HiJolly Posted August 21, 2009 Report Share Posted August 21, 2009 Post it again for me please, this is way too long to go through again.I missed it because I wasn't looking for it. It never occured to me that what the Apostles speak at General Conference is not considered scripture.I'll read it this time, promise.Cool. It is here: Approaching Mormon Doctrine - LDS Newsroom The first bullet point, in part reads: "Not every statement made by a Church leader, past or present, necessarily constitutes doctrine. A single statement made by a single leader on a single occasion often represents a personal, though well-considered, opinion, but is not meant to be officially binding for the whole Church." I think they settled on this due to so many people pulling weird quotes from the Journal of Discourses. ...and that sort of thing... HiJolly Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Believer_1829 Posted August 21, 2009 Report Share Posted August 21, 2009 I was just throwing in my agreement, nothing more.I guess it's just a bad night.Come 'er buddy... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pam Posted August 21, 2009 Report Share Posted August 21, 2009 Heyyyy no PDA allowed on this site. lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pam Posted August 21, 2009 Report Share Posted August 21, 2009 Cool. It is here: Approaching Mormon Doctrine - LDS Newsroom The first bullet point, in part reads: "Not every statement made by a Church leader, past or present, necessarily constitutes doctrine. A single statement made by a single leader on a single occasion often represents a personal, though well-considered, opinion, but is not meant to be officially binding for the whole Church." I think they settled on this due to so many people pulling weird quotes from the Journal of Discourses. ...and that sort of thing... HiJolly For debate sake..if something is said from the pulpit at General Conference and it is meant to go to every member of the Church..how is that not to be taken as doctrine? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justice Posted August 21, 2009 Report Share Posted August 21, 2009 HiJolly, I'm referring to messages they give at General Conference that are printed in the Ensign. I don't think this statment is saying what the Apostles speak at Conference is not modern scriptire. I get the gist of what it's saying, but at General Conference? ...scripture ...at least to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Believer_1829 Posted August 21, 2009 Report Share Posted August 21, 2009 Interesting quote...“We call ourselves monotheists,” says Donna Lee Bowen of BYU’s Department of Government. “Muslims are really monotheists and are confused and outraged when you explain that there are really three members of the godhead—Heavenly Father, Jesus Christ, and the Holy Ghost."So Ms. Bowen indicates that though the church may call itself monotheists, is is not really in the traditional sense.***The italics are in the article.*** Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lattelady Posted August 21, 2009 Author Report Share Posted August 21, 2009 So the core doctrine of the church is that there is ONE GOD--monotheist--One God that you worship and give glory to. There ARE teachings that you can be exalted to godhood, but you would never be on the same level with GOD, so others should never consider that to mean Latter Day Saints are polytheistic. Am I saying that in a way that honors your beliefs? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pam Posted August 21, 2009 Report Share Posted August 21, 2009 Honestly..I'm so tired right now I don't know one istic from another istic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lattelady Posted August 21, 2009 Author Report Share Posted August 21, 2009 That's okay...you should go to bed Pam if you're tired! Thankyou for reading the post, though. I appreciate the time you put in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kawazu Posted August 21, 2009 Report Share Posted August 21, 2009 (edited) So the core doctrine of the church is that there is ONE GOD--monotheist--One God that you worship and give glory to. There ARE teachings that you can be exalted to godhood, but you would never be on the same level with GOD, so others should never consider that to mean Latter Day Saints are polytheistic. Am I saying that in a way that honors your beliefs?This statement has been certified 100% Kawazu Approved. Edited August 21, 2009 by Kawazu I like clipart. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rameumptom Posted August 21, 2009 Report Share Posted August 21, 2009 (edited) Wow, I was away for a few hours and come back to a new thread that has 6 pages already. Without going back to each of the other posts, I'll just start here and say Orthodox Christianity is about monotheism and spoke against polytheism actually. Snow, you were using some names from people that did not believe in monotheism but heresy (because of that polytheism). Yes, Christians believe in one God. That one God is in three persons, The Father, Son and Holy Ghost. That is the Trinity. Belief in henotheism or only worshiping one God does not side step the definition of polytheism if the belief in "more than one God" is still there. Finally, I wanted to say again that "gods" is used a lot but in each case they are false gods or like judges and not meaning Gods.You need to read what the scholars are saying on this. Early Jews and Christians were henotheists. I suggest you read some of the great stuff from