The Word of God

For discussing the Church, Gospel of Jesus Christ, Mormonism, etc.
Post Reply
Tribunal
captain of 1,000
Posts: 1496

The Word of God

Post by Tribunal »

How does a dictation from God become the Word of God? In the days of the Ancients a dictation from God was told to a wise man (a prophet) and then passed down from generation to generation. Eventually the story of the experience was put on stone or paper. This became the Word of God. These stories become our Scripture, our Gospel.

What about now? What is the process for a dictation from God to become the Word of God for all of us to study and follow? Is a proclamation from the pulpit sufficient? What about a committee of wise men? Would a sustaining vote from a congregation even be sufficient for such a grand event?

I often hear from members of the Church that anything said in General Conference or found in the Ensign is Scripture? I've also heard that in order for anything to become Scripture it must be screened through a committee of common consent? Are these processes found in Scripture? Isn't it sufficient for a man recognized as a Prophet of God to stand up and proclaim that God told him this, or told him that, and that 'this' or 'that' will be a new Commandment of God?

When the Church was restored through Joseph Smith it was sufficient for the early members to accept his [Joseph Smith] claim that 'this' or 'that' was dictated to him from God. Then shortly after his death a claim needed to be screened by common consent through a committee of wise men. Then as the Church progressed it seemed that anything a general authority claimed over the pulpit, or typed in a magazine, came from the God and was to be considered Scripture. How did this become practice, or policy, or even doctrine?

I have stated many times that practices in the Church have evolved into the policy of the Church, and policies of the Church have evolved into the doctrines of the Church, and the doctrines of the Church evolved into new additions to Scripture, even if they conflict with Scripture.

In our Church we have examples where God told a prophet that a dictation, a commandment, would be a law for His children for eternity, only to have following prophets declared a change to the commandment for a more modern one. How can this be? How can an eternal God change his mind and go back on an eternal law after only a few years?

I understand line upon line, precept upon precept, but I believe that this concept deals with a degree and progression of growth, not a taste or teaser of some future program God has for His children.

Would an all-knowing God actually allow his children to practice one program only to change his mind because His children weren’t ready to practice the original program? Why give them a taste of something they couldn’t possibly understand or accept? Are there any examples of this in the Old Scripture? I can find numerous examples where God changed His mind in New Scripture, but what about Old Scripture?

Robert Sinclair
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 11006
Location: Redmond Oregon

Re: The Word of God

Post by Robert Sinclair »

Look into the book called the "One Stick" given unto Ephraim as foretold by Ezekiel 37:15-23.

This great "Urim and Thummin" for our day reveals from page one of:

In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.

And ends with,

If there is anything virtuous, lovely, or of good report or praiseworthy, we seek after these things.

Search through and see that which changes not, witness after witness to the words of God given to his beloved son Jesus Christ to give to us.

It is to be no more confounded on how to treat the poor among us, loving one another with pure hearts.

Come to know "all" the words of God given to us.

Then you can look into any book like the Book of Enoch the Prophet or the Koran and see what he has spoken and what he has not.

The children of Ismael have been told through the angel Gabriel no less than 99 times to " do good " as also Moroni told us to "do good continually".

Come to know "all" the words of God and you shall see easily how to be and what to do, and what to know. :)

User avatar
jeffrey09
captain of 10
Posts: 40
Location: Columbus Ohio

Re: The Word of God

Post by jeffrey09 »

In general, the Word of God consists of three things: revelation (personal or corporate), scripture and prophets. All three must agree and be in harmony with one another. If anyone of those do not agree with the other two, something is amiss.

That may not answer your specific questions, but it should help. That's the standard and always will be.

User avatar
TZONE
captain of 1,000
Posts: 1724

Re: The Word of God

Post by TZONE »

While the law of common consent was the process to cannonize scripture. It really is much simpler than that. It just may not be recognized as a body of believers to be cannon but anything that satisfies this is scripture.
1 My servant, Orson Hyde, was called by his ordination to proclaim the everlasting gospel, by the Spirit of the living God, from people to people, and from land to land, in the congregations of the wicked, in their synagogues, reasoning with and expounding all scriptures unto them.

2 And, behold, and lo, this is an ensample unto all those who were ordained unto this priesthood, whose mission is appointed unto them to go forth—

3 And this is the ensample unto them, that they shall speak as they are moved upon by the Holy Ghost.

4 And whatsoever they shall speak when moved upon by the Holy Ghost shall be scripture, shall be the will of the Lord, shall be the mind of the Lord, shall be the word of the Lord, shall be the voice of the Lord, and the power of God unto salvation.
D&C 1 says the same thing.
20 But that every man might speak in the name of God the Lord, even the Savior of the world;
Today though it has morphed into, unless the prophet says it, don't listen because only he can speak in the name of the lord. Even than though the issue is determining what is spoken by the holy ghost?

Tribunal
captain of 1,000
Posts: 1496

Re: The Word of God

Post by Tribunal »

jeffrey09 wrote:In general, the Word of God consists of three things: revelation (personal or corporate), scripture and prophets. All three must agree and be in harmony with one another. If anyone of those do not agree with the other two, something is amiss.

That may not answer your specific questions, but it should help. That's the standard and always will be.
I'm speaking more specifically to Scripture recognized by the LDS Church. Canon. Under our current latter-day system revelation for the Church can only come through...what? Committee of common consent? Ancient Scripture? Modern Scripture? Prophets? A correlation committee? What is the process?

