A great new book on the topic of Mormonism is now available. Co-authors Bill McKeever and Eric Johnson have just released Answering Mormons’ Questions: Ready Responses for Inquiring Latter-day Saints (Kregel Publications, 2012). Chapter 2 seems particularly timely for the ongoing conversation here at Mormon Coffee: “Why won’t you let us define our own doctrine rather than telling us what we believe?” The summary provided at the front of the chapter explains:
“When Christians attempt to define important doctrines as taught in Mormonism, a dispute potentially can arise over whether or not a particular teaching is truly LDS doctrine. Some Mormons even back away from more controversial teachings of their church leaders, especially when those particular leaders are deceased. However, if there is any authority in the Mormon Church, surely it must lie in the pronouncements provided by the leaders, along with official curriculum produced by the church.” (31)
In this blog I can only provide a brief overview of some of the main points in the chapter, but here goes.
McKeever and Johnson explain the office of Mormonism’s living prophet (quoting Gospel Principles page 45, “The inspired words of our living prophets are also accepted as scripture”) and then discuss the question, “Is the Mormon Prophet a Trustworthy Source?” They write,
“While Mormons may give lip service to the idea that their church alone has access to modern-day revelation from God, many have brushed aside claims made by their leaders with whom they disagree, especially after those particular leaders have died. This position sends a clear message that they consider the ‘revelation’ of these leaders nothing more than the personal opinion of the speaker and not something to be taken seriously. One proponent of this thinking is LDS apologist Michael R. Ash, who states that ‘the official position of Mormonism is that of a fallible prophet, yet few Mormons really seem to believe it. …we can know if leaders speak the will of God when we, ourselves, are “moved by the Holy Ghost” (D&C 68:3-4). The onus is upon us to determine when they speak for the Lord. If we rely solely on the revelations of the prophets, without seeking our own personal confirming revelations, we tend to tacitly accept their revelations as infallible” (Shaken Faith Syndrome: Strengthening One’s Testimony in the Face of Criticism and Doubt, 21-22. Italics in original). He also warns, “We need to be aware that sometimes we are too quick to uncritically accept the things we hear or read—even from sources such as Church leaders or in Church magazines” (ibid., 16).
“Ash’s claim that church leaders and official church publications can be products of the day and culture means that some false ideas from Salt Lake City could possibly be disseminated (for example, he pointed to the issue as to the place for the Book of Mormon lands, saying ‘prophets may offer speculations like any other student or scholar,’ 25). This salad-bar philosophy of picking and choosing among the leadership’s teachings is not easily supported by official church manuals and general conference addresses through the years.” (35)
McKeever and Johnson then provide supporting statements by four past Mormon prophets, but I will include only one here:
“I may have my own ideas and opinions, I may set up my own judgment with reference to things, but I know that when my judgment conflicts with the teachings of those that the Lord has given to us to point the way, I should change my course. If I desire salvation I will follow the leaders that our Heavenly Father has given to us, as long as he sustains them.” (Teachings of Presidents of the Church: George Albert Smith, 60)
McKeever and Johnson point out,
“Clarifying official church doctrine is not the job of Mormon lay members or employees at church-owned schools. President Ezra Taft Benson (1899-1994) stated, ‘Doctrinal interpretation is the province of the First Presidency. The Lord has given that stewardship to them by revelation. No teacher has the right to interpret doctrine for the members of the Church’ (Teachings of the Living Prophets Student Manual: Religion 333, 25). … Apostle M. Russell Ballard declared to a general conference audience, ‘When we hear the counsel of the Lord expressed through the words of the President of the Church, our response should be positive and prompt. History shows that there is safety, peace, prosperity, and happiness in responding to prophet counsel’ (Ensign, May 2001, 65. Quoted in Teachings of the Living Prophets Teacher Manual: Religion 333, 6).” (36)
After addressing several additional Mormon sources that are deemed “official” by the Mormon Church (i.e., Church manuals, Church magazines, and the Church’s Web site), McKeever and Johnson conclude,
“With all of this said, ultimately the Mormon people are left having to depend on living mortal men for guidance, even when their teachings may deviate from the Bible. Christians, on the other hand, can rest assured that their living prophet (Jesus) will never lead them astray. Reading the Bible and understanding His special revelation thus becomes the goal of every faithful Christian believer.” (39-40)
For those Latter-day Saints at Mormon Coffee who are frustrated because they believe the Christians here won’t let them define their own doctrine, I pose three questions from Answering Mormons’ Questions:
- In what way do you feel that we have erroneously defined your doctrine?
- Without becoming a Latter-day Saint, what would be a good way for someone to better understand just what it is that Mormonism teaches?
- While you certainly might disagree with your leaders, shouldn’t the authoritative words of these men reflect the actual doctrines of your church?
Q: In what way do you feel that we have erroneously defined your doctrine?
A: I actually do not recall at this time the writers of these blogs giving false definitions. On this point I have no complaints against the writers.
Q: Without becoming a Latter-day Saint, what would be a good way for someone to better understand just what it is that Mormonism teaches?
A: Read, without preconceptions, the words of the leaders, and then ask a member. In other words, don’t think you know the doctrine before you have read it, and allow us to answer questions without always telling us that you know more than we do.
