Do you really concur with these statements?

[john doe]

$40 in ten years? That's not bad considering my 401(k) has lost considerably more than that lately. Of course, when you calculate in inflation............

[Traveler]

I wasn't aware you really intended for me to answer your obviously ridiculous questions. Have I read the entire JOD? No

I have them at my disposal to check the context of any given quote.

Do I have access to old "out of publication" Ward teaching materials? No (and I never claimed I did)

Have I read said Ward Teaching materials? No

Where did I find the quote? I remembered it from various things I've read through the years googled it and copied and pasted the first site that quoted it. I have no clue what the site was.

I have nothing to hide.

You wish to debate a topic you have not researched? My questions are no more ridiculous than you are. They demonstrate your lack of preparedness and understanding of research.

My problem with you is:

1. You quote from sources you have not studied let alone even read.

2. You quote from sources you have not verified or even care to verify.

Your conclusions are flawed and you do not care to understand why. There is no logic in discussing points of doctrine that you do not understand nor have any desire to comprehend.

Good luck to the rest of this forum trying to have a discussion with this "one".

The Traveler

[Guest ceeboo]

You wish to debate a topic you have not researched? My questions are no more ridiculous than you are. They demonstrate your lack of preparedness and understanding of research.

My problem with you is:

1. You quote from sources you have not studied let alone even read.

2. You quote from sources you have not verified or even care to verify.

Your conclusions are flawed and you do not care to understand why. There is no logic in discussing points of doctrine that you do not understand nor have any desire to comprehend.

Good luck to the rest of this forum trying to have a discussion with this "one".

The Traveler

YEEEAAAHHH, TAKE THAT !!!!!!

Your lucky he didn't tell you how he really feels !! :lol::lol:

( sorry, ceeboo is in one of those moods today )

[applepansy]

These conflicting teachings (amoung others) are reasons why I could no longer in good faith be a member of the LDS Church. You never know what is going to be taught next.

Kris, With faith we can know what will be taught. . .we can know and trust that it will NOT ever conflict with current revealed knowledge from God. That's the measuring stick. God is the same yesterday, today and tomorrow. Anything in conflict with the teachings of God are not the teachings of God.

I'm sorry you're lost your faith in modern day revelation. I rejoice in modern day and personal revelaion.

With love and concern,

applepansy

Edited November 20, 2008 by applepansy

[candyprpl]

I would concur for the most part.

This one would be a little bit on the edge (for me)

Yes and part of that judgment well be how we followed the commandments of our leaders.

And I think this is part of the miss understanding that is kind of coming into this thread.

The reason we (LDS members) would trust/follow a prophet so faithfully is because we have already made that judgment up that this person is a prophet of God. That we have gotten that witness that this mortal man, has a calling of Prophet, Seer, and Revelator.

This is the obligation of the members of the church. I feel if they DON’T do this and are following the prophet, then that is the wrong path. The point being, is when one follows the prophet it isn’t because of the calling or title, its because I know by the spirit, that this person is lead and guided by God.

You are, you use your agency to study it out in your mind and in your heart. You use your agency to get on your knees and pray about it. To seek the Lord in guidance. You use your agency based off the decision that you have come to know that this prophet is called of God. You use your agency to follow that council that came from one that is called of God. Agency is very much part of the process.

Like I pointed out, this is not a good comparison. Those following Hitler did not have a choice to find out for themselves if he was the “chosen” leader. Hitler rose to that position and people were forced to follow that.

For a prophet, each member is to gain there own testimony that the prophet is called of God. Each member individually sustains that prophet on there own. If one feels that a prophet is not called of God, they can do what they well. They are not forced in any way.

Wow!! Wish I had said that!! My (unspoken) words also.:)

[applepansy]

I respectfully suggest that it is not always a win-win situation. If you counsel with your bishop about your marriage, and he recommends that you seek divorce but is incorrect in his advice -- but you obey because he is your called and ordained bishop . . . I think being "blessed" for obedience is cold comfort for having followed uninspired advice -- especially if you had your own misgivings.

Again, I'll say that considering a leader's input is one thing. Obeying for the sake of obeying is another.

OtterPop, have you been faithfully obedient to counsel that has resulted in more heartache? I've never ever heard of a bishop who counseled divorce.