User avatar
TZONE
captain of 1,000
Posts: 1724

Re: The Word of God

Post by TZONE »

Tribunal wrote:
jeffrey09 wrote:In general, the Word of God consists of three things: revelation (personal or corporate), scripture and prophets. All three must agree and be in harmony with one another. If anyone of those do not agree with the other two, something is amiss.

That may not answer your specific questions, but it should help. That's the standard and always will be.
I'm speaking more specifically to Scripture recognized by the LDS Church. Canon. Under our current latter-day system revelation for the Church can only come through...what? Committee of common consent? Ancient Scripture? Modern Scripture? Prophets? A correlation committee? What is the process?
Here is hte process in action in Josephs day.

D&C 1835 edition. You can read it I think in hte back of the book. (or front?)
“President Cowdery arose and introduced the ‘book of doctrine and covenants of the Church of the Latter Day Saints,’ in behalf of the committee: he was followed by President Rigdon, who explained the manner by which they intended to obtain the voice of the assembly for or against said book: the other two committee, named above, were absent. According to said arrangement W.W. Phelps bore record that the book presented to the assembly, was true. President John Whitmer, also arose, and testified that it was true. Elder John Smith, taking the lead of the high council in Kirtland, bore record that the revelations in the said book were true President Cowdery arose and introduced the ‘book of doctrine and covenants of the Church of the Latter Day Saints,’ in behalf of the committee: he was followed by President Rigdon, who explained the manner by which they intended to obtain the voice of the assembly for or against said book: the other two committee, named above, were absent. According to said arrangement W.W. Phelps bore record that the book presented to the assembly, was true. President John Whitmer, also arose, and testified that it was true. Elder John Smith, taking the lead of the high council in Kirtland, bore record that the revelations in the said book were true… Elder Levi Jackman, taking the lead of the high council of the church in Missouri bore testimony that the revelations in the said book were true, and that the said High Council in Missouri, bore testimony that the revelations in said book were true, and the said high council of Missouri accepted and acknowledged them as the doctrine and covenants of their faith, by a unanimous vote. President W.W. Phelps then read the written testimony of 12 as follows. ‘The testimony of the witnesses of the book of the Lord's commandments, which he gave to his church through Joseph Smith, jr. who was appointed by the voice of the church for this purpose: we therefore feel willing to bear testimony to all the world of mankind, to every creature upon the face of the earth, and upon the islands of the sea, that the Lord has borne record to our souls, through the Holy Ghost, shed forth upon us, that these commandments were given by inspiration of God, and are profitable for all men, and are verily true... (Revelations and Translations, Joseph Smith Papers, 1835 Doctrine and Covenants)

User avatar
marc
Disciple of Jesus Christ
Posts: 10352
Contact:

Re: The Word of God

Post by marc »

Tribunal wrote:...When the Church was restored through Joseph Smith it was sufficient for the early members to accept his [Joseph Smith] claim that 'this' or 'that' was dictated to him from God...
In Rough Stone Rolling, a 700+ page biography of Joseph Smith, I read a most peculiar statement:
A revelation typically began with words like "Hearken O ye people which profess my name, saith the Lord your God." Many thought him presumptuous if not blasphemous, and he made no effort to prove them wrong. He did not defend his revelations or give reason for belief.
This had never occurred to me, but it makes sense and is consistent with the age old pattern of scoffing at the Lord's messengers and it gives a little more insight to the jarrings and contentions and envyings and strifes that existed at the time, which prevented the saints from ever redeeming Zion and ultimately influenced his decision to return and give himself up to be taken by the Lord.

Tribunal
captain of 1,000
Posts: 1496

Re: The Word of God

Post by Tribunal »

TZONE wrote:While the law of common consent was the process to cannonize scripture. It really is much simpler than that. It just may not be recognized as a body of believers to be cannon but anything that satisfies this is scripture.
I understand the verses you cited but do they apply to the LDS Church in the past or even in the present?
Today though it has morphed into, unless the prophet says it, don't listen because only he can speak in the name of the lord. Even than though the issue is determining what is spoken by the holy ghost?
I agree and that's my concern. The "morphing" of practice into policy, policy into doctrine, doctrine into modern-day revelation or even Scripture.
Here is the process in action in Josephs day.
Again, "the process in action in Joseph's day". Why has the process changed? And what is the current process?
D&C 1835 edition. You can read it I think in the back of the book. (or front?)
That was the process for canonizing the Doctrine and Covenants as Scripture, but in many cases the D&C has been overruled by the Church Handbook 1 & 2. Did the Church Handbook go through the same level or degree of consent?

So, what is the process? What do we do when someone promotes something as GOSPEL when it isn't? How do we go against the grain of our current practices becoming the doctrine of tomorrow's LDS Church, and still maintain good standing with our bishops and stake presidents?

Robert Sinclair
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 11006
Location: Redmond Oregon

Re: The Word of God

Post by Robert Sinclair »

You could always ask them is it no longer a commandment to be equal in our temporal things by giving covenants and deeds that cannot be broken into the hands of the poor Saints?

This was the commandment to Joshua 1:6. Inheritances.

This as a witness of such was lived by Peter and his fellow apostles and members of the Church. Act 4:31-34

As another witness in 4th Nephi 1:1-3

Another witness D&C 42:30-35

And in the Doctrine and Covenants 70:10-14

And of course Moses 7:18

And after all these witnesses and many more such as Isaiah and Zenos and many other witnesses can it be said new revelation says no longer do we need to do this we can enter into the temple with clean hands and pure hearts without keeping these commandments of God given to be equal in our temporal things and this not grudgingly.

The words of God?

You decide. :)

Time for Ephraim to acknowledge this offence and wake up and return?

We shall see. :)

Post Reply