Jump to content
Seriously No Politics ×

Soft Tyranny of LDS Bible Chapter Headings


consiglieri

Recommended Posts

Posted

Only when the Church has published to that effect. Otherwise, it is the doctrine of the Church. There really is no such concept as "binding doctrine" as opposed to "nonbinding doctrine" in the Church. It's either doctrine or it's not.

I'm afraid you didn't parse my comment correctly. I suspect you may have misunderstood the Church's statement you link to in your sig as well.

I notice that this seems to be a pet issue for you so I won't contend semantics with you over it. Since ours is a "living" church, it is not as important a point as it would be for a church with no "active" divine connection and such discussions tend to become more focused on metadoctrine as opposed to the good news itself.

Posted

In this instance, one does not have to rely on the chapter heading to derive this interpretation, as it is supported elsewhere in the scriptural canon, namely Doctrine and Covenants 27:4. Since this verse is written in the first person with Christ doing the speaking, and if one presumes that the same Christ inspired Ezekiel's writing, then I don't concede that one can reasonably take a hard-and-fast position that this was not Ezekiel's primary meaning.

I agree that chapter headings do not carry scriptural authority, but in this case, the chapter heading seems to have scriptural support.

4 Wherefore, you shall partake of none except it is made new among you; yea, in this my Father
Posted
Only when the Church has published to that effect. Otherwise, it is the doctrine of the Church. There really is no such concept as "binding doctrine" as opposed to "nonbinding doctrine" in the Church. It's either doctrine or it's not.
I'm afraid you didn't parse my comment correctly. I suspect you may have misunderstood the Church's statement you link to in your sig as well.

I think I understand you quite well.

I notice that this seems to be a pet issue for you so I won't contend semantics with you over it.

I only bring it up when the subject comes up so "pet" might be better applied to others but perhaps not since there are those who are truly confused by the standard "FAIR" response to the question of what is doctrine.

Since ours is a "living" church, it is not as important a point as it would be for a church with no "active" divine connection

Continuing revelation is part of our systematic theology.

and such discussions tend to become more focused on metadoctrine as opposed to the good news itself.

Many have the good news already and want to know the proper way to apply it. Most of the Church's cirriculum is focused on various aspects of such application.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...