How much prophetic fallibility is too much?
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 3 июл 2024
- In this episode, the hosts discuss questions about prophetic fallibility. It is acknowledged early on that prophets are fallible but the big question is -- At what point is a prophet "too" infallible to no longer be rendered a prophet of God?
The hosts discuss the nuance and also discuss why they choose to stay in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
What do you think? Let us know in the comments below!
SUBSCRIBE:
saintsunscripted/subscribe
Follow Us:
Facebook: / saintsunscripted
Instagram: / saintsunscripted
Website: saintsunscripted.com/
Follow the Hosts:
David: / davidesnell
Allex: / allex_lennon
Kaitlyn: / kait_fotheringham
Sabrina: / srhymasfuller
Cam: / camcondie
Lauren: / ladylaurencassidy
Wilson: / wilsongustaveson
Brett: / brett.fotheringham
I am a Catholic Christian, and I watch this channel because 1.) I have tremendous respect for the Latter Day Saint faith, and 2.) I find these topics very fascinating! I do want to say, in a spirit of charity, that papal infallibility is not what most people think it is. Ultimately, it really boils down to the idea that the Pope will never bind the Catholic Church to hearsay. Frankly, the pope, like all human beings, does act and speak in manners that are sinful at times.
A few thoughts on this:
1 - the question of “how far is too far” is a good question, but it bypasses the earlier checkpost of a mistake that does not disqualify a Church leader. Our leaders have always been sincere, good men, but they’ve gotten a lot wrong across history-much of it could have been prevented by having enough institutional humility to hear out and appropriately address the concerns of the members. Just because it isn’t considered to have risen to the level of nullifying their calling and authority doesn’t make any of those mistakes ok.
2 - where we rely on the collective agreement of the Q15, we must remember that structure heavily prioritizes tradition, as changes require unanimity and all apostles are expected to back the quorum decision. But it’s not lost on me that Pres Oaks is responsible for 90% of the harsh rhetoric on LGBTQ issues, that President Packer’s designation of the Family Proclamation as revelation was walked back on the published talk, or that Elder Gong doesn’t adhere to Pres Oak’s recommended manner of dealing with his gay son. By appearances, leaders are not of the same mind on this issue, so they might anticipate changes with future turnover.
3 - the active suppression of dissent is significant, as is the continued lack of full transparency. The Church has improved by leaps and bounds in this, but still has far to go. There are journals from key historical figures still in the vault, as well as redaction in what does get published. But this is isn’t limited to history-the Church has denied member inquiries into the nature of the audit warnings that preceded the SEC investigation and penalties over dishonest reporting.
I do agree with the sentiment of doing the best you can, but I don’t believe that entails setting your conscience aside, especially when you feel that will make you complicit to harm. At some point down the road I hope that the Church becomes more receptive to issues and questions raised through the members-there’s no reason this can’t be considered part of a divine is information source.
I was put in a position where I had to diffuse (from the pulpit and on the spot) some severe heresy about the prophet and his apostles at the time that would definitely be harmful to our congregation. I am not a powerful speaker but I said a quick prayer for help and experienced the “gift of tongues,” in that I was able to refute what was being said, and bring comfort and understanding to the congregation. It was not me. The words came from the Holy Ghost. I barely remembered what I said, but the one phrase that sticks in my mind to this day is that we have been promised the prophet will never lead us astray. I take this phrase literally. I do understand that prophets are fallible and can make mistakes, even in leading the church, temporarily, but that does not necessarily mean we are being led astray in the eternal sense. The Lord is always in control.
Guys--the case of Camille Johnson is one of the easier cases over the course of Mormon history. And yes, it is very problematic but it goes so much deeper than that. It begs the question, how can a prophet be trusted and what value does a prophet even have?
This reminded me of a conference talk given M. Russell Ballard in 2015 or so, where he was talking about, among other things, evolution. My wife and I were listening to the talk live on the radio. He said something to the effect of, "They expect us to believe in the big bang theory. It's like comparing the way a printer press can me thrown down to where the letters get jumbled up, but then they randomly go back in order over time.......I'm not buying that......." - At the end of the talk, a person on this live radio broadcast said something to the effect of: "The opinions expressed in this talk do not necessarily express the opinions of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day saints". My wife and I looked at each other and were shocked, because we had never heard this type of advisory at the end of a talk before. (However, we usually didn't listen to conference on the radio). NO ONE that i've ever talked to seems to remember this happening!
@@christianb8900 hilarious 😂 they should all get an advisory like that
As a convert, I learned that we should pray about everything that we hear. Being all different individuals with different needs and hopes. We all have personal experiences and problems. Therefore, it may seem we are being disobedient, but who are we to judge?
And what about prophets who have told us to be educated and prepared for a need to work in our future. Also, what a good example to our children regarding education.
Always be prayerful and continually be introspective regarding our obedience.
