The Folk Prophet

*shrug* It doesn't much matter. Just an interesting point to me. It's not proof, and I certainly would not expect it to convince a Catholic faithful of anything with it. If one accepts Joseph Smith as a prophet and the restoration of the gospel then it is a useful idea to help understand the LDS perspective. If one does not accept the restoration of the gospel then it's less useful.

Well theoretically, adults know better (even though some seem oblivious). Kids do not. Eating nothing but chocolate, for example, doesn't mean anything to a kid. They do not put any consequence to the action. An adult knows there will be consequences, even if they choose to ignore said consequences.

Not to mention the petros/petra Peter/rock meanings. https://www.lds.org/ensign/1986/01/i-have-a-question?lang=eng

He kind of got his head chopped off.

I'm a bit surprised no one has brought up Elder Uchtdorf's talk in Oct 2013 Come Join With Us. In many ways it was the catalyst for my starting of this thread. He talks therein about doubt. I have found (from my perspective) that those who encourage the doubt culture use what he said to support their ideas, and those who discourage it use it to support their end, and both kind of ignore the full picture. I'm posting the relative part here: ______________________ "One might ask, “If the gospel is so wonderful, why would anyone leave?” "Sometimes we assume it is because they have been offended or lazy or sinful. Actually, it is not that simple. In fact, there is not just one reason that applies to the variety of situations. "Some of our dear members struggle for years with the question whether they should separate themselves from the Church. "In this Church that honors personal agency so strongly, that was restored by a young man who asked questions and sought answers, we respect those who honestly search for truth. It may break our hearts when their journey takes them away from the Church we love and the truth we have found, but we honor their right to worship Almighty God according to the dictates of their own conscience, just as we claim that privilege for ourselves.5 "Some struggle with unanswered questions about things that have been done or said in the past. We openly acknowledge that in nearly 200 years of Church history—along with an uninterrupted line of inspired, honorable, and divine events—there have been some things said and done that could cause people to question. "Sometimes questions arise because we simply don’t have all the information and we just need a bit more patience. When the entire truth is eventually known, things that didn’t make sense to us before will be resolved to our satisfaction. "Sometimes there is a difference of opinion as to what the “facts” really mean. A question that creates doubt in some can, after careful investigation, build faith in others. "And, to be perfectly frank, there have been times when members or leaders in the Church have simply made mistakes. There may have been things said or done that were not in harmony with our values, principles, or doctrine. "I suppose the Church would be perfect only if it were run by perfect beings. God is perfect, and His doctrine is pure. But He works through us—His imperfect children—and imperfect people make mistakes. "In the title page of the Book of Mormon we read, “And now, if there are faults they are the mistakes of men; wherefore, condemn not the things of God, that ye may be found spotless at the judgment-seat of Christ.”6 "This is the way it has always been and will be until the perfect day when Christ Himself reigns personally upon the earth. "It is unfortunate that some have stumbled because of mistakes made by men. But in spite of this, the eternal truth of the restored gospel found in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is not tarnished, diminished, or destroyed. "As an Apostle of the Lord Jesus Christ and as one who has seen firsthand the councils and workings of this Church, I bear solemn witness that no decision of significance affecting this Church or its members is ever made without earnestly seeking the inspiration, guidance, and approbation of our Eternal Father. This is the Church of Jesus Christ. God will not allow His Church to drift from its appointed course or fail to fulfill its divine destiny. "To those who have separated themselves from the Church, I say, my dear friends, there is yet a place for you here. "Come and add your talents, gifts, and energies to ours. We will all become better as a result. "Some might ask, “But what about my doubts?” "It’s natural to have questions—the acorn of honest inquiry has often sprouted and matured into a great oak of understanding. There are few members of the Church who, at one time or another, have not wrestled with serious or sensitive questions. One of the purposes of the Church is to nurture and cultivate the seed of faith—even in the sometimes sandy soil of doubt and uncertainty. Faith is to hope for things which are not seen but which are true. "Therefore, my dear brothers and sisters—my dear friends—please, first doubt your doubts before you doubt your faith. We must never allow doubt to hold us prisoner and keep us from the divine love, peace, and gifts that come through faith in the Lord Jesus Christ."

*shrug* I tend to the childlike thing. Kids who aren't accountable certainly know pleasure and pain. But they don't KNOW pleasure or pain because they cannot really understand. The things that give them pleasure are, as often as not, stupid, as well as the things that sometimes give them pain. (Not that they don't experience true pleasure and pain, of course, but even then, they can't really understand). I expect it was likewise in the Garden. They weren't robots. They were simply innocent.

Genesis 3:6 (Moses 4:12): And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat. "Pleasant" implies emotion to me.

I don't not take your word. I just believe that the Trinity is not truly understandable because it is senseless. I will grant, that my understanding of it is not well studied...shallow reading at best...but those explanations I have read are back-bending, mind-twisting, illogical logical efforts to try and explain the unexplainable. Which, frankly, seems strange to me. There are things in LDS teachings that are unexplainable -- even in the nature of God. We understand, for example, that God has a physical body -- but how He is able to see all things at once, travel anywhere immediately, attend to all things all the time, etc., etc... We do not understand. We cannot understand. Saying that we understand that God is all knowing does not mean we actually understand God being all knowing. Even if one were to concede the Trinity as truth, to say that one understands that God is three separate persons in one being does not mean that this concept is, in the least, understandable.

We'll have to agree to disagree on this one.

