What is and isn't doctrine?

[Guest User-Removed]

You need to learn to follow the discussion, Skip. I wasn't claiming it as your doctrine, but Ska said he believed what has been stated by your prophets was true but just "too meaty" for the membership. I was simply reminding him of some of the stuff said from the pulpit by an early church leader. "Me thinks he doth protest too much" your anger is just a defense mechanism to silence the doubts within your own mind concerning these issue. I do hope you'll forgo any cursing or false accusations concerning my sexuality in your response to this post.

Two problems with your thought process...First off, you chose to link to an apostate website. Now...don't start playing the semantics game on me...like you pulled on Elphaba.

You know that there are 26 volumes of the JOD...not all addresses in those volumes come from the "Pulpit" or the Tabernacle. Many come from the Bowery, which was just a common town square type of meeting place in the early days of life in the Valley.

Your second problem is your use of your faux "Harvard Conflict Diffusion" tactics...no one is angry at you. You're projecting your frustration at once again being "outted" for the Apostate you are. Again, shall I cut and paste some of the "Doctrine" and views of the Church, you've claimed God called you to establish?

Further, unlike you...I have no doubts about Brigham Young...He is and was a Prophet called of God. Now...in his capacity as a man...he oftimes made statements about race, that by today's standards are offensive...sadly, were quite common place in his day.

Somewhere...I remember reading these words..."All Men Are Created Equal"...The author of those words believed in this equality so much...he owned over 200 people until he died....

Now...Kosher if y'all wanna discuss doctrine here...tell us about the doctrine of

HaMishpachaYahushua

[Snow]

It was brought up in another thread that everything the prophets, general authorities, and church leaders produce is considered official church doctrine. I find this to be contradictory to much of what I have heard in LDS apologetics. Perhaps those that make this claim are unfamiliar with apologetics or objective church history, or maybe more people believe this to be true than I thought. Any one else subscribe to this theory - that everything the prophets, GA's and church leaders say in print or from the pulpit is considered official church doctrine? I'd love to hear more from either side.

Best,

GoodK

By "doctrine" most of us mean those unchanging truths pertaining to the gospel, usually officially sanctioned by Church authority as being doctrinal.

In practice, "doctrine" can simply mean something that is taught and, in practice, something may be true and unchanging but the Church hasn't sanctioned it as doctrine.

The simplest way to think about it is: the canonized standard works (and a few other things that are promulgated and sanctioned by the 1st Presidency) are the sources of Church sanctioned doctrine. Anything else - Ensign articles, General Conference addresses, Church instructional manuals, etc - are essentially interpretations of doctrine. They may be absolutely correct and accurate but they are not the source of sanctioned doctrine, rather they are an "abstract" or interpretation of it.

One may rest assured that what one reads in the Ensign or in a manual is a pretty accurate depiction of doctrine but, obviously (past examples) it is not in 100% of the cases.

In prior times, the Church might have accepted or believed certain things to be doctrinal (eternal and unchanging truth) and those things might have been spoken or written by prophets and apostles, but, in retrospect, they were not and are no longer viewed as doctrinal - there are plenty of examples - and that is why you have to look to the canon as the source and all else, more or less, is commentary.

... and that's the way it is.

[Guest User-Removed]

I'm sure it would be extremely beneficial to you if I was able to do all your homework for you, but unfortunately I cannot. If you do not care to read things in context - or even an entire thread from beginning to end - why even participate in the discussion? To vent? To express your distasted for other posters?

So please, my attention seeking brother/sister, stop beating up that straw man. Apparently you are too eager to post your opinion to see the quote from Elder Mconkie saying that what BY taught regarding Adam-God was not true.

Please, take some time to catch up and then get back to us. In regular size and color font.

Actually...My good Brother/Sister...why not feel free to read what our late Prophet Joseph Fielding Smith wrote on the "Adam/God" theory in Doctrines of Salvation???

[Hemidakota]

Volume 1 chapter 7?

[GoodK]

Actually...My good Brother/Sister...why not feel free to read what our late Prophet Joseph Fielding Smith wrote on the "Adam/God" theory in Doctrines of Salvation???

I have read it, silly boy/girl. I even linked to a page that quotes it. Holy smokes... you certainly take a unique approach, don't ya?

