Interpreting LDS scriptures and doctrine

[Snow]

Did you read my link Snow? DIDNT think so

current prophets are more important than dead ones. Current prophets give us current doctrine all the time.

That is why the article is titled "THE LIVING PROPHET: OUR SOURCE OF PURE DOCTRINE" not 'our source of current interpretation'

I was responding to what YOU wrote, not the link you posted. You can tell because in my posted I quoted what I was responding to.

To your claim, that current prophets are more important than dead ones, I suppose you could construct a peculiar definition of the word "important" such that your claim makes sense. However, the normal sense of the word "important," it just doesn't make much sense at all.

Take away Paul and you lose half the New Testament and likely Christianity as we understand it.

Take away Joseph Smith and you take away 3/4 of the books in the Standard Works... not to mention the Restoration.

Take away Brigham Young and The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is likely something like the Bickertonites or Strangites or Community of Christ.

Take away Thomas Monson and... what exactly?

The Church has seen fit to canonize as doctrine (set as it's standards) 7 or so books of Paul, numerous things written by JS and nothing from Thomas Monson.

[Snow]

Jayanna...I believe others have said the same as Snow here--that Joseph Smith actually laid out most of the doctrine for this dispensation, and that subsequent prophets--including today's living ones, have mostly explained what Joseph Smith contributed (whether by direct proclammation, or through inspired translation). Would you agree, or have you experienced today's prophets offering new doctrine?

You're correct. Current prophets seldom, if ever, offer new doctrine. What they offer is an inspired reiteration and interpretation of already revealed doctrine, made relevant for the audience to whom they are speaking / writing.

[jayanna]

please read the article I linked, here it is in case my link isn't working. This is a conference talk given by a General Authority:

Just over two years before his death, the Prophet Joseph Smith published the Articles of Faith. The ninth article of faith states, “We believe all that God has revealed, all that He does now reveal, and we believe that He will yet reveal many great and important things pertaining to the Kingdom of God.” I will speak concerning the final sentence, “He will yet reveal many great and important things pertaining to the Kingdom of God.” This principle of continuing revelation is an essential part of the kingdom of God.

In the fourth and fifth verses of the Doctrine and Covenants section 21, the Lord declared to the Church their obligation to heed the guidance of His prophet:

“Wherefore, meaning the church, thou shalt give heed unto all his words and commandments which he shall give unto you as he receiveth them, walking in all holiness before me;

“For his word ye shall receive, as if from mine own mouth, in all patience and faith.”

The Prophet Joseph Smith translated the Book of Mormon and received the revelations laying the foundation for the restored Church. He had premonitions of his own death and hastened to confer on the Quorum of the Twelve all the priesthood keys. In the words of Wilford Woodruff: “And thus addressing the Twelve, [Joseph] exclaimed, ‘upon your shoulders the kingdom rests, and you must round up your shoulders, and bear it; for I have had to do it until now. But now the responsibility rests upon you’” (Times and Seasons, 5:698).

Revelation and guidance from heaven did not end with the death of Joseph Smith. “Many great and important things pertaining to the Kingdom of God” have been revealed through those who succeeded him as President of the Church. In the words of President Spencer W. Kimball:

“Since that momentous day in 1820, additional scripture has continued to come, including the numerous and vital revelations flowing in a never-ending stream from God to his prophets on the earth. …

“There are those who would assume that with the printing and binding of these sacred records, [and he was speaking here of the four standard works] that would be the ‘end of the prophets.’ But again we testify to the world that revelation continues and that the vaults and files of the Church contain these revelations which come month to month and day to day. We testify also that there is, since 1830 when The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints was organized, and will continue to be, so long as time shall last, a prophet, recognized of God and his people, who will continue to interpret the mind and will of the Lord” (“Revelation: The Word of the Lord to His Prophets,” Ensign, May 1977, 78).

We have large amounts of written historical material available to us, including sermons of early Church leaders. These give us background that help us understand the early events of the Restoration and the situations that existed in those days. This year we have the privilege of studying teachings of the prophet Brigham Young in priesthood and Relief Society meetings. There are wonderful continuity and agreement of these teachings and those of our more current prophets.

As the policies and procedures of the Church are refined by continuing revelation and inspiration, there are those who become disturbed by any changes. Some literally hunt for situations where earlier Church leaders or members made statements which are not in complete harmony with our understanding and practices today. The mind-set of some is that anything coming from an earlier time must be more correct.

