Posted on 05/22/2010 8:07:38 AM PDT by Colofornian
JESUS: Hey Smith!
Remember that boast you made about doing more than even I had done to hold the 'church' together?
JOSEPH SMITH: Where am I?
JESUS: Don't you remember? A few seconds ago you were in that jail.
JOSEPH SMITH: Oh; yeah; but where am I NOW?
JESUS: Don't you remember? Does bang - bang ring a bell?
JOSEPH SMITH: Oh; yeah - that crummy gun I had was about USELESS!
JESUS: I hope you left instructions on how to hold your church together.
JOSEPH SMITH: Dang! I knew there was SOMETHING I was forgetting!
JESUS: Looks like there's a power struggle going on down there.
JOSEPH SMITH: Yeah; there was always SOMEone who wanted the power that I held - especially over the LADIES - wink wink.
JESUS: No need to worry about that now; remember what my friend Matthew wrote down?
JOSEPH SMITH: This? At the resurrection people will neither marry nor be given in marriage; they will be like the angels in heaven (Matthew 22:30)
JESUS: That's it.
JOSEPH SMITH: I thought that was mistranslated.
JESUS: Nah - it was right.
JOSEPH SMITH: Oh well; it was fun while it lasted. My buds will still get it on with the girls.
JESUS: Uh; I'm sorry; in just a few more years; your followers will cavein to the United States government and abandon the 'Eternal Covenant' that you came up with.
JOSEPH SMITH: ME!? YOU are the one that told me to do that!
JESUS: Sorry; but you must have mistranslated what I told you. What part of Do NOT commit ADULTERY did you not understand?
JOSEPH SMITH: mumble....
JESUS: What did you say?
JOSEPH SMITH: Oh, nothing.
JESUS: Well; it was interesting talking to you; but now I must get back to perparing a place for those who believe in Me.
JOSEPH SMITH: Oh, yeah; the Celestial Kingdom.
JESUS: No...
JOSEPH SMITH: The Telestial one?
JESUS: Nope.
JOSEPH SMITH: SUREly not the TERRESTRIAL one!!
JESUS: Nope. Didn't you read that the mind of man had NOT conceived of it? Paul wrote it down in 1 Corinthians 2:9.
JOSEPH SMITH: I thought that was mistranslated.
JESUS: No; it wasn't.
JOSEPH SMITH: You SURE?
JESUS: Yes. Now I must be going: what did you say your name was again?
JOSEPH SMITH: Joseph Smith.
JESUS: Hmmmm. According to my Heavenly Facebook, you didn't sign in as one of my friends - sorry, I never knew you.
JOSEPH SMITH: But....
Christ said this as recorded by Matthew (Matt 7:22-23).
What an awful thing. To not be known -- relationship-wise -- by Christ.
What's interesting is that Christ called people who cast out demons, who did miracles, and one other category "evildoers" in Matt 7:22-23
Why? Because of what you just pointed out, Els. Jesus didn't know them. There wasn't any relationship. And because of that, Jesus cast them away permanently.
Now what was the "one other category?"
It was those who "prophesy in my name." If Jesus didn't know the prophesy-tellers...the continuing "revelation prophets" like Smith, Young, etc...then they, too, were doomed to banishment.
Mormons make continuing revelation as some "all-out" pedestal to elevate. But that's not what Jesus said was ultimately pivotal. No. It was, "Do I know you?"
Does Jesus know you in a living relationship?
Ah, you've captured the Mormon defensive spirit perfectly.
After spending a solid year or more discussing in-depth with LDS Freepers (2007 into the first four months of '08), this spirit of disenguous distancing revealed itself over & over again. To the point where, finally, when an Lds Freeper posted an article by Lds apostle Jeffrey Holland on May 5 two years ago, I just had to respond to highlight this same spirit you noticed.
Here's what I wrote back then (the first part I mention the McConkie spirit...but the latter part falls in exactly with what you mentioned):
[All following references to "From the Article" were from this Lds apostle's article -- see 'My Words...Never Cease' ]
From the article: Continuing revelation does not demean or discredit existing revelation.
Yes it does, if it directly contradicts. The Bereans were noble because they searched out new revelation to see if it matched the older revelation. (Acts 17:11) To not do that when something contradicts is to be ignoble.
From the article: Clearly the Bible, so frequently described at that time as common ground, was nothing of the kindunfortunately it was a battleground.
Aha! Holland is in the Bruce R. McConkie camp, after all, eh? (McConkie later in his life didnt want Mormons to challenge anything based on the Bible anymore he wanted only the distinctive LDS revelations emphasized.) So the McConkie campgrounders are those who see the Bible as only a snake-infested swamp to stay away from.
From the article: So the scriptures are not the ultimate source of knowledge for Latter-day Saints.
