Close Topic Options

Journal of Discourses - Page 5

i believe in the journal of discoures .i also believe it is scripture because many things that were written were inspired by the prophets else why did they say them.it is doctrine that must  be kept back from the saints until their faith is strong enough

Discourses Journal

[quote]i believe in the journal of discoures .i also believe it is scripture because many things that were written were inspired by the prophets else why did they say them.it is doctrine that must  be kept back from the saints until their faith is strong enough [/quote]

But don't you think the Church should give an statement regardless whether is doctrine or not to avoid confusion and misunderstandings?

Journal of Discourses Studies Doctrine Mormon

I guess I should add my two cents, if I may.  When the JD was first published, Brigham Young selected a young unemployed member, and allowed him to record all Conference sermons, and publish them for money to support himself.  However, he was instructed that after each conference he was to allow each speaker to review his speech and make any corrections as needed, before they were published.  So in the beginning the JD was accepted as Church doctrine.  But after about 1 yr. the man died, leaving noone to carry on.  but two brothern took it upon themselves to pick up where the other gentleman left off.  But they did not allow the speakers to proof read what they had recorded, and there were many instances where Bro.Young and others had to try to correct things after they were published, but things got completely out of hand, with persecutions, etc. so much of the JD has many untruths, but a lot of truths.  But for this reason the Church does not accept the JD as official Church Doctrine, but under the direction of the Prophet, many quotes are used in our church Magazines, Priesthood,& Relief Society Manuals, other Church materials.  These things are accepted as official Church doctrine.  Any publication approved and signed by the First Presidency, can be accepted as official doctrine.  Now what about all the things stated by all the Prophets from the first to the present?  Let me say the Lord does not call Puppets to be Prophets, He calls men.  And by that I mean, Not everything that comes from the President of the Church is revelation. He is allowed to express himself as he sees fit.  However, if he should start teaching false doctrine, that might lead the Church astray, the Lord will see to it that it is corrected, or He will remove that Prophet from office.  the Lord will not allow His Prophet to lead us astray.  And by the same token the Lord does not intend for us to stop using our brains, when we join the Church, He expects us to try the doctrines, whether they be of Him or whether they came from another source.  Anyone who has the Holy Ghost is intitled to revelation, that's what he does.  But the Lord expects us to do all we can to come to a conclusion, than kneel in prayer and ask if our decision is right.  If it is the Holy Ghost will let us know.  If not we will know that also.  Hope this helps.

Page 5 Discourses Journal

[quote]However, he was instructed that after each conference he was to allow each speaker to review his speech and make any corrections as needed, before they were published.  So in the beginning the JD was accepted as Church doctrine.  But after about 1 yr. the man died, leaving noone to carry on.  but two brothern took it upon themselves to pick up where the other gentleman left off.  But they did not allow the speakers to proof read what they had recorded, and there were many instances where Bro.Young and others had to try to correct things after they were published, but things got completely out of hand, with persecutions, etc. the JD has many untruths, but a lot of truths.  But for this reason the Church does not accept the JD as official Church Doctrine, but under the direction of the Prophet, many quotes are used in our church Magazines, Priesthood,& Relief Society Manuals, other Church materials.  These things are accepted as official Church doctrine.  Any publication approved and signed by the First Presidency, can be accepted as official doctrine.  Now what about all the things stated by all the Prophets from the first to the present?  Let me say the Lord does not call Puppets to be Prophets, He calls men.  And by that I mean, Not everything that comes from the President of the Church is revelation. He is allowed to express himself as he sees fit. [/quote]

Why then the Church quotes things from the Journal of Discourses after this same guy you speak about died?.
Also why they select certain things that FIT in the present LDS doctrine and the controversial stuff is left behind as 'not inspired'. It is confusing. If they (The Church) think that the Journal of Discourses have not so inspired things on it, why they bother to quote from it in the first place?. They cannot be quoting what it fits to our own beliefs and ignore o take off the controversial stuff. That's too have double standards in my opinion. They should give an statement about the position of the Church about these collection of books although is clear to me that if they quote from it and add it to the LDS manuals we use on Sunday, it is definetly consider doctrine.

Discourses Journal

I don't know if this will help in this discussion but if anyone is interested in Pres. Kimball's opinion on the matter, I've dug this up:
"We warn you against the dissemination of doctrines which are not according to the scriptures and which are alleged to have been taught by some of the General Authorities of past generations. Such for instance is the Adam-God theory. We denounce that theory and hope that everyone will be cautioned against this and other kinds of false doctrine (Church News, Oct. 9, 1976)."

I read the JD to better understand the Prophets, their lives, personal beliefs and their personalities rather than to discern new doctrine from them.  We are all products of our times - influenced by our cultures and the environments we live in. The Prophets were/are  no different in that regard. I agree however, that there is a need now for the 1st Presidency of the Church to take the time to annotate and or clarify (if possible) each discourse to help members avoid reading things into them that are not there.    

Journal of Discourses

[quote] I read the JD to better understand the Prophets, their lives, personal beliefs and their personalities rather than to discern new doctrine from them.  We are all products of our times - influenced by our cultures and the environments we live in. The Prophets were/are  no different in that regard. I agree however, that there is a need now for the 1st Presidency of the Church to take the time to annotate and or clarify (if possible) each discourse to help members avoid reading things into them that are not there. [/quote]
Well said. I believe someone used that quote on the 'God-Adam' thread we have somewhere on this board.
[offtopic]Long time no see, I sent you several emails with no reply, you may wish to update your profile now as many things have been added.[/offtopic]

Journal Discourses - Page 5

Hi Nephiproject, welcome back! . Now, the point here guys is not anymore whether the JD is doctrinal or not (I think until the First Presidency gives an statement regards to it we will never know...: ) but my point is first of all, we cannot disregard the words of Pres. Young and others and second how in the world we as members can difference the words of an inspired Prophet talking as such and the normal man who is giving their thoughts and opinions?.

Journal Discourses Mormon Doctrine Studies - Page 5

[quote]... but my point is first of all, we cannot disregard the words of Pres. Young and others and second how in the world we as members can difference the words of an inspired Prophet talking as such and the normal man who is giving their thoughts and opinions?.[/quote]

In my opinion......

I think part of this can be answered with the fact that not everything that the Prophet utters is revelation or scripture or doctrine.  Please don't take this personally, I'm being really sarcastic here but, "When he orders a pizza, is that scripture?"

The early days of the Church were still in the "infancy" of the procedures and policies.  It took a while for the Presidency to determine what constituted official policy, official doctrine, standard works, etc.  The JoD was published, as has been pointed out already, during the early days of the Church, when these official policies regarding doctrine and standard works weren't settled yet.  Impromptu speeches or interviews with obvious personal opinions and/or popularly accepted sentiment within them can't be construed as doctrine.  Particularly when those opinions or sentiments are clearly outdated!  Moonmen and sunmen, indeed!  Just as outlandish as the opinions/popular sentiment *of that time period* regarding blacks!  Absurd!  But *at that time* it was just "common knowledge."

We do have to "study it in [our] minds" and come to an understanding of the truth.  I think it was Pres. Taylor who said something like "we should be a church of thinkers" -- it is for us to find the truth for ourselves.

Roz