To hear tell StormPrepper, why it's nothing more than chicken scratches made by some Mormon bumpkins ... and it's all how ya wanna "interpret" those chicken scratches:
The JoD was written in short-hand from talks and sermons by someone that heard the prophet. It was later sent off to be transcribed by someone that wasn't there. So, JoD is actually the interpretation of the short-hand by someone who never heard the prophet. A symbol in short-hand could mean what ever the interpreter thinks it means. The JoD is not considered scripture. The end result are not the words of the prophet but the words of the interpreter. Wow, you sure spent a lot of effort on that mole hill to mountain build up too...
Well, after the Journal of Discourses was published, what have Mormonism's top leaders said about these messages from Mormonism's "General Authorities?"
(1) Who authorized Watt to record the Journal of Discourses? (Brigham Young)
(2) According to Lds.org, who solicited the Mormon faithful to purchase the Journal of Discourses via subscription basis? (That's right: Brigham Young):
...Watt proposed to Brigham Young the idea of publishing these materials on a subscription basis. Such a plan would make the materials available to more Saints and allow Watt to earn a living with his work. President Brigham Young supported the plan, a letter from the First Presidency was included in the first volume encouraging Church members to cooperate in the “purchase and sale” of the journal.
Source: Lds.org
(3) Who ranks highest in the Mormon church to carry out what he assigns? (The "prophet")
(4) What did Lds "apostle" Franklin D. Richards in the JoD preface of vol. 2 reference the JoD as?
The Second Volume of the Journal of Discources needs no recommendation to make it interesting to every Saint who loves to drink of the streams that flow from the fountain of Eternal Truth.
(5) What did this First Presidency official reference the JoD as?
The Journal of Discourses deservedly ranks as one of the standard works of the Church, and every rightminded Saint will certainly welcome with joy every Number as it comes forth from the press..." (President George Q. Cannon, JoD, preface, Vol. 8)
Tell us, StormPrepper: Was Lds President George Q. Cannon lying here? Deceived? Or what?
(6) What about Lds leaders within our lifetime? What have Lds leaders said about the JoD?
Well, on March 21, 1963, the Deseret News -- owned by the Mormon Church -- ran an ad from Lds church leadership about the JoD. The ad read:
Every Latter-day Saint should take this opportunity of owning the written words of remarkable teachings from the LDS pulpit. To the clear and vigorous exposition of Latter-day Saint doctrine is added the unmistakable authority of divine inspiration."
What more can we get from Lds leaders re: the JoD? Here church leaders were sqawking that the JoD is...
..."from the LDS pulpit..."
...exposes "Latter-day Saint doctrine" clearly & vigorously...
...presented with "divine inspiration...authority" -- and there's no mistake ("unmistakable" about that)
So, e'en tho many grassroots Mormons -- and public-relations' minded Lds General Authorities -- will indicate these "Lds leaders" are mistaken re: their assessments of the JoD, note that...
...Three months after that ad appeared in the Deseret News, the assistant manager of the DesNews, Axel J. Andresen, wrote a letter about the JoD to a Mr. H.C. Combes dated June 12, 1963. In a few excerpts from that letter, Mr. Andresen said:
"...the 26 volumes of the 'JOURNAL OF DISCOURSES, '...If anyone tells you that the sermons found therein are not recognized by the Church, they know not what they are talking about. I am sure that the individual is not anyone in authority -- certainly not among the General Authorities...May we also assure you that Deseret Book Company, being the only Church-owned book store, would not distribute literature on the Church, particularly anything as important as the Discourses of the Presidents and Apostles of the Church, without the approval of the Church..."
Furthermore, the Lds Church publishes MASSIVE footnoted curricula, annual priesthood and relief society devotionals, books, pamphlets, digital articles, multiple magazine publications, and if you gathered up all of them published over these past 45 years, you would have literally tens of thousands of footnotes/excerpts of them citing Lds leaders -- as quoted in the Journal of Discourses.
You see, the Lds church has no trouble rifling thru the JoD to cull extracts/quotes to feed their internal publishing machine. They know faithful Mormons generally don't see beyond who made the comment, anyway. But when it comes to the public, the Lds church is aware of hundreds to thousands of extremely contradictory and embarrassing teachings in the JoD. So, inwardly, they vociferously cite it; outwardly, they need plausible deniability about "official" sanction.
(Can you say religious hypocrisy exercised by the ranks of Lds general authorities?)
ALL: When you read this, and when you see Stormprepper's response to the JoD, it prompts me to ask SP: What have you got to be ashamed about re the JoD? Why are your previous Prophets and apostles' sermon messages to be hidden under a rock? Don't you want to trumpet your "Living Prophets?" (I thought that's your claim to being a "distinctive" church?)
As I mentioned last post: "To hear tell StormPrepper, why it's nothing more than chicken scratches made by some Mormon bumpkins ... and it's all how ya wanna "interpret" those chicken scratches:"
(That's in response to StormPrepper's comment on the JoD):
The JoD was written in short-hand from talks and sermons by someone that heard the prophet. It was later sent off to be transcribed by someone that wasn't there. So, JoD is actually the interpretation of the short-hand by someone who never heard the prophet. A symbol in short-hand could mean what ever the interpreter thinks it means. The JoD is not considered scripture. The end result are not the words of the prophet but the words of the interpreter. Wow, you sure spent a lot of effort on that mole hill to mountain build up too...
So...allow me to repeat a few graphs from my last post to set up a classic FREEPER quote:
...the Lds Church publishes MASSIVE footnoted curricula, annual priesthood and relief society devotionals, books, pamphlets, digital articles, multiple magazine publications, and if you gathered up all of them published over these past 45 years, you would have literally tens of thousands of footnotes/excerpts of them citing Lds leaders -- as quoted in the Journal of Discourses.
You see, the Lds church has no trouble rifling thru the JoD to cull extracts/quotes to feed their internal publishing machine. They know faithful Mormons generally don't see beyond who made the comment, anyway. But when it comes to the public, the Lds church is aware of hundreds to thousands of extremely contradictory and embarrassing teachings in the JoD.
Could; but very unlikely.
You see; there are RULES for this kinda stuff.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stenotype
A symbol in Reformed Egyptian could mean what ever Joseph claimed it to be.
There was not a peer review.
When it WAS put to the test; it failed.
Likewise the Facsimiles of the Book of Abraham.
Joseph failed miserably at 'interpretation'.
Why do MORMONs still cling to err?