LDS

[Cat Tale]

Cat, can you pull quote the relevant passages? I know you are not lying but I think it important and that's your responsibility...
I've never heard of such a thing. I don't remember ever voting on doctrine. You will need to supply the sources. I can't find them and the Mormons I know have never heard of this...
Again I reject your assertions. You've not demonstrated that scripture must be voted on.

Geez, we get after Janadele for posting too much, and me for too little.

Since the book [new additions to the D&C] was to be presented at the conference of 17 August 1835, several priesthood leaders were apparently given unbound copies to read ahead of time. They were then able to testify at the conference to the truthfulness of the revelations. After hearing the testimonies, the whole conference voted, first as quorums, then as a congregation, to accept the book as arranged.

As far as the blacks getting the priesthood, the link I sent in the previous post is from the church General Conference report, but it's also in the D&C here I was going to quote the relevant passages, but you seemed to be asking for something from a non-LDS site. So I will forego that here and quote instead from a UPI article published in the San Diego Union, on Sunday October 1, 1978. You need to have a subscription to view the site, but I'll try to just quote the relevant parts.

It reads in part:

The 'revelation from the Lord' granting the priesthood to all male Mormons regardless of race was unanimously approved yesterday at a session of the church's 148th semi-annual conference.
N.Eldon Tanner, first counselor in the First Presidency of the church, told the conference: 'Recognizing Spencer W. Kimball as the prophet, seer and revelator of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, it is proposed that we, as a constituent assembly, accept this revelation as the word and will of the Lord.'
There were no dissents from the thousands who packed the Tabernacle on Temple Square...
President Kimball has asked that I advised the conference that after he received this revelation, which came to him after extended meditation and prayer in the sacred rooms of the holy temple, he presented it to his counselors, who accepted and approved it,' said Tanner.
'It was then presented to the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, who unanimously approved it, and was subsequently presented to all other general authorities, who likewise approved it unanimously.'

I think one reason why you all don't remember doing a lot of voting on doctrine is because it doesn't happen very often. I don't think it's happened since I joined the church.

Cat, your evidence would not likely sway anyone who was not a Mormon.

I'm not trying to sway anyone. I wouldn't have even come to this forum except Pup was asking questions and it just seemed easier for me to speak my own mind than to report through him.

 

[abaddon]

It is not yet the time to bring forth to us the further knowledge and understanding that Brigham Young had. He was so far advanced Spiritually, and understood so much more of Eternal matters than do we, that only further revelation can make clear to us some of his reported comments which were not clarified before his death. The Lord has not given any further revelation on such matters, and therefore there are no teachings nor LDS Doctrine regarding them. I support Brigham Young totally as a Prophet, Seer and Revelator and do not consider him nor his truefully reported thoughts or teachings to have been discredited in any way.

Not your words, just more copypasta. What do you think?

ETA: Sorry, taken from here and rephrased, forgot the link.

 

[tsig]

It is not yet the time to bring forth to us the further knowledge and understanding that Brigham Young had. He was so far advanced Spiritually, and understood so much more of Eternal matters than do we, that only further revelation can make clear to us some of his reported comments which were not clarified before his death. The Lord has not given any further revelation on such matters, and therefore there are no teachings nor LDS Doctrine regarding them. I support Brigham Young totally as a Prophet, Seer and Revelator and do not consider him nor his truefully reported thoughts or teachings to have been discredited in any way.

Janadele you're the first one I've see call Brigham Young advanced Spiritually.

 

[Empress]

Geez, we get after Janadele for posting too much, and me for too little.


As far as the blacks getting the priesthood, the link I sent in the previous post is from the church General Conference report, but it's also in the D&C here I was going to quote the relevant passages, but you seemed to be asking for something from a non-LDS site. So I will forego that here and quote instead from a UPI article published in the San Diego Union, on Sunday October 1, 1978. You need to have a subscription to view the site, but I'll try to just quote the relevant parts.

