Re: None of our Business
Posted: July 18th, 2009, 9:45 pm
by firend
I want to be very very clear here.
I love Hinckley, and we are related. I knew he had the keys of the Kingdom. He was not perfect though, and did not expect people to think he was.
Hinckley knew debt was not good. That is a non-issue. My issue to show as great as he was, he was not perfect and therfore this is why we follow God, and support our leaders but don't follow blindly.
I had a couple of these articles on hand, there are more I just don't have them on hand. As you can see in his talks he blasts debt, just like God does. However, he throws in a line or 2 that contadicts the whole. This is a great leader whom had an opinion. If you followed what I have blackened below, you would see nothing wrong with a modest house payment. God sees everything wrong with it. If you have a house payment at all period, you suffer, there is no inbetween. Please read and see what i mean.
GORDON B. HINCKLEY
Gordon B. Hinckley was a member of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles
of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints when this fireside
address was given at Brigham Young University on 1 March 1992.
....."American business now devotes 50 percent of its earnings to debt service, double the level 15 years ago" (U.S. News & World Report, 15 October 1990). But this problem is not confined to business institutions. It is shared by individuals--such as you and me--in countless numbers in our land. Within a period of one year, consumer nonmortgage debt increased 27 billion dollars. "The typical family now spends 30 percent on debt service, compared with 20 percent a year ago" (U.S. News). Our pioneer forebears lived by the adage "Fix it up, wear it out. Make it do, or do without." Reasonable debt for the purchase of an affordable home and perhaps for a few other necessary things is acceptable. But from where I sit, I see in a very vivid way the terrible tragedies of many who have gone on a binge of borrowing for things they really do not need.
Here's an excerpt from a talk delivered by Church President Gordon B. Hinckley in October 1998 General Conference:
"So many of our people are living on the very edge of their incomes. In fact, some are living on borrowings.
We have witnessed in recent weeks wide and fearsome swings in the markets of the world. The economy is a fragile thing. A stumble in the economy in Jakarta or Moscow can immediately affect the entire world. It can eventually reach down to each of us as individuals. There is a portent of stormy weather ahead to which we had better give heed.
I hope with all my heart that we shall never slip into a depression. I am a child of the Great Depression of the thirties. I finished the university in 1932, when unemployment in this area exceeded 33 percent.
My father was then president of the largest stake in the Church in this valley. It was before our present welfare program was established. He walked the floor worrying about his people. He and his associates established a great wood-chopping project designed to keep the home furnaces and stoves going and the people warm in the winter. They had no money with which to buy coal. Men who had been affluent were among those who chopped wood.
I repeat, I hope we will never again see such a depression. But I am troubled by the huge consumer installment debt which hangs over the people of the nation, including our own people. In March 1997 that debt totaled $1.2 trillion, which represented a 7 percent increase over the previous year.
In December of 1997, 55 to 60 million households in the United States carried credit card balances. These balances averaged more than $7,000 and cost $1,000 per year in interest and fees. Consumer debt as a percentage of disposable income rose from 16.3 percent in 1993 to 19.3 percent in 1996.
Everyone knows that every dollar borrowed carries with it the penalty of paying interest. When money cannot be repaid, then bankruptcy follows. There were 1,350,118 bankruptcies in the United States last year. This represented a 50 percent increase from 1992. In the second quarter of this year, nearly 362,000 persons filed for bankruptcy, a record number for a three-month period.
We are beguiled by seductive advertising. Television carries the enticing invitation to borrow up to 125 percent of the value of one’s home. But no mention is made of interest.
President J. Reuben Clark Jr., in the April 1938 general conference, said from this pulpit: “Once in debt, interest is your companion every minute of the day and night; you cannot shun it or slip away from it; you cannot dismiss it; it yields neither to entreaties, demands, or orders; and whenever you get in its way or cross its course or fail to meet its demands, it crushes you”.
I recognize that it may be necessary to borrow to get a home, of course. But let us buy a home that we can afford and thus ease the payments which will constantly hang over our heads without mercy or respite for as long as 30 years.
No one knows when emergencies will strike. I am somewhat familiar with the case of a man who was highly successful in his profession. He lived in comfort. He built a large home. Then one day he was suddenly involved in a serious accident. Instantly, without warning, he almost lost his life. He was left a cripple. Destroyed was his earning power. He faced huge medical bills. He had other payments to make. He was helpless before his creditors. One moment he was rich, the next he was broke.
Since the beginnings of the Church, the Lord has spoken on this matter of debt. To Martin Harris through revelation He said: “Pay the debt thou hast contracted with the printer. Release thyself from bondage” (D&C 19:35).
President Heber J. Grant spoke repeatedly on this matter from this pulpit. He said: “If there is any one thing that will bring peace and contentment into the human heart, and into the family, it is to live within our means. And if there is any one thing that is grinding and discouraging and disheartening, it is to have debts and obligations that one cannot meet”.
We are carrying a message of self-reliance throughout the Church. Self-reliance cannot obtain when there is serious debt hanging over a household. One has neither independence nor freedom from bondage when he is obligated to others.
In managing the affairs of the Church, we have tried to set an example. We have, as a matter of policy, stringently followed the practice of setting aside each year a percentage of the income of the Church against a possible day of need.
I am grateful to be able to say that the Church in all its operations, in all its undertakings, in all of its departments, is able to function without borrowed money. If we cannot get along, we will curtail our programs. We will shrink expenditures to fit the income. We will not borrow.
One of the happiest days in the life of President Joseph F. Smith was the day the Church paid off its long-standing indebtedness.
What a wonderful feeling it is to be free of debt, to have a little money against a day of emergency put away where it can be retrieved when necessary.
