Looking beyond the Mark.

[The Folk Prophet]

1 hour ago, Mores said:

Think about how the first sentence informs the second sentence.

Explain please.

[Guest Mores]

51 minutes ago, Vort said:

Rosanna Rosannadanna?

The image was Roseanne Roseannadanna.

The quote was Emily Litella.

Both Gilda Radner.

Roseanne's catchphrase was "It's always something."

 

[The Folk Prophet]

12 minutes ago, mikbone said:

Shall we agree that occasionally the ‘Church’ puts forth uninspired policy?

No.

 

[Anddenex]

39 minutes ago, mikbone said:

Joseph Smith never mentioned any ban of priesthood ordination.  Neither do any of the standard works discuss this policy.  But during Brigham Young’s administration this became policy and had been propagated for over a century until President Spencer W. Kimball petitioned the Lord in order to have clarification of the policy.  

Simple invitation, read the essay one more time and you will see that President McKay petitioned the Lord regarding the policy and the Lord did not provide any revelation to remove the ban. Spencer W. Kimball wasn't the only prophet to petition the Lord. This sentence makes it sound like President Kimball was the only prophet to address this issue.  So you have to ask yourself, why did the Lord not remove the ban during President McKay, when a prophet asked for clarification, when it could have easily been done then?

Let me clarify how I am following the premise provided:

No other prophet Adam to Joseph in Egypt mentioned the "Law of Moses." The Law of Moses was not in any standard work or teaching from any past prophet, it was never discussed. There were individuals who said Moses was following his own will (I believe even Mose's sister). The Law of Moses was propagated for more than a thousands years, until Christ was born.

 

[clbent04]

On 6/3/2019 at 1:42 PM, mikbone said:

I may possibly be addicted to Diet Mt. Dew.  Am I breaking the WoW? 

Yes, this is breaking the Word of Wisdom (IMO).  For a while, I was drinking a bunch of Dr. Pepper (maybe 2-3 cans a day), plus eating out for lunch and dinner every day (Smashburger, Cafe Rio, Cane's Chicken, Chick-Fil-A, Mexican food...).

While I wasn't breaking the blacklist of the Word of Wisdom (coffee, tea, tobacco, alcohol, drugs), I certainly was breaking the spirit of the Word of Wisdom.  I got up to 187 lbs and had to get on Lipitor for what I was doing to my body.  Fortunately, I've made a lot of positive transformations lately and have been working out and eating clean almost every day. I'm at 168 lbs now which is more normal for me.

Granted, I think I abused the Word of Wisdom much more than you do, but it's my opinion that anyone who consumes a lot of soda on a daily basis is most definitely breaking the spirit of the Word of Wisdom (plus most people agree these days that soda is horrible for you, even the diet stuff. poison in an FDA approved can).  

Edited June 4, 2019 by clbent04

[mikbone]

1 hour ago, Anddenex said:

Simple invitation, read the essay one more time and you will see that President McKay petitioned the Lord regarding the policy and the Lord did not provide any revelation to remove the ban. Spencer W. Kimball wasn't the only prophet to petition the Lord. This sentence makes it sound like President Kimball was the only prophet to address this issue.  So you have to ask yourself, why did the Lord not remove the ban during President McKay, when a prophet asked for clarification, when it could have easily been done then?

Let me clarify how I am following the premise provided:

No other prophet Adam to Joseph in Egypt mentioned the "Law of Moses." The Law of Moses was not in any standard work or teaching from any past prophet, it was never discussed. There were individuals who said Moses was following his own will (I believe even Mose's sister). The Law of Moses was propagated for more than a thousands years, until Christ was born.

 

Possibly some people are better at petitioning the Lord?

2 Nephi 25: 23-24

I believe that President Nelson has been trained and prepared from his lifetime of learning to ask questions and persist until he receives a satisfying answer.  

 

[The Folk Prophet]

1 minute ago, mikbone said:

to ask questions and persist until he receives a satisfying answer.  

Hmm. Seems like we have a scriptural and historical example of the folly of doing such a thing.

[Vort]

2 hours ago, mikbone said:

First thing first.  Shall we agree that occasionally the ‘Church’ puts forth uninspired policy?

No, we shall not. At least I do not.

