There is a Difference Between Truth and Error

From a sermon by Charles Haddon Spurgeon, “Taking Hold of God,” delivered October 7, 1877:

Wheat and ChaffIn the present age, if any man can talk well, he will get a following whatever he may teach. I am astounded at some professors who can hear this man, today, and that man the next, though the two are diametrically opposed. Surely there is some difference between truth and error. Surely mere cleverness cannot neutralize false doctrine.

Our forefathers discerned between things that differed and when false doctrine came before them they cast it out, notwithstanding the eloquence of its advocate. I do not want you to be bigots. God deliver us from their bitter spirit, but I do want you to be sound Believers. There is a great difference between obstinate bigotry and a decided maintenance of that which we have believed. After all, what is the chaff to the wheat? There is a difference between the doctrines of men and the teachings of the Lord. No lie is of the truth. Garnish it as you may, it is still a lie. Oh to be rooted and grounded and built up in Christ! One of the most desirable things in this fickle age is to see around the minister of Christ a people who know the truth, and feel that the truth binds them fast to their God.

———

“His winnowing fork is in his hand,
and he will clear his threshing floor
and gather his wheat into the barn,
but the chaff he will burn with unquenchable fire.”
Matthew 3:12

About Sharon Lindbloom

Sharon surrendered her life to the Lord Jesus Christ in 1979. Deeply passionate about Truth, Sharon loves serving as a full-time volunteer research associate with Mormonism Research Ministry. Sharon and her husband live in Minnesota.

This entry was posted in Christianity and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

112 Responses to There is a Difference Between Truth and Error

  1. MJP says:

    I’d add that Shem has argued that Young did not say that Adam is God. He’s tried to differentiate Young’s statement on Adam to show that he really didn’t mean that Adam is the god we are to worship. He’s said Adam is our god, the organizer, the stake president, of this earth, but not really the god we are to worship.

    This is a very different point than personal belief/binding church doctrine.

    I’m left, again, more confused than before concerning couple LDS approaches to theology. First, what precisely is binding church doctrine? What, exactly, does a doctrine that is binding mean to a believer? Does it mean they have to accept it to be an LDS? Or something else? Second, what role does guessing (using Shem’s words on Young) by a prophet play in the broader scheme of defining binding doctrine? This is in a perfect church, a church that cannot lead its people astray. Yet, here is a prophet guessing on a point of revelation, and if wrong, could lead his people astray…

  2. grindael says:

    I’m left, again, more confused than before concerning couple LDS approaches to theology. First, what precisely is binding church doctrine? What, exactly, does a doctrine that is binding mean to a believer? Does it mean they have to accept it to be an LDS? Or something else? Second, what role does guessing (using Shem’s words on Young) by a prophet play in the broader scheme of defining binding doctrine? This is in a perfect church, a church that cannot lead its people astray. Yet, here is a prophet guessing on a point of revelation, and if wrong, could lead his people astray…

    MJP,

    You will get no satisfaction on those points. For example, take what they just did with the new heading for the Priesthood to Blacks “revelation”. They put right in there, that Mormon “prophets” are too stupid to figure out where that doctrine came from:

    Early in its history, Church leaders stopped conferring the priesthood on black males of African descent. Church records offer no clear insights into the origins of this practice.

    That is from the new “inspired” heading for Official Declaration 2. This sums up Mormon “prophets” nicely. They have “no clear insights” into anything, and it is in their best interest to keep obfuscating their own roles in the world. They are nothing but Corporate Managers. For them, that is a step up from “prophet, seer & revelator”, because that job title doesn’t pay well.

  3. MJP says:

    I suppose it is good that I am not looking for satisfaction, and I don’t expect to find satisfactory answers because I don’t think they exist.

    The whole program takes a very relativistic approach to dealing with matters. About the only things they seem quick to stand up for are Joseph Smith, and that they follow a Jesus Christ who lived about 2000 years ago in Israel. You might throw in the restored gospel, and the power of personal revelation, too. Otherwise, they are very willing to manipulate and alter the plain words of its previous leaders.

