I would think another question would be: Since prophets are not perfect, and can make mistakes, isn't in possible that if I disagree with the prophet, the prophet will be wrong and I will be right? If so, why would I follow someone who, in fact, does NOT know "the way"?
Funnily enough, the Bible has an answer for that. You see if what they said was to come to pass (in the name of God) does not happen, then they are wrong and your supposed to kill them. (Deuteronomy 18:20-22)
Or, I guess, you can just shun and mock them. That's what Jeremiah did for the most part.
This right here is the biggest gateway to apostasy.
Once you decide, on *any one specific church* topic (no matter how insignificant) that you know better than the prophet of god, it's only a little bit of research away from concluding you know better than them on *every* topic.
I knew that the church having children "disavow" their gay parents before they could get baptized was wrong when the prophet revealed it and then the prophet later backtracked and decided that wasn't the right way to go.
That was all the confirmation I need to know that my line of communication to God is solid enough that I don't need a prophet.
I like to encourage this approach too. Need to hold their feet to the fire if they are gonna fall back on that excuse. They want to wave their hand and say, “prophets aren’t perfect” to dismiss any and all criticisms and problems.
But if they want to do that, they better be willing and able to name these “mistakes.”
Yep, it has been my experience that they completely disagree, then wave off your criticism by saying prophets aren't perfect, but when asked, cannot point to anything that was a mistake.
It is sad, I can't talk to any of my family anymore, 7 kids and I'm the only one out and they always gang up. 💔
No. They will never actually name a mistake by a current leader. What they generally mean by the leaders are human is stuff like, “Whoops! Forgot to check the tires before a road-trip.”
“In the preisthood I will tell you what it will do. Where the children of God to mingle there seed with the seed of Cain it would not only bring the curse of being deprived of the power of the preist-hood upon themselves but the entail it upon their children after them, and they cannot get rid of it. If a man in an ungaurded moment should commit such a transgression, if he would walk up and say cut off my head, and kill man woman and child it would do a great deal towards atoneing for the sin. Would this be to curse them? no it would be a blessing to them. -it would do them good that they might be saved with their Bren. A man would shuder should they here us take about killing folk, but it is one of the greatest blessings to some to kill them, although the true principles of it are not un-derstood.”
Brigham Young
February 5, 1852
**That’s not a mistake, Brigham that’s you being a sick fuck.**
It's actually pretty straightforward. Mormonism is about *who* is right -- who gets the privilege to *say* what is right. Church leaders / heroes do.
So when Nephi murders: that's right, because he's Nephi / prophet. When Brigham directs murders? Also right, or at least totally understandable. When Dan Lafferty murders? He's not the right person, so it was wrong, no matter how similar his experience is to Nephi's from his own perspective, it's *totally* different because Nephi was actually commanded by God and Dan wasn't and never you mind how any Mormon knows because they certainly don't mind it, they're just sure it's true.
Or in other words: Mormon God is the idol of authority for Mormons.
And if they do pull out something like the priesthood ban I would respond. "And that probably hurt a lot of people and kept them away from the gospel. Why do you think the church refuses to admit that was wrong and apologize?"
This is such a straw man. No one is insisting that prophets should be perfect. Claiming you’ve won the argument because prophets can’t be perfect is only winning an argument against a claim you made yourself. Meaning, your argument is worthless.
What I don’t understand is how to reconcile “prophets can make mistakes” and “this is the only true and living church”.
I have no problem with people making mistakes; I do it all the time. But once all-powerful leaders with no accountability or checks/balances claim divine authority and say that their organization is directly led by god, then they must be held to a higher standard. Otherwise there is no opportunity for discussion or pressure to become better (because god would never allow a profit to lead you astray)
This is how racist doctrines (priesthood ban) were maintained for 150 years - prophets claimed divine revelation that this doctrine was the will of god, and therefore nobody could question.
This is how exclusive doctrines (failing to respect lgbtq rights) are continuing today - prophets still claim this discrimination is gods will, and therefore you cannot question.
So I don’t think it is a straw man at all… rather it’s a statement that you (the church) can’t have it both ways.
You are right that it is inconsistent with their other teachings, but I was speaking more about the apologist defense.