President Faust would not tell you this himself. Perhaps I can tell it, and he can take it out on me afterward. He had a mortgage on his home drawing 4 percent interest. Many people would have told him he was foolish to pay off that mortgage when it carried so low a rate of interest. But the first opportunity he had to acquire some means, he and his wife determined they would pay off their mortgage. He has been free of debt since that day. That’s why he wears a smile on his face, and that’s why he whistles while he works.
I urge you, brethren, to look to the condition of your finances. I urge you to be modest in your expenditures; discipline yourselves in your purchases to avoid debt to the extent possible. Pay off debt as quickly as you can, and free yourselves from bondage.
This is a part of the temporal gospel in which we believe. May the Lord bless you, my beloved brethren, to set your houses in order. If you have paid your debts, if you have a reserve, even though it be small, then should storms howl about your head, you will have shelter for your wives and children and peace in your hearts. That’s all I have to say about it, but I wish to say it with all the emphasis of which I am capable.
I leave with you my testimony of the divinity of this work and my love for each of you, in the name of the Redeemer, the Lord Jesus Christ, amen."
April General Conference, 1998
A holier-than-thou attitude is not becoming to us. I am in receipt of a letter from a man in our community who is not a member of the Church. In it he says that his little daughter has been ostracized by her schoolmates who are Latter-day Saints. He sets forth another instance of a child who, it is alleged, had a religious medal ripped from his neck by an LDS child. I hope this is not true. If it is, I apologize to those who have been offended.
I plead with you boys tonight to keep yourselves free from the stains of the world. You must not indulge in sleazy talk at school. You must not tell sultry jokes. You must not fool around with the Internet to find pornographic material. You must not dial a long-distance telephone number to listen to filth. You must not rent videos with pornography of any kind. This salacious stuff simply is not for you. Stay away from pornography as you would avoid a serious disease. It is as destructive. It can become habitual, and those who indulge in it get so they cannot leave it alone. It is addictive.
It is a five-billion-dollar business for those who produce it. They make it as titillating and attractive as they know how. It seduces and destroys its victims. It is everywhere. It is all about us. I plead with you young men not to get involved in its use. You simply cannot afford to.
Be modest in your wants. You do not need a big home with a big mortgage as you begin your lives together. You can and should avoid overwhelming debt. There is nothing that will cause greater tensions in marriage than grinding debt, which will make of you a slave to your creditors. You may have to borrow money to begin ownership of a home. But do not let it be so costly that it will preoccupy your thoughts day and night.
Did Hinckley have the keys (YES) Did he love God (you can't tell lol) but was all his understandings direct from God all the time, ofcoursenot. If all his thoughts and teachings were direct from God then he would give the credit to God. He had opinions, some great ones, but he was not perfect. I did not follow him on his reasonable debt belief. Today I suffer not in this area , but many do.
UNDERSTAND. i HAD THE OPPORTUNITY BEFORE ME IN THE 90'S TO CHOOSE. GOD SAID NO DEBT. HINCKLEY SAID OK AT CERTAIN TIMES. I LOVE HINCKLEY BUT I KNEW ALL DEBT WAS WRONG. I WAS WILLING TO LIVE IN A TRASH MOBILE IF IT MEANT FOLLOWING GOD. I MADE A CHOICE AND OATH OF NO DEBT, AND EVER SINCE IT HAS BEEN WONDERFUL. MY FRIEND CHOOSE DEBT CUZ HINCKLEY SAID IT WAS OK FOR CERTAIN THINGS AND IS MISERABLE TODAY WITH PAYMENTS.
i CANNOT MAKE IT MORE CLEAR. LOVE YOUR LEADERS. SUPPORT THEM FOR THEY NEED IT. BUT WE ANSWER TO GOD AND IN HIM WE MUST KNOW THE LAW TO SUCCESSFULLY SUPPORT OUR LEADERS IN THE RIGHT
Re: None of our Business
Posted: July 19th, 2009, 10:07 am
by firend
shadow wrote:As far as debt is concerned, we're all in debt. Firend is in debt too. Think it through
Regarding my house debt (I have no car debt): I make a monthly payment to a bank. My neighbor makes a monthly payment to his landlord. His payment is a tad more than mine (plus he can't write off any interest). As far as I'm concerned, he's in worse shape than I am. However, we both can walk away
Follow the prophet, he knows the way.
That is straw man and twisting doctrine shadow. (saying were all in debt anyway type argument.) This is also false justification. Nothing against you shadow
As for the people on here that see to blindly follow the prophet, and debt is no big deal :
When God has perfectly commanded us to not go in debt what do you think that means? Do you understand what debt and foreswearing is?
The sin of debt is when you foreswear yourself in contract for something you presently have no means to cover either through cash or collateral.
I HAVE NO DEBT BY THE WAY, WHY? BECAUSE GOD SAID NOT TOO. THOSE WHO WANT TO JUSTIFY DEBT GO AHEAD, AS YOU SUFFER RIGHT NOW. DON'T EXPECT GOD TO BAIL YOU OUT WHEN YOU WON'T LISTEN TO HIM. THAT IS NOT HOW GOD AND MATHAMATICAL PRINCIPLE WORKS.
Most people do have debt. They choose to mortage a house over lets say 30 years at a cost of lets say 300,000 dollars. At the contract date they have 5000 dollars to their name. They have no means to cover their promise to pay. They are in bondage, and if anything happens to them (job, health, etc) they loose.
