We had Mormons at Mass on Sunday!

[why_me]

False Prophets

Brigham Young - Cain and his posterity will remain cursed and not receive the priesthood until all other children of Adam have had this privilege. — Journal of Discourses, vol. 2, p. 143 (December 12, 1854)

Brigham Young - Before 26 years go by LDS elders will be as much thought of as kings on their thrones. — Journal of Discourses, vol. 4, p. 40 (August 31, 1856)

Heber C. Kimball - “Brigham Young will become President of the United States.” — Journal of Discourses, vol. 5, p. 219 (September 6, 1856)
irr.org/mit/WDIST/wdist-false-prophecies.html

I am afraid that you have forgotten one very important fact. The Journal of Discourses are not LDS scripture. They are however, discourses but nothing more and they are published by the lds church.

Now wouldn’t it be wonderful if we had the all the discourses of Paul and James or from any other of the early disciples. I am sure that they wrote and said some strange things.

 

[why_me]

You are entirely correct of course. Prophets are human, and are not immune from making mistakes, including silly ones. There are plenty of examples of it in the Bible. Noah made the silly mistake of getting drunk, and exposing himself, for which one of his sons was cursed. Moses made the foolish mistake of failing to glorify God at the waters of Meribah, for which he was chastened, and denied the privilege of entering the Promised Land with the Israelites. Jonah made the silly mistake of trying to escape from the Lord! Then he was swallowed by a fish until he repented. David (who was also a great prophet) made the terrible error of committing adultery with a married woman, and then compounded it by having her husband murdered to cover it up, for which he was punished. Solomon (who was likewise a prophet) made the mistake in his old age of favouring his foreign wives with idolatry, and then himself became idolatrous, for which he (and his posterity) suffered. Isaiah admitted that he had been a man of “unclean lips”. Moving on to the New Testament, we have the example of Peter, who denied the Lord three times; of the doubting Thomas, who would not believe until he had “seen”; of Paul, who persecuted the saints. Peter and Paul had disagreed, they couldn’t have both been right. Paul and Barnabas disagreed, they couldn’t have both been right.

I am sure the critics will now say that these are errors of judgement or conduct, not of doctrine. But how do you know that they also didn’t make errors of doctrine? We don’t have everything that they ever said or wrote. What we have are only what was regarded canonized scripture by them, not everything that they said. The book of Isaiah is only about 40 pages long. Is it conceivable that this is all a great prophet and writer like Isaiah ever wrote or said? Certainly not! But we don’t have everything that they ever said. The only thing that has been preserved has been what was considered at that time to be scripture. But for the LDS prophets, we have everything that they have said. If you want to compare like with like, the right way is to compare modern LDS canonized scripture with ancient canonized scripture, and see how they fair; not everything that they ever said.

zerinus

But as you know our biased friends on this thread will not see the comparisons. What I have found especially strange on this forum is the lack of christian charity in regards to other faiths. On www.mormonapologetics.org the respect of other faiths is ruthlessly enforced. It would be nice if the catholics on this thread or forum would follow the teachings of Mother Teresa. She was truly ecumenical in her outlook of other religions. I have to admire her.

 

[majick275]

I am afraid that you have forgotten one very important fact. The Journal of Discourses are not LDS scripture. They are however, discourses but nothing more and they are published by the lds church.

Now wouldn’t it be wonderful if we had the all the discourses of Paul and James or from any other of the early disciples. I am sure that they wrote and said some strange things.

and what are those “discourses”? they are the talks given at general conference. much like the conference issue of the Ensign. that is supposed to be just like scripture.

Make you wonder about just when these “prophets, seers and revelators” are speaking as “oracles of the Lord” and when they are just engaging in foolish speculation. I suppose you could just ignore everything that isn’t canonized but that doesn’t happen in LDS churches and even the canonized scriptures change doctrines from when they change in the LDS church.

 

[dosdog]

I am afraid that you have forgotten one very important fact. The Journal of Discourses are not LDS scripture. They are however, discourses but nothing more and they are published by the lds church.

Now wouldn’t it be wonderful if we had the all the discourses of Paul and James or from any other of the early disciples. I am sure that they wrote and said some strange things.

If the Journal of Discourses are really not reliable, why did Mormon Apostle John Widtsoe use them as a primary source for his 1925 book entitled Discourses of Brigham Young? In his preface, Widtsoe makes no effort to hide the fact that the Journal played a significant role in his book. In the preface he wrote:

“This book was made possible because Brigham Young secured stenographic reports of his addresses. As he traveled among the people, reporters accompanied him. All that he said was recorded. Practically all of these discourses (from December 16, 1851 to August 19, 1877) were published in the Journal of Discourses, which was widely distributed. The public utterances of few great historical figures have been so faithfully and fully preserved. Clearly, this mass of material, covering nearly thirty years of incessant public speaking could not be presented with any hope of serving the general reader, save in the form of selections of essential doctrines” (p. vi).