2 hours ago, mikbone said:

For example, the ban on males of African descent being ordained to the priesthood.

Great example. I believe this ban was of God. I see absolutely no concrete evidence suggesting otherwise, just speculation and unwarranted inference.

2 hours ago, mikbone said:

There is excellent evidence that Joseph Smith either ordained or at least presided over the ordination of Elijah Able to the office of Elder and then Seventy.

Which does not preclude a Priesthood ban.

2 hours ago, mikbone said:

Joseph Smith never mentioned any ban of priesthood ordination.

Which, again, does not preclude a Priesthood ban. As I said before, unwarranted inference.

2 hours ago, mikbone said:

Neither do any of the standard works discuss this policy.

None of the standard works "discuss the policy" of being ordained at 12 or serving a mission at 18. So are we to suppose that those policies are uninspired by God? Non sequitur.

Besides, the standard works discuss many instances of people who were not allowed to hold the Priesthood, even among God's own people. So your statement above is narrowly true, though meaningless in such a context, and broadly false.

2 hours ago, mikbone said:

But during Brigham Young’s administration this became policy and had been propagated for over a century until President Spencer W. Kimball petitioned the Lord in order to have clarification of the policy.

Mikbone, this is a false characterization of what happened. President Kimball did not petition for clarification, but to find out if the time had come for the ban to be rescinded. You must be about my age; surely you remember the teachings in the 1960s and 1970s that those of African black descent would one day be allowed to receive every Priesthood and temple blessing available to anyone else. So the idea that this was merely a "policy clarification" is false on its face.

2 hours ago, mikbone said:

I myself bought into the nonsense, because I had read McConkie’s Mormon Doctrine and had been educated in the line of though that supported the ban.

You should perhaps keep your words sweet, in anticipation of the moment you have to eat them. This is especially good policy when speaking of the Lord's anointed—speaking of whom, I have never heard even one of them under any circumstance support your allegation that the Priesthood ban was anything less than inspired.

2 hours ago, mikbone said:

There is excellent documentation of Joseph Smith & Wilford Woodruff partaking of alcoholic beverages.  Coffee was consumed by the saints during the migration to UTAH.  During the 1920’s Heber J. Grant instituted the complete abstention of alcohol, tobacco, coffee and tea as required for the temple recommend interview one year after the passage of the US 18th amendment.

And therefore...?

2 hours ago, mikbone said:

Do I live by the Word of Wisdom?  Yes, It is current policy.  But I suspect that within the next decade that It will no longer be part of the temple recommend list of questions…

Your suspicion is certainly false.

2 hours ago, mikbone said:

Do we realize what is policy vs. core doctrine?  Do we understand why we do what we do?

"Policy vs. core doctrine" is primarily an argument brought up by agitators and false Saints to stir up the Saints. The current practice of the Church—what you call "policy"—defines the Church's current understanding and implementation of the revealed doctrine.

And we do what we do because we strive to be faithful to our covenants, one of which is to sustain our leaders. Finding fault with them or pretending that they're just controlled by their biases and not by the Lord's inspiration is not sustaining them.

2 hours ago, mikbone said:

What is worse for your body, caffeine or birth control pills?

Probably birth control pills. What of it? The Word of Wisdom doesn't proscribe every action or bodily intake.

2 hours ago, mikbone said:

When we read The Family: A proclamation to the World, do we agree with its proposals?  Is it policy or doctrine?  For example, take this passage.

Quote

By divine design, fathers are to preside over their families in love and righteousness and are responsible to provide the necessities of life and protection for their families. Mothers are primarily responsible for the nurture of their children. In these sacred responsibilities, fathers and mothers are obligated to help one another as equal partners. Disability, death, or other circumstances may necessitate individual adaptation. Extended families should lend support when needed.

When I read this, I seem to have a radical interpretation that is contrary to the majority of the US members.  I read that Fathers are to preside, provide and protect their families.  While Mothers are responsible for the nurture of children.  The exceptions are disability, divorce, or death.   Yet I see many LDS mothers having a job outside of the house and the husbands supporting their wife’s career… 

I don't understand your point. Yes, the majority of the Church does not live up to its privileges, and through poor choices or outright disobedience misses out on many blessings. Are you suggesting that such actions stand as evidence that Church "policy" is "uninspired"? Because I don't see the connection at all.