Debt is not owing something you can cover. If I pay for a trip on credit card for 2000 dollars, and I have 100000 dollars in the bank, I have the collateral to cover it. I am not in bondage.
yes you can buy a house debt free as God says
yes you can pay for college without a loan you have no present means to cover
yes you can rent an apartment debt free
WHY ARE WE HERE BUT TO TAKE A TEST AND SEE WHO IS FAITHFUL. WHY TAKE THIS WORLDLY EASY ROAD OF "I CAN HAVE IT NOW' ATTITUDE.
LATTER DAY SAINTS ARE SUPPOSED TO BE A PECULIAR PEOPLE. ALMOST EVERY JOE BLOW IS IN DEBT. CATHOLICS, MUSLIMS, JEWS, MORMONS, WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE THEN IN US AS MORMONS.
Basically people get off your duff and do what God said to do. Quit justifying your worldly ways. Especially quit justifying something ungodly because one of God's servants made a mistake because he had an opinion.
Hinckley made a mistake. HANDLE IT. don't try to justify it.
At what point will you see that God's servants are still human. At what point will you see that you as an individual are solely responsible for your standing with God. How dare you justify yourself by pushing off your test on another man.
Most on this forum I imagine are in debt. They suffer right now to make all those payments. Hinckley said those payments were acceptable, God did not. So when you suffer, don't blame God.
Realize our Apostles are men that have opinions. How are you supposed to righteously support them when you yourself do not know the law. You have no understanding of the relationship then of why we even have leaders.
I support Monson because I know the law, and by knowing the law i can fully support him.
How can you expect to support the Prophet if you yourself offer no help because you are just a slave to him. The goal is righteousness. The goal is not he knows the law, I don't and I listen to him blindly supposing him to guide me 100% of the time correctly. You people suffer right now because you think debt is ok, that is my whole point, you listen to a imperfect man tell you the law, and know not the law yourself. If you knew the law yourself, you could correct your leader, and a righteous leader would be glad to see he was in error. This same principle applies to Husband/Wife-Employer/Employee-Government/People, etc. It is called both parties being responsible though one has the leadership responsibility to direct and legitimately ask what that role demands. Again in D&C 107 God created a procedure to impeach the Prophet if he strays, why would he do that if the Prophet can't stray, etc.
To finish this. Most on here obviously don't understand their relationship to God, and family, and what the church is, and what the leaders responsibilities are, and our responsibilities in conjunction with the leaders. I am tired of people justifying wrong doing for whatever reason, and in their justification they suffer, and still justify.
Re: None of our Business
Posted: July 19th, 2009, 8:28 pm
by cayenne
luv your posts firend, it got me looking around on the net. This guy named jeff lindsey has a great article on this subject. It explains how prophets do error, but are still prophets. It is like u were saying, debt is wrong, hinckley's opinion was not totally right. here is the article:
it is on Jefflindsay.com
On the Fallibility of Inspired Human Leaders
in the True Church of Jesus Christ
Essay by Jeffrey Dean Lindsay
March 20, 2004
Fallible Prophets--A Scriptural Truth
Many critics of the Church, and some critics within, ridicule the concept of revelation in the Church. They object to the idea of a living prophet, and mock the prophets because of their human failings. Inherent in much of the criticism is the notion that a real prophet should be infallible. There is no hint of such a doctrine anywhere in the Bible or in the LDS scriptures. Moses and other prophets made mistakes and were even chastised by the Lord at times for their failings. In the LDS volume of scripture called the Doctrine and Covenants, almost from the beginning we have a powerful warning about the fallibility of the Prophet Joseph Smith, for in Section 3 he is sorely chastised for his mistake of being tricked into letting the first part of the Book of Mormon--the 116 pages of initial translation--be stolen. Joseph prayerfully made the decision to lend the 116 pages to Martin Harris, but in spite of his prayers, he followed his own will, not the Lord's, and made a mistake that would cost millions of people access to sacred words and details that I imagine could have provided much additional significant evidence for the authenticity of the Book of Mormon. This was no minor mistake, but a devastating tragedy for the whole Church, and the fallible Joseph Smith was sorely rebuked by the Lord. Here is an excerpt from Doctrine and Covenants 3:
3 Remember, remember that it is not the work of God that is frustrated, but the work of men;
4 For although a man may have many revelations, and have power to do many mighty works, yet if he boasts in his own strength, and sets at naught the counsels of God, and follows after the dictates of his own will and carnal desires, he must fall and incur the vengeance of a just God upon him.
5 Behold, you have been entrusted with these things, but how strict were your commandments; and remember also the promises which were made to you, if you did not transgress them.
6 And behold, how oft you have transgressed the commandments and the laws of God, and have gone on in the persuasions of men.
7 For, behold, you should not have feared man more than God. Although men set at naught the counsels of God, and despise his words--
8 Yet you should have been faithful; and he would have extended his arm and supported you against all the fiery darts of the adversary; and he would have been with you in every time of trouble.
9 Behold, thou art Joseph, and thou wast chosen to do the work of the Lord, but because of transgression, if thou art not aware thou wilt fall.
Ouch! That's pretty strong language. (And so much for the theory that Joseph Smith was a megalomaniac who felt he could do no wrong. Here he is recording a royal--no, a divine--chewing out that leaves him looking pretty guilty and foolish, and he puts this dressing down near the very beginning of his collection of revelations.) But if Joseph could make a mistake like that, we surely can't expect other mortal leaders to be free of other embarrassing failures. Another prophet, Lorenzo Snow, understood this when he acknowledged the human limitations of Joseph Smith:
I can fellowship the President of the Church, if he does not know everything I know. . . . I saw the . . . imperfections in [Joseph Smith]. . . . I thanked God that he would put upon a man who had those imperfections the power and authority he placed upon him . . . for I knew that I myself had weakness[es], and I thought there was a chance for me. . . . I thanked God that I saw these imperfections.
