Do you treat Brigham Young and Bruce McConkie like grape vines or thornbushes?
“By their fruit you will recognize them. Do people pick grapes from thornbushes, or figs from thistles?” (Matthew 7:16)
Viewpoint on Mormonism Archives
Blogroll
- 365 Reasons
- Apologetics 315
- Ensign vs. The Bible
- Heart Issues for LDS
- Heart of the Matter
- I Love Mormons
- Keith Walker
- Latter-day Saint Woman
- Mark Cares
- Mormonism Investigated UK
- Mormonite Musings
- Mormons are Christians… aren't we?
- Musings on Mormonism
- Of First Importance
- Share the Son Ministries
- The Mormon Chapbook
- The Religious Researcher
- Utah Advance
Links
Subscribe
Join the Discussion
Check out our comment policy.Categories
Afterlife Authority and Doctrine Baptism for the Dead Bible Book of Mormon Brigham Young Christianity Coffee Beans D&C and Pearl of Great Price Early Christianity Early Mormonism Forgiveness Friendship, Interaction, and Evangelism General Conference God the Father Gospel Grace Great Apostasy Jesus Christ Joseph Smith King Follett Discourse LDS Church Marriage and Singlehood Misconceptions Mitt Romney Mormon Culture Mormon History Mormon Leaders Mormon Missionaries Mormon Scripture Mormon Temple Multimedia Nature of God Nature of Man Nauvoo Personal Stories Polygamy Priesthood Prophets Salvation Truth, Honesty, Prayer, and Inquiry Uncategorized Viewpoint on Mormonism Virgin birth Worthiness
I treat the councils of men as thornbushes.
There have been many councils of men that force narrowing definitions on God’s teachings. I do not see much of the fruit of their labors as being true. That is why I agree with you when you say I do not follow the “traditional” Jesus.
I am a nonTrinitarian Christian.
Much of what these two men offered as spiritual truth was akin to thorn bushes .
The organized councils that these two men were a part of were responsible for ,
” teaching for doctrine the commandments of men ” , on several vital issues.
They were men that Jesus long ago warned about being aware of —- false prophets
in the latter -days [ Matt 24:11] .
Mormon authorities have claimed to be the true trinitarian christians today , officers
in the one true church of Jesus .
Jesus said to beware —Matt 7:15
“Mormon authorities have claimed to be the true trinitarian christians today…”
Please show me where my Church leaders are saying that we are Trinitarian like you believers in that traditional manmade definition of the Trinity.
As far as JS and BY goes, they along with all the Mormons prophets that have come over the years are more than thorns, They are wolves in sheeps clothing. They Are the People Paul spoke of in Gal1:8-9, They are the Tares that Jesus spoke of Growing up with the wheat and they will be pulled up and thrown into the everlasting fire as Jesus said. They are the People spoken of in 2nd 2 Thessalonians
2Th 1:8 In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ:
2Th 1:9 Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power;
And they are spoken of in Jude.
Jude 1:4 For there are certain men crept in unawares, who were before of old ordained to this condemnation, ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ.
8 Likewise also these [filthy] dreamers defile the flesh, despise dominion, and speak evil of dignities.
12 These are spots in your feasts of charity, when they feast with you, feeding themselves without fear: clouds [they are] without water, carried about of winds; trees whose fruit withereth, without fruit, twice dead, plucked up by the roots;
13 Raging waves of the sea, foaming out their own shame; wandering stars, to whom is reserved the blackness of darkness for ever.
15 To execute judgment upon all, and to convince all that are ungodly among them of all their ungodly deeds which they have ungodly committed, and of all their hard [speeches] which ungodly sinners have spoken against him.
These are just a few verses that sum up LDS prophets.
Parkman, are saying that sentence I posted is inaccurate as to what Mormon authorities
have taught ? Are you sure you want to talk about the late man made definition of God/Trinity
taught by Mormon authorities ? Or should we try harder to stay on topic ? 🙂
“Do you treat Brigham Young and Bruce McConkie like grape vines or thornbushes?”
I think I treat them like grape vines. Just yesterday I read the last six pages or so of one of BY’s sermons that Sharon quoted from in the last post, and I found all of what I read fascinating and useful (if a bit long winded).
Of course that doesn’t mean I agree with every theological thought they ever had or decision that they made. But on what I deem the truly important theological points of salvation I believe them to be good fruit.
TJAY
Well said, and I would only add that theological points are not the only evidence, or fruit. The work of their lives in the church; all that they did is astounding.
TJ,
Of course you dig these guys, they just kind of made it up as they went along. Basically from what you’ve written here in the past, I’d say you’ve created your own form of Mormonism.