I would offer the following thoughts on such matters: (1) Some of the procedures of the Church were not completely developed early in this dispensation and have been amplified and clarified by subsequent prophets. (2) Our protection from erroneous doctrine lies in an overriding belief in continuing revelation to the current prophet.

President Harold B. Lee spoke of this by relating an experience:

“Years ago as a young missionary I visited Nauvoo and Carthage with my mission president, and we were holding a missionary meeting in the jail room where Joseph and Hyrum had met their deaths. The mission president related the historical events that led up to the martyrdom and then he closed with this very significant statement: ‘When the Prophet Joseph Smith was martyred, there were many saints who died spiritually with Joseph.’ So it was when Brigham Young died: so it was when John Taylor died. Do revelations given to President John Taylor, for example, have any more authority than something that comes from our president and prophet today? Some Church members died spiritually with Wilford Woodruff, with Lorenzo Snow, with Joseph F. Smith, with Heber J. Grant, with George Albert Smith. We have some today willing to believe someone who is dead and gone and to accept his words as having more authority than the words of a living authority today” (Stand Ye in Holy Places [1974], 153).

President Lee amplified this by telling of his response to a man who was disturbed at a new policy of the Church which was different from one established in the time of Joseph Smith. He said to this questioning brother:

“‘Have you ever thought that what was contrary to the order of heaven in 1840 might not be contrary to the order of heaven in 1960?’ He had not thought of that. He again was following a dead prophet, and he was forgetting that there is a living prophet today. Hence the importance of our stressing that word living” (Stand Ye in Holy Places, 153).

In summary, the Church is founded on continuing revelation to a current, living prophet. “Many great and important things pertaining to the Kingdom of God” have been revealed, and more are yet to be revealed through the living prophet. Beginning with Joseph Smith and continuing on to his successors as President of the Church, the ongoing stream of revelation has perfected our understanding of the gospel. The understanding of doctrines is more complete as taught by the Church today than at any prior time in this dispensation. Of this I testify in the name of Jesus Christ, amen.

That is pretty clear to me. Btw, the doctrine taught by Joseph Smith was not a new doctrine, it was 'new' to us, but not new, it is a restored church, and it was restored from something that had previously existed on the earth. The temple ordinances were not original to Joseph Smith's time even. Joseph Smith was not a greater prophet than Thomas S. Monson. Pres. Monson holds and uses all of the keys that Joseph Smith had, has spoken with HF, and recieves revelation from the cornerstone of our church, Jesus Christ, a living Jesus Christ, and he uses them for us in our day, and teaches us current doctrine, and Pres. Monson's words carry more authority for us today than Joseph Smith's words do.

Edited January 24, 2012 by jayanna

[Snow]

That is pretty clear to me. Btw, the doctrine taught by Joseph Smith was not a new doctrine, it was 'new' to us, but not new, it is a restored church, and it was restored from something that had previously existed on the earth.

Okay, I'll bite. Where and when was the doctrine that the highest degree of the Celestial Kingdom required one to be a polygamist first revealed.

Please be specific and quote the original sources.

[jayanna]

We don't have where it was first revealed, but we do have a church of restoration. If it was lost, it woudln't need to be revealed. There were sealings in OT times. Adam and Eve were sealed, Abraham and Sarah were sealed. It was lost, now it is restored. This is not a new church, and you know that.

Many books of scripture are yet to come. Some old that are brought back to us, some new that are yet to be written.

The sealing keys were not new to Joseph Smith, Elijah had them. This is ancient doctrine.

Edited January 23, 2012 by jayanna

[Matthew0059]

Joseph Smith was not a greater prophet than Thomas S. Monson. Pres. Monson holds and uses all of the keys that Joseph Smith had, has spoken with HF, and recieves revelation from the cornerstone of our church, Jesus Christ, a living Jesus Christ, and he uses them for us in our day, and teaches us current doctrine, and Pres. Monson's words carry more authority for us today than Joseph Smith's words do.

Sorry to be nit-picky- but the bolded statements are false. The subsequent prophets since Joseph have all had stewardship over the church that Joseph established, which was called by the name of Christ because it contained His gospel. All those prophets have had the legal right to revelation and authority to guide the Church according to the will of God, and many have done so and gone on to their eternal reward. None have been greater than Joseph, however, and all is not well in Zion.

There has not been a "seer" guiding the church- and by "seer" we will use the scriptural definition of "one who uses seer stones (interpreters)" (Mosiah 8:13)- guiding the Church since Joseph. Or, if there has been, his gift was hidden from the world because of the condemnation of the Church (see D&C 84:54-56). One may be a prophet without being a seer, and seership is the greatest of the gifts of God (Mosiah 8:15-16).