Methodist Preacher and OT scholar, Margaret Barker, for example.By technical definition, we ARE henotheists. But so are all Christians. Ask a Jew or Muslim what they think of the Trinity or Godhead, and they will all agree that we believe in multiple gods. And that is true, regardless of how you try to slice and dice them up: i.e., one God in three persons, or 3 persons in one Godhead.You won't find "henotheist" in LDS General Conference talks. They are not there to discuss critical theological theory. But you will find several points on it at FAIRLDS.org where they DO discuss theory.henotheist - Google Search Edited August 21, 2009 by rameumptom Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gatorman Posted August 21, 2009 Report Share Posted August 21, 2009 I am a Christian. I am a Latter Day Saint. I am a Mormon. I am a Male. I am a follower of Christ. I am a computer geek. I am a father. Sure, there are a few more lables you can throw on me. But, I could care less if you call me mono, poly, heno, or whatever. I believe in Heavenly Father, with a body, his son Jesus Christ, my Savior, with his own body, and the Holy Ghost, with its own body. I believe that they are One, just as we are to be one with Christ, one with our spouse, and one as a body of the Church. If you feel you must lump that into some category and then berate me for it, so be it. It will not change my faith or my belief that I am right, thanks to the Holy Spirit confirming it for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hemidakota Posted August 21, 2009 Report Share Posted August 21, 2009 Concur! Titles given are mere creations of the scholars [honorable] but for us, we worship the FATHER, The Son, and The Holy Ghost. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
desirexnoel Posted August 21, 2009 Report Share Posted August 21, 2009 I am sure it is great that you don't mind, but the rest of the world likes to have a clear idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gatorman Posted August 21, 2009 Report Share Posted August 21, 2009 I am sure it is great that you don't mind, but the rest of the world likes to have a clear idea.Well, honestly, I believe that my descriptions are more clear than the debate that has been occurring. And, titles and classifications are the creation of science to try to 'understand' things by man's terms. Heavenly Father does not deal in man's terms. I respect science, but, unlike some, I do not believe it is necessary to tear every aspect of our lives, of our beliefs, and of our faith apart to classify and categorize it. Doing so, to me, disrespects our Heavenly Father, IMHO. Others will chaff at that, I am sure, and I am sorry. But, that is how I feel and believe. I have said it before, my faith will always trump science when they disagree. Always. Science is the flawed creation of men. Faith is the perfect creation of our Heavenly Father. Both have to be studied to understand and have 'great' knowledge of. But, the fact is, one is created by man to know about our world, etc. The other was created by Heavenly Father to know him. Any true Christian would argue the greater importance of faith. Any true scientist would argue the greater importance of science. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HiJolly Posted August 21, 2009 Report Share Posted August 21, 2009 Well, honestly, I believe that my descriptions are more clear than the debate that has been occurring. And, titles and classifications are the creation of science to try to 'understand' things by man's terms. Heavenly Father does not deal in man's terms. I respect science, but, unlike some, I do not believe it is necessary to tear every aspect of our lives, of our beliefs, and of our faith apart to classify and categorize it. Doing so, to me, disrespects our Heavenly Father, IMHO. Others will chaff at that, I am sure, and I am sorry. But, that is how I feel and believe. I have said it before, my faith will always trump science when they disagree. Always. Science is the flawed creation of men. Faith is the perfect creation of our Heavenly Father. Both have to be studied to understand and have 'great' knowledge of. But, the fact is, one is created by man to know about our world, etc. The other was created by Heavenly Father to know him. Any true Christian would argue the greater importance of faith. Any true scientist would argue the greater importance of science.I'm glad that works for you, Gatorman. It does not work for me, though. I love, respect and use both faith and science. It is true that at times, one must give way to the other. That only occurs when one or the other is based on something less than truth. For me, it is truth that always wins. And with that, I win, Heavenly Father wins, my family wins, and the Church wins. HiJolly Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gatorman Posted August 21, 2009 Report Share Posted August 21, 2009 I'm glad that works for you, Gatorman. It does not work for me, though. I love, respect and use both faith and science. It is true that at times, one must give way to the other. That only occurs when one or the other is based on something less than truth. For me, it is truth that always wins. And with that, I win, Heavenly Father wins, my family wins, and the Church wins. HiJollyThat is a dangerous statement to me HiJolly. Any time you believe that science can trump Heavenly Father, which is what this seems to suggest. God is Truth. Science can be. One is absolute. The other is not. I respect science as well. But, it is