If the Standard Works are the Standard, Why is Our Curriculum Focused on the Words of the Modern Prophets?

[endlessQuestions]

Wondering what people's thoughts are regarding this.

I have five children. They get very little scriptural instruction while at Church.

Why is this? The standard works are still the standard, right?

If these men wanted to, they could add their works to the standard works - so why don't they try?

[InfoWarrior82]

And why do we not have any more words of Jesus Christ to be added to canon of Scripture? Do our PSRs all have carpal tunnel or arthritis? Can they not dictate His words to a scribe?


I remember being a missionary and having investigators ask me this question. Our response was always "we have ensign magazines!"


27 Yea, wo be unto him that saith: We have received, and we need no more! 28 And in fine, wo unto all those who tremble, and are angry because of the truth of God! For behold, he that is built upon the rock receiveth it with gladness; and he that is built upon a sandy foundation trembleth lest he shall fall. 29 Wo be unto him that shall say: We have received the word of God, and we need no more of the word of God, for we have enough! 30 For behold, thus saith the Lord God: I will give unto the children of men line upon line, precept upon precept, here a little and there a little; and blessed are those who hearken unto my precepts, and lend an ear unto my counsel, for they shall learn wisdom; for unto him that receiveth I will give more; and from them that shall say, We have enough, from them shall be taken away even that which they have.

[endlessQuestions]

And why do we not have any more words of Jesus Christ to be added to canon of Scripture? Do our PSRs all have carpal tunnel or arthritis? Can they not dictate His words to a scribe?


I remember being a missionary and having investigators ask me this question. Our response was always "we have ensign magazines!"

I understand your frustration.

I guess my logical brain doesn't understand:

IF the standard works are the standard
And IF the prophets aren't adding to the canon, but are just repeating what's already in there
Then WHY do I need to listen to the words of the prophets? Wouldn't I be better served just going straight to the source, and making sure there was no room for error?

I'm hoping people can help me work through this one - I don't have any answers, but the question was forcibly impressed upon my mind awhile back, and I haven't been able to answer it for myself satisfactorily.

Maybe it's just my engineering brain and the idea that you don't reference anything but the standards when you're working inside a certain discipline. That's why they're the standard.

[InfoWarrior82]

And why do we not have any more words of Jesus Christ to be added to canon of Scripture? Do our PSRs all have carpal tunnel or arthritis? Can they not dictate His words to a scribe?


I remember being a missionary and having investigators ask me this question. Our response was always "we have ensign magazines!"

I understand your frustration.

I guess my logical brain doesn't understand:

IF the standard works are the standard
And IF the prophets aren't adding to the canon, but are just repeating what's already in there
Then WHY do I need to listen to the words of the prophets? Wouldn't I be better served just going straight to the source, and making sure there was no room for error?

I'm hoping people can help me work through this one - I don't have any answers, but the question was forcibly impressed upon my mind awhile back, and I haven't been able to answer it for myself satisfactorily.

Maybe it's just my engineering brain and the idea that you don't reference anything but the standards when you're working inside a certain discipline. That's why they're the standard.

They want their commentary on holy writ to be what members cling to. They can't produce their own.

[Reluctant Watchman]

Because the church literally teaches that their words, the words of a “living prophet”, are more important than the scriptures. They are in a category all their own. In some ways, they are the “living” law. To leaders and members, they are scripture incarnate.

[endlessQuestions]

And why do we not have any more words of Jesus Christ to be added to canon of Scripture? Do our PSRs all have carpal tunnel or arthritis? Can they not dictate His words to a scribe?


I remember being a missionary and having investigators ask me this question. Our response was always "we have ensign magazines!"

I understand your frustration.

I guess my logical brain doesn't understand:

IF the standard works are the standard
And IF the prophets aren't adding to the canon, but are just repeating what's already in there
Then WHY do I need to listen to the words of the prophets? Wouldn't I be better served just going straight to the source, and making sure there was no room for error?

I'm hoping people can help me work through this one - I don't have any answers, but the question was forcibly impressed upon my mind awhile back, and I haven't been able to answer it for myself satisfactorily.

Maybe it's just my engineering brain and the idea that you don't reference anything but the standards when you're working inside a certain discipline. That's why they're the standard.

They want their commentary on holy writ to be what members cling to. They can't produce their own.

Okay, but that's illogical, right?

It's the same problem the Jews had, if I understand things correctly. God had given them the Pentateuch, and then along came all these men who wanted to add their commentary, and then over time, the commentary became as or more important than the word of God.

I don't know why I don't feel settled on this one. The argument seems tight, but it's like I'm missing something that makes me reticent to form a final conclusion.

