I've had these responses:

"These were recorded like you would write notes during a speech."
My response: If you had someone write notes down for you during your speech as your scribe, wouldn't you trust this person to write down the right stuff? And wouldn't you look over it afterwards to see if it was correct and okay to distribute? If they distributed without your permission, wouldn't you be vocal about this?

"This isn't official church doctrine anymore."
My response: Yes, NOW it isn't, but if you were giving a sermon back in the day, your followers are going to believe it. You just can't pick and choose what you believe now.

Something else that interested me...
"People confuse the History of the Church with the Journal of Discourses."
Wait, what? I was almost positive that these were separate publications...am I wrong?

Because old "prophets didn't know shit". Thank god for modern day revelation and prophecy which will be thrown in the trash tomorrow! Just need to keep the sheep dumb and money rolling in.

Too bad that it can't last...

Houses of cards fall hard...

when the church confiscated as many as they could from compliant members. The material was too controversial and weird for popular consumption in a more modern world.

That's when the idea came out about listening to living prophets who are receiving updated revelations over dead prophets who could be misunderstood and who were out of date.

About 11,800 results found! (In other words, the Mormon church uses it when its convenient, yet conveniently dismisses it when expedient.)

http://www.google.com/webhp?hl=en#sclient=psy-ab&hl=en&safe=off&site=webhp&source=hp&q=site:lds.org+%22in+journal+of+discourses%22&pbx=1&oq=site:lds.org+%22in+journal+of+discourses%22&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&gs_sm=s&gs_upl=62691l65446l1l66935l5l4l1l0l0l1l1163l1847l2-3.7-1l5l0&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.,cf.osb&fp=d013020512624b3e&biw=1015&bih=566



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/15/2011 08:19PM by Fetal Deity.

wow thank you!! I'll definitely use this next time someone conveniently says that it's not official doctrine. :D

The retort, of course, is that the current prophet has used his hotline to Jesus to learn which parts of the JoD were transcribed correctly.

I clicked on that link and didn't get anything.:-(

... and type in (or copy and past) the following:

site:lds.org "in journal of discourses"


That should give you the same results as the link I posted.

Hope it works! : )

http://www.google.com



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 11/16/2011 02:23PM by Fetal Deity.

When I was a kid, virtually everyone had a volume of it. Then it became just a small book of "selections."

Mormons often flag someone using the JoD as being anti-Mormon. It is fun to use things from current classroom manuals, institute manuals, etc. because it makes it harder for Mormons to call you an anti-Mormon.

if the words of dead prophets can be so easily dismissed, why stop at the journal of discourses? Why not the Bible, or the Book of Mormon, too, while they're at it.

http://exmormon.org/phorum/read.php?2,137410,137445#msg-137445

Apparently they were essential words from God for a long time.

Simple. It makes the Church look bad.

It has been ditched just like all talks given now will be ditched by the future top 15.

Mark E Peterson was in England in the early 60's and instructed members to bring all copies to their local stake centers..He then instructed all copies to be destroyed (burned).. His beef was the dozens of references to the Adam-God doctrine contained in the Journal of Discourses

Note: He wrote a book called "Adam Who is He?"

JB

He was probably my favorite church authority. I bought all of his prophet series books and many many copies of his talks were in my talk library. I finally got around reading his Adam book and when I read the part about the Adam God Doctrine, my opinion of him instantly changed. I threw all of his books and all of his talks away, which was very uncharacteristic of me, and in retrospect I can not believe that I actually did it. I think that moment was a defining one. I chose truth over teachings. But it still took me another 25 years to fully let go of my axioms that kept my mind bound.

And in the same breath say that TSCC proclaims the everlasting and unchanging gospel!

Please do not lead others astray by following the false teachings of the prophets in your Priesthood Line of Authority.

Or as the statement goes, some truths are not useful- do not spread disease germs.

When I was younger, I used to frequently pour through the book, Mormon Doctrine. They're beginning to do the same thing to that book.