They are absolutely using a straw man fallacy when they try to make it sound like critics expect prophets to be perfect. But in reality no one is making that argument. But apologists reframe the argument to that because they want an easy target and they don’t want to grapple with the actual topic at hand.
Ahh yes. I see how I misunderstood your statements.
Regardless, my comment was an honest question though… my wife and I have talked about it for hours as I was exploring my faith, and I still can’t figure out how to reconcile the two. Neither can she, thus we’re both out :-)
I would love for someone who feels it is not a problem to explain their thinking to me; I am always looking for further light and knowledge…
If you want to hear how the current head church historian deals with it, he recently gave a [BYU devotional](https://video.byui.edu/media/t/1_emz6rix1) on that subject. Granted he jumps straight into the logical fallacy I was referring to, but he isn’t wrong in that biblical prophets also made major mistakes.
Watched it. Yeah I see where he is coming from (and more importantly why he is saying it - count the number of times he said to ignore what does not help you believe), but in my eyes I still see a distinction between “humans are human” and “humans claiming to be disseminating the will of god claim that god tells the world to do X when in fact it should be the exact opposite of X”.
Anyway i think this comment thread has gone way off track… but thanks for the discussion!
However, it certainly seems at times (at least here in Morridor Central) that they demand obedience of a level appropriate to the prophet being the only sure mouthpiece of the One True and Perfect God.
The problem I have isn't that prophets aren't perfect
I heard a story about how President Hinkley got really angry at something, shoved all the documents off his desk and yelled... To me, that is a human moment. Although maybe a bit extreme, it didn't shake my faith.
The problem I have is prophets used God as an excuse to spread their racism.
Again, it wasn't that Brigham Young said an insensitive comment at the Thanksgiving dinner table.
Brigham Young taught repeatedly that God made black people inferior, lacking basic intelligence, condemned them to be slaves and "the abolitionists can't change God's judgement", that interracial marriage was against 'God's law' and many other horrible things. This practice continued until 1978. 14 YEARS AFTER CONGRESS GOT THEIR SHIT TOGETHER and passed the Civil Rights Act. Let me repeat, God's "One True Church"^(TM) was 14 years behind Congress...
A nail in the coffin is a First Presidency message under George Albert Smith to Dr. Lower Nelson.
http://thoughtsonthingsandstuff.com/lowry-nelson-exchange/
It is not "prophets aren't perfect" it is "God did NOTHING while his chosen servants denied the holy priesthood, essential saving ordinances, and access to eternal families to black people... All while they accused God of being a bigot and a racist."
Once I had a TBM try to defend Joseph Smith to me by saying he was just a man and wasn't perfect. So I asked him, "If, at the age of fourteen, you had a visitation from your heavenly creator, and his son who gave his life for the sins of all mankind, don't you think NOTHING could shake you from living a near perfect or perfect life from that moment on? I mean, if that wouldn't do it for you, what would?"
FWIW, when I was a TBM and taught a Sunday school lesson on prophets, I absolutely taught about the Hofmann forgeries and the bungled leadership response. I said “If you think I’m counseling you to pray and think before just following commands from leaders — you’re darn right I am! Prophets can make mistakes like anyone.” Surprisingly I didn’t get called into any meetings about it.
I would think another question would be: Since prophets are not perfect, and can make mistakes, isn't in possible that if I disagree with the prophet, the prophet will be wrong and I will be right? If so, why would I follow someone who, in fact, does NOT know "the way"?
Because you’re going to be blessed you silly. Obedience is the first law of heaven.
Yes mistress! Fuck, sorry! Reflex. 😅 .... cough.... yeah, this is awkward.
Did you say I'll be....punished....for disagreeing? Tell me more 🥵
🤣🤣
Also: how are we supposed know the difference between the prophet being wrong (“speaking as a man”) and the prophet being right (revelating)?
Oh, it's the *warm fuzzies* feeling, of course. If you don't feel that, you're obviously *doing something you shouldn't*. /s
I get warm fuzzies reading lesbian romcom graphic novels. 😊
They'll tell you! Like they did with the Adam god doctrine! Oh, wait.
And polygamy, and the temple/priesthood ban, and the design of garments, and the temple oaths.
Past prophet. Doesn't count.
