Jesus, lds prophets old and new

So I’ve been reading through some of the threads and I cant help but notice that old lds prophets words mean nothing next to the new prophet. What the current prophet says is correct. So if an old prophet spoke of something that wasn’t “good” then it would seem he is thrown under the bus. So where does that leave smith? The founder of the lds church. Do you lds reject his words?

I believe that Christ started His Church (Catholic Church). The lds say that their church is the true church. So who’s wrong? Why would Jesus let His Church fail? Was Jesus a poor leader and teacher only to leave His Church unguided? Was the Holy Spirit not present when Christ physically left the earth even though He sent His Advocate to guide the Apostles?

LDS seem to have a very low view of Jesus Christ and His ability to shepherd His Kingdom, His Body.

The Church, the Kingdom of God, was predicted in the Old Testament to never be destroyed, by Daniel.

Well said.
Mary.

Yes, the living prophets words are put above previous ones because of new revelations. Some revelations from Joseph Smith are kept and others are not.

A prophet is the “mouthpiece of God” and why would past prophesies be discarded? I say, if you got to believe he was a prophet, you got to believe all he taught in God’s name. Polygamy for example.

The Bible teaches of a God who doesn’t change.

Not only do they discard their old prophets, the diminish Jesus. Remember, js said he had done more for the church than even Jesus Himself. And, to make the lds church relevant, Jesus MUST be dishonest and weak.

Hello Kimg901,
I can see how you would get the impression you offered above had you been reading the threads here. I think it is quite a wrong impression and I will offer a few thoughts on this. In the interest of honesty, I will also put a rhetorical trick below because I think it is of value.

First, I have weighed and measured Mormonism. I have asked what history and logic have to say about big questions like truth and falsity of Mormonism, what is Mormon theology, and what is a prophet. From this perspective it would be inaccurate to say that I think “old lds prophets words mean nothing next to the new prophet.” I place great value upon the thoughts and ideas of old LDS leaders especially Joseph Smith. Blake Ostler’s book series **Exploring Mormon Thought **IMO does a fabulous job of emphasizing the importance of LDS leaders in the production of a coherent LDS theology. That being said, Ostler’s book and my posts are attempts at analytical presentations of the religion and …

Second, there is a part of me that I do not frequently share on this board. This me sat in sacrament meeting today and listened to the lady speak about her struggles, fears, and doubts. This me taught about the atonement and the “Lord’s supper,” and how this impacts me and my walk with Christ, my walk with my family, and my walk through life. As I quoted President Joseph Fielding Smith, there was no “weighing and measuring” as analyst are wont to do. This is a huge part of me that does not appear often in the pages of Catholic Answers.

Next, as one responsible for about 3-5% of the posts on Mormonism you have read here, I am responding most often to the posts of those who spend 90% of their Mormon related time criticizing my faith. While I reject the views of Joseph Smith on geography and Brigham Young on Adam-God, it would be inaccurate to say that I reject the bulk of the legacy left by these two men who I respect. The bulk of the posters here are trying to make Mormonism seem ridiculous and ugly, and … in response to this I reply that what they offer is not Mormonism. They then quote volumes of **** collected over the last 150 years by critics of my church. It is ****, not because old LDS leaders said it, but because it is chosen for its anti-Mormon impact.

These are the posts written by disaffected ex-Mormons or by people who never have been Mormon but who have made their mark on the internet by pushing unadorned bigotry-from which anti-Mormons get their juiciest information. Relying on them for the straight story on the CoJCoLDS is like relying on a political candidate to tell you all the good points about his opponent. Now it may well be that a man leaving one religion for another can write fairly, without bitterness, about the one he left behind. But it stands to reason that most people who suddenly think they have an urge to write about their change of beliefs just want to vent their frustrations or justify their actions. Their posts should be read and used with discretion, and they should not be used at all as explanations of the beliefs of their old religion if the posts betray the least hint of rancor.

You are as likely to get a faithful picture of Mormonism here as you would of Catholicism at a Former Catholics for Christ convention. The posts here critical of my church are quite similar to the thoughts and ideas of anti-Cathoilcs. To my knowledge I have posted on only one board I believe to be anti-Catholic. I consistently defended Catholicism and truthfully claimed I was considering returning (or joining I cannot remember) Catholicism. I choose that board because there was one brilliant poster who had some knowledge that I thought I could use. It was a short lived endeavor. He was convinced I was already on the road to Rome and all the other posters were not valuable. BTW, the Catholic Answers tracts are better than the average post here, but suffer from the similar shortcomings (and the truth is there are LDS boards where Catholicism gets unfair treatment).
Charity, TOm

I think the position you offer is a fine Catholic position.
I guess I will just remind you that the bulk of Jews in Jesus day thought the idea that this humble man was the Christ ridiculous. They expected a conquering king not a suffering servant. Never mind the scriptures pointed to both.
LDS say scriptures point to apostasy, Catholic say not total apostasy.
LDS point to writtings from the Shepard of Hermas that speak of apostasy. Catholics say, no that was apocalyptic literature, not total apostasy.

