What Beliefs (If Any) Do You As A Member Hold Differently Than The Official Church Position?

[JLHPROF]

For many here I think I have a good notion of where they land on the spectrum of beliefs.  I have seen many members disagree firmly on beliefs and stand up for the doctrines and ideas they believe, regardless of what the Church position on the topic should be.

 

I want this thread to be positive, but what I am hoping to achieve is almost simple and introductory. 

In as brief terms as possible where do you feel your biggest digression from official Church Position comes and how do you justify it doctrinally?

 

Some examples (that I know exist on this board) are those who support SSM, believe that polygamy was sinful or never happened at all, support OW, pro-evolution, believe we can be led astray, and SO many more.

Are you wiling to in brief explain ANY major difference of opinion you have with the Church, and perhaps avoid having to explain your views every time you post?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I'm willing to go first.  I support and agree with the Church on almost every doctrine.  The ones I find myself most challenged to agree with are:

 

1. I have studied the Adam-God doctrine as taught by Brigham Young and other leaders and have found it makes more sense to my mind than our current teachings on the Godhead.  This includes the identity of Jehovah, the identity of Christ's father, the status of Adam and Eve when they entered the Garden and other related ideas.

 

2. I do not agree with any alterations made to form or execution of ordinances.

I base this on the teachings of the prophet Joseph Smith and the scriptures that they must not be changed and are eternal in nature.  I disagree with the explanation that changes made are only administrative or cosmetic or that the current prophets have the right to bypass the past prophets on these things.

 

I think I pretty much agree with everything else the Church teaches.

Edited November 5, 2014 by JLHPROF

[Coreyb]

Oh JLHPROF, you are always pushing the limits aren't you

[JLHPROF]

Oh JLHPROF, you are always pushing the limits aren't you

 

If Joseph Smith hadn't pushed the limits of religious belief we wouldn't be here.

Do you think I am wrong to ask this question?  I think people should like to voice their doctrinal testimonies and opinions.  It's very 11th Article of Faith.

 

I think a thread of peoples beliefs (that we DON'T all share) is a fascinating idea given the range of belief on this board.

And Coreyb, you and I have agreed more often than I agree with many - I would think you would have a unique belief or two.

Edited November 5, 2014 by JLHPROF

[shinedown]

I'm still learning so much about the doctrine that it's hard for me to say one way or another on much of the teachings. There are a couple things that I disagree with personally, but I don't have any references to back up my feelings

[Calm]

Baptism not needed at all ever and going straight to the CK for those who die under the age of eight..though that might just be some people's interpretation given I've seen a few leaders teach baptism comes later.

It seems contrary to the Plan of Salavation not to give the opportunity to choose and human nature to assume all would choose it. It might be covered by only allowing those who would choose the CK to die early, but then that seems to remove agency again (for example from a parent who choose to neglect a child instead of choosing righteousness and caring for it).

I figure we just don't know all the details yet, so it is nothing that weakens testimony.

Global flood...I don't think it is a required belief, but it appears to be the only taught through official channels.

[The Nehor]

If Joseph Smith hadn't pushed the limits of religious belief we wouldn't be here.

 

The difference is that Joseph Smith was not looking to push the limits of religious belief until he got it from the source.

 

1. That sexual sin is second in seriousness to murder. I am not convinced that that was what the Book of Mormon teaches in the story of Corianton. Some sin of that nature yes. But not all. That said I follow the church's interpretation when I teach.

 

2. That masturbation is a sin. This appears to have come primarily from McConkie and others going off of dated medical literature. That being said, viewing pornography is sin. That said, I go with the official line in my own private conduct and if I were called to teach on this topic (please never).

 

3. That all religions have some light and truth. Scientology does not. I have to stick to my guns on this one.

 

4. King Benjamin's assertion that doing good in serving God results in immediate blessings. I think I have seen delays.

 

5. That Utah can be called Zion. Seriously.....no.

 

6. That God is in the details of our lives. If that is true then I should give gratitude for the good things and blame God for the bad if He truly is in the details. Not sure on this one. Need further light and knowledge.

Edited November 5, 2014 by The Nehor

[pogi]

Assisted suicide in certain situations for the terminally ill.  You can read about why I believe the way I do on the euthanasia forum.  

[Robert F. Smith]

.......................................................................

I think a thread of peoples beliefs (that we DON'T all share) is a fascinating idea given the range of belief on this board.

....................................................................  

