Handshakes and Drawn Swords

Public forum for those seeking support for their experience in the LDS Church.
User avatar
DBMormon
Posts: 806
Joined: 18 Aug 2012, 04:42
Location: Ohio near Kirtland
Contact:

Handshakes and Drawn Swords

Post by DBMormon » 24 Apr 2015, 19:11

I am taking a beating from some apologists over this but curious what you guys think. The episode is only about 25 minutes long. If you can't listen a synopsis is below
http://www.mormondiscussionpodcast.org/ ... awn-sword/
Image
Handshakes and Drawn Swords
Today’s episode deals with Section 132 of the D&C. We talk about the introduction of polygamy, the angel with the drawn sword, and Joseph’s adherence with the revelation. While Critics accuse Joseph Smith of creating section 132 to fulfill his sexual needs and while apologists proclaim the revelation is from God and that criticism should cease, I argue there is indeed a third option. An option that is much more nuanced. We take time and use scriptural sources as well as the quotes of leaders to show there is possibly room and precedent to set off to the side section 132 while still holding up Joseph as the prophet of the restoration. When we add up nuanced views of Scripture, Prophets, and ministering angels, is there room to both doubt section 132 while still leading with faith.

http://scottwoodward.org/adam-god_brucermcconkie.html

http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Brigham_Young

https://www.lds.org/scriptures/dc-testament/dc/129

https://www.lds.org/scriptures/bofm/1-ne/8
================================

The Van Allen's are supposedly being brought before a disciplinary council because they have chosen to disbelieve section 132. They otherwise consider themselves faithful members and it seems that is the case. But I share sources that seemingly gives room for us to possibly set aside section 132. I will present the myths as I see them and the reasons for calling them myths

Myth #1 - We can not disbelieve 132 because it is cannon


cannon = scripture. But is all scripture from God? Consider this quote from Brigham Young

Quote
I have heard some make the broad assertion that every word within the lids of the Bible was the word of God. I have said to them, "You have never read the Bible, have you?" "O, yes, and I believe every word in it is the word of God." Well, I believe that the Bible contains the word of God, and the words of good men and the words of bad men; the words of good angels and the words of bad angels and words of the devil; and also the words uttered by the *** when he rebuked the prophet in his madness. I believe the words of the Bible are just what they are; but aside from that I believe the doctrines concerning salvation contained in that book are true, and that their observance will elevate any people, nation or family that dwells on the face of the earth. The doctrines contained in the Bible will lift to a superior condition all who observe them; they will impart to them knowledge, wisdom, charity, fill them with compassion and cause them to feel after the wants of those who are in distress, or in painful or degraded circumstances.Journal of Discourses 13:175 (May 29, 1870)

Brigham seems comfortable not believing every word of it to be from God. we also should acknowledge that each of us interpret and understand portions of scripture very differently. literal vs figurative, local or global flood, WoW interpretation, skin will become white, sexual sin next to murder, etc...

Myth #2

We can not discard 132 because a Prophet believed it was revelation.

Consider the quote where Brigham Young claims his Adam God theory was Revelation


Quote
"How much unbelief exists in the minds of the Latter-day Saints in regard to one particular doctrine which I revealed to them, and which God revleaed to me – namely that Adam is our father and God – I do not know, I do not inquire, I care nothing about it. Our Father Adam helped to make this earth, it was created expressly for him, and after it was made he and his companions came here. He brought one of his wives with him, and she was called Eve, because she was the first woman upon the earth. Our Father Adam is the man who stands at the gate and holds the keys of everlasting life and salvation to all his children who have or who ever will come upon the earth. I have been found fault with by the ministers of religion because I have said that they were ignorant. But I could not find any man on the earth who cold tell me this, although it is one of the simplest things in the world, until I met and talked with Joseph Smith."
- Prophet Brigham Young, Deseret News, v. 22, no. 308, June 8, 1873


And then how the Church discarded it.

