HEY!
I thought we told you little people to QUIT bothering us at Headquarters with all of your inane little question!!??
What do we learn from Jeff as “excuses” why what Lds “prophets” and “apostles” are not to be readily believed in what they preach from the Mormon pulpit or what they write?
| Lds FR poster Jeff Head's actual comments from: Mormonism: What the Latter Day Saints think of Islam [Indicator of how Mitt perceives Islam?] | Upshot of Jeff Head's commentary? |
| (1) ”These men were not perfect and they had their opinions like we all do on such things...” (Post #30) | Imperfect, opinionated men serve as Mormon “prophets” – just like us [So much for being elite mouthpieces for God who take care to speak more on HIS behalf than THEIRS!] |
| (2) "They do have their opinions, like we all do. "When moved upon by the Holy Ghost," then their words are taken as the counsel and direction you cite for the church and I agree wholeheartidly with that. When that is the case, the church is informed, policy and instructions are issued and the Church moves along accordingly..." (Post #36) | Opinionated men who offer counsel and direction – but not to be deemed as authoritatively official Mormon doctrine until IF (a HUGE IF) it's LATER (as in MUCH LATER) determined if they moved by the Holy Ghost. [ALL: Keep in mind that Joseph Smith's first vision found in the Pearl of Great Price Mormon “scripture” wasn't determined as “official scripture” until 1875...almost 40 years after the fact...and Brigham Young's D&C 136 didn't become “official” Mormon “scripture” until 74 years after the fact (1921). Joseph F. Smith's D&C 138 didn't become “official” Mormon “scripture” until 62 years after the fact (1981). For some reason, it takes the Mormon church between 40-74 years to determine if the Holy Ghost actually spoke thru one of its “prophets”...yet they keep promising a huge benefit is a “living prophet” who is on “real time” between God and man...if God's message can't be “officially” confirmed until 40-74 years after the fact, what do they do in the interim?] |
| (3) "The Journal of Discourses is not recognized or taught of as scripture for the church. It is a historical journal of many of the speeches and lectures those men gave, but they of themselves do not represent the doctrine that the Church espouses or follows. People should check with Church offical representatives and spokesmen and ask as regards these things before they quote those speeches as somehow being the offical doctrine of the church...because more often than not, particularly when quoted to try and find the most outlandish things that those men said many years ago, and to find fault with or tear down the church, they simply are not." (Post #41) | Jeff Head essentially says in the bold-faced portion – hey, listen to what our “prophets” and “apostles” say...but don't quote them... IOW, Lds public relations spokesmen and spokeswomen actually carry more “official” weight in what they say than do past Lds “prophets” and “apostles”!!! Wow! Just wow! Apparently Mormon PR spokespeople are the "final arbiters" of Mormon "truth" (who trump even deceased Mormon "prophets" and "apostles"). Elsewise, they wouldn't be the "filter" people have to go through to determine “official” Mormon "truth," now would they? |
| (4) ”Sorry, Godzilla, Gospel Principles is a book Joseph Fielding Smith wrote, it is not regarded as scripture. Not every word they speak or write is scripture and considered or taught as church doctrine, it is when they are moved upon by the Holy Ghost to do so...Are there things in Gospel Principles that the Church does teach as its doctrine? Yes. Are there things in there it does not? Also, yes.” (Post #46) | Yes, the “official” Mormon church book “Gospel Principles” has official doctrine in it; and unofficial doctrine in it, too...but, hey, Mormons aren't going to tell you which is which! (And that's the unofficial official word on this!) |
| (5) ”...And no, the leaders do not teach false doctrine, because then they would be representing it as doctrine...but, like all of us, they are entitled to their own opinions when speaking or talking outside of their mantel as an Apostle or Prophet when moved upon by the Holy Ghost to speak for the Lord. When they are speaking in that manner, then the doctrine is passed down to the Church as I have indicated earlier. As I said, these men are not perfect...” (Post #62) | When Lds “prophets” and “apostles” speak, you can't readily tell if they are speaking on the official “prophetic” mantle or not...could be just their opinions, which they're entitled to... (When, again, are they donning that mantle and moving beyond mere personal opinions? Um...we'll let you know...maybe...but that might not be “official” word until determined by a later group of Mormons sustaining whatever is being uttered now) |
| (6) ”I have read what you quoted and pointed to in the Gospel Principles manual, and have no problem with it. As I said, when new scripture or revelations are decided upon (and the quorum to the twelve must prayerfully and through inspiration themselves agree unanimously upon them) it is them communicated to the whole church in the manner I indicated. Not everything these men say or write is regarded as such. Only that which is recognized as inspired and moved upon by the Holy Ghost as mentioned. Now, it goes without saying that there are members of the church who take everything they say as “scripture” because of their calling, and there is no doubt that they are thought highly of and listened to closely...but they are still human and have never indicated anything but that, and history and the doctrine itself that we as a church embrace, as pointed out by yourself in the manual, indicates that this is not the case.” (Post #70) | You know we really can't trust what “prophets” and “apostles” say 'cause they're human...but some of what they say eventually makes it thru the “recognition-as-revelation” filter and when it receives official imprimatur, it's only THEN what they say is deemed 100% trustworthy |
| (7) ”...read the Church web site, it makes clear what the “Standard Works” are, right now, right here. They do not include the Journal of Discourses and officially, they never have. That’s just the truth...Do people gain good information about doctrine from them? Yes, of course. They are volumnous. I have a set myself which I read and use for reference quite often...there are a lot of very good things in there. But, are there are also some very clear and difinite opinions in there that are not considered doctrine by the Church? Yes, of course, you have shown quite a few. But the fact renmains, they are not the “Standard Works,” and not considered “scripture” by the Church.” (Post #93) | Even though other Lds officials have called the Journal of Discourses as “the fountain of eternal truth” (an Lds “apostle”), “one of the standard works of the church” (a First President), “exposition of Latter-day Saint doctrine” (the official Mormon publishing house), “the unmistakable authority of divine inspiration” (the official Mormon publishing house), etc....apparently Mormon leaders weren't really serving as daily “living prophets” whose very words could be trusted? Why? Because, per Jeff, their messages are so imbedded with their personal opinions, who can readily sort what from what?. |
The key question then to ask of Jeff: When will the Lds church let us know that what past and present Lds “prophets” and “apostles” have said is specifically UNtrustworthy? (Crickets)
HEY!
I thought we told you little people to QUIT bothering us at Headquarters with all of your inane little question!!??