And Shem thinks these deep thinkers were producing “fruit”. Yea, unfortunately it’s all rotten fruit.
I’ve often said that these guys remind me of bad karaoke. They tried to sing and dance and entertained their friends and relatives who loved them no matter how off key they were.
I think one of the greatest fruits of BY was his exploitation of the hand-cart brigade. And BTW if Young was such a salwart then why is he treated like a crazy uncle living in the attic with his adam-god doctrine and blood atonement? Why were there Mormons who wouldn’t follow the guy and who created their own Mormon sect headed, eventually by Joseph Smith’s son. BY style Mormonism is practiced by the FLDS.
I think you guys should get yourself a couple more wives and really sell out to old Brigham.
Say didn’t McConkie through old Brigham under the LDS bus?
Pick up a copy of “Devil’s Gate”.
“David Roberts has researched this story in Mormon archives and elsewhere, and has traveled along the route where the handcart pioneers came to grief. Based on his research, he concludes that the tragedy was entirely preventable. Brigham Young and others in the Mormon leadership failed to heed the abundant signs of impending catastrophe, including warnings from other Mormon elders in the East and Midwest, where the journey began. Devil’s Gate is a powerful indictment of the Mormon leadership and a gripping story of survival and suffering that is superbly told by one of our finest writers of Western history.”
Ah yes, what wonderful fruit.
”parkman says: October 25, 2012 at 1:08 pm
“Mormon authorities have claimed to be the true trinitarian christians today…”
Please show me where my Church leaders are saying that we are Trinitarian like you believers in that traditional manmade definition of the Trinity.”
“Mike R says: October 25, 2012 at 2:45 pm
Parkman, are saying that sentence I posted is inaccurate as to what Mormon authorities
have taught ? Are you sure you want to talk about the late man made definition of God/Trinity
taught by Mormon authorities ? Or should we try harder to stay on topic ?”
I just asked you to show me where LDS Church leaders have ever taught in your man created definition of Trinity. It looks like you are trying to divert people’s attention to something else.
Falcon,
Yes, we all know you feel any Mormon that doesn’t fit into your preconceived and narrow-minded view of LDS theology isn’t really a Mormon at all. Thankfully your opinion of what does and doesn’t make a good Mormon is irrelevant, and I’m a full member in good standing. But please, continue beating this dead horse. It helps highlight your bigotry and inability to make a rational argument against those things you don’t find “Mormon enough”.
My family had a grape vine while I was growing up. It was (and still is) a good producer. But occasionally a few bunches bunches would go bad. Maybe because they got to close to the ground and began to rot, or birds and insects get to them, or other reasons. That didn’t mean we needed to get rid of the entire vine, that would have been stupid. The vast majority of the fruit is very good, you just have to be sure and avoid what is bad.
Thanks for the book recommendation. It has four stars on Amazon and I could pick up a copy for four bucks with shipping. When I get a little extra money I’ll look into it. Unless you just want to send me a copy, then I’ll promise to read it. I do love free books.
“I think you guys should get yourself a couple more wives and really sell out to old Brigham.”
Thanks for the advice, but I think I’ll just keep selling out to old Jesus, my Lord and Savior. God truly is amazing!
TJayT, I agree God is truly amazing . He has provided the means for us in these latter
times to test and evaluate the claims of those who come to our door with a message
they say is from Jesus . The good fruit that Mormon people exhibit by their lives
hardly needs testing ,but the fruit produced by the Mormon hierarchy , their teachings,
needs to be evaluated by those investigating their claims . I think you’ve touched on
something important , namely, looking to the old Jesus . I’m leary of any “new and
improved version ” of Him promoted by those who may claim to be apostles in this
time which we live . Caution is paramount —Matt 24:24 .
Parkman, I posed a simple question to you on 10-25 at 2:45 pm . A yes or no from you
would suffice , and I have no intention on pursuing that topic further at this time .
“Parkman, I posed a simple question to you on 10-25 at 2:45 pm . A yes or no from you
would suffice , and I have no intention on pursuing that topic further at this time .”
Yes, I think you are sidestepping the answer. Why do you believe that LDS leaders are now teaching your version of the Trinity?
TJ wrote:
“Yes, we all know you feel any Mormon that doesn’t fit into your preconceived and narrow-minded view of LDS theology isn’t really a Mormon at all. Thankfully your opinion of what does and doesn’t make a good Mormon is irrelevant, and I’m a full member in good standing. But please, continue beating this dead horse. It helps highlight your bigotry and inability to make a rational argument against those things you don’t find “Mormon enough”.”
