The topic of “Mormon folklore” seems to be a popular one right now, following on the heels of the racially offensive comments made by BYU Professor Randy Bott last week (see “Did the Mormon Church ever discriminate against black people?” on Mormon Coffee). As Mormons scramble to try to distance the LDS Church from its past, over and over they tell the world that the things taught by now-gone Mormon leaders regarding the priesthood ban–and about black people in a broader sense–amounts to nothing more than “folklore,” “speculation” and mere “opinion.” In an official statement the LDS Church said,
“It is not known precisely why, how, or when this restriction began in the Church [i.e., the ban against blacks holding the priesthood] but what is clear is that it ended decades ago. Some have attempted to explain the reason for this restriction but these attempts should be viewed as speculation and opinion, not doctrine.”
The use of the that’s-not-official-that’s-just-his-opinion defense among Mormons is not limited to the priesthood ban. For example, if you were to tell a Mormon that LDS apostle Orson Pratt taught that the Virgin Mary was the lawful wife of God the Father, or that Brigham Young taught that interracial marriage between Caucasians and Africans would forever carry a penalty, under the law of God, of death on the spot, more often than not you would hear, “That’s not official. That’s just his opinion.” (Sources for the teachings cited: Orson Pratt, The Seer, 158; Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses 10:110. See also John Lewis Lund’s The Church and the Negro, 1967, 54.)
In an article addressing this common Mormon objection to many early LDS teachings, Vincent McCann from Spotlight Ministries makes some good points. He notes several reasons Mormons cannot really rest in the idea that “official” Mormonism is only found in the Standard Works of the Church:
- The absence of doctrines essential to Mormonism in the Standard Works makes it necessary for Mormons to accept so-called “unofficial” sources as authoritative
- Statements from LDS leaders indicating the unequivocal authority of their teachings as the very word of God
- The current/ongoing official LDS Church pronouncements that the inspired words of living prophets “become scripture” to Latter-day Saints (Mr. McCann cites an older edition of Gospel Principles; in the current edition the teaching can be found on page 48)
One point Mr. McCann makes is often overlooked by Latter-day Saints. That is, Mormons who want to downgraded the doctrinal teachings of past prophets to mere “folklore” generally fail to consider the effect these teachings had on real people who believed their Mormon prophets. Mr. McCann writes,
“Although many Mormons do not view other LDS writings as official Scripture (for example, The Seer or The Journal of Discourses), it should be remembered that many of these writings consist of the words of very prominent leaders in the Mormon Church. As such individuals commanded great respect they were certainly influential over the rank and file. Their statements must have carried some weight. Mormon leaders in prominent positions, like Brigham Young, Orson Pratt, and Bruce R. McConkie, influenced those who looked to them for leadership. The words of these early LDS leaders did not just go out into a vacuum, they went [into] the hearts and minds of the Mormon people and were incorporated into their beliefs.”
Therefore, when Mormon leaders taught people born with dark skin were reaping punishment for premortal behavior, Mormons then treated these people as an “inferior race.”
When Mormon leaders taught Adam was God, Mormons then worshiped a false god.
When Mormon leaders taught that polygamy was required for gaining eternal life, Mormons then submitted to behaviors contrary to biblical teaching.
When Mormon leaders taught that people must atone for some sins with their own blood, Mormons then “helped” those they believed needed to shed their blood (e.g., the Mountain Meadows Massacre).
If Mormons want to say certain LDS teachings were merely the non-authoritative personal opinions of the men who taught them, these Latter-day Saints must come to grips with the fact that these so-called prophets, while claiming to speak for God (but presumably knowing otherwise), led thousands of people astray.
Both options – that these teachings were mere (faulty) opinions or that these teachings were at one time official doctrines of the LDS Church – place a heavy burden on today’s Mormons to explain.
The truth is, these prophets (and their teachings) were untrue. They did not speak for God or represent Him in any way.
God calls us to turn away from false prophets:
“Thus says the Lord GOD: Repent and turn away from your idols, and turn away your faces from all your abominations… that [you] may be my people and I may be [your] God, declares the Lord GOD.” (Ezekiel 14: 6, 11)
May we all, at all times, heed God’s call.
—
For more information see “Pinning Down Mormon Doctrine” and “Disposable Doctrine.”
gpark,
See what I mean, they rather call me names then think that there group uses double standards.
fred
Fred said
Fred, again, more whining and no real honest answers from you. As to calling you names, No one that I recall did that, If your referring to me saying your a hypo-crite and a L-i-a-r, well thats not calling you names, Thats stating a fact which I cited evidence as to why I feel that way.
If I see a person who is clearly drunk and say, That person is a drunk, I’m not calling them names, I am stating a fact. If I see some one who is a thief stealing and say, That guy is a thief, I am not calling him names, I am stating a fact. If I see someone not telling the truth, again, I am not calling them names but am in fact stating what they are. Jesus and his disciples did the same thing.
All your doing is dodging questions, then trying to get that attention away from you when your called on it by asking more questions or complaining about people like me calling you out. Sadly it wont work, no one is buying it, even your beloved defender Clyde cannot defend you when asked point blank to provide in depth answers from you to questions we ask you.
Why do you not know the Bible well enough to know what God had Paul change?
You keep bragging that you know the Bible better than Mormons.
Or do you know and just do not want to admit the double standards you play by?
Or maybe you do not want to think that your teachers that you follow faithfully have created a double standard in you?
fred
[Fred, please stop playing this game. If you would like the Christians here to respond to your assertion that Paul changed something God said, provide the pertinent biblical references so they can explain the Christian position on the text. If you choose not to change your assertion into an actual question, let the matter drop. -Sharon]
Fred why do you keep ignoring what I say, then demanding I answer you? Why do you hold me to a standard you wont live to.
Since you keep claiming I claim I know the Bible, and I do, let me quote you a scripture, but only in part. I will tell you what was said, you find the verse, and it applies to us. The religious leaders asked Jesus a question. You ask me questions. Jesus said, let me ask you a question, and once you answer it I will answer you. I ask you questions, but The religious leaders refused to answer Jesus and blew it off as they did not know. You refuse to answer me, but not because you dont know, but because you cannot. So I wont answer you, not because I cannot, but because you wont answer me.
