What exactly do we define as scripture?

[Call2Serves]

So recently someone speaking in priesthood said outright that any talks given by prophets (latter-day prophets like Joseph Smith / Brigham Young / President Monson) were not considered scripture, and the same was to be thought of ensign articles, and any church publications other than The Standard Works (The Bible, The Book of Mormon, D&C, PoGP). So my question is, is that a correct statement? My understanding was that if the church publishes it, or it was written by a prophet (The Miracle of Forgiveness, Jesus The Christ, The Discourses of Brigham Young, Doctrines of Salvation (which he also said was not scripture)) was all considered scripture. Was I incorrect in assuming materials written by church authorities is to be considered as such? Should I read these books as merely "personal opinions" (his words)?? Any advice on this would be greatly welcomed :)

[Traveler]

Paul talked about the scriptures that are written in one’s heart as opposed to the scriptures written on paper. He suggested the scriptures written on one’s heart are the more important. The standard works are scripture for all the world but I have some personal scriptures in my heart that are for me alone.

The Traveler

[Onhech]

Official scripture for The church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints must be canonized, meaning submitted and approved by the 12 apostles [and the the general membership of the church].

Generally though in D&C 42: 28 it tells us that whatever is spoken under the influence of the Holy Ghost is scripture.

I once read a general authority that said something to the effect that "There is a lot of doctrine that isn't "official Doctrine"" meaning that just because it hasn't been canonized doesn't mean it's not doctrine. I think we can be reasonably secure in believing that the words of the prophets are on par with scriptures. As Ezra Taft Bension said:

"The living prophet is more vital to us than the standard works."

So I would say scripture is subjective for the individual but for LDS we should be considering the words and council of the prophets scripture (when they are speaking in their capacities as prophets seer and revelators)

Edited June 23, 2010 by Onhech
added correction/clarification as indicated by wingnut

[Wingnut]

Official scripture for The church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints must be canonized, meaning submitted and approved by the 12 apostles.

It must be approved by the general membership of the Church. New sections of the D&C submitted for addition to the canon are approved by a sustaining vote in General Conference.

[MarginOfError]

In the LDS religion, we use the term scripture rather ambiguously. For the purpose creating a dialog of understanding, I'm going to propose some terminology that hopefully we can agree on, even if it doesn't generalize beyond this thread.

Let us assume that by scripture, we mean the canonized word of God as approved by the the First Presidency, Quorum of the Twelve, and sustained and affirmed by the common consent of the Church membership. This would include the Old and New Testaments, the Book of Mormon, the Doctrine and Covenants, and the Pearl of Great Price.

Now, let us define doctrine as accepted and recognized principles not explicitly contained in scripture, but for which there exists some basis for consideration. This basis may be either a series of logical and justifiable assumptions and conclusions from scripture, or it may be the word of God revealed through a prophet. Let us also stipulate that doctrine is define by those sustained as prophets, seers, and revelators.

Let truths be defined as principles and statements that are revealed to individuals-regardless of faith or calling-by the power of the Holy Ghost. These may be received by anyone with a mind and a heart open to receive them.

Interpretations are attempts to clarify and apply scripture, doctrine, and truths. These may or may not be confirmed by the Holy Ghost, and interpretations of the same scripture may vary by context of the situation. Interpretations are subjective where as scripture, doctrine, and truths are objective.

Lastly, policy is the institutionalized interpretation and/or application of scripture, doctrine, and truths that govern how the kingdom of God functions. These are subject to change at the discretion of the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve.

By these technical definitions, what your friend has said is fairly accurate. The Standard Works are the only scriptures in the Church, and are the standard against which all doctrines, truths, interpretations, and policies are measured. There is no other scripture until it is canonized into the Standard Works.

General Conference talks and Ensign articles may be either doctrine, truths, or interpretations. It takes some effort, open thought, and prayer to determine what a given talk or article may be. Some talks and articles include elements of all three. Members should use the spirit as a guide to distinguish doctrine from truth from interpretation.

Books by General Authorities are even more vague, as they don't have to pass through the Church's correlation department. While these can certainly be valuable resources, they should not be held above Church publications, and should always be carefully weighed against the Standard Works. Use of the Spirit is even more crucial here to determine was is doctrine, truth and interpretation.

The confusion many in the Church have is that we casually define scripture based on the statement in Timothy that "All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: " causing us to associate any good and inspired statement with the word 'scripture.' (There is also a reference in Doctrine and Covenants that makes this association even more apparent, but I can't remember where it is right now). This is likely based on the assumption that the scriptures lead us to salvation. But we have to recognize a difference between scripture and canonized scripture.

So, in short, yeah, your friend was kind of right in what he was saying. But the fact that General Conference talks and other books by General Authorities aren't scripture (as define above) doesn't mean they aren't valuable and worthy of our attention, nor does it necessarily mean that they aren't binding on the Church (doctrine certainly is binding, and policy sometimes can be too).

Thoughts, comments, or tangents?

[HiJolly]

Essentially there are 3 official sources of doctrine:

1) The scriptures

2) The declarations and proclamations of the first presidency

3) The Articles of Faith

Doctrine is explained and promulgated by Church publications and Church leaders. But these are not sources of doctrine.

See here: Approaching Mormon Doctrine - LDS Newsroom

HiJolly

[mikbone]

For LDS members the word scripture not only refers to the four Standard works of the Church it can also be described as "whatsoever [God's representatives] shall speak when moved upon by the Holy Ghost (D&C 68:2-4, 2 Tim. 3:16). Therefore, anyone who is moved upon by the Holy Ghost while speaking in General Conference and recorded for later reading in the Ensign, including the First Presidency messages, are considered scripture, although they would not be included as part of the Standard works of the Church.