Ah, the second shoe drops for the McConkie camp Wow! What a nifty move moving folks away from the Bible as their key revelational foundation in life! (This way, if the Bible causes "doubts" in the minds of Mormons, well, it wasn't "the ultimate source of knowledge for LDS," anyway, says Holland as he tries to innoculate the Saints from the Bible!!!
From the article: In this Church, even our young Primary children recite, We believe all that God has revealed, all that He does now reveal, and we believe that He will yet reveal many great and important things pertaining to the Kingdom of God.
I dont think Ive yet encountered an LDS missionary (of any lengthy convo, that is) who doesnt get around to basically saying this same thing, citing Amos 3:7 as a proof quote to underscore the need for an ongoing living revelator: Surely the Sovereign Lord does nothing without revealing his plan to his servants the prophets. [The way they often apply this verse, Im often thinking, What? Now we have prophet-weathermen because the Lord wont let it rain & snow without telling an LDS prophet of his plan?] Ya gotta understand how LDS missionaries have often plastered this verse on others & how its used: The following is a bit of an exaggeration of the tone, but not much: Naa, Naa, Naa, Naa, Naa we have a 24/7/365 living revelator & you doe-ont. Now if I took the same angle Holland took with describing an ongoing revelator and seer I think folks would say ho-hum why do we need him again?
What do I mean?
Well, how often does somebody cite a previous sermon or Journal of Discourses reference by an LDS "prophet" or general authority only to be told, Ya know, thats not LDS canon! or You cant hold an LDS 'prophet' or 'apostle' accountable for every obscure spiritual message he gives in public, can you?
Well, now were really befuddled. Here, LDS have lectured us left & right about the need for living revelators & seers via general conference messages, Ensign mag articles, sermons, teachings, writings, etc. (So tell us again why its our issue if you consider what any prophetdead or alivehas voiced publicly to be obscure?)
I think its downright disingenuous to hype up tone & content-wise to
IN ONE BREATH
Were the only church on earth that has a living prophet who speaks for God on all things
AND THEN IN THE NEXT BREATH TELL US
Yeah, we know all about that speaking for God thing but you know
(a)
Nobodys perfect
(b)
these guys engage in countless public speculations
(c)
we were hoping you wouldnt notice all that much of what theyve had to say cause we assigned much of it to that round file over there we call the obscurity bucket
(d)
and, besides, nobody knows for certain if what they say has been recorded accurately
these are things that were just reported to have been said at one time or another
I mean, come on, theyre only Gods living prophet, president, revelator, seer & representative on earth
What? Do you expect us to have an accurate stenographer on hand to at least 100% accurately report what theyve said in sermons & general conferences?
So my questions? What good is an ongoing living seer & revelator of God if he cant properly ID who God is? (Hes Adam. Youre kidding? Nope. Imagine that. Well, well just have to name our most prominent university after you because of your amazing perception of who God is!)
What good is an ongoing living seer & revelator of God (like Young) if he inserts ourselves in place of the Saviors blood a temporary doctrine of individual blood atonement? (How trustworthy then is to apply Amos 3:7 in any absolute way to an LDS prophet?) Or since Young inserted our blood for Jesus blood in that doctrine, what about an LDS prophet like John Taylor who emphasizes the LDS church as saviors of the world due to the practice of baptizing dead folks?
What we keep hearing from Mormons is along these lines: "What I don't understand is why anti-Mormons want to look up obscure things that someone or another was reported to have said at one time or another and then try to claim that their statement somehow is a core doctrine of the LDS Church. Tell me, is everything that comes out of the mouth or the pen of every pastor, preacher, priest, elder, minister, bishop, cardinal, reverend, or whatever of every other church the authoritative gospel of that particular religion? Is every book published by any Baptist minister now a core doctrine of the Baptist religion? Is every word that every Pope has uttered core doctrine of the Catholic Church? I don't understand why you set such an unreasonable standard for the LDS Church and its members."
Answer: Its not us who have set the standard & built it up. Its LDS who cite Amos 3:7 & say God doesnt do anything without revealing His plan & will to His prophet. So you expect to tell us that we can continually look to him for ongoing plan revelations and ongoing will revelations but when we do, you say, Hey dont be disappointed 99.99999999999% of what he has to say wont even qualify as core doctrinal level statements let alone be sustained as a new revelation. What gave you the idea that everything that comes out of the mouth or the pen of every living revelator, seer, prophet, Gods only authoritative rep on earth is the authoritative gospel? Why we just cant understand how you would misconstrue our build-up of an Amos 3:7 prophet!!!