(As cited by Neal A. Maxwell, "Out of Obscurity," Ensign, Nov. 1984, p. 10; also Conference Report, Oct. 1984.)
A few sections later in Doctrine and Covenants 10:37, the Lord again points to the limited human abilities of the Prophet Joseph Smith:
But as you cannot always judge the righteous, or as you cannot always tell the wicked from the righteous, therefore I say unto you, hold your peace until I shall see fit to make all things known unto the world concerning the matter.
Ponder that: God tells the Prophet by revelation just how limited the gift of revelation is. Joseph is not able to always discern who is righteous or wicked, meaning that he can be deceived. Being a prophet does not mean that one gains continuous access to the knowledge of God. That's an utterly unbiblical concept that is also not part of LDS doctrine.
In spite of his mistakes and errors in judgment, Joseph Smith was a prophet of God--not because he was free of error, and not because he could see the future at all times and make miraculous, inspired decisions every moment of his life, but because he was called of God and given authority from Jesus Christ to serve as the prophet and President of the Church. His divine calling as prophet was not based on his error-free track record or supernatural judgment, but was based on the fact that God made him prophet and put him in that office of the Church. The Book of Mormon is but one powerful piece of evidence confirming his divine calling as a prophet, but even that shows human influence (grammatical and spelling problems, awkward phrasing, typographical errors), as do all manuscripts and translations of the Bible.
Pres. Hinckley on Fallible Leaders
"We have critics who appear to cull out of a vast panorama of information those items which demean and belittle some men and women of the past who worked so hard in laying the foundation of this great cause. They find readers of their works who seem to delight in picking up these tidbits, in chewing them over and relishing them. . . . My plea is that as we continue our search for truth . . . we look for strength and goodness rather than weakness and foibles in those who did so great a work in their time.
"We recognize that our forebears were human. They doubtless made mistakes. . . . There was only one perfect man who ever walked the earth. The Lord has used imperfect people in the process of building his perfect society. If some of them occasionally stumbled, or if their characters may have been slightly flawed in one way or another, the wonder is the greater that they accomplished so much."
("The Continuous Pursuit of Truth," Ensign, April 1986, p. 5)
In February of 1843, Joseph Smith corrected a couple who thought that "a prophet is always a prophet," instead explaining that "a prophet was a prophet only when acting as such," making it clear that not every word and deed would be determined by God (Joseph Smith, History of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, edited by B. H. Roberts (Salt Lake City, 1958), Vol. 5, p. 265; see also Vol. 2, p. 302 and Vol. 6, p. 366).
Regarding the human weaknesses of Joseph Smith, the prominent LDS General Authority B.H. Roberts had this to say:
It is but just also to the Prophet to say that he made no claim for himself of either impeccability or infallibility. "Where is the man that is free from vanity?" he asked on one occasion. "None ever was perfect but Jesus," he continued; "and why was he perfect? Because he was the Son of God, and had the fulness of the Spirit, and was greater than any man."
Referring to this subject upon another occasion he said:
"I do not think there have been many good men on the earth since the days of Adam; but there was one good man, and his name was Jesus. Many persons think a prophet must be a great deal better than any one else. Suppose I would condescend--yes, I will call it condescend!--to be a great deal better than any one of you, I would be raised up to the highest heaven; and who should I have to accompany me? I love that man better who swears a stream as long as my arm yet deals justice to his neighbors, and mercifully deals his substance to the poor, than the long, smooth-faced hypocrite. I do not want you to think that I am very righteous, for I am not."
The sentence "many persons think a prophet must be a great deal better than anybody else," will bear further consideration. President Smith relates that once when he was in conversation with a brother and sister from Michigan, who thought that "a prophet is always a prophet," he told them to the contrary. "But I told them," are his words, "that a prophet was only a prophet when acting as such."
These two remarks linked together, disclaim for the Prophet impeccability; and limit his words and actions to which sanctity and inerrancy are to be attributed, to his official or ex cathedra actions and utterances.
Again in disclaiming perfection for himself, the Prophet said:
"Although I was called of my Heavenly Father to lay the foundation of this great work and kingdom in this dispensation, and testify of his revealed will to scattered Israel, I am subject to like passions as other men, like the prophets of olden times." [History of the Church, Period I, vol. v, p. 516.]
Not only in these personal disclaimers of perfection, and of unusual sanctity or inerrancy may we see the admitted defects of deportment and character in the Prophet, but in the revelations he proclaimed are frequent reproofs of the Prophet. In these revelations he is never shielded, never justified when he steps aside from the path direct; reproof, chastisement, and warnings are administered to him. God in these revelations deals with him indeed as with a son whom he loves, if it be true--and we have warrant of holy writ that it is--that "God chasteneth whom he loveth, and scourgeth every son he receiveth."
Because of these reproofs and corrections of the Prophet in the revelations, however, or because of the disclaimers of unusual sanctity made by himself, it must not be thought that there was any act of great unrighteousness, or deed outrageously wicked in his life; much less that any habit of sinfulness is here admitted. None of these things can be successfully maintained against him. His defects, such as they were, may be gathered from the reproving revelations themselves, and from the facts set forth in this History.
(B. H. Roberts, A Comprehensive History of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 6 vols. (Salt Lake City: Deseret News Press, 1930), Vol. 2, pp. 356-358 [footnotes omitted].)