WORDS OF OUR LIVING PROPHETS - In addition to these four books of scripture, the inspired words of our living prophets become scripture to us. Their words come to us through conferences, Church publications, and instructions to local priesthood leaders. "We believe all that God has revealed, all that he does now reveal, and we believe that he will yet reveal many great and important things pertaining to the kingdom of God" (Ninth article of faith). Gospel Principles Chapter 10

Article of Faith Eight - We believe the Bible to be the word of God as far as it is translated correctly.

Bible Dictionary - Song of Solomon: Whether Solomon is actually the author is doubtful. The composition has many beautiful phrases and lyrical prose, often quoted in religious literature. The JST manuscript contains the note that "the Song of Solomon is not inspired scripture"

The Hymnal (D&C 25:11) and Temple Endowment can also be considered as scripture.

Edited June 23, 2010 by mikbone

[HiJolly]

For LDS members the word scripture not only refers to the four Standard works of the Church it can also be described as "whatsoever [God's representatives] shall speak when moved upon by the Holy Ghost (D&C 68:2-4, 2 Tim. 3:16). Therefore, anyone who is moved upon by the Holy Ghost while speaking in General Conference and recorded for later reading in the Ensign, including the First Presidency messages, are considered scripture, although they would not be included as part of the Standard works of the Church.

WORDS OF OUR LIVING PROPHETS - In addition to these four books of scripture, the inspired words of our living prophets become scripture to us. Their words come to us through conferences, Church publications, and instructions to local priesthood leaders. "We believe all that God has revealed, all that he does now reveal, and we believe that he will yet reveal many great and important things pertaining to the kingdom of God" (Ninth article of faith). Gospel Principles Chapter 10

Article of Faith Eight - We believe the Bible to be the word of God as far as it is translated correctly.

Bible Dictionary - Song of Solomon: Whether Solomon is actually the author is doubtful. The composition has many beautiful phrases and lyrical prose, often quoted in religious literature. The JST manuscript contains the note that "the Song of Solomon is not inspired scripture"

The Hymnal (D&C 25:11) and Temple Endowment can also be considered as scripture.

Good points, however I think it is very important that everyone realize that this standard is PERSONAL only. The Holy Ghost witnesses to us INDIVIDUALLY that something (say, a talk in General Conference) is "TRUE", and at that point (and ONLY at that point), it is scripture TO US.

We cannot declare to other people that it is scripture, for they must obtain that same witness from the Holy Ghost FOR THEMSELVES.

Sorry if I CAPITALIZED too much.

HiJolly

[Dravin]

What usually comes to mind for me when that scripture is quoted is a Patriarchal Blessing, or even a more regular blessing.

[MarginOfError]

Good points, however I think it is very important that everyone realize that this standard is PERSONAL only. The Holy Ghost witnesses to us INDIVIDUALLY that something (say, a talk in General Conference) is "TRUE", and at that point (and ONLY at that point), it is scripture TO US.

We cannot declare to other people that it is scripture, for they must obtain that same witness from the Holy Ghost FOR THEMSELVES.

Sorry if I CAPITALIZED too much.

HiJolly

Which was kind of where I was headed in my previous post, although not so succinctly stated.

[rameumptom]

The LDS newsite has the Church's official statement regarding this:

• 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. With divine inspiration, the First Presidency (the prophet and his two counselors) and the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles (the second-highest governing body of the Church) counsel together to establish doctrine that is consistently proclaimed in official Church publications. This doctrine resides in the four “standard works” of scripture (the Holy Bible, the Book of Mormon, the Doctrine and Covenants and the Pearl of Great Price), official declarations and proclamations, and the Articles of Faith. Isolated statements are often taken out of context, leaving their original meaning distorted.
• Some doctrines are more important than others and might be considered core doctrines. For example, the precise location of the Garden of Eden is far less important than doctrine about Jesus Christ and His atoning sacrifice. The mistake that public commentators often make is taking an obscure teaching that is peripheral to the Church’s purpose and placing it at the very center. This is especially common among reporters or researchers who rely on how other Christians interpret Latter-day Saint doctrine.

Approaching Mormon Doctrine - LDS Newsroom

So we should take everything with a grain of salt. It is our duty as we listen to General Conference, read any book (from a GA or not), etc., to ponder and pray about it to determine through the Spirit if it is true (for us) or not. If the Spirit witnesses to us to believe it, then it becomes binding upon us personally.

Note: the Spirit can witness to us about one teaching, and later witness to us of a higher teaching. When we are ready for greater things, the Lord witnesses to us concerning them by His Spirit. But then it only is binding upon us.

Official Doctrine is binding upon all members.

BTW, Discourses of Brigham Young was NOT written by BY, but is a compilation of some of his talks. To use such logic to accept the DBY as scriptures, we would also have to accept the entire Journal of Discourses - including the parts that have since been rejected by modern prophets.

As it is, there are things in Miracle of Forgiveness and Mormon Doctrine that I do not agree with. That does not mean I reject the books, but that I am careful with the information within, because they were both written decades ago.

Our views on the atonement have changed since these were written. While both focused on salvation by works and that salvation = exaltation, and basically viewed anything less as hell; we now focus much more on the atonement of Christ.

Salvation includes both the resurrection and the atonement. The atonement requires faith on Christ, and obedience as a natural outgrowth of that faith. We do not repent out of fear, as Pres Kimball's book tends to cause; but we repent out of love for our Savior and Father. It isn't that the old teachings are wrong, but that we now understand more correctly how things work.

[Call2Serves]

Thank you everyone for all the detailed replies! The differences between scriptures, doctrine, and the others are now more defined. =)