Policy changes, but doctrine is eternal.

[jayanna]

When we are interviewed for baptism, and for our temple recommend we are asked if we sustain President Thomas S. Monson as a prophet, seer, and revelator. We also sustain them in this at conference. There is a current seer, and his name is Thomas S. Monson.

[Matthew0059]

Double post, sorry.

None of that should be construed to assume that the keys aren't still on the earth, or that they are held within the Q of 12, First Presidency, and Thomas S. Monson. I, personally, believe they are. However, the injunction from the lord "if ye are not one, ye are not mine" is as applicable to us today as it was in olden times. If we try to pit the living prophets against the dead ones, we are not in the spirit of Christ.

[Matthew0059]

When we are interviewed for baptism, and for our temple recommend we are asked if we sustain President Thomas S. Monson as a prophet, seer, and revelator. We also sustain them in this at conference. There is a current seer, and his name is Thomas S. Monson.

Tell me: what has he "seen" (or, ancient record translated) recently? I believe that he may hold the power, but not he nor any other church president since Joseph has used the seer stones. Few have "revelated" anything, as well- meaning offering new "light and truth" in Conference to be sustained by common consent. There *have* been revelations- but they have been in the form of dreams, not "thus saith the Lord" commandments. (Yes, I'm aware of Pres. Benson's 14 principles of a prophet)

Seership may be his right, but he has not utilized that gift- whether that is good or bad, is up for each of us to decide. I believe it is because of the wickedness and unbelief of the Saints that the Lord has covered the seers (2 Nephi 27:5).

[Vort]

Sorry to be nit-picky- but the bolded statements are false. The subsequent prophets since Joseph have all had stewardship over the church that Joseph established, which was called by the name of Christ because it contained His gospel. All those prophets have had the legal right to revelation and authority to guide the Church according to the will of God, and many have done so and gone on to their eternal reward. None have been greater than Joseph, however, and all is not well in Zion.

There has not been a "seer" guiding the church- and by "seer" we will use the scriptural definition of "one who uses seer stones (interpreters)" (Mosiah 8:13)- guiding the Church since Joseph. Or, if there has been, his gift was hidden from the world because of the condemnation of the Church (see D&C 84:54-56). One may be a prophet without being a seer, and seership is the greatest of the gifts of God (Mosiah 8:15-16).

Policy changes, but doctrine is eternal.

Four or five times a year, I sustain fifteen men as prophets, seers, and revelators. The gift of seership was not taken away with the death of Joseph any more than the gift of prophecy was taken away.

Joseph stands at the head of this dispensation. As such, he is a "dispensational" prophet, as was Adam, Enoch, Noah, Moses, and Jesus himself. In that sense, he is "greater", or at least more "foundational", than the prophets that follow him. But in another sense, the living prophet teaches for us today, right now, and thus is "greater than" the prophets who preceded him.

Playing the game of "Which prophet is greater?" likely ends in some very non-prophetic disunity. I doubt the prophets themselves engage in such discussions.

[jayanna]

Prophets, Seers, and Revelators - general-conference

In our baptism interviews, recommend interviews, and at every conference we sustains our prophets and apostles as prophets, seers, and revelators. I have raised my hand to sustain them as such many many times. I also try to sustain them by following their leadership, and supporting them by doing those things that are asked of me.

I find it so very sad that the pharisees who said they would not have killed Jeremiah, got be present to see Jesus teach, heal, and perform many countless miracles did not see what was right before them. They had a current prophet that they regarded as less than thier dead ones.

I personally have a testimony that one such as Moses, Elijah, Joseph Smith, and Brigham Young is alive and leading us today. He weilds the power of God on the earth, shares with us direction from our Heavenly Father, and currently holds the authority and all keys of the priesthood.

Prophets, Seers, and Revelators - general-conference

Elder Jeffrey R. Holland said: "In a world of unrest and fear, political turmoil and moral drift, I testify that Jesus is the Christ—that He is the living Bread and living Water—still, yet, and always the great Shield of safety in our lives, the mighty Stone of Israel, the Anchor of this His living Church. I testify of His prophets, seers, and revelators, who constitute the ongoing foundation of that Church and bear witness that such offices and such oracles are at work now, under the guidance of the Savior of us all, in and for our very needful day. Of these truths and of the divinity of this work I bear witness. Of them I am a witness, in the sacred name of Jesus Christ, amen.