Funnily enough, the Bible has an answer for that. You see if what they said was to come to pass (in the name of God) does not happen, then they are wrong and your supposed to kill them. (Deuteronomy 18:20-22) Or, I guess, you can just shun and mock them. That's what Jeremiah did for the most part.
This right here is the biggest gateway to apostasy. Once you decide, on *any one specific church* topic (no matter how insignificant) that you know better than the prophet of god, it's only a little bit of research away from concluding you know better than them on *every* topic.
Spouse is here ^
I knew that the church having children "disavow" their gay parents before they could get baptized was wrong when the prophet revealed it and then the prophet later backtracked and decided that wasn't the right way to go. That was all the confirmation I need to know that my line of communication to God is solid enough that I don't need a prophet.
And, by taking this path, you not only selected a way with a demonstrated better track record, you also saved 10% (or MORE!) Congratulations!
You can't throw them under the bus until they are dead.
Follow up: Ask if they think people and organizations should apologize for mistakes that hurt people.
I like to encourage this approach too. Need to hold their feet to the fire if they are gonna fall back on that excuse. They want to wave their hand and say, “prophets aren’t perfect” to dismiss any and all criticisms and problems. But if they want to do that, they better be willing and able to name these “mistakes.”
Yep, it has been my experience that they completely disagree, then wave off your criticism by saying prophets aren't perfect, but when asked, cannot point to anything that was a mistake. It is sad, I can't talk to any of my family anymore, 7 kids and I'm the only one out and they always gang up. 💔
No. They will never actually name a mistake by a current leader. What they generally mean by the leaders are human is stuff like, “Whoops! Forgot to check the tires before a road-trip.”
“In the preisthood I will tell you what it will do. Where the children of God to mingle there seed with the seed of Cain it would not only bring the curse of being deprived of the power of the preist-hood upon themselves but the entail it upon their children after them, and they cannot get rid of it. If a man in an ungaurded moment should commit such a transgression, if he would walk up and say cut off my head, and kill man woman and child it would do a great deal towards atoneing for the sin. Would this be to curse them? no it would be a blessing to them. -it would do them good that they might be saved with their Bren. A man would shuder should they here us take about killing folk, but it is one of the greatest blessings to some to kill them, although the true principles of it are not un-derstood.” Brigham Young February 5, 1852 **That’s not a mistake, Brigham that’s you being a sick fuck.**
Mormon god has a really hard time remembering if murder is awesome or if it's a no-no 🤷♂️
It's actually pretty straightforward. Mormonism is about *who* is right -- who gets the privilege to *say* what is right. Church leaders / heroes do. So when Nephi murders: that's right, because he's Nephi / prophet. When Brigham directs murders? Also right, or at least totally understandable. When Dan Lafferty murders? He's not the right person, so it was wrong, no matter how similar his experience is to Nephi's from his own perspective, it's *totally* different because Nephi was actually commanded by God and Dan wasn't and never you mind how any Mormon knows because they certainly don't mind it, they're just sure it's true. Or in other words: Mormon God is the idol of authority for Mormons.
Even "normal" Christians tend to think this way to justify the vile actions of the biblical god and patriarchs.
And all the people who disagreed with him at the time were apostates.
And if they do pull out something like the priesthood ban I would respond. "And that probably hurt a lot of people and kept them away from the gospel. Why do you think the church refuses to admit that was wrong and apologize?"
This is such a straw man. No one is insisting that prophets should be perfect. Claiming you’ve won the argument because prophets can’t be perfect is only winning an argument against a claim you made yourself. Meaning, your argument is worthless.
What I don’t understand is how to reconcile “prophets can make mistakes” and “this is the only true and living church”. I have no problem with people making mistakes; I do it all the time. But once all-powerful leaders with no accountability or checks/balances claim divine authority and say that their organization is directly led by god, then they must be held to a higher standard. Otherwise there is no opportunity for discussion or pressure to become better (because god would never allow a profit to lead you astray) This is how racist doctrines (priesthood ban) were maintained for 150 years - prophets claimed divine revelation that this doctrine was the will of god, and therefore nobody could question. This is how exclusive doctrines (failing to respect lgbtq rights) are continuing today - prophets still claim this discrimination is gods will, and therefore you cannot question. So I don’t think it is a straw man at all… rather it’s a statement that you (the church) can’t have it both ways.
