Mormons and authority

[Janderich]

So, when did LDS teachings regarding the Holy Ghost change? It must have changed in the past year since I stopped attending the LDS church. My entire life I had been taught in pretty much every LDS teaching venue (sacrament meeting, Sunday School, YW, seminary, BYU, Relief Society, etc) that the only people who have the Holy Ghost in their lives are people who are confirmed members of the LDS church. Everyone else gets the “light of Christ”, which is basically one’s conscience and not the same thing as the Holy Ghost. But even then the Mormon Holy Ghost is a rather fickle friend because the Holy Ghost can abandon a faithful LDS member who happens to be out past midnight or go into a bar and drink a Shirley Temple and act as designated driver for friends.

It is a pretty important revelation that the Holy Ghost no longer limits himself to persons who are confirmed LDS but guides “all the family of Adam and Eve” (which I assume means everybody). So, at which General Conference session did Mr. Monson announce this? Is there a proclamation or official declaration that I can read about this doctrinal change?

There is no change in doctrine. However, there is a difference between the Spirit of the Lord (ie. Light of Christ, Spirit, etc.) and the Holy Ghost. Bruce R. McConkie, Parley P. Pratt and others have spoken clearly on this subject.

Elder Widtsoe said:

The Savior while on earth declared that “It is the spirit that quickeneth” (John 6:63); and in modern times, speaking to Joseph Smith the Prophet, He said, “the Spirit beareth record” (D. & C. 1:39; 59:24); and “the Spirit giveth light to every man.” (D. & C. 84:46) The Apostle Paul, interpreting life in terms of this doctrine, wrote “the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God.” (I Corinthians 2:11) This profound yet almost self-evident truth is the beginning of an understanding of the gospel. (Evidences and Reconciliation, Ch 11)

 

[TexanKnight]

There is no change in doctrine. However, there is a difference between the Spirit of the Lord (ie. Light of Christ, Spirit, etc.) and the Holy Ghost. Bruce R. McConkie, Parley P. Pratt and others have spoken clearly on this subject.

lds :doctrine" changes all the time…as do the teachings…like black turning into white, adam/god, god being once man, where Cumorah is, polygamy, blacks in the priesthood, the temple worship ceremony, god being spirit or flesh…and the list can go on and on

 

[marywarfield]

There is no change in doctrine. However, there is a difference between the Spirit of the Lord (ie. Light of Christ, Spirit, etc.) and the Holy Ghost. Bruce R. McConkie, Parley P. Pratt and others have spoken clearly on this subject.

Elder Widtsoe said:

So no change in doctrine? Did blacks stop carrying the
mark of Cain and can freely advance in Temple?
Is it taught now that instead of multiple wives and
kids Jesus was celibate so now polygamy is a no no?
How many wives did Young have? How many do YOU have?
I can tell you how many the Mormons in good standing
have around here: one each.

Following the law and civil authority: after Smith rebelled
fought with and escaped from civil authority does not
LDS now teach the importance of following legitimate authority?
If your rituals are of the Holy Spirit we have the Paracletes
assurance they would be seen by all and available
to be seen by all.
The Holy Pirit does not hide from ridicule and attack. Ever.
Ever. The evil one hides but never the Holy Spirit.

My suggestion is you cite doctrines that have NOT changed.
They are fewer I number than those that have.

 

[LivingWaters7]

To certain individuals at certain times visions and revelations are discussed. But they are not discussed openly to those who would ridicule and mock. But “dispute not, because ye see not” for a witness comes after faith is proven, not before.

How do you view this in the context of the recording of visions and revelations in canonized scripture?

 

[iepuras]

There is no change in doctrine. However, there is a difference between the Spirit of the Lord (ie. Light of Christ, Spirit, etc.) and the Holy Ghost. Bruce R. McConkie, Parley P. Pratt and others have spoken clearly on this subject.

Elder Widtsoe said:

So basically, when you refer to “the Spirit”, you are referring to the light of Christ and not the Holy Ghost, which is reserved for confirmed LDS only. Still doesn’t change the fact that the Holy Ghost is fickle and flees at the very thought of sin. Not a very powerful member of the godhead.

The problem is that you use words that have a completely different meaning than what Christians understand. For example, you refer to the “Spirit shed[ding] forth light, knowledge, and understanding to all the family of Adam and Eve” and the Mormon Holy Ghost actually has nothing to do with it. However when Christians will hear the word “Spirit” or “Holy Spirit” they think about the third person in the Holy Trinity and assume you are referring to the Mormon Holy Ghost who is the third person of the Mormon godhead.

 

[in_servitude]

I’d like to see these questions answered, plus one I have below.

