Question for LDS

[RebeccaJ]

Teachings Of The Living Prophet Student Manual

3-8

                                 “In conclusion, let us summarize this grand key, these ‘Fourteen  Fundamentals in Following the Prophet,’ for our salvation hangs on them.                 
                                  “First: The prophet is the only man who speaks for the Lord in  everything.                 
                                  “Second: The living prophet is **more vital to us than the standard  works**.                 
                                  “Third: The living prophet is more important to us than a dead  prophet.                 
                                  “Fourth: The prophet will never lead the Church astray.                 
                                  “Fifth: The prophet is not required to have any particular earthly  training or credentials to speak on any subject or act on any matter at  any time.                 
                                  “Sixth: The prophet **does not have to say “Thus saith the Lord”** to  give us scripture.                 
                                  “Seventh: The prophet tells us what we need to know, not always  what we want to know.                 
                                  “Eighth: The prophet is not limited by men’s reasoning.                 
                                  “Ninth: The prophet can receive revelation on any matter, temporal  or spiritual.                 
                                  “Tenth: The prophet may be involved in civic matters.                 
                                  “Eleventh: The two groups who have the greatest difficulty in  following the prophet are the proud who are learned and the proud who  are rich.                 
                                  “Twelfth: The prophet will not necessarily be popular with the  world or the worldly.                 
                                  “Thirteenth: The prophet and his counselors make up the First  Presidency—the highest quorum in the Church.                 
                                  “Fourteenth: The prophet and the presidency—the living prophet and  the First Presidency—**follow them and be blessed; reject them and suffer**.

4-1

While Latter-day Saints revere the Bible as the word of God, they also have other scriptures. In addition to the Bible, any message given by God’s prophets through the power of the Holy Ghost is scripture.
…

Seems LDS believe that their members living at the time of BY were under different prophet fundamentals.

Beyond that, LDS want it both ways. They want to tell us their prophet is essential, yet, they tell us they don’t have to listen to him.

Maybe once a mormon “prophet” is dead, what he said can be discarded as not inspired by the Holy Spirit?

 

[Caprica]

First, they did NOT have to be corrected first. Second, for them to be published when they were false, the LDS Church is either NOT led by a prophet or, they were valid sermons, ie. doctrine.

Which is it, exactly?

Of course they had to be corrected first. Brigham Young himself stated that the sermon had to be corrected by himself.

Who said they were published when they were false? The question is whether Brigham Young corrected the sermons and approved them as scripture. A valid sermon does not mean that it is doctrine (I assume you mean scriptural). The sermon had to be corrected by Brigham Young and approved by him, according to his own words. Who exactly published these sermons, who wrote them down, etc.? That is the issue here. If Brigham Young did not correct the sermon and approve of it as scripture, then it did not meet the requirements set forth by Brigham Young himself.

 

[why_me]

Don’t need to. They were published. Certainly, the LDS Church would have published anything that was incorrect, right? Especially when their prophet allegedly speaks to God face to face

Well, the lds church was quite honest with the journal of discourses of past leaders. They endorsed their publication. Not because they approved of everything that BY said. But because it was mormon history. They could have burned everything.

Since many mormons have the discourses in their home libraries, what is inside them does not shock them. It is only brigham young…

Here is an Ensign article about the journal of discourses. I think that you will find it interesting. It was written in 1978.

library.lds.org/nxt/gateway.dll/Magazines/Ensign/1978.htm/ensign%20august%201978%20.htm/i%20have%20a%20question.htm?fn=document-frame.htm&f=templates&2.0#LPTOC2

Now I must admit that the lds church needs to go back to the good ol’ days of the 1970’s and 1980’s. They published some interesting things back then. Nothing was hidden as some claim that it is today.

 

[Caprica]

Teachings Of The Living Prophet Student Manual

3-8

                                 “In conclusion, let us summarize this grand key, these ‘Fourteen  Fundamentals in Following the Prophet,’ for our salvation hangs on them.                 
                                  “First: The prophet is the only man who speaks for the Lord in  everything.                 
                                  “Second: The living prophet is **more vital to us than the standard  works**.                 
                                  “Third: The living prophet is more important to us than a dead  prophet.                 
                                  “Fourth: The prophet will never lead the Church astray.                 
                                  “Fifth: The prophet is not required to have any particular earthly  training or credentials to speak on any subject or act on any matter at  any time.                 
                                  “Sixth: The prophet **does not have to say “Thus saith the Lord”** to  give us scripture.                 
                                  “Seventh: The prophet tells us what we need to know, not always  what we want to know.                 
                                  “Eighth: The prophet is not limited by men’s reasoning.                 
                                  “Ninth: The prophet can receive revelation on any matter, temporal  or spiritual.                 
                                  “Tenth: The prophet may be involved in civic matters.                 
                                  “Eleventh: The two groups who have the greatest difficulty in  following the prophet are the proud who are learned and the proud who  are rich.                 
                                  “Twelfth: The prophet will not necessarily be popular with the  world or the worldly.                 
                                  “Thirteenth: The prophet and his counselors make up the First  Presidency—the highest quorum in the Church.                 
                                  “Fourteenth: The prophet and the presidency—the living prophet and  the First Presidency—**follow them and be blessed; reject them and suffer**.