I have seen many people who approach the Book of Mormon with the attitude “I know this is wrong, so I am reading it to prove what I already know.” Of course they will never fully understand because they have already convinced themselves they are right.
I have also had people try to tell me they know more about our doctrine than I do, which is never a good approach, as it is basically saying that you are refusing to be corrected, so even if you are wrong you will never know it.
Q: While you certainly might disagree with your leaders, shouldn’t the authoritative words of these men reflect the actual doctrines of your church?
A: They reflect the actual doctrine. The problem is when you try to make words that are not authoritative carry authority. When the prophet speaks by the spirit that is the end of all discussion. But when he speaks only by opinion and reason then we are free to disagree with him. The trick is determining what statements were meant to carry the authority or not.
Great to see another book available which can help people understand Mormonism . Though
there’s been a lot in the news the last few years about Mormons and what they believe
because of Mitt Romney’s visbility , still the public needs quality information . Mormon
leaders have worked hard the last few decades to present their church as another christian
church , and this effort could be greatly aided by downplaying or denying some of their
“unique” doctrines , and this move has proven to be fairly successful . The public needs
to be aware of this shift and the behavior it has birthed to present Mormonism in a favorable
light . To help with all the attention on this issue Mormon apologists have working overtime
to provide “answers” to the public . Yet despite all their effort in recent years there has been
a sizable crowd of LDS who have become disillusioned with their leaders and as a result they
have left or become inactive . Perhaps they see what non-LDS have been trying to help them
understand about false prophets in the latter days —men who can be polite,well dressed , and
moral individuals but who teach for doctrine the commandments of men , and that this has been
a pattern since 1830 . Many LDS are busy with the many obligations of family and church , but
may they try to take time to consider information that ministries like MRM offer them , and
the concern and good news that men like Bill and Eric can share with them about Jesus .
OK so which denomination of Mormonism has the definitive form of the religion? There are any where between 70 to 100 different sects of Mormonism. These groups vary to a very great degree. So I’m not so sure that there is a definitive form of Mormonism.
I guess I’d like to know which Mormon brand is claimed to have been practiced by first century Christians. After all that’s the rationale for Mormonism. Without that claim, there’s no need for Mormonism. So did first century Christians practice polygamy, wear sacred undergarments and practice Free Masonry rituals in Christian Temples? Did the first century Christians believe that Jesus visited a lost tribe of Jews who boarded magic boats and journeyed to America and became Indians? Must have been some ancient record of this happening, right?
Fact of the matter is that it’s all a very bad fantasy. What Mormons believe is whatever pops into some bodies’ mind and which a bunch of gullible people will believe. Mormonism is a blank slate upon which any Mormon creative enough can write.
Shem,
I am happy that you shared you thoughts, But I dont agree and here is why.
Sadly more times than not members either dont know either, or they cannot agree. As I said before, I had to LDS members sit in my house, I said let me read you some quotes and you tell me if you agree with them or not. They did not agree with most of the quotes and could not agree with each other. Then I shared the quotes were from the Book, Miracle of forgiveness.
I aslo said Many mormons on this blog over the years have not agreed, then as Falcon points out, Mormon sects cannot agree. Then not to get onto Adam God, but as some of us have shown, some LDS prophets or “Officals” have deemd Adam God as False, leading us to believe they understood BY to believe what he meant.
Shem said
I have lost count over the years from Mormons telling me to pray about the BoM, and when I tell them I did, and the reply was, God told me it is false, I always hear that it is somehow my Fault, I was not sincere or really did not pray, or ignored what God really said.
I love how what it boils down to is, If I dont believe it is upon me, and if I do belive then I am really listing to God. (cont)
(Cont)
It seems to me according to the LDS either the BoM is true, or were not really interested in hearing from God.
Then it not a matter of me going into it already believeing it’s wrong, it’s a matter of me going into reading the BoM then asking, where is the evidence? I can look over history of other books like the Bible, or books written about former presdients or people groups from 100’s of years ago.
I ask, where is the reformed egyptian that the BoM was translated from? Where are the BoM people groups? Or lands? or Coins? Or any evidence? I see none, but thats ok, if mormons have faith they existed, then they existed.
Shem said
Funny thing about this is, Some prophets were very clear saying God told them, or God said, or Thus saith the Lord, or, It is doctrine, yet despite being that clear, LDS still dont care and try and insist that it was mere opinion if the LDS dont agree.
Shem,
You’re really not very convincing. In fact you sound rather foolish. Mormonism and its doctrine is a game of tag. People just running all over the place tapping this one or that one, saying they’re “it” and then arguing about whether they were really touched or not.
So those in the game argue about who’s “it” and who is not “it” and those of us who observe think you’re all a little bit touched.
There is no definitive Mormon doctrine because 1) there are multiple sects of Mormonism who all claim the true revelation and 2) despite the attempts of Mormons to try and make a case for their inspired prophets, unpopular prophecies simply become opinions.
It reminds me of the old Bud Abbot and Lew Castello routine “Who’s On First”.
Shem said
Here is another problem I have with this, If a prophet says something is doctrine, or God spoke to him and told him it is an everlasting law, or The prophet said, Thus saith the Lord, and then years later LDS dont agree or like it, they claim it was mere opinion. Many things former prophets have taught were very clearly stated, it is Doctrine,or of God, and now is chalked up to mere opinion.
