Mormon Mythology

[Average Joe]

Do you know anybody that feels like general authorities are infallible?

yes

[Average Joe]

When I contributed to the editing of a manuscript for a fictional story of the three Nephites, the author came under fire for making one of them look less then apostolic by expressing a woman could be ugly. His orthodox LDS editors had a fit. How dare make an apostle look as someone who has human traits!  Besides that one scene in the book, the characters were stalward gardians of the gospel.

 

That's how extreme some perceive the infalibility of leaders.

 

I even had a post deleted from this forum for what I presume was my being critical of a local leader, when in fact I only reported something in our daily paper. I really don't think we need to scrub reality to make our leaders look spotless. That makes them unapproachable. 

 

 

 

That's why I love these words from the "Psalm of Nephi"

16 Behold, my soul delighteth in the things of the Lord; and my heart pondereth continually upon the things which I have seen and heard.

 17 Nevertheless, notwithstanding the great goodness of the Lord, in showing me his great and marvelous works, my heart exclaimeth: O wretched man that I am! Yea, my heart sorroweth because of my flesh; my soul grieveth because of mine iniquities.

 18 I am encompassed about, because of the temptations and the sins which do so easily beset me.

 19 And when I desire to rejoice, my heart groaneth because of my sins; nevertheless, I know in whom I have trusted.

[Average Joe]

It appears the point is to be combative? At least that is what I gather from the OP closing words..."Let the stoning begin"

 

lol, any time one goes sacred cow tipping, you should expect the natives to get restless No combativeness meant at all, although I'll freely admit written words are subjective :)

Edited October 1, 2015 by Average Joe

[Windseeker]

In a way it brings me comfort knowing my leaders are not perfect and they struggle along the same path that I do.

 

But knowing their weaknesses I think it's important that we take care what we do with that knowledge. We have been warned.

 

Truth—and More

By Elder Russell M. Nelson 

 

Any who are tempted to rake through the annals of history, to use truth unrighteously, or to dig up “facts” with the intent to defame or destroy, should hearken to this warning of scripture:

 

“The righteousness of God [is] revealed from faith to faith: as it is written, The just shall live by faith.

 

“For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness.” (Rom. 1:17–18.)

 

I repeat: “The wrath of God is … against all … who hold the truth in unrighteousness.”

 

To anyone who, because of “truth,” may be tempted to become a dissenter against the Lord and his anointed, weigh carefully your action in light of this sacred scripture:

 

“These dissenters, having the same instruction and the same information … yea, having been instructed in the same knowledge of the Lord, nevertheless, it is strange to relate, not long after their dissensions they became more hardened and impenitent, and … wicked, … entirely forgetting the Lord their God.” (Alma 47:36.)

 

When teachers and writers leave the lofty ethics of their honored professions, passing from legitimate reporting to feasting on sensational and pointless disclosures that appeal temporarily to a flattering few, their work slants more toward gossip than gospel. Even worse, if they “lift up [their] heel against mine anointed, saith the Lord, … their basket shall not be full, their houses and their barns shall perish, and they themselves shall be despised by those that flattered them.” (D&C 121:16, 20.)

 

 

[Average Joe]

I strongly suspect that when we have advanced far enough to understand things as they are, we will see the so-called "Adam God doctrine" in an entirely different light. We may find that it is far more true than we currently think, and that weaknesses of our language or deficiencies in our understanding of how things really work -- or both -- are at the root of this supposedly controversial (and doubtless poorly understood) teach of President Young.

I find this to align with my views on it.

[Average Joe]

It is my opinion that the problem lies in not understanding the oath and covenant of the priesthood - and covenants in general.  Doctrine & Covenants 82:10 summarizes how covenants are fulfilled.  Each covenant has a proctor - our current proctor is President Monson.  The covenant is not that President Monson will not ever make mistakes a our president, prophet and proctor.  The promise is that if he does we are not in any way be penalized for following him while he is our proctor.  In essence we are covered.  We may understand the error - even take a separate way and we are still okay as long as we do not disavow the proctor in their station - but then if we error in any way in our separate way we are accountable for covenant breaking.  We also may choose to contact our covenant proctor and advise them of their mistake - but to oppose them as the proctor before the covenant is a sin of treason within G-d's kingdo

 

it should be remembered that this is a church of converts more than Born in the Covenant members. Most church lessons and study material is geared to that audience. And often times in the past the manuals have been very sanitized. And with this in mind it isn't hard to see how some come to that false impression. 