Perhaps we're largely in agreement, underneath everything else. But when you make claim such as that the Restored Church puts forth "uninspired" policy or that it's somehow vitally important that we distinguish between "core doctrine" and "policy", you lose me.

Edited June 4, 2019 by Vort

[mikbone]

1 hour ago, Vort said:

Perhaps we're largely in agreement, underneath everything else. But when you make claim such as that the Restored Church puts forth "uninspired" policy or that it's somehow vitally important that we distinguish between "core doctrine" and "policy", you lose me.

I think we are in largely in agreement.  This is Jesus Christ's restored church.  Our Lord and Savior is the core of the church.  Joseph Smith, the Book of Mormon, Pearl of Great Price, and the Doctrine and Covenants have given the Latter-Day Saints a huge advantage in understanding the doctrine and the character of God.  

If there had been no revelation since Joseph Smith's Death, this church would still be true.  Just out of curiosity, in your opinion, what percentage of the core beliefs of our church were provided by Jesus Christ through the Prophet Joseph Smith?  

The following are excellent examples of Core / Eternal Doctrines. 

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/general-conference/2012/04/the-doctrine-of-christ?lang=eng

Quote

 

Of Things That Matter Most - Dieter F. Uchtdorf, Oct 2010

Rejoice in the Pure Gospel

Brothers and sisters, let us be wise. Let us turn to the pure doctrinal waters of the restored gospel of Jesus Christ. Let us joyfully partake of them in their simplicity and plainness. The heavens are open again. The gospel of Jesus Christ is on earth once more, and its simple truths are a plentiful source of joy!

Brothers and sisters, indeed we have great reason to rejoice. If life and its rushed pace and many stresses have made it difficult for you to feel like rejoicing, then perhaps now is a good time to refocus on what matters most.

Strength comes not from frantic activity but from being settled on a firm foundation of truth and light. It comes from placing our attention and efforts on the basics of the restored gospel of Jesus Christ. It comes from paying attention to the divine things that matter most.

Let us simplify our lives a little. Let us make the changes necessary to refocus our lives on the sublime beauty of the simple, humble path of Christian discipleship—the path that leads always toward a life of meaning, gladness, and peace. For this I pray, as I leave you my blessing, in the sacred name of Jesus Christ, amen.

 

The Church is a huge organization and because of this, there are necessarily many Church Policies that are uninspired.   Legal protocol, finances, business organization, etc...

The Word of Wisdom is common sense.  It is not some astounding divine revelation.  Yeah even back then, they knew that alcohol and tobacco were bad.

[mordorbund]

8 hours ago, Anddenex said:

sex is a bodily gratification (I would add more so for men than women)

[The Folk Prophet]

46 minutes ago, mikbone said:

If there had been no revelation since Joseph Smith's Death, this church would still be true. 

False.

[estradling75]

Sigh...

If I am walking down the street  I might be inspired by God to turn Right...  This would be the Mind and Will of God.

The Next day I could be walking down the Street and he inspires me to turn Left...  This also would be the Mind and Will of God.

Just because what I was inspired to do at different times was different does not mean that one of them was not inspired.  Claiming that is just being simple minded.  It would be like Nephi declaring that Moses was not inspired in giving the 10 commandments... Because they say "Thou shall not kill" and the Nephi knew that the Lord clearly inspired him to kill Laban

[Anddenex]

1 hour ago, mordorbund said:

Haven't you seen the following psychology clarifying a difference between male and female and intimacy:

[Guest Mores]

11 hours ago, mordorbund said:

I was going to say something along these lines.  But I didn't feel I was familiar enough to do such ribbing.

[Anddenex]

1 hour ago, Mores said:

I was going to say something along these lines.  But I didn't feel I was familiar enough to do such ribbing.

I think you would have been fine.

[Guest Mores]

13 hours ago, mikbone said:

The Church is a huge organization and because of this, there are necessarily many Church Policies that are uninspired.   Legal protocol, finances, business organization, etc...

Simply because they are "wise mortal decisions" does not make them uninspired.  We should at least be able to agree that mankind is not a wise race.  So, for someone to make a truly wise choice, even regarding mundane mortal decisions, is very often inspired.