Then we also have LDS claiming older sources like the JoD cannot be used or cited, yet they them selves quote or use these sources, Funny how that works.
I also like how LDS finally have a say with these questions and can set us straight as many of us have asked LDS to do in the past, but now it seems LDS are silent. Where is Parkman, or Ralph, or Clyde, or Mormons in General who were here long ago or even simply lurk?
I understand some one will say, Well these LDS members are busy with life and thats why they dont reply. I say, they are not busy when it comes to minor issues and they can tell us we are wrong, and now they have a free forum to tell us openly in their words, and they are starngly absent.
Rick
First of all, I know your attitudes from this and other blogs. You have, in the past, tried to claim that the Book of Mormon does teach things that are so clear from the text that any claim you have made to reading that book becomes hollow. On this point I am not making generalizations, because I am speaking based on what you have told me directly on these various blogs, and I believe one was hosted by you.
This is the kind of things that I am taking about. You have already convinced yourself that you are right.
I liked this “I said let me read you some quotes and you tell me if you agree with them or not….Then I shared the quotes were from the Book, Miracle of forgiveness.”
This is not what I am taking about. This is a challenge, not a discussion. The simple fact that you concealed the source of your quotes shows that your intention was not to learn from them, and thus your approach was nothing like what I suggest.
You have basically told me that my suggestion to talk doesn’t work because the last time you beat someone over the head nothing happened.
Falcon
Here you go again not listening to anyone with a different idea of Mormonism than you do. Your descriptions are just delusions drawn from your mind and placed over what you don’t want to see.
As to all the sects that have broken off of the truth, all your complaints on this subject apply just as easily to thousand or so Christian sects. Your double standard on this is so obvious and outrageous that nothing else really needs to be said.
Let me clarify my points just a little.
When I say ask a member I am not saying to start throwing quotes at them to prove your point. It is very likely that they have not read everything you have, and thus will not be familiar with the quotes, and definitely not with the context surrounding them. As such they may misunderstand the quote and thus not agree with it.
(I do not say this because the church discourages reading these things, as that has never been the case. I say this because most people just don’t have the time or the access to these materials. Their daily lives are enough to keep them busy and the basics of the gospel that are taught to them in church are sufficient for their salvation, so there is no need to seek out any more.)
I am talking about you reading the words of the leaders without prejudice, and then, when the setting is appropriate, asking the members if your understanding seems right.
To actually follow my advice the conversation should have been more like “I have heard that your church teaches…Is this right?”
For instance, I had a friend once who came to me to ask about what he heard concerning the “Mormon’s magical underwear” and to verify what he had heard. I explained the truth of the matter and, though he said magic underwear sounded better, he understood the idea and was grateful.
On the other hand, I had some acquaintances approach me with a list of “false doctrine taught by Mormons” and while they asked if it was true, their tone and attitude was one of mocking and so I left without addressing most of their questions.
I hope this makes things a little clearer.
Rick
Just to point things out: I claim very few things as opinion, though I do state rightly that many are non-essential.
I also have seen clearly that, in general, you don’t understand the meaning behind the quotes you give.
As to the others, I don’t comment on every thread either. That does not mean I can’t. It usually means that the topic is not one that I feel is worth my time and effort, though it can also be that I am just not interested, or I lack the time at present.
I know you like to judge our motives, but I don’t think you are as perceptive as you think. Rather you seem to want a certain motive to exist, and you will make everything you can support it.
Shem,
You live in a dream world……literally. You have no idea what sect of Mormonism holds what Mormons claim is the restored gospel. Mormonism is a disjointed mess of odd, peculiar, strange and just plain nutty beliefs.
What makes you think that the Salt Lake City sect of Mormonism has the truth? I’d say you have absolutely no claim on the truth of Mormonism.
Mormonism is a loss for the Mormon people regardless of what sect makes the claim of exclusivity.
What Mormonism sees as it’s most attractive feature is actually it’s biggest weakness. That is, the claim of having a living prophet. To be blunt, these living prophets have contribute to the absolute chaos in Mormon doctrine.
I’m glad that I don’t have to depend on some guy, who moved-up through a religions political system, to become what they call a “prophet”. These men aren’t picked or anointed by God. Mormonism is a heretical cult that depends on some mere men to tell them things supposedly inspired by God that subsequent church leaders have to deny and distance themselves from.
I stand on the Word of God for my guidance as the Spirit leads me. Believers are indwelt by the Holy Spirit as we are born again by faith in the Lord Jesus Christ. The Word of God is our standard. It doesn’t change with the whims of some faux prophet.
We give praise, honor and glory to Jesus, the Living God.
Shem,
Telling me I have never read the BoM or telling me you dont think I read it does not make it true. Also this topic was the best topic for lds to openly speak and tell us where we are wrong as LDS seem to do alot, yet as I said they are strangely silent. Then you sure seem to make a lot of excuses as to why you wont answer questions, Thats fine, say what you want or dont say anything at all, all I see is you dodging questions.
Then you can believe the BoM and follow JS all you want, but as of right now all major news sources on the TV and on the internet are claiming Obama has one re-election and I will say, I did not vote for Him and dont want him in office, I did vote for Mitt, but since Mitt did not win, this is another Failed Prophecy by JS. And before you make excuse For Him and say, their is always next time, I will say, this was the best time for him or a mormon in general to be elected, and it sadly did not happen. So chalk up another failed prophecy for JS and this just adds to his track record of being a false prophecy.