Edited October 1, 2015 by Average Joe

[Average Joe]

There is a contingent that take what a GA says in general conference and think that it is cannon or close to it. There is a contingent that will not see error in past prophets writings, speeches or actions. 

 

That contingent is alive and well on this board. Frankly I am surprised by some who have responded to the OP 

 

I have noted the same thing

[Average Joe]

I'm with TFP.  I just don't get the point of this thread.

you can delete it if you feel it is inapprobriate

[Average Joe]

Sorry, john doe. Of course. 

 

 

Mark me as another who doesn't get the point.

you can delete it if you feel it is inapprobriate

[Average Joe]

I appreciate Average Joe's post/thread.  Although we give lip service to the idea that our leaders are not perfect, when it comes down to it, we don't really seem to believe it.  I think the whole issue is understandable, but complicated. For example, we've been warned that criticizing our leaders is the first step on the road to apostasy.  And we have all raised our hand and committed to sustain them.  We have been counseled against murmuring.  So where is there room in all of that to accept human frailty?  I'm not complaining, I've ceased expecting things to be easy--whether in the gospel or in life.  This life is messy, and I'm learning to live with questions and uncertainty.  That said, I think Average Joe's reminder is an important one.

 

The Crucible of Doubt by Terryl and Fiona Givens has a whole chapter on this topic, Chapter 5 On Prophecy and Prophets: The Perils of Hero Worship.  Here are a few salient quotes:

 

"Dostoevsky believed that 'man, so long as he remains free, has no more constant and agonizing anxiety than to find as quickly as possible someone to worship."   Fyodor Dostoesky, The Brothers Karamazov

 

In 1945, a church magazine wrote, " 'When our leaders speak, the thinking has been done.' Many are familiar with that expression; fewer are aware that when President George Albert Smith learned of it, he immediately and indignantly repudiated the statement. 'Even to imply that members of the church are not to do their own thinking,' he wrote, 'is grossly to misrepresent the true ideal of the church.' "  (The offensive statement was published in The Improvement Era June 1945, Smith responded in a letter to J. Raymond Cope, a Unitarian leader who expressed concern. Dialogue 19.1 (Spring 1986): 35-39)

 

"The scriptures themselves, even as they paint inspiring pictures of the faithfulness of God's chosen leaders, are surpassingly frank about their foibles.)

 

"As Lorenzo Sonw wisely noted, 'I thanked God that He would put upon a man who had those imperfections the power and authority He placed upon him for I knew that I myself had weakness[es], and I thought there was a chance for me.' "  In Maxwell, "Out of Obscurity," 10.

 

"A second reason for God's choice of fallible leaders is simply this: He has no other kind."

 

"Airbrushing our leaders, past or present, is both a wrenching of the scriptural record and a form of idolatry.  It generates an accurate paradigm that creates false expectations and disappointment.  God specifically said that He called weak vessels so we wouldn't place our faith in their strength or power, but in God's.  The prophetic mantle represents priesthood keys, not a level of holiness or infallibility.  That is why our scripturally mandated duty to the prophets and apostles is not to idolize them but to uphold and sustain them 'by the power of faith.' "   (reference for power of faith D&C 43:12)

 

 

The Crucible of Doubt is published by Deseret Book.  This book did so much to strengthen and buoy up my testimony when I needed it.  I'm very grateful to the Givens for this and their other book, The God Who Weeps.  It is in large part thanks to their writings that I'm not lost in the mists of darkness.  

 

Thank you very much for this, I'll definitely look for the books. The insights you shared were a long the lines of what I was thinking, 

[Traveler]

Last year at the October conference Elder Lynn Robbins gave a most interesting talk that I think applies directly to this topic;  It is titled "Which way do you face?"  In essence we either stand facing the world as an example of G-d an things divine or we stand and face G-d as an example of the world. 

 

We can either see the strength in the Kingdom of G-d or we can see its weaknesses.   There may be a season to see weakness but if we do not ever see the strengths or if our season of seeing weakness overflows the bounds of such season - we will end up either not planting the seeds of faith and righteousness or not harvesting the fruits of faith and righteousness when the time for such is right.

