Has your view of the church

[Tex]

Originally Posted by UtahDan

You think I'm getting ready to stone and slay the prophets huh? I don't even live in Utah.

Stone and slay is a little fun hyperbole, but there seems to be no shortage of pining for the good ol' days of Joseph Smith, when "revelation flowed freely and independent thought was a cherished value!"

I wonder how many CG/CUFers would be lining up to follow Smith's free-wheeling ways after having lost/left their homes and farms a couple of times, and their entire life savings in the Kirtland Safety Society.

[UtahDan]

Originally Posted by Tex

Stone and slay is a little fun hyperbole, but there seems to be no shortage of pining for the good ol' days of Joseph Smith, when "revelation flowed freely and independent thought was a cherished value!"

I wonder how many CG/CUFers would be lining up to follow Smith's free-wheeling ways after having lost/left their homes and farms a couple of times, and their entire life savings in the Kirtland Safety Society.

I have been trying for years to trick you into criticizing the Lords anointed and it appears I have finally succeeded by accident. I now officially retire.

[UtahDan]

Originally Posted by Tex

Stone and slay is a little fun hyperbole, but there seems to be no shortage of pining for the good ol' days of Joseph Smith, when "revelation flowed freely and independent thought was a cherished value!"

I wonder how many CG/CUFers would be lining up to follow Smith's free-wheeling ways after having lost/left their homes and farms a couple of times, and their entire life savings in the Kirtland Safety Society.

Seriously though, Joseph was just an anti-establishment guy to his core. Once you become the establishment it is hard to stay that way. But as I have said before, that current rigidity doctrinally is much more the legacy of Brigham than Joseph. I think the only impulse that observation makes me feel is that Joseph was a kindred spirit, but not Brigham. That isn't a critique, really, just a fact.

I also sometimes think about the fact that this was the only time we ever had a 30 year old guy in charge. That has to factor into it somehow.

[Tex]

Originally Posted by UtahDan

I have been trying for years to trick you into criticizing the Lords anointed and it appears I have finally succeeded by accident. I now officially retire.

[MikeWaters]

Originally Posted by UtahDan

Seriously though, Joseph was just an anti-establishment guy to his core. Once you become the establishment it is hard to stay that way. But as I have said before, that current rigidity doctrinally is much more the legacy of Brigham than Joseph. I think the only impulse that observation makes me feel is that Joseph was a kindred spirit, but not Brigham. That isn't a critique, really, just a fact.

I also sometimes think about the fact that this was the only time we ever had a 30 year old guy in charge. That has to factor into it somehow.

Isn't Bednar 30?

[UtahDan]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

Isn't Bednar 30?

If by 30 you mean nearly 60; yes.

[UtahDan]

Originally Posted by Tex

Don't act you weren't taking a back handed swipe by alluding to the saints all losing their shirts in the Kirkland Anti-Bank. You can't fool me, pal.

[Tex]

Originally Posted by UtahDan

Seriously though, Joseph was just an anti-establishment guy to his core. Once you become the establishment it is hard to stay that way. But as I have said before, that current rigidity doctrinally is much more the legacy of Brigham than Joseph. I think the only impulse that observation makes me feel is that Joseph was a kindred spirit, but not Brigham. That isn't a critique, really, just a fact.

I also sometimes think about the fact that this was the only time we ever had a 30 year old guy in charge. That has to factor into it somehow.

It seems to me you're drawing in some fairly broad strokes. Joseph was anti-establishment in a religious sense because the establishment was corrupt and apostate. What else can you be as a restorationist? Aren't those mutually exclusive positions?

But as you point out, Joseph sought to create his own establishment. He was constantly in the process of trying to build a society everywhere he went, which by definition involves setting up rules and constraints. Foundational, earth-shattering-style revelation--of the type that should be included in the D&C--gradually tapered.

Would Joseph disapprove of the modern church? Hard to say. Jews ask themselves that question about Moses all the time. But I think its a mistake to assume that Joseph would have led the church the same way in old age that he did in the early beginning.

Originally Posted by UtahDan

Don't act you weren't taking a back handed swipe by alluding to the saints all losing their shirts in the Kirkland Anti-Bank. You can't fool me, pal.

It's true, they did much better once they got into home furnishings.

[UtahDan]

Originally Posted by Tex

It seems to me you're drawing in some fairly broad strokes. Joseph was anti-establishment in a religious sense because the establishment was corrupt and apostate. What else can you be as a restorationist? Aren't those mutually exclusive positions?

Yeah that is exactly what I was saying. You can't be anti-establishment once you are the establishment.

Originally Posted by Tex

But as you point out, Joseph sought to create his own establishment. He was constantly in the process of trying to build a society everywhere he went, which by definition involves setting up rules and constraints. Foundational, earth-shattering-style revelation--of the type that should be included in the D&C--gradually tapered.

I agree. But not everything is foundation that is in the D&C. There is an awful lot that was just whatever was on Joseph's mind to ask. Again, not a critique, just an observation. Joseph saw and heard all kinds of things from a variety of sources that got him thinking and he would then ask.

Originally Posted by Tex

Joseph disapprove of the modern church? Hard to say. Jews ask themselves that question about Moses all the time. But I think its a mistake to assume that Joseph would have led the church the same way in old age that he did in the early beginning.

I hadn't really thought about whether he would approve or disapprove. I think he would find it a little stodgy, but that is as much a function of the age of the leadership as anything. I have no doubt that Joseph would have evolved, but I still say that his approach to life was much different than Brighams, and the cultural and intellectually legacy is much more Brighams than Josephs. If you are trying to see what critique I'm making with that, just stop, there isn't one. It is what it is.

Originally Posted by Tex

It's true, they did much better once they got into home furnishings.

It has a "t" in it?

[ute4ever]

Originally Posted by UtahDan

Seriously though, Joseph was just an anti-establishment guy to his core. Once you become the establishment it is hard to stay that way. But as I have said before, that current rigidity doctrinally is much more the legacy of Brigham than Joseph. I think the only impulse that observation makes me feel is that Joseph was a kindred spirit, but not Brigham. That isn't a critique, really, just a fact.

I also sometimes think about the fact that this was the only time we ever had a 30 year old guy in charge. That has to factor into it somehow.

I'd like to see that bible-thumper Elder Holland in charge. He really missed his calling as an Evangelical.