Post One:
Lisa Yvonne Thorsen If we take this to be true-that there is no proof that Elder Tanner ever made that comment about blacks and the priesthood (the one that that has gone viral recently), we nevertheless still have proof that other prophets and apostles made similar statements about blacks and the priesthood, includingBrigham Young. So, what does that do to the credibility of this article? It appears like the author is simply grasping at straws trying to discredit the
movement based on his own suppositions to further his own agenda. The article
has no legs to stand on.
FWJ Answer:
Lisa misses the whole point, and actually proves my assertions by so easily abandoning the alleged Tanner quote. The point is that Anti-Mormons and Ordain Women advocates rely upon the same flawed reasoning when it comes to quoting Church leaders. They assume the quotes and sources to be accurate, and then interpret them to support their arguments without considering the essential elements of context; historical, thematic, and particularly spiritual. Those same flaws apply to the other quotes she mentions, and renders them just as suspect as the Tanner quote.
It is the methodology that is flawed, and which they cannot escape, because they do not in reality seek truth, but rather decide for themselves what truth is, and then try to prove their private truth by the laying on of quotes.
Thus, her claim of other credible sources, to support her private truth, actually does nothing to reduce the credibility of my argument, however it does reveal another similarity between this Ordain Women advocate and Anti-Mormons I have dealt with. Since the underlying flaw for both is that thy do not want to know the truth from God, but want to be the truth, they assume omniscience, and along with that often adopt the prerogative to make statements, unsupported by facts or evidence, AND as if speaking from their private Sinai, expect them to be taken at face value as true. Anyone who honestly reads the arguments I've made, knows that they are well founded, contrary to Lisa's self serving claim.
Post Two:
Lisa Yvonne Thorsen Gregg! You are so right! We finally agree on something. But I hope you realized that you just acknowledged that it is not blasphemous for OW to be questioning talks given by apostles and prophets that do not testify to us by the power the Holy Ghost. We are able to do so and remain faithful members because we KNOW that sometimes the things people speak from the pulpit are nothing more than strongly held personal beliefs and are NOT revelation from God. This is precisely why OW supporters makes this argument and precisely why OW supporters point to past examples of prophets and apostles giving opinions that are not scripture or doctrine.
FWJ: Lisa’s point might have some basis except that she ignores the rest of the story, which is that God has already revealed the doctrine with regard to women and the priesthood. Thus issues about opinion are no longer relevant. To take a true doctrine from God, as revealed by His Holy Spirit and to self servingly declare it to be opinion, for the sole purpose of supporting her desire to advocate for a change is not only disingenuous but apostate. So contrary to what she claims here, since the doctrine has already been revealed, OW supporters are acting to replace God’s decrees, with their private, flawed and human views of how things ought to be, which is apostate. In essence their methodology is this. "I will declare doctrine to be opinion, and then advocate for that opinion to change, and any future doctrines taught by the apostles, which contradict my personal desire, I will similarly decree to be opinion and carry on the fight. Sadly, there position is the exact opposite of Jesus's example, as their actions cry..."nevertheless not thy will, but mine be done"