What do you want to know about LDS beliefs?

[nutshell]

I'd like to know more actual historical facts about the beginning of LDS. Religious history fascinates me.

Maize, here is a link to the official LDS Web site about Church history.

http://lds.org/churchhistory/0,15478,4154-1,00.html#FlashPluginDetected

There is actually a lot of information there. I encouarge you to review it and then, please, ask a specific question about the history you discover at the Web site. Thank you.

 

[SoyLeche]

I'd like to know more actual historical facts about the beginning of LDS. Religious history fascinates me.

LDS history is very interesting, to me at least. I am currently reading a biography of Joseph Smith (the one Jonny kept bringing up) called "Rough Stone Rolling". It has been pretty good. If someone wants to work under the assumption that he was perfect, however, they better not read this book. He lays it all out pretty well, although it is still slightly biased because the author is LDS.

A pretty good, easy to read intro can be found in a series of books called "The Work and the Glory". These are "historical fiction" - where the author weaves a fictional family into actual events. It leans a lot towards the side of "the church is true" though. They are a good read, although pretty long.

If you have any specific questions, we can discuss them.

 

[Green Gaia]

Thanks guys.

 

[nutshell]

What is a stake? (I'd thought you'd just mis-typed 'state')

In Isaiah (chapter 54 for example) Zion is compared to a tent with stakes to strengthen it. We think of the church as Zion today.

The stakes we speak of today are geographical regions overseen by local priesthood authority.

The way church organization works is this:

You gave general world leaders we call General Authorities. They oversee the affairs of the entire church.

Next are regional authorities. Regions are large geographic areas such as the Northwest region or Northern California region or New England region. (I'm making these names up...I'm not sure of the actual names, but you get the picture).

A region is made up of many Stakes. For example, in my city there are three stakes.

Stakes are made up of even more local congregations called wards. In my stake are ten wards.

Each wards I'm guessing has a congregation of 100 members or so attending church each Sunday and it is within the ward that the majority of instruction takes place.

 

[SoyLeche]

What is a stake? (I'd thought you'd just mis-typed 'state')

It is an organizational unit. Here is the basic outline

The fundamental unit of the church is the family.

Congregations are organized into "Wards" by geographical region. These usually average about 400 people, although it fluctuates quite a bit. My ward is on the smaller side of things here. A ward is presided over by a Bishop. If there aren't enough people for a ward in an area, they are organized into a "Branch" - which is basically the same thing as a ward, only smaller. A branch is presided over by a Branch President.

Groups of wards and branches are organized into a Stake. There are 3 stakes in the Richmond area, for example - Richmond, Chesterfield and Midlothian. Each stake usually has somewhere between 6 and 10 wards or branches. The stake is presided over by a Stake President.

I'm a little fuzzy on what the next level is. It seems like it changed not too long ago - but basically you have "Areas"

The Church as a whole is presided over by the "General Authorities" - with the 12 Apostles and the First Presidency at the top of the hierarchy. And, of course, we believe that Jesus Christ is the head of the church.

 

[Bishka]

It usually goes like this for how the church is organizized

Ward/Branch
Stake
Region
Area
Church

Correct me if I'm wrong on that. You can sort of compare it to how the Catholics divide up their areas. Sort of..

 

[Aqualung]

The ward back in my hometown got a new patriarch over the break. I guess it's just "new patriarch" time. Er, rather, our stake got a new patriarch, who happened to be called from our ward.

 

[SoyLeche]

It usually goes like this for how the church is organizized

Ward/Branch
Stake
Region
Area
Church

Correct me if I'm wrong on that. You can sort of compare it to how the Catholics divide up their areas. Sort of..

I'm not sure if there are both "Regions" and "Areas" - or if one replaced the other. Again, this is the part that I am fuzzy on.

 

[Bishka]

The ward back in my hometown got a new patriarch over the break. I guess it's just "new patriarch" time. Er, rather, our stake got a new patriarch, who happened to be called from our ward.

The Patriarch that I got my blessing from, recently came home from a mission with his wife in South Africa.