I have be tested with obedience to counsel from a bishop that was against my thoughts and feelings. In time, the blessings were truly amazing and things worked out better than if I hadn't followed the counsel from my bishop. We cannot know all things except through God. Our leaders speak to us for God and we can confirm that through prayer and personal revelation. Only our loving Heavenly Father knows what is truly best for us . . .and sometimes what he asks of us is hard.

applepansy

Edited November 20, 2008 by applepansy

[Guest DeborahC]

I consider only the Prophet, WHILE he is Prophet, to be speaking for God.

The rest of them are humans and fallible, even when they are doing what they consider to be correct.

[MarginOfError]

I consider only the Prophet, WHILE he is Prophet, to be speaking for God.

The rest of them are humans and fallible, even when they are doing what they consider to be correct.

Can you clarify that? Because the way it's phrased it implies that you believe the prophet is infallible.

[Wingnut]

I consider only the Prophet, WHILE he is Prophet, to be speaking for God.

The rest of them are humans and fallible, even when they are doing what they consider to be correct.

Then I suppose you don't raise your hand in Conference to sustain the First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve as prophets, seers, and revelators?

They're all fallible.

[OtterPop]

OtterPop, have you been faithfully obedient to counsel that has resulted in more heartache? I've never ever heard of a bishop who counseled divorce.

I have be tested with obedience to counsel from a bishop that was against my thoughts and feelings. In time, the blessings were truly amazing and things worked out better than if I hadn't followed the counsel from my bishop. We cannot know all things except through God. Our leaders speak to us for God and we can confirm that through prayer and personal revelation. Only our loving Heavenly Father knows what is truly best for us . . .and sometimes what he asks of us is hard.

applepansy

No, I was never counseled badly by a bishop. I would like to comment on the rest of your post, but it wouldn't be appropriate for this board.

[HiJolly]

Hard to believe, but this whole thread has gone almost two days now without anyone linking to this article:

When the Prophet Speaks, Is the Thinking Done?

Here is a (lengthy) excerpt:

Dr. J. Raymond Cope, the leader of the First Unitarian Society in Salt Lake City, was one of those concerned. He decided to express his concerns about the impact of this message in a letter to President George Albert Smith in November of the same year. The letter was cordial, and expressed the feeling that such a message was "doing inestimable harm to many who have no other reason to question the integrity of the Church leaders... this cannot be the position of the true leaders."

President Smith responded to Dr. Cope with a letter of his own, designed to clarify the point, at the first of December. The letter, reproduced in full below, should lay to rest any misconception about whether the Church or its leaders expect blind obedience in any degree. (Items that are underlined are underlined in the original.)

Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints

Office of the First Presidency

Salt Lake City, Utah

December 7, 1945

Dr. J. Raymond Cope

First Unitarian Society

13th East at 6th South Street

Salt Lake City, Utah

My dear Dr. Cope:

I have read with interest and deep concern your letter of November 16, 1945, in which you make special comment on "a short religious editorial prepared by one of your (our) leaders entitled "Sustaining the General Authorities of the Church'". You say that you read the message with amazement, and that you have since been disturbed because of its effect upon members of the Church.

I am gratified with the spirit of friendliness that pervades your letter, and thank you for having taken the time to write to me.

The leaflet to which you refer, and from which you quote in your letter, was not "prepared" by "one of our leaders." However, one or more of them inadvertently permitted the paragraph to pass uncensored. By their so doing, not a few members of the Church have been upset in their feelings, and General Authorities have been embarrassed.

I am pleased to assure you that you are right in your attitude that the passage quoted does not express the true position of the Church. Even to imply that members of the Church are not to do their own thinking is grossly to misrepresent the true ideal of the Church, which is that every individual must obtain for himself a testimony of the truth of the Gospel, must, through the redemption of Jesus Christ, work out his own salvation, and is personally responsible to His Maker for his individual acts. The Lord Himself does not attempt coercion in His desire and effort to give peace and salvation to His children. He gives the principles of life and true progress, but leaves every person free to choose or to reject His teachings. This plan the Authorities of the Church try to follow.

The Prophet Joseph Smith once said: "I want liberty of thinking and believing as I please." This liberty he and his successors in the leadership of the Church have granted to every other member thereof.

On one occasion in answer to the question by a prominent visitor how he governed his people, the Prophet answered: "I teach them correct principles, and they govern themselves."

Again, as recorded in the History of the Church (Volume 5, page 498 [499] Joseph Smith said further: "If I esteem mankind to be in error, shall I bear them down? No. I will lift them up, and in their own way too, if I cannot persuade them my way is better; and I will not seek to compel any man to believe as I do, only by the force of reasoning, for truth will cut its own way."