[The Folk Prophet]

Ecclesiastes 3(KJV)

1 To every thing there is a season, and a time to every purpose under the heaven

 

estradling75 has covered this fairly well in his lastest post http://lds.net/forums/topic/57933-mormon-mythology/?p=837552

 

If you don't see a particular point to this post  

 

I didn't say I don't see a point to this post. I do. As I see it the point is to hurt the church, shatter testimony, raise hard questions that challenge faith, and generally stir the pot to no good end. The point is, in a word, evil.

 

What my post is asking is for verification of denial of my presumption, and support behind whatever answer is given.

 

"Was Mormonism, according to Pratt’s argument, to become a religion primarily bound to scripture or would it continue to find its fundamental strength in the living oracles who led the church, the position espoused by Brigham Young?" 

 

 

The LDS position on this is very plain. I'm not sure what you hope to get out of trying to, once more, stir the pot with something that they were working out in the very early days of the church. But it has been, very clearly, worked out over time through the medium of continuing revelation and the living oracles.

 

But, once more, I can't quite understand what your point is in raising this issue beyond trying to damage things.

[Guest LiterateParakeet]

Now let me tell you why I think the idea that the church needs to somehow do more...

So really what more do you want the church to do to reach out to these people who aren't following their councils in the first place?

First of all, I didn't say, nor do I think anyone else did, that the church (leaders) needed to change. I simply said this was a good topic for discussion meaning that it is a good reminder for us as members. From there you appear to have jumped to a lot of false conclusions--in spite of all my words to the contrary.

From your post I can see that we are not one whit closer to understanding. No matter how many times, or how many ways I try to explain my position you keep coming back to this.

Your line about people who aren't following their counsels in the first place is very telling about what you think about me and anyone else who agrees with me on this topic. But I tell you again, good people trying to follow the Lord and His leaders can sometimes share my experiences and opinion. No matter what I say you apparently think Average Joe and and I or anyone else who dares say the leaders are anything less than perfect are comparable to Kate Kelly and John Dehlin. There does not appear to be any room in your thinking for ANY other possibilities.

If I'm wrong explain to me how, explain to me that you don't think I'm just a Kate Kelly in embryo (or worse). Do you recognize any difference at all? I assure their is a huge difference but I really don't think you can see it.

[Guest LiterateParakeet]

Actually I think the stoning has fallen on LiterateParakeet for agreeing with you and then trying to support why she feels the way she does.

... I think there is a need for more open dialogue on this issue Avg Joe has brought up. With less finger pointing and accusing and more understanding.

Thanks for your post. About the stoning, LOL, yes it felt that way to me too. :)

And naturally I love your last two lines.

Edited October 1, 2015 by LiterateParakeet

[estradling75]

Your line about people who aren't following their counsels in the first place is very telling about what you think about me and anyone else who agrees with me on this topic. But I tell you again, good people trying to follow the Lord and His leaders can sometimes share my experiences and opinion. No matter what I say you apparently think Average Joe and and I or anyone else who dares say the leaders are anything less than perfect are comparable to Kate Kelly and John Dehlin. There does not appear to be any room in your thinking for ANY other possibilities.

 

First question for you then...  Do you agree or disagree that the scripture are full of examples of the human side of the prophets God calls?

[Guest LiterateParakeet]

First question for you then... Do you agree or disagree that the scripture are full of examples of the human side of the prophets God calls?

That doesn't answer my question to you remotely...characteristic of our conversation, IMO, for you to ignore anything I say that does support your agenda. Have I said anything that would make you think otherwise? Consider our conversation and the times that I agreed with you. I think that is sufficient answer if you were listening.

[estradling75]

That doesn't answer my question to you remotely...characteristic of our conversation, IMO, for you to ignore anything I say that does support your agenda. Have I said anything that would make you think otherwise? Consider our conversation and the times that I agreed with you. I think that is sufficient answer if you were listening.

 

I am trying to clarify my position...  But to do that I have to understand the point it becomes unclear to you.  I can't do that if you instantly jump to assuming that I am assuming the worst about you when we have a disconnect.

[Average Joe]

Actually I think the stoning has fallen on LiterateParakeet for agreeing with you and then trying to support why she feels the way she does. 

 

I'm not sure I agree with the exact format of Avg Joe's post, but I do feel that it is good to see human frailty and how apostles and prophets overcame it. Such a lesson is extremely valuable. Why? Because there are a number of members in this church that place apostles and prophets on such a high pedestal that what they have accomplished appears unobtainable to we who fight through common difficulties and challenges. For example, have apostles ever faced depression? How did they overcome it? Have they ever dealt with anger? What did they do? Knowing such details could give people hope and direction.