 

[SoyLeche]

The ward back in my hometown got a new patriarch over the break. I guess it's just "new patriarch" time. Er, rather, our stake got a new patriarch, who happened to be called from our ward.

Actually, I'm pretty sure that the calling of Patriarch is one that you keep for life, so it just happened that some patriarchs died.

 

[Quiddity]

Ok I have a question. One of things that has always baffled me was the progressive revelation in the LDS Church. It is true that progressive revelation was in fact alive in the Church. Prophets came and went. Although Christians believe it ended with the death of the last apostle. But the distinct feature that makes LDS so difficult for me is that the people of the 1800's were not equipped to make such distinctions. They basically had to take Joseph Smith's word on it. The New Testament had the OT and other resources to test Christ for example. And the same goes with other prophets. But Joseph Smith was different in that his teachings were foreign to the people. They weren't waiting for anybody. The concept of Baptism was different. The concept of the Trinity was different. Etc. etc. How would I a normal joe know the difference if I had nothing but Joseph's Smiths interpretations to go by?

~Victor

 

[SoyLeche]

Ok I have a question. One of things that has always baffled me was the progressive revelation in the LDS Church. It is true that progressive revelation was in fact alive in the Church. Prophets came and went. Although Christians believe it ended with the death of the last apostle. But the distinct feature that makes LDS so difficult for me is that the people of the 1800's were not equipped to make such distinctions. They basically had to take Joseph Smith's word on it. The New Testament had the OT and other resources to test Christ for example. And the same goes with other prophets. But Joseph Smith in that his teachings were foreign to the people. They weren't waiting for anybody. The concept of Baptism was different. The concept of the Trinity was different. Etc. etc. How would I a normal joe know the difference if I had nothing but Joseph's Smiths interpretations to go by?

~Victor

I'm not sure you put all of the words in your sentances that you meant to, because I don't really understand some of what you are saying, but I'll do my best.

First of all, there were people waiting. Many of the origional converts were members of organizations that were looking for a return to New Testament Christianity. They felt that they found what they were looking for in the Gospel that Joseph Smith was preaching.

Second, normal Joe needs to take it upon himself to ask God for personal revelation. Any Missionary that is doing their duty testifies of what they know to be true and then invites the person to find out for themselves. Not all of us are biblical scholars, and to be honest, pulling the bible out to establish your position can be more confusing than enlightening. Look at some of the debates here. The only real way to know if something is true or not is to ask God to tell you.

 

[Quiddity]

I'm not sure you put all of the words in your sentances that you meant to, because I don't really understand some of what you are saying, but I'll do my best.

First of all, there were people waiting. Many of the origional converts were members of organizations that were looking for a return to New Testament Christianity. They felt that they found what they were looking for in the Gospel that Joseph Smith was preaching.

This doesn't mean they were waiting for it SL. I could simply mean that Joseph Smith persuaded them with his great talks. Do you have any historical evidence showing that people were waiting for such a man?

Second, normal Joe needs to take it upon himself to ask God for personal revelation. Any Missionary that is doing their duty testifies of what they know to be true and then invites the person to find out for themselves. Not all of us are biblical scholars, and to be honest, pulling the bible out to establish your position can be more confusing than enlightening. Look at some of the debates here. The only real way to know if something is true or not is to ask God to tell you.

Then why the need for prophets and leaders now? Personal revelation is fine but you need something objective test it with. Not just a book, but someone you can ask. As you know that personal revelation can turn into fuzzy feelings that can be completely misguided. This should not be the way to find truth.

 

[nutshell]

Then why the need for prophets and leaders now? Personal revelation is fine but you need something objective test it with. Not just a book, but someone you can ask. As you know that personal revelation can turn into fuzzy feelings that can be completely misguided. This should not be the way to find truth.

Of course we have completely opposing views of the apostacy, but to answer your question "why now?" I'd say because this is the time God choose for the Church to be reestablished.

While personal revelation can be great for the individual, prophets are needed for revelation for the whole Church. I might have some great ideas, but I'm not in the position to receive revelation for the Church, the prophet is. I can only receive revelation for myself, my family, and as a member of my ward's Elder's quorum presidency, revelation for the members of that quorum as needed.

