Completely agree with you…
I was in a leadership meeting years ago where a member of the 70 was speaking and he had a Q/R session after. Someone brought up this quote and asked that since there were missionaries in countries where polygamy was legal if men could currently or in the future be married and sealed to multiple wives. I will never forget what was said. paraphrasing “I am not going to talk on the topic, but I would not contradict revelation given by a prophet of god.” It was interesting because the individual who brought it up was really concerned about the topic. I always wondered if he now has a second wife.
“The only men who become Gods, even the Sons of God, are those who enter into polygamy.” Brigham Young
I don’t know if all quotes were stated the way we have them. Brigham Young has had quotes that seem to contradict that aren’t in any book of Doctrine. It would seem more appropriate that any man who righteously has more than one wife would enter into the Celestial Kingdom. But not limited to because a bishop may have only one wife.
Today, our current prophet says only one wife is necessary for all men to have the opportunity to enter into the Celestial Kingdom. And, we are limited at this time to only one wife.
No, but most quotes attributed to Brother Brigham is found in his Journal of Discourse books. Which a lot of members site as “doctrinal” or “factual” which in truth is neither.
Not sure how that affected all those polygamist bishop’s in the early days of the church up until the manifesto.
I will say polygamy is still practiced through temple marriage. for instance, if a man is married and sealed, then his spouse passes to the next life. He then remarries and is sealed to his second wife, that is polygamy in his truthist form.
The problem is that a lot of talks in the Journal of Discourses were given in General Conference and we have been told for years that conference talks are scripture. I have had the Journal of Discourses for over 45 years but haven’t read in them much. I will research things on occasions but I haven’t read all the volumes cover to cover, not even close. I wonder if some of things written were opinion, some poor transcriptions (no tape recorders in the day), I don’t know which of Brigham Young’s talks that were controversial were given in conference and which were given in other settings where he was giving his opinion. A lot of the talks given were in conference and some in other settings. I have always understood that conference talks were to be taken as doctrine and in other settings you need to know if the speaker is speaking his opinion or doctrine. They won’t always differentiate so it is incumbent on us to be in tune.
I would have thought that the brethren would have read the talks after they were transcribed to vouch for the accuracy of the transcription and correct transcription errors. I still wonder about the talk about Adam. I wonder whether we are totally misinterpreting the talk or if there was some problem in the transcription of his remarks. I have heard the explanations but the text seems to say something different than the interpretations I have heard.
The information printed in the Journal of Discourses most often includes sermons of Church leaders, but it was never expected to contain official doctrine or statements of the Church. Most of these “Sermons” was when authorities visited branches of the church.
That is one reason why President Hinckley banned the use of the JD and Mormon Doctrine in teaching gospel doctrine classes.
George D. Watt was a convert to the Church from England. In 1842 he immigrated to the U.S. and eventually lived in Salt Lake City. He had learned Pitman shorthand, and he used shorthand to record conference talks and even the trial of those accused to be the murderers of Joseph Smith.
In 1852 he began transcribing for the Deseret News . He was paid little for this service and asked if he might privately publish a selection of the sermons as a subscription to those who could not receive the Deseret News Brigham Young felt it was a good idea and told him to go ahead and begin printing.
General conference talks are checked by the First Presidency and changes made if necessary. But, they are talks and put into the Ensign. Doesn’t make them scripture nor doctrine. Doctrine is that contained in the written canonized scriptures and approved by the current Prophet.
I think we can consider a conference talk as having the same efficacy as scripture if it is inspired by the spirit and we receive a confirmation of the spirit. This seems apparent to me based on what is stated in the D&C 1:38. Of course we also need to understand what is said by the spirit so we don’t misinterpret things.
I would agree concerning official church policy and doctrine. It will be clearly stated in proclamations so forth as to what church policy and doctrine is.
I appreciate that clarification. I am not as versed in church history as you are.
But that which is in the Ensign by speakers may be inspired correct principles, but not scripture as we think of the Standard Works. That sort of scripture is doctrine. I’m just trying to make the distinction of the level of scripture to show why sermons aren’t always Doctrine.
I don’t think we are in disagreement. I was editing my post before I saw yours.