Thanks for your thoughts. I appreciate the conversation.

[endlessQuestions]

Because the church literally teaches that their words, the words of a “living prophet”, are more important than the scriptures. They are in a category all their own. In same ways, they are the “living” law. To leaders and members, they are scripture incarnate.

Can you provide me a source or two to show that they "literally" teach this? That would be interesting, and I know you're a wealth of information on sources like that.

[Teancum1]

Jesus said that if we know his words then we won’t be deceived. Therefore if we don’t know his words then we can be deceived.
It’s my opinion that they’ve made themselves lesser gods, quoting each other and misapplying/prooftexting Jesus’s words for their own purposes.

Jesus is the way/truth/life but it seems they want us to believe that they are now the way.

[InfoWarrior82]

I understand your frustration.

I guess my logical brain doesn't understand:

IF the standard works are the standard
And IF the prophets aren't adding to the canon, but are just repeating what's already in there
Then WHY do I need to listen to the words of the prophets? Wouldn't I be better served just going straight to the source, and making sure there was no room for error?

I'm hoping people can help me work through this one - I don't have any answers, but the question was forcibly impressed upon my mind awhile back, and I haven't been able to answer it for myself satisfactorily.

Maybe it's just my engineering brain and the idea that you don't reference anything but the standards when you're working inside a certain discipline. That's why they're the standard.

They want their commentary on holy writ to be what members cling to. They can't produce their own.

Okay, but that's illogical, right?

It's the same problem the Jews had, if I understand things correctly. God had given them the Pentateuch, and then along came all these men who wanted to add their commentary, and then over time, the commentary became as or more important than the word of God.

I don't know why I don't feel settled on this one. The argument seems tight, but it's like I'm missing something that makes me reticent to form a final conclusion.

Thanks for your thoughts. I appreciate the conversation.

This is right. That's exactly what's happening again.

In the absence of the literal, divine, words of God... They just fill that void to distract and keep themselves relevant.

[Reluctant Watchman]

Because the church literally teaches that their words, the words of a “living prophet”, are more important than the scriptures. They are in a category all their own. In same ways, they are the “living” law. To leaders and members, they are scripture incarnate.

Can you provide me a source or two to show that they "literally" teach this? That would be interesting, and I know you're a wealth of information on sources like that.

Benson’s 14 Fundamentals in Following the Prophet. These are all very… “special”

First: The prophet is the only man who speaks for the Lord in everything.

Second:The living prophet is more vital to us than the standard works.

Third: The living prophet is more important to us than a dead prophet.

Fourth: The prophet will never lead the Church astray.

Fifth: The prophet is not required to have any particular earthly training or credentials to speak on any subject or act on any matter at any time.

Sixth: The prophet does not have to say “Thus saith the Lord” to give us scripture.

Seventh: The prophet tells us what we need to know, not always what we want to know.

Eighth: The prophet is not limited by men’s reasoning.

Ninth: The prophet can receive revelation on any matter—temporal or spiritual.

Tenth: The prophet may be involved in civic matters.

Eleventh: The two groups who have the greatest difficulty in following the prophet are the proud who are learned and the proud who are rich.

Twelfth: The prophet will not necessarily be popular with the world or the worldly.

Thirteenth: The prophet and his counselors make up the First Presidency—the highest quorum in the Church.

Fourteenth: The prophet and the presidency—the living prophet and the first presidency—follow them and be blessed; reject them and suffer.

[Reluctant Watchman]

And this recent talk from Elder Haynie is a gem:

“President Russell M. Nelson has testified that “God’s long-established pattern of teaching His children through prophets assures us that He will bless each prophet and that He will bless those who heed prophetic counsel.” So the key is to follow the living prophet. Brothers and sisters, unlike vintage comic books and classic cars, prophetic teachings do not become more valuable with age. That is why we should not seek to use the words of past prophets to dismiss the teachings of living prophets.”

He pretty much just pulled a trump card and crapped on all of those dead prophets. Mind you, Jesus’ teachings are included in that pile of “past prophets.” But don’t worry, “when Nelson speaks, he speaks for the Lord.” –Rasband

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/stu ... e?lang=eng

[CaptainM]

1) The LDS church is not the true church of Christ.

2) The so-called prophets are in it for the profits.

3) The D&C, JST, and PGP are lies and fables.

4) JS was NOT a prophet, but a temporary translator.

5) Our eyes are blinded because we have bought into the rejection of the fulness of the gospel that is contained in the Book of Mormon.

6) The phrase “Standard Works” is a precept of men.

7) etc., etc., etc…

8) Need I go on?

