LDS Doctrine

[BCSpace]

Just to be clear, is the following statement "Official Doctrine"? Would a belief that Adam's body was "created" through an evolutionary process beginning with lower forms of life contradict this doctrine?

It is held by some that Adam was not the first man upon this earth and that the original human being was a development from lower orders of the animal creation. These, however, are the theories of men. The word of the Lord declared that Adam was

[BCSpace]

It has released such a list, yes.

I found the list on the Church's official website. However, the Church's official website is not on the list.

This doctrine resides in the four

[cinepro]

The bottom line remains that official publication is THE sign for knowing what is and is not LDS doctrine. The Church has been teaching this to it's members for decades and it's only in remote places like the esoteric world of self-styled LDS apologetics where there exists a significant fraction of LDS who don't understand this.

While I agree with your interpretation of the newsroom statement, I think the statement is imprecisely worded, and I'm surprised it was released like that. Especially when its purpose was to bring clarity to the subject!

But sadly, as with so many things in the Church, there's enough wiggle room for those who don't want to believe it.

[Ahab]

The bottom line remains that official publication is THE sign for knowing what is and is not LDS doctrine..

Personally, I prefer what our Lord said about how we can know what our doctrine is, or should be.

Jesus answered them, and said, My doctrine is not mine, but his that sent me. If any man will do his will, he shall know of the doctrine, whether it be of God, or whether I speak of myself. -- John 7:16-17

And btw, what Jesus said was true doctrine at the very moment it came from his mouth, even before it was written down.

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

Chirp, chirp, chirp..........................................................

No Atticus yet?

[why me]

Chirp, chirp, chirp..........................................................

No Atticus yet?

I don't think that we will be hearing from him. He is much loved on CAF where he has a loyal following, including with the moderators. The more hate he posts the more kudos he gets. Also, I have seen catholic posters suspended for being uncharitable, but atticus has never been suspended for his posts which is quite amazing. On this forum he will be challenged and he will never be able to answer to the challenge without lashing out in platitudes and innuendos with an occasional: Mormons worship a false god and follow a false prophet. Which is one of his common comebacks. But I think that he is probably a decent guy in person.

Such is the life of SirThomasMoore (atticus finch) on CAF. But I don't think that we will see him here.

[Ahab]

I don't think that we will be hearing from him. He is much loved on CAF where he has a loyal following, including with the moderators. The more hate he posts the more kudos he gets. Also, I have seen catholic posters suspended for being uncharitable, but atticus has never been suspended for his posts which is quite amazing. On this forum he will be challenged and he will never be able to answer to the challenge without lashing out in platitudes and innuendos with an occasional: Mormons worship a false god and follow a false prophet. Which is one of his common comebacks. But I think that he is probably a decent guy in person.

You think he is probably a decent guy in person???

What logical basis do you have for thinking something like that?

You do realize he is making those comments he is making in person right now, don't you?

Just because he's on the internet, and not disclosing his real name, doesn't mean he isn't a real person.

The way he is is the way he is.

[todd520]

Such is the life of SirThomasMoore (atticus finch) on CAF. But I don't think that we will see him here.

But, he can be found lurking, reading our MADB post, to find select quotes for use on CAF

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

But, he can be found lurking, reading our MADB post, to find select quotes for use on CAF

He can do what ever he wants. I used some of his quotes on this board, which I probably shouldn't do anymore.

[todd520]

He can do what ever he wants. I used some of his quotes on this board, which I probably shouldn't do anymore.

Me think's it is very appropriate to use quotes, so long as it is done with integrity, and the original context or intent is not construed for propoganda

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

Me think's it is very appropriate to use quotes, so long as it is done with integrity, and the original context or intent is not construed for propoganda

I agree.

THe few times I did quote him I quoted his entire post in full.

[mfbukowski]

Oh man, do I have to go over there now and wade into that pit? Maybe post a link or two to this thread?

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

Oh man, do I have to go over there now and wade into that pit? Maybe post a link or two to this thread?

No, I posted his stuff in this thread and in the other thread here about become a God accourding to Catholic beliefs.

[mfbukowski]

I forgot Pahoran is over there too.

[why me]

You think he is probably a decent guy in person???

What logical basis do you have for thinking something like that?

You do realize he is making those comments he is making in person right now, don't you?

Just because he's on the internet, and not disclosing his real name, doesn't mean he isn't a real person.

The way he is is the way he is.

I have read him since he came on CAF. He used to post under atticus there too before he changed his name. I think that the name change was significant for him. I don't want to write anything personal about him. But usually, when one is obsessed with an idea or with a group, there is usual a reason behind it. There is one poster on CAF who lives in salt lake and posts 99.9 posts against mormons and mormonism. I tend to wonder how this poster survives and then, I figured out the poster is probably nice as pie to the lds they meet in person.

Most of the haters on CAF are releasing an angst that they have in their personal lives. I tend to give them a break. But of course, when they post on the internet and their angst becomes everyone's burden, well, they need to be responded to even though it is a waste of time.

[why me]

I forgot Pahoran is over there too.

