When the LDS Apologists on these boards claim that the Prophet was "speaking as a man" when he obviously erred, do you deny them the right to honestly and forthrightly hold a TR? Is that a failure to uphold the leadership of the church?
Obviously not and here's why. The Church defines doctrine as that which is published by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Therefore, upholding the leadership of the Church doesn't mean hanging on every word or opinion they write or speak.
Am i missing something, or isn't there a scripture or revelation stating in no uncertain terms, "the lord will not allow the prophet to lead the church astray"? As such a decree, wouldn't it be a small leap of logic to say that every word that flows from the mouth of the prophet to likewise be considered from the mouth of god?
One nice thing is, ze game of love is never called on account of darkness - Pepe Le Pew
Am i missing something, or isn't there a scripture or revelation stating in no uncertain terms, "the lord will not allow the prophet to lead the church astray"? As such a decree, wouldn't it be a small leap of logic to say that every word that flows from the mouth of the prophet to likewise be considered from the mouth of god?
If the prophet is giving his opinion, he is not leading the Church (though some will think he is).
Ok, so when is he giving opinion and when is he speaking for the lord? I don't know about you, but i count every time he stands at a pulpit of one kind or another and goes on record as prophet.
One nice thing is, ze game of love is never called on account of darkness - Pepe Le Pew
Ok, so when is he giving opinion and when is he speaking for the lord?
When his words are published by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. That would be for the whole Church. He may also speak directly and personally to YOU, just as any of our other ecclesiastical leaders might, and then the onus is on you to heed the promptings of the Holy Spirit if such words are of the Lord or not.
I don't know about you, but i count every time he stands at a pulpit of one kind or another and goes on record as prophet.
And many times you would be right (Conference issues of the Ensign for example).
Ok, so when is he giving opinion and when is he speaking for the lord?
When his words are published by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. That would be for the whole Church. He may also speak directly and personally to YOU, just as any of our other ecclesiastical leaders might, and then the onus is on you to heed the promptings of the Holy Spirit if such words are of the Lord or not.
I don't know about you, but i count every time he stands at a pulpit of one kind or another and goes on record as prophet.
And many times you would be right (Conference issues of the Ensign for example).
oh man....i don't know where to begin quoting stuff from the ensign and church distributed books that using that definition would be constituted as so very wrong.... (eh, why lie, ill be honest. im just too lazy. So ill let everyone else dogpile onto it. Have fun guys!)
One nice thing is, ze game of love is never called on account of darkness - Pepe Le Pew
oh man....i don't know where to begin quoting stuff from the ensign and church distributed books that using that definition would be constituted as so very wrong....
bcspace wrote:The Church defines doctrine as that which is published by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Therefore, upholding the leadership of the Church doesn't mean hanging on every word or opinion they write or speak.
I'm not so sure about that. Here is what David Bednar had to say, in reference to an RM who dumped his girlfriend when she didn't remove her extra earrings after GBH counseled women to wear just one pair:
For this [i.e., refusal to remove the extra earrings] and other reasons, he [i.e., the RM] stopped dating the young woman, because he was looking for an eternal companion who had the courage to promptly and quietly obey the counsel of the prophet in all things and at all times.
"Quick to Observe" (May 10, 2005 talk to BYU; reprinted in the Ensign) (emphasis added).
"Moving beyond apologist persuasion, LDS polemicists furiously (and often fraudulently) attack any non-traditional view of Mormonism. They don't mince words -- they mince the truth."
-- Mike Quinn, writing of the FARMSboys, in "Early Mormonism and the Magic World View," p. x (Rev. ed. 1998)
Ok, so when is he giving opinion and when is he speaking for the lord?
When his words are published by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. That would be for the whole Church. He may also speak directly and personally to YOU, just as any of our other ecclesiastical leaders might, and then the onus is on you to heed the promptings of the Holy Spirit if such words are of the Lord or not.
I don't know about you, but i count every time he stands at a pulpit of one kind or another and goes on record as prophet.
And many times you would be right (Conference issues of the Ensign for example).
Not so. The prophet is only speaking as a prophet pronouncing doctrine from the Lord when what he says is presented and voted upon by the membership of the church. No vote takes place at any point just because something is printed in the Ensign or published by the church. Since it's the FP and the 12 that decide what is published by the church, such circular reasoning is ludicrous and completely self-serving. That would definitely be a case of unrighteous dominion, in that they would be making decisions and pushing their own agendas on the members without the members consent.
Remember common consent, bcspace. It's very important to the governance of the church. The members must be given the opportunity to reject the utterances of the prophet in order for agency to work.
The Church defines doctrine as that which is published by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Therefore, upholding the leadership of the Church doesn't mean hanging on every word or opinion they write or speak.
I'm not so sure about that.
Anyone taking teacher preparation class knows this. Part of the first lesson goes through a list of publications and identifies which are doctrinal and which are not. For example BRM's "Mormon Doctrine" is not a doctrinal work. It is also wise to note if something being presented in a doctrinal work is actually being presented as doctrine (context).
Here is what David Bednar had to say, in reference to an RM who dumped his girlfriend when she didn't remove her extra earrings after GBH counseled women to wear just one pair:
Quote: For this [i.e., refusal to remove the extra earrings] and other reasons, he [i.e., the RM] stopped dating the young woman, because he was looking for an eternal companion who had the courage to promptly and quietly obey the counsel of the prophet in all things and at all times.
"Quick to Observe" (May 10, 2005 talk to BYU; reprinted in the Ensign) (emphasis added).
Simply proves the point as the Ensign is published by the Church. Perhaps you'd better double check and see for yourself if the quote is indeed reprinted in the Ensign seeing as how you did not give a reference for it.