Quote

The Word of Wisdom is common sense.  It is not some astounding divine revelation.  Yeah even back then, they knew that alcohol and tobacco were bad.

You're assuming, of course, that the WoW is solely for the purposes of health.  You haven't really read it very thoroughly then?

17 hours ago, mikbone said:

I suspect that within the next decade that It will no longer be part of the temple recommend list of questions

Whether true or not, it doesn't really change anything in this discussion.  The interview questions don't talk about working for Planned Parenthood.  So, does that mean the Church endorses abortions now?

Edited June 5, 2019 by Mores

[Guest Mores]

8 minutes ago, Anddenex said:

I think you would have been fine.

You know not what you have done.  RELEASE THE HOUNDS!!! Bwwuhahaha!!!

[Anddenex]

15 hours ago, mikbone said:

Possibly some people are better at petitioning the Lord?

2 Nephi 25: 23-24

I believe that President Nelson has been trained and prepared from his lifetime of learning to ask questions and persist until he receives a satisfying answer.  

 

Possibly some people are better at petitioning the Lord?

The reality of this question is a true thought. We know for sure there are people who are better at petitioning the Lord for answers, or to receive blessings. We are able to read how family went to the brother of Jared and asked him to petition the Lord, when we know they could have asked the same question/blessing themselves. They seemed to believe themselves that the brother of Jared would receive an answer.

My only hiccup with this though is that we are comparing two prophets, both of which were prepared. If you have had the opportunity to read President McKay's biography it seems as though President McKay was just as prepared to become the prophet as President Nelson. It appears from President McKay's life that he knew how to approach our Father in heaven and how to receive answers. Our comparison is two prophets, and when a prophet petitions/asks they appear to receive answers the same.

I believe that President Nelson has been trained and prepared from his lifetime of learning to ask questions and persist until he receives a satisfying answer.  

I am not sure what you mean by a "satisfying answer." Here are some questions that are induced from this thought. Was the introduction of polygamy a "satisfying answer" to Joseph and the members in the beginnings of the Church? Was the commencement of having a "king" with the children of Israel a satisfying answer to the people?

I would be concerned if our prophet was only seeking "satisfying answers" according to our time. If we look at scriptural history, not all answers were satisfying. In the past, a certain decisions (accomplished in unity and prayer) that did not satisfy some members (especially the world). President Nelson who was part of that unity and prayer made a new announcement changing the policy. Both policies were inspired via unity and prayer by the Lord.

Edited June 5, 2019 by Anddenex

[Guest Mores]

16 minutes ago, Anddenex said:

I am not sure what you mean by a "satisfying answer."

Absolutely agree.  The object of prayer is not to change the mind of the Lord.  It is to change our will to be in correspondence with HIS will.

Apparently, some people forget this.

[mikbone]

2 hours ago, Anddenex said:

Possibly some people are better at petitioning the Lord?

The reality of this question is a true thought. We know for sure there are people who are better at petitioning the Lord for answers, or to receive blessings. We are able to read how family went to the brother of Jared and asked him to petition the Lord, when we know they could have asked the same question/blessing themselves. They seemed to believe themselves that the brother of Jared would receive an answer.

My only hiccup with this though is that we are comparing two prophets, both of which were prepared. If you have had the opportunity to read President McKay's biography it seems as though President McKay was just as prepared to become the prophet as President Nelson. It appears from President McKay's life that he knew how to approach our Father in heaven and how to receive answers. Our comparison is two prophets, and when a prophet petitions/asks they appear to receive answers the same.

I believe that President Nelson has been trained and prepared from his lifetime of learning to ask questions and persist until he receives a satisfying answer.  

I am not sure what you mean by a "satisfying answer." Here are some questions that are induced from this thought. Was the introduction of polygamy a "satisfying answer" to Joseph and the members in the beginnings of the Church? Was the commencement of having a "king" with the children of Israel a satisfying answer to the people?

I would be concerned if our prophet was only seeking "satisfying answers" according to our time. If we look at scriptural history, not all answers were satisfying. In the past, a certain decisions (accomplished in unity and prayer) that did not satisfy some members (especially the world). President Nelson who was part of that unity and prayer made a new announcement changing the policy. Both policies were inspired via unity and prayer by the Lord.

