If LDS doctrines are changed based on the principle of continuous revelation, who receives this revelation? Is there a church hierarchy, like in the RCC, and the top person receives the revelations from God and passes them down?
Also, if the whole “no blacks can have the Priesthood” thing was revoked in 1978, was this due to a revelation that somone received? And if so, does that mean that God’s will before 1978 was that blacks should not have the Priesthood? Is there an explanation for why this is? or was it more a, “We had been misinterpreting God’s will and now he has corrected us” thing?
Also, do Mormons believe in the standard Christian Old and New Testaments? If so, I believe it says in Corinthians that wives should submit to their husbands. If Mormons don’t believe this, how do they get around it?
To answer the question about a hierarchy, there’s a joke that Mormons are the only people who need an org char to understand their relationship with God.
The top person is the President and he, with his (and always “his” only males can hold the Priesthood) two counselors, forms the First Presidency. There are twelve apostles, called the Quorum of the Twelve. The counselors are apostles. All fifteen of these members are Prophets, Seers and Revelators, and are called as specials witnesses to Jesus. They all are given the authority to receive revelations, but any revelation from God which pertains to the Church as a whole is given to the President, then sustained by the First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve.
God gives and god takes away. There is strong evidence that the founder of the Church, Joseph Smith, confirm the Priesthood on a black member. However, the second President, Brigham Young, strongly preached that blacks should not be given this authority. Pretty much everything Joseph Smith and Brigham Young spoke were considered to come from direct revelation so the policy on blacks was Church doctrine until it was changed in 1978.
Mormon belief is that God told Brigham Young that blacks couldn’t have the Priesthood until the resurrection, but then in 1978 he revealed they could have it starting then. To the best of my knowledge, the Church has not addressed the discrepancy. Being God means that you apologize to no man.
In addition to their own scriptures, Mormons believe in the Bible, as far as they are translated correctly. This give wiggle room when beliefs don’t match up.
But how many married guys get to have their wives swear to God that they will submit?
The Church absolutely does not ask members to follow the guidance of the Brethren unquestioningly. It’s just that a lot of Mormons do. They find it easier to let someone tell them what to believe than to find out for themselves - also not unique to Mormonism.
But I must say, TokyoPlayer is expressing his personal distaste with the Church in a way that is not really relevant to the post. Sure, lots of people have complaints with how the Church operates. TokyoPlayer may feel that he is doing everyone a favor by exposing Mormonism for what it really is. But like all religions, the specifics of Mormonism that TokyoPlayer brings up are easy enough to explain for believers and quite difficult to swallow for unbelievers. That is what makes one person a believer and another not.
Anyway, trying to keep this thread germane to OP, I guess it just goes to show you that Mormonism can still be devisive and that is why it will be tough to get a Mormon president.
So long as there’s a perception from non-members that the church requires blind obedience, then there will still be that hurdle to overcome if an LDS member tries for the Presidency. Just add that to other mistaken notions about the faith as hurdles.
Just to be clear, Elder Oaks is a Church leader but he is not one of the Twelve Apostles. His is a member of the Quorom of the Seventy.
TokyoPlayer’s point is well-taken. But for those unfamiliar with the Mormonism, a little bit more context is required. Mormonism teaches all of its members and potential members to gain a testimony of the Church through a spiritual conversion. While there are people in the Church who believe that the Church can be explained logically, most claim that belief in the Church should come from some sort of experience with God. Regardless of whether or not any Mormons actually have such experience (Most claim they do), it can’t be said that the Church doesn’t encourage members to gain their own testimony.
Elder Oaks’ remarks are directed at believing members who have had such an experience. Essentially he is saying to believe in the spiritual experiences over your own wisdom. This is something difficult for me considering I have not had such an experience. I probably have as much difficulty believing in the Church as TokyoPlayer does. However, I do believe that the Church, and all religions, should be represented fairly.
But that really isn’t the issue. The idea is that if a member says that they believe in God, the Church then expects [del]blind[/del] unquestioning faith. I can supply references, if requested.
And at the same time, people considering joining should undertand what is expected.
If, as claimed, other churches are Christian, why do they have crosses?
Seriously, though, whether a particular denomination uses the cross as a physical symbol or not does not prove or disprove its status as a Christian sect. Of course, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is a Christian sect (and of course I say that, being a member of that particular group). They use the Bible, including the New Testament, and they worship in th name of Jesus Christ.
The LDS do not seem to be that much into physical iconography other than that which appears on their temples (the Angel Moroni, for example). My own personal take on it is that the LDS members seem to prefer to focus on the message instead of physical images.