A 1997 priesthood manual entitled Teachings of Presidents of the Church: Brigham Young cites literally hundreds of quotations from Widtsoe’s work, so in essence the LDS Church is still endorsing the Journal since the great majority of Widtsoe’s compilation was taken from it.

Conclusion
It would seem that Mormons who willfully declare the Journal to be unreliable fall into one of two camps. Either they are honestly ignorant of how and why these sermons were preserved and therefore have no authority to speak on the matter, or they are purposely being deceitful.

mrm.org/topics/miscellaneous/journal-discourses-mere-opinions-or-eternal-truth

 

[dosdog]

Old Heresy never dies they just change thier name to LDS

1. Called by its followers “the New Prophecy”, this movement is known to us as Montanism after its founder Montanus, a convert to Christianity. Around the year 170 he began to proclaim to his fellow believers that he was a prophet, that he was the very mouthpiece of that Spirit which the Lord had promised would “teach all things and guide into all truth” (John 14:26; 16:13).

Montanus was soon joined by two women, Priscilla and Maximilla who like him delivered oracles in a state of ecstacy, speaking not in their own persons but in that of the Holy Spirit.
2. Montanus and his companions represented a revival of the apocalyptic spirit and announced the forthcoming end of the world. The Lord was about to return, and the new Jerusalem would be set up in the vicinity of the town of Pepuza in Phrygia. As preparation for the end of all things they purified themselves and cut themselves loose from their attachments to society. The Phrygians, as they were frequently called, fasted longer and more elaborately than other Christians and discouraged marriage.
theologywebsite.com/history/montanus.shtml

Montanism- , apocalyptic movement of the 2d cent. It arose in Phrygia (c.172) under the leadership of a certain Montanus and two female prophets, Prisca and Maximillia, whose entranced utterances were deemed oracles of the Holy Spirit. They had an immediate expectation of Judgment Day, and they encouraged ecstatic prophesying and strict asceticism. They believed that a Christian fallen from grace could never be redeemed. Prisca claimed that Christ had appeared to her in female form. When she was excommunicated, she exclaimed “I am driven away like the wolf from the sheep. I am no wolf: I am word and spirit and power.”

The belief that the prophecies of the Montanists superseded the doctrines proclaimed by the Apostles
education.yahoo.com/reference…entry/Montanis
newadvent.org/cathen/10521a.htm

 

[majick275]

But as you know our biased friends on this thread will not see the comparisons. What I have found especially strange on this forum is the lack of christian charity in regards to other faiths. On www.mormonapologetics.org the respect of other faiths is ruthlessly enforced. It would be nice if the catholics on this thread or forum would follow the teachings of Mother Teresa. She was truly ecumenical in her outlook of other religions. I have to admire her.

there are limits to the benefit of ecumenism. Catholics cannot silently watch the promulgation of false doctrine in our places. Even the most charitable LDS site must acknowledge Mormon scripture stating that all other churches are not only wrong but their creeds are an ABOMINATION. how willing are you to entertain the possible “goodness” of David Koresh or Jim Jones? I see little difference between them and Joseph Smith. how respectful of satanists is www.mormonapologetics.org ? should they be?

 

[zerinus]

If the Journal of Discourses are really not reliable, why did Mormon Apostle John Widtsoe use them as a primary source for his 1925 book entitled Discourses of Brigham Young? In his preface, Widtsoe makes no effort to hide the fact that the Journal played a significant role in his book. In the preface he wrote:

“This book was made possible because Brigham Young secured stenographic reports of his addresses. As he traveled among the people, reporters accompanied him. All that he said was recorded. Practically all of these discourses (from December 16, 1851 to August 19, 1877) were published in the Journal of Discourses, which was widely distributed. The public utterances of few great historical figures have been so faithfully and fully preserved. Clearly, this mass of material, covering nearly thirty years of incessant public speaking could not be presented with any hope of serving the general reader, save in the form of selections of essential doctrines” (p. vi).

A 1997 priesthood manual entitled Teachings of Presidents of the Church: Brigham Young cites literally hundreds of quotations from Widtsoe’s work, so in essence the LDS Church is still endorsing the Journal since the great majority of Widtsoe’s compilation was taken from it.

