The First Feebles

[yellowstone123]

Thank you for your answer, MG. Then why create the policy. I think Nelson spoke of prayers to God, explaining that this was causing lots of pain and tears, so the church rescinded it. But why not see the pain and tears beforehand. Religious leaders seem to make calls based on the still small voice of their counselors or of their cultural upbringing. President Monson appears to have done it, he died, a new prophet came in and changed the rule. Is it from God or from someone else’s culture. It’s not prophecy after the fact, it’s a wrong call. The LDS church missed the mark, regrouped and tried again. Good for them.

I won't argue that revelation is a multi-faceted thing. It has many faces and ways of presenting itself to the world and the humans that live in/on this 'blue dot' piece of rock in/through various ways/means.

What really matters are the results/outcomes, I would think. Sometimes the path/routes in getting there are difficult for the human/mortal eye to discern. No argument there.

Regards,
MG

Thanks for your response, MG. Also, the quote where I wrote ‘it’s a wrong call’ should be - it’s correcting a wrong call.

[Limnor]

God either backs off or readjusts to the 'group dynamics' in play.

This is a stunning statement, MG.

Although I’ve frequently thought that some of Joseph’s revelations were “under duress,” and coerced by his followers.

For example, following the tar and feathering incident, the mob that carried out the act were in the pews the next day.

I’ve often wondered if Joseph was more subject to his followers than his god.

[MG 2.0]

God either backs off or readjusts to the 'group dynamics' in play.

This is a stunning statement, MG.

Although I’ve frequently thought that some of Joseph’s revelations were “under duress,” and coerced by his followers.

For example, following the tar and feathering incident, the mob that carried out the act were in the pews the next day.

I’ve often wondered if Joseph was more subject to his followers than his god.

I think that in the background of ALL of Mormonism is the idea of Divine Counsel and Common Consent. Agency, at the end of the day, is God's will. He will force no man to heaven, so to speak. He will express his will, give commandments, but we live in a world where counsels and consent rule the day.

Granted, most of the time counsels and consent given run in tandem with the revelations and what the prophets receive and/or teach/instruct. It sounds like you are fairly knowledgeable in regard to early LDS History. You would be familiar with:

Nauvoo High Council and Governance Structure
Council of Fifty and Open Deliberation
Sidney Rigdon's Trial (Common Council of the Church)
High Council Disputes
Relief Society and Emma Smith (Emma Smith openly resisted Joseph’s push for plural marriage)
General Council Deliberation Practices (Joseph often encouraged serious, even confrontational, council debate, famously warning against “hurry[ing] and agree[ing] with him” simply to align with his preferences)

There was a tradition of church councils having authority, open deliberation, and sometimes making choices that differed from Joseph's original will or recommendations. I think the same may hold true today although we don't hear about it much at all. I think some of that may be due to the size and scope of an international church.

Group dynamics played a part in the six examples I've given and others that might be mentioned as the church matured. Now, was God 'being played' or was He cognizant of what the overall purposes were and how to achieve them? I would thing that He was.

After all, He's God, right?

Regards,
MG

[Limnor]

It sounds like you are fairly knowledgeable in regard to early LDS History. You would be familiar with:

Nauvoo High Council and Governance Structure
Council of Fifty and Open Deliberation
Sidney Rigdon's Trial (Common Council of the Church)
High Council Disputes
Relief Society and Emma Smith (Emma Smith openly resisted Joseph’s push for plural marriage)
General Council Deliberation Practices (Joseph often encouraged serious, even confrontational, council debate, famously warning against “hurry[ing] and agree[ing] with him” simply to align with his preferences)

Most of my historical interest is concentrated on the 1820-1830 time-frame. While I’ve heard about some of the issues listed, I haven’t really studied them.

But I’m about to.

[MG 2.0]

It sounds like you are fairly knowledgeable in regard to early LDS History. You would be familiar with:

Nauvoo High Council and Governance Structure
Council of Fifty and Open Deliberation
Sidney Rigdon's Trial (Common Council of the Church)
High Council Disputes
Relief Society and Emma Smith (Emma Smith openly resisted Joseph’s push for plural marriage)
General Council Deliberation Practices (Joseph often encouraged serious, even confrontational, council debate, famously warning against “hurry[ing] and agree[ing] with him” simply to align with his preferences)

Most of my historical interest is concentrated on the 1820-1830 time-frame. While I’ve heard about some of the issues listed, I haven’t really studied them.

But I’m about to.

[Limnor]

Most of my historical interest is concentrated on the 1820-1830 time-frame. While I’ve heard about some of the issues listed, I haven’t really studied them.

But I’m about to.

I wouldn’t get too excited - I’m sure several former members here could point out the associated issues of having a prophet holding ultimate ecclesiastical authority as a form of veto power over Common Consent.

It isn’t hard to imagine people remaining silent in the face of such authority.

But I’ll do some reading - you’ll recall this is still just a hobby for me.

Edited: “formal” to “former”

[MG 2.0]

I wouldn’t get too excited - I’m sure several formal members here could point out the associated issues of having a prophet holding ultimate ecclesiastical authority as a form of veto power over Common Consent.

It isn’t hard to imagine people remaining silent in the face of such authority.

But I’ll do some reading - you’ll recall this is still just a hobby for me.

I understand. I find your perspective interesting.

Regards,
MG

[Limnor]

I wouldn’t get too excited - I’m sure several formal members here could point out the associated issues of having a prophet holding ultimate ecclesiastical authority as a form of veto power over Common Consent.

It isn’t hard to imagine people remaining silent in the face of such authority.

But I’ll do some reading - you’ll recall this is still just a hobby for me.

I understand. I find your perspective interesting.

Regards,
MG

I am pretty sure my take on the book is very unique.

[MG 2.0]

I understand. I find your perspective interesting.

Regards,
MG

I am pretty sure my take on the book is very unique.

It is. There have been some others that have tried to put Joseph and one or two others into the book...if I remember correctly (it's been a long time since I researched this) ...but you're taking it to the extreme. I don't think anyone has attempted that. What a project!

Regards,
MG

[Limnor]

I am pretty sure my take on the book is very unique.

It is. There have been some others that have tried to put Joseph and one or two others into the book...if I remember correctly (it's been a long time since I researched this) ...but you're taking it to the extreme. I don't think anyone has attempted that. What a project!

Regards,
MG

Yeah. Some people garden as a hobby.