This is the key statement through which to understand what your poll means:

 

I accept all the official doctrines of the LDS Church, but am well aware that the primary problem in making such a statement is that there are folks on this board who make the same declaration, yet differ with me (and with others) as to what the actual official doctrines of the LDS Church truly are.

 

Some of them even resort to name-calling and cries of heresy whenever their particular version of "official" doctrines of the LDS Church is not adhered to.  They usually cite and quote their favorite General Authority(s) or Scriptural source(s) in defense of their view, at the same time ignoring other GAs and Scriptures that do not necessarily say the same thing -- or even take a very different position.  And they may appeal to selected Church manuals or other publications to claim them as "official" sources.  They typically fail to place their individual views into a larger context.

 

Those with an appropriate sense of perspective can take a cue from the hot disagreement between Brigham Young and Orson Pratt:  Orson was punished for not accepting Brother Brigham's  view, but Orson's position is normative for the LDS Church today.  Knowing what is in fact the official doctrine may not always be so easy to establish.

[JLHPROF]

Thanks so far guys...now we're getting somewhere.

Who's next?

[Coreyb]

If Joseph Smith hadn't pushed the limits of religious belief we wouldn't be here.

Do you think I am wrong to ask this question?  I think people should like to voice their doctrinal testimonies and opinions.  It's very 11th Article of Faith.

 

I think a thread of peoples beliefs (that we DON'T all share) is a fascinating idea given the range of belief on this board.

No I'm all for it. Here I'll go:

1. I believe the institution/hierarchy of the church is not exempt from the possibility of falling away

2. I believe the priesthood ban was never commanded by God

3. I believe the 1886 revelation was from God and that the 1890 manifesto, or at least the current interpretation of it, is not

4. I don't think the churches finances are sacred enough to be secret

5. I don't think the Word of Wisdom prohibits beer

6. I prefer the doctrine of a progressing God, but I wouldn't say I have a testimony of it

7. I think women should anoint, bless and heal the sick

8. I believe in divine glossolalia

9. I think Joseph probably screwed up his PRACTICE of polygamy

10. I believe eternal polyandry is just as divine as eternal polygyny

11. I believe there are things God cannot do and possibly does not know...

12. I Believe temporal consecration is a law we should be striving to live already. It already was commanded by God

13. I believe humans can become gods, planets, celestial sex, eternal increase and all

There it is, now don't stone me...

[pogi]

2. That masturbation is a sin. This appears to have come primarily from McConkie and others going off of dated medical literature. That being said, viewing pornography is sin. That said, I go with the official line in my own private conduct and if I were called to teach on this topic (please never).

 

Just teach them to take a bath afterwards, then they will only be "unclean" until the evening. 

"And if any man's seed go out from him, then he shall wash all his flesh in water, and be unclean until the evening (Leviticus 15:16).

Edited November 5, 2014 by pogi

[JLHPROF]

No I'm all for it. Here I'll go:

1. I believe the institution/hierarchy of the church is not exempt from the possibility of falling away

2. I believe the priesthood ban was never commanded by God

3. I believe the 1886 revelation was from God and that the 1890 manifesto, or at least the current interpretation of it, is not

4. I don't think the churches finances are sacred enough to be secret

5. I don't think the Word of Wisdom prohibits beer

6. I prefer the doctrine of a progressing God, but I wouldn't say I have a testimony of it

7. I think women should anoint, bless and heal the sick

8. I believe in divine glossolalia

9. I think Joseph probably screwed up his PRACTICE of polygamy

10. I believe eternal polyandry is just as divine as eternal polygyny

11. I believe there are things God cannot do and possibly does not know...

12. I Believe temporal consecration is a law we should be striving to live already. It already was commanded by God

13. I believe humans can become gods, planets, celestial sex, eternal increase and all

There it is, now don't stone me...

 

Love it.  There are many here I should add to mine - esp. #3,6,7,11,12,13.

See, I knew we were kindred spirits on many topics.

Edited November 5, 2014 by JLHPROF

[Robert F. Smith]

Baptism not needed at all ever and going straight to the CK for those who die under the age of eight..though that might just be some people's interpretation given I've seen a few leaders teach baptism comes later.

It seems contrary to the Plan of Salavation not to give the opportunity to choose and human nature to assume all would choose it. It might be covered by only allowing those who would choose the CK to die early, but then that seems to remove agency again (for example from a parent who choose to neglect a child instead of choosing righteousness and caring for it).

