Announcement

Collapse

Message to all users:

https://carm.org/forum-rules

Super Member Subscription
https://carm.org/carm-super-members-banner-ad-signup

As most of you are aware, we had a crash to forums and were down for over two days a while back. We did have to do an upgrade to the vbulletin software to fix the forums and that has created changes, VB no longer provide the hybrid or threaded forums. There are some issues/changes to the forums we are not able to fix or change. Also note the link address change, please let friends and posters know of the changed link to the forums. For now this is the only link available, https://forums.carm.org/vb5/ but if clicking on forum on carm.org homepage it will now send you to this link. (edited to add https: now working.

Again, we are working through some of the posting and viewing issues to learn how to post with the changes, you will have to check and test the different features, icons that have changed. You may also want to go to profile settings,since many of the notifications, information in profile, also to update/edit your avatar by clicking on avatar space, pull down arrow next to login for user settings.

Edit to add "How to read forums, to make it easier."
Pull down arrow next to login name upper right select profile, or user settings when page opens to profile,select link in tab that says Account. Then select/choose options, go down to Conversation Detail Options, Select Display mode Posts, NOT Activity, that selection of Posts will make the pages of discussions go to last post on last page rather than out of order that happens if you choose activity threads. Then be sure to go to bottom and select SAVE Changes in your profile options. You can then follow discussions by going through the pages, to the last page having latest responses. Then click on the other links Privacy, Notifications, to select viewing options,the forums get easier if you open all the tabs or links in your profile, user settings and select options. To join Super Member, pull down arrow next to login name, select User Settings and then click on tab/link at top that says Subscriptions.

Thank you for your patience and God Bless.

Diane S
https://carm.org/forum-rules
See more
See less

Itís ok to disagree with a prophet...JFS

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Itís ok to disagree with a prophet...JFS

    I use some flippant expressions when I disagree with teachings of former prophets, who have expressed ideas and made policy not based in the standard works.

    The canon of scripture is the standard.

    Here is what the Prophet Joseph Fielding Smith said.

    "My words, and the teachings of any other member of the Church, high or low, if they do not square with the revelations, we need not accept them. Let us have this matter clear.... You cannot accept the books written by authorities of the Church as standards in doctrine, only in so far as they accord with the revealed word in the standard works. Every man who writes is responsible not the Church, for what he writes. If Joseph Fielding Smith writes something that is out of harmony with the revelations, then every member is duty bound to reject it. If he writes what is in perfect harmony with the revealed word of the Lord, then it should be accepted" (Joseph Fielding Smith, in Doctrines of Salvation 3:203-4).

    The church has rejected the reasons for the priesthood ban, and called those teachings racist.

    We reject adam God Theory, we reject some of the early ideas regarding the nature of God.

    I reject ideas forwarded of color changing people in the Book of Mormon.

    I reject that playing cards are of the Devil.

    I reject hardly anything considering the long history of recorded talks and memoirs.

    I accept all the men who said these things as prophets seers and revelators.

    I also realize the irony in that that he wrote this in a book, and that the book contains some of the things we reject.

  • #2
    Originally posted by CTR-Lloyd View Post
    I use some flippant expressions when I disagree with teachings of former prophets, who have expressed ideas and made policy not based in the standard works.

    The canon of scripture is the standard.

    Here is what the Prophet Joseph Fielding Smith said.

    "My words, and the teachings of any other member of the Church, high or low, if they do not square with the revelations, we need not accept them. Let us have this matter clear.... You cannot accept the books written by authorities of the Church as standards in doctrine, only in so far as they accord with the revealed word in the standard works. Every man who writes is responsible not the Church, for what he writes. If Joseph Fielding Smith writes something that is out of harmony with the revelations, then every member is duty bound to reject it. If he writes what is in perfect harmony with the revealed word of the Lord, then it should be accepted" (Joseph Fielding Smith, in Doctrines of Salvation 3:203-4).

    The church has rejected the reasons for the priesthood ban, and called those teachings racist.

    We reject adam God Theory, we reject some of the early ideas regarding the nature of God.

    I reject ideas forwarded of color changing people in the Book of Mormon.

    I reject that playing cards are of the Devil.

    I reject hardly anything considering the long history of recorded talks and memoirs.

