David O. McKay book....

[UtahDan]

So I bought the book (through here of course) and it is facinating. One thing I wanted to throw out there was the apparently widely held belief amoung the brethren that the Catholic Church was/is the great and abominable church.

I know that we have backed away from that position, to the extent that it was ever taken publically outside of McConkie's masterpiece of errors "Mormon Doctrine."

My question is, has this ever been addressed directly, that is, do we have a statement with the impremature of authority where that idea has been repudiated? Or have we simplty de-emphasized it?

I have enjoyed the book so far. Does anyone else come away seeing McConkie as a little bit of a villain, or am I bringing my own personal bias to this?

Discuss. :-)

[Archaea]

but as far as dogma, I'm not finding him to be a sympathetic figure.

I know the missionaries who taught me kinda intimated that, but then again, that doesn't make a whole lot of sense, as there are many abominable churches, and the Catholic Church actually takes a more sympathetic view to many moral doctrines.

Once upon a time, one might not be able to say that.

[Dan]

... catholic church is the 'great and abominable' church. I do not believe that is at all what Nephi was getting at. Nephi was setting up a dichotomy between true disciples of Christ (Zion) and those infused in Babylon. Zion and Babylon are mutually exclusive, just as are light and darkness. Where one exists, the other cannot. IMO, very few, especially in the latter/last days that Nephi described, will be true disciples. Many (most? :cry: ) members of the church, IMO, are actually of the 'great and abominable' church. It does not matter what church you are an outward member of, but rather where your heart is. If your heart is pure, you will not be involved in the abominable church. But if your heart is full of idolatry (in its many, MANY forms), then you have included yourself in babylon, and the abominable church. You cannot have a heart full of idolarty, vanity and pride, and hope to be found outside the abominable church, at least no more than you can hope to serve two masters.

Lehi's dream teaches that the numbers of the true followers will be few. Even back in the 70s, SWK acknowledged that for the most part the members of the church are full of idolatry. he gave a great talk on that topic in general conference. It has only worsened, IMO, since that time. If our hearts are set upon the things of the world, then we fail to learn the one real lesson we are here to learn (D&C 121), which is to discharge the natural man and live the one true eternal law of charity as a spiritual man. This is why the world must go through a great and terrible cleansing at the end. Regardless of what LeGrand Richards taught, the "Marvelous Work and a Wonder" is about this very thing.

Few understand Nephi's absolutely fantastic discourse on the last days. The main reason they do not understand is because when Nephi gets to the part where he is about to divulge what will happen in our actual days on the earth, he says he cannot say anymore because of our unbelief. But then he goes right on ahead and tells us exactly what he had just said he was not going to tell us. The funny thing is that most people do not comprehend it though. But it is meant to be that way. It is only meant to be understood by those actually ready to understand the message. In fact most do not even read the message itself. I would guess many do not have any clue what I am talking about right now. :? What Nephi could not say blatantly, he said in another way. He used the words of the great apocalyptic prophet Isaiah. Isaiah lays the last days out quite nicely, but few search long enough to understand what he is saying, and most give up and just skip his words altogether. Yet, the words of Isaiah are the only words (speaking of a particular prophet) that Jesus himself commanded us to specifically read. Isaiah's "marvelous work and a wonder" is not about the restoration of the gospel. The restoration is one initial part of it, but that is all. The vast bulk of it is referring to something else altogether.

I wish I had a nickle for every time I heard a member of the church use the parable of the 10 virgins to try to claim half the members will "make it", so to speak. I do not believe that is at all the division the parable portrays. Numbers are extremely symbolic and they must be used with care. Virtually any time the number "10" is used it means one of two things (or a combination of both). The number 10 means 'an incomplete part' or 'limited part'. For example, in "the Revelation" of John, you see all sorts of beasts and numbers, and the number 10 is common. Well, 10 tries to teach that the power of last days tyrants and entities, etc. are limited. This number is in opposition to the number "12" which represents complete power or governance, or completeness in an earthly and/or eternal sense. There are many examples of the number 12 through out scripture and you will see it has a positive indication as I just explained, or it tells of complete power and control by God in general, or by darkness for a limited time.