It reads in part:


I think one reason why you all don't remember doing a lot of voting on doctrine is because it doesn't happen very often. I don't think it's happened since I joined the church.

Thanks for that, Cat. Given your cite, I'm going to withdraw my earlier objection about voting on doctrine, as it appears that I was wrong. I will say that I only recall one incident of someone voting "nay" about supporting someone in a calling when I was a child, so I'm not sure that putting something up for a vote when it's virtually certain that the membership is going to go along with whatever the prophet says, really constitutes voting, but again, I concede to your citation.

Wanted to reiterate my earlier statement that it's a pleasure to have you here, since you'll actually discuss your faith.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

Not your words, just more copypasta. What do you think?

ETA: Sorry, taken from here and rephrased, forgot the link.

I was just considering remarking that Jadanele appeared to have expressed an opinion, just for once. Seems like it was someone else's opinion, as usual. Never mind.

 

[jsfisher]

It is not yet the time to bring forth to us the further knowledge and understanding that Brigham Young had. He was so far advanced Spiritually, and understood so much more of Eternal matters than do we, that only further revelation can make clear to us some of his reported comments which were not clarified before his death. The Lord has not given any further revelation on such matters, and therefore there are no teachings nor LDS Doctrine regarding them. I support Brigham Young totally as a Prophet, Seer and Revelator and do not consider him nor his truefully reported thoughts or teachings to have been discredited in any way.

I do believe those are your own words, Janadele. Thank you.


ETA: ...or not. I do believe abbadon has proven me wrong.

 

[abaddon]

I was just considering remarking that Jadanele appeared to have expressed an opinion, just for once. Seems like it was someone else's opinion, as usual. Never mind.

Janadele doesn't have opinions of her own.

 

[ynot]

It is not yet the time to bring forth to us the further knowledge and understanding that Brigham Young had. He was so far advanced Spiritually, and understood so much more of Eternal matters than do we, that only further revelation can make clear to us some of his reported comments which were not clarified before his death. The Lord has not given any further revelation on such matters, and therefore there are no teachings nor LDS Doctrine regarding them. I support Brigham Young totally as a Prophet, Seer and Revelator and do not consider him nor his truefully reported thoughts or teachings to have been discredited in any way.

Why don't people like you ever seem to be around when I'm selling a used car?

 

[Janadele]

Is that right, Janadele? So you believe the Adam-God doctrine that BY espoused? Or do you consider that to be one of his not-truthfully reported thoughts? It's well-documented. I'll remind you that your church today does not accept it.

My previous post to which your comment was directed, clearly answers your subsequent question.

It is not yet the time to bring forth to us the further knowledge and understanding that Brigham Young had. He was so far advanced Spiritually, and understood so much more of Eternal matters than do we, that only further revelation can make clear to us some of his reported comments which were not clarified before his death. The Lord has not given any further revelation on such matters, and therefore there are no teachings nor LDS Doctrine regarding them. I support Brigham Young totally as a Prophet, Seer and Revelator and do not consider him nor his truefully reported thoughts or teachings to have been discredited in any way.

 

[abaddon]

My previous post to which your comment was directed, clearly answers your subsequent question.

No that is simply copypasta, and addresses nothing. Your response addresses nothing.

 

[ynot]

No that is simply copypasta, and addresses nothing. Your response addresses nothing.

Never mind the quality . . . feel the delusion.

 

[Shalamar]

My previous post to which your comment was directed, clearly answers your subsequent question.

What is the penalty in the LDS church for thinking for yourself? Even if you cannot post for yourself, copypasta will have to be ok.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

My previous post to which your comment was directed, clearly answers your subsequent question.

Well, no, not very clearly.

We might infer that if there are doctrines attributed to Brigham Young which are not now accepted by your church, then your automatic presumption is that he was misquoted.

Is that what you meant? (A yes or no may assist clarity)

 

[Empress]

My previous post to which your comment was directed, clearly answers your subsequent question.

No it doesn't. Brigham Young announced the policy in General Conference in 1852 speaking as your prophet, seer, and revelator, making the Adam-God doctrine part of the LDS belief system. You your copypasta claims that it's not, and in fact your church does not accept it today, even though BY announced it, and it's never been officially withdrawn. Was BY a prophet of god, or wasn't he? Do his revelations count, or don't they?

Young reiterated the doctrine later:

"How much unbelief exists in the minds of the Latter-day Saints in regard to one particular doctrine which is revealed to them, and which God revealed to me -- namely that Adam is our father and God...Our Father Adam is the man who stands at the gate and holds the keys of everlasting life and salvation to all his children who have or ever will come upon the earth" (Sermon delivered on June 8, 1873. Printed in the Deseret Weekly News, June 18, 1873.)

Seems pretty clear that Young claimed he received this revelation directly from god, and that he was speaking as your prophet. So I ask again, do you accept the Adam-God doctrine or not?

All that said, I will withdraw my earlier statements, as Cat Tale has done your work for you and shown a citation that official doctrine is voted on, despite Brigham Young's own words that he received this revelation from god.

 

[RandFan]

It reads in part:

Saints, it is proposed that we, as a constituent assembly, accept this revelation as the word and will of the Lord.'

I don't want to be difficult but this is just an affirmation made in a public setting. It's a forgone conclusion. It's as much of a vote for doctrine as votes in the former Soviet Union were votes and not simply ritual. But, let me concede that you have demonstrated that there was something akin to a vote. I don't want to be accused of moving the goal posts so let me say that I feel you have demonstrated that much.

That said, I reject that what you have demonstrated that members analyze and consider whether or not something should be considered scripture. I don't think that claim is justified. We know empirically that people in such situations (voting in out in the open with a crowd) are expected to go along with ¹authority and ²peer pressure. If you want to ensure that people are not simply acting in a rote fashion you need to make the vote secret.

See:

1. Milgram Experiment.
2. Asch conformity experiments

I'm not trying to sway anyone. I wouldn't have even come to this forum except Pup was asking questions and it just seemed easier for me to speak my own mind than to report through him.

Oh, I understand. I'm trying to make a point. This is all after the fact ad hoc rationalization. Arguments that can only persuade true believers isn't evidence. It's faith promoting feel good explanation.

 

[Craig4]

The resurrected Lord visited and ministered among the "lost tribes" following His ministry among the Nephites:
3 Nephi 17:4 "But now I go unto the Father, and also to show myself unto the lost tribes of Israel, for they are not lost unto the Father, for He knoweth whither He hath taken them."

That's just from the Book of Mormon. It's nothing.

 

[Slowvehicle]

The resurrected Lord visited and ministered among the "lost tribes" following His ministry among the Nephites:
3 Nephi 17:4 "But now I go unto the Father, and also to show myself unto the lost tribes of Israel, for they are not lost unto the Father, for He knoweth whither He hath taken them."

Do you not feel as if it is rude, and dismissive, of you to completely ignore my polite questions?

1. In your opinion, when did "Eve" and "Adam" live?

2. In your opinion, when die the gloal flood happen?

3. In your opinion, is the Earth really hollow, with human people living inside it?

4. Please provide a citation for the "International Internet Laws" you claim censure certain behaviours in this thread.

I hope you will see fit to address these questions.

 

[Foster Zygote]

Janadele, does the blatant racism of the Book of Mormon, which declares that dark skin is a curse from God, embarrass you?

 

[abaddon]

Cat Tale has quite happily, as an LDS member, discussed her beliefs.

Janadele has not.

Cat Tale deserves a whole bag of kudos.

 

[arthwollipot]

Is it too much to ask that you engage in a dialogue here, Janadele, instead of posting copied words of others? Do you have any opinions of your own?

The resurrected Lord visited and ministered among the "lost tribes" following His ministry among the Nephites:
3 Nephi 17:4 "But now I go unto the Father, and also to show myself unto the lost tribes of Israel, for they are not lost unto the Father, for He knoweth whither He hath taken them."

That would be a "no", then.