    I accept all the men who said these things as prophets seers and revelators.

    I also realize the irony in that that he wrote this in a book, and that the book contains some of the things we reject.
    You also said that scores of GA wern't educated enough to understand metaphors. It seem like you showed some true colors and crossed the line and are now trying reel it in a bit.

    Do you believe that children of practicing gay people should not be baptized?

    Blood atonement?

    Taking virgins under the ELC is okay

    God was going to kill Emma if she did not accept polygamy

    The Catholic church is the whore of Babylon

    Protestant church is her harlot daughter.

    Lost tribes of Israel are in the arctic circle.

    Garden of Eden is in Missouri

    Hill Cumorah battle was in NY

    I can go on and on...start with these...lets make a list of all the false teachings these guys have taught. What are false teachings of what I wrote?

    Also...you left out some of what JFS wrote...

    STANDARD WORKS JUDGE TEACHINGS OF ALL MEN. It makes no difference what is written or what anyone has said, if what has been said is in conflict with what the Lord has revealed, we can set it aside. My words, and the teaching of any other member of the Church, high or low, if they do not square with the revelations, we need not accept them. Let us have this matter clear. We have accepted the four standard works as the measuring yardsticks, or balances, by which we measure every man's doctrine. You cannot accept the books written by the authorities of the Church as standards in doctrine, only in so far as they accord with the revealed word in the standard works. Every man who writes is responsible, not the Church, for what he writes. If Joseph Fielding Smith writes something which is out of harmony with the revelations, then every member of the Church is duty bound to reject it. If he writes that which is in perfect harmony with the revealed word of the Lord, then it should be accepted. 42

    Joseph Fielding Smith. Doctrines of Salvation: Sermons and Writings of Joseph Fielding Smith: Volumes 1-3 (Kindle Locations 16435-16440). Deseret Book Company. Kindle Edition.

    Yet you change the standard works? And why do you believe JFS in this quote, but not others...it is a circular argument.








    But there has been a great difficulty in getting anything into the heads of this generation. It has been like splitting hemlock knots with a corn-dodger for a wedge, and a pumpkin for a beetle. Even the Saints are slow to understand. Joseph Smith...

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Markk View Post

      You also said that scores of GA wern't educated enough to understand metaphors. It seem like you showed some true colors and crossed the line and are now trying reel it in a bit.

      Do you believe that children of practicing gay people should not be baptized?

      Blood atonement?

      Taking virgins under the ELC is okay

      God was going to kill Emma if she did not accept polygamy

      The Catholic church is the whore of Babylon

      Protestant church is her harlot daughter.

      Lost tribes of Israel are in the arctic circle.

      Garden of Eden is in Missouri

      Hill Cumorah battle was in NY

      I can go on and on...start with these...lets make a list of all the false teachings these guys have taught. What are false teachings of what I wrote?

      Also...you left out some of what JFS wrote...

      STANDARD WORKS JUDGE TEACHINGS OF ALL MEN. It makes no difference what is written or what anyone has said, if what has been said is in conflict with what the Lord has revealed, we can set it aside. My words, and the teaching of any other member of the Church, high or low, if they do not square with the revelations, we need not accept them. Let us have this matter clear. We have accepted the four standard works as the measuring yardsticks, or balances, by which we measure every man's doctrine. You cannot accept the books written by the authorities of the Church as standards in doctrine, only in so far as they accord with the revealed word in the standard works. Every man who writes is responsible, not the Church, for what he writes. If Joseph Fielding Smith writes something which is out of harmony with the revelations, then every member of the Church is duty bound to reject it. If he writes that which is in perfect harmony with the revealed word of the Lord, then it should be accepted. 42

      Joseph Fielding Smith. Doctrines of Salvation: Sermons and Writings of Joseph Fielding Smith: Volumes 1-3 (Kindle Locations 16435-16440). Deseret Book Company. Kindle Edition.

      Yet you change the standard works? And why do you believe JFS in this quote, but not others...it is a circular argument.
      Reel it in?
      I’m the one starting the thread knowing you and each other Anti Mormon doctrine person will have a pet list to put out.

      We record what the brethren say.

      Each have said that the living prophet is the one to look to.

      This list you put out has zero bearing on the salvation of men, they are not fundamental teachings or doctrines. Whether I believe or reject them has no bearing on my salvation.

