Quote:
|
Originally Posted by stonewallperry
We, as members of the Church, don't have to have an answer for everything. We don't have to have perfect understanding of everything. Faith has to play some role, but members have a hard time with that. So, they press their leaders with incessants "Why?" I'm sure than in many instances the leaders may not have an answer either. I believe that may have been the situation with some of the statements early leaders made, they were trying, with the best they had, to provide an explanation.
|
Of course we don't need answers for everything, but if the church is lead by Jesus, why the inconsistency? The Lord isn't a lord of confusion, he is a Lord of absolution and love. Dispensational changes are understandable but as you put it, doctrinal changes where the power of God is distributed drastically different over a 125 year span? Seems weird the Lord would change his mind so drastically so quickly.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by stonewallperry
Did the Church do some things that appear racist? It did. Does that mean that it was racism that 'inspired' the policy/doctrine of the ban? It doesn't. We're some of the leaders racist? Probably. However, this is the Lord's Church, and He uses imperfect mortals to serve in it. A loving, merciful Lord, wouldn't allow his prophet, to completely remove the opportunity to be full participating members of the Church unless it were his will. I don't understand this and some day, I'll get to ask why, but until then, declaring that the prophets are racist and that's what brought about the policy is absurd.
|
So in your opinion, it wasn't the prophets saying racist things, it was the Lord saying them through his people? Please explain the mental gymnastics you had to do to reconcile the current comments by our prophet. (This is a dangerous line of thinking, imo)
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by stonewallperry
I'm not sure, at least I'm getting the strong impression here, that many downplay the necessity of a living prophet. We know from the past, what happens when there isn't a prophet. It's not up to us to pick and choose which doctrines we like/don't like or will obey/not obey, ours is to follow. The 12 are a great example. I know they don't agree about everything, but when President Hinckley tells them how something is going to be, they all fall in line and follow his lead, whether or not it was what they thought was the correct course of action.
|
So what about the differences in doctrine, since everything from a prophet to you is doctrine? Which prophet do I follow? Wilford Woodruff, John Taylor, Brigham Young, all said polygamy was never to leave the earth, and that the saints were to be practicing polygamists or they could not gain exaltation, am I screwed because the current prophet now says that we are well beyond and past polygamy? Why is Jesus changing his mind so much? Why the confusion?
I uphold and follow the prophet, I think he gives us directives that are extremely valuable and we need to, in part, follow those to maintain certain relationships with our Heavenly Father and Savior.....BUT.....if everything the prophet says is doctrine and the will of the Lord, you are setting up the church to be a highly changing, fallible, and inconsistent organization. Absolutely different than the canon presented and accepted as the will of the Lord.
In fact, I don't know how somebody can maintain faithful in the church if he doesn't take many quotes of the prophets as mistakes of men. The church to me, rings highly untrue, if everything said by prophets was doctrine, or the will of the Lord as you so matter of factly put it.