I cite these few quotations, from many that might be given, merely to confirm your good and true opinion that the Church gives to every man his free agency, and admonishes him always to use the reason and good judgment with which God has blessed him.

In the advocacy of this principle leaders of the Church not only join congregations in singing but quote frequently the following:

"Know this, that every soul is free

To choose his life and what he'll be,

For this eternal truth is given

That God will force no man to heaven."

Again I thank you for your manifest friendliness and for your expressed willingness to cooperate in every way to establish good will and harmony among the people with whom we are jointly laboring to bring brotherhood and tolerance.

Faithfully yours,

Geo. Albert Smith [signed]

This letter can be found in the George A. Smith Papers (Manuscript no. 36, Box 63-8A), Special Collections, Marriott Library, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah. More detailed information on this topic can be found in Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought 19:1 (Spring 1986), 35-39.

:)

HiJolly

[PeterVenkman]

God is the same yesterday, today and tomorrow. Anything in conflict with the teachings of God are not the teachings of God.

That sounds like a tautology to me.

[Truegrits]

I've never ever heard of a bishop who counseled divorce

I have. Not all marriages can be saved. If one of them breaks their marriage covenants, and is not willing, or even interested in counseling, repentance...and fasting and prayer have brought no change of heart...what other recourse is there?

[KristofferUmfrey]

Kris.......I notice that you believe the Book of Mormon to be sacred scripture. Do you also believe that Joseph Smith is a Prophet? Did he see Heavenly Father and Jesus Christ as he claimed? Do you believe that the Church of Jesus Christ was restored? If so, what changed? Why did you decide to accept the Book of Mormon as scripture, but reject the church?

Thanks-Bytor

I believe Joseph was a prophet as far as he obeyed and taught the things found in the Book of Mormon and Bible. I believe he saw God, whether it was the Father and the Son or just the Son I couldn't venture to guess. I believe the rights and privileges of the priesthood were restored in 1829 and that a church was organized by those men who initially received it. I believe that church is in a scattered position at the present, with men able to baptize and lay on hands found in several of the different Book of Mormon believing churches. I believe that soon the Lord will set the church in order and we will be gathered to build New Jerusalem and go out in full power in the era known as "The Work of the Father." I don't reject the church, I do reject however, what I believe to be unscriptural doctrines found in the various scattered branches of the church and trust in God to correct those things when He brings the church back into order.

[KristofferUmfrey]

Kris, With faith we can know what will be taught. . .we can know and trust that it will NOT ever conflict with current revealed knowledge from God. That's the measuring stick. God is the same yesterday, today and tomorrow. Anything in conflict with the teachings of God are not the teachings of God.

I'm sorry you're lost your faith in modern day revelation. I rejoice in modern day and personal revelaion.

With love and concern,

applepansy

Don't be confused... I have NOT lost my faith in modern day or personal revelation. I just test anything proclaimed as revelation against the Book of Mormon and Bible standard, and may at times reach a different conclusion then yourself as to what is pure inspiration from heaven and what are the teachings of men.

[HiJolly]

Don't be confused... I have NOT lost my faith in modern day or personal revelation. I just test anything proclaimed as revelation against the Book of Mormon and Bible standard, and may at times reach a different conclusion then yourself as to what is pure inspiration from heaven and what are the teachings of men.

You might want to consider that there are some beautiful and profound truths that are specifically and in all righteousness, NOT in the scriptures. That's what the temple endowment is to help us with.

HiJolly

[KristofferUmfrey]

You might want to consider that there are some beautiful and profound truths that are specifically and in all righteousness, NOT in the scriptures. That's what the temple endowment is to help us with.

HiJolly

I have been through the endowment and am glad you find the experience worthwhile. I do believe however the commitments you make in the endowment ceremony are the same commitments you make upon entering the waters of baptism, and there is not any new teaching not found in scripture, aside from the parts which we won't discuss out of respect for privacy.

[HiJolly]

I have been through the endowment and am glad you find the experience worthwhile. I do believe however the commitments you make in the endowment ceremony are the same commitments you make upon entering the waters of baptism, and there is not any new teaching not found in scripture, aside from the parts which we won't discuss out of respect for privacy.

I'm not talking about the covenants. And there surely IS something not found in scripture there in the instruction given. But that's not even what I'm talking about -- the endowment is instruction that as we apply it in our lives, provides to us that which NO (mortal) MAN can convey. It is the key, not the thing itself.

HiJolly

[KristofferUmfrey]

I'm not talking about the covenants. And there surely IS something not found in scripture there in the instruction given. But that's not even what I'm talking about -- the endowment is instruction that as we apply it in our lives, provides to us that which NO (mortal) MAN can convey. It is the key, not the thing itself.

HiJolly

And I happen to disagree. I believe the daily study of scripture brings to light and shows the importance of the promises you make in the temple just as well as the ceremony does.

The instruction are something completely different, but as I said I won't discuss those or my feelings on them out of respect for the members here.

[Hemidakota]

I have. Not all marriages can be saved. If one of them breaks their marriage covenants, and is not willing, or even interested in counseling, repentance...and fasting and prayer have brought no change of heart...what other recourse is there?

Concur and I would expect the Spirit to notify the Bishop to do so.

[Elphaba]

Is that really a course ?

No, but it should be. Maybe I’ll start one.

What degree would that be in?

Bachelor of Boring

Master of Matters of Fact

PhD in Purposeful Pithiness

How many credits is it worth?

All you want if you let me talk a lot.

Elphie

[HiJolly]

I have been through the endowment and am glad you find the experience worthwhile. I do believe however the commitments you make in the endowment ceremony are the same commitments you make upon entering the waters of baptism, and there is not any new teaching not found in scripture, aside from the parts which we won't discuss out of respect for privacy.

Ether 13: 13

13 And I was about to write more, but I am forbidden; but great and marvelous were the prophecies of Ether; but they esteemed him as naught, and cast him out; and he hid himself in the cavity of a rock by day, and by night he went forth viewing the things which should come upon the people.

3 Nephi 17: 15-17

15 And when he had said these words, he himself also knelt upon the earth; and behold he prayed unto the Father, and the things which he prayed cannot be written, and the multitude did bear record who heard him.

16 And after this manner do they bear record: The eye hath never seen, neither hath the ear heard, before, so great and marvelous things as we saw and heard Jesus speak unto the Father;

17 And no tongue can speak, neither can there be written by any man, neither can the hearts of men conceive so great and marvelous things as we both saw and heard Jesus speak; and no one can conceive of the joy which filled our souls at the time we heard him pray for us unto the Father.

HiJolly

[KristofferUmfrey]

Ether 13: 13

13 And I was about to write more, but I am forbidden; but great and marvelous were the prophecies of Ether; but they esteemed him as naught, and cast him out; and he hid himself in the cavity of a rock by day, and by night he went forth viewing the things which should come upon the people.

3 Nephi 17: 15-17

15 And when he had said these words, he himself also knelt upon the earth; and behold he prayed unto the Father, and the things which he prayed cannot be written, and the multitude did bear record who heard him.

16 And after this manner do they bear record: The eye hath never seen, neither hath the ear heard, before, so great and marvelous things as we saw and heard Jesus speak unto the Father;

17 And no tongue can speak, neither can there be written by any man, neither can the hearts of men conceive so great and marvelous things as we both saw and heard Jesus speak; and no one can conceive of the joy which filled our souls at the time we heard him pray for us unto the Father.

HiJolly

I believe the first verse is speaking of information that will be contained in the Sealed Portion. And I'm sure many of the things from the 2nd verse will be there also. I know you want to tie these things to the endowment of your church, but I just don't see the connection. Somethings are just so wonderful that to try and repeat them or write them down wouldn't do the event justice.

[Hemidakota]

Despite the marvelous prophecies and teaching of Ether to his people, he was rejected and his words were "trampled under foot". His people, like Mormon's, world not hear and heed his words, so he was left to witness and record their destruction from a cave. [i was about to write more, but I am forbidden] Moroni desires to include in his abridgment more of the great prophecies of Ether, but is constrained by the Spirit from doing so. We are left to wonder what he would have included and why he was forbidden to do so. The record is silent on both accounts, but possibly it has to do with a trial of faith (see 3 Nephi 26:9-11). In conclusion, I would suspect since we have inherited the writings from those of old, it may be us that is foreseen by Ether. May had witnessed some future events but told not to write it.

Saints today may see what shall come and role playing buy name of future leadership but are forbidden to hear what is being taught [see it only] or not allow to write it.

[Elphaba]

[i was about to write more, but I am forbidden]

Hi Hemi,

What do you mean you are forbidden? Who is forbidding you?

Elphaba