I hit a nerve with you again haven’t I TJ? The fact of the matter is that you just sort of make it up to satisfy your own intellectual satisfaction because you know the LDS church is full of folly. I don’t care if you’re a member in good standing in the LDS church. All that means is your coughing up your 10% entry fee every year. Start proclaiming what you believe. You won’t last long.
So Jesus is your Lord and Savior? What Jesus is that? He’s the one that you share with the Jehovah Witnesses.
If you were a Mormon after the brand of Joseph Smith and Brigham Young you’d belong to the FLDS.
I really get a kick out of you LDS free lancers and the way you can justify this fantasy to your own satisfaction.
I can’t figure it out. If these Mormon prophets are really all that then why do their prophetic utterances get tubed in future generations? I don’t buy the “progressive revelation” nonsense. That’s just an excuse for endless do-overs. Brigham Young and McConkie are embarrassments. They didn’t even agree with each other.
So what’s a Mormon left with? Well the Mormon is left with making up their own brand of Mormonism. All of this “doctrine” that Brigham Young spoke was Brigham speaking out of his own imagination just like the false prophets of the OT.
Bottom line for Young and today’s free-lancers in the LDS church? It’s all ego.
If today’s Mormon had any confidence what-so-ever in the prophets that they venerate, then their wouldn’t be so much confusion in the Mormon camp and they wouldn’t be left to making their own brand.
What we have in Mormonism, from the beginning, is a bunch of religious entrepreneurs. They are spiritual toddlers who have no insight into what true Scripture is and how the Word of God is rightly understood.
What a deal. A stray idea comes floating through the mind and it appears to these people as the oracle of God. There is no foundation here.
Jesus spoke rightly when he said that there would be false prophets coming in His name. He also said that at the Day of Judgement there would be those that would cry “Lord, Lord” to Him and He would not recognize them. That’s because they didn’t know Him but instead substituted a god that isn’t God and reduced Jesus to a mere created being.
Knowing Christ and the power of His resurrection results in eternal life. Substituting a Christ of their own making, while satisfying the ego with faux spirituality, is spiritual death.
Falcon wrote,
“I hit a nerve with you again haven’t I TJ? The fact of the matter is that you just sort of make it up to satisfy your own intellectual satisfaction because you know the LDS church is full of folly.”
You didn’t hit a nerve. I’ve just discovered you are unwilling or incapable of carrying on a civil discussion with a Mormon, so I don’t bother trying anymore.
“Start proclaiming what you believe. You won’t last long.”
That’s the funny thin Falcon, I do. I’ve talked to plenty of Mormons about vast numbers of different theological topics. I’m not actually outside the norm (at least not in the wards I’ve lived in, I can’t speak for everyone). Again, your oppinion is irrelivent, and your understanding of the things that are truly important in LDS theology is flawed.
” I really get a kick out of you LDS free lancers and the way you can justify this fantasy to your own satisfaction.”
Proverbs 14:6
MikeR
A question for you. Earlier you said;
” The good fruit that Mormon people exhibit by their lives hardly needs testing…”
Seeing that (if I understand your beliefs correctly) you feel good works are the product of a saved heart do you also beloved that some of these good Mormons are saved despite what you would say is there bad theology?
“I’ve talked to plenty of Mormons about vast numbers of different theological topics. I’m not actually outside the norm (at least not in the wards I’ve lived in, I can’t speak for everyone).”
The posters here have from time to time said we stick our head in the sand when it comes to the things they want us to believe happen in the LDS Church. The more I listen to them, the more I see that it is they who have their head in the sand.
TJayT, even non believers can live a moral livestyle consistent in large part with what we see
advocated by Jesus’ apostles . The Christian life (in my opinion) is like a coin , one side is living
our lives in accordance with what the New Testament reveals , the other side is belief , what
do we believe about God/Jesus / how to receive eternal life . I personally believe that not
everyone that sits in the local Mormon Ward Sunday morning is not saved . But once someone
is made aware of what Mormon prophets have actually taught about God /Jesus then they have a
decision to make , a decision which can affect their eternal well being .
Parkman, your listening skills like everyone else can always be better . I hope you’re not
claiming to be a better listener than all the non-LDS who post here , because if you are then
re read that simple sentence I posted on Oct 25 and see how you immediately ran with your
own assumptions instead of not listening and asking for more information etc. To many times
you appear angry , and that makes me wonder why you are even here . Life’s to short .
