Mormons: Have you ever read Journal of Discourses, Millennial Star, Lectures on Faith or History of the Church

Question

Disclaimer: This question is meant to seek truth, not to incite bashing between non-LDS and LDS.

I ask a lot of questions about obscure, little-known LDS principles and doctrines that were taught early in the Church, along with stories and recorded happenings involving early leaders.

All of my questions are based on information from sources published by the LDS Church (sometimes quoted on other websites, both pro-mormon and anti-mormon). However, I am often surprised to see that few people in the LDS Church have ever heard of these points, even though background and information is plentiful in these LDS publications.

Are the History of the Church and Journal of Discourses not seen as being as important as they were in the early days? If not, why not?

Lastly, if you have read these books, how do you feel when you come across information that goes against the doctrines and principles that are currently taught by the LDS Church?

Answer 1

I have read many of them, but not necessarily for doctrinal understanding. I have also heard many of the points that people bring up from these writings and take them one at a time and for what they are worth.

These books are not seen as being important to one's salvation or necessary to one's understanding of church doctrine. In fact, many of the things in these books is not doctrine of the church, but rather opinions and views of individuals, even if they be prophets or apostles in the Church. So, for the historical and information background of these people and to see what some people have believed and taught they are interesting and informative, but when it comes down to it the only thing people in the Church really must rely on is the scriptures and the words of the prophets when formally counseling the people.

Because I have educated myself in all things, including studying the beliefs of hundreds of religions (from members of those religions and attending those religions) and have received answers to my prayers regarding the truth, when I read negative things about the church it doesn't bother me. Also, when I read things in those books you referrence, and they appear to be contrary to the actual doctrine of the Church, I realize all people are free to their interpretations and views. Additionally, I think there is much truth that is misunderstood or remains unclear that people attempt to expound on, which is their right. We must each find our own truth and our faith, because that's what religion is...personal.

Answer 2

Good question. All members of the church should read the Journal of discourses to learn what the taught in the early days of the church . It is totally different from what teach today. Its like the church changes on daily
time frame. Which god never changes. He the same today, tomorrow and forever.
If I had the time when I was member of the church to read the early doctrine of the church I would have left long time ago.

Answer 3

First - I love your disclaimer - thank you for that :)

Honestly, for the longest time, I didn't even like learning about the church history stuff in Sunday School (which we do about every 4 years) just because I found history in general (church, national, world, whatever) to be completely boring. When you're a teenager and think you're going to be young forever, learning about old, dead people seems so pointless.

Then I got a little bit older, one of my friends gave me a book with random excerpts of Joseph Smith, bits of history from people's journals, and excerpts from those things you mentioned (journal of dicourses, lectures on faith etc). It was a good friend, so for his sake, I sucked up my boredom and read it.

Was there a thing or two that raised my eyebrow? Absolutely - but I didn't instantly freak out about it because I already had a testimony of the Gospel through some very personal spiritual means that were very profound for me. So, those things that raised my eyebrow, I decided I would either, try to learn more on, and/or ask Heavenly Father about it.

I remember one, I wondered why the whole hat thing during the translation of the Book of Mormon, that seemed so odd. Then I read some more on it, and I realized inside my own heart and mind that the hat was just Joseph's Smiths way of blocking out the world so he could concentrate - he could have used anything - a blanket, his own hands - it didn't really matter, there was nothing special at all about that hat.

Are older revelations not seen as important as modern day ones? Yep, you got it. We believe in a living, breathing church, one where revelations are constant, and God can change policies or practices anytime he wants (biblical examples - no longer needing circumsicion, begining to teach the gentiles, no longer needed the whole law of Moses, needing the sacrament, the new law given by Jesus on the sermon on the mount).