4-1

While Latter-day Saints revere the Bible as the word of God, they also have other scriptures. In addition to the Bible, any message given by God’s prophets through the power of the Holy Ghost is scripture.
…

Seems LDS believe that their members living at the time of BY were under different prophet fundamentals.

Beyond that, LDS want it both ways. They want to tell us their prophet is essential, yet, they tell us they don’t have to listen to him.

Maybe once a mormon “prophet” is dead, what he said can be discarded as not inspired by the Holy Spirit?

“any message given by God’s prophets through the power of the Holy Ghost is scripture”-I believe that that is the key sentence there. This reminds me (as I know it does others) of Papal Infallibility, where a Pope is not always infallible, except under certain circumstances. LDS believe that the prophet is essential, yet not everything they say is infallible. “Prophets have the right to personal opinions. Not every word they speak should be thought of as an official interpretation or pronouncement.”-the same manual, 4-6.

 

[twopekinguys]

How does his quote lead to the conclusion that Brigham Young corrected all of his sermons and then approved them as scripture?

What makes you think he didn’t?

Somebody gave the approval for them to be published. Somebody thought they were OK to be published as they are.

What makes you think it wasn’t him? Do you have proof that he didn’t approve them to be published?

Keep in mind, that the JoD was first published in 1854. BY didn’t die until 1877. There is 23 years for him to do some correcting and authorizing.

Also, the first publisher of the JoD was by George Watt, who was stenographer to BY.

I’m thinking BY had a hand in saying what was OK to publish.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Journal_of_Discourses

 

[RebeccaJ]

“any message given by God’s prophets through the power of the Holy Ghost is scripture”-I believe that that is the key sentence there.

Indeed it is, as it seems to me LDS are making a claim that their prophet BY was not led by the Holy Spirit.

This reminds me (as I know it does others) of Papal Infallibility, where a Pope is not always infallible, except under certain circumstances.

The Pope is infallible when speaking on faith and morals. There is no claim the Pope is a prophet (though some have been very prophetic).

LDS believe that the prophet is essential, yet not everything they say is infallible.

This is not what the link at LDS org says. It says, your prophets speak as prophets for all things. That what they say is more important than your standard works.

I can understand how you’d want to ditch a lot of what BY said, but to do so I see you have to make all sorts of exceptions.

The question is really easy. Was BY a prophet or not? If what he says, when teaching to all mormons at a mormon general conference is not to be adhered to, then what is the point?

 

[why_me]

“any message given by God’s prophets through the power of the Holy Ghost is scripture”-I believe that that is the key sentence there. This reminds me (as I know it does others) of Papal Infallibility, where a Pope is not always infallible, except under certain circumstances. LDS believe that the prophet is essential, yet not everything they say is infallible. “Prophets have the right to personal opinions. Not every word they speak should be thought of as an official interpretation or pronouncement.”-the same manual, 4-6.

My friend Rebecca forgot to include that sentence. You are doing a good job Caprica defending the lds church. Soon you will be a seasoned apologist. This board will cause you to search and defend and in the end, you will be a better mormon for it. But…most lds experience burnout on this board. Take it slowly and don’t spend too much in explanation. It will only wear you down. Just make comments and add a reference.

That is my advice after a few thousand posts.

 

[why_me]

Teachings Of The Living Prophet Student Manual

3-8

“In conclusion, let us summarize this grand key, these ‘Fourteen Fundamentals in Following the Prophet,’ for our salvation hangs on them.
?

Welcome back Rebecca. I missed you.

I think that she has me on ignore.

 

[SirThomasMore]

Indeed it is, as it seems to me LDS are making a claim that their prophet BY was not led by the Holy Spirit.

The Pope is infallible when speaking on faith and morals. There is no claim the Pope is a prophet (though some have been very prophetic).

This is not what the link at LDS org says. It says, your prophets speak as prophets for all things. That what they say is more important than your standard works.

I can understand how you’d want to ditch a lot of what BY said, but to do so I see you have to make all sorts of exceptions.

The question is really easy. Was BY a prophet or not? If what he says, when teaching to all mormons at a mormon general conference is not to be adhered to, then what is the point?

exactly

 

[Caprica]

The Pope is infallible when speaking on faith and morals. There is no claim the Pope is a prophet (though some have been very prophetic).

It is not just when the Pope is speaking on faith and morals, otherwise all of those encyclicals would be under Papal Infallibility. And yes, we know that the Pope is not a prophet.

This is not what the link at LDS org says. It says, your prophets speak as prophets for all things. That what they say is more important than your standard works.