As has been said, the JoD is embarrassing to them, so they try to sweep it under the carpet in the same way they do that with everything which they think makes them look bad.

The problem is that the entire Church is starting to look bad, hence the desperate I am a Mormon commercials.

The cheapest I've ever seen for a full 26-volumn set of the JOD is online at Amazon for $595.00. If I had the money I'd buy it just so my kids could later read it and see how BS so much of TSCC doctrine is! :-D

However, you can easily access the JOD online and I even purchased it for my Kindle for maybe about $13.00 or so. It makes very intersting reading when the SM talks are just rehashes of latest GC talks and a great way to beat SM boredom. (evil).

The True and Everlasting Gospel in the fulness of times is ALWAYS constantly changing and under constant revision. The "prophets, seers, and revelators" in the past can never get the darn doctrines right!

THIS ALONE, proves to any thinking person that TSCC is a fraud.

The talks in the Journal of Discourses were given to the members as the mind and will of the Lord at the time.

Of course, now they are an embarrassment to the church.

The talks give a very clear picture of how far into magical beliefs and theosophy church leaders were at that time.

They spoke off the cuff and called it revelation.

I have the complete set of the JoD.

The morg has course corrected so much, especially during the last 25 years, that it's not even the same church anymore.

Many of the disconcerting comments made by the prophets have come from the Church publication called The Journal of Discourses. It's often quoted in Church and even by LDS apologists. How much credence should we give to the JofD?

From journalofdiscourses.com:

The Journal of Discourses deservedly ranks as one of the standard works of the Church, and every right-minded Saint will certainly welcome with joy every number (issue) as it comes forth.
President George Q. Cannon, Journal of Discourses, Preface, Vol.8.

Each successive Volume of these Discourses is a rich mine of wealth, containing gems of great value, and the diligent seeker will find ample reward for his labor. After the fathers and mothers of this generation have made them the study of their lives their children's children will find that they are still unexhausted, and rejoice that this Record has been handed down from their fathers to also aid them in following the way of life.
Apostle Orson Pratt, Preface. Volume 3.

It is impossible to give monetary value to the past volumes of this publication, ... Those who read the utterances of the servants of God, contained in this book, under the same influence by which the speakers were inspired, cannot fail to receive profit from the perusal.
President Joseph F. Smith, Preface, Vol.18.

We take great pleasure in presenting to the Saints and the world the ... the JOURNAL OF DISCOURSES, which they will find contains rich treasures of information concerning the glorious principles of Eternal Life, as revealed through God's anointed servants in these last days. All who read the discourses contained in this Volume are earnestly recommended to adapt them to their lives by practice, and we can confidently assure them that, in doing so, they are laying up a store of knowledge that will save and exalt them in the Celestial kingdom.
Apostle Albert Carrington, Journal of Discourses, Preface, Vol. 15.

The Church has recently issued the following statement on their website: 'The Journal of Discourses is not an official publication of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. It is a compilation of sermons and other materials from the early years of the Church, which were transcribed and then published. It includes practical advice as well as doctrinal discussion, some of which is speculative in nature and some of which is only of historical interest.'

Critic's point: Some LDS apologists try to wiggle out with "it's not doctrine", but even they admit it's a long-running series of public transcriptions of sermons by the highest Mormon leaders. If even that's not doctrine, then everything they make you sit through on Sundays must be utterly meaningless.

The Journal of Discourses is available online: http://www.journalofdiscourses.org

Great orators didn't read from a prepared speech like politicians and GAs do today. They got in front of people and orated. Scribes wrote it down. Without scribes, we wouldn't have any idea what they said.

The speeches were often reprinted in the monthly publication of the day, and were often reviewed by the orator and corrected. The same topics were addressed over and over.

There is corroborating evidence of every silly idea BY ever said.

Also, the JoD was originally published by the church on their own presses. Explain how God would allow that if they weren't true.