From George Q. Cannon, we have this statement about the fallibility of prophets (Journal of Discourses, Vol. 24, Aug. 12, 1883):
Now, was not Joseph Smith a mortal man? Yes. A fallible man? Yes. Had he not weaknesses? Yes, he acknowledged them himself, and did not fail to put the revelations on record in this book [the Book of Doctrine and Covenants] wherein God reproved him. His weaknesses were not concealed from the people. He was willing that people should know that he was mortal, and had failings. And so with Brigham Young. Was not he a mortal man, a man who had weaknesses? He was not a God. He was not an immortal being. He was not infallible. No, he was fallible.
Joseph Smith was as mortal as any of us, though he was a great and often inspired man. He saw God, he translated sacred scriptures with the power of God, he was ordained under the hands of angels, and he made many true prophecies of the future--but he was a mortal man who lacked omniscience.
Should errors in his views on some topics, or mistakes in his judgment on some issues, be cause for rejecting him as prophet? Should we leave the Church when we determine that past or present Church leaders have understood some things incorrectly, or said things that proved to be incorrect, or let personal biases determine their decisions in some matters? Joseph Fielding Smith felt that man would never go to the moon. When he was proven wrong, he acknowledged that his opinion was wrong and that he was glad they made it. This should pose no problem for anybody: his opinions on the moon were his opinions, and were never canonized as official doctrine that members were required to accept. The same applies to so many of the things that fuel anti-Mormon attacks, from unclear Brigham Young quotes about Adam and God to views of modern leaders on a host of topics (the Lamanites, former limitations on the Priesthood, forged documents from Mark Hoffmann, etc.). (As useful resources, please see "What is Official Doctrine?" by Stephen Robinson and "Are Brigham Young's Sermons Scripture?" by John Walsh.)
I have heard many critics rail against Gordon B. Hinckley for his business decision to purchase a document that was later proven to be a forgery. According to the critics, a real prophet would not have been fooled. (I also suppose they think that a real prophet would never buy a defective product, and would always be able pick the box of cereal with the "instant winner" prize.) Their standard is completely unbiblical. Perhaps they forget that the real Old Testament prophet Joshua was fooled by a false report from the Gibeonites in Joshua 9? Was he any less of a prophet than the blind patriarch Isaac, who was fooled by his son Jacob into giving a blessing meant for his brother (Genesis 27:12, 35)? (See also 1 Kings 13 for an example of a prophet being fooled by the lies of others.) When President Hinckley purchased the forged document from Mark Hoffmann, he was making a business decision based on the best available information. It was a document of apparent interest to the Church, and though it appeared embarrassing, he acted in good faith to make it available for analysis and evaluation. He made no official Church declaration regarding the authenticity of the document. He apparently did not fast and pray for days to obtain revelation about which documents to buy. No First Presidency statements were made purporting to convey divine revelation about Mark Hoffmann. But tragic events would soon bring the revelation that it was a forgery, thwarting many enemies of the Church who tried to use the forged document to "shake the foundations of Mormonism."
Why is it so hard for critics to understand that neither the Bible nor LDS doctrine claims that true prophets will always be free of human error? All prophets have opinions, views, guesses, biases and many weaknesses. To admit to these problems is to admit to an awful truth: the leadership of the Church is largely populated with mortals. Fallible humans don't always seek and receive revelation from God on each matter before them, nor do they always hear it or act upon it even when they do seek it. Be shocked, if you will, but this is the reality of mortality: humans make mistakes.
The concept of continuing revelation clearly implies that no mortal knows it all yet. Continuing revelation is needed to correct past ignorance, overcome human errors, and provide new truth and knowledge when the Lord sees fit to give it. As long as there are mortal leaders in the Church, their knowledge and views will not all be based on revelation from God, meaning that they inevitably will have their own human views. The Church fully recognizes this! According to the Encyclopedia of Mormonism:
There are many subjects about which the scriptures are not clear and about which the Church has made no official pronouncements. In such matters, one can find differences of opinion among Church members and leaders. Until the truth of these matters is made known by revelation, there is room for different levels of understanding and interpretation of unsettled issues.
(M. Gerald Bradford and Larry E. Dahl, "Doctrine," Encyclopedia of Mormonism, 4 vols., ed. Daniel H. Ludlow (New York: Macmillan, 1992), 1:395.)
Having the Spirit of God move you from time to time does not make you perfect. Being a chosen and ordained prophet does not make every opinion true, nor does it make one superior in every area of knowledge. Reverend J.R. Dummelow (not LDS) described the authors of the Bible in terms that ought to be applied, in all fairness, to Joseph Smith as well (J.R. Dummelow, One Volume Bible Commentary, p. 85):
Though purified and ennobled by the influence of the His Holy Spirit, these men each had his own peculiarities of manner and disposition - each with his own education or want of education - each with his own way of looking at things - each influenced differently from one another by the different experiences and disciplines of his life. Their inspiration did not involve a suspension of their natural faculties; it did not make them free from earthly passion; it did not make them into machines - it left them men.
Therefore we find their knowledge sometimes no higher than that of their contemporaries....
Hardly the megalomaniac portrayed in anti-Mormon literature, Joseph told members of the Church that he was but a man and that they could not expect perfection from him any more than he could expect it of them, "but if they would bear with my infirmities and the infirmities of the brethren, I would likewise bear with their infirmities" (History of the Church, Vol. 5, p. 181). Latter-day Saints do not believe in infallible prophets whose every word must be true.
So what should our reaction be when faced with irrefutable evidence that Church leaders are homo sapiens with numerous human limitations? Let me offer my viewpoint with an analogy to family life, and the shocking truth about parents.