From the article: I testify that the heavens are open. I testify that Joseph Smith was and is a prophet of God, that the Book of Mormon is truly another testament of Jesus Christ. I testify that Thomas S. Monson is Gods prophet I would like to address the other major doctrine which characterizes our faith but which causes concern to some, namely the bold assertion that God continues to speak His word and reveal His truth, revelations which mandate an open canon of scripture. our friends in some other faiths shut the door on divine expression that we in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints hold dear.. Imputing no ill will to those who take such a position, nevertheless we respectfully but resolutely reject such an unscriptural characterization of true Christianity.
Lets say, for arguments sake, that we buy what LDS criticize others for Lets say, OK, heavens revelationally wide open God still reveals Scripture Youre telling us His mouthpiece is that old guy over there Lets take a look @ what he has to say since I guess we need to apply Amos 3:7 according to the way youve structured it
Two minutes later we say, Wait a minute. You say, What? I thought you told me that the Lord does nothing without revealing his plan to his prophet? And? Well, I just reviewed his general conference talk on the Lords will? And? Well, whens this going to be added to the D&C as a new revelation? Uh, it probably wont be. Why not? (Silence)
Bottom line: Stop putting prophets up on the New Scripture-producing pedestal if youre going to keep lambasting them as dried-up, antiquated sources of irrelevant obscure directives from the Lord (like Brigham Y. talking about individual blood atonement or Adam=God). Otherwise, its far too easy for you to distance yourself from them when they embarrass you; and then to elevate them to the highest post on earth when you want your PR ambassadors to be able to market, See, we have Gods ONLY direct authoritative pipeline to earth.
As for your references to our pastors, preachers, priests, elders, ministers, bishops, cardinals, reverends, churches, southern Baptist ministers, and even the Pope, you just let us know when they claim to be New Scripture-producing factories and then you can hold them all to the same standard. (The same can be said, minus the Pope, re: just letting us know that any ONE of these titled persons claims to be Gods ONLY direct authoritative pipeline to earth
then when that day comes, please hold them to the same standard!) Until that day comes, stop the double standards, the double-talk, etc.!!!
In conclusion let us summarize this grand key, these Fourteen Fundamentals in Following the Prophet, for our salvation depends on them.
1. The prophet is the only man who speaks for the Lord in everything.
2. The living prophet is more vital to us than the standard works.
3. The living prophet is more important to us than a dead prophet.
4. The prophet will never lead the church astray.
5. The prophet is not required to have any particular earthly training or credentials to speak on any subject or act on any matter at any time.
6. The prophet does not have to say Thus Saith the Lord, to give us scripture.
7. The prophet tells us what we need to know, not always what we want to know.
8. The prophet is not limited by mens reasoning.
9. The prophet can receive revelation on any matter, temporal or spiritual.
10. The prophet may advise on civic matters.
11. The two groups who have the greatest difficulty in following the prophet are the proud who are learned and the proud who are rich.
12. The prophet will not necessarily be popular with the world or the worldly.
13. The prophet and his counselors make up the First Presidencythe highest quorum in the Church.
14. The prophet and the presidencythe living prophet and the First Presidencyfollow them and be blessedreject them and suffer.
I testify that these fourteen fundamentals in following the living prophet are true. If we want to know how well we stand with the Lord then let us ask ourselves how well we stand with His mortal captainhow close do our lives harmonize with the Lords anointedthe living ProphetPresident of the Church, and with the Quorum of the First Presidency.
Ezra Taft Benson
(Address given Tuesday, February 26, 1980 at Brigham Young University)
Lets say, for arguments sake, that we buy what LDS criticize others for
OK, heavens revelationally wide open God still reveals Scripture Youre telling us His mouthpiece is that old guy over there Lets take a look @ what he has to say since I guess we need to apply Amos 3:7 according to the way youve structured it
Two minutes later we say, Wait a minute.
You say, What? I thought you told me that the Lord does nothing without revealing his plan to his prophet?
And?
Well, I just reviewed his general conference talk on the Lords will?
And?
Well, whens this going to be added to the D&C as a new revelation?
Uh, it probably wont be.
Why not?
** Bruce R. McConkie’s Mormon Doctrine, one of the most influential LDS books of the 20th century, has quietly gone out of print.***
Save your copies! When they write a new version of doctrine the old ones will suddenly become...”Just one man’s opinion”.
WOW! Since when has "diversity of opinion among mormons and their leaders" been allowed?
"When our leaders speak, the thinking has been done. When they propose a plan--it is God's Plan. When they point the way, there is no other which is safe. When they give directions, it should mark the end of controversy, God works in no other way. To think otherwise, without immediate repentance, may cost one his faith, may destroy his testimony, and leave him a stranger to the kingdom of God."
Ward Teachers Message, Deseret News, Church Section p. 5, May 26, 1945
There most likely won’t be a new one!
The offical Mormon Doctrine is in the Standard Works
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.