Hi Fred
You said “Why do you not know the Bible well enough to know what God had Paul change?”
I know I’m not the sharpest tool in the shed, and that I don’t know the bible as well as I would like. But I have no idea what it is God told Paul to change. As someone that loves learning new things I have to ask, what was it?
Hello TjayT,
I hate to say it, but my mind works in a weird way, and I know exactly what the question Fred is asking with out asking an actual question. But as I told him I refuse to answer him until he answers me. But also I do understand why no one knows what Fred is asking, since he is babbling his thoughts and thinks he is asking a clear question.
Maybe it was from my years of using people and drugs, and being used, and while being used, I was not stupid, I knew I was being used, but did not care since I got what I wanted from the deal. Anyway, my mind is warped, partly from sin, partly from choices I choose to do and lived out. But Praise God I am no longer the guy I once was. I just still can read between the lines and understand babble.
I think we all see what’s going on here. fred’s some sort of Mormon torpedo sent here to blow-up the blog. The more time we spend on his stupid, inane remarks and requests the less we spend on the actual topic at hand. I say forget him. Nobody could possibly be that ignorant on purpose. It’s a game.
Once Mormons figure out that the “prophets” they thought were spokesmen for God, are phoney as a three dollar bill, they get themselves free. Freedom from a form of slavery that caused them to jump through all kinds of hoops in support of a religious system that is as fraudulent as the men at the top.
Deloy Bateman was a member of one of the fundamentalist Mormon sects but what he says in “Under The Banner of Heaven” could be applied to the LDS members also.
“Now that he’s no longer a member of the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of LDS, Deloy is astonished at some of the beliefs the religion instills in its members. “It staggers me,” he says, “to look back on the things I used to believe…….” It’s amazing how gullible people are,” DeLoy continues. “But you have to remember what a huge comfort the religions is. It provides all the answers. It makes life simple. Nothing makes you feel better than doing what the prophet commands you to do. ….And that’s a real big part of what holds this religion together: it’s not having to make those critical decisions……”
People in the LDS church, Fundamentalist and otherwise, out source their thinking to fallible men who have no more depth of spiritual understanding than they do. They haven’t been chosen by God nor to they have any special gifts. They moved up through the political part of the LDS system.
([Fred, please stop playing this game. If you would like the Christians here to respond to your assertion that Paul changed something God said, provide the pertinent biblical references so they can explain the Christian position on the text. If you choose not to change your assertion into an actual question, let the matter drop. -Sharon])
It is no game, it goes to the way your group uses a double standard and choose not to know it.
“Christians here”? It is all in YOUR Bible and since you claim to know the Bible better than Mormons, you should already know about it.
You do check your work against the Bible, don’t you? So why can a Mormon who you claim knows less then you, have to show you what is in your Bible? You know all those things you say we Mormons do to deny the truth, well look to yourself and say them to yourself about yourself because ya’ll have proven by your posts that you live that way.
fred
I’ll take the liberty to answer for Sharon, Fred. You need to read up on the word “olam”._grindael http://www.christianarticles.org/Articles/McCord/Jesus%20And%20The%20Priesthood.htm
Well it seems that Sharon has thrown in the towel. It’s not that anything is won it is just that mormon research ministries does no research what so ever.
Nice try Clyde , but it won’t work .
Ok, I took a day off, and have come back to the same silly shenanigans by the Mormons here. Why am I not surprised? We get this,
I postulated the Levitical Priesthood, (which I’m pretty sure is right, and have addressed above) but of course was ignored. Instead, we have gotten a bunch of blather that we don’t answer questions or don’t know the Bible. Well, is that what you are talking about Fred? If not, then please pony up. Or are you afraid that an answer to your vague question will be something you can’t explain away? Again, we don’t see any serious attempt at debate here, (and I’m perfectly willing to debate any Mormon on any doctrine of their church), and so I’ve come to the conclusion that that is what they are afraid of.
For all of you lurkers out there, this seems to be the best that Mormons can do: “The Church is true because I say so.” Pretty pathetic. I would ask Clyde if he could answer the question, but it would be too easy for him to mail Fred and get the answer that Fred thinks is going to “stump” all the Christians. Paul was not a false apostle by any Christian standard, but Joseph Smith, Brigham Young, and the rest of them sure are. Perhaps I’ll just leave a few examples to give the lurkers something to chew on, instead of more Mormon blather. _johnny
If Mormons don’t agree with their “authorities” it is they, that has the problem:
“What we get out of general conference is a build-up of our spirits as we listen to those particular principles and practices of the gospel which the Lord inspires the present leadership of the Church to bring to our attention at the time. He knows why he inspired Brother Joseph F. Merrill to give the talk he just gave. He knows why he inspired the other brethren who have talked in this conference to say what they have said. It is our high privilege to hear, through these men, what the Lord would say if he were here. If we do not agree with what they say, it is because WE are out of harmony with the Spirit of the Lord.” (~Marion G. Romney, Conference Report, October 1950, p.126. emphasis mine)
This is simply Cult (spurious religion) mentality. Agree or it is you who have the problem. Can you trust this “prophet”? No.
