Lds Prophets - Official Doctrine Vs. Personal Opinions

[LDSMusic483]

There you go. There is no such thing as opinion=doctrine or doctrine=opinion in Catholicism, or any other church that I am aware of.

No one said that opinion = doctrine. But statements - church sanctioned doctrine = opinion.

For example, on whether we will become gods...this is doctrine, it is found in the Doctrine and Covenants. Any process thinkings on how this will happen...well, that's opinion, because it hasn't been revealed the exact process.

[saemo]

But statements - church sanctioned doctrine = opinion.

I have no idea what this means.

[zerinus]

hi wes, I asked this a while back, really trying to figure it out. What I got is this:

1 - the official doctrine guidelines from lds.org, posted in this thread

2 - personal witness of the Holy Spirit

Where I find this problematic is that what is called opinion today, was taught as doctrine and people of the time received a personal witness of the Holy Spirit.

After you've asked the same question 10 times in 10 different ways and people believe they have honestly answered it...there isn't really anything more to be asked or said.

Also, after numerous conversations with LDS folks, I find that some believe certain doctrines and other don't, and all claim a personal witness of the Holy Spirit for their position of belief, or unbelief.

I gave up on trying to figure this one out. If I ever find myself in a conversation with an LDS person about LDS doctrine, I don't assume what they accept as doctrine. Five different people will give you five different answers, and so I will ask what a person's position if it is relevant to our conversation.

LDS doctrine is determined by the standard works of the Church. We do not have a catechism as such. The standard works are our catechism.

zerinus

[wenglund]

My experience is that it has led me to become more like Christ. My experience is that it leads everyone to become more like Christ. You must be an exception. zerinus

I am of the opinion that for those who aren't lead to become more like Christ, it is because they don't correctly understand the restored gospel and its purpose, and/or they utilize the gospel in ways other than how it was intended--i.e. they concern themselves with things like categorizing doctrines and whether things may have been racist in the distant past rather than concerning themselves with rightly living their lives now according to revealed precepts from God.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[LDSMusic483]

I have no idea what this means.

What it means is that if an individual (regardless of who) makes a statement without it being supported by official doctrine of the church, it is held that it is the opinion of that individual.

[ttribe]

I am of the opinion that for those who aren't lead to become more like Christ, it is because they don't correctly understand the restored gospel and its purpose, and/or they utilize the gospel in ways other than how it was intended--i.e. they concern themselves with things like categorizing doctrines and whether things may have been racist in the distant past rather than concerning themselves with rightly living their lives now according to revealed precepts from God.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

I seem to recall a comment once about "strain[ing] at a gnat" while "swallow[ing] a camel".

[zerinus]

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?

Official Mormon teaching is what is contained in the standard works. And quoting Brigham Young out of context, and ignoring the vast quantity of other things he has said, is not a very honest way of discussing Brigham Young.

zerinus

[wes]

My experience is that it has led me to become more like Christ. My experience is that it leads everyone to become more like Christ. You must be an exception.

zerinus

Me and the numerous others who have left Mormonism after discovering it was fraudulent.

[saemo]

For example, on whether we will become gods...this is doctrine, it is found in the Doctrine and Covenants.

So says you, and I believe that this is what you believe. But I have had very devout Mormons tell me this is NOT doctrine. And, in a conversation I had with a Mormon who is a bishop, asking about this, he said that a devout Mormon did not have to believe this as doctrinal (but that he did believe it himself).

This is why I just finally came to the conclusion, don't assume what any one LDS person holds as doctrinal. Everyone seems to have their own individual church.

[zerinus]

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.

Okay, what is your point? That decision was right at that time. We don't know the reason. God does not have to give us a reason for everything He does. Then the decision was changed by the commandment of God, as God willed it. The decision to give the priesthood to Blaks does not mean that the decision not to give it to them before was wrong.

zerinus

[saemo]

Me and the numerous others who have left Mormonism after discovering it was fraudulent.

A good question, which is the exception, joining the LDS church, or leaving it?

[thesometimesaint]

saemo:

Individual LDS can believe pretty much what they want to, but they do not and can not make doctrine.

[wes]

Okay, what is your point? That decision was right at that time. We don't know the reason. God does not have to give us a reason for everything He does. Then the decision was changed by the commandment of God, as God willed it. The decision to give the priesthood to Blaks does not mean that the decision not to give it to them before was wrong.

zerinus

No, God does not have to give us a reason for everything HE does. However, I do not believe that HE was in any way involved with either decision.