I think the Jews were wrong about Christ and the Catholics were wrong about the church He established.
You just think the Jews were wrong about Christ.

Christ was born, died, and rose again.
His bride was born, died, and rose again.
Charity, TOm

[/quote]

After 700 words, Smith is under the bus.

Mormons are wrong from the simple reading of the text.

Pretty much sums it up.

And any truthful description of LDS doctrine or teachings is “ugly”.

Hey TOm, guess which anti-Mormon literature started me on my way out. “Rough Stone Rolling” by Richard Bushman. As far as I know he is still a member of the LDS church in good standing, and his “anti-Mormon” tome is sold at Deseret Book which, as you know, is owned by the LDS church. The book was recommended to me by several still faithful members of the LDS church.

How about you guess which anti-Mormon organizations and websites I frequented as part of my research. FAIR and FARMS/Maxwell Institute. I wanted to go straight to the apologetic, I mean, anti-Mormon source.

Why don’t you also guess where I first heard all those **** quotes from the Journal of Discourses that were taken out of context by critics of the LDS church. That’s right, BYU religion classes! Who knew that the BYU religion department is full of nasty anti-Mormons!

Here’s the thing. Many people who leave the LDS church get all their “anti-Mormon” information directly from LDS sources. All it takes is an open mind and the courage to go forward with researching the tough questions. Despite your preconceived notions, we are not “disaffected”. We are incredibly happy and grateful to God for calling us to Him and leading us out of the LDS church. For myself, I want to tell the plain truth about the LDS church. The truth speaks for itself. I’ll be the first person to counter actual lies and exaggerations about the LDS church. There is no need to lie or exaggerate as the plain and simple truth about the LDS church is enough to condemn.

This perfectly sums it up for me.

I get it…you have a large mental shelf and can rationalize and pick and choose what you want to believe to make it all “fit.” It works for you. But like other active LDS that post here, you disappear and play the persecution card when it gets tough or your pressed to substantiate claims that you make.

Either way, your claim about the “bulk of the posters here trying to make Mormonism seem ridiculous and ugly” is nothing more than a dodge.

You choose to keep your head in the sand where all the problems disappear and go away; however, I chose to pull my head out and see the church for what it really is.

Hi Tom - What are some thoughts and ideas of Joseph Smith that you place the most value on?

Hi Tom - Please provide quotes from critics of your church from the last 150 years.

Tom: First, I have weighed and measured Mormonism. I have asked what history and logic have to say about big questions like truth and falsity of Mormonism, what is Mormon theology, and what is a prophet. From this perspective it would be inaccurate to say that I think “old lds prophets words mean nothing next to the new prophet.” I place great value upon the thoughts and ideas of old LDS leaders especially Joseph Smith. Blake Ostler’s book series Exploring Mormon Thought IMO does a fabulous job of emphasizing the importance of LDS leaders in the production of a coherent LDS theology. That being said, Ostler’s book and my posts are attempts at analytical presentations of the religion and …

Funny…you have rejected most of what we have posted that your old “prophets” have stated. I get why you do that, but still…

Tom: Second, there is a part of me that I do not frequently share on this board. This me sat in sacrament meeting today and listened to the lady speak about her struggles, fears, and doubts. This me taught about the atonement and the “Lord’s supper,” and how this impacts me and my walk with Christ, my walk with my family, and my walk through life. As I quoted President Joseph Fielding Smith, there was no “weighing and measuring” as analyst are wont to do. This is a huge part of me that does not appear often in the pages of Catholic Answers.

I have heard similar stories in real churches of every denomination. And I have sat thru the board-meeting like Sac Meeting many, many, many times. That proves nothing.

Tom: Next, as one responsible for about 3-5% of the posts on Mormonism you have read here, I am responding most often to the posts of those who spend 90% of their Mormon related time criticizing my faith.

It is sad when speaking the truth is reduced to “criticizing”. How sad to belong to a church where truth is considered criticizing.