Our loving Heaven Father has not left us alone to blow in the wind, He guides us now through the trials that are in the world today. I have searched, pondered and prayed, and have a testimony that this is true.

I used to be afraid when I first started studying the gospel, that I would find some little kernel of truth that would make me not believe in the apostles. I was afraid that I would learn something that would make be not believe in the Church of Jesus Christ. I studied nonetheless and the more I study the scriptures the more true it gets. When studying, I don't really read a lot of books that are not issued by the church about the gospel. I do not confess to be an intellectual. Reading scripture and the words of latter-day apostles, I can see that the gospel flows through them. I can see the flow of it, like a river. I can see it all has the same author.

The steps are search, ponder and pray. Search the words of prophets, ponder our own understanding, and pray for revelation. This is how we can learn if something doctrinal is true. Sometimes when it comes to a practice, like tithing for example, you have to live it before you can really get a testimony of it, but when it comes to understanding something that is written, search, ponder and pray.

[jayanna]

Here is a really fantastic article by Ezra Taft Benson: Fourteen Fundamentals in Following the Prophet - Liahona June 1981 - liahona

the 14 fundamentals

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 diplomas 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 well advise on 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.

Those are not my personal interpretation, they are directly copied, and are explained the article linked above.

[Matthew0059]

Four or five times a year, I sustain fifteen men as prophets, seers, and revelators. The gift of seership was not taken away with the death of Joseph any more than the gift of prophecy was taken away.

Okay, if it hasn't been taken- where is it? Where are the new records of ancient scriptures yet to be had? We have been promised that Moroni will return with the Golden Plates, and that we will receive the rest of the record (including the vision of the Brother of Jared)- but where is it?

The "issue" here is the definition of the word "seer". I believe that Pres. Monson could receive the gift of seership if he sought for it- and he would seek for it if he saw the need for it (if the people were ready to receive new records). However, the colloquial definition of "seer" in the church is actually closer to the definition of a "prophet" (or, one who has the spirit of prophecy) and can "see" things, with their spiritual eyes, that non-prophets cannot see. If there are any "seers" (as in, stone-using seers) in the Church leadership, their gifts are hidden. Why? See my previous posts.

Joseph stands at the head of this dispensation. As such, he is a "dispensational" prophet, as was Adam, Enoch, Noah, Moses, and Jesus himself. In that sense, he is "greater", or at least more "foundational", than the prophets that follow him. But in another sense, the living prophet teaches for us today, right now, and thus is "greater than" the prophets who preceded him.

Playing the game of "Which prophet is greater?" likely ends in some very non-prophetic disunity. I doubt the prophets themselves engage in such discussions.

Some do. Bruce R. McConkie's "7 Deadly Heresies" for example claimed to repudiate the Adam-God doctrine that was adamantly taught by Brigham Young (who, from among all the presidents, probably had the most intimate relationship with Joseph Smith). There are more examples, if one cares to search for them.

"If ye are not one, ye are not mine".

I agree that pitting the prophets against each other is folly. However, failing to recognize the special place that Joseph held, the glory of his position and the responsibility he held, and saying that the subsequent ("lesser") prophets have received just as much as he had without evidence, is folly as well. The Lord made it clear that there were none greater than Moses until Christ. There is a reason that Joseph sold into Egypt prophesied that the Lord would raise one "like unto Moses" (Joseph Smith) in the last days. Brigham Young was adamant that he was *not* as great as Joseph was. He hesitated to take Joseph's mantle as Church President upon himself. However, the distinction between "lesser" and "greater" prophets- not lesser or greater in their value to God or in their respective assignments, but lesser and greater in their dominion pertaining to spiritual things and the Kingdom of God- has been lost, and many modern members almost worship the living prophet while adamantly claiming they do not.

[Matthew0059]

Here is a really fantastic article by Ezra Taft Benson: Fourteen Fundamentals in Following the Prophet - Liahona June 1981 - liahona

the 14 fundamentals

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 diplomas 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 well advise on 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.

Those are not my personal interpretation, they are directly copied, and are explained the article linked above.

It's a good thing I haven't rejected the prophet and presidency, then.

[Matthew0059]

I still want an answer from anyone who cares to discuss instead of a knee-jerk retaliation:

Has has the gift of seership (as defined in Mosiah 8:13) been publicly manifest in the Church since the days of Joseph Smith? If it has been utilized, where? If it has not been utilized, why not?

I have to go to work. God bless.

