Religious vs cultural Mormonism

[Guest MormonGator]

It's the opposite, in my view. Inactive LDS get invited to all sorts of events. 

I seriously can't imagine @mirkwood writing a ticket or not based on a temple recommendation.   

Option three probably happens more than the others. 

[omegaseamaster75]

2 hours ago, Fether said:

“The prophet does not have to say “Thus saith the Lord” to give us scripture.” - President Benson

You should read this https://www.lds.org/liahona/1981/06/fourteen-fundamentals-in-following-the-prophet?lang=eng

I have read that, a talk given by Ezra Taft Benson WHEN HE WAS NOt THE PROPHET, and NOT DURING GENERAL CONFERENCE. We can discuss the problems with that talk if you want.

 

[Vort]

2 minutes ago, omegaseamaster75 said:

I have read that, a talk given by Ezra Taft Benson WHEN HE WAS NOt THE PROPHET, and NOT DURING GENERAL CONFERENCE. We can discuss the problems with that talk if you want.

Pretty sure I sustained him as a prophet, seer, and revelator before he gave that talk.

[omegaseamaster75]

2 hours ago, Fether said:

“When the Lord’s servants speak or write under the influence of the Holy Ghost, their words become scripture”

https://www.lds.org/manual/gospel-principles/chapter-10-scriptures?lang=eng

Well if it was in gospel principles than I'm convinced

2 hours ago, Fether said:

What is the Book of Mormon if not words of dead prophets? Are their words more inspired than prophets today? I would argue and say that the words modern day prophets are more important than the words of dead prophets.

I agree the Book of Mormon is the word of God as ratified by the prophet, quorum of the 12 and the body of the church this makes it cannon and doctrine.

I also agree that the words of modern day prophets are important and we should follow their counsel.  

 

[omegaseamaster75]

Just now, Vort said:

Pretty sure I sustained him as a prophet, seer, and revelator before he gave that talk.

You might have, but he was not the prophet when he gave that talk and not authorized to speak for and on behalf of the church.

[omegaseamaster75]

1 hour ago, Fether said:

Every member of the church ought to take every word spoken in conference as scriptural.

delete

Edited April 16, 2018 by omegaseamaster75

[Vort]

Just now, omegaseamaster75 said:

You might have, but he was not the prophet when he gave that talk and not authorized to speak for and on behalf of the church.

An apostle is not authorized to speak in behalf of the Church?

[omegaseamaster75]

Just now, Vort said:

An apostle is not authorized to speak in behalf of the Church?

can an apostle make policy? Can an apostle receive revelation for the church?

Edited April 16, 2018 by omegaseamaster75

[Vort]

3 minutes ago, omegaseamaster75 said:

4 minutes ago, Vort said:

An apostle is not authorized to speak in behalf of the Church?

can an apostle make policy? Can an apostle receive revelation for the church?

Of course an apostle can receive revelation for the Church. Do you claim he cannot?

And just who do you suppose makes the Church's policies, if not the apostles? You, perhaps?

[zil]

12 minutes ago, omegaseamaster75 said:

Well if it was in gospel principles than I'm convinced

Erm, what @Fether quoted from the manual, the manual got from the D&C. https://www.lds.org/scriptures/dc-testament/dc/68.4?lang=eng#3

[Fether]

31 minutes ago, omegaseamaster75 said:

the Book of Mormon is the word of God as ratified by the prophet, quorum of the 12 and the body of the church this makes it cannon and doctrine.

Earlier you also talked about us members “ratifying” scripture. Where does this idea come from? Honest question, I have never heard that my word can effect what is doctrine and what is not.

 

34 minutes ago, omegaseamaster75 said:

I have read that, a talk given by Ezra Taft Benson WHEN HE WAS NOt THE PROPHET, and NOT DURING GENERAL CONFERENCE. We can discuss the problems with that talk if you want.

 

https://www.lds.org/manual/teachings-of-presidents-of-the-church-ezra-taft-benson/chapter-11-follow-the-living-prophet?lang=eng

church felt like it was true enough to put in their teachings of the presidents books.

[The Folk Prophet]

2 hours ago, NeuroTypical said:

Ok, TFP, here are some examples of what I'd call the seedy underbelly of "cultural mormonism".  Let's see you defend some of these as righteous behavior:

- Intentionally not inviting someone to some group activity because you haven't seen them in church recently and fear they've become inactive and would be a bad influence.

- When Mirk pulls you over for speeding, you hand him your temple recommend, and then judge him insufficiently spiritual when you get a ticket anyway.

- Assuming that someone accused of a crime must be innocent, because they're more active than you, and hold what you consider to be a higher calling.  (Or, the more evil version of this one - helping someone hide their misdeeds because if they came to light, the church would be embarrassed.)

Weird.

Are you under the impression I'm out to defend all activities of all Mormons as righteous behavior?

[mordorbund]

Round and round we go.

 

 

[omegaseamaster75]

3 hours ago, Vort said:

Of course an apostle can receive revelation for the Church. Do you claim he cannot?

