FAIR: A Prophet Doesn't Speak For God

[_beastie]

Big deal. I already mentioned that Young's concepts had been repudiated by the Church (which is not the same thing as being repudiated by Bruce McConkie, but they have nonetheless).

What does this add to the discussion? That's Elder McConkie's opinion and its as good as any other. I think there may be more to it than that, however. Either way, Young himself taught the orthodox, accepted understating of the relationship between the personages of the Godhead his entire life. The question, it seems to me, is not explaining why or what he was teaching privately to a few friends and associates, but why he continued teaching the orthodox view throughout his life?

The answer may be that he was experimenting with some things he was trying to work out in his own mind and really couldn't make it work and so gave it up.

Oh well. What does this change about the legitimacy of the Church?

It changes nothing about the legitimacy of the church as long it admits it’s based on men trying to “work things out” in their own minds rather than based on revelation that is clear enough to be “binding”.

And, by the way, he wasn’t “teaching Adam-God privately to a few friends and associates”. He, in fact, chastised Saints who would NOT accept this teaching.

He also couldn’t get straight whether or not the practice of polygamy is required for exaltation. Knowing whether or not a certain ordinance is required for exaltation seems kind of “binding”, doesn’t it?

by the way, you had asserted:

Again, there is no "Adam/God" theory. Young never taught one. The somewhat incoherent stuff he left us has, in the form we have it and as it has been interpreted, repudiated by the Church. No other Prophet taught it (which is telling, given the cachet it's been granted, but only outside the Church).

BRM:

Yes, President Young did teach that Adam was the father of our spirits, and all the related things that the cultists ascribe to him.

This puts me in mind of Paul's statement: "There must be also heresies among you, that they which are approved may be made manifest among you." (1 Cor. 11:19) I do not know all of the providences of the Lord, but I do know that he permits false doctrine to be taught in and out of the Church and that such teaching is part of the sifting process of mortality.

[_truth dancer]

Are you saying that prophets say things they intend to be understood as Gospel truths, and binding upon the membership of the Church that are wrong? What statements do you think they have made that are wrong that they intended to be understood as inspired and "official", and in what since do you mean they are wrong?

These questions are completely irrelevant to my point as was your previous comment.

I'm wondering how regular members of the church can think they are receiving truth through the HG, think they KNOW something to be true through inspiration, when in fact even the prophets, and Joseph Smith himself are unable to figure it out and often get things wrong.

Even prophets and leaders of the church, after much prayer, after pleading for inspiration (and assuming they are receiving it), and as they address the church in an official capacity get it wrong and make mistakes and are obviously NOT getting the correct information, (for whatever reason), yet some regular, average, ordinary folk here seem to think they are immune to receiving wrong information, or misinterpreting inspiration, or getting their facts mixed up, or whatever.

If the prophets and leaders of the church are not sure what is or is not inspired, and often make huge mistakes even while they believe they are inspired, I am wondering why average folks here on this board think they can be so sure.

Let me give you an example... BRM has testified to various "truths" that were completely wrong. I think it is safe to assume he prayed while preparing for his talks, and prior to addressing members in an official capacity. I think it is safe to assume he believed he was indeed being inspired and led by the HG during these important times. He had a very strong testimony of things that were not true. YET, as strongly as he "KNEW", he was wrong.

And right on this board, we have folks who claim to "know" through the witness of the HG. How can they be so sure when even the very elect, and called of God are unable to get it right?

~dancer~

[_Yoda]

And right on this board, we have folks who claim to "know" through the witness of the HG. How can they be so sure when even the very elect, and called of God are unable to get it right?

Exactly! This is why I have come to the conclusion that, for me, I am better off simply taking the good things away from the Church that work well for me in my personal life, and leaving the rest. I have also been moved, and glean truths from other churches as well.

[_Pokatator]

Big deal. I already mentioned that Young's concepts had been repudiated by the Church (which is not the same thing as being repudiated by Bruce McConkie, but they have nonetheless).

What does this add to the discussion? That's Elder McConkie's opinion and its as good as any other. I think there may be more to it than that, however. Either way, Young himself taught the orthodox, accepted understating of the relationship between the personages of the Godhead his entire life. The question, it seems to me, is not explaining why or what he was teaching privately to a few friends and associates, but why he continued teaching the orthodox view throughout his life?

The answer may be that he was experimenting with some things he was trying to work out in his own mind and really couldn't make it work and so gave it up.

Oh well. What does this change about the legitimacy of the Church?

This Holy Ghost issue has everything to do with the legitimacy of the Church.

The Church has set itself up as the only true church. The only church or religion on the face of the earth with a direct link to God Almighty. The only organization in the world with a living prophet that talks for God, walks for God and does the work of God on this earth. The church that claims to restore God's church to the world. The church with a prophet that saw and talked with God. And yet....

Yes, and yet, we have a church that has hidden and rewritten its history. A church that has edited the Book of Mormon, D&C, and about everything else they have in print. A church were a living prophet over rides and conflicts with past prophets. Prophets that claim word for word translations from the power of God but the translation doesn't match the papyrus. A church doesn't have a systematic theology but does have an endless amount of rewrites, doubletalk, edits, interpretations, changing policies and doctrines.

The Church shows me no legitimacy, it is chaos, nothing seems like God's church to me. The prophet(s) seem to have no more discernment about anything than I do or any other human being. I fail to see anything special about the Holy Ghost talking to a prophet over anyone else.

Coggy and Charity you both think that there is something so special about the Holy Ghost, speaking opinion or for God, Moroni's promise, revelation, translation, etc. but it is nothing special. The track record of all this is no better than someone taking a guess. The track record is no better than mine. But somehow your track record is better than mine, better than a non-member, heck your track record is better than any past member, present or past prophet.... because, you know, you really, really KNOW.

But the reality is, and what the track record proves is that what a prophet says or does, doesn't mean anything.

[_Jason Bourne]

Since the current LDS prophets sometimes contradict the former ones, how do you decide which one is correct? Most "contradictions" are actually misunderstandings or misrepresentations of LDS doctrine and teachings by critics. The LDS standard for doctrine is the scriptures, and united statements of the First Presidency and the Twelve.

This is in all essential particulars, correct. The scriptures and the counsel and teachings of the Brethren as a body. Infymus's tortured straw grasping is just more confirmation of the kind of bad faith that infects the committed anti-Mormon mind when questioning and debating the Church.

Some may be misrepresentations, others are not. For example, BY did teach Adam God, it was part of the lecture at the veil in St George, it was believed by many members as recorded in their journals, it seems all the 12 but Orson Pratt agreed with Brigham. Probably would have become official doctrine but for Pratt.

This is not a small issue Coggins. BY taught it. You can dismiss it as his opinion, or as unofficial but gee, it seems that one thing the prophet really ought to know is who God is.

[_Jason Bourne]

The Adam/God idea is an utter mystery. Nobody knows what Brigham Young was actually trying to get at, what was going on in his mind, and what he was trying to say. What is certain is that he taught it to a few people privately and slipped a few references to it in sermons here and there, but that's where it ends. There is no "Adam/God" theory in the Church; that's an invention of Mormonism's critics. Brigham had some idea regarding the offices and names of various members of the Godhead and related characters, but what we see in his lecture in the St. George Temple is convoluted, at best. In essence, a non-issue.

This is simply not true. Why do you delude yourself? The record just does not bear this out. BY was quite clear over a more then 20 year period. But keep telling yourself this if it gives you comfort.

[_Jason Bourne]

I resolved my severe confrontation with polygamy as a teen in precisely the manner prescribed in the D&C; I studied it out in my mind, read, reflected, meditated, debated myself endlessly in my head, and then went to the Lord in prayer.

Me too

God has told me it was not of him and that Joseph introduced it by mistake.

[_Jason Bourne]

A principle is binding when it is a Gospel truth received through the power of revelation, obedience to which now becomes a precondition for our exaltation (within, of course, the general framework of repentance, grace, and Christ's Atonement). Once we have a principle revealed to us through the Holy Ghost, we become accountable before God for our obedience to that principle. Divine truths or counsel received by the President of the Church and disseminated to the general membership, in other words, makes us accountable to God for the degree to which we follow that counsel or obey the principles in question. Food storage, Chastity, WoW, whatever it may be.

Sort of like the new and everlasting covenant of celestial-plural marriage that 19th century prophets repeatedly taught was required for exaltation. Oh wait, that was given up in 1890, oh wait, it was really about 1905, so Utah could become a state. Oh wait, BY never really taught that now, sort of like Adam God....

We do, to the degree it has been revealed, have such a knowledge. You may not accept it, and that's fine, but the official, settled theological concepts haven't changed since Joseph's day. Brigham didn't change or add anything. If he had wanted to, he could have, but he didn't. Again, there is no "Adam/God" theory. Young never taught one. The somewhat incoherent stuff he left us has, in the form we have it and as it has been interpreted, repudiated by the Church. No other Prophet taught it (which is telling, given the cachet it's been granted, but only outside the Church).

Brigham did teach it. It is dishonest to declare otherwise. It is bad apologetics. I know of apologist that denies that he taught it. No other prophet taught it because they were so embarrassed about it that when Brigham dies they brushed it under the rug.

[_truth dancer]

Hi Jason...

God has told me it was not of him and that Joseph introduced it by mistake.

I too prayed about polygamy. I fasted, pleaded, pondered, studied it out, (asked the right questions), went to the temple and sat in the celestial room praying with all sincerity of heart.

My clear message, and answer to my prayer was.... "It is not of God. It is of man."

In that moment I had a clear understanding of the reality of polygamy... the hurt, the pain, the suffering, the cruelty, and the unholiness of it all.

Of course today, I see these spiritual experiences somewhat differently, nevertheless, I am convinced that there is nothing Godly about polygamy. NOTHING.


~dancer~

[_Jason Bourne]

Hi Jason...

God has told me it was not of him and that Joseph introduced it by mistake.

I too prayed about polygamy. I fasted, pleaded, pondered, studied it out, (asked the right questions), went to the temple and sat in the celestial room praying with all sincerity of heart.

My clear message, and answer to my prayer was.... "It is not of God. It is of man."

In that moment I had a clear understanding of the reality of polygamy... the hurt, the pain, the suffering, the cruelty, and the unholiness of it all.

Of course today, I see these spiritual experiences somewhat differently, nevertheless, I am convinced that there is nothing Godly about polygamy. NOTHING.


~dancer~

Of course Coggins will respond that our answer differs from his and thousands of others and thus we have the wrong answer. This is essentially what he told beastie about her lack of confirmation when asking about Joseph Smith being a prophet.

The fact that the sheer audacity of taking such a position never enters his mind, or Charity's as well, is mind boggling.