There is a talk by a seventy that talks about the President Benson talk. He stated if we teach the rule and the exception at the same time people only hear the exception. It wasn't that they didn't allow work, but according to the seventy, they teach the rule and after deal with the exception. You can get revelation outside of policy, but not outside of commandments that have been approved of through general conference or scripture (you're not going to be told to sleep with your ex for example). I still believe that Kimball's advice was inspired and we could do a lot better with it. Now when the prophet starts to agree with the world, that's when I get worried and I don't think it's inspired.
Would you talk about Elder Keron's talk : God's intent to bring you home and how it ties into the Abrahamic covenant. Please!
I'm trying to understand it!
FYI, Brigham Young made this claim in 1862, well before Wilford Woodruff taught this in 1890.
"You may go home and sleep as sweetly as a babe in its mother's arms, as to any danger of your leaders leading you astray, for if they should try to do so the Lord would quickly sweep them from the earth."
This is a dangerous teaching, there are multiple examples of church leaders teaching false doctrine and leading astray. Support and sustain your leaders when they lead in righteousness, but build a relationship with a God, trust in Christs atonement, and do what you know is right. It’s okay to wrestle and disagree on occasion.
I wish Sister Johnson would tell us how she reconciled working when the GA kept telling women to stay home. She kind of left that part out.
It is not Church doctrine that the brethren are infallible. Elder Bednar has said that they are not infallible, but I can't immediately cite the source. The Lord has promised that the Church will not be led astray, but that doesn't mean the leaders are perfect. No one is perfect except God. I think of it like a good but imperfect parent who still leads their children in the right path. On another note, we get into trouble when we isolate and obsess over one issue, like mothers not working outside the home when children are young. The Proclamation on the Family says, "Disability, death, or other circumstances may necessitate individual adaptation." A lot of principles and commandments are like the Word of Wisdom, "adapted to the capacity of the weak and the weakest of all saints, who are or can be called saints." We also have times and seasons to our lives and can't do everything at once. Put first things first, which to me are the things I need to do to worthily attend the temple.
All prophets since the time of Adam have made mistakes. Show me better people than our current modern day prophets and I will listen to them. Only Jesus Christ is perfect.
So is it all or nothing? President Oaks has repeatedly stated that it’s wrong to criticize leaders, even if the criticism is valid. I get that criticism can become counterproductive in excess, but one can’t even raise concerns internally without putting their good standing at risk. And I should know-I had the rug pulled out from under me by a Stake President who mulled over whether or not I warranted formal discipline after I confessed in private that I had concerns over polygamy and the truthfulness of the angel with a flaming sword account.
Church leaders need our support BECAUSE they are imperfect, and that should include good-faith avenues to escalate concerns that local leaders cannot resolve. We’re not there yet-it’s still very top-down, take-it-or-leave-it.
@@aBrewster29 I think Brigham Young made a mistake when it came to Blacks and the Priesthood. I still feel that he was a great prophet. The good he did outweighed any mistakes.
@@dwRS1 sincere question: outweighed in what sense? The goal here isn’t to make an overall assessment of Brigham Young or any other prophet-it’s to come unto Christ. BY did many things well, but his errors created obstacles for individual classes of people that aren’t remedied by things he got right. We can and should appreciate past and current prophets for what they got right while still actively engaging with ways to improve the Church where they came up short. But that can’t happen if we sweep things under the rug.
@@aBrewster29 I agree with everything you said.
If you do a part 2 on this ever, consider discussing Ezra Taft Benson's "14 Fundamentals in Following the Prophet". It touches a lot of your points and opinions made here.
Because God knows everything, I believe that some of these, seemingly odd or unusual, actions that leaders take are not necessarily be for every member. Like let's say naman who was told to wash in the Jordan river seven times to receive his healing. Could everyone or all of the Jews, have done the same thing for their personal issues. I don't think so. It is a matter of faith and as we reach into the dark of our faith, there are miracles for each person according to their situation and according to God's wisdom. So, I think in those instances where a leader seems to be going a little crazy, it's important for most people to prayerfully reach for heavenly father and find out through inspiration what they could do or could not do. After all, the earth life experience is for the individual learning and experience, as we are all saved buy our individual faith and understanding and not collectively relying on everyone else.
To blindly follow any leader or prophet is contradictory to what God wills for us. God has endowed us all with intelligence and discernment through the Spirit. Prophets are exceptionally valuable, however; they are guides. You aren't to give up your agency unquestionably.
well we know many times in the past the personal opinions filtered into talks, whether political, sexual or racial. the last couple decades they've gotten better about it , i think
☺
I enjoyed this topic but disagreed a little at the end. Though I haven't necessarily gone into GC's or other meetings looking for all the reasons why I should doubt them, I value my experience of taking the time to question and dissect the parts of me that may have a problem or concern with this or that talk in conference. Honestly, those have been some of my more meaningful experiences. I think people shouldn't be afraid to sit and explore their doubt or concerns. We just need to learn to do so in healthy ways that doesn't end up dismissing or ignoring all that we do agree with.