“A person was mentioned today who did not believe that Brigham Young was a Prophet, Seer, and Revelator. I wish to ask every member of this whole community, if they ever heard him profess to be a Prophet, Seer, and Revelator, as Joseph Smith was? He professed to be an Apostle of Jesus Christ, called and sent of God to save Israel. If you know what the calling of an Apostle is, and if there were ten thousand of them on the earth at the same time, you must know that the words of an Apostle who magnifies his calling are the words of the Almighty to the people all the time. He never need be called in question whether he revealed the mind of the Lord or not.” (~Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, Vol 6, pages 319-20. emphasis mine)
Oops. There’s another one, and Brigham Young just validated Marion G. Romney’s words. (The calling of an “apostle” in Mormonism is to be a “prophet, seer, & revelator”)
“Hiram Page and Oliver Cowdery went to Toronto on this mission, but they failed entirely to sell the copy-right, returning without any money. Joseph was at my father’s house when they returned. I was there also, and am an eye witness to these facts. Jacob Whitmer and John Whitmer were also present when Hiram Page and Oliver Cowdery returned from Canada. Well, we were all in great trouble; and we asked Joseph how it was that he had received a revelation from the Lord for some brethren to go to Toronto and sell the copy-right, and the brethren had utterly failed in their undertaking. Joseph did not know how it was, so he enquired of the Lord about it, and behold the following revelation came through the stone: “Some revelations are of God: some revelations are of men: and some revelations are of the devil.” So we see that the revelation to go to Toronto and sell the copy-right was not of God, but was of the devil or of the heart of man. When a man enquires of the Lord concerning a matter, if he is deceived by his own carnal desires, and is in error, he will receive an answer according to his erring heart, but it will not be a revelation from the Lord.” (~David Whitmer, An Address to All Believers in Christ, page 31. emphasis mine)
Oh man, this isn’t good. Here, a professed “witness” to Smith’s Book of Mormon plates is telling us that he got revelations from the devil, or made them up. Can we trust this guy? Heck no. But Marion G. Romney told us that if we don’t agree, it’s our fault! Drat. (No wonder David Whitmer denounced Joseph Smith!)
“I wish to emphasize the fact that this revelation is not limited to Joseph Smith and the other great prophets who preceded him. We have standing at the head of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints today living oracles through whom God reveals his will. Certainly the words of this revelation apply to President George Albert Smith, to his Counselors, to the Twelve Apostles, Patriarch to the Church and to me, just as much as they did to Joseph Smith, or to Isaiah, Jeremiah, Moses, Nephi, Alma, Peter, Paul, or to all of the other ancient prophets of God.” ~(~Milton R. Hunter, Conference Report, April 1948, p.31. emphasis mine)
And what did George A. Smith reveal?
The attitude of the Church with reference to Negroes remains as it has always stood. It is not a matter of the declaration of a policy but of direct commandment from the Lord, on which is founded the doctrine of the Church from the days of its organization, to the effect that Negroes may become members of the Church but that they are not entitled to the priesthood at the present time. The prophets of the Lord have made several statements as to the operation of the principle. President Brigham Young said: “Why are so many of the inhabitants of the earth cursed with a skin of blackness? It comes in consequence of their fathers rejecting the power of the holy priesthood, and the law of God. They will go down to death. And when all the rest of the children have received their blessings in the holy priesthood, then that curse will be removed from the seed of Cain, and they will then come up and possess the priesthood, and receive all the blessings which we now are entitled to.” (~George Albert Smith, J. Reuben Clark, David O. McKay, First Presidency Statement, August 17,1949.emphasis mine)
Oh no. What a pickle this is. It’s a commandment that stated that all of the rest of the children must receive the “priesthood” first, then the “children of Cain” will get their chance. This is in plain English, so there is no debate about it, and likening it to the Levitical Priesthood is ludicrous. George A. Smith was adamant, and he was a prophet, right? Guess not. We can’t trust these guys. And this is only a few examples out of hundreds! Sharon, the evidence is in. They can’t be trusted. And our Mormon friends have not explained why they can be. Can you believe it?
MRM does it’s research Clyde (see answer to Fred above). The ball is now in your court. _johnny
Good job grindael.
The amount of weasel-ing that Mormons have to do to support their false apostles, prophets and priesthood is unbelievable. Judging by their standards, anyone claiming to be a prophet, an apostle, or member of some fictitious office called the “priesthood” could be made to be viable.
Mormon authorities claim over and over again that what they say is directly from the mouth of God and yet their batting average isn’t even as good as the most struggling player in the class D minor leagues. It just goes to prove that if someone is emotionally attached to a person or a movement, they can alibi anything to keep the fantasy alive.
In the Book of Revelation Jesus reveals to John what he thinks about these people who bill themselves as apostles, prophets, or prophetess. Revelation 2:2 says “I know your deeds and your toil and perseverance and that you cannot endure evil men, and you put to the test those who call themselves apostles, and they are not, and you found them to be false;…….”
The men in the Mormon church who call themselves “apostles” are indeed evil men as the Scripture here tells us. They are evil because they are claiming to speak for God when in fact they are not. They represent a “god” and a “Christ” who is neither God or Christ. Any “apostle” who promotes a god other than God is evil. Any “apostle” who promotes a “Christ” who isn’t Christ is evil. The Mormon apostles are evil and those who support them are as evil as they are.
Revelation 2:20 says “But I have this against you, that you tolerate the woman Jezebel, who call herself a prophetess, and she teaches and leads My bond-servants astray……….”
This is a picture of the Mormon prophets.
Now a Mormon might ask when has a prophet of the Mormon church ever taught or led people to commit sexual immorality? The practice was called polygamy. Joseph Smith was the number one perpetrator of sexual immorality. He seduced women, some married to other men and at least one a child of fourteen, to join him in a phoney practice that promised them a reward in the Celestial Kingdom. Even Smith’s own son rejected his father’s hideous practice as he (son) became the leader of a rival Mormon sect.
How any Mormon, knowing the facts about the swingers club that Smith ran in Nauvoo and continued by Young in Utah, can call these guys “prophets” is just mind boggling. The fact that they promoted the practice and said it was from God is diabolical.
This is what happens when people give themselves over to a spirit of deception and embrace men as apostles and prophets who are anything but. We see it today as Mormons excuse the behavior and alibi the false teachings of men past and present. The priesthood myth is another such deception. There is only one “priest” and that is Jesus Christ Himself. He is the only one qualified to hold such an office in His Church.
The false prophet Joseph Smith came up with another one of his fantastic stories to justify his usurping of the priesthood from its only rightful holder. False Mormon apostles and prophets created a new god, a new Jesus, a new plan of salvation. They are truly evil.
I was listening to the news today 3-8-2012 and they said Harold Camping the preacher that claimed twice the world would end and gave exact dates, said he was wrong, he said he was really sorry for all trouble he caused and he is done predicting the end of the world.