The Analogy to Families
Even in strong families with loving, dedicated parents, every child eventually makes a terrible discovery: my parents are not perfect. Maybe it was when Dad tried fixing the car himself and nearly destroyed the poor vehicle, or when Mom burned the pizza for the second time in a week, or when parents were tricked into punishing the wrong child. (Sadly, many children face much more serious issues.) It is a painful reality to know that your parents do not live up to your expectations, and that they have unique and sometimes embarrassing weaknesses. Some children overlook parental flaws and continue obeying and respecting their parents, while others focus on the faults, and may grow more cynical, more negative, and more rebellious. The terminally disenchanted can bring dissension and strife into the family, resisting the unwelcome authority of parents. They may even run away or otherwise withdraw from home. In some cases, much grief and loss could have been avoided if the child had been more accepting of the natural flaws that come with mortal parents.
Parents have been given special authority over their children, which also means special responsibility. Their responsibility for the well-being of their children comes from the human government and from God. Parental authority can be withdrawn under some circumstances such as abuse or neglect, but their authority is not contingent on perfection and omniscience. Mortal parents will make many mistakes, some of which may embarrass and disappoint their children. We hope that the love and devotion shown by good parents will be appreciated enough for children to patiently respect and honor the imperfect mortals that preside over them in the most fundamental and divine organization on earth, the family.
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is another divine organization which operates according to similar principles, and which experiences similar tensions between its members and leaders. At the head of the Church is our absolutely perfect divine Parent, God the Father, and His Son, Jesus Christ. But here on earth, the mortal leader who has been given authority to guide and nurture us is the Prophet, currently Gordon B. Hinckley, President of the Church. Like young children, some naive members of the Church have the illusion that the Prophet and other Church leaders should be virtually perfect, guided directly by God in every word and deed. Then one day comes the terrible discovery: top Church leaders are not perfect (in many cases, this actually means "they don't agree with my views.").
There are many critics in and out of the Church who focus on the faults of Church leaders, past and present. These critics begin mocking them and steadily grow more cynical, more negative, and more rebellious. The terminally disenchanted in the Church resist the unwelcome authority of their leaders and may run away, leaving the Church (but some of those who leave the Church cannot leave the Church alone, devoting their energies to continued attacks on the Church). A more realistic and spiritually mature view could have prevented their sad and unnecessary abandonment of faith.
Turning again to the family analogy and my own experience, let me state that I am a mortal parent, blessed with the best wife any man could hope for, and yet I am painfully aware that both of us have flaws that can make life challenging for my kids. I appreciate their patience with us--so far, anyway.
Many parents are not as fortunate as I am. In fact, the first family in Genesis, the family of Adam and Eve, ran into severe problems. One rebellious child did more than just irritate others--he actually killed his brother. What could be more traumatic to the family? Perhaps Adam and Eve, like typical mortals, blamed themselves and wondered what they should have done differently to raise Cain better. Naturally, Cain must have felt that he had good reasons for rebellion. Perhaps he was ashamed of his parents' tastes in fashion ("Animal skins? That's so last century. And what's up with these old fig leaves in the attic?"). Perhaps he was embarrassed by his parents' questionable past. After all, how would you feel if your parents were former residents of a nudist colony--and were even kicked out for shoplifting fruit? Sure, Cain had his reasons for rebellion and violence, though he probably couldn't whine about how much cooler other kids' parents were.
As with parents, the divine authority of the Prophet is not contingent on his perfection. There is no claim to infallibility anywhere in the scriptures. Those members and outside critics who assume that real prophets must be infallible are dangerously naive. As with parents, the Prophet has a divine stewardship and the divinely given right (and responsibility) to receive revelation for those in his stewardship, but it is not automatic and takes effort and patience. We should not be surprised to see prophets making decisions regarding Church administration and programs using human-generated data, recommendations from counselors and other experts, results from pilot studies, and so forth. In fact, the divine pattern of revelation typically requires that we do the best we can with the brains we have and the information available to us--and then turn to the Lord to receive further guidance or confirmation for our conclusions (see D&C 9:7-9). And in some cases, the Lord may not see a need to provide revelation, or it may not be obtained for other reasons, and we may see human efforts flounder or need revision. This is how we learn and grow and live. Welcome to mortality! No need to flee.
My Experience as a Bishop
The analogy between families and the Church is especially meaningful to me as a father and former Bishop. From 1996 to 2001, I have served as a Bishop in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints over a congregation that I loved and strived to serve (the Appleton Second Ward, Appleton, Wisconsin, which was formed as the same time I was called). As a Bishop, I was entitled and, in fact, expected to receive revelation from God for the well-being of my congregation. It was a serious responsibility.
I believe that my calling truly came from God, through revelation to my own Church leaders. Over a month before I was called, I had a dream in which a respected authority figure sat next to me in a Church service and explained that I was going to be called as a Bishop. This dream was fulfilled, and brought comfort and courage to me when the call came. That was one of many experiences in which I experienced revelation pertaining to that calling. I learned that it truly was possible to receive answers to prayer to help me in my calling. There were times when I truly knew that someone needed help, or that a particular person needed a calling or a visit. I saw the hand of the Lord in many small miracles, often associated with His coordination of the timing of events coupled with gentle promptings of the Spirit.
Over and over, I learned that revelation from God is real, but also that it isn't automatic, that it isn't always easy, and that I could easily ignore it or make things worse by relying on my own strength. I sometimes marveled at the workings of the Spirit in the lives of those who strive to come unto Christ. But there were times when I relied on incorrect information or exercised poor judgment, resulting in plain and simple human errors. Sometimes I was too harsh on someone in need of correction, or misinterpreted their actions, or called someone who was simply wrong for a position. In these cases, I often failed to seek revelation carefully, but made decisions based on my logic, my will, or my limited understanding. It takes effort, time, and patience to seek revelation, and listening to the promptings of the Spirit is often challenging enough even when one is consciously trying. It's not an automatic process. As one who has struggled with the challenge, I can affirm that revelation is real and can flow to a Bishop to guide him in his stewardship, just as much as revelation can flow to parents to guide their family, or to an individual to guide his or her life. Revelation from God is a real and powerful thing. But it's not constant, and it doesn't override our own wills and stop us stubborn mortals from making our own mistakes.