How does this work, in your thinking, when two different people from two different denominations honestly seek the Spirit and get different answers that directly contradict each other?

To be clear, I do not believe this. President Monson's views on breakfast cereal are probably not from God. Nor could any current faithful Latter-day Saint accept that everything Brigham Young said was from God. It really comes down to more how estradling75 put it. Approaching it from a benefit of the doubt until there's reason to see it differently. I suspect the difference of opinions come down to what qualifies as a reason to see it differently. Edit: Also...I think I've been clear. I do not think it is "enough". I very, very clearly and plainly believe that one needs spiritual confirmation that the prophet is a prophet and that the church is led by God.

The Lord giveth no commandments unto the children of men, save he shall prepare a way for them that they may accomplish the thing which he commandeth them. We can. We just won't.

Ah...perfectly clear now.

Great wisdom here. How many of our "I can't" moments in life are really "I want" moments? I daresay more than most of us are often willing to admit.

There is a third.

In the newest video they also have Adam digging for some reason in the Garden. I always understood that work was not necessary in the Garden. What would he be digging for? :)

As compared to: Person :"God is this man your prophet?" God : "Yes" Person: " He says I shouldn't do <Thing A> is this correct?" God : "No. That doesn't apply to you." Person: " He says I shouldn't do <Thing B> is this correct?" God : "No. He got it wrong on that one." Person: " He says I shouldn't do <Thing C> is this correct?" God : "No. He got it wrong on that one too." Person: " He says I shouldn't do <Thing D> is this correct?" God : "Um...no on that one too. It's a good thing your coming to me with all these, 'cause otherwise...boy howdy! What do I even have a prophet for?" Is this what some people expect? :)

I am not taking it personally. I have very clearly explained myself and the attitudes with which I believe one should approach prayer. When you ignore all that and say, "I want to believe you are not suggesting praying and seeking the Holy Spirit is unwise." it comes across as if you have either not bothered to read what I have said, are purposefully misunderstanding me, or are just ignoring the things I've posted. I don't want to banter back and forth saying the exact same things I've already said. If you can't understand it from what I've already explained, I'm not sure how restating it will help. Would you rather I restate what I've already said? These posts are the answer to your question. Now wherein does it imply or say that seeking the Holy Ghost is unwise? How can you possibly have read that into my view? And from Spirit Dragon, which I showed strong agreement with: And finally, of key importance:

Nobody understands the Trinity.

I'm not going to continue a discussion where you're bent on twisting everything I say.

Of course it's their right. That doesn't make necessarily make it wise. Because I already know. I think this has been pretty well covered by the preceding interchange between Spirit Dragon and myself. Please refer to the words "in general" -- as opposed to "exclusively", and also see the exchange between Spirit Dragon and myself, which I believe makes the position quite clear.

Thank you. Well said. Going to the Lord for answers and understanding is, obviously, important. Mistrusting our leaders' every word until God backs it up with the Spirit is faithless and ungrateful. It fits nicely into the idea of sign seeking.

Right. I would never discourage someone seeking to gain a testimony on any given issue. But there is a big difference between knowing something is correct because you know the church is true and that God leads the church through our leaders, but you still struggle with the idea so you need help and spiritual confirmation of the idea to bring you peace -- vs. -- going to the Lord with an "I don't believe this is true so please prove it to me through the Spirit" attitude. Or a refusal to believe anything said until the Spirit confirms it. It is very different going to the Lord from a position of faith but not understanding and going to the Lord from a position of doubt. Very, very different.

I know this will get a rise out of Suzie and a few others, because it has in the past, but I simply don't buy that I need to get a specific testimony of every single thing spoken by our leaders. I have a testimony that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is true, the Book or Mormon is the word of God, Joseph Smith was a true prophet, and that the keys were passed by him to Brigham Young and the 12 and then on to the succeeding leaders. By virtue of the fact that the spirit has revealed to me that this structure, organization, and pattern is true and correct, I may safely follow the words given by them without a specific spiritual witness of every word they speak. I do not, of course, see any problem with praying about principles they teach, but for myself, I know that going to ask God if a specific principle they give is true and correct would, in general, be faithless and ungrateful. For example, I never prayed to know if the lowering of the missionary age to 18 and 19 was given by God. And yet I have full and absolute confidence that it was. I trust, implicitly, that President Monson, his counselors, and the twelve guide this church through revelation. You are dead-on correct about the fact that we must have testimony in Christ, the fact that this is His restored church, and that He leads it. The Brigham Young quote given by Suzie means that we need this testimony so that we may safely and surely follow our leaders. We must have spiritual witness that Christ is at the head of this church, or we are putting our faith in man and our confidence is reckless. But, as you said, there is no implication that once we gain this testimony that Christ is in charge that we should not show absolutely loyalty and confidence in our leaders.

Missing the point. I did not say God will always set apostasy right. And the great apostasy was foretold. But we have promises that the latter-day, restored church will be led correctly, not that everyone who is apostate will be corrected. We have promises that our leaders will not lead us astray, in spite of their imperfections, which means to me that God will correct them if and when they are in error, just as he did with prophets of old. The bottom line is that we have been repeatedly promised that if we will cling to the guidance of our leaders that we will be safe. This is not a replacement for testimony and spiritual guidance, but neither is spiritual guidance and testimony a replacement for living prophets and apostles. They are both necessary, both part of God's means, both part of the living church, and both requisite. Doubting one is just as problematic as doubting the other.