Close Topic Options

Journal of Discourses - Page 2

I found a good quote that supports the points made so far in this topic.

Elder James E Faust, then a member of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, stated:
"We make no claim of infallibility or perfection in the prophets, seers, and revelators. Yet I humbly state that I have sat in the company of these men, and I believe their greatest desire is to know and do the will of our Heavenly Father. Those who sit in the highest councils of this church and have participated as inspiration has come and decisions have been reached know that this light and truth is beyond human intelligence and reasoning." (conference report 1989)

The prophets are just human like us and at times they may make mistakes in judgement and express personal opinions that are not accepted doctrine of the Church, but nevertheless they are entitled for revelation for the time and when the spirit speaks to them there is no doubt of the authority they possess.

Discourses Journal

Great quote!!!! perfect for the subject!!! Now, if we see our prophets as imperfect people just like you and me...how we know where and when they're speaking by the power of the Lord or they're just giving their own thoughts?.

Journal of Discourses Studies Doctrine Mormon

Okay, so now with all of the above, how do we determine what is expressed fact and just opinion if both are quoted from and taught? In other words, in a class like Institute do we teach factual doctrine or also opinions? i think there needs to be some sort of line that says, 'Look, this is doctrine, and this is opinion'. Or is it that we are left to figure it out for ourselves through the Spirit?

Page 2 Discourses Journal

The church has taken a possition on the Journal of Discourses, Brigham Young as President of the Church authorized their original publication.  No prophet from that time has said otherwise.  

[edit]Hey Brian, welcome back, you may want to update your profile to get rid of the frog. I am sure you are going to love the international issues section too! LOL[/edit]

Discourses Journal

Regarding fact or opinion, when a prophet gives his opinion he says it is his opinion.  Even then it is not something that should simply be disregarded, Alma presented an opinion that turned out to be right.  

A lot of people in the church have a hobby of pick and choose doctrines, and in such they argue that what a prophet has spoken was his "opinion" and that is somehow suppose to save them the grief of not actually listening to his words as a prophet of the Lord.  It makes it easy for them to say they follow the living prophet even though they really don't.  

Journal of Discourses

[quote] A lot of people in the church have a hobby of pick and choose doctrines, and in such they argue that what a prophet has spoken was his "opinion" and that is somehow suppose to save them the grief of not actually listening to his words as a prophet of the Lord.[/quote]
I agree, but then this reverts back to the original question... what is opinion and what is to be taken as standard Doctrine of the Church? We use a book, but then pick and choose what should be considered opinion and which should not, what authority do we have to do that?

Journal Discourses - Page 2

Brian T, so what you're saying is that the Church consider the Journal of Discourses as LDS official Doctrine?

Journal Discourses Mormon Doctrine Studies - Page 2

All truth is official doctrine.  Now we can discuss certain aspects of what is contained in the Journal of Discourses, and discuss that.  If we are for example speaking of the so called Adam-God theory, or Adam-God doctrine we would first have to talk about what was agreed upon by the scriptures and the brethern and what was not.  Orson Pratt disagreed with Brigham Young about certain aspects of the Adam-God issue, however, reading between what the two men thought, they basically have the same perspective on the gospel.  There is really nothing "official" or "unofficial" as far as doctrine goes, the church does not have that in mind.  What I have learned is that the question should be an issue of the doctrine being discussed is a doctrine that is appropriat for those who are listening.  For example, I would not go to deep in discussing how the Bible flat out says that God made Moses a god to pharaoh (it does read Ex. 7:1) because many people don't understand that, they need the basics.  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.  

Something else that needs to be understood is that just because a revelation is given to a prophet that does not mean he understands what it all means.  It is true that the children of Cain won't recieve the priesthood in this life, as the early Genral Authorities taught, but we know that those who join the church are not the seed of Cain anymore because they are adopted into the house of Abraham and therefore adopted into the house of Shem.  They are no longer the seed of Cain.  The early general authorities did not understand that, and for that reason, it was common culture for lds blacks to not recieve the priesthood before 1978 (some did though)  It was through revelation that we learned that all worthy males could recieve the priesthood.  

As for the church calling them official doctrine or not, they never have said that they are unofficial.  I use them in talks and in teaching people all the time.