Historians have usurped the prophets

[tooblue]

Originally Posted by Tex

I guess I don't see answers to prayers as being one-stop shop packages, whether they arrive at the beginning, the middle, or the end. I believe the struggle is part of the process, certainly.

I suppose what I'm really getting at is, I think the conception that "were God involved, all would be in agreement" is false. The diversity of opinion among smart and well-intentioned brethren is an intended consequence of our creation, perhaps given to us by God to remind us that he can be reached in many different ways, and that not all problems have only one solution.

In my experience answers to prayer are rarely sudden and instantaneous ... much to my chagrin they often only arrive with time, after toil, effort and great frustration.

I go back to a previous statement in this thread, in response to Mike's question ... I believe concenus occured at "the very first moment that SWK voiced what he had been feeling." Each member of twelve was then left to discover how to reconcile their personal feelings with the will of the Lord. I have seen this happen in local leadership decision making process.

[SoCalCoug]

It doesn't seem to me that the two camps on this are really that far apart. I think I lean toward the belief that God allows us (and the church leaders) to rely on our own training and experience and mental capacity to try to make the decisions that are in line with God's will.

It seems to me that the model for inspired decision-making was the counsel given to Hyrum Smith to study it out in his own mind, and then pray to ask God for confirmation.

I think SWK believed that allowing blacks to hold the priesthood was the right thing to do. I don't doubt that he was inspired through the Spirit to this end. I also believe that there were a number of the apostles for the many years prior who did not, primarily because of the prejudices built up over their lives by their experiences, believe this to be the right thing to do. Over time, SWK was able to finally build a consensus, and then the church leadership had a great confirmatory revelation.

I don't see why it's not a reasonable opinion that the time wasn't right for the change before 1978 because prior to that time there was a significant opposition among the church leaders. It was only after SWK had built his consensus (and other dissenting voices passed on) that the church leaders would be able to accept the revelation with unanimity.

[MikeWaters]

Imagine if you phrased a prayer: "Dear God, is it right for a dirty unintelligent people with an inferior sense of family be given they holy priesthood?"

I exaggerate, but you get the point. As some have suggested, prayer is not sufficient alone in all cases.

[tooblue]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

Imagine if you phrased a prayer: "Dear God, is it right for a dirty unintelligent people with an inferior sense of family be given they holy priesthood?"

I exaggerate, but you get the point. As some have suggested, prayer is not sufficient alone in all cases.

You are projecting current day progressive attitudes onto a period in time that you or I CANNOT fully understand. The absurdity, while poignant and compelling to this audience, of your statement above is alien to the prevailing attitudes of that time frame.

It seems so simple to you and I now, however it was not that simple then. And what bearing does it have on the Church now. Embarassment? Is it a stumbling block -a trial to overcome ... aren't stumbling blocks and trials essential to the exercise of agency?

Gosh, it would be great if you and I were perfect -for you and I are the Church ... think about it

[MikeWaters]

You know in the OT where it says that sins are punished even unto the fourth generation?

We are seeing this with Brigham Young's racism.

Except it is now more than 4 generations. I am guessing that phrase means "all who are alive" since it was probably rare to have more than 4 generations alive at one time.

[tooblue]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

You know in the OT where it says that sins are punished even unto the fourth generation?

We are seeing this with Brigham Young's racism.

Except it is now more than 4 generations. I am guessing that phrase means "all who are alive" since it was probably rare to have more than 4 generations alive at one time.

You and I are not held accountable for BY's words and actions -we must deal with the consequences however.

I am held responsible for my own actions. I will answer to God for misteps in my personal life, as a father and in my stewardship having accepted many callings.

[Cali Coug]

Originally Posted by tooblue

You and I are not held accountable for BY's words and actions -we must deal with the consequences however.

I am held responsible for my own actions. I will answer to God for misteps in my personal life, as a father and in my stewardship having accepted many callings.

Sadly, it is only a matter of time before Ezra Taft Benson is brought into the discussion. It doesn't take much to portray him as a fanatical zealot, or a racist zealot at that (not that the two are frequently separated).

Benson's involvement with the John Birch Society was awful for the church. Romney sure could do without that bit of news making headlines right now. It is one thing to be portrayed as supporting a church that had a racist leader over 100 years ago. It is something else to portray Mitt as supporting a church that had a racist leader in the 90's.