But you just don't get it, do you? The point is the church does not accept everything a prophet says as "doctrine" - as evidenced by many things. The first example I have to support this belief is the Brigham Young Adam-God theory.

That is the topic. Feel free to follow along and participate, or start your own thread on why people are apostates, anti's, blah blah blah... adults are talking here.

[KosherXMorg]

Two problems with your thought process...First off, you chose to link to an apostate website. Now...don't start playing the semantics game on me...like you pulled on Elphaba.

You know that there are 26 volumes of the JOD...not all addresses in those volumes come from the "Pulpit" or the Tabernacle. Many come from the Bowery, which was just a common town square type of meeting place in the early days of life in the Valley.

Your second problem is your use of your faux "Harvard Conflict Diffusion" tactics...no one is angry at you. You're projecting your frustration at once again being "outted" for the Apostate you are. Again, shall I cut and paste some of the "Doctrine" and views of the Church, you've claimed God called you to establish?

Further, unlike you...I have no doubts about Brigham Young...He is and was a Prophet called of God. Now...in his capacity as a man...he oftimes made statements about race, that by today's standards are offensive...sadly, were quite common place in his day.

Somewhere...I remember reading these words..."All Men Are Created Equal"...The author of those words believed in this equality so much...he owned over 200 people until he died....

Now...Kosher if y'all wanna discuss doctrine here...tell us about the doctrine of

HaMishpachaYahushua

While I'm flattered I don't see the point of making this discussion about me. Do you often attack the person and not the argument? Oh yeah, you do. Never mind.

If the racial statements were common place, I guess that makes Brigham just a common man?

The statement I quoted was from the Tabernacle, go to the link and you would see that.

Since when does the origin of the web site affect the contents of the page? Are you accusing the Nutall's of making things up?

Now, someone asked for the Rodney Turner BYU thesis...

I'm having a hard time finding a link to it, so I offer this up for you reading pleasure..

http://f1.grp.yahoofs.com/v1/4EpQSG2ftSVzJwsjl9u2kiKrSWMkIHSTRb2p1OHt8mGMZAvgg4yvcex6NN9jNVvCpK7h4hefY-lV3ArcZ7P2SD9R18UPycJh/Adam-God%20by%20Craig%20Tholson.txt

[Guest User-Removed]

I am uncertain if you want to hear all the quotes. They are rather uncomplimentary.

Moksha...If you post them in Klingon...They might seem less uncomplimentary???

[Guest User-Removed]

Link the article.

Hemi...Let me assist my apostate friend here....

The Position of ADAM

[Guest User-Removed]

Be careful not to confuse the Apostolic United Brethren with the FLDS. Don't use people ignorance of the varying groups and their practices as a tool to deflect attention away from the quote itself.

Kosher...Poly's are all whack jobs in my book...whether they follow Uncle Warren...or Ed Allred.

I am impressed that you recognize the difference...

[Hemidakota]

Skip, I have the Journal Discourses and they also can be found online via the web. It would require time to make comparison with the original statement versus someone else’s fragmented article to ensure accuracy. If this personis looking for faults within the leadership, I would not bother even to read anything with this man's website. It is stands to reason, this man is on the road of apostacy.

Now, what I will say. as I stated before in my last thread with GoodK, there are doctrines or truths that are not made privy to all. It is given to those who Christ allows to see and hear that are called. Whether or not President Young was stating something that is out the norm, I would be cautious to attack that truth, since he did have two Seer stones in his possession. For him to look into the past, that would not be a hard to do.

[KosherXMorg]

Kosher...Poly's are all whack jobs in my book...whether they follow Uncle Warren...or Ed Allred.

I am impressed that you recognize the difference...

Of course I know the difference. Did you not read my post in the Elphaba/Kosher topic? BTW. LaMoine Jensen is the current head of the AUB, I have no idea who Ed Allred is

I meet David Allred once though (he's the FLDS guy that bought the YFZ property) while I was working in Las Vegas. Seemed like a nice guy, had one of his wives with him. she wasn't some meek wall-flower.

I know a gentlemen that was married to one of Owen Allred's girls at one point.

No Ed though.