[jayanna]

I know, but sometimes I think we all do for a little while. Sometimes, I do something maybe I shouldn't have and later really regret it. Sometimes they counsel something and I'm slow to really accept it and live it. I'm glad I get new chances to try again

The most important part of that one is follow them and be blessed. It is true, any time I have decided to follow their counsel right away, there was a blessing. It is not just a blessing for in heaven, but a blessing for now. It amazes me sometimes, it shouldn't I know, but I'm still in awe when something I do because I was told to just works, things click right into place. lol I don't know why I have to make things hard on my self.

btw, I tried to make my last post rainbow, but, sigh, it didn't turn out.

[jayanna]

I still want an answer from anyone who cares to discuss instead of a knee-jerk retaliation:

Has has the gift of seership (as defined in Mosiah 8:13) been publicly manifest in the Church since the days of Joseph Smith? If it has been utilized, where? If it has not been utilized, why not?

I have to go to work. God bless.

OOooo, that is a good one, and one I'd love to have a crack at, but I think we may be hijacking PC's thread, new one maybe?

[RMGuy]

I'd disagree. Some of the most influential theologian in Church history have been the scholars, for example... Talmage, Widstoe, etc

Snow,

I see what you are saying, but you will also note that originally I did clarify as scholars in the classic theological sense, for example Doctor of Divinity or similar. Talmage was a geologist, and Widstoe a biologist. Both were highly intelligent, well educated, and added a lot to church theology, but educated in a classical seminary type environment like PC would typically think of, not so.

-RM

[Traveler]

I still want an answer from anyone who cares to discuss instead of a knee-jerk retaliation:

Has has the gift of seership (as defined in Mosiah 8:13) been publicly manifest in the Church since the days of Joseph Smith? If it has been utilized, where? If it has not been utilized, why not?

I have to go to work. God bless.

According to Mosiah 8:13 there are several elements to do with a seer. One element is that they do not use their gift unless commanded. I know of no commandment to publicly manifest the gift.

I would submit that those that understand the Oath and Covenant of the priesthood as outligned in D&C 84 - understand now it is that revelation comes - The reason you are thinking that you are getting knee-jerk retalitation is because your question has a somewhat knee-jerk tenor to it. Thus the repsonse is in kind.

The Traveler

[Matthew0059]

According to Mosiah 8:13 there are several elements to do with a seer. One element is that they do not use their gift unless commanded. I know of no commandment to publicly manifest the gift.

There is at least one promise associated with the gift of seership in the last days:

Ether 4:4-7

4 Behold, I have written upon these plates the very things which the brother of Jared saw; and there never were greater things made manifest than those which were made manifest unto the brother of Jared.

5 Wherefore the Lord hath commanded me to write them; and I have written them. And he commanded me that I should seal them up; and he also hath commanded that I should seal up the interpretation thereof; wherefore I have sealed up the interpreters, according to the commandment of the Lord.

6 For the Lord said unto me: They shall not go forth unto the Gentiles until the day that they shall repent of their iniquity, and become clean before the Lord.

7 And in that day that they shall exercise faith in me, saith the Lord, even as the brother of Jared did, that they may become sanctified in me, then will I manifest unto them the things which the brother of Jared saw, even to the unfolding unto them all my revelations, saith Jesus Christ, the Son of God, the Father of the heavens and of the earth, and all things that in them are.

According to those passages, the Gentiles (including the members of the Church) are not yet, as a group, fully sanctified in the Lord- if we were, we would receive the full record of the Brother of Jared. This time will not come until after the Church is cleansed from the tares that encumber the ground of it.

I notice you yourself do not offer a simple answer. I understand your reasoning and approach- but the Gospel is simple. According to the scriptures, a "seer" is one who looks into the seer stones and renders a translation. The gift of seership is greater than the gift of prophecy. All seers are prophets, but not all prophets are seers.

Thus, scripturally speaking, we can prove- according to the public records we have available- that the gift of seership has not been publicly manifest among the presidents of the Church since the days of Joseph Smith. Has it been there, in secret? Possibly- however, there has been no new light and truth from God in the form of ancient records given to the Saints in the manner perscribed in the D&C ("by common consent"). There have been revelations and dreams- but those did not come by Urim and Thumim.

I agree that, were he commanded, the prophet could be a seer. However, he has not been commanded. One day, someone (I believe the Church president) will be commanded to again utilize the gift of seership and translate the sealed portion of the Book of Mormon. However, that time will not come until after the iminent testing, trying, and cleansing of the Saints of the Most High God.