I’m on page 244 at the moment and what I love most about the book is the quotes. There are some great quotes in this book! I’m sure many of these come from Mr. McKeever’s previous book “In Their Own Words”, but some are quite recent. The quotes I love the most are those that directly contradict LDS claims to moderation and defense against extremism. I’m reading quickly through the book right now, but I will definitely go back and mark the best and most useful quotes. If I can, I’ll have to get a copy of “In Their Own Words”, I’m sure that has more and it seems to be organized in a great way.
As for the Post topic, I think this issue of “defining” the religion of Mormonism, and the CoJCoLDS in particular, goes back significantly to an issue I brought up a few threads back about how LDS see the current instantiation of their religion as the only relevant one, while Christians take LDS claims to effective one prophet, one full scriptures, one priesthood, OF GOD so seriously that they look for evidence of such THROUGHOUT LDS history, not just the present. So you get Christians using quotes from talks and sermons and conference presentations from the beginning through to the present while LDS just want to talk about the plan of salvation, First Vision, coming forth of the BoM as presented by the missionaries, along with zingers about “families are forever”.
I’m still discussing this issue with shematwater(I’ll post my response to you soon shem), who agrees with me only to a certain extent, but I think it ironic that LDS who claim direct prophetic/priestly/scriptural link to the past and/or God, Himself, want so much to focus on the present stream-lined presentation bereft of historical perspective.
Side note:
Not seeing anything on my usual Mormon sites about Obama’s win/Romney’s loss so far. It’s been at least an hour since it was announced. I wonder what will be said and not said.
Two specific points:
1) There is no evidence that first century Christians practiced present day Salt Lake City Mormonism. Therefore the “restored gospel” is a total fantasy.
2) There is no evidence that present day Salt Lake City Mormonism, within the family of Mormonism, is the restored Mormon gospel. In-other-words, that it is “true” Mormonism.
Mormonism is a confused mess because, as spartacus has pointed out, everyday is a new day in Mormonism. It’s a constant reload or push of the “refresh” button. So in the mind of Mormons, what was said or done in the the past by their leaders, has no relevance for today unless (today’s Mormons) want it to. Mormonism can never be wrong or not true, to Mormons.
That’s why I don’t engage them or acquiesce to their demand that the BoM be read. Rick rightly pointed out that the only conclusion acceptable to a Mormon is that the BoM is true. This is just one more example of the dysfunctional thinking of Mormons.
From my four years of posting on this blog I have concluded that Mormonism can be whatever anyone wants it to be because Mormonism falls apart at the second level of questioning. A Mormon’s opinion regarding what Mormon doctrine is, isn’t any more valid than what a non-Mormon says it is. It’s all speculation and an attempt to spin gold out of straw.
Bottom line is that Mormonism is a constant game of “counts, doesn’t count”. Mormons are about the last people we should ask regarding their doctrines and beliefs. They have no authority to give a definitive answer and function more out of emotion than solid evidence.
Andy Watson used to carry around this messenger bag stuffed with Mormon publications and when he’d encounter some missionaries he’d pull out the documentation to support what he was telling them. The missionaries would stand there dumb-founded because they had no retort to what Andy was saying, supported by their own LDS publications.
So the only thing Mormons can claim, since it’s written in black and white, is that it’s just an opinion or that (in Andy’s case) it was just HIS opinion. After all, the LDS church is true even if the evidence in their own publications demonstrate that (the LDS church) and the religion are a confused mess.
Again, it’s not that we don’t understand Mormonism because we do. The problem for Mormons is that we don’t believe it. Because to them “understanding” means “believing”. Mormons could look at black, say it’s white and it’s white because it’s all just a matter of interpretation or someone’s opinion. Given that test, especially because it’s feelings based, is that anything can be true.
Rick and I often ask Mormons to tell us where we are getting it wrong about their doctrine. It generally comes down, again, that we don’t nuance it enough. Nuance in Mormon speak is to come up with any explanation no matter how far-fetched or convoluted because anything will work as long as the tag line “therefore the church is true” is applied to it.
Shem so badly wants to belive that I dont know the BoM, so I guess he can believe what he wants. I have a 1920 edtion of the triple combo, I read the entire thing, all 3 books in it, and I have lots of notes written in it and I also have spoken with many Mormons face to face, Missionarys and just Mormons who were not Missionarys.
I have been to 3-4 LDS church services and spoken with many mormons then, They are all impressed at how much I know and ask me, am I a former Mormon? When I say no, they ask why I know so much and why I dont believe. All the mormons I have meet tell me flat out, they know when someone is talking and that person is acting like they know something when in fact they never studied Mormonism and they are simply speaking from what they heard from someone else.
So Shem, you keep telling yourself I no nothing so you can simply avoid answering questions. I really dont care if you answer them or not, people here are not dumb, they can tell when you guys wont answer or avoid questions.
I also believe many LDS will start to question their faith and even leave as a result of Mitt not winning, since this proves another false prophecy. I can see all the PR machine turning out to defeat this false prophecy. I cant wait to see how they justify this one.
Falcon said
I simply cannot say it enough, This topic at hand is the perfect topic for the LDS to set us straight if they really think we are getting it wrong, yet where are they? They seem to be strangely silent.