Conclusion
It would seem that Mormons who willfully declare the Journal to be unreliable fall into one of two camps. Either they are honestly ignorant of how and why these sermons were preserved and therefore have no authority to speak on the matter, or they are purposely being deceitful.

mrm.org/topics/miscellaneous/journal-discourses-mere-opinions-or-eternal-truth

“Reliability” is not the issue here. The Journal of Discourses is not canonized LDS scripture; and neither is the Discourses of Brigham Young. That is the issues.

zerinus

 

[majick275]

If the Journal of Discourses are really not reliable, why did Mormon Apostle John Widtsoe use them as a primary source for his 1925 book entitled Discourses of Brigham Young? In his preface, Widtsoe makes no effort to hide the fact that the Journal played a significant role in his book. In the preface he wrote:

“This book was made possible because Brigham Young secured stenographic reports of his addresses. As he traveled among the people, reporters accompanied him. All that he said was recorded. Practically all of these discourses (from December 16, 1851 to August 19, 1877) were published in the Journal of Discourses, which was widely distributed. The public utterances of few great historical figures have been so faithfully and fully preserved. Clearly, this mass of material, covering nearly thirty years of incessant public speaking could not be presented with any hope of serving the general reader, save in the form of selections of essential doctrines” (p. vi).

A 1997 priesthood manual entitled Teachings of Presidents of the Church: Brigham Young cites literally hundreds of quotations from Widtsoe’s work, so in essence the LDS Church is still endorsing the Journal since the great majority of Widtsoe’s compilation was taken from it.

Conclusion
It would seem that Mormons who willfully declare the Journal to be unreliable fall into one of two camps. Either they are honestly ignorant of how and why these sermons were preserved and therefore have no authority to speak on the matter, or they are purposely being deceitful.

mrm.org/topics/miscellaneous/journal-discourses-mere-opinions-or-eternal-truth

the JoD are still consistently quoted in LDS lesson manuals of all types.

 

[dosdog]

“Reliability” is not the issue here. The Journal of Discourses is not canonized LDS scripture; and neither is the Discourses of Brigham Young. That is the issues.

zerinus

It appears obvious that one of the reasons a Mormon may wish to distance himself from the Journal is because it contains information with which he may personally disagree. I too am glad that discerning individuals recognize that the Journal contains some bizarre notions that should not be believed. However, Mormons who hold to this conclusion cannot escape the fact that they are also being intellectually dishonest if they extol such spokesmen as prophets and apostles of God while being fully aware that they taught things that are considered blatant heresy by their church today. Sadly, that is the double standard many Latter-day Saints choose to employ.

If LDS leaders really feel that the Journal is unreliable they need to quit quoting it and admit to their members that Mormon prophets are quite capable of leading the church astray. The fact that the church has yet to offer an official statement denouncing the Journal also tends to speak volumes.
mrm.org/topics/miscellaneous/journal-discourses-mere-opinions-or-eternal-truth

Old Heresy never dies they just change thier name to LDS

1. Called by its followers “the New Prophecy”, this movement is known to us as Montanism after its founder Montanus, a convert to Christianity. Around the year 170 he began to proclaim to his fellow believers that he was a prophet, that he was the very mouthpiece of that Spirit which the Lord had promised would “teach all things and guide into all truth” (John 14:26; 16:13).

Montanus was soon joined by two women, Priscilla and Maximilla who like him delivered oracles in a state of ecstacy, speaking not in their own persons but in that of the Holy Spirit.
2. Montanus and his companions represented a revival of the apocalyptic spirit and announced the forthcoming end of the world. The Lord was about to return, and the new Jerusalem would be set up in the vicinity of the town of Pepuza in Phrygia. As preparation for the end of all things they purified themselves and cut themselves loose from their attachments to society. The Phrygians, as they were frequently called, fasted longer and more elaborately than other Christians and discouraged marriage.
theologywebsite.com/history/montanus.shtml

Montanism- , apocalyptic movement of the 2d cent. It arose in Phrygia (c.172) under the leadership of a certain Montanus and two female prophets, Prisca and Maximillia, whose entranced utterances were deemed oracles of the Holy Spirit. They had an immediate expectation of Judgment Day, and they encouraged ecstatic prophesying and strict asceticism. They believed that a Christian fallen from grace could never be redeemed. Prisca claimed that Christ had appeared to her in female form. When she was excommunicated, she exclaimed “I am driven away like the wolf from the sheep. I am no wolf: I am word and spirit and power.”

The belief that the prophecies of the Montanists superseded the doctrines proclaimed by the Apostles
education.yahoo.com/reference…entry/Montanis
newadvent.org/cathen/10521a.htm

 

[why_me]

and what are those “discourses”? they are the talks given at general conference. much like the conference issue of the Ensign. that is supposed to be just like scripture.