...............................................................................

However, based on your question about Divine choice based on expectations, think of the risk taken by God the Father in depending upon His Son Jesus to actually conduct Himself perfectly and then to allow Himself to suffer and die on behalf of all of us.  Does God the Father in fact know His children well enough to know which ones will meet certain high expectations, thus not requiring that they actually live to age eight in order to return to Him in full glory?

[Calm]

The difference is that Joseph Smith was not looking to push the limits of religious belief until he got it from the source.

 

1. That sexual sin is second in seriousness to murder. I am not convinced that that was what the Book of Mormon teaches in the story of Corianton. Some sin of that nature yes. But not all. That said I follow the church's interpretation when I teach..

Quite likely IMO some form of ritual prostitution.

[Calm]

However, based on your question about Divine choice based on expectations, think of the risk taken by God the Father in depending upon His Son Jesus to actually conduct Himself perfectly and then to allow Himself to suffer and die on behalf of all of us. Does God the Father in fact know His children well enough to know which ones will meet certain high expectations, thus not requiring that they actually live to age eight in order to return to Him in full glory?

And that goes onto micromanaging since so many deaths are results of minor details/accidents...a child is in the road one sec where a few before and a few after she was not.

I don't doubt that God has the knowledge, I just don't know if using that absolute knowledge can be done in such a way without negating agency too much (some removal of options can occur I have no doubt while still allowing us enough experience to learn what is needed to be able to truly choose).

Edited November 5, 2014 by calmoriah

[Robert F. Smith]

.....................................................................  

1. I believe the institution/hierarchy of the church is not exempt from the possibility of falling away

......................................................................   

Correct, and the same has to be said for Jesus, who had to be able to fail (if He chose to do so) in order for His success to have any meaning.  Lucky for us, He did not fail.

 

Did God the Father need a "plan B" in case of such a failure?  I don't think so, but I don't really know.

[Robert F. Smith]

And that goes onto micromanaging since so many deaths are results of minor details/accidents...a child is in the road one sec where a few before and a few after she was not.

I don't doubt that God has the knowledge, I just don't know if using that absolute knowledge can in such a way without negating agency too much (some removal of options can occur I have no doubt while still allowing us enough experience to learn what is needed to be able to truly choose).

Excellent points!!

Once again, Cal, you are making me sit back and rethink my simplistic notions.

[Calm]

Thank you, this is one of best compliments I get from people. Even better than changing people's minds. Examining and being aware of our assumptions is so very important in my view.

[Tsuzuki]

Would this be an appropriate thread to bring up my beliefs about Lucifer?

[Calm]

Not really IMO. If you feel the need, link to previous posts and the Prof can decide.

Edited November 5, 2014 by calmoriah

[Duncan]

Apparently eating a chocolate bar with less than .5% of coffee is breaking the word of wisdom, which allegedly one Bishop would deny a recommend to someone, I say nay nay eat it and enjoy it!!

[Calm]

I caused a class of Primary kids to lose their temple worthiness then.

Granted, I didn't know what coffee flavour chocolate tasted like and the label was in Russian, but we ate it and therefore are damned!

(one of the kids was a convert and I learned something new that day from her so it didn't happen a second time though throwing away that good chocolate made me a bit sad, I don't do coffee in stuff not because it is a sin, but because it is a simple act of devotion I can easily give so why not, others don't experience it the same way so I see no need for them to have the same rule for themselves).

Edited November 5, 2014 by calmoriah

[JLHPROF]

Would this be an appropriate thread to bring up my beliefs about Lucifer?

 

It would NOT be an appropriate thread to argue your beliefs.  This thread is not about arguing our beliefs.  It is about learning each others different beliefs and the reasoning.

Basically, it's a tapestry thread - how members of the Church are all unique, even in belief.

If you can state your belief in a brief sentence or two and the basic source of your belief with it great.

But this is not the thread to debate these beliefs.  Each debate would need its own thread.

[Tsuzuki]

That's what I was thinking.

In that case, I believe that Lucifer is the Holy Ghost, the third member of the Godhead, and this differs from official LDS church teachings.

[theplains]

This includes the identity of Jehovah, the identity of Christ's father, the status of Adam and Eve when they entered the Garden and other related ideas.

 

What do you mean by "the status of Adam and Eve when they entered the Garden"?

Do believe that Adam was without Eve for a time in the Garden?

 

Thanks,

Jim