Lds Prophets - Official Doctrine Vs. Personal Opinions

[wes]

Please don't put words into my LDS mouth. It is not my place or your's to judge where you may end up in the afterlife. That is the purview of Christ.

Besides, we were talking about whether living the restored gospel of Christ would enable one to become more like Christ or not, and not whether rejecting the restored gospel would do the same. You claimed that the way you lived the restored gospel it took you away from being like Christ, whereas it has taken me towards being like Christ. But, I will leave discussing wy the difference to another thread.

That is certainly your choice, and again I wish you well.

But, please note that the scripture you quoted has to do with testing whether something is "good" or not and holding on to the good (which is essentially what I have been suggesting), and not whether something may be classified as "official doctrine" or not. It also doesn't suggest quibbling with your former faith over differences of understanding and perceptions about statements made by LDS Church leaders.

At least that is the way I see it--not that I wish to argue about it.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

I did not put words in your mouth Wade. I said according to Mormon teaching. The only reason I even mentioned it was because you wished me well in my new faith which again, is not Mormonism and thus means I am an apostate. I do not accept JS as a prophet and I do not accept the BOM as true.

As for testing what is good, yes I have, and I found that the Mormon gospel is NOT good. Nor are many of the statements made by numerous Mormon Prophets. Mormons are the ones who claim they have a living prophet, and thus when those prophets say things that are contrary to becoming Christlike it is a problem that needs to be dealt with, is it not?

[wenglund]

Another reason it is important to distinguish official doctrine from personal opinions is because Mormon Leaders in the past have made statements that are anything but Christlike. Are you familiar with the Journal of Discourses, Wade? Consider the following statement made by Brigham Young:

"You see some classes of the human family that are black, uncouth, uncomely, disagreeable, sad, low in their habits, wild, and seemingly without the blessings of the intelligence that is generally bestowed upon mankind." Journal of Discourses, volume 4, p. 219.

In light of this statement would you still say that it's unimportant to distinguish what is offical Mormon teaching and what is not?

Yes...I still contend that it is unimportant to make that distinction, but instead we should concern ourselves with those things that will bring us to Christ. Certain obscure quotes from over 100 years ago (like the one you cited) tend not to lend themselves to that objective--which is why such quotes are obscure to the general Church membership, and seem only to have significance to those, such as yourself, who have lost sight of the objective.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[Zakuska]

I did not put words in your mouth Wade. I said according to Mormon teaching. The only reason I even mentioned it was because you wished me well in my new faith which again, is not Mormonism and thus means I am an apostate. I do not accept JS as a prophet and I do not accept the BOM as true.

As for testing what is good, yes I have, and I found that the Mormon gospel is NOT good. Nor are many of the statements made by numerous Mormon Prophets. Mormons are the ones who claim they have a living prophet, and thus when those prophets say things that are contrary to becoming Christlike it is a problem that needs to be dealt with, is it not?

What gave you a silly idea like that?

Can you explain why the Prophet Jonah, a Prophet whom Christ himself quoted exibits such Christ like attitudes as dereliction of duty, blood lust, and H8?

[wes]

Yes...I still contend that it is unimportant to make that distinction, but instead we should concern ourselves with those things that will bring us to Christ. Certain obscure quotes from over 100 years ago (like the one you cited) tend not to lend themselves to that objective--which is why such quotes are obscure to the general Church membership, and seem only to have significance to those, such as yourself, who have lost sight of the objective.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Well, considering the fact that the Mormon Priesthood was denied to people of the African race up until only 30 years ago it would seem to me that these matters are extremely relevant.

[wenglund]

I did not put words in your mouth Wade. I said according to Mormon teaching. The only reason I even mentioned it was because you wished me well in my new faith which again, is not Mormonism and thus means I am an apostate. I do not accept JS as a prophet and I do not accept the BOM as true.

You misunderstood what I said, but that's okay. It isn't important enough to me to pursue it with you further.

As for testing what is good, yes I have, and I found that the Mormon gospel is NOT good. Nor are many of the statements made by numerous Mormon Prophets. Mormons are the ones who claim they have a living prophet, and thus when those prophets say things that are contrary to becoming Christlike it is a problem that needs to be dealt with, is it not?

I don't know if it is a "problem", but each of us are certainly free to determine what brings us closer to Christ or not. And, as long as that is where our energies are directed (rather than counter-productively quibbling over whether something may be classified as "official doctrine" or not), then I think that is wise.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[thesometimesaint]

wes:

Having the Priesthood is not nor has it ever been a requirement for membership in the Church or the Kingdom of God.

[wes]

wes:

Having the Priesthood is not nor has it ever been a requirement for membership in the Church or the Kingdom of God.

I never said it was.