  4. Mike R says:

    Shem, you said , ” You aren’t really paying attention to what I am saying if you actually think
    you have accurately described anything I have said . ”

    Actually I have accurately described what you have said . It is you that is not paying enough
    attention what Brigham Young and officers who served with him have said , and as a result you
    not understanding how serious of doctrinal error the Adam-God doctrine is . You say personal
    belief is not the same thing as binding church doctrine , the two must be separated . But that is
    really not the main issue because a false prophet is one who believes and teaches false doctrine
    to his followers , it does not matter if none or all of his flock accepts his teaching because he is
    still a false teacher/prophet . Now , Brigham’s new doctrinal revealment about Adam has
    been labeled as false doctrine by even some Mormon authorities not to long ago . This is not
    that difficult to understand . This doctrine is a terrible doctrine repeatedly promulgated by
    the alleged leader of Jesus’ church in these last days , and testified to by those other officers
    under him . Until Mormons like you can do the right thing and admit that Brigham Young taught
    false doctrine , that he caused many under his care to follow him in embracing his doctrine
    then non-LDS will always keep bringing it up . Why would we trust and respect your current
    leaders when they won’t stand for truth and admit Young was guilty of believing and teaching
    egregious doctrine ?
    And just so you know , what you said in the last sentence in your reply to me is not completely
    accurate . You’ll find the answer to your accusation by reading through the information that
    grindael provided , I did .
    I submit that you can’t see the truth of this issue because you’re to intent on reading your own
    ideas into what Brigham taught in an attempt to rescue him from being a false prophet .
    It’s my testimony to you that what Brigham taught was wrong , he drifted into error and
    refused correction by those who served beside him . Brigham Young was a false prophet .

  5. shematwater says:

    Mike

    No leader of the church has ever said that Brigham Young taught false doctrine. President Kimbal said that the meaning that people like you and Grindael give to his words is a false meaning, and I agree. Elder McConkie at one time said that some statements of Brigham Young appear to contradict other statements by Brigham Young, and so we have the task of determining which statements to accept.

    Also, just because Brigham Young taught what he believed does not make him a false prophet, for the simple fact that he made it clear that this was his belief and that the saints needed concern themselves with it as it was not intended to be binding on them. As it was a personal belief, and stated to be such, I really don’t care how many people agreed with him or not, and neither did he.

    As to everything that Grindael said, I have read most of it, and I have shown just how inaccurate he really is in regards to Brigham Young. He has done nothing to prove that Brigham Young ever intended his thoughts on the matter to be of any importance, and so for for you or Grindael to add that qualification to his words is wrong and dishonest.

    I submit to you that you are so blinded by your prejudice and bias against the LDS that you are only able to see that which supports these ideas and allows you to remain in your ignorant and blind state. Brigham Young was a great man and a great prophet, and will stand with the great men of Christ when he returns in his glory. This is my testimony, as revealed to me by the Holy Spirit, which witness cannot be impeached or denied.

    MJP

    Binding Church doctrine are those points of truth that must be accepted by the faithful if they are to expect the reward of eternal glory. They are the doctrines contained in the Standard Works. There is no doctrine that I have ever heard, which is binding on the saints, that cannot be taught and supported through a study of the Standard Works. If a doctrine cannot be supported in this way it is not a binding doctrine. There is nothing simpler.
    The personal beliefs of Brigham Young regarding Adam cannot be directly supported or taught through the standard works, and thus are not binding doctrine.

    As to the roll of guessing in defining doctrine, it plays no roll. A guess is not nor has it ever been doctrine. When a person guesses we are free to agree or disagree as we choose and doesn’t matter which. When you wish to define doctrine the first step is to remove or ignore all guesses, and then work with whatever is left.