      With regard to the first one, baptizing children of practicing homosexuals—- I support the policy.

      If we baptized these children we would be placing them in the awkward position of teaching them that their parents are sinful. Why would a Gay couple want to send thier child to a Place that preaches against their lifestyle and union.

      This would lead to minimum awkwardness and at worst irreparable harm to that family.

      To have the child wait until 18 is appropriate and merciful.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Markk View Post
        lets make a list of all the false teachings these guys have taught.
        And just how do you plan to compile such a list? Do you plan to determine for us what is true and what is false?

        You did make a list....

        Originally posted by Markk View Post
        children of practicing gay people should not be baptized?

        Blood atonement?

        Taking virgins under the ELC is okay

        God was going to kill Emma if she did not accept polygamy

        The Catholic church is the whore of Babylon

        Protestant church is her harlot daughter.

        Lost tribes of Israel are in the arctic circle.

        Garden of Eden is in Missouri

        Hill Cumorah battle was in NY
        Were you suggesting that these are all false? Or even that these are all teachings of the Church?

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by CTR-Lloyd View Post
          I use some flippant expressions when I disagree with teachings of former prophets, who have expressed ideas and made policy not based in the standard works.

          The canon of scripture is the standard.

          Here is what the Prophet Joseph Fielding Smith said.

          "My words, and the teachings of any other member of the Church, high or low, if they do not square with the revelations, we need not accept them. Let us have this matter clear.... You cannot accept the books written by authorities of the Church as standards in doctrine, only in so far as they accord with the revealed word in the standard works. Every man who writes is responsible not the Church, for what he writes. If Joseph Fielding Smith writes something that is out of harmony with the revelations, then every member is duty bound to reject it. If he writes what is in perfect harmony with the revealed word of the Lord, then it should be accepted" (Joseph Fielding Smith, in Doctrines of Salvation 3:203-4).

          The church has rejected the reasons for the priesthood ban, and called those teachings racist.

          We reject adam God Theory, we reject some of the early ideas regarding the nature of God.

          I reject ideas forwarded of color changing people in the Book of Mormon.

          I reject that playing cards are of the Devil.

          I reject hardly anything considering the long history of recorded talks and memoirs.

          I accept all the men who said these things as prophets seers and revelators.

          I also realize the irony in that that he wrote this in a book, and that the book contains some of the things we reject.
          Tell us, under Joey Smith, how would the
          Danites have reacted if some group started
          denying Joe's "revelations" say, on POLYTHEISM?

          What happens today if somebody speaks out against the
          "living" prophet? I think you call it disfellowshiping or "excommunication."
          When the prophet dies, are his teachings all subject to questioning?
          How do you know that what Nelson teaches today won't be disregarded
          tomorrow, as was the Adam god doctrine? Blood Atonement? etc.?

          What happened to the office of the "Nauvoo Expositor" when
          Mormons spoke out against polytheism, polygamy, and the political
          ambitions of Joey Smith? Was that right? How does the Mormon cult
          historically handle dissenters?

          Last edited by Catherine Aurelia; 07-05-18, 09:12 AM.
          Christian scholar John MacArthur about Mormonism: “Mormonism is wrong in epic proportions.”

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by CTR-Lloyd View Post
            Reel it in?
            Iím the one starting the thread knowing you and each other Anti Mormon doctrine person will have a pet list to put out.

            We record what the brethren say.

            Each have said that the living prophet is the one to look to.

            This list you put out has zero bearing on the salvation of men, they are not fundamental teachings or doctrines. Whether I believe or reject them has no bearing on my salvation.

            With regard to the first one, baptizing children of practicing homosexualsó- I support the policy.

            If we baptized these children we would be placing them in the awkward position of teaching them that their parents are sinful. Why would a Gay couple want to send thier child to a Place that preaches against their lifestyle and union.

            This would lead to minimum awkwardness and at worst irreparable harm to that family.

            To have the child wait until 18 is appropriate and merciful.
            And playing cards has a bearing on your salvation more that belonging to a church that is the whore of Babylon? Let me maybe rephrase the question...will those in any church but the church of the firstborn gain eternal life according to LDS scripture". But at any rate the GA taught that the Catholic church is the whore of babylon...do you believe that?


            am creating a list, off the top of my head that will show how messed up the GA were and are. please let me know which false teachings I am going to start a list so we can track these. If blood atonment is true, that could be key to the salvation of every murderer alive.