[InfoWarrior82]

Sixth: The prophet does not have to say “Thus saith the Lord” to give us scripture.

He just pulled that one right out of his rear end. Citation needed, Ezra


Every prophet in our scriptures did it. Why couldn't you???

[endlessQuestions]

Because the church literally teaches that their words, the words of a “living prophet”, are more important than the scriptures. They are in a category all their own. In same ways, they are the “living” law. To leaders and members, they are scripture incarnate.

Can you provide me a source or two to show that they "literally" teach this? That would be interesting, and I know you're a wealth of information on sources like that.

Benson’s 14 Fundamentals in Following the Prophet. These are all very… “special”

First: The prophet is the only man who speaks for the Lord in everything.

Second:The living prophet is more vital to us than the standard works.

Third: The living prophet is more important to us than a dead prophet.

Fourth: The prophet will never lead the Church astray.

Fifth: The prophet is not required to have any particular earthly training or credentials to speak on any subject or act on any matter at any time.

Sixth: The prophet does not have to say “Thus saith the Lord” to give us scripture.

Seventh: The prophet tells us what we need to know, not always what we want to know.

Eighth: The prophet is not limited by men’s reasoning.

Ninth: The prophet can receive revelation on any matter—temporal or spiritual.

Tenth: The prophet may be involved in civic matters.

Eleventh: The two groups who have the greatest difficulty in following the prophet are the proud who are learned and the proud who are rich.

Twelfth: The prophet will not necessarily be popular with the world or the worldly.

Thirteenth: The prophet and his counselors make up the First Presidency—the highest quorum in the Church.

Fourteenth: The prophet and the presidency—the living prophet and the first presidency—follow them and be blessed; reject them and suffer.

I have a great story about The Fourteen Fundamentals that's brand new - would you like to hear it? I think you will really appreciate it.

[endlessQuestions]

Sixth: The prophet does not have to say “Thus saith the Lord” to give us scripture.

He just pulled that one right out of his rear end. Citation needed, Ezra


Every prophet in our scriptures did it. Why couldn't you???

There's a brand new story about The Fourteen Fundamentals that I don't think many people know about that I just uncovered. Would you like to hear about it?

[Reluctant Watchman]

I have a great story about The Fourteen Fundamentals that's brand new - would you like to hear it? I think you will really appreciate it.

I’ve heard a few different theories. I’d be interested to get your take.

[CaptainM]

Benson’s 14 principles caused him to be disciplined by Kimball.

viewtopic.php?t=70545&hilit=Kimball

[Reluctant Watchman]

Sixth: The prophet does not have to say “Thus saith the Lord” to give us scripture.

He just pulled that one right out of his rear end. Citation needed, Ezra

Every prophet in our scriptures did it. Why couldn't you???

You just have unrealistic expectations……….

[BringerOfJoy]

Can you provide me a source or two to show that they "literally" teach this? That would be interesting, and I know you're a wealth of information on sources like that.

Benson’s 14 Fundamentals in Following the Prophet. These are all very… “special”

First: The prophet is the only man who speaks for the Lord in everything.

Second:The living prophet is more vital to us than the standard works.

Third: The living prophet is more important to us than a dead prophet.

Fourth: The prophet will never lead the Church astray.

Fifth: The prophet is not required to have any particular earthly training or credentials to speak on any subject or act on any matter at any time.

Sixth: The prophet does not have to say “Thus saith the Lord” to give us scripture.

Seventh: The prophet tells us what we need to know, not always what we want to know.

Eighth: The prophet is not limited by men’s reasoning.

Ninth: The prophet can receive revelation on any matter—temporal or spiritual.

Tenth: The prophet may be involved in civic matters.

Eleventh: The two groups who have the greatest difficulty in following the prophet are the proud who are learned and the proud who are rich.

Twelfth: The prophet will not necessarily be popular with the world or the worldly.

Thirteenth: The prophet and his counselors make up the First Presidency—the highest quorum in the Church.

Fourteenth: The prophet and the presidency—the living prophet and the first presidency—follow them and be blessed; reject them and suffer.

I have a great story about The Fourteen Fundamentals that's brand new - would you like to hear it? I think you will really appreciate it.

I would be. I've heard that Reed Benson actually wrote it, but that is purely a rumor as far as I know.

[OneEternalRound]

I understand your frustration.

I guess my logical brain doesn't understand:

IF the standard works are the standard
And IF the prophets aren't adding to the canon, but are just repeating what's already in there
Then WHY do I need to listen to the words of the prophets? Wouldn't I be better served just going straight to the source, and making sure there was no room for error?