    Now, I agree that you will never get satisfaction, because you have just stated that you don’t think it is possible, and thus you have already decided to be dissatisfied with everything concerning the gospel. Unless you believe satisfaction is possible you will never find it.

    As to relativity, I have stated few things in a relativistic way, and there are few things in the gospel that are relative. What is relative is the final rewards we will receive, which are relative to our diligence in this life. The difficulty is that you want everything to be based off your conceptions and doctrine, and anything that is not based on that is labeled as relative.

  6. grindael says:

    As to everything that Grindael said, I have read most of it, and I have shown just how inaccurate he really is in regards to Brigham Young. He has done nothing to prove that Brigham Young ever intended his thoughts on the matter to be of any importance, and so for for you or Grindael to add that qualification to his words is wrong and dishonest.

    Funny how Shem keeps repeating this BUT NEVER SHOWS ANY EVIDENCE. This is just bubble talk, pure and simple. Until Shem coughs up actual evidence, he is just spitting in the wind.

  7. shematwater says:

    Just so that people understand the nature of evidence and proof, let me enlighten them.

    It is impossible to prove a negative. What this means is that no one can prove that something does not exist, or that something is false. What can be proven is something that is true or does exist. This must be fully understood, and should be understood by anyone who claims to have proof that something is true or not, and is something that any competent scientist, statistition, or any other profesional with attest to.

    I mention this for one very simple reason. Grindael is attempting to prove a positive in his claim that Brigham Young taught…etc. I cannot prove that he did not teach it, because that is a negative statement and thus is unprovable. Thus the burden of proof is on Grindael, not me. What I have done, and continue to do, is to show how he has failed to meet that burben by any reliable or accurate measure.
    So, when Grindael claims that I have no proof of what Brigham Young did not teach, he is being very accurate. However, he has not proven what he claims to prove, and that is all that is necessary for me.

  8. grindael says:

    So, when Grindael claims that I have no proof of what Brigham Young did not teach, he is being very accurate. However, he has not proven what he claims to prove, and that is all that is necessary for me.

    Unfortunately, I have proven my claims, on many threads that you have not refuted nor provided the evidence to back up. Nice try, but you have spit all over your face. You have proven nothing, and shown to all that you will not, and can not prove that Brigham Young did not teach that Adam was God the Father of the spirits of Man. Thanks Shem, for proving me right.

  9. Mike R says:

    Shem, sorry but you’ve said nothing that is convincing . Your testimony about this did’nt
    come from the Holy Spirit because the Holy Spirit does’nt condone false prophets . Now I don’t
    doubt that you experienced some internal feeling but it was of your own heart . Your motive I
    won’t judge , but your “witness” that Brigham Young was a great prophet did’nt come from the
    Holy Spirit .

    Now you’re wrong on several comments you made in your last post . First , Apostle McConkie
    did admit that Brigham Young erred in some of his teachings about Adam —- doctrinal error ,
    i.e. he taught false doctrine .

    Secondly, your statement : ” Also, just because Brigham Young taught what he believed does
    not make him a false prophet ….” A prophet who believes and teaches false doctrine is a
    false prophet/teacher , it does’nt matter if anyone in his flock accepts his new aberrant
    teaching or not because that does not negate the fact that what he believes ( and taught ) is
    wrong . What Brigham Young taught about Adam was wrong , and he influenced others to
    embrace his new doctrinal revealment . That’s what false prophets are good at doing .

    You accuse grindael and me of dishonesty for allegedly adding qualifications to Brigham
    Young’s words . I think that the best response to that accusation is to remind you of the
    saying , ” the pot calling the kettle black ” .

    It’s plain that you are just spinning your wheels with this issue . Your efforts to try and rescue
    Brigham Young from being seen as a false prophet , are futile . So do the right thing and stand for
    truth . You don’t need the prophets of Mormonism to have a saving relationship with God .

  10. shematwater says:

    Mike

    You are missing the entire point and thus showing that you really don’t know what a prophet is.

