Of Doctrine and Stationarity

[Tex]

Originally Posted by fusnik11

I'd like your comments on these passages from your boy BRM:

The comments from "my boy" clearly indicate that Brigham Young was not obeying the Word of Wisdom while making those statements.

Originally Posted by BRM

What? BRM is posting here? Do we have seance ability on Cougarguard too?

Remarkable!

[Indy Coug]

Originally Posted by fusnik11

Dude, now I know you are just shitting around here.

Break down the content of the letter Indy, he basically says this:

a. BY taught false doctrine
b. BY was allowed to lead people spiritually astray
c. BRM, not Jesus, is extending his generous hand
d. BRM's words are more important than God's
e. A leader is to be followed into error

How could you think his letter was excellent in any way shape or form?

Yeah, that's an accurate summary... particularly c and d. :-O

[pelagius]

Originally Posted by jay santos

P.S. Where did he get the 2.5B years figure? That was random.

I liked all the doctrine McConkie gave in this letter, but the approach was typical for him.

Right, in the letter BRM quotes from his "Seven Deadly Heresies" talk. Jay is referring to the following paragraph:

And eternal progression consists of living the kind of life God lives and of increasing in kingdoms and dominions everlastingly. Why anyone should suppose that an infinite and eternal being who has presided in our universe for almost 2,555,000,000 years, who made the sidereal heavens, whose creations are more numerous than the particles of the earth, and who is aware of the "fall of every sparrow" -- why anyone would suppose that such a being has more to learn and new truths to discover in the laboratories of eternity is totally beyond comprehension.

I think WW Phelps is BRM's source on this one (WW Phelps referencing Joseph Smith?). In Times and Seasons (5:758) they publish a letter written by WW Phelps addressed to William Smith. It looks like the date of publication is December, 25, 1844 but that might be the date of the letter. Here is the salient portion:

Well, now, Brother William, when the house of Israel begin to come into the glorious mysteries of the kingdom, and find that Jesus Christ, whose goings forth, as the prophets said, have been from of old, from eternity: and that eternity, agreeably to the records found in the catacombs of Egypt, has been going on in this system, (not this world) almost two thousand five hundred and fifty five millions of years: and to know at the same time, that deists, geologists and others are trying to prove that matter must have existed hundreds of thousands of years;-it almost tempts the flesh to fly to God, or muster faith like Enoch to be translated and see and know as we are seen and known! [emphasis added]

WW Phelps seems to be referring to the Book of Abraham with the reference to the records "found in the catacombs of Egypt." Thus it seems possible that this is something that Joseph Smith told WW Phelps while translating the Book of Abraham. Was WW Phelps a scribe during the Book of Abraham Translation?

[UtahDan]

Originally Posted by All-American

An interesting letter, to say the least. It is an uncharacteristically open expression from BRM, though very typically heavy handed, as he is unfortunately wont to be at times. It is not often that you will see a member of the Twelve frankly discuss erroneous teachings of past church leaders in such a way.

My surmise is that once you get outside the "core" doctrines where we have very direct authority in the standard works, that the 12 differ a great deal in their personal thoughts and interpretations. Particularly true about past teachings, I imagine. I would think this has to be part of the reason such open codemnation is not typically seen.

It is consistent with what BRM thought of himself, however. I have said before that we have to be careful in demonizing an apostle and that it is probably not appropriate to do so. Still, it is hard to escape drawing conclusions about the kind of personality that would presume to publish a definitive work on Mormon Doctrine knowing full well that the prophet and his brethren in the quorum disapproved. The tone of that letter (I had never seen it before) certainly didn't change my thinking on that count.

[Tex]

Originally Posted by DarkBritches

I really enjoyed this letter. In some parts BRM is being a real dick.

That's a delicate way to put it. Kind of amusing how McConkie-bashing has slowly become more vogue over the years.

My surmise is that once you get outside the "core" doctrines where we have very direct authority in the standard works, that the 12 differ a great deal in their personal thoughts and interpretations. Particularly true about past teachings, I imagine. I would think this has to be part of the reason such open codemnation is not typically seen.

I think this is probably right, especially apostles of yesteryear.

[MikeWaters]

Prophets are men and they make mistakes. Sometimes they err in doctrine...No single individual all the time is in tune with the Holy Spirit...If I lead the Church astray, that is my responsibility.

--Bruce R. McConkie

Where does BRM get that God has been ruling the universe for less than 2,555,000,000 years.

What is the significant of that number? (iotw, why did he choose that one).

That's actually not a long time. Less than the earth is old. You would think God's rule is older than the rocks of the earth. Maybe not.

[MikeWaters]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

--Bruce R. McConkie

Where does BRM get that God has been ruling the universe for less than 2,555,000,000 years.

What is the significant of that number? (iotw, why did he choose that one).

That's actually not a long time. Less than the earth is old. You would think God's rule is older than the rocks of the earth. Maybe not.

I didn't read the entire thread before I replied.

My faith isn't that strong on the 2.5 billion number.

[pelagius]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

I didn't read the entire thread before I replied.

My faith isn't that strong on the 2.5 billion number.

I'm actually surprised that BRM used it with such apparent confidence if I have correctly identified the source as WW Phelps. I mean it is a pretty oblique reference. It's hard to imagine the Joseph Smith wasn't WW Phelps' source given the Book of Abraham context, but WW Phelps doesn't spell out the larger context beyond the Book of Abraham. For example, Phelps doesn't explain why the date isn't in the Book of Abraham itself.

[Indy Coug]

Originally Posted by DarkBritches

Dick isn't who BRM. It just means he woke up on the wrong side of the bed. We are all dicks from time to time. No bashing there. I like BRM. I got his dictionary when I got baptized, and used it to study the gospel. Now I realize he taught some mistakes, like Brigham Young before him. My salvation isn't at stake over his mistakes or his waking up on the wrong side of the bed. Different calling BRM a Dick than Bachman a wussie with a P. One recognizes the crankiness that is in all of us from time to time, when we just get tired of someone not understanding us. Other is just retaliating against apostate for having views against the church. Bachman was a dick because he chose hurtful words. Maybe on a different day he would not be such a dick. But he isn't a wussie with a P. Or at least we can't know that he is a wussie with a P without knowing more about him. His song isn't so bad. I might play it on an official date to warm up the situation.

Christ wasn't all that diplomatic with what he called the Pharisees...