I was surprised he admitted he was wrong, since this made his third time, he did it once I believe it was back in the 90’s. I think it’s great this guy did it, now if only the Mormons and the prophets could follow his lead and admit they are and were wrong. The problem is, if they did that the church would cease to exist and lots of these prophets would need to get a real job and no longer have their positions of power, influence and money.
So Mormonism has false prophets, false apostles and a false priesthood. I would call that the trifecta of religious falsehood. There’s no anointing and certainly no power. The only power that Mormonism could claim comes directly out of the occult and the souls of men. That’s why the Mormon religion is an abomination.
It all started with the magic stone peeping of Joseph Smith as demonstrated by the quote in grindael’s post above and continued with the occult based Masonic rituals co-opted for the Mormon temples and the occult symbols that adorn these edifices.
Smith was an expert at conjuring there’s no doubt about it. My guess is that much of his hocus pocus played into the gullibility of those who traipsed after him on his treasure hunting excursions.
It’s instructive to note that Smith’s witnesses to his gold plates never claimed to see them with their physical eyes but rather “the eyes of faith”. Any religion that comes up with a new god and a new savior isn’t all that tough to see through. Neither are Smith’s claims of all sorts of appearances by all manner of spirit beings.
So is it any wonder that those who follow in leadership, will be as phoney as the “prophet” who founded the religion in the first place.
People are brought to decision points along the way as they learn more about religious leaders and their claims. It is quite astounding that Mormons will believe Smith’s tale to begin with, but then when exposed to the truth to continue to follow the hoax is even more astounding.
But as I keep saying, there’s an emotional component in all of this and also a spiritual one. The second of these is attached to the spirit that Smith embraced and followed and drew inspiration.
I’ll offer a bit on what this issue as it is so vital today for our spiritual health to
evaluate any prophet/apostle that would offer their gospel as the truth . Jesus
warned of a proliferation of false prophets that would come in the end times
Matt 24:24 , but these deceivers were already at work during the time of the early
church — [2Pt.2:1; 1Jn.4:1] . I started out looking into the claims of one such prophet
many years ago . Their claims were specific : There’s only one prophet on earth today
that speaks for God , those that submit to this prophet teachings constitute the
only true church/organization . Failure to follow this prophet will bring God’s
judgement upon you . This prophet claims to be the modern day counterpart of Ezekiel
and Jeremiah . Those who follow this prophet are cautioned to not attempt to embrace
their own interpretation of the scriptures as the prophet’s interpretation is final for the
whole organization . There are several million people who follow this prophet today.
they are extremely moral and have a tremendous drive to get their message , their
gospel out , believing as they do that door to door work is mandated by the Bible.
Considering their claim to be exclusively picked by God to reveal His spiritual truths
they have advertised for the public to trust their teachings . The following are a sample
of their claims to be a trustworthy guide in spiritual truths [ direct quote is in quotation
marks ] God has a ” singular channel of reliable spiritual guidance ” today . Also:
This organization ” is under the direct supervision of Jesus Christ” . [cont].
[cont]. Also: concerning the official publication the prophet uses to teach his
followers God’s spiritual truth : ” Since 1879 it has …CONSISTENTLY PROVEN ITSELF
DEPENDABLE . Unfailingly it has magnified the name of Almighty God ‘ Jehovah and
made known His purposes toward mankind.” One testimony published in this official
publication: Jehovah’s visible organization is a TREMENDOUSLY DEPENDABLE
SOURCE.NEVER ONCE HAS IT MISLED ME IN ANY WAY . everything it has said is
based on God’s word” . This prophet has actually warned his people about false prophet
and how to spot them : a false prophet will predict something to happen but it will not
take place as predicted; a false prophet will be unreliable in his teachings , a pattern of
vacillating on important doctrines. Yet what has this prophet taught as gospel truth?
A quick sample: OK to celebrate Christmas , now forbidden. Jesus died on a cross now
it is forbidden to teach this. The Great Crowd in Rev7:9 to heaven when they die
now they stay on earth, no need to even to Born again re: 1935 revelation. Once
ok to worship Jesus , now it is forbidden . Official Scriptural interpretation of whether
the men of Sodom will be resurrected: 1952 == no , 1965= yes , 1988= no . There’s
many , many, more examples . One last note , despite what their track record has
revealed , the leadership will use Eph 4:14 as a good indicator to spot a false prophet!
And to calm any complaints for their track record? They simply quote Prov 4:18 over
and over and over again. So submit or else you’ll be inviting God’s judgement .
My wife once followed this prophet.[cont]
[cont] Now we come to the Claims of another modern day prophet who claims to be
the only prophet on the earth to speak for God . Those who embrace this prophet’s
claims are said to constitute the only church/organization . This church is said to also
be personally supervised by Jesus, since 1830 . The leadership is said to relay spiritual
truth from God and then teach those who follow them Failure to submit to this prophet
is to also invite God’s judgement on your life. Thus we meet the prophet of Mormonism.
The claims of being a reliable guide in spiritual truth is what this prophet advertises.
Mormon leadership has also counseled on how to detect false prophets/teachers. It’s
the same criteria mentioned by the other modern day prophet ( last post). To be
a consistent trustworthy guide in important spiritual truths is to be truely led by God .
The Mormon leadership compares themselves to other religious men as a way to warn
the Mormon people on how to avoid being misled on important spiritual truths that
will have bering on their relationship with God. They caution the Mormon people to
dismiss those who alter , revise , the gospel that Jesus gave His apostles in the early
Church because they state the true ” Gospel cannot possibly be changed “. and ” the
gospel must always be the same in all it’s parts ….no one can change the gospel ”
[ Church News 6-5-1965]. also : Mormonism supplies a CONSISTENT and positive
theology ….IT SPEAKS WITH NO UNCERTAIN SOUND. It utters the voice of
authority…IT IS DEFINITE IN IT’S REVEALMENTS AND DOCTRINES. DUBIETY
REMAINS NOT UNDER IT’S INFLUENCE.UNCERTAINTY IS MARKED UPON ALL THE
CREEDS OF MEN.”