I am a little confused. BYU online allows you to view the full JoD. Why would they do that if they are destroying JoD copies?

The morg wanted to hide them from outsiders, investigators, and new members not from totally indoctrinated and committed members.

is somehow less truthful than what the Lord's Mouthpiece says in General Conference today.

Question is...aren't we living in the [future] past right now? What am I hearing from God today that I can selectively ignore?

The Ensigns, and Conference talks, contained in them today will be tomorrow's Journal of Discourses, not to be trusted and fodder for anti-Mormons.

I wouldn't use the JoD to prove a "doctrine" to a TBM, but I would use it to prove to them how uninspired LDS prophets are.

Ex-CultMember Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I wouldn't use the JoD to prove a "doctrine" to a
> TBM, but I would use it to prove to them how
> uninspired LDS prophets are.

Very true. It seems to me that as soon as the masses started getting smarter and have a better understanding of evolution and other cultures and religion the prophets stopped saying anything of meaning because it can be proven wrong. What new doctrine did GBH teach? Only 1 piercing an ear? Be prepared for an emergency? Debt is bad? Really? Thats it?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/16/2011 06:01PM by babyraptorjesus.

The discrediting of the JoDs is akin to tactics used by the communists in repressing knowledge and pushing their view of history. The church is embarrassed by the words in the JoD. Unfortunately the books were published, they exist, and they can't destroy every copy. So all they can do is say what they say.

The end.

fancypants Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I've had these responses:
>
> "These were recorded like you would write notes
> during a speech."

[snip] These were recorded by someone highly trained in taking shorthand dictation. George Watt, for example, was very skillful and was trusted by the brethren. Also almost all of the JOD discourses were published in Salt Lake City in the Deseret News where there was ample opportunity for the original speaker to check first. Brigham Young, for example, mentioned that he checked that the publications of his discourses were correct.

> "People confuse the History of the Church with the
> Journal of Discourses."
> Wait, what? I was almost positive that these were
> separate publications...am I wrong?

Yes they are separate publications.

Because he said negroes would never have the priesthood and that anyone that ordained a negro would suffer a painful death.

Because he said there were 7' tall Quakers on the moon eating oatmeal waiting to be converted.

Among other things...

Ron

Nothing wtong with the JoD --- The Ensign article quotes from it all the time ... heavily edited of course. For example, see "Potter and the Clay" in the January 2011 ensign. http://lds.org/ensign/2011/01/the-potter-and-the-clay?lang=eng

I was able to cross reference the "Gospel Classics" article (a JoD reprint of an 1854 address by Heber C. Kimball. All I had to do was look at the beginning, the end, and any "..." to see where whitewashing occurred (note: All of these quotes can be found in Volume 2 of the JoD; 2 April 1854).

1. Opening remarks were not reprinted in the Ensign. Why? HCK was praising the remarks of Jedediah Grant (Father of Heber J. Grant and known as "Brigham's Sledgehammer"). You know, where Grant said:

"I look for the Lord to use His whip on the refractory son called "Uncle Sam;" I expect to see him chastised among the first of the nations. I think Uncle Sam is one of the Lord's boys that He will take the rod to first, and make him dance nimbly to his own tune of "Oh! Oh!!" for his transgressions, for his high-mindedness and loftiness, for his evil, for rejecting the Gospel, and causing the earth to drink the blood of the Saints - for this, I say, I expect he will be well switched among the first of the sons."

To this, HCK said, "I have been much interested and edified with the remarks of brother Grant: they are good."

Not exactly patriotic language that modern day LDS would understand.

