also no reason for anyone to be smug about it. Everyone I know has some kind of physical, mental, emotional, or spiritual defect. When everyone realizes that many of their challenges are given to them to correct flaws in their character the doctrine is humbling. I found out through prayer and seeking that several of my flaws are there to protect me and to teach me because of flaws I have. This is not some new doctrine.

Which makes life harder? Not being able to receive the Priesthood or poverty? A slow mind or a slow body? A fragile emotional state or a missing limb? It seems that critics think we believe everyone comes to Earth equal. We don't. Everyone has strengths and weaknesses. In addition, God has made it clear that difficulties do not always come from some premortal or mortal errors/flaws. The Lord gave this parable after all:

23 But, verily I say unto you, teach one another according to the office wherewith I have appointed you;
24 And let every man esteem his brother as himself, and practise virtue and holiness before me.
25 And again I say unto you, let every man esteem his brother as himself.
26 For what man among you having twelve sons, and is no respecter of them, and they serve him obediently, and he saith unto the one: Be thou clothed in robes and sit thou here; and to the other: Be thou clothed in rags and sit thou there—and looketh upon his sons and saith I am just?
27 Behold, this I have given unto you as a parable, and it is even as I am. I say unto you, be one; and if ye are not one ye are not mine.
"Surely he knows that DCP, The Nehor, Lamanite, and other key apologists..." -Scratch clarifying my status in apologetics
"I admit it; I'm a petty, petty man." -Some Schmo
Post Reply