[cont]
So the Mormon people are counseled that they have a way to evaluate religious
teachers : Mormon leaders are consistent and trustworthy and accurate in the
doctrines they teach , other teachers are inconsistent and vacillating . The truths
that scriptures like Eph 4:14 reveal about false teachers are even utilized by Mormon
leaders as a solid criteria to fortify their accusations against others . Mormon
prophets claim to have the true gospel of salvation , it was long unavailable to man ,
but then restored thru their prophet 1n 1830 . A great universal apostasy from the
Christian religion caused the true gospel to be altered , it was corrupted by evil men
who mixed it with their own human speculation. Ordinances were also altered and
laws were changed , Mormon leaders claim this happened. But now the true gospel
is back and is proclaimed by them only. Their counsel is claimed to be the place for
” PURE UNPOLLUTED GUIDANCE.” [ Oct 1998 Conf. ” Come listen to a Prophet’s voice]
Because of this it is also promised : ” The Lord will NEVER allow the President to
to teach us false doctrine “. [ G.P. 1978, p 46] . Also: ” THE TIME WILL NEVER
COME when we will not be able to put CONFIDENCE and exercise faith IN THE
TEACHINGS AND INSTRUCTION OF THOSE WHO LEAD US ” [ Conf. report Oct 1952,
Joseph F Smith jr ] . What about the track record of Mormon prophets/apostles?
Personally supervised by Jesus to give consistent accurate and reliable spiritual
guidance since 1830 ? Their track testifies against this claim . Jesus said to Beware
of them –Matt 7:15
Using OT prophets as a model, as Mormons do, what we see is that the (OT) prophets actually knew what they were doing. They were chosen by God, anointed by God, recognized by the people as speaking for God and they were actually right when they spoke; reinforcing what was a consistent message. These OT prophets also straightened leaders out, specifically the king, when need be.
Because Mormonism is so ill-defined and driven by the next new shiny object (re. revelation, teaching) doctrine remains in a state of flux and subject to interpretation. These prophetic utterances can also be dispatched and sent to the Mormon doctrinal graveyard.
1 Samuel 3:11-20 gives a clear picture of the calling of a prophet, his anointing by God and the service he rendered to the Lord. Verse 20 says, “And all Israel from Dan even to Beersheba knew that Samuel was confirmed as a prophet of the Lord.”
First of all, Mormon prophets aren’t called by anyone not even the Mormon god since he doesn’t exist. What we have is a bunch of men who move through the Mormon management system to eventually lead the sect. They are little more than middle managers who moved up into top management and now run the business.
I would venture to say that they don’t even hear from the Mormon god as he exists in their imagination. As they’ve come up through the system, they’ve learned how to posture and pose for the people and say religiously sounding drivel that satisfies the ears of the listeners but has no serious spiritual quality to it.
One thing to mention is that what the 9th article of faith says is pertinent in life because I believe that God still has much to reveal about himself and his ordinances.
All the non mormons on this blog have the right to believe as they want to believe. It seems that if they were mormons they would throw out the 9th article and just follow the early prophets. Not realizing that things can change.
One last thing, I thought that Fred’s query had to do with circumcision not what grindael mentioned. Kudos to Grindael for the answer, to Rick B. for not answering right away so the blog had 73 comments and to rick, Falcon and Mike R. for more than half the comments. Way to go Fred for egging them on.
Clyde
Why does it matter who has the most comments? There are some posts where I have a good half of the comments. Does that make me bad somehow?
Another OT prophet that demonstrated what a prophet actually has as part of his portfolio and spiritual skill set is Nathan. In 2 Samuel 7:4-16 Nathan initially tells David to go ahead and built a house for the Lord as David desired to do. However Nathan forgot to check it out with the Lord first. When the word of the Lord came to Nathan that night he was given the message and reported it to David. This was a prophet acting in the capacity of a prophet after assuming something without the Lord’s counsel.
Again in 2 Samuel 12:1-14 Nathan is called upon to deliver some news to David and it isn’t good news. David had sinned and it was time to pay the piper for the dance. In 2 Samuel 12:7 Nathan brings the hammer down on David the King.
Whoever has brought the Mormon prophets to account for their sins and misdeeds. When people follow a false prophet and that prophet is the head of the religious sect, no one is allowed to call him to account for his behavior.
The false Mormon prophets have had free reign to do and say as they please. The worst of these were the first two Joseph Smith and Brigham Young. But this is what happens when people foolishly give themselves over to an attitude of “whatever the prophet does is of God”.
We see it here on this blog were daily Mormons will defend the most obvious sin and lawless deeds of their prophets. The worst of these is the rejection of God and Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.
False prophets are an abomination. The Mormon church has been led by such men from its inception.
clyde,
What are you, the self-appointed blog hall monitor. I’ve heard that Mormons tend to be busy bodies into everyone’s business and you are proving the observation as true. ‘I guess besides spending your time organizing your paperclip collection you chart poster contributions. Well I guess people have to find meaning in life where they can.
In his Epistle Jude takes to task those who claim certain individuals and his characterization could be easily applied to Mormon prophets and apostles. The one line that is readily applicable to these frauds is when he says that they “…..deny our only Master and Lord, Jesus Christ.” This description gets to the heart of Mormonism; the rejection of God and his replacement with a sinful man who they claim became a god. There are many egregious errors in Mormonism, but the rejection of Jesus is the greatest among them.
Jude says they are, “……..hidden reefs…clouds without water, carried along by winds; autumn trees without fruit, doubly dead, uprooted; wild waves of the sea, casting up their own shame like foam; wandering stars, for whom the black darkness has been reserved forever.”
This is an apt description of Mormon apostles and prophets. In modern terms we would say things like “all hat and no cattle” to describe the Mormon leaders. We could also say that they change their doctrine about as often as they change their magic underwear.
It’s a tough thing for well meaning Mormons when the discover that their leaders don’t measure up to their billing. It would be like going to a concert by a skilled and popular rock band and find out that a third rate tribute band is performing.
What we have are flawed men in a flawed and counterfeit religious system. The quicker Mormons figure it out and exit the better.
