More scripture?

[JLHPROF]

Will you please indicate what specific changes he made to what? Because I believe I made my case in the link I provided. Whenever I make a claim, I am always ready and willing to show how and why. I've learned that if I cannot show it, I don't say it. Therefore, please show me what you say what you said.

Multiple literary authorship analyses have shown that Joseph Smith did write the lectures. I linked a video above describing original text of D&C and the testimonies of the four presiding leaders of the truthfulness and correctness of the texts at the time of its publication.

What did Joseph change? How did his later teachings differ from the doctrine taught in early canon?

Lecture 5 (selections)
We shall, in this lecture speak of the Godhead: we mean the Father, Son and Holy Spirit.
There are two personages who constitute the great, matchless, governing and supreme power over all thing —They are the Father and the Son: The Father being a personage of spirit, glory and power: possessing all perfection and fulness: The Son, who was in the bosom of the Father, a personage of tabernacle, made, or fashioned like unto man, or being
in the form and likeness of man, — possessing the same mind with the Father, which mind is the Holy Spirit, that bears record of the Father and the Son, and these three are one.
Question 3: How many personages are there in the Godhead?
Two: the Father and the Son.

D&C 130:22 The Father has a body of flesh and bones as tangible as man’s; the Son also; but the Holy Ghost has not a body of flesh and bones, but is a personage of Spirit. Were it not so, the Holy Ghost could not dwell in us

Everlasting covenant was made between three personages before the
organization of this earth, and relates to their dispensation of things to men on
the earth; these personages, according to Abraham’s record, are called God
the first, the Creator; God the second, the Redeemer; and God the third, the
witness or Testator. (TPJS 190) May 1841.

So is the Father a personage of spirit or tabernacle?
Is the Holy Ghost an individual personage or the mind of the Father and Son?
Are there two or three members of the Godhead?

You are just like the church, you know beforehand that you are omitting some pertinent facts, but you do it anyway, in an intellectually dishonest attempt to sway people to your side. Let's list the things you deceitfully omitted.

1. The Bible teaches God is a spirit. The BoM teaches God is a spirit. The Lectures on Faith teach God is a spirit. 3 testaments all in perfect harmony.
2. Lectures on Faith: Attested to as correct doctrine by 4 Prophets, Seers, and Revelators.
3. Section 130: Not attested to by any PSR's, evidenced by Joseph never claiming the teaching and purposefully omitting it in the 1844 edition.
4. Lectures on Faith did make the 1844 cut and remained as canon.
5. Two scribes claiming JS taught something is not the canonization process.
6. The words of these prophets are the very foundation we have for detecting false teachings. The LoF are the broom that sweeps section 130 into the trash.
7. BY did not meet the requirement of the Lord in D&C 43:1-7 to add revelation to the church.

Next time all you have to say is: The Lectures on Faith were indeed canon throughout Joseph's ministry and though he didn't canonize Section 130, I believe it anyway.

Likewise, you could simplify your posts and say you only accept Kirtland era doctrine and reject all the further light received during the Nauvoo years.
It would save a lot of time.
And I utterly reject your points, just as I generally reject the idea of canon to begin with.

[Shawn Henry]

I generally reject the idea of canon to begin with.

And generally, the Law of Witnesses too, right?


D&C 6:28 And now, behold, I give unto you, and also unto my servant Joseph, the keys of this gift, which shall bring to light this ministry; and in the mouth of two or three witnesses shall every word be established.
D&C 128:3 that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established.
2 Nephi 11:3 Wherefore, by the words of three, God hath said, I will establish my word. Nevertheless, God sendeth more witnesses, and he proveth all his words.
2 Corinthians 13:1 This is the third time I am coming to you. In the mouth of two or three witnesses shall every word be established.
Matthew 18:16 But if he will not hear thee, then take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established.

It's so obvious the Lord misspoke when he said "every word". Obviously new words can come with none at all, right?

[JLHPROF]

I generally reject the idea of canon to begin with.

And generally, the Law of Witnesses too, right?


D&C 6:28 And now, behold, I give unto you, and also unto my servant Joseph, the keys of this gift, which shall bring to light this ministry; and in the mouth of two or three witnesses shall every word be established.
D&C 128:3 that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established.
2 Nephi 11:3 Wherefore, by the words of three, God hath said, I will establish my word. Nevertheless, God sendeth more witnesses, and he proveth all his words.
2 Corinthians 13:1 This is the third time I am coming to you. In the mouth of two or three witnesses shall every word be established.
Matthew 18:16 But if he will not hear thee, then take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established.

It's so obvious the Lord misspoke when he said "every word". Obviously new words can come with none at all, right?

No, I accept that law.
I reject your understanding of its application.
There are so many gospel principles that don't operate on that principle.

[FrankOne]

Joseph Smith published the Book of Mormon in 1830 and the first D&C in 1835 as a follow-up to the 1833 Book of Commandments. After Joseph died, the scriptures dried up. Shouldn't we have two or three volumes of the D&C by now, if not more? I guess what I'm saying is what would the D&C look like today with President Hinkley's or President Nelson's revelations in the same volume with Joseph's?

Considering we believe in continuing revelations, the Canon should be an open book which is updated annually and voted upon by common consent. I'm just thinking out loud here trying to visualize it.

I can't recall the text name, but decades ago, some Indians took a sacred text to the church authorities to interprete. The language was unknown at the time. The 15 basically said "This is an unknown language, we aren't experts in linguistics". The Indians left with their sacred text understanding that the power of revelation had fled the church.

The 15 are not gifted, nor do they have any divine abilities.

Continuing revelation? There isn't any from church leadership. They are men walking in the dark.

Do you have any other info so I can find this?
Did a Google search and came up empty. This is very interesting to me.

i am not sure that this is the right one, but it does look like it. It's been a very long time since I read it so I can't be sure.I believe the original text was The Mentinah .

http://www.nemenhah.org/

[Shawn Henry]

The purpose of scriptural canon is to be an anchor against such a thing.

What! Scripture is that important?!!!

I thought we were commanded to rely on alleged, unsubstantiated Joseph Smith quotes from his dog Major seconded by his cat. Me and several others here are convinced that that is the Iron Rod, and we have both hands grasping firmly.

[Shawn Henry]

There are so many gospel principles that don't operate on that principle.

It doesn't apply to other principles; it only applies to what is the word.

[innocentoldguy]

Joseph Smith published the Book of Mormon in 1830 and the first D&C in 1835 as a follow-up to the 1833 Book of Commandments. After Joseph died, the scriptures dried up. Shouldn't we have two or three volumes of the D&C by now, if not more? I guess what I'm saying is what would the D&C look like today with President Hinkley's or President Nelson's revelations in the same volume with Joseph's?

Considering we believe in continuing revelations, the Canon should be an open book which is updated annually and voted upon by common consent. I'm just thinking out loud here trying to visualize it.

The D&C was added to in 1978.

The D&C was also taken away from in 1920.

Yep. This is fine too, since we believe in ongoing revelations.