[Bat-Man]

It has been the position of the Mormon Church that not everything said by LDS prophets is considered official doctrine. Thus, my question is this - How is one to determine what is official and what is opinion?

There's a difference between what a person says and what a person teaches.

There is also a difference between what a person teaches as his/her opinion and what a person teaches as the truth.

And, yet again, there is also a differences between what a person teaches as the truth and what a person teaches which is actually true... according to God and all other people who really know the truth.

Realizing those differences is often difficult for some people, but that is all it comes down to when trying to get at which is true and what is not true and what is only a person's opinion regarding what he or she believes to be true which may or may not be true according to God.

In our Church, the people who speak for God, officially, are the officials of the Church, and anything those officials teach is official doctrine.... whether or not anyone else agrees with that idea, and whether or not anyone else agrees with what they are teaching.

What officials teach is aka official doctrine, and what officials of a (any) Church teach is aka official doctrine of that Church... whether or not anyone else agrees, or believes it.

Period. The end.

Thank you for playing with us.

[selek]

Me and the numerous others who have left Mormonism after discovering it was fraudulent.

I'll counter you with the millions who research Mormonism and stay.

I believe you'll find that our numbers far outweigh yours.

Fraudulent is inflammatory, divisive, and frankly, unprovable.

Matter of fact, just to drive the point home:

Call For References:

Please provide the evidence that proves conclusively that Mormonism is fraudulent.

And no, your typical appeal to "I think" won't cut it.

Conclusive proof, rather than your opinion, is required.

[zerinus]

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. . . .

It may be a problem for you, but it isn't a problem for me. What do you want us to do about it that it is a problem for you?

zerinus

[saemo]

Okay, what is your point? That decision was right at that time. We don't know the reason. God does not have to give us a reason for everything He does. Then the decision was changed by the commandment of God, as God willed it. The decision to give the priesthood to Blaks does not mean that the decision not to give it to them before was wrong.zerinus

hi, I have yet to read that denying the Mormon priesthood to those of African heritage was ever doctrinal. Yet, the change in this regards is doctrinal (by the definition that it is in your D&C). I have no idea what that means, but I guess the question is, in regards to Mormon doctrine, did God really will it?

saemo:Individual LDS can believe pretty much what they want to, but they do not and can not make doctrine.

so, what is the basis of belief (or unbelief)?

[zerinus]

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 would say that is a problem for you, not for us. My experience is the opposite. Who says you are right and I am wrong?

zerinus

[wenglund]

I seem to recall a comment once about "strain[ing] at a gnat" while "swallow[ing] a camel".

Yes, it fits quite well with what the same person said in Matt 25, particularly verses 34 - 40:

34Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world:

35For I was an hungred, and ye gave me meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me in:

36Naked, and ye clothed me: I was sick, and ye visited me: I was in prison, and ye came unto me.

37Then shall the righteous answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, and fed thee? or thirsty, and gave thee drink?

38When saw we thee a stranger, and took thee in? or naked, and clothed thee?

39Or when saw we thee sick, or in prison, and came unto thee?

40And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[ERayR]

Me and the numerous others who have left Mormonism after discovering it was fraudulent.

No Wes you have not discovered it was fraudulent, you have discovered that you can't accept it. Now if you have some incontrovertable proof that it is fraudulent please present it otherwise appologize for your fraudulent and offensive remarks.

[thesometimesaint]

saemo:

What our Scriptures say, and my personal revelations from God.

[zerinus]

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

Neither are we, nor have been. The decision to deny the priesthood to blacks was not an act of racism. That decision was made by revelation; just as the decision to give them the priesthood was made by revelation.

zerinus

[saemo]

saemo:

What our Scriptures say, and my personal revelations from God.

Yes, I know that is the answer. The thing is, God seems to be mighty fickle and gives every Mormon a different revelation. As though, every Mormon has a different god.

[zerinus]

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.

Except that the "faith" you are contending for is an apostate faith. It is not the "faith that was once delivered to the saints".

zerinus

[saemo]

Except that the "faith" you are contending for is an apostate faith. It is not the "faith that was once delivered to the saints".

zerinus

proof please