Make you wonder about just when these “prophets, seers and revelators” are speaking as “oracles of the Lord” and when they are just engaging in foolish speculation. I suppose you could just ignore everything that isn’t canonized but that doesn’t happen in LDS churches and even the canonized scriptures change doctrines from when they change in the LDS church.

Talks at General Conference are also not scripture. They are however, advice on how to do life. But they are not scripture. Likewise, what the pope says in the Vatican newspaper is not part of the catholic cathecism unless it is decided for it to be so.

BY was a man of his time. He was basically a frontiersman with all the rough edges of a pioneer. He spoke his mind.

 

[why_me]

the JoD are still consistently quoted in LDS lesson manuals of all types.

I don’t know about that. But so what? The discourses are not scripture and so they would be looked on only as writings of a man who happened to be a prophet. Nothing more.

 

[dosdog]

Talks at General Conference are also not scripture. They are however, advice on how to do life. But they are not scripture. Likewise, what the pope says in the Vatican newspaper is not part of the catholic cathecism unless it is decided for it to be so.

BY was a man of his time. He was basically a frontiersman with all the rough edges of a pioneer. He spoke his mind.

BY was a Certifiably Insane “Nutjob”

 

[zerinus]

But as you know our biased friends on this thread will not see the comparisons. What I have found especially strange on this forum is the lack of christian charity in regards to other faiths. On www.mormonapologetics.org the respect of other faiths is ruthlessly enforced. It would be nice if the catholics on this thread or forum would follow the teachings of Mother Teresa. She was truly ecumenical in her outlook of other religions. I have to admire her.

Yes, I wish. Wishful thinking I fear!

zerinus

 

[RebeccaJ]

And the Catholic faith does not believe that they are the one true church? I do think they do. In fact, there are two organized christian churches that believe that they are the truth: the LDS and the Catholic. One based on the great apostacy and the other on the keys given to Peter.

And? A mormon missionary is not sitting at a Catholic Mass thinking, “I am sitting in the other true Church”

 

[RebeccaJ]

But as you know our biased friends on this thread will not see the comparisons. What I have found especially strange on this forum is the lack of christian charity in regards to other faiths. On www.mormonapologetics.org the respect of other faiths is ruthlessly enforced. It would be nice if the catholics on this thread or forum would follow the teachings of Mother Teresa. She was truly ecumenical in her outlook of other religions. I have to admire her.

Whatever, I have been there. YOUR posts are fair, others I cannot same the same about.

 

[zerinus]

It appears obvious that one of the reasons a Mormon may wish to distance himself from the Journal is because it contains information with which he may personally disagree. I too am glad that discerning individuals recognize that the Journal contains some bizarre notions that should not be believed. However, Mormons who hold to this conclusion cannot escape the fact that they are also being intellectually dishonest if they extol such spokesmen as prophets and apostles of God while being fully aware that they taught things that are considered blatant heresy by their church today. Sadly, that is the double standard many Latter-day Saints choose to employ.

If LDS leaders really feel that the Journal is unreliable they need to quit quoting it and admit to their members that Mormon prophets are quite capable of leading the church astray. The fact that the church has yet to offer an official statement denouncing the Journal also tends to speak volumes.
mrm.org/topics/miscellaneous/journal-discourses-mere-opinions-or-eternal-truth

Old Heresy never dies they just change thier name to LDS

1. Called by its followers “the New Prophecy”, this movement is known to us as Montanism after its founder Montanus, a convert to Christianity. Around the year 170 he began to proclaim to his fellow believers that he was a prophet, that he was the very mouthpiece of that Spirit which the Lord had promised would “teach all things and guide into all truth” (John 14:26; 16:13).

Montanus was soon joined by two women, Priscilla and Maximilla who like him delivered oracles in a state of ecstacy, speaking not in their own persons but in that of the Holy Spirit.
2. Montanus and his companions represented a revival of the apocalyptic spirit and announced the forthcoming end of the world. The Lord was about to return, and the new Jerusalem would be set up in the vicinity of the town of Pepuza in Phrygia. As preparation for the end of all things they purified themselves and cut themselves loose from their attachments to society. The Phrygians, as they were frequently called, fasted longer and more elaborately than other Christians and discouraged marriage.
theologywebsite.com/history/montanus.shtml

Montanism- , apocalyptic movement of the 2d cent. It arose in Phrygia (c.172) under the leadership of a certain Montanus and two female prophets, Prisca and Maximillia, whose entranced utterances were deemed oracles of the Holy Spirit. They had an immediate expectation of Judgment Day, and they encouraged ecstatic prophesying and strict asceticism. They believed that a Christian fallen from grace could never be redeemed. Prisca claimed that Christ had appeared to her in female form. When she was excommunicated, she exclaimed “I am driven away like the wolf from the sheep. I am no wolf: I am word and spirit and power.”