Now there is another problem. I feel part of the reason why such personal issues are almost never discussed may be because some members, if they see how human our apostles and prophets are, may reject them as called of God. They have gotten it into their head that a prophet or apostle must be close to perfect. But such a notion is false. It seems best to disabuse people of it as soon as possible. Yes these are good, sincere, humble, men but they are not perfect.

I think there is a need for more open dialogue on this issue Avg Joe has brought up. With less finger pointing and accusing and more understanding.

 

I'm sorry I wasn't here to take my own stoning instead of LP but I've been struggling through a sinus infection the past 3 days, and so , no, It wasn't formatted well but it did serve its purpose (as far as I'm concerned but I'm still running a temp so what do I know?) But I definitely agree with your closing remarks:

 

"I think there is a need for more open dialogue on this issue Avg Joe has brought up. With less finger pointing and accusing and more understanding."

[Guest LiterateParakeet]

I am trying to clarify my position... But to do that I have to understand the point it becomes unclear to you. I can't do that if you instantly jump to assuming that I am assuming the worst about you when we have a disconnect.

The answer is yes.

I don't think anyone on this board would say no, that is why I view your question with suspicion.

I didn't answer Vort's question for the same reason. I support Penn State's reasons for firing him. Those reasons are common knowledge.

Why ask questions with such obvious answers....perhaps you can explain that. I would be surprised if you really wondered about my answer to your question. Now will you answer mine?

[Average Joe]

I didn't say I don't see a point to this post. I do. As I see it the point is to hurt the church, shatter testimony, raise hard questions that challenge faith, and generally stir the pot to no good end. The point is, in a word, evil.

 

What my post is asking is for verification of denial of my presumption, and support behind whatever answer is given.

 

 

The LDS position on this is very plain. I'm not sure what you hope to get out of trying to, once more, stir the pot with something that they were working out in the very early days of the church. But it has been, very clearly, worked out over time through the medium of continuing revelation and the living oracles.

 

But, once more, I can't quite understand what your point is in raising this issue beyond trying to damage things.

 

Since you are clearly an intelligent man, and I, probably not so much, you should know I can't read your mind given the brief statement you made. And apparently you can't read mine since your presumption is 100% wrong. So I guess as mind readers, you and I are about on the same level.

[estradling75]

The answer is yes.

I don't think anyone on this board would say no, that is why I view your question with suspicion.

I didn't answer Vort's question for the same reason. I support Penn State's reasons for firing him. Those reasons are common knowledge.

Why ask questions with such obvious answers....perhaps you can explain that. I would be surprised if you really wondered about my answer to your question. Now will you answer mine?

 

Earlier in this thread you accused me on not being able to understand both sides...  And I was like seriously???... its rather insulting to assume I don't see a problem with Leader worship or thinking that our Leaders are perfect. I called you on it and you said 

 

"I'm only basing my responses on your comments in this thread.  You haven't said anything that gives me indication that you do."

 

And I am like "Ok fine here is my position"  And we reached an understanding that we simply had different triggers.  I accepted that you felt the correct course of action was to not assume (no matter how offensive that lack assumption was) and get correct data before continuing and I let go of my offense.

 

So that is the behavior  I did... and you got all offended that I didn't just "assume."  Sorry... I was following the behavior that you showed was acceptable to you.  So please in the future please treat people the way you expect them to treat you...  Otherwise it is all kinds of confusing.

 

Now back to the question...  So we agree that the scripture provide examples of prophets being human.  To void further offense I am going to assume that you also agree that the Church through it leaders are very clear we need to be studying and learning from the scripture.

 

So now to the heart of the matter what in your opinion would cause someone who is diligently studying the scriptures who reads those passages of scripture and yet still hold to the idea that Prophet's are perfect?   (And again this is not some kind of trick question.  I have my ideas and assumptions, but it is pretty clear that we don't always think the same way)   

[Guest LiterateParakeet]

Earlier in this thread you accused me on not being able to understand both sides... And I was like seriously???... its rather insulting to assume I don't see a problem with Leader worship or thinking that our Leaders are perfect. I called you on it and you said

"I'm only basing my responses on your comments in this thread. You haven't said anything that gives me indication that you do."

And I am like "Ok fine here is my position" And we reached an understanding that we simply had different triggers. I accepted that you felt the correct course of action was to not assume (no matter how offensive that lack assumption was) and get correct data before continuing and I let go of my offense.