The main point I am making is very simple- a man who does not exercise the gift of "seership" is not a "seer"- whether he has the ability to do so is beside the point. I sustain every prophet as a "prophet" in whatsoever he prophesies; a "revelator" in whatsoever he reveals; a "seer" in whatsoever he will "see" via seer stone. I sustain them as men who have the ability to do all three when commanded to by the Spirit of God.

This- along with a plethora of other instances- is an example how blind allegiance to the living prophet blinds someone to what the prophets and scriptures actually teach.

If someone equates the greater portion (searching for the mysteries of Godliness yourself and seeking to approach Christ and the Father yourself) with the lesser portion (letting seers and prophets do all the work for you and experience Christ secondhand throught the Holy Ghost, scriptures, and the living oracles) said person will never seek for the greater portion. The false assumption that the living prophet gives us everything we need to know is one of the ways Satan stops us from seeking the face of Christ for ourselves. Indeed, it was the greatest stumbling block of ancient Israel- the refusal to speak to God themselves, preferring instead that Moses be their mediator and their god.

[prisonchaplain]

Snow,

I see what you are saying, but you will also note that originally I did clarify as scholars in the classic theological sense, for example Doctor of Divinity or similar. Talmage was a geologist, and Widstoe a biologist. Both were highly intelligent, well educated, and added a lot to church theology, but educated in a classical seminary type environment like PC would typically think of, not so.

-RM

I guess I am still confused. There seems to be an aversion to the term THEOLOGY. Yet, BYU has a department of religious studies. Surely, the professors who staff it are scholars.

Maybe why I am confused is that I am a pastor, and we pastors are likely to read the works of Evangelical scholars. Most church members are more likely to read the works of our more popular pastors and evangelists. Since there are no clergy in the LDS system (bishops are similar, but their callings are more administrative and counsel-oriented), so there is not a significant market for LDS religious academic writing or reflection.

Keep in mind that I am reflecting on this string and speculating--not pronouncing--feel free to correct me.

[annewandering]

hmmm I might not agree there is not a strong market for religious academic writing. Deseret books does sell quite a bit of that kind of thing.

I agree that theology does seem to be a not so popular term to us. It kinda grates on my skin for some reason. Smacks a bit of non LDS religions for some reason. I really have no idea why unless it carries with it the implication that the regular church member is not as educated as some because they do not have a religious degree after their name. We really do have a bit of dislike for that. Maybe somewhat like the Quakers in that area?

[Dravin]

I guess I am still confused. There seems to be an aversion to the term THEOLOGY. Yet, BYU has a department of religious studies. Surely, the professors who staff it are scholars.

It's probably unwarranted but I suspect there is an undercurrent of the idea that theologians don't study religion so much as they go about mucking with it. It's probably coming from the emphasis we have on revealed religion and our beliefs on the apostasy.

Edited January 24, 2012 by Dravin

[HiJolly]

I guess I am still confused. There seems to be an aversion to the term THEOLOGY. Yet, BYU has a department of religious studies. Surely, the professors who staff it are scholars.

Yes, but they are not paid to be theologians. The Church has ZERO paid theologians. None. We may have a pseudo-theology, but not really.

Maybe why I am confused is that I am a pastor, and we pastors are likely to read the works of Evangelical scholars. Most church members are more likely to read the works of our more popular pastors and evangelists. Since there are no clergy in the LDS system (bishops are similar, but their callings are more administrative and counsel-oriented), so there is not a significant market for LDS religious academic writing or reflection.

Well there is that, but we kept getting told in church that scholars usually get the Gospel wrong, so we need to listen instead to the priesthood line of authority. There is a clear bias against scholarly understanding of ANYTHING in the Church. I butt heads with my Bishop regularly on this.

Keep in mind that I am reflecting on this string and speculating--not pronouncing--feel free to correct me.

Yep. I think you've got it just right.

I was talking to the first counselor in the Stake Presidency last week and mentioned that the Conference Talks and Ensign magazine articles are not doctrine. He about had a cow, even though this is clearly stated by the Church in the LDS.ORG website since 2007. He's worried about my salvation now.

I love my church and the people in it, but there is a huge bias against intellectual anything amongst us.

HiJolly

[prisonchaplain]

Hijolly suggests it's not just theology, but intellectualism that is suspect. If so, such was true with my church's early pioneers as well. When our first graduate school was established, they would not call it a seminary, much less a theological one. Many of our older pastors prayed for its demise.

Now, our theological seminary touts "knowledge on fire." It's a way of saying we're not afraid of wisdom, so long as it is Spirit-directed.