I do make that claim

3 hours ago, Vort said:

And just who do you suppose makes the Church's policies, if not the apostles? You, perhaps?

Apostles make policy plural not individually, it is done by committee. 

[omegaseamaster75]

2 hours ago, Fether said:

Earlier you also talked about us members “ratifying” scripture. Where does this idea come from? Honest question, I have never heard that my word can effect what is doctrine and what is not.

 

Sure:

1830, bible and BOM officially accepted with the organization of the church

1835 first 103 sections of D&C officially accepted

1880 D&D added additional 32 sections along with POGP

1890 official declaration repeal of polygamy

1976 D&C sections 137 & 138 added offically

1978 priesthood given to all worthy males

On each occasion each item required approval of the first presidency, concurrence of the quorum of twelve apostles and then accepted in a sustaining vote by the entire membership.  This is our doctrine, the standard works as we currently have them and official declarations ratified by the 12 and then the entire body of the church.  Everything else is just policy subject to change.  Can you imagine if every Sermon given of Brigham Young was taken as doctrine?

We just went through a large policy change in our current conference, with the priesthood quorums and change in policy to home/visiting teaching.

3 hours ago, Fether said:

https://www.lds.org/manual/teachings-of-presidents-of-the-church-ezra-taft-benson/chapter-11-follow-the-living-prophet?lang=eng

church felt like it was true enough to put in their teachings of the presidents books.

I never said what they said wasn't true, in fact in think I said that we should follow the counsel of our prophets.  It's just not scripture in the technical sense.

 

[omegaseamaster75]

3 hours ago, Vort said:

Of course an apostle can receive revelation for the Church. Do you claim he cannot?

https://www.lds.org/topics/prophets?lang=eng

As members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, we are blessed to be led by living prophets—inspired men called to speak for the Lord, as did Moses, Isaiah, Peter, Paul, Nephi, Mormon, and other prophets of the scriptures. We sustain the President of the Church as prophet, seer, and revelator—the only person on the earth who receives revelation to guide the entire Church. 

[Vort]

2 minutes ago, omegaseamaster75 said:

https://www.lds.org/topics/prophets?lang=eng

As members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, we are blessed to be led by living prophets—inspired men called to speak for the Lord, as did Moses, Isaiah, Peter, Paul, Nephi, Mormon, and other prophets of the scriptures. We sustain the President of the Church as prophet, seer, and revelator—the only person on the earth who receives revelation to guide the entire Church. 

Consider the context. When an apostle receives an assignment from the First Presidency, he is entitled to revelation for that assignment -- which affects the entire Church. Of course an apostle receives revelation for the entire Church. Offering a quotation out of context does not change that obvious truth.

[omegaseamaster75]

1 minute ago, Vort said:

Consider the context. When an apostle receives an assignment from the First Presidency, he is entitled to revelation for that assignment -- which affects the entire Church. Of course an apostle receives revelation for the entire Church. Offering a quotation out of context does not change that obvious truth.

Really? The context? it's straight from the LDS website. 

Who gives the assignments? honestly it's ok to eat crow every once in a while.

Edited April 16, 2018 by omegaseamaster75

[Vort]

1 minute ago, omegaseamaster75 said:

Really? The context? it's straight from the LDS website. 

Who gives the assignments?

Did you read what I wrote? The First Presidency.

2 minutes ago, omegaseamaster75 said:

honestly it's ok to eat crow every once in a while.

Indeed it is. You should try it when appropriate.

[Vort]

I find this rather entertaining. @omegaseamaster75 is pretending to be orthodox and establish that the prophet alone receives revelation to guide the entire Church -- yet is doing so in order to undermine prophetic teachings of apostles, a decidedly non-orthodox position.

[omegaseamaster75]

1 minute ago, Vort said:

I find this rather entertaining. @omegaseamaster75 is pretending to be orthodox and establish that the prophet alone receives revelation to guide the entire Church -- yet is doing so in order to undermine prophetic teachings of apostles, a decidedly non-orthodox position.

Which prophetic teaching have I undermined? 

I find it entertaining that you were caught out as being wrong and won't own up to it. It's one thing to have an opinion about something it's another to be just flat out wrong, proven wrong and then to try to dodge and change the subject.

[Vort]

25 minutes ago, omegaseamaster75 said:

Which prophetic teaching have I undermined?

Here:

4 hours ago, omegaseamaster75 said:

I have read that, a talk given by Ezra Taft Benson WHEN HE WAS NOt THE PROPHET, and NOT DURING GENERAL CONFERENCE. We can discuss the problems with that talk if you want.

Elder Benson, speaking in his capacity as an apostle, gave sage advice. You are seeking to discount it.

27 minutes ago, omegaseamaster75 said:

I find it entertaining that you were caught out as being wrong and won't own up to it.

You are incorrect. You are playing with words to try to do a "gotcha". That the President of the Church is the person who uniquely holds the active keys of revelation for the Church as a whole is beyond dispute. it is through the prophet, and him alone, that the Church will receive revelation that modifies the doctrine of the Church, such as President Kimball's 1978 revelation.