Quote
Now may I say something for your guidance and enlightenment.... As it happens, I am a great admirer of Brigham Young and a great believer in his doctrinal presentations. He was called of God.
He was guided by the Holy Spirit in his teachings in general. He was a mighty prophet. He led Israel the way the Lord wanted his people led. He built on the foundation laid by the Prophet Joseph. He completed his work and has come on to eternal exaltation.
Nonetheless, as Joseph Smith so pointedly taught, a prophet is not always a prophet, only when he is acting as such. Prophets are men and they make mistakes. Sometimes they err in doctrine. This is one of the reasons the Lord has given us the Standard Works. They become the standards and rules that govern where doctrine and philosophy are concerned. If this were not so, we would believe one thing when one man was president of the Church and another thing in the days of his successors. Truth is eternal and does not vary. Sometimes even wise and good men fall short in the accurate presentation of what is truth. Sometimes a prophet gives personal views which are not endorsed and approved by the Lord.
Yes, President Young did teach that Adam was the father of our spirits, and all the related things that the cultists ascribe to him. This, however, is not true. He expressed views that are out of harmony with the gospel. But, be it known, Brigham Young also taught accurately and correctly, the status and position of Adam in the eternal scheme of things. What I am saying is that Brigham Young contradicted Brigham Young, and the issue becomes one of which Brigham Young we will believe. - Elder Bruce R McConkie

Quote
We warn you against the dissemination of doctrines which are not according to the Scriptures and which are alleged to have been taught by some of the General Authorities of past generations. Such, for instance, is the Adam-God theory. We denounce that theory and hope that everyone will be cautioned against this and other kinds of false doctrine.
—Spencer W. Kimball, "Our Own Liahona," Ensign (November 1976), 77

Brigham claimed his teaching of Adam as God came from God himself and yet we have discarded his revelation as false.

Myth #3 we can not discard 132 because it was given by an angel of the Lord

Lehi's dream has Lehi possibly being deceived by an evil spirit
5 And it came to pass that I saw a man, and he was dressed in a white robe; and he came and stood before me.

6 And it came to pass that he spake unto me, and bade me follow him.

7 And it came to pass that as I followed him I beheld myself that I was in a dark and dreary waste.

8 And after I had traveled for the space of many hours in darkness, I began to pray unto the Lord that he would have mercy on me, according to the multitude of his tender mercies.

D&C 129 gives us room to acknowledge that evil spirits come in the name of God and can fool us if we don't test them properly. Lehi's dream is a possible demonstration of this along with Jesus being tempted, and Adam and eve being tempted as other examples. The question must be asked if Joseph took time to shake hands with an angel that threatened him with a drawn sword...

At a minimum it should be acknowledged that we set aside portions of cannon (song of solomon, parts of the law of moses, old D&C section 109, lectures on faith) as not binding and in some cases as not divine truth or from God.

At a minimum it must be acknowledged that we have on occasion discarded what was believed by our prophets to be revelations.

At a minimum it must be acknowledged that we leave room for leaders to think they got info from an angel of God only to have been deceived.

On this basis it appears Mormonism itself may possibly give you permission to personally discard portions of its theology and proposed revelations.
------------------------------------------------------------
In my personal views I have not discarded 132 though I admit i am very uncomfortable with it.

User avatar
Ilovechrist77
Posts: 596
Joined: 08 Nov 2011, 21:42

Re: Handshakes and Drawn Swords

Post by Ilovechrist77 » 24 Apr 2015, 20:45

Great episode, Bill. However, I have some concerns about the 3 grand keys. I agree that we can't physically touch Satan and his angels because they don't have physical bodies. But couldn't Satan and his angels make it seem like you're touching them, because according to stories in the scriptures they can touch you? Maybe I misunderstood those stories in the scriptures. Hopefully you can help me or somebody can.

User avatar
DBMormon
Posts: 806
Joined: 18 Aug 2012, 04:42
Location: Ohio near Kirtland
Contact:

Re: Handshakes and Drawn Swords

Post by DBMormon » 24 Apr 2015, 20:47

Ilovechrist77 wrote:Great episode, Bill. However, I have some concerns about the 3 grand keys. I agree that we can't physically touch Satan and his angels because they don't have physical bodies. But couldn't Satan and his angels make it seem like you're touching them, because according to stories in the scriptures they can touch you? Maybe I misunderstood those stories in the scriptures. Hopefully you can help me or somebody can.
Wilford Woodruff wrestled with an evil spirit... can't get more physical than that

User avatar
hawkgrrrl
Site Admin
Posts: 3335
Joined: 22 Oct 2008, 16:27

Re: Handshakes and Drawn Swords

Post by hawkgrrrl » 24 Apr 2015, 21:11

canon = approved set of books, cannon = artillery stalwarts will blast you with if you are found to be unorthodox in which books you accept.

I like your thinking here, though. We need to have room for thinking people in this church.