[Guest User-Removed]

Skip, I have the Journal Discourses and they also can be found online via the web. It would require time to make comparison with the original statement versus someone else’s fragmented article to ensure accuracy. If this personis looking for faults within the leadership, I would not bother even to read anything with this man's website. It is stands to reason, this man is on the road of apostacy.

Now, what I will say. as I stated before in my last thread with GoodK, there are doctrines or truths that are not made privy to all. It is given to those who Christ allows to see and hear that are called. Whether or not President Young was stating something that is out the norm, I would be cautious to attack that truth, since he did have two Seer stones in his possession. For him to look into the past, that would not be a hard to do.

Oh...Hemi...as always, a voice of reason in a sea of insanity.

I am not attacking the words, nor memory of our late Prophet Brigham Young, I'll leave that to Kosher to do. I was merely commenting on the fact that the link Kosher provided is run by an apostate group.

I remember in college, I had an instructor at the Institute...who once commented on the Prophet Brigham's JOD this way..."Greatest set of books for good...Greatest set of books for evil." I happen to own two complete sets of his JOD's, but alas...I'm down on the beach working off my wifi connection and enjoying all the reasons you and I pay an obscene amount of money to live in Southern California. <VBG>

With the exception of the Tanner's...most websites that provide access to the JOD don't monkey around with the text.

As for the truths of Breigham, I've never attacked any comment he's made. As I stated to our good friend Kosher, most of his racial views of that day...were frankly on a par with those of Abraham Lincoln and others. While we find them shocking today...they were nonetheless common back then.

Additionally...I find it interesting that in his name...he uses a derogatory term used mainly on exmo.com that of "morg"...which is exmo.com's way of comparing us to the "Borg" of TNG...Hmmmmmmmmm

[Guest User-Removed]

Of course I know the difference. Did you not read my post in the Elphaba/Kosher topic? BTW. LaMoine Jensen is the current head of the AUB, I have no idea who Ed Allred is

I meet David Allred once though (he's the FLDS guy that bought the YFZ property) while I was working in Las Vegas. Seemed like a nice guy, had one of his wives with him. she wasn't some meek wall-flower.

I know a gentlemen that was married to one of Owen Allred's girls at one point.

No Ed though.

Kosher...I will bow to your superior knowledge of all thinks poly...since I believe you have more than once stated you still believe in polygamy????

I know one of the sects was founded and still run by an Allred...I suspect I've gotten them confused with Dr. Ed Allred...a notorious abortionist here in Southern California...

BTW...I once lived up Little Cottonwood Canyon way...where there were plenty of poly's...mainly of the Jeff's Cult ilk.

I did a quick google and I think it should be Rulon or Owen Allred, et al..here's a link

Rulon C. Allred - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Edited June 11, 2008 by MyDogSkip
additional info

[KosherXMorg]

I like the term "morg", heard about it in a story they did on the TV show "Big Love" apparently the teenage kids call them that in the show (I've don't have HBO, so I've never seen it.) I don't frequent anti-mormon sites so their use of it is news to me.

Ah, polygamy, the age old question. To believe or not to believe that is the question. I'm still studying it out. I say stuff then I take it back, I have believing times and unbelieving times. It's hard to break the grip of LDSism. The "morg" nick is appropriate, because at times I do feel like 7 of 9, torn between the unity of the collective and my upbringing, and the beauty of freedom and truth.

The Apostolic United Brethren was formed by Rulon Allred when he split from LeRoy Johson after the death of Joseph Musser. Rulon was the junior member of the council and some of the old timers didn't like that Musser chose him to be the head of the council. After Rulon was murdered by Ervil Lebaron's followers, Owen took over, but he died a few years back. LaMoine Jensen now leads them.

[tubaloth]

It was brought up in another thread that everything the prophets, general authorities, and church leaders produce is considered official church doctrine.

Figuring out what is and isn’t doctrine in the LDS religion is pretty tough because we have an open cannon. This makes it hard for “outsiders” that aren’t familiar with our teachings to figure out what is doctrine, or just interesting teachings.

I can make this a lot longer, but for sake of time it really comes down to witnesses. In the LDS church we really do believe in the mouth of 2 or 3 witnesses every word is established.