What is equally beyond dispute is that the apostles are General Authorities -- note the word -- and thus in a position of leadership over the entire Church. Thus, when they receive revelation pursuant to their callings, it is revelation that applies to their callings -- over the entire Church. This would include apostolic speaking assignments. That their words are not doctrine-shifting revelations does not mean they are not revelatory, or not true, or for that matter not binding on those who receive those teachings.

32 minutes ago, omegaseamaster75 said:

It's one thing to have an opinion about something it's another to be just flat out wrong, proven wrong and then to try to dodge and change the subject.

Indeed. As I recall, you have quite a history of doing just that. Such as, well...now.

[The Folk Prophet]

"When we convene as a Council of the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve, our meeting rooms become rooms of revelation. The Spirit is palpably present. As we wrestle with complex matters, a thrilling process unfolds as each Apostle freely expresses his thoughts and point of view. Though we may differ in our initial perspectives, the love we feel for each other is constant. Our unity helps us to discern the Lord’s will for His Church.

In our meetings, the majority never rules! We listen prayerfully to one another and talk with each other until we are united. Then when we have reached complete accord, the unifying influence of the Holy Ghost is spine-tingling! We experience what the Prophet Joseph Smith knew when he taught, “By union of feeling we obtain power with God.”7 No member of the First Presidency or Quorum of the Twelve would ever leave decisions for the Lord’s Church to his own best judgment!" Russell M Nelson

“The First Presidency and the Council of the Twelve Apostles, called and ordained to hold the keys of the priesthood, have the authority and responsibility to govern the Church, to administer its ordinances, to expound its doctrine, and to establish and maintain its practices.” Gordon B Hinkley

“… any major questions of policy, procedures, programs, or doctrine are considered deliberately and prayerfully by the First Presidency and the Twelve together.” ibid.

"And make no mistake about it: the Lord directs His Church through living prophets and apostles." M Russell Ballard

"This general conference was convened at a time when there is such confusion and such danger that our young people hardly know which way they can walk. Having been warned through the revelations that it would be this way, the prophets and apostles have always been shown what to do." Boyd K Packer

 

[mdfxdb]

The 14 points speech is interesting.  it has been used in/referenced heavily in general conference several times.  I have problems with the speech as presented.  First, as Omega pointed out, he wasn't the prophet at the time.  Second, the speech was given at BYU to a select audience, and probably not given with the contextual understanding that it would be disseminated as "doctrine" for the rest of the church.  Third, have you read the 14 points??????   wow!!!

Point 5: The prophet is not required to have any particular earthly training or credentials to speak on any subject or act in any matter at any time.  

If we do in fact believe the 14 points to be correct, then there are fundamental problems with accepting conference talks as scripture, and we might even have fundamental problems with our current cannon of scripture as we currently know it.  We can all agree that there are/were many revelations that were left out of Doctrine and Covenants correct?  Why was that?

[mdfxdb]

5 minutes ago, The Folk Prophet said:

"When we convene as a Council of the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve, our meeting rooms become rooms of revelation. The Spirit is palpably present. As we wrestle with complex matters, a thrilling process unfolds as each Apostle freely expresses his thoughts and point of view. Though we may differ in our initial perspectives, the love we feel for each other is constant. Our unity helps us to discern the Lord’s will for His Church.

In our meetings, the majority never rules! We listen prayerfully to one another and talk with each other until we are united. Then when we have reached complete accord, the unifying influence of the Holy Ghost is spine-tingling! We experience what the Prophet Joseph Smith knew when he taught, “By union of feeling we obtain power with God.”7 No member of the First Presidency or Quorum of the Twelve would ever leave decisions for the Lord’s Church to his own best judgment!" Russell M Nelson

“The First Presidency and the Council of the Twelve Apostles, called and ordained to hold the keys of the priesthood, have the authority and responsibility to govern the Church, to administer its ordinances, to expound its doctrine, and to establish and maintain its practices.” Gordon B Hinkley

“… any major questions of policy, procedures, programs, or doctrine are considered deliberately and prayerfully by the First Presidency and the Twelve together.” ibid.

"And make no mistake about it: the Lord directs His Church through living prophets and apostles." M Russell Ballard

"This general conference was convened at a time when there is such confusion and such danger that our young people hardly know which way they can walk. Having been warned through the revelations that it would be this way, the prophets and apostles have always been shown what to do." Boyd K Packer

 

Not sure what you are trying to prove with the above.  I think Omega is saying that not all general conference talks are scripture/doctrine.  I think you are saying the church is run by committee.  Your quotes are great, but we are a theocracy, and the Prophet is the only person who is authorized to posses and exercise all priesthood keys.  There have been no fundamental doctrinal changes or scriptural changes for a very long time.  The most recent change with the organization of the Elders Quorum is an inspired policy change, and a good example of inspired policy vs. doctrine/scripture.