I know people don’t like to here it, but Brigham Young and Bruce R. McConkie were great men, and their teachings, when properly understood, are of great relevance to us today. The problem is that I have yet to see a non-LDS actually give an accurate portrayal of these men, but insist on their versions being excepted.
Falcon
What we get from you, for the most part, is twisted and distorted understanding of what Mormonism is and what its leaders have taught, both now and in the past. You rarely actually discuss anything, preferring to simply present your twisted view of everything Mormonism and seem to think that is sufficient. Almost every comment you give is based around what you want people in the church to be like, and thus end up as false accusations against those who are here.
I have heard nothing here from TJAY, Parkman, or any other member that is not fully supported by the leadership of the church (past and present) and little that is not actively taught in our Sunday meetings. I know you don’t want to think that these are common LDS subject that are freely discussed by the membership, as that would destroy your delusion of secrecy among the leaders. That the fact remains that little of what you talk about is not generally known (at least to my experience).
Shem said
From everything I see, it is only when you agree with what they said then it is properly understood, and when you dont agree then they are not.
Lets see, JS taught we can become gods and millions of gods exist, so LDS like that idea and their fore it is properly understood. Yet BY said Adam God IS DOCTRINE, and that blacks will NEVER HOLD THE PRIESTHOOD and that is a law of God, Yet since LDS deny this and dont agree, it boils down to, we really dont understand and have enough facts.
Rick
Again, it is you that has no clue what these men meant; especially Brigham Young.
I have freely admitted that Brigham Young taught that Adam was a god before this planet was created, and that he believed he was the father of our spirits as well as our body. However, that is the extent of his teachings. He never went beyond this, and I don’t care who says he did. He never taught that Adam should be worshiped; he never said Adam as Elohim; get that through your thick skull instead of trying to pass off your false ideas as being his.
As to blacks and the priesthood, I have never read any quote where he said anything like this. Now, I am not as well read as I would like, but instead of throwing things around like you like to to do, how about a quote.
Shem,
I suspect no matter what I show you that BY said about blacks you will find a way to claim I am wrong, but here goes.
So tell me Shem, How can BY say, this is a law of God and is death on the spot and now is no longer in effect?
Now if you claim BY or the JoD is to old to trust or say something like that, then try this more Modern statement, The Mormon leaders were still extremely concerned about intermarriage in 1954. Apostle Mark E. Petersen warned:
cont
John L. Lund, LDS author and teacher, gave the following explanation of Brigham Young’s admonition against intermarriage:
Cont
Cont
Apostle Bruce R. McConkie also taught that Mormons are not to intermarry with blacks. He likened it to a caste system:
Rick
You only give one quote that actually says anything about the restrictions never being lifted. However, this has been fully explained by all the other quotes you give.
Simply put, a person who is able to hold the priesthood is not to marry a person who is not able to have that privilege. If such a marriage was to take place the justice of God demands that the two be killed to prevent the spreading of the cursed race among the non-cursed.
Now, today no one is cursed and thus the law does not apply. It is still and eternal law of God, but there is simply no one that fits the descriptions. It has become meaningless to us.
Now, I never once said that I do not believe what these men said. I simply said that I have never read any quote by any of them that actually teaches that the curse was never to be lifted, and I haven’t; and you have failed to provide any new ones that do.
Shem I really do feel sorry for you, You so badly want to believe a false prophet that you will say and do anything to justify what they said or even change what they said.
BY said
This will always be….
Until a prophet changes His mind on the subject. Also no mention of this curse is Priesthood holders marrying non priesthood holders.
Brigham Young stated that his sermons (as cited above) are Scripture:
I have never yet preached a sermon and sent it out to the children of man, that they may not call Scripture (JoD 13:95).
Wilford Woodruff, who became the fourth President and Prophet of the LDS Church:
What was that mark? It was a mark of blackness. That mark rested upon Cain, and descended upon his posterity from that time until the present. To day there are millions of the descendants of Cain, through the lineage of Ham, in the world, and that mark of darkness still rest upon them (Millennial Star, 51:339;
LDS Apostle and prolific writer Bruce R. McConkie:
Cont
(cont)
Is this Christian? Did Jesus or the Apostles teach prejudice on the basis of skin color? These racist teachings, which were clearly taught by the leaders of the Mormon Church, echo those of the Skinhead, K.K.K. and other destructive groups. This, is not Christianity:
Then Peter open his mouth, and said,
I love how the Black
people did not start turning white as was prophcied, so not only was that a failed prophecy, but it was then changed to Pure. I can see black turning white, not pure. But again, You will twist everything, tell me how and why I am wrong, and sadly you will hear from Jesus, I never knew you, so depart from me you worker of evil into everlasting darkness. Sadly I suspect you will be tormented by the fact you heard the truth over and over and rejected it in favor of lies.
I gotta admit, that would be hell, to hear from people you dont like for all of eternity saying, I told you but you rejected it in favor of lies.
Rick
I feel sorry for you. You are so intent on not believing that you end up with eyes that do not see and ears that cannot hear.
Brigham Young used the terms “African Race” and “White Race” because that was the division that existed at the time concerning the curse of the priesthood that was placed on Cain. It has no significance beyond this.
They were the cursed race. They are no longer the cursed race. As such his statement no longer applies to them.
Nothing you give contradicts this in any way. The problem here is that you are attempting to interpret the words of these men by using the meanings that we today use. It doesn’t work that way. You cannot interpret their words without understand how those words were used at the time.
A prime example of this is your quote from Nephi. In the 1800’s the term ‘white’ could be used as a reference to purity. Consider Isaiah’s statement that we shall be as “white as snow” and “as wool.” White was associated with purity and was used in this way on many occasions. Thus, in 2 Nephi 30: 6, considering the context of spiritual darkness, the word would have taken this meaning. However, in the modern day such use of the term has become unpopular and little used, and so the alteration is an update in language so that those reading the verse get the original intent. (Thus your accusation of failed prophecy is also false.)
After all, we still read in 2 Nephi 5: 21 that “And he had caused the cursing to come upon them…a skin of blackness…” and then in 3 Nephi 2: 15 that “their curse was taken from
I honestly am not surprised by how you twist and twist and twist to justify changes to believe what you want. So did you think that up all by yourself? Or did a Mormon prophet say that? I’m guessing you made it up and I doubt it is in any book any place.
Rick
I realize you have no answer for what I said. It is perfectly logical. No one has to say it for those who understand the nature of language and the doctrines taught in the Book of Mormon. It is obvious.
I also realize that you don’t like it when a logical explanation is given that simply destroys your argument, but I can’t help that. I have posted the truth of the matter, and anyone who actually read and the studied the Book of Mormon would imediately recognize it.
After all, why change only this one verse when in at least three other places the cursing of black skin, and the later removal of that curse is mentioned directly?
It is you who are twisting things, not me.
Shem said
Shem, seeing as how this is mormon logic and you guys tend to make up stuff, can you tell me, did you make this up or is this an official teaching that was stated by an LDS prophet or president. If an official prophet or president said or taught this and you can show me where, then we will talk, if you cannot and you simply made it up, then I reject it and dont buy it since you said it and not a prophet.
Rick
I understand. You don’t want to actually consider the fact that I am right, and so you are seeking for any reason you can grab onto in order to dismiss what I say. You will find any reason, whether it actually makes sense or not, to disbelieve the obvious truth.
No, I am not one of the General Authorities, and I do not know of any time where they took time to explain he reasons behind various alterations in the texts beyond saying that it has been updated for language and basic errors. Taking this statement it becomes obvious that this change was an update in language, as I have explained, which you are so intent on rejecting.
However, more to the point, can you show me any quote that gives an alternate explanation? Do you actually have anything beyond your made up reasoning to support your claims? You are always quick to accuse us when things don’t seem to go your way, but you fail to check yourself in the same manner. I think there is something off about that.
It’s like this, JS, Not me, not you not some Mormon Prophet said, The BoM will bring us closer to god than any other book, and the BoM is the Most correct book upon the earth. So if this is true, then why do we need an “Update” in the language if the book has been around for relatively 200 years? Also again it was said the black people would start turning white and since that clearly did not happen, you need to change the word white to anything just to avoid the fact that never happened.
Rick
Yeah, I know what it is like. You cling to everything that helps you disbelieve, no matter how illogical and just plain crazy it is.
The Book of Mormon is the most correct book. This does not mean it is perfect, and it is plain idiocy to claim such. It means that in disseminating truth there is no book that is more clear and accurate than the Book of Mormon.
Of course, you will always argue that any kind of error proves this statement wrong, because you have to have a reason to reject it.
After 200 years things need an update, and only a person truly ignorant in the nature of language would say otherwise. There are phrases and words that alter meaning in the span of a few decades, as does grammar and structure. We have 200 years, so it really is not surprising that some updates would be helpful.
Almost everything you say in your arguments regarding the Book of Mormon is illogical and just not thought out very well. They are supported only by your own imagination and nothing else. Yet you demand that you know more than and actually seem to think you have the more reasonable explanation of things.
It would be funny if it wasn’t so sad.