    Brigham Young believed sertain things, and he taught those things as his own belief, and not as the doctrine of the church. Doing this does not make him a false prophet because he did not claim them to be from God, but from himself. If he had claimed them to be from God than you would have a case, but you don’t because he never did.

    I have never once denied that Brigham Young believed these things, nor have I denied that he spoke on them and expounded that belief to the saints. But in every instance when his purpose was to speak on these matters he clearly indicated that it was his own thoughts and that it didn’t matter if we agreed or not, as it would have no direct effect on our salvation.
    I have pointed this out on more than one occassion. I have shown where he stated that it was his opinion that he had reasoned these things out himself. I have shown that he stated directly that none of it really matter, as he was merely gratifying his own desire to speak about it, as well as the curiosity of others. These statements are ignored by you and white washed by Grindeal.

    Brigham Young was a great prophet, and I really don’t care how many times or how eloquently you deny it. You will see him on the right hand of Christ when the Son of Man comes in his glory, and maybe then you will acknowledge this fact.

  11. grindael says:

    I have shown where he stated that it was his opinion that he had reasoned these things out himself. I have shown that he stated directly that none of it really matter, as he was merely gratifying his own desire to speak about it, as well as the curiosity of others. These statements are ignored by you and white washed by Grindeal.

    You have shown no such thing, only that you don’t know how to spell my name. As a matter of fact, I’ve proven you totally wrong, but you have ignored it and not responded to it, AGAIN. All that you do is repeat the same old lines over and over again that mean nothing. So really, Shem, go crawl back into your bubble, and stop wasting our time with your lame opinions, they really show how little you know about Mormonism. And while you are at it, think on this discourse by Brigham Young, who taught in it that Adam was indeed God and said it was a REVELATION from God to him: (so whether you or anyone else accept it or not makes no difference at all):

    I wanted to make a few remarks upon the subject touched upon by my brother, [Joseph] but I shall not have the time. I frequently think, in my meditations, how glad we should be to instruct the world with regard to the things of God, if they would hear, and receive our teachings in good and honest hearts and profit by them. I have been found fault with a great many times for casting reflections upon men of science, and especially upon theologians, because of the little knowledge they possess about man being on the earth, about the earth itself, about our Father in heaven, his Son Jesus Christ, the order of heavenly things, the laws by which angels exist, by which the worlds were created and are held in existence, &c. How pleased we would be to place these things before the people if they would receive them! How much unbelief exists in the minds of the Latter-day Saints in regard to one particular doctrine which I revealed to them, AND WHICH GOD REVEALED TO ME–namely that ADAM IS OUR FATHER AND GOD–I do not know, I do not inquire, I care nothing about it. Our Father Adam helped to make this earth, it was created expressly for him, and after it was made he and his companions came here. He brought one of his wives with him, and she was called Eve, because she was the first woman upon the earth. Our Father Adam is the man who stands at the gate and holds the keys of everlasting life and salvation to all his children who have or who ever will come upon the earth. I have been found fault with by the ministers of religion because I have said that they were ignorant. But I could not find any man on the earth who could tell me this, although it is one of the simplest things in the world, until I met and talked with Joseph Smith.

    Is it a great mystery that the earth exists? Is it a great mystery, that the world can not solve, that man is on the earth? Yes, it is; but to whom? To the ignorant—those who know nothing about it. It is no mystery to those who understand. Is it a mystery to the Christian world that Jesus is the Son of God, and still the son of man? Yes it is, it is hidden from them, and this fulfils the Scripture—“If our gospel be hid, it is hid to them that are lost,” who have no faith, and who pay no attention to the Spirit of God. These things are called mysteries by the people because they know nothing about them, just like laying hand on the sick. Is it a mystery that fever should be rebuked and the sick healed by the laying of the hands of a man who is endowed with authority from God and has been ordained to that gift? “Oh yes,” say the ignorant, “we know nothing about it,” That is true, but where is the mystery?