[thesometimesaint]

wes:

So being Black is irrelevant to your case against the Mormons. On that we can agreed upon.

[wenglund]

Well, considering the fact that the Mormon Priesthood was denied to people of the African race up until only 30 years ago it would seem to me that these matters are extremely relevant.

It is certainly your perogative to fester on the distant past in whatever strained way you desire as supposedly your way of becoming more like Christ.

For my part, as with the many black members of the Church, we find it more productive to embrace with gratitude things as they now are, and to look and work towards the future realization of our shared desire to be like Christ.

To each their own.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[wes]

wes:

So being Black is irrelevant to your case against the Mormons. On that we can agreed upon.

Actually it is very relevant. The fact that being Black prevented a person from ANYTHING with regard to Mormonism is a huge problem for me and many others. Especially in light of the numerous racist comments made by numerous Mormon Prophets. The fact that a church who claims to have the restored gospel of Christ would deny a person something based on their skin color is atrocious.

[ttribe]

Actually it is very relevant. The fact that being Black prevented a person from ANYTHING with regard to Mormonism is a huge problem for me and many others. Especially in light of the numerous racist comments made by numerous Mormon Prophets. The fact that a church who claims to have the restored gospel of Christ would deny a person something based on their skin color is atrocious.

And yet you refuse to actually look at the links I provided to you before regarding responses to these issues. So, c'mon wes, admit it - this little adventure you're on here isn't about learning anything new is it? It's really about your personal mission to denounce the Church and its teachings, right?

[wenglund]

wes:

Having the Priesthood is not nor has it ever been a requirement for membership in the Church or the Kingdom of God.

Even more important, personally holding the priesthood within the restored gospel is not requisite to becoming like Christ--i.e. becoming the very best person possible and achieving a fulness of joy, love, value, and meaningfulness.

In fact, there are not a few sisters in the gospel who have done just that, and even much better than some of the men who have held the priesthood.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[wes]

It is certainly your perogative to fester on the distant past in whatever strained way you desire as supposedly your way of becoming more like Christ.

For my part, as with the many black members of the Church, we find it more productive to embrace with gratitude things as they now are, and to look and work towards the future realization of our shared desire to be like Christ.

To each their own.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Yes, to each their own. I think we just need to agree to disagree Wade. I have not experienced Mormonism as something that makes a person more like Christ. It certainly didn't seem to help Brigham Young nor has it helped anyone else I have known.

[ttribe]

Yes, to each their own. I think we just need to agree to disagree Wade. I have not experienced Mormonism as something that makes a person more like Christ. It certainly didn't seem to help Brigham Young nor has it helped anyone else I have known.

Since Christ is the only one qualified to make such a judgment about BY or anyone else, I'm not sure what makes you think your statement is appropriate.

[thesometimesaint]

wes:

Blacks have been members of the Church since it's beginnings. You are loosing credibility fast.

[wes]

Since Christ is the only one qualified to make such a judgment about BY or anyone else, I'm not sure what makes you think your statement is appropriate.

My point is that Christ was not a racist nor did he encourage racism.

wes:Blacks have been members of the Church since it's beginnings. You are loosing credibility fast.

You obviously did not read what I wrote.

[ttribe]

My point is that Christ was not a racist nor did he encourage racism.

Was the Atonement sufficient to overcome BY's sins?

[thesometimesaint]

wes:

Read the Bible wes. He specifically did not to go but to the Jews.

[LDSMusic483]

My point is that Christ was not a racist nor did he encourage racism.You obviously did not read what I wrote.

Yet he refused to go to the gentiles? "Salvation is of the Jews" sound familiar to you? Or limiting the Priesthood to just one tribe of Israel for so long? No, Christ/God has never been an exclusionist...obviously.

Also, because Christ said He wouldn't answer by what authority He acted...did that mean He didn't know? He avoided the question. He had His reasons. Why limit others if Christ could do it as well?

Perhaps some prophets made racial comments. They were and are imperfect. You are holding up too high of a standard. I can't imagine what you would have done to the Prophets of old considering some of the things they did. Stop holding up a standard that is not achievable. And you must be looking at the wrong Mormons to see if they are trying to draw closer to Christ. You can answer only for yourself and I think your desire to try to belittle anothers religion says enough about how much better you're doing now as a non-member compared to when you were one.

[ttribe]

Yet he refused to go to the gentiles? "Salvation is of the Jews" sound familiar to you? Or limiting the Priesthood to just one tribe of Israel for so long? No, Christ/God has never been an exclusionist...obviously.

Also, because Christ said He wouldn't answer by what authority He acted...did that mean He didn't know? He avoided the question. He had His reasons. Why limit others if Christ could do it as well?