That leads us to what is a good witness? This can get kind of into some gray area, but for the most part there are a lot of witnesses. The first is probably a prophet of God! Next is Twelve Apostles, the Scriptures. (there really isn’t a ranking here, but in some cases there is).

Also church publications, like manuals, and so far can add a witness. For example Jesus the Christ (the book) was actually endorsed by the church, this would be a case for a good witness as Church approved book. On the other hand Mormon Doctrine was not… but lets get into that later.

Last main key witness and the hardest for non-members is the Holy Ghost.

For me, Doctrine is teachings of the church that have more then one witness. This actually is pretty easy in concept but hard to prove to anybody. So if I hear some teaching giving by the prophet, I feel the spirit that it is true, that usually is enough for me (I do have two witnesses). But usually further study of these “Doctrines” show that they have been taught over and over again (adding more and more witnesses). For the basic doctrines they are found in the scriptures.

So does that mean I just take everything that is been taught? Not necessarily. There are a lot of good teachings, that we just don’t have enough information (or maybe enough witnesses) to really make that teaching doctrine. That doesn’t mean I completely ignore it, it means that I take it proper light it was given. This is where Mormon Doctrine (the book) would fall into place. Yes I know who Elder McConkie was, I also know he had his own opinions on things. But I use his teaching as just one witness, when I add more to it (mostly Scripture) then I can see if that teaching was doctrine.

The same can hold true with trying to prove some idea not as doctrine.

Last, we have to realize how revelation works! New Doctrines can override old Doctrines. Mostly New Revelation (for us) is more important then Revelation given to Adam, Noah and Brigham Young. That isn’t to say it is outdated, but there is a priority on what we need to know and live by.

So when you are trying to find out what is doctrine or not, look for how many witnesses it has!

[Guest User-Removed]

I like the term "morg", heard about it in a story they did on the TV show "Big Love" apparently the teenage kids call them that in the show (I've don't have HBO, so I've never seen it.) I don't frequent anti-mormon sites so their use of it is news to me.

Ah, polygamy, the age old question. To believe or not to believe that is the question. I'm still studying it out. I say stuff then I take it back, I have believing times and unbelieving times. It's hard to break the grip of LDSism. The "morg" nick is appropriate, because at times I do feel like 7 of 9, torn between the unity of the collective and my upbringing, and the beauty of freedom and truth.

The Apostolic United Brethren was formed by Rulon Allred when he split from LeRoy Johson after the death of Joseph Musser. Rulon was the junior member of the council and some of the old timers didn't like that Musser chose him to be the head of the council. After Rulon was murdered by Ervil Lebaron's followers, Owen took over, but he died a few years back. LaMoine Jensen now leads them.

http://www.exmormon.org/mormon/mormon158.htm

Planet LDS Rhetoric

Morg - a derogatory term confounding Mormons or the LDS Church with Star Trek’s Borg, connoting that Mormons are mindless drones.

Education, Scholarship, and Mormonism

Additionally, there seems to be the belief that the more educated a person is, the less likely they are to be religious. In other words, the more that individuals focus on scholarship, the more they will leave the LDS Church. Some of the more polemic of this group have used derogatory terms to describe the LDS, such as "the Morg" (a combination of Mormon and Borg, from the Star Trek: The Next Generation television series), "the collective," and "mind-numbed robots."1

Say what you will Kosher....Morg is a term designed to inflict ridicule on all things LDS....

[KosherXMorg]

Mormon Church - the Fastest Growing Church?

Planet LDS Rhetoric

Morg - a derogatory term confounding Mormons or the LDS Church with Star Trek’s Borg, connoting that Mormons are mindless drones.

Education, Scholarship, and Mormonism

Additionally, there seems to be the belief that the more educated a person is, the less likely they are to be religious. In other words, the more that individuals focus on scholarship, the more they will leave the LDS Church. Some of the more polemic of this group have used derogatory terms to describe the LDS, such as "the Morg" (a combination of Mormon and Borg, from the Star Trek: The Next Generation television series), "the collective," and "mind-numbed robots."1

Say what you will Kosher....Morg is a term designed to inflict ridicule on all things LDS....

You can choose be insulted if you like it's your choice.