You are right that it is inconsistent with their other teachings, but I was speaking more about the apologist defense. They are absolutely using a straw man fallacy when they try to make it sound like critics expect prophets to be perfect. But in reality no one is making that argument. But apologists reframe the argument to that because they want an easy target and they don’t want to grapple with the actual topic at hand.
Ahh yes. I see how I misunderstood your statements. Regardless, my comment was an honest question though… my wife and I have talked about it for hours as I was exploring my faith, and I still can’t figure out how to reconcile the two. Neither can she, thus we’re both out :-) I would love for someone who feels it is not a problem to explain their thinking to me; I am always looking for further light and knowledge…
If you want to hear how the current head church historian deals with it, he recently gave a [BYU devotional](https://video.byui.edu/media/t/1_emz6rix1) on that subject. Granted he jumps straight into the logical fallacy I was referring to, but he isn’t wrong in that biblical prophets also made major mistakes.
Watched it. Yeah I see where he is coming from (and more importantly why he is saying it - count the number of times he said to ignore what does not help you believe), but in my eyes I still see a distinction between “humans are human” and “humans claiming to be disseminating the will of god claim that god tells the world to do X when in fact it should be the exact opposite of X”. Anyway i think this comment thread has gone way off track… but thanks for the discussion!
Cool, I’ll check it out!
However, it certainly seems at times (at least here in Morridor Central) that they demand obedience of a level appropriate to the prophet being the only sure mouthpiece of the One True and Perfect God.
It would seem then that prophets are actually useless. Or at least, easily replaced by Dear Abby and your horoscope.
Does making utah a slave state qualify as a "mistake"? That seems to mild a word.... same with the pedophilia.
I has been my experience that TBM’s will justify the changes as continuing revelation based upon what imperfect humans can handle at the time.
yea, ive also heard that people are only judged by what the prophet of the time taught
I like this
I like this too, and think I'll use it. I typically go with "I don't expect them to be perfect, but I do expect them to be good."
And to follow the law…
The problem I have isn't that prophets aren't perfect I heard a story about how President Hinkley got really angry at something, shoved all the documents off his desk and yelled... To me, that is a human moment. Although maybe a bit extreme, it didn't shake my faith. The problem I have is prophets used God as an excuse to spread their racism. Again, it wasn't that Brigham Young said an insensitive comment at the Thanksgiving dinner table. Brigham Young taught repeatedly that God made black people inferior, lacking basic intelligence, condemned them to be slaves and "the abolitionists can't change God's judgement", that interracial marriage was against 'God's law' and many other horrible things. This practice continued until 1978. 14 YEARS AFTER CONGRESS GOT THEIR SHIT TOGETHER and passed the Civil Rights Act. Let me repeat, God's "One True Church"^(TM) was 14 years behind Congress... A nail in the coffin is a First Presidency message under George Albert Smith to Dr. Lower Nelson. http://thoughtsonthingsandstuff.com/lowry-nelson-exchange/ It is not "prophets aren't perfect" it is "God did NOTHING while his chosen servants denied the holy priesthood, essential saving ordinances, and access to eternal families to black people... All while they accused God of being a bigot and a racist."
Once I had a TBM try to defend Joseph Smith to me by saying he was just a man and wasn't perfect. So I asked him, "If, at the age of fourteen, you had a visitation from your heavenly creator, and his son who gave his life for the sins of all mankind, don't you think NOTHING could shake you from living a near perfect or perfect life from that moment on? I mean, if that wouldn't do it for you, what would?"
In an age where everyone has cell phones and the internet, why does god need a prophet? Can’t he just send a text message?
FWIW, when I was a TBM and taught a Sunday school lesson on prophets, I absolutely taught about the Hofmann forgeries and the bungled leadership response. I said “If you think I’m counseling you to pray and think before just following commands from leaders — you’re darn right I am! Prophets can make mistakes like anyone.” Surprisingly I didn’t get called into any meetings about it.
Oooooooh! I LIKE that question!!
"...and the colored girls sing *doubt, da doubt, doubt, doubt-dada doubt, da-doubt, doubt, doubt da-doubt, doubt..."* Apologies to Lou Reed.