While I reject the views of Joseph Smith on geography

Ok…“prophet” number 1 rejected…

and Brigham Young on Adam-God,

And now prophet number 2 rejected…

it would be inaccurate to say that I reject the bulk of the legacy left by these two men who I respect. The bulk of the posters here are trying to make Mormonism seem ridiculous and ugly, and … in response to this I reply that what they offer is not Mormonism. They then quote volumes of **** collected over the last 150 years by critics of my church. It is ****, not because old LDS leaders said it, but because it is chosen for its anti-Mormon impact.

Wrong. We quote your leaders to show they are NOT prophets. And I love it that you reject what they have taught. If they were false on some things, they are false prophets…something to which you have now accepted. You cannot be sorta pregnant…and you cannot be an off-again on-again prophet

These are the posts written by disaffected ex-Mormons or by people who never have been Mormon but who have made their mark on the internet by pushing unadorned bigotry-from which anti-Mormons get their juiciest information.

And now you judge? Wrong. I feel sad for you that the truth is “unadirned bigotry”. I haver done nothing but post truth. I have done nothing but post direct quotes. I have done nothing but post actual LDS doctrine.

Relying on them for the straight story on the CoJCoLDS is like relying on a political candidate to tell you all the good points about his opponent.

Wrong again. Relying on us is like relying on someone who drove a Ford for many years for many years to tell you the truth about driving a Ford.

Now it may well be that a man leaving one religion for another can write fairly, without bitterness, about the one he left behind. But it stands to reason that most people who suddenly think they have an urge to write about their change of beliefs just want to vent their frustrations or justify their actions.

Nope. I left in 1989. I have no frustrations. I simply am here to inform people about the truth.

Hey TOm, guess which anti-Mormon literature started me on my way out. “Rough Stone Rolling” by Richard Bushman. As far as I know he is still a member of the LDS church in good standing, and his “anti-Mormon” tome is sold at Deseret Book which, as you know, is owned by the LDS church. The book was recommended to me by several still faithful members of the LDS church.

How about you guess which anti-Mormon organizations and websites I frequented as part of my research. FAIR and FARMS/Maxwell Institute. I wanted to go straight to the apologetic, I mean, anti-Mormon source.

Why don’t you also guess where I first heard all those **** quotes from the Journal of Discourses that were taken out of context by critics of the LDS church. That’s right, BYU religion classes! Who knew that the BYU religion department is full of nasty anti-Mormons!

Here’s the thing. Many people who leave the LDS church get all their “anti-Mormon” information directly from LDS sources. All it takes is an open mind and the courage to go forward with researching the tough questions. Despite your preconceived notions, we are not “disaffected”. We are incredibly happy and grateful to God for calling us to Him and leading us out of the LDS church. For myself, I want to tell the plain truth about the LDS church. The truth speaks for itself. I’ll be the first person to counter actual lies and exaggerations about the LDS church. There is no need to lie or exaggerate as the plain and simple truth about the LDS church is enough to condemn.
I have heard this before. It is at odds with my experience, but I do not deny there are others who have had different experiences.
It would seem you explain my existence by believing that I lack, “an open mind and courage to go forward.” I disagree.
You are a “disaffected” ex-Mormon. You are no longer happy to be a part of Mormonism. You spend time criticizing your former faith. That is being a disaffected ex-Mormon.

It is my position that little praiseworthy within the CoJCoLDS will be discoverable here. Kimg901 cannot get a real picture of my faith here.
Concerning what you call “truth.” There is a world of experience within the CoJCoLDS that I do not see evidenced in your posts. Perhaps you never were a member? Or perhaps you have forgotten? Or perhaps we are different people and have experienced a religion differently. I doubt the last can explain all the differences. I think it most likely that you are a disaffected exMormon and self-select the “truths” you share. That is fine. I only seldom speak of how much I love and loved my parish priest or the deacon I most connected with. Still, I do not think my disaffected Catholicism has impacted my treatment of the faith I left as much as your disaffected Mormonism. Perhaps you feel betrayed by what you were taught as a LDS that didn’t alight with what Richard Bushman wrote in RSR. I can appreciate that, but that was not my experience when I read RSR at all.
Charity, TOm

I get it…you have a large mental shelf and can rationalize and pick and choose what you want to believe to make it all “fit.” It works for you. But like other active LDS that post here, you disappear and play the persecution card when it gets tough or your pressed to substantiate claims that you make.

Either way, your claim about the “bulk of the posters here trying to make Mormonism seem ridiculous and ugly” is nothing more than a dodge.

You choose to keep your head in the sand where all the problems disappear and go away; however, I chose to pull my head out and see the church for what it really is.
If I communicated this to you, then I communicated poorly. Sorry.