I agree-the differences tend to emerge on their own. What’s troubling is that members are not really given latitude to follow their conscience where such dissonance exists.
5:30 polygamy is not what exalts a person. It is doing all that God asks, thus showing our faith in Christ. The act of polygamy doesn’t need to be lived by all to he exalted, and D&C 132 when taken in context states this. Doing all God asks is the litmus test of our faith, whether asked to live polygamy or stop living it. Do what God commands. Even if it doesn’t make sense.
Brigham Young was a great prophet and did many wonderful things but he made a BIG mistake based on race. A lot of other churches were racist during that time of history. The Bible or the book of Mormon does not support racism.
I agree that ultimately, it was a big mistake, but there was a lot more to it with the issue of free blacks vs slaves in the valley at the time, and the trouble it was presenting among the saints.
While in our day, it is a huge wrong, back then, their reality was far more gray on the issue. In the case of blacks first being asked not to use their PH in public settings in the hope of quelling the conflict, it was a suggestion that led to a policy and then further down the line from B.Y. it became a false doctrine, published most through Jospeph Fielding Smith, who held truly racist beliefs... which only goes to illustrate the point that prophets can be fallable.
See the case of Elijah Able and the Changin' Status of Blacks.
Would you look at Moses or Jesus as if they could speak out of step with the Father?
Moses did. Jesus was more than a prophet, so a different animal all together.
Moses, yes. Jesus, no. You can't compare the two.
Jesus wasn't just a prophet, He was the Only Begotten of the Father, clothed with all authority and perfection of God.
Moses, yes. Moses killed a man, lost his temper, was afraid to speak, doubted God's calling, acted without God's instruction, and was just a man
A pretty good argument can be made in support of the premise that the origin, the motivation, the impetus, etc., of all revelations issued by the 16 prophets that have followed Joseph Smith, have been of the nature of a sociological and/or political nature. Those kind of revelations obviously do not depend upon divine intervention.
Did Brigham made the decision to exclude black colored people himself without a revelation,, since around 36 AD Peter was prompted to meet a Ethiopian teach him the Gosple and book of Isaiah and baptise him??
Joseph Smith himself gave the priesthood to a black man. And If i remember right, it was after that, that they realized something didn't 'feel right'. As Thurl Bailey once said, "Whites just weren't ready, and blacks just weren't ready." Did that mean that whites were too racist back then? Probably. - Did it mean that blacks weren't worthy and why they "weren't ready"? No, i don't believe them 'not being ready' had anything to do with their worthiness.
@john..I think Brigham was wrong about the Priesthood ban. Many other churches at that time were also racist and segregationist. The church would not be where it is if it wasn't for Brigham Young.
@@dwRS1To be fair to Brigham, our church was not segregated. We had mixed-race congregations for our entire church history
@@StewartFletcher i agree and understand that, I was just referring to the Priesthood ban. I fully support and sustain all of our modern day prophets. I love the church organization and realize no one is perfect.
The principal duty of the priesthood is to be a servant to fellow men and God, I suspect Brigham Young did not expect individuals that were forced salves to also be expected to be their servants through the priesthood. As the actual reasons were not adequately documented with much speculation, by many, it took a number of years to correct the process by Prophet President Spencer Kimball in 1978. I like to speculate that the Egyptian Pharaoh selected the date of 1979 AD as the date that his descendants would be given the full Priesthood as evidenced by measurements taken in the Giza Pyramid, setting the entrance to the Kings Chamber & Queen's Chamber at 1979 with the entrance to the Grand Gallery at 33 AD and Pyramid outside entrance at 2623 BC.
I think we can dig deeper here. I, frankly, find it odd that we refer to the president of the church as 'The Prophet', when all members of the first presidency and Q12 are sustained as prophets, seers, and revelators. I likewise, find it odd that we culturally grant the president of the church authoritative precedent over the non-president prophets.
Here are some questions we could ask related to authority:
Question: Do living prophets who are presidents trump living prophets who are apostles?
Question: Does a living prophet (president) trump a dead prophet (president)?
Question: Does a dead prophet who is a president trump a living prophet who is an apostle?
Question: Do dead prophets whose writings ended up in canonized scripture trump living prophets?
Question: Can biblical scholars trump the scriptural interpretations of prophets?
Question: Is there a meaningful distinction between a prophet speaking with divine authority and the same person making a mistake in their personal capacity? If so, can someone reliably discern when a prophet is speaking as a man versus as a prophet?
Question: Assuming a "yes" to the previous question, do you believe that a prophet's personal opinion still holds more authority than others' opinions?