One thing I will say is I don't agree that the more educated one is the more likely they are to fall away from the church. And I don't see LDS as mindless, I believe they choose to be and not question what they are taught, not because they are mindless but because of their good feelings and close associations.

I do, however, believe that if more people had the opportunity to investigate other Book of Mormon believing churches after receiving their BofM witness, the membership break-down between the various churches would be drastically different.

[Guest User-Removed]

You can choose be insulted if you like it's your choice.

One thing I will say is I don't agree that the more educated one is the more likely they are to fall away from the church. And I don't see LDS as mindless, I believe they choose to be and not question what they are taught, not because they are mindless but because of their good feelings and close associations.

I do, however, believe that if more people had the opportunity to investigate other Book of Mormon believing churches after receiving their BofM witness, the membership break-down between the various churches would be drastically different.

OH...Kosher....please...if you truly believed that, you would be sitting next to Mike K in his Hedrickite Sect and not out on the internet creating your own church...

Please...I may have been born at night...but it wasn't last night...

As my dearly departed Grandfather taught us kids..."The Church is True...The Book is Blue"

[KosherXMorg]

I'm not exactly sure what that had to do with my post.

I haven't ruled out the possibility of ending up in the Church of Christ in fact it's probably likely. I've meet them and the are wonderful very down to earth people. I'm still in study and prayer. Sometimes I may jump the gun on an idea, or get fired up about something. But I usually center back on the Church of Christ when I calm down. They are good patient people and aren't out to make quick baptisms, so I'm sure they'll bear with my while I work my ideas out. I don't pretend to have all the answers or to know if I'm even asking the right questions, but God knows me and he knows my heart, and he will lead me where he wants me to be sooner or later. So don't fret too much for me, trigger.

[Traveler]

It was brought up in another thread that everything the prophets, general authorities, and church leaders produce is considered official church doctrine. I find this to be contradictory to much of what I have heard in LDS apologetics. Perhaps those that make this claim are unfamiliar with apologetics or objective church history, or maybe more people believe this to be true than I thought. Any one else subscribe to this theory - that everything the prophets, GA's and church leaders say in print or from the pulpit is considered official church doctrine? I'd love to hear more from either side.

Best,

GoodK

The other side of your question concerns what is not doctrine. I believe it is within scope to say that anything said or printed by an "anti" LDS organization is not doctrine.

The Traveler

[Snow]

AH...The true Apostate finally shines through...Kosher...EVERYONE, knows that the JOD is only "Doctrine" to those like you who enjoy slagging and attacking the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints....

Shall I post some of your Doctrine, from the church you founded???

Are you here trawling for new members????

Tell me - do you find pejorative name-calling to be a particularly effective technique? I assume you do since you employ it often enough... but exactly what do you hope it accomplishes?

[KosherXMorg]

It's no skin off my nose. I've seen him do far worse to others. It just gives me a resigned chuckle at this point.

[GoodK]

The other side of your question concerns what is not doctrine. I believe it is within scope to say that anything said or printed by an "anti" LDS organization is not doctrine.

The Traveler

What does this mean? What is an anti- LDS organization? And who brought up anything anti? Jump the gun, eh? I assume you are conditioned to interpret criticism as "anti" but your statement does not relate to the original post or topic at all.

[Snow]

What does this mean? What is an anti- LDS organization? And who brought up anything anti? Jump the gun, eh? I assume you are conditioned to interpret criticism as "anti" but your statement does not relate to the original post or topic at all.

Of course it relates to the topic and to the original post. If you see something on an anti-Mormon website (and your inference that "an anti -LDS organization" isn't easily determined is prima facie untrue) that seeks to pejoratively define LDS beliefs, you can be fairly certain that it either untrue, or presented in a way that mischaracterizes our beliefs and, if it is authored by the anti-Mormon (as opposed from a quote of our scriptures - in context), then it is also very likely non-doctrinal.

[Guest User-Removed]

Tell me - do you find pejorative name-calling to be a particularly effective technique? I assume you do since you employ it often enough... but exactly what do you hope it accomplishes?

What...Snow...kinda like when you attacked Laura Cooke??????

Please.....Ira Fuller is RIGHT!!!!