So it is no real suprise that the parable about those who will enter into the kingdom of heaven and church of the firstborn are of a selct and limited number of people. And also notice that the 10 females are "virgins". This is not about the 5 virgins and 5 whores. This is about a select number of virgins (i.e., those who try to comply with the commandments and to keep their hearts clean). I would not classify all of the church as "virgins". No, I would only classify a minority share of them as "virgins" in the sense that they are spiritually espoused to Christ.

Well, the other thing the number 10 often represents is a 'tithe'. The number 10 can represent 10% (which of itself is an incomplete part of a whole, as I explained above). I believe the parable of the 10 virgins represents a tithe of the true followers of Christ, those who truly desire to give all of their heart to him. The others, who are not even included with the 10 virgins, are clearly of babylon, or the great and abominable church. Of the "virgins" there is yet a separation within in that only half of them are truly doing all they need to do to become at one with God.

IMO, if the parable is only describing the church, then I see 5% or so as the 5 'righteous' virgins. That makes sense to me as I ponder how many members I think may be REALLY giving their whole heart to god and eschewing idolatry, pride and vanity in their entirety. But the parable may be speaking of a much broader selection that just the church.

[ute4ever]

I believe the "great and abominable church" is not a literal congregation, but an aggregate collective of every individual who is actively engaged in creating opposition to the true gospel of Jesus Christ.

Note however, said "church" does not include Billy Bob Baptist in Birmingham who conveniently attends the closest church down the road, exclaiming "Halleleujia" and donating to his meetinghouse....for he is not intentionally writing false doctrine or fighting the kingdom.

Additionally, for example, there are many members of the Catholic Parish worldwide who truly believe they are doing the right thing, are ignorant to what the other faiths have to offer, and do not speak against any other faith. Such people are also excluded from the "great and abominable church."

Adrian Peterson, pastor of Bellevue Baptist in Memphis: member of the great and abominable church.

Joel Osteen, pastor of the Lakewood Church in Houston: absolutely NOT a member of the great and abominable church.

During the great millennium, I believe the world will still be saturated with non-Mormons (albeit not the billions we see today), because their hearts are pure, and many do a better job of honoring the name of Christ than many active LDS church members do.

[non sequitur]

The translator at the conference was the son of the our landlady. This guy spoke about 5 languages and had an advanced degree in Hebrew studies. He was one of the smartest guys I have ever known.

Anyways, during his talk McKonkie quoted a passage from a book (may have been the D & C) and used the word "tenet". When the translator translated the passage, he used the spanish word "dogma". At which point McKonkie stopped the talked, turned to the translator and said, "That's the wrong word. It shouldn't be dogma." What was funny was that the translator said, "No, dogma is the correct word." They went back and forth a few more times and the translator wouldn't relent. It was one of the funniest things I have ever seen.

[MikeWaters]

Personally I think you can get into a bit of trouble if you worry or think too much about who's going to "make it" and who is not.

As an example of the more inclusive nature of eternal glory, one remembers the talk that says that children born in the covenant will return......that talk hints towards some kind of doctrine that has not fully been revealed to us, I believe.

[Dan]

... think we should worry about others in that sense. I think we should really focus on ourselves and those overwhom we have stewardship, all the while helping others where and when we can. BUT, if we are looking at the topic in general, I am just voicing my opinion on what I think the scriptures teach.

I really do not think children who died will come back as children. Joseph did say that would be the case, but then he waffled on it. BY made the comment that that was one of the few instances where he felt JS said something that was not true. Don't ask me for quotes right now, I am going on memory. But yes, there are some mixed signals out there on that issue. I am at home and I do not have access to my electronic files. But even then, I do not have time to sit down and dig through them.

[MikeWaters]

i meant children that have strayed from the gospel will return (not talking about dead children). I guess "offspring" is the better word.