I dare suppose that the role of Bishop must be somewhat similar to the role of Prophet. I imagine that the prophet must regularly struggle to access the revelation needed to guide the Church. Fasting, prayer, study, meditation, and hard work are required for both. Like Bishop, it must be a lonely calling with challenges not easily shared with others. I see great humility in the prophets, and do not think we will see them boasting of their gifts and wisdom. But there is a real "mantle" of authority placed on the Prophet, and many have spoken of the reality of the mantle that a Bishop receives, to which I fully agree. But it's a mantle that could slip off my shoulders when I failed to look up. I think I understand what Joseph meant when he said "a prophet is only a prophet when acting as such."
Do I really think that it requires a lot of effort and time for revelation to get through to the living Prophet? Perhaps not always, but there is clear evidence that revelation to the living prophet can require a lot of work and effort. We certainly saw this with the 1978 revelation on the Priesthood, which extended it to all worthy males regardless of race. The Lord didn't just come down unexpectedly and tell Spencer W. Kimball that it was time for a change. President Kimball was seeking revelation on the matter, and was persistent , putting in many hours in his quest. Here is an excerpt from his 1978 statement (Official Declaration - 2) regarding the revelation:
Aware of the promises made by the prophets and presidents of the Church who have preceded us that at some time, in God's eternal plan, all of our brethren who are worthy may receive the priesthood, and witnessing the faithfulness of those from whom the priesthood has been withheld, we have pleaded long and earnestly in behalf of these, our faithful brethren, spending many hours in the Upper Room of the Temple supplicating the Lord for divine guidance.
He has heard our prayers, and by revelation has confirmed that the long-promised day has come when every faithful, worthy man in the Church may receive the holy priesthood, with power to exercise its divine authority, and enjoy with his loved ones every blessing that flows therefrom, including the blessings of the temple.
Note the last sentence in the first paragraph, "we have pleaded long and earnestly..., spending many hours in the Upper Room of the Temple supplicating the Lord for divine guidance."
Revelation to the prophets commonly comes only after the prophets seek it first. Sometimes a simple question is asked, like Joseph inquiring of the Lord about how to deal with the chewing tobacco problem among the men that was so irritating his wife, an inquiry which gave the Lord an opportunity to reveal laws of health and diet ("the Word of Wisdom") that were over a century ahead of scientific findings.
One more thing about my experience as Bishop: I knew as a Bishop I was going to get plenty of things wrong. There is a reason the Lord gives counselors to Church leaders. It's our very fallibility that makes counselors so important. I needed correction. I needed people who could resist my errant wishes, help expose my biases and mistakes, and straighten me out when I was thinking poorly. Being surrounded by "yes men" was the last thing I wanted. To help me, I chose counselors who were outspoken, bold men who could stand up against me when needed. We had some great and vigorous discussions, and I am grateful for the balance and correction they brought.
If I was making a mistake, I wanted to know. I wanted the other perspectives. And I've been on the delivering end as well, going to my own Church leaders to ask for a reversal on a decision, or to complain about what I felt was a mistake. I have taken the same outspoken stand that I have expected from those under me, but through this I have sustained my leaders, even when I strongly disagreed with them, just as I hoped members of my ward would still sustain me and respect my position even when I knew they strongly disagreed with me. None of us are infallible, and we can never afford to pretend we are. I sometimes had members going to higher leaders to complain of my decisions or actions, and I'm OK with that. There need to be checks and balances in the system as long as there are humans in the Church.
On Those Who Depart
After years of faithfully attending Church, some Mormons abandon their faith, upset over alleged mistakes of men. How can such a thoroughly human organization be divine?, they wonder. If they cannot rely on the prophet, who can they rely on? Aren't the words of the prophets the ultimate source of authorized doctrine? If they can be wrong, how can we have faith in the Church?
Please note: the prophets are not the ultimate authority in the Church, nor are their words. Even canonized scripture--the standard we should use to check the teachings of any, including living prophets--is not infallible and is not the ultimate authority. God is the ultimate authority, and we base our faith in Christ, not humans. We worship God the Father and Christ, not the scriptures that have been written, translated, and printed by man.
If prophets make mistakes that need to be corrected by God, God can find ways to bring about the correction, perhaps through a future revelation. But if a prophet has a wrong opinion on a matter of science, such as Moses thinking a bat was a bird, or Joseph Fielding Smith thinking man would never go to the moon, or others not appreciating certain scientific details of the Creation and its timing, then it may be adequate to wait for future advances in human learning to provide the correction. In the event that we believe a prophet's views on some matter are wrong, we must be patient and not fall to pieces. We must not make the immature mistake of treating those views as a deciding factor for the divine authority of that prophet.
Why do I and many others remain firm in the faith? Like some who leave the Church, I, too, see the occasional mistakes of men, and realize that the Church is permeated with fallible humans, yet I recognize that such a thoroughly human organization can be divine (in fact, I know that it IS divine)--not because of who we humans are, but because of Who Christ is, the Leader of all humans who will come unto Him, and the ultimate Leader of the Church. He gives man free agency, and even when we come unto Him and seek His spirit, He does not turn us into mindless robots.