Odd, the link also states this-"“Prophets have the right to personal opinions. Not every word they speak should be thought of as an official interpretation or pronouncement.” 4-6.

I can understand how you’d want to ditch a lot of what BY said, but to do so I see you have to make all sorts of exceptions.

The question is really easy. Was BY a prophet or not? If what he says, when teaching to all mormons at a mormon general conference is not to be adhered to, then what is the point?

Of course we believe that Brigham Young was a prophet. We also believe that no prophet, whether in the Bible or otherwise, is always infallible.

 

[SirThomasMore]

Of course they had to be corrected first. Brigham Young himself stated that the sermon had to be corrected by himself.

Who said they were published when they were false? The question is whether Brigham Young corrected the sermons and approved them as scripture. A valid sermon does not mean that it is doctrine (I assume you mean scriptural). The sermon had to be corrected by Brigham Young and approved by him, according to his own words. Who exactly published these sermons, who wrote them down, etc.? That is the issue here. If Brigham Young did not correct the sermon and approve of it as scripture, then it did not meet the requirements set forth by Brigham Young himself.

nope…if the LDS published them, one must assume they were corrected OR the LDS Church has no idea what they are publishing

 

[twopekinguys]

What makes you think he didn’t?

Somebody gave the approval for them to be published. Somebody thought they were OK to be published as they are.

What makes you think it wasn’t him? Do you have proof that he didn’t approve them to be published?

Keep in mind, that the JoD was first published in 1854. BY didn’t die until 1877. There is 23 years for him to do some correcting and authorizing.

Also, the first publisher of the JoD was by George Watt, who was stenographer to BY.

I’m thinking BY had a hand in saying what was OK to publish.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Journal_of_Discourses

Notice also that it was published with “endorsement” of the first presidency.

Looks like he had the opportunity to correct any errors prior to publication.

 

[zaffiroborant]

It is old and full of false doctrine. When it was first published it was under criticism from the lds leadership. In the second edition, many things were changed. It is just a book that outlived its time.

There was a thread about MD on MADB and most posters disagreed with you.

 

[why_me]

exactly

I don’t know. What were the popes doing during the religious wars that engulfed europe? Protestants and catholics were killing eachother for years and years. Were they condemning the bloodshed or condoning it? I don’t think that they were actively seeking an end to the violence. And if they were condoning it, would you agree with them?

And where they acting as popes or as men?

 

[Caprica]

What makes you think he didn’t?

Somebody gave the approval for them to be published. Somebody thought they were OK to be published as they are.

What makes you think it wasn’t him? Do you have proof that he didn’t approve them to be published?

I believe I asked you first to demonstrate which sermons of Brigham Young were corrected by him and approved as scripture, in accordance with his own words. Since this is a positive claim (i.e. it is not normative), then it must be demonstrated.

Keep in mind, that the JoD was first published in 1854. BY didn’t die until 1877. There is 23 years for him to do some correcting and authorizing.

Right, and all I ask is for you to demonstrate that he did.

Also, the first publisher of the JoD was by George Watt, who was stenographer to BY.

I’m thinking BY had a hand in saying what was OK to publish.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Journal_of_Discourses

Right, and all I ask is for you to demonstrate that he corrected the sermons and approved them as scripture. The wikipedia link states that he had reporters accompany him who recorded his words. It must then be demonstrated that Brigham Young corrected these words and approved them as scripture. That’s all I ask.

 

[SirThomasMore]

I believe I asked you first to demonstrate which sermons of Brigham Young were corrected by him and approved as scripture, in accordance with his own words. Since this is a positive claim (i.e. it is not normative), then it must be demonstrated.

Right, and all I ask is for you to demonstrate that he did.

Right, and all I ask is for you to demonstrate that he corrected the sermons and approved them as scripture. The wikipedia link states that he had reporters accompany him who recorded his words. It must then be demonstrated that Brigham Young corrected these words and approved them as scripture. That’s all I ask.

Nope. It can assumed that they were corrected, else God would have never let them be published

 

[Caprica]

nope…if the LDS published them, one must assume they were corrected OR the LDS Church has no idea what they are publishing

Please demonstrate that it was Brigham Young himself that corrected and approved the sermons as scripture, and not just a vague “the LDS”.

 

[SirThomasMore]

Please demonstrate that it was Brigham Young himself that corrected and approved the sermons as scripture, and not just a vague “the LDS”.

Don;t need to. The fact they were published is enough. What you need to do is prove he never corrected them or did not approve of them

 

[Caprica]

Nope. It can assumed that they were corrected, else God would have never let them be published

Please demonstrate that it is LDS teaching that “God would have never let them be published”. Also that they were corrected by Brigham Young himself, and not just a vague “the LDS Church”.

 

[SirThomasMore]

Please demonstrate that it is LDS teaching that “God would have never let them be published”. Also that they were corrected by Brigham Young himself, and not just a vague “the LDS Church”.

Don;t need to. The fact they were published is enough. What you need to do is prove he never corrected them or did not approve of them