Yet when Topics like Adam God come up, or Did JS really shoot and kill 3 people, then the LDS come out of the wood work and tell us we are wrong and clueless. Yet this topic, they avoid. Seems to me they avoid the topics where they have a good chance to speak and correct us, and the topics that they dont feel are doctrine and dont really matter, thats when they show up.
Rick, it’s ALWAYS someone else’s fault according to “prophet, seer & revelator” Marion G. Romney:
Yea Ralph,
What a great manipulative line:
“If we do not agree with what they say, it is because we are out of harmony with the Spirit of the Lord.”
Another way of saying it is, when the leaders have spoken the thinking has been done. A leader cannot be questioned according to your quote above. That’s why we have all these Mormons getting confirmation in their spirit that what the leader is saying is true. Is there any other choice? After all these dudes have worked their way up the ladder of success in the political religious world of the Mormon system. They are not to be questioned. It’s just not possible that they can’t be hearing from God.
We have a long list of items that use to be Mormon doctrine but have now been shelved. I was out looking at what one Mormon sect (Temple Lot) has to say about Joseph Smith. They call him a fallen prophet.
At least they have made some progress.
We owe it to the Mormon people to remind them of the seduction of false prophets that
these messengers with an imitation gospel can appear quite normal and acceptable in
appearance and behavior . They can be well dressed and polite individuals who preach
from the Bible about the importance of living a lifestyle that is moral and consistent .
These prophets will introduce false teachings about God/Jesus and salvation , and this
is why Jesus warned of such prophets in the latter days , they would be not easily detected
if only the outward appearance was evaluated . To many Mormon people this fact is not
readily perceived because upon sharing with them some of the abberrant doctrines taught
by their prophets/apostles they immediately respond by rejecting what we have shared
because they observe the moral lifestyle of these men. This is a dangerous mind set .
Mormons are in peril because they follow prophets who have taught falsely about who God
is , or how salvation can be received .The vast majority of Mormons are sincere
and decent people who are striving to serve God , but the Bible is clear about being
sincere and being sincerely misled . Mormonism does’nt claim to be true because of merely the
lifestyle it offers , it claims to be the true christian faith because of the doctrinal teachings of
it’s apostles, and that’s where the spotlight should shine in evaluating them . Unfortunately
in sharing with Mormons what the spotlight has uncovered as to why we can’t accept their
apostles as truely hearing from Jesus on important issues and our being firm in that conviction ,
some Mormons can resort to making personal attacks against those who seek to warn them
as Matt 7:15 instructs —“Beware”
Mike hits on a good point regarding our knowing that Mormon doctrine is not true. There are two levels to this knowing. One is the serious investigation regarding what is proclaimed as “doctrine” that has been done as evidenced by the above reviewed book.
Secondly it is the witness of the Spirit who indwells all those who are born again through faith in Jesus. So it’s a combination of the intellect and the Spirit. In the NT, after His resurrection, Jesus appears to His disciples, explains clearly who He is and points them to the Scriptures as a witness. In the Book of Acts, the disciples are constantly going to the Scriptures to bolster their personal witness in the Spirit of whom Jesus is. In the Book of Acts, Paul preaches Jesus to the Bereans who are then referred to as “noble” because of their diligent study of the Word of God.
Mormonism, with it’s religious system, false prophets and false doctrines has no value to mankind. Clean living alone never got anyone saved. Having faith in the Living Christ is the only pathway to the Father. Knowing who Jesus is starts the journey to eternal life.
According to Shem, a person is somehow supposed to “read, without preconceptions, the words of the leaders, and then ask a member. In other words, don’t think you know the doctrine before you have read it, and allow us to answer questions without always telling us that you know more than we do.”
A perfect straw man. One of the goals of those in the countercult ministry is not to make up what is believed by the group in question. This wouldn’t make sense because it could be easily refuted. And if we are not supposed to read, “with preconceptions,” the LDS material, shouldn’t Shem be obligated to follow the same rule?
He also says that “I have also had people try to tell me they know more about our doctrine than I do.” If he means that his view is assumed correct because, after all, he is the Latter-day Saint, but he claims “opinion” when someone shows him evidence to the contrary, this is pure silliness and the reason why this book was written in the first place. The new AMQ takes LDS leaders/correlated volumes according to the English they spoke and deals with those issues from, admittedly, a Christian world view. If they interpret these sources wrong, show how. But don’t just complain that the critics are saying they know more when they’re dealing with source material.
Finally he says that when the prophet “speaks only by opinion and reason then we are free to disagree with him. The trick is determining which statements were meant to carry the authoritythefirstpalce.” And, please tell, how is a individual supposed to figure this out? And why, do we even need prophets in the first place if I am obligated to determine authoritative versus opinion teachings? May I say once more, “silly”?
erusseljohnson said
This goes along with the issue of the teaching in the 14 fundamenatls of following the prophet that says, The prophet does not need to say, thus saith the Lord to be scripture.
So this is how they avoid teachings they dont like, Since they can then claim it was mere opinion. But on the other hand, teachings they agree with, how can we know it really is Doctrine and of God and should be followed since the Prophet did not say, thus saith the Lord? It’s a serious delima since only LDS really know if it is doctrine or not, at least according to them.
As far as the questions go –
* In what way do you feel that we have erroneously defined your doctrine?