When it comes down to it, the most important Prophet to me is the one that is alive today - so right now, that's Gordon B. Hinkley. If you want you can see him speak this weekend through our general conference (happens every 6 months). You can get a live stream of it through http://www.lds.org/broadcast/gc/0,5161,7536,00.html

Thanks

Answer 4

1. Parts.
2. Just my opinion - but I think the break-off groups who are still living polygamy in the 19th century style put more stock in the 19th century publications than the actual, official members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Wouldn't it be nice if we could travel in time and actually verify everything one way or another, which has actually been recorded by every source of every kind? But it's not going to happen, so we stick to a current, living prophet and ongoing revelation.
3. I will tell you something on a personal basis. My grandmother, who is now deceased and whose favorite Church writer was B.H. Roberts, and I used to have an ongoing argument about polygamy. She used to say that polygamy wouldn't bother her, that she would be willing to live it again if it was required of her. I had exactly the opposite point of view, and I still have it, that polygamy was only a principle for the times, and the only reason it was called an "eternal" principle was because God -whose name is always associated with the word "eternal" - commanded it for those times alone. It is my opinion, and it is still my opinion based on study and observing people around me, that there is someone for everyone, that even people who have died in wars or from disease or in other centuries without the privilege of finding their one, single eternal companion, will have that blessing sometime during the Millennium (if they haven't already) and all the family connections will be worked out. Other things I have run into which seem to be "against" as you put it, can actually be understood if you start looking at historical trends leading up to whatever was said, in addition to using prayer. There are so many marvelous books written by recent apostles, such as Neal A. Maxwell, why would you want to be limited to 19th Century stuff, unless you are into 19th century re-enactments of some kind. Also, don't you think it is a strength, that we are not restricted to 19th century documents, because you can see around you in the world today so much strife and conflict coming from people who are still adhering to the same information they had say, 1,000 years ago. Have a happy day, and I send you a modern 21st century gummy bear.

Answer 5

I have read from the History of the Church. I have also read from the Journal of Discourses. When I come across something that has been changed or that I don't understand, I seek further truth and light. I also pray and rely on the Spirit to help me understand the things which I am reading.

Answer 6

The Official doctrine of our church is in the Bible, Book of Mormon, Pearl of Great Price,and Book of Mormon.

Any church leader can write books, but if it is not matching the scriptures, it is not regard as truth or church doctrine.

Further more, we believe in divine revelation through our living prophet, he shall have the last word on church doctrine for present days.

So you see, what ever errors you may find or false teaching you can dream up, by our church leaders or ex leaders, or whatever source, it does not damage our church doctrine at all.

Answer 7

I have read bits and pieces, not much. Why not? I guess I haven't felt as though I needed to...
One thing you must remember in our church, we believe in modern day revelation. I also think a lot of things from like Brigham Young, sound silly to us now, but were normal to the members (and) others when he said them. We have more knowledge of things now than he did. Revelation is revelation and opinion is opinion... I think we as members can distinguish from the two but it is harder for others who do not have the faith that we have. Maybe in 100 years people will look back on things President Hinckley says and think they were weird..who knows. The point is, doctrine doesn't change even though the Prophets do.
Thanks for asking.

Answer 8

The works you mention are not sources of doctrine, no matter how much anti-Mormons want to think they are. They belong in their own time. Some have read some of them, others have not. Personally, I would rather concentrate on the scriptures, and on the words of our PRESENT prophet and apostles. If there is anything said by one of our past prphets or apostles, that's in the J of D's or whatever, then God will impress on the heart and mind of our PRESENT prophet these things.

I think the anti-Mormons are way more interested in our past prphets, mostly because they can find some obscure thing to try to hang us on, and those men are no longer here to defend what they said.

Answer 9

I think you read more things about Mormonsim then me.
No I haven't read the Journal of dicourses, I am too busy reading the Book of Mormon and the Bible. I have only been a member for three years!
I have a question for you...Do you really care what LDS members think or are you just trying ot show them what you have discovered?

Answer 10

I am not a Mormon, but I have read these books. Most interesting reading in there. Too bad that more members didn't read that! They would learn what the church is really about.