Most? Don’t know. Here are some ideas I value.
One would be that God leads His church as He did in the Old and New Testament via revelation.
Another is the idea that all God’s children are entitled to receive revelation from God.
I like this quote too:

If I esteem mankind to be in error, shall I bear them down? No, I will lift them up and in their own way too, If I cannot persuade them my way is better; and I will not seek to compel any man to believe as I do, only by the force of reasoning, for truth will cut its own way.

I am not encouraged by the way I was understood in my above attempt to answer a question. It could be entirely my fault. But whether it was a product of polemic and/or uncharitable reading OR my poor communication doesn’t much matter if communication is the goal. I stand by my assessment that understanding my faith here is unlikely to occur.
Charity, TOm

That would make me tired.
I recommend Vipers on the Hearth.
Charity, TOm

So you come here and criticize the Catholic Church and you are not a “disaffected ex-Catholic”. However, I speak the truth about the LDS church and you call me a “disaffected ex-Mormon” and speculate that I was never a member. Methinks thou dost protest too much.

So have you actually spent the time to read every single one of my posts on this forum prior to issuing your judgment?

So how long have you been LDS? I have gathered from your posts that you are an adult convert. I was born in the covenant. There is a good chance I was LDS longer than you have been. Since you know enough about me to judge, then you would know that I attended BYU and was an ordinance worker at the temple. There were some things I didn’t understand and struggled with, but I gave the LDS church the benefit of the doubt. I was, overall, a very happy Mormon.

I find it very interesting that while I accept what you say about yourself and your beliefs at face value, you do not give me the same courtesy and essentially accuse me of not being who I say I am. You have a tendency to take things personally, especially when the plain truth is spoken of the LDS church and its prophets. Please tell me specifically where I have not spoken the truth about the LDS church. You cannot or will not and that is telling.

Despite your judgment, I am not angry or disaffected. There are other places on the Internet where there are truly angry ex-Mormons and for good reason. I was never treated badly by the LDS church. I don’t have problems with the people. Most are good people who are trying to do the best they can. My last bishop was actually very respectful when we resigned and gave us some very good advice. It’s not my fault that since I left I was shunned, lied to and otherwise treated like garbage by LDS people I thought loved me unconditionally. And no, I actually didn’t tell anyone why I came to know that Joseph Smith was a false prophet. The simple fact that I left was enough to be treated badly.

So have you actually spent the time to read every single one of my posts on this forum prior to issuing your judgment?

So how long have you been LDS? I have gathered from your posts that you are an adult convert. I was born in the covenant. There is a good chance I was LDS longer than you have been. Since you know enough about me to judge, then you would know that I attended BYU and was an ordinance worker at the temple. There were some things I didn’t understand and struggled with, but I gave the LDS church the benefit of the doubt. I was, overall, a very happy Mormon.

I find it very interesting that while I accept what you say about yourself and your beliefs at face value, you do not give me the same courtesy and essentially accuse me of not being who I say I am. You have a tendency to take things personally, especially when the plain truth is spoken of the LDS church and its prophets. Please tell me specifically where I have not spoken the truth about the LDS church. You cannot or will not and that is telling.

Despite your judgment, I am not angry or disaffected. There are other places on the Internet where there are truly angry ex-Mormons and for good reason. I was never treated badly by the LDS church. I don’t have problems with the people. Most are good people who are trying to do the best they can. My last bishop was actually very respectful when we resigned and gave us some very good advice. It’s not my fault that since I left I was shunned, lied to and otherwise treated like garbage by LDS people I thought loved me unconditionally. And no, I actually didn’t tell anyone why I came to know that Joseph Smith was a false prophet. The simple fact that I left was enough to be treated badly.
I am not sure where I claimed to not be a “disaffected ex-Catholic.” I do think I go out of my way to read Catholic thought in as charitable of a way I can, but I am sure I fail even in this AND I suspect my failure is never more evident than when it is witnessed by a faithful committed Catholic.
I am sorry that you have been treated poorly by those you left behind in Mormonism. I do not know your individual situation at all. You probably were a member longer than I was. I am under 20 years and I am an adult convert.
I can say that there is an unfortunate trait possessed by many of my co-religionist and myself. Believing the CoJCoLDS is true there is a tendency to want to assign less than flattering reasons upon the departures of people we know. This is often unfair and seldom charitable. It betrays our collective or individual insecurity. Something must be wrong with iepuras if she left the faith, because all is well in Zion! I am sorry.
Charity, TOm

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.