– When you write what our leaders have said an interpret it by your standards/doctrine. You need to interpret it by the LDS standards/doctrine because of course it will not make sense or sound bad if its interpreted through any other way.
* Without becoming a Latter-day Saint, what would be a good way for someone to better understand just what it is that Mormonism teaches?
– Take off your Ev doctrine glasses and read and apply our doctrine by LDS standards to understand it.
* While you certainly might disagree with your leaders, shouldn’t the authoritative words of these men reflect the actual doctrines of your church?
– I have never disagreed with my Prophet. I have some disagreements with other leaders’ comments. I do disagree with how people, both members and nonmembers, interpret their words if its done incorrectly.
Falcon,
I am busy now with a new job that has me working different shifts taking over for sickies. I do not have computer access while at work anymore and when I get home I am too tired to do anything other than the most important things to look after my family. If you dont like the explanation then discuss it with some of the Evs on this site that have said they are not writing as much anymore because they are busy. I visit now and then and answer when I can.
Also, you addressed me a couple of posts ago – I didnt write anything before now so I think youve addressed the wrong person.
Ralph, you complain that
“when you write what our leaders have said an interpret it by your standards/doctrine. You need to interpret it by the LDS standards/doctrine because of course it will not make sense or sound bad if its interpreted through any other way…. Take off your Ev doctrine glasses and read and apply our doctrine by LDS standards to understand it.”
You’re correct. Evangelicals do have presuppositions. But obviously so do Latter-day Saints. So to say everyone must somehow take on an LDS perspective to evaluate Mormonism just wreaks havoc. Suppose I say that unless you understand “us” Branch Davidians, you’ll just never grasp the concept of catching the tail-end of the Hale-Bopp comet. How dare you judge us for committing suicide in our white shrouds with 50 cents in our pocket. You’re just not looking at it with the right perspective.
Ralph, what would you think? Take back your judgmental thoughts about the group because you must not understand them? No, you would say, “Don’t commit suicide. Consider the possibility that you are wrong.” While I have certainly given an extreme example, Evangelicals are merely saying, “Wait a minute, this Mormon religion doesn’t make sense. From an objective point of view, consider the possibility that you might be wrong.”
In the same way, might I suggest you take off your LDS rose-colored glasses and ask, what if Smith/Monson were/are wrong? What if this religion really is leading me to hell?
And finally you say, “I have never disagreed with my Prophet.” Does this mean in your own lifetime? Or in the lifetime of the church? If the former–I have no idea how old you are–please tell me how far I can go back and I’m sure I can find quotes you don’t agree with today.
So Ralph,
When you say you have never disagreed with your prophet, Does that mean you agree with Blacks never holding the priesthood? But then it was allowed even after being told it would never happen? Or what about Blacks and whites getting married, thats death on the spot? What about all the other wacky teachings?
Ralph, you said we need to interpret LDS doctrine by your standards , yet what happens when LDS dont agree? Who do I trust? How come LDS claim we dont understand your teachings, Yet how many times have me and Falcon and others said flat out, tell us where we are wrong, or how and why, yet no reply’s? These two newest topics are the best topics to set us straight and do exactly that, yet where is everyone? Parkman was one of the most vocal LDS telling us were wrong, yet now where is he? Where’s Clyde? He’s busy telling me he does not agree on other topics, Just not this one.
You claim your Busy, I dont doubt that, but if your really the loving, caring LDS you seem to think you are, then I would ask, whats more important? My eternal well being, or you sitting at home resting. I think your family would understand if you told them,I really want to set these Christians straight and correct some error, now is the perfect topic to do it. Even the Bible tells us, to correct those in error and to give every man an answer that asks, were asking, but you guys are not replying. This tells me everything I need to know.
erusselljohnson,
Everyone has a bias from their life. To fully understand anything one must first overcome that bias before making any kind of judgement. For example on the post the other day entitled “Brigham Young: King of kings” I posted some Biblical proof for me that teaches we can become gods like our Heavenly Father. One of the other posters said that a dog can be made an heir in a will but that does not make them human. I agree, but what does the LDS church teach about the human race compared with Heavenly Father? We teach that we are His children – thus making us already the same ‘species’ (for lack of a better word) as Him. So this poster’s view, which is an Ev view, is irrelevant to the interpretation of the LDS view. So in order to understand the scriptures I gave one must look at them in an LDS perspective.
You said Evangelicals are merely saying, “Wait a minute, this Mormon religion doesn’t make sense. From an objective point of view, consider the possibility that you might be wrong.” From a logical/objective perspective the Trinitarian Christian religions don’t make sense. They worship a being that is not 1 being but 3, but is not 3 beings but 1. It is its own father and child. It is immortal and eternal yet it died. There is more but I will leave it those examples.
As far as my age, I am just shy of 42. I have not found any quote from any Prophet that I disagree with. I just disagree with the interpretations put on them by other people, especially if they have not been fully expounded upon.
RickB,
As far as your question about why shouldn’t I leave my family time and use it to answer questions on here – My priority for salvation is myself first, then my family and then others. I am spending time with my children in teaching them about Heavenly Father and Jesus and how to return to live with them. When I am finished with that, if I have time I will be here trying to answer reasonable questions.