2. The part where Heber talks about the Ghosts of the wicked coming back to haunt the righteous (I'm not making this up), not surprisingly, did not make the cut either:

"Brother Grant was speaking about the work of God, in the laying waste of nations by sea and by land. I believe it is all the work of God, and it is all right. Will He sweep them from the earth in order to destroy their power and influence? He will. And when kings, and princes, and captains, and great men, according to the greatness of the world, go into the world of spirits, they will not have as much power as they had here upon the earth. We can hear of their spirits trying to peep, and mutter, and mock, and rap, and cause tables to dance, and chairs to move from one place to another, but that is all the power they have. While I am in the flesh, I can take a chair, or a club, and make you feel my power to a still greater extent; I could bruise your flesh, and break your bones, but they cannot do anything but peep, and make tables and chairs dance, and rap, and give uncertain sounds. That is wisdom great enough for the world; it does well enough for them; it is all the revelation they deserve; and a few of this people go to those spirits."

3. The part where all you exmos who made temple covenants will be forced to fulfil your obligations in yonder heavens, even if it takes 10,000 years:

"What you have agreed to do, God will require you to perform, if it should be ten thousand years after this time. And when the servants of God speak to you, and require you to do a thing, the Lord God will fulfil His words, and make you fulfil His words he gave to you through His servants. Inasmuch as you have come into this Church, and made a covenant to forsake the world, and cleave unto the Lord, and keep His commandments, the Lord will compel you to do it, if it should be in ten thousand years from this time. These are my views, and I know it will be so."

4. Two for the price of one: He preaches blind obedience to Brigham Young comparing rebellion against the leaders as rebellion by a wife:

"You Bishops, or Presiding Elder, Teacher, Deacon, Apostle or Prophet, how do you appear when you rebel against your head? You look like the woman who rebels against her husband or Lord."

5. The priesthood should be honored more than your family:
"that I may always honor that Priesthood, magnify it, reverence it, and love it more than I do my life, or my wives and my children."

6. Disobedience leads to depression: "I am never blue when I do brother Brigham's will; but when I do not do it, I begin to grow blue"

7. All property deeded to the church ... nothing should be left to the plural wives or families: "I have said it to my family, and I say it now, when I have finished my course pertaining to the flesh, I am going to deed all my property to the Church; my wives, my children, shall not have it to quarrel about; but I will deed it all to the Church, and the Church shall dictate them from this time henceforth and forever."

There's more ... but it's the same story. Hide the embarrassing parts of Church History. The weird stuff scares people.

The History of the Church and The Journal of Discourses: the two sets of books that went a long way to getting me out.

Really, who WOULD want to belong to an organization with such a founding? No wonder present-day LDSinc wishes them gone for good. After all, even if "the church was true," who in good conscience would want to belong to it? Not good people, or people that believe in the Good, that's for sure.

Q: "What's wrong with using the journal of discourses as a source?"

A: I'm reminded of that objection from Jim Carrey's character in Liar, Liar:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dx32b5igLwA

LDS people, primarily the powers that be and apologists, object to using the Journal of Discourses, or Lecures on Faith (formerly cannonised), or journals from true believing contemporary followers, or any other non-correlated document because these sorts of things are detrimental to the LDS Church's case. They look like any other manmade and therefore not-divine institution when they're proved to be inconsistent, or dishonest, or incompetent.

If all the claims of the origin of the church are true, and if the BoM is the word of God, and if it's true that the Mormon Church is the one true church restored in the latter days led by God's prophet on earth, and if... and if.... and if...

Then why isn't every pronouncement in the JoD, uttered by official prophets of God and recorded for posterity by their command, also true? Why isn't every crappy ass, inappropriate, racist, misogynist, authoritarian comment that Brigham Young ever made also true?

Every prophet/speaker quoted in the JoD says it is so.

It is only since the discovery of the Joseph Smith Papyrus that the awful truth dawned on church leaders - Mormonism is a hoax.

What we are seeing now are desperate efforts at damage control.

When debating topics with Mormons I tend to avoid drawing from the JoD because I already expect the whole "it's not actually scripture" nonsense from them. So i've just moved away from that argument entirely and don't even bring up info from the JoD.

It's fine really, there is enough damning evidence in the shit they DO consider scripture to still make them look like cultists.