Perhaps some prophets made racial comments. They were and are imperfect. You are holding up too high of a standard. I can't imagine what you would have done to the Prophets of old considering some of the things they did. Stop holding up a standard that is not achievable. And you must be looking at the wrong Mormons to see if they are trying to draw closer to Christ. You can answer only for yourself and I think your desire to try to belittle anothers religion says enough about how much better you're doing now as a non-member compared to when you were one.

Amen!

[wenglund]

Yes, to each their own. I think we just need to agree to disagree Wade. I have not experienced Mormonism as something that makes a person more like Christ. It certainly didn't seem to help Brigham Young nor has it helped anyone else I have known.

I will let Christ and Brigham decide that between themselves, just as I am pleased to do the same between you and Christ.

Again, if you have determined, for whatever reason, that the restored gospel is not the way to Christ, then I can respect your choice even though I have concluded otherwise.

It is just that I don't see how you will become more like Christ by quibbling with members of your former faith about your former faith. Why not stop looking backwards and re-arguing the past, and proceed forward on your chosen path? Is your destiny behind you or ahead of you?

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[wes]

I will let Christ and Brigham decide that between themselves, just as I am pleased to do the same between you and Christ.

Again, if you have determined, for whatever reason, that the restored gospel is not the way to Christ, then I can respect your choice even though I have concluded otherwise.

It is just that I don't see how you will become more like Christ by quibbling with members of your former faith about your former faith. Why not stop looking backwards and re-arguing the past, and proceed forward on your chosen path? Is your destiny behind you or ahead of you?

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Again, the Bible says to contend for the faith earnestly (Jude 1) along with testing all things (1 Thessalonians). You can criticize me for following what the Bible says but it is the destiny that is in front of me.

[ttribe]

Again, the Bible says to contend for the faith earnestly (Jude 1) along with testing all things (1 Thessalonians). You can criticize me for following what the Bible says but it is the destiny that is in front of me.

Again I ask - Was the Atonement sufficient to overcome BY's sins?

[saemo]

From your avatar, I figure you're Catholic. I think I remember you saying you are someplace, but my mind is on vacation once again. In the Catholic Church, there is Tradition and it is non-biblical, in the sense that it's not in the Bible. How does one determine which of the writings are Tradition and which aren't. Are there any Catholics who believe that certain non-Tradition beliefs are Tradition? Whose fault is that?

I have heard Catholics say that praying to the saints isn't the same as worshiping them, yet I have heard some say that it is. I have heard Catholics say that the picking of a new Pope is through revelation and others say that it isn't. So when it comes to deciding often times what is Catholic doctrine and what isn't, like you with us LDSers, I don't assume what they accept as doctrine is doctine.

And I'm not going to get into what Evangelical accept as doctrine and what isn't doctrine. Talk about a brier patch.

The Catechism of the Catholic Church clearly define the doctrines of the Roman Catholic Church. If individual Catholics disagree, the doctrines do not change. Doctrine is clear that we are not worshiping the Saints. Doctrine is clear on how a Pope is selected. If a person gives you a different answer, it is because they do not understand their own Catholic faith.

Also, regarding revelation, I have found that any conversation I have with an LDS person they are convinced that the Catholic Church has no belief in revelation at all. And then there is the fact that doctrinally, we divide revelation into two different types. So no, we do not believe in the sort of Revelation that can change the doctrines as Jesus imparted to the Apostles. But yes, we do believe the Church is lead by the Holy Spirit, as are individuals, which is revelation. LDS tend to not grasp this difference for some reason.

Anyway, in the LDS church, every person can believe whatever they like (to a point), and still be in good standing with the LDS church. My own observations (for whatever that is worth) is that there are core doctrines, such as Jesus lived, died and was resurrected on the third day. All are in agreement with this.

But doctrine is not clearly defined for the stranger doctrines.

Do men become gods? Some believe this is absolutely doctrine, and it was clearly taught as doctrine by Brigham Young and others. Yet, today, many LDS deny this is doctrine. Is polygamy a doctrine? There is no one source that I could go to, such as a catechism, and read: THIS IS THE DOCTRINE OF THIS SUBJECT.

There was a time when I wanted to get this figured out, just because it was so darned puzzling. But this is no longer the case. I just figure it is what it is.

(I have no idea how Evangelicals determine doctrine. )

[LDSMusic483]

Again, the Bible says to contend for the faith earnestly (Jude 1) along with testing all things (1 Thessalonians). You can criticize me for following what the Bible says but it is the destiny that is in front of me.

So then...what you're saying is since you're following the scriptures so full of enthusiasm, and you're trying to achieve your destiny is that you are likewise on sites dedicated to every other religion to which you are not a member?

Or are you depriving them of your enthusiastic destiny?