(I’ll take the liberty to answer for Sharon, Fred. You need to read up on the word “olam”._grindael http://www.christianarticles.org/Articles/McCord/Jesus%20And%20The%20Priesthood.htm)
Grindael;
Thanks for the good article. The way McCord speaks about the differences in man’s understanding and teaching of God’s word backs up what I have been saying.
fred
Falcon
No, I am not but at times I think that there should be a referee. Some of your comments make me wonder what you are talking about. You almost come across like some radical terrorist. But you can believe the way you want to and so can I.
Tjayt
I remember looking at one blog here and of thirty postings only three were not posted by falcon or Mike R. It was like there no opportunity to post a different view. One needs to remember what Richard L. Evans said in one of his Thoughts for a hundred days. If you look hard enough you can find fault with anything.
Let me wrap up my points on this whole issue about trusting the Mormon leadership.
We’ve already viewed the exclusive claims of these men . They ask us to trust their
inner witness , a confirmation that they are giving accurate reliable counsel on spiritual
matters. Consider how these men compare their own ministry to the Mormon people as
opposed to non-Mormon religious leaders : can’t trust the RLDS because their always
altering their doctrines , they have no true apostles and prophets at their head to keep
their members from being ‘ tossed to and fro ‘ with every wind of doctrine .” [ McConkie
,M.D. p. 630]. Consider what is said about those men who departed from the faith soon
after the death of the original apostles : ” without Revelation and priesthood authority
people relied on human wisdom to interpret the scriptures…false ideas were taught as
truth. ” [ Preach my Gospel, p.35] . Consider what is said about other non-Mormons :
” It is because men deny the Holy Ghost who giveth utterance and preach instead their
own ideas of what scriptures mean, that there are so many false and vain and foolish
notions in so-called Christendom…” [ McConkie, A New Witness For The Articles of
Faith p. 324]. As we run down a tiny sample of what Mormon leaders have issued as
gospel truth ,remember what these men just accused others of , namely : 1. teaching
their own ideas as spiritual truth on important teachings 2. A pattern of altering or
vacillating on important beliefs , can’t seem to make up their minds etc. , in short,
teaching for doctrine the commandments /precepts of men [ Eph 4:14; 2 Nephi 28:14]
cont
A tiny sample of spiritual guidance from Mormon prophets:
– the ordinance of sealing men to men , called the Law of Adoption. A man could greatly
increase his family and kingdom making himself a more powerful Being in the hereafter.
practiced as a gospel truth for decades , then discarded
– Re-baptism . Once a requirement for first time Temple attendees . Before that it was
practiced for not only re-dedication but also for the remission of sins. This gospel
truth was discarded around the turn of the 20th century .
– Polygamy . practiced as a gospel truth from 1843 to 1890 ; not practiced from 1890-
today; will be practiced after Christ returns; and in heaven .
– Negroes and the Priesthood. see previous thread for the confusion over this doctrine!
– White or Pure at 2Nephi 30:6 . 1830 Bof M = white; 1840 edtion=pure ;all editions
after 1840= white, 1981 edition = pure
– Adam -god . Prophet B.Y. taught from inspiration that Adam was the literal Father of
Jesus ‘ spirit . This caused many LDS to worship Adam as the only God for this earth.
this gospel truth from prophet Young took years after his death to be discarded .
– Polandry . a gospel ordinance where a woman could marry a man to live with in this
life but also marry a different man to live with in heaven after she dies . This gospel
ordinace discarded .
– Baptism for health .Practiced in the Temple . Discarded decades later
Fred, you haven’t said anything. You have no argument, nor proof to back up what you say. Since you won’t clarify, that tells me that you don’t have anything substantive to offer.
cont.
– denying Temple recommends to Casino dealers in Las Vegas . Then Changed .
– LDS women once could’nt attend Temple for Endowments if married to a non-Mormon.
– Gospel laws. Articles of Faith #3 : must be obedient to the laws of the Gospel to be
saved . Various Laws in the Mormon Gospel were : Polygamy ; can’t marry a Black
person, death penalty for thieves ( habitual ) , adultery . Not practiced now.
– Access to the Temple : Married couples counseled to refrain from intimacy a week
or so before attending the Temple, and in the 1980’s First Pres. interpreted that what
the scriptures called “impure” included a sexual position married couples often
practiced . Discarded later .
– The Holy Ghost , a personage ? for decades several Mormon leaders were confused
about if the Holy Ghost was a person .
– Adam created on another earth ? Brigham taught such .
– Heavenly Father still progressing in knowledge ? Brigham and others taught such .
decades later Joseph Fielding Smith said this was a dangerous doctrine.
– Temple ritual. After 1990 several significant parts of the Endowment ceremony
were discarded .
– Hill Cummorah in upstate New York , now in Central America ?
There are more examples . In light of what Mormon leaders have offered as
trustworthy teaching of spiritual truths , and in how they accuse non-Mormons
of being unreliable teachers , we can dismiss Mormon prophets.
clyde,
“Radical terrorist” ? That’s pretty funny. I do have a sharp edge. I admit that. When I think of a “radical terrorist” type, I think of Mark Hofmann who pulled the wool over the eyes of the Mormon prophets a couple of decades ago. Here’s some highlights of how he flim-flamed these supposed Mormon prophets and apostles. Incidentally, the fact that these guys were unable to see through Hofmann caused a crisis of faith for many in the Mormon community. Their lack of spiritual insight and just plain old common sense made them look like the total fools they are.
Mark Hofmann was a forger and shrewd observer of human behavior. Like any good con man, he knew part of his success manufacturing and selling fake historical documents depended on willing victims � people who wanted to believe his claims.
“Growing up Mormon, Hofmann realized he was surrounded by credulous people who were trained to trust those who presented themselves as authorities. He also saw they were nuts about their sacred history and legends. There was a situation ripe for exploitation.”
“Hofmann�s method was to learn what kind of documents people really wanted to find and then he would �find� them. Producing what people already wanted assured a lucrative market. Or he would create things no one imagined existed because it was harder to challenge their authenticity.”
“Hofmann had a grudge against the church, so he took special glee in selling bogus church-related documents. It was one thing to fool collectors, it would be quite another to fool the supposedly inspired leaders of the church. Besides, they had deeper pockets.”