I'm hoping people can help me work through this one - I don't have any answers, but the question was forcibly impressed upon my mind awhile back, and I haven't been able to answer it for myself satisfactorily.

Maybe it's just my engineering brain and the idea that you don't reference anything but the standards when you're working inside a certain discipline. That's why they're the standard.

They want their commentary on holy writ to be what members cling to. They can't produce their own.

Okay, but that's illogical, right?

It's the same problem the Jews had, if I understand things correctly. God had given them the Pentateuch, and then along came all these men who wanted to add their commentary, and then over time, the commentary became as or more important than the word of God.

I don't know why I don't feel settled on this one. The argument seems tight, but it's like I'm missing something that makes me reticent to form a final conclusion.

Thanks for your thoughts. I appreciate the conversation.

"The son of Zacharias [John the Baptist] wrested the keys, the kingdom, the power, the glory from the Jews, by the holy anointing and decree of heaven" - Joseph Smith, TPJS Chp 6

Did the Jews notice?

[endlessQuestions]

They want their commentary on holy writ to be what members cling to. They can't produce their own.

Okay, but that's illogical, right?

It's the same problem the Jews had, if I understand things correctly. God had given them the Pentateuch, and then along came all these men who wanted to add their commentary, and then over time, the commentary became as or more important than the word of God.

I don't know why I don't feel settled on this one. The argument seems tight, but it's like I'm missing something that makes me reticent to form a final conclusion.

Thanks for your thoughts. I appreciate the conversation.

"The son of Zacharias [John the Baptist] wrested the keys, the kingdom, the power, the glory from the Jews, by the holy anointing and decree of heaven" - Joseph Smith, TPJS Chp 6

Did the Jews notice?

That's fascinating, and I've never seen that quote. Thank you for sharing!

To answer your question, I don't know, but my study of the standard works informs me that people and groups rarely "notice" that things have gone wrong until it's far too late. Hence all the blind, deaf, and dumb symbolism in the standard works.

I'd love to hear your thoughts.

[endlessQuestions]

Benson’s 14 Fundamentals in Following the Prophet. These are all very… “special”

First: The prophet is the only man who speaks for the Lord in everything.

Second:The living prophet is more vital to us than the standard works.

Third: The living prophet is more important to us than a dead prophet.

Fourth: The prophet will never lead the Church astray.

Fifth: The prophet is not required to have any particular earthly training or credentials to speak on any subject or act on any matter at any time.

Sixth: The prophet does not have to say “Thus saith the Lord” to give us scripture.

Seventh: The prophet tells us what we need to know, not always what we want to know.

Eighth: The prophet is not limited by men’s reasoning.

Ninth: The prophet can receive revelation on any matter—temporal or spiritual.

Tenth: The prophet may be involved in civic matters.

Eleventh: The two groups who have the greatest difficulty in following the prophet are the proud who are learned and the proud who are rich.

Twelfth: The prophet will not necessarily be popular with the world or the worldly.

Thirteenth: The prophet and his counselors make up the First Presidency—the highest quorum in the Church.

Fourteenth: The prophet and the presidency—the living prophet and the first presidency—follow them and be blessed; reject them and suffer.

I have a great story about The Fourteen Fundamentals that's brand new - would you like to hear it? I think you will really appreciate it.

I would be. I've heard that Reed Benson actually wrote it, but that is purely a rumor as far as I know.

Okay, this is going to need its own thread. It's about the Huntsman tithing case, of all things. I'll post a link to the new thread when I make it.

Here's the new thread that tells the story of how the Church went from condemning Benson's talk to using it as an "Authority" in its amicus brief filed in the Huntsman lawsuit. I haven't seen tmac around - I hope he'll chime in here, since he's far more qualified to do analysis on this than I am.

viewtopic.php?t=72827

[4Joshua8]

Can you imagine the discontent (even malcontent) if a man gave a lesson in combined priesthood/womens using the New Testament as a basis of laying out a woman’s role toward her husband? Or a GC talk?

[endlessQuestions]

Can you imagine the discontent if a man gave a lesson in combined priesthood/womens using the New Testament as a basis of laying out a woman’s role toward her husband? Or a GC talk?

I sure can.

So is the argument that we shouldn't use the standards if we know it's bad for business?

That's actually quite a pithy little statement that packs quite a punch, isn't it? Pretty reflective of what's going on in the world, in my opinion.

[Reluctant Watchman]

Can you imagine the discontent if a man gave a lesson in combined priesthood/womens using the New Testament as a basis of laying out a woman’s role toward her husband? Or a GC talk?

Are you talking obedience to her husband… right? lol.