Brigham Young on the Attributes of Deity

[Sleeping in EQ]

"Even the best of the Latter-day Saints have but a faint idea of the attributes of deity. Were the former and Latter-day Saints, with their Apostles, Prophets, Seers, and Revelators collected together to discuss this matter, I am led to think there would be found a great variety in their views and feelings upon this subject, without direct revelation from the Lord. It is as much my right to differ from other men, as it is theirs to differ from me, in points of doctrine and principle, when our minds cannot at once arrive at the same conclusion." (JD 2:123)

[Solon]

Originally Posted by Sleeping in EQ

It is as much my right to differ from other men, as it is theirs to differ from me, in points of doctrine and principle, when our minds cannot at once arrive at the same conclusion." (JD 2:123)

I'm pretty sure I heard something along these lines in General Conference.

Oh wait. Nevermind.

Yet another indication that today's LDS church is very different from that of the 19th century.

[tooblue]

Originally Posted by Solon

I'm pretty sure I heard something along these lines in General Conference.

Oh wait. Nevermind.

Yet another indication that today's LDS church is very different from that of the 19th century.

How is a quote taken out of context indicative of 'very different'? There is no doubt the church is 'very different', however is it not logic that it is 'different' due to times and seasons and not merely romanticized quotations pitted against blanket statements on quotations for our day?

What will we be found 50 years from now when journals of the prophets of our time are read, studied, dissected and quoted? Will a future Solon solemnly and with acute cynicism render a similar lament?

[Sleeping in EQ]

Originally Posted by tooblue

How is a quote taken out of context indicative of 'very different'? There is no doubt the church is 'very different', however is it not logic that it is 'different' due to times and seasons and not merely romanticized quotations verses blanket statements on quotations for our day?

What will we be found 50 years from now when journals of the prophets or our time are read, studied, dissected and quoted? Will a future Solon solemnly and with acute cynicism render a similar lament?

The quote I provided is not out of context. I don't play those sorts of games.

[tooblue]

Originally Posted by Sleeping in EQ

The quote I provided is not out of context. I don't play those sorts of games.

I'm not suggesting you are playing games. Yes, it is out of context -posted on it's own without commentary, and only a mere citation as to it's origins. I like the quote, it's interesting but it is less than a glimpse and yet no more than a glimpse!

[Sleeping in EQ]

Originally Posted by tooblue

I'm not suggesting you are playing games. Yes, it is out of context -posted on it's own without commentary, and only a mere citation as to it's origins. I like the quote, it's interesting but it is less than a glimpse and yet no more than a glimpse!

It is not out of context. Not at all. Your definition of "out of context" seems quite odd. Had I given commentary, would the argument have been that I'm trying to "spin" Brigham Young's comments? How is this suddenly about me? I'd rather it not be, but this sort of thing can be par for the course when someone likes a quote as much as you seem to like this one. Your love for it is just oozing out everywhere, you know.

The fact is, I've given plenty of the quote to establish that Brigham Young is, in fact, addressing himself to what little is known about the attributes of deity. His doing so was recorded in the JD.

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by Sleeping in EQ

It is not out of context. Not at all. Your definition of "out of context" seems quite odd. Had I given commentary, would the argument have been that I'm trying to "spin" Brigham Young's comments? How is this suddenly about me? I'd rather it not be, but this sort of thing can be par for the course when someone likes a quote as much as you seem to like this one. Your love for it is just oozing out everywhere, you know.

The fact is, I've given plenty of the quote to establish that Brigham Young is, in fact, addressing himself to what little is known about the attributes of deity. His doing so was recorded in the JD.

I really believe both of you would enjoy the paradoxes of People of Paradox, as it juxtaposes several of the competing philosophies extant in the early restored church.

The truth is, the early church entertained many perspectives, whereas the modern restored church seems more sanitized, more homogeneous and less diverse in presentation.

[tooblue]

Originally Posted by Sleeping in EQ

It is not out of context. Not at all. Your definition of "out of context" seems quite odd. Had I given commentary, would the argument have been that I'm trying to "spin" Brigham Young's comments? How is this suddenly about me? I'd rather it not be, but this sort of thing can be par for the course when someone likes a quote as much as you seem to like this one. Your love for it is just oozing out everywhere, you know.

The fact is, I've given plenty of the quote to establish that Brigham Young is, in fact, addressing himself to what little is known about the attributes of deity. His doing so was recorded in the JD.

I am not trying to suggest you wish to distort the quotes meaning ... I'm suggesting that I do not understand the context of your quotation in this forum and that perhaps Solon used the quote to bolster his cynicism, which perhaps is not in context to your original intent, and certainly isn’t the intent behind BY’s words.

Why can I not examine or question yours or any other posters comments/posts without it being identified with Machiavelli? Did I earn this stigma –perhaps- is it fair –perhaps- and maybe just maybe you should ask why I am tinted in your view?

I do like the quote. I do find it interesting. Are you a ute and am I Austin Collie of the Religious Studies forum?

Are we not to debate and examine? Or is the spectre of paranoia the constant companion of such subject matter. Am I tooblue defender of truth; or am I tooblue willing to ask questions, make comments and demand an exchange!

[Sleeping in EQ]

Originally Posted by tooblue

I am not trying to suggest you wish to distort the quotes meaning ... I'm suggesting that I do not understand the context of your quotation in this forum and that perhaps Solon used the quote to bolster his cynicism, which perhaps is not in context to your original intent, and certainly isn’t the intent behind BY’s words.

Why can I not examine or question yours or any other posters comments/posts without it being identified with Machiavelli? Did I earn this stigma –perhaps- is it fair –perhaps- and maybe just maybe you should ask why I am tinted in your view?

I do like the quote. I do find it interesting. Are you a ute and am I Austin Collie of the Religious Studies forum?

Are we not to debate and examine? Or is the spectre of paranoia the constant companion of such subject matter. Am I tooblue defender of truth; or am I tooblue willing to ask questions, make comments and demand an exchange!

I am interested in thoughts, questions, possibilities, you name it. I find Brigham Young paradoxical--sometimes he says things that I find insightful. Other times he says things that leave me wondering if he hadn't just hit his head.

In this instance (and fairly often, really) I just didn't want the post to be about my views. I like the idea of reading one of Brigham Young's ruminations and seeing where we can run with it. At the moment I'm particularly interested in some of the Godhead issues as I'm exploring the whole Holy Spirit-as-wind thing, the Paraclete passages, Lectures on Faith, and so on.

I am not a Ute, although I don't have anything against Utes (other than I want the Cougars to defeat them on the field). They are fun rivals. I'm not sure what you mean with your reference to Austin Collie.

[Sleeping in EQ]

Originally Posted by Archaea

I really believe both of you would enjoy the paradoxes of People of Paradox, as it juxtaposes several of the competing philosophies extant in the early restored church.

The truth is, the early church entertained many perspectives, whereas the modern restored church seems more sanitized, more homogeneous and less diverse in presentation.

I just ordered PoP and look forward to reading it over the holidays. Thanks for the recommendation.