    Will the ignorant [Shem] receive the truth when they hear it? No, they will not, and this is their condemnation, that light has come into the world, and they choose darkness rather than light, because their deeds are evil. That is the fact in the case. What is the mystery about it? They do not understand invisible things. Ask the wicked, “Do you know anything about the laying on of hands?” “oh yes, such a man”—a man who is wicked in his whole life—“has the art of laying on hands for the curing the tooth—ache, fevers, wounds,” &c.; and now, in fulfillment of the words of the ancient prophet, thousands of people seek unto “wizards who peep and mutter,” &c., but they will not seek unto the living God. I can say to all the inhabitants of the earth that before what is called spiritualism was ever known in America I told the people that if they would not believe the revelations that God had given he would suffer the devil to give revelations that they—priests and people—would follow after. Where did I declare this? In the cities of New York, Albany, Boston, throughout the United States and in England. Have I told the people that as true as God lived, if they would not have the truth they would have error sent unto them, and they would believe it. What is the mystery of it?

    The Christian world read of, and think much about, St. Paul, also St. Peter, the chief of the Apostles. These men were faithful to and magnified the priesthood while on the earth. Now, where will be the mystery, after they have passed through all the ordeals, and have been crowned and exalted, and received their inheritances in the eternal worlds of glory, for them to be sent forth, as the Gods have been for ever and ever, with the command–”Make yourselves an earth and people it with your own children?”

    Do you think the starry heavens are going to fall? Do the Christian world or the heathen world think that all things are going to be wrapped up, consumed, and annihilated in eternal flames? Oh fools, and slow to heart to believe the great things that God has purposed in his own mind!

    My brother said that God is as we are. He did not mean those words to be literally understood. He meant simply, that in our organization we have all the properties in embryo in our bodies that our Father has in his, and that literally, morally, socially, by the spirit and by the flesh we are his children. Do you think that God, who holds the eternities in his hands and can do all things at his pleasure, it not capable of sending forth his own children, and forming this flesh for his own offspring? Where is the mystery in this? We say that Father Adam came here and helped to make the earth. Who is he? He is Michael, a great prince, and it was said to him by Eloheim: Go ye and make an earth.” What is the great mystery about it? He came and formed the earth.

    Geologists tell us that it was here millions of years ago. How do they know? Adam found it in a state of chaos, unorganized and incomplete. Philosophers, again, in talking of the development of the products of the earth, for instance, in the vegetable kingdom, say the little fibres grew first, then the larger vegetation. When this preparatory stage was completed then came the various orders of the animal creation; and finally man appeared. No matter whether these notions are true or not, they are more or less speculative.

    Adam came here and got it up in a shape that would suit him to commence business. Father Adam came here, and then they brought his wife. “Well,” says one, “Why was Adam called Adam?” He was the first man on the earth, and its framer and maker. He with the help of his brethren, brought it into existence. Then he said, “I WANT MY CHILDREN WHO ARE IN THE SPIRIT WORLD TO COME AND LIVE HERE. I once dwelt upon an earth something like this, in a mortal state, I was faithful, I RECEIVED MY CROWN AND EXALTATION. I have the privilege of extending my work, and to its increase there will be no end. I want my children THAT WERE BORN TO ME IN THE SPIRIT WORLD to come here and take tabernacles of flesh, that their spirits may have a house, a tabernacle or a dwelling place as mine has, and where is the mystery?

    Now for mother Eve. The evil principle always has and always will exist. Well, a certain character came along, and said to Mother Eve, “The Lord has told you that you must not do so and so, for if you do you shall surely die. But I tell you that if you do not do this you will never know good from evil, your eyes will never be opened, and you may live on the earth forever and ever, and you will never know what the Gods know.” The devil told the truth, what is the mystery about it? He is doing it today. He is telling one or two truths and mixing them with a thousand errors to get the people to swallow them. I do not blame Mother Eve, I would not have had her miss eating the forbidden fruit for anything in the world. I would not give a groat if I could not understand light from darkness. I can understand the bitter from the sweet, so can you. Here is intelligence, but bind it up and make machines of its possessors, and where is the glory or exaltation? There is none.

