Close Topic Options

Journal of Discourses - Page 6

Farseer, thanks for your input. Although I totally agree with you in everything you said in my opinion the Church then should not quote from it since in the Journal of Discourses there is a big amount of opinions about different matters...we cannot quote what it sounds good and what it sounds ridiculous to just leave it. If they quote from it, it's because is a great source of talks by different Church Presidents...but what about the controversial part of it? isn't better to just not quote from it?.

Discourses Journal

LDS_F said:[quote]we cannot quote what it sounds good and what it sounds ridiculous to just leave it. If they quote from it, it's because is a great source of talks by different Church Presidents...but what about the controversial part of it? isn't better to just not quote from it?.[/quote]

Well, why not quote the good parts, and leave the ridiculous parts?  If there is wisdom there, why not learn from it?

For instance, we know that the people of the world once believed that the earth was flat.  To say otherwise in that time period, you would be laughed at!  This information is still in the history books, followed with modern knowledge of the truth.  The same with slavery in the history books.  Men are quoted as to what they believed about the blacks, the treatment of slaves is well documented, and we know now from experience that those things are wrong and not true.

Why, then, can we not also learn from our early Brethren, their misconceptions and mistakes, and take note that things change over time?  I think having the Journal of Discourses is a wonderful history of the Church, and a literal "Journal" of the time period.  When we read from these works, we now understand that some of what these men said was blatantly incorrect, and we should read them with that in mind.  We can, with the Spirit of discernment, recognize the difference between the truth and what is just outdated opinion.

In my opinion.

Roz

Journal of Discourses Studies Doctrine Mormon

[quote]Why, then, can we not also learn from our early Brethren, their misconceptions and mistakes, and take note that things change over time?  I think having the Journal of Discourses is a wonderful history of the Church, and a literal "Journal" of the time period.  When we read from these works, we now understand that some of what these men said was blatantly incorrect, and we should read them with that in mind.[/quote]

I understand your point but do you think the First Presidency think that these men were 'blatantly incorrect'? or they were mistaken?. I don't think so. I do see that certain doctrines of old time are trying to be razionalize by the Church by saying 'Well, Brigham Young didn't really mean that" when the words of Pres. Young were so clear to me. I do agree in learning from the mistakes of other people but I don't think the Church considers those statetements as mistakes.

Page 6 Discourses Journal

[quote]I understand your point but do you think the First Presidency think that these men were 'blatantly incorrect'? or they were mistaken?. I don't think so. I do see that certain doctrines of old time are trying to be razionalize by the Church by saying 'Well, Brigham Young didn't really mean that" when the words of Pres. Young were so clear to me. I do agree in learning from the mistakes of other people but I don't think the Church considers those statetements as mistakes.[/quote]

I honestly don't know what the First Presidency's stand is on this subject -- I haven't researched that, but now that we've discussed it here, I guess I'll have to!  :D  Because as you say, the words in the Discourses are quite clear, and I'm sure they meant what they said -- and that it was probably relevant at the time.

Roz

Discourses Journal

If anyone want to help me where I get Journal of Discourses interely for download I'd be glad email me  

[edit]Admin: If someone wants to contact you there is an instant message system for that, no need to post an array of email addresses. Plus, the Journal of Discourses are not free for download. A CD must be purchased (see infobase - search in google)[/edit]

Journal of Discourses

[center] I'm Super Active [/center]
My opinion is that with the Journal of discourses that it was a compilation of various talks etc. therefore, it is based largely on personal opinions and that if the church was to take a stand on it, it would take 1 a long time and also 2 a person to make his own opinion and to seek out personal revelation.  I have used the institute manuals quite reguarly and everytime I read all the various quotes, they don't always have definate answers.  The institute manuals are to give greater insights but also to stimulate an interest and environment to receive personal revelation.  The Church doesn't usually bann the readding of gospel material except they caution people to use the spirit.  I think that this is due to the personal revelation, also I think that there is truth else where not just within the walls of the church.

