[tantiboh]

~”I don’t see how those two statements can be reconciled.”~

You seem genuine. As you read on, you’ll see that I’ve answered this same concern. I’ll be happy to explain it you you.

We are speaking here from the point of view of LDS doctrine, which is what I was asserting.

Smith was a prophet. He taught the Gospel of Jesus Christ. We must accept the Gospel of Jesus Christ in order to receive salvation. Therefore, we must incidentally accept Smith, who taught the Gospel, as a genuine prophet.

This is not to say that salvation comes through Smith. Salvation comes only in and through Christ. Period. End of story, and I’m sure we agree on that point. But the Priesthood, prophets, and revelation - all point which intertwine intimately with Smith - are part of the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

Thank you for the question.

[greyfoxx39]

"No man or woman in this dispensation will ever enter into the celestial kingdom of God without the consent of Joseph Smith. From the day that the Priesthood was taken from the earth to the winding up scene of all things, every man and woman must have the certificate of Joseph Smith, junior, as a passport to their entrance into the mansion where God and Christ are" (Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, vol. 7, p. 289).

The above has NOT been denied by apologists on FR, but has been explained as Young speaking of the present "Dispensation".

Smith was a prophet. He taught the Gospel of Jesus Christ. We must accept the Gospel of Jesus Christ in order to receive salvation. Therefore, we must incidentally accept Smith, who taught the Gospel, as a genuine prophet.

This is not to say that salvation comes through Smith. Salvation comes only in and through Christ. Period. End of story,

[Elsie]

Smith was a prophet. He taught the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

Billions of Christian think that...

Smith was a FALSE prophet. He SCREWED UP the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

[farmer18th]

Thanks for taking my question seriously. I know this topic generates a lot of flame sometimes, without much light.

With respect to your answer:

Smith was a prophet. He taught the Gospel of Jesus Christ. We must accept the Gospel of Jesus Christ in order to receive salvation. Therefore, we must incidentally accept Smith, who taught the Gospel, as a genuine prophet.

The quote in question, though:

[There is] no salvation without accepting Joseph Smith...

..seems pretty explicit, as though the believer would have to accept Joseph Smith overtly and not incidentally. I know a lot of Mormons who would be startled to even read that quote; it just seems like the Church would be more consistant if it just repudiated the doctrine overtly as one of the many steps it might consider taking towards building a bridge towards (don't take this the wrong way) orthodoxy.

I routinely find myself defending the Mormons because of their conviction that the gospel of Jesus Christ should be seen in the fruits of the culture itself, that religion is not just a praise experience on Sunday, but I can't help finding some of the more ecstatic utterances of Joseph Smith and Brigham Young impossible to defend.