    They must pass through the same ordeals as the Gods, that they may know good from evil, how to succor the tempted, tried and weak, and how to reach down the hand of mercy to save the falling sinner. The Lord has revealed his gospel and instituted its ordinances that the inhabitants of the earth may be put in possession of eternal life. But few of them, however, will accept it. [Like Shem] I have preached it to many thousands of them who are naturally just as honest as I am, but through tradition there is an overwhelming prejudice in their minds which debars them of that liberty I have in my heart. They would be glad to know the ways of God, and to know how Jesus is, and to reap the reward of the faithful, if they had the stamina, I will call it, the independence of mind necessary to embrace the truth, to say, “I know this is true, and if there is no other person on the face of this earth who will defend it, I will to the last.” But this is not in their hearts, it is not in their organization, consequently they do not manifest it. What mystery is there about it?

    None whatever. What is the mystery in Jesus being the Son of God and at the same time the son of the Virgin Mary? You know what the infidels say about this, but their words are no worse than the practice of many in the Christian world.

    I do not want to be found fault with, but if I am it is all the same to me. There is no mystery to me in WHAT GOD HAS REVEALED TO ME, or in what I have learned, whether it has been through Joseph, an angel, the voice of the Spirit, the Holy Ghost or the Spirit of the Lord; no matter how I have learned a thing, if I understand it perfectly it is no mystery to me. It is like making one of these pulpits, or a house like this. This is no mystery to me, I dictated it, and a great many say it is a great piece of architecture to have a single span, so large as this roof and composed of wood that will sustain itself. But it is no mystery to me. I know the strength of the materials and how to place them together. It is no mystery to me to build a temple or a common house. But you take a gentleman or lady who was never beyond the confines of a densely populated city, who never saw wheat grow, and who never saw cattle in the fields, and it is a great mystery to them to see them. Why? Because they never saw such things before, and they know nothing about them; but it is no mystery to those who know all about such things.

    Do you think it any mystery to angels to know how the various organizations are brought on earth? Not the least in the world. There is no mystery in all this to the Gods, no mystery in them to the prophets and apostles whom they send, and to whom they reveal them; it is all plain, everyday common sense, just as much so as with anything else in the world—we understand it.

    Some may say to me, “Why, Brother Brigham, you seem to know it all.” I say, Oh no, I know but very little, but I have an eternity of knowledge before me, and I never expect to see the time when I shall cease to learn, never, no never, but I expect to keep on learning for ever and ever, going on from exaltation to exaltation, glory to glory, power to power, ever pressing forward to greater and higher attainments, as the Gods do. This is an idea that drowns the whole Christian world in a moment. Let them try to entertain it and they are out of sight of land without a ship, and if they had a ship it would have neither sail, rudder nor compass.

    “What,” say they, “God progress?” Now, do not lariat the God that I serve and say that he can not learn any more; I do not believe in such a character. “Why,” say they, “does not the Lord know it all?” Well if he does, he must know an immense amount. No matter about that, the mind of man does not reach that any more than it comprehends the heaven beyond the bounds of time and space in which the Christians expect to sit and sing themselves away to everlasting bliss, and where they say they shall live for ever and for ever.

    If we look forward we can actually comprehend a little of the idea that we shall live for ever and for ever; but you take a rear-sight, and try and contemplate and mediate upon the fact that there never was a beginning and you are lost at once. The present and the future we can comprehend some little about, but the past is all a blank, and it is right and reasonable that it should be so. But if we are faithful in the things of God whey will open up, open up, open up, our minds will expand, reach forth and receive more and more, and by and by we can begin to see that the Gods have been for ever and for ever.