I have not come across a quote from a Prophet that I disagreed with, including the examples you gave. I can’t remember who it was or the reference pages, but in the Journal of Discourses that you like to use, an LDS member in a past blog gave a quote from Brigham Young saying that the Blacks will never get the priesthood in this life until all the tribes of Israel have received it. Remember in the OT God promised that the true gospel will go to the rest of the world through the 12 tribes of Israel. So I guess that somewhere along the line all the tribes of Israel started receiving the priesthood and thus the blacks were allowed. I do not have a copy of the JoD to look it up, but I am sure you could find it since you say you know the JoD very well. Then the next part about mixed marriages is answered with that as well. Remember in the OT the Israelites were not allowed to mix their seed with other people outside of the Israelite nation unless that person fully renounced their background and showed full conversion to the Israelite God. This is a similar situation.
RickB
Yes, LDS do not agree with each other on various minor topics, but on the major points like who Heavenly Father and Jesus are in relation to us, Jesus’ role and importance to our salvation, and what are the standard works/scriptures for us. Just like many Trinitarian believers don’t agree on issues. You will find variances in any group religious or otherwise. It does not make it a false religion, unless you want to count Trinitarian Christianity a false religion. It just means that some people need to be taught more, or some things are not really necessary for our salvation at this point in time.
If you want an example of how you misinterpret one of our teachings then read the post above I sent to erusselljohnson. That is just one example. I have given others in the past, so if you don’t remember them how do you expect me to remember?
Where’s Parkman and Clyde? How the hell would I know, I don’t live with them nor can I read their thoughts. I am on here when I can and I will answer reasonable questions when I am able to with time constraints. I have been on here for many years now, about the same length of time as you and I have answered and re-answered questions posed by the same people, so now, to make the most of my time, I am just picking and choosing the reasonable ones that I have not answered in the past or is a new poster. It is now after midnight and I need to get up in 5 hours for work. I will say good night and see you later.
Ralph,
How about the issues of the curse on blacks…do you agree with these from the prophet living at your birth?
“There is a reason why one man is born black and with other disadvantages, while another is born white with great advantages. The reason is that we once had an estate before we came here, and were obedient; more or less, to the laws that were given us there. Those who were faithful in all things there received greater blessings here, and those who were not faithful received less” (Joseph Fielding Smith, Doctrines of Salvation 1:61. Italics in original).
“That the negro race, for instance, have been placed under restrictions because of their attitude in the world of spirits, few will doubt. It cannot be looked upon as just that they should be deprived of the power of the Priesthood without it being a punishment for some act, or acts, performed before they were born. Yet, like all other spirits who come into this world, they come innocent before God so far as mortal existence is concerned, and here, under certain restrictions, they may work out their second estate. If they prove faithful in this estate, without doubt, our Eternal Father, who is just and true, will reward them accordingly and there will be in store for them some blessings of exaltation” (Joseph Fielding Smith, The Way To Perfection, p. 43).
“Not only was Cain called upon to suffer, but because of his wickedness he became the father of an inferior race. A curse was placed upon him and that curse has been continued through his lineage and must do so while time endures. …Moreover, they have been made to feel their inferiority and have been separated from the rest of mankind from the beginning” (Joseph Fielding Smith, The Way to Perfection, p.
I have heard a lot of rubbish posted since I last commented, and I have to say that I am not surprised.
Rick
I don’t care how much you know, you don’t know everything, and you have made statements concerning the Book of Mormon that are so obviously false that I have to conclude that you either didn’t read it or you are purposely twisting and ignoring the text. I am not making this up, and I can’t comment about how you act in face to face meeting. Personally, I don’t care how much you have read and studied, from my experience with you I can state plainly that you don’t know the doctrine of our church as well as you think you do.
On March 5, 2009, on your blog “mormonism reviewed” you posted an article titled “Bruce R. McConkie’s “Challenge” based on his book Mormon Doctrine (http://mormonismreviewed.blogspot.com/2009/03/ruce-r-mcconkies-challenge.html). Near the end of that article you made the comment that “I lovingly added a list of things That LDS feel are core doctrine yet cannot be found in the BoM.” You proceeded to give a list of ten topics that supported this claim. Of that list of ten items three are directly taught in the Book of Mormon, and another three or four are logically inferred from the text. As such, making this claim proves that you do not know what you are talking about.
(Visit my blog for a response to this list http://shematwater.wordpress.com/2012/09/07/what-the-book-of-mormon-doesnt-contain/).
Don’t tell me I am not willing to answer questions, as I have answered almost every question you have asked. The real problem is that you usually ignore my answers, or tell me that I don’t know the doctrine like you do, so I should just bow down to your superior understanding.
One more comment: Ralph is perfectly right in pointing out that trying to explain LDS doctrine from the view point of Evangelical doctrine never works out.
I was in a conversation at one point in the past where I was attempting to explain some point of LDS doctrine. I cannot remember the particulars, but the person I was discussing with said it didn’t make sense because it contradicted their evangelical doctrine. I have to laugh a little at that. Of course it contradicts evangelical doctrine, because it is not evangelical but LDS. But after a little more discussion they began to see how it didn’t contradict other LDS doctrine and how all the doctrine fit together when not trying to explain it through the evangelical thought.
I have also had people tell me straight out that logic and objectivity can have no place in understanding the nature of God and the doctrine of the Trinity. One person actually told me that if I was attempting to use logic in a religious context than he would ignore me because it just doesn’t apply.