Janderich, and any other LDS participating, I have a few questions if you don’t mind:

1. LDS claim a restoration of “Aaronic Priesthood” and “Melchizedek Priesthood”. Do you believe that the ancient Church of Jesus Christ had these two priesthoods? If so, what is your evidence?
2. LDS claim a restoration of the offices of the priesthood. Do you believe that “Seventy” is a priesthood office? Did the ancient Church of Jesus Christ have this office? If so, what is your evidence?
3. Are 12 Apostles necessary for the Church of Jesus Christ? If so, then why did the LDS Church not have 12 Apostles until 1835, 5 years after the church was established? Was it the restored Church of Jesus Christ, with the “same organization” as the primitive Church in 1830?
4. How do you view the previously cited Acts 1:20, which talks about taking the “bishoprick” of another, in relation to Matthias replacing Judas? Do you find that relevant at all to the Catholic/Orthodox view that the Apostles appointed Successors, the Bishops?

Thank you.

Since #3 was addressed, and I suppose #5 was somewhat waved off - can you answer the rest of these?

I have one as well:

#7) For the LDS men responding to this thread, I presume you believe that you’ll be a God in some way after you die. Will that occur in this Universe or does that take place in a different Universe? Will you be ruled by the laws of physics at that time? Or, will you be creating your own physical rules for the way the Universe will operate?

 

[jadamo]

Miracles occur today but of course they are not accepted by the world; and they never were, and they never will be.
To certain individuals at certain times visions and revelations are discussed. But they are not discussed openly to those who would ridicule and mock. But “dispute not, because ye see not” for a witness comes after faith is proven, not before.

Miracles are constantly occuring, and many believe in them! Miracles have never ceased happening
By what standards are your visions and revelations held to? How do you know if these visions and revelations are truly coming from God, how are they tested? If the truth was so badly distorted long, long ago, how can Smith compare what was truly lost to what is a false teaching by the devil? After all, many of your churchs teachings cannot be found historically at all, and many contradict each other, such as the polygamy example I already listed.

 

[marywarfield]

See this is the problem here with all these new religions
springing up in the past couple hundred years. They all
sort of make it up as they go along so if we are confused
about what they preach just imagine the face palms their
own members do!

 

[Janderich]

How do you view this in the context of the recording of visions and revelations in canonized scripture?

There are revelations and visions today as there were of old. But I think sometimes we get a distorted view from scripture because thousands of years pass in one book. Moreover, much scripture is reserved for future generations. Thus we receive the scripture after the prophecy has been given and fulfilled, or read of a vision which no one at the time knew of or that was not understood.

 

[TexanKnight]

There are revelations and visions today as there were of old. But I think sometimes we get a distorted view from scripture because thousands of years pass in one book. Moreover, much scripture is reserved for future generations. Thus we receive the scripture after the prophecy has been given and fulfilled, or read of a vision which no one at the time knew of or that was not understood.

u huh. So the definitive English was too hard for y’all to understand? Or was it easy to understand until a later prophet told you that you really did not understand it?

 

[adawgj]

I found a video that deals with some arguments of apostolic succession and apostasy.

youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=gPsWcLEKIos#t=0

 

[lynnanine]

Yes, Mormons ignore scripture that shows the faithfulness of Jesus to His Bride. They ignore Christian history, that shows the Church fulfilling Jesus’ prophecy that people of all tongues and nations would come to believe and be baptized. Yes, Mormons ignore the evidence of Christ, living, in His Church. They ignore the evidence of the Holy Spirit. They must, in order to be a Mormon.

Thanks! Glad to know that I wasn’t totally off the mark there.

 

[twopekinguys]

Your facts on Joseph Smith are incorrect. He did not kill two people. Please review the history and you will see this is not the case.

Moreover, you have ignored your own question. You asked me to name one prophet who was, in your words, “As violent as Joseph Smith”. I gave you Elijah who killed 450 people. After this event the scriptures say he was taken up into heaven in whirlwind (2 Kings 2:11). So I ask, when he was taken up into heaven was he a prophet?

You might want to review your own “history of the church”. It is in volume 6 where “elder Reed Blake” testified that in fact smith did shoot back at the carthage jail, and in fact did kill at least one, and possibly two people.

Just sayin…

 

[twopekinguys]

Of course not, priesthood is conditioned on following the will of the Lord. Apostolic keys were not restored until Joseph again received them. There is no contradiction here.

No contradiction? Let’s see here, your exact words were…

succession vanished from the earth with the deaths of the apostles a long time ago,]/QUOTE]

To which I stated that Mormons believe the Apostle John still walks the Earth.

Now you want to condition that with the above statement?

Don’t you get dizzy going around in circles chasing your tail? Seriously? Even you have to see that you’re going around in circles here.