He is doing a great job. He is hard hitting but shows charity. I don't think that the mormon haters ever seen anything like him. I am glad that he is there for the cause. SirThomas is being taken to task and is sort of floundering in platitudes.

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

He is doing a great job. He is hard hitting but shows charity. I don't think that the mormon haters ever seen anything like him. I am glad that he is there for the cause. SirThomas is being taken to task and is sort of floundering in platitudes.

What thread over there?

[Pahoran]

Chirp, chirp, chirp..........................................................

No Atticus yet?

Something weird happened "over there" earlier.

He made a post in which he claimed, inter alia, that the mods here had banned him from this thread. I wrote a reply in which I challenged that assertion, based on the fact that no moderator note to that effect had appeared in the thread. When I previewed my post, I noticed that his post, to which I was replying, and my earlier post, to which his had replied, had both been deleted from the thread, in their entirety, without any notice or comment.

Since the post to which I was replying no longer existed, I did not post my reply, as it seemed like bad form to do so.

Does anyone know if AF has been banned from this thread?

Regards,

Pahoran

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

Something weird happened "over there" earlier.

He made a post in which he claimed, inter alia, that the mods here had banned him from this thread. I wrote a reply in which I challenged that assertion, based on the fact that no moderator note to that effect had appeared in the thread. When I previewed my post, I noticed that his post, to which I was replying, and my earlier post, to which his had replied, had both been deleted from the thread, in their entirety, without any notice or comment.

Since the post to which I was replying no longer existed, I did not post my reply, as it seemed like bad form to do so.

Does anyone know if AF has been banned from this thread?

Regards,

Pahoran

Interesting. I cant recall a time when some one was banned with out at the very least a mod stating so.

[todd520]

Something weird happened "over there" earlier.

He made a post in which he claimed, inter alia, that the mods here had banned him from this thread. I wrote a reply in which I challenged that assertion, based on the fact that no moderator note to that effect had appeared in the thread. When I previewed my post, I noticed that his post, to which I was replying, and my earlier post, to which his had replied, had both been deleted from the thread, in their entirety, without any notice or comment.

Since the post to which I was replying no longer existed, I did not post my reply, as it seemed like bad form to do so.

Does anyone know if AF has been banned from this thread?

Regards,

Pahoran

Technically, I don't think you can ban someone from a thread, and he's not banned from the forum.

Since he stretches the truth, he could have turned the negative feedback on this thread into a 'ban' when posting on CAF

I wonder if he might be a mod over there, and using STM as his latest pen name?, If not a mod, close friends with one.

[mfbukowski]

He is doing a great job. He is hard hitting but shows charity. I don't think that the mormon haters ever seen anything like him. I am glad that he is there for the cause. SirThomas is being taken to task and is sort of floundering in platitudes.

He is doing a great job. He has found his niche!

[mfbukowski]

There is one poster on CAF who lives in salt lake and posts 99.9 posts against mormons and mormonism. I tend to wonder how this poster survives and then, I figured out the poster is probably nice as pie to the lds they meet in person.

She alleges that she is invited to Christmas parties with the prophets due to her family connections. I don't think we need to be coy about her screen name since anyone can easily figure out who you are speaking of, but I will follow your lead.

In her favor, she has shown some personal kindness toward me, but she has no understanding of the church and is ruthless in what she says about it. She is one of my least favorite people in the world.

She has also said she is a member here and posts occasionally- I have no idea what her screen name here would be, but I have a few guesses.

Hi R!

[mfbukowski]

Does anyone know if AF has been banned from this thread?

It's not like him to run from a fight. He only knows how to escalate no matter how ridiculous it gets.

[why me]

Something weird happened "over there" earlier.

He made a post in which he claimed, inter alia, that the mods here had banned him from this thread. I wrote a reply in which I challenged that assertion, based on the fact that no moderator note to that effect had appeared in the thread. When I previewed my post, I noticed that his post, to which I was replying, and my earlier post, to which his had replied, had both been deleted from the thread, in their entirety, without any notice or comment.

Since the post to which I was replying no longer existed, I did not post my reply, as it seemed like bad form to do so.

Does anyone know if AF has been banned from this thread?

Regards,

Pahoran

The moderator over there most likely deleted those posts due to the fact that they are off topic. I have no idea if he was banned from this thread.

The responses over there to your posts do not seem to get quality responses. And this would be the case since the usual mantra by the haters do not seem to work well for them when they deal with your on target replies.

[mfbukowski]

The moderator over there most likely deleted those posts due to the fact that they are off topic. I have no idea if he was banned from this thread.

The responses over there to your posts do not seem to get quality responses. And this would be the case since the usual mantra by the haters do not seem to work well for them when they deal with your on target replies.

Yep- that's exactly it. It's a little hard to fit canned responses into an actual on going discussion. The responses never quite fit the question raised. Nobody seems capable, or maybe it is just willing, to participate in independent thought.

The Magisterium may not like it.

You know, for all the flack we get about defining our doctrine, I am so glad we don't have a "Magesterium". Man, even the very word raises images of "thought police".

I'd much rather have a loveable grandpa/prophet and Quorum of the Twelve Grandpas than a regal golden-robed pope and a "Magesterium".

But then I am prejudiced.