So that is the behavior I did... and you got all offended that I didn't just "assume." Sorry... I was following the behavior that you showed was acceptable to you. So please in the future please treat people the way you expect them to treat you... Otherwise it is all kinds of confusing.

Now back to the question... So we agree that the scripture provide examples of prophets being human. To void further offense I am going to assume that you also agree that the Church through it leaders are very clear we need to be studying and learning from the scripture.

So now to the heart of the matter what in your opinion would cause someone who is diligently studying the scriptures who reads those passages of scripture and yet still hold to the idea that Prophet's are perfect? (And again this is not some kind of trick question. I have my ideas and assumptions, but it is pretty clear that we don't always think the same way)

First of all "accused" is a pretty strong word that gives the wrong impression of our misunderstanding.

Second what is confusing is after we appeared to come to an understanding, you then jumped back to an earlier point in our conversation and started the discussion up again. I'm still to sort that out.

Third, I notice that you still have not answered any of my questions while continuing to ask your own. I realize that you said you are trying to clarify at what point our ideas divirged, I don't see that it is helping as evidenced by your recent question.

The answer to your question is - I agree why would we and yet this thread is evidence that of what I have suggested. We give lip service to the idea that our leaders aren't perfect but the moment any one like Average Joe or I mention it most of the people on this board seem to assume we are not better than Kate Kelly, and go into full defense mode.

Further, I used the example of Josh because his blog is public and he is clearly no Kate Kelly or John Dehlin...I had hoped that example would clarify how someone who is honestly trying to live the gospel could be hurt by something the leaders have said.

And yet after all of that you still continue (or so it appears to me) to view any one who sees this topic differently than you do as apostates in embryo whose ideas you must confront.

If I'very misunderstood you, then please feel free to correct me.

[estradling75]

First of all "accused" is a pretty strong word that gives the wrong impression of our misunderstanding.

Second what is confusing is after we appeared to come to an understanding, you then jumped back to an earlier point in our conversation and started the discussion up again. I'm still to sort that out.

Third, I notice that you still have not answered any of my questions while continuing to ask your own. I realize that you said you are trying to clarify at what point our ideas divirged, I don't see that it is helping as evidenced by your recent question.

The answer to your question is - I agree why would we and yet this thread is evidence that of what I have suggested. We give lip service to the idea that our leaders aren't perfect but the moment any one like Average Joe or I mention it most of the people on this board seem to assume we are not better than Kate Kelly, and go into full defense mode.

Further, I used the example of Josh because his blog is public and he is clearly no Kate Kelly or John Dehlin...I had hoped that example would clarify how someone who is honestly trying to live the gospel could be hurt by something the leaders have said.

And yet after all of that you still continue (or so it appears to me) to view any one who sees this topic differently than you do as apostates in embryo whose ideas you must confront.

If I'very misunderstood you, then please feel free to correct me.

 

 

The word accuse was chosen, based on the feelings your statement invoked with in me... aka I felt accused by your declaration.

 

As for you question the only question I saw in your post was

 

"If I'm wrong explain to me how, explain to me that you don't think I'm just a Kate Kelly in embryo (or worse). Do you recognize any difference at all?"

 

My answer was "you instantly jump to assuming that I am assuming the worst about you when we have a disconnect."

So I did answer and the answer was no...  Not only that, I have never even mentioned the name Kate Kelly or Josh in any of my posts so you can't possibly know what my thoughts or feelings are about them. Finally I am not known pulling my punches on when and how I think people are in error.  You don't need to assume how I might be feeling.... I'll tell you flat out.

 

Did I miss your opinion on "what would cause someone who is diligently studying the scriptures who reads those passages of scripture and yet still hold to the idea that Prophet's are perfect?"

Edited October 1, 2015 by estradling75

[Vort]

That doesn't answer my question to you remotely...characteristic of our conversation, IMO, for you to ignore anything I say that does support your agenda.

 

Ironic that you should say this to estradling, given your utter refusal (on many attempts) to answer my simple question about what you meant with your apparent slander of Joe Paterno.

[Vort]

 

I didn't answer Vort's question for the same reason. I support Penn State's reasons for firing him. Those reasons are common knowledge.

 

You know perfectly well that is not what I asked you. I did not ask you why Penn State fired Joe Paterno; I asked you what you were claiming was "the truth" about Joe Paterno.