14 Fundamentals of Falsifying the Prophet

When this talk was repeated in GC it was very traumatic for many that were trying to Stay with non-traditional beliefs.

I remember having a talk after priesthood with a member of the Stake Presidency about his use of the phrase “the church is perfect.” I felt that it would be so easy to explain that the church cannot be “perfect” unless we twist the definition to mean something different from what it usually means. He kept inquiring about my faith, when I simply wanted to talk about word definitions.

My quandary is the same here. It is difficult to speak contrary to the content (church is perfect, prophet will never lead the church astray) because doing so is too close to the heart of the church. My personal plan is to make very certain that I miss this particular priesthood lesson (it helps to work in primary).

The part that I found most disturbing, and shows the church has not changed is obfuscation of the truth, is the way the Teachings of ETB manual references the original BYU speech. Instead of footnoting the original speech found on a church owned BYU web site, or an article in the June 1981 Liahona, the manual references Tambuli. Anybody know what Tambuli is? Its the Filipino language magazine for the Philippines that is NOT online or in English. That is the only reference to the original speech in the whole lesson, even though the lesson is complete based on that talk. The writers of the lesson does not want anybody to ready the original speech, so they hide it.

I was teaching the Gospel Principles class when they came out with the new manual. I was curious what types of changes had been made. One big change was that every reference that had been made to journal of discourses, discourses of Brigham Young, or Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith had been replaced by references to the the new RS/Priesthood manuals Teachings of the Presidents of the Church: Brigham Young and Joseph Smith. To be fair, one purpose for the change was so that members would not have to own or reference these older books in order to understand the gospel. Many members from different countries might never have access to such old reference materials. OTOH, this kept the gospel knowledge firmly in the realm of correlation. Want to know more about topic Y? Reference our other correlated manual that only includes selected pre-screened excerpts of the prophets words. Seems to make perfect sense from a correlation committee perspective. Not in a necessarily sinister way, their job is to guide the main body of teaching and belief for the church. Why then would they want to reference in their manuals books that contain troubling and outdated material in addition to the principle they ware trying to expound upon.

This. This is the main factor of my inactivity. I could not accept or perpetuate THIS. Not in a teacher capacity. It is ironic that a seventy attended my adult SS class and I was released. I was happy with that calling ( we were in the OT rotation), and after Malachi, I planned to tell members about the Macabee reign to fill in the gaps to the NT. We had a few weeks before the correlated NT schedule. The previous teacher got us a little ahead of schedule.

The stuff in the adult manual was almost primary-ish to me (probably overly critical on my part). Then I got called to RS. The manual was 14F-ish. There was a “bitty committee” that was unwelcoming to investigators and newbies, especially over the issue of “appropriate attire.”

I’ve already faced displinary actions and was exiled 20+ yrs. Not gonna martyr myself over the latest manual but not gonna aquiesque either. couldn’t do it.

I can accept a talking snake or donkey. I can accept the BoM is true whether a stone in a hat (or as a commenter in hawkgrrl’s funniest comments where a poster said it doesn’t matter if JS put his head in a hat or a horse’s arse to translate). Even Paul in some of his epistles admitted it was his opinion only, and BY, as self assured as he was, said we should get our own revelation. Bereans would not do it. standard works do not support a borg mentality or extremism.(at least the NT). I cannot. Or maybe I make excuses since I immensely enjoy mild barley drinks

I had debated on whether the lesson in the new manual would be an appropriate one to skip or whether it was a can’t miss lesson. I could prepare ahead of time (the lesson comes up in 6 months right?) and maybe come up with some constructive comments that are aimed at re-centering the discussion on the gospel.

We recently had a class that was very similar, or at least many of the 14 fundamentals were brought up and many people testified of them. It was a lesson on the FP message in the January Ensign.

It’s a complex issue, at least to me. Most of the 14 fundamentals make perfect sense to the orthodox mind. When we disagree on some points an orthodox person might not be open to the nuance or the “what ifs” they may only think “of course we follow the prophet, he speaks for god, it’s a no-brainer.” Any opinion contrary to that would be completely indefensible. Going into the class in debate mode isn’t going to accomplish anything because the way I see it, everyone is correct in their own way.

It’s tricky to rock that rhyme. We’ve got 6 months or so to meditate on it.

I, too, have been debating whether to skip, go, or teach. Our schedule has it the second Sunday in June, so we do have some time to decide.

To the OP, I agree with the premise of the linked article, and I do personally find the 14 Fs troubling. I’m not sure I buy all the assertions in the linked article, though. It would be interesting to have another view as to why the original source is not directly sourced. Googling it is easy.

I fear you are right, Mom3. Even if we were to reference Quinn, orthodox members see him as an apostate so he has little credibility.

Maybe we should spend the next 6 months combing the quotes archive for good responses when the lesson happens.

I heard that pres kimball’s son has a book that he talked about it. I have it on my to-read list.

I noticed it is lesson 11 for priesthood. I am going to prepare well for this lesson.