Journal Discourses - Page 6

[quote]it is based largely on personal opinions[/quote]
The Church actually uses it for official doctrine, just walk into any institute class. No one could hold you for quoting the JDs even though a lot of it may sound as though you went apostate.

Journal Discourses Mormon Doctrine Studies - Page 6

While I don't have easy access to the reference, I have read a quote by Joseph Smith to the effect that no man should be "persecuted" for his beliefs.  This was, in context, at the time that various leaders within the church were considering disfellowshipping a man for apostasy.  Joseph was censuring them for that attitude.

When you really look at the teachings within the church, there isn't all that much "official" doctrine.  Bruce R. McConkie attempted to define it with his book Mormon Doctrine, but failed.  Apparently there was some serious consideration by the First Presidency to ask him to stop its publication.  Instead, they asked him to fix it up a bit - remove or change some of the worst errors.  Yet there are lots and lots of members who use it as the absolute definitive source of doctrine.

Joseph F. Smith's work, Gospel Doctrine, is also used by many as a definitive work.  Spencer W. Kimball's The Miracle of Forgiveness also.

Now, why have I written all this?

[quote]Why does the Church not take an official position on the Journal of Discourses?[/quote]

For the same reason that it doesn't on Gospel Doctrine, The Miracle of Forgiveness, The Kingdom of God, or a host of other books.  Many study manuals quote from all of these books, because they contain good, useful information.  Just as the JoD does.

Personally, I believe that there is a tremendous body of doctrine that is contained within the JoD, the personal journals, various other periodicals, etc, that the members of the Church don't know (in general).  The problem is that most of us don't want to know!

Knowledge of a doctrine, especially real knowledge, requires action.  It is much easier for us to just coast along, enjoy Sunday School with its lessons designed for the least common denominators, and not have to stretch too much.

Also, real knowledge of doctrines that most of us don't want to know about creates problems.  It is uncomfortable.  It can create pride and arrogance (as well as true humility and spirituality).  When someone tries to discuss some of these things that he/she has learned, through study and faith, she may very well be labeled "apostate" and even experience disfellowship and excommunication.

I am speaking from a little bit of personal experience.

About 1 ½ years ago, I was ordained a High Priest.  Because of my own problems, I seriously doubted that I would ever be ordained to this office.  From the way it all happened, I know that the Lord wants me in it, so I don't really quibble about it, although I still have my doubts.

After receiving this office of the Priesthood, suddenly I found a terrible hunger within myself for depth of knowledge of eternal principles.  I now have some knowledge about such principles, I have very little knowledge regarding specifics.  I now have a long list of questions in my mind that I ponder and study.

Because of this study, I have had contact with people who are very strong and sincere in their testimonies of Jesus Christ, of the Book of Mormon, and of Joseph Smith, but who have been cast out of the Church for their beliefs.

Anyway, much of what I have learned is uncomfortable, to the point that I don't speak of very much of it to anyone.  If I even speak of some of it to my wife, I get funny looks.  I am not even saying that I believe these things, they are just concepts that I find I need to explore in more detail.

To get this back on topic, some of these concepts are really only presented in the JoD.  There is quite a lot of dicussion afterwards, some of it by Brigham Young, some by Orson Pratt, etc., but the original concepts are/were presented there.

What this really says to me is that the Journal of Discourses, The Seer, and all the other sources contain truths, sometimes deep truths.  But, just like the daily newspaper, those truths are bound up with other information, much of which is false, distorted, misunderstood, or just neutral.

The Church quotes from the JoD because the information is good and useful.  Some of the other information may or may not be true, but it may also, if true, cause lots of confusion for new members, less active, or just plain unready members.  I know that some of the things I have learned, that I firmly believe, would have blown me away two or three years ago.  I have felt guided to a lot of information.

So, the information, the doctrine (both true and false) is there.  Very few members take the time to actually read any of it, other than the minimal quotes in other, approved, sources.  Only those who are seeking, who are willing to put forth the effort, will find the valuable nuggets of doctrine.

NightHawk