Lets look at a few of Joseph Smith’s interactions with the Lord.

D&C 130:14-17

&

The Kerfuffle with Martin Harris and the 116 pages 

So prophets can make uninspired or poor decisions or can receive an answer that is ambiguous, right?

I lead my family & I can tell you that despite my intentions to seek devine guidance sometimes I am left to make my own decisions.  I have received what I believe to be revelations, be they visions, promptings, or feelings of rightness.  But I still have to make the decisions and provide family policy.  I have never been privy to provide family doctrine.  And I lean heavily on my wife.

I don’t think that our Latter-Day Prophets lead the church much differently.

I don’t think that the Prophet speaks with the Lord face to face on a routine basis.  The apostles are special witnesses of Christ.  But I assume that the majority of revelations come from the Holy Ghost.   AND THIS IS OK.

 

I honor and follow all the Prophets.  But I recognize that just like me, they are men and can make honest mistakes.  But the Lord will never allow the Prophet to lead the Church astray.

President Nelson’s background as a surgeon has empowered him to ask questions, find answers, and act.  Surgeon’s are adept with tools and one of our preferred tools is the scalpel. 

The Lord choose Brigham Young as the second prophet because he had the spirit and skills to grow the church and get us to Utah.

[mikbone]

2 hours ago, Mores said:

You're assuming, of course, that the WoW is solely for the purposes of health.  You haven't really read it very thoroughly then?

Nope, I follow the WoW.  I just don’t think that Caffeine is implied within section 89.

D&C 130: 20-21

[Guest Mores]

1 hour ago, mikbone said:

Nope, I follow the WoW.  I just don’t think that Caffeine is implied within section 89.

D&C 130: 20-21

I wasn't addressing caffeine.  I was pointing YOUR statement on the WoW is simply common sense and not an astounding revelation.  YOUR statement indicated it being only about health.  If you think health is the ONLY principle behind Section 89, you're not reading it very well.

[The Folk Prophet]

2 hours ago, mikbone said:

Nope, I follow the WoW.  I just don’t think that Caffeine is implied within section 89.

And yet it's been very clearly "implied" by prophets and apostles through the years. But I guess according to you the living prophets and apostles are all just looking beyond the mark.

[mikbone]

24 minutes ago, The Folk Prophet said:

And yet it's been very clearly "implied" by prophets and apostles through the years. But I guess according to you the living prophets and apostles are all just looking beyond the mark.

Yes, at times some of them have done so.  Whatever you do, do not read the following articles!

http://www.ldsliving.com/What-the-Prophets-Have-Really-Said-About-Caffeine/s/86182

& 

https://www.mormonnewsroom.org/article/mormonism-news--getting-it-right-august-29

The below is a quote from the Church news room...

Quote

Finally, another small correction: Despite what was reported, the Church revelation spelling out health practices (Doctrine and Covenants 89) does not mention the use of caffeine.  The Church’s health guidelines prohibit alcoholic drinks, smoking or chewing of tobacco, and “hot drinks” — taught by Church leaders to refer specifically to tea and coffee. *

 

Just to be clear.  I honor the living prophets and apostles.  they are the Lord's anointed.  But they are men and can make mistakes.

And I routinely make mistakes that are much worse than theirs.

I only expect perfection from one person.

Edited June 5, 2019 by mikbone

[Guest Mores]

31 minutes ago, mikbone said:

Yes, at times some of them have done so.  Whatever you do, do not read the following articles!

http://www.ldsliving.com/What-the-Prophets-Have-Really-Said-About-Caffeine/s/86182

& 

https://www.mormonnewsroom.org/article/mormonism-news--getting-it-right-august-29

The below is a quote from the Church news room...

Just to be clear.  I honor the living prophets and apostles.  they are the Lord's anointed.  But they are men and can make mistakes.

And I routinely make mistakes that are much worse than theirs.

I only expect perfection from one person.

I'm going to forget for a moment that you apparently have no clue what "looking beyond the mark" actually means to everyone else.  

I'm going to humor you for a moment and work with the definition you've decided to use and say it means "going above and beyond" what is commanded of us.

Why do you condemn such a practice?  Do you think it is a righteous principle to do only the bare minimum of what is required of us?