gardener4life wrote: ↑December 26th, 2017, 12:25 am The only sources of scripture that are free of mistakes is the Book of Mormon. (You will probably argue against that too because that's what you do.) And the only approved learning sources are the standard works, possibly the hymn book, the gospel principle and Sunday school books, and approved literature. That's because we know those are free of error.
Journal of Discourses isn't approved material. Why are you quoting it? Are you trying to prove you are right by showing flaws in a priesthood holder? By doing so you will confuse people around you that are young in their testimonies. Is that really what you should be doing? And I've had seminary teachers tell me years and years ago to stay away from it (Journal of Discourses) and that it has errors.
You guys keep quoting the Journal of Discourses like it's scripture. I would be really careful about that. A lot of people get mixed up by putting a secondary book before the Book of Mormon and the real scriptures, or use them to pick flaws out in priesthood leaders. One time in a ward a few years ago they had to keep bringing the Bishop into Gospel Doctrine because the teacher kept teaching Hugh Nibley book ideas as scripture instead of the real scriptures. She kind of embarrassed herself and had to be publicly corrected because she was leading people off. IF there weren't victims she wouldn't have had to be corrected in front of others. Simons Ryder started doing what you are doing by trying to look for errors instead of building his own testimony and others) and then apostatized because of a flaw he perceived in Joseph Smith. And who kept bringing up the flaw to that? That person didn't help. (his name was spelled wrong.) And if you don't fall away yourself, you will be the instrument of causing others to fall away. And then you started out saying you admit Adam God is wrong and then at the end sound like you are promoting it again by saying another championed it.
I don't want to offend you but every time I turn away from here yet another false idea pops up or bringing up some flaw in a prophet (which is the same thing). You shouldn't be doing that. That's shaky ground to be trying to show flaws in a prophet. People grab onto that and use it for persecution. And this tactic of picking flaws in prophets is a trap Satan uses a lot.
One of the reasons we don't accept everything quoting people as scripture or acceptable teaching material is because the people taking it down might have mixed up wording too. And do you really think that you know the gospel better than Brigham Young?
And how do you know what you read in that so called book that Brigham Young quoted was even quoting it right? The typewriter wasn't in mass production until only a few years before his death (the year the typewriter was invented and mass produced are different by quite a bit). And even then you could only get them in certain parts of the world (not Utah yet). And I doubt they had access to it They didn't have tons of paper and resources in Pioneer era Utah. They wrote stuff by hand, and I doubt they could keep up to a speaker that wasn't waiting for them. And if there was bad hand writing they might have guessed what someone said. He could have gotten tongue tied maybe from meaning one thing but it didn't sound like he intended (which does happen to people due to fear of public speaking and or dehydration or other reasons.) And because the J of Discourses was never meant to be teaching material it wasn't really edited right. When something is edited then you correct what needs adjusting, clarify something, and make sure you don't confuse people. People misquote stuff too. You will never know if mistakes in there are editor, note takers perceptions, or mistakes, instead of the teacher (very likely note takers could be culprits, most those people had no formal education and very little access to books.)
You could cause harm by your misplacing something that isn't scripture going before scripture, and by continually bringing up flaws on someone that you never met. I don't know about you but it sounds impossible to perfectly quote someone's talk word for word in the 1800s before they had the technology to be able to do so. And you are so sure that's accurate what you are reading?
Also people have tampered with the Journal of Wilford Woodruff. I saw two versions, and one of them looked as if it was trying to cause harm. Sometimes you get wolves wearing sheep's clothing. And even back then they did have those too. And you know saying someone is putting history first or history into perspective isn't a good idea. You put the Spirit and scriptures first, and history later. History is perception and people have never been able to cut their perceptions and bias away from truth when trying to document truth, so there will be errors with documented history. You should be questioning whoever documented history over questioning a prophet. That right there tells me something is off. Why would someone question and doubt the prophet first instead of questioning the documentor(s) or the supposed history?
You should just say sorry and move on. This is a real issue that people have to square in their minds. I have finally put it away in my mind after a mighty struggle. You are operating in the dark because you have not educated yourself in church history and so have unwittingly drawn attention to this issue.
https://www.fairmormon.org/wp-content/u ... n_Adam.pdf