            That is a stupid argument...the church baptizes kids of drug addicts, alcoholics, and criminals of sorts. All different sins that you can apply the same logic you just said about the Homosexual. But I can scratch that one off or your list, but the LDS church is divided on that one and growing more so every day. We may have to put asterisks by some of these that are 50/50 questions.
            Last edited by Markk; 07-05-18, 10:13 AM.
            But there has been a great difficulty in getting anything into the heads of this generation. It has been like splitting hemlock knots with a corn-dodger for a wedge, and a pumpkin for a beetle. Even the Saints are slow to understand. Joseph Smith...

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by JustaLurker View Post

              And just how do you plan to compile such a list? Do you plan to determine for us what is true and what is false?

              You did make a list....



              Were you suggesting that these are all false? Or even that these are all teachings of the Church?
              Good question...cut and paste the list...Green=True....Red = False
              But there has been a great difficulty in getting anything into the heads of this generation. It has been like splitting hemlock knots with a corn-dodger for a wedge, and a pumpkin for a beetle. Even the Saints are slow to understand. Joseph Smith...

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Catherine Aurelia View Post

                Tell us, under Joey Smith, how would the
                Danites have reacted if some group started
                denying Joe's "revelations" say, on POLYTHEISM?

                What happens today if somebody speaks out against the
                "living" prophet? I think you call it disfellowshiping or "excommunication."
                When the prophet dies, are his teachings all subject to questioning?
                How do you know that what Nelson teaches today won't be disregarded
                tomorrow, as was the Adam god doctrine? Blood Atonement? etc.?

                What happened to the office of the "Nauvoo Expositor" when
                Mormons spoke out against polytheism, polygamy, and the political
                ambitions of Joey Smith? Was that right? How does the Mormon cult
                historically handle dissenters?
                Well Lloyd?
                Christian scholar John MacArthur about Mormonism: “Mormonism is wrong in epic proportions.”

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Catherine Aurelia View Post

                  Tell us, under Joey Smith, how would the
                  Danites have reacted if some group started
                  denying Joe's "revelations" say, on POLYTHEISM?

                  What happens today if somebody speaks out against the
                  "living" prophet? I think you call it disfellowshiping or "excommunication."
                  When the prophet dies, are his teachings all subject to questioning?
                  How do you know that what Nelson teaches today won't be disregarded
                  tomorrow, as was the Adam god doctrine? Blood Atonement? etc.?

                  What happened to the office of the "Nauvoo Expositor" when
                  Mormons spoke out against polytheism, polygamy, and the political
                  ambitions of Joey Smith? Was that right? How does the Mormon cult
                  historically handle dissenters?
                  There are proper ways to disagree.

                  if I disagreed with the living prophet I would talk to my bishop, if he agreed with me weíd talk to the stake pres, and on up. If the bishop/stk pres did not agree with me, then Iím probably out to lunch.

                  If we were correct the prophet would be grateful and correct the message.

                  There isnt a need for activism or shaming.

                  I would never oppose, I would respectfully raise concern internally.



                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by CTR-Lloyd View Post
                    There are proper ways to disagree.

                    if I disagreed with the living prophet I would talk to my bishop, if he agreed with me we’d talk to the stake pres, and on up. If the bishop/stk pres did not agree with me, then I’m probably out to lunch.

                    If we were correct the prophet would be grateful and correct the message.

                    There isnt a need for activism or shaming.

                    I would never oppose, I would respectfully raise concern internally.


                    Do you disagree with the latest decision not to baptize the children of homosexual couples?
                    Christian scholar John MacArthur about Mormonism: “Mormonism is wrong in epic proportions.”

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by CTR-Lloyd View Post
                      There are proper ways to disagree.

                      if I disagreed with the living prophet I would talk to my bishop, if he agreed with me we’d talk to the stake pres, and on up. If the bishop/stk pres did not agree with me, then I’m probably out to lunch.

                      If we were correct the prophet would be grateful and correct the message.

                      There isnt a need for activism or shaming.