 

[SoyLeche]

This doesn't mean they were waiting for it SL. I could simply mean that Joseph Smith persuaded them with his great talks. Do you have any historical evidence showing that people were waiting for such a man?

All I have is the record of what they said, written in journals and such. I don't know what else you are looking for. Do you have any historical evidence that the Israelites were waiting for Moses, or that the Gentile converts were waiting for Paul?

Then why the need for prophets and leaders now? Personal revelation is fine but you need something objective test it with. Not just a book, but someone you can ask. As you know that personal revelation can turn into fuzzy feelings that can be completely misguided. This should not be the way to find truth.

Direction, orgainization, to teach. I didn't say that God would tell you everything just by asking, or at least I didn't mean to. The process is something akin to this. You hear something. You wonder "could this be true". You study and ponder it. When you think you are onto something, you ask God to confirm. I understand that personal revelation can turn into fuzzy feelings. A person still is responsible for recognizing what is being given. I know that when God has confirmed to me that the BOM is true that it was the Holy Spirit confirming this to me, and not merely a "fuzzy feeling". Unfortunately, I can't reproduce that for you. That's something you've got to find out for yourself.

Just curious - what method do you propose for finding out religious truth?

 

[Quiddity]

Of course we have completely opposing views of the apostacy, but to answer your question "why now?" I'd say because this is the time God choose for the Church to be reestablished.

Of course you do, but to clarify I don't think it would make a difference if it was in the 1800's vs. the 1700's or whatever other year you want to pick. Either way you look at it I don't read of people waiting for such a man.

While personal revelation can be great for the individual, prophets are needed for revelation for the whole Church. I might have some great ideas, but I'm not in the position to receive revelation for the Church, the prophet is. I can only receive revelation for myself, my family, and as a member of my ward's Elder's quorum presidency, revelation for the members of that quorum as needed.

So personal revelation is useless to the whole of the Church? I'm sure you have a way of dismissing a bad thought from a personal revelation right?

 

[SoyLeche]

Of course you do, but to clarify I don't think it would make a difference if it was in the 1800's vs. the 1700's or whatever other year you want to pick. Either way you look at it I don't read of people waiting for such a man.

I'm missing something. What exactly are you looking for here?

 

[Quiddity]

All I have is the record of what they said, written in journals and such. I don't know what else you are looking for. Do you have any historical evidence that the Israelites were waiting for Moses, or that the Gentile converts were waiting for Paul?

Please SL, don't turn the tables as a way out. This is a thread about LDS beliefs. I am quite comfortable with the response I can give you but let's focus on guys believe.
Written journals from who SL?

Direction, orgainization, to teach. I didn't say that God would tell you everything just by asking, or at least I didn't mean to. The process is something akin to this. You hear something. You wonder "could this be true". You study and ponder it. When you think you are onto something, you ask God to confirm. I understand that personal revelation can turn into fuzzy feelings. A person still is responsible for recognizing what is being given. I know that when God has confirmed to me that the BOM is true that it was the Holy Spirit confirming this to me, and not merely a "fuzzy feeling". Unfortunately, I can't reproduce that for you. That's something you've got to find out for yourself.

How do you confirm it with God?

Just curious - what method do you propose for finding out religious truth?

Reason, divine revelation, divine interpreter. All which must exist and be available at all thoughout time.

 

[Quiddity]

I'm missing something. What exactly are you looking for here?

I'm looking for early church writings before the 1800's that was a clear indication they were waiting for a man to come restore the Church. That would do just fine.

 

[SoyLeche]

Please SL, don't turn the tables as a way out. This is a thread about LDS beliefs. I am quite comfortable with the response I can give you but let's focus on guys believe.
Written journals from who SL?

Will you please just get wherever you are trying to lead me? Journals of people who were waiting.

How do you confirm it with God?


Reason, divine revelation, divine interpreter. All which must exist and be available at all thoughout time.

Victor, why are you Catholic? How do you know that the Pope is ordained of God?