If logic cannot explain your doctrine why demand that it explain ours, especially if you are unwilling to even look at the doctrine for what it is and not what you think or want it to be?
Shem,
You just keep telling yourself I dont know what I’m talking about and how I never read the BoM.
Once you can no longer defend what you belive you must resort to attacks and claiming we never read the BoM or dont understand it, Etc.
Then if your going to say I must have never read it based upon those then questions, then I guess you must believe and say the people at MRM have also never read the BoM and have no clue what they are talking about, and I recal you saying you dont have a problem with them and what they say.
I point this out since those ten questions came from the MRM blog and something they said, and they are the ones that made that claim those things are not found in the BoM. I did ask permission and it was granted to me to use those ten questions in my topic. So tell me shem are you willing to say they also never read the BoM and dont understand Mormonism?
Shem,
You really are a funny guy, It’s to bad that you believe in a false prophet. First you said under a different topic
Then I posted as did another poster things said about the Blacks by your prophets, then you said this and I am thinking you said this in reply to all the things posted about the blacks by your leaders.
Now if I am correct and that reply was about all the things posted on Blacks, then I gotta say, how can you claim you were not aware of these teachings and your not very well read on these subjects, but then turn around and be so sure it is rubbish? Talk abut just believing what your prophets said and taught. You never knew it was said or existed but then are sure we are the ones wrong, Funny how that works.
Rick
Now you do have a load of rubbish.
I am not attacking, simply pointed out that you are not as reliable a source as you want to claim.
Now, I can discuss anything you want, and you know that perfectly well, so why not stop with the absurd accusations to the contrary.
Speaking of discussion, why not go to my blog and tell me how I am wrong in the answers I give? Not that on this thread I only mentioned the ones that are taught in the Book of Mormon. I did not address your other false claim that they are all essential core doctrine, as not all of them are.
Now, I know perfectly well that you got this list from MRM, and I will say without hesitation that anyone who supports that claim you have made is just as much in error as you. If they did read the Book of Mormon they didn’t listen to or understand anything that it is teaching. Beyond that they have no real concept as to what is essential core doctrine. (Actually, I believe they had twenty questions, all of which are about equal in accuracy to the ten you gave.)
Now you also say “I recall you saying you don’t have a problem with them and what they say.”
What I actually said was “I actually do not recall at this time the writers of these blogs giving false definitions. On this point I have no complaints against the writers.”
So, when I wrote this comment I was unaware of any of the blogs having false information. I have since found this list, and so yes, I have a problem with this, as it does misrepresent and give false information. But I didn’t know when
Rick
I would also like to point out your other stretching of facts to build false accusation.
I did make the comment that “I have heard a lot of rubbish posted since I last commented, and I have to say that I am not surprised.”
Now, your attempt to have this be a comment directed to what people have said on other threads is not only ridiculous but desperate. If I was going to reference another thread I would have. This comment was made in regards to the comments made by the Non-LDS on this thread after my comment on November 6, 2012 at 3:12 pm but before the comment containing this statement (made on November 12, 2012 at 10:54 am).
Now if there were any comments in those posts regarding blacks and the priesthood, please point them out as I can’t find them, nor do I recall reading them.
Once again, please stop twisting my words and accusing me falsely of things I have never done.
Shem, why not read everything first and maybe re read it again before you assume I am twisting your words. I said, I am thinking you said this in reply to the issue of the blacks. It was implied in what I said that I was guessing that is what you meant. Then I also went onto say, now if I am correct and that reply was about the blacks then…
So if you would simply read a little better you would know what I said.
Rick
I am perfectly aware of how you worded things.
If you actually thought that then the fact remains that in your mind you made the assumption that I was referring back to other threads and thus in your own mind you twisted my words. Apparently you were unable to see any other explanation, but your mind automatically twisted my words into the worst possible explanation it could come up with.
If you didn’t actually think that than your presentation of it in any way is not only a twisting of my words, but a deliberate attempt to do so, and thus to conceal the attempt through careful wording.
Either way, whether intentional or unintentional, you need to stop twisting my words.
Let me ask you this: Why would you think that a comment on this thread was addressing comments on another thread? What was it in my statement that gave you this impression?
Shem said
I came to this idea because erusseljohnson mentioned blacks on this topic, I mentioned them on another topic, then you came along and said
Just a side note, How can you hear something you read? Maybe you read it out loud?
Anyway, you were not clear about what topic or exactly what was rubbish, it was a general statement, so I figured you were talking about the blacks issue. That was why I said that.
Rick
So what you are saying is that out of 22 different posts and half a dozen different topics that had been discussed on this thread since my last post you assumed that a general comment I made about what I had read referred to only one topic and one post, and thus connected back to other threads.
I don’t suppose you see how ludicrous that sounds? If I wanted to single out one topic and one thread why wouldn’t I have done it?
Again, it seems clear that in some way (whether consciously or unconsciously) you wanted me to be saying what you say you thought I said.
Now, I will apologize for the harshness of my previous comments. I did not remember any post concerning the black race on this thread, and so I was out of line in how I put thinks.
(P.S. I prefer the term ‘hear’ to read when I am in an active discussion, regardless of the literal nature of the discussion. I will most frequently refer to reading the original blog, but refer to hearing the comments posted on it.)