The belief that the prophecies of the Montanists superseded the doctrines proclaimed by the Apostles
education.yahoo.com/reference…entry/Montanis
newadvent.org/cathen/10521a.htm

Allow me inform you that I very rarely read your posts (including this one), because they are often so lengthy and irelevant that I can’t be bothered to read them. You seem to produce lengthy posts instantaneously out of nowhere, which suggests that you are cutting and pasting from somewhere without putting any thought into it, and that is not what inspires anyone to read your posts.

zerinus

 

[hosemonkey]

Your link is antimormon crapola. This is the problem with your link.

Please explain which part is “crapola.”

 

[dosdog]

Allow me inform you that I very rarely read your posts (including this one), because they are often so lengthy and irelevant that I can’t be bothered to read them. You seem to produce lengthy posts instantaneously out of nowhere, which suggests that you are cutting and pasting from somewhere without putting any thought into it, and that is not what inspires anyone to read your posts.

zerinus

Let me shorten it
To many Jews, “baptized” has a greater emotional reaction because to them — and me — to posthumously baptize a Jew is to rape his soul.
deseretnews.com/dn/print/1,14…037136,00.html

 

[zerinus]

Let me shorten it
To many Jews, “baptized” has a greater emotional reaction because to them — and me — to posthumously baptize a Jew is to rape his soul.
deseretnews.com/dn/print/1,14…037136,00.html

To which the answer was already given, and need not be given again. Is there anything else you wanted to add to that?

zerinus

 

[dosdog]

To which the answer was already given, and need not be given again. Is there anything else you wanted to add to that?

zerinus

To many Jews, “baptized” has a greater emotional reaction because to them — and me — to posthumously baptize a Jew is to rape his soul.
deseretnews.com/dn/print/1,14…037136,00.html

It appears obvious that one of the reasons a Mormon may wish to distance himself from the Journal is because it contains information with which he may personally disagree. I too am glad that discerning individuals recognize that the Journal contains some bizarre notions that should not be believed. However, Mormons who hold to this conclusion cannot escape the fact that they are also being intellectually dishonest if they extol such spokesmen as prophets and apostles of God while being fully aware that they taught things that are considered blatant heresy by their church today. Sadly, that is the double standard many Latter-day Saints choose to employ.

If LDS leaders really feel that the Journal is unreliable they need to quit quoting it and admit to their members that Mormon prophets are quite capable of leading the church astray. The fact that the church has yet to offer an official statement denouncing the Journal also tends to speak volumes.
mrm.org/topics/miscellane…-eternal-truth

Old Heresy never dies they just change thier name to LDS

1. Called by its followers “the New Prophecy”, this movement is known to us as Montanism after its founder Montanus, a convert to Christianity. Around the year 170 he began to proclaim to his fellow believers that he was a prophet, that he was the very mouthpiece of that Spirit which the Lord had promised would “teach all things and guide into all truth” (John 14:26; 16:13).

Montanus was soon joined by two women, Priscilla and Maximilla who like him delivered oracles in a state of ecstacy, speaking not in their own persons but in that of the Holy Spirit.
2. Montanus and his companions represented a revival of the apocalyptic spirit and announced the forthcoming end of the world. The Lord was about to return, and the new Jerusalem would be set up in the vicinity of the town of Pepuza in Phrygia. As preparation for the end of all things they purified themselves and cut themselves loose from their attachments to society. The Phrygians, as they were frequently called, fasted longer and more elaborately than other Christians and discouraged marriage.
theologywebsite.com/history/montanus.shtml

Montanism- , apocalyptic movement of the 2d cent. It arose in Phrygia (c.172) under the leadership of a certain Montanus and two female prophets, Prisca and Maximillia, whose entranced utterances were deemed oracles of the Holy Spirit. They had an immediate expectation of Judgment Day, and they encouraged ecstatic prophesying and strict asceticism. They believed that a Christian fallen from grace could never be redeemed. Prisca claimed that Christ had appeared to her in female form. When she was excommunicated, she exclaimed “I am driven away like the wolf from the sheep. I am no wolf: I am word and spirit and power.”

The belief that the prophecies of the Montanists superseded the doctrines proclaimed by the Apostles
education.yahoo.com/reference…entry/Montanis
newadvent.org/cathen/10521a.htm