not my religion and it can NEVER trump my faith. I will never allow it to. Now, before everyone gets up in arms, I do understand and respect science. I do not shun it. I simply do not worship it. It is flawed. It is man's creation. It can have beauty and ugliness. It can do great and terrible things. But, in the end, it is a creation of men to understand and categorize that which is around them. The debate on evolution is such a case. A Christian should always believe that Heavenly Father created man. What is never taught is what process he used. Evolution is one possible theory. But, until Heavenly Father chooses to make that known to us or until we attain perfect knowledge, Evolution will simply be a theory with the potential to be flawed. Heavenly Father's process will not be flawed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
desirexnoel Posted August 21, 2009 Report Share Posted August 21, 2009 (edited) That is a dangerous statement to me HiJolly. Any time you believe that science can trump Heavenly Father, which is what this seems to suggest. God is Truth. Science can be. One is absolute. The other is not. I respect science as well. But, it is not my religion and it can NEVER trump my faith. I will never allow it to.I don't think that is what he meant. As far as I understood he said that for the most part he tries to reconcile the two, but when that doesn't work he trusts in his faith.What I got from you is science and faith can never be reconciled.I believe science can explain a few things that faith can't, but I don't worship it. In fact I don't even think scientists do. I am not sure you need to... Edited August 21, 2009 by desirexnoel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john doe Posted August 21, 2009 Report Share Posted August 21, 2009 Boxes are so confining. You can't make blanket statements and say they apply to all of our beliefs. Monotheistic, polytheistic, henotheistic, it all depends on what portion of the gospel you're talking about. Don't put us in a labeled box and say 'this is you'. It doesn't work unless you label it 'True followers of Christ'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
desirexnoel Posted August 21, 2009 Report Share Posted August 21, 2009 Boxes are so confining. You can't make blanket statements and say they apply to all of our beliefs. Monotheistic, polytheistic, henotheistic, it all depends on what portion of the gospel you're talking about. Don't put us in a labeled box and say 'this is you'. It doesn't work unless you label it 'True followers of Christ'.I don't think the goal is to put you in a box. I think the goal is just to better understand and that is what helps most of the world understand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lattelady Posted August 21, 2009 Author Report Share Posted August 21, 2009 (edited) To Gatorman: I hope you weren't insinuating that it was I that was "berating" you for your beliefs--not once have I berated ANYONE on this forum. Not once! John Doe: The only labels I'm even THROWING OUT (not ATTACHING to anyone) are ones that have been thrown out by others here (church members). THe whole point of this thread was to sort out what the Church teaches on the subject. I've gotten a multiplicity of answers. I've not pegged you as any one thing. I'm trying to figure out which it is. The portion of the gospel I've BEEN referring to is: does your Church believe in one God or many? THat's it. It's taken on a life of its own from there, mainly because it seems there are wide and varied beliefs. I never labeled anyone. I never berated anyone. Strangely, some are happy to take on a label and say: Yes, you've hit the nail on the head. We are monotheistic, but also henotheistic in the way we see other gods coming into the picture. (like Kawazu) Others, like you, seem very offended by that. Why? Edited August 21, 2009 by lattelady Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gatorman Posted August 21, 2009 Report Share Posted August 21, 2009 No, my statements were not at any one person. There have been other discussions on the forum where it has been suggested by many people that my lack of, well, faith in Science is a bad thing. I believe Faith and Science can reconcile. When they don't, I turn to faith. Others on here turn to science and start to suggest that belief in scriptures or faith or the teachings of prophets, without 'proof' is dogmatic, etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
desirexnoel Posted August 21, 2009 Report Share Posted August 21, 2009 No, my statements were not at any one person. There have been other discussions on the forum where it has been suggested by many people that my lack of, well, faith in Science is a bad thing. I believe Faith and Science can reconcile. When they don't, I turn to faith. Others on here turn to science and start to suggest that belief in scriptures or faith or the teachings of prophets, without 'proof' is dogmatic, etc.So then you and HiJolly agree, just in different words? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gatorman Posted August 21, 2009 Report Share Posted August 21, 2009 So then you and HiJolly agree, just in different words?We are closer than others who have posted on this and other sites, yes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john doe Posted August 21, 2009 Report Share Posted August 21, 2009 Others, like you, seem very offended by that. Why? I'm not offended, but you do seem to be trying to offend. Why? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts