Close Topic Options

Journal of Discourses - Page 3

I understand that school of thought, but I would not use this...
[quote]For that reason my institute teacher told me that the reason the church does not put too much discussion in the Journal of Discourses is because they were written at another time and culture, not everyone now can understand them.  [/quote]
as a reason, because the same is true for the WHOLE standard works which were written at another time and culture. That withdrawn is fine, but again the meat of the matter is this... how is opinion seperated from fact since a lot of these 'deeper' doctrines come from books or resources that need interpretation, and I would dare to say, only by a Prophet.

Discourses Journal

"That withdrawn is fine, but again the meat of the matter is this... how is opinion seperated from fact since a lot of these 'deeper' doctrines come from books or resources that need interpretation, and I would dare to say, only by a Prophet. "

The problem then would lead to us asking if the prophets interpetation is official.  Sometimes I wonder, which prophets interpetation is required before we can become content?  The Journal of Discourses already contain the words of Joseph Smith, Brigham Young, John Taylor, Wilford Woodruff, Lorenzo Snow, and Joseph F. Smith.  What prophet do we need to interpet for them?  And who will we have to interpet the words of our modern prophet if we don't understand them, sometimes we don't.  The answer leads me to conclude that sometime we will need to learn to pray for understanding as Jesus taught the nephites to do when he could see that they had a hard time understanding his doctrine.  I have confidence that any latter day saint who reads their scriptures as they should and lives their lives as they should will eventually understand all the principles taught to us in the Journal of Discourses or anywhere else.  

Journal of Discourses Studies Doctrine Mormon

[quote] I have confidence that any latter day saint who reads their scriptures as they should and lives their lives as they should will eventually understand all the principles taught to us in the Journal of Discourses or anywhere else. [/quote]

Let me take this statement with a grain of salt Brian. I always heard this of 'if you live your life in a certain way etc etc etc' which leads to the point that if a person DO NOT understand a particularly doctrine it means they are NOT living their life like they should?.  This is wrong and unfair in my point of view. God will give us the answers if we look for them, just because someone doesn't understand a certain part of our Doctrine it doesn't make them 'unworthy' or 'it's because they're not living their lives like they should'. We all have questions that need to be answer. Going back to the subject, I don't personally see anything difficult to be 'interpreted'. The Prophets in the Journal of Discourses have said certain things of a very deep nature, some other things that sound crazy too, definetly! we as LDS members need to accept that truth too..but I don't see the need for the interpretation of those things that are not necessary for Savation. I think people need to understand that Prophets of God are men...NOT gods themselves, they commit mistakes and sin like anybody else. And certain things they have stated in the Journal of Discourses are their own thoughts, theories and opinions about different issues. I don't see anything that need to be interpreted when it's very clear when you read it. Now, if we don't agree with that, that's another story...

Page 3 Discourses Journal

[quote]he answer leads me to conclude that sometime we will need to learn to pray for understanding as Jesus taught the nephites to do when he could see that they had a hard time understanding his doctrine.  I have confidence that any latter day saint who reads their scriptures as they should and lives their lives as they should will eventually understand all the principles taught to us in the Journal of Discourses or anywhere else.[/quote]
Well let's close down FARMS, SHIELD, Institute, etc because all we need to do is pray. Brian we know the 'golden answer' it is not the answer to the question. Perhaps you did not review the start of the thread? Read on...

Brian I believed you are confused with the issue at hand. The question here is not to dispute the Journal of Discourses of itself (the JofD is merely ONE example), the question is this....

How does the Church decide what is authoritative and which is spekulation?

Put in other words... if you hear something like Lighter's marriage to Joseph and her angelic vision, is it to be taken AS Church History or merely that individual's personal belief. If it is just that person's individual belief then why would we quote from something that cannot be substantiated?

Members, as you did above... when they do not know the answer to a direct question will say 'pray' about it, but they forget the part called 'study it in your mind' which comes FIRST. We cannot pray about something that we have not researched, That is what we are doing now.

PS. Please keep in mind this is not an anti-mormon forum, we ask questions here out of genuine interest, not a desire to find fault. I only say this because I know you are used to the 'others'.

[offtopic]Please update your prfile, unless you like to be seen as a lazy frog.[/offtopic]

Discourses Journal

I know this is not the anti mormon vent shop like the other forum.  But I'm not worried that you guys are a bunch of anti mormons or apostates either he he.  

I simply said my last remarks because I feel that prayer is what helps us understand.  It is by study and also by faith that we learn the truth.  Not just one and not the other.  Like I told my friend a few minutes ago, emotions are a hard thing to communicate over the computer unfortunatly emotions are a part of normal communication.  

What I am wondering is what it is that bothers people about the Journal of Discourses that has started the conversation to begin with?  From my own experience it was the Adam God thing, which really bothered me when I first heard it (from an anti mormon source) but after doing the praying and seminary and all of that, it makes a lot of sense to me now.  

"How does the Church decide what is authoritative and which is spekulation? "

Brigham Young answered the question:

"In trying all matters of doctrine, to make a decision valid, it is necessary to obtain a unanimous vice, faith and decision.  In the capacity of a Quorum, the three First Presidents must be one in their voice; the Twelve Apostles must be unanimous in their voice..."

I have heard some of the brethern speak about meetings with the quorume of the twelve, if their is not unity in what is being discussed, they simply drop what they are discussing and move on to something else.

Journal of Discourses

[quote] What I am wondering is what it is that bothers people about the Journal of Discourses that has started the conversation to begin with? [/quote]
Perhaps you did not look over the previous pages... the answer is simple... when something is heard from the JD that sounds to far fetched then members generally say, 'Oh that is just the opinion of the person, besides it is not official Church dosctrine' and when it is understandable they are quick to quote from it as being from the JD. In doing this members seem like hypocrites. It is either the work is authoritative and can be quoted from and used in doctrine (as it is alread) or it is not. Do you understand now?

Journal Discourses - Page 3

"I always heard this of 'if you live your life in a certain way etc etc etc' which leads to the point that if a person DO NOT understand a particularly doctrine it means they are NOT living their life like they should?. "

Richard G. Scott said while I was at the MTC that he did not understand a particular point in the Book of Mormon.  I thought I did till he pointed out that he did not, now I realize I did not understand it as I should have.  I sometimes get misunderstood, I was not suggesting that a member of the church was not living their religion because they did not understand a certain point of doctrine, let me put it in another way, if we live our religion we will eventually know all things, and understand all things.  It does not mean that we will understand them all at once however, like the saying goes, line upon line precept on precept.  I don't know if you guys are aware of the fact that there is an Adam worshipper that visites that other site were you guys met me.  He reads the Journal of Discourses a lot, well the parts that he likes, the parts about Adam being God, he does not understand them though.  I told him he should spend more time reading the scriptures first.  I believe that.  I believe in my heart that a way for us to know we are going off the wrong path is when we find ourselves reading deeper doctrines more than the Standard Works.  I disagree with his interpetation because his interpetation shows a lack of understanding towards the simple things taught in the Book of Mormon and Doctrine and Covenants.  

Anyways, I've got a question for you all, we say the standard works are doctrine to us and we accpet the history found in them.  What about the Old Testament?  Is it official for example to teach eye for an eye tooth for a tooth?  Do we accept the history about bears killing kids that make fun of bald prophets?  The reason I am asking is because the Old Testament a "Standard Work" is far more on the deep end than the Journal of Discourses.  

Journal Discourses Mormon Doctrine Studies - Page 3

[quote]I don't know if you guys are aware of the fact that there is an Adam worshipper that visites that other site were you guys met me[/quote]
No, have not heard of that, but we will leave that for the other board called, 'Religious Beliefs and Traditions' which caters for those that want to express that point of view (yes we cater for other beliefs too, just no on this board).

[quote] Anyways, I've got a question for you all, we say the standard works are doctrine to us and we accpet the history found in them. [/quote]
I really do not want to dive into that because it will defer from the thread... why... think about it, you are asking a question about books that HAVE BEEN made official and given official statements attached. "We believe.... as far as it is translated correctly". These have even been translated correctly to show error (example JS Bible), that have been crossreferenced. You cannot compare that to the JD which seems to be left to the interpretation of the 'gurus' of CES and other places. There is a direct difference.