Though individuals may not always seek it or listen to it, God does provide precious revelation to leaders in the Church. Of course His Church is permeated with humans. Every decision, every doctrine, every book goes through human hands and minds. We cannot escape this.
Yes, the Church is led by revelation from Christ. I truly believe this. Yet even the greatest prophets of all were not constantly led by revelation or even remotely infallible in their work. Thank goodness they are NOT the ultimate authority and the source of our faith. Thank goodness that Jesus Christ stands at the helm of His Church, patiently working with us mortals to guide us back to Him. Errors of doctrine and understanding can be corrected, if they need to be, but it will be in His own time. We need to be patient with the Lord's timetable, and be patient with our flawed human leaders, who in spite of their weaknesses, have been called of God to lead us and guide us in the Gospel.
We have prophets, apostles, and other General Authorities, but they are not authorities in general. They may share some views that will later be revealed to be incomplete or simply wrong. Even the scriptures have some demonstrable flaws due to human influence. None of this is reason to abandon the Lord and His Church! We must patiently wait for the Lord and stay true to our covenants, and do all we can to remove our own weaknesses and errors, trusting the Lord to take care of essential issues in His Church as we do all we can to follow Him and build up His kingdom in the midst of our fellow mortals.
Re: None of our Business
Posted: July 20th, 2009, 12:58 pm
by firend
jnjnelson wrote:firend wrote:You can easily look up all the no debt sciptures.
Yes, I looked them up, and I can't find one that prohibits all financial debt. A little help?
ya your right about "all" financial debt, debt simply needs defining. It is bondage that is sin:
First of all God hates bondage. The whole theme of the scriptures is that Christ breaks our bondage from sin and death. Sin is bondage. Bondage is another term for slavery. Anything opposite of God is ungodly and filthy. Any form of bondage is bad, but when it is voluntary, you are purposely going against God. I don't think any Mormon believes in slavery.
So God and bondage don't mix, lets talk about modern slavery.
Debt is a form of modern slavery. When it is voluntary you decide to allow yourself to do something that is opposite of God's way. Anything opposite of the "iron Rod" is of the devil and world, and therefore by definition sin.
So to be a slave, and to be in debt, you must not have the ability to pay for what you have said you would right now. You say I will pay for this $30,000 car, but I only have $2000 in my bank. I have no assets either. You have voluntarily allowed yourself to be a slave to the world. That is sinful. For everything God directs us is to move away from slavery and into his freedom. This is the whole theme of scriptures.
Now, borrowing is acceptable if it is not bondage. When you borrow your neighbors lawn mower, do you have the means to cover it right now if it gets broke, stolen, etc. If you do, you are not in slavery. Financial borrowing is fine, if you are not enslaving yourself. I use my credit card all the time, but I have the means to cover it.
So I hope it can be seen a difference here. When God forbids debt and slavery, it is in context of you are enslaving yourself against all his principles of freedom.
.
My comments below in ( )
D&C 19:35 “Pay the adebt thou hast bcontracted with the printer. Release thyself from cbondage.”
(Bondage)
D&C 64:27 “Behold, it is said in my laws, or forbidden, to get in adebt to thine enemies.”
(Thine enemy is anyone who does not follow God, hense people that like bondage)
D&C 72:13 “And he who ahath not wherewith to pay, an account shall be taken and handed over to the bishop of Zion, who shall pay the debt out of that which the Lord shall put into his hands”.
(pay that bondage away)
D&C 104:78 “And again, verily I say unto you, concerning your debts—behold it is my will that you shall apay all your bdebts.”
(get out of ALL bondage)
D&C 115:13 “Verily I say unto you, let not my servant Joseph, neither my servant Sidney, neither my servant Hyrum, get in adebt any more for the building of a house unto my name.”
(you won’t listen for yourself, then by golly you don’t dare put my house under bondage!)
D&C 117;5 “Let the properties of Kirtland be turned out for adebts, saith the Lord. Let them go, saith the Lord, and whatsoever remaineth, let it remain in your hands, saith the Lord.”
(let that bondage go)
D&C 101:79 “Therefore, it is not right that any man should be in abondage one to another.”
(not right this bondage thing going on)
Romans 13:8 “Owe no man any thing, but to love one another: for he that bloveth another hath fulfilled the law.”
(owe nothing, no slave)
Isaiah 5:13 “Therefore my people are gone into acaptivity, because they have no bknowledge: and their honourable men are famished, and their multitude dried up with thirst.”
(captivity, bondage, it is all the same principle)
I really like it when Jesus talks about not for-swearing yourself. Same concept. If you promise something, and you do not have the present means to cover it, you risk a lie, and are in bondage.
It is the same as the scriptures talking about making rash oaths.
Bondage is bad, anyone who says it is ok at all has made a mistake. It is never ok to go into bondage. Going in debt for a house or other so called needful items is slavery unless you can cover the contract. If you could cover the house, why loan for it in the first place.
So yes you can borrow, yes you can loan ( no usury to Israel though) but the debt bondage is sin. You may borrow my car, but you had better have the means to cover your responsibility.
The banks are ridiculous. They charge unrighteous interest to the gentiles. They charge interest to Israel even when the bank is owned by the blood of Israel. They don’t have the collateral to cover much of anything, etc
We are stuck so far in bondage as it is, and to say it is ok for certain things is wrong. To voluntarily add to what is already forced on us, very painful. The fruits are evident why the Mormon people are hurting.
If it means living in a travel trailer to be free, then do it. My grandmother’s best times of her life was living in a travel trailer with hubby and 2 kids debt free. To bad my father has not listened.
I feel that this is good enough for our purposes.