President Joseph Fielding Smith (1876–1972) taught about latter-day scripture:
“When one of the brethren stands before a congregation of the people today, and the inspiration of the Lord is upon him, he speaks that which the Lord would have him speak. It is just as much scripture as anything you will find written in any of these records, and yet we call these the standard works of the Church. We depend, of course, upon the guidance of the brethren who are entitled to inspiration.
But, that scripture is not considered doctrine unless it aligns with the standard works. Those scriptures that have found their way into the Doctrine and Covenants or Pearl of Great Price aren’t things spoken at most of the past General Conferences. So, I’m simply making the distinction between scripture that is doctrine and that which is not doctrine.
No what you are doing is called “Nit Picking”… Doctrinal vs Scripture, which comes first?
Scriptures are written doctrine when moved upon by the spirit and one having authority. So what President Neilson says at the pulpit (with what I just described) is “Doctrine”.
Remember the church teaches that the words of our current Prophets/Apostles are too take precedence over the what is written in the standard works.
Yep and if you go back a few posts I said the same thing. We are in alignment.
I will ask you because SCOTT has no credibility with me,
- The Word of Wisdom-doctrine or policy-remember the wording of the 89th section
- Polygamy-doctrine or policy
- All worthy males of any race are eligible to hold the priesthood-doctrine or policy
- Married gays -not able to hold the priesthood-doctrine or policy
I have heard spoken that doctrine never changes-I disagree - Eleven year olds are now able to hold the Aaronic Priesthood-doctrine or policy
- Baptism at the age of 7-doctrine or policy
I appreciate your views because you are actually well-spoken, and try to view things with literacy and refuse to get roped in to these belligerent stereotypes who know nothing but attack and destroy-something I consider opposite of the mission of Christ’s church
We have Doctrines and Commandments and Policies.
- Word of Wisdom: It’s a Doctrine found in the D&C and Bible. When first given in our days, it was not by commandment at first. But later, through a Prophet, given again as a Commandment. The Policy is that if we desire to attend the Temple, we must comply with the Commandment to adhere to the Doctrine. How did I do Floyd?
- Same as #1. Doctrine as it’s in our scriptures. Commanded but not by everyone. In fact, it seems to be given to those called to do so through the Prophets. Policy since 1889 is no mas!
- While the scriptures in the OT suggest the Priesthood isn’t given to all, there is no indication that is true in the NT. However, it’s indicated that the Priesthood is for males only. Same in the D&C. So, in today’s world, limits for which males can hold the Priesthood based on skin color is policy. In the OT, it was by Commandment only male descendants of Aaron (Levites) could hold the Priesthood. Not Judah or Joseph either.
- The Doctrines are always there once written in the scriptures. Commandments can be changed and have been. The levitical food laws were changed by Christ as all those things were made clean. Policies can be changed. What I haven’t seen changed are those things that are morally vile such as adultery. The list in Romans Chapter 1 of vile acts have not changed. They are doctrinal and given by Commandment not to participate in. And Christ went further by not carrying the thoughts of doing those vile things in our hearts or we would be committing the sins of breaking those Doctrines and commandments. So, my conclusion of the policy of the Church is to adhere to these Doctrines and commandments including abstaining from homosexual thoughts and acts.
- Policy as to age of receiving the Priesthood.
- Doctrine and Commandment. The policy isn’t about the age. It’s abiut the worthiness and if the child is ready and prepared for baptism. This includes the policies regarding parents approval.
Hope that helps. Note I didn’t attack anyone. Just answered your questions.
It started out by being “advice” type thing, then 1856 or so BY made it made more of a commandment(doctrine). In around 1905 or so , the brethren tied it to the temple recommend.
Doctrine- part of the restoration of all things. Joseph knew about far earlier than when I was reveal to the members. Didnt want to upset Emma.
Policy… can’t find any doctrine.
As far as I understand it has been doctrine since the days of gamorrroah.
Doctrine with a policy, the age limit has never been set prior in the scriptures.
Never heard about 7, but she of accountability has been set through revelation. So doctrine.
Thanks for the compliments, I try, but fall short at times.
I think you did well. We agree. You may have more historical understandings. I did my best with including the OT, NT and D&C.
I should note that there is records that Joseph Smith baptized and ordained at least three black brothers during his ministry.
That is we why I said policy not doctrine.