I believe it's crucial to reexamine our cultural perspectives on prophetic authority within the Church. We should move away from idolizing the church President with hero worship. We should recognize that church leadership holds priesthood keys for administering ordinances, rather than exclusively conveying divine communications. It's important to reduce our dependency on and expectations of prophets, taking personal responsibility for our discipleship and actively serving as agents of God. We should approach teachings from prophets understanding that they are fallible individuals through whom revelation is filtered. Without these adjustments, we risk spiritual handicaps and potential faith crises among Latter-day Saints.
A quote from Brigham Young:
"Some may say, "Brethren, you who lead the Church, we have all confidence in you, we are not in the least afraid but what everything will go right under your superintendence; all the business matters will be transacted right; and if brother Brigham is satisfied with it, I am." I do not wish any Latter-day Saint in this world, nor in heaven, to be satisfied with anything I do, unless the Spirit of the Lord Jesus Christ, the spirit of revelation, makes them satisfied. I wish them to know for themselves and understand for themselves, for this would strengthen the faith that is within them. Suppose that the people were heedless, that they manifested no concern with regard to the things of the kingdom of God, but threw the whole burden upon the leaders of the people, saying, "If the brethren who take charge of matters are satisfied, we are," this is not pleasing in the sight of the Lord."
@@TheMightyJorthat quote is good in theory….until you no longer feel the spirit with what they say. Then you are an apostate.
@@King_Puffleump so you believe the prophet is inerrant or you believe we should always heed a prophet’s utterances, even if it is not true?
@@TheMightyJor I’m saying personal revelation and prophets are not compatible. It sounds beautiful in theory but it rarely lines up. I don’t believe that any of our prophets are what they have claimed to be
I have a hard time spelling "toilet" as I think in needs an "r" like "torlet" my family gives me such a hard time I don't want to quit. Part of the confusion Latter Day Saints and others compare the Prophet to the Pope, so many get confused that we might also have a principal belief like papal infallibility, which LDS does not.
There are also decisions for the times and conditions, that may change as we get better at living the gospel. The early leaders were weaker than the current leaders.
Someone alluded that no one in the LDS Church can make mistakes , because then the Church probably
becomes false, because they should have known better.
Bizarre. I don't believe that philosophy at all.
I think they mean that if the prophet is having ongoing conversation with the LDS god, then they should be ahead of cultural adaptations or social transformations like the equal rights movement, racism, or LGBTQ issues as general examples instead of behind them. LDS prophecy should get the church proactively ahead of and not reactively behind these issues relative to the rest of society.
You should know them by their fruits!...
You have a lot of prophets that spoke to god in person had lots of crazy miracles happen and seen angels and all kinds of things . And they still infallible.
Prophets are infallible when speaking as prophets. When speaking as men with speculations and things not yet revealed from God, are fallible. Until God sets them straight which is His right.
18:45 she sound like she’s a convenient member by what she says here. “Be willing to not do what the prophet says if it inconveniences you.” That’s not faith.
10:30 women should not be working. That doesn’t mean they don’t have to sometimes, but the standard needs to be SHOULDN’T. Because otherwise society takes advantage of the situation and forces women to work when they should be doing other things that does not cause them to be slaves to society. The women of the 90’s were DUPED hard. And children have suffered because of the greed to obtain more by working. Now they’ve sucked women into working their tails off.
"Women should not be working" is not a statement you should be making. That's purely your own opinion and not supported by the church in any way and I personally disagree with it. Each family should determine what works best for them in their specific situations...blanket statements about certain genders working or not working is the wrong approach.
@@chase3rd1 no, because the statement “women should not be working” is a generalization. We NEED generalizations t know the standard by which we prevent society from abusing the natural order to the family.
Ya know what would have been a great episode to do today? "The Church and Patriotism," or maybe "How Members Celebrate July 4th," or perhaps "Prophets and Presidents."
Ya know, something to indicate that y'all recognize the value of this holiday even in the church. 🤦🏻♂️ You could have saved the episode of "infaluability" for next week
🍿 and it begins, Mormon on Mormon judgement.
@mikespage0123 no judgement other than critique of a RUclips channel. Has nothing to do with being Mormon, so get over yourself.
@@DannyAGray 🤣 triggered ⬆️ you’re just showcasing Mormon hate when you could have thanked them for a good show
@@mikespage0123 if it was a good show or a good episode, I very well might have done so. Sorry you're feeling triggered.
@@DannyAGray haha no that’s you all day long, triggered Danny 🤣
Prophets are fallable. They are human, but following the Spirit will always be rule #1.
We should follow the prophet, yes, but if the Spirit says otherwise, no one outranks God.
For instance, if the Spirit tells you that a "shot" is going to hurt you and you must not take it, then I'm going to listen to that instruction. God outranks all men.
Funny how covid was the breaking point for conservative members. lol