Hofmann, in my estimation, was a modern day Joseph Smith in that he was very clever and knew how to scam people.
From his years of poking around old documents and studying church history, Hofmann knew there were skeletons in the Mormon closet. Authentic LDS history is far murkier than the official version. He also knew the church was interested in acquiring potentially embarrassing documents so they could suppress them. Again, the situation was ripe for exploitation.
Like most inactive Mormons, Hofmann was pretty sure the brethren had no special divine light, no powers of discernment. They did have access to document experts, though. So Hofmann tested the waters with some minor forgeries. The fish took the hook.
Here’s more of the story:
Hofmann knew Joseph Smith and his family had been heavily involved in ritual magic, astrology and alchemy. He knew they believed in charms and incantations, in ghosts and shape-shifting creatures. And he knew that the brethren knew and that they didn�t want others to know, because it wasn�t faith-promoting.
So Hofmann concocted the �salamander letter,� an account of JS encountering a talking salamander that turned into an angel. The forgery neatly connected the Smith family�s occult practices with the origins of Mormonism.
Now here’s the point of Hofmann’s revealing the Mormon apostles and prophets as frauds without any particular spiritual gifts.
The fact church leaders accepted the salamander letter as authentic tells us several things. First, they didn�t say, �Joseph Smith, the Lord�s chosen prophet of the restoration, never saw any talking salamanders. That would never have happened, so this document is obviously fake.� Rather, they accepted that JS might have had such a vision because they knew there were even weirder things recorded.
Get it? They accepted it as a fact because they knew that Smith was engaged in all sorts of odd, peculiar and just plain bizarre escapades.
Finally:
“How is it that church leaders could meet several times with Mark Hofmann and never discern the dark spirit inside him? How could they not recognize the devil within their midst? And how many times before had they failed at similar challenges? How many more times would they fail?”
The Mormon corporate leaders, labeled “apostles” and “prophets” are nothing more than men who made it to the top of the leadership pyramid of LDS Inc. They’ve learned to speak the Mormon language with accompanying facial expressions, gestures and body language. They’ve got the LDS lingo down with all of the spiritually sounding phrases and vocabulary. They know how to do Mormonism at a high level. They’ve got the culture nailed. They can repeat the narrative with appropriate sincerity. They know who to appear devout and righteous.
They are snakes! Wolves in sheep clothing whose purpose is to foster and keep the institution humming along.
They perpetuate a myth which condemns their followers to spiritual destruction.
Source: ex-Mormon.org; Stray Mutt
clyde,
Everyone gets the same amount of posts on this blog; it’s six a day. If some of us are dominating the posts it’s because we have chosen to do the research and spend the time writing the posts. People like you and fred choose to do a very low level form of presentation. There is no substance to what you and fred write; just some random pot shots and attempts to take the topic some place other than it’s intended destination. This tells me that you folks have limited knowledge, limited resources and an extremely shallow faith in Mormonism.
We see it all the time here. It’s basically “testimony bearing” level nonsense.
Take for example what grindael, who is an ex-Mormon, writes and the response fred provides. grindael is playing the game at a major league level, fred can’t even get a ticket to attend as a spectator.
Generally when we see this sort of poster, the guess is that they are also rans within the structure of the Mormon ward, wandering about with little status and no one to listen to them. So they show-up here because it’s anonymous and they can get some attention.
It’s good though. The Mormon lurkers can see the stark contrast and it’s helpful to them in that it assists them in their journey out of Mormonism which is our goal.
grindael says: – March 9, 2012 at 12:13 am – (Fred, you haven’t said anything. You have no argument, nor proof to back up what you say. Since you won’t clarify, that tells me that you don’t have anything substantive to offer.)
It was your article I was comment on; — You did read it, didn’t you?
Even when you have your own article to read and study, you choose to say I do not spoon feed you enough.
Average for this group, it’s your need for someone to tell you what you are to think before you study something!!!!!!!!!!!!!
fred
grindael says: – March 8, 2012 at 1:39 am – {Ok, I took a day off, and have come back to the same silly shenanigans by the Mormons here. Why am I not surprised? We get this, Just so I know you know the Word of God in the Bible: What did God say would be forever in the OT that He later had Paul say was no longer in effect?
I postulated the Levitical Priesthood, (which I’m pretty sure is right, and have addressed above) but of course was ignored. Instead, we have gotten a bunch of blather that we don’t answer questions or don’t know the Bible. Well, is that what you are talking about Fred?}
That is not the one I was thinking about, there are more. Keep digging, if you are able to have an original thought.
fred
Clyde,
You wonder why people do not trust LDS and I say stuff like you guys are L-iars and you device people. It’s because you do. Here is an example of what you said and did.
You said
You said I (Rick) Belittle the Word of God by stating “in so far as it is translated correctly” You said flat out I made that claim and said that. Then when I said it is in fact your church that teaches that, you said,
So you still dodge what your church said and taught. So here is what A of F 8 says,
So when you quoted number 9, did you skip number 8? Have you only read 1-7, then picked up on 9? Your church teaches this, Not me, so to sit here and act as if this was something I made up and your church never taught is very dishonest. This shows me You and Fred have no clue what your talking about and no one can take anything you say seriously.
You two are lucky I dont know where you live or what LDS church you attend. I would report you two and tell your leaders you guys are leading people astray with false doctrine and giving the church a bad name.
Clyde6070;
I see that you have noticed that these folks do not like it when we will not play with their marked and stacked deck of cards.
fred
Fred, you may have read the article I posted, but it’s obvious you did not comprehend what it was saying. The relevant passages are,
In regards to time, since olam, excluding context, only denotes a period of “indefinite duration,” the context in which olam appears tells the reader how long a period of time is being considered. For example, Jonah, inside the stomach of a “great fish” said that the “earth with its bars closed upon me for ever” (olam, Jonah 2:6). But actually the duration of his olam stay in the fish was “three days and three nights” (Jonah 1:17), though he certainly felt that it was “for ever.”
