Replies

Ask yourself: When a Protestant Christian commentator writes something, does he speak for/officially represent the entire Protestant church body?

Staaaaawmaaaan! Hellllloooo!

Notice the word commentator instead of "preacher" or "pastor" which would infer authority. Because the protestants are made up of many different denominations and a single person can't possibly speak for them all. So it's impossible logic.

"But when a Mormon "prophet" or "apostle" speaks...does he officially represent Mormondom?

Answer: Ya better believe it!!!!"

Wrong. Wrong. And way wrong.

Apostles speculate and speak privately with out speaking officially or for the Lord. They do it all the time.

Bruce R. McConkie is an Apostle and I've read his book "Mormon Doctrine" from cover to cover. It's his opinion, it's not scripture. If it were scripture we'd be handing it out as such.

Even James E. Talmage's "Jesus The Christ" which was written in the Temple, isn't considered scripture. All though it's an amazing piece of literature and many truths can learned in it, it's not official.

So, please correct your understanding of how things work in my Church.

Apostles speculate and speak privately with out speaking officially or for the Lord. They do it all the time.

Except I don't quote their PRIVATE speculations, do I?

(Can you say you've intro'd a "straw man" consideration? I can!!!!)

And when I cite these Mormon leaders, Mormons like yourself don't claim MOST of those comments to be "private" -- now do they? (Especially considering that they usually were either public pronouncements made @ official Lds events...like General Conferences...OR, they were written PUBLICLY -- often @ church expense...curricula...or a Deseret book...or an Ensign article, etc.)

Bruce R. McConkie is an Apostle and I've read his book "Mormon Doctrine" from cover to cover. It's his opinion, it's not scripture.

#1...Mormon Doctrine isn't the only controversial book McConkie wrote. The book I cited in this thread wasn't even that one!

#2...McKay rejected portions of that book; but because of that, Harold B. Lee -- when he became the "prophet" -- had the next "prophet" (one of his counselors, Spencer W. Kimball), go over MD with a fine tooth comb to make some edits. They did that and it was thereby revised/republished in 1966.

Therefore, Lee & Kimball, two Mormon "prophets" gave their stamp of approval in the '66/ensuing versions. Just not every 1958 statement. What? You don't Lee & Kimball had discernment enough to lead the church beyond administrative tasks? Or that Lds "apostles" don't?

#3...

The MD book wasn't originally published by Deseret Books. But then Deseret Books bought the rights to it -- and cont'd re-publishing it thru the 1978 version.

Deseret Books is owned by the Mormon church. It's not just some fly-by-night Lds publisher.

ALL: Do you see how Mormon apologists work?

They try to reduce the comprehensive PUBLIC fine-tooth combed edited (from the very top) books -- published by the Mormon church -- into "Oh, this was just their private interpretation."

They either didn't want to those these facts I just relayed ... OR, IF they did know them -- or some of them -- that's called public deception.

Bruce R. McConkie is an Apostle and I've read his book "Mormon Doctrine" from cover to cover. It's his opinion, it's not scripture. If it were scripture we'd be handing it out as such.

Here's what I wrote May 9, 2008 on FR AFTER reading McConkie's son's account:

Any critical assessments or putdowns of republished books of "Mormon Doctrine" since then is an outright slam against the entire First Presidency & General Authorities & the editors & publishers of the book. Many authors make as you reference it mistakes--but when a book is republished, those are fixed. I know many such "mistakes" in McConkie's '58 version were "fixed." But if mistakes continue in the 1966 & 1978 revisions--and you imply that you acknowledge that's the case--then it's not just a one-man doctrinal show.

According to Deseret Book Publishing, owned by the LDS Church, (see The Bruce R. McConkie Story: Reflections of a Son, a biography written by his son, Joseph Fielding McConkie (Deseret, 2003):

On July 5, 1966, President McKay invited Elder McConkie into his office and gave approval for the book to be reprinted if appropriate changes were made and approved. Elder [Spencer W.] Kimball [of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles] was assigned to be Elder McConkie’s mentor in making those changes....My father told me that President McKay had so directed him. In addition to that, I am in possession of handwritten papers by my father affirming that direction.

There ya have it. McConkie acted on his own with no review committee in the late 1950s. Marion Romney, a member of the First Presidency, reviewed the initial work and reported on “errors” in the book. McConkie wanted to fix his 1958 errors and re-publish the book in the early 1960s. Members of The First Presidency told him “no.”

A future LDS “prophet” Spencer Kimball, was assigned as McConkie’s “mentor” leading up to the ’66 revision. McKay and the First Presidency changed their mind…otherwise, McConkie would have been told in the mid-1960s what he was told in the early 1960s, “No, you can’t republish."

******************************

So I said Harold B. Lee in a previous post, but 'twas actually McKay.

So you actually had 3 of the top Lds hierarchists (McKay, Kimball, Romney) overseeing the revision -- along with the "apostle"-author himself -- revising it.

And you, a grassroots Mormon, label it all as just mere man-made "opinion?" Hmmm...Isn't that the accusation Joseph Smith gave in his first vision about all the OTHER sects? That they taught man-made opinions in place of God's commandments?

So what? YOU have some authority to "trump" two Lds "prophets," a first counselor President, & an "apostle" to declare what he PUBLICLY disseminated with official church branding (Deseret Book) as mere "opinion?" (Mormon Doctrine was republished by Deseret)...

And the above citation of this process was published by Deseret.

Finally, why is it then when I read THOUSANDS of Lds curricula pages -- some hard copy, some online -- I find McConkie quoted/references HUNDREDS of times?

That was true for stuff published in the 1970s...the 1980s...the 1990s...well into 2000.

McConkie shows up cited in numerous -- perhaps even almost every -- priesthood manual for several decades!

And he shows up in D&C study manuals & other curricula.

Certainly, they don't quote the most controversial comments. But they DO cite Mormon Doctrine -- and his Millennial Messiah -- and his New Testament Doctrinal Commentary...and a few other of his most controversial works.

The church officially sanctions the document when they reference it for purposes of teaching curricula!