    Some philosophers have tried to reveal the first cause. I would change the position of the whole affair. I would plant my position in the ignorance of man that undertakes to prove or show the existence of a first cause. He had better go to work and prove himself a fool to begin with and then stop, for all his reasonings, arguments and researches with regard to the first cause only prove that he is a fool. Excuse me for this rough expression, perhaps it would be better to say that he comes far short of knowing or understanding himself in the least degree that he is lost in ignorance of himself. Is this the fact? It is. We can know nothing until we learn it, and when we come to a knowledge of facts they are no mystery to us.

    Take one of these native Navajo women down south here into a factory and show her the machinery for weaving blankets, and if she has never seen anything of the kind she would laugh at such nonsense. Says she, “That is not the way to weave blankets, why do you not tie your web up to the limb of a tree, fasten the other end down, and then take a stick and do just so? That will never weave a blanket.” By and by she sees the blanket finished, but it is a mystery to her, and she can not understand anything about it, because she has not learned it. It is so with the whole human family.

    You will excuse me for detaining you a little longer than usual. I wanted to ask the brethren and sisters if they did not think my brother, Joseph Young, pretty good. He is nearly seventy-seven years of age and had a severe sickness last winter. Do you not think he is pretty hale, and doing pretty well? I think he is. I like to see him here. I know that he has been trying to tell the people with regard to the things of God for fifty years past. If I were to live and learn as I have for forty years past—since I have been in this church—for a thousand years, I should only have just commenced to learn the great lesson of eternity.

    I do hope and pray—and I want you to listen how I shape this prayer, instead of praying to my Father in heaven in the name of Jesus to make you and me faithful—I pray that we Latter-day Saints may be faithful to the covenants we have entered into with our Heavenly Father and with one another, and to live our holy religion., for we do know how. I need not ask the Father to make us faithful any more than I need ask him to come and sow our wheat for us, not a particle, for we know all about it. Be faithful, do right and live so as to be worthy of life everlasting. Amen. (Deseret News, Vol. 22, No. 308, June 18, 1873. Brigham Young; discourse delivered in the New Tabernacle, Salt Lake City; Sunday Afternoon, June 8th, 1873. Reported by David W. Evans).

    There are no “I reckon’s” or anything else that can be construed by the ignorant as opinion in this discourse. He also had it published to the world.

  12. Mike R says:

    Shem, You said : ” you are missing the point and thus showing that you really don’t know
    what a prophet is . ”

    Actually , it is you that is missing the point with this issue . A prophet is a teacher . They teach
    their followers . What Brigham Young taught about Adam was false doctrine . Even if no one
    in the church had joined him in his heresy he still is guilty of being a false teacher/prophet .
    Young taught that Adam was the father of the spirits of mankind , you agreed he believed and
    proceeded to teach this . But this has been declared to be erroneous doctrine by later Mormon
    authorities .

    The problem with your reasoning is that you are pulling statements by Young out of their
    context and time frame in an effort to prove he was only giving his opinion , that he never
    considered it as being newly revealed spiritual truth to him by God etc.
    Not only did he testify that this was doctrine , but those officers under him testified to that fact
    as well . They joined their leader and agreed this doctrine was from God . In fact when Orson
    Pratt disagreed with Young he stated he had’nt gotten revelation confirming it was correct
    doctrine , so he opposed it being taught . Some of his fellow officers told Pratt to get revelation
    on it , in doing so he would then know that what Young believed and taught was indeed truth
    from God .

    Shem , your bias against objectively evaluating this doctrine is evident . You want me to take
    your testimony , your inner witness about this . Sorry , but the testimony and inner witness
    of Brigham Young and those officers who served with him that this doctrine was REVEALED
    to them by God , trumps yours .

    Brigham Young was a false prophet . He won’t be at the right hand of Jesus when He comes
    in His glory .

    Now this thread is fading , so this topic can be moved to the ” Adam God Challenge ” thread.

Leave a Reply