In another example, a Hebrew slave, refusing legal freedom after six years from a loving master, asking to retain his slave status, had his master to “bore his ear through with an awl,” then serves his master “for ever” (olam, Exodus 21:2-6). In this example the “indefinite duration” of olam is that the slave will serve his master the rest of his life.
Similarly, God’s plan, “according to the eternal purpose ….in Christ Jesus” (Ephesians 3:11), was that Jesus would become a “priest for ever,” not “after the order of Aaron” (Psalm 110:4; Hebrews 7:11, 21). This means that olam, in reference to the exclusive Aaronic priesthood, translated as “everlasting” and “perpetual” (Exodus 29:9; 40:15), is mistranslated. The word olam in Exodus 29:9; 40:15 does not contradict Jesus’ priesthood if it is translated “unlimited but not endless” (Leopold, p. 195). The “all” of Exodus 40:15 in the NIV is not in the Hebrew text. Its omission leaves a translation that harmonizes with the lexical definition of olam: “a priesthood for their generations of indefinite duration” (Davidson, p. 601).
If you are speaking of the context of circumcision, (as Clyde speculated) or anything else you won’t commit to admitting, Paul and the apostles understood that these laws were never meant to be “eternal” in the sense that we attribute today. God had a plan. On the other hand, Brigham Young gave SPECIFIC TIME CONSTRAINTS BY COMMANDMENT OF GOD, to the Priesthood Ban, and later Mormon Prophets DOUBLED-DOWN on it, giving the world the official “word of the Lord” that the Priesthood would not be given to the blacks until ALL the seed of Abel, (the whites) got it. Your little game of vagueness, is just a ploy to say no to anything anyone calls you on here. Again, “you haven’t said anything. You have no argument, nor proof to back up what you say. Since you won’t clarify, that tells me that you don’t have anything substantive to offer.” _johnny
grindael says: – March 9, 2012 at 9:29 am – (The relevant passages are,)
And you ignore the rest of the teachings, like you ignore the rest of the truth in God’s Word in the Bible.
fred
Clyde, Jesus actually attributes circumcision to the patriarchs,
Jesus said to them, “I did one miracle, and you are all amazed. 22 Yet, because Moses gave you circumcision (though actually it did not come from Moses, but from the patriarchs), you circumcise a boy on the Sabbath. 23 Now if a boy can be circumcised on the Sabbath so that the law of Moses may not be broken, why are you angry with me for healing a man’s whole body on the Sabbath? 24 Stop judging by mere appearances, but instead judge correctly.” (John 7:21-24)
Jeremiah understood the true purpose of circumcision,
Circumcise yourselves to the LORD, circumcise your hearts, you men of Judah and people of Jerusalem, or my wrath will break out and burn like fire because of the evil you have done–burn with no one to quench it. (John 7:21)
Rick,
Speaking to article of faith #8, I’d like to know just what “translated correctly” means. Mormon leaders have cherry picked verses here and there from the Bible and then created whole doctrines around that one verse or sentence. Is this what is meant by “translated correctly” ???? The Mormon made up version of that one verse or sentence? I’m thinking that the thing fred is talking about with Paul is one of these “translated correctly” things. It means something totally different to a Mormon than it does to a Christian, therefore he thinks he’s one up on everyone, not realizing that Christians see it very differently.
Too bad Ralph isn’t here to give his Mormon opinion, at least he can put together an argument and really does try to defend his Mormon faith.
Clyde was crying that some of us post 6 times a day while other do not, well here is something the Bible says about Paul.
Paul spoke Boldly, I do that, Not you or clyde, then it said Paul ” expounded unto him the way of God more perfectly” I do that, but not you or clyde, You guys dont expounded on anything, you just babble incorherant thoughts then complain when we say you make no sense.
It goes onto say about Paul,
You guys only mightily babble and complain, then you never even attempt to show who Christ is from your Scriptures. If we show you from your scriptures, you LDS say Jesus is, you can only deny and complain but you never try and do as Paul did and contend for the faith and show us where we are wrong. Your simply wasting everyone’s time playing games. No wonder people wont respond to you. If you were on my blog I would ban you, and would make a blog post about LDS giving the church a bad name, as you do.
Fred, LOL.
I think the answer to the question of whether Mormons can trust their prophets
or not is clear : they can’t . Neither can we. Someone is bound to object by pointing
out that Mormon prophets are always teaching about living a life style that is
consistent with N.T. teachings, so how could they be false prophets ? In my talking
to Mormons or reading their literature I get the sense that for them the word “false” as
in “false prophet” means an evil, immoral individual. They don’t understand that some
false prophets can be very moral , well dressed, polite, individuals, it’s these prophets
that are the more successful in misleading their followers on the vital doctrines of who
God is or how can a person receive eternal life. Everyone is focused on one area of the
prophet’s teachings and fail to evaluate his other teachings . False prophets teach false,
i.e. inaccurate doctrine , and if this doctrine concerns how a person can have a right
relationship with God , the gospel of salvation , then the scriptures reveal a severe
consequence for embracing such . The biggest reason many Mormons fail to see this
clear fact is because they have allowed the prophet to convince them that to doubt
his claim to be a trustworthy guide in important spiritual matters is to doubt God also,
and the prophet always makes a point to remind everyone of this . All of us need to be
able to trust those in authority over us, whether it’s trusting a Doctor’s claims and
ability to help us, or trusting that the car we by is safe and dependable as advertised.
It’s no different with religious leaders.Do their claims of being trustworthy match their
track record ? 1Jn4:1; Rev2:2
Falcon
You remember Hoffman, I remember David Koresh and Jim Jones. I also remember that some people are more able to tell a person’s character than other and some usually are given the benefit of the doubt. I also know the six post limit but I like to follow the flow of the argument. When there are 33 comments and only 3 are not from you or Mike then why should I comment. It seems that my comments will not change anything. I do like to toss out a Molotov cocktail ever so often.
Rick .B.
You need a spell checker. You also give my comments a unique spin that make me wonder what I am talking about. You are greatly deviced.
Fproy2222
You have to get in early to shape the tone of the comments. I see it as useless to comment when their mind has been made up by what the common poster and others have already said.