Discussions toward a better understanding of LDS doctrine, history, and culture. Discussion of Christianity, religion, and faith in general is welcome.
So, in my latest chapter of the Laura Hales book one of the reasons given for the priesthood not being talked about until later was that there is a prophetic pattern established where sacred experiences should not be talked about. This attitude continues today with leaders and the rank and file alike wanting to only talk about their experiences where it suits them.
Ronald Barney who wrote the chapter on priesthood restoration drug up the following quote from Joseph Smith:
We must be clean every whit. Let us be faithful bretheren, and if God gives you a manifestation, keep it to yourself.
---Joseph Smith journal November 12th, 1835.
And yes, 1835 was the beginning of polygamy and the year for the "statement on marriage."
So, is there any real scriptural basis for this? I'm not aware of any of the top of my head.
If one looks at the ancient apostles such as Paul, there was no hesitation to speak of the appearance of the Savior to Paul, in an open forum. That's quite a sacred experience.
But there were times when the Savior told the Apostles that the things he was relating to them was not for the general population of the time.
So it can go either way.
But as with so many things, Mormon leadership are just as good at twisting the scriptures to their advantage as any of the so-called apostate religions whom they abhor.
Best to apply Occum's razor to see if the story adds up or just stinks of self protection.
ETA: The JS quote used above however seems like a mis-use of the saying. In reality what Joseph was attempting to do was to eliminate competition or disagreement between members or other leaders and himself by silencing someone else's revelation.
"Oh...you had a revelation? Fine. Keep it to yourself, Bub...."
"There is but one straight course, and that is to seek truth and pursue it steadily."
"Truth will ultimately prevail where there is pains to bring it to light."
Palerider wrote: ↑Tue Dec 26, 2017 2:13 pm
ETA: The JS quote used above however seems like a mis-use of the saying. In reality what Joseph was attempting to do was to eliminate competition or disagreement between members or other leaders and himself by silencing someone else's revelation.
"Oh...you had a revelation? Fine. Keep it to yourself, Bub...."
It is pretty hard to determine what he was attempting with it. It comes from a section where he is talking about the temple and the endowment. It kind of comes out of the blue, and he just keeps on going with his thoughts. http://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper- ... 35-1836/34
Palerider wrote: ↑Tue Dec 26, 2017 2:13 pm
ETA: The JS quote used above however seems like a mis-use of the saying. In reality what Joseph was attempting to do was to eliminate competition or disagreement between members or other leaders and himself by silencing someone else's revelation.
"Oh...you had a revelation? Fine. Keep it to yourself, Bub...."
It is pretty hard to determine what he was attempting with it. It comes from a section where he is talking about the temple and the endowment. It kind of comes out of the blue, and he just keeps on going with his thoughts. http://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper- ... 35-1836/34
Having read the quote in context I would agree. I might have partially mis-interpreted that.
What really stands out from these writings however is the Gnosticism that had infected Joseph's thinking. One cannot believe that the Savior would make His Gospel so tied to all this "special knowledge" and exclusive righteousness that is only attained through secret ordinances and endowments.
It's the very thing Joseph railed about regarding other "apostate" religions and here he is creating his own amalgamation of priestcraft. His very own Kabbahla.
So, what happened to the concept of restoring the "plain and simple" truths of the Gospel that had been replaced by the intricate teachings of men?
"There is but one straight course, and that is to seek truth and pursue it steadily."
"Truth will ultimately prevail where there is pains to bring it to light."
Palerider wrote: ↑Tue Dec 26, 2017 8:40 pm
So, what happened to the concept of restoring the "plain and simple" truths of the Gospel that had been replaced by the intricate teachings of men?
My best guess is that they didn't allow him to impose his will on the membership.
I think the word "sacred" often means "do not examine." There's no better way to keep others from examining your spiritual experience than keeping it secret. Another way is to teach forcefully what it means and demonize those who come to a different conclusion.
"Don't cast your pearls before swine" is the usual scriptural justification for keeping sacred things secret.
Learn to doubt the stories you tell about yourselves and your adversaries.
Reuben wrote: ↑Tue Dec 26, 2017 9:36 pm
I think the word "sacred" often means "do not examine." There's no better way to keep others from examining your spiritual experience than keeping it secret. Another way is to teach forcefully what it means and demonize those who come to a different conclusion.
Yes, this is the central problem. In my experience when some makes the assertion "Sacred, not Secret", they are actually doing this calculation: "Sacred = Secret + Embarrassing".