                      I would never oppose, I would respectfully raise concern internally.


                      The prophet would be grateful and correct the message? In what universe? Thats not going to happen.
                      ~ There is life after mormonism, and it's good! Just stay close to Christ.
                      ~ You can't follow Christ and false prophets at the same time.
                      ~ "Come to Me, all who are weary and heavy-laden, and I will give you rest." Matthew 11:28

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Catherine Aurelia View Post

                        Do you disagree with the latest decision not to baptize the children of homosexual couples?
                        Catherine,

                        I understand what it is you are desiring to accomplish by your question but am compelled to state homosexual couples cannot have children, it is a physical impossibility. They may possess children as a result of the natural coupling of a male and a female, but of themselves are unable to produce children. There always has to be a third party involved which in itself makes it for the most part inordinate if not tragic.
                        Please don’t be offended.
                        We had a sad case some years ago where a mother believing herself unable to provide for her son, put him up for adoption. When she learned he was being adopted by two homosexual men, she attempted to have her voluntary release of the child overturned and have the child returned to her.
                        A judge decided it was best for the child to have “two parents” rather than the uncertain future facing it with a single mother.
                        He denied her request.
                        At any other time this would be mocked were let’s say that a having father and a mother provide the better environment for raising children. That is God’s will.
                        It is not God’s will a child be raised by homosexuals. It is only an event that has been allowed to flourish by society in general and further aggravated by wrong headed judges.
                        Of course, we can always go against His will, but that in itself guarantees destruction at some point, even up to whole civilizations being destroyed.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Catherine Aurelia View Post

                          Do you disagree with the latest decision not to baptize the children of homosexual couples?
                          I agree with the direction given to bishops and stake presidencies by the prophet.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by CTR-Lloyd View Post

                            I agree with the direction given to bishops and stake presidencies by the prophet.
                            So, you believe that your "god" doesn't want the children of homosexual couples baptized. If in the future your cult changes its mind, will you repudiate this directive?
                            Christian scholar John MacArthur about Mormonism: “Mormonism is wrong in epic proportions.”

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by CTR-Lloyd View Post
                              I use some flippant expressions when I disagree with teachings of former prophets, who have expressed ideas and made policy not based in the standard works.

                              The canon of scripture is the standard.

                              Here is what the Prophet Joseph Fielding Smith said.

                              "My words, and the teachings of any other member of the Church, high or low, if they do not square with the revelations, we need not accept them. Let us have this matter clear.... You cannot accept the books written by authorities of the Church as standards in doctrine, only in so far as they accord with the revealed word in the standard works. Every man who writes is responsible not the Church, for what he writes. If Joseph Fielding Smith writes something that is out of harmony with the revelations, then every member is duty bound to reject it. If he writes what is in perfect harmony with the revealed word of the Lord, then it should be accepted" (Joseph Fielding Smith, in Doctrines of Salvation 3:203-4).

                              The church has rejected the reasons for the priesthood ban, and called those teachings racist.

                              We reject adam God Theory, we reject some of the early ideas regarding the nature of God.

                              I reject ideas forwarded of color changing people in the Book of Mormon.

                              I reject that playing cards are of the Devil.

                              I reject hardly anything considering the long history of recorded talks and memoirs.

                              I accept all the men who said these things as prophets seers and revelators.

                              I also realize the irony in that that he wrote this in a book, and that the book contains some of the things we reject.

                              If Abraham, Isaac and Jacob are gods why not Adam ? However Adam isn't recorded with many wives


                              Doctrine and Covenants section 132:


                              20 Then shall they be gods, because they have no end; therefore shall they be from everlasting to everlasting, because they continue; then shall they be above all, because all things are subject unto them. Then shall they be gods, because they have all power, and the angels are subject unto them.




                              37 Abraham received concubines, and they bore him children; and it was accounted unto him for righteousness, because they were given unto him, and he abode in my law; as Isaac also and Jacob did none other things than that which they were commanded; and because they did none other things than that which they were commanded, they have entered into their exaltation, according to the promises, and sit upon thrones, and are not angels but are gods.



                              And inasmuch as mine enemies come against you ... ye shall curse them; And whomsoever ye curse, I will curse, and ye shall avenge me of mine enemies (Doctrine and Covenants, 103:24-25)

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X