User avatar
Ilovechrist77
Posts: 596
Joined: 08 Nov 2011, 21:42

Re: Handshakes and Drawn Swords

Post by Ilovechrist77 » 24 Apr 2015, 21:29

True. Woodruff did wrestle with an angel. I guess it's like learning to decipher true doctrine or false doctrine. Only God has all the answers. That's what i still believe.

User avatar
mom3
Posts: 3100
Joined: 02 Apr 2011, 14:11

Re: Handshakes and Drawn Swords

Post by mom3 » 24 Apr 2015, 21:33

Lectures on Faith was part of the D & C. Now it is not. Looks like we can discard things. Hmmm.

Keep chugging, the apologists need the business.
"I stayed because it was God and Jesus Christ that I wanted to follow and be like, not individual human beings." Chieko Okazaki Dialogue interview

"I am coming to envision a new persona for the Church as humble followers of Jesus Christ....Joseph and his early followers came forth with lots of triumphalist rhetoric, but I think we need a new voice, one of humility, friendship and service. We should teach people to believe in God because it will soften their hearts and make them more willing to serve." - Richard Bushman

Ann
Posts: 2549
Joined: 09 Sep 2012, 02:17

Re: Handshakes and Drawn Swords

Post by Ann » 24 Apr 2015, 23:26

DBMormon wrote:I am taking a beating from some apologists over this ....
Hi, Bro. Reel - Where are discussions about this happening? If you have links, etc., I'm curious to see them. Do you plan to interview the Van Allens? (Then they can take some of the beating with you?) Good luck.
"Preachers err by trying to talk people into belief; better they reveal the radiance of their own discovery." - Joseph Campbell

"The real voyage of discovery consists not in seeking new landscapes, but in having new eyes." - Marcel Proust

"Therefore they said unto him, How were thine eyes opened? He answered and said unto them, A man that is called Jesus made clay, and anointed my eyes...." - John 9:10-11

User avatar
DBMormon
Posts: 806
Joined: 18 Aug 2012, 04:42
Location: Ohio near Kirtland
Contact:

Re: Handshakes and Drawn Swords

Post by DBMormon » 25 Apr 2015, 06:26

Ann wrote:
DBMormon wrote:I am taking a beating from some apologists over this ....
Hi, Bro. Reel - Where are discussions about this happening? If you have links, etc., I'm curious to see them. Do you plan to interview the Van Allens? (Then they can take some of the beating with you?) Good luck.
On my prrsonal Facebook page and on mormondialogue

User avatar
DarkJedi
Posts: 5284
Joined: 24 Aug 2013, 20:53

Re: Handshakes and Drawn Swords

Post by DarkJedi » 25 Apr 2015, 08:54

I'm very comfortable with the idea that not every word in the scriptures is "scripture" (or the word of God). I really have difficulty understanding how people can see it otherwise, except I understand that in the very black and white view it must need be so. I would guess one would get more push back in trying to point out that the BoM contains things that are not he word of God than the Bible, but some of the stories in the BoM pretty clearly (tome anyway) have nothing to do with the gospel. I do believe both the Bible and the BoM do contain the gospel (and we assert such in the temple), but I also espouse a very simplified view of the gospel as do several of the apostles (Christofferson, Ballard, and Uchtdorf to name a few).

I can see where the push back is coming from, though. In the last few months I have encountered in class individuals who have stated that all the talks in General Conference are scripture. Just last week an old guard went on for a minute about how any translation of the Bible other than the KJV was false (I have actually contemplated making a post of that here as I fail to see where any modern prophet has said that and don''t see its use as anything more than tradition).
In the absence of knowledge or faith there is always hope.

Once there was a gentile...who came before Hillel. He said "Convert me on the condition that you teach me the whole Torah while I stand on one foot." Hillel converted him, saying: That which is despicable to you, do not do to your fellow, this is the whole Torah, and the rest is commentary, go and learn it."

My Introduction

startpoor
Posts: 193
Joined: 22 Nov 2013, 13:43

Re: Handshakes and Drawn Swords

Post by startpoor » 25 Apr 2015, 13:13

I don't understand the apologists position on this one. They want us to believe 132 was spoken by God, AND they want us to believe JS was acting in accordance to Gods commands? How can any sane person believe both of those things? They should be thanking you for giving folks a reasonable way out of that conundrum.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Happiness (n.) The state of being in compliance with Mormon norms, regardless of one’s actual resulting emotional state

George, Sr.: Faith is a fact. No, faith is a facet. I almost said faith is a fact.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Roy