 

[Janderich]

Miracles are constantly occuring, and many believe in them! Miracles have never ceased happening

I agree.

jadamo:

By what standards are your visions and revelations held to? How do you know if these visions and revelations are truly coming from God, how are they tested? If the truth was so badly distorted long, long ago, how can Smith compare what was truly lost to what is a false teaching by the devil? After all, many of your churchs teachings cannot be found historically at all, and many contradict each other, such as the polygamy example I already listed.

All men are given a portion of the Spirit to discern good from evil. By this light we may distinguish the two. Here is the process. When we hear the word of the Lord, or we hear of a vision or revelation we must consider it. If it is good, over time it will enlighten our minds and bring joy to our hearts. Then we will know it is of God. As we act on what we know it becomes a sure knowledge. Many may ridicule such words but what of it? I have given the way to know.

Other ways to learn are useful but they are of men. By such ways distortions may creep in and choke the word.

 

[TexanKnight]

I agree.

Other ways to learn are useful but they are of men. By such ways distortions may creep in and choke the word.

you just described js and the lds church. May God show you the true light

 

[eddie_too]

someone in the RCC, i think it was pope benedict XVI, explained that the RC faith requires the use of reason to fully understand; and, that reason without faith is not adequate for human fulfillment.

so often when i encounter the lds thought and lds evangelization, i am struck by how the lds depend solely on emotion or perhaps more adequately inspiration to the neglect of reason.

knowing this helps to understand why it is so difficult to discuss faith with the lds. when reason is diminish by faith rather than enhanced by faith, the believer is handicapped and forced to overemphasize faith as it relates to reality.

when this occurs, the believer as he or she discusses their faith and are confronted with reasonable questions and contradictory facts MUST retreat in to a kind of, "i now because the spirit told me so.

the only spirits that rely on faith alone to explain reality are those sent by lucifer.

 

[jadamo]

I agree.
All men are given a portion of the Spirit to discern good from evil. By this light we may distinguish the two. Here is the process. When we hear the word of the Lord, or we hear of a vision or revelation we must consider it. If it is good, over time it will enlighten our minds and bring joy to our hearts. Then we will know it is of God. As we act on what we know it becomes a sure knowledge. Many may ridicule such words but what of it? I have given the way to know.

Other ways to learn are useful but they are of men. By such ways distortions may creep in and choke the word.

So what about Smith and his revelation for polygamy? Over time, that one didn’t enlighten your minds or bring joy to all hearts, maybe it brought joy to some hearts, but I would say (especially as a woman), it didn’t bring joy to many of the womens hearts (especially Smiths wife, after all, she was threatened by destruction by God Himself if she didn’t comply, and that doesn’t sound very joyful). And Smith practiced polyandry as well, which I definitely don’t consider joyful or enlightening, especially when your church has yet to be enlightened as to why he did that in the first place.

And Brigham Young taught some doozies as well which were promptly rejected such as Adam-God and, Jesus’ sacrifice not being enough to atone for all sins (I posted the link for that in a previous post).

And blacks not being allowed to receive the priesthood until 1978? That doesn’t seem very englightening or joyful either, in fact, I think that really hurt alot of people.

Your past prophets have indeed acted on what they’ve been told and “known”, and yet many of these revelations were not joyful or enlightening after all, so were they truly from God? By your own standards, there are many “revelations” which most likely did not come from God, b/c they were neither joyful or enlightening. Yet you condition whether or not it’s from God AFTER putting the revelation into practice, rather than soundly making sure it’s from God first. This leaves a wide door for the devil to be tricky here if your church doesn’t know how to test the spirits first. After all, polygamy itself introduced adultery, despair, depression, anger, frustration, and pride. Read the link from the journal of discourses that I provided earlier and please understand that the way Young was addressing the women in the terriroty was not loving, but condescending. Just reading that entry made me upset on behalf of the women he was talking to, I was insulted on their behalf!

And I’m not trying to ridicule at all, thank you for responding and keeping up with as, it’s probably not easy defending your faith on this site, I truly appreciate your time here.

 

[eddie_too]

whatever the source of the BOM and the teachings of joseph smith, because of the constant changes to those teachings it is safe to conclude many of them were not true.

that alone, in and of itself, should be enough for a rational person to conclude that the BOM and the teachings of joseph smith did not originate with almighty God who can neither deceive nor be deceived.

 

[TexanKnight]

whatever the source of the BOM and the teachings of joseph smith, because of the constant changes to those teachings it is safe to conclude many of them were not true.

that alone, in and of itself, should be enough for a rational person to conclude that the BOM and the teachings of joseph smith did not originate with almighty God who can neither